CNN’s anti-Israel narrative was shown a few times before, here on Israellycool. Couple that with Israeli elections, where it seems everyone else in the world but Israelis know what’s best for Israelis, and you get two examples of journalistic crap.
First up is Ben Wedeman‘s piece titled: Analysis: World distracted as Israelis head to polls.
There was a time when Israel was a top story. War and peace in the Middle East has always been big news. But today, at least in Israel, there is neither war nor peace, just that gray area between the two.
Israelis are going to the polls next Tuesday, but there’s a feeling that little of great import to the rest of the world will be decided this time around. As political analyst Daniel Levy wrote in Foreign Policy, these elections are “about nothing.” Consequently, there is less international interest in Tuesday’s vote than usual.
Wedeman and others are upset that in lieu of more pressing issues, like Mali, Algeria, Syria, and other 3rd world countries, quad-annual elections in a democratic country is not all that interesting. I’m sorry Ben, would you like us to change governments faster than socks, like our eastern neighbour Jordan, for you to get your “hit” of portraying Israel as a failed democracy?
It appears fairly certain that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will keep his job. The Israeli body politic will continue its rightward shift, with hardliners insisting on deepening Israel’s now more than 45 year-old occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights.
Since the beginning of the millennium, Israel has put down the second Palestinian uprising (intifada). It has gone to war with Hezbollah in Lebanon, and taken its battle with Hamas direct to Gaza.
Political “analysts” are pumping out the “rightward shift” as a symptom of the illness of Israeli society, completely ignoring events which trigger shifts in elections, namely Palestinian terror. Hardliners, like me for instance, or Izhak Rabin, do not take for granted this nation’s military victories. Delegitimizing Israel’s claim to Jerusalem is more of a hardline shift than any, and presenting the 19 years of Jordanian occupation and apartheid as the baseline narrative for any future action speaks volumes on the type of people to which Wedeman caters.
Wederman even goes on to give examples of recent events where Israeli “aggression”, the result of said right-wing shift, had brought upon violence. This has got to be the most repugnant piece of journalist dishonesty and bias by far. Not only were all these events Wedeman is citing a direct result of Arab-Islamic terrorism, even the Prime Minister at the time of these events belonged to the “center-left”, a made up political compass of the spineless and opportunistic, like Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert.
2000: After premeditating the Intifada and blowing up buses and restaurants, Palestinian terrorism hit a zenith in the Park hotel suicide attack that killed 30 Israelis during Passover Seder. Israel responded with two actions, launching the successful Operation Defensive Shield to root out the terror infrastructure, and started building the separation barrier, that has since stopped 99% of the terror attacks in Israel.
2006: After a cross-border raid on an IDF patrol, Hizbullah killed and kidnapped the bodies of two IDF reservists. As a result, Israel attacked Hizbullah in Lebanon.
2009: After years of rockets and terror attacks by Gazan terrorists, and 4 years since Israel had withdrawn its last presence there, Israel launched Operation Cast Lead and attacked Hamas on its own turf, which were hiding among the civilian population in Gaza, curbing Hamas for a long period of time.
Rightward shift? More like right way to respond. And remember, the last two were done by the new leftist darling, the convicted criminal Olmert. Wedeman signs off his bile with wishful thinking:
Right now the world may have too much on its plate to pay close attention to Israel. The U.S. and Europe are struggling with an economic crisis that is now into its fifth year, and there are more pressing matters to deal with. But there is also a growing disillusionment with Israel. The Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) movement, aimed at isolating Israel in protest over its treatment of the Palestinians, is gaining ground. Even pop stars are now shunning Israel in reaction to protests.
Some say the dynamic between Israel and the Palestinians is being reframed much like South Africa under apartheid. It’s a comparison, drawn by Desmond Tutu among others, that enrages many Israelis and their supporters elsewhere, but it is one that many in Israel acknowledge is a growing reality. Few believe it will be addressed at this election.
The BDS movement is a joke at best, a bully at worst, and the equation of Israel to apartheid South Africa has been busted time and time again for the anti-Semitic trope that lies behind it. Even CNN itself disprove that latest anti-Israel narrative with another piece, focusing on the Israeli female Arab MK and wannabe shahida Haneen Zoabi.
