By Stuart Kaufman
On Thursday, November 20, the Charleston Post and Courier published a story about the vicious murders, committed by Arab terrorists, of four rabbis who were praying in a synagogue in Jerusalem. The hook of the article was the impact of the murders on Charleston. To that end, the reporter interviewed several prominent leaders of the Jewish community of Charleston, including Rabbi and Mrs. Moshe Davis who have significant connections to Har Nof, where the slaughter occurred. However, the reporter also decided that, in the interest of fairness, he should interview a few Arabs from Charleston.
After paying lip service to the horror and the tragic loss of life, these worthies proceeded to put the murders in “context,” blaming the Israeli “occupation” for this and other atrocities. Right now I won't explore the moral bankruptcy of this argument. My purpose here is to highlight the moral bankruptcy of the reporter, Dave Munday and his editors at the Post and Courier for deciding that it would be only fair to balance out the interviews with members of the Jewish community by interviewing some Arabs, so as to put the murders in “context.”
I don’t single out the Post and Courier or its reporter to highlight the unusual nature of the lapse in publishing this example of putrid moral equivalence. I am singling them out as typical examples of the corruption that is endemic in so much of the media today. Why not interview supporters of Boko Haram to understand the “context” of their rampage of murder and rape against Christians? Why not interview supporters of ISIS to understand the “context” of their beheadings of Western hostages?
There is no “context” in those vile acts that requires “understanding.” Nor is there “context” in the case of these murdered rabbis that requires “understanding” by interviewing advocates of a fraudulent land claim against the Jewish state of Israel. This unfortunate article put in “context” the miserably sorry state of “journalism” in America today.