- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 15,782
- Reaction score
- 2,371
- Country
So they had it coming?
It's OK to kill journalists
- Thread starter JohnD
- Start date
Is motorbiking trying to blame the journalists again?
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 15,782
- Reaction score
- 2,371
- Country
I haven't blamed Journalists for anything. No doubt you blame the Jews for everything.
Christ on a moped. it's like talking with retarded children.
I actually agree with most of the above.
That doesn't make it right of course.
Since the outbreak of the Israel-Gaza war, Israelis have been glued to their TV sets and scrolling through news and social media. The ordinarily news-obsessed public has become even more engrossed, and the war has seen the propagation of a point of view that for much of Israel’s media history has been marginal, but has now reached its apex: that of the settler far right.
In its early years, the settler movement distrusted the mainstream media and wasn’t closely engaged with it. It believed the Israeli public didn’t disagree with the settlers’ goals for ideological reasons, but rather because their ideas didn’t infiltrate mainstream channels. Two events shook the settler community and changed its outlook: in 1995, the then-prime minister, Yitzhak Rabin, was assassinated by a religious Zionist; a decade later, there was a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and the evacuation of settlers there. The prevailing sentiment in the settler camp was that the broad Israeli public blamed them for Rabin’s murder and showed little concern for the settlers being forcibly removed from their homes.
They determined that it was no longer enough to simply capture another hill and expand their physical settlements; to ensure the movement’s future, they needed to “settle in the hearts” of the Israeli people. By embracing the mainstream media, they could narrate their story and integrate the settlement ideology into the Israeli ethos. Luckily, they found a willing partner in Netanyahu.
Examples abound: Zeev Kam, parliamentary correspondent for the TV channel Kan 11, wrote that the soldiers who invaded a mosque in Jenin and said Hebrew prayers in the speakers for the call to prayer “spread light” in this evil place”. Zvi Yehezkeli, Arab-world analyst for Channel 13 who lives in the extreme-right settlement of Bat Ayin, said that 100,000 Palestinians should have been killed right after 7 October. Amit Segal, the most influential Israeli political correspondent today, blamed 7 October on the unilateral withdrawal. And Israel Hayom correspondent Yehuda Schlesinger tweeted in favour of “voluntary migration” so Palestinians wouldn’t raise “another Nazi generation”.
However, there’s no more egregious example of the settler takeover than Channel 14. Originally launched as a channel offering “Jewish” programming, it began airing opinion shows. Despite being fined for content that exceeded its licensed remit, intervention from Netanyahu’s government allowed it to include news in its broadcasts. The channel has since become a significant platform for the reactionary right, broadcasting rightwing propaganda previously unseen on Israeli television. Channel 14 has a counter that logs the number of buildings demolished in Gaza, the number of Palestinians wounded, the number of “terrorists killed” (all casualties are labelled as “terrorists”). On a late-night panel show, an operative from Netanyahu’s party, Likud, blamed the Hamas surprise attack on “the crimes of Oslo” and the “leftist cancer” to the cheers of the live audience, while host Shimon Riklin said he was “for war crimes”.
The extreme discourse is so widespread that South Africa has cited journalists from Channel 14 and others cheering for mass killings in its appeal to the international court of justice against Israel.
We are at a moment of reckoning, not just in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but in the internal Israeli conflict: will the rest of the media resist these reactionary anti-journalists and outlets that Netanyahu and the settlers have created, or will voices devoted to truth and journalistic integrity be silenced?
Etan Nechin@the Gurdiaan
In its early years, the settler movement distrusted the mainstream media and wasn’t closely engaged with it. It believed the Israeli public didn’t disagree with the settlers’ goals for ideological reasons, but rather because their ideas didn’t infiltrate mainstream channels. Two events shook the settler community and changed its outlook: in 1995, the then-prime minister, Yitzhak Rabin, was assassinated by a religious Zionist; a decade later, there was a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and the evacuation of settlers there. The prevailing sentiment in the settler camp was that the broad Israeli public blamed them for Rabin’s murder and showed little concern for the settlers being forcibly removed from their homes.
They determined that it was no longer enough to simply capture another hill and expand their physical settlements; to ensure the movement’s future, they needed to “settle in the hearts” of the Israeli people. By embracing the mainstream media, they could narrate their story and integrate the settlement ideology into the Israeli ethos. Luckily, they found a willing partner in Netanyahu.
Examples abound: Zeev Kam, parliamentary correspondent for the TV channel Kan 11, wrote that the soldiers who invaded a mosque in Jenin and said Hebrew prayers in the speakers for the call to prayer “spread light” in this evil place”. Zvi Yehezkeli, Arab-world analyst for Channel 13 who lives in the extreme-right settlement of Bat Ayin, said that 100,000 Palestinians should have been killed right after 7 October. Amit Segal, the most influential Israeli political correspondent today, blamed 7 October on the unilateral withdrawal. And Israel Hayom correspondent Yehuda Schlesinger tweeted in favour of “voluntary migration” so Palestinians wouldn’t raise “another Nazi generation”.
