Fisk - alive and kicking, without fisking

For several years I have neglected the subject, somehow considering it being passe and not exciting at all anymore. After all these years.

Besides, there is that promise given by myself to myself 11 years ago:

It was already agreed in the blogger community that fisking Fisk has lost its appeal due to this specific target becoming too pathetic, senile and totally cooking on another planet. Barmy, in one word.

So, when a kind friend brought this to my attention, I have decided just to bring up a choice quote or two from the shining beacon of anti-Zionism. Here:

Two thousand five hundred miles separate the Israeli ministry of defence in Tel Aviv from the Indian ministry of defence in New Delhi, but there’s a reason why the usual cliche-stricken agency dispatches sound so similar.

And:

But it is difficult to see how Zionist nationalism will not leach into Hindu nationalism when Israel is supplying so many weapons to India – the latest of which India, which has enjoyed diplomatic relations with Israel since 1992, has already used against Islamists inside Pakistan.

And now, instead of fisking, let's just unleash the power of positive thinking: ain't India the biggest dog the Zionist tail has succeeded to wag so far?

At least, according to the much fisked thinker...

O Come All Ye Jew Haters - says Pat Condell - and promptly gets censored.

I have made a screenshot of the "offensive" three minutes clip page:

Click to enlarge for better viewing. I can't embed the clip itself, since the sharing option was disabled by YouTube owners. So you can only use the link above to get there.

And if you find what was so offensive in the contents of Condell's short speech - do me a favor and explain it to me.

CNN fact checking team in overdrive, folks!

CNN deigned to notice a news item that might clash with their  hitherto firm narrative of Israeli soldiers murdering innocent and defenseless "protesters".

A senior member of Hamas' political bureau said during a TV interview on Wednesday that 50 people killed by Israeli soldiers during clashes in Gaza on Monday were members of Hamas.

So far, so good. Only in this case, unlike in many other cases where the blame is laid at the Israel's doorstep, CNN diligently sought some input that will sow doubts about that quote. Like this:

Ahmed Abu Artema, widely credited as the person who brought the latest wave of demonstrations into being, cast doubt on Hamas' claims.

I don't know how the Hamas' mandarin reached his number of 50 and, frankly, I don't care.

But the diligence of the CNN employees in our era of fake news is nothing short of amazing, you must agree. Very laudable, that.

And this is the way it rolls, ladies and gentlemen.

The Independent way of publishing libel, Peter Yeung and modern journalism

To start with the conclusion: if you ever expected to see dry factual information, checked and double checked by the newspaper's staff, under the rubric "News" - you can now forget it. The brave new world of the modern media has made a big step over that red line that once separated news from opinions, not to mention fairy tales and libel.

And here is one of the tools of that tectonic change: Peter Yeung, whose bio is linked and who (if you don't want to click through) describes himself in Twitter format as "Freelance journalist @Guardian @BBC @Independent @Telegraph & others".

Said Mr Yeung published in the Indy an article, which headline and the mandatory for the topic picture are:

Of course, as its big brother, BBC, uses to, the online editor was wise enough to insert quotation marks in the headline, not that it makes no nevermind to any reader, does it? The story came originally from Al Jazeera. Since publication of that article, some water has passed under the bridge. Under some pressure from CAMERA, Al Jazeera modified the article, making it a bit more palatable. As you can see in the linked CAMERA report, Peter Yeung didn't respond to their inquiries at the time.

UK Media Watch also contributed to debunking of the libelous (save the quotation marks, of course) story. It is a worthy read by itself.

But, aside of a good debunking, linked above, UK Media Watch discovered an even better pearl, one that inexorably leads to the conclusion that starts this post. While being one of the tools in that media revolution, Peter Yeung appears to be a tool in the other sense of the word, so he blurted out what, most probably, is today's unwritten editorial policy of Indy:

@adirkrafman @Independent @cogat_israel the allegation still stands. It was never reported as fact

— Peter Yeung (@ptr_yeung) June 15, 2016

So how do you like them chickens? First you sell an allegation as a news item, then, since it's "only" an allegation, you might as well feel free not to correct it, when it appears to be a libelous one.

And all that is safely covered by a pair of quotation marks.

So there.

