An analysis of the vocabulary and the images used by the Spanish media regarding Israel.

On Tuesday, March 22, 2011, an article by Ana Carbajosa was published by Spanish daily El País. Ana Carbajosa is El País' correspondent in Jerusalem, which is Israel's capital, though the newspaper she works for still denies this fact by intentionally indicating that Israel's capital city is Tel Aviv.

But now it's time to focus on the vocabulary and the images used by the Spanish anti-Israeli media, and the aforementioned article will be used here as a good example of media bias against the Jewish State.

Firstly, the article is titled as follows: El ejército israelí mata a ocho palestinos, dos de ellos menores, en Gaza, i.e., Israeli army kills eight Palestinians, two of them being minors, in Gaza. And secondly, it's subtitled as follows: "Más de una veintena de palestinos, varios de ellos jóvenes, han resultado heridos durante el ataque a consecuencia de una serie de ataques perpetrados por el ejército", i.e., "More than twenty Palestinians, several of them being youths, have been injured during the attack as a consequence of a series of attacks perpetrated by the army".

Both the title and the subtitle deliberately omit Israel's main reason to attack: Palestinian attacks intentionally directed against Israeli civilians by launching rockets from the Gaza Strip. It's also deliberately omitted that among those killed there were three Palestinian terrorists who were firing from densely populated areas, a fact which could confirm Israel's claim of being attacked by them and the use of local non-combatants as human shields and civilian infrastructures as bases for their operations.

The Palestinian attacks against Israel, the dead terrorists and their tactics are mentioned within the main body of the article, but taking into account that the title is written in bold and in bigger letters and the subtitle is just under it, as well as they're the first part to be read, they claim the attention of the reader firstly and thus condition his or her perception of what has happened: a supposed Israeli attack against Palestinian civilians or at least without consideration for them.

Furthermore, the terms "terrorist", "terrorists" or "terrorism" are not used regarding the members of Palestinian terrorist groups or the groups themselves. The two Palestinian terrorist groups mentioned in this case are Islamic Jihad and Hamas, which are referred to by their names or as "Palestinian armed groups" or simply "armed groups". Hamas is also referred to as an "Islamist movement".

The terrorists are referred to as "militiamen".

In order to avoid doubts about Israel's veiledly alleged vileness among the readers and to erase those facts which could be used to defend Israel's claims from their minds, it's told precisely in the last paragraph that Israel's invasion of the Gaza Strip, early in 2009, left 1,400 Palestinians dead.

Facts which could be used to defend Israel's claims regarding what really happened during the 2008-2009 Gaza War, such as statements by a spokesperson of Hamas admitting the use of human shields as well as confirming Israel's death toll of Palestinian terrorists killed (about 700, an estimation initially denied by Hamas), as well as the increasing of Palestinian rocket and mortar attacks against Israel in spite of the 2005 Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, are not mentioned.

Finally, the picture shown next to the article shows a dead Palestinian child's body, which is claimed to have been "murdered" by an Israeli tank. Please notice that the verb "murder" is used referring to an intentional, premeditated and illegal killing, and in this case there is no evidence enough supporting such a claim; it seems to have happened rather the opposite, i.e., an unintentional, unpremeditated killing, whose legal consequences should affect the terrorists who fired from a densely populated area.

Meanwhile, not a single picture showing the intentionally sought adverse effects of the Palestinian rocket attacks against Israeli civilians is shown to El País' readers.

Is Antonio Gala an anti-Semite?

Antonio Gala is surely one of the most renowned Spanish writers, with works such as Petra regalada, Samarkanda or La pasión turca, among many others.

But he doesn't only write novels, poems or scripts, but also opinion articles to be published by Spanish daily El Mundo. And, as Libertad Digital reported on Wednesday, March 16, 2011, one of his last ideas consisted of using the human and national tragedy Japan is currently living to target Israel.

Gala explained in his article about what he calls the "human fleas" that "lessons such as the earthquake and the tsunami in Japan should teach them other kinds of behaviour: unity in the face of helplessness, generosity, (...). But they don't learn." And then he writes about Israel in this manner: "So we see Israel there, the most racist country, going back to Gaza after the fright."

This is not the first time he targets Israel or even the Jews. In an article published on February 5, 2009 by El Mundo, he explained that "the Jewish people will succumb again. Like it happened many times: pogroms, voluntary or unvoluntary ghettos, extermination, persecutions, expulsions,... From Egypt to Sepharad, from Canaan to Zion: all of them promised lands. Shouldn't they ask themselves why does always happen the same to them? Or is the rest of the world wrong?"

Spanish journalist David Gistau answered Gala through an article published on February 8, 2009 by El Mundo. He wrote that Gala's "reasoning makes Hitler an executor arm of a hate morally justified by a majority", as well as "we should ask Gala whether he would apply the same logic to (...) understand other persecutions (...). For example, those which were suffered by homosexuals."

