Trending Topics:

‘New York Times’ teams up with Israel to smear slain medic Razzan al-Najjar as ‘complex,’ not innocent

US Politics

The New York Times today printed a long article giving credence to Israeli claims that Razzan al-Najjar, the young medic killed by an Israeli sniper a week ago, was not innocent. The article takes at face value Israel’s desperate efforts to taint the young woman, whom the army has previously maintained it killed by accident.

The first paragraph announces the Times’s service to Israel:

The Israeli military published a brief video on Thursday aimed at showing that a Palestinian medic killed by Israeli forces last week was not the neutral health care worker she has been portrayed as.

The article parrots Israeli hasbara, or propaganda, about al-Najjar: that in a video interview of the medic that the Israelis passed along she described herself as a “human shield.”

Not till paragraph 20 of 22, does the Times state what Jonathan Ofir reported yesterday, the Israeli video cut short al-Najjar’s actual statement in an effort to misrepresent her.

In the longer video, the comment that the military translated as “I act as a human shield” was part of a sentence in which Ms. Najjar said, “I’m acting as a human rescue shield to protect the injured inside the armistice line.”

Nonetheless, Times author Herbert Buchsbaum, a desk editor in New York, chimes in: al-Najjar “may have been a more complex person than either side is making her out to be.”

Razan Ashraf Al-Najjar, 21, nurse killed in Gaza, June 1, 2018.

What can the Times mean by “more complex”? That is, she was not only saving lives, but was part of the protest. Apparently there is something “complex” about this and therefore Israel isn’t really guilty of lying, just oversimplifying.

That is obfuscation. Everyone knows what this woman was doing: protesting and saving lives. Calling this “complex” is just the NY Times saying she wasn’t really sweet and innocent. If Russia did this the Times would call it the cynical slander and lie that it is. But since it is Israel they have to make this into a he said/she said debate. There is a “battle” of narratives about al-Najjar, the Times says.

There is no debate. Israel has lied about the al-Najjar case repeatedly. The NYT wants to give some sort of face-saving excuse for this and all they can come up with is this subtle endorsement of the slander about her lack of innocence. The video, Buchsbaum writes, is “an effort to chip away at Ms. Najjar’s image of fresh-faced innocence.”

If the Times really wanted to find out more about Najjar, it would not ape propaganda. It would send out reporters to interview her family and friends. Or they could call B’Tselem to ask its opinion. No, the Times has a deskbound New York man parroting Israeli talking points.

Calling al-Najjar a human shield is a serious charge. Shouldn’t they have asked her mother for a reaction? The family would surely tell you: This is despicable.

H/t Norman Finkelstein.

About Donald Johnson

Donald Johnson is a regular commenter on this site, as "Donald."

Other posts by .


About James North

Other posts by .


About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

52 Responses

  1. pabelmont
    June 8, 2018, 10:51 am

    Hmmm — I wonder — do Palestinians have the right, now, to kill “complex” Israeli persons? Is that what the NYT — ever radiant in its reputation as defender of human rights — is saying or implying? In other words, per NYT, Israeli people who might seem to be “innocent” and “civilians” may in a proper case instead be regarded as acceptable targets for deliberate non-war-crime military killing? and shall the determination of this delicious complexity repose solely with the Palestinians?

    • echinococcus
      June 8, 2018, 1:43 pm

      Pabelmont,

      Israeli people who might seem to be “innocent” and “civilians” may in a proper case…

      Very good question, who are the proper Azraeli Master-race civilians?
      Those under draft age, a number of hyperreligious (but at the same time invader) hypocrites, and then? The “settlers” in post-1967 conquests do not qualify as protected civilian population, see Geneva Convention Part IV, and anyway most are paramilitary terrorists. The rest seem to be on lifelong reserve duty, and that doth not a proper civilian make.

    • mondonut
      June 8, 2018, 2:27 pm

      @pabelmont

      Absolutely. If masses of Israelis attempt to cross into Gaza to “take back” what they erroneously claim as their own, then sure, fire away.

