Shaniqua O’Toole vs Gateway Pundit. Spoofer: 1, Pundit: 0.

One of the signs of the time is, unfortunately, that a good spoof is practically indistinguishable from the so called "real life". Of course, we should thank our clinically confused and ridden by fake news media for this situation. But some hilarious misreadings plague even the ones that are supposed to be on guard.

Shaniqua O’Toole, one of the more successful spoofers lately, succeeded admirably to deceive the famous Gateway Pundit (not the first time he is being spoofed, by the way). Here is what caused him to lose his cool:

Here is what Gateway Pundit has said on the subject:

On Saturday Guardian contributor Shaniqua O’Toole argued in her column that the police were at fault for shooting the terrorist and should have known he was wearing a fake suicide vest.

You just can’t make this up!
A far left commentator is attacking police for shooting dead the ISIS killer.

Oh well, Shaniqua O’Toole is only a spiritual entity, and The Guardian, while they might be dying to have her on the list of their contributors, are not able to recruit her.

And the Guardian-looking page that irks so many people, is a product of a piece of software that generates such spoofs at your beck and call.

So there.

P.S. Gateway Pundit, it has to be mentioned, got wise to the nature of the spoof and eventually deleted it, but the delectable Shaniqua saved it in an archive.

Happy Passover, New York Times!

Interrupting the (hopefully temporary) silence for this extraordinary bit of news:

The New York Times on Saturday acknowledged publishing in Thursday’s international print edition an anti-Semitic political cartoon, reminiscent of the worst Arab, Soviet and Nazi works. It depicted President Trump as a blind man wearing a yarmulke and being led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the shape of a seeing eye dog wearing a collar adorned by a blue star of David.

The story checked out by several people, who bought the edition in question.

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.

Media, headlines, the usual

Of course, to complain about media's way to bend our minds to their ends is an exercise in futility. But a good whiny complaint sometimes makes the load of bile in out innards that much lighter, so here it goes.

CNN, August 20, 2018, Monday:

White House rejects Turkey's offer for pastor's release: report

I am not sure why the word "report" had to be added. How different is that article from a myriad others? To be on the safe side, here is a definition of the word, as it seems pertinent to our case:

A written document describing the findings of some individual or group

There is another definition:

A sharp explosive sound,

but we shall leave it for later.

Anyway, if you, like many other surfers of the news sites, skimmed the headlines, your conclusion after reading this headline alone and not clicking through must be unequivocal: the powers that be don't really want the good pastor to get out of Turkish jail. Right?

Only, if you do click through, what you get is a bit different:

The White House has rejected a Turkish offer to release an American pastor in exchange for forgiveness of billions of dollars in US fines on a Turkish bank, expressing that other matters would be considered only after Andrew Brunson is released, a senior administration official told The Wall Street Journal.

In effect, it looks like Turkey was trying to sell an American citizen for a ransom of several billions, isn't it so? Just like a regular gang of kidnappers or, even worse, some terrorist outfit low on cash...

So why wasn't it presented in the headline as it should have been? Like this:

Turkey offers to release the pastor for a ransom of several $B : report

You know why, don't you? Now I refer you to the second meaning of the word "report", and if you are above the age of 18 (or as appropriate in your place of residence), you can see it here.

CNN, burning cars, burning boats, bullshit...

A few days ago some Swedish citizens have had them a field day, running around several cities and putting cars on fire. Whether their choice of the cars was random or directed at a specific model or specific owners will remain unknown, probably. But we are here to learn, so CNN helpfully provided an article where one can learn the following:

Around 80 cars were set on fire and a further 40 vandalized in the city of Gothenburg in western Sweden on Monday night, according to Hans Lippens, police spokesman for the country's western region.

It is not unusual for such attacks to take place in Sweden in the week before schools reopen after the summer holiday, Lippens told CNN, but "the current count and level of damage is unprecedented."

Aside of the article showing that the festive events were well organized, the main thing we have learned, of course, is the timing.

What can I say: going back to school after a long, sunny and happy holiday is traumatic for the kids, no question about it. And everyone with real blood in his veins will understand that need for release of the bad feelings. Of course, loving parents can afford a few cars to make the progeny docile for the looming September 1. Especially if the cars were insured.