Did Gala react to Gistau's argument by apologizing to the Jews? No, he didn't. On March 5, 2009, another article written by Gala was published by El Mundo. The Spanish writer explained about the Jews that: "Always the same: or persecuted or persecutors. Or both things at the same time."

I'll not insult anybody's intelligence by explicitly answering the question which serves as the title of this article since I think you can do it by yourselves easily.

Spanish society surveyed about international issues.

The Real Instituto Elcano surveyed 1,200 people in Spain between October 28 and November 10, 2010, regarding international issues. When it comes to rate different countries in a 0 to 10 scale, the results are the following:

1.- Brazil: 6.

2.- Germany: 5.9.

3.- France: 5.8.

4.- United States: 5.7.

5.- Argentina: 5.6.

6.- Chile: 5.3.

6.- Venezuela: 5.3.

8.- Russia: 4.7.

9.- Cuba: 4.6.

10.- China: 4.5.

11.- Turkey: 4.4.

12.- Israel: 4.1.

13.- Morocco: 3.9.

14.- Iran: 3.

Russia, Cuba and China are considered Not Free by Freedom House's Freedom of the World report of 2010, while Venezuela and Turkey are considered Partly Free and Israel is considered Free by the same report. But in spite of these facts, Israel is rated worse than Venezuela, Russia, Cuba, China and Turkey by the Spanish society.

Does a Spanish intelligentsiya exist, properly speaking?

Through an article by Lucía Villa published on Público's official website on Monday, February 7, 2011, a video has been presented in support of a campaign for a new Gaza flotilla, called Ship to Gaza (translated into Spanish as Rumbo a Gaza). The video shows Spanish celebrities such as Alberto San Juan, Guillermo Toledo, Wyoming, Juan Diego Boto and Melanie Olivares, among others. They mainly come from the so-called mundo de la cultura (literally, culture world), which encompasses personalities from sectors like the TV, the cinema or the literature.

In other words: celebrities. Celebrities who serve as useful idiots (as Bernard-Henri Lévy portrayed those who joined the last Gaza flotilla on behalf of the I.H.H. through an article I'll translate soon) for a cause related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, whose history and characteristics they surely don't even know (as they demonstrate by their own words, repeating myths proven historically wrong on this blog), but who don't hesitate to present themselves as a moral authority on humanitarian issues (and they're often accepted as such by the public opinion and the mainstream media).

Well, or that's what they pretend to be. Because we've been presented individuals in that video such as Spanish actor Willy Toledo, who justifies the Cuban dictatorship and portrayes a non-violent anti-Castro activist as a common criminal.

Because those who appear in that video tell absolutely nothing about the despotic regime Hamas established in the Gaza Strip and the rocket and mortar attacks that terrorist organization committed against the Jewish State, in spite of the 2005 Israeli withdrawal from the aforementioned Palestinian territory (which these celebrities also omit), a withdrawal which Hamas tried to avoid and managed to delay.

Independent documentary filmmaker Maital Guttman managed to explain all of this and more here. Why don't we the Spaniards have such an example of real (and, by the way, beautiful) intelligentsiya?

Indoctrination in schools.

Two Galician associations known as Cosal and Buserana will adhere to the Rumbo a Gaza (Ship to Gaza) campaign, officially intended to send another flotilla to the Gaza Strip. They'll also try to gain public support through "informative" activities in schools. Chicha Martínez, member of both of the associations, explained in Cee's municipal plenary room that an agreement was reached in order to perform their activities in schools of Corcubión, Cee and Muxía municipalities, and that the number of schools to visit will grow during the next days.

Martínez's conference in Cee's municipal plenary room was completed with a documentary about the Gaza flotilla stopped by the Tzahal the night between Sunday, May 30, and Monday, May 31, 2010.

First of all, sending another flotilla to the Gaza Strip would be opposed to U.N.R.W.A.'s official policy. Martin Nesirsky, a U.N. spokesperson, explained last July that even the U.N.R.W.A. considers that routes for supplies to enter by land through Israel's border are well established, and that those routes are the way to send the humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip.

Secondly, it should be noted that the last Gaza flotilla seemed to be an act of provocation rather than a humanitarian campaign, if we attend to the proofs that demostrate the pre-planned violence by the activists and I.H.H.'s ties with international terrorism.

Finally, we must ask ourselves about the supposed democratic and legal legitimacy of the arrangement between the aforementioned Galician associations and Corcubión's, Cee's and Muxía's municipal authorities. This is not about teaching schoolchildren lessons on universal human values, democracy or ethics. What Cosal and Buserana associations are trying to do is to gain support by indoctrinating kids into an specific political ideology.

It would be like entering those schools and preach ideological principles of a political party. And it wouldn't be the first time this happens regarding Israel and the Palestinians. In 2010, the Israeli Embassy in Madrid received anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic postcards sent by six to nine-year-old Spanish schoolchildren. The school in which those kids were studying belongs to Amnesty International's school network.

