Double Standard of The Day at the New York Times

Posted on January 17th, 2011

Well, technically it’s an AP story that appears in the New York Times, but that’s not my point.

The article discusses the impact of Ehud Barak’s announcement that he’s leaving the Labor Party. Here’s the part I don’t like:

Dianabol natural steroid
“Labor has been the sole moderate party in Netanyahu’s coalition, which is otherwise dominated by religious and nationalist parties that oppose major concessions to the Palestinians.”

Buy dianabol cape town
Now before everyone clicks the comment button to say that I am overreacting — because Netanyahu’s coalition in fact does oppose major concessions to the Palestinians — just think about this: have you ever seen a New York Times article that included language that even remotely sounded like:

…Abbas’ government, which is otherwise dominated by religious and nationalist parties that oppose major concessions to the Israelis…

Of course you haven’t. Is it true? Of course it is. But the fact remains that if you look at which side is more resistant to making concessions, consider that:

  • Israel has agreed to the formation of a Palestinian State
  • Israel instituted a freeze on settlement construction for ten months, a freeze it was willing to extend in return for guarantees from the U.S. that never materialized.
  • Israel removed dozens of checkpoints and took other measures to improve the Palestinian economy.
  • Israel removed by force all Jewish residents of the Gaza Strip.

This list goes on.

So tell me, which concessions have the Palestinians endorsed, major or minor? What trust-building measures have they implemented? Say that again? I couldn’t hear you. Please, speak into the mike.

Abbas won’t even condescend to recognize Israel as the legitimate homeland of the Jewish people. He continues to demand that millions of Palestinians from abroad be admitted to Israel so that he can have not one, but two Palestinian states.

Yet the AP and New York Times want to label the Israeli government as the ones who ‘oppose concessions.’

Netanyahu and Lieberman may in fact be “to the right,” but by the same standards, Abbas isn’t even on the field.


Share this article: Tell a Friend


  1. Susan says:

    How I wish Netanyahu was “to the right!” Last I heard it was Bibi who agreed to, maybe even suggested, the first building freeze and was ready to offer a second freeze. Meanwhile, in the absence of a ‘building freeze’ he refuses to issue – or have his Defense Minister – issue building permits. For those waiting to legally build the difference between a freeze and a refusal to issue permits is no difference at all. Not a terribly right wing position!