Topmost (in use)

Tag Archives | Israel

CBC’s Evan Solomon forgot half the Harper story. The positive half. Golly. Oops.

Synopsis: Prime Minister Harper made a historic speech to the Israeli Knesset today. At one point, Harper was heckled by a couple of pro-Palestinian, Arab members of the Knesset, who were themselves jeered and eventually they left. Most importantly, the entire Knesset then erupted into a standing ovation for Harper. Here is what the state-owned CBC’s Evan Solomon reported to his 51,000 Twitter followers to explain what happened:



Yes it’s just a tiny thing  —  a tweet  —  but add them up and it all serves as irreducible proof of the systemic anti-Harper, anti-conservative (both small c and capital) bile that runs through the journalistic and editorial veins of the state-owned CBC. It’s this drip, drip, drip of left-wing propaganda from the left-wing media that is so pernicious.

While Prime Minister Harper was speaking to the Israeli Knesset today, the state-owned CBC’s Evan Solomon was watching the live feed. At one Follow this link for more hypocrisypoint, I imagine he forgot other people like me were watching too.

It was a pretty exciting thing that happened during that speech, as historic speeches go, but as a news analyst and reporter for a national news network, you have to be very careful about how you present things to your audience, lest your audience be mislead.

Toward the end of the historic Harper speech, a couple of anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian Arab members of the Knesset (yes they exist  — a dozen or more, actually) heckled and jeered at Harper when our Prime Minister was bold enough to talk about the abhorrent “Israel apartheid” meme touted by far-left anti-Israel zealots here and abroad.

Being bold and speaking the truth instead of the usual liberal-left talking points and politically-correct platitudes, is risky. So this could have looked really bad for our Prime Minister, had the story ended just there. But it didn’t. The real story is that the two hecklers left, after several other Knesset members turned and sternly told them to shut up. And then the bigger part of the story happened: the whole Knesset stood up in a grand gesture of approval and thanks to our prime minister, who was brave enough to speak the truth in bold colors. That’s huge.

But the story didn’t end right, for Evan Solomon. He preferred this other ending. here’s what he rushed to tweet to his 51,000 followers:


That’s it. No immediate follow-up to that tweet explaining that this big, momentous event was actually received very positively for Harper. Solomon got his preferred headline out there instead, which made Harper look bad. It’s a false narrative when you leave out half the story.

He might have tried to be as good and honest as several others on Twitter, including journalists like David Akin of Sun News, who tweeted:


Simple, right?

In the twitterverse, tweets are viewed by some as the day’s headlines  –  much like headlines in a paper. And journalists and editors know very well that many people “read the news” by simply scanning the headlines. That’s why some headline  —  and tweets  —  are absolutely ghastly misrepresentations of the real, full story. Sometimes the editors/journalists are simply using a quasi-marketing ploy to get your attention so you read the full story (where you may or not find the truth), but in many cases  —  particularly among the more biased, liberal-left media  — the ploy is simply to get their angle on the story out there into the popular culture. That can lead to incorrect conclusions. And that is the whole idea.

For my part, after Solomon’s tweet of half-truth, I tweeted:


Solomon replied, no doubt after seeing that it was being re-tweeted and after getting lots of negative feedback from wary conservatives and other normal people.


No.  Again, that’s only half the truth. The wrong half. Solomon only “reported” (tweeted) the ovation that was given to Harper at the end of the speech, literally saying in that tweet (it was three tweets later) that the ovation was received “as he concludes his speech.” An ovation at the end of a speech is something most people would expect to happen simply out of common politeness.

So no, it’s not “fair reporting” at all. It’s utterly unfair. So then as you can see, even in his effort at denial, he did not represent himself and his timeline truthfully at all to me and his followers. That’s two Pinocchios. And he’s a “news” man! On our dime.

And many agreed with me.


It’s no longer important to “watch the news” or listen to it or read it  —  except to catch journalists in the act as they bend the truth or tell half-truths. Mainstream media has been ruined by the drip, drip, drip of bias and ineptitude.

I view the mainstream media with deep suspicion.  I suspect that there is a systemic left-wing, anti-Harper, anti-conservative bias at the state-owned CBC. You should too.


No reply from Solomon.

There is no reply that would change the facts.



The network is now joining in the half-truth that Solomon started, in what will become their false narrative. On the news.


The whole article at the left-wing is from the perspective of one of the Arab Israelis who heckled. Copious quotes. No mention made of the standing ovation Harper got as a result of his remarks, nor did the CBC get any perspective from anybody in harmony with Harper’s position.


Continue Reading

Israel: Decades-old conflict not about to cease

Since 9/11, western powers have behaved more or less like Prince Hamlet, conflicted by doubts and stalemated by niceties that barely register with those who have mounted their version of “slings and arrows” against the West and its allies.

A dozen years following 9/11 should have erased any remaining doubt that Osama bin Laden spoke for many in the Arab-Muslim world who believe Islam is locked in a millennial conflict with the West, and victory will belong to the party that has the faith to take defeats and yet remain on the field of battle as the last man standing.

Bin Laden and his associates might well be described as the crudest expression of this deep-seated conviction of Islamist thinking and practice — that Islam is politics in action, not merely a religion, with the mission to establish its system of government based on the Shariah.

Waging war, engaging in diplomacy, signing treaties, and maintaining or breaking truce are merely means in the pursuit of the end that Islamist doctrine prescribes.

Hamlet’s dilemma was how to act commensurate with the knowledge of the crime given him by the ghost of the murdered king, his father.

The tragedy that unfolds in Shakespeare’s drama is a result of action delayed and ineptly executed by the Prince of Denmark.

The West cannot play Hamlet, while Islamists have mastered the art of exploiting the West’s niceties to their advantage.

It is instructive to note Islamists are most cautious in dealing with Russians and Chinese — that neither Moscow nor Beijing will hesitate in using disproportionate force when needed and will not be troubled by any doubt over actions taken against Islamist terrorism.

But what is worse than playing Hamlet is playing the role at the expense of another.

The West does this with Israel.

Sitting in the shadow of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem one evening when visiting Israel, it became strikingly clear to me, as it is to most Israelis, that the ground zero of the millennial conflict between Islam and the West is right where I sat.

Islamists have made it amply clear, and the vast majority of Muslims support them, that this millennial conflict will not cease until Israel is annihilated.

Those Muslims small in numbers who repudiate such obscenity are in turn repudiated, ostracized, or killed as apostates from Islam.

Israelis are left with no choice but to act with wisdom and courage in doing whatever is necessary for survival. Yet instead of resolutely supporting Israel, many in the West have parked their discredited anti-Semitism inside mosques to appease Islamists.

In an ancient temple located outside of India’s capital are found words inscribed on the wall, “Coincidences, if traced far back enough, become inevitable.”

The recurrent conflict between Hamas and Israel in Gaza, as was 9/11 and many similar, can be traced back sufficiently to see a pattern whose message brooks no doubting.

Continue Reading

Michael Coren: Canada’s NDP unfriendly to Israel

It was only fitting that Israeli president and elder statesman, Shimon Peres, should visit Canada and thank this country for its support of the Jewish state, and by extension its support for democracy and decency in the Middle East.

He had to be diplomatic, but I can be a little more direct.

While numerous Liberal leaders were far from being opposed to Israel, none of them possessed the visceral support and the genuine concern for the country we saw from Brian Mulroney, even Joe Clark, and especially Stephen Harper.

Contrary to what critics claim, Harper is not a Christian Zionist, and he doesn’t support Israel for the largely apocryphal Jewish vote. He simply believes — politically, morally, and emotionally — that Israel is the good guy in the region.

Opposition and NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair, on the other hand, may personally support Israel, and certainly relies on Jewish support in his parliamentary riding, but he is increasingly a head without a body, a manager with a rebellious staff.

His problem is that not just some but almost all of the opposition to Israel today, some of it vehement and even violent, within Canadian politics comes from the left, the labour movement, Islamic radicals, student activists. And many of them are part of and increasingly influential within the NDP.

The phenomenon is not confined to Canada, of course. Other than a handful of far-right extremists and a few democratic conservatives well outside of the mainstream, the sole opposition to the Jewish state comes from the left.

In fact, for someone like Mulcair to claim the NDP is the natural and long-term friend of Israel is as insulting to Israelis as it is to the NDP membership.

The party’s voters may be indifferent about the issue, but its core support and its union backers boarded the anti-Zionist train long ago, and the steam and speed are increasing all the time.

The absurd Libby Davies took over the mantle of hysterical Svend Robinson in being super-prominent New Democrats horribly jaundiced on the Middle East. Ironically, both are homosexuals and while they would be given legal protection and social respect in Israel, they would be persecuted if not killed in most of her neighbours.

Then we have Ontario Federation of Labour boss and former NDP candidate Sid Ryan, whose criticism of Israel borders on the obsessive. Attend any NDP meeting, read NDP blogs, look at conference motions. Reality cries out to be heard here. This is a party sinking deeper into an irrational anti-Zionism, made all the muddier and darker by the influx of separatist MPs in orange clothing who are intimately connected to Quebec Islamic politics.

These people may be wrong and their ideas repugnant, but party leaders being dishonest about it is almost worse.

I can assure Mr. Mulcair that he is certainly no Shimon Peres, and also that the Israeli president has seen and knows enough to detect friends and perceive enemies. You’re one of the last people left in the pro-Israel room in the house of Canadian socialism, my friend, and pretty soon you’ll look around and find you’re talking to yourself.

Your comrades will be outside, screaming back.

Continue Reading

It's a question.