NZZ and Hezbollah with international critic on Israel

It is interesting article today (31.01.2013).

Header: International Critic to Israeli attack (Internationale Kritik am israelischen Angriff).

Hezbollah mentioned 6 times in this article. There are 2 sentences in 1st paragraph –  

  • 1st – informs about attack and that raises international critic
  • 2nd detailed international critic voiced by Hezbollah, calling attack barbaric.

Hezbollah mentioned 6 times as follows

  • 1.    Der von syrischen Staatsmedien dargestellte israelische Luftangriff in Syrien hat international heftige Kritik ausgelöst. Der islamistische Hizbullah in Libanon nannte den Angriff in einer Stellungnahme am Donnerstag eine «barbarische Aggression». (1st paragraph)
  • 2.    Der Hizbullah erklärte sich solidarisch mit
  • 3.    Weiter warf der Hizbullah Israel vor
  • 4.    auf dem Weg zum Hizbullah in Libanon gewesen sei.
  • 5.    Die Hisbollah beschiesst Israel seit Jahren
  • 6.    Israelische Politiker befürchten seit langem, dass durch den Bürgerkrieg chemische oder konventionelle Waffen in die Hand von Rebellen oder auch der Hizbullah fallen könnte.

According to the article, USA knew about attack but it remains not clear to me if US also criticized Israel or US is not a part of international community.


Tagged with: , ,
Posted in Uncategorized

NZZ puzzled with header again or is NZZ completely wrong reporting UN-Israel topic?

NZZ nr. 24.  page 5. Header:
Israel boycotts UN Human Rights Council  (”Israel boykottiert Uno-Rat”)

on-line version has a puzzle in its header:
Israel boycotted review (Israel boykottiert Überprüfung)
There is not a big chance to understand anything from this header, but also from on-line article.  Below is about printed version.

What is wrong with this article to me? the article presents the issue as

  • Israels reaction to one resolution only (‘Anlass war eine Resolution’)
  • UN is looking into human rights issues of all countries (‘alle Ländern .. unter die Lupe genommen werde’)
  • UN Resolution is presented as reasonable, all countries wants Israel to participate and Israel is not participating  because it is probably bad by building homes in Judea and Samaria.

Is it really so? Will NZZ reader be able to understand the following statements (Wikipedia and US congress) after reading today’s NZZ:

  • On 20 June 2007, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon issued a statement that read: “The Secretary-General is disappointed at the council’s decision to single out only one specific regional item given the range and scope of allegations of human rights violations throughout the world.
  •  As of 2010, Israel had been condemned in 32 resolutions by the Council since its creation in 2006. The 32 resolutions comprised 48.1% of all country-specific resolutions passed by the Council.[59] By April 2007, the Council had passed nine resolutions condemning Israel, the only country which it had specifically condemned.
  •  At the UNHRC’s opening session in February 2011, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized the council’s “structural bias” against the State of Israel
  • March 2012 Criticism. The United States urged the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva to stop its anti-Israel bias. It took particular exception to the council’s Agenda Item 7, under which at every session, Israel’s human rights record is debated. No other country has a dedicated agenda item.

UN human rights council is famous subject for critic and jokes in Internet since a long time

In Addition, presenting an issue as Israel intention to avoid investigation under one resolution   (‘Anlass war eine Resolution, die die Untersuchung der Auswirkungen der völkerrechtswidrigen Siedlungen..’) does not correspond to other sources i found and may be completely untrue.

  • Israel’s mission to the United Nations in Geneva informally notified the Human Rights Council this month that it wanted to delay its participation but did not follow up with a formal request for postponement, creating uncertainty about its intentions. The uncertainty led to intense behind-the-scenes discussions to persuade Israel to reconsider its position.
  •  Israels no-show reflects longstanding frustration with the council’s perceived anti-Israel bias, diplomats say.  

Poor NZZ, poor NZZ readers ….


Tagged with: ,
Posted in Uncategorized

NZZ in a Kingdom of Crooked Mirrors. Confusing words-2

Middle East conflict is known by its confusing vocabulary. It is very difficult to agree on words to be used. For example

Palestine’ may refer to

  • Territory occupied by Israel, PA, South Lebanon & Syria, West Jordan (East Bank).
  • PA – Judea, Samaria (shamefully called West Bank) and Gaza
  • Israel with PA as per British Mandate borders of 1922 after c.77% land cut to Jordan.