But - and there is a big but here. The CNN reporters (3 of them on that article!) have done a poor job of research. The real roots of car burning escaped their attention. Which is strange, since at least one of the three names sounds kinda Swedish. But no matter, here I come, helpful as always and armed with Google and a keyboard. Simple as that:

The Vikings were also known to be fearless and ruthless warriors. One of their actions can be used by the aspiring and ambitious managers to help their organizations to create value. After they landed their boat on some distance land and as they departed to fight the local inhabitants (enemies?), the leader would have the crew burn their own boat on the shore. Then they went into battle with the image of their burning boat at their back.

Were they crazy!! Why did the Vikings do that? There seems to be three major reasons. First, it was to strike fear and panic in the hearts of their opponent. Man has always had this love/fear of fire. The awesome sight of a burning ship on the beach could probably be seen for miles, certainly emphasizing the point, “We are here!”

Second, the burning ship was strong signal to the enemy that the Vikings were serious and committed. Given that they had destroyed their only way home, the enemy must have taken that as a sure sign that this was going to be an extremely tough battle.

Third, it was a signal to the Vikings themselves. The burning of their ship clearly made the point that the only possible way home was to win the battle. It reinforced their own level of commitment.

So, dear reader, it is not "Back To School" syndrome at all, but an important part of Viking folklore, a hallowed ancient ceremony, reenacted every year in August, incidentally at the same time when moms and dads visit the department shops to buy new schoolbags, pencils, books, lunch boxes etc.

So there. You are welcome.

Some pigs are not like the others: right, Jerusalem Post?

The story starts with this cartoon a veteran cartoonist posted:

A veteran Israeli cartoonist was cut loose on Tuesday from the magazine he worked at for nearly three decades over an illustration portraying Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Likud lawmakers as pigs from George Orwell’s “Animal Farm.” The cartoon by Avi Katz drew on a photo of Netanyahu and members of his Likud party snapping a selfie at the Knesset following the passage of the so-called Jewish State law last week.

Undoubtedly, the cartoon was inspired (besides Orwell) by this picture:

Likud MK Oren Hazan takes a selfie with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, center, and MK David Bitan, right of Netanyahu, after the passage of the so-called Jewish State law at the Knesset on July 19, 2018.

I wouldn't go into the rights or wrongs of the artist's vision or his politics. Should I mention my opinion of many years that Jerusalem Post is quite a provincial rag, and that nothing has happened so far to persuade me differently? Nah, no need, really.

I shall just throw in another tidbit that may look somewhat unrelated to the matter and hand. At the first glance, possibly. Here is a Russian cartoonist, in a country that is not known for its gentleness toward dissidents of all stripes, publishing a cartoon including... but see for yourself:

"Orthodox devils" - says the caption.

And you know what: so far Mr. Kopeikin, the author of the cartoon in question, was neither fired nor fed a Polonium cookie.

Make one wonder, innit?

Forward, to a gentler and progressive Israel! Er... how?

Another stumbleupon situation that caused me to argue with another Jew. Two Jews arguing is usually a lose/lose game, but in spite of this we have never been able to desist. This time it was a Facebook encounter with Nathan Friedman Hersh*, who penned an article Israel's Only Policy on Gaza Is to Beat the Drums of War in (you guessed right) Haaretz.

Before I get to the fisking, let me say that I agree with the headline. It is nothing more and nothing less than a statement of fact. This is exactly what is going on for quite a few years. While the beating of the mentioned drums is never as belligerent as in the picture below, the threats aimed at Gazan leaders in particular and Hamas in general are an almost daily occurrence, so far never carried out to their full extent.

Let's start with the most important point: the article, heavy on criticism and denigration of the government, doesn't offer any solution to the hellishly difficult situation with Gaza. Nothing, zilch, gurnisht. One would have hoped that an article with such a bombastic headline and of such epic length will have at least two thirds of it dedicated to a solution that will stop the strife. But no, that hope fell flat.

There are two points the author offers to our attention as potential steps to a solution:

The first is a 2011 Israeli initiative designed to alleviate the blockade of Gaza with an offshore seaport. The plan would help improve the plummeting Gaza economy while also helping ensure security for Israel.

