Nick Ferrari sustains blood libel against Israel in clumsy attempt at 'even handedness'

21 June 2016 UPDATE: The dead baby story has indeed been confirmed as a scam (as was obvious from the start to anybody who is not a Hamas supporter). The 8-month-old actually died from a fatal blood condition that runs in the family and Hamas paid them 8,000 shekels to make up the story blaming Israel for the death.


Nick Ferrari is the commentator beloved by Britain's 'official Jews' because they claim he is a 'friend of Israel'. Anybody following this blog will know how nonsensical this claim is (see links below; UPDATE 25 MAY: even Hamas now admits the baby's death had nothing to with Israel).  Now, several days after the 'baby killed by Israel gas' blood libel was completely debunked he is still pushing the same narrative (and stretching it to to include the nonsense 'seven other children killed'). The fact that this is a clumsy attempt at 'even handedness' - suggesting that the parents should not have taken the children to such a demonstration - does not excuse the fact that he is still promoting the 'Israel kills babies in Gaza' narrative.

Of all the 'official Jews', including, for example, those who invited Ferrari to host the recent Israel 70th celebration event at the Savoy Hotel, is there not one able to inform him of the fact that at least 54 of those 62 claimed to have been killed at the border were members of terrorist organisations and that this includes two who were 16 and 17 (i.e. the 'children killed by Israel')?  If Ferrari wanted to be even handed why did he not use his column to inform his readers that the terrorist organisations themselves are the ones who have stated that it was their members who were killed. This would have been extremely helpful given that the main stream media has been careful to keep these claims quiet as it contradicted the lies in their previous reporting.

See also:

• LBC's pathetic response to my latest complaint against Nick Ferrari
• Anti-Israel ignorance from Nick Ferrari
• Nick Ferrari: Jews killing Arabs again for no reason
• Nick Ferrari: not enough dead Jews
• Nick Ferrari's latest gem 
• LBC's Nick Ferrari: "Not enough dead Israelis for me"  (2012)
• LBC's 'pro-Israel' Nick Ferrari cannot understand why Israel picked on Hamas (2012)

Nick Ferrari's latest gem

This was in a discussion with a caller about the 'hate crime' committed against an asylum seeker in Croydon yesterday. Ferrari was contrasting it with the Westminster attack, which he said was in no way a hate crime as "Khalid Masood was a petty criminal who did not care what the religion was of people he killed."

See also LBC

LBC's pathetic response to my complaints about Nick Ferrari

I've sent two complaints recently to LBC about Nick Ferrari's repeated suggestions that "Jews kill Arabs for no reason" (one about the 25 September programme and one on 13 October).

I have received a response which appears to be directed to the second complaint but it is actually a standard response sent to everyone who complained about that programme and misses the specific complaint I made.

Thanks for your email. We always appreciate people getting in touch to share their thoughts and views on our output.

In what has been a very busy week of domestic, UK-based news we have found time to report on recent events in Israel. As ever, our approach has been to adopt a very careful and cautious approach in our coverage, sticking to the facts. This was the approach taken by Nick Ferrari on Wednesday during his interview with a journalist from the Jerusalem Post and lengthy, sympathetic discussion with a caller from a suburb outside Tel Aviv.

Please be assured we will continue to analyse our output as we strive to make it as accurate and relevant as possible, given the often fast-moving and complex events we are covering.

We also appreciate there are many deeply held opinions about what is happening and will continue to aim to reflect a wide range of views.

Thanks again for taking the time to get in touch.

While LBC at least responded on this occasion (Sky News never do and nor do most newspapers) I have sent back a follow-up complaint.

Dear LBC

Thank you for your response but it does not address my specific complaint. It does not matter who Ferrari interviewed. I complained about the words Ferrari used to introduce the subject (and incidentally these were the ONLY words said about the subject for about 10 minutes, so many listeners would ONLY have heard those words). He said at about 8.40am:

"To Israel now. And a Palestinian has been fatally shot in Jerusalem. More on this later".

