The New York Times has to be one of the most racist papers in the nation. It has one standard of value for one people - Israelis - and another for the other people - Palestinians.

The banning of Israeli tennis player Shahar Peer from the Dubai women’s tournament - which I opposed because Peer is one of those Israelis who protested against the Gaza siege and solely because of that I believe she should have been allowed to play - was given TWO fuckin’ stores in this so-called paper of record.

One was written by the Zionist sports writer Harvey Araton (I’ll tell you below why he’s a Zionist, and it’s not because his name sounds Jewish) with the headline: A Political Swing at One Player Sours a Tournament for All.

Araton wants to bring to tears his readers all because one Israel was denied permission to compete in a tournament. And study his headline; “sours tournament for all.” No, the tournament was fine because not every one’s a fanatical Zionist like Mr. Araton. He even suggests a boycott of the Dubai tournament calling on pro-Israel Jews to launch a campaign of intimidation against all sponsors of the Dubai games:

“For one thing, tennis does big business in American markets — think New York, Los Angeles and Miami — with large Jewish populations. The men, who follow the women to Dubai next week, may want to remember that, too, along with the companies that sponsor these events.”

But one story was not enough for the Times. They had to inform readers that the Tennis channel was refusing to broadcast the Dubai tournament because Peer was banned [Tennis Channel Won’t Televise Dubai Event in Protest]. Is that really “all the news that fit to print”? Do we really need to now that some special-interest channel whose American subscription base is in the single-digit million isn’t airing a Middle East tournament all because a foreigner was denied entry? But the Times is concerned with documenting everything Israel, but the Palestinians get scant mention even when scores of them die. This is a paper that hardly writes any obituaries for deceased Arab writers, poets, and numerous other notables but once had one for a chef who spent some time in Israel.

The Times is racist and incredibly biased because it highlights the plight of one Israeli athlete someone like Mr. Araton has never written one things about the untold number of Palestinians denied the ability to compete in sports because of Israel’s occupation. The Palestinians Football team, for example, has never even played on Palestinian soil because the Israeli government denies them a visa. Palestinians are denied the ability to train and compete in international events all the time. The Times is racist because they write about Shahar Peer and not someone like Zakia Nasser and her Olympic troubles. ESPN wrote the following:

Then there is Zakia Nassar. She’s a 21-year-old Palestinian from Bethlehem studying dentistry in Jenin, a city in the West Bank. She said it has been her dream since she was 10 to swim in the Olympics but there is no pool available for training in Jenin. There is an Olympic-sized, 50-meter pool in nearby Nazareth, but the Israeli government did not give her permission to use it.

“Without permission, there is no way to go there,” Nassar said. “Many journalists did their best. They talked, they wrote, they talked, they wrote. Our Olympic committee, our swim federation, they said, ‘This is sport; let her train.’ And they said no. I said, ‘I am just going to swim.’ And they said no. They didn’t say anything. They just ignored me.”

Nassar was limited to training only when she returned to her parents’ home in Bethlehem, but she did so only about every two months for two days or so, and the pool is only 12 meters long. Yes, she is very good at flip turns.

“My parents always encouraged me,” Nassar said. “They said, ‘This is your dream, these are the Olympics, you must train as best you can.’ And I’m glad. I’m here.”

Nassar said she received a lot of supportive text messages from Palestinians back home. “All the Palestinian people always support me. They said, ‘We are proud of you. Keep going. Swim your best for Palestinians.’”

She swam the 50 in 31.97, more than seven seconds behind the best time, but it was good enough to win her heat. She will not appear on the cover of Time magazine or a Wheaties box or receive millions of dollars in endorsements, but she can always say she won a race at the Olympics.

“There wasn’t a lot of training,” she said. “But I tried my best, and that’s OK. It has been my dream, and I am excited to be here. I don’t think I will keep on swimming. I have to concentrate on dentistry now. But maybe I’ll keep on swimming for next time.”

So while Peer is denied entry to just one game, Zakia is denied even the ability to conduct proper training. Will Mr. Araton call for a boycott of Israeli-hosted tournaments because they obstruct Palestinian athletes? Will he write that the Olympic mood was soured because of Israel’s petty actions? No, he will not. Zakia doesn’t even exist for him and for the rest of the Times her story just isn’t the story “fit to print”. And if you suggested a boycott of Israeli tournaments he’d shout you down as an anti-Semite.

Moving on. Why is Araton a bleeding heart for Zionism? It’s because his politics shows in the stores he chooses to highlight. Just days after the Peer story, Araton highlighted another one of his outrages: Sweden’s decision to not allow exhibitioners for the Davis Cup when Israel is competing for security reasons [Life Lessons From Sports in a World of Strife].

“That was the unfortunate message sent by organizers of a Davis Cup tie next month in Malmo, Sweden, when they cited anticipated protests in announcing that the matches against Israel from March 6 to 8 will be played in front of 4,000 empty seats at their Baltic Hall. What, they don’t have metal detectors in Scandinavia?

At best, this can be called a craven circumvention of an unpleasant situation. At worst, it might be interpreted as an attempt to isolate the Israelis, sweep them under the carpet as if they do not exist. It’s fair to ask: would this be the strategy for the United States if a march was organized against its presence in Iraq? If the Russians were coming and Georgian sympathizers were planning to be heard?”

Put aside the debate as to whether Araton is right or wrong. That isn’t my point. My point is that to highlight every single discomfort for Israeli athletes while ignoring those inflicted on Palestinians by Israel is nothing short of racism because it’s underpinned by the valued judgment that Israelis are worthy of more sympathy than Palestinian solely for the reason, and there can be no other reason, that people Araton believe Israelis are more human than Arabs.

In the aforementioned piece, Araton also congratulates Andy Roddick for boycotting the men’s leg of the Dubai tournament solely because of Peer [”Andy Roddick has said he will boycott on principle, and good for him.”] If Roddick ever boycotted Israel in solidarity with Zakia, Araton would smear him day and night. Araton also writes about the “eternal Jewish-Muslim conflict” in reference to Israel-Palestine. This is a fallacious talking-point might not distraction attention from the colonization and occupation of Palestine by the Zionist movement. Instead, Zionists make it seem as if the conflict is not about anything as mundane as land and occupation, but instead not 2,000 year struggle between Islam and Judaism. Not that’s not what the conflict is about.

. . . But the New York Times doesn’t just think the plight of Israeli athletes is all that deserves a headline. Apparently a critical play on Israel is worthy too. Check out this headline: Workshop May Present Play Critical of Israel.

Wake up the children! Wake up the children! There’s a play in New York - a city with hundreds of productions - that [gush!] is critical of Israel. Boycott Now! . . .

[Sidenote:

While the Times’ itself acknowledges that over 200 Palestinians were killed, it still found it more appropriate to feature a photo of an Israeli family suffering from shock rather than showing Americans any Palestinian victims. Source.]

. . . But, again, one headline never suffices when the beloved child of Israel is in question. Robert Mackey writes the Times’ The Lede blog and he raises the assertion that the play may be anti-Semitic [Is a Play About Gaza Anti-Semitic? Read the Script]:

“In Wednesday’s New York Times, Patrick Healy writes about the possibility that the New York Theater Workshop may present a production of a new play inspired by the recent war in Gaza. Some critics have charged that the 10-minute play, “Seven Jewish Children,” by British playwright Caryl Churchill, is anti-Semitic.”

Really? No, you must be kidding? You’re telling me that there are people out there, say an Israel lobby?, who go around calling everything and everyone critical of Israel anti-Semitic? Now I’ve heard of everything.

But the Times has still to hear about Palestinians under occupation.