The Methods and Standards of the New York Times: how to protect Israeli war crimes

This is a classic example of the Zionist methods of the New York Times. Look at this piece (signed by some Fares Karam, and I don't know who he is and it does not matter if the NYT adds another token Arab or two, and they can sign the name of George Habash and the article will be cooked to read like a Zionist propaganda brochure). So the news story is rather critical of Israel: "“What we are seeing here for the people of Gaza is an existence, not a life,” the official, John Holmes, the under secretary general for humanitarian affairs, told reporters." So this is a straight news story about a UN official and his findings in Gaza. And then suddenly you encounter this paragraph that was inserted for no reason--other than to respond to the UN official and provide justifications for Israeli siege and war on Gaza: "Israel imposed import restrictions on Gaza after Hamas captured an Israeli soldier in a cross-border raid in 2006, and strengthened them a year later after Hamas, which calls for Israel’s destruction, seized Gaza. Israel allows daily shipments of food, medicine and other supplies." So notice that even the facts are not in the interests of Israel, the foreign editor manages to insert sentences in order to provide nuggets of Israeli propaganda to the reader. So according to the New York Times, Israel allows food, medicine, and other supplies to enter Gaza. So that means that there is no siege of Gaza. So that means, the UN official is lying, and that his eyes were lying too. So what is not being allowed into Gaza? What is left, according to the New York Times? PlayStation III? OK, so according to the New York Times, Israel allows everything to enter Gaza except PlaySation III. So it is really a PlayStation III siege of Gaza.