one reason why israel is so good at Propaganda

[CELTICEMPIRE]

I am truly shocked to say that, for the first time on CFC, after almost 4 years, I agree with Useless on something.

 

[ThERat]

Classical hero, how is Israel not an Apartheid state? The restrictions on movement for Palestinians are worse than they were for black or coloured people in South Africa. To me Gaza and whatever is left for Palestinians in west bank are equivalents for open air prisons.
Sure, Israel will tell you it's all needed to protect them (I guess white people made the same claims in South Africa). Fact is, that Israel has used its 'we are the victims' status and the huge support from big brother USA to shamelessly push their agenda.

I do blame Arafat for walking out of the negotiations in the late 90s, but that can't be an excuse to let the current warmongers rule without the international community doing sth about it. I live in Singapore which has a sizable moderate Muslim population and the current Israeli actions are having a huge impact on them. The West makes a big mistake not restraining Israel.

 

[bhsup]

Maybe if they would stop colluding with Hamas to store rockets there... Sure, you say they are not colluding, but considering they give them back once discovered, that's what I have to assume is happening. After all, it's the UN we're talking about here, perhaps the most anti-Israeli organization in the world besides those found in the middle east.

 

[Tee Kay]

Yes, sure, unarmed civilians vs ruthless terrorists.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Maybe if they would stop colluding with Hamas to store rockets there... Sure, you say they are not colluding, but considering they give them back once discovered, that's what I have to assume is happening. After all, it's the UN we're talking about here, perhaps the most anti-Israeli organization in the world besides those found in the middle east.

Having jumped the gun last time this came up, this time I will ask a couple questions.

What is the right thing to do if you found a weapons cache, say while hiking in a nearby park?

Who is the designated and duly elected authority in Gaza?

On another note...is the reason you call the UN 'anti-Israel' due to the mind boggling number of times the UN has censured them for violations of international law? If so you should take your complaint to the writers of international law (probably mostly dead, skip that) or the numerous attorneys specializing in international law who prosecuted and defended each of the endless parade of cases. Maybe spring for a better attorney for Israel's defense...oh, wait...they can afford and do have a whole bunch of the very best.

Best option, get over it. The UN censures them (but never sanctions them) because they are stone guilty (but very good customers of nations that do not want to lose them so will veto any actual sanctions). There is no 'let's pick on Israel' conspiracy, they just do flaunt international humanitarian law like it doesn't apply to them. It is really of no consequence to them, so there is really no need to go to the mat over it and make people drag out lists of case after case after case after case after case...well, I'm sure you see why it's no fun for anyone.

 

[Natan35]

Classical hero, how is Israel not an Apartheid state? The restrictions on movement for Palestinians are worse than they were for black or coloured people in South Africa. To me Gaza and whatever is left for Palestinians in west bank are equivalents for open air prisons.
Sure, Israel will tell you it's all needed to protect them (I guess white people made the same claims in South Africa). Fact is, that Israel has used its 'we are the victims' status and the huge support from big brother USA to shamelessly push their agenda.

I do blame Arafat for walking out of the negotiations in the late 90s, but that can't be an excuse to let the current warmongers rule without the international community doing sth about it. I live in Singapore which has a sizable moderate Muslim population and the current Israeli actions are having a huge impact on them. The West makes a big mistake not restraining Israel.

Singapore? I suggest you check who helps your country's military then....
Israel is not apartheid state, because most of its population is Jewish, and actually there are almost no Palestinians in Israel's territory....

 

[Natan35]

Yes, sure, unarmed civilians vs ruthless terrorists.

Yeah. When Hamas shots his own civilians....

 

[classical_hero]

Yes, sure, unarmed civilians vs ruthless terrorists.

You have to prove they are the target, not unfortunate victims of collateral damage when legitimate targets are struck.

@TR. Palestinians are not Israeli citizens and thus not under the rule of Israel. Just like I am not and American citizen thus I am not treated like an American citizen. People seem to forget such basics in this situation for some reason. Also the restriction of movement are there because far too often when the restrictions are removed, terror strikes. The Palestinians could and the Gazans could have a relationship with Israel if they bothered to work with Israel, but Hamas in particular are aiming to destroy Israel. When you are at war you simply don't have open borders with an enemy trying to destroy you. There was a short time where there was no blockade of Gaza but Hamas has shown time and again they don't want peace and only want destruction.