Another plan to ease the humanitarian crisis in Gaza is a solar energy field Israel would build, perhaps with Gulf funding, to supply Gaza with continuous electricity.

Let's assume that Hamas agrees to a seaport with our military oversight and that Hamas/Islamic Jihad rocket scientists don't destroy such an easy target as a solar energy field, in one of their fits of freedom fighting zeal (as they have repeatedly done with border crossings that provide their vital supplies, electricity, gas and water lines etc.). But what exactly is new with the proposal? I am getting tired to remind people to look at what was agreed with Palestinians toward the disengagement with Gaza, to recall the airport that was build and had to be destroyed, the seaport plan that had to be scrapped etc. We all know how it started and how it ended, don't we?

The other fault with the idea of improvement of Gazans' (indeed largely pitiful) conditions is the assumption that the leaders of Gaza care about their lot. So far, all we have seen shows the opposite. People who build their shelters under hospitals and launch rockets from schoolyards don't really care, that much is crystal clear. People who use all available metal to build Qassam rockets and the available cement to build tunnels (not the drainage ones, to our sorrow) don't really care.

Now to this short and unequivocal statement:

The blockade isn’t working.

I know what Nathan thinks about the purpose(s) of the blockade - he sees the blockade as a measure undertaken to break the spirit of the Hamas' freedom fighters:

Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert initiated the blockade to strangle the Palestinians of Gaza until they voted out or overthrew their Hamas leaders...

But in fact blockade had one purpose only: to prevent smuggling of more and more sophisticated weapons that are so helpfully provided by Iran and other state actors unhappy with the mere fact of our existence. And it is working - not a full proof measure, but it works. Nothing more, nothing less.

The next curious paragraph:

Instead of listening to those voices, however, the government was satisfied to allow the army to set Israel’s policy toward Gaza. By yielding to the army the mandate to form solutions for Israel’s Gaza problem, government ministers avoid accountability.

What are the voices that should be listened to is totally hidden, the article so far doesn't mention any. The point about letting the army to set Israel's policy toward Gaza is factually wrong - it is the army and Shin Bet that support and push for an improvement of Gazans' living conditions. The point about accountability mentioned is quite absurd: there is a minister that is responsible and accountable for the military and there is a PM responsible for that minister. The buck doesn't stop an the CoS' table. Meaningless and confused.

And the next one, which is not only curious but rather stupid:

Ultimately, this lack of accountability not only led to thousands of innocent Palestinians killed...

Thousands (multiple) of innocent people - right, Nathan? - no matter how many of those killed were rank and file of Hamas troops? No more comments on this one.

As with the occupation of the West Bank, there is no alternative policy to the Gaza blockade. This is by design.

What kind of a dark design it is, remains unexplained in the rest of the article.

Well, the rest of the article I said. That rest is so long and rambling and so unconnected to the quandary of Gaza that I shall leave it alone. Aside of this curious ending:

Both Israelis and Palestinians deserve the possibility of freedom from occupation and blockade. Israelis deserve a government that can offer them long-term, multi-faceted protection from their enemies.

What is omitted from this passage is whether we deserve an end to the attempts to kill us in many different ways. Because the only thing Nathan mentions is "multi-faceted protection", whatever it means. Not peace.


(*) Nathan Friedman Hersh is a writer and the former managing director of Partners for Progressive Israel**. He has written for the New York Times and the Washington Post. He served in an unnamed IDF combat unit, as follows from the article discussed here and is studying medicine in US. Much to respect, even if his views are somewhat or sometimes confused and his responses when in a tight corner tend to "it is all hasbarah" knee-jerk reaction.

(**) A group that seems to be affiliated with (or very close to otherwise) Israeli Meretz party. Nothing to be ashamed of, some of my closest and dearest are members, but defines one's political allegiances quite well. Boycott the settlements' produce, strive for real peace etc.

The censor - soon in your home too

The censor will call itself "Content Filtering" these days. If you have used something similar in your cable or other TV provider's set top box to prevent your kids from viewing inappropriate context,  you might guess where it is going.