      • zaid
        June 8, 2018, 11:04 pm

        So you believe that killing settlers is justified since they crossed the 67 borders in the West bank and Jerusalem?

      • Misterioso
        June 9, 2018, 11:01 am

        @mondonut

        “Absolutely. If masses of Israelis attempt to cross into Gaza to ‘take back’ what they erroneously claim as their own, then sure, fire away.”

        Moronic comment!!

      • Atlantaiconoclast
        June 9, 2018, 12:59 pm

        please tell us Israel’s legally declared borders

      • Talkback
        June 10, 2018, 3:58 am

        How about the masses of pre-Israelis who crossed into Palestine since 1922 to “take back” what they erroneously claim as their own?

  2. patrickb57
    June 8, 2018, 1:18 pm

    What scares me — and I lived in the Gaza Strip for six years and the West Bank for nearly four — is that “complex” Israelis should be permitted to travel at will. I witnessed first hand their violence. They shot and killed one of my colleagues and injured another. Perhaps a people who lived in the shtetlach and ghettos for centuries should be confined to the shtetl that they have constructed for themselves in the Middle East, complete with razor wire, watch towers, and walls. The aim should be to keep them confined to their “safe space” that Americans subsidize.

  3. Keith
    June 8, 2018, 3:51 pm

    DJ/JN/PW- “There is no debate. Israel has lied about the al-Najjar case repeatedly.”

    Over at CounterPunch, there is a review of the Liberty attack, following which Israel claimed that the Liberty was to blame.

    “Predictably, Israel’s first response was to blame the victim, a tactic that has served them so well in the Palestinian situation….“The Liberty contributed decisively toward its identification as an enemy ship,” the IDF report concluded.” (Jeffrey St. Clair)

    Israel traditionally relies upon lies and deceptions to achieve its objectives. To point this out opens one to charges of anti-Semitism. To point out the pro-Israel bias of the Times Zionist reporters and editors also opens one to charges of anti-Semitism. America’s newspaper of record should move its offices to Tel Aviv or Jerusalem and be done with it.

  4. gracie fr
    June 8, 2018, 4:23 pm

    Democracy Now does a fairly decent job of shedding light on Israel’s “Human Shield” deception

    https://www.democracynow.org/2018/6/8/israeli_military_pushes_misleading_video_in

    • Atlantaiconoclast
      June 9, 2018, 1:00 pm

      But DN will not expose Israel’s role in arming, lobbying for,, and giving aid to both ISIS and AQ in Syria.

  5. Maghlawatan
    June 8, 2018, 5:08 pm

    The NYT always fights for the Palestinians

    The NYT fought slavery in 1865. The NYT did not fight with Israel who wore the confederate uniform.

    The NYT fought Nazism in 1944. The NYT did not fight with Israel who wore the swastika

    The NYT fought for civil rights in 1968. The NYT did not fight with Israel who lived as a police dog in Alabama.

    The NYT fought apartheid in 1985. The NYT did not fight with Israel who was a South African policewoman.

    The NYT always fights with the Palestinians whether they are slaves, Jim Crow non citizens or victims of totalitarianism. It doesnt matter what uniform Isrsel wears.

    There is only one exception. When Israel wears the Star of David.

    The NYT is in a hopeless place

     https://youtu.be/tg00YEETFzg

    • Atlantaiconoclast
      June 9, 2018, 1:02 pm

      There were slaves in the North as late as 1865, the end of the war. And the North was most involved in the slave trade. And a far greater percentage of Jewish Americans than Gentile Americans owned slaves.

  6. LHunter
    June 8, 2018, 5:12 pm

    There are no limits, no boundaries, no sense of decency or empathy or journalistic integrity- the NYT is Israel’s mouthpiece.

    There coverage on I/P will form part of the record that future generations will study to better understand just how vile Zionism and Zionist were and how they managed to fool the world.

    • Maghlawatan
      June 8, 2018, 5:28 pm

      The NYT fought its demons. Then it joined them.

    • echinococcus
      June 8, 2018, 11:42 pm

      Hunter,

      That may be redundant, seeing how a very thorough study of Nazi and Fascist propaganda was done for many years. All the Zionist tricks are in that book.

      Important to note, this study did not really change the ways of the world except in making marketing and mass manipulation psychology officially into a fully fledged branch of college studies… and brought us the Bushes, Obamas and Trumps.

  7. rhkroell
    June 8, 2018, 11:47 pm

    This story makes me ponder the question: “Do some human rights activists, conceivably, dream of a U.S. presidential candidate openly modeling himself symbolically after Titus Flavius Caesar Vespasianus?”

    Can I post this kind of satirical/sardonic comment on MW?

    • Mooser
      June 9, 2018, 3:11 pm

      “Can I post this kind of satirical/sardonic comment on MW?”

      Classical allusions are always welcome, as far as I know.

      • rhkroell
        June 10, 2018, 7:43 pm

        That’s cool, Mooser. I didn’t know that.

        Quem mortis timuit gradum,
        Qui siccis oculis monstra natantia,
        Qui vidit mare turbidum et
        Infames scopulos, Acroceraunia?

        H. Odes I.iii. 17-20

  8. JLewisDickerson
    June 9, 2018, 3:33 am

    RE: Times author Herbert Buchsbaum, a desk editor in New York, chimes in: al-Najjar “may have been a more complex person than either side is making her out to be.” ~ Johnson, North & Weiss

    IT’S ALL SO BLOODY COMPLICATED!
    SO VERY, VERY COMPLICATED!
    EVEN WORSE THAN QUANTUM MECHANICS!
    NOTHING IS AS IT SEEMS!
    NO WAY TO TELL WHICH OF THE “DUELING NARRATIVES” TO BELIEVE!
    NO USE TRYING TO MAKE SENSE OF IT FROM THOUSANDS OF MILES AWAY!
    IT’S BEST JUST NOT TO WORRY ABOUT IT!

    MEANWHILE:
    “The Brainwashing of the Israelis”
    by Uri Avnery | zope.gush-shalom.org | June 06, 2018

    [EXCERPT] . . . The events on the Gaza Strip border have activated a mechanism of brainwashing that dictatorial regimes in the world can only envy.

    Let’s examine ourselves: what have we heard over the radio? What have we seen on TV? What did we read in the papers?

    Within a few weeks more than a hundred human beings were shot dead, and many thousands were wounded by live fire. Why?

    “We were forced to fire at them because they were storming the border fence”. And indeed, did the Gazans themselves not proclaim their will to “return home” – meaning, to return to Israeli territory?

    But on May 14, “Black Monday”, 63 unarmed demonstrators were shot dead and over 1500 wounded by live fire. Every Israeli knows that this was necessary because the demonstrators stormed the fence and were about to swarm into Israel. Nobody paid attention to the simple fact that there was not a single photo showing such an occurrence. Not even one. In spite of the fact that on both sides of the fence there were hundreds of photographers, including Israeli army photographers, who filmed every single detail. Tens of thousands stormed, and not a single picture?

    One should notice the use of the word “terror”. It has turned into an adjective attached to everything. There are not just tunnels – they are all always “terror-tunnels”. There are “terror-activists”. There is “the Hamas terror-regime” and there are “terror-bases”. Now there are “terror-kites”.

    Notice: not just “incendiary kites”, or “destruction-kites”, only “terror-kites”. The same every day in all media. Someone has made the terminology decision. Of course, everyone who has the word “terror” attached to his name is “a son of death”, as you say in biblical Hebrew. Another proud term of the brainwashing.

    The inhabitants of the Gaza Strip are “terrorists”. (In Hebrew, a special term has been invented: “Mekhablim”). All of them? Of course, no question. Especially Hamas members. But Hamas is a political party, which has won democratic elections in all of Palestine. A civilian party which has indeed a military wing. But in our media all party members and supporters are “terrorists”, sons of death. Of course.

    The use of these terms, hundreds of times every day, clearly constitute brainwashing, without the citizens noticing it. They are getting used to the fact that all Gazans are terrorists, mekhablim. This is a process of dehumanization, the creation of Untermenschen in the Nazi lexicon. Their killing is allowed, even desirable.

    In such an atmosphere, even abominable sentences pass unnoticed. For example, this week I heard on one of the TV news programs this sentence from the mouth of a military correspondent, speaking about the coming Gaza demonstration: “Iran wants dead demonstrators, and it seems that they will get them.” One has to read this sentence twice to realize what it says: that the Israeli sharpshooters serve Iranian interests.

    Or a sentence that is repeated again and again, even by respected commentators: “Iran wants to destroy the State of Israel”. I don’t know what 80 million Iranians want, nor does the writer. But the sentence itself is ridiculous. Israel is a nuclear power. How does one annihilate a nuclear power (with submarines that can launch nuclear devices in the hour of need). Are the Iranians ready to turn their country – one of the cradles of human civilization – into a graveyard and a desert?

    Or a forecast “Friday another violent demonstration will take place”. “Violent”? “Another”? There is no argument about the fact that all the demonstrations along the Gaza fence were completely nonviolent. The demonstrators did not shoot one single shot, when thousands of them were wounded by live fire, and more than a hundred killed. Yet the lie passes without comment.

    Not a single one of the hundreds of TV news program presenters ever corrects such statements by correspondents. Because the directors, presenters, commentators and correspondents are themselves thoroughly brainwashed. The army spokesman knows the truth, of course, but he is a central cog in the brainwashing machine.

    Events reached a climax with the murder of the 21-year-old female paramedic Razan Ashraf al-Najjar, when she was trying to save the life of a wounded demonstrator. The sharpshooter who shot her in the chest saw that she was a medic treating a wounded person. It was a clear war crime.

    Was there a public outcry? Did the media demand an investigation? Did the media report this event in their page one headline? Did the Knesset observe a minute of silence? Nothing of the sort. A minor news item in some papers (by no means all). An excellent article by the admirable Amira Hass in Haaretz. And that’s that.

    A few days passed, and abroad there were outcries. The Argentine soccer team, with the admired Messi, canceled a friendly game against the Israeli team in Jerusalem.

    The brainwashers realized that it was impossible not to react. So the army spokesman published a statement saying that an investigation had taken place. What did it discover? Ah, well. It was clearly established that nobody had shot Razan. She was hit by the ricochet of a bullet that had hit the ground far from her. That is such a blatant lie that even the army liar should be ashamed of producing it. It was accepted by the brainwashed public.

    One of the hallmarks of brainwashing is a phenomenon that everyone can notice: the total absence of a second opinion. When a commentator voices the official line on an event, does anyone express an alternative version? Is there a debate between the official spokesman and a contrary commentator? In the democratic media, that would be commonplace. Here it is very, very rare. . .

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1528467876/

    • eljay
      June 9, 2018, 8:07 am

      || JLewisDickerson: … MEANWHILE:
      ■ “The Brainwashing of the Israelis”
      . . .
      The inhabitants of the Gaza Strip are “terrorists”. (In Hebrew, a special term has been invented: “Mekhablim”). All of them? Of course, no question. … ||

      And as we all know – because Zionist jon s has told us so – it is entirely acceptable to massacre terrorists.

      • jon s
        June 9, 2018, 12:03 pm

        Eljay seems to be implying that I would condone a massacre of the inhabitants of Gaza.
        Nothing could be further from the truth.

      • JLewisDickerson
        June 9, 2018, 1:07 pm

        It’s not just acceptable for Israelis to massacre “terrorists”, it’s a sacred duty/obligation (per Netanyahu)!

        NETANYAHU’S USE OF THE ‘MITZVAH/HOLY WAR’ AS A “DOG WHISTLE” TO THE IDF – http://mondoweiss.net/2018/04/influential-soldiers-genocide/#comment-913563

      • Mooser
        June 9, 2018, 1:15 pm

        “Eljay seems to be implying that I would condone a massacre of the inhabitants of Gaza.”

        And if you didn’t condone the massacre, would it make a goddam bit of difference?

        “Jon s” your faith in the abiding stupidity of non-Zionists is very obvious. I can’t understand why you can’t perceive how insulting it is.

      • JLewisDickerson
        June 9, 2018, 1:40 pm

        “Israel Can Do No Wrong” w/ Max Blumenthal & Dan Cohen

        “Killing Gaza” | By Dan Cohen and Max Blumenthal
        ■ ‘ON DEMAND’ LISTING -https://vimeo.com/ondemand/killinggaza

      • JLewisDickerson
        June 9, 2018, 1:44 pm

        “Killing Gaza” | By Dan Cohen and Max Blumenthal

        “KILLING GAZA” VIMEO ‘ON DEMAND’ LISTING -https://vimeo.com/ondemand/killinggaza

        P.S.
        “Killing Gaza” captures culture of resistance
        By Max Blumenthal | The Electronic Intifada | 17 May 2018
        LINK – https://electronicintifada.net/content/killing-gaza-captures-culture-resistance/24321

      • JLewisDickerson
        June 9, 2018, 2:07 pm

        “Killing Gaza” trailer + pitch from Max and Dan

      • JLewisDickerson
        June 9, 2018, 2:11 pm

        Max Blumenthal and Dan Cohen on their new documentary, “Killing Gaza” – May 30, 2018

      • echinococcus
        June 9, 2018, 2:50 pm

        John S

        Eljay seems to be implying that I would condone a massacre of the inhabitants of Gaza.
        Nothing could be further from the truth.

        If you would condone or not will remain unknown, as long as you don’t go public with it –not even a trepanation and a look at your grey matter would provide proof.

        The many times reaffirmed proud pleasure you take in your illegal occupation of Palestine, to enjoy illicit possession of the land left by the massacred and exiled inhabitants of Bir Assaba, in order to brainwash poor invader kids into adoring the murderers of Palestinians (which also includes “inhabitants of Gaza”) is documented.

      • JLewisDickerson
        June 10, 2018, 2:44 am

        ▣ The Zero Hour with RJ Eskow
        Max Blumenthal: Killing Gaza, A Documentary Film

      • eljay
        June 10, 2018, 9:08 am

        || jon s: Eljay seems to be implying that I would condone a massacre of the inhabitants of Gaza.
        Nothing could be further from the truth. ||

        jon s says:

        I wrote that I don’t make any distinctions based on ethnicity, nationality, religion and so forth but that I do make a distinction between innocent civilians and armed terrorists and criminals.

        If all inhabitants of Gaza are deemed to be not-innocent civilians (which means they fall into the “armed terrorists and criminals” camp), according to your “moral compass” it is acceptable to massacre them.

        I don’t condone massacres, so maybe I had trouble reading your “moral compass”. Please feel free to spell out more precisely:
        – who is eligible to be massacred and who is not; and
        – what person(s), group(s), organization(s) and/or government(s) is (are) responsible for making the official determination?

      • jon s
        June 11, 2018, 3:34 pm

        eljay,
        I got tired of going around in circles the last time we had this exchange, so here we go again:
        What I wrote was that there’s a difference between innocent civilians and armed terrorists or criminals. It’s the kind of distiction that should be clear to any reasonable, decent, moral, person.
        If you don’t see it then you’re the one with the broken moral compass.

      • eljay
        June 11, 2018, 5:14 pm

        || jon s: eljay,
        I got tired of going around in circles the last time we had this exchange … ||

        You got tired of dodging the issue and taking responsibility for the fact that you selectively approve of massacre.

        || … so here we go again: ||

        Yup, here you go again. But let me try again:

        1. Please spell out as precisely as possible:
        – who is eligible to be massacred and who is not; and
        – who (what person(s), group(s), organization(s) and/or government(s)) determines eligibility for massacre.

        2. If Israel were to withdraw from Occupied Palestine and the inhabitants of various formerly-Israeli, Jewish-only colonies were to remain in place and – according to their new (Palestinian) government – become “armed terrorists or criminals”, according to your “moral compass” the Palestinians would have every right to massacre them. I would disagree. Why do you hate Jews so much that you would approve of their massacre?

        || … What I wrote was that there’s a difference between innocent civilians and armed terrorists or criminals. It’s the kind of distiction that should be clear to any reasonable, decent, moral, person.
        If you don’t see it then you’re the one with the broken moral compass. ||

        Not only do I see the distinction but unlike you I don’t condone any massacre of any person(s) ever.

      • Mooser
        June 11, 2018, 5:30 pm

        “What I wrote was that there’s a difference between innocent civilians and armed terrorists or criminals. It’s the kind of distiction that should be clear to any reasonable, decent, moral, person.”

        Certainly a distinction which could be easily made by the “bravest, warmest, most wonderful human beings” which make up the IDF forces at the fence.

      • oldgeezer
        June 11, 2018, 9:24 pm

        @jon s
        ” It’s the kind of distiction that should be clear to any reasonable, decent, moral, person.
        If you don’t see it then you’re the one with the broken moral compass.”

        Well that rules out the vast vast majority of Israelis as being “reasonable, decent, moral”. Particularly the significant percentage that don’t think enough killing has been done. And the elected leaders who call for an ever increasing amount of death and destruction. Based on your equivocation wrt to cold blooded murder are left wondering you would fit on the continuum.

        I can’t really think of a country where the moral rot is so pervasive. We have some tin pot dictators where their citizens live terrible lives but for outright moral rot and depravity Israel takes the cake as it permeates every level of society.

    • LHunter
      June 11, 2018, 10:25 am

      How is it that so many brains get washed – who is providing access to all those brains and how is that made possible?

  9. Boomer
    June 9, 2018, 7:32 am

    Ever since I started to follow this issue with some degree of understanding (which happens to be roughly since the WWW became available), I’ve noticed that so-called “liberal Zionists” ultimately fall back on “it’s complicated.”

  10. Retep
    June 9, 2018, 8:42 am

    I have made 14 trips to the West Bank, never made it to Gaza. Colleagues from Bath Uk have made another 25.

    We have come to the conclusion, the PA government are a useless bunch, who live well, but don’t want to rock the boat. I also believe the “Two State Solution” is dead. A plan B is required.

    When I met the Tamimi father he said a “single state with equal rights for all – we have to learn to live together from the Jordan river to the Mediterranean sea. Surprisingly, when I visited the Tel Aviv student bar I received the same response as I did when on a plane from the orthodox Jew.

    Secondly, the Palestinians must not look to the USA but to Europe, who created the problem with their Pogroms, Ho;ocaust and the British Mandate

    • echinococcus
      June 9, 2018, 12:16 pm

      Retep

      the Palestinians must not look to the USA but to Europe, who created the problem with their Pogroms, Ho;ocaust and the British Mandate

      Nonsense. Pogroms were not performed by Palestinians; the problem, i.e. the invader colonial ideology of Zionism, was started and its offensive organized some 40-50 years before the Nazi genocide.

      And of course the key is in the US, which took over from the former empire GB the role of inciter, direct accomplice and unconditional protector of Zionism. It is now a direct military participant in the Zionist invasion and genocide and the obedient attack dog for Zionist wars of aggression.

      • Annie Robbins
        June 9, 2018, 3:33 pm

        Nonsense. Pogroms were not performed by Palestinians

        i think you read it wrong. Retep wrote that europe created the problem w/the pogroms.

      • echinococcus
        June 10, 2018, 12:06 am

        Annie,

        I did read it right, and it is immortal bullshit all right.

        1. The pogroms weren’t performed by the Palestinians, so pogroms had f*ckall to do with the problem, because Zionism did not decide to invade Palestine because of the pogroms. Period. Pogroms in Palestine (defined as different than the imprescriptible right to resist to invaders) have only been performed by the Zionists. Nothing to do with Europe.

        2. Zionism, ie the problem and the only, world-poisoning, problem, was already fully there as early as 1897 at least, meaning well before the genocide of Jews, Roms, Slavs etc. in the 1940s. Again, nothing about Europe “creating” the problem.

