Diane Mason prides herself on knowing Hebrew, but I see very little indication she uses it. In this post she deduces from some quotation marks in a caption on the English side of Haaretz that... oh, I'm not even going to give her the respect of repeating her thesis. Suffice it to say that had she looked at the Hebrew version (and remember, Haaretz is a Hebrew newspaper, with some translators added on) she'd know that there were no such quotation marks, because that whole pernicious method isn't used in Hebrew.
But even if there were: she has taken decades of Israeli social history, contrasted it with one caption in a newspaper, and found her interpretation of the caption more convincing than the entire story of a society. I have no better description for her method and reasoning than idiocy.
The question remains, however: how is it that an educated young woman is willing to broadcast such idiocy?