The Times refers to that blockade!

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2023

And to an occupation: Last Saturday, it appeared as a front-page report in the New York Times. 

In their report, Hartocollis and Saul sifted through a war of words which is currently being fought on some college campuses. Online, their report appears beneath these dual headlines:

After Antisemitic Attacks, Colleges Debate What Kind of Speech Is Out of Bounds
Pro-Palestinian students say that they are speaking up for an oppressed people, but critics say that their rhetoric is deeply offensive.

What sorts of claims are antisemitic? What sorts of claims are not? The reporters tried to puzzle that out. Along the way, they wrote this:

HARTOCOLLIS AND SAUL (11/11/23): Pro-Palestinian supporters are quick to push back, asking whether any criticism of Israel and Zionism is acceptable.

They say that the cries of antisemitism are an attempt to stifle speech and divert attention from a 16-year blockade of Gaza by Israel, backed by Egypt, that has devastated the lives of Palestinians...

Stating the obvious, a great deal of "criticism of Israel" is routinely taken to be acceptable, as is completely appropriate. But how about that term "blockade?" Does the Times regard that as a reasonable description of ongoing Israeli policy with respect to Gaza? Or was that simply an account of what the "pro-Palestinian supporters" had said?

The reporters provided a link, and so we decided to click it. It took us to a second news report by the Times—a news report which appeared online in the immediate aftermath of the slaughters of October 7.

The report didn't appear in print editions. Also, the report was rather brief. 

That said, it may have signaled a certain semantic decision on the part of the Times. Where Barack Obama recently referred to an "occupation," the Times seemed willing to go with "blockade" in the case of Gaza:

Gaza Has Suffered Under 16-Year Blockade
Held in place by Israel and Egypt, the blockade restricts imports to the region and prevents most people from leaving.

For some Gazans, Saturday morning’s surprise Palestinian attack into southern Israel seemed a justified response to a 16-year Israeli blockade. Others worried that the coordinated attack would only add to Gaza’s misery as the tiny enclave braced for a large-scale response from Israel.

The Palestinian territory of Gaza has been under a suffocating Israeli blockade, backed by Egypt, since Hamas seized control of the coastal strip in 2007. The blockade restricts the import of goods, including electronic and computer equipment, that could be used to make weapons and prevents most people from leaving the territory.

More than two million Palestinians live in Gaza. The tiny, crowded coastal enclave has a nearly 50 percent unemployment rate, and Gaza’s living conditions, health system and infrastructure have all deteriorated under the blockade.

Israel says the blockade is necessary to stop the flow of arms into the territory, but Palestinians and aid groups say it is collective punishment and exacerbates dire economic and social conditions.

In this brief report, Raja Abdulrahim freely refers to the "blockade" of Gaza—an action Israel says "is necessary to stop the flow of arms into the territory."

Abdulrahim doesn't refer to an "occupation" of Gaza. In other news reports, the New York Times, rightly or wrongly, has routinely referred to the West Bank as being occupied by Israel. But we haven't found a news report in which the Times refers to a current or ongoing "occupation" of Gaza.

We mention this because of Professor Dershowitz's recent passionate meltdown.  He said there's no "occupation" at all—not in Gaza, not in the West Bank—and he said that Barack Obama had been "lying through his teeth" when he used that term.

As we noted this morning, different people, and different organizations, have different views on this particular semantic and legal matter. Also, discussion becomes impossible when people are swept away by the passionate intensities they may understandably feel.

By the way, has that 16-year blockade been necessary? That's the position of Israeli's government. Discussion, debate and the search for solutions must proceed from there.

"There is no occupation," the passionate professor said. He voiced that judgment about both Gaza and the West Bank.

The professor has every right to give voice to that view. But then, he began to shout and yell and to call decent people names. 

Despondently, top experts say that we human beings are inclined to behave in such ways. "The adults are frequently worse than the kids," one sad expert declared.