This was after multiple terror attacks that very morning in Jerusalem specifically against Jews in which four Jewish civilians were killed (mostly elderly) and dozens injured in shooting, knifing and car attacks.. The Palestinian who was 'fatally shot' is the man who committed the atrocity that you can actually see here:

https://youtu.be/wChXPbocWhw

For Ferrari to have used the words he did to summarise that morning's news from Israel was inexcusable and can only be put down to either him or whoever fed him this 'strapline' as being driven by antisemitic hatred and ignorance. It was disgraceful and shoddy journalism that requires a full on-air apology by Ferrari.

Moreover, I also bring to your attention the fact that Ferrari conducted a 30-minute antisemitic blood libel on 25 September when he accused Israelis of killing a 'tiny young woman' for no reason even though she had in fact attacked them with a knife after refusing repeated attempts to stop advancing.

See also:

• Nick Ferrari: Jews killing Arabs again for no reason
• Nick Ferrari: not enough dead Jews
• Perfect illustration of anti-Israel bias in the media
• LBC: a platform for the propaganda of Hizb ut Tahrir (2005)
• How LBC reported the massacre in Jerusalem (2008)
• LBC's Andrew Pierce: "Not enough dead Israelis for me" (2009)
• LBC's Nick Ferrari: "Not enough dead Israelis for me"  (2012)
• LBC's 'pro-Israel' Nick Ferrari cannot understand why Israel picked on Hamas (2012)
• Why LBC's James O'Brien (like many other liberal commentators) is an antisemite (2014)
• More on LBC's James O'Brien and his claim not be an antisemite (2014)
• LBC's war against Israel (2014)
• LBC responds to my complaint about their war against Israel (2014)
• How the media sees the timeline of events in Israel
• Letters to MP and Downing Street about anti-Israel media bias
• Compare and contrast responses to terrorism in Israel
• Rules and Guidelines for Western reporting on Israel 
• Media ignores or dehumanizes murdered Israelis
• BBC ignore attacks against Israel
• Martians attacking Jews again
• Arabs massacred by Americans on day of tit-for-tat violence
• Reporting attacks against ISIS and Hamas
• Another dedication to the useful idiots at CNN and the BBC
• If the response to Pearl Harbour had been the same as that of modern Islamic attacks. 

Nick Ferrari: Jews killing Palestinians for no reason again this morning

The details of the bus attack are only just emerging, but it is clear that at least two Jews were killed including an elderly man. And this is all we get from Nick Ferrari and LBC.

By not only covering up for the terrorists, but also slamming Israel when a a terrorist dies, the media is providing a massive incentive for continued Palestinian terrorism. For them it is a win-win. They kill Jews and yet get all the sympathy while Israel gets even more blame.

See also:

• Perfect illustration of anti-Israel bias in the media
•  How the media sees the timeline of events in Israel
• Letters to MP and Downing Street about anti-Israel media bias
• Compare and contrast responses to terrorism in Israel
• Rules and Guidelines for Western reporting on Israel 
• Media ignores or dehumanizes murdered Israelis
• BBC ignore attacks against Israel
• Martians attacking Jews again
• Arabs massacred by Americans on day of tit-for-tat violence
• Reporting attacks against ISIS and Hamas
• Another dedication to the useful idiots at CNN and the BBC
• If the response to Pearl Harbour had been the same as that of modern Islamic attacks. 

Perfect illustration of anti-Israel bias in the UK media

I've sent the following abbreviated complaint to Nick Ferrari at LBC and the full complaint below.

Dear Nick

While you have completely ignored the continued vicious unprovoked terrorist attacks by Palestinians that are now killing and injuring Israeli civilians daily, on 25 September you spent 30 minutes spewing vicious slander and blood libels against Israel based on the false account of what happened when a Palestinian woman was shot during one such terrorist attack. You gave no context for the story and said that Israelis had no right to self-defence against knife attacks by women.  Given that the Israel account of events was proven correct, I expect an on-air apology

Full complaint to LBC:

Nothing sums up the inherent antisemitism of the British media than a segment of Nick Ferrari's prime time morning show on LBC on 25 September when he spent 30 minutes spewing vicious slander and blood libels against Israel. Taking account of the context and evidence I demand an on-air apology from Ferrari for his ignorance, bias, and lies for the reasons set out below.   