P.S. Did I mention that Indy employees and managers (freelancers included) are "the main providers of bicycle seats' sniffers, pedophiles, petty animal store thieves, flashers and vice squad stool pigeons - all at the same time"?

Read more »

Fareed Zakaria, Anti-Muslim rhetoric and other crapola

One of the (American) nation chief Valium dispensers, whose main drive on CNN and elsewhere is to lull his followers into a zombified state of well being, Fareed Zakaria is not totally unknown on these here pages. Just three years ago he appeared in a special burlesque called "Iran is weak and getting weaker" (no, it is not a joke).

Recently Mr Zakaria decided to stick his unerring GPS into the issue of Islamophobia, timing this move to follow the San Bernardino massacre. Here he is dispensing his soporific version of wisdom.

I was watching this and, as usual in case of Mr Zakaria speeches, gradually nodding off and also nodding, in a positive sense of this word, at some true statements, such as:

• Islamophobia is not nice
• And so is Anti-Muslim rhetoric
• We shouldn't demand that Muslims as a whole condemn publicly the barbarian acts by a few terrorists (what is the use, besides, it is not as if the said terrorists consult with the said Muslims as a whole?)
• We should be... whatever, I think it was about somehow or other being politically correct
• Etc.

And then, Mr Zakaria, all of a sudden, decided to go into some calculations. Here I have prepared a snapshot of these numbers for you:

I am still unsure about the generously offered by the author number of 50 "planners". But I sincerely hope that by "planners" he doesn't mean people (some call them "activists", some use a more down to earth "terrorists") who are ready to use firearms and other implements of murder. Let's be less generous and agree on a smaller number.

Numbers, however, are not on the side of Mr Zakaria, who tries to impress on his listeners that there is an infinitesimally small bunch of these "planners", generally shunned by other Muslims. To use a sample, recognized by people who are generally in tune with what Mr Zakaria is claiming, this is an "optimistic" estimate of Daesh supporters' demography:

Even if we generously use only 5% as a percentage of Daesh supporters in Arab world, the result will be quite serious 18 millions. While 95% of the non-supporters is indeed an overwhelming majority, 18 million of supporters are not to be taken lightly by any sane measure.

And this estimate of 5% is being challenged, for instance by this Pew poll that says that more than 60 million Muslims in 11 countries support Daesh. And this is only for 760 million of Muslims, less than half of total Muslim population of the world! So much for the infinitesimal minority...

The number 60 million echoed another number in my memory. The population of Germany, which numbered a tad more in 1930 (about 63 millions), produced two millions of Nazi party members by 1933 (or about 5% of self). This same population produced a bit more than 18 million soldiers of all kinds that served in the Nazi military during the life of the Third Reich.

Yeah, Mr Zakaria, just keep up with the Valium. Sterling work that...

What should be said

Well said, Paul M.

Jodi Rudoren and the balancing act of a fellow traveler

Frightening, isn't it? I mean the power of the truth manipulators in the media, who don't even have to make an effort to lie. Just conveniently forget to tell some of the truth.

Good job, CAMERA.

IDF - politically and socially incorrect toward the Palestinian stabbers

In their latest review of the wave of stabbings, Amnesia Amnesty International blames IDF in:

1. Failing to produce timely trigger warnings before using deadly force towards the stabbers.
2. Failing to create a safe zone for would be and already been stabbers.
3. Overreacting to the stabbing act itself, which act is clearly no more than a microaggression that should be treated by timely implementation of 1. and 2.

Dr. Pipper Bluto, Director of Political Correctness for Lesser Hebrides (Amnesty International), brought up his own example from that time in the Lesser Hebrides when, misunderstood by the natives, he was somewhat inconvenienced by several piercing instruments, as depicted in the photo:

However his good will and powers of persuasion eventually won the day and were awarded by undying popularity among and brotherly love from the aforementioned natives.

IDF response is still awaited, first informal reaction being somewhat incoherent. Probably because of being produced solely in Hebrew, which is a language not recognized by Amnesty International.

Yair Lapid on Hard Talk

Stephen Sackur - condescending and repeating the usual BBC formulas like a robot.
Yair Lapid - not bad, not bad at all.
Worth watching.

Ayman Mohyeldin (MSNBC): from where we are lying...

The so called "Ayman Mohyeldin controversy" (not that I can see much of a controversy here - just a little SOB blandly distorting reality to suit his agenda) is described in this post quite well, including a bit from Mr Mohyeldin's past. Very much recommended.

