September 15, 2014 --

When it comes to the State of Israel, The New York Times leads the way in disproportionate criticism of Israel. Isabel Kershner's article, September 11, is of a piece with such journalistic imbalance.

Israel gets attacked by rockets from Hamas and, although its theoretical right to defend itself is -- grudgingly, LPR believes -- recognized by the West's media and governments, the Jewish State is threatened with war crimes accusations when it fact it does respond.

The Kershner article asserts that over 2,100 Palestinians were killed in Gaza. I have seen reports in The New York Times that 2,600 people have been killed in Ukraine, with vast numbers turned into refugees. I am not aware of any clamor in the media about civilian casualties and suffering in Ukraine. Indeed, as has been noted elsewhere, the western media that shows damage to buildings in Gaza has ignored the damage to civilian areas in Ukraine's Donbass.

Ms. Kershner indicates that while Israel will investigate the conduct of its troops in the recent fighting in Gaza, similar investigations are not to be expected from Hamas. Ms. Kershner does got address the question: is the war crimes concept conceivable Hamas, committed to Jihad against Israel -- notwithstanding the apparent refusal of the media to acknowledge this? In view of the references to Jihad in the Hamas Charter, neither The New York Times nor the Obama administration, nor the Israel-haters can claim that Hamas is not waging Jihad against Israel

Ms. Kershner reports that Hamas summarily killed suspected collaborators with Israel and has drawn criticism for these acts. headlined criticism Unmentioned by Ms.Kershner is the use by Hamas of "human shields" around its missile-launching locations. Does The New York Times dismiss the assertion that Hamas fired missiles against Israel from within civilian centers? Perhaps so. The House of Representatives passed a resolution critical of the use of "human shields" by Hamas; LPR is not aware that The New York Times reported this House action which, even if reported, must have been buried in the pages of the paper.

Ms. Kershner's lead sentence points to "widespread criticism, even among allies like the United States, that Israeli forces had used excessive fire-power in a number of highly publicized assaults in [Gaza]." This would suggest that Israel's "allies" recognize that Israel has a right of limited self-defense. and must remain vulnerable to continued attack from the Jihadists who are committed to the obliteration of Israel, with the Islamic State of Palestine rising on her ashes These critics of Israel might as well recognize for Hamas a unilateral right of belligerency against the Jewish State of Israel -- Hamas may attack and Israel has the right to be destroyed.

A hint of this approach was indicating during the Gaza fighting with assertions that it was unfair for Israelis to be protected by the Iron Dome -- unless Gaza was similarly protect, and by outrage that the number of civilian casualties in Gaza far exceeded the number of civilian deaths in Israel. LPR believes these critics will not be satisfied until the flag of Hamas appears on Jerusalem's Western Wall.

Article 13 of the Hamas Charter declares that Hamas has no interest in peace terms with Israel. The Hamas goal is total victory over Israel by means of Jihad. Either Israel's critics are unaware of this Hamas reality -- or, they back this goal.

Articles 15 and 30 of the Hamas Charter invite media support for Hamas as it wages Jihad against Israel. Again, either the media critics of Israel are unaware of this invitation from Hamas -- or, quite aware of it, they have been pleased to comply.