In the previous weeks Israelis had been victims of  multiple, unprovoked knife, car and rock attacks (not to mention rockets from Gaza and Syria) which had claimed the lives of civilians including babies. Not a single one of these hundreds of incidents got a mention on the '24 hour news' channel that is LBC. In one of these incidents a female Arab terrorist (Hadeel al-Hashlamunarmed) was armed with a knife concealed under a burka and ignored calls by soldiers to put her weapon down for several minutes, before lunging at them with the knife. At that point she was shot in the lower part of her body. She later died in hospital. As IsraellyCool reported on 25 September the British media only took an interest in the story when an alternative anti-Israel narrative was spun. Based on a photograph showing that the terrorist was very short while the soldier was tall the Palestinian lie industry claimed that the woman could not have been a terrorist and some even claimed she was unarmed.

Accepting the Palestinian narrative unquestioningly Nick Ferrari (on what was a very heavy news day in the UK) devoted the entire slot between 8.30 and 9.00am to a barrage of abuse against Israel. His invited 'guest expert' to speak about the story was a member of the UK Palestine Solidarity Committee a group of congenital liars and antisemites whose only objective is to destroy the Jewish state. None of the callers seemed to know the true facts about the incident and those who called to defend Israel were ridiculed by Ferrari who repeatedly said that "even if she had a knife what possible harm could she have done with it; it was only a knife".

In fact a subsequent investigation has confirmed that the original Israeli account of what happened was true. 

But especially relevant is that fact that, in the last week there have been several hundred terrorist attacks by Palestinians (often individuals using knives) against Israel civilians resulting in several deaths and multiple injuries. But yet again LBC has been unable to find the time to mention any of these and, of course, they have been ignored by Nick Ferrari. This is despite the especially savage nature of the attacks and the fact that they have been greeted with widespread celebrations by the Palestinian community. For example, on 1 October Palestinians shot and killed Eitam and Naam Henkin in front of their four young children (all under 10). But of especial significance was the attack by Palestinian terrorist Mohammed Halabi (who, in contrast to the media’s narrative of Palestinian desperation and poverty, came from a wealthy family and was a law student at Al Quds University). On 3 October Halabi killed Nehamia Lavi and Aharaon Benita with a knife in Jerusalem while other Arabs looked on and applauded. He also stabbed Benita’s wife Adele and baby. They survived, but only after Adele was slapped, spat at and laughed at by the Arab passers-by while the knife was still in her body. Despite all of this being captured on video, Nick Ferrari did not feel it worthy of mention – let alone a half-hour spot on prime time. Dead Jews – no matter how horrific and bizarre the circumstances - is no news.

And here is something for Nick Ferrari to look at (Courtesy: via Drora Klement Katzav at Documenting Anti-semitism).  This is a victim of a terrorist stabbing today in Jerusalem.

 Dozens of these attacks are now taking place daily with the incitement of the Palestinian Authority. As Drora says: "why aren't we seeing this image in every single newspaper around the globe? or at least, the big newspapers?"
 












And here is an example of the 'harmless rocks' that the Palestinians are throwing at motorists and passers-by.












There are still people in the Jewish community who delude themselves that Nick Ferrari is 'pro-Israel' on the basis that he once spoke at an Israel rally. On his own admission his views have since by influenced by his 'Turkish Muslim driver' who takes him to work each morning. No doubt the kind of London based Turkish Muslims who actually convinced a close (non-Jewish) friend that Israeli soldiers in Gaza stuffed Palestinian babies into their tank turrets before firing them.