So the liar was caught in flagrante delicto, a satisfactory event by itself. I would like to gloat about something from the recording, probably missed by most viewers. Notice the slip of the tongue that happens at about 1'30" into the recording:



"...we can clearly see from where we were lying... oops from where we were standing..."

I know I will be overdoing it a bit, but can you deny yourself such an innocent little pleasure?

Lying or Lie may refer to:

• Lie, a deliberate untruth
• Lying (position), a horizontal position

Yeah, just keep lying, Ayman.

Move aside, BBC - here comes the Indie!

Enough grumbling about BBC's artistry with headlines, the competition is quite hot right now, and the righteous indignation of Israelis, hardly believing their eyes, should move to another British media outfit. But first things first. The story, as told by Israeli sources, is quite simple:

The perp succeeds to wound two (randomly chosen, of course) Jews and is shot by a policeman. Sounds simple and straightforward, doesn't it? You would think so, but Independent's folks have found another way to present the story:

Nice, ain't it? And makes the BBC's attempt at misrepresentation somewhat pale in comparison. The second version of the headline of the same story is also quite interesting:

Now we have two seemingly independent (no pun intended) events: "Israeli security forces" kill a boy and, besides, there was some stubbing in Jerusalem.

When you click through, though, another "surprise" awaits you at the headline of the article

Meaning, for an uninvolved and hardly interested enough to read the whole piece reader, that the bloodthirsty Israelis continue the unimpeded killing of Palestinians.

Doesn't it hurt to be so full of excrement, dear Independent?

Update: Y.Medad of My Right World noticed another telling wrinkle: the judicious use of the word "allegedly" by the (alleged) idiots:

do you read this alleged newspaper @Independent ? pic.twitter.com/QkW6l2TBMA

— ymedad (@ymedad) October 10, 2015

UNHRC report: catering to the dictators' club tastes

When a supposedly objective report is 'citing a press release from Hamas' military spokesperson Abu Obeida, saying that, "In some instances, Palestinian armed groups in Gaza reportedly attempted to warn civilians in Israel of imminent attacks"', you must smell something rotten.

Here is some antidote against the UN-issued poison, by Maurice Ostroff.

Although the Israel government refused to cooperate with the UN commission of inquiry on the 2014 Gaza War, a number of concerned citizens and NGO’s presented cogent well researched submissions to the Commission whose report is due to be released in advance of the scheduled June 29 debate before the Human Rights Council.

Unfortunately the commission’s refusal to open the evidence it has examined to public scrutiny will make it difficult for fair minded people to attempt to evaluate the report when it is published. However, a substantial listing on the internet, of some of the above mentioned informative documents that were submitted to the commission, will enable members of the public as well as journalists and politicians to make informed evaluations.

Both the listing in the link above and the rest of the Maurice Ostroff's post are informative and will help an unprejudiced person to understand the subject matter.

Omar Mahmood and the goddess of Political Correctness

This post is dedicated to my friends of left persuasion, you know who you are, I bet. And I hope (nah, I know) that you'll find it in you to condemn the new generation of left wing cultural fascists that is growing among us.

The story starts with an article by a University of Michigan student Omar Mahmood, who, unfortunately for him (as it appeared to be) espouses conservative beliefs. The guy (to understand his beliefs better, you have to take a look at this article, not related to the subject matter of this post) has a misfortune to possess a sense of humor. It is true that sense of humor is a trait that is not looked upon kindly by the deadly serious promoters of extreme left and extreme right viewpoints. Which is what happened in this story.

Omar has written many other things, among them a rather nice send-up of the PC thought and, especially, PC language with its ugly Soviet-like rejection or mauling of existing words in favor of the PC neologisms. The piece was called “Do The Left Thing”. I read it before the story exploded and had me quite a few laughs. The only fault of the article, in my un-professional opinion, was its somewhat excessive length, it could have been improved by some judicious trimming.

Now I 'll let the Fox News* to take over:

Omar Mahmood, a junior majoring in literature and anthropology at the University of Michigan, lost his job as a writer for the main campus newspaper and saw his front door tattooed with angry and profane messages after he wrote a satirical column dubbed "Do the Left Thing" for another publication. Written as parody, the column sought to poke fun at people who constantly perceive “microaggressions” -- a new term for small racial or ethnically-driven snubs.

