The New York Times depicts the shootdown of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 (photo copyright Dmitry Lovetsky/AP).
The New York Times (7/22/14) didn’t mince words in its editorial on the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17: “Whoever unleashed a lethal missile not knowing how to distinguish between a military and a civilian plane is not only irresponsible and stupid, but a war criminal.”
That seems pretty unequivocal. But if you look at the New York Times‘ archives, you’ll see that some people who unleash lethal missiles without knowing how to distinguish between military and civilian planes aren’t irresponsible, stupid or criminal—they’re just doing what they had to do. Of course, if you’re going to shoot down a civilian jetliner—from the Times‘ point of view—it helps to be working for the US Navy when you do it.
When the Navy shot down Iran Air 655 over the Persian Gulf in 1988, killing all 290 people on board (Extra!, 7/88), the Times editorial (7/5/88) insisted that “while horrifying, it was nonetheless an accident. On present evidence, it’s hard to see what the Navy could have done to avoid it.”
Far from denouncing Will Rogers, the captain of the USS Vincennes that brought down the passenger plane, as “irresponsible and stupid,” let alone a “war criminal,” the Times invited readers to “put yourself in Captain Rogers’ shoes.” He “had little choice,” the paper assured. “It is hard to fault his decision to attack the suspect plane.”
The USS Vincennes launching the kind of missile that it used to kill 290 people aboard Iran Air 655.
Bear in mind that this is not one of the ragtag separatists the Times points to in the Malaysia Airlines case—so unsophisticated that the Times suspects they must have had outside help to learn how to use a surface-to-air missile. Rogers was a high-ranking professional military officer who had at his command the finest surveillance and computer technology that the Cold War produced. Still, it’s his “not knowing how to distinguish between a military and a civilian plane,” not the separatists’, that the Times finds easy to empathize with.
Has the Times just grown less forgiving over the years? Well, not really. A few years before the downing of Flight 655, the Times published a blistering editorial (9/2/83) about the Soviet Union shooting down Korean Airlines Flight 007. “There is no conceivable excuse for any nation shooting down a harmless airliner,” it began.
Yet the Times was able to conceive of excuses when a certain other nation shot down a harmless airliner. Perhaps the editorialists don’t know what the word “conceivable” means.
The Times was dismissive of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s efforts to deflect responsibility about Flight 17. “Mr. Putin also sought to transfer blame to Ukraine, saying the tragedy would not have happened if Kiev had maintained a cease-fire. And he sanctimoniously declared ‘no one has the right to use this tragedy to pursue their own political goals.'”
But Putin’s effort to blame an enemy state for its continued belligerence sounds a lot like the New York Times in 1988. The paper first said that if Navy rules that allow its ships to shoot first can’t be “prudently altered,” then “the onus for avoiding such accidents in the future rests on civilian aircraft.” (One tip offered by the Times: “avoid combat zones,” a suggestion not offered by the paper in the wake of the Malaysia Airlines disaster.)
But the best prospect for avoiding similar tragedies in the future would be “Teheran’s willingness to bring an end to its futile eight-year war with Iraq.” Note that that war began when Saddam Hussein invaded Iran in 1980—and that the Vincennes was in the Persian Gulf to defend Iraqi oil shipments as part of the United States’ intervention on Hussein’s side. One might almost say that the Times was using the Iran Air tragedy to pursue the United States’ political ends.
You don’t have to go back to 1988 to find examples of the Times‘ hypocrisy, though. For the editorialists, Putin pointing to Ukraine’s failure to maintain a ceasefire was a cynical effort to “transfer blame.” The New York Times editorial (7/18/14) after four children were killed by Israeli bombing on a beach in Gaza closed with this:
Without a political strategy, another cease-fire may be the most anyone can hope for at this moment. But Hamas leaders have rejected one proposed in the past week by Egypt and are demanding better terms. Meanwhile, Palestinian civilians suffer the consequences.
The NYT is a rag barely worthy of lining the bottom of a birdcage.
To put this stupid mistake in perspective, I was shocked to learn that Ukraine is involved in an all out war with the separatists in the east, and that there has been regular aerial bombing of the region. Who flies a commercial aircraft through such air space, and worse yet, why is an all out war in eastern Ukraine barely making the news (until now at least)?
Several issues come to mind over this tragic event.
First of all, one hates to blame the victim, but what responsible airline flies over a combat zone to save 1,500 dollars in fuel and ten minutes of flight time, as has been reported at other sites? Reportedly, most of the majors from Quantas to British Air avoid flying over Ukraine, etc.
This airline corporation owes serious reparations to the families of the deceased, as do the reckless separatists who equally share the blame.
Secondly, I’ve read that, “a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”
But I doubt one asks too much in this instance. For god’s sake, NYT, if you’re going to “moralize,” about war crimes (because all the horrible incidents noted in this piece certainly qualify) try to apply your moral demands with equal fervor towards *all* parties!