However, there’s no more egregious example of the settler takeover than Channel 14. Originally launched as a channel offering “Jewish” programming, it began airing opinion shows. Despite being fined for content that exceeded its licensed remit, intervention from Netanyahu’s government allowed it to include news in its broadcasts. The channel has since become a significant platform for the reactionary right, broadcasting rightwing propaganda previously unseen on Israeli television. Channel 14 has a counter that logs the number of buildings demolished in Gaza, the number of Palestinians wounded, the number of “terrorists killed” (all casualties are labelled as “terrorists”). On a late-night panel show, an operative from Netanyahu’s party, Likud, blamed the Hamas surprise attack on “the crimes of Oslo” and the “leftist cancer” to the cheers of the live audience, while host Shimon Riklin said he was “for war crimes”.
The extreme discourse is so widespread that South Africa has cited journalists from Channel 14 and others cheering for mass killings in its appeal to the international court of justice against Israel.
We are at a moment of reckoning, not just in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but in the internal Israeli conflict: will the rest of the media resist these reactionary anti-journalists and outlets that Netanyahu and the settlers have created, or will voices devoted to truth and journalistic integrity be silenced?
Etan Nechin@the Gurdiaan
So they were warned it was coming by their most trusted supporters.
Evidently they chose to ignore any warnings.
I think it's OK to kill a journalist if they're either:
A. Piers Morgan.
B. A murdering terrorist.
IDF Chief Spokesman Brig. Gen. Daniel Hagari on Wednesday night presented evidence to prove that two Gazan journalists killed by the IDF on Sunday were terrorists.
Regarding Hamza Al-Dahdouh, the son of Al Jazeera's chief correspondent in Gaza, Wael Al-Dahdouh, Hagari said that Israeli forces had found Islamic Jihad internal documents in their various command centers in Gaza proving he was part of their terror ranks.
The IDF presented a copy of the document in Arabic, which it said listed Hamza as a dual-hat terrorist-journalist for Islamic Jihad.
The Jerusalem Post could not confirm what the document said, and there was no English translation, but the IDF said that it listed Hamza as working for the terror group's electric engineering unit.
Documents also said that Hamza had previously served as a terrorist battalion leader for the Zeitoun area of northern Gaza and that he was still currently responsible for firing Islamic Jihad rockets in that area.
Well that clears that up then.
A. Piers Morgan.
B. A murdering terrorist.
IDF Chief Spokesman Brig. Gen. Daniel Hagari on Wednesday night presented evidence to prove that two Gazan journalists killed by the IDF on Sunday were terrorists.
Regarding Hamza Al-Dahdouh, the son of Al Jazeera's chief correspondent in Gaza, Wael Al-Dahdouh, Hagari said that Israeli forces had found Islamic Jihad internal documents in their various command centers in Gaza proving he was part of their terror ranks.
The IDF presented a copy of the document in Arabic, which it said listed Hamza as a dual-hat terrorist-journalist for Islamic Jihad.
The Jerusalem Post could not confirm what the document said, and there was no English translation, but the IDF said that it listed Hamza as working for the terror group's electric engineering unit.
Documents also said that Hamza had previously served as a terrorist battalion leader for the Zeitoun area of northern Gaza and that he was still currently responsible for firing Islamic Jihad rockets in that area.
Well that clears that up then.
According to the Jerusalem Post, according to an IDF chief spokesperson.I think it's OK to kill a journalist if they're either:
A. Piers Morgan.
B. A murdering terrorist.
IDF Chief Spokesman Brig. Gen. Daniel Hagari on Wednesday night presented evidence to prove that two Gazan journalists killed by the IDF on Sunday were terrorists.
Regarding Hamza Al-Dahdouh, the son of Al Jazeera's chief correspondent in Gaza, Wael Al-Dahdouh, Hagari said that Israeli forces had found Islamic Jihad internal documents in their various command centers in Gaza proving he was part of their terror ranks.
The IDF presented a copy of the document in Arabic, which it said listed Hamza as a dual-hat terrorist-journalist for Islamic Jihad.
The Jerusalem Post could not confirm what the document said, and there was no English translation, but the IDF said that it listed Hamza as working for the terror group's electric engineering unit.
Documents also said that Hamza had previously served as a terrorist battalion leader for the Zeitoun area of northern Gaza and that he was still currently responsible for firing Islamic Jihad rockets in that area.
Well that clears that up then.
