If the Palestinians say it, they print it
Who is “they”? Why the MSM, of course. For as long as I’ve been blogging (and before), this has been the way it’s been.
The latest involves the death of an Al Jazeera journalist:
McKernan then uncritically repeats Al Jazeera’s unsubstantiated allegation that Israel “deliberately killed” the journalist, whilst omitting that the outlet is well known as a “mouthpiece for the Qatari monarchy” and a “purveyor of Islamist extremism” whose claims can’t be accepted at face value. A couple paragraphs down, McKernan uncritically quotes a ‘journalist’ from Al-Quds Network suggesting that the killing was an Israeli “assassination”, without reminding readers that Al-Quds is associated with Hamas.
Later, McKernan writes that Israel’s foreign minister, Yair Lapid, said Israel had “offered the Palestinians a joint pathological investigation”, but fails to note that Palestinians reportedly rejected the offer…
Further, today Palestinian officials made it clear that they wouldn’t be handing over the bullet that killed Abu Akleh, the key piece of evidence that could have shown who killed her.
McKernan then attempts to frame Abu Akleh’s killing in the context of what she suggests is an Israeli pattern of targeting journalists…
That the Guardian, a leftist newspaper. But there’s also the AP:
CAMERA’s Israel office yesterday prompted correction of Associated Press captions which stated as fact the unverified claim that Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh “was shot dead by Israeli forces.” There is no substantiation of this allegation, with the Palestinian side having blocked the necessary ballistic analysis to match the fired bullet to the weapons used by the Israeli troops.
The captions were corrected, but only at CAMERA’s urging. This sort of thing has been going on for many many decades, despite CAMERA’s dogged work fighting it. In this manner, the press has done remarkable damage to the truth, to Israel, and to the world. To continue to report Palestinian propaganda without plenty of caveats is to continue to be complicit.
When we were energy independent under Trump, I was thrilled to know that we were no longer dependent upon the lunatics in the Middle East.
Indeed.
Currently it’s more than clear that we’re utterly dependent on the lunatics in the current regime in DC…
Related:
“How the Palestinians Pay Terrorists as Biden Pumps Millions of Aid Dollars Into Their Government”—
https://freebeacon.com/national-security/how-the-palestinians-pay-terrorists-as-biden-pumps-millions-of-aid-dollars-into-their-government/
File under: Take THAT, you ZIONISTS!!
The Israel/Palestinian thing is a nice distillation of what’s wrong with the modern liberal mindset. It’s not really about antisemitism, though that certainly gets involved along the way. The Left’s logic on Israel and the Palestinians goes like this:
1. The Palestinians are weak and the Israelis are strong.
2. That makes the Palestinians the victims.
3. It is always morally correct to be on the side of victims.
4. So, the Palestinians are the good guys.
5. That makes Israel the bad guy.
It’s childishly reductive but in a weirdly pseudo-Christian way that makes weakness an actual virtue.
Mike
Very true.
In fact, the Democrat Party presents itself as perennial “victim”—of concerted and unceasing GOP/Trumpist/Insurrectionist/White Supremacist depredations and attacks upon it and its members (and upon the country!) even as the GOP, according to this Narrative, continually tries to STEAL elections. (One way they try to steal elections is by trying to use the laws of the land to prevent the Democrats from doing so…oh those tricky, icky, disgusting Republicans!)
At the same time, the Democratic Party is the party of revolution and freedom!
In this “new” (actually not so new) “configuration”, the Democratic Party “victims”—and “revolutionaries”—are actually the venal, criminal reactionaries….
MBunge:
Indeed.
See this old post of mine from 2005.
The first I heard of the death of this journalist was when a lefty friend of mine posted on Facebook that she (the journalist) had been deliberately gunned down by Israelis, in spite of being clearly identified as a journalist. This was stated as simple fact.
Mbunge is right about the not-exactly-anti-semitic nature of this syndrome. The person I’m talking about truly is not anti-semitic in any fundamental way. But he pretty much loathes the state of Israel, and I think the fact that Israel is not the weakling in this fight is the basic reason.
Neo:
See this old post of mine from 2005.
Interesting that there were no comments posted until 2007. I wonder if that is due to pre-2007 comments being hosed in a software update.
I knew three generations of a Palestinian Christian family, whom I first met in high school. High achievers, with a lot of STEM postgraduate degrees in the family. The patriarch told his children, before the Six Day War, to get out of the West Bank. He worked as a civil servant in the Jordanian-run administration, where his experience was that Muslims would always be promoted over Christians. The last news I had of him was a Christmas card he sent to my mother in the late 1980s where he told us that he and his wife were living in Kuwait with one of their children. Wonder where they went after support for Saddam got the Palis booted out of Kuwait.
