Complying With Israeli Censorship Order, NYT Conceals Name of Soldier Who Shot Wounded Palestinian
That Israeli courts are protecting a soldier charged with murder by censoring media outlets is disturbing for all sorts of reasons.
(updated below with the New York Times's response)
LAST THURSDAY, an Israeli soldier was arrested after the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem posted horrific video of the soldier shooting a 21-year-old Palestinian man in the head from point-blank range, and killing him, even though he was already shot, wounded, and lying incapacitated on the ground. The killing took place in the occupied West Bank city of Hebron after the Palestinian man, Abed al-Fatah al-Sharif, stabbed an IDF soldier at a military occupation checkpoint.
As The Intercept's Robert Mackey reported that day, none of the nearby IDF soldiers or Israeli rescue workers — who had ignored the wounded Palestinian — reacted at all to the killing, suggesting that this sort of point-blank, cold-blooded assassination was the norm for the occupying army — except for the fact that this time, it was captured on video. Mackey also noted that although the soldier's face could be seen in the video, none of the Israeli media named him, despite the fact that his name quickly circulated on social media sites:
The soldier's name was not used in the Israeli media, but his supporters online, calling him a hero, drew attention to what appears to be his Facebook profile. That account, in the name of Cpl. Elor Azaria, includes several photographs that closely match the appearance of the soldier seen in the video, as well as a recent commendation of his service from the army.
Other writers have also subsequently named the soldier [his Hebrew name is transliterated as Cpl. Elor Azarya or El'or Azariya] as well; that includes Israelis and even municipalities celebrating him as a hero, publishing his photograph and Hebrew name to do so:
Beit Shemesh Municipality will hold a rally in support of the Hebron executioner."For us you are the national hero" pic.twitter.com/uADQor0B6X
— Elizabeth Tsurkov (@Elizrael) March 28, 2016
The fatal shooting by Cpl. Azariya has become a major news story in Israel, but not for the reason one might assume. There is very little outrage over his decision to shoot a wounded, subdued 21-year-old Palestinian in the head from point-blank range. There is, however, significant outrage at the military for detaining and investigating him. One poll from Channel 2 News in Israel, cited by Haaretz, found that "most of the public (57 percent) believed there was no need to detain and investigate the soldier," while only "5 percent defined the shooting of the wounded assailant as murder."
In today's New York Times, Jerusalem-based correspondent Isabel Kershner has an article reporting on the controversy. There is, however, a glaring omission: the name of the soldier who did the killing and is now under arrest. Here's how the paper justifies that suppression:
An Israeli military court order has banned the use of the soldier's name in all press accounts, including those of foreign news organizations accredited in Israel, even though the soldier has a Facebook page and has been widely identified by name in social media.
The soldier's Facebook page suggests sympathies with some far-right causes. He told another soldier at the scene that Mr. Sharif had stabbed his friend and "deserved to die," according to Israeli news media reports.
The NYT's compliance with Israel's censorship orders has previously provoked controversy. In 2014, the paper's public editor, Margaret Sullivan, described the compliance by Kershner and Jodi Rudoren with an order from an Israeli military censor to conceal the name of an Israeli soldier who was being held hostage.
At the time, the paper's reporters and editors insisted that they would obey Israeli censorship orders only in the rarest and most compelling of cases. In the 2014 case, there was a valid argument that disclosing the soldier-hostage's identity could jeopardize his safety because he was related to the Israeli defense minister. Moreover, in her own article explaining the censorship, Rudoren acknowledged that the NYT "has ways to circumvent the censor" by simply having other NYT journalists not based in Israel report the censored information.
In this case, there's no valid rationale for censoring the name of the soldier. He's a criminal defendant in a high-profile case that, at least originally, involved charges of murder. His face is in the video. His name has been spread all over the internet by his supporters heralding him as a hero. His name has also been reported by media outlets — including The Intercept — not subject to Israeli censorship orders.
One distinction here is that the suppression order comes from an Israeli court rather than a military censor. During the 2014 controversy, the Huffington Post's Michael Calderone reported that while the explicit rationale of the paper's spokesperson was that the paper must abide by the laws of the countries where it operates, "some of the paper's top editors said they didn't know the Times abided by such restrictions," at least when it came to orders from military censors.
It's true that the situation faced by the NYT here — along with other media outlets based in Israel — is a difficult one. The paper could theoretically lose its media credentials to report from Israel if it flagrantly violates a judicial gag order, though it's hard to imagine Israel expelling the NYT and other major media outlets from the country.
But there's an even greater danger from allowing a government or a court to censor vital information that is needed to fully report on the story. Certainly there must be some Israeli censorship order that is so offensive to journalistic integrity and accurate reporting that the NYT would refuse to comply with it, no matter the consequences. Remember that 45 years ago, in the U.S., the same paper defied orders from the U.S. government to refrain from publishing the Pentagon Papers, risking prosecution to do so. Few things are more damaging to journalistic credibility than allowing governments and militaries to dictate what can and cannot be reported.
The Haaretz investigative journalist Uri Blau extensively analyzed the soldier's Facebook postings and — without naming him — concluded that his social media output "presents a deep-rooted hatred of Palestinians." Understanding the shooter and his motives is vital.
The complexity of the situation should not be overlooked. Violating a court order is not an easy choice. But at the very least, the NYT should publicly account for why it withheld this information (The Intercept's requests for comment were not returned at the time of publication; they will be added if they are received). And the fact that Israeli courts are protecting a soldier charged with murder, captured on video, by censoring media outlets from reporting his name is disturbing for all sorts of reasons.
The New York Times's deputy international editor, Jodi Rudoren — who was also involved in the 2014 military censorship order described in this article — has responded to The Intercept's inquiry. Posted below is Rudoren's response:
Thanks for the interest in Isabel's story.
Whether we comply, defy, or challenge an order in court in a foreign jurisdiction is a decision we make based on the particular facts before us. In this case, we felt we could tell the story of how this case is roiling Israeli society without the soldier's name. Had we thought that the court order prevented us from providing a robust, complete version of that debate, we would have considered workaround options we have used in the past — reporting the story from outside Israel.
Of course we always want to give readers as much information as possible. Indeed, we included a reference to the court order so that readers would know exactly what was going on; that transparency is important to understanding both our practices and how Israel functions.
As for my past comments, I'm not sure I said "compliance" would "occur only in the most extreme cases." I think what I said — and certainly what I meant — was that we hardly ever encounter Israel's censor. The situation you mention, of the potentially kidnapped soldier's relationship to the defense minister, was my first dealing with the censor. In that case, as you probably know, the ban on writing about the relationship was lifted two days later, and we wrote about the relationship as well as the whole censorship process.
I'll simply note that any censorship order from a government that has no valid rationale — and that's certainly the case here — ought to be defied or at least challenged given the threat it poses to journalistic freedom and reporting accuracy.
Top photo: Right-wing Israeli protesters wave flags outside the Castina military court near the southern city of Ashkelon, Israel, March 29, 2016. Hundreds of protesters have rallied there in support of a soldier filmed last week fatally shooting a wounded Palestinian attacker in the West Bank. The signs say: "Jewish blood is not abandoned" and "death penalty to terrorist."
April 3 2016, 12:15 a.m.
Alert to readers:
Craig Summers is well aware that Hamas did not start the events leading to the obscene carnage that Israel collectively imposed on Gaza during the summer of 2014. He has seen, many times, the documentation that Israel knew, very early, that the three kidnapped Yeshiva teens were dead. Israel pretended not to know this, so that the IDF had an excuse to ransack homes and menacingly interrogate Gazans, under the pretense that they were "searching" for young men they already knew were dead.
This thread is stale. Or I'd again document all of this.
Moreover, I do not advocate torturing or killing Israelis (tho I do not object to attacking members of the IDF). But I do not object to kidnapping them for exchange of the thousands of Palestinians that Israel unjustly tortures and imprisons.
Palestinians are occupied, and the Israelis are living on their land that they stole from Palestinians, Arabs whom they now subjugate, and often imprison. As Moshe Dayan put it during a 1956 eulogy for an Israeli soldier killed by a Gazan:
Let us not today fling accusation at the murderers. What cause have we to complain about their fierce hatred to us? For eight years now, they sit in their refugee camps in Gaza, and before their eyes we turn into our homestead the land and villages in which they and their forefathers have lived.
We should demand his blood not from the Arabs of Gaza but from ourselves. . . . Let us make our reckoning today. We are a generation of settlers, and without the steel helmet and gun barrel, we shall not be able to plant a tree or build a house. . . . Let us not be afraid to see the hatred that accompanies and consumes the lives of hundreds of thousands of Arabs who sit all around us and wait for the moment when their hands will be able to reach our blood.<<
It's now far more than eight years. The clear-eyed (and monstrous) Dayan understood that no people would passively accept what Zionists did and do to the Palestinians.
So, kidnapping Israelis, as long as they are well-treated (and they usually are), does not disturb me. Not if the purpose is prisoner exchanges.
margview
April 2 2016, 9:12 p.m.
I am still waiting for all the dots to be connected–in this case the dots of security breaches of privacy but the tying of said misuse of power to the secret campaign to use trade agreements—NAFTA (2 billion o/s ISDS lawsuits), CETA (with more enhanced ISDS clauses +changes to allow corporate to control governmental procurement contracts) TPP (more intrusion, more of the same) TTIP (privacy stripping for individuals) and the TISA (where the gloves are off–and corporations privatize all that is paid for and known to be the 'public sphere' and why government exists—corporations are said to intent to simply take over public pensions, education, privacy in banking rights, healthcare, utilities, protect lands and waterways——See bilaterals.org (ck out FIPA (China deal)….Comments as to the need to control and diminish nation-state's domestic economies (the last means of growth for small -and -medium-sized industries -which really are the nation state job creators.? The implications regarding 823 trillion in derivative contracts o/s—-and the push by banks to force a cashless society….?
Bar Heffetz, an Israeli farmer and peace activist, writes that BDS is working, in part because BDS means bureaucratic hassle:
Contrary to what you get told, the boycott and BDS are working, and how. At you can feel it everywhere, at least in my field of agricultural exports to Europe. And that's apart from the fact that you must sign a document that your produce does not come from the settlements, with aerial photographs attached. Even plain Israeli products [from inside the Green Line] encounter a lot of problems because the buyers cannot think of a reason why they need all that hassle. Buy from Spain and it's all simple and quiet. And what is really nice about it, is that government departments such as the Ministry of Agriculture headed by that top Rightist Uri Ariel cooperate with all this. They provide official documents that indicate separate production lines do exist which are free of settlements' produce, for those who wish to export to Europe The conclusion? The road to South Africa has never been shorter.
April 2 2016, 2:55 a.m.
Another random attack targeting Muslim men of military age may have taken out a leader of al-Shabaab responsible for at least two deadly terrorist attacks:
"………WASHINGTON — An American drone strike in Somalia is believed to have killed a key leader of the Shabab militant group…… in a statement emailed to reporters that the American military, in cooperation with the government of Somalia, was still assessing whether Thursday's attack had succeeded in killing Hassan Ali Dhoore, described as an important member of the Shabab security and intelligence wing. Defense Department officials said he was involved in two high-profile attacks in Mogadishu more than a year ago in which Americans were killed………In his statement, Mr. Cook said the Shabab leader played a direct role in the Dec. 25, 2014, attack on Mogadishu International Airport, "resulting in the death of several African Union Mission in Somalia personnel and one U.S. citizen." He said Mr. Dhoore was also "directly responsible" for the March 2015 attack on the Maka al-Mukarram Hotel in Mogadishu, which resulted in the deaths of 15 people, including one Somali-American. Officials said Mr. Dhoore was also involved in the assassination of a dual-citizen member of the Somali Parliament……..the drone had struck in the early evening hours as Mr. Dhoore, who has been under American surveillance on and off for a considerable time, was riding in a vehicle with two other Shabaab members……"
April 1 2016, 10:29 p.m.
Antisemitism is a complex topic so it is impossible to cover the entire subject in one response. You wrote,
"……..This is the Faustian bargain Zionists and their Western lobbies have made: they behave per some of the most vicious stereotypes about Jews in order to protect Israel from any criticism, much less denunciation……"
In one post, you argue that it is the responsibility of the left to call out anti-Jewish bigotry, but then in the next post, you say it is impossible because the tropes are true! Then you use Sheldon Adelson as an example of why they are true. He is a rich Jew buying influence for Israel (and other causes as well). Finally, you accuse Zionists of using anti-Semitic stereotypes to protect Israel from criticism.
First of all, I would refrain from calling anyone below the line an anti-Jewish bigot since they rightfully can call you a hypocrite (which you admitted above). Second, there is nothing wrong with Jewish people supporting the concept of a Jewish state as a source of pride. Most would probably agree that the ideas and motivations behind Zionism were fundamentally correct. That is the main reason that Zionism is not racism because it denies the centuries of anti-Jewish bigotry which led Jewish people to seek a refuge i.e., a Jewish state. UN Resolution 3379 defined Zionism as a form of racism (repealed at a later date). You have also called Zionism equal to racism at times.
There are plenty of Jewish people that contribute financial support to the various lobbies like AIPAC. There are also plenty of Jewish people who do not support the current policies of Israel – and don't give anything (or possibly to more liberal Jewish lobbies). There are some Jewish people who are not Zionists. It's impossible to label all Jews under the same banner because Sheldon Adelson gives a boatload of money to Republicans in the hope that they will win elections and support Israel better than Obama did (to this date). Rich people besides Adelson – like the Koch Brothers and George Soros – also give a lot of money for their various pet causes. Additionally, AIPAC is a strong lobby. That's undeniable. However, to suggest that they run US foreign policy or the Republican Party is ridiculous. Chomsky – the greatest hero ever to the radical left (who also knows something about ties) – said the tail does not wag the dog in the case of Israel. There are other strong lobbies like the military Industrial Complex, Wall Street, private and public unions and even Saudi Arabia (and the list goes on).
Criteria used by the ADL to determine anti-Semitic stereotypes (for their world polls conducted on antisemitism):
1) Jews are more loyal to Israel than to [this country/the countries they live in].
2) Jews have too much power in the business world.
3) Jews have too much power in international financial markets.
4) Jews don't care about what happens to anyone but their own kind.
5) Jews have too much control over global affairs.
6) People hate Jews because of the way Jews behave.
7) Jews think they are better than other people.
8) Jews have too much control over the United States government.
9) Jews have too much control over the global media.
10) Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust.
11) Jews are responsible for most of the world's wars.
Finally, Roger Cohen published an article March 7, 2016 in the New York Times about left wing anti-Semitism ("An Anti-Semitism of the Left"). You will of course be in denial, and interpret this to be just another attempt to stifle debate. I think a couple of his reasons are valid for calling someone anti-Semitic:
"……..Chalmers referred to members of the executive committee "throwing around the term 'Zio'" — an insult used by the Ku Klux Klan……….and the dismissal of any concern about anti-Semitism as "just the Zionists crying wolf."………
………What is striking about the anti-Zionism derangement syndrome that spills over into anti-Semitism is its ahistorical nature. It denies the long Jewish presence in, and bond with, the Holy Land. It disregards the fundamental link between murderous European anti-Semitism and the decision of surviving Jews to embrace Zionism in the conviction that only a Jewish homeland could keep them safe. It dismisses the legal basis for the modern Jewish state in United Nations Resolution 181 of 1947. This was not "colonialism" but the post-Holocaust will of the world: Arab armies went to war against it and lost………
……….Johnson, writing in Fathom Journal, outlined three components to left-wing anti-Semitic anti-Zionism. First, "the abolition of the Jewish homeland; not Palestine alongside Israel, but Palestine instead of Israel." Second, "a demonizing intellectual discourse" that holds that "Zionism is racism" and pursues the "systematic Nazification of Israel." Third, a global social movement to "exclude one state — and only one state — from the economic, cultural and educational life of humanity."………"
There are tons of other sources on the roots of left wing antisemitism.
Who are Semites craigsummers
Are Arabs and European Jews considered Semitic people and included in the definition of anti-Semitism?
gorsky Who are Semites
Although, both the Arabs and the Jews are Semites, the term anti-semitism applies to those who subscribe to and exhibit hatred exclusively towards the Jews. But you knew that already. Didn't you?
Who are Semites gorsky
Then, it should be called anti-Jewishism and not anti-Semitism.
Totallynotgator craigsummers
As to #1 on the ADL list, SOME Jews really ARE "more loyal to Israel" than to their country of residence. I have known American Jews who absolutely fit that description. (And it's fine with me anyway; the rule that one's principal loyalty must be to one's country of residence seems kind of arbitrary.) Is it anti-semitic for me to say this?
ooBilly craigsummers
There is a video on youtube showing the roll call in AIPAC's 2008 policy conference. They brag about 350 members of us congress. Thats 100% Senate and 250 in the HoR. As well as the POTUS.
Isnt that a legislative majority? To think policy isnt made by one of those AIPAC supporters is a bit naive.
Look it up "when the roll is called by AIPAC' youtube – 25 secs in.
So Israelis are OK with extrajudicial executions now? The soldiers are the accuser, the judge and the executioner. Have fun living in a fascist state without rule of law! At least you lock cool in a uniform right..
Barrie Krisis
Typical behaviour for an ocupying army.
According to the Jerusalem Post today:
"………The Islamist group Hamas publicly acknowledged on Friday that it is holding the remains of two Israeli soldiers and also has in its custody two Israeli nationals who went missing in the Gaza Strip…….Izzadin Kassam Brigades [Hamas military wing], released a televised statement through official Hamas media in Gaza on Friday saying Israel will have to make concessions if it wants the Islamist organization to provide information about the conditions of the "four prisoners of war."….." my insertion in brackets
This is why Hamas wants to kidnap Israelis – only it's a dangerous game. That is what was behind the war between Hezbollah and Israel in 2006. Hezbollah killed several Israel soldiers in an attempt to kidnap Israelis. That quickly escalated into a devastating war – mostly for the Lebanese (Wikipedia):
"…….The conflict was precipitated by the Zar'it-Shtula incident. On 12 July 2006, Hezbollah fighters fired rockets at Israeli border towns as a diversion for an anti-tank missile attack on two armored Humvees patrolling the Israeli side of the border fence.[52] The ambush left three soldiers dead. Two Israeli soldiers were abducted and taken by Hezbollah to Lebanon.[52][53] Five more were killed in Lebanon, in a failed rescue attempt. Hezbollah demanded the release of Lebanese prisoners held by Israel in exchange for the release of the abducted soldiers.[54]……"
The same principle was behind the kidnap and execution of the three Israeli teens (children). Hamas was entirely responsible since their operatives kidnapped and murdered the Israelis. Hamas encourages the kidnapping of Israelis – and Hamas will not stand in the way of any terrorist who challenges Israel. This precipitated another war with the Israelis although Hamas had a place to hide (tunnels) while Gazans were pummeled by the IDF onslaught. They had nowhere to go.
Sebastian craigsummers
Oh my god. I try to avoid engaging you, but would you please stop lying about the fact that Hamas abducted the three Israeli teens? They did not. That's a well established fact. It was some splinter group that was not in touch with Hamas Proper. Even IDF spokesman Mickey Rosenfeld admitted that.
Really, your only purpose here is to try and hang the blame for the last Gaza war on the Palestinians. Like the Palestinians are responsible for all the civilians the IDF murdered. That is disgusting. And I see you've conveniently neglected to mention the fact that the IDF already knew the three Israeli teens were already likely dead, and that the IDF swept through the West Bank anyway and arrested over 300 Hamas members as "suspects." What a joke.
Yeah. Israel can do no wrong. It's the Palestinians that keep killing themselves.
Gorsky Sebastian
Oh, it is so easy with your type. Here, http://www.npr.org/2014/08/22/342318367/hamas-finally-admits-to-kidnapping-and-killing-israeli-teens
"A senior Hamas leader has said the group carried out the kidnapping and killing of three Israeli teens in the West Bank in June — the first time anyone from the Islamic militant group has said it was behind an attack that helped spark the current war in the Gaza Strip. Saleh Arouri told a conference in Turkey on Wednesday that Hamas's military wing, the al-Qassam Brigades, carried out what he described as a "heroic operation" with the broader goal of sparking a new Palestinian uprising…. It was an operation by our brothers from the al-Qassam Brigades," he said, saying Hamas hoped to exchange the youths for Palestinian prisoners held by Israel.
And eat it too…
Sebastian Gorsky
Oh fuck you sockpuppet. Like I'm gonna play your stupid games? Assclown.
Here you go… That was easy, wasn't it?
@Mona See another example of what your type does when faced with indisputable facts. That's becoming entertaining…
-Mona- gorsky
You continue with hasbara-fail. As I'm sure you are aware, there are many reports, from credible outlets, that a rogue Hamas group — one not under the direction of Hamas — did the kidnapping. If this thread were still significantly active I'd take the time, for the other readers, to document this.
(Zionists rapidly learn that posting bullshit is a mistake if I am around; I and others here can almost always not only debunk it, but are able to post additional, fact-based material that makes Israel and its supporters look quite bad. Typical hasbara is not the way to handle the well-educated audience that participates here. Indeed, at least one of the online Hasbara Manuals has a separate set of instructions for dealing with those who are well-informed.)
You are a Zionist hasbara-ist, and as such totally untrustworthy. Many have your number by now. Certainly I do.
There is nothing you could write that will absolve Hamas of the responsibility for the kidnapping and murder of the three Israeli children – and there are a number of reasons why which I have pointed out. Just because they denied ordering the kidnapping (the military wing of Hamas took credit contradicting leadership), they most certainly encourage kidnapping of Israelis for trade bait. I pointed that out in an earlier post. In fact, Hamas will not stand in the way of anyone fighting Israel even in Gaza (but we know they can shut down rocket fire from other terrorist organizations like Islamic Jihad when they want because they are easily the powerful military in Gaza).
If the kidnapping was for trade, then it went woefully wrong with the murders. As in the case of Hezbollah, miscalculations lead to wars – (in this case) Operation Protective Edge. No matter what you post, you will never absolve Hamas of the responsibility – "rogue" Hamas members or not.
