Unlawful and brutal attack on Turkish boat improves with age in the New York Times

US Politics

In a writeup of Israeli responses to the deal with Turkey this week, New York Times reporter Isabel Kershner basically justifies the killings of ten activists on the Turkish boat the Mavi Marmara in 2010. That’s a pattern with the NYT– wait long enough and something controversial that happened in the past will be written up entirely in Israel’s favor.

Israel agreed to pay about $20 million in compensation to the families of 10 pro-Palestinian activists who were killed during a 2010 raid by Israeli naval commandos after they met violent resistance aboard a Turkish passenger vessel as it tried to breach Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip.

There is no sense here that the Israelis boarded a ship bringing aid to Gaza in international waters, at night, with masked commandos dropped from helicopters. The UN said that the flotilla was traveling to Gaza because it was (and is) experiencing a humanitarian crisis, that the attack was “clearly unlawful,” and that six of the ten victims were summarily executed. And if there was violent resistance, it was of an improvised variety. “People picked up what they could to defend themselves against armed, masked commandos who were shooting,” the Guardian quoted a passenger saying. The UN Human Rights Council also said (in a report unassisted by the Israelis):

The conduct of the Israeli military and other personnel towards the flotilla passengers was not only disproportionate to the occasion but demonstrated levels of totally unnecessary and incredible violence. It betrayed an unacceptable level of brutality.

Kershner gives the views of Israelis who think this was a surrender to Hamas. Israeli Jewish views from right to far right are given. Nothing from the Israeli human rights groups. Later there is a brief mention of the blockade, in a quote from Ahmed Yousef, an adviser to Hamas leader Ismail Haniya. And one sentence saying, “In Gaza, there was a sense that the deal offered some hope but fell short of what Hamas wanted.”

In short, the suffering caused by the blockade to Gazans doesn’t matter enough to treat in its own right–instead, Kershner sees it as something that hurts Hamas and something that Hamas wants lifted. Palestinians and their demands to be treated as though their basic rights mattered are seen by Kershner only in terms of what Hamas wants. That’s how you justify the blockade.

While there are repeated references by name to the Israelis whose bodies are being held in Gaza since the 2014 conflict, there is no mention of the ten Turkish victims of the commando attack by name.

So six years later the NY Times will totally adopt the Israeli version of events if they think they can get away with it. Is this a conscious decision or just how they think? It hardly matters in the end.

About Phil Weiss and Donald Johnson

Phil Weiss and Donald Johnson are NY writers and regular contributors to this site

Other posts by .


Posted In:

33 Responses

  1. Rusty Pipes
    June 29, 2016, 5:43 pm

    Nine Turkish victims and one American citizen, Furkan Dogan.

    • Rusty Pipes
      June 29, 2016, 5:54 pm

      As the autopsy reports verify, the Israeli commandos sprayed the deck of the Mavi Marmara with machine gun fire as they descended from the helicopter, which downed Furkan Dogan. The only shots they had encountered from Furkan Dogan on the deck were from his camera shutter. The Israelis instigated the violence at every stage.

  2. DaBakr
    June 29, 2016, 7:29 pm

    @pw

    The U(useless) N(nothing) has absolutely zero credibility when it comes to israel and next to zero credibility when it comes to determine international law. just because the un “said” he attack was unlawful doesn’t mean it was unlawful. in fact the body that determines international law on the high seas determined the attack was not in breach of maritime law and it’s doubtful wether it would stand up to actual evidence,,( it gossip and hearsay, in most other international courts.

    But then we know it’s part of the pro-Palestinian hasbara project to claim everything that Israel does is against so-called ‘international law’ wether true or false simply to cause maximum zionist /israel narrative reversal.

    • Annie Robbins
      June 29, 2016, 8:13 pm

      in fact the body that determines international law on the high seas determined the attack was not in breach of maritime law

      where? cite source please. because Criminal Court Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda (who is an expert on maritime law) stated: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/11/committed-sufficient-investigation/

      Following a thorough legal and factual analysis of the information available, I have concluded that there is a reasonable basis to believe that war crimes under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court were committed

      however, she thought there wasn’t “sufficient gravity” (a requirement of the rome statute) to justify prosecution by the ICC. but at no time did she say it wasn’t a breach of maritime law: explained later the ICC passed “because the number of deaths in the incident was too low for the scope of the international tribunal.”

