Prior to the war on Iraq, then afterwards and until this very day, I have been writing time and again, and then a thousand times after that, that the American press has failed in uncovering the deliberate lies, exaggerations and falsification that took place in preparation for the war. The reason behind this was that the target was an Arab and Muslim country. After tackling the issue of the new media (the electronic press) yesterday, I shall continue today with the printed press, in particular the New York Times and the Washington Post, the world's two most important newspapers in my opinion, and the two most professional ones, except when it comes to the issues related either to Israel, or to the Arabs and Muslims. I cannot take credit here except for collecting material and translating it, and what I will present to the reader today has already been mentioned before in this column. However, I am in the same trench with Palestine, the Arabs and the Muslims, being thus in the dock, just like them. For this reason, I will quote American journalists who are not in the dock like me. Robert Parry is a veteran American journalist who has contributed to some of the most prestigious American media institutions. He uncovered many of the Iran-Contra Affair events that took place in the eighties, and is the renowned author of ‘Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush'. For a month now, I have followed articles he had written, in which he said things, if said by an Arab, would immediately place him/her in the rank of the accused of being anti-Semitic, but then perhaps Parry himself is also accused of the same thing. He wrote an article entitled ‘US Media Replays Iraq Fiasco in Iran', in which he said that the New York Times and the Washington Post are repeating their mistakes in covering the war on Iraq, but in their coverage of Iran this time, and that the entire media in the United States is exaggerating the events that ensued following the presidential elections in June and Iran's nuclear program. He added that the best proof of their bias against Iran, similar to their bias against Iraq previously, can be found in the op-ed pages and the commentary provided there, as there are many countries in the region that have nuclear weapons including Israel, but which are nonetheless never mentioned. The fact of the matter is that Iran is surrounded by nuclear countries, from Russia, to India and Pakistan, and also Israel. Parry also criticized turning a blind eye to Israel and the issue of its nuclear expert Mordechai Vanunu, who exposed the Israeli [nuclear] military program and was kidnapped and placed in solitary confinement for 11 years out of his 18 year prison sentence. Yet, the American media never mentions him or the Israeli nuclear program, and only focuses on Iran, while the American media paints a bleak picture of Iran, such as by claiming that it supports terrorism as it supports Hezbollah and Hamas. Parry stresses that many people in the Middle East and around the world (including myself) consider Hezbollah and Hamas to be resistance groups, before reminding the readers of the Israeli assassinations, occupation, and oppression against the Palestinians. In another article entitled ‘The NYT Veers Neocon', Parry specifically criticized an NYT editorial that focused on Iran and its nuclear program. He said that the Iranian nuclear bomb does not exist, and that the newspaper is overlooking Israel and the fact that China augmented its nuclear arsenal to about 200 bombs, the same number of bombs that Israel possesses, a fact that is being deliberately neglected by the editorial. Perry complemented this article with another one he published this month, entitled ‘The Woeful Washington Post'. In the article, Parry complains of the newspaper's reputation of being liberal, while its op-ed pages are full of neoconservative stances. He specifically complained about an article written by Richard Cohen, in which he denied that Israel is an apartheid state, and insinuated that those who criticize Israel are racists. Parry said that Cohen's rejection of the comparison between the plight of Palestinians with the South African blacks under the apartheid contradicts with the conclusion reached by many of Israel's friends that Israel is seizing (I say robbing) Palestinian lands on the basis of Biblical mandates. Robert Parry is not just one voice crying in the wilderness. In fact, Richard Cohen's article was equally criticized by Chas Freeman in an article entitled ‘This time apartheid has western complicity'. In the article, Freeman says that Cohen is denying the realities that confirm that Israel is enforcing apartheid against the Palestinians, and that Israel has a dedicated cadre of advocates abroad, including Jews and Zionist Christian that defend it, something that the White South African Apartheid did not have. In two articles separated by two weeks, both Allison Kilkenny and Jason Lenkins, criticized the fact that Thomas Friedman from the New York Times is still holding on to his stance that supports the war on Iraq today as much as he did in the past and present, claiming that the war gave the Iraqis the opportunity to freely build their social contract. Lenkins responds to this by insisting that the price of the war can never justify the results. Kilkenny, on the other hand, recalls that hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have perished, citing the crimes committed by the private security firm Blackwater against civilians and other issues that the Arab readers no doubt know. I want to say here that Cohen and Friedman are moderates, and hence, one can only imagine what the extremist neoconservatives write. All what I quoted from the American journalists has been mentioned in this column, and by many other Arab journalists. However, what matters in the Americans' opinion, is that it proves our honesty. It also demonstrates that Israel's popularity is going downhill, as well as that of its supporters. Israel is just a reminder of the fable about the Emperor without clothes: its moral, ethical and humane deprivation has become clear and blatant. [email protected]