Gorsky craigsummers
I think you are wasting your time trying to convince one of Intercept's resident-antisemites Mona that sun light is bright. You'd have more success building the great Trump wall on our Southern border alone with your bare hands. She can't relate to facts. She lives in an ivory tower (or perhaps a basement) where sun light can't reach. One can only use facts to expose bigots like herself; you'll never convince here that 2+2=4…
kassandra -Mona-
There are 406 Palestinian children in the Zio project's jails right now. During the latest Gaza massacre 504 Palestinian children were murdered.
pictures of Palestinian children arrested by Israel
The problem with the Zio project is proportionality, i.e. three Jewish children equal over a thousand Palestinian children. And the killings and kidnappings of Palestinian children continue.
I am beginning to think that The Craig is a Hamas plant. He gives us the perfect opportunity to repudiate the Hasbara fertilizer that is bein spread by professional and well-funded hasbara farmers.
kassandra kassandra
http://www.daysofpalestine.com/news/israeli-troops-assault-palestinian-child-wb/
More, many more, pictures available on the Internet.
"…….While Israel's hand in the outbreak of the Syrian civil war is perhaps not as obvious as that of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the CIA, they certainly played a role….."
Yea, according to your source, they are providing humanitarian aid to the Free Syrian Army in exchange for leaving the Syrian Druze alone on the Syrian side of the border. Your link:
"……..,During a briefing with Israel's diplomatic correspondents at the IDF's headquarters in Tel Aviv, Ya'alon said that Israel's ongoing humanitarian assistance to Syrian rebel fighters, a source of growing conflict between Israel and its own Druze population, safeguards the minority population in Syria……"
What a role those sneaky Joos are playing. Just like when you accused the US of supplying ISIS, you were talking right out of your ass.
"……You know, craigsummers, I used to be a bit skeptical about the BDS movement as it seemed to be too narrowly focused on Israel relative to Saudi Arabia, but after reading your lunatic one-sided posts for some time, I think I now understand just how crazy and dangerous the right-wing Zionist agenda is, and will now spend a fair amount of time and energy lending my support to the BDS movement………."
Do you honestly believe that I give a flying fuck what you support?
William St. George
Time to wish the First Amendment a happy journey as it leaves America. And we can give Journalists a big thank you for helping get the First ready with a nice send off.
If Trump doesn't win the presidency in the US, he can always claim to be Jewish, move to Israel, and campaign for Bibi's job. He would fit right in.
The impossibility of telling the truth without antisemitic tropes
Most of us accused by Zionists of being antisemitic are merely reciting unpleasant realities about Israel and its U.S. lobby. (Not all; there are some actual antisemites ranting about Jews per se.)
Margaret Sullivan, in her last column as Public Editor of The New York Times, revealed the paper doesn't cover many aspects of Sheldon Adeleson's behavior because it can't be done without strongly paralleling antisemitic tropes. Mondoweiss quotes her thus:
"We'd really like to cover the Republican candidates' appeals for Adelson's support, but we can't do so because the reporting would inevitably bring up anti-Semitic stereotypes."
"I mean, here we have a rich Jewish casino magnate trying to buy political candidates to support an international Jewish cause, in this case support for the Jewish state of Israel," Sullivan continued. "Do I have to draw an anti-Semitic cartoon to make it any clearer for you?"
As if that wasn't enough, Sullivan also pointed out that Adelson is also feeding such vicious stereotypes by appearing to influence the media, through his purchase of the popular Israeli daily Israel Hayom and The Las Vegas Review-Journal. "In the end we just decided to wash our hands of the subject," Sullivan said. "It hurts as a journalist, but the tropes—the tropes!"
Mondoweiss also notes:
"Let's just put it this way, after I said the Congress was bought and paid for by the Israel lobby, I got crucif—sorry, I couldn't get arrested on Broadway."
This is the Faustian bargain Zionists and their Western lobbies have made: they behave per some of the most vicious stereotypes about Jews in order to protect Israel from any criticism, much less denunciation. Some of us care more about truth than being smeared as antsemites, and this now includes many Jews.
Zionists have actually provided heaps of fodder to antisemites. If they don't like this they might wish to reconsider the wisdom of continuing.
Sebastian -Mona-
-Mona- Sebastian
gorsky -Mona-
As I have already said, you can write 2000 words, but you can't hide your hateful anti-semitic nature. What is interesting with your type is that when you run out of arguments or are faced with facts, you resort to your favorite labels – Zionist/Hasbara.
I'll give you a hint: the first sign of a not so smart anti-semite (you) is when they say hasbara and Zionist. Second sign is when they proclaim they don't like Israel, but love the Jews. Third sign is when they employ the above two in response to indisputable facts and reasoning, like you did when I told you about definitions of occupied land and apartheid and that neither applied to Israel. Your reply – hasbara/zionist. Pretty banal and dumb, even for a "retired" lawyer…
I told you about definitions of occupied land and apartheid
Could be. I'm familiar with the absurd "definitions" hasbara-sists resort to; I generally don't bother to correct them, unless I feel it would be beneficial to unknowledgeable readers.
Your reply – hasbara/zionist.
No doubt. You can expect me to consistently do that, when I realize the person I'm interacting with is a hasbara-ist. They have common talking points — sophistry, most special "definitions" and versions of "facts," and even outright lies — and are not difficult to spot.
On occasion, I will employ the presence of the hasbara-ist to document the online Israel/hasbara project. When it seems as tho doing so would be useful for others.
Definitions: the beauty of this (and I say beauty, because this further exposes your cheap 90 IQ worth anti-semitism) is that all you can respond is hasbara/zionist, but definitions are not mine. They are of the International Law. But who (among cheap 90 IQ anti-semits) cares about International Law, when they (you) can't fit it in their obvious hateful agenda.
As far as your nonsense about a "rouge Hamas group", you may want to take a look at their own website where they proudly call themselves a military wing of Hamas. By the way, their "news" and other articles remind my the Intercept. Here, take a look: http://www.qassam.ps/news.html.
And by the way, Saleh Al-Arouri, who is Hamas's official, said this: "There was much speculation about this operation, some said it was a conspiracy. The popular will was exercised throughout our occupied land, and culminated in the heroic operation by the Qassam Brigades in imprisoning the three settlers in Hebron," Clearly, these are not the words describing acts of a rouge group. Also, that would be a statement against own interest, so, I have no reason to disbelieve this fellow…
"No doubt. You can expect me to consistently do that" (hasbara/zionist) But of course, you clearly are incapable of doing anything else.
It seems that this soldier has French citizenship too.
Christopher FredM
Well that's going to get… Interesting.
Rodger Lodger
Problem: Israeli soldiers killing subdued Palestinians.
Solution: Palestinians not attacking Israelis.
Topher Rodger Lodger
Solution: Ending military occupation
AtheistInChief Rodger Lodger
Problem: Palestinians attacking Israelis.
Solution: Israelis getting out of Occupied territories.
Solution: Israelis can stop evicting Palestinians out of their homes.
Solution: Israelis can stop firebombing sleeping residents and killing entire families
Solution: Israelis can start behaving like fucking human beings.
barabbas AtheistInChief
Problem: Rodger Lodger
Solution: get out of my country.
on another note-
" Israelis can start behaving like fucking human beings."
lol – israelis tossed and lost that capacity a long time ago. They are going backward so fast in time that we will soon recognize them by their body hair, clubs, bad teeth and a frequent uhg'ing sound.
The difference between Muammar Gaddafi and Benyamin Netanyahu is striking. They are opposites. Muammar Gaddafi was a tyrant looking to be a leader of democracy and Benyamin Netanyahu is a leader of a democracy looking to be a tyrant.
Netanyahu ain't lookin' any more. He's there.
William Bednarz
And the NYT is listening to them proving what their reporting is worth…..
This was just tweeted from Benjamin Netanyahu's official Twitter account:
A strong Israel prevents the passage of masses of refugees to Europe.
The world would be different if we were not here.
In a word; better.
photosymbiosis -Mona-
What a nutter. While Israel's hand in the outbreak of the Syrian civil war is perhaps not as obvious as that of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the CIA, they certainly played a role – and that civil war is what sent millions of refugees fleeing to Europe.
craigsummers photosymbiosis
"…….What a nutter. While Israel's hand in the outbreak of the Syrian civil war is perhaps not as obvious as that of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the CIA, they certainly played a role – and that civil war is what sent millions of refugees fleeing to Europe….."
You are lying through your teeth – and you know you are lying. PROVIDE THE SOURCES.
barabbas craigsummers
The only reasons that refugees dont travel thru israel is because israel is in a "genocide kind of mood". Hell, they even shoot people who are already dead. What does that tell ya?
craigsummers barabbas
You love the word "genocide" which is OK. Look up Rwanda.
-Mona- photosymbiosis
Yea? So what? There is nothing in that story at all. Certainly Israel has an interest and a stake in the outcome of the civil war on its border with Syria. They treat some casualties of the war. They may hope that Assad is removed from office which – again – undercuts the reach of Iran and Hezbollah, but Israel is obviously not actively bombing the Assad regime (although Greenwald had an article on Israel bombing a weapons depot meant for Syria). There is nothing wrong with protecting the Druse on the Syria side of the border. There is some obvious benefits to the war in Syria for Israel:
"…….Which is perhaps why Israel seems content with having radical Islamist militants on yet another border—at least for now: Its enemies—both the Islamists and Assad—are fighting one another, and the Druze who support the Syrian government may soon become unlikely allies of the Jewish state. "Our situation in the northern arena has never been better," General Yair Golan, the Israeli deputy chief of general staff, said in early June. "Throughout Syria and Lebanon, there are international jihadi organizations which do not act against us and are busy fighting Assad, Hezbollah and Iranian forces."….."
That pretty much sums it up. Maybe Photosymbiosis just thinks those Joos must be up to something.
craigsummers craigsummers
That should read ……(although Greenwald had an article on Israel bombing a weapons depot meant for HEZBOLLAH).
That is one heck-of-a wound you got there. Pain is evident. You should see a doctor about that. Treatment is available and it sounds like it could be stress related, or exaccerbated. Might even be PTSD. Netanyahu may have it since his brother's murder. One of the effects of PTSD is that you become so defensive as to attack other people.
I am not trying to be funny. See a doctor.
nfjtakfa -Mona-
I'm not sure I've ever encountered a true sadomasochist before, Mona, as HDH kids only beat their head on walls because they can't help it. This child actually enjoys it – and wants to see "others" tortured, too.
What a misspoke when I was headed to dinner, "ADHD."
Probably lost its meaning.
craigsummers nfjtakfa
Either way, it never had any meaning – but it is the best I can expect in a comment from you.
"……While Israel's hand in the outbreak of the Syrian civil war is perhaps not as obvious as that of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the CIA, they certainly played a role – and that civil war is what sent millions of refugees fleeing to Europe…."
The US role has been relatively small, but the largest role has been played by the Assad regime and their material and personnel support from Iran, Russia and Hezbollah. Why do you tend to "forget" that Photo?
photosymbiosis craigsummers
Israeli Defence Minister Ya'alon: "We've assisted them under two conditions. That they don't get too close to the border, and that they don't touch the Druze."
http://www.timesofisrael.com/yaalon-syrian-rebels-keeping-druze-safe-in-exchange-for-israeli-aid/
"Speaking at the Institute for National Security Studies' (INSS) conference in Tel Aviv on Jan. 19, Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon made a bold statement: If he had to choose between Iran and the Islamic State, he told the audience, he'd "choose ISIS." "- Source: Washington Post
Christopher craigsummers
So… What's you're next trick? Pulling a Benny Morris and saying it might be genocide, but the Jewish state has "good reasons?"
You're already justifying summary execution, that's where Hitler first dipped his toes in an ocean of blood.
the insanity of arrogance and paranoia of mentally disordered patient speaks for itself.
" Throw the Jew down the well, so my country can be free" Borat . It's so true.
AtheistInChief Steve
You see 10 antisemitic comments and you start crying.
If you're Black, you see the police choking a black man on tape and getting away scott free.
If you're Muslim, you hear on television, the most popular politicians talking about banning your kind.
If you're Mexican, you hear unabated public discourse about building walls to keep you out.
If you're Native American, you hear White Suburbanites talking about how you can't take care of your front yards.
But we're all supposed to empathize with your sensitivities; when the discussion is about an Israeli soldier shooting an incapacitated man in the head, in front of other Israelis and nobody doing anything about it. We're supposed to believe the Bullshit about how the soldier shot the man because he was scared, and then went smiling and shaking hands with the man who offers free pizza for killing Palestinians.
Do you have the ability to feel somebody else's pain? Or has your own pain from 70 years ago consumed you so pathologically that you can't see beyond your own skin?
AtheistInChief AtheistInChief
-If you're a woman, you hear politicians talking about what you can and cannot do with your body.
– If you're gay you have to live in a world where there are laws that says you can be fired anytime
– If you're transgender, people are going to invade your dignity by telling where you can and cannot go to the bathroom
pick your fucking poison. Everybody is oppressed. Yes, Jews are too. But Israeli Jews are not. Don't ask me to cry for Israelis. They're engaged in warfare against your first Amendment at your universities. And you're crying about how you feel. It really is gross. You're turning people off. And you can't even see it.
Steve AtheistInChief
I like Borat I think it's funny when he sings his throw the Jew down the well song. I was trying to joke around about Jews you dummy . Fuck Jews, Christians, Muslims etc I'm an earthling or some kind of hairless monkey that's all. And if I was boss I'd give Isreal one week to free the Palestinians and if they didn't I'd be boots on the ground the next day I'd give Netanyahu the same treatment Godhhafi got .
Oh, so you weren't being ironic. You meant it!!
Well stick around. I'm sure somebody is going to give you a medal.
craigsummers AtheistInChief
I don't think he is quite that far off target at the Intercept Atheist.
NoOneYouKnow
Well, why would you need to know the name of the accused to report on a murder? We don't want to over-report, do we? People can't handle too much detail.
Lin Ming
I'm still waiting for all of the 'moderate' Jews to denounce publicly the Zionists and who carry out atrocities in the name of their religion…
According to Palestinian Media Watch, "The following text was posted by PA Security Forces Spokesman Adnan Al-Damiri on his Facebook page on March 22, 2016, following the terror attacks in Brussels:"
"…….."While we condemn and denounce terrorist acts everywhere in the world, we Arabs are the ones who have been most severely burned by the fire of terror, which has been created and exported by the US and Europe since the Arab Jihad fighters in Afghanistan, and before that by exporting the Jewish terror to Palestine, supporting it and justifying it. Today, Europe is being burnt by its [the terror's] fire in its airports and squares. I do not gloat but feel pain over every innocent soul that was killed, but those who prepare the poison will taste it themselves, and today Europe is having a taste of what it prepared with its own hands. Unless you fight terror everywhere, first and foremost in Palestine, since the [Israeli] occupation is the ugliest form of terror, as well as in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Egypt, Tunisia and Jordan – you will be burnt by its fire, and terror has no religion."….."
Hence the common refrain among the various nations and peoples of the world so often overheard at United Nations deliberations nowadays: 'one mans terrorist, is another mans freedom fighter.'
There are a number of antisemitic commenters in this space; as long as they are tolerated here I will never refrain from calling them out. As Owen Jones just wrote in the Guardian: Antisemitism is a poison – the left must take leadership against it. Owen is writing about cleaning house on the left in Britain, but the points apply everywhere in the West:
It is possible to passionately oppose antisemitism on the one hand, and on the other oppose the policies of Israel's government and support Palestinian national self-determination. Both these issues have to be completely disentangled: a discussion about serious antisemitism should not be a launchpad into a debate about Israel. It cannot be acceptable that Jewish people feel uncomfortable in Labour, or indeed in Britain. The left should speak out ever more loudly about antisemitism as an act of solidarity with Britain's Jews
Lin Ming and dahoit are both antisemitic. Recently there have been others as well. These should not be accepted here as legitimate and welcome peers.
Lin Ming -Mona-
You are a fucking overgrown crybaby and a certified lunatic. And a total bigot.
Lin Ming Lin Ming
big·ot
/?bi??t/
noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots
A person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.
"Don't let a few small-minded bigots destroy the good image of The Intercept"
synonyms: chauvinist, partisan, sectarian
-Mona- Lin Ming
Oh, indeed, I am highly intolerant of antisemites, you included.
You are intolerant of everyone and everything that does not agree with your lunatic left-wing identity politics and victimhood agenda.
No one who knows me and my views would claim I am an advocate of "identity politics." In fact, I have been a critic and hold serious skepticism. But being a literate, well-educated and well-read individual raised by antisemites whose views I came to strenuously reject before the age of 21, I know antisemitism when I see it.
You are a neon light of antisemtitism. And I will call it out in every thread where you post such foulness.
And you are a very dim bulb indeed…
That an antisemite claims to think little of my intellect is pleasing to me.
Simple pleasures for simple minds.
"…….There are a number of antisemitic commenters in this space; as long as they are tolerated here I will never refrain from calling them out. As Owen Jones just wrote in the Guardian: Antisemitism is a poison – the left must take leadership against it. …."
Owen Jones is certainly right, but that is wishful thinking since the left purposely (and inadvertently) promotes antisemitism in a number of ways. Left wing antisemitism may not be as dangerous to Jews as the far right (at least from a violence standpoint), but there has been a steady promotion by the left of anti-Jewish centuries old canards. Certainly in some parts of Europe, left and right wing antisemitism can be dangerous to Jews.
Despite what Mona says, not all accusations of antisemitism are meant to stifle debate and antisemitism may be couched in anti-Zionism. In fact, the "stifle debate" card is an excuse to cross the line. Here is (just) one unidentified post from a previous thread which clearly crosses the line:
"……..Again, I don't have anything against Jews, as individuals or people, but if the over-influence of Jews, leading to an irrational support of Israel, as Israel now stands, by the US gov't , goes against the US's long term interests , solely to support an Israeli state, then I see it as my duty to point it out , criticize it and label it for what it is – treason……"
But he/she did something against Jews…..obviously.
ezrapowned -Mona-
Mona –
Lin Ming and dahoit are Hasbarist provocateurs pretending to be anti-Semites. They are no different then the Jewish student who was caught painting a Swastikas on her own dorm room door.
Just ignore them.
-Mona- ezrapowned
Generally, I ignore those two. But I will not let it be said that antisemitism in this space goes unchallenged and undenounced.
Agreed and rightfully so.
I know antisemitism when I see it.
So what is it? Put your money where your keyboard is and, pray, tell us what is antisemitism.
Is it OK to despise Judaism? You know, the old time misogyny, the child mutilation, and the most disgusting practice I can imagine, sucking.
How about those little wooden blocks on the rabbi's head that contains an amulet. That's some serious juju, right there. Been working for thousands of years, apparently …
And then a little country is drawn up on stolen land and it swears allegiance to all those practices. Daily land theft and murder by the Jewish state should be condemned by any and all.
Are we supposed to tolerate what we see done, to fellow human beings, in the name of Judaism?
No. So we unleash a torrent of derision that tarnishes the modern, secular Jew along with the supporters of Israel. That is how the game is played.
The decades-long assault by the IDF is clear in that there is no middle ground to be had with Israel. Those chilling quotes by the IDF rabbi are exactly reminiscent of Nazi Germany's approach to "untermensch."
Fuck the Jewish state and those who do not condemn it.
Antisemitism; my ass …
craigsummers nuf said
Mona can recognize blatant bigotry, but is clueless about the more subtle antisemitism which she has displayed on occasion.
You are one of the resident antisemites. This is why I very seldom do not reply to you.
Getting called an antisemite by ardent Zionists is a badge of moral clarity. Zionists have rendered the label almost impotent.
But I, and others like me, retain the moral authority to denounce the actual thing when it manifests. You manifest it.
Well, shit. This should not have included the bolded words:
This is why I very seldom do not reply to you.
"…….Getting called an antisemite by ardent Zionists is a badge of moral clarity. Zionists have rendered the label almost impotent……"
Indeed you do Mona, but your comments in the past are nothing to brag about wearing a badge of "moral clarity" – insensitive and completely false.
AtheistInChief nuf said
@Nuf Said,
Yes, it's okay to despise Judaism, or Islam or any sort of religion or ideology. But if you're going to blame Misogyny on Judaism, or child mutilation on Judaism, that's horseshit. These are cultural things. All this shit is cultural, and the sucking and what not is ceremonial. What on earth do these have to do with Israel? Israel has very little to do with Judaism. It's about the politics of property, of land. Israelis could be of any religion and any race, and given the political position, they'd be behaving exactly the same way. Are you suggesting that a bunch of French Catholics in Israel would behave in any other way.
You're going to lose your argument when you blame Judaism for Israeli behavior. It's settler colonial behavior. They're doing it in the name of Judaism, or so they say, just like people do shit in the name of Islam, or so they say. It's all about politics and other people's property.
I think you know that's the situation. But you keep deliberately missing the point. And I don't know why you keep doing that, if you want to win the argument.
That Jodi Rudoren! Butter wouldn't melt in her mouth!
The Israeli military prosecutor today downgraded the charge against the soldier from murder to manslaughter.
from the free dictionary, a definition of manslaughter:
The unjustifiable, inexcusable, and intentional killing of a human being without deliberation, premeditation, and malice. The unlawful killing of a human being without any deliberation, which may be involuntary, in the commission of a lawful act without due caution and circumspection.
Manslaughter is a distinct crime and is not considered a lesser degree of murder. The essential distinction between the two offenses is that malice aforethought must be present for murder, whereas it must be absent for manslaughter. Manslaughter is not as serious a crime as murder. On the other hand, it is not a justifiable or excusable killing for which little or no punishment is imposed.
At Common Law, as well as under current statutes, the offense can be either voluntary or Involuntary Manslaughter. The main difference between the two is that voluntary manslaughter requires an intent to kill or cause serious bodily harm while involuntary manslaughter does not. Premeditation or deliberation, however, are elements of murder and not of manslaughter. Some states have abandoned the use of adjectives to describe different forms of the offense and, instead, simply divide the offense into varying degrees.
Yes, a "crime of passion" in which, say, one walks into a room and sees one's spouse naked with one's best friend and grabs a knife and stabs. That's heat of passion and manslaughter.