I've been tracking LBC's anti-Israel obsession for a few years now - so I thought it was worth providing a set of links to previous postings:

• LBC: a platform for the propaganda of Hizb ut Tahrir (2005)
• How LBC reported the massacre in Jerusalem (2008)
• LBC's Andrew Pierce: "Not enough dead Israelis for me" (2009)
• LBC's Nick Ferrari: "Not enough dead Israelis for me"  (2012)
• LBC's 'pro-Israel' Nick Ferrari cannot understand why Israel picked on Hamas (2012)
• Why LBC's James O'Brien (like many other liberal commentators) is an antisemite (2014)
•  More on LBC's James O'Brien and his claim not be an antisemite (2014)
• LBC's war against Israel (2014)
• LBC responds to my complaint about their war against Israel (2014)
• Why you should not be surprised LBC is employing George Galloway (2015)

Also see Caroline Glick's outstanding article today that summarises Mahmoud Abbas's central role in the current terrorist onslaught.

Must watch video for those who think George Galloway is not an evil liar and hypocrite

 As reported here George Galloway is currently hosting the 10-13.00 phone-in slot on LBC. Anybody who still has any doubts about what a nasty piece of work Galloway is must watch the video linked to in the self-explanatory complaint letter to LBC below (hat tip to Ambrosine for video). Worth saving this video because many others like this exposing Galloway seem to have vanished from YouTube.

Dear LBC

George Galloway: liar and hypocrite

The people who made the decision to allow George Galloway a one week slot are clearly unaware of what an odious character he is. I challenge you to watch this short video of him and not accept that he is a liar, hypocrite, terrorist supporter and also blatantly antisemitic**.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whhgPaz8w70

The clip also demonstrates that he is uniquely unsuitable to be a radio phone-in host since he clearly seeks to censor callers who do not support his obsession with seeking the destruction of the Jewish State. So why are you employing him (and also helping his political campaign to be mayor of London)?

Yours

Edgar Davidson

**see http://edgar1981.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/the-anti-semitism-v-anti-zionism.html

Why you should not be surprised that LBC is employing George Galloway

I've been seeing lots of irate Facebook postings about LBC's decision to employ George Galloway for a week (while James O'Brien is away) on the 10.00-13.00 slot. I do not understand why anybody is surprised or even angry about this. Having Galloway on fits very well with LBC's narrative. Indeed the 10am slot has always been dominated by obsessive anti-Israel jerks (Livingstone and Mellor perform that role on Saturdays while James O'Brien does it on weekdays). There are plenty of other LBC presenters who hate Israel - even the so-called 'conservative' ones like Andrew Pierce.

I've been tracking LBC's anti-Israel obsession for a few years now - so I thought it was worth providing a set of links to previous postings (I have actually given up complaining** to them now):

• LBC: a platform for the propaganda of Hizb ut Tahrir (2005)
• How LBC reported the massacre in Jerusalem (2008)
• LBC's Andrew Pierce: "Not enough dead Israelis for me" (2009)
• LBC's Nick Ferrari: "Not enough dead Israelis for me"  (2012)
• LBC's 'pro-Israel' Nick Ferrari cannot understand why Israel picked on Hamas (2012)
• Why LBC's James O'Brien (like many other liberal commentators) is an antisemite (2014)
•  More on LBC's James O'Brien and his claim not be an antisemite (2014)
• LBC's war against Israel (2014)
• LBC responds to my complaint about their war against Israel (2014)

**Note that none of these even touches on the hard-core anti-Israel obsession of Livingstone and Mellor - expecting any change from them on their Israel hatred would be the equivalent of stopping their oxygen supply. The fact that LBC has allowed this to go on for years now tells you everything you need to know.

Paris attacks: Do not jump to conclusions...it could be "right-wing extremists"*

Rapid response memo** to all UK media editors

Memo: A measured response to the Paris attack

OK, so the magazine Charlie Hebdo has been the focal point for Muslim hatred because it satirised Mohammed. And it had been attacked before by Muslim terrorists in 2011, as well as receiving numerous fatwas. But you do not need to mention any of that. And OK there was a new threat of violence issued by the Islamist State against the magazine yesterday after it ran more cartoons. And OK the gunman today - dressed in jihadist black 'uniforms' were yelling "Allahu Akbar" and "We have avenged the prophet Mohammed" as they murdered journalists and cartoonists at the magazine's office. OK, so Paris has a recent history of multiple Islamic terrorist attacks...

