More Trouble In Israel

[ZiprHead]

From my reading Hamas didn't attack until after the Israelis stormed peaceful worshippers at the al Aqsa mosque and injured over 300 of them.

And the Jan 6 people were peacefully touring the capital.

(Hint: Any Palestinian action less than firearms or explosives will be reported as "peaceful".)

Who were they going to attack in a mosque?

 

[Harry Bosch]

My sympathies are definitely with the tenants on this one.

Tenants who refuse to pay rent. I.e. illegal squatters. They should not get to live rent-free just because they have deranged friends who shoot thousands of rockets at a civilian population unless they do.

Is it really worth it though? All this over a few squatters? Israel is starting to lose the propaganda war.

 

[TomC]

The AP staff in Gaza City would witness a rocket launch right beside their office, endangering reporters and other civilians nearby—and the AP wouldn’t report it, not even in AP articles about Israeli claims that Hamas was launching rockets from residential areas. (This happened.) Hamas fighters would burst into the AP’s Gaza bureau and threaten the staff—and the AP wouldn’t report it. (This also happened.)

And yet, AP is now lying, claiming they had no idea that the building was also used by Hamas ...

I don't claim to know what really happened here, so I'm not passing judgement exactly.

But this reminds me of an event several years back. The big story in western media was "IDF targets hospital in Gaza." Which they did. The media was rife with the personal dramas of patients and staff.

What wasn't made clear in most of the reporting was that Hamas had installed missile launchers on the roof of that hospital.


The best, most effective, lies are the incomplete truths.

Tom

 

[Harry Bosch]

The AP staff in Gaza City would witness a rocket launch right beside their office, endangering reporters and other civilians nearby—and the AP wouldn’t report it, not even in AP articles about Israeli claims that Hamas was launching rockets from residential areas. (This happened.) Hamas fighters would burst into the AP’s Gaza bureau and threaten the staff—and the AP wouldn’t report it. (This also happened.)

And yet, AP is now lying, claiming they had no idea that the building was also used by Hamas ...

I don't claim to know what really happened here, so I'm not passing judgement exactly.

But this reminds me of an event several years back. The big story in western media was "IDF targets hospital in Gaza." Which they did. The media was rife with the personal dramas of patients and staff.

What wasn't made clear in most of the reporting was that Hamas had installed missile launchers on the roof of that hospital.


The best, most effective, lies are the incomplete truths.

Tom

Yep, the above is a true story that can't be spun. Hamas is a despicable organization more for what they do to their own citizens than what they do to Israelis.

 

[lpetrich]

But this reminds me of an event several years back. The big story in western media was "IDF targets hospital in Gaza." Which they did. The media was rife with the personal dramas of patients and staff.

What wasn't made clear in most of the reporting was that Hamas had installed missile launchers on the roof of that hospital.

So what about that? Does the end justify the means? Is it necessary to break eggs to make an omelet? Is Hamas so horrible that one must imitate it?

I'm reminded of this which I read long ago:
Bertrand Russell - Nobel Lecture: What Desires Are Politically Important? (1950)

There are, of course, various reasons for hating communists. First and foremost, we believe that they wish to take away our property. But so do burglars, and although we disapprove of burglars our attitude towards them is very different indeed from our attitude towards communists – chiefly because they do not inspire the same degree of fear. Secondly, we hate the communists because they are irreligious. But the Chinese have been irreligious since the eleventh century, and we only began to hate them when they turned out Chiang Kai-shek. Thirdly, we hate the communists because they do not believe in democracy, but we consider this no reason for hating Franco. Fourthly, we hate them because they do not allow liberty; this we feel so strongly that we have decided to imitate them.

Especially that last part.

 

[lpetrich]

 Human shields (law),  Human shield

According to many observers, including B'tselem, Hamas repeatedly used Palestinians as human shields. This practice became military policy during the second Intifada, and was only dropped when Adalah challenged the practice before Israel’s High Court of Justice in 2002. though the IDF persisted in using Palestinians in its 'neighbor procedure', whereby people picked at random were made to approach the houses of suspects and persuade them to surrender, a practice which arguably placed the former's lives in danger. The court ruled in October 2005 'that any use of Palestinian civilians during military actions is forbidden, including the “prior warning procedure”.' According to B'tselem, reports indicate that the practice has continued nonetheless, in military operations like Operation Cast Lead, and Operation Protective Edge, and the 'vast majority of these reports were never investigated, and those that did result in no further action.'[52] Neve Gordon and Nicola Perugini, in their study of the phenomenon, note that Israeli citizens in densely populated areas like Tel Aviv are never spoken of as human shields when Hamas fires rockets towards the Israeli Defense command located in the centre of that city, whereas Palestinians in Gaza are depicted as human shields when Israel fires rockets at, or bombs, equally densely populated cities like Gaza.[53]

MSN on Twitter: "AOC calls Israel ‘apartheid state’ in Twitter outburst over Gaza attacks (link)" / Twitter
then
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "So are the extensively researched, painstaking conclusions from the UN, Human Rights Watch, and B’Tselem (among the largest human rights orgs in the world and in Israel) considered “outbursts” too?

Or is that just a descriptor MSN reserves for the women legislators quoting them?" / Twitter

 

[TomC]

So what about that?

It means I don't trust media to report accurately and completely.

All I trust them to do is maximize advertising revenue.

Media bias in favor of Zionism used to be the profitable bias. Now, media bias in favor of Islamism is more profitable.

