Erlanger "Rebukes" Israel
Erlanger: More One-Sided Pap
New York Times Jerusalem bureau chief Steve Erlanger picks up a couple of favorite Times Sulzberger Template themes today -- Israel is groaning under the weight of criticism, and the Road Map for Peace is worth mentioning only when it concerns Israel, not the Palestinians.
Erlanger takes a routine, unpublished report by the European Union containing ritual criticism of the Israeli security fence, and blasts it out of all proportions as reflected by the inaccurate headline, "Europeans Rebuke Israeli Jerusalem Policy." Erlanger reports that "The European Union's diplomatic representatives in East Jerusalem and Ramallah have sharply criticized Israel's policies in East Jerusalem, saying they 'are reducing the possibility of reaching a final-status agreement on Jerusalem that any Palestinian could accept.'"
Uhh.... the only problem is that Israel was not "rebuked" or even "criticized." To do that, after all, you have to communicate with the rebukee/criticizee. But as you can see from the story, this was an "unpublished" report that was not even given to the Israelis-- because the Europeans decided this was not a good time to rebuke Israel! It's right there in the story.
In fact, it was leaked to Erlanger by "someone who wanted to publicize it," -- and an Israeli official only commented on it after he was told about it by Erlanger.
So the EU didn't "rebuke" Israel at all. In fact, a more accurate headline would be "Times Jerusalem Bureau Chief Rebukes Israel."
In the course of his "rebuke," Erlanger fails to mention the word "security" even once, and uses the loaded Moonbat term "separation barrier" in referring to the fence that has sharply reduced the number of suicide bombers.
Also, Erlanger once again makes a reference to Israeli obligations to the Road Map while never referring to Palestinian obligations. (You know, to do minor, unimportant things like dismantle terrorist groups.) "Road Map illiteracy" when it comes to Palestinian duties is Times policy, one that Erlanger and deputy foreign editor Ethan Bronner painstakingly defended in a letter to a reader that I wrote about some weeks ago.
As has been my practice with the last few Times items, I'm sending a copy of this item to the Empty Suit, New York Times spokesman (a/k/a "public editor") Barney Calame. Something else for you to ignore, Barney, while you shill for management and focus on trivia.