Link to video.

 

[squadbroken]

You have to prove they are the target, not unfortunate victims of collateral damage when legitimate targets are struck.

boy it's great how we always have this convenient shield that wards off any and all responsibility

 

[classical_hero]

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/5114/a_thank_you_letter_from_hamas_to_the_mediahttp://

Dear Members of the Mainstream Media,

You've been awesome! Everyone knows that we start unwinnable wars with Israel because the real victory happens when you predictably side with us each time. And you've been so supportive of our strategy that we really want to acknowledge your helpfulness. In particular, we thank you for:

-Focusing so much more on our suffering than anyone else's. Nigerians must die in far greater numbers before you take notice, so we're glad that you value our lives so much more.

-Minimizing your coverage, if any, of our attacks that led up to Israel's military response and generally providing so little context that outsiders think that Israelis kill Palestinians just for fun. We're especially grateful to the French media for this.

Their distortions of the conflict are so one-sided that they incite Muslims across France to attack Jews and synagogues, and that is welcomed by our anti-Semitic worldview (although, unfortunately, such attacks remind everyone why Jews need a state).

-Emphasizing our civilian death toll without explaining that (1) our casualty reports are hasty and inflated, and (2) we maximize that total by using Palestinians to shield our weapons and by urging them to stay in the very areas that the IDF -- in its annoying effort to minimize our civilian deaths -- warns Gazans to evacuate.

-Never mentioning the fact that if we could kill millions of Israelis, we would (after all, our charter calls for Israel's destruction). Just as the 9/11 hijackers made the most of what they had but would have liked to kill far more Americans (for example, with the help of WMD), we too would love to kill far more Israelis.

Indeed, we have purposely targeted Israel's nuclear reactor on several occasions, with that very goal in mind. Fortunately, you never highlight the genocidal intent behind our attacks when mentioning Israel's "disproportionate" response.

-Never calling us jihadists even though we persecute Christians (like the ISIS, which just compelled Mosul's Christians to convert to Islam). The forced conversion, expulsion, or murder of Christians and other religious minorities by Islamists has been happening for millennia, as assiduously documented in Crucified Again, but such historical context is thankfully absent from your reporting on our conflict with Israel.

-Downplaying how bad we are for Gazans by not reporting on, for example, our attack on the very Israeli power station that provides electricity to 70,000 Gazans. Thankfully, you also ignored how the Israelis -- in their stupid display of goodwill -- exposed their workers to the perils of our rockets so that they could restore power to Gaza.

-Minimally reporting on our corruption, unfair wealth, or vast expenditures on tunnels to attack Israel while ordinary Palestinians grew poorer.

-Overlooking how -- to maximize Palestinian deaths -- we store our missiles in an UNRWA-run school and how, when UNRWA finds out, they just hand us back our missiles.

-Disregarding Arabs who have the courage to critique us -- like Dr. Tawfik Hamid, an Islamist-turned-reformer who blames Palestinian suffering entirely on us.

-Ignoring Israelis' humanitarian folly in providing medical aid to the very terrorists trying to kill them.

-Failing to acknowledge Israel's immense restraint. Had we been fighting Syria's Assad regime, by now Gaza would have been flattened -- devastated by barrel bombs, poison gas, and other attacks that are far more indiscriminate than Israel's intelligence-directed strikes. And of course, if Syria were killing us, you'd hardly care. But luckily, we're dealing with Israel -- that country that everyone loves to hate -- so we can count on your helpful coverage here.

-Omitting how Israel chose to sacrifice dozens of IDF soldiers when destroying our tunnels and weapons in densely populated areas like Shejaiya because doing so with airstrikes (which risks no soldiers) would have killed many thousands of Palestinians.

Your friendly omission of such crucial facts reminds us of how wonderfully you covered Jenin in 2002, when (again) -- rather than praise Israel's humane but costly decision to use ground troops rather than airstrikes -- you very helpfully and falsely accused Israel of a massacre during another IDF operation to stop Palestinian terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians.

-Not sharing with your English readers what we openly say in Arabic: that we view any truce as just an opportunity to rearm for our next war against Israel (as our spokesman, Musheer Al Masri, recently declared on TV).

