Let me start this presentation with a true story I became a
part of in a way I never expected while running a newspaper in a small Ontario town.
One day, a large fast food company that happened to be American,
opened a new branch in our town. Many people, including the owner or manager of
the three local newspapers were invited to the opening ceremony. At some point,
the regional manager of the food company called all three of us to his office
and said a few words about his company. He gave us the good news that he'll
place a great deal of advertising with each of us, and that he looked forward
to having good relations with everyone.
It turned out he was a local boy that made good. The thing,
however, is that he was well aware of what happens in the small towns where
several publications compete for the advertising dollars of big companies. He
called it the brutal badmouthing of each other and warned it was something that
annoyed him greatly. He said that the practice amounted to insulting his
intelligence rather than the denigration of the other publications. To put it
bluntly, he said, come tell me what's good about your publication; not what's
bad about the other guy. “The bottom line is that I'm intelligent enough to
make my own choice”.
I remember that incident every time that I read an article
about Egypt
in a North American publication. Whether it is a factual and neutral article
about the country, or it is a hate and incitement Jewish propaganda, I feel
that Egypt
will be affected very little by it. This happens at a time when the
intelligence of the readers is being insulted by the writers and editors of the
publication. As a member of the audience, I am greatly offended.
Two articles, published lately about Egypt , will
serve as examples on how to write about that country, and how not to write
about it. The first article came under the title: “Months After ISIS Attack, Egypt 's Tourism
Industry Still Paying the Price,” written by Henry Johnson and published on
March 1, 2016 in Foreign Policy. The second article came under the title: “Egypt ,
optimistically,” written by Hannah Burns and published on March 4, 2016 in the
Hill Magazine.
The Henry Johnson article is an example of how the Jewish
hate and incitement machine insults the intelligence of its audience. Here is a
publication that never wrote something positive about Egypt , now
reminding its readers how good things were in the past but (and there is that
BUT) things are bad now. Look at the first paragraph: “scuba diving business
once boomed [note the ONCE] with tourists, but that was before...” Again you
see in the same paragraph: “airlines ONCE brought millions of tourists.”
A dozen paragraphs follow one another, all written in that
same style. Meanwhile, the astute readers will have noticed two damnable
occurrences telling them that the Jewish hate and incitement machine was the
hand that wrote the useless article. The first occurrence tells from where the
Henry Johnsons of this world get their ideas: “Egypt 's Youm7 newspaper,” a kind of
local supermarket tabloid known for its sensational reporting.
To give it credence, Johnson dabbles in the second kind of
damnable occurrences: “The newspaper makes all too clear what Cairo
has feared for months: Egypt 's
economy is paying a hefty price for the attack against the Russian passenger
jet.” But who has told this guy what Cairo
fears?
Still, in an effort to buttress that idea, he unwittingly
shoots himself in the foot. He wants to say that Egypt
is struggling to “reassure foreigners Egypt is a safe place to go on
vacation.” That's because “tour companies provide the country's second biggest
source of income.” And this, my friend, is how the writer shoots himself in the
foot. The truth is that tourism is the second biggest source of foreign
currency, not the second biggest source of income. Agriculture, mining,
manufacturing, hi-tech, construction, banking, health services and may other
industries rank well ahead of tourism as a source of income in Egypt .
And that's what you encounter in the first three paragraphs.
The rest of the article follows the same pattern relentlessly … on and on and
on for several more sickly paragraphs.