Only now it is done on a completely another level and it is you who are being protected by the omniscient, benevolent and omnipotent eye of your betters. The ones in Brussels this time.

Here it comes, from one of my British friends who will remain unnamed, just in case. The friend is subscribed to Virgin as an Internet provider. This is what appeared on the screen, after the friend tried to get into Breitbart.com:

I am not a great fan of Breitbart, not in its current incarnation, I haste to declare (in case of the above mentioned Big Brother listening in). But this sucks. It sucks in all major ways and should be fought.

So you better fight.

Update: And something similar almost happened here too.

A radically unprecedented and far-reaching proposal that would have given the government the ability to block Israeli web users’ access to parts or the entirety of any website was stopped in its tracks Wednesday morning, hours before it was set to be voted into law by Knesset members who had “no idea” of its far-reaching implications.

People like Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan and Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked are a clear and present danger to democracy. That much is clear, unfortunately.

Update 2: OK, more on the internet filters as implemented in UK.

The Guide to ISP web filters is quite a good explainer:

Since 2013 all new customers to the four biggest ISPs - along with many of the smaller providers - were automatically opted in to web filtering. In 2014 this was extended to all existing subscribers too. If you haven't previously chosen to opt out of the filtering, it's likely your connection will be affected.

The Guide talks about 8 categories of verbotten content, one of which at least (Hate Speech) allows the internet provider a great freedom of decision. The article presents porn as the main issue that was resolved thanks to the filters, but in reality it isn't the only one. Virgin, for instance, calls its filtering "Child Safe", which is quite deceptive, obviously, since they use the Hate Speech on political sites as well.

And yes, you can opt out of the filtering, it is an option, not a mandatory one. When you sign up to service, filtering is switched on automatically, so it needs your intervention to remove it.

But make up your own mind.

Is football the universal religion or is BBC off its collective gourd?

It started for me with looking at the reports on this night's skirmishes on the Gaza border, after a series of rocket and mortar shells barrages from the neighbors. Somehow it evolved in getting to the BBC site. And this is part of what I have found in their World section of the news:

Surely you understand that it is a rare client what clicks on the World section of their site. And even there, all the coverage the murder of "over 100" Pakistanis got is the following:

A suicide bomber has killed at least 128 people at a campaign rally in south-western Pakistan - the deadliest attack in the country since 2014.

A local candidate was among the dead in the Mastung town, police say. So-called Islamic State (IS) claimed the attack.

Earlier, a bomb attack on a similar rally in the northern town of Bannu killed four people. The attacks come ahead of general elections on 25 July.

It must be clear to anyone that vying with Scarlett Johansson isn't all that easy.
And here comes the front page of BBC of that same day (click to enlarge):

What, indeed,  could compete with the crucial question of football vs religion? Or with the way Thai cave smells?

Yeah... and this is the way it goes.

P.S. And regarding the skirmishes mentioned: this is the closest BBC got to any mention of those:

So there.

And now, from the murky depths of the 'net...

It is not a big story, all in all. Just a fairly random example of the crap that floats in quantities on the surface (and beneath it) of the endless ocean of bits and bytes we let into our houses.

A small (probably Israeli) Russian language outfit Mignews published an unremarkable short article, titled (translated):

Israeli doctors found out that whiskey protects against cancer

I am calling it unremarkable, because for many years media is inundated by articles about similar discoveries about any and all alcoholic beverages. For all I know, there might be even a grain (no pun intended) of truth in this claim.

Read more »

Another two gems in my NYT collection

And another gem via Greg Aydt:

With thanks to Noga The Contentious.

To join that other, apparently later, pearl:

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.

Washington Post and complicity in murder

It is already several weeks since Hamas cold-bloodily and calculatingly started to encourage the attempts to breach the border fence. Hamas know perfectly well what the response will be and are consciously sending people to die.

Anyone who understands that and still finds it acceptable to encourage Hamas murderers - directly or by blaming Israel - is covering their hands in blood. That much is clear.

And now to the reason for this post. Here it is:

So - Israelis kill protesters?

Check you hands, WaPo, check your hands.

(Hat tip: James S. Oppenheim).

