Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit, Moderators, protect
27,867
edits
Changes
no edit summary
Analysis:<ref>Yossi Yehoshua, [https://www.ynetnews.com/article/ry00hflre2 Operation Shield and Arrow is a success for Israel], ''YNet'', May 14, 2023.</ref><blockquote>With a fighting round lasting five days Israel delivers the worse blow on PIJ since its inception and as a result, against its patrons in Iran, as well.
Analysis:<ref>Yossi Yehoshua, [https://www.ynetnews.com/article/ry00hflre2 Operation Shield and Arrow is a success for Israel], ''YNet'', May 14, 2023.</ref><blockquote>With a fighting round lasting five days Israel delivers the worse blow on PIJ since its inception and as a result, against its patrons in Iran, as well.
The ceasefire agreement between Israel and the Islamic Jihad went into effect Saturday night and if preserved, Operation Shield and Arrow could be described as one of the most successful operations of the IDF and the Shin Bet in Gaza.</blockquote>
The ceasefire agreement between Israel and the Islamic Jihad went into effect Saturday night and if preserved, Operation Shield and Arrow could be described as one of the most successful operations of the IDF and the Shin Bet in Gaza.</blockquote>
Unfortunately, some of Israel’s arrows have also killed uninvolved civilians. The UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, said yesterday that the civilian deaths in Gaza are “unacceptable” and called on Israel to “abide by its obligations under international humanitarian law”….
Unfortunately, some of Israel’s arrows have also killed uninvolved civilians. The UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, said yesterday that the civilian deaths in Gaza are “unacceptable” and called on Israel to “abide by its obligations under international humanitarian law”….
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
==Bigoted CAIR linked "Palsione"- propagandist: Raja Abdulrahim at NYT==
[[NYT]]'s Islamic reporter purposely misreported facts:<ref>Jonathan S Tobin, [https://www.jns.org/opinion/palestinians-are-addicted-to-an-endless-cycle-of-nakbas/ Palestinians are addicted to an endless cycle of ‘nakbas’], ''JNS'', May 9, 2023.<blockquote><small>
Israel’s pushback against rocket fire generated the usual condemnations. But the fighting with a rogue terror group based in Gaza is just the latest chapter of a century-old war against the Jews.</small></blockquote></ref><blockquote>Abdulrahim’s explanation of the goal of Islamic Jihad was purposely vague. She left out the fact that it is an Islamist party that believes that the entire country—Israel and the territories—should be governed solely by Islamic law. Even more important, she wrote that it was created in the 1980s “to fight the Israeli occupation.” To most Times readers and consumers of other corporate media outlets, that sounds like the organization wants to end Israel’s “occupation” of Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”), as well as Jerusalem. But for Palestinian Arabs, the phrase means something different.
When members of PIJ, or for that matter, those affiliated with its Hamas rivals or even the so-called “moderates” of Fatah—whose leaders corruptly run the Palestinian Authority— speak of “occupation,” they are not referring to those territories that Israel gained during the 1967 Six-Day War, and which the international community and the media wrongly describe as “Palestinian” rather than disputed. As far as PIJ is concerned, every inch of Israel is “occupied.” It regards the creation of the Jewish state 75 years ago as a nakba—a “catastrophe” or “disaster”—as well as a crime that must be expunged by violent struggle.</blockquote>
Raja Abdulrahim, again, weeks later, demonized Israel with another skewed piece but not blaming the vicious Jihadists choosing residential areas, nor praising humamitarian Israeli effort to minimize Arab casualties.<ref>[https://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2023/05/how-nytimes-slanders-israel-while.html?m=1 How the @NYTimes slanders Israel while adhering to narrow journalistic standards], ''EoZ'', May 31, 2023. <blockquote><small>...the bias and innuendo is stark to the point of slander.
The suffering Palestinian families are given paragraph after paragraph of detailed sympathy, while the victims in Israel are nameless statistics.
The article includes '''ten''' photographs of damage in Gaza and grieving victims. When was the last time you saw any newspaper article show ten photographs? Those photos give the impression of widespread damage in Gaza, when in fact the amount of damage was very limited - and far, far less than other wars.
It says that there were 9-12 civilians killed - but doesn't mention that they were killed in the course of targeting and killing over 20 terrorists. This makes the ratio of innocent victims killed one of the lowest in the history of airstrikes.
The article pretends to be even-handed by quoting Israeli responses - usually adding a "but" to dismiss what they say.
Abdulrahim generously uses quotes from families of victims that contain bald-faced lies - but the New York Times is not obligated to factcheck a quote or an opinion. For example:
<i>“What kind of precision is this when you kill civilians?” said Asmahan Adas, referring to a strike on the home of her next-door neighbor, Khalil al-Bahtini, another Islamic Jihad commander, that also killed her two teenage daughters. “When Israel wants to kill someone, they can find many different ways to kill, but they want others to die along with their target.”</i>
Or the subhead: "Palestinians in Gaza say that Israel’s strikes against Islamic Jihad amount to a collective punishment aimed at making them fearful about who their neighbors might be."
Abdulrahim even quotes an Islamic Jihad terrorist whose lies are clear - but doesn't call them out:
<i>Khaled al-Batsh, an Islamic Jihad leader in Gaza, said his group’s members lived in their own communities in the tiny enclave that is home to more than 2.3 million people.
“Where should we go? Should we flee Palestine? Can we go set up a military base in Colorado?” he said. “They target[sic] the civilians so they can pit people against us.” '</i>
Given that Israel killed Islamic Jihad leaders who lived in apartments next to civilians, obviously al-Batch is lying. And he is just a obviously lying saying that Israel chooses to murder innocent people. But the article doesn't call out these lies, and lets a terrorist speak without any opposition. Unlike quoting Israeli sources, there is no "but" here.
That is the message that the New York Times is spreading with this article, that Israel could have avoided civilian deaths and chose to murder innocent people anyway. It is slanderous. But the article never says this directly, instead letting the quotes from Gazans stand alone as if they were factual.
This is some of the bias in the article's contents. But that is only a small part of how this article is lying in effect.
The main way that this article gives an entirely wrong message while adhering to a narrow set of facts is by omitting a huge amount of context - context that a fair reporter would seek out.
It doesn't mention that under international law, the existence of civilians around a military target does not make that target immune from attack. In other words, Israeli airstrikes on major Islamic Jihad leaders are perfectly legal under international law of armed conflict. Instead, Abdulrahim quotes an Amnesty report claiming (falsely) that Israel violated international law in previous conflicts in Gaza.
It doesn't mention that the ratio of civilians killed compared to militants is perhaps the lowest in any airstrikes on urban areas where the targets live among the people in history.
It doesn't mention that the ratio of civilians killed compared to militants is perhaps the lowest in any airstrikes on urban areas where the targets live among the people in history.
It doesn't mention the huge amount of time and money, not to mention the number of legal checks, that Israel uses before choosing a target.
It makes it sound like Israel could have somehow killed only Islamic Jihad targets without hurting any civilians - but does not say exactly how.
It does not interview any military experts. It does not interview any international law experts.
The entire article is meant to give an impression on readers that Israel is acting wantonly, that it is violating international law, that it either doesn't care about or deliberately chooses to target civilians, without saying those things explicitly and without giving any easy-to-find facts that would undermine that entire narrative.</small></blockquote></ref>
==References==
==References==