The effects of capitalism on media show in the coverage.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

"Resistance" is all about somebody funding it, not about right or wrong. The truly oppressed peoples of the world do not resist.

Where do you come up with such nonsense?

Look around. Terrorism exists when someone funds it.

(Hint: Any Palestinian action less than firearms or explosives will be reported as "peaceful".)

Do you think this up all by yourself or is there a propaganda site you use?

It's called paying attention.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The AP staff in Gaza City would witness a rocket launch right beside their office, endangering reporters and other civilians nearby—and the AP wouldn’t report it, not even in AP articles about Israeli claims that Hamas was launching rockets from residential areas. (This happened.) Hamas fighters would burst into the AP’s Gaza bureau and threaten the staff—and the AP wouldn’t report it. (This also happened.)

And yet, AP is now lying, claiming they had no idea that the building was also used by Hamas ...

Note that the author of the Atlantic article is a former AP reporter. He's now beyond retaliation from Hamas and can tell the truth.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But this reminds me of an event several years back. The big story in western media was "IDF targets hospital in Gaza." Which they did. The media was rife with the personal dramas of patients and staff.

What wasn't made clear in most of the reporting was that Hamas had installed missile launchers on the roof of that hospital.

So what about that? Does the end justify the means? Is it necessary to break eggs to make an omelet? Is Hamas so horrible that one must imitate it?

You apparently don't understand how the Geneva Conventions work.

Rocket launchers = valid target. The fact that they are sitting on a hospital does not change that. Using human shields = war crime. Killing human shields to get the target they are protecting = collateral damage but not a war crime.

 

[TomC]

But this reminds me of an event several years back. The big story in western media was "IDF targets hospital in Gaza." Which they did. The media was rife with the personal dramas of patients and staff.

What wasn't made clear in most of the reporting was that Hamas had installed missile launchers on the roof of that hospital.

So what about that? Does the end justify the means? Is it necessary to break eggs to make an omelet? Is Hamas so horrible that one must imitate it?

You apparently don't understand how the Geneva Conventions work.

Rocket launchers = valid target. The fact that they are sitting on a hospital does not change that. Using human shields = war crime. Killing human shields to get the target they are protecting = collateral damage but not a war crime.

I was talking about media reporting.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

 Human shields (law),  Human shield

According to many observers, including B'tselem, Hamas repeatedly used Palestinians as human shields. This practice became military policy during the second Intifada, and was only dropped when Adalah challenged the practice before Israel’s High Court of Justice in 2002. though the IDF persisted in using Palestinians in its 'neighbor procedure', whereby people picked at random were made to approach the houses of suspects and persuade them to surrender, a practice which arguably placed the former's lives in danger. The court ruled in October 2005 'that any use of Palestinian civilians during military actions is forbidden, including the “prior warning procedure”.' According to B'tselem, reports indicate that the practice has continued nonetheless, in military operations like Operation Cast Lead, and Operation Protective Edge, and the 'vast majority of these reports were never investigated, and those that did result in no further action.'[52] Neve Gordon and Nicola Perugini, in their study of the phenomenon, note that Israeli citizens in densely populated areas like Tel Aviv are never spoken of as human shields when Hamas fires rockets towards the Israeli Defense command located in the centre of that city, whereas Palestinians in Gaza are depicted as human shields when Israel fires rockets at, or bombs, equally densely populated cities like Gaza.[53]

Since B'tselem said it, it's most likely deceptive or outright false.

What you are describing is not human shield tactics as there is no reason for shooting at all in such a situation. Both sides are in protected locations and are not realistically able to shoot at each other--the person carrying the message is not in danger. It's improper because you can't just grab a civilian and order them to do something, but it's not putting them in harm's way.

 

[TomC]

Since B'tselem said it, it's most likely deceptive or outright false.

As opposed to who?

I don't trust any particular media outlet.

If BBC, AlJazeera, and WSJ all agree upon a fact, I'd give it a strong likelihood of being true. Otherwise, I stay pretty skeptical.
Tom

 

[Swammerdami]

Media bias in favor of Zionism used to be the profitable bias. Now, media bias in favor of Islamism is more profitable.

I've highlighted a phrase which surprised me. Which media is in favor of Islamism?

 

[TomC]

Media bias in favor of Zionism used to be the profitable bias. Now, media bias in favor of Islamism is more profitable.

I've highlighted a phrase which surprised me. Which media is in favor of Islamism?

I didn't say any media was in favor of Islamism.

The part of my post you clipped out was about something else altogether. Post #167. Feel free to actually read it.
Tom

 

[ZiprHead]

Media bias in favor of Zionism used to be the profitable bias. Now, media bias in favor of Islamism is more profitable.

I've highlighted a phrase which surprised me. Which media is in favor of Islamism?

I didn't say any media was in favor of Islamism.

The part of my post you clipped out was about something else altogether. Post #167. Feel free to actually read it.
Tom

WTF? You even re-quoted it.

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[TomC]

I didn't say any media was in favor of Islamism.

The part of my post you clipped out was about something else altogether. Post #167. Feel free to actually read it.
Tom

WTF? You even re-quoted it.

Pardon me.
Please show me where I requoted whatever it is you think I did.
Tom

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Media bias in favor of Zionism used to be the profitable bias. Now, media bias in favor of Islamism is more profitable.

What a weird comment.

 

[TomC]

Media bias in favor of Zionism used to be the profitable bias. Now, media bias in favor of Islamism is more profitable.

What a weird comment.

The depth of your insight is an inspiration to us all.
Tom