Critics: Israel loyalty oath undermines pluralism

Dear Editor,


Amy Teibel is back!

For people who don’t know this phenomenal but troubled writer, a short introduction.

First, she hasn’t heeded our repeated call to go to therapy. So when we read her we should to bear in mind that foremost she craves empathy & compassion. (Sure, many would-be writers are actually putting words down as a sort of therapy. Still, we’d think that it is kind of funny when the largest press organization in the world employs someone like that.)

Next thing to remember always where we read her is that what sets her off is anything that she misconstrues as a threat to her, or better, reminds her of her fear of extinction of secular Israelis. Whenever she writes “Israel” or “Israeli” she means I, me and myself. Whenever she quotes an “expert” she gives her own opinion on her existential worries.

(AP writers never give own views. They use “sources, “experts” to voice it for them.)

She might come across as hateful, malicious even, but it’s all but fear & angst.

“Critics: Israel loyalty oath undermines pluralism”

Although a gifted writer and at times a master of subtlety, Amy is not above using cheap & ordinary tricks that makes AP Mideast reporting stand out so much. Here also, she starts off with a slew of smears towards Israel in the headline & the first two paragraphs, only in the third paragraph to be followed by a dispassionate, blend, token counter-statement.

Still true today, the golden oldie, that the first blow is half the battle. Here it’s a full knockout.

Israel is accused of a “string of recent moves that are undermining pluralism and stifling dissent,” of being “racist” & of “a provocation aimed at further making [the Arab minority] second-class citizens in a country where they already feel discriminated against.”

With this, the report is dead. The case is fought & most readers will move on to the next item, mislead & indoctrinated. AP again has done its vile dirty work of slandering Israel.

In keeping with AP policy, Amy here throws in a statement reducing negotiation for Middle East peace as “aimed at creating an independent Palestinian state” – Israel as the party that needs to give up, Palestinians as the ultimate victims. Not a word on Israeli’s need for safety & security amidst a sea of hostile, treacherous, undemocratic and violent regimes.

Here we could stop the review, because here is where most readers will stop.

But, in honor of her great style and creativity, curious as we are, for the true connoisseurs, we will read some more of her hate-mongering.

The rest

It would be fun to catalog the terms of abuse & lies she has about Israelis she dislikes. Ready? (Italics by us, for emphasis on the main distortions.) [plus some clarifications]

  • nationalists [only a crime in Israel, in her eyes]
  • defensive [not Amy]
  • siege mentality [never mind that Israel and Jews ARE under siege]
  • hard-line pressure [the old stereotype about any Israeli leader with a backbone]
  • atmosphere of polarization [they, not Amy; Amy is Mrs. Tolerance herself]
  • criticism is being muzzled [no, it is not; in Gaza and the West Bank, yes]
  • committing war crimes [the old canard]
  • a military offensive in the Gaza Strip [if ever there was a defensive war]
  • harsh international criticism over a deadly naval raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla [as we have shown before, the international community supported Israel; the main international criticism came from….. AP]
  • killed a Palestinian militant in Dubai [a terrorist leader, he was]
  • would shut down groups that provide information that could be used to support war crimes allegations against Israel in court cases raised in other countries [no, rather, that baselessly slander Israel – we understand that she fears for her hobby horse, but she could always move to Gaza City or Jericho to continue to write her heartfelt cries]
  • would impose fines and entry bans on supporters of an anti-Israel boycott [any country would ban entry for people who come to make trouble, but Israel should be above this?]
  • the Palestinian grief over Israel’s 1948 creation [rather, they should grieve about being used by all the Arab states that attacked Israel, that promised them all of Palestine, that used them as a bargaining chip and their leaders that never bothered to go for a state, especially not when the West Bank was occupied by Jordan]
  • hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were expelled from homes in what is now Israel [in AP’s narrative, Arabs are victims, & Israelis are aggressors]
  • would deny state funding to groups that mourn the “nakba” [the chutzpah of wanting state funding for deploring the existence of the state!]
  • human rights groups that expose unethical Israeli conduct should not be allowed to operate freely [the biggest lie; unethical conduct is chased after by so many Israeli Jews and Israeli Jewish organizations, and they have broad support in the Israeli mindset]
  • Israeli citizens who support sanctions or boycotts against Israel should be punished [Amy would like them to be medalled?]
  • Israel’s internal security service called in for questioning a former air force pilot who has become an outspoken critic of Israeli policy toward the Palestinians [people that don’t endanger the state should have nothing to fear from being questioned by them]
  • accused Israeli naval commandoes [sic!] of roughing him up [if it were true it became a court case]
  • to Gaza to draw attention to Israel’s blockade of the territory [run by a terrorist junta; where is a reference to Gilad Shalit?]
  • Naomi Chazan, a professor who has come under fire from ultranationalists who accuse her of being “anti-Israel” [a friend of Amy; nice example of her polarizing (Who? Amy? Never!)]
  • the antagonism is dangerous [the antagonism by others, that is; hers is fine]
  • dissent is being quieted [in Israel everybody is a dissident and quiet is not what happens here]
  • ultranationalist [the term itself conveys intolerance]
  • played on the perceived disloyalty of Israel’s Arab citizens [suggestive use of language]
  • It has been widely speculated [by Amy’s sub-conscience]
  • the bill appeared aimed squarely at Arab Israelis [appeared but is not]
  • limiting democracy in Israel and deepening the prejudice against its Arab minority [baseless accusations that are possible in Israel’s democracy]
  • antidemocratic [sic!] laws that ostracize and delegitimize minority views, particularly those of Arab citizens [we’re all shivering with Amy at this dreadful perspective]

All this has some token, drowned-out real information after each barrage of defamation.

The verbal diarrhea of someone who is really frantic. Poor Amy.

[Some people have asked us if there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING that we like about AP reporting. Well, there is. AP is not racist in its choice of writers on the Mideast. Jew and Gentile alike, anyone ready to slander and defame Israel is welcome in its midst.]


This entry was posted in 0. Chronological, 3. Negative, 5. Important. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s