CNN and selective color vision

A curios situation in the CNN reporting on the Austin TX serial bomber. Here is the passage that confused me mightily:

The first explosion killed 39-year-old Anthony Stephan House on March 2. The second blast on March 12 killed 17-year-old Draylen Mason. The third blast happened several hours later and critically injured a 75-year-old woman. Those three blasts all happened after someone left explosives-laden packages on the victims' doorsteps. In the fourth blast, a device was triggered by a tripwire, injuring two white men, police said. The device was left on the side of a road in a predominantly white area.

So the first three blasts killed or injured three persons without any color attributed and the other blast injured two white persons.

Is there some special new kind of explosive material that could be set to injure a colorless person or a person of specific color, depending on the circumstances or on the bomber will?

Hmm... consider me confused. Like this:

P.S. I hope they will get the bastard. And there really is no need to research his color preferences. Just to shoot...

Update: done. Good.

CNN on NK Fatso or how to produce a tasty nothing burger

Just a bit of the usual grumbling about the media. Probably my stomach problems and all... anyway, here it is.

The headline was way too alluring to skip:

Who is Kim Jong Un? Separating myth from fact

There are two key sentences, one at the beginning of the piece and one a bit down the screen:

The little that is known about North Korean leader Kim Jong Un is, for the most part, questionable.

and

All conclusions over Kim Jong Un's motives are speculative at best, and preposterously hysterical at worst.

Saying this, the author succeeded to produce a very long screed, full of information that could be easily collected by a most unprofessional internet surfer. Freely available to all. And no separation of crap from fact, as promised...

And Jamie Tarabay, the author of the piece, has a formidable record, according to this.

So why?

The proper progressive response to Iranian people

People are dying on the streets of Iranian cities. Not people with rifles or stones in their hands: just people who are unhappy with the extremist regime of Ayatollahs. Regime that prefers to spend their people's money on fomenting terror over the globe and producing more and more weaponry to become a regional superpower.

Accidentally, that same regime that the last POTUS, Barack Hussein Obama II, decided to befriend from the start of his first presidency. We all know how it ended: with a nuclear agreement hardly worth the paper it was written upon and with "Death to America" demos continuing and even increasing in frequency on the streets of Tehran.

And how do the Western progressive liberals respond to the unrest in Iran? My first jaw-dropping experience with that response was via an article in NYT:

How Can Trump Help Iran’s Protesters? Be Quiet.

The headline is quite sufficient to understand the trend, but here is what is probably the main passage of that (frankly revolting) opus:

One reason to worry that Mr. Trump may try to seize the moment by championing the protesters is that it has become an article of faith among President Barack Obama’s critics than in 2009 he missed a golden opportunity to do just that, when many Iranians took to the streets after a disputed election result. But it was never clear what difference American rhetorical support would have made then, other than allowing the Iranian government to depict the protesters as American lackeys, giving the security services more of a pretext to crack down violently.

Of course, this bit of circular logic (or poisonous wisdom, you name it) is applicable to any tyranny in this here world. And, if you learn a bit about the author of this dreck, one Philip Gordon, who appears to be "a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and an assistant secretary of state and White House coordinator for the Middle East during the Obama administration", you shall understand better the roots. You shall also understand better what kind of "assistants" the last POTUS has chosen - to sing hosannas to his international politicking...

But this is not about the POTUS, it is about people dying in the streets, to remind you. Something that should be protested and fought against. And I guess it will be vociferously protested if it were to happen on the streets of, say, San Francisco or London or Buda... no, it is too Eastern for the true progressives, let's say Berlin instead , OK?

Tehran is where all these brown people live, after all. They have their own customs and their own culture, they have that Religion of Peace thing that we are obliged to respect, so it is not our business to stick our noses where our noses definitely don't belong, right?

And speaking about the right: Mr Gordon here is a living proof, among many others, of how the modern progressive left has made the successful voyage to the place where the ultra-conservative paleocons with their non-involvement motto lay in wait for their victory. Now these two, ostensibly mutually exclusive gangs, could lay down together in the same bed.