-Not underscoring that Israel can do nothing to make peace with us (after all, Israelis ended their occupation of Gaza in 2005 and we've been rocketing them ever since). It's a bit nervy of Israel to use its border controls to limit our ability to rearm and rebuild cross-border attack tunnels, but -- with your help -- maybe the next cease-fire will remove Israel's blockade so that we can more easily replenish our weapons and restore our tunnels for our next attack.

And yes, we're embarrassed that our fellow Arab Muslims in Egypt also choose to blockade us because of the problems that we've caused them.

-Not reminding readers, when you mention potential truce arrangements, that world powers are no more capable of ensuring a demilitarized Gaza than they were capable of disarming Hezbollah in south Lebanon.

Seriously, you've been AMAZING. Please keep it up!

Love,

Hamas

p.s. Many thanks also to the countless protesters around the world who follow your lead, embolden us, and make us look legit!

 

[squadbroken]

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/5114/a_thank_you_letter_from_hamas_to_the_mediahttp://

great article bro but allow me to present a rebuttal

 

[useless]

Maybe if they would stop colluding with Hamas to store rockets there... Sure, you say they are not colluding, but considering they give them back once discovered, that's what I have to assume is happening. After all, it's the UN we're talking about here, perhaps the most anti-Israeli organization in the world besides those found in the middle east.

Yeah i am sure the un is colluding WITH TERRORISTS

your evidence being:

also im sure they condemned hamas for storing rockets but whatever man

 

[brennan]

You have to prove they are the target, not unfortunate victims of collateral damage when legitimate targets are struck.

No. You have to prove that the risk to civilians was not excessive compared to the military advantage gained from making the attack. As per the Geneva Conventions you have already been cited.

We all know what the military advantage is from attacking such a place. Virtually nil. Whereas the risk to civilians is roughly one dead per four attacks.

Obvious war crime.

Minimizing your coverage, if any, of our attacks that led up to Israel's military response and generally providing so little context that outsiders think that Israelis kill Palestinians just for fun.

What a silly article. Just picking the above, we know perfectly well how many rocket attacks there are. Our position is not that there is no cause for any action at all (an obvious strawman) but that the response is excessive to the point of constituting war crimes and that the solution is diplomatic, not the worn-out and counterproductive one of bombing Gaza.

 

[Quackers]

I watched the BBC 1 O clock news.

The newscaster was saying that Israel were gearing up for another assault on Gaza. What images did we see during this part of the programme? A room full of innocent, cute Palestinian children.

Stinks of propaganda to me.

 

[Tahuti]

I watched the BBC 1 O clock news.

The newscaster was saying that Israel were gearing up for another assault on Gaza. What images did we see during this part of the programme? A room full of innocent, cute Palestinian children.

Stinks of propaganda to me.

 

[brennan]

Stinks of propaganda to me.

Yeah, they should instead show a roomful of innocent, cute Israeli children who are far less likely to be killed.

 

[useless]

I watched the BBC 1 O clock news.

The newscaster was saying that Israel were gearing up for another assault on Gaza. What images did we see during this part of the programme? A room full of innocent, cute Palestinian children.

Stinks of propaganda to me.

So remind me, how many times have Israeli representatives been on BBC news, Newsnight etc? Mark Regev regularly has a podium on BBC news.

And also, Children are dying, should that aspect not be shown because i don't know, it doesn't paint Israel in a perfect light?

I wonder if you'd apply the same logic to Israeli children killed by Hamas or Fatah...

Somehow i doubt it.

 

[Quackers]

I'm not making any grand assertion that the BBC is biased in one way or another. I don't watch much coverage to make a case either way but the way they approached this snippet of the programme was an emotional plea rather than reporting the news.

 

[useless]

Maybe because the deaths of innocent children is an inherently emotional issue for some?

We can't all look at deaths and be "Beep Boop people die in a conflict, i am a robot".

Also, I am pretty sure Mark Regev and other Israeli Interviewees routinely bring up the emotional impact of having rockets fired upon them, where's your criticism of them for making emotional pleas?

 

[Quackers]

If I took everything I watched on the news emotionally as seriously as possible, I couldn't be able to watch it. Maybe I'm cold hearted but i'll give a few seconds of thought to the hundreds who died in that plane over the Ukraine but than I get on with my life. Otherwise I would be a bumbling emotional wreck 90% of the time.

The BBC's "impartial" broadcasting went out of the window today; it went for an emotional plea and it was blatently obvious what they were trying to do. Re-read my account of it, is that impartial news reading? Is that acceptable for an organisation like the BBC?