    • Mooser
      June 9, 2018, 1:19 pm

      “Retep”, you forgot the underscore in your user-name.

  11. Atlantaiconoclast
    June 9, 2018, 12:56 pm

    We all know why the NYTimes refuses to tell the truth about this issue. But folks here just want to dance around it. Name the problem, for once!

    • Mooser
      June 9, 2018, 3:15 pm

      “But folks here just want to dance around it. Name the problem, for once!” “Atlanta iconoclast”

      We are all too scared to name it. It’s up to you to smash that idol and show us it has no power!
      So don’t beat around that burning bush, Name That Problem!

      • Atlantaiconoclast
        June 9, 2018, 10:10 pm

        I do, but my responses naming the problem are not usually posted.

      • Mooser
        June 10, 2018, 2:35 pm

        “I do, but my responses naming the problem are not usually posted.” “Atlantaiconoclast”

        Yes, that’s what’s called ‘a whiter shade of fail’.

    • Annie Robbins
      June 9, 2018, 3:37 pm

      at a time of moral reckoning, the stable of New York Times has been strongly on Israel’s side….. That’s what you get when you hire only pro-Israel columnists, several with an ideological commitment to Zionism.

      where’s the mystery? http://mondoweiss.net/2018/06/columnists-largely-massacre/

  12. JLewisDickerson
    June 10, 2018, 2:57 am

    RE: But yesterday, the paper topped itself, running an op-ed from Jewish Journal editor Shmuel Rosner entitled “Israel Needs to Protect Its Borders. By Whatever Means Necessary.”

    By any means necessary
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/By_any_means_necessary
    [EXCERPT] By any means necessary is a translation of a phrase used by French intellectual Jean-Paul Sartre in his play Dirty Hands. It entered the popular civil rights culture through a speech given by Malcolm X at the Organization of Afro-American Unity founding rally on June 28, 1964. It is generally considered to leave open all available tactics for the desired ends, including violence; however, the “necessary” qualifier adds a caveat—if violence is not necessary, then presumably, it should not be used. . .

  13. Boomer
    June 10, 2018, 3:16 pm

    I haven’t had cable TV for years, and haven’t missed it, but I guess I have missed the rare bit of decent coverage or comment regarding Gaza. Juan Cole says that Mr. Bourdain spoke forthrightly about it:

    https://www.juancole.com/2018/06/anthony-bourdain-mensch-on.html

    Coverage in NYT is, as one would expect, more “complex.” More “nuanced.” Thus Sarah Jackson lists many places around the world, and in the U.S. where he spoke out for various liberal causes, for victims of various sorts, and against injustice. She includes a reference to Gaza:

    “After he visited Gaza, he openly criticized what he saw as the dehumanizing representation of Palestinians in the media, and proclaimed that the world was ‘robbing them of their basic humanity’.”

    Perhaps it’s just me, perhaps I’m being too critical, but that “what he saw as” strikes me as essential distancing, saving Ms. Jackson from actually endorsing such a judgment, and thus making the sentence “fit to print” for the Times.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/08/opinion/sunday/anthony-bourdain-death-bad-boy.html

  14. Abu Yusef
    June 10, 2018, 11:39 pm

    When I first saw the murder of this beautiful young woman my first thought was the same one I had about my young cousin Ahed. I thought it is a shame what the Israeli’s and their supporters are going to do to smear this child in attempt to cover up their vile murder! Well they have not disappointed. Almost immediately the Israeli sycophants and apologist made videos denouncing Razzan as a threat to Israel and a Hamas terrorist.

    Some of the most heinous accusations were made and are now being certified by the Zionist ilk at the New York Times. One of them was that Razzan professed to be a human shield for terrorist who are trying to kill the poor IDF Soldier perched on a dune and killing at will and with glee. The IDF allowed a video to be released that stops just short of hearing the young medic’s full statement of “ I am acting as a human rescue shield to protect the injured inside the armistice line”. Reasonable enough statement for sound people who are Health Care Professionals. But, this is the Palestinians we are talking about so the world view gets