The editors at the nationalist grey lady should hang their collective heads in shame over such obvious favoritism and partisan tergiversation.
Be well.
Killing is killing. And murder is murder. Period. No credit for being a “good-guy”.
Transcript of meeting of FAIR bloggers – the speaker is apparently Peter Hart: “You young bloggers have a lot to learn from Naureckas. See how he closed out a piece on the Ukraine with an attack on Israel? Get it? I don’t care if you’re writing about ant farms in Timbuktu – you darn well better work in an attack on Israel, or we’ll ship you off to Mother Jones. Look how he “forgot” to mention the war crimes committed by Hamas, the fact that every missile it fires at Israel’s civilian population is a war crime. Don’t you get it? Look how he “overlooked” Hamas’ use of human shields, guaranteed to maximize civilian casualties. Brilliant! That Naureckas can twist the truth like a pretzel. Look at how he faults Israel for failing to negotiate with Hamas, even though Hamas’ own charter ridicules negotiations – only Jihad will solve the Palestinian issue, according to Hamas’ charter. You won’t hear a peep about that from Naureckas – first-rate! Do you get it or don’t you? I heard one of you sniveling at the water cooler that FAIR is supposed to be objective, that it’s not supposed to cozy up to fascists like Hamas. I don’t want to hear that – we only want pretzel-twisters around here! [Abashed murmurs of asset.]”
“it’s hard to see what the [U.S.] Navy could have done to avoid [the Iranian plane].”
Quite so, NYT. The Vincennes was just defending the U.S. — in the Persian Gulf or the New York harbour, what’s the difference?
And anti-aircraft missiles almost launch themselves. If GM took a decade to fix faulty ignitions, who could blame the Navy?
I also agree with “William” that Gaza children are responsible for their own deaths. (What gives them the right to play on a beach?)
Israel is constantly sending friendly missiles and making friendly phone calls to warn Gazans about unfriendly missiles and artillery shells, and who could fault a friend like that? Hamas would do well indeed to accept the Israeli/U.S./Egyptian dictator’s terms and go back to meekly welcoming near-starvation and deprivation in its friendly, U.S.-backed, Egypt-enforced, open-air jail. Otherwise the unfriendly jihadists in Tel Aviv will turn Gazans into mincemeat.
Seriously William – you need to stop smoking that stuff, and try not picking the mushrooms off the cow pies (yes they are delicious) because from that last post you have but a distant, passing relationship with reality and truth. Actually if you can manage to wean yourself from the Fux Snooze Nitwork, you’ll find it’s easy to not be a troll for the Uber-richt Wing nuts.
Verified recording of meeting between newly-hired FAIR staffer and Peter Hart: “NEWLY-HIRED FAIR STAFFER: I have an idea. The mainstream media rarely report on the Palestinians’ explicit endorsement of terrorism. For example, the Palestinian Authority provides grants and stipends to terrorists released by Israel, including Abu-Musa Atia, who murdered a Holocaust survivor (Isaac Rotenberg) with an ax. If they’ve been imprisoned long enough, they’re elevated to Major-General or Deputy Minister. This would be a significant neglected story for FAIR to cover, don’t you think? PETER HART: Me hate Israel–Israel bad! Me no like Israel–Israel bad!”
It’s only bad if the other guy does it.
Lupine is correct “It’s only bad if the other guy does it”
Jim Naureckas was wrong to include comments about the Israeli v Palestinian conflict in an article about Malaysia Airlines Flight 17: “Whoever unleashed a lethal missile not knowing how to distinguish between a military and a civilian plane is not only irresponsible and stupid, but a war criminal.”
Therefore Will Rogers, the captain of the USS Vincennes is guilty of a war crime.
What is more criminal is the airlines flying over a war zone.
As for the comments by William, Eric on the Palestinian v Israeli conflict.
The annexation of a country that is not yours and the subsequent pillaging of that countries land, resources and the exploitation of its people is a breach of International Law.
Also Israel is complicit in the massacre of Palistinian, men, women and children in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.
The only thing that stops Israel been found guilty is the United States of America in this respect the USA support for Israel is no better than Russian support for Syria.
Verbatim audio recording of meeting between FAIR intern and Jim Naureckas: “FAIR INTERN: I have an idea. The mainstream media rarely report on the real Abbas. For example, Abbas is routinely called a moderate, even though he’s a Holocaust-denier, and there’s significant evidence he financed the Munich Massacre. There is no dispute he wrote a letter of condolence upon the death of Abu Daoud, the mastermind of the Munich massacre. This would be an important neglected story for FAIR to cover, don’t you think? JIM NAURECKAS: Me hate Israel! Israel bad! Me no like Israel! [Frustrated sobbing of FAIR intern audible at this point.]”
Great article!
The NYT needs such criticism.
But there’s a typo here in the word _airlines_: Yet the Times was able to conceive of excuses when a certain other nation shot down a harmless airlines.