There was no "Jenin Massacre." Period. The only "massacre" that took place at Jenin was that of the truth.Nothing untoward there; until you glance at the photo accompanying Muwbray's column:
Palestinians, long masters of media manipulation, went by the hundreds to foreign media - whom Israel kept outside of the armed conflict - to claim that over 500 innocents had been slaughtered. The man at the front of the prevarication parade was longtime Arafat sidekick Saeb Erekat.
The international media was in a tizzy, and most of the world fell for the lie. Only after the smoke had cleared and outsiders allowed in did the truth come out.
Fifty-six Palestinians had died, but 47 of them were armed. The civilian casualties were at a minimum because Israeli soldiers went door-to-door and put their own lives at risk. Their caution cost 23 young Israelis their lives.
Even the United Nations - which had initially condemned the "massacre" - eventually determined that there had been no massacre. Yet to this day, Jenin is a rallying cry for Muslims around the world, particularly on college campuses in the United States.
Jenin Propaganda (click to enlarge)
This is nonsense. The column says, correctly, that 56 Palestinians (47 of which were armed) died in Jenin, yet the caption perpetuates the myth of a massacre. Though Mowbray probably never saw the photo caption before today, his last paragraph anticipated the problem:
[Y]ou can't fight their fiction with facts. Because to them, their fiction is fact. The saddest fact, though, is that academia's moral relativism dictates that there is no distinction.And what's true in academia is true in the media--even in a supposedly conservative newspaper like the Examiner.
1 comment:
Brian, I recommend WaPo columnist William Raspberry's arrogant piece about Fox News today:
So why would I consider Fox such a generalized threat? Because I think the plan is not so much to convince the public that its particular view is correct but rather to sell the notion that what FNC presents is just another set of biases, no worse (and for some, a good deal better) than the biases that routinely drive the presentation of the news on ABC, CBS or NBC -- and, by extension, the major newspapers.
For the Foxidation process to work, it isn't necessary to convince Americans that the verbal ruffians who give FNC its crackle have a corner on the truth -- only that all of us in the news business are grinding our partisan axes all the time and that none of us deserves to be taken seriously as seekers of truth.
This is huge. As a friend remarked recently, time was when if you found it in the New York Times, that settled the bar bet and the other guy paid off. But if the Times and The Post or any other mainstream news outlet -- including the major networks -- come to be seen as the left-of-center counterparts of Fox News Channel, why would anyone accept them as authoritative sources of truth?
It's hard to believe idiots like Raspberry still are believed to have any connection with truth.
Post a Comment