But - as I am pleased the UK media is now saying with one voice - we must not jump to any conclusions about who is responsible for this and we must remove any mention of the words Islam, Muslim etc from our reporting, except in relation to Muslim victims. Because, even if this was committed by people claiming to be Muslims, they could not have been Muslims because Islam is a religion of peace. In particular remember that, as always, the REAL victims of these attacks are indeed Muslims - so you must reinforce this narrative of Muslim victimhood (use the expression "unjustified backlash against the Muslim community" liberally in all reports, and include quotes like "All Muslims condemn this attack, which is clearly an attack against Islam" from a local Imam (just make up a name if you cannot find one). 

I am pleased to report that so far the entire UK main stream media is falling in line with the memo.

Indeed, I just heard LBC’s commentator say (in all seriousness):

“Hebdo is a left-wing publication, so this could be the work of right-wing extremists”

Meanwhile Sky News – which for once clearly cannot use its standard ‘lone madman’ excuse to describe Islamic terrorist attacks in the West, has described it as a

“semi-lone gunman type attack”.

*Although this was meant to be satirical, both of the above statements were actually made. I kid you not. And the actual reporting really is sticking to the memo.

** copyright of every single mainstream western news media outlet, as well as every government agency

See update (again this is NOT a joke): BBC News removes all mention of 'Islam' from its main page  on Paris attack

And remember President Obama has very firmly aligned himself in the recent past with those who wish to persecute people who 'slander Islam', He has done this in actions as well as words.

LBC responds to my complaint about their war against Israel

I sent a formal complaint to LBC about what I reported here and have received the following response:

Dear Edgar,

Thanks for your email. We always welcome feedback from our listeners.

As a station, LBC seeks to ensure stories are accurately reported and multiple perspectives are aired, especially on controversial issues. In light of the seriousness of what's happening in Israel and Gaza we are also consistently monitoring our programming to ensure it is fair and balanced.

Generally speaking, across the station's output, when a presenter expresses an opinion, our listeners are enthusiastic about wanting to communicate the opposite viewpoint and to participate in a debate - and, typically, we can achieve balance in our coverage of an issue in that way.

During the hour of his show which focussed on the Gaza conflict, James O'Brien asked whether those in support of the Israeli government's action could fairly be described as "radicalised?" His contention was challenged by a number of different callers all of whom were given plenty of time to question and examine the basis of his argument and to advance alternatives.

That said, we are of course very conscious of how the ongoing conflict provokes strong feeling on both sides and will continue to actively encourage a wide range of views to be expressed and heard on air. This is also a message we have re-iterated to our production team.

On your point about our news bulletins, in fact the newsreader said "with both Israel and Palestinian militants blaming each other for the attack." In neither the scripts nor on-air did the words "Israeli militant extremist groups" appear.

Thanks once again for getting in touch and I do hope this goes someway to reassuring you.

Kind regards,


LBC Complaints

And here is my follow-up response:

Dear LBC Complaints

I appreciate that you have taken the time to respond to my specific concerns.

Regarding your response about James O'Brien:  Just because some people phoned in to respond does not make it right that he equated people who support Israel with terrorists. If LBC ever actually considered any of the multitude of evidence to prove that Israel is the moral participant in the Gaza conflict while Hamas is pure evil, then perhaps people like James O'Brien would have realise how irrational his statement was.

Regarding your response to the news reports:  I find this almost bizarre. So the newsreader did not say "Israeli militant extremist groups" repeatedly but she DID say repeatedly "..with both Israel and Palestinian militants blaming each other for the attack". That is just as offensive and misleading as what I recalled. Who exactly are the Israeli militants being referred to? The Israeli Government and the IDF provided proof (subsequently confirmed by an Italian journalist who was there) that it was a Hamas rocket that struck the hospital. Are you claiming that the Israeli government and the IDF are "militants" who are morally equivalent to the terrorist organisation Hamas? And in any case why did LBC never follow up on the story and confirm the evidence?

I invite you to read the report below which not only explains in detail why the LBC reporting is fundamentally flawed, but also the devastating impact such biased anti-Israel coverage is having on British Jews:

http://edgar1981.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/being-jew-in-uk-how-medias-false.html

Yours

Edgar Davidson

LBC's war against Israel

For update on this (with LBC response) see here. Also see this update.

On LBC this morning the antisemite presenter James O'Brien said that

"any person who defends Israel must be classified as a radical extremist exactly like an Al Qaeda or ISIS supporter". 

Also, in every main news report on LBC yesterday evening about the (Hamas) rocket that struck the Shifra hospital in Gaza the newsreader said

"Both Palestinian and Israeli militant extremist groups claimed it was the other side whose rocket struck the hospital"

 As I posted yesterday the British media no longer needs to know what is really happening in Gaza as they can just keep reusing this template:

 

More on James O'Brien and his claim not be an antisemite

Last week I wrote about the self-righteous James O'Brien (LBC presenter) explaining why, despite his protestations to the contrary, he was an antisemite based solely on his demonization of Israel. Since then I stumbled across an old email that someone sent me which illustrates that O'Brien is just a good old fashioned antisemite. The email was in response to the 2012 false story that the deadly terrorist attack on the US embassy in Benghazi was in response to an anti-Muslim youtube video produced by 'an Israeli funded by 50 rich American Jews' (the video - which had absolutely nothing to do with terrorist attack -  was actually the work of an Egyptian Copt with no 'Jewish' involvement at all):

Edgar
Same problem with James O'Brien on the LBC phone in . He repeatedly referred to the producer being an Israeli Jew . In order to reinforce the stereotype , he mentioned the standard trope of a 'shadowy group of cigar chomping individuals (early Hollywood Jewish moguls smoking cigars) and congratulating themselves on achieving the desired outcome. I eventually got through to one of his team informing her that as of the previous evening, AP and the Huff had identified him as being a 55 year old Coptic Christian from Egypt. It was obvious O Brian's researchers had not done their homework or as more likely were closed down.  Needless to say I was not put through and O Brien was allowed to carry on slating the Jews for something that was nothing to do with them.  I'm not surprised. O'Brien has previous form on Israel and it's all bad .
Joke is, on the same programme he went on to castigate the Sun for their reporting of the Hillsboro disaster labelling the Sun gutter press .
Man is a hypocrite without parallel.

Why James O'Brien (like many other liberal commentators) IS an antisemite

Update: see here for example of James O'Brien's good old fashioned anti-semitism.  Also on 29 July 2014 O'Brien stated (during the Gaza war) that "any person who defends Israel must be classified as a radical extremist exactly like an Al Qaeda or ISIS supporter".

This post is not really just about James O'Brien who is a presenter on radio station LBC and who often describes himself as a 'typical bleeding heart liberal'. The problem is that, like almost every other 'bleeding heart liberal', he feels that one of the worst accusations you can make against him is that he is an antisemite. So earlier this week he was ridiculing the fact that a listener had accused him of being an antisemite after he fiercely criticized Israel (something he does very frequently). He said this was ludicrous because many people in Israel criticised the country's government for similar things, so that's like calling them antisemites also. 

This an an argument you hear all the time by people who say they are anti-Israel but not antisemitic. But there is a simple, and fundamental, flaw in their argument. They select Israel for criticism but ignore the other 180 countries in the world where offences far worse than what they accuse Israel of are committed. And, until O'Brien spends time criticizing all those other countries, there is only one explanation for his continued baiting of Israel (a country he knows absolutely nothing about) - and that is good old-fashioned antisemitism.

And what makes O'Brien's defence even more hypocritical is that he accuses everybody who highlights the horrors of Islamic terrorism or Sharia law of being an 'Islamaphobe'.

Postscript: More on O'Brien's antisemitism here, here and here in his own words is why he considers it ridiculous to call him an antisemite. Yet there is something very revealing in what he says there. He ridicules a listener who suggested the media was antisemitic for failing to report the 2012 terrorist attack at the airport in Bulgaria that killed 7 Israeli tourists. He says he "asked her what crimes commited in Bulgaria she could remember ever being reported at length in British newspapers. She didn't have an answer, obviously,.." So, O'Brien thinks it is normal for the British media not to report a major act of international terrorism at an airport in a European capital .... yet somehow he thinks it IS the business of him and the rest of the British media to comment every time permission is granted for somebody to build an extension on a home in the Israeli capital city....