What that video shows doesn't reasonably show a person being rather quickly propelled to kill with no reflection; driven only by emotion.
avelna2001
On anonymity granted to sources:
Anonymity in the New York Times: By the Numbers
http://fair.org/home/anonymity-in-the-new-york-times-by-the-numbers/
Israel is a shame for the civilized world, an Apartheid society same as South Africa used to be. The only way to stop to this country that do not accept or recognize international laws is, Boycott.
The NYTimes refusal to report on Israel's nuclear weapon arsenal is where you really see them cooperating with the Israeli military censor. For example, when South African documents detailing Israel's nuclear dealings with the South African apartheid regime, the New York Times refused to do any reporting other than to reprint the official Israeli government's denial. Their only report on the issue was this one, consisting of unvetted, unchallenged repetition of Israeli claims:
"Israel Denies It Offered South Africa Warheads" By Isabel Kershner, May 24, 2010
The documents themselves tell a different story.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/may/23/israel-south-africa-nuclear-weapons
"The documents, uncovered by an American academic, Sasha Polakow-Suransky, in research for a book on the close relationship between the two countries, provide evidence that Israel has nuclear weapons despite its policy of "ambiguity" in neither confirming nor denying their existence."
"The Israeli authorities tried to stop South Africa's post-apartheid government declassifying the documents at Polakow-Suransky's request and the revelations will be an embarrassment, particularly as this week's nuclear non-proliferation talks in New York focus on the Middle East."
To quote directly from the documents:
Memorandum of March 1975
"In considering the merits of a weapon system such as that offered, certain assumptions have been made:
a) That the missiles will be armed with nuclear warheads manufactured in the RSA or acquired elsewhere.
b) That the missiles have an acceptable rack life so that they will remain stable and operational in storage for a considerable number of years."
It's also notable that Isabel Kershner, the Jerusalem-based NYTimes reporter on all matters Israeli, has written around 100 articles mentioning the "Iranian nuclear program", but the only one about the Israeli nuclear program is that cited above. That's one-sided government propaganda, not 'impartial balanced reporting' – if it was impartial, then those stories about Iranian nuclear programs would have to include a comparison to Israeli nuclear programs.
If Isabel Kershner and her editors need a model for how to do this, they should look at the hundred-plus articles on Pakistan and India's nuclear weapons program published in the NYTimes, which almost always compare the two countries' nuclear weapons programs to one another. And if Israel denies her a visa in response, well, that was okay for China, wasn't it?
rrheard photosymbiosis
Rudoren and Kershner are at best highly biased if not totally bankrupted by actual conflicts of interest in their NYT "journalism" on the topic of Israel. They've both got a long well document history of which this link is only one. I could post a bunch of others by this site still hasn't figured out how to solve the problem of multiple links in a comment. The NYT really isn't a good source for journalism on the State of Israel in the first instance, historically speaking.
https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/maureen-clare-murphy/jodi-rudorens-parting-gift-israel
Unfortunately the NYTimes strict adherence to the Israeli exemption rule pollutes all of their writing on nuclear weapons issue, for example William Broad and David Sanger's article on the Nuclear Security Summit, which makes no mention of Israel:
As Nuclear Security Summit Begins, Materials Remain Vulnerable to Theft
By DAVID E. SANGER and WILLIAM J. BROAD, MARCH 29, 2016
It's really just really poor journalism in general, also making no mention of the fact that Obama has embarked a $1 trillion 'nuclear weapon modernization' program, and instead going with drivel like this:
"The nuclear initiative has been a signature issue for Mr. Obama: It is among the goals he campaigned on in 2008 and part of the reason he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize barely a year into his presidency."
It's dishonest, one-sided BS – and William Broad of course co-authored some of the Iraq War propaganda with Judith Miller on 'WMDs' that was used to promote the disastrous invasion of Iraq by the GW Bush administration, yet he's still there, writing about the same subject. That paper has become little more than a propaganda-spewing outfit staffed by a collection of PR monkeys. I don't understand how anyone could be a 'loyal' reader of that tripe.
"……That's one-sided government propaganda, not 'impartial balanced reporting' – if it was impartial, then those stories about Iranian nuclear programs would have to include a comparison to Israeli nuclear programs….."
No. You are wrong. That is simply "adversarial" journalism. Haven't you learned anything at the Intercept?
I thought Israeli PR people were not allowed to comment on the subject of Israeli nuclear weapons. Won't the military censor be upset with you?
leamas
Not surprising coming from the NYT, but what interests me is, now that Elor has realized his dream of killing a Palestinian, was it everything he thought it would be?
Israel telling the U.S. media what not to print. Next thing you know they will be financing somebody's campaign.
Lin Ming alan479
…or using another false-flag attack to focus attention and sympathies onto their own internal 'terrorist' threats.
photosymbiosis alan479
Saudi Arabia is the top foreign financiers of American politicians. See this recent report on John McCain, for example:
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-03-31/mccain-linked-nonprofit-received-1-million-from-saudi-arabia
"Though federal law strictly bans foreign contributions to electoral campaigns, the restriction doesn't apply to nonprofits engaged in policy, even those connected to a sitting lawmaker. Groups critical of the current ethics laws say that McCain's nonprofit effectively gives Saudi Arabia – or any other well-heeled interests – a means of making large donations to politicians it hopes to influence."
With Israel, however, the money flow tends to run in the opposite direction, with American billionaires backing far-right Israeli politicians:
"Netanyahu raised more than 90 percent of his campaign money this cycle in the United States, with more than half of the total coming from just three American families."
(Reuters, Dimi Reider	, February 27, 2015)
If you look at the whole picture, it's American and European consumers, who buy Saudi oil, with some of the money from the sales used to finance Wahhabi-ISIS terrorism, and much of the rest recycled into American banks via arms sales and financial deals, which fills the pockets of billionaires, who then finance the far-right Zionist politicians in Israel, while Israel receives billions every year in U.S. taxpayer-financed military aid, which they use to further destabilize the region, in coordination with Saudi Arabia – round and round it goes.
So if the world gets off the Saudi oil teat, and gets out of the Middle East, then the whole perpetual war cycle will come crashing down, since ultimately it's all funded by people buying Middle Eastern oil.
The crucial issue is not some legalistic or journalistic ratiocination. The victim of this murder is not just the individual murdered, but the entire Palestinian people who are wantonly slaughtered under the cover being given by the U.S. and an equally complicit mainstream media.And we wonder why they hate us?
NYT has become a mouthpiece of monied interests rather than protecting the common good through transparent reporting. It's why I no longer subscribe to that entity. Their political pundits (opinion writers) can't for the life of them figure out what's happening this election: they didn't see it coming. Just a sign of how out of touch they are with the swath of low and middle income citizens; out of touch with the ramifications of empire; out of touch with the fact that being "reasonable" in the face of unreasonable actions on the part of our government officials, other governments (such as Israel, that we ally with) , or any entity for that matter, isn't so reasonable after all. Domination and greed are the order of the day , and mutually reinforce one another. Keep up the excellent reporting, Glenn.
max berry
45 years ago, in the U.S., the same paper defied orders from the U.S. government to refrain from publishing the Pentagon Papers.
That was before oligarchs had the oligopolies in Banking, Newspaper, health care, Radio and TV.
Now they are all beholden to and cooperate with the political power structure that is controlled by the few themselves. The people will see and hear what the oligarchs decide they will see and hear.
JLocke max berry
You think America's oligarchs are something, Take a glimpse into one possible American future:
Entertainment provided by Jennifer Lopez, Enrique Iglesias and an £18,000 ($25,000) designer wedding dress is far beyond the reach of most brides, but when the groom's father is worth billions you can afford to splash out.
Billionaire's son Said Gutseriev, 28, married 20-year-old student Khadija Uzhakhovs in Moscow this weekend in a jaw-droppingly lavish affair, rumoured to have cost up to $1 billion.
Held at the luxury Moscow restaurant and banqueting venue Safisa, which was dripping with fairy lights and decked with wall-to-wall fresh flowers, the wedding set a new bar for extravagance.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3514779/Inside-oligarch-s-multi-million-pound-wedding.html
But at least Russia raised the minimum wage, to 109$ a month. So more people can afford to buy a magazine with pictures of the wedding.
bahhummingbug JLocke
I can see how Donald Trump likes these people … poor Trump.
*watched the wedding video … and if someone spent $1 billion on that, then a fool and his money was well parted!
Glenn, the response you received from the Times' Rudoren really puts the pressure on today's comics to come up with good material. How are they supposed to compete? How can they possibly measure up to a bar that contains such side-splitters as, "Of course, we always want to give our readers as much information as we can." (rim shot, please) As long as the information doesn't contain any names, of course…(cymbal crash!)
Or, how about this equally hilarious Rudoren laffer, "…I'm not sure I said "compliance" would "occur only in the most extreme cases." I most certainly would have added, "…or, whenever the Israeli government tells us to." (please…can't catch breath)
As good as those are, the routine's climax is reached with this good, old Times' chestnut, "We hardly ever encounter Israel's censor." And with that, I'm on the floor, because the only reason they never encounter Israel's censor, as you've alluded to many times, Glenn,is because they never have to–they censor themselves.
Hilarious, isn't it!
Here's an unintentionally honest take on why America sends billions to support the occupation of Palestine, it "Serves US National Interests" (which America's interests? Not the one with the people who want to better afford college)
American Aid to Israel Serves US National Interests
Israel has the best regional intelligence operation and shares its intel on known terrorist groups
http://observer.com/2016/03/american-aid-to-israel-serves-our-national-interests/
But before advocating for "US interests" Abraham Miller starts off by first dismissing other uses for all that tax money, mocking a political billboard:
"We give Israel $10 million per day! That money can send our kids to college." So reads a billboard on Interstate 680 in Walnut Creek, California, sponsored by "If Americans Knew."
Sending kids to college has an anti-Semitic subtext supposedly:
Of course, the obvious subtext of the billboard is that if not for those damn Jews and all their power, your kid could go to college for free.
In other words after removing anti-Semitism, Abraham H Miller can find no other motive for Americans wanting to shift funds from the Israeli military, to their own underfunded schools. That many want their own kids to be able to afford college doesn't get a mention.
So apparently seeing a billboard, with an advert against funding Israel is enough to take one of Bernie Sanders main positions, and reduce it to anti-Semitism.
Left unsaid by this Observer article is the obvious. Of course if Obama didn't send all that money to the war industry, more people's kids could go to college.
And it was Israel that helped the FBI get into the San Bernardino 'terrorist's' I-phone…
dahoit Lin Ming
Shh..that's insider info!
Lin Ming dahoit
https://www.rt.com/business/337894-cellebrite-mobile-fbi-iphone/
Israeli firm allegedly helped FBI break into San Bernardino shooter's iPhone
Published time: 31 Mar, 2016 14:33
The US Federal Bureau of Investigation worked with Israel's Cellebrite Mobile to crack the iPhone of the dead gunman behind last year's mass shooting in California, reports Bloomberg citing unnamed sources.
nuf said Lin Ming
Israel has most likely penetrated Apple's engineering section with humans.
I'll wager there are no major tech companies that have not been compromised.
Johnathan Pollard …
What happens when an International KKK group is allowed to expand unfettered…
Lin Ming RF
Regrettably Ms. Rudoren's response is neoliberal gobbledygook !
The statement "Of course we always want to give readers as much information as possible." is telling — as if they get to regulate the amount of information the readers should get.
The occupation has turned the people of Israel into monsters!! WTF a medic executes the guy, fucking shameful.
Lin Ming frank
Some day the tide will turn on them…
Fuckin' Jews.
You are some sort of Trump-loving wingnut troll. Please STFU.
You are some sort of crazy and Self-Absorbed wingnut troll. Please STFU.
barabbas Lin Ming
Mona is a thoughtful knowledgeable insight full critical thinker who details relevant information for the greatest meaning for understanding.
If you can compete with that, please demonstrate.
Lin Ming most likely is paid by AIPAC, who is trying to get young liberal American Jews (who support equal rights for Palestinians and who also support the BDS movement on American college campuses) to shift their support to Israel's Zionist-apartheid-racist policies.
The Orthodox Zionist settler movement and their government supporters (Netanyahu, Lieberman, etc.) is pretty bizarre; their mentality is comparable to that of Woodrow Wilson, the 1913 U.S. President who called himself a "liberal reformer" while he championed racial segregation and promoted racist films like "Birth of a Nation."
https://www.bu.edu/professorvoices/2013/03/04/the-long-forgotten-racial-attitudes-and-policies-of-woodrow-wilson/
So, how does AIPAC plan to get the disaffected Jewish population of the United States, which is largely indifferent to the whole Israeli Zionist project, to get on board? The central plank of their platform is to equate the BDS anti-apartheid movement with 'hatred of Jews', so it stands to reason that AIPAC itself would be interested in promoting hate speech targeting all Jewish people in the comment sections of stories about Israel.
For all we known, Lin Ming could merely be the other identity of craigsummers. These kind of propaganda games are pretty common fare.
"……Lin Ming most likely is paid by AIPAC….."
Oh those sneaky fucking Jews. You can't trust them. Obviously Lin Ming couldn't possibly think for himself/herself.
Give it up. Young American Jews want nothing to do with the hate-filled Zionist agenda, they think its an embarrassment, a leftover from the 20th century, and the sooner the whole program is flushed down the drain, the better.
"When Luntz displayed ads depicting Palestinians as violent and hateful, several [Jewish] focus group participants criticized them as stereotypical and unfair, citing their own Muslim friends. Most of the students, in other words, were liberals, broadly defined. They had imbibed some of the defining values of American Jewish political culture: a belief in open debate, a skepticism about military force, a commitment to human rights. And in their innocence, they did not realize that they were supposed to shed those values when it came to Israel."
And no, they don't 'hate themselves,' either. That's the same kind of rhetoric that skinhead neoNazi gangs use about white people who despise their agenda, as well. It's pathetic, small-minded, stupid and vile.
Paranam Kid
All those advocating the release of the name only clamour for it out of rage & revenge, intent on a conviction via the media. That is the ONE & ONLY "added value" to naming names.
-Mona- Paranam Kid
There's a reason almost all names of the accused are made public in the U.S. Crimes, arrests and trials are public business.
Paranam Kid -Mona-
Yes, without any consideration for the family of the perpetrator. You have to realise that the family should not have to bear the burden of their name being banded around in public in a criminal context, much less should they have to also pay for the individual's crime. But in your "fine" US justice system that phrase "… and justice for all" is misapplied when making names public.
Yes, without any consideration for the family of the perpetrator.
That interest is far, far outweighed by the interest in arrests and trials being open to the public, and the system therefore susceptible to scrutiny by the the citizenry and the free press. There are to be no Star Chambers in the United States.
Moreover, in this case, knowing the identity of the "medic" who executed the downed assailant has allowed reporting on the soldier's social media statements and enthusiasms — he's far right and filled with loathing for Palestinians. That, too, is newsworthy information.
"…….How "rightly on edge" do you think Palestinians feel when Israel warplanes and tanks start bombing the living fuck out of them which Palestinians cannot "predict" or "prevent" because you know they are an occupied people without a state, without a military, and no way to protect themselves from the unfettered violence of the Israeli military and police….."
I suspect many feel as I would. Why did the government "I" elected to govern Gaza decide to spend millions building cemented tunnels into Gaza so they could attack and/or kidnap Israeli soldiers/citizens? "We" (the people) were left to fend for ourselves when the IDF attacked Gaza – no bomb shelters etc. Hamas rockets were launched from various locations within the citizenry of Gaza putting us (the people) at risk. Israel has always bombed the rocket launcher sites – so Hamas knew that Gazans would die.
Why did the government of Gaza kidnap three Israeli children and execute them? The kidnapping and murder was the catalyst for Operation Protective Edge. Hamas has a policy of kidnapping Israelis to exchange for prisoners (Haaretz):
"………the organization [Hamas] even distributed an 18-page "Field Manual for Kidnapping" to its Qassam Brigades, providing detailed explanations on how to target Israeli soldiers, when to kidnap (rainy days are best)…..According to a study published this week by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, Israeli security forces have foiled at least 48 kidnapping attempts since January 2013, 14 of them this year alone……"
Hamas is the most powerful military in Palestine (outside of the IDF) which publicly states it will not oppose anyone that wants to fight Israel. Of course, Hamas absolutely can control attacks against Israel – if it wants:
"……Hamas leader Yahya Moussa stressed that his movement provides support for any faction or party that wants to fight Israel. "Hamas embraces the resistance and cannot prevent anyone from resisting the occupation, regardless of their political affiliation. Anyone who wants to fight Israel is welcome," he told Al-Monitor…….It seems clear that Hamas in Gaza supports anyone who believes in armed resistance and gives them a space to operate even if they were political enemies……"
So Hamas – the government of Gaza – allows anyone to "resist" Israel (also) at the expense of Gazans and their children. As the elected government of Gaza, Israel rightly holds them responsible.
I guess those are a couple of the questions I might ask Hamas (we the people) from behind bullet proof glass. Possibly I might also ask why Hamas keeps launching rockets into Israel (with little military value, but with terror value) which bring much more powerful retaliatory strikes killing Gazans. Possibly I might also ask why Hamas keeps sacrificing Gaza citizens in their war against Israel – and for propaganda value (like the ubiquitous articles in the Intercept).
Thanks RR, it is always a pleasure to discuss the issues with you.
-Mona- craigsummers
To the readers: Craig has posted propaganda such as this before. He knows the answer, because I and others have posted it many, many times.
Hamas is not terribly popular with Gazans, but they do support its current goals. During Israel's obscene bombardment of Gaza during the summer of '14, Gazan civil society (doctors, lawyers, academics) published an open letter endorsing "no ceasefire" until these demands are met:
A living death
Charges in the media and by politicians of various stripes that accuse Hamas of ordering Gaza residents to resist evacuation orders, and thus use them as human shields, are untrue. With temporary shelters full and the indiscriminate Israeli shelling, there is literally no place that is safe in Gaza.
Likewise, Hamas represented the sentiment of the vast majority of residents when it rejected the unilateral ceasefire proposed by Egypt and Israel without consulting anyone in Gaza. We share the broadly held public sentiment that it is unacceptable to merely return to the status quo – in which Israel strictly limits travel in and out of the Gaza Strip, controls the supplies that come in (including a ban on most construction materials), and prohibits virtually all exports, thus crippling the economy and triggering one of the highest poverty and unemployment rates in the Arab world.
To do so would mean a return to a living death.
Unfortunately, past experience has shown that the Israeli government repeatedly reneges on promises for further negotiations, as well as on its commitments to reform.
Likewise, the international community has demonstrated no political will to enforce these pledges. Therefore, we call for a ceasefire only when negotiated conditions result in the following:
*Freedom of movement of Palestinians in and out of the Gaza Strip.
Unlimited import and export of supplies and goods, including by land, sea and air.
*Unrestricted use of the Gaza seaport.
*Monitoring and enforcement of these agreements by a body appointed by the United Nations, with appropriate security measures.
Each of these expectations is taken for granted by most countries, and it is time for the Palestinians of Gaza to be accorded the human rights they deserve.
Speak about propaganda Mona. The ultimate cease fire conditions differed little from the one offered by Egypt and Israel early on. How many Gazans died as a result of the incompetence of the terrorist organization Hamas?
Cease Fire conditions.
"…….Hamas, the militant Islamist faction that dominates Gaza, declared victory even though it had abandoned most of its demands, ultimately accepting an Egyptian-brokered deal that differs little from one proffered on the battle's seventh day. In effect, the deal put both sides back where they were at the end of eight days of fighting in 2012, with terms that called for easing but not lifting Israeli restrictions on travel, trade and fishing in Gaza……"
Guardian (8-27-2014):
"……..But the terms of the deal – brokered by the Egyptian government, and reached on the 50th day of the conflict – appeared to be almost identical to those agreed at the end of the previous war 21 months ago. Israel will open crossings on its border to allow humanitarian aid and construction materials to enter Gaza, and will extend the permitted fishing zone to six miles off the coast of Gaza. The Rafah border crossing between Gaza and Egypt is also to be opened………More difficult issues will be deferred for further indirect talks between the two parties in a month. They include Hamas's demands for an airport and seaport in Gaza and the release of Palestinian prisoners, and Israel's insistence on the disarmament of militant groups and the return of the remains of two of its soldiers killed in the fighting……"
dahoit -Mona-
Hamas is not very popular with the Gazans;Is that wishful thinking or the truth?
I do know their religious attitude is anathema to you,so you are displaying your prejudices.
As the world has shown,when all other avenues fail to produce justice,religion is the last redoubt,witness ISUS,AlCIAda and Al NUSrA,(all false flags of American imperialism)Shiaism, Hezbollah and Hamas.
They,Hamas are certainly better than the PA and all those pos bribees.
-Mona- dahoit
I should think you'd know better than to challenge me in this area; I don't make fact claims unless I am confident in them. Gazans are sick of the corrupt PA but also have no great love for Hamas. They rally to the latter pretty much only when under direct attack from Israel.
Lady,your constant telling us of your knowledge is a sign of insecurity.Really.
Eric Alterman in drag?
I find you to be an indoctrinated holder of shibboleths.
The Palestinians have endured hell under the Hamas people,yes.
Yes,its possible that some under their sway do not like it.
You can't see that Israels intention is to undermine Hamas support?That they are the most effective force so far,making the PA an afterthought?Irrelevant?Whom the Zionists would prefer as the rulers as they are malleable scum?
Your stupid prejudices impair your brain.
dahoit dahoit
The Christian Science Monitor?Another total Ziorag,maybe worse that all the rest,as they purport to be Christian.
I subscribed to them for a short while,fooled by the name.A bunch of scum liars like all the rest.
No, it's a sign of exasperation that anyone who's read here sufficiently long would imagine I have no factual basis for anything I report in this area. It's simply a fact that I am immersed in this topic and have read vast amounts about it, and stay current.
Hamas is not especially popular with the Gazans. Yes, Israel is trying to undermine Hamas, and Israel also worked hard to make sure Hamas and Fatah could not successfully forge a Unite Government.
Your rants like this:
Are not a substitute for extensive knowledge from reliable sources.
Hamas has no "military" in any sense of the word.
Palestine does not use "human shields" but it is well documented that the IDF does.
"I Craig Summers am so stupid and such a bad hasbarist I don't even really understand the order of events that first came Operation My Brother's Keeper, which detained and interrogated hundreds and hundreds of Palestinians, killing 9 and raiding between 1300 and 2000 Palestinian properties, arresting and interrogating 800 Palestinians without charge or trial . . . , and then after Israelis burned a Palestinian teenager alive in retaliation, used all of this as a pretext for even more indiscriminate killing of innocent Palestinian women, children, teenagers and old folks in what was known as Operation Protective Edge."
Hamas' "leadership" likely did not order or participate in the kidnapping and killing of three Israeli teenagers in 2014:
According to J. J. Goldberg, the military indictment contains no evidence of orders from Hamas itself and strengthens the thesis that the incident was organized by the Qawasmeh family alone from start to finish. According to Amos Harel and Chaim Levinson, the kidnappers planned to wait a few days, then contact senior Hamas operatives in the Hebron area, to manage the hostage and negotiate a prisoner swap with Israel. In their view it appears doubtful that any senior Hamas official would have been ready to accept that kind of risk.
[O]pinions were divided within Israel's security services as to whether or not the two suspects had direct ties to Hamas.On 26 June, the Israel Security Agency identified two Hamas members as key suspects in the kidnapping, whom Palestinian police noted, had gone missing since the night of the kidnapping. High-ranking members of Hamas denied that the group had any involvement or foreknowledge of the incident. The two named suspects hail from the Qawasameh clan which is notorious for consistently acting against Hamas's policies and its attempts to reach an entente with Israel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_kidnapping_and_murder_of_Israeli_teenagers
Netanyahu's government is the elected government of Israel, and the Palestinian's rightly holds them, the IDF, and every "ready member" of the IDF responsible for all the 6 to 1 to 10 to 1 ratio of innocent civilian women, children and old people Israel has killed for every Hamas victim.
Of course Netanyahu's government can absolutely control attacks the indiscriminate killing and daily deprivations of Palestinians if it wants, but it doesn't and hasn't for decades.
Netanyahu's government (and Israeli governments before it) have been kidnapping and torturing and jailing Palestinian teenagers for decades. If not executing them "for throwing rocks and bottles".
See how much fun mimicking your hasbara is–it simply looks stupid when you can't directly answer a question, because you lack the simple human decency and empathy, or even comprehension of the differing levels of power and killing and subjugation of one people vs. the other.
As I've said, your moral worldview and cowardice repels me.
It is never a pleasure to discuss anything with you because your words are as ugly as your depraved soul. That you lack the capacity to contextualize (historically or otherwise) or even accurately reproduce "facts" would be embarrassing to any human being with a modicum of intellectual or moral integrity. Integrity being just another human attribute like empathy and courage that you lack.
Fuck off you pathetic propagandist.
-Mona- rrheard
Why he thinks his shit makes any difference to what I posted about Gazan civil society's support for Hamas' ceasefire demands, well, there is no understanding CraigWorld.
rrheard -Mona-
@ Mona
I'm going to say this again for the record so nobody misunderstands my position with regard to the I/P situation: I do not condone violence even in the face of repression and subjugation of one people by another. And for the very simple reason that I believe strategically and tactically it is counterproductive and/or an inferior strategy in most instances to achieving actual meaningful change in the status quo. Gandhi and MLK Jr. demonstrated the most effective strategy in the face of repression and subjugation–non-violence that provokes an overreaction. But to employ that strategy takes an incredible amount of individual-collective discipline and self-restraint, it takes an incredible amount of patience, and most importantly it takes the absolute most amount of courage human beings can muster because it requires that you be willing to put your life on the line and not lash out in retaliation against the thing and/or people (violence perpetrated by others against you) that is the most primal and instinctive of human reactions. For human beings it is either fight or flight (or submission to violence and hope for survival) in the face of an imminent significant threat to your physical integrity.
When you strip human beings of their dignity, right to self-determination, their liberty, and hope for a meaningful way to provide for their families and children, you have backed them into a corner that can only produce one of very few outcomes.
Again, while I don't condone violence, I understand it as a likely response by some humans to certain circumstances and events–intuitively, implicitly and empathetically as a human being I understand it.
I even understand to a degree, given their historical experience, the Jewish diaspora's paranoia and fear of the world around them. Nevertheless, I no more justify Israeli violence against Palestinians than I do my nation's violence against too many groups of human beings to even being to list in the name of "ideology", or fear, or in pursuit of their perceived "interests."
There may be a time and place for justifiable violence in defense of self, others or nations in the face of imminent catastrophic physical violence being perpetrated by others. Gandhi, MLK Jr. and other notable pacifists can make a compelling argument against even that justification. But I am not them. And while I agree with them morally, strategically and tactically I do not have their strength as human beings to likely do what they did in the face of what they faced.
Again, Israel needs to be very careful and thankful. Thankful that of the 5.5 million Palestinians living in the West Bank and inside Israel (and another 4.1 million in the global diaspora not to mention the 10s if not 100s of millions sympathetic to their plight all over the world of whatever faith, ethnicity, nationality or place of origin), by and large, agree that non-violence and patience is the better path. Because if the day ever comes when they don't, Israel will have an asymmetrical "war" on their hands that will likely destroy Israel and its global interests. And that destruction will have been totally preventable and no less tragic.
I am not opposed to the idea of a State of Israel. I am opposed to the very idea of ethno/religious states from Saudi Arabia to Israel. But it is also for a people, as a fundamental right of self-determination, to constitute themselves as such, but only to the degree they respect the human rights of the minority populations in their midst (which an actual commitment to ultimately makes it impossible to have such a state in the long term).
Gorsky rrheard
With all due respect, but this is a typical ivory tower left wing BS (don't take me wrong, there is right wing ivory tower BS too, just not you). You can make a post 10 times larger, but you can't hide the fact that you are a pure unadulterated anti-semite. You and most people who post their second hand hatred in the Intercept too. In addition, you are not making any sense (as it is always the case with pure anti-semites). Israel has had assymetrical war on its hands since it defeated the Arabs in several wars (almost 40 years). After defeating State actors, Israel made peace with with them; the leftovers who were rejected by every Arab country they came from, decided to "unite", to a very limited extent they were able to, to literally create a previously non-existent nation and people. The "nation" of those "people" has proclaimed (in writing) its goal of destroying Israel and expelling Jews from Israel and Middle East. Now, it is quite understandable why one would not want peace with the country (Israel) that is on your hit list.
The keys to self-determination and sovereignty of that fictitious nation (Palestine) is in their own hands. Just stop terrorism. But they can't, because they see a better and bigger prize (destroying Israel and expelling the Jews).
Gorsky Gorsky
Sorry, this was meant for our friend Mona.
Israel has had assymetrical war on its hands
Actually, Israel has a military occupation maintaining an apartheid state on its hands. Part of this occupation entails locking up 1.8 million people in the open air prison called Gaza. Another part entails continued land theft and settler terrorism in the West Bank, where Jews are allowed to kill, commit arson, assault and harass Arabs with almost complete impunity.
but you can't hide the fact that you are a pure unadulterated anti-semite.
If Zionists of your sort didn't routinely call me an antisemite I'd be doing morality wrong.
'Military occupation'
More pure unadulterated anti-semitic BS. You claim you are a lawyer. So I say again, look up the definition of occupation or re-read my original post. There is no occupation. Nor is there an apartheid state, as Gaza/West Bank is not part of Israel.
Again, the key to sovereignity are in the pockets of savages who call themselves palestinians (by the way, they can also call themselves native americans with a similar legal basis).
Your response was mostly whataboutery in the first place, but my second response does show that Hamas capitulated – and the demands of the Palestinian signatories was for naught.
"…..Likewise, Hamas represented the sentiment of the vast majority of residents when it rejected the unilateral ceasefire proposed by Egypt and Israel without consulting anyone in Gaza. We share the broadly held public sentiment that it is unacceptable to merely return to the status quo – in which Israel strictly limits travel in and out of the Gaza Strip….."
But they did anyway after hundreds more died.
You don't read quite as well as you talk, rr.
"…….Hamas' "leadership" likely did not order or participate in the kidnapping and killing of three Israeli teenagers in 2014…."
I like Jeffrey Goldberg, but he doesn't know shit about what Hamas did and did not order, and did or did not know about the kidnappings. First of all, the kidnappers were Hamas operatives.
"……..The stated aim of the Israeli operation was to stop rocket fire from Gaza into Israel, which increased after an Israeli crackdown on Hamas in the West Bank was launched following the 12 June kidnapping and murder of three Israeli teenagers by two Hamas members.[28][29][30]………" WIKIPEDIA
"……..A senior Hamas official boasted during a conference in Istanbul on Wednesday that the group's military wing was behind the kidnapping and murder of three Israeli teenagers in the West Bank in June……." HAARETZ
"…….Hamas leader Khaled Mashal admitted for the first time in an interview with Yahoo News on Saturday that Hamas militants were behind the kidnapping and killing of three Israeli teenagers in the Hebron area in June, and claimed that the political leadership was "not aware of this action taken by this group of Hamas members in advance."……" (YNET NEWS)
Secondly, as I stated in my first post (above), Hamas encourages kidnappings of Israelis to exchange with Israeli prisoners. They handed out a flyer in 2013 stating exactly how that should be done. Third, Hamas (also stated in my first post) is the most powerful military in Gaza (and Palestine outside of the IDF) fully capable of controlling the other terrorists. They are also the elected government of Gaza and (rightly) are held accountable by the IDF.
1.	Hamas leadership praised the kidnapping and,
2.	Hamas leadership has stated that they will not obstruct terrorism conducted against Israel ("…..Hamas leader Yahya Moussa stressed that his movement provides support for any faction or party that wants to fight Israel…..")
As a result of the kidnappings and the wanton, racist execution of the three Jewish children, everything that followed including the war resulted from Hamas actions. Of course, no one expects you to have any sympathy for the 3 children murdered by Hamas operatives:
"……Again, so what if 4 Jews out of 128 non-Jews were "targeted"? Is the death of ever delicate flower Jew in the world somehow more important than the death of a non-Jew that it needs some sort of special recognition? If so, why?….."
As you have proven in the past, you say really fucking stupid things.
Thanks rr.
Any day you want to put your ability to read for comprehension against mine to the test happy to do it.
But generally speaking I allow our fellow commenters here to judge for themselves who offers the better proof and argument in support of their positions.
I've said it repeatedly, I find you to be a fucking immoral moron, a liar, and somebody who generally speaking it is beneath me to even engage. But I do it so your lies, obfuscation and ugly morality and worldview do not go unchallenged. As an example, you are so computer illiterate that after years here you still haven't figured out how to blockquote or link to your purported proof so others can read the entirety of it in context. Telling of course regarding your intellectual and personal integrity.
I would truly enjoy meeting you face to face so I could tell you what I really think of you. But as I suspect, and as been my experience repeatedly over the years, people like you despite easily being able to discern my identity and location, are cowards. Cowards of the worst and most despicable kind. And that is why I know you and I will never meet because you are not someone who would have the courage to peddle openly to someone's face the crap you do on the internet.
Since electronic information can be transmitted almost instantly, it makes sense for the jurisdiction with the strictest censorship laws to become the world's de facto censor. The United States often has difficulty respecting the legal systems of other countries, but should be willing to acknowledge that perhaps the free press was a mistake. You might think that rewarding a few sycophantic news agencies with exclusive access to all government announcements would be enough to keep them friendly and obedient. But there is always some small startup seeking to draw attention to itself by publishing critical stories.
The founders never anticipated that the barriers to printing and distribution would be lowered by electronic media – so I don't blame them personally. However, those who seek to repeat their mistakes have no such excuse.
I was reading the comments section in this Breitbart "article."
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/03/30/patrick-leahy-andre-carson-ask-kerry-to-investigate-israeli-human-rights-violations/
I have to say, it made me laugh, thinking about all the people who complain about the lack of civility on this site's comments section.
It is typical of all sites to lash out at people with opinions that don't support the political bend of the author or site. Of course, that is the enjoyment, atheist.
Sebastian AtheistInChief
You made me click! I scanned a bit, saw this:
"Arabs are scum of the earth. Lower life form than chimpanzees."
You know, that's a very typical comment. I see a lot of that at WaPo. Crazy, huh? Now imagine substituting "Arabs" with "Jews." No one would stand for that.
I am usually very supportive of Glenn's articles, his analyses & how he views many world affairs. However, in this case I beg to differ.
Let me state upfront that I absolutely abhor Israel, its fascist policies & the mentality of the majority of its citizens. It is very difficult for me to find anything positive to say about the country. However, I do not see the rationale of publishing the name of the perpetrator of a crime, no matter how heinous that crime. Even if the name has already been published on the internet & video footage shows the face of the person.
An Israeli court has the right to impose a gag order covering all journalists reporting from Israel, whether domestic or foreign. If a news outlet does not agree with that, they can leave the country. Yes, a gag order does not make sense anymore in the age of instant communications. But that is not the point. The court has its reasons for the gag order, and everybody has to abide by that, whether they agree or not. So the NYT (a news outlet towards which I often feel an intense dislike) was correct in acting the way it did.
But even if one goes beyond the question of the principle of a gag order & its usefulness, some questions remain.
Does publishing the name allow a better description of the facts about the crime? Does it allow a better understanding of what happened? Or is the objective to designate guilt through the media? If the latter is the case, that runs counter to a fundamental democratic principle: that a person is innocent until proven otherwise in a court of law and NOT in the media.
I cannot marry Glenn's vehement condemnation of the NYT's behaviour with his usually balanced & fair approach to issues.
For him and all those who advocate publishing the name I have 1 simple question: what is the added value of publishing the person's name?
Mike Sulzer Paranam Kid
Yes, a gag order does not make sense anymore in the age of instant communications. But that is not the point.
I think it is a very important point. Such a gag order is an arbitrary use of government power with no legitimate purpose. That should not happen, and should be called out when it does.
Mike Sulzer Mike Sulzer
The first sentence should be a quote.
JLocke Paranam Kid
– "For him and all those who advocate publishing the name I have 1 simple question: what is the added value of publishing the person's name?"
Does it need "added value", publishing the names of accused murderers is standard procedure in, well, democracies.
Also, in democracies, (and occupied Palestine is under "democratic" Israeli rule) criminal trials are usually public, not secret. So the mere fact that the state is hiding the killer's identity is itself a story, and the killer's identity thus becomes, a news story in itself.
Hiding the identities of individuals in a military operation is one thing, hiding the identities of an accused criminal is another. The problem here, one of them, is the way America and Israeli zone in, and out of war and crime, one moment attacking an enemy soldier is a crime, the next, bombing an occupied civilian neighbourhood is war. America and Israel can't get their story straight.
craigsummers JLocke
"……Does it need "added value", publishing the names of accused murderers is standard procedure in, well, democracies……"
Not always – at least right away.
"…….The release of the officer's [Wilson] name has been a core demand of protesters in Ferguson since Brown was killed on Saturday, August 9. Previously, Ferguson Police Chief Tom Jackson had said that he would not reveal the officer's identity unless ordered to do so by a judge, or until official charges were filed. Jackson cited safety concerns as the reason the name was originally withheld, claiming that threats against the officer had been made on social media……" my insertion in brackets
Or in the case of a juvenile accused of a crime (I think).
Deschutes Paranam Kid
The added value is quite obvious: if you anonymize the name of the murderer, it lessens the severity of the crime. It protects the murderer, insulates him from further scrutiny–scrutiny which in fact often brings more helpful evidence to the prosecution as people who know something about the murderer can come forward with helpful information to fill in the missing gaps, essentially to help solve the murderers motivation, associations, key background information. Naming names in murders like this also sets the proper precedent that in the future the name of the murderer will be made public. This actually can be a deterrent of sorts. An IDF soldier who is assured of anonymity if he blows an Arab kids brains out on the pavement will definitely kill more Arabs than an IDF soldier who knows his name will be made public in the news if he murders yet another Arab at a checkpoint.
Paranam Kid Deschutes
It is not up to the public, nor journalists, to determine guilt, only a court of law can do that. Investigation can be carried out, knowing the name of the perpetrator, without naming him.
Your problem is your myopic thinking about this issue. You have your little mantra 'innocent until proven guilty' which you think precludes the media and the public from knowing who the accused are. But that's wrong: the media in the vast majority of cases report the names of the accused. You seem to have your own little notion of 'law and order', and, erm, it's wrong. See ya.
Aaron Aarons Paranam Kid
The idea that any crimes of the Zionist murder machine can be dealt with adequately by the Zionist courts is as absurd as expecting United Snakes courts to prosecute and seriously punish most war crimes by members of the U.S. killitary.
Does publishing the name allow a better description of the facts about the crime? Does it allow a better understanding of what happened?
Among other things, it allows others to research the accused, to learn what his associations and views are.
I cannot marry Glenn's vehement condemnation of the NYT's behaviour
Rather unusually for Glenn, this column was notable for its lack "vehement condemnation." He gives all the reasons why the NYT might decide not to publish in violation of the gag order, and treats some of them sympathetically.
"……Rather unusually for Glenn, this column was notable for its lack "vehement condemnation." He gives all the reasons why the NYT might decide not to publish in violation of the gag order, and treats some of them sympathetically….."
Wow – and ever since the Brazil article. Greenwald seems to be dabbling with including ALL the facts. New mission statement?
"…..The Intercept, launched in 2014 by Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras and Jeremy Scahill, is dedicated to producing fearless, [objective] journalism. …." my insertion in brackets
Lahore massacre
"……..A splinter group of the Pakistani Taliban called Jamaat-e-Ahrar claimed responsibility for the attack, which killed at least 72 people, including dozens of children, and injured hundreds. The group said the target of its suicide bomber was the Christian minority, celebrating Easter. But when the city's hospitals counted the dead, they found that more Muslims than Christians had been killed.…….Yet the psychological imprint of this attack will be etched deeply into the consciousness of the Christian minority, which makes up about 1.6 percent of the population. Over the years, Christians have been cowed into silence by their extremist persecutors — abetted by a government that has failed to protect them….."
"……..Craig, your unfair criticisms astound me. How can you say that 'there will be NO story in The Intercept on the brutal terrorist attack in Lahore ……' You do not know that, and have no more of an idea what The Intercept will report on next., than any other reader……"
"……Maz Hussain has been tweet-storming the Lahore bombing. This one stuck out: "What kind of sick fuck do you have to be to blow yourself up in a park full of kids."….
…..It wouldn't surprise me if he writes here about it……"
If someone in Israel spits toward Mecca, the Intercept will cover it – but not a brutal terrorist attack where Christians are the targeted minority. However, some of the time and effort by Journalists at the Intercept is well spent like David Dayen's earth shattering article "This Obama Endorsement Is a Sign Pro-Corporate Democrats Are Getting Nervous" which is about the "progressive" challenge to Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz in her district in Florida. Greenwald has blasted Ms. Schultz in the past – a strong supporter of Israel.
AtheistInChief craigsummers
If someone in Israel spits toward Mecca, the Intercept will cover it
Well Craig, somebody has to cover it. The rest of the media is singing about the world's most moral army and the only democracy in the middle east (let's forget about Turkey). Somebody has to try to pry open the mask. Not every institution is well behaved enough to follow the example of the Associated Press.
"…….The rest of the media is singing about the world's most moral army and the only democracy in the middle east (let's forget about Turkey). Somebody has to try to pry open the mask….."
Trust me. It runs much deeper than a "mask". You could start with Columbus Day, or even with the 1975 UN Resolution 3379 equating Zionism with racism, but this goes way beyond exposing human rights violations. You can do that with any army in the world. Aside from that, with thirty journalists all crying about human rights in various articles, you would think that one article acknowledging the massacre of a targeted minority would be warranted. Not so in the wold of the selectively "adversarial" Intercept.
-Mona- AtheistInChief
The rest of the media is singing about the world's most moral army and the only democracy in the middle east
Yes, and Craig knows that. The Intercept is the antidote (or among them) to this hasbara-fest in the establishment media. Craig doesn't like that — he'd prefer that The Intercept focus on the Permitted Victims, like the rest of the elite media.
dahoit AtheistInChief
The absurdity of that statement is that Israel and Saudi Arabia are sitting in a tree k=i=s=s=i=n=g,at the moment.
Of course the wind of Zioprop could turn that on its ear.
BREAKING!!!
A new category called "Mental Gymnastics" have been added to the Olympics. All supporters of Israel automatically win Gold.
The New York Times' editors are compromised chicken-shits afraid of Israel.
What? Somebody had to say it and Glenn's trying to be nice.
Another great addition to the discussion.
nfjtakfa craigsummers
Yeah, because everyone here so appreciates your endless unhinged crapflooding how The Intercept should just be just like the NYTimes, or all the other mainstream outfits obviously kissing Israel's tuchus. What's truly sad yet also additive in a tiny way is I frequently see you doing your part to convince new readers about the true worth of all that golden-calf close-minded Zionist hypocrisy, and so understand the [bad] example you provide though not your intention.
I'll also never get over you once wrote in a reply to me that you "accept" the official 9/11 explanation, not that you "believe" it. And in that same exchenge you proceeded to call me the coward because although I suggest the science doesn't add up – I won't speculate about the identity of possible perps, yet.
Maybe your thick head should learn to find these wall beatings less attractive.
I generally disagree with releasing the names of any suspected criminal, regardless of the evidence against him. As long as he has not yet been convicted in a court of law, he should be presumed innocent, and his identity should be protected. I would say the same of anyone, whether it is a Palestinian, an Israli soldier, an alleged pedophile or suspected mass murderer. Justice belongs in courts of law, not in the court of public opinion.
Yoel N.
His photos show his rank to be Sergeant (three stripes), not Corporal (two stripes, but rarely worn).
"Had we thought that the court order prevented us from providing a robust, complete version of that debate…" Very weak. The fact that the name was censored in the first place indicates that it is an interesting fact, so this soft defense, on its own, doesn't fly. And the fact that the name has been reported elsewhere makes the NYT seem compliant in a way that clearly compromises its journalism. Rudder's reply is insulting to readers – very paternalistic (but par for the course).
barabbas Lydia
no matter. Barring any responsibility personally, the man who accepts full responsibility is their supreme commander who would order and does protect those orders and his name is "Benyamin aka BeBe Netanyahu".
What is it with this bebe thing? like bebe rebozo.
Next time, shoot to kill then no more legal gray areas.
barabbas Christian
pardon me, please. i am trying to reconcile your "shoot to kill" recomendation, and the plight of a victim of the palestinian holocaust. Your alias implies a wisdom to benefit us all. Please help us.
"…….and the plight of a victim of the palestinian holocaust……"
Don't be ridiculous, barabbas.
M.G. Christian
Don't you mean, "Next time, shoot to kill (people with cameras) then no more gray areas."?
Or better yet shoot everyone with a camera, every journalist that doesn't share you, or everyone that doesn't share your opinion.
AtheistInChief Christian
Are you a fake Christian, or are you just eagerly waiting for The Rapture?
He probably doesn't get it.
A Cruzy.
Surely no surprise that NYT,Israel's most fervent apologist outside aipac would go along.
dahoit Rob
The lying times is just one of all our MSM outlets in the hands of dual citizen traitors.To single them as the worst is an exercise in futility,they are all the worst.
barabbas dahoit
One cannot live in one country and have a greater loyalty to another. America is a soveriegn country in need of rebuilding. Given 2 flags, the u.s. flag in one and and the israeli flag in the other. And you have to burn one.
This is a test of supreme loyalty. One must choose.
Another day, another Arab kid shot by the IDF. He was at a protest organized by a man whose home had been burned down by Zionist settlers who had also spray-painted "Death to Arabs" on his property.
Muhannad Saad Salah is being detained by Israel after daring to protest against attacks on his home.
On 10 March, Salah's home in Shushahla, a small village south of Bethlehem in the occupied West Bank, was set on fire by suspected Israeli settlers.
Salah and his family were not at home at the time. Salah had brought his wife and daughter to stay with relatives in the nearby town of al-Khader after settlers had thrown rocks at their house earlier in the day.
A few days later, Salah and other community activists in al-Khader held a protest against the arson attack. The demonstration was broken up by Israeli forces using tear gas, rubber coated bullets and live ammunition. A 16-year-old boy was shot by the soldiers, with a bullet narrowly missing his heart.
Salah tried to file a formal complaint about the attack on his home. But when he arrived at the Gush Etzion police station, his mother said, he was arrested by Israeli forces for organizing the demonstration. Initially held at the station, he was eventually taken to Ofer, an Israeli military prison in the West Bank, where he remains in detention.
The Only Democracy™ and its Most Moral Army™
General Hercules -Mona-
I think your posts should be placed above the comments section, as footnote to the featured article. This will reduce the litter in the comment section.
-Mona- General Hercules
And you are a full-blown nut, so I don't care what you think.
I have very high regard for your litterature. It should have its own perch.
Jonah -Mona-
I actually feel sorry for you this time. Embarrassing. The man fabricated the story and is under investigation. Here's the link. "Death to Arabs" lol! That's a little cliche, even for West Bank Settlers
http://www.timesofisrael.com/palestinian-made-up-account-of-jewish-arson-attack-police-say/
barabbas Jonah
sure. The israeli zionistas are too cowardly to let him out to speak to the press and independent investigators of human rights. I once read that israelis are the chosen people. It was a lie written by some maniacal paranoid schizophrenic sociopath with a manic-depressive disorder who wrote something that charles manson took to worship.
Nete Peedham Jonah
Uh huh…a link to that thoroughly neutral outlet…the Times of Israel.
-Mona- Nete Peedham
There is no justice for Palestinians in the West Bank. If the Israeli cops "decide" the victim is lying, the ToI isn't going to question that.
Nor will there be any repercussions for the soldiers that shot a 16-year-old Palestinian inches from his heart.
Lol!!! It's all a big conspiracy. The rest of that article actually proceeded to overhype the phenomenon of Jewish terror so I don't know why you're questioning the atyicle's veracity. Mona, you need to retract and apologize. You lose this round.
nuf said Jonah
the phenomenon of Jewish terror
It is quite phenomenal.
If one sends money to Palestine, just money, one is sent jail.
if one sends medical supplies to Palestine, one is murdered by the IDF.
If one sends money to Israel, one receives a federal tax deduction.
A foreign government gets laws passed requiring Americans to fund that government's slaughter of Palestine. Fucking phenomenal alright.
-Mona- Jonah
Oh, it's not a "conspiracy." The grotesque dual system of law in the occupied West Bank is open and obvious. As you know, because I've posted it several times, former Shin Bet director, Yuval Diskin, has written that Jewish terrorists literally get away with murder, arson and other violence.
Justice for Palestinians is surpassingly rare. Law enforcement and the military do not accept the complaints of Palestinians and rarely act on them. They let Jewish settlers commit atrocities almost completely as they will.
That's Yuval Diskin writing that. Not me.
Bless you. I am most grateful for the facts of the … cannot put into words. As a youth i was well read on the plight of the American Indian and i am reminded of the ghost dance.
God will tell anyone, when you ask, that evil is when others deprive another of life support or habitat. Jesus emphasized the 10 commandments. If the israelis were doing what is good, they would be pleased to allow the cameras and press. Yet they do not.
AtheistInChief barabbas
If the israelis were doing what is good, they would be pleased to allow the cameras and press. Yet they do not.
What the Israelis are doing is so moral, it cannot be videotaped.
Keep up the good work Mona!!
Nete Peedham
Ah…shades of the performance of the Associated Press in Nazi Germany in the 1930's, where they out-and-out canoodled with the Nazis, as reported during the last few days. NYT…the Nazi Yankee Typists.
Not unlike most of us NOT hearing (much, if anything ever, at all) about RoboGuns on Israel's walls…
Freedom of Press?
Something you will never read in the Intercept. This story from the state-operated New York Times today ("Russia Shows What Happens When Terrorists' Families Are Targeted"):
"……..Donald J. Trump, the leading Republican presidential candidate, was widely condemned when he called for the United States to "take out the families" of terrorists. His approach — even after he clarified that he was not talking about killing the relatives — was dismissed by many as immoral and unlawful. Yet, it is the very tactic that Russia has pursued for decades……..In the conflict that began in Chechnya and has since metastasized into a loosely organized Islamic rebellion throughout the Caucasus region, Russian security services routinely arrest, torture and kill relatives, rights groups say……. The most sweeping application of the tactic came during the pacification of Chechnya, after Mr. Putin engineered the recapture of the separatist territory……..Relatives were used as "hooks" to lure in militants. If the militant did not switch sides, the family member disappeared. Chechnya had about 3,000 to 5,000 unresolved disappearances from 2000 to 2005 or so. The policy, executed by the Chechen leader, Ramzan A. Kadyrov, the scion of a prominent Chechen family that itself switched sides, broke the organized resistance……"
Tens of thousands of innocent people died in the two secessionist Chechen wars. Russia nobly ran a "democratic" referendum for the Crimea Peninsula before annexing the home of a Russia Naval base located on the peninsula. Strangely, Russian leadership never offered to hold a referendum for Chechens.
Nete Peedham craigsummers
And, tediously predictably, craig comes by to whatabout, deflect, and otherwise go totally off topic.
Without reading the content of your comment, and based on what you have spit before, allow me to summarize your complaint..
"blah blah blah blah blah"
"…….Did i miss anything?….."
No barabbas. You didn't miss anything. It was the Intercept which seems to have missed this story about the Russian War on Terror – and the methods the Russkies use to fight terrorism. Several thousand relatives of suspected Muslim terrorists disappeared – never to be seen again. Seems like a human rights issue. Doesn't the Intercept profess to support human rights? (yes, when it is politically expedient)
What happened? Were you doing magic acts off the strip and got fired so you decided to practice your art of deception here? Does it pay more? I hope it's not your seemingly PTSD flaring up. How come you didn't instead pick a more challenging confrontational dilemna like Jason and the Argonauts?
dahoit craigsummers
Whatever they do,they learned from you.(Israel)
The land of atrocities.The birthplace of world terror.The instigators of global destabilization.The land of poison milk and spoiled honey.
All postjudicial observations.
CAF craigsummers
Israel formally endorses collective punishment as a doctrine. They deliberately target families, neighborhoods, entire villages, entire populations in response to specific incidents.
In a world with telegraphs and pony express, the power of censorship — of State or military censorship — makes sense to those defending monolithic policies. Surely an independent attack upon monolithic State policies would force a more democratic and a more human response. The Spanish did not blow up the Maine, but how could anyone (at the time) argue otherwise?
Even in a world dominated by television and radio — the world of Wag the Dog — disputation is almost useless.
But in the world in which journalistic organizations representing different national or cultural interests (see RT or Al Jezeera for instances), State regulation of so-called traditional media like the NYTimes makes absolutely no sense. Information cannot be adequately verified, even coming from State organs, because alternative narratives develop almost miraculously the minute a State institution declares such or such indisputably true.
Further, individuals and non-state organizations can immediately challenge a State or military authority set of facts.
The bombing of the MSF hospital in Kunduz displays this emerging dynamic. Military authorities who have carefully crafted a plausible cover story must suddenly adjust their story as independent voices call attention to inconsistencies and illogical claims.
With cell phone videos so ubiquitous, various police stories have been immediately discredited.
Even this website is a refreshing addition to the power of individuals and credible voices in challenging State or military "facts." That's the whole point of prosecuting WikiLeaks.
The internet tends to democratize authoritarian narratives.
So what if Israeli authorities tells the NYTimes they cannot publish the soldier's name?
They might as well demand the oceans to stop rising or Donald Trump to behave himself.
barabbas Milton Wiltmellow
"So what if Israeli authorities tells the NYTimes they cannot publish the soldier's name? "
Obviously you also admit then that as useless or as pimped out as the NYT is to the zionistas, there are those that cannot see that which is why the article is important.
Also worth pointing out that the attempted branding of non-whites in harlem as Palestinians for "stop and frisk" was the beginning of the effort to rob them of their liberty and habitat just like in Palestine. Perhaps you might also enlighten the newcomers as to the evils of the Yinon plan and what Dr. Hajo Meyer says of the ZION CULT.
Milton Wiltmellow barabbas
What I "admit" isn't your concern. It certainly isn't "obvious." Your inference isn't my obligation.
Why would you think that anyway? Should I demand that you must likewise "admit" your anti-semitism?
E.g.: "Hah. All anti-zionists actually just hate jewish people."
In fact when your overlay your biases upon others expressing an opinion — expressing a fact based narrative that differs from yours — how do you differ from Roger Ailes or, for that matter, Joseph Goebbels or the Office of Pentagon for Public Relations?
Because if you interpret any or every statement as a coded expression of this or that political agenda, then you might as well make up facts as cherry pick your facts. If you're in a position of State authority, why not arrest and prosecute people who express "radical" opinions?
Your interest "obviously" isn't accuracy or honest observation.
Here's a better example of what happens when political fabricators drive State actions.
The Israelis properly arrested and charged a soldier for a criminal act.
Too bad the US isn't so scrupulous.
Or can you tell me the names of the gunner and pilot of the Apache helicopter responsible for the killings seen on the "collateral murder" tape?
You are a critical thinker, knowledge of history and relationships and a splendid writer. At the same time, there is also the realm of the spirit and that which is good and evil. Jesus was not a prophet, he was a protester. And he was murdered for illuminating and challenging the lawyers and the moneychangers who only seek to rule by authority and economy.
Evil is here today and i had only hoped that a person with your talent would see fit to at least give that the proper weight under the circustances where one willfully steals a life, friend or foe.
Otherwise one might conclude that israel might only be satisfied if they have killed every palestinian and taken all their land. I say "might".
respectfully
the goy
I think NYT did the right thing this time, something that they rarely do these days, because in this instance the life of a precious Jew hero soldier was at stake. The fellow who was killed made the grave mistake to first attack soldiers, and then while he was on the ground he made some threatening moves that alerted the soldier to discharge his weapon, which they usually do in any case these days as there are too many terrorists to handle. The real problem is ISIS who have spread all kinds of elimination tactics through their videos and which the other agencies are now copying. If we have to blame anyone it should be ISIS and their training videos that they continuously post on the internet.
I hope we will have some peace before our guys get to the fire-in-cage routine. That will be really bad.
Rob General Hercules
Threatening moves on the ground? I'd love you to point to any part of that video where he makes ANY "moves ",let alone threatening. But then if you are determined to excuse the inexcusable,as the old saying goes:don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.
barabbas Rob
In his world sudden moves are cause for him to "draw and dare". He does the "one false move" when the restaurant waitress does the surprise attack on the empty coffee cup with pot in hand. His wife snuck up on him the other day and he shot her in the foot, then had her arrested for making a terroristic approach. His kids have to carry an air-horn and announce their impending arrival 10 minutes in advance of arriving so he can have enough time to figure things out and put his gun away. His dog didnt fare so well however. The sudden unexplained moves as it slept had him wondering if it was a left wing progressive booby trap so better safe than sorry, he killed the family dog.
disclaimer: This is a fictional satirical parody. Any obvious relationship to characters IRL are imaginary.
Half of Israelis approve of executing 13-year-old Palestinian girls. NYT today:
Palestinian officials and human rights groups have accused Israeli forces of shooting to kill in some other instances captured on video where the threat appeared to have passed. Among them was a case in November in which a teenage Palestinian girl who had tried to stab passers-by with scissors was shot by a police officer as she lay on the ground.
…[ Lt. Gen. Gadi ]General Eisenkot told high school students recently that he would not want a soldier "to empty a magazine at a 13-year-old girl with scissors."
A February survey conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute, an independent research group, found that 50 percent of the Jewish public disagreed with General Eisenkot's position while 48 percent supported it.
And that just about says it all regarding the morality of 50% of the citizens of Israel. The only thing close to being on par with that sort of moral depravity is a solid 35-40% of the American population. But we're working on it, is what I hear.
Milton Wiltmellow rrheard
And that just about says it all regarding the morality of 50% of the citizens of Israel.
You have to be careful with these sort of claims.
1. You don't know the poll; you only know the claim.
2. Statistics always prove selectively those numbers (questions) chosen to promote an agenda.
3. Well crafted propaganda can convince the gullible of almost anything.
4. No question of morality — especially the morality of an entire religion or culture — can be stated as an absolute.
Quote scripture, quote individuals, quote credible sources, but never, never offer a statistic to make a political/moral point.
You might as well claim that 95% of ducks quack when they see a monkey quoting Shakespeare.
General Hercules Milton Wiltmellow
I like your insight.
-Mona- Milton Wiltmellow
but never, never offer a statistic to make a political/moral point.
That's ridiculous.
quote credible sources
Including those that rely on statistics?
dahoit Milton Wiltmellow
Oh,the estimable uncle miltie reveals himself as what I always knew.A closet Zionist.
Come into the light!
dahoit rrheard
Yes,the hell bitch scum and crazy Cruzers,make up that %.
Every time i read about stuff like this i pray to wash my sole of the poison. Those who don't curse themselves.
I don't know what it was like in prior generations who looked the other way on this stuff, but i don't see the world getting better without denouncing these sadistic predators and demanding that charges be prefered against them. Populations that do not protest this (worse than) murder should not be allowed to vote. Leaders who do not immediately bring charges to these murderes themselves should be charged and arrested for contempt for humanity.
We can offer laws like these and insist on their implemetation. We don't need monsters at the pinnacles of power on this tiny planet.
As usual great reporting from Glenn Greenwald.
Wow did you hear what I just heard?
I think I just heard in the distance something like "That young man knew what I meant when I wrote", "Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter."
photosymbiosis Fellow Citizen
"Every government is run by liars. Nothing they say should be believed."
? I.F. Stone
Fellow Citizen photosymbiosis
At the present time I find it a little hard to debate you on that…but I think maybe why we post our comments is in the first place is to hope for better.
Fellow Citizen Fellow Citizen
less one "is" above
Genocidal hatred of Palestinians is not unusual in Israel. Israel has a state religion, Orthodox Judaism. Some of the rabbis embrace exactly what the soldier in the video did: How To Kill Goyim And Influence People: Leading Israeli Rabbis Defend Manual for For Killing Non-Jews
Several years ago, Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira published a book in Israel that argued "[n]on-Jews are "uncompassionate by nature" and should be killed in order to "curb their evil inclinations." "If we kill a gentile who has has violated one of the seven commandments… there is nothing wrong with the murder," Shapira insisted. He further declared: "There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us, and in such a situation they may be harmed deliberately, and not only during combat with adults."
Max Blumenthal writes:
Despite his longstanding involvement in terrorism, or perhaps because of it, Shapira counts Israel's leading fundamentalist rabbis among his supporters. His most well-known backer is Dov Lior the leader of the Shavei-Hevron yeshiva at Kiryat Arba, a radical Jewish settlement near the occupied Palestinian city of Hebron and a hotbed of Jewish terrorism. Lior has vigorously endorsed Torat Ha'Melech, calling it "very relevant, especially in this time."
Lior's enthusiasm for Shapira's tract stems from his own eliminationist attitude toward non-Jews. For example, while Lior served as the IDF's top rabbi, he instructed soldiers: "There is no such thing as civilians in wartime… A thousand non-Jewish lives are not worth a Jew's fingernail!" Indeed, there are only a few non-Jews whose lives Lior would demand to be spared. They are captured Palestinian militants who, as he once suggested, could be used as subjects for live human medical experiments.
Otherwise, Lior appears content to watch Palestinians perish as they did at the muzzle of Dr. Baruch Goldstein's machine gun in 1994. Goldstein, who massacred 29 Palestinians and wounded 150 in a shooting spree while they prayed in Hebron's Cave of the Patriarchs mosque, was a compatriot and neighbor of Lior in the settlement of Kiryat Arba. At Goldstein's funeral, Lior celebrated the massacre as an act carried out "to sanctify the holy name of God." He then extolled Goldstein as "a righteous man." Thanks to Lior's efforts, a shrine to Goldstein was constructed in center of Kiryat Arba so that locals could celebrate the killer's deeds and pass his legacy down to future generations.
That's a former chief rabbi of the IDF. Of course many IDF soldiers are willing to murder Palestinians. Respected authority figures tell them it's good and proper.
I really marvel at the cognitive dissonance of people like Israelis who think they are at "war" with the Palestinians and then condemn Palestinians for fighting that "war" with whatever tools are at their disposal just as Israel does.
I look forward to the day the apartheid State of Israel falls just like the apartheid State of South Africa before it ultimately fell. Too bad I likely won't see it in my lifetime so long as America is one of the last nations to continue to back it just like America was with South Africa.
If Israel was an apartheid state, it would fall (have fallen) like South Africa. The reason it hasn't is because it isn't. It is a Jewish state. Being perpetually pissed off at Jews (Israelis) doesn't make it an apartheid state.
Craigsummers has explicitly detailed his pro-apartheid, anti-Palestinian views in previous posts.
He first says:
1) "Just to reiterate: the BDS campaign seeks to [give] equal rights for Palestinian Arabs in Israel i.e., land and immigration laws would no longer favor Jews."
2) "The BDS campaign (and their friends on the radical left) has used a series of lies to (attempt to) delegitimize Israel including comparing Israel to apartheid South Africa"
Isn't a state that denies equal rights to members based on race/religion the very definition of an apartheid state? The South African BDS movement sought to give equal rights to blacks in South Africa, i.e. land and immigration laws would no longer favor white Afrikaners.
I suppose he'd argue that South Africa was a white state, not an apartheid state.
But I think the following craigsummers quote really illustrates just how far the Zionists have gone with their tunnel-vision view of reality:
"In my opinion, the US made a mistake by bombing ISIS in Syria since they are the best military fighting Assad."
Ding dong! We have a winner.
The African National Congress has declared Israel to be an apartheid state. Repeatedly and fiercely.
It's political Mona. Israel supported the white government – not the ANC. Of course, the ANC wants some political payback.
Being particularly motivated to denounce Israeli apartheid does not disqualify the denunciation. Furthermore:
> it's political
That is absolutely vacuous. Everything we are discussing is political. So nothing anyone states is legitimate, because the topic at hand is political?
Its fine to be a deranged extremist on the wrong side of a moral question (thats you in a nutshell) but try harder not to be a *vacuous* deranged extremist.
"…….But I think the following craigsummers quote really illustrates just how far the Zionists have gone with their tunnel-vision view of reality….."
I answered this exact same post by you in a previous thread. Ok, I will repeat the statement and the answer:
"………"In my opinion, the US made a mistake by bombing ISIS in Syria since they are the best military fighting Assad."….."
It has nothing to do with Zionism, but if regime change in Syria is the US goal to undercut the reach of Iran, then why turn on the one military that can help accomplish that goal? I don't support ISIS anymore than al-Qaeda, but a true political settlement can not happen in Syria while Assad is in power.
No single terrorist organization has committed more atrocities (war crimes) than the Assad regime. The civil war is entirely his fault because he refused to grant the protesters seeking political rights any say in the government. He (alone) made the decision to brutally crush militarily the protesters associated with the Arab Spring. He could easily have made a peaceful solution. He promised political reforms a decade ago when he assumed power from his Dad.
Maybe you can explain why my opinion on Assad and the Syrian regime has anything to do with Zionism?
2) "The BDS campaign (and their friends on the radical left) has used a series of lies to (attempt to) delegitimize Israel
The whites in South Africa were always a minority to the majority black population. Israel is recognized by 150 countries or so as a Jewish state. There is a Jewish majority in Israel and the land and immigration laws maintain that majority because Jews are a small population world-wide. There are over one billion Muslims, but only about 20 million Jews.
As I recommended before, read about the laws of South Africa.
Yawwwwn. You should head on over to live with the Palestinians and get back to me on your working definition of apartheid. Short of that you can fuck off, you and your insipid posts are literally too stupid for me to do anything but mock, ridicule, deconstruct, or point out what a self-evident immoral hypocrite and coward you are.
Aggrieved rrheard
Well placed missile. CS is a cancer on these thread discussions. Thanks Mona for you continual rebuttals.
CAF rrheard
Craig and those like him really are intolerable, aren't they?
Israel is propped up by the West, LIKE South Africa was for years…because the USA! USA! USA! likes its tinpot fascists.
dahoit Nete Peedham
As a Briton,you do have mirrors right?
I look forward to the day the apartheid State of Israel falls just like the apartheid State of South Africa before it ultimately fell.
It's inevitable. Apartheid South Africa could not tolerate being a pariah nation. It drives the citizenry mad.
There is a difference between Apartheid South Africa and Israel. There was a significant portion of the South African White population that wanted to end Apartheid. They wanted to figure out how to do it. But they elected DeClerk for a reason. To figure out how to end Apartheid without destroying the White population.
There is no segment of the Israeli population that is going to get mad at their government for continuing the status quo. The Israeli citizenry only gets mad when they try to prosecute a murderer medic. They don't really give a shit about the Palestinians. It's a fucking sick country. This whole thing will only end when the US tells them to stop it. Otherwise the Israeli population will continue to show the finger at the rest of the world.
There was a significant portion of the South African White population that wanted to end Apartheid.
Almost up until the day it ended, virtually everyone said white South Africa would never end apartheid. No two situations are ever exactly the same, but the pressures on white South Africans were substantially similar to those of Zionist Israelis. Including a pervasive fear that ending apartheid would mean disaster for whites and possibly even mass carnage.
Almost up until the day it ended, virtually everyone said white South Africa would never end apartheid.
I'm sure you're right, in that that's the way it looked. But I've had in depth discussions with a South African college buddy of mine, and according to him, a lot of South African Whites accepted that the days of Apartheid in SA were numbered.
Also one other prominent difference is that as kids, at least my friend, they weren't taught to hate Blacks. And there was some sort of separation between the Security/Police services and the rest of the White population. A lot of South African's didn't want to know of the atrocities until they were adults, in College. I don't know how true this is, this is only my friend's version. To me, Israel seems like a completely different species. There is only PW Botha. There is no DeClerk.
Deborah AtheistInChief
Are you saying that there are no Palestinian citizens of Israel?
AtheistInChief Deborah
No, I'm not saying that. Maybe I should have specified, like I specified "South African Whites." I meant Jewish Israelis.
What is the import of your question? Are you trying to say Palestinian citizens of Israel count for something? What do they count for? Window-dressing? So Israel can say "look, we elect Palestinians to the Knesset?" Just like the US could say in 1870 "look, we have a black person in congress?"
Read some Max Blumenthal. Palestinians are a different level of "citizen" in Israel.
Sebastian Jimenez
I have to say I agree with the NYT's decision here. The soldier's name is such a trivial fact to the story and what the story entails that there was no real reason to try to circumvent a court order just to give that one insignificant detail. When defying governments or institutions in censorship situations, one should not only take into account the rationale the government or institution is using to justify their censorship order, and determine whether that rationale is valid or not, but also take into account the vitality the information in question has to the story and to the general public's understanding of that story. In this case, I don't see how knowing the soldier's name was going to drastically improve the public's understanding of what happened. The important facts are that there was an Israeli soldier, who shot a Palestinian, that that Palestinian was a criminal who previously tried to stab innocent people, that that Palestinian was also defenseless and almost incapacitated when he was shot, and that when he was shot in the head and killed, none of the by standing Israeli medics or military personal showed any signs of concern. All those facts, with or without mention of the name of the soldier, would paint the same picture and raise the same questions. Mainly: "Did this soldier commit murder?" and "Should the Israeli government convict this soldier for murder?" I really don't understand how not defying this irrelevant gag order poses a threat to journalistic freedom and accuracy.
rrheard Sebastian Jimenez
@ Sebastian Jimenez
Then what is the valid rationale for the gag order in the first instance?
Alleged murderers who are American have their names attached to their alleged crimes every day in the US press? In fact their names are usually disclosed by the press before they are even arraigned. Happens every single day all over America. Those accused criminals receive nominally "fair trials" notwithstanding their names being disclosed. So what exactly is the valid rationale for the Israeli government to ever withhold the name of any individual accused of murder whether he/she be an IDF soldier or Israeli civilian?
Sebastian Jimenez rrheard
I never said that there was a valid rationale for trying to censor the name of this soldier, I agree with you in that I am pretty sure there isn't. My point is that knowing the name of the soldier, at least for a non-Israeli audience, is not a vital fact that would change the understanding of the story, or change the effect the story has on the public it is presented to. I never said I agree with the gag order, or with whatever rationale there is behind it, I said I agreed with the NTY's decision not to defy it because defying this order to inform a non Israeli public about such a trivial fact as is the name of this soldier – a fact that would not at all change the story or the public's perception of that story – would not have been a smart decision. It all boils down to choosing your fights wisely. This is a fight that the NYT chose to opt out of, and I can totally understand why: because it was not an important fight.
photosymbiosis Sebastian Jimenez
Do you think that if the New York Times had violated the censor's order, that the Israeli government would have begun denying visas to their reporters, as China did?
Of course not, that would have created a very negative impression in the United States, it would have made it impossible to present Israel as a democracy that believed in press freedom (which is a central AIPAC PR line).
The New York Times had the upper hand, and would have risked nothing by printing the soldier's name. So why did it fold so easily?
Sebastian Jimenez photosymbiosis
@photosymbiosis
Because it wasn't an issue for them. Because they didn't care at all about the soldier's name and cared much more about the fact that the soldier was Israeli, the fact that the guy killed was a defenseless Palestinian, and that none of his fellow soldiers acted concerned when he shot the guy in the head.
@ Sebastian
Fair enough. But then it necessarily follows, why is it not a "smart or wise decision" for the NYT's not to pick this fight? For fear of offending the Israeli censors or physical access to the State of Israel from which to report? It's not like the New York Times is (or has ever) changed anything on the ground with regard to its journalism concerning the State of Israel. In fact quite the opposite. So who, possibly other than you, gives a crap if the NYT was to display a little journalistic integrity backbone and get kicked out of Israel in the process?
I would be thrilled if the NYT got kicked out of Israel for displaying journalistic integrity. But I'd only be thrilled if they got kicked out for something relevant. It would be a little disappointing, and frankly stupid from their part, to get kicked out of Israel for publishing some stupid soldier's name when his name had no significance to what he did or what happened, or to how the public's reacted to what happened.
Think of this scenario: a referee tells me not to chew gum while playing football (soccer for you guys), and that if I do chew gum while playing football I am going to face some type of penalty. Now, I really like playing football, and I don't care that much for gum and wasn't even thinking of chewing it while playing. Even though I see no valid reason for which I shouldn't be allowed to chew gum while playing football, it would be very foolish for me to defy the referee's rules just to pick a fight with him, because ultimately, I don't give a crap about the stupid gum rule. Sure the rule doesn't make sense, but it doesn't affect me or my goal which is to play football, so why the hell would I be compelled to break it?
In this specific case about the soldier's name, why would the New York Times be at all compelled to defy Israel's stupid censorship gag if it really doesn't affect their reporting, their story, or their accuracy?
Sparrow Sebastian Jimenez
Putting a "name" to the "filmed cold-blooded murderer" makes it REAL not fiction and not whitewashed like some kind of movie. The fact that you parallel this heinous atrocity with a "simple" "dumbed down" football rule is the problem with MSM and the blatant control Israel has on it. Alternate media is screaming for TRUTH to be told…So demeaning this "highly" regarded mercenary that happens to be a MEDIC is somehow blasphemous? The whole reason for the gag order indicts Israel. BTW…Israeli news jumps at any chance to demean and lower American soldiers who have done horrible acts and name their names. They jump at the chance to name a fallen dual US/Israeli soldier…but when the guilt/blood is on their hands, it's a gag order.
Sebastian Jimenez Sparrow
"Putting a name to the filmed cold blooded murder makes it REAL not fiction and not whitewashed like some kind of movie"
So are you basically suggesting that people perceiving that video as reality and not fiction is entirely contingent on them knowing that soldier's name? Are you really that delusional? I don't know, I thought that the main give away was that the story and the video were being reported in actual news outlets and not the Onion.
Also, I am not agreeing with the gag order. If you just had the common sense to read what I wrote instead of just vomiting your stupid rhetoric on your keyboard like a child with indigestion who can't think clearly, you would have noticed that I acknowledged that there was no valid reasoning for the gag order. I am completely aware of the neurotic ploy Israel is trying to pull here But I also recognize that in this case that ploy doesn't even matter because people are still going to see that video of that Israeli soldier killing an unarmed Palestinian who posed no danger to anyone. People are still going to see that and see how that soldier was congratulated by his peers for cold blooded murder. That will not change because of some stupid name. That is why I don't think that the New York Times deserves to be criticized for just simply not caring about this gag order and still managing to report all the relevant and disturbing facts about this story. Now, if the Israeli government told the NYT that they couldn't post the video, or that they couldn't accurately report on what happened, and the NYT placidly complied, then yes, I'd be the first pointing my finger at them and calling them out for serving as a propaganda channel. But this time that was not the case: they managed to report exactly what happened just like every other alternative media outlet just that without putting the dickhead's name.
In many cases, the NYT does serve more as a propaganda channel than an actual journalistic institution, but this is not one of them. Critiquing them for stuff like this is just petty-unnecessary squabbling.
Deborah rrheard
Who's picking a fight? Israel is our ally, no?
dahoit Deborah
In what way?Do friends spy on friends?Do friends create hatred that the haters in turn kill Americans,which makes America double down on the support which created the hate in the first place?Do their supporters muddy our politics and back those who lick the Zionist balls?Have they not promoted economic suicide for Americans by trade steals?Promoted attacks on defenseless enemies of Zion where thousands of Americans die for nada?
Sounds like friends from hell to me.
China is our biggest trading partner, around $500 billion a year. So should the New York Times follow the same rules on Chinese censorship of stories that it follows in Israel?
As a matter of fact, the New York Times published multiple stories about China in violation of the censor's rules that resulted in China denying visas to New York Times reporters for several years:
http://www.poynter.org/2015/new-york-times-visa-gridlock-in-china-loosens-a-bit/383613/
The particular stories that got the NYTimes into trouble in China involved reports of how the families of leading politicians had become extremely wealthy as those politicians rose to leadership positions.
But why name names? The important fact is that there was a Chinese politician, who helped his family members get very rich, and who used a complex paper trail to hide that fact from the general public – and as you say, all those facts, with or without the name of the politician, would paint the same picture and raise the same questions. Or would they?
Why is the New York Times willing to upset the Chinese censors, but not the Israeli censors?
To be clear, I am not arguing that the NYT or any other news organization should always comply with a censorship order whether it is from Israel, or from Saudi Arabia, or from the United States Pentagon. What I am saying is that when deciding whether to defy a censorship order or not, journalists should determine not only whether the rationale for the censorship is valid, but if what is being censored is a relevant piece of information. In this case, I don't see how the name of the soldier would be at all relevant to a non-Israeli audience. The story, the perception of the story, and the public's reaction to it would be completely unaltered, name or no name.
But by saying that I am also not generalizing and saying that a name is always a trivial piece of information. I am sure that there are many cases where naming a person is a very important fact to the story, but in this particular case I don't see how the name of the soldier is important at all. Even after briefly reading the soldier's name, I don't even remember it now, but I am still as outraged as I was when I first saw the video. I really don't see why the name matters in this case.
The name of the soldier is relevant because people have backgrounds and histories.
For example, consider a white police officer who shoots and kills an unarmed black man in the United States. If that officer also happens to attend Klu Klux Klan meetings in his spare time, then that's relevant information. And printing the officers name allows people to investigate his specific background. That's why it's part of the story.
I don't know if I'm mistaken but I believe the NYT also talked about the relevant aspects of this solider's background that could be gathered from his fb page without mentioning his name. They said that he appeared to sympathize with far right groups and ideas. That's the equivalent of saying that a police officer who shot an unarmed black man sympathized with the KKK. That's not something I could only learn if I knew the person's name. Im still not convinced that the soldier's name was at all important to the reporting of this story, especially when being reported to a non israeli audience that has little to no means of influencing this soldier's trial in Israel.
So are you saying that the US/AIPAC/ISRAEL/and the many tax exempt proIsrael charities/American MSM/the minions of dual US/ISRAELI citizens…
are a "non-Israeli" audience? Especially the millions of US Taxpayers that foot the bill to assassinate Palestinians? Are the POTUS(s) that give AIPAC sound reassurance at the top of their priorities to protect Israel a non-Israeli audience? Oh…and how about those invitations of the Israeli Netanyahu—– to the US Congress…to make speeches and demanding BILLIONS of US aid…a NON-ISRAELI AUDIENCE?
Sparrow Sparrow
Name the fucking COWARD. So the world will know when the same FATE comes back to meet him. (Oh yea…remember him?) Just like the arrogant American sniper Chris Kyle who was also celebrated as a "Hero"… got his in the end. Good riddance.
Okay, okay, let me see how I put this. People who live in Israel and read about the murder are an Israeli audience. People who don't live in Israel are a non Israeli audience. Some people who don't live in Israel might be pro Israel, but that still doesn't make them part of the Israeli audience. It is true that people in the US inadvertently or purposefully support Isarel's oppression of Palestinians trough their tax dollars, but that still doesn't make them an Israeli audience. Glad we could clear that out.
Now unto the main point.
The reason why I say the name of the soldier matters very little in the first place, but matters even less to a non Israeli audience is because first, people who are not Israel fanatics are still going to be outraged by his actions and by the apathy his fellow medics showed towards his actions regardless of whether they know his name or not. And second becuse even if they did seek to influence this soldier's trial by instilling pressure from abroad, it would be very easy for them to find his name if they so wished to know it, given that it has been published in many other places including here.
Also, let me just point out that I am as outraged as you are by what this asshole did. That was murder and that guy's a murderer plain and simple. But I don't need his name to know that. In fact, even after reading his name, my mind immediately discarded it as irrelevant information and I kept thinking of this asshole not by his name but by what he did. In fact, look at how you refer to him: "the the fucking COWARD." Even for you the word coward carries much more meaning regarding this guy than his actual name.
Apparently it will take the same sad situation for you to be in…to make your triviality of the assassin's name not known to feel the pain. You haven't experienced the outrage, loss, and total agony of this particular cold blooded act. Americans NEED to be face to face with this horrible crap….WITH NAMES…and come forth and demand for it to stop. We certainly know Bibi's name whether we want to or not. And as far as my vomit….YES…this makes me sick with all the outrage that is in me. And because there is no Law anymore…there is no justice. The NYT had a chance to make an example of the rest of the miserable MSM by doing the right thing, but they cowardly prostrated. At least Glenn and other alternate media outlets have the integrity to stand up and say enough. If he (the slain) were yours…living in a hellhole prison not being able to escape…you would cry out 'enough' too. Have a nice day in your Freedom.
Deborah photosymbiosis
Yes, that's the question to ask. Especially when we hand over the largest sum of US foreign aid to Israel.
Rob photosymbiosis
Because the NYT is an obvious mouthpiece,ie propaganda organ of the US govt which always supports Israel and is engaged in(futile)attempts to contain China. See the difference?
It's been apparent for some time that Israel has a "take no prisoners" policy. Almost every story of "knife wielding terrorists" ends in death to the Palestinians. It mirrors Obama's kill, don't capture" policy which he brought in when he replaced Bush. Assassinating more suspects, instead of kidnapping them and bringing them to Guantanamo became the new "smart" way to wage war on brown people.
Why Israel's Unwritten 'Shoot to Kill' Policy Is So Dangerous
Since September this year, death has been the fate of most knife-wielding Palestinians. Is this the result of 'excessive force', and what are the consequences for Israel itself?
Habtom Zarhum paid the ultimate price for Israeli public officials' failure to do their job during this latest wave of terror and violence. Zarhum is the 29-year-old Eritrean who was "accidently" shot by a security guard and then beaten into a pulp by bystanders at the Be'er Sheva central bus station on Sunday night. All he wanted to do was to go home after extending his work permit.
His death is the result of the Israeli government sowing fear and encouraging vigilantism – rather than level-headedly instructing the public to let the security services do their job – as well as fostering xenophobic hostility toward asylum seekers and migrants.
Zarhum's death is also linked to the shooting and killing of 19 knife-wielding terrorists since early October. As disturbing as these attacks have been – and everyone wants to see terrorists stopped before they can harm anyone – the trend of shooting people who have stabbed others to death should concern us because of what it says about our leaders' attitudes, as well as its ramifications for Israeli society in general and innocent bystanders in particular.
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.681234
Rob JLocke
No no when you keep saying terrorist terrorist , you aught to be aware that the incident which is the subject of the article took place in Hebron. This is Palestinian territory under Israeli occupation. Under the 4th Geneva convention an occupied people(the Palestinians) have a legal right to violently oppose the occupation further the occupying power( Israel) has no right to self defence under that same convention. The murdered Palestinian was allegedly trying to stab an occupying soldier, no terrorism involved.
"I think what I said – and certainly what I meant – was that we hardly ever encounter Israel's censor" – Jodi Rudoren
Astonishing. One of the most heavily censored issues in Israel, and also in the US government, is anything related to the Israeli nuclear weapons program. A search through NYTimes archives turns up very few news stories mentioning that program, but there was this interesting quote:
"In a career spanning 66 years, the Polish-born Mr. Peres served two short stints as prime minister of Israel, played a major role in arms procurement and is credited with creating Israel's nuclear program."
By Jodi Rudoren and Isabel Kershner, Middle East, June 18, 2013
Did Jodi Rudoren not run into trouble with the Israeli censors when she wrote that? Or was it enough to leave out the word "weapons"?
The other US 'paper of record', the Washington Post, explained its own unequal coverage of Iranian vs. Israeli nuclear weapons programs in an August 31, 2012 op-ed by its then ombudsman, Patrick B. Paxton, as follows:
"Furthermore, although Israel has an aggressive media, it still has military censors that can and do prevent publication of material on Israel's nuclear forces. Censorship applies to foreign correspondents working there, too."
Interestingly the Clinton email archive has some discussion of the Israeli nuclear weapons program:
"What Israeli military leaders really worry about — but cannot talk about — is losing their nuclear monopoly. . . . The result would be a precarious nuclear balance in which Israel could not respond to provocations with conventional military strikes on Syria and Lebanon, as it can today."
A dubious justification. . . but obviously, a key step in avoiding the outbreak of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East is for Israel to accept IAEA inspections of its nuclear weapons program, and agree to come clean about (and reduce) the size of its nuclear arsenal.
However, since the U.S. press refuses to investigate the Israeli nuclear program in the way it has investigated the Iranian nuclear weapons program, there is little public pressure on the U.S. or Israeli governments to accept an IAEA presence in Israel. As with the NYTimes reporting on Iraqi WMDs in 2002-2003, it's just more parroting of the official government line, without asking any difficult questions. Is that kind of journalism in line with the NYTime's stated mission of "impartiality, accuracy and integrity"?
worth noting also that Israel is not a signotory to the NNPT. And they stole everything they have in that regard. That makes them a very dangerous rogue state. And with a genocidal maniac in charge, you have to figure that no other nation would lift a finger to protect them except their "beat wife" the u.s.
What i am seeing is China – certainly not willing to be dogged used and abused like the u.s. – will take their personal space rights in the south china sea. And just like WW2, the dumbly u.s. will knock a block off the chinese shoulder and it's game on.
The u.s. will lose that fight. Israel knows this. The zions who have abused the u.s. and physically drained all the resources, are now fearful that their seat on high will be pulled from under them as their neighbors, having seen the u.s. bite some dust, move in for the kill.
Certainly China and Russia will keep their alliance. This scenario will be precipitated by the dumping of u.s. bonds – worthless as they are – printing iou's to sell to prop sales from the dumpers is a ponzi scheme that will be quickly seen and… anticipated. The world is no longer fooled by the fed con so the defcon of the game has passed the "on your marks" and the "set" has already been hollered. Get ready for the sell, it's coming.
all my opinion.
"…….The Haaretz investigative journalist Uri Blau extensively analyzed the soldier's Facebook postings and – without naming him – concluded that his social media output "presents a deep rooted hatred of Palestinians." Understanding the shooter and his motives are vital….."
I wonder how the Palestinian who attempted to knife the soldiers felt about Jews. There have been a series of knife attacks targeting civilians and IDF soldiers which began in 2015. Jewish people are rightly on edge from the attacks which are nearly impossible to predict or prevent. Targets are chosen at random. The attackers wear no uniform so any Palestinian Arab is a potential terrorist – and most of these attacks are clearly defined acts of terror. Even one American was killed.
"…….The recent wave in violence that began in October 2015, in which 29 Israelis, four foreign nationals and some 190 Palestinians have been killed, with around two-thirds of Palestinians deaths occurring while attacking Israelis……"
Chances are fairly good that few if any of the attackers thought to himself: I sure hate to stab this nice Jew – but resistance to Israeli occupation requires lot of responsibility. Hatred runs deep on both sides of the conflict. That is undeniable – and it is based on more than seven decades of warring between Palestinians and Israelis. The three Israeli children executed by Hamas operatives certainly is a testament to the hatred by Palestinians. The retaliatory murder of an Israeli Arab by settlers (burning him to death) was vindictive and cruel – and certainly driven by hate. Running around Jerusalem looking for Jews to stab to death is also a fairly good indication of the hatred. Racism exists on both sides – Arabs and Jews. A Pew poll conducted in 2011 indicates that Palestinians (and Arabs, in general) don't like Jews (Jerusalem Post):
"…….In the predominantly Muslim nations surveyed, views of Jews were overwhelmingly unfavorable. Nearly all in Jordan (97 percent), the Palestinian territories (97%) and Egypt (95%) held an unfavorable view.……."
About 97 out of 100 Palestinians dislike Jews. The other three are probably Mossad agents posing as Palestinians. Additionally, 78% in Pakistan and 74% in Indonesia hold unfavorable views of Jews. Both of those conflicts are far from the IP conflict, but the polls show a high level of dislike toward Jews throughout the Muslim world.
It is not surprising that the IDF soldier has a deep rooted hatred of Palestinian Arabs – and it was likely behind the killing of the Palestinian attacker.
Jewish people are rightly on edge from the attacks which are nearly impossible to predict or prevent.
How "rightly on edge" do you think Palestinians feel when Israel warplanes and tanks start bombing the living fuck out of them which Palestinians cannot "predict" or "prevent" because you know they are an occupied people without a state, without a military, and no way to protect themselves from the unfettered violence of the Israeli military and police.
You think that would put you "rightly on edge"? Or are you just a garden-variety coward who would lay down and let another people suppress you and yours without a fight?
Any idea how many innocent Palestinian civilians have been killed (specifically a ratio) in the last 40 years by comparison to "innocent" (and I use that term in its loosest sense for a people who occupy another peoples' land) Israeli civilians by "terrorists"?
Got any guesses? When your people are dying at about a clip of anywhere from 6 to 1 to 10 to 1, if I was Israel I'd be thankful the vast majority of people show tremendous restraint by not trying to take out as many illegal settlers and IDF members on their borders and military checkpoints as humanly possible. You should probably think long and hard about that.
Hillary Clinton's email archive contains a discussion of the growing gap between Israeli's Orthodox Zionist Jewish community and the United State's liberal Jewish community, particularly among young people, based on a focus group/polling effort conducted by Republican Frank Luntz. You should consider these three points that Luntz came up with about this group:
1) First, "they reserve the right to question the Israeli position." These young Jews, Luntz explained, "resist anything they see as 'group think." They want an "open and frank" discussion of Israel and its flaws.
2) Second, "young Jews desperately want peace." When Luntz showed them a series of ads, one of the most popular was entitled "Proof that Israel Wants Peace," and listed offers by various Israeli governments to withdraw from conquered land.
3) Third, "some empathize with the plight of the Palestinians." When Luntz displayed ads depicting Palestinians as violent and hateful, several focus group participants criticized them as stereotypical and unfair, citing their own Muslim friends. Most of the students, in other words, were liberals, broadly defined. They had imbibed some of the defining values of American Jewish political culture: a belief in open debate, a skepticism about military force, a commitment to human rights. And in their innocence, they did not realize that they were supposed to shed those values when it came to Israel. . .
This is in contrast to the ultra-right hate-filled settler movement that Netanyahu and his followers support:
"Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, Shas's immensely powerful spiritual leader, has called Arabs "vipers," "snakes," and "ants." . . . . But in the United States, groups like AIPAC and the Presidents' Conference patrol public discourse, scolding people who contradict their vision of Israel as a state in which all leaders cherish democracy and yearn for peace."
That accounts for why the BDS movement has gotten so much support on American campuses, in part, and also explains why AIPAC and similar groups are so desperate to brand it as "anti-Semitic."
@ photosymbiosis
Well until those young liberal Jewish Americans are in positions to affect US foreign or Israeli domestic policy, or willing to go put their lives on the line for peace as human shields, I'm skeptical that their correct thinking on the issue will amount to much for a very long time if ever. Although I wish it would and think they are the best positioned to foment change and forge peace if they were ever to organize effectively and wish them well in doing so.
He's not interested in the Palestinians.
Oh,the poor Israelis,having to live with the prospect of uncertainty.Sheesh.
Like the Palestinians have felt since 1948.
When you push people to the breaking point.watch out for insanity,which are these attacks on Israelis by scissor and knife wielders,who know they will be shot or executed,like that guy..
This site's latest hasbara-ist, Jonah, below asks Glenn about the IDF solider:
Are you seriously suggesting he fired his gun at the terrorist because he felt like that?
And a serious investigation and prosecution are (maybe) going forward only because the video went viral internationally. The IDF executes Palestinians all the time and almost always with impunity.
How Glenn would answer I do not know, but he is aware of the facts I commented about earlier here vis-a-vis the popularity of snuff films in Israel.
"……The IDF executes Palestinians all the time and almost always with impunity….."
Got any percentages on that Mona? Regardless so does Hamas:
"…….The armed wing of Palestinian militant group Hamas executed one of the group's leading commanders after allegations surfaced of gay sex and theft, it has been revealed……….Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades shot Mahmoud Ishtiwi, 34, three times in the chest after they had detained him for a year, The New York Times reported on Tuesday……."
Would never want to hold the Palestinians to the same standard now would we Mona?
https://theintercept.com/2016/03/18/brazil-is-engulfed-by-ruling-class-corruption-and-a-dangerous-subversion-of-democracy/?comments=1#comment-212423
Would you like to comment on the Hamas operatives that murdered the three Israeli children Mona? This was the crucial catalyst for Operation Protective Edge. Double standard for Hamas Mona?
NoOneYouKnow craigsummers
Except they didn't belong to Hamas, and the Israeli government knew who the murderers were within 24 hours but didn't say anything for weeks to create a reason to kill a few thousand Palestinian civilians.
You should probably know what you're talking about before you type.
your tit for tat crap is a con game and frankly, juvenile.
i would say "grow up" but i figure that is beyond your capacity.
But if you are to the point of suicide, or your family was tortured to death, or some similar tragedy, ask Jesus for help. The way you're going yer gonna need it.
FWIW, you sound like a god damned mobster hitman or a paid mercenary. really vile. despicable. You lack empathy for your victims. Basically, you dance for the devil.
Ahhhh the sweet sweet comfortable blanket of whataboutery you are so famous for around here.
Here I'll help you out–I can say unequivocally it is wrong and evil for any group to murder another human being due to "allegations" of "gay sex and theft" and whichever members of Hamas did such a thing should be condemned and prosecuted for murder.
By the same token–I can say unequivocally it is wrong and evil for any group to murder another human being while laying wounded and incapacitated on the ground even if/when such person has allegedly just committed a heinous crime and whichever members of the IDF that did such a thing or failed to prevent one of their own from doing it should be condemned and prosecuted for murder.
Did I fulfill your journalistic "equivalence" standard that all bad events in the world must be covered equally and simultaneously at all times lest Craig accuse said journalist of unreasoning bias?
You really are a simpleton. Or a paid propagandist. I'm just not quite sure which yet. My guess is both.
I just watched the video again. The soldier clocks his weapon, takes aim, takes his time, and then fires. There's no rush. Jonah's eyes aren't lying to him. His brain is.
Moreover, according to NYT, if the guy had been wired with explosives, the shot could have set them off.
exactly. and if he was booby trapped, given that he was motionless, killing him wouldn't change that.
but they will employ that con to forcefeed the u.s., their dog.
"…..This site's latest hasbara-ist, Jonah…."
Last week you were warning new readers about me (because new readers are simply too stupid to make their own minds up). This week you are calling new readers names. You certainly have an important position at the Intercept Mona.
So a medic was standing around and just randomly decided to shoot a terrorist in the head? You don't think he subjectively held the belief the terrorist was wearing a suicide vest? I don't see why that's implausible.
Jonah, even Craig Summers isn't denying the obvious. Your brain is either addled on Zionism, or you are a hasbara-ist and are trying to pollute the discussion. Or both.
Ok so what motivated the medic to shoot the terrorist? Describe why your explanation is more plausible than mine. Why is the subjective belief that the terrorist was trying to detonate a suicide vest a less probable explanation than a Israeli hatred for Palestinians?
Sparrow Jonah
https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/israelis-rally-around-soldier-filmed-executing-injured-palestinian
"Confirming the kill"
According to Silverstein's analysis, Azarya, a medic, "asked permission from his commanding officer to 'finish off' the wounded Palestinian."
"Apparently the commander approved," Silverstein added. "The soldier walked to within six feet of the wounded Palestinian, cocked his rifle and shot him."
This practice is known in the Israeli army as "confirming the kill," and has been used and subsequently approved even in the slaying of Palestinian children such as 13-year-old Iman al-Hams in Gaza in 2004.
Azarya also "liked" the Facebook pages of Israeli leaders who have incited violence or genocide against Palestinians – justice minister Ayelet Shaked and former foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman – as well as the Facebook page of Marzel.
Israel's political and military establishment broke out into a chorus of condemnation immediately after the release of the video on Thursday.
The army also announced the detention of the soldier and an investigation into the killing.
Yet the condemnations were baldly hypocritical given the long record of Israeli leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, of inciting and approving extrajudicial executions of Palestinians.
Numerous videos have shown such killings of Palestinians who were injured, incapacitated or otherwise posed no plausible threat.
Now Netanyahu appears to backing away from his criticism, in light of a swell of public support for the Hebron gunman.
The prime minister told cabinet colleagues on Sunday that "questioning the IDF's [Israeli army's] morality is outrageous and unacceptable … IDF soldiers, our children, maintain a high moral standard when they deal with bloodthirsty murderers."
Netanyahu added that he was "certain that in this case, like in every other case, all of the circumstances are taken into account. Thus we must all support the IDF chief of staff, the IDF and the soldiers that protect us."
Haaretz called Netanyahu's comments a "backtrack" from his initial condemnation of the shooting.
Netanyahu's change of tune appears to be in harmony with public opinion as well as with other politicians who are striking tougher poses.
Naftali Bennett, the Israeli education minister who has boasted about his own record of killing Arabs, also offered his support to the gunman.
"The soldier is not a murderer. Have we lost our minds?" Bennett wrote in a Facebook post that calls Israel's military "the most moral army in the world."
At Sunday's cabinet meeting, several ministers, including Bennett and Ayelet Shaked, voiced support for the soldier.
Meanwhile, Avigdor Lieberman demanded the impeachment of the defense minister for failing to back the soldier, and called Netanyahu "spineless."
Israel's Channel 2 published an opinion poll on Saturday showing that 57 percent of Israelis believe there is no need to investigate or detain the soldier, as reported by Haaretz.
Two in five respondents called the soldier's behavior "responsible" and just five percent described it as murder.
An online petition calling on Israel to give the soldier a medal has received almost 50,000 signatures.
The municipality of Beit Shemesh, a town in present-day Israel, even published an ad on its official website urging citizens to attend a rally on Monday to demand the release of Azarya, whom it called a "national hero."
Official website of the Beit Shemesh municipality advertises rally in support of Elor Azarya, who was filmed executing an injured Palestinian at close range.
The soldier's family has also mounted a high-profile campaign in defense of Azarya.
The gunman's mother wrote an open letter to Moshe Yaalon, the defense minister, telling him that "you stood in my son's place, only in the room of Abu Jihad, and confirmed the kill of a despicable terrorist and murderer."
She was referring to Yaalon's role in the 1988 slaying of Khalil al-Wazir, a senior PLO leader who was executed in his Tunis home by Israeli assasins, in front of his wife and son.
Meanwhile, the Israeli army investigation into Thursday's killing has reportedly revealed that the shooter had told a comrade that Abd al-Fattah Yusri al-Sharif "needs to die" shortly before he shot him.
According to Haaretz, the "investigation also found that in contradiction to claims of self-defense voiced by the soldier's lawyer, there was no evidence supporting the claim there were fears the prone Palestinian was carrying a suicide belt."
Palestinians targeted
While Israeli leaders line up to support al-Sharif's killer, Israeli forces on the ground are targeting the youth's family.
On Sunday, Israeli soldiers raided the home of Abd al-Fattah's brother, Khalid Yusri al-Sharif, in the village of Jabal Abu Rumman, near Hebron, the Ma'an News Agency reported.
Imad Abu Shamsiyyeh, the B'Tselem volunteer who filmed the execution video, told Human Rights Watch that Israeli forces threatened him both at the scene of the shooting and later on.
Abu Shamsiyyeh was called in by the army to give a witness statement.
He says the army interrogator told him: "How will you benefit from this video? It got a lot of publicity. Your name is known to everyone. Who is going to protect you and your family from right-wing Israelis? Remember you live in [Tel Rumeida], surrounded by Israeli settlers, who will be able to protect you there?"
"I felt that I was being threatened," Abu Shamsiyyeh said.
Impunity for war crimes
Human Rights Watch said that "the open and casual way that a soldier appears to execute a wounded, prone Palestinian, which was captured on video, suggests a dangerous climate of impunity for war crimes."
"The video of al-Sharif's killing by an Israeli soldier shows both an apparent cold-blooded murder and numerous witnesses, which should make for a strong legal case," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Human Rights Watch's Middle East director.
"The question is whether Israeli authorities will do what they haven't done in countless other cases and bring the alleged killer to justice," Whitson added.
Given the way Israeli leaders are rallying around the gunman, there's little reason to expect anything different this time.
He is providing an opposing opinion – which to the authoritarian radical left is "polluting the discussion.
rrheard Jonah
@ Jonah
Why would a "medic" be the first one to pull that trigger if so many others soldiers were standing around seeing what the medic was seeing?
Here's what's entirely "plausible"–you're an idiot or a paid hasbarist shill or both. So which is it, plausibly?
Jonah rrheard
He may have been the only to notice a subtle movement, others may have been occupied by other things. Not everyone may have carried the same concern. I am focused on the medic's subjective belief. You are evaluating this scenario with an objective standard. You are relying on the wrong legal principal
I am focused on the medic's subjective belief. You are evaluating this scenario with an objective standard. You are relying on the wrong legal principal.
I know what you're focused on because you are an immoral idiot. And since I'm well aware of the what the correct legal principle should be as an attorney, rather than what it too often is, I'll go ahead and keep my own counsel on the subject since you are now resorting to "only he noticed the subtle movements that may or may not have been threatening, but thank Jehovah instead of acting reasonably and objectively he just relied on his own potentially highly flawed subjective belief about the theoretically possibly maybe statistically remote "threat" that an incapacitated wounded human being presents to others and just dispensed with his humanity and legal due process by just taking matters into his own hands and executed him for everyone's benefit and saving everyone all the bother of assisting him medically and trying him."
People like you and the IDF "medic" literally morally repulse me with your worldview and pathetic cowardice.
Can't speak to Israeli law, but as you know, the standard in our law is objective. What a "reasonable person" would believe; not what the defendant believed.
Israeli law may well be subjective for Jews, and strict liability for Palestinians. When, in the rare circumstance, a Jew is prosecuted for harming or killing a Palestinian.
Are you sure the standard in the United States for self defense is an objective one? That isn't the case in the UK or Canada. The accused must subjectively perceive a threat and respond for the purpose of defending themselves and others and there must be a reasonable basis for the accused's response in those circumstances. Furthermore, a jury should be instructed to consider any characteristics and experiences that are relevant to the accused's ability to perceive harm and respond it. The American standard seems unfairly restrictive. I would double check that, Mona.
If Israel has a similar position on self defense, it seems a conviction for murder will be difficult.
In Canada, an acquittal will occur if there's reasonable doubt for the following three requirement
1) belief on reasonable grounds that a force or threat is being made against the accused
2) the act was being done for the subjective purpose of defending the accused or others.
3) the act was reasonable in the circumstances
It's not unreasonable for him to think the terrorist may have had a suicide vest, for him to subjectively believe that he to do something to protect those around him and that shooting the terrorist was the only he could control the situation. There's room for argument but there's reasonable doubt surrounding all three requirements
Are you sure the standard in the United States for self defense is an objective one?
Altho the jury first considers whether the defendant actually believed there was a threat, the jury ultimately renders a verdict based on the "reasonable person" standard.
It's not unreasonable for him to think the terrorist may have had a suicide vest, for him to subjectively believe that he to do something to protect those around him and that shooting the terrorist was the only he could control the situation.
Didn't happen. The whole "suicide vest" notion is bullshit. He casually walked up to the guy, cocked the gun, and shot him in the head. There's no urgency to his movements. He didn't exclaim, before or after, to those around him that he feared a suicide vest. He didn't yell for everyone to back away. That whole notion of the suicide vest arose with the guy's defense attorney.
The NYT, citing the Israeli press, reports he told another soldier he was angry and the Palestinian "deserved to die" because the Palestinian had stabbed his friend.
The standard for self defense in the USA is not objective. What a "reasonable" person would believe is not always the same thing as a "reasonable belief". How a person may perceive a given threat will depend on their characteristics and experiences. I'm sure courts in the US are taking this into account. There is no way they are applying a one-size-fits-all standard to self defense. And if you lived in Israel, the fear that a Knife wielding terrorist may have been strapped with a suicide vest is a reasonable belief.
You literally do not know what you are talking about. This is common with you.
"……I know what you're focused on because you are an immoral idiot……"
You are always winging out names, but you have never shown me to be exactly brilliant RR. Why don't you calm down.
Here's a newsflash whataboutery boy, on my least brilliant day I'm about 50 IQ points smarter than you have ever been or will ever be on your best day. And what you think about any topic is absolutely 100% irrelevant to me, except to the extent it provides me with material to mock you and point out what an immoral hypocrite you are.
Here's a better idea since I'm very calm, why don't you find another sandbox to fling your shit in? It's not like you've ever likely swayed a single mind, on a single topic, with your facile sophistry and cherry-picked, decontextualized and misrepresented tidbits of info that you aren't even skilled enough to blockquote or link to like the average 10 year old is capable of doing.
I'll tell you a really good place where you could peddle your inane sophistry–how about RedState, Drudge, Breitbart, or the National Review? I bet you could become famous at any of those and be a real comment section luminary without even trying. That's where most commenters with an average IQ of about 80, or a radish, reside. Seems like it would be a great fit for someone like you–torture apologist, 4th Amendment hater, you know your garden variety authoritarian goon.
"……Here's a newsflash whataboutery boy, on my least brilliant day I'm about 50 IQ points smarter than you have ever been….I'll tell you a really good place where you could peddle your inane sophistry–how about RedState, Drudge, Breitbart, or the National Review? ……"
Wow, that puts me in the negative range. You are just another extremely angry radical leftist, but you are what makes coming to this site such a joy. No reason to go anywhere else when I can have this much fun……
altohone rrheard
The plausibility of a guy with explosives choosing to use a knife requires the skills of an idiot.
what a surprise that the shooter is in hebron; the trailer park of occupied palestine.
what a surprise that the new york times would err on the side of obeying israeli orders.
and does anyone really think israel would expel or block the new york times from reporting? the most dick-suckingly obsequious and slavish mouthpiece for israel ever put to paper this side of an aipac meeting pamphlet? yeah, okay.
at least this is more evidence (not needed at this point) that the whole "blame the government not the people" excuse used by other countries does not apply to these colonial psychopaths. whether it's support in the 80-90th percentiles for the regular election-timed massacres in gaza or this brand of nazi-esque bullshit, there seems to be little reason for any soldier or politician in israel to pretend they're human. if anything, not killing in cold blood could cost them their job. awesome behavior for "the only democracy in the 'middle east'".
brmull
Yes, you COULD tell the story without revealing the killer's name, but it's routinely done in every case except U.S. or allied soldiers who commit war crimes. The problem is the media is shaping the news to please, rather than challenge, the authorities and their audience.
Truth telling is getting harder and harder and it's never been easy. There are those that don't want to hear the truth and there are those that don't want the truth to be told. Juggling anyone? What does it leave us? Reporters and camera-persons in the line of fire. Hazardous duty this truth telling. Thanks go to the staff of The Intercept for pushing the envelope further. Keep your head-down and paper dry.
coyote180 gilbert
Agreed, and I will beg off reading too many comments after reading this rational note from Gilbert.
gilbert coyote180
Thank you, I try very hard not to waste time w/myths and try to spend more time exposing Truths, I don't get compliments very often.
Of course we always want to give readers as much information as possible.–Jodi Rudoren
Since the soldier's name was available to you, and so you could have included his name within the article for readers, your declaration is obviously not true.
A poll of American Jews on the murderer/hero topic would be quite enlightening.
If such sickness has become contagious, Americans deserve to be informed about it.
Someone getting all the presidential candidates on the record would also seem prudent.
A judge blocking an already publicized name certainly gives new meaning to gag order… a joke to prevent free speech.
Anyway, aren't there supposed to be official condemnations all over the media when a close ally violates established norms like this?
I'm reminded of this — in the Guardian, today:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/30/associated-press-cooperation-nazis-revealed-germany-harriet-scharnberg
"Few things are more damaging to journalistic credibility than allowing governments and militaries to dictate what can and cannot be reported." -from the article
Hear, hear, Mr. Greenwald.
ezrapowned anon
Ironic considering what articles the Guardian will and will not allow their readers to comment on. Clearly it is their policy to censor and/or not allow readers to openly discuss issues concerning Israel and Israeli policies.
Macroman ezrapowned
British law prohibits comments on stories about open criminal cases, I believe. Don't know if that applies to cases in foreign countries.
photosymbiosis ezrapowned
Precisely why I gave up commenting at the Guardian website, they don't allow comments on most stories relating to foreign policy in Eastern Europe or the Middle East – comments are typically only allowed on the fluffier articles. They were getting too much pushback for their promotion of neoliberal corporate agendas in the foreign policy section, so they just cut the comments section on those stories.
Seems that the New York Times cannot (or chooses not to) emerge from beneath one of the Establishments™ favorite newsboys (Bill Keller's) and his sycophantic, anti-illuminating "journalism," even when covering news from foreign nations.
dahoit
The NY Times answers to a higher authority.
But, but, but whatabout all that censorship by North Korea, Glenn, huh? How come you never write about that?
Sorry, I was trying on a craigsummers hat. Terrible fit though, it's tiny and inside-out.
nuf said nfjtakfa
whatabout all that censorship by North Korea,
The Guardian has some info on NK news coverage.
The AP spokesperson denied that the agency submitted to censorship. "We do not run stories by the Korean Central News Agency or any government official before we publish them. At the same time, officials are free to grant or deny access or interviews."
Nate Thayer, a former AP correspondent in Cambodia who published the leaked draft agreement, told the Guardian: "It looks like AP have learned very little from their own history. To claim, as the agency does, that North Korea does not control their output, is ludicrous.
NYT would not be so cooperative if this were a Turkish court demanding censorship.
Hasus
So many incorrect information and one-sided opinion in one article:
1. Both terrorist went to kill Israelis that morning. This is the case almost every day.
2. The commanding officers of the force have reported and incident to the high command and a MP investigation was initiated BEFORE the video was published.
3. The soldier claims that he saw the terrorist moves and he was afraid he was carrying an explosive device. This claim will be tested in court and not by the media. You have to remember that it was a day after the bombing in Belgium! The only way stop a suicide bomber is to shoot him in the head.
4. The Israeli public was upset that the soldier was arrested an accused of murder by the politician before his claims has been tested.
5. The minister of defense and the chief of stuff has strongly condemned that soldier.
6. You have no evidence of other incidents like that. All you're say are speculations based on Palestinian lies.
7. Lastly, regarding Hebron. Jews have been living in Hebron for the last 3000 years. Only when Hebron was occupied by the Jordanian army in 1948 (no, there was never a Palestinian state), all Jews were expelled from the city.
Gorsky Hasus
Oh, please. This is Intercept, the most anti-semitic second hand outlet in the US. They are not interested in facts. They will attack their own tail to make a point (and incoherent one)…
"Israeli Censorship Order" In incoherent mind only. Most Western countries have due process provisions which include a prohibition on disclosure of a criminal defendant's name, especially when a person is a soldier and was acting in a war related situation.
And of course, since Greenwald and Mackey were right there (and possibly video taped the whole thing themselves), they certainly made sure that that terrorist wasn't about to detonate explosives….
Great journalism, as always…
gkjames Gorsky
(1) Which countries have statutory prohibitions "on disclosure of a criminal defendant's name, especially when a person is a soldier and was acting in a war related [sic] situation"? (2) What's a "war related situation"? (3) The video displays a number of people / soldiers standing around. Their casualness suggests a lack of concern that a "terrorist [was] about to detonate explosives." Are you saying that, by not being more concerned, they were being negligent in their duty of care to their comrades? (4) On what evidence do you conclude that The Intercept is "the most anti-semitic second hand outlet in the US"? (5) In what facts is The Intercept "not interested"?
Gorsky gkjames
1. Due process is not limited to statutes. France does, Italy does, Israel does. Even in the US, there is such a thing as sealed records. And by the way, in what way can the name of a person in a case as this one is, make a difference, unless of course you mean harm to that particular person. In other words, the name of that soldier does not have an probative value for publications outside of Israel. Note, that the main theme of this pseudo-journalistic article is that NYT succumbs to Israeli "censorship."
2. War related situation: I define this as a state of events that requires the use of army against imminent threat or actual violence by non-resident actors. Think Paris (since last November) or Brussels).
3. Video displays a number of people whose casualness suggests a lack of concern. That wouldn't be relevant would it, as all it takes is one soldier to notice something suspicious. And yes, in that case, the other soldiers will be negligent (let's write another intercept anti-semitic article)
4. Intercept is the most anti-semitic second hand outlet in the US/not interested in facts contrary to its neo-liberal extreme left wing (bordering on fascism) agenda
That's my opinion. I can point to multiple examples in virtually every article. The extent of this disregard is so obvious and extreme that most often the article loses coherence and turns into shear hysteria. Let's turn to this piece, the latest addendum with a response from NYT and comment from Glreenwald:
The NYT responded by saying that they were able to present a robust article without the soldier's name. That did not fly well with Greenwald's agenda (see above) of hysterically bad- mouthing Israel. Hence, he notes: any censorship order from a government that has no valid rationale – and that's certainly the case here – ought to be defied or at least challenged given the threat it poses to journalistic freedom and reporting accuracy. He is standing on his head both in terms of facts and logic. First, about rationale: it is clear that the only reason not to disclose the name of the soldier is to protect him from vigilantes (foreign and domestic). What is the rationale to have the soldier's name? None. You can still make all your points whether valid or not without the name. Why would Greenwald need the soldier's name if he wants to show how cruel Israel is?
I am not even talking about Greenwald's illogical innuendoes about where this episode took place and who were the soldiers. All this garbage about occupied land or occupying army is just that. Look up the definition of occupied land: you need at least 2 countries one occupying and another occupied. Well, there were more than 2 countries, but they did not include anything that is today called Palestine or palestinians…
dahoit Gorsky
The Jews don't like it,rock the temple,rock the temple.
nuf said Hasus
Jews have been living in Hebron for the last 3000 years.
Bullshit. Pure hasbara bullshit.
Why don't the Italians reclaim London? Oh, Jews are the exception, I always miss that part.
Look in the Encyclopedia Britannica and you'll see a country called Palestine.
Until 1948 that is. Who wiped Palestine off the map? Jews.
Always demanding their pound of flesh and ready to explain why they deserve it.
Glenn Greenwald Hasus
Which Israelis specifically did they go to kill? Where were those Israelis, and what were they doing there?
It's also bizarre to claim this article omitted that when this sentence appears in the very first paragraph: "The killing took place in the occupied West Bank city of Hebron after the Palestinian man, Abed al-Fatah al-Sharif, stabbed an IDF soldier at a military occupation checkpoint."
3. The soldier claims that he saw the terrorist moves and he was afraid he was carrying an explosive device.
It's unbelievably warped to try to justify in any context the deliberate, point-blank head shooting of a wounded, incapacitated human being. But to do so in the context of defending an occupying army shooting people in the place they've been occupying for decades is a special kind of twisted morality.
There is, needless to say, literally zero evidence that the Palestinian victim had any explosives. I invite everyone to watch the video of him laying incapacitated on the ground to see if they find this explanation plausible.
The history of Facebook postings expressing hatred for Palestinians should also be examined.
This claim will be tested in court and not by the media.
You mean tested in a court run by Israelis that is notorious for exonerating its own? Why, if this killing didn't take place in Israel, is it being tried by Israelis?
Also, did you miss the polling data showing that a majority of Israelis don't want this soldier detained or investigated at all, let alone tried?
-Mona- Glenn Greenwald
I invite everyone to watch the video of him laying incapacitated on the ground to see if they find this explanation plausible.
Beyond absurd. People — including soldiers — mill about for a long time, one soldier tying his shoe only a feet away from the wounded man.
"Hasus'" comment is a pile of unsourced garbage. But that's hasbara for you.
Jonah Glenn Greenwald
There's quite a bit of evidence. Your assumptions about this soldier rest on the belief that he used the pretext of a subtle movement to blow the terrorist's brains out. Are you seriously suggesting he fired his gun at the terrorist because he felt like that? It was just something he always wanted to do? Why do you think so little of Israelis? The terrorist was wearing a coat in very warm weather. That's often a sign someone is hiding an explosive. If you lived through an endless campaign of suicide bombings, you may be a little more cautious around the bodies of Jihadists.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/262338/sapper-terrorist-shooting-case-warned-jihadist-daniel-greenfield
Oh FFS. First you tell a Muslim commenter she must leave her religion, and now you approving link to David Horowitz's insane cesspool that has all the credibility of Donald Trump.
Jonah, if you want to defend Israel here, I assure you, you are doing it wrong.
Another pointless ad him from Mona. Challenge the argument Mona
Your "argument" is prima facie stupid and I do not need to "challenge" it. No intelligent person needs to read a rebuttal to that bullshit. But I did wish to call attention to the fever swamp you cite as a source.
Deborah -Mona-
The terrorist was wearing a coat in very warm weather. That's often a sign someone is hiding an explosive.
Please provide empirical data, linked of course, that establishes that there is any statistically significant link between those who wear coats on a "warm" day and detonating hidden explosives within their coats (not sure what qualifies as "warm" or to whom).
Also, please objectively define which type, style, thickness and composition of "coat" is "suspicious" for all temperature ranges from 32 to 100 degrees Fahrenheit.
Thanks in advance. I'll wait. This should be fascinating in the same sense some people believe "profiling" human beings based on their "race" is an effective law enforcement or counterterrorism method.
I have no clue. The fact that he was wearing a coat in that weather was just another piece of evidence which could have given a soldier the impression he was hiding explosives
I lived in Miami my first year of law school. Half the kids in the metropolitan area wore what I would consider "warm coats" in weather that I found absolutely balmy by comparison to my home state Oregon where I spent all my life. In fact I was in shorts, a t-shirt and flip flops 99% of the time while those kids were wearing what I would consider "parkas". Was that "evidence" that all those kids could have been "terrorists" or is it another case of you "having no clue" and talking out your hasbarist ass with your immoral idiocy and pathetic defense of cowardice and/or murder?
rrheard Hasus
@ Hasus
The minister of defense and the chief of stuff has strongly condemned that soldier.
I think that is so cool that Israel has a "chief of stuff" position in its government. I wish the US did too, and I nominate myself to be the US Chief of Stuff.
Good stuff only of course. Soldiers shooting injured incapacitated alleged criminals is "bad stuff" so I would strongly condemn it as well.
Seems like AP had their "access" quandary, too. The Guard chose not to cooperate.
German historian shows how news agency retained access in 1930s by promising not to undermine strength of Hitler regime
The Associated Press news agency entered a formal cooperation with the Hitler regime in the 1930s, supplying American newspapers with material directly produced and selected by the Nazi propaganda ministry, archive material unearthed by a German historian has revealed.
When the Nazi party seized power in Germany in 1933, one of its first objectives was to bring into line not just the national press, but international media too. The Guardian was banned within a year, and by 1935 even bigger British-American agencies such as Keystone and Wide World Photos were forced to close their bureaus after coming under attack for employing Jewish journalists.
Bubba nuf said
CNN also covered for Saddam's Iraq between the wars. http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000259.html Additionally the media's surrender of objectivity by agreeing to the terms of imbedding during Desert Storm took the high-minded ethics of journalism for a ride.
barabbas nuf said
Thanks for the invaluable info & link. Did not know that. I did notice a LOT OF CENSORSHIP while israel was attacking Palestine a couple years back. I was amazed about the lack of reporting that continues to this day about the transgressions of israel.
Then the other day i came across this link at theintercept.com
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-28/top-german-journalist-admits-mainstream-media-completely-fake-we-all-lie-cia
It's hard to get much lower than exulting in an act of cowardice.
DocHollywood Froncek
Censorship? Let's face it – it's a half measure. What really works is complete censorship. We could end all wars and conflicts if only people could embrace total censorship of all speech. No verbal communications. Nothing written. People could bask in the ultimate peace and harmony of being together without the complication of linguistic differences.
For details on how this perect solution can work for the planet, google MEHER BABA.
Jn1bgood barabbas
The "sound of silence" re Simon and Garfunkel.
DcentDiscourse
NYTimes is such a shell of its former self. At the very least, they could have published a link to sites with the name they are too intimidated to print themselves.
while only "5 percent defined the shooting of the wounded assailant as murder."
That is a deeply disturbing statistic.
barabbas TallyHoGazehound
The rise of the nazi state was the same. Censorship in israel is a lot like china but reporting on that has also been censored.
Hasus barabbas
The reason for not publishing the soldier name is to protect his life from potential revenge by the terrorist.
casey nicholas Hasus
The "terrorist" is dead.
How is a "terrorist" going to harm a soldier in an Israeli civilian or military jail cell? Are you suggesting Israeli "security" is so weak that a "terrorist" could penetrate one of its "secure" facilities to exact their revenge against this soldier? Or are you suggesting this soldier's life would be in danger once he is released on bail (assuming he is) or once he has been tried and exonerated (which of course he will be because that's what the Israeli civilian and military courts do when one of their own kills a Palestinian).
Either way–bullshit. I'm honestly hoping that if there is a hell, and I honestly don't believe their is unfortunately, but if there is I hope every single Israeli hasbarist like you ends up in it roasting in the eternal fire of your own sophistry and hypocrisy preferably while being slow basted by Satan in some non-kosher food stuffs.
charliethreeee
I'm lost. This is a domestic crime that took place on the other side of the world and the alleged perp has been arrested for the crime.
Why are we supposed to be outraged? Mackey's piece was was about as logical as a three year old's crayon drawing. Glen you and Mackey are making the same generalization mistakes…. you are saying these examples = all of Israel is shit.
It's the same as saying America is shit because we sometimes do stupid shit. That too is fallacy.
That is not logical.
Lin ming charliethreeee
He was due for a column.
-Mona- charliethreeee
Oh dear. A guy who posts endless non sequiturs and strawmen claims someone else is illogical.
AtheistInChief charliethreeee
He's not saying that all of Israel is shit. He is just saying that 95% of Israelis polled think that that videotaped incident of "domestic crime," is not murder. If you don't find that outrageous, then that's fine. But it's good to know.
Mike Sulzer charliethreeee
Did you not notice that it is the various reactions to the crime, both international and in Israel, that is the story? Perhaps you are just pretending that you do not know that so you can engage in your usual outrage over supposed outrage.
Glenn Greenwald charliethreeee
The US Government supports this occupying army in every way conceivable, rendering their crimes and their national cheering for them – self-evidently newsworthy in the US.
Moreover, the NYT is a US paper written largely for an American audience, rendering censorship over their reporting important.
And that's to say nothing of your ugly, provincial premise that we should ignore things that happens in places far away.
Lin Ming Glenn Greenwald
AtheistInChief Lin Ming
Oh you got him!!
cn Glenn Greenwald
It seems to me that some distinction should be made re a country censoring what is published in that country versus having the gall to attempt to censor that freely available information in another country. But we do know that the NYT publishes all the news that's fit to print.
charliethreeee Glenn Greenwald
You know, I am getting tired of my fellow liberals of late. Why is it ugly to question your reasoning? Why are you assuming my premise is to ignore? Why are you blindly trusting polling data to say "most Israelis are ____"
If your feelings got hurt that I insulted Robert Mackey's crappy reporting on this subject than perhaps you are being too sensitive?
barabbas charliethreeee
ahhhhhhhhh…. How are you doing today? All happy with your operating environment are you? Why don't you spend some of your valuable time and enlighten all us here on your idea of a world that works for everyone?
surely you are a good enuf person to do that.
charliethreeee barabbas
There is no such thing as a world that works for everybody. No matter where you are, whether that is Brazil, America, Israel… there are people like us and people very different than us competing.
I really like the journalism of GG, Scahill and Poitras. I like the concept of this site and will keep coming back. But it is frustrating to me hearing the constant bashing. Brazil, America, Israel, wherever… all great countries… we just sometimes get shitty leaders and shitty policies… doesn't mean shitty people!
I just don't believe the concept that most Israelis are okay with what is happening… and that there is some type of active conspiracy to censor and hide what happened… it's like claiming most Americans were glad Michael Brown was shot.
Bubba charliethreeee
Please explain how crime that occurred in occupied territory and was committed by the occupying army, thereby clearly constituting a war crime under international law, is a 'domestic crime?'
Perhaps Israeli law protects him from the intercept crowd who might incite freedom loving Hamaz or some "retired" resident-lawyer to execute the soldier. But this is legal stuff and who knows anything about the law at the intercept? No one…
Is there a legal point on which you want to educate readers or is a sneer all you've got?
F. Kelso gorsky
Hmmm… I wonder, might it be Glenn, who has a JD, and has worked on for notable news organizations all over the world. C'mon son
rrheard gorsky
But this is legal stuff and who knows anything about the law at the intercept? No one…
Yeah except Glenn the inactive lawyer, Mona the inactive lawyer, me the active lawyer, Corim Nobis the active lawyer, and quite a few other active and inactive lawyers that happen to read and periodically comment on Glenn's work and the legal issues he covers. Yeah, so except for all those folks at the Intercept, nobody I guess.
And I've read at least half a dozen legal thrillers.
A mood lightening habit.
Don't sue me.
Dang… I did it again.
"It's true that the situation faced by the NYT here – along with other media outlets based in Israel – is a difficult one. They could theoretically lose their media credentials to report from Israel if they flagrantly violate a judicial gag order, though it's hard to imagine Israel expelling the NYT and other major media outlets from their country."
Which would not be good for anyone, would it? The name is readily available online, so it is not as if the NYT is suppressing the truth by not publishing the name.
-Mona- Mike
The level of censorship in Israel is why it ranks so low on press freedom indexes. The NYT is in a position — if it so desired — to make a huge issue of this.
barabbas Mike
censorship plus propagandist lies reposted – quite alarming.
All 3 short -10m of less ea- videos are worth seeing. Also quite sickening when you realize the WMD lie that criminal Bush pushed for a war for profits that got thousands murdered.
The fatal shooting by Cpl. Azariya has become a major news story in Israel, but not for the reason one might assume. There is very little outrage over his decision to shoot a wounded, subdued 21-year-old Palestinian in the head from point-blank range.
Oh, many Israelis LOVE seeing that man shot; they find it exciting and pleasurable. For many, it is yet another snuff video of the sort they crave and celebrate.
The Israeli military has been murdering Palestinians for years, to huge popular enthusiasm when videos of these murders go viral in Israel. Israeli academic at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Neve Gordon, calls them "snuff videos," including that of the shooting of Asraa Zidan Tawfik Abed, a 30-year-old Palestinian mother who was not about to attack anyone.
Writes Gordon:
Asraa…sobs and cries out. She clearly poses no threat whatsoever to those around her, and yet suddenly a police officer nonchalantly walks toward her, aims, and shoots, three times. Asraa falls to the ground, while someone in the crowd shouts, 'Daughter of a whore!'
Gordon further explores the "Orgies of Feeling" this vile fare generates among Israelis.
Unlike ancient Rome, in Israel events are framed by a melodramatic political script that thrives on what Elisabeth Anker, following Nietzsche, calls orgies of feeling.
Indeed, the current popularity of snuff media in Israel is the product of a local melodrama industry that solicits intense pathos, which is aimed at encouraging heroic retribution against those considered responsible for so-called national injuries. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is the ultimate melodrama king, and he has, throughout his long political career, spun many tales that produce extreme feelings of fear and self-righteousness.
This is the foul stuff of fascism.
charliethreeee -Mona-
That is some Ted Cruz-like bs. The only difference between his lies and yours are the flavor. Every population has folk you are going to like and dislike. Condeming the entire country as fascist is insane.
Granted, this type of comment is par for the course for you…
The only difference between his lies and yours are the flavor.
Ima gonna go out on a limb here, and say that an Israeli academic is less likely to be lying against his tribal interests than you are to be right.
Macroman -Mona-
Tyranny, tribalism, nationalism, and vigilantism, but not fascism per se. We'll see if Mussolini agrees.
-Mona- Macroman
but not fascism per se
Yes, fascism. Tyranny + tribalism + nationalism, combined with whipping up frenzied hatred of the Other who is relentlessly depicted as the enemy of the nation, is generally part of fascism.
No — fascism has syndicalism/state control of the use of privately owned capital as a necessary condition by definition. So "fascism" is obfuscatory to describe what you're talking about.
Tyranny + tribalism + nationalism…is generally part of fascism.
Note we agree and also that your claim does not at all contradict mine. Key term in my first is "per se."
Anyway, in an age when Trump (whom I despise) is "fascist," clearly the term has lost all meaning, so I'll give up now.
fascism has syndicalism/state control of the use of privately owned capital as a necessary condition by definition.
1. Israel extensively controls the private sector, and
2. Such control need not be total.
nuf said Macroman
Key term in my first is "per se."
Your nit picking, per se, isn't getting you anywhere, per se.
Fascism is corporatism which defines America and Israel both.
The American government is bought, and paid for, by law and it isn't $27 donations changing hands.
William -Mona-
Good post. But I'd say it's much worse than fascism. It's vile unadulterated sadism.
-Mona- William
That, too. Sadists have a good time in fascist nations.
Bardi William
William, it truly is worse than fascism.
and SADISTIC. Israel is fast becoming the new NAZI STATE with their alternate name of ZIONISTAS.
What about the argument that publicizing his name and background beliefs interferes with the possibility of a fair trial? And isn't this sort of thing a form of pretrial punishment that violates the innocent-until-proven-guilty standard, if that even applies in Israel?
Typo in the middle: "censorsing"
TallyHoGazehound Macroman
If the trial were going to be held in the US, or NY…. maybe there would be an argument of some sort to protect a notion of "fair trial." But, how do we currently manage identities of defendants: alleged.
But, if I take your premise as given, what are the instances in which the Israeli press has afforded the same identity/assumption of innocence protections to others of its own citizens or Palestinians?
Macroman TallyHoGazehound
My understanding is that, if the perp is Palestinian, s/he is detained, tortured, and perhaps murdered and has their family home destroyed and then the "due process" is when police/IDF lose the file. That's just my understanding though. It could be worse in practice.
Jose Macroman
Defendant names are always known in high profile cases, so I don't see how that would be a violation of due process.
Glenn Greenwald Macroman
Trials in most western countries are open and public, which means the identity of the defendants is known except in the rarest of cases.
A gag order was needed in Israel precisely because it's not the norm.
Macroman Glenn Greenwald
Right, but the prospect of an untainted jury pool is diminished by publicity so I thought there was at least a semi-credible rationale for the gag order. That said, it sounds like the jury will be tainted by rabid Zionism regardless.
barabbas Macroman
Israel is an apartheid state. Israel imprisons people without trial. Israel instructs citizens to murder Palestinians. Israel practices genocide and ethnic cleansing killing and maiming women and children at their homes. Netanyahu is a sociopath. Israel is experimenting with GMO humans in Dimona. Israel is a rogue state. BDS is an exemplary reaction by the world of nations as to what israel is. Israel is running a the YINON PLAN. Israel is making America a target by getting America to fight their war for Yinon. Israel is run by a Zion cult which members are in the currency monopolyl. To learn more about the zion cult, google Dr. Hajo Meyer – a holocaust survivor who recently died of old age and a very good jewish person.
If what you're saying is true, "ethnic cleansing" "genocide" and so, you should have seen hundreds of bodies every day. However, just look as how one death is making so much news. The total number Palestinians ever killed in the last 67 years is much less than one month of war in Syria (according to Palestinian data). It's less than the number NATO killed in Afghanistan and Iraq. Even Jordan has killed more Palestinians in one months – "black September" 1970.
Also, the Palestinians with Israeli citizenship are the only arabs with democratic rights and they the most educated. They also have the highest GDP (except from oil countries.
Please check some fact or just come visit before publishing your lies
Bubba Hasus
You're reading from an old hasbara manual. Tunesia is the only democracy in the Middle East if don't regard Turkey as Middle East. Also Iran counts as a democracy, as imperfect and flawed as it is. Fully half of all people under Israel's rule have no vote whatsoever, and the Israeli-Palestinians have no effective voice in the country. The gross inequity of budgetary allocation is a great example of that.
the Palestinians with Israeli citizenship are the only arabs with democratic rights and they the most educated. They also have the highest GDP (except from oil countries.
I love how you gloss over "the only arabs with democratic rights". Fucking stupid.
subbob Hasus
Not "one death", but rather the latest death.
Bubba Macroman
Juries are not used in Israeli civilian courts let alone courts martial. Fair trial issues related to pre-trial publicity are generally concerned with spoiling a jury pool.