While I was driving to the bank recently, a report on NPR about an Israeli air strike in Gaza caught my attention. Of course, as a self confessed Israel news junkie, any news about Israel catches my attention. This report however, really riled me, as it was blatantly biased. This again, comes as no surprise nowadays. But in this instance, it was the very subtle nature of the bias that disturbed me greatly. Brazen bias is bad enough, but at least most people can recognize the leopard for its spots. Veiled bias on the other hand, is insidious and far more alarming, as it will unwittingly lead the listener to a profound misunderstand of the actual situation on the ground.

The offensive excerpt went as follows:

“An Israeli air strike in Gaza killed three militants (pause for effect) … and eight civilians.

“Relatives of the dead screamed in the streets (sounds of screaming people). Abbas denounced Tuesday’s air strike as quote ‘State terrorism,’ while still pressing for the renewal of peace talks. Many Palestinians called for revenge, and Hamas militants rained rockets down on towns in Southern Israel.”

Now, consider:

1. The setup, with the pause in the first sentence almost blames Israel for having killed eight civilians;

2. The clip of the distraught relatives further drives this point home;

3. Abbas is quoted as speaking of “state terrorism,” and this statement is left unchallenged, implying that Israel’s action may indeed be defined as such;

4. The reporter then states that Abbas is “still pressing for peace talks,” suggesting that the Palestinians are pursuing a peaceful path, even in the face of Israeli actions;

5. The report then continues to mention that many Palestinians call for revenge, which by now the listener might find completely justifiable, and that Hamas rained rockets down on towns in Southern Israel. There is no audio tape of crying, terrified civilian Israeli men, women and children.

While the misrepresentations of fact are subtle, it is exactly the subliminal nature of these misrepresentations that makes them so egregious.

However, the report is most offensive not for what it says, but for what it doesn’t say. The report completely neglects the fact that the three dead “militants” were riding in a van filled with katyusha rockets that would have been aimed at Israel and might have caused untold casualties and damage. Israel’s strike was an act of self defense, and the people responsible for the very tragic deaths of those eight civilians are exactly the same three “militants,” and their Hamas government. Militants, my foot! These people were in fact terrorists, cold-blooded murderers.

And the Hamas “revenge” action of course was not revenge as such, but part of a planned, ongoing offensive aimed specifically at Israeli civilians, which Israel is trying to prevent, or at least limit, through its highly targeted (though unfortunately not always 100 percent pinpoint) air strikes. What would we expect (no, demand!) the U.S. government to do if the Mexicans were setting up katyushas to launch at San Diego?

The report, though not factually incorrect, is highly misleading by innuendo and by omission.

Israel is a stable democracy and, as is the nature of democracies, has never attacked another state or people other than in self defense (or in defense of its allies). Israel, despite everything, is always seated at the table with an outstretched hand, and the Palestinians consistently fail to take it. Israel has to defend itself against constant Palestinian attacks, not the other way around!

No one denies the Palestinians a right to self determination. Their situation, mostly of their own (leadership’s) making, is desperate and must be resolved immediately. However, terrorism and kidnappings are not, and will never be, the answer and will only evoke more acts of self defense on the part of Israel.

The clear facts on the ground show that there is no moral equivalence. The Palestinians continue to opt for mayhem, anarchy, death and destruction, as typified by the recent election of Hamas, a terrorist group. Israel conversely, acts in self defense only and yearns for peace more than anything. As long as the media will not recognize this fundamental difference, Palestinians opposed to peace will continue to be emboldened and encouraged to play the part of the victimized underdog to the hilt. The media, through inaccurate reporting, certainly bear a great responsibility here. Journalists and editors should consider the detrimental impact that misleading reports can have. The pen is indeed mightier than the sword.