But let's slow down a bit, because there are at least two chapters to the story worth your attention. To start with - details of being fired from the campus newspaper

After his column was published last week, Mahmood tells The College Fix: “I received a call from the editorial editor [of the Daily] telling me that I had created a ‘hostile environment’ among the editorial staff and that someone had felt threatened because of what I had written … The issue had been taken to the editor in chief who procured a bylaw by which I was given an ultimatum to leave the Review or leave the Daily within a week. I was not allowed to know the name of the offended individuals.”

There is more about the bylaw and what they call "the conflict of interests" there. But, after noting the term ‘hostile environment’ (another rotten fruit of PC language), let's proceed to the second chapter. Namely the attacks on Omar Mahmood.

“These progressive students attacked Omar because they felt that he, as a Muslim, cannot also be a conservative,” Derek Draplin, a student and editor of the conservative student paper The Review, which published the parody, told FoxNews.com. "He doesn't fit their social justice agenda so they attack him, censor him, try to get him to shut up.”

The sheer idiocy of expecting a Muslim to be automatically of the left persuasion is hilarious. But the thing that never fails to disturb me: the same people who whine and protest about anything that might be conceivably presented as "muzzling" (that term, startlingly, includes criticism as well, absurd as it may sound) never hesitate to muzzle - in any way, including firing and even physically harming - anyone who thinks differently. But let's set aside the quote by Derek Draplin and move to the physical part.

On Friday night, according to Mahmood, people attacked his dorm room door, egging it and leaving copies of his satirical article with notes on the backs including “Shut the f--- up!” and “You scum embarrass us” and “DO YOU EVEN GO HERE?! LEAVE!!” along with various others, including an image of a creature with horns and another one of him with his eyes crossed out.

FoxNews.com viewed surveillance footage taken early Friday at 1:40 a.m. local time inside of Mahmood's dorm, which is for students but is run independently of the university. It showed four figures meeting in the hallway and one of them handing the other three hooded sweatshirts. The three then put on hooded sweatshirts and go to his door. Mahmood says he believes he knows who the attackers were based on the footage.

“Shut the f--- up!” indeed... this from the folks that will die defending your right to free speech... no, wait, they may have missed that concept in their PC studies...

And the university's response to that incident is by itself a shining example of bureaucratic idiocy draped in PC clothes:

“This off-campus incident has been reported to the university's Bias Response Team for follow-up,” spokesman Rick Fitzgerald told FoxNews.com. “The team will take appropriate action once information has been gathered.”

"Bias Response Team" - don't you get a feeling of total disconnect with real life seeing this? Instead of throwing the four yobs out of the university to get some serious spanking by their parents - this is what happens with barbarians on campus? Bias Response Team? You must be pulling my leg.

Meanwhile the only person who suffers the consequences of exercising his right of free speech is Omar Mahmood - but read the whole story. Shame.

Maybe it's quite the time to add another mandatory course on US campuses - Freedom of Speech 101. A course that will explain what freedom of speech really means and how it doesn't include messing with the freedom of speech of somebody you disagree with? And also explain the possible consequences of such messing?

What consequences? - you may want to ask right now. A good question too...

P.S. And if you want another typical expression of that mix of cultural fascism and idiocy - here you go:

Sir Tom Jones says he is proud that his song Delilah has become an anthem at Welsh rugby games, despite the fact it has been labelled inappropriate over claims it promotes domestic violence.

Yeah...


(*) Strangely or not, not a single big media outlet other than Fox News picked up the story. Which is a shame by itself, you must agree.

Dear Amnesty International: fuck you very much

Hardly a week passes by without another broadside from Amnesty International in the general direction of the Zionists. This time, though, this outfit crossed the boundary between irresponsible and biased critic into the absurd hate-mongering.

The human rights group Amnesty International said Israel attacks on four high-rise Gaza buildings during the summer war amounted to war crimes.

This while being forced to confess that:

...no one was killed in the attacks because the Israeli military warned of the impending bombing, but many in the neighborhood were injured by debris.

So where is the war crime? Here:

Amnesty International's Phillip Luther said the destruction "was carried out deliberately and with no military justification."