Of course, Mr Gordon is only a single example. Here are more, from different (oh well...) media giants (headlines only, you can imagine the contents):

Iran: By supporting protests, Donald Trump may inadvertently be helping the government's cause

Trump's backing of Iranian protesters could backfire as Tehran cracks down

The progressive echo chamber at its full glory. And bless the fact that you can't smell the said glory as well...

And here is a slightly different source, one Iranian-British citizen, Aaron Bastani, a Labor activist:

Imploring y'all to desist with your wishes for a change (Remember, the CHANGE?), because the results will be frightful, not to mention the usual suspects fomenting unrest... sweet, ain't it?

Oh well, so what can we all learn from this progressive thing? Only this, I am afraid:

A curious case of BBC that forgot to bark in the daytime

What with the unrelenting flow of news coming out of the White House these days, the media is overwhelmed. Their journos are too busy trying to catch up with the stream.

Well, this is the only explanation I have got for the most curious omission in BBC reporting from their favorite corner of the world, I mean the Middle East. In their reporting of a sad case where a British man has been arrested as part of an anti-terror operation while on holiday in Turkey, they have missed an important clue. Not that the clue is relevant to the fate of Joe Robinson, the British man in question. But let's put the things in order. The man first:

Mr Robinson, who is originally from Lancashire, spent five months fighting as a volunteer with the YPG against the so-called Islamic State group and has previously spoken about his experiences in media reports. Although the YPG is not a proscribed group in the UK, Turkey views it as the extension of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK).

I can hardly add something to the quote. Possibly a plea to the British government to intervene more forcefully and to save the British subject from an almost certain incarceration by the friendly and oh how democratic NATO member and its leader going from mad to crazy. But it is hardly my business.

The other thing, though, the writing on the wall (no pun intended) is somewhat different, being totally in the domain of the Elders. The fact that not a single BBC employee got even remotely curious about it...

נַ נַחְ נַחְמָ נַחְמָן מְאוּמַן‎‎

This text adorns many a wall and a fence in Israel, being a part of the local lore. A curious person with access to Google could have easily deciphered the meaning, available in English in Wiki:

Na Nach Nachma Nachman Meuman (Hebrew: נַ נַחְ נַחְמָ נַחְמָן מְאוּמַן‎‎) is a Hebrew language name and song used by a subgroup of Breslover Hasidim colloquially known as the Na Nachs. The complete phrase is Na Nach Nachma Nachman Me'uman. It is a kabbalistic formula based on the four Hebrew letters of the name Nachman, referring to the founder of the Breslov movement, Rebbe Nachman of Breslov, along with a reference to his burial place in Uman, Ukraine.

But the text evidently was mistaken by the BBC editors for Arabic, most probably related to Daesh/ISIS and not a single man/woman of BBC has caught on the possibility to explore this golden lode of a Zionist plot  - obviously of some import.

Opportunity lost...

Hat tip: P.V.

Update: The mystery resolved, thanks to Gilead, whose comment includes this article:

Timothy Paul Jacobs Wordsworth, speaking to The Jerusalem Post from northern Syria on Monday, said he was inspired to join the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) in Syria because he was instilled with the desire to do everything he can to help people.

In the 1990s, he was a soldier for the British military and served as a NATO peacekeeper in Bosnia and Kosovo. However, his life took a different direction as the horrors of Islamic State continued to mount.

And, most important for this post:

Wordsworth has been spray-painting a popular hassidic slogan in places that the Kurdish forces recapture, former Islamic State bases and mosques around Syria. Sometimes the slogan appears alongside the Islamic State flag.

So there:

Many thanks, Gilead!

CNN's startling incompetence

The dramatic developments (and sometimes lack of thereof) in the unending drama of the Russian involvement in the last US elections are certain to leave an external observer confused. As an avid reader of spy stories and a longtime watcher of the Kremlin shenanigans, I personally would like nothing more than tidily laid out proof of Kremlin's tentacles reaching into the North American continent and doing their usual dirt. Of course, a discovery of a few US VIPs serving as Kremlin moles would be a serious cherry on top of that thriller. Unnecessary to say that if one of these VIPs proves to be the POTUS his own self, it will be not just a cherry but a whole watermelon. Not really, it would be very sad, but still thrilling.