      but later,

      judges of the International Criminal Court (ICC) ruled that Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda committed “material errors” in her “Decision Not to Investigate” war crimes complaints

      – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/07/prosecutor-reconsider-investigation/#sthash.GFvr37Hi.dpuf

      The Prosecutor determined that there was reasonable basis to believe that the war crimes of wilful killing under article 8(2)(a)(i), wilfully causing serious injury to body and health under article 8(2)(a)(iii), committing outrages upon personal dignity under article 8(2)(b)(xxi), and, if the blockade of Gaza by Israel is to be deemed unlawful, also intentionally directing an attack against civilian objects under article 8(2)(b)(ii) of the Rome Statute (the “Statute”) have been committed in the context of the referred situation.

      Continuing:

      18. By articulating in the Decision Not to Investigate a principle without basis in the law, the Prosecutor committed an error. However, the Chamber observes that the Prosecutor did not in fact apply the principle she announced, and did take into account certain facts “outside of the Court’s jurisdiction” for the purposes of her analysis under article 53(1) of the Statute, such as for her conclusion that crimes were committed only on the Mavi Marmara and that no serious injuries occurred on the other vessels in the flotilla (para. 138), or for her conclusion that the identified crimes had no significant impact on the population in Gaza (para. 141).

      19. Therefore, the Chamber is of the view that the articulation of the erroneous abstract principle did not, as such, affect the validity of the Prosecutor’s assessment of gravity. The various factors considered by the Prosecutor in the context of her assessment of gravity need to be examined individually.

      • DaBakr
        June 29, 2016, 11:48 pm

        The blockade does not violate international maritime law. The incident on the mm does not meet the criteria for the court to proceed

        * I would give you the ‘source’ if I could remember. I read the decision quite a few years ago but what I remember is that the blockade, though widely criticised and despised by Israel’s enemies met the criteria for a legal maritime blockade including the distance further then the 12mile inter. zone. The incident on the mm is a different case then the blockade itself

      • Annie Robbins
        June 29, 2016, 11:51 pm

        so that would be a ‘no’, you have no source.

      • DaBakr
        June 30, 2016, 12:04 am

        Oh Jeezus….read the UN Palmer report. I’m sure its all there in black and white

      • DaBakr
        June 30, 2016, 2:08 am

        @an

        and again, you’ve illustrated perfectly why i don’t bother to provide links here as ultimately your counters always lead back to your own blog or some similar zionist-hating/israel hating blogsite devoted primarily and foremost to delegitimizing israel. you want to discount the palmer report but have the world take seriously the endless number of bogus, biased and bastardized unwra reports from gaza. or reports about us smashing dams in the south. i am truly sorry miss annie that you don’t seem to have a very good perception of the absurdity of this (and in fairness, some uber-pro zionist sites as well) place and its regular commentators. that i could come here with g-d himself in hand a lay the secret of the universe at your feet and you would immediately link and source it to somebody that claims they have knowledge that its all an aipac conspiracy.

        At least be honest and admit that you have never ever agreed (at least on mw) with any UN report that came out favourably towards israel. either the vote was ‘fixed’, the arab/muslim block voted in unison or the puny little scurge got big ‘ol america to vote no -as the last two have been the 2 ways condemnations of israel pan out. with the cowardly chickens pretending they are circumspect and wise old lions sit on the sidelines and abstain.

        and here is another example from a report on the faceless report to the World Health Assmb. co-pro-palestinianist at JVP:

