Yesterday’s New York Times report on the rising violence in occupied West Bank Palestine is an insult to our intelligence. The paper could not ignore the latest Israeli settler/colonist pogrom against Palestinians, but reporters Patrick Kingsley and Isabel Kershner used time-honored techniques to downplay its seriousness and the responsibility for it.

The article’s most dishonest feature was that it buried the most alarming news — Israeli government military complicity in the ferocious attacks — down in paragraph 26. Here’s the relevant section:

Asked why the Israeli Army did not prevent the settler violence, and even stood by as some attacks took place, a military official, who requested anonymity in line with protocol, acknowledged mistakes and said commanders had not expected the settlers to fan out through Huwara’s back streets instead of remaining on the main thoroughfare.

Paragraph 26! Do the Times reporters expect us to believe that they have no sources inside the Israeli army who could have told the truth, even anonymously? By contrast, this site had no trouble reporting that during the pogrom: “All the while, the Israeli army accompanied the settlers as they were out for blood, ensuring their safety and freedom to lynch and burn as they pleased.”

Americans for Peace Now reported the truth about government complicity in the “pogrom” two days ago:

According to credible reports, the IDF did not take measures to block the settlers’ path to Hawara, nor did it stop them from systematically attacking Palestinians and their property, nor did law enforcement authorities carry out appropriate arrests. According to press reports, Israeli authorities sought to let the settlers “vent” their anger. Following the settlers’ violent campaign, the government of Israel did not take any significant actions to address the settlers’ lawlessness. Instead, some members of Netanyahu’s coalition publicly supported the settlers’ violence. One even tweeted from the site as the settlers were on the attack.

What’s more, there’s an even larger story. Increasing numbers of Israeli soldiers actually come from occupied West Bank settlement/colonies, including well-known figures like the messianic General Ofer Winter. That they would stand by when their neighbors attack Palestinians should not be a surprise.

The true loyalties of Israel’s army in 2023 should shovel even more dirt on top of the grave for the 2-state solution. Any 2-state arrangement that wins approval from a majority of Palestinians will require moving a large proportion of the 700,000 Jewish settler/colonists back into pre-1967 Israel. The Israeli army will never carry out these orders.

Today’s Times article used other techniques to confuse, such as “Starting the Timeline With Palestinian Violence.” Here’s the very first sentence:

When a Palestinian gunman killed two Israeli settler in the northern part of the occupied West Bank, residents of nearby Palestinian towns knew from long experience to await sporadic acts of revenge.

This leaves the false impression that Palestinians started the “cycle of violence.” Times reporters could have glanced at Thomas Friedman’s column, which said accurately that “a Palestinian gunman killed two Israeli Jews near Nablus to avenge the deaths of 11 Palestinians at the hands of the Israeli forces in Nablus a few days earlier.”

The Times report continued with the bias. The two Israeli victims were named, with 3 paragraphs of personal details. The latest Palestinian casualty remained nameless.

There was some slight improvement from the previous Times strategy of hiding or downplaying Jewish settler/colonist extremists. The paper did quote a couple of settler “lawmakers,” but left the impression that their violent language was just a sudden reaction to the Palestinian attack — instead of explaining that every Jewish settler/colonist has known for decades that their ongoing theft of Palestinian land promotes resistance. The Times could easily have gotten some more bloodthirsty quotes if they wanted to.

The report also continues the longstanding misuse of the English language. Yet again, the Times (along with the rest of the U.S. mainstream media), uses the words “settlers” and “settlements” (32 times in this article) to describe people who are by any fair-minded definition “colonists.” If that word makes Times editors squirm too much, at least they should point out that the (now 700,000) settlers are “Jewish-only”; the 20 percent of Israelis who live inside the 1967 borders who are Palestinian are not being moved into the West Bank.

Finally, once again the key explanatory background paragraph was missing. Here it is:

“Israel has occupied West Bank Palestine since 1967, and violates international law by moving hundreds of thousands of Jewish-only settler/colonists into the territory. In response, Palestinians…