The Jerusalem Post on WikiLeaks revelations regarding Spain.

The Jerusalem Post published two articles on WikiLeaks revelations regarding Spain. Both of the now available cables corroborate two main challenges Spanish authorities must meet:

a) A severe problem of anti-Semitism does exist in Spain.

b) Catalonia, in northeastern Spain, is a major Mediterranean center for Islamic terrorism while the whole country is a past and present target for al-Qaeda.

Bernard-Henri Lévy and Susan Abulhawa.

On Sunday, December 5, 2010, El País published an opinion article by French intellectual Bernard-Henri Lévy under the title ¿Vuelve el antisemitismo? This is in fact a translation into Spanish from his article, published by The Huffington Post under the title The Antisemitism to Come two days before.

Lévy denounces French initiatives to boycott Israel, Susan Abulhawa's novel Mornings in Jenin and Vibeke Løkkeberg's film Tears of Gaza as signs of a resurgent anti-Semitism which seems to affect the world and especially Scandinavia.

On Tuesday, December 21, 2010, El País published an opinion article by Palestinian American author Susan Abulhawa under the title Respuesta a Bernard-Henri Lévy. This is in fact a translation into Spanish from her article, published by The Huffington Post under the title The Antisemitism to Come? Hardly one day before, as a response to Bernard-Henri Lévy's aforementioned article.

Abulhawa's answer seems to consist mainly of denying Lévy's statements without having read the reliable data he provides in order to denounce the aforementioned events. This reliable data provided by the French philosopher consists of:

a) French individuals and organizations want Israel to be boycotted, in spite of the fact that the Jewish State is the only democracy in the Middle East, whose population mainly accepts a two-State solution.

b) Israel's neighbours are not democracies and many of them still reject a two-State solution, but they're not subjected to boycott proposals.

c) Fathi Hamad, a senior Hamas official, stated recently that about 700 members of Hamas and other Palestinian armed factions died during the Operation Cast Lead, which almost match the number of Palestinian combatants provided by Israel (709).

d) Tears of Gaza, whose production team didn't actually go to the Gaza Strip in order to collect evidence, omitted that Hamas is directly responsible for the war itself, committed war crimes during the clash and rules the Gaza Strip in a despotic manner; all of this makes the film to be propagandistic in nature.

e) Mornings in Jenin is a compendium of anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic topics.

f) Israel's Embassy in Oslo had to be protected by installing a security fence.

g) A Swedish fascist party known as Sverigedemokraterna (i.e., Sweden Democrats) has gained access to the Riksdag (i.e., the Parliament) in the past elections.

h) Malmö, which is Sweden's third largest city and suffers from inter-ethnic violence, is ruled by a mayor who equates anti-Semitism and Zionism.

Abulhawa's answer mainly consists of:

a) She ignores the aforementioned eight points.

b) She supports the boycott campaign against Israel, in spite of the fact that the European Court of Human Rights of the Council of Europe sentenced against such a measure as a discriminatory action, and thus, a punishable offense.

c) She states the Palestinians are the only ones who can be considered the native population not only of Palestine, but also of Israel, thus implicitly denying Israel's right to exist as a Jewish State, when the Jews historically are a native population of Israel and Palestine.

d) She states that Lévy considers every single sort of criticism against Israel an act of anti-Semitism, something which is not true. Lévy only states that anti-Semitism is resurging in Europe.

e) Abulhawa accuses Israel of wiping Palestine of the map, expelling people from their homes, stealing their possessions and so on, while she ignores 1.5 million non-Jews living in Israel while enjoying democracy; that the Jewish State is not entirely and exclusively accountable for the Palestinian exodus, being the Arab countries also responsible for it, as well as for the living conditions of the Palestinian refugees living in their territories and the absence of a Palestinian State which they refused to build while occupying the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip; that the Palestinian Arabs themselves started the conflict and rejected a State of their own with the war when they were offered one; that Mahmoud Abbas waited almost until the end of Israel's moratorium on settlement building to resume negotiations, so when the moratorium came to an end almost inmediately, he had the excuse to stop negotiating again; as well as many other historical facts.

f) She accuses Israel of applying apartheid-style policies in spite of the fact that Israel grants equality for its population by law, regardless of ethnicity, religion and race, while the South African laws during apartheid granted the opposite.

g) She accuses Israel of deliberately targeting Palestinian schools, in spite of the fact that Hamas and other armed factions deliberately used schools with military purposes.

h) She accuses Israel of having expelled Palestinian Christians from Bethlehem, when the truth is that those Christians are subjected to threats and violence by Muslims.

i) She states about Lévy as somebody who thinks that he has more rights to the land of her grandparents than herself just because he is a Jew. This comes to be a false allegation after reading Lévy's arguments and demonstrates Abulhawa's predisposition to disqualify Jews, thus demonstrating Lévy's main argument: there is a clear resurgence of anti-Semitic attitudes.