        On May 25, 2016, the delegates of the 69th World Health Assembly (held under the auspices of the World Health Organization) in Geneva adopted a decision condemning Israel. Out of 24 items on the meeting’s agenda, only Item 19 focused on political issues – specifically on “Health conditions in the occupied Palestinian territory, including east Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan”.
        Representatives of one-hundred and seven countries voted in favor of the resolution, with eight voting against, while others either abstained or did not take part in the vote. Commenting on this activity, Hillel Neuer, of Geneva-based UN Watch declared, “Shame on Britain, France and Germany for encouraging this hijacking of the annual world health assembly, and diverting precious time, money, and resources from global health priorities, in order to wage a political prosecution of Israel, especially when, in reality, anyone who has ever walked into an Israeli hospital or clinic knows that they are providing world-class health care to thousands of Palestinian Arabs, as well as to Syrians fleeing Assad.”
        The documents accompanying the resolution include blatant propaganda from the Syrian and Palestinian health ministries. (The Syrian “report” is absurdly entitled Health Conditions of Syrian Citizens in the Occupied Syrian Golan.) The report of the Palestinian Ministry of Health to the World Health Organization, dated May 20, 2016, is based on numerous wild accusations with minimal citations. For example, the text (p. 29) asserts that “In April 2013 the Russian newspaper Pravda accused Israel of injecting a number of Palestinian prisoners who were approaching their release date with cancer-causing viruses. Despite Israel’s rejection of the accusations made by the newspaper, the question remains: is it true that Israel is injecting prisoners with viruses?”
        Many similar allegations have no citations or sources – instead, the text includes “references” to political bodies and NGOs with no medical credentials. For example, Euro- Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor is a strictly political group whose Chairman of the Board of Trustees, former UN Rapporteur Richard Falk, has been widely denounced for his extreme anti-Israel and antisemitic agenda.
        In addition, the Palestinian document includes a number of graphic images, designed to reinforce the narrative of Palestinian victimization and Israeli responsibility. A detailed analysis by the CAMERA media watchdog demonstrated that the imaged claiming to show Israelis “attacking a Palestinian child while being observed by Israeli occupation forces” in fact was a conflict between Israelis and included no Palestinians. Similarly, a “photograph taken during the Israeli war on Gaza, 2014” was shown to be an artificial image that was created digitally.

        so, in summary, my providing you- oh clever debater you are – totally boring and detailed UN reports exonerating Israel gives you -at least what you treat as-a low slow pitch that you can then blast out of the park using primarily ‘links” derived from your site or those who have contributed to your site with archived articles or commentary.

        so your point about the Palmer report is something along the lines of: ‘its a joke’ or ‘insults your intellect. ‘ And pray tell I suppose you would recommend we all ignore the palmer report and read other U[seless]N[othing] reports that do not exonerate israel but rather indict israel for crimes not proven by any military/international court from breaking’. But isn’t that your main job description,,,,,,,,,,,,,, oy, its late, haven’t slept. days. on reserves, sleep setting in, must end b4 i self regenerate as moosers parasitic twin

      • amigo
        June 30, 2016, 7:55 am

        “Oh Jeezus….read the UN Palmer report. I’m sure its all there in black and white .” duhbaker

        Try not to use the name of the Son of God in such a irreverent manner , if you don,t mind.

        As to the report —you made the claim , now get off your posterior and produce a link.

      • Annie Robbins
        June 30, 2016, 10:19 am

        your counters always lead back to your own blog or some similar zionist-hating/israel hating blogsite

        my “counters” led to democracy now and the other linked and quoted the palmer uribe report directly:

        The summary of the Report’s findings explained the limited scope and methods of the inquiry: “The Panel is not a court. It was not asked to make determinations of the legal issues….The Panel’s means of obtaining information were through diplomatic channels….[and it] had no coercive powers to compel witnesses to provide evidence. It could not conduct criminal investigations. The Panel was required to obtain its information from the two nations primarily involved in its inquiry, Turkey and Israel.”

        The Report concedes that these limitations were important, for they meant that “the Panel cannot make definitive findings either of fact or law.”

        iow, according to the report itself, it could not make definitive findings either of fact or law — so it was not, as you allegedin fact the body that determines international law on the high seas was it?

        your allegation was simply incorrect and i would have not found that out had i not ask what your source was so i could check it myself.

        i mistakenly thought you were referencing some authoritative body of professional international experts on maritime law. but you were not. you were referencing a panel that, according to it’s own words was not authoritative. the report states: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/Palmer-Committee-Final-report.pdf

        14. We observe that the legal views of Israel and Turkey are no more authoritative or definitive than our own. A Commission of Inquiry is not a court any more than the Panel is. The findings of a Commission of Inquiry bind no one, unlike those of a court. So the legal issues at large in this matter have not been authoritatively determined by the two States involved and neither can they be by the Panel.

        15. The Panel will not add value for the United Nations by attempting to determine contested facts or by arguing endlessly about the applicable law. Too much legal analysis threatens to produce political paralysis. Whether what occurred here was legally defensible is important but in diplomatic terms it is not dispositive of what has become an important irritant not only in the relationship between two important nations but also in the Middle East generally. The Panel has been entrusted with some policy responsibilities and that was not the case with the domestic investigations whose reports we have received.

      • Annie Robbins
        June 30, 2016, 10:39 am

        and what’s this:

        oy, its late, haven’t slept. days. on reserves, sleep setting in, must end b4 i self regenerate

        it wasn’t late when i posted last night (PST 9:45), and i sleep very well. you need to brush up on your debating skills if you’re so desperate that resorting to this pathetic form of ad hominem is an option worthy of your consideration. or are you writing about yourself? if so, i recommend not posting in the middle of the night.

      • Mooser
        June 30, 2016, 5:20 pm

        Dabakr, I’m not sure, but I think a half-hour spent connected to a website is a “session”. Happy “sessions” to you, “Dabakr”!

      • Mooser
        June 30, 2016, 5:49 pm

        It’s so surprising to me that after all this time, they still don’t recognize the feeling and the smell. They still don’t know until somebody tells them they’re tracking it all over the house.

        “haven’t slept. days. on reserves,”

        Well, there’s one thing sure. He’s not on PEP pills.

      • Annie Robbins
        June 30, 2016, 6:28 pm

        i have no clue what to think of a comment like that. maybe he was commenting while sleepwalking for all i know. like don’t drive drunk — don’t comment w/no sleep!

      • DaBakr
        June 30, 2016, 7:55 pm

        @an

        Yes. Exactly. Commenting while half asleep. I require extensive hours awake and when I relax and sit down with MW I am sometimes falling asleep but want to continue posting. Kind of a trade off in clarity vs. Fluidity. Not that uncommon actually.

        Now, as per the sourcing and hysterical over-response on the blackade…your still parsing the legality of Israel’s blockade while the world, including Israel’s enemies has moved along. There is no court of any type that is contemplating charges related to the maritime legality of the blockade that I am aware of. I’m sure you will enlighten me if there is.

        @m

        Your brain is failing you. It wasn’t “pep pills”. It was crystal meth. I remember you got quite excited about the reality of said. Hah. Thanks for caring funny guy.

      • Annie Robbins
        June 30, 2016, 8:07 pm

        so that would be another big fat “no” — you still can’t back up your claim the body that determines international law on the high seas determined the attack was not in breach of maritime law

        unless you’re somehow claiming, against the very words of the report itself, that the palmer uribe report determines international law on the high seas? whateva!

        it’s no big deal to just say ‘whoops i was wrong’ because i have no source to back up my claim (which you referenced as a “fact” — blame it on the lack of sleep, i won’t hold it against you).

        cheerio

      • DaBakr
        June 30, 2016, 10:20 pm

        @an

        What you want me to admit to seems to be that I’m wrong about the source and not the actuality that Israel is not in violation of international maritime law. Just like I can state with absolute certainty that Jerusalem is the eternal capital of Israel , you could ask me for a definitive source and parse It as a ridiculous joke it wouldn’t change a thing.

        You too could ‘just’ admit you are stretching the point so thin it’s nearly invisible. Your hung up on the source (and the interesting anti-zionist leanings you learned there in) and I’m talking about the here and now. Badgering me into admitting I am wrong on a peripheral point does not maketh israel any less innocent, at this point in time, then it already is. But until you admit to stretching the point to win the argument I will Hold off on any admissions

        And seriously, if there was any chance in hell that Israel could be charged with violating the law of high seas your friends in the million dollar pro Palestinian PR machine would find the funds to launch an international campaign. I think that the whole point of this ridiculous repprochment between us and Turkey is specifically to put the kabosh on any international court action for the foreseeable future(especially not with mashaal kissing erdogans ass for essentially getting nothing but slightly schtupped up the end) money talks, bs walks. Sad fact since pre biblical times

        And listening to the portrait gallery whine about my so-called hypocrisy in citing. The Palmer report when I am on record as having complete disdain for the UN is the real joke.

        The majority of resolutions from sc and hrc are against Israel and the complainers here are livid that the real world pretty much ignores this constant barrage as Muslim block venting. But the one time out of dozens upon dozens that aUN commission finds something in Israel’s favor and its immediately labeled a.’joke’. That is the point of my disdain and not evidence of hypocrisy. But I don’t expect the resident zio-haters here to understand the nuance of what hypocrisy is since it is hardwired into their cortex.

        As for the little trick the msm uses when referring to ‘illegal’ Israeli activity or occupation- the insertion of the modifier “considered” before the word “illegal” has become sop. There is a very big difference between things ‘considered’ and things that have been proven in court of law. Our enemies know very well we have mapped out legal strategy just the establishment of what is occupied territory vs. What is not in the first place let alone wether the jews that live on said territory are in any way ,’,illegal’. Nothing has been decided. Nothing will be decided until direct negotiations start.

        In other words “considered illegal” is not an actual thing.

      • Annie Robbins
        July 1, 2016, 12:22 am

        What you want me to admit to seems to be that I’m wrong about the source and not the actuality that Israel is not in violation of international maritime law.

        you were wrong about the source regarding what i challenged you on and i just quoted them proving that. viola!

        earth to dabkr, slight advice there ol dude. prefacing something w/”the fact” does not make it so — which has just been demonstrated. likewise, placing “the actuality” in front of an unsourced and untrue allegation doesn’t make it true. and i don’t “want you to admit” — i merely suggested a way for you to slide out of it. lest one might construe you were delusional or traveling in misinformation.

        but like i said before it’s no biggie. and hey, if you’d like to claim (again) i’m hysterical or (again) i am badgering — i could give you a drumroll ;)

      • Mooser
        June 30, 2016, 11:07 pm

        “It wasn’t “pep pills”. It was crystal meth.” “Dabakr”

        Looks like it still is.

      • oldgeezer
        July 1, 2016, 12:35 am

        @duhbaker

        The problem is that you have the hang up. You have the belief that your opinions are facts even when your opinions are demonstrably false. Your delusion is deep enough you double down on your ignorance and stupidity for the whole world to see. A reasonably intelligent person would admit an error and move on bit not you. No sir!

        Maybe the crystal meth you seem to be using in excessive quantities has too high a level of impurities. Or maybe it’s the reasonably intelligent hurdle that’s too high.

      • Mooser
        July 1, 2016, 1:30 am

        “That is the point of my disdain and not evidence of hypocrisy. But I don’t expect the resident zio-haters here to understand the nuance of what hypocrisy is since it is hardwired into their cortex.”

        Oooh, “Dabakr”, that one really bit, hard. I mean, ouch. Maybe you could go a little easier on us until we learn to view ourselves with the proper disgust.

      • DaBakr
        July 1, 2016, 2:08 am

        @gz.
        I have a hang up? Lol. Just simply lol

        @msr.
        What are you…. Some kind of skeevy narc? Myob.

        @an

        Tenacity. Something you share with many Palestinians, old girl.

      • Mooser
        July 1, 2016, 1:04 pm

        Hmmmm, looks like “Dabakr”, who has been all up in the air, has fell to earth he knows not where.

      • eljay
        July 1, 2016, 2:19 pm

        || ar: … Just like I can state with absolute certainty that Jerusalem is the eternal capital of Israel … ||

        …so, too, can I state with absolute certainty that unicorns exist. But we’re equally wrong. :-(

      • RoHa
        July 1, 2016, 10:14 pm

        Anti-unicornite.

    • Talkback
      June 30, 2016, 8:53 am

      @ Dabakr

      First, you claim that the UN has no “absolutely zero” credibility when it comes to Isrel and “zero credibility” when it comes to determinining international law. Well, you sound like the usual war criminal. But then you refer to the Palmer Report which was the report of an UN commitee.

      Secondly the Palmer Report made very clear that “it was not acting as a Court and was not asked to adjudicate on legal liability. Its findings and recommendations are therefore not intended to attribute any legal responsibilities.”.

      And UN right experts rejected the report’s conclusions and said that Israel’s blockade of Gaza is illegal, because it subjected Gazans to collective punishment in “flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law” and that the Palmer Report does not recognize the naval blockade as an integral part of Israel’s closure policy toward Gaza which has a disproportionate impact on the human rights of civilians”.

      But then we know it’s part of the Hasbara project to claim everything that Israel does is not against international or human right law.

    • talknic
      July 1, 2016, 3:08 am

      @ DaBakr spews shite then stomps around in it, seemingly oblivious.

      “The U(useless) N(nothing) has absolutely zero credibility … blah blah blah “

      Is that the same UN you hypocritically rely on – “Report of the Secretary-General’s Panel of Inquiry on the 31 May 2010 Flotilla Incident September 2011” . That’d be the Secretary General of the UN I guess.

      Seems supporters of the colonization of Palestine such as yourself will say anything no matter how idiotic it makes them look

      ” in fact the body that determines international law on the high seas determined the attack was not in breach of maritime law”

      The UN Secretary-General’s Panel of Inquiry Report that you hypocritically rely on tells us this

      “67. This part of our report presents our conclusions on the facts, circumstances and context of the incident under review by the Panel. These conclusions have been reached against the backdrop of the exposition of the principles of public international law set out in the Appendix prepared by the Chair and Vice-Chair. Yet we must stress we are not asked to determine the legality or otherwise of the events. The Panel is not a court; its report is not an adjudication.

  3. jon s
    June 30, 2016, 1:04 am

    On the legality of the naval blockade see here, p.38-45:

    http://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/middle_east/Gaza_Flotilla_Panel_Report.pdf

    • Talkback
      June 30, 2016, 8:58 am

      How about page 3? “In so doing [the panel] was not acting as a Court and was not asked to adjudicate on legal liability. Its findings and recommendations are therefore not intended to attribute any legal responsibilities.”

      How about its rejection by UN right experts?
      U.N. experts say Israel’s blockade of Gaza illegal

      … the blockade had subjected Gazans to collective punishment in “flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law.” The four-year blockade deprived 1.6 million Palestinians living in the enclave of fundamental rights, they said.

      “In pronouncing itself on the legality of the naval blockade, the Palmer Report does not recognize the naval blockade as an integral part of Israel’s closure policy toward Gaza which has a disproportionate impact on the human rights of civilians,” they said in a joint statement
      http://www.reuters.com/article/us-un-gaza-rights-idUSTRE78C59R20110913

  4. amigo
    June 30, 2016, 7:44 am

    Note the section below that passengers were shot several times and from close range as well as in the back.Note also the statements that no satisfactory explanation has been received from the rogue entity regarding these excessive actions.

    From your link.

    “Israel’s decision to board the vessels w
    ith such substantial force at a great
    distance from the blockade zone and w
    ith no final warning immediately prior
    to the boarding was excessive and unreasonable:
    a.
    Non-violent options should have b
    een used in the first instance. In
    particular, clear prior warning that th
    e vessels were to be boarded and a
    demonstration of dissuading force s
    hould have been given to avoid the
    type of confrontation that occurred;
    b.
    The operation should have reassessed
    its options when the resistance to
    the initial boarding attempt became apparent.
    vii.
    Israeli Defense Forces personnel face
    d significant, organized and violent
    resistance from a group of passengers when they boarded the
    Mavi Marmara
    requiring them to use force for their
    own protection. Three soldiers were
    captured, mistreated, and placed at risk
    by those passengers. Several others
    were wounded.
    viii.
    The loss of life and injuries resulting
    from the use of force by Israeli forces
    during the take-over of the
    Mavi Marmara
    was unacceptable
    Nine
    passengers were killed and many others
    seriously wounded by Israeli forces.
    No satisfactory explanation has been pr
    ovided to the Panel by Israel for any
    5
    of the nine deaths. Forensic evidence
    showing that most of the deceased were
    shot multiple times, including in the back, or at close range has not been
    adequately accounted for in the material presented by Israel”

  5. Kay24
    June 30, 2016, 10:08 am

    Another innocent life taken because of Israel’s occupation and war crimes:

    Netanyahu: ‘Enlightened Nations’ Should Condemn Palestinian’s Murder of Israeli Teen
    After 13-year-old is stabbed to death inside her Kiryat Arba home, prime minister says Israel will revoke work permits for relatives of the Palestinian assailant.
    read more: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.728081

    Did Nutty call for the condemnation from “enlightened nations” when:

    1. Civilians were killed in the Gaza Flotilla?

    2. Mohamed Abu Kdheir was brutally tortured and killed?
    His cousin Tariq Kdheir was viciously beaten by an IDF thug?

    3. 2 innocent kids were killed by IDF snipers during the commemoration of Nakba day?

    4. Palestinian kids are shot and left to bleed to death on the streets by the IDF

    5. When a wounded Palestinians (supposed to be an attacker with knife) lay helpless
    on the ground and was brutally assassinated by a cowardly Israeli soldier?

    6. When kids are thrown in jail, and abused and ill treated?

    Nutty (drama king) sure can whine and show outrage when it is one of theirs, while disregarding the senseless killings carried out by his people.

    End the occupation and stop these deaths.

  6. Mr.T
    June 30, 2016, 10:47 am

    Expecting the NYT to do anything but parrot Israeli government propaganda is a fool’s game. It’s a co-conspirator with that criminal organization.

Leave a Reply