One of his grandsons got a STEM doctorate in the US. While he appeared to spend as much time in Palestinian cause activism as he did on his university jobs in the US, he also published a fair amount in his academic specialty. He eventually went back to the West Bank. One irony is that while his activism (unsurprisingly) focused on the wrongs the Israelis did the Palestinians, a cousin of his from the other side of his family- not the Patriarch’s side- focused HIS activism on how Hamas and other Muslim groups were doing wrong to the Palestinian Christians. (A further irony may be that according to some web scuttlebutt while he was still in the US, his daughter had a Jewish boyfriend.)
Gringo:
2007 was the date of the transfer to WordPress from Blogger. The comments are much older than that, but they received the date of the transfer when it happened. The old comment threads are also upside down. There doesn’t seem to be any way for me to fix it.
If you want to look at the original comment thread, you can find it here, with the comments properly dated and in their original order.
When we were energy independent under Trump, I was thrilled to know that we were no longer dependent upon the lunatics in the Middle East.
Oil is fungible. The price will be influenced by events in the Near East, no matter where they’re pumping it.
Experience has taught me that any claims made by the Palestinians, are at least 97% probability of being lies.
But he pretty much loathes the state of Israel, and I think the fact that Israel is not the weakling in this fight is the basic reason.
Having had more occasions than I can count to scan your friend’s pixel rages, I had to conclude that other men’s athleticism, bravery, and accomplishment leaves him incensed. (The person in question is also notable for a hatred of cops).
In private, not all on the left are in denial of Islam’s totalitarian nature, of whom the ‘Palestinians’ are but one subset. Those on the left who are advocates of the ‘theory’ of transnationalism, which would include all aligned with the WEF… View nationalism itself as the primary obstacle to the advancement toward creation of a world without war. Israel is a strongly nationalistic country and so it must go. Support for the Palestinian ’cause’ thus serves a… ‘larger purpose’.
Not that it’s just Israel, the E.U. country’s open borders policies, the democrat party’s efforts to transfer US sovereignty to the UN and WHO are all part and parcel of the advocates of transnationalism efforts to create a world without war.
Nations must go and a nation without enforceable borders is a nation in name only.
That too many to count wars occurred long before the onset of nation states is just another inconvenient truth.
Wonder where they went after support for Saddam got the Palis booted out of Kuwait.
The vociferous admiration for Saddam was manifest on the West Bank, in Gaza, and in Jordan. Doubt their cousins in Kuwait signed on to it, having had experience with the Tikriti way of doing business.
I knew three generations of a Palestinian Christian family, whom I first met in high school. High achievers, with a lot of STEM postgraduate degrees in the family.
Mark Steyn’s interpretation of the educated classes in the Arab world and of the West Bank, Gaza, and the UNRWA camps in particular. You meet these accomplished and sophisticated people, and half way through the conversation you suddenly political lunacy comes out of their mouths. It’s also his hypothesis that the human capital on the West Bank, in Gaza, and in the camps has largely emigrated and built lives for themselves elsewhere. The people left are ‘the most wrecked people in the world’. Israel’s been rebuffed by this population and its leaders and tribunes a half-dozen times in fifty-odd years, so there isn’t much point at making further initiatives aimed at ameliorating the situation of said population. What that population has is more agreeable to them than the alternatives which might be had from coming to terms with their Jewish neighbors.
In private, not all on the left are in denial of Islam’s totalitarian nature,
Oh, for crying out loud. There are dozens of Muslim states. The political order can be criticized in any and all of them. Very few qualify as ‘totalitarian’.
