The U.S. news media\u2019s bias\u00a0in favor of Israel and against Israel\u2019s enemies represents a\u00a0journalistic failure to honestly inform the American people about issues that can lead to war. A glaring example is the double standard applied to Israel\u2019s rogue nuclear arsenal.<\/i><\/p>\n
If a country with a large but undeclared nuclear arsenal threatens war against a country without a single nuclear bomb, you might think that a serious news organization would note the existing nuclear arsenal at least in passing. But if the country doing the threatening is Israel and the country being threatened is Iran, the New York Times can\u2019t seem to find space to mention Israel\u2019s rogue nuclear weapons.<\/p>\n
The fact certainly was relevant to the\u00a0Times\u2019 story<\/a> about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu\u2019s United Nations speech which focused on his fear that Iran might build one nuclear bomb. And Netanyahu\u2019s threat of war against Iran was not exactly subtle, as he referenced the need for \u201ccredible military threats\u201d and vowed that \u201cif Israel is forced to stand alone, Israel will stand alone.\u201d<\/p>\n For Israel\u2019s threat to unilaterally destroy Iran\u2019s thus-far peaceful nuclear program to be \u201ccredible,\u201d Israel\u2019s nuclear weapons \u2013 at least its smaller tactical nukes \u2013 must be considered as possible elements of that attack. Indeed, I\u2019ve been told that Israel\u2019s tentative war plans against Iran include potential use of low-yield nuclear bombs to shatter some of Iran\u2019s hardened sites.<\/p>\n But the New York Times article on Wednesday\u00a0made no mention of Israel\u2019s possession of nuclear weapons. Neither did a companion Times\u00a0editorial<\/a>\u00a0which catalogued reasons why the world should be skeptical of Iran\u2019s repeated insistence that it has no intention to\u00a0build\u00a0a nuclear bomb. The Times wrote:<\/p>\n \u201cIran hid its nuclear program from United Nations inspectors for nearly 20 years, and the country is enriching uranium to a level that would make it possible to produce bomb-grade nuclear material more quickly. It has also pursued other activities, like developing high-voltage detonators and building missiles that experts believe could only have nuclear weapons-related uses. These facts make it hard not to view the upcoming American-brokered negotiations skeptically.\u201d<\/p>\n Given the Times\u2019 excoriation of Iran over its alleged secrecy, basic journalistic fairness would seem to require that the Times point out that Israel has hidden its\u00a0actual nuclear weapons arsenal<\/i>\u00a0from the United Nations for longer than 20 years \u2013 and Israel has gone far beyond simply pursuing some related activities, but actually has put\u00a0sophisticated delivery systems in place.<\/p>\n The context of Israel\u2019s regional nuclear weapons monopoly also sheds light on why Iran might actually think it needs a nuclear weapon as a deterrent against the possibility of a preemptive nuclear strike by Israel. Yet,\u00a0the Times didn\u2019t include a simple sentence acknowledging that Israel itself possesses nuclear weapons.<\/p>\n Surely, if the Times did publish such a sentence in its articles on\u00a0Netanyahu\u2019s belligerent UN speech, the editors would have gotten some angry e-mails from staunch Israel backers and might have lost some subscriptions. But such fears do not justify journalistic cowardice and malfeasance.<\/p>\n Even the Washington Post, which has served in recent years as the media flagship for America\u2019s neoconservatives, recognized its journalistic duty to acknowledge the existence of Israel\u2019s nuclear weapons. In its story about Netanyahu\u2019s speech, the Post included this simple sentence at the end of a paragraph deep down in the article: \u201cIsrael possesses an undeclared nuclear weapons arsenal.\u201d<\/p>\n The sentence didn\u2019t amount to much. The Post could have done a lot more to elaborate on this reality and its relevance to Iran\u2019s behavior. But its inclusion represented at least a minimal nod to journalistic ethics. The Times couldn\u2019t bring itself to do even that.<\/p>\n __________________________<\/p>\n Investigative reporter Robert Parry<\/b> broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his new book,\u00a0 <\/i>America\u2019s Stolen Narrative,\u00a0either in\u00a0print here<\/a>\u00a0or as an e-book (from\u00a0Amazon<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0barnesandnoble.com<\/a>). For a limited time, you also can order Robert Parry\u2019s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includesAmerica\u2019s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer,\u00a0click here<\/a>.<\/i><\/p>\n