The Jerusalem Post
The Jerusalem Post - Wikipedia
Yeah and Iraelis don't kill civilians, don't bomb hospitals, schools, refugee camps, etc.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Hamza al-Dahdouh's death was "an unimaginable tragedy". He added that "far too many innocent Palestinian men, women and children" have died in the war.
Mark Regev, a senior adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, told the BBC's World This Weekend that "Israel does not deliberately target journalists". "We're the only country in the Middle East that actually does have a free press. We're the only country in the entire region where the press can write bad things and criticise the leaders of government," he said.
"To say Israel deliberately targets the press is ridiculous, we're the only country that actually enshrines the free press."
*Is that actually true?
Not according to 'Reporters Without Borders' who say: The Israeli media landscape has been destabilised following the rise to power of a government that threatens freedom of the press.
Politicians have a great deal of influence over appointments to the broadcasting regulators. Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu, who has enjoyed Israel Hayom’s unfailing support for more than a decade, is accused in corruption cases of trying to influence the editorial policies of several media outlets in exchange for political favours.
Under Israel’s military censorship, reporting on a variety of security issues requires prior approval by the authorities. In addition to the possibility of civil defamation suits, journalists can also be charged with criminal defamation and “insulting a public official”. There is a freedom of information law but it is sometimes hard to implement. The confidentiality of sources is not protected by statutory law but by case law.
Israel’s media are centralised and unprofitable. They are often owned by large corporations or businessmen who are difficult to investigate and who use them to pressure regulators and elected officials.
Arab journalists in Israel encounter more difficulties in their work than their non-Arab counterparts, above all because of the tensions inherent in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Gangs restrict the Arab media’s coverage of criminal activity, while women are almost completely excluded from the ultra-Orthodox Jewish media.
Palestinian journalists are systematically subjected to violence as a result of their coverage of events in the West Bank, and Israeli reporters are barred from entering the Gaza Strip. The 2022 assassination of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh by Israeli security forces remains unpunished, despite strong pressure from the international community and the Israeli authorities’ admission. The climate of impunity has only increased violence against Palestinian journalists in Israel, as well as in the West Bank and Gaza.
RSF.org
*Israel ranks 97 out of 180 for press freedom.
Mark Regev, a senior adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, told the BBC's World This Weekend that "Israel does not deliberately target journalists". "We're the only country in the Middle East that actually does have a free press. We're the only country in the entire region where the press can write bad things and criticise the leaders of government," he said.
"To say Israel deliberately targets the press is ridiculous, we're the only country that actually enshrines the free press."
*Is that actually true?
Not according to 'Reporters Without Borders' who say: The Israeli media landscape has been destabilised following the rise to power of a government that threatens freedom of the press.
Politicians have a great deal of influence over appointments to the broadcasting regulators. Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu, who has enjoyed Israel Hayom’s unfailing support for more than a decade, is accused in corruption cases of trying to influence the editorial policies of several media outlets in exchange for political favours.
Under Israel’s military censorship, reporting on a variety of security issues requires prior approval by the authorities. In addition to the possibility of civil defamation suits, journalists can also be charged with criminal defamation and “insulting a public official”. There is a freedom of information law but it is sometimes hard to implement. The confidentiality of sources is not protected by statutory law but by case law.
Israel’s media are centralised and unprofitable. They are often owned by large corporations or businessmen who are difficult to investigate and who use them to pressure regulators and elected officials.
Arab journalists in Israel encounter more difficulties in their work than their non-Arab counterparts, above all because of the tensions inherent in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Gangs restrict the Arab media’s coverage of criminal activity, while women are almost completely excluded from the ultra-Orthodox Jewish media.
Palestinian journalists are systematically subjected to violence as a result of their coverage of events in the West Bank, and Israeli reporters are barred from entering the Gaza Strip. The 2022 assassination of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh by Israeli security forces remains unpunished, despite strong pressure from the international community and the Israeli authorities’ admission. The climate of impunity has only increased violence against Palestinian journalists in Israel, as well as in the West Bank and Gaza.
RSF.org
*Israel ranks 97 out of 180 for press freedom.
According to the Jerusalem Post, according to an IDF chief spokesperson.
The Jerusalem Post
Granted, it's not Facebook.
I know that much, even though I'm not a subscriber to facebook.Granted, it's not Facebook.
I suspect facebook is more reliable and less biased.
Content on facebook is from a plurality of opinions. That can't be said about IDF nor the Jeruslaem Post.
More snippets of personal information lads. Store it away for later. Every little helps.
Ironically, the paper used to be called the Palestine Post.Granted, it's not Facebook.
As funny as it was intended to be, it's actually good info for a real snoop, as you've demonstrated.More snippets of personal information lads. Store it away for later. Every little helps.
It'll save a lot of time you searching for me on there.
You're either being very naive or you're still intent on causing as much harm or distress as possible.