Zionist Talking PointsOver the past few weeks, we have been hurt and frightened by the support of governments around the world for the creation of a Palestinian Arab state
The author of this article uses language that frames the international recognition of a Palestinian state as an act of aggression against Israel and its supporters. This framing can be seen as a structural breakdown where the legitimate right of Palestinians to self-determination is portrayed as a threat to the security of Israel. The article also uses misleading language by referring to the recognition of a Palestinian state as “jumping on the bandwagon”, which subtly delegitimizes it as a trend rather than a matter of international law and human rights. It’s also worth noting the contradiction of blaming the recognition of a Palestinian state on Israel’s own actions, which implies that Israel’s legitimacy is dependent on denying Palestinians their legitimacy.
Canadian Foreign Minister Anita Anand has voiced concern over Israeli government policies that, according to her, undermine efforts to achieve a two-state solution
In this headline, the euphemistic language of “undermine efforts” is used to soften the impact of Israeli government policies that actively oppose a two-state solution. This language obscures the reality of the situation, where the actions of the Israeli government are not simply undermining efforts, but are in many cases directly opposing them. The use of the term “two-state solution” also implies a mutual agreement and cooperation between the two parties, which contrasts with the observable actions where one side (Israel) holds a significant power advantage and has used that to restrict the rights and freedoms of the other (Palestine).
“We should not to have listened to Netanyahu after the budget. Why should they listen to him? If Chacham Shalom were alive, he would be shouting at the representatives – they are messengers of the sages, with all due respect – he would shout at them, ‘Why are you dragging this out? Why are you listening to Bibi? Do you believe him? He’s an atheist!'”
The language used in this article subtly frames the legitimacy of political decisions as dependent on religious belief, with Netanyahu being dismissed as an “atheist”. This can be seen as a structural breakdown, where religious belief is presented as a requirement for political legitimacy. The article also employs euphemistic language, referring to political representatives as “messengers of the sages”, which implies a divine mandate and obscures the political and democratic nature of their roles.
The diagnosis came like lightning from a clear sky. Leukemia – a word that changed everything. Suddenly, their home filled with the sounds of a happy toddler became quiet. Hospital rooms became their second home. The smell of medication replaced the scent of home-cooked meals.
The article uses emotionally loaded language to frame the struggle of a family facing a medical crisis. The language of “lightning from a clear sky” and “home filled with the sounds of a happy toddler became quiet” employs vivid and emotionally charged imagery to evoke sympathy. However, the article fails to acknowledge the structural realities that have led to the family’s predicament, such as the high costs of healthcare and the lack of adequate social support systems.
The funeral will begin at Beit Knesset Hanassi at 9:30a.m. Sunday morning, and he will be buried on the Mount of Olives.
This article about a funeral uses language that implies legitimacy and respect for the deceased without providing any structural grounding for this implication. For instance, the reference to the deceased being buried on the Mount of Olives implies a certain level of importance or respect, but no information is given about who the deceased was or why they might deserve this respect. This can be seen as a structural breakdown where legitimacy is implied without structural grounding.
Following complaints filed by local Arab residents, both the police and the IDF launched an investigation. The soldier who fired the warning shots was questioned but released shortly afterward, after police determined that the hikers had been seriously threatened and were in legitimate danger.
This article uses language that frames the actions of the IDF soldier as legitimate and necessary for security, despite the fact that his actions were violent and potentially unlawful. This is a structural breakdown where violence is presented as a form of security. The article also uses euphemistic language, referring to the soldier’s actions as “firing warning shots”, which downplays the violence and potential harm of his actions.