West Bank’ – which is a new term help avoiding usage of ‘Judea’ and ‘Samaria’.
Palestinians’ replaces ‘Palestinian Arabs’ to enhance demand of Arabs to Palestine. (There was no mention of Palestinians, Palestinian Arabs or Palestine in UN resolution 242)

NZZ Nr.13, from 17.01.2013, page 5 has the following description of Israeli Arabs:

  • Palästinensischen Stimmberechtigten
  • Israels arabischen Bürgern
  • Palästinensische Bürger Israels
  • Muslimische Araber
  • Palästinensischen Israeli
  • Arabischen Israeli
  • Arabern
  • Israels Araber

Article header is also different in printed and on-line versions:

  • On-line version header: Disinterest among Israeli Palestinians (Desinteresse unter israelischen Palästinensern)
  • Paper version header: Disintegration of Israel’s Arab citizens (Desintegration von Israels arabischen Bürgern)

It may be well that NZZ wants to stay neutral (which is good) but might be they work on introduction of a new term as ‘ Israeli Palestinians’ would be still too odd for a printed version of newspaper. On-line version can be changed if something.

There is no question of confusions but it makes NZZ interesting reading to spot anti-Israel bias.





Tagged with: , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized

NZZ and ‘confusing words’ usage: Westjordanland or Cisjordanland? or still Judea and Samaria …?

NZZ (Nr. 23, 29.01.2013, page 6) article is almost good and informative but missing some important points that should have been mentioned.

Deadly violence in West Bank (Tödliche Gewalt in Cisjordanien)

Why i consider this NZZ article as an example of anti-Israel bias:

  • Number of attacks from Palestinian Arabs (almost daily) and a constant threats to population not mentioned
  • Presenting well-known ‘According to Palestinian sources’ story with the same level of credibility as IDF information before investigations.
  • Using only anti-Israel vocabulary like ‘army of occupation’ (while army protects population from terror) and Cisjordan instead of Judea
  • Ignoring positive information on Israel like number of Palestinian Arabs getting treatments in Israel, financial aid, employment, education etc.
  • I treat this article as one in a chain of articles that present Middle East conflict in inadequately.

Sources and facts not mentioned by NZZ as follows

  •  Everyday Terror. Terrorists carried out a number of major attacks against Israel in 2012. But they also targeted Israeli citizens in smaller attacks — just about every day.




Tagged with: , ,
Posted in Uncategorized

NZZ im Dienst palästinensischer Politik in Jerusalem (link)

Tagged with: , ,
Posted in Uncategorized

NZZ or when negligence is good….

27 January 2013 is Holocaust Remembrance Day. There are a lot of news in weekend edition of NZZ today but no word about this date, United Nation and celebration.

“Denying historical facts, especially on such an important subject as the Holocaust, is just not acceptable. Nor is it acceptable to call for the elimination of any State or people. I would like to see this fundamental principle respected both in rhetoric and in practice by all the members of the international community”.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

This silence says everything about NZZ.

The one thing is good – NZZ is not misusing this day with its articles. Thank you NZZ.


Sunday Times blood libel cartoon, on Holocaust Memorial Day no less

Die Sunday Times aus London begeht den Holocaust-Gedenktag mit einer widerwärtig antisemitischen Karikatur

Posted in Uncategorized

Das geheime Wissen der NZZ-Redaktion (link)

Das geheime Wissen der NZZ-Redaktion.

Tagged with: , ,
Posted in Uncategorized

Jewish News Service - ISSN 1662-2626

abseits vom mainstream - heplev

Nahost, Europa, Deutschland und die Welt...

Leben in Jerusalem

Leben und Alltag in Jerusalem & Israel


Reporting Media Bias against Israel

Anne's Opinions

Promoting and defending Israel and the Jewish People, combatting antisemitism and BDS, with a dose of Middle East news and politics

Building Bridges Between Northern Ireland and Israel


Israel and its impact on our world

A R T i t e c t

Street Art in Israel


Liberal! Was sonst!

Eva-Lottas Blog

"Um Zions willen will ich nicht schweigen" Jes 62

Blick auf die Welt - von Beer Sheva aus

was so eine Perspektive ausmacht...


From my articles, comments and ruminations

The Blog

The latest news on and the WordPress community.