In 2005 Israel evacuated every Jew from Gaza, an act which provided Palestinians in the coastal strip a chance to have an independent polity free of foreign interference for the first time in history.
In 2006, despite assurances from the ‘international community’ that the absence of an Israeli military and ‘settler’ presence would moderate the Palestinian electorate in Gaza, a plurality of Gazans voted for Hamas – an extremist group committed to the annihilation of Israel and the murder of Jews. Hamas has run the territory without political opposition since their violent purge of Fatah in 2007.
Since 2006, and despite the absence of Israeli occupation, over 8,000 rockets have been fired from Gaza into Israeli towns. Or, to put it more accurately, there have been 8,000 individual attempts to murder innocent Israelis since that time.
To those who don’t understand why many Israelis are reluctant to cede more land to the Palestinians without sufficient and sustainable security guarantees that aren’t dependent on the good will of Palestinian leaders or the casual ‘assurances’ of Western governments, the answer can be culled from the results of this real-life ‘land for peace’ experiment. In short, though most Israelis strongly support, in principle, a two-state solution, most wearily expect that the new Palestinian state will quickly devolve into either failed state or, more likely, a terror state.
The reason why this blog focuses at times on the Guardian’s failure to report terror attacks from Gaza (and the West Bank), is that such an egregious failure to report the full story about the conflict allows their readers to lazily dismiss Israel’s insistence on defensible borders. This security doctrine is based on past wars and terror attacks, as well as the current reality of terrorist enemies on their borders (Hezbollah and Hamas) who are in possession of a combined arsenal of up to 170,000 (increasingly sophisticated and accurate) rockets and missiles.
So, for instance, the Guardian has failed to publish even one stand-alone article (by their regional reporters) on any of the 100 plus rocket attacks from Gaza since January, 2014. (The only minor exception pertains to two AFP stories (not written by Guardian staff) which characteristically focused on Israel’s response to rocket attacks.)
Here are the headlines of the two AFP reports which even mentioned Gaza rocket attacks. (Note the ‘tit for tat’ narrative, and emphasis on Israel’s response to the Gaza rockets):
AFP/Guardian story, March 3:
AFP/Guardian story, March 13:
Though their regional correspondents evidently didn’t find scores of deadly projectile fired at Israeli civilian targets newsworthy, they did, however, find time to pen two articles on complaints by former employees of the Netanyahus (a maid and a household assistant) about alleged unfair treatment by the prime minister’s wife, Sara.
Here’s a January 17 report by Rory McCarthy:
Here’s an April 9 report by the Guardian’s new Jerusalem correspondent, Peter Beaumont:
‘Shocking’ details in the Jan. 17 report, included the following:
Peretz [the former maid] worked in the Netanyahu family home, in Caesarea, for six years. In the lawsuit she reportedly claimed that the prime minister’s wife, a psychologist, denied her basic social benefits and shouted at her for not following rules. Among the rules was allegedly the instruction that the employer be addressed only as “Mrs Sara Netanyahu,” following her husband becoming prime minister last spring.
Peter Beaumont’s story including even more ‘explosive’ charges:
He alleges that on another occasion Mrs Netanyahu woke him at 3am to complain that he had bought milk in bags rather than cartons. “When I complained about the time and the tone in which she spoke the harsh words to me, Mr Netanyahu interfered in the discussion and said I should do everything Mrs Netanyahu asked ‘so she will calm down’,” Naftali claims.
To put the Guardian’s priorities in some perspective, here are stats comparing their coverage of over 100 rockets attacks (100 individual Palestinian war crimes) vs their coverage of complaints against the prime minister’s wife by two former employees:
- Guardian stories covering Sara Netanyahu’s alleged mistreatment of two employees: 2
- Number of words in two Guardian reports on Sara Netanyahu’s alleged mistreatment of two employees: 1228
- Guardian stories primarily devoted to terrorist attacks from Gaza: 0
- Number of words devoted to Gaza rocket attacks on Israel within two broader Guardian/AFP reports (which focused on the general ‘tit for tat’ attacks between Gaza and Israel): 110
In case you were wondering, the latest illegal attack on Israeli civilians by the terrorists in control of Gaza (not reported by the Guardian) occurred on April 9, the very day the Guardian’s Jerusalem correspondent published the latest installment of L’Affair Sara.
Such contrasting priorities, which place greater emphasis on gossip about the Israeli prime minister’s wife than on deadly projectiles fired at innocent Israeli men, women and children, explains quite a bit about British misconceptions on the root cause of the conflict, and the main impediments to its resolution.
- Tyranny of the weak: Why the Guardian will support the next Palestinian Intifada (cifwatch.com)
- Goodbye, Harriet Sherwood: Three years covering Gaza and no lessons learned. (cifwatch.com)
- This Ongoing War: 9-Apr-14: Fell short (again) and no one outside of Gaza knows (again) that it happened and what resulted (thisongoingwar.blogspot.com)
- Guardian editorial advances ‘raw political lie’ about Israeli views on peace talks (cifwatch.com)
- A round-up of BBC reporting of security incidents in March 2014 (bbcwatch.org)