Stop Press: Hamas turns infants out of humidicribs
It’s only a matter of time until we see such a lurid headline, such is the clamour by apologists for Israel’s assault on Gaza to justify the bloodbath.
Such as the retailing on another forum by a C Eliot Parsney of a youtube video claiming to portray “Hamas beating a guy to death with a pole at a wedding reception — for singing.”
Oh dearie, how reprehensible!
And how does C Eliot Parsney know this to be authentic video of Hamas beating a guy to death with a pole for singing at a wedding reception?
Why, because the semi-anonymous guy who published the video only 6 days ago says in the voiceover that it is Hamas beating a guy to death with a pole for singing at a wedding reception.
Truly there’s one born every minute, but that kind of stuff takes discipline.
Labels: Middle East
posted by Jacob A. Stam at 1/12/2009 10:15:00 PM
13 Comments:
Nothing like intellectual rigour Jacob.
Still The Herald Sun has Bolt; the Telegraph Ackerman and Webdiary the fiction that is C Parsons / Eliot Ramsay.
Every media outlet must have its lightening rod no matter how reprehensibly it might, at times, behave.
How does Hamas see the lobbing of hundreds of "homemade" rockets being in the interests of the Palestinian people though?
Excellent question!
Without going to the Hamas songbook, the rationale would be along the lines of the standard eye-for-an-eye, death-to-Israel liturgy. This is the region, after all, which coined eye-for-an-eye. It's merely been updated to homemade-rocket-for-a-bombed-out-school, etc.
I see from the timeline Mazza posted on that thread (nice potted summary, if a bit one-sided) that on May 22 1948 the UNSC called for an end to fighting. It took weeks to get a ceasefire, then the thing soon got rolling again.
I still reckon the entire region ought to be put under international administration. The fly in the ointment is that no serious international player would want to take on a region populated by deranged children. The Bitish got out while the going was good.
Bitish?
Feeling a bit that way myself. Come on lunch time...
There seems little serious intent, on both sides of the fence, for an "equitable" settlement (pardon the pun).
The more "extreme" of the Jews refuse to remove themselves from settlements that patently are "theirs" to settle. They would, I fear, refuse to move even should their government agree to it.
On the other side you have deluded loons that pontificate that to stop sticking thumb tacks into the side of the elephant is "not in the interests of the Palestinian people".
All the while you have none too disinterested third parties that have grown well attached to this deadly playground and prefer that merry goes round without end.
I'm not about to jump into the Webdiary thread (threads now) on the conflict in Gaza. My prediction is that (a) it'll devolve into a match of 'my outrage is more sincere than your outrage', and (b) no one on the thread is going to approach it with a mind that is open to being changed. As a result it'll just descend into competing casualty stats, links to a little bit of war porn and arguments over the precise meaning of 'proportionate'. Should be pretty much useless.
On the brighter side, while Caz is having a little rest from blogging Jack Robertson (ex-WDist) has started up again. His new blog is here (via an announcement on Cattalaxy).
Well spotted, Dylan, I've missed Jack, he's usually a lively read.
And yes, that WD thread is best considered a no-go zone. The comments thread on that youtube video demonstrates what it would become without WD's 'secret sauce' of moderation, what with protagonists on both sides calling each other 'homo' and even more colourful pleasantries.
As you suggest, best to 'engage' in the topic as minimally as possible. Also, do one's own research and make one's own judgements as best one can, because there's an awful lot of unreliable sources (to put it politely) out there vying for one's soul. And if one is compelled to 'take action', do it through or within networks and organs whose integrity one is comfortable with.
I just looked before, and uh oh, Justin has called defeat for Israel. He's a larrikin, that one...
I largely think the ol' Justin might be onto something - larrikin or not. Hamas cannot seriously have entered into this entertaining anything but the possibly of it's own near anihilation. The Israelis cannot - "morally" - come out of this on top.
I'm starting to think the reactionaries are right: nuke the frigging lot of 'em....
That is despair.
Yes, I was being lazy and flip there, the Albatross indeed makes some sense. I was expecting more of a rise from Seep, but the latter seems reduced to flailing desultorily with variations on the same old fear-and-loathing spray: Hamas &c are evil incarnate, ergo massive reprisals against the collective population are just dandy.
Nuke 'em all? To some that would seem a legitimate option for dealing with hapless civilian populations. I recall a few years back The Chaser guys had a vox pop segment in which an American average-Joe-in-the-street suggested with a straight face that the solution to the ME problems would be to "turn the place into one big crater". I assumed at the time that individual wasn't entirely serious, but one can never be sure. Odds up whether that Joe was subject to despair or merely ennui.
A region soon-to-be rich in trinitite?
Then there's Maralingite, a glassy substance of red ochre hue.
Now you've got me thinking, if I recall correctly some of those British tests in Aust weren't fission devices at all, but conventional explosives rigged to disperse radioactive contaminants over a wide area. In other words, some of the world's first 'dirty bombs'.
A bugger to clean up, and getting money out of the Brits to do it was like extracting teeth. Apparently putting up with the mess was our premium for the strategic security afforded by a British Bomb, lucky us.
Never Dylan, never. I was giving vent to being morose and singularly unimpressed.
The Palestinians need a voice; that voice is not backyard rockets launced against a state quite capable of waging modern industrial war. The fuckwits directing this crap need to be brought into the real world. A short course in which would show that they are responsible for more deaths of those that it is "not in the interests of the Palestinian people" to cease chucking the aforementioned backyard rockets on behalf of.
The Israelis - and their apologists - must come to terms with that state's dogged insistence on colonising that which is not theirs. Without apology; without justification.
Israel may well point to third parties that might sponsor "Palestinian terror". In this they are correct. That they signally fail to understand that it is their actions that create the "lightening rod" for these "sponshorships" is indicative of their us/them view of the world.
Yep. Hear hear.
Spot on Mike!
Post a Comment
<< Home