See also:
More on O'Brien and his claims not to be an antisemite
Is ant-Zionism the same as anti-semitism?

Update on the London Sharia patrols story

I woke up this morning to the sound of James Max on LBC talking about the fact the Sunday Times was now running with this story (it only took the main stream media a week to catch up!). In typical James Max, LBC style however they were interviewing a religous Christian (whose name I did not catch) to act as apologist for the Islamists. What he said - to Max's approval - was that these guys were no different to any other pious religous Christians or Jews in that all they wanted to do was to protect their family and faith from the horrors and decadence of modern Western society.

There was also the usual suggestions that, in running with this story, the media was being Islamaphobic. Well it turns out that, as I noted in the original article, Youtube has indeed now censored and removed the videos (nobody is allowed any more to cast Islam in a bad light even when it is the Islamists doing it themselves). So I have uploaded one that I saved. If my blog is now closed down you will know why.

Update on this story at the Commentator where they now have a video of the Muslim patrol harassing man they assume is gay as "dirty, bloody fag"

Gaza: The pure anti-Semitism of the Western Media

The narrative in the UK media is that they do not understand why Israel chose 'this time' to launch attacks against Hamas. In the words on Nick Ferrari, LBC's top talk show host (laughably considered 'pro-Israel'): "why did this suddenly kick off again?"  before inviting a host of Islamists to tell London listeners about Israel's 'war crimes'.  This is the very same media who, in the two weeks leading up to Israel finally responding, failed to report any of the unprovoked hundreds of rocket attacks against Israeli civilians as well as a dozen lethal attacks along the border against Israel army outposts.

If anybody wants proof that this obsession to cast Israel in a bad light is anything other than pure anti-Semitism then you need only compare the media's response to what Turkey did last week as pointed out here.

Turkish air force jets and attack helicopters pounded Kurdish militants along the border with Iraq and Iran for three days, killing 42 militants, the local governor's office said on Friday.

Did you hear about that in the media? Did Sky News and BBC suddenly switch off reporting all other news when Turkey was killing 'militants' in far greater numbers and without any provocation? Then why Israel?

Sultan Knish sums it all up very well:

A few things to remember about what is going on in Israel. And this may sound cynical, but unfortunately recent history bears me out.

1. This is not a war. This is what happens when you cede territory to a terrorist group with plenty of eager Muslim regimes supplying it with weapons. This is what happens when that terrorist group is supported by Egypt and Qatar.

2. Israel ethnically cleansed its Jewish population from Gaza and pulled out, and we were told this would improve Israel's strategic position. Like every other withdrawal and pullout, it worsened it.

3. This is still not a war. What will most likely happen is that Israel will carry out some more air strikes and possibly even a limited ground operation. Some Hamas terrorists will die along with some Israeli civilians.

4. After some brief support for Israel's actions in the international community, there will be some incident, real or faked, the Hamas stooges will brandish some bodies for the camera, the media will cry about disproportionate force and Washington Post pundits will say that Israel overreacted and lost the sympathy of the world.

5. Phone calls from Washington and London will warn Netanyahu to wind down the operation. Turkey or Egypt will offer to negotiate a truce. Israel will pull out. Hamas will celebrate the usual victory of insurgencies, that of surviving the war they began. Israeli generals and politicians will boast that Hamas knows better than to try the same thing again, as they have after every such operation. Hamas will hold funerals for its martyrs and begin firing rockets again to show that they can. Egypt, Turkey and Qatar will smell Israeli weakness.

6. Western terrorist supporters will begin making the next set of documentaries about Israeli atrocities and distributing them on campus. Israeli politicians will blame Netanyahu's fumbling for losing the sympathy of the world. Israeli supporters will begin discussing new Hasbara methods to get Israel's message out. The message: "Israel wants peace, but sometimes has to defend itself again attacks. Israel will happily withdraw from everywhere so long as it isn't being bombed."

