We may devoutly hope that a properly reported platform fight will cool down Clinton's ardor for what the Nation magazine calls the "most right wing government in Israel's history."
"The recent political reshuffling in Israel's governing coalition will put the unbridled nationalist Avigdor Lieberman in charge of the defense ministry and seal the creation of the most overtly right-wing government in Israeli history."
The New York Times doggedly clings to Israel's version of the Palestinian struggle as it pretends its media neutrality. At times the pretense is dropped.
Recent case in point: The Times' initial print story about two of Sanders' platform committee appointees initially put quotation marks around the word "occupation." Later editions, and the web version of the story, hastily removed the exposing quote marks.
Below is a screen shot captured by Mondoweiss of the original print story, with "occupation" in quote marks, the publication's way of suggesting an uncertainty of veracity.
Stephen Zunes, Professor of Politics and International Studies at the University of San Francisco, examined Clinton's hard-line support of Israel in an essay for The Progressive:
"While the large-scale civilian casualties inflicted by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) in military operations in recent years have raised concerns both within Israel and internationally, Hillary Clinton -- the almost-certain Democratic nominee for President -- has repeatedly gone on record defending the IDF's conduct.
"Not only has she failed to even once raise concerns about the thousands of civilian deaths inflicted by Israeli forces, she has been a harsh critic of human rights organizations and international jurists who have.
"Going well beyond the normal 'pro-Israel' rhetoric expected of American politicians, she has defended Israeli attacks on heavily-populated civilian areas as legitimate self-defense against terrorism, even in cases where the Obama administration and members of Congress -- including Sanders -- have raised objections.
"Her statements raise serious questions as to what kind of rules of engagement she would support for U.S. forces in the 'War on Terror.'"
The New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, usually sweetens his criticism of Israel's ultra right-wing government with digs at Israel's progressive critics.
In his May 25 column, "Netanyahu, Prime Minister of the State of Israel-Palestine," Friedman went beyond a casual nod to the progressives. He offered what must be described as false testimony by misrepresenting BDS, dismissing it an anti-Israel American "campus movement." He wrote:
"Israel has recently been under intense criticism on the world stage. Some of it, like the 'boycott, divestment, sanctions' (B.D.S.) campaign, is a campus movement to destroy Israel masquerading as a political critique."
Friedman's clipping service could inform him that BDS originated among Palestinian religious and secular leaders. It is anything but merely "a campus movement," an epithet that is unfair to campus activists and to the international BDS campaign.
Take note, Thomas Friedman, if BDS is just an "anti-Israel campus movement," then the New York Yankees are just a bunch of guys tossing and hitting baseballs in Central Park.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
