June 18 , 2010

Israeli Lobby Forces US Media into Aberrations

 

Two recent events portray the limitations of the US media, known for its objectivity in reporting, when it comes to covering some events having a bearing on the vital interests of Israel.

The first incident concerns the humiliation the media’s own icon, Helen Thomas, was subjected to just because she made the extemporaneous and unfiltered observation on May 27 to a film maker in Washington: “Jews should get the hell out of Palestine”. When asked where they should go, she said, “Go home to Poland, Germany, America and everywhere else.”

The second incident concerns the May 31 attack by Israeli commandoes on a seven-boat flotilla carrying humanitarian aid for the badly deprived inhabitants of the Gaza strip. The Israeli action was universally and uniformly condemned. But, the US media was conspicuously pulling punches.

Let us first study the case of Helen Thomas. An out-of-context report on her May 27 comments stirred an emotional controversy. A staunch human rights advocate, she was talking about the dire circumstances of the Palestinians. Some tendentious commentators lifted just an abrasive sentence from her comments, and even in that dropped the words “ America and elsewhere”. This act of omission, gave the impression that she wanted them to go back to Poland and Germany, countries known for their extermination camps.

Such twisted reports led her literary agent to cut ties with her. Her speaking engagements were cancelled. She was tarnished as a bigot and anti-Semite. The Time columnist, Joe Klein, wanted her removed from her traditional front row seat to the back at future White House briefings. Ari Fleischer, a former White House press secretary, known for his pro-Israel proclivity, advocated that Hearst Newspapers fire her so that she loses her credentials at the White House.

Literally hundreds of comments, inspired or instantaneous, denigrating her, appeared on different websites. Her Lebanese ancestry was highlighted and her opposition to the Iraq war was underscored to paint her as a biased and anti-Semitic person.

Anti-Semitic is a label often used to deflect criticism. The uproar against her utterance shows that she was perhaps speaking the truth. Truth is often bitter.

She was in any case too old – almost 90 - to keep much longer her assignment at the White House. But, that is not the point. What is sad is the unbecoming manner in which this legendary White House correspondent, a celebrated, feisty veteran reporter, the dean of the White House press corps was sent home to lick the wounds of humiliation.

Thomas had years back carved a niche for herself as a pioneer, breaking down barriers for women in journalism. She had earned a prominent seat in the White House press corps. She sat in the middle of the front row and only her seat carried her name while all other members of the corps had on their seats names of the media they represented. And, she had the privilege, as dean of the White House press corps, of thanking the President at the end of each briefing. The respect she enjoyed was in line with the American value system. But the ungracious manner she was sent home, after a distinctive career spanning over half a century, was certainly un-American.

She was known for posing blunt, often uncomfortable questions to the world’s most powerful leaders. Her gumption was invariably appreciated. But the rules of the game were reversed when she gave a blunt and uncomfortable answer to a question about Israel.

Americans are justly proud of the freedoms they enjoy. Freedom of speech is the first and foremost of them enshrined in the constitution. President Clinton was accused of being “a two-timing lecher” over the Monica Lewinsky scandal. It brought no wrath on the accuser.

One may burn the national flag, indulge in blasphemy, and get away with it. But it is a different set of rules that apply to questioning the conduct of Israel. Israel is a ‘touch-me-not’; it is the only holy cow; it is the tail that wags the dog; and, it has its finger in every American pie as well as on several levers of power.

Helen Thomas may have had an ungracious, ignominious end to her outstanding career for uttering an inconvenient truth, but future historians might view her as a martyr to the freedom of expression.

The second incident that followed on the heels of her episode concerns the US media’s low-key coverage of Israel’s May 31 attack on the international flotilla comprising six ships carrying humanitarian aid to the Palestinians of Gaza. The strip dominated by Hamas has been blockaded by Israel for the past three years leading to deprivation and misery for the 1.5 million inhabitants - a humanitarian catastrophe. The flotilla carrying some 700 persons of various nationalities and vocations, including a good number of media men, and 10,000 tons of humanitarian aid, was stopped by Israeli navy whose commandoes raided the flotilla and unleashed a virtual massacre. The heinous act has been condemned vehemently in all parts of the world.

US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, articulated the official position by saying, “ United States supports the UN Security Council’s condemnation of the acts leading to this tragedy”. President Obama regretted the loss of life owing to the Israeli attack.

The universal condemnation of Israeli action, however, incited comments by some American leaders that Israel was within its right to search foreign boats heading towards its territory and suspected of carrying arms for the area’s dissidents. No arsenal was discovered on any of the boats. For, they were on a peace mission.

Condemnation in the US media was conspicuous by its absence or scarcity. There was, however, no dearth of comments in support of the action taken by Israel. Several pro-Israel commentators asserted that the international aid flotilla was but a gimmick to denigrate Israel, as there was no humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

Charles Krauthammer, an eminent commentator told Fox News the day the flotilla was raided by Israeli forces, “What exactly is the humanitarian crisis that the flotilla was actually addressing? There is none. No one is starving in Gaza. The Gazans have been supplied with food and social services by the UN for 60 years in part with American tax money.”

New York Times op-ed columnist, Daniel Gordis commented, “But there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza; if anyone goes without food, shelter or medicine, that is the choice of the Hamas government which puts garnering international sympathy above taking care of its citizens.”

The chorus of ‘there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza’ echoed, as if on cue, in several papers and in radio and TV broadcasts. Similar protests of innocence were heard in December 2008 when Israel started air attacks, over 60 a day, on the Gaza enclave to pound out of existence the hold of the leadership of Hamas.

The genocide of January, 2009 claimed a thousand lives and was squarely condemned by the UN and other international bodies. But the resort to genocide was typical of a state that has been totally indifferent to international law and sees military slaughter as the only way to solve political problems. The brutal rampage of murder and terror waged then by the fourth strongest army of the world against a blockaded, beleaguered and starved people who merely wanted to survive and be free, very much like the Jews did under the Nazi occupation of Europe. A Holocaust does not become less obnoxious when perpetrated by the Jews.

By thwarting the humanitarian aid flotilla and by maneuvering a humiliating exit from White House of Helen Thomas, Israel might succeed in the short run, but it must accept in its own long-term interest a negotiated settlement with the Palestinians on the basis of the already agreed two-state formula. It can’t continue indefinitely as the bully of the block.

Arifhussaini@hotmail.com