7. Israeli and American newspapers will run editorials urging another round of peace negotiations and withdrawals to stave off another such conflict... even though their urgings, their negotiations and their withdrawals are why the conflict exists.

8. Every Israeli general who gets face time on television during the conflict will shortly retire and run for office in a party with a platform dedicated to security, negotiations and more withdrawals. All of them will butch up and growl that their experience will allow Israel to have peace with security.

9. Next time around Hamas' missiles will be bigger and better aimed.

And don't forget that the bigger missiles Hamas is getting from Libya (as well as Iran) coming through Egypt are all thanks to Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood he installed in Egypt and Libya.

The Western media must take a lot of the blame

The Western media's ignorance and misrepresentation of the current situation in Gaza was perfectly demonstrated by an appalling interview by Andrew Pierce on LBC last week of the Israeli Ambassador Ron Prosor. My letter to LBC below is self-explanatory:

I wish to complain about the questioning by Andrew Pierce (on LBC on 29 Dec) of Ron Prosor the Israeli Ambassador. Mr Pierce sarcastically and repeatedly asked why so few Israelis had died if the attacks against them were as serious as the Israelis claimed ("come on Mr Ambassador just tell me how many dead Israelis are there from these so-called rockets").

Mr Pierce exhibited appalling ignorance, unprofessionalism and insensitivity. He seemed to be completely unaware of the years of rocket attacks and their seriousness (including the use of long-range Iranian Grad missiles). He had no conception that 800,000 Israelis were living under constant threat of rocket attacks, unable to be more than 15 seconds from a shelter, unable to work, shop, drive, or go to school. He was unaware that the reason for the relatively few fatalities was the infrastucture, warning system and use of shelters since Israelis (unlike Palestinians) take repsonsibility for their citizens. But what was especially unforgivable was that he was unaware of the particularly ferocious and significant barrage of rockets that rained down on Israel for several days prior to Israel's response. That new barrage included attacks against major cities (including Ashdod and Beersheba) which had previously been beyond range.

Perhaps if news stations like LBC had bothered ever to report the attacks against Israel, Mr Pierce and other listeners may have realised that these actions put Hamas beyond the pale, especially when their misfiring rockets also kill Palestinians such as on 26 Dec when a Hamas rockets killed two Palestinian children in Beit Lahiya.

In fact if News stations such as LBC had bothered to ever report on the daily rocket attacks against Israel over the last few years then I believe that the current Gaza crisis may never have happened since Hamas may have been made aware by the rest of the world that these actions were intolerable.

Yours

Edgar Davidson

The last bit is something I really believe. Although I am not naive to assume that the Hamas attacks - if reported properly - would have triggered the same kind of worldwide condemnation and UN action that greeted Israel's eventual defensive actions, I believe there would have been widespread revulsion of Hamas and even pressure on it, which could have led to its eventual demise.

Unfortunately, nobody in the West has ever been made aware of the suffering of the Israelis living under constant rocket attacks. It was painful having to explain to even intelligent Jewish pro-Israel friends after the Israeli response that Israel had just been subjected to days of intolerable attacks. Typical responses were "that cannot be true because there was nothing about it in the newspapers or on TV". And it is little surprise that idiotic presenters like Andrew Pierce behave in the way they do. Or why Palestinian spokespeople, such as Diana Buttu (who, note, is an advisor to the 'moderate' Fatah not Hamas) are now consistently - and without challenge on interviews like on CNN - making the claim that the Hamas rockets never carried any explosive charge.

So, you see, the 800,000 Israelis living under constant threat of rocket attacks are all either a figment of the imagination or need to realise that their worries about being harmed are totally irrational since the rockets fired at them are less harmful than a broken sparkler.

Anyway, some good pieces on the situation are here:

Alan Dershowitz's analysis of the legal aspects of Israel's actions

Melanie Philips on the moral case

Barry Rubin on the ground in Gaza

Michael Totten: Gaza and the Law of Armed Conflict