AP's Ibrahim Barzak Publishes Least Subtle Anti-Isreal Bias Yet
Dishonest cycle of violence implications? Check. Implacably anti-Israel Gaza Occupation Fetish? Check. Weird scare quotes meant to randomly undermine even minor Israeli claims? Check check. And there's even a relatively new technique - and a reasonably clever one - buried deep in the article.
Now if you read just these first two paragraphs - which is all that 95 percent of people read - you'd think that the IDF invaded Khan Younis in the Gaza Strip and killed 10 Palestinians. That, of course, is the opposite of true.
There was a battle in Khan Younis. Four Palestinians died there. Then, in an extensively planned operation in a totally different part of the Gaza Strip, a team of Palestinians crashed through the Gaza fence - which puts them outside of Gaza inside of Israel - in a kidnapping attempt on an Israeli army base. Now you'd think that any reporter of Barzak's experience would know how to dishonestly provide himself with plausible deniability by explaining those distinctions below - the kind of move that would make the first paragraphs "technically true but totally dishonest". But even here - amazingly - the story still manages to wobble from weasel to liar. Proof after the jump that they just don't even care any more.
An Israeli army commander, Col. Shlomi Dahan, said the heavily armed Palestinians intended to capture a soldier. Palestinians said Israeli forces withdrew from the Khan Younis area after nightfall.
That last section is a single paragraph in the original story. It's a very interesting little typesetting stunt if the goal is to ensure that no one ever knows that one of yesterday's firefights was launched by Palestinians after they invaded Israeli territory. And that's before we get to the weird use of scare quotes or the really obvious use of euphemisms for "Palestinian terrorist" and "Palestinian soldier".
But what's not included is - incredibly - even more dishonest:
(1) The Palestinians were more than "heavily armed," which is what the article says (or rather: what the article says that Israeli officials said - weasel phrases all over). In addition to machine guns and grenades, they also had suicide bomb belts.
(2) The kidnapping attempt happened in central Gaza far from Khan Younis and took extensive planning.
Why isn't the part about the suicide belts in the article? Because the point is to demonize Israel for the Palestinian body count - so Barzak can't let readers in on the news that they were already going to blow themselves up. Why isn't the information about the distance and difference between the two battles in the article? Because the point is to minimize Palestinian intransigence by reinforcing a "cycle of violence" narrative.
This is the kind of thing where you just kind of throw up your hands in helpless disgust and say "they're just lying." We'd suggest he should be fired, but it's not like the rest of the AP's staff is going to do a less dishonest job.
References:
* When They Say "Cycle of Violence" This is What They Mean [MR]
* BBC Slips, Proves Liberal Gaza Occupation Fetish [MR]
* The Telegraph Celebrates, Excuses Palestinian Atrocities [MR]
* 10 Palestinian militants killed in clashes with Israeli forces in Gaza [AP]
* IDF foils Kissufim kidnapping attempt [JPost]
Previously:
* Are You Kidding?!?! AP Coverage Of Israeli Hit On Hamas Terrorists Is Frustrating.
* Hamas Intentionally Creating Humanitarian Disaster In Gaza - Now They're Shutting Down The Few Medical Clinics That Are Still Working
* So This Is What Hamas Means By "Respecting Past Agreements" (Bonus: AP's Ibrahim Barzak Whitewashing Palestinian Terrorism Again?)
