NY Times: Arafat no, cocoa yes

NY Times: Arafat no, cocoa yes

By Sean Marquis

Dec. 14-- While Yasir Arafat's compound was being hit physically by Israeli airstrikes, Arafat was being hit verbally by Israel, the United States, and the New York Times.

On Tuesday, Dec. 4, the Times carried four articles, an editorial and an opinion piece all concerning Israel attacking Arafat's headquarters.

The content of five of the pieces was overwhelmingly anti-Arafat.

Arafat was not given one sentence in any of them to defend himself against accusations or to simply give his view of the situation.

One article did focus on Arab leaders and their view of the Palestinian/Israeli situation.

Again, Arafat himself was not in it.

This is a classic one-two punch as often delivered by the US government and US media. While the US or one of its allies (Israel) is bombing an "enemy" (Arafat), the US press (NY Times) bombs the enemy as well.

Take the case of Osama bin Laden.

The US media openly (at the request of the US government) is censoring his statements. Al-Jazeera, the Arabic language satellite and internet news channel, has defied US requests that it too censor bin Laden's statements. The US government went as far as to pressure the government of Qatar, where al-Jazeera is based, to clamp down on the station. Qatar said no.

Freedom of the press means something somewhere, but not in the US.

In an appalling display of partisanship, the NY Times gave Arafat no room to respond to US and Israeli accusations and demands, or to the accusations of the Times itself.

The Times' coverage of the Israeli airstrikes began on the front page with the article, "Israelis strike Arafat's bases; accuse him of 'a war of terror'".

The article is 31 paragraphs long with 23 separate mentions, including headlines, of Yasir Arafat. The first direct quote in the article comes from Ariel Sharon, the Israeli Prime Minister.

Sharon is quoted as saying: "A war has been forced upon us, a war of terror."

The first Palestinian quote comes six paragraphs later and it is from Saeb Erekat, a chief negotiator, not from Yasir Arafat.

The Times article contains numerous demands made on Arafat, accusations of promises made and broken by him, questions as to his intentions and his ability to lead the Palestinian people, and all throughout not a single quote from the man himself addressing any of this.

The article is continued on page A-8 with three more articles on the same topic, taking up one full page of text and photographs.

"US walks a tightrope on terrorism and Israel" is a 12 paragraph article giving the US and Israeli positions (which are virtually the same) on the terror war and Arafat and the Palestinians.

Phil Reeker, US State Department spokesman, said, "You can't pick and choose terrorists. That's the message that we've given to the Palestinian Authority."

And White House spokesman, Ari Fleischer, discussed Arafat in terms of the Taliban and its leader, Mohammed Omar. The message is clear. US bombs are good for Omar, Israeli bombs are good for Arafat.

No space is given to Arafat's or any other Palestinian's views. Nothing.

"Excerpts from talk by Sharon" contains 10 paragraph's worth of a speech given by Ariel Sharon on the day his country launched the attacks against Arafat and the Palestinians.

Sharon is given room to make such statements as: "Arafat is guilty of everything that is happening here [radical Palestinian groups carrying out suicide bombings in Israel and Israel blowing up Palestinian civilians]…" and "Arafat is the greatest obstacle to peace and stability in the Middle East."

The entire article is a speech from Sharon. Not a word from Arafat.

The one article devoted to an 'opposing' view (a view not held by the US, Israel or the NY Times) was "Arabs say it was Israel that set off the violence".

Several Arab leaders and newspapers from other nations are quoted condemning Israel and its attacks on Palestinians. Ariel Sharon gets two mentions (though in a negative context in this article) while Yasir Arafat is not even mentioned in any of the quotes the Times used in this article, nor is Arafat himself quoted anywhere in the article.

The Times continued its assault on Arafat with an editorial, "Yasir Arafat's last chance" on page A-22. The editorial begins: "Yasir Arafat has a long and frustrating history of fudging or postponing hard decisions. Now he can postpone no more," and it goes downhill from there. The Times lists 'failures' of Arafat's and presents a series of demands on him as well.

The Times even goes so far as to blame Arafat for not being able to "deliver the kind of security Israel requires" without even passing the thought that Israeli jets, bombs, tanks and occupations of
Palestinian lands may be threats to Israeli security.

The editorial finished off with, "Time is rapidly running out on Mr. Arafat…it is hard to see how he has any meaningful role left to play."

The finishing touch is put on by an opinion piece on page A-23 by Dennis Ross, former envoy to the Middle East under Bill Clinton's administration.

Ross speculates on Arafat's ability to lead and whether he even has much sway left amongst the Palestinian people. Ross says Arafat needs to rein in radical Palestinian groups and that Palestinian bombings, attacks, and "terror" on Israel must stop if the Palestinians want peace. Not a word about Israeli bombings and "terror" against the Palestinians. And again not a word from Arafat.

But what makes this all the more atrocious is what the NY Times did have room to include.

On page A-15 was a 9 paragraph article, "White House holiday scene with everything but the public", which was all about Laura Bush bemoaning the fact that the general public was not being let in to see this year's Christmas decorations because such tours were canceled by George Bush for "security reasons".

The article even was accompanied by a picture of Laura Bush standing in front of a gingerbread rendition of the White House.

The article states that Mrs. Bush, "led a restive mob of reporters and photographers on a tour of the White House Christmas decorations".

Maybe this "restive mob of reporters" should have been following Yasir Arafat around instead and asking him some questions.

But no. The NY Times felt it was more important for us to know that the White House Christmas decorations consisted of "miniatures of 18 [historic] presidential homes…800 hundred pounds of fake snow…a forest of 49snow-covered evergreens," and that the gingerbread house pictured with Laura Bush, "is made from 80 pounds of gingerbread, 30 pounds of chocolate and 20 pounds of marzipan".


The Times article even gives us a bit of a clue as to why we are being distracted with such drivel: "Mrs. Bush implored her guests from the press to publicize the decorations as much as possible so that the public could at least see Christmas at the White House in pictures and on television".


And the NY Times dutifully obeyed the First Lady's 'imploring'. The Times even printed a picture, just like Laura Bush asked. How nice.

In the last paragraph of the article the Times went above and beyond the call of duty and, as an extra special treat, printed the full text of "Mrs. Laura Bush's Hot Chocolate Recipe". If you'd like a copy of it, call the New York Times. But don't ask them for a quote from Arafat, because they don't have one.

This piece of distraction-propaganda was not in the Living section of the paper or even in Arts and Entertainment. It was in the A-section with world and national news.

Yasir Arafat might have had plenty to say about having his personal compound and several helicopters blown up by the Israeli military. He may have even more to say about Ariel Sharon's and Ari Fleischer's demands and accusations.

But the Times didn't print any of it.
Maybe Arafat should start baking gingerbread so the Times will think there's a story to be had. Doubtful.

Better yet, maybe he should ask Laura Bush to "implore" the press to print his point of view or at least to give him some space to respond to his accusers. The NY Times listens to Laura Bush. Maybe then they would print something from Arafat. Just as soon as they finish that mug of cocoa.