Iran is probably the most totalitarian, Saudi Arabia largely has a similar cast, although prince salman has been trying to make right from the family business under his father the King, who set up the camps that trained the hijackers under the auspices of the High Commision on Bosnia, but as the Kingdom reforms, Qatar keeps the Salafi flame alive, Jamal Khashoggi was their agent, and his predelictions for Hamas, the Algerian GIA and even Islamic State was the calling card,
Israel represents the West, so largely those in the camp that despise it, set their hearts against it, for the largest time the forces were nationalist, Baathist Nasserite, Arafat a kin of the Mosque keeper n Jerusalem, in Hitler’s proxy in the region, was largely a Soviet instrument, GRU as the late Ion Pacepa relates, the Survivor Abu Mazen was a KGB instrument, in the 80s, the former could do no wrong, Hama rules was the signifier that this was the appropriate course of behavior in Academia Edward Said who came from the most urbane milieu, spread the mind arson through academia along with Rashid Khalidid,
and by the 90s the winds turned more toward the Islamist current, the rot at the center of the Tikriti mob, created an awakening in the formerly secular leaning military and intelligence sectors, Assad Allawtes tried to tame the Sunni elements, and employed them to attack coalition forces, but the foundations there were rotten, and this was seen in 2003,
Malley pere, was a follower of the former currents, his son who largely stears US policy, is a supporter of Islamists, particularly the examples I stated for Khashoggi, the Crisis Forum was his instrument, his lifelong friendship with Blinken since they shared a Parisian Lycee, has the same function, the rages against Al Sisi, even the recent delisting d the EIJ a base of Al Queda, is indicative of this,
Cornhead – exactly right. Trump 2024
“There are dozens of Muslim states. The political order can be criticized in any and all of them. Very few qualify as ‘totalitarian’.” Art Deco
It is to the inherent totalitarianism of Islam itself to which I referred. By now, to dispute it is to reveal a willful and ultimately suicidal blindness. Over time, Muslim States may oscillate from strict adherence to Islam’s tenets to apparent moderation. But always the ‘philosophic’ supremacy of Islam remains unchanged. Even among a ‘moderate’ Muslim State like Egypt, 86% approve of the death penalty for apostasy. That is a totalitarianism of the mind.
Saeb Erekat, who was Secretary-General of the PLO, said to Michael Oren something to the effect of : “if there were peace tomorrow, you would continue to be Jews and Israelis, your national identity and image would be intact. We (the Palestinians) would have nothing. Our entire identity is tied up in the war against Israel. ”
Which is very sad, especially considering they were supposed to be negotiating the ”peace process” at the time.
When I heard of the death of this reporter, it occurred to me that one is never surprised when a cheerleader on the sidelines is hit by a football…
It is to the inherent totalitarianism of Islam itself to which I referred. By now, to dispute it is to reveal a willful and ultimately suicidal blindness.
An ‘inherent totalitarianism’ that you cannot actually observe.
But always the ‘philosophic’ supremacy of Islam remains unchanged. Even among a ‘moderate’ Muslim State like Egypt, 86% approve of the death penalty for apostasy. That is a totalitarianism of the mind.
No clue where you got that datum. Why not observe what Arab states actually do? In Saudi Arabia, which has a population of 33,000,000, the homicide rate has in recent years been around 1.29 per 100,000 while the frequency of executions has been around 0.49 per 100,000. The United Arab Emirates, which has a population of 10 million, has an average of about one execution per year. Here’s a list of executions in the UAE over the period running from 1994 to 2015
https://gulfnews.com/going-out/society/timeline-of-executions-in-uae-1.2129533
Every one of them was for murder.
Egypt has executed about 80 people per year in recent years, a number unusually high for that country. There are 106 million people living in Egypt, so the rate has been 0.076 per year You can see a precis of the offenses carrying a death sentence here:
https://www.egypttoday.com/Article/1/40968/List-Crimes-punishable-by-death-penalty
Here’s a report from 2019. I count 20 Muslim majority countries who carried out no executions.
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/international/executions-around-the-world
If you were going to run through a list of the most abusive regimes in the Muslim world since 1945, that list would include Iran during the period running from 1979 to 1989 and the Sudan for most of the period since 1983. It would also include the Ba’athist regimes in Iraq and Syria. The biggest threat to the well-being of populations in Muslim societies is not Islamist political parties, but political violence and the breakdown of civil authority. (See Somalia, Yemen, Libya, the Borno state in Nigeria, Iraq (2003- ), Algeria (1992-99), Afghanistan).
}}} Experience has taught me that any claims made by the Palestinians, are at least 97% probability of being lies.
I think you vastly over-rate their veracity.
I think it is somewhat less than 100% lies, but only by random chance is there a truth hidden in their bloviations, like a grain of rice in a ton of human sewage.
}}} … View nationalism itself as the primary obstacle to the advancement toward creation of a world without war. Israel is a strongly nationalistic country and so it must go. Support for the Palestinian ’cause’ thus serves a… ‘larger purpose’.
The disconnect here is the insane notion that somehow, Israel is any more “nationalist” than the notion of Palestine itself, which clearly, blatantly, and obviously a “nationalist” idea, despite being based on a nation which never ever actually existed in reality.