And how do we know that there wasn't a justification? Just because:

Even if the Israeli authorities had good reason to believe that a part of a building was being used for military purposes, they had an obligation to choose means and methods of attack that would minimize harm to civilians and their property.

And how does Amnesty International know that there indeed was a method like that? They are not saying.

And you know what: if IDF used another method of dealing with tunnel-riddled and booby-trapped highrises that might have endangered a hair on the head of a single soldier, I (and other 99% of Israeli population) would have accused IDF of a crime against its soldiers. That simple.

As for Amnesty International: where were we? Oh yes - fuck them.

Assisting Lisa Goldman in her balancing act

In her +972 resume Lisa Goldman proudly states: "I am the director of the Israel-Palestine Initiative at the New America Foundation NYC." That New America Foundation thing is a bit of a dark horse. Unless, of course, you know how to decipher "dedicated to big ideas and lively conversation", coupled with such an impressive list of sponsors.

Whatever (NAF) New America Foundation stands for, aside of big ideas and lively conversation, you must agree that "Israel-Palestine Initiative" sounds good. Israel and Palestine or Palestine and Israel, whatever, it sounds as a declaration of New America's vision: truth serving, objective and - beyond all - balanced approach to Israel and Palestine (or Palestine and Israel). Unfortunately, the NAF site doesn't contain any articles by Lisa, aside of a few references to some outside publications and hints of some events she is either participating in or organizing. So that fair and balanced approach could be still glimpsed only in her +972 articles, like this one:

Investigation of Abu Khdeir murder tainted by racism, police incompetence

Let's first dispose of that "racism" sticker. Lisa, like many a progressive debater in a hurry, seems to misuse this term quite freely - even speaking about people of same race, like Jews and Arabs. Funnily, the picture she used to illustrate her article is telling:

I bet that 90% of world population that don't know (or care) about our local peculiarities and local languages will have a hard time distinguishing between the Arab and Jew in this picture, even when one of the two is equipped with yarmulke and the picture of the second is adorned with an Arabic caption. So here I helped Lisa a bit with finding some balance already, but wait, it's only a beginning.

Now to police incompetence. Not that it is secret that our cops are as much of a Keystone ones as anywhere else. But again - that's all about balance, isn't it. So let's take a look at an affair mentioned by Lisa: "the murders of three Jewish boys abducted by Hebron-area men who were linked to Hamas". Mentioned, I have to add, without any links, when the rest of the article is literally peppered with links to all and sundry. But no matter, it is easy to find some links. And you know what, in this case we have a glaring issue of police incompetence as well:

The handling of the call represented a severe failure “that ran along the entire chain of command at the center, crossing a series of police, officers and commanders,” police said on Monday.

Should we cry "racism"? After all there are some Arab, Druze and other police officers in Israel, so possibly... nah, let's leave it at that and proceed with the balancing act. Meanwhile, we already can amend the headline:

Investigation of Abu Khdeir, Naftali Fraenkel, Gilad Shaer and Eyal Yifrah murders tainted by police incompetence


Now to the next sentence that requires some balance:

The abduction and immolation of Mohammed Abu Khdeir shocked Israelis and was the catalyst for violent demonstrations in East Jerusalem.

Hm... difficult: there practically wasn't any violent response by Jews after the murder of Naftali Fraenkel, Gilad Shaer and Eyal Yifrah, at any rate not even remotely resembling the rioting following the grisly murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir. Still, for the sake of symmetry:

Hamas released a statement saying that "Our people will not let this crime pass.... You will pay the price for these crimes."

And:

Rachel Fraenkel, mother of 16 year-old Naftali, when she heard that a Palestinian teenager had been murdered in apparent revenge for her son, condemned it immediately. She broke into her own period of mourning to issue a statement: "There is no difference between blood and blood. Murder is murder. There is no justification and no atonement for murder."

As for the next surprising statement on Lisa's agenda:

Riot police responded by invading East Jerusalem and using crowd control methods ranging from tear gas and rubber bullets to severe beatings and mass arrests.

Here, I am at a loss. On one hand we have what Lisa calls "violent demonstrations". On the other, cruel and totally unexpected "crowd control methods" by police. I bet in the universe Lisa and her friends from +972 inhabit, police meets "violent demonstrations" by flowers and welcoming speeches. So I can't find any symmetry in this instance, I confess.

