Wednesday, July 23, 2014

When facts and images on the ground speak against the Israeli enemy, the US media rush to provide "context"

This article by Anne Barnard from Gaza is the typical method of US media. When the tide of international opinion intensify its condemnation of Israeli terrorism the paper resorts to something that has nothing to do with fact, "analysis" that miraculously manage to make Israel the innocent party.  This is a classic example of the propaganda tricks of US media in covering the Arab-Israeli media. Notice it is not based on facts but on twisting of acts and tons of Zionist contextualization. Thus in the rendering of Barnard, the tunnels of Gaza become a security threat against the nuclear-armed state of Israel.  Furthermore, Ms. Barnard even endorses the strangulation and siege of Gaza simply because of the existence of tunnels (which are a military, economic, and survival necessity).  Look what she says: "Israel says its severe restrictions on what can be brought into Gaza, such as construction materials, are needed because Hamas poses a serious security threat, and the discovery of the tunnels has served only to validate that concern." So the discovery of tunnels validate the ban on food necessities and medical supplies coming to Gaza. And what do you mean by "discovery of tunnels"? The tunnels are not new and there have been tons of articles about them so you should have come out early on in this conflict and say that the very existence of tunnels validate Israeli justifications for war on Gaza and its population.  She then bring up the issue of vote (as if Abbas and the club of US potentates in the region all have votes to back up their actions): "Gazans did not get a vote when Hamas chose to escalate conflict, nor did they when Hamas selected areas near their homes, schools and mosques to fire rockets from the densely populated strip." Yes, the PA did not want to hold elections while Hamas called for them.  The US in fact foiled all elections plans because they learned that they could not buy off the results as they do in other countries. But people did vote for Hamas the last time around AFTER Hamas did all that you accuse it of doing. So this is not some new method or action by the organization.   But wait: she then offers an opinion on Hamas by none other than an adviser to the corrupt and discredit PA (an independent observer indeed):  "“It comes at an exceptionally high price,” said Khaled Elgindy, a fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former adviser to the Palestinian leadership in Ramallah."   There is one final point about this lousy article: I was watching New TV footage from Gaza today and interviews on the streets with average regular people (something that Ms. Barnard can't do because she does not know Arabic) and it struck me: how come the Gazans that are cited in US newspapers are often unrecognizable form the Gazans that I watch on Arabic TV? Where do they find those people? Do they get a list of collaborators with Israel and then they interview them upon recommendation from the Israeli terrorist military? Legitimate questions indeed.