If it weren’t for the destruction of wealth and valuable social structure it has destroyed, this clueless ignorance and stupidity the support requires would be merely risible.
As-is, it’s defacto evil as a direct cause of much of the misery in this world.
PostModern Liberalism is a social cancer. Literally, not figuratively.
The primary problem with liberal idiocy in this regard is the fact that The Right (and most libertarians) understand something that The Left fails utterly to grasp:
Q: “Why is there more war than peace? Why is there more hate than love?”
A: “Simple: It takes one to make war, it takes two to want piece. It only takes one person to hate, but it takes two to love.”
This, among other things, is that humans will always find reasons to hate and make war — ideas other than “Where I was born”: Things such as “What kind of government (or economic system) should we have?” and “What is your religion?”
They might not call it “war”, but it will involve people shooting at each other, blowing each other up, and generally making other people miserable… Which is a distinction in words, not in results.
Q: “Why is there more war than peace? Why is there more hate than love?”
1. There isn’t and 2. Usually there isn’t.
}}} An ‘inherent totalitarianism’ that you cannot actually observe.
Oh, PLEASE.
The fact that the governments don’t do it openly — mainly because they’re rat-shrewd about public image — is irrelevant.
WTF do you think Kashoggi was?
What do you think Theo van Gogh was?
What do you think a Fatwa is?
Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Geert Wilders all beg to disagree with you regarding the attitude of Islam towards anyone critical of them.
The REAL FACT is that any actual moderates in Islam — less than 50% but not a trivial number — are too terrified to speak out publicly against radical Islam. Because they know they will be targeted immediately.
“Oh, Fatwas are religious edicts, not political”.
Bovine Excreta. There is no distinction in Islam between religion and government: “Sharia Law”. When your imam tells you to kill, you take the command seriously. And either contribute to someone who will, or do it for the 72 virgins.
So, either you are being willfully ignorant, or deliberately lying.
}}} Q: “Why is there more war than peace? Why is there more hate than love?”
1. There isn’t and 2. Usually there isn’t.
Yes, which is why if you go through the history of humanity and look for periods where every group is at peace with everyone else, you find something like 54 total years where the entire world was at peace, out of like 5000 on record. This ignores social groups that lack any longer-term records, like, say, two major tribes in Africa, or something… which would likely negate even those 54 years. Someone, somewhere, is ALWAYS trying to force others to do their bidding.
.
Peace, there’s so much of it to be found.
SMH.
The end run in politics is always to pick up a stick.
Yes, which is why if you go through the history of humanity and look for periods where every group is at peace with everyone else,
Why would you do that?
Oh, PLEASE.
I think you need to sober up before you post again.
If you take ialam seriously which i do (the last 20 years have made it unavoidable) it is deeply problematic
“An ‘inherent totalitarianism’ that you cannot actually observe.” Art Deco
It’s built deeply into Islam’s tenets, whch are based upon the Qur’an’s declarations and Muhammad’s exportations. Visit a Muslim majority country and publicly speak even moderately critical of Islam and witness the reaction. If you’re very lucky you’ll escape with your life.
“But always the ‘philosophic’ supremacy of Islam remains unchanged. Even among a ‘moderate’ Muslim State like Egypt, 86% approve of the death penalty for apostasy. That is a totalitarianism of the mind.” GB
“No clue where you got that datum.”
“the Pew Research Center’s 2013 survey report, “The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society,” regarding the percentage of Muslims in Egypt and Pakistan who support the death penalty for leaving Islam. The correct figures, based on the 2013 Pew Research Center report, are 88% of Muslims in Egypt and 62% of Muslims in Pakistan favor the death penalty for people who leave the Muslim religion.
Egyptian society’s treatment of the Christian Coptic minority is infamously brutal.
“Turkey’s Culture of Genocide Continues”
https://www.persecution.org/2019/06/04/turkeys-culture-genocide-continues/
“I count 20 Muslim majority countries who carried out no executions.”
Executions are unnecessary when ‘vigilante’ termination of anyone who annoys faithful Muslims is encouraged. Your faith in the honest reportage of deaths in Muslim majority countries is at best disturbingly naive.
Ah, the can’t counter the argument, so resort to labeling it drunken incoherence… Right out of the Left’s playbook.
Ah, the can’t counter the argument, so resort to labeling it drunken incoherence…
It is incoherent. If you want it countered, it has to make minimal sense.
It’s built deeply into Islam’s tenets,
Try looking at actual social relations and political practice.
An artist in sophistry argues with a man who prefers to cite statistics.