The perplexedly-titled: For Israeli voters, missile fire, money main issues in Tuesday election, is co authored by Israellycool’s favourite Fatah whitewasher Sara Sidner, and laments that, contrary to what the world might think is important, Israelis have other things to worry about than Palestinians. The article focuses on some of the issues in these coming elections, with one of them being – you guessed it - the rightward shift:
Netanyahu’s Likud-Beitenu is the product of a coalition — an uneasy alliance — between Netanyahu’s Likud and Lieberman’s even more right-wing Yisrael Beitenu.
Along with its vigilance on security, Likud-Beitenu is supportive of West Bank Jewish settlements, whose presence is reviled by Palestinians and many Israelis as well as obstacles to a peace agreement.
Polls are saying the coalition will get 30-some seats, the most of all the parties signed up to participate.
Likud-Beitenu is trending more to the right. Haim Malka, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said a growing nationalistic and religious faction has asserted influence within the internal politics of Likud.
Another right-wing party, a religious and nationalist movement called Jewish Home, is gaining strength. Its leader is Naftali Bennett, a charismatic rising star in Israel.
He’s Netanyahu’s former chief of staff, a self-made high-tech millionaire with a well-regarded military track record. His movement, analysts say, could gain Knesset seats in the teens.
The group wants to annex territory in the West Bank and backed a ground invasion during last year’s war in Gaza.
Malka explained Bennett’s appeal to some voters.
“He’s young, he’s fresh, ” Malka said. “He hasn’t been in politics long.”
Bennett’s party, a coalition of smaller political parties, attracted voters from other movements, including Likud.
“He personally is not a deceiver. He is a sincere and worthy individual,” said Ari Shavit, columnist for the daily Haaretz.
“But the phenomena is a deceiving phenomena which enables the extreme right to win the hearts of many moderate right-wingers and even centralists who don’t understand that when the vote for this high-tech guy from Ra’anana they actually vote for an ideology which wants to annex most of the West Bank,” Shavit said.
Jewish Home’s gain in popularity might “explain why, in the aftermath of the November 29 U.N. vote on Palestine, Netanyahu pushed for settlement planning (albeit not construction) northeast of Jerusalem, in the controversial 4.5 square-mile area designated E-1,” said the Washington Institute’s David Makovsky, an Israel expert.
Palestinians are upset with that plan because settlements in that spot would break up the contiguous nature of a future state.
True to their narrative, CNN prints the unchallenged quote that the settlements are an obstacle to peace, and not, let’s say, Palestinian incitement and terror. Also, some of you might notice the debunked contiguous state lie.
A sure way to spike an article with reliability is to quote an “analyst” or “expert” here and there. The first one, Chaim Malka, is just another liberal living in his own personal delusional world of Palestinian reconciliation, and backtracking on the US’ policy on Egypt-turn-Islamic state.
In 2009 he stated that:
He notes that Egypt has not been helpful in stopping the smuggling of weapons because “they have their own constraints.” But a decision by the U.S. Congress to delay aid to Egypt until it cracks down on the smuggling may prove helpful, he thinks.
But fast forward 2 years, all of a sudden the US should fund the Islamic regime in Cairo:
Calls in Washington to suspend military aid to Egypt are fueling an already blazing fire. Although a serious review of the $1.3 billion in U.S. military aid to Egypt is long overdue, raising the threat in the midst of a burning crisis is dangerous. The Egyptian military, the primary beneficiary of U.S. aid, will play a significant role in shaping the contours of the post-Mubarak system. The United States’ ability to influence that system is already limited. Freezing military aid now undermines what leverage the U.S. government does have to promote a post-Mubarak system that is more than just a reconfiguration of the status quo.
Here he is saying that Marwan Barghouti, an arch-terrorist serving multiple life sentences for murdering Israelis, should be freed so he can form a pragmatic and moderate Palestinian government, I kid you not!
Haim Malka says that experience suggests that Fatah is unlikely to carry out extensive reforms. What is most important for Palestinian society is to bridge the gap between Fatah and Hamas, and Mr. Malka suggests that Marwan Barghouti, who is now in prison, might be the best person to do that. He notes that the Palestinians are dealing with Yasser Arafat’s legacy of authoritarian rule. Without building a Palestinian “consensus” across party lines, Haim Malka suggests, there will probably be no “viable peace process” in the future. He says the United States should not try to divide Palestinians “between the good guys and the bad guys.” Instead, Washington should first try to get a cease-fire that is “tied to some kind of international involvement.
That’s CNN for you. Making their own news and wars, like a real life Elliot Carver, since the real news is too boring to draw a crowd, or not anti-Israel enough. They repeat debunked lies and hype, quote delusional “analysts”, and paint Israel and Israelis as a society in need of replacement.