And now, instead of being critical, I shall search for a perfectly balanced sentence by Lisa herself. And here it comes:

Lone Palestinians have carried out stabbings and deliberate hit-and-runs against Jewish civilians, while paramilitary police have responded with increasing violence.

Now we have it and can relax.

And finish the whole with a typical example of Palestinian Authority propaganda "symmetry" Lisa should use as a beacon:

That's the ticket, Lisa, but I'm sure you will get there eventually by yourself.

The Media Intifada: Bad Math, Ugly Truths About New York Times In Israel-Hamas War

This. Should. Be. Read.

Debunking a debunker: Mehdi Hasan and his 11 points.

Mehdi Hasan, a "political director* of The Huffington Post UK" came out with a piece titled Debunking Israel's 11 Main Myths About Gaza, Hamas and War Crimes.

The article starts with a useful disclaimer:

Let's be clear: I'm no fan of Hamas, a brutal and anti-Semitic group which has been accused by Amnesty International and other NGOs...

Then Mr Hasan quickly cuts to the chase:

According to the pro-Israel, pro-IDF crowd, Hamas is to blame for everything.

This, of course, is utter nonsense.
...
So, in a Moynihanian spirit, here are fact-filled, evidence-based rebuttals to the 11 main myths, half-truths and self-serving 'talking points' that are repeatedly pushed by various Israeli spokespersons, both on the airwaves and on social media:

Fact-filled and evidence based... my foot. But lets' get to the gist of the "debunking" already:

1) The Gaza Strip isn't occupied by Israel

First of all, Gaza Strip is blockaded, no one denies this - but there is a difference between a blockade and occupation. And accidentally, legality of said blockade isn't challenged anymore. Secondly, describing the current status of Gaza Strip without going into the last 9 years of its history, since 2005, is an (intentional) fallacy. Imagine two consequent photographs of an incident: one showing a man A attacking a man B with a knife and the second photograph showing the man B kicking the crap out of man A. You would agree that there is a story to tell. However, destroy the first photograph... should I retell the story now? But this is exactly what Mr Hasan is trying to sell you.

2) Israel wants a ceasefire but Hamas doesn't

I shall skip the author's use of Al Jazeera for obvious reasons, but here is a quote from Jerusalem post:

One day after an Egyptian-brokered cease-fire accepted by Israel, but rejected by Hamas, fell through, the terrorist organization proposed a 10-year end to hostilities in return for its conditions being met by Israel, Channel 2 reported Wednesday.. Hamas's conditions were the release of re-arrested Palestinian prisoners who were let go in the Schalit deal, the opening of Gaza-Israel border crossings in order to allow citizens and goods to pass through, and international supervision of the Gazan seaport in place of the current Israeli blockade.

Wow, a 10-year end to hostilities. Here is the full list of the demands, Channel 2 being a TV channel, squeezed it in a short time frame. So - a hudna (yes, that hudna) for opening an airport and a seaport with some vague "international supervision". How about demilitarization and some real no nonsense international control of thereof? No? I thought so. So we should be handing Hamas two venues for transporting newer and better mass murder tools - for a hudna? There is a con man and a mark in this discussion, but I just can't put my finger on the identities...

Should I also skip the fact that during the recent round of hostilities Hamas has broken four consecutive ceasefires? Oh well. 

3) Israel, unlike Hamas, doesn't deliberately target civilians

It is a lowly practice, I know, to beat a man on the head with the list of sources for his "fact-filled, evidence-based rebuttals". But let me see: Guardian*, Navy Pillay, United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, 2009 (not including the retraction by Goldstone, of course). How much lower could one stoop to get some "fact-filled, evidence-based rebuttals", I wonder?

(*) I am not linking anything about Guardian's attitude to Israel. Excuse me, I prefer to vomit in the privacy of my home.

4) Only Hamas is guilty of war crimes, not Israel

With a nod to Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. Since Goldstone report wasn't mentioned by me to start with, does Mr Hasan know what exactly Mr Goldstone said in his retraction about the subject of deliberation? Worthy reading for a man who is ostensibly after "fact-filled, evidence-based rebuttals".

5) Hamas use the civilians of Gaza as 'human shields'

Instead of flaming against the Mr Hasan's choice of sources (Jeremy Bowel, Guardian, Independent, UNHRC-Pillay), here is "some" info re human shields.

Post by StandWithUs.

And this:



And this:



And this:



And this:



and this:



And how about reading the bloody Hamas' field manual for a change - to close the subject?

To top it all: use of hospitals:

Post by Israel Defense Forces.

I hope it will be enough for Mr Hasan. If not, nothing will be enough.

6) This current Gaza conflict began with Hamas rocket fire on 30 June 2014

The IDF operation in the framework of the last Gaza war started after more than a week of intensive Hamas' rocket bombardment. Full stop. Introducing various other imaginary or real acts by both sides into the story makes the story more interesting, possibly, but doesn't change that first fact.

7) Hamas has never stopped firing rockets into Israel

The point of this item by Mr Hasan is that, while the rocket launches never really stopped, the said rockets weren't launched by Hamas itself, but by "groups other than Hamas". Bullshit - as if Hamas doesn't control every square inch of the Gaza strip.

8) Hamas provoked Israel by kidnapping and killing three Israeli teenagers

Here we see another pathetic attempt to declare that Hamas isn't involved at all in the kidnapping and murder mentioned. Put paid to already.

9) Hamas rule, not Israel's blockade, is to blame for the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip

Again the chicken and egg game. But who is responsible for the blockade, Mr Hasan?

10) The Israeli government, unlike Hamas, wants a two-state solution

I really don't know how this item is relevant to the current Gaza war, but Bibi saying that he doesn't want a fully armed Palestinian state on Israeli borders is not exactly the same as saying that he is against the two-state solution. Even a person hell-bent to prove his point should be aware of it. Or shouldn't he?

11) All serious analysts agree it was Hamas, and not Israel, that started this current conflict

Now, really, finding an "expert" that disputes the opinion of another "expert" - it is a real achievement. Read the newspapers, Mr Hasan, and be content with 10 items instead of 11. Oops, I forgot, the other ten also appear to be full of shit.

Oh well, there always is the next time. So try again.

(*) "Political director"- is it something like "commissar" in HuffPost, I wonder?

Update: I was unhappy with Mr Hasan using Al Jazeera for a source. He appears to be working for Al Jazeera too... oh well.

Jon Donnison of BBC, journalistic integrity, whatever

First of all, an important disclaimer: right now, people of Gaza are dying in reality, among them women and children, to provide Hamas masters their revolting propaganda feed. It is impossible to remain apathetic to their suffering.

But then there is suffering and there is media, and... but it's better to see that than to read that (but you should do both).

A BBC war reporter made a shocking blunder by tweeting a photograph of an injured child from Syria but indicating she was from Gaza.

So, folks, what you shall see immediately is not Gaza:

This, on the other hand, is Gaza (but not right now, rather during earlier, happy and peaceful times):

So there.

Phoebe Greenwood of the Guardian, I doff my hat to you!

I was somewhat discombobulated and somewhat inspired by that amazing Guardian's pair of headlines.

Little did I know. The above was child's play compared to this. And I just have to quote from this post:

As one commentator suggested, Greenwood’s argument goes something like this.

1. Israel accepted the ceasefire and held its fire for six hours, hoping Hamas would do the same.
2. Hamas ignored the ceasefire and continued firing dozens of rockets at Israeli towns.
3. Israel finally retaliated against Hamas rocket attacks which showed no signs of winding down.
4. Ergo, Israel violated the ceasefire.

Mee too ees speechless...

Hat tip: Peter.

The Guardian: hilarious and oh so sad

The honors (honours in this case) go to David Toube who got onto this one:

Ceasefire collapses as Israel responds to Gaza rocket fire – live updates

I've kept to the original font, so you could feel how momentous is this act of treacherous Israeli response to Hamas ceasefiring...

And, to keep it for posterity, just in case someone in the Guardian wakes up to own endless stupidity:

Update: it was even better, much better that the above, latest version. To start with, it was:

Gaza ceasefire collapses as Israel army resumes attack.

Here is the source:

Gaza ceasefire collapses as Israel army resumes attack – live updates http://t.co/nQg9aH7Pyl
— The Guardian (@guardian) July 15, 2014

To avoid the inevitable deletion:

Journalistic integrity in action? Or: why don't these little roaches crawl into their comfy little holes and... WTF...