But, not being able to follow the inner workings of the discovery process in the offices of NAS, CIA and other hailed intelligence outfits, I, like all other lovers of the genre, have to rely on the media. And herein lies the yuge problem. Take, for instance, the eagerly anticipated hearing of Attorney general Jeff Sessions. Out of several articles on the subject by CNN, one has totally discombobulated me. The one by Errol Louis, with a headline that (I confess) made my heartbeat speed up:

Sessions' startling admission

I wouldn't deny, I have already seen in my imagination Mr Sessions leaving the room in shackles and handcuffs, mumbling something in broken Russian through his tears. But here is what astonished Errol Louis:

Attorney general Jeff Sessions, sparring with his former colleagues in testimony before the Senate intelligence committee, made a startling and dismaying admission on Tuesday. Despite months of turmoil surrounding Russia's efforts to distort American elections, says Sessions, he neither received nor requested a classified briefing to get up to speed on the threat posed by Russian forces.
...
That is an incredible statement, given the size and scope of the threat Russia posed to American democracy.

Titillating, isn't it? Attorney general, the man who should be at the frontline of the fight against the dark powers of Kremlin, is ignorant of the threat? But...

But then there is another article, published by CNN on the same day and written by Tom LoBianco, with a much less dramatic headline:

5 things we learned at Jeff Sessions' hearing

Lo and behold: one of these five things addresses that same "startling* admission":

2. Sessions' recusal started almost immediately, and left him blind on Russia's hacking

The chief law enforcement officer of the United States was never briefed on Russia's hacking of one of its major political parties, or any other efforts by Russia to mess with the elections -- past and future.

Why? Because he personally recused himself from all things related to the Trump campaign's ties to Russia the day after he was sworn into office. What Sessions didn't explain is why he waited a month to tell the public -- and his own associates -- that he had stepped aside from the probe.

Incredible, innit? I don't even blame Errol Louis for his glaring incompetence. And I can be hardly surprised by CNN and its editors, playing with half-baked information and producing one hair-raising news item after another, never conceding they were wrong. Nothing to see here, folks, move along, please.

Just why do I always think Keystone Cops or similar when opening CNN? You tell me.

(*) Here is what I would call really startling (among other things).

Mobileye sale and knee biters, large and small

The media, of course, is full of praise for the successful exit of Mobileye, the Israeli maker of safety and self-driving car technology, sold to Intel for a serious amount of money ($15.3B, as the media says). I, like many other folks, applaud and congratulate the company owners and employees with their success and wealth. And, seeing how some of the proceeds of that sale will inevitably end up in our treasury's pockets, I too will expect to make a shekel or two out of it in various ways our inventive ministry of finance and others will undoubtedly devise.

So it was kinda strange to see a sour face on the general background of celebration and joy. The sour face belongs to no other than our progressive Haaretz, via its reporter, one Eliran Rubin. The article in question:

Mobileye Founder After $15.3 Billion Exit: 'It’s Not the Money. We Want to Change the World'

But it is not the headline, it is the lede that caught my attention:

Amnon Shashua defends the sale of the self-driving car technology firm to Intel as essential for the company’s growth.

Have you notice that word that somehow jumped out at me when I've read this sentence? The "defends", I mean? Apparently the sale itself isn't as obviously desired step in a high tech Israeli start-up career as one might consider. Somebody had even asked Amnon Shashua why has he done it, judging by the following response:

Asked why he consented to selling Mobileye when it was riding the crest of the autonomous-car wave, with a market cap of $10 billion and alliances with some of the world’s top auto makers, Shashua said he saw it as the only way for the company to keep growing.

I can only guess who was asking and so can you.

The motive of the sale to Intel needing defence appears once again in the article:

Yesterday Netanyahu and Economy and Industry Minster Eli Cohen defended the move, saying it boosted economic growth and helped lure multinational companies to Israel.

I happened to hear part of that on radio, and the last thing that would have come to mind of the listener was that the speeches were defensive in any conceivable way. You can take it to the bank.

But nothing to do about it, I guess. Knee biters will be knee biters, no matter what. And, since small knee biters were mentioned, here is an example of one: