Uh, that was the point.

You see no requirement for journalists to even make a reasonable attempt to contextualize? That media spin is as standard in international public relations as a suit and tie? That it is highly likely that a similar manual exists in every country on earth?

Did you miss the lede? It's not that Israeli government spokesmen spin their policies - which, as you concede, probably everyone does. No, it is "What they say is directly contradicted by the facts." "The Israeli government is lying to you."

How is this anything but agitprop?

*conversation about American Jews joining the army in Israel*

Lilu7 posts, out of nowhere:

*Gamblor says he's not even American*

then:

lol.

I "joined the Israeli military" the same way everyone in Israel does. You get a letter from the government saying when and where (bakum) to be.

Took me like 2 seconds to find out this video was shot in Libya.

I dunno. Dont know what 2 unidentified people taking part in bestiality has to do with anything though.

Interesting exchange of letters in the Guardian about the proportionality of the Israeli response. One writer said that when the Nazi's bombed London, the British all supported burning down German cities and Israel is fine. Others said the world would never tolerate the British leveling Irish neighborhoods during the troubles, why does Israel get a pass? Another said he was in a Zionist youth group in South Africa in 1948. A speaker said their goal was a greater Israel all the way to the Litani river in Lebanon, free of current residents. "Even the Boers hadn't gone so far as to expel the Natives from South Africa, I said, and left Habonim," and argued that Israeli aggression was the root of the conflict.

apparently, for the Guardian and Bill Haywood, history not only starts in 1947, but also ends there.

Hey, Bill, remember these crazy guys?



Look at that photo - those crazy Zionists clearly want Jordan also. The peace treaty might be a Zionist ruse.

1947 is over man. Let it go.

Why are you always comparing Israel to the Arab states? Does this unflattering comparison not bother you? Do you think a democratic and relatively free country that was once a shinning light in the Middle East and a beacon of restraint and human rights in the region is now compared to and acting like the cesspits that surround it?

Not sure if these were posted, but imagine if Arab or non-jewish MKs/citizens were saying this about jews in Israel. Imagine if occupiers of the highest offices in other civilised countries would talk about anyone like this

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/....IbzGYBih.dpuf


VN - http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-Ed-Contribut

http://rt.com/news/israel-gaza-hamas-war-103/

A more minor figure, but I've posted it because of the sheer lol of an Israeli wanting to use the Syrian government as an example to use. This is pure nuts (it's offensive to Syrians and Israelis alike)

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/....rGEuG9x9.dpuf


I'm reminded of Sabra and Shatila, and how the Israeli authorities then asked the Lebanese Phalange to show restraint and behave like a dignified army. It's funny how things change.

Do you think this is an expedient way to gain advantage for the Palestinians?

The gopher?

Do you think that they think they can beat the Israelis army by doing things which are obviously completely ineffective?

The problem is when they do that no one outside of s small proportion of liberals speak up for them. Like take the last 7 years of the blockade. Were there daily protests against Israel for this like we see now, protesting the violence? No. Right now, people are talking about their plight. When the slaughter is slower and they are being squeezed in less dramatic but equally damaging ways, no one is talking about them. And after all it is the outside support of the U.S. which allows Israel to get away with these atrocities. This is another reason it is logical for the Palestinians to look to the international community for support.

I don't think getting slaughtered and giving Israel the thin excuse necessary to carry out that slaughter is in any way some campaign to convince the West Bank to act like them. What is the message there? Fight back, get slaughtered?

Tell you what, I doubt Israeli leadership had any sense of how big Hamas's balls were. HUGE BALLS. Did anyone anticipate they could take this kind of pounding?

Also is anyone impressed by the size of the tunnel infrastructure? That's like some Shawshank/The Great Escape type stuff. Tunnels for days.

I loath Hamas pretty bad, but some part of me has to respect their resolve.

Oh so you agree your link is just agitprop too? For clarity, I don't. I think both articles are valuable. They both only address one group of people, and both contain a bit of colour I'm largely going to ignore, but both raise important points useful for a good understanding of the larger situation. But under your condemnation of the the first article, surely you apply the same condemnation to the second?

Firstly, as a point of process, can you please not make up quotes. I had to go reread the article again to make sure I was correct that you made up the quotes. At least give a clear indication you are giving your own interpretation or attempting to paraphrase. Especially when "hiding facts" - their most egregious opener - is a MUCH weaker claim then "directly contradicted by the facts".

So basically you are mad that they didn't put in an empty throwaway like "hey everyone does this guys" with no specificity? This was reporting (which is entirely appropriate) of a specific leaked document applying to a specific country. It is entirely fine to report on that, and just that. Just as it is entirely fine to report on a specific instance of, say, republican electoral fraud without saying "hey but everyone does this both sides are equal lololololz".

It is true that like much of the media, they throw in a title and opening sentence designed to catch attention. I wish the media in general didn't do this, but it is clearly in their best interest to do so so I can't be too mad. You would probably like these eye catchers to not cast any bad light on Israel. And you want some empty "everyone does it" thrown in. Well sure, have at this. But the bulk of the article - discussing the specific leaked report - is entirely valid. More than valid, it is important things for people to know. Some will know the general thrust already, but if anyone didn't, they should read the article. And they should read your article too.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014...rael-conflict/

Pelosi says Hamas is a humanitarian organization.

No she didn't. The general principle (outside of STOP) when reading the blaze, is to carefully read the quotes because the blaze has no compunction against highly misleading titles.

What she said was this: "“And we have to confer with the Qataris, who have told me over and over again that Hamas is a humanitarian organization. Mbe they could use their influence to–”

She didn't say they were a humanitarian organization. She said the qataris keep telling her they are a humanitarian influence. She then didn't dispute the interviewers cut in about them being a terrorist organization. It didn't even come off in a way where it implied she thought this and was using a 3rd party to say it. It came off as a "well if they think hamas is so amazing, maybe they should try and get hamas to actually be peaceful" or something to that effect but hard to say as it was cut off.

Most of her interview is standard pro peace pro two state emptiness that delivers neither controversy nor anything of interest.

This is surely the effect, but I am not convinced that Hamas is deliberately focusing on this effect. In particular, if gaining international sympathy was their goal, they are doing a TERRIBLE job of it, routinely doing things the international community abhors. For instance, at a bare minimum they should change their charter. If they were outwardly focused, working to gain public sympathy, they could do so many things like this. But they don't.

It is so inward it isn't even trying to get the WB to back them. Most of their motivations are truly constrained to being inside gaza.

What you get is things like this: after the kidnappings and unity deal, Israel rounded up a huge number of Hamas people in the WB. There was a sense that Hamas - as the putative resistors of the israeli oppression - had to act. Well, they don't have a lot of actions avaliable to them, so they did the one they had: fire 80 rockets or something like this. Israel responds, they respond back, and well now we are where we are. But the need to appear as the vigilantes against the evil oppressor isn't something that is meant to appeal to internationals and not necessarily even to people in the WB. It is mainly to keep their position at the top of the rather small gazan food chain.

One thing I really respect about Gamblor is he doesn't just talk the talk. He walks the walk. And what better way to demonstrate that then to join the IDF himself?

Do they take psychotics?

Well we now know where the millions and millions worth of cement and building materials (that the international community insisted Israel allow).

I'm starting to get the impression that they aren't calling their own shots. Qatar, Turkey, Syria, and Iran (and who knows how co-ordinated their interests are) are all funding Hamas, with the likely goal of asserting influence over Saudi, and Egypt.

Im not going to give a date or information, but it's already a long time ago. It's just life there, nothing you can do.

I'm also not the only one itt who did.

I've never understood this, maybe you can explain it. In what specific ways does Hamas assert influence over Saudi Arabia? Egypt makes some sense given the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood allowing things like, say, an Iranian warship in the suez (in 2011 or so I think). But even there it is much more one directional, where the muslim brotherhood taking and losing power in egypt were very important for hamas, but what hamas does is less influential on what happens in Egypt. But for SA, the connection seems even more vague. It is true that SA/Iran/Turkey compete for supremacy in who gets the most influence in the region, but the direction of Hamas "asserting influence" on SA doesn't really occur.

I didn't mean Hamas influencing SA, sorry if that's the impression I gave.

I thought you were more well-versed and I don't mean this to be condescending. It's just my understanding.

The Middle East is a crazy, ****ed up place, especially outside Israel. Shiite vs. Sunni, and Sunni authoritarian vs Sunni Islamist are the biggest battles, both of which dwarf the I-P conflict.

So it's still, to this day, up for grabs (thanks to the Sykes-Picot, et al).

The Islamists are sponsored and supported by Turkey, Qatar, and Iran, all of whom are independently trying to increase influence via Hizballa and the Muslim Brotherhood (including Hamas).

The other side is the authoritarian Arabist governments of Egypt and Saudi. They view the MB and Islamists as a threat to their alliances with the West - which they are.

Keep in mind that these axes are not necessarily co-operative; each of those countries are competing with each other as well, though the imperative is greater as against the other side.

After the Muslim Brotherhood was booted from Egypt, they were essentially marginalized. I'm reading more and more analysis that this whole conflict is really about a re-assertion of their authority over the rest of the Middle East.

It doesn't make sense that Hamas would think they can win this. While certainly genocidal and crazy, they are not stupid. They know that Israel isn't going anywhere in the short-term. To them, it is a temporary Western imperialist presence that will, sooner or later, disappear (hopefully with western help, hence the PR move rebrand the re-establishment of a state for the indigenous Jewish people as a Western presence, to align with anti-colonialists). So this is about the long game of control over the PalArabs against Fateh, with foreign support to win the battle against Saudi and Egypt.

Saudi and Egypt have not only been uncharacteristically silent with respect to criticism of Israel this time around, Egypt has actually harshened its blockade at Rafiah and has been mowing down Hamasniks and other PalArabs who are trying to infiltrate Egypt, which hasn't gotten any Western press. They're actively rooting for Israel, if not publicly.

Why does Hamas play along?

$. Haniya and Mashaal are worth millions and millions from building and taxing the tunnels. I don't know if they anticipated the length to which Israel would go to destroy them and the degree to which it would ignore international criticism this time.

But eventually there will be quiet, and the tunnels will be constructed all over again, which accumulated knowledge.

Kinda rambly, but I'm on my phone.

The entire war in a single tweet from Italian journalist in Gaza, Gabriele Barbati
This is a f***ing scandal and it should be front page news. Every reporter is parroting only what Hamas will allow them to say, under threat of "retaliation".

How many of the 1000 or so deaths have been blamed on Israel by Western reporters, for fear of Hamas retribution?

How many bombed-out hospitals and schools were reported as Israeli strikes before Hamas operatives scrubbed it clean of evidence of failed Hamas rockets?

Without purporting to know how difficult it is to report from a conflict zone, how many reporters are reporting only what Hamas allows them to? All of them?

He followed that with:

Of course. I was arguing that, if such a criticism applies to the second article, it should apply to the first. My view of journalism is that it should be contextualized, at least to a reasonable degree. I understand we differ on that view. But every story about every detail has the throwaway about how many people have been killed in the conflict overall. For context. Seems that idea should apply here as well, but for governments' PR activities.

It was intended to paraphrase, not be a quote. I'd put it in a quote tag if I meant it to be a quote. It is admittedly sloppy. When 2p2 starts handing out degrees I'll cite and quote more exactly. Until then, citations are to make assertions more robust, I'm not claiming personal credit for anything that I write here.

Ding ding ding. I wouldn't put it in such terms exactly, but the gist is what I mean to say. I mean, even a line like "governments push their political views through a variety of means. Here is one example." would suffice.

Fair enough. In my view, again, it is so slimy to write such a one-sided, contextless piece.

Id have executed them just for this. sick pigs.

nyt on hamas as a proxy

People have asked repeatedly itt why Hamas would need to resort to propaganda when there are already such compelling images of the current humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Because international pressure is Hamas' biggest trump card. This is as much a war of public opinion as it is of one on the ground. Hamas knows it will never win the latter but hopes to win or at least gain ground on the former and has no problem lying and letting thousands of its own citizens die to achieve that goal (while Hamas' leader rejects cease-fire proposals from the relative comfort of a Qatari hideout).

I would have thought it's hard to garner the West's sympathy when you're purposely aiming missiles at civilian population centers, advocate the use of human shields, and use precious humanitarian resources not to build schools or housing or businesses, but to build terror tunnels. But alas some in the West continue to romanticize Hamas' "struggle" and "resistance", ignore the fact that it is a terrorist organization created with the explicit purpose, not of peaceful coexistence, but of destroying the entire state of Israel, and is committed to killing Jews wherever they find them in the name of Allah. This is Hamas.

Still, it becomes even harder to garner sympathy internationally when it turns out your own ****ty missiles have blown up your own hospitals and schools, you're threatening journalists in the region accusing them of collaborating with Israel, and killing other suspected "collaborators" without any type of due process. Just shoot them in the head and drag their dead bodies around the streets on motorcycles.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/07...ng-to-unravel/

The Palestinians are in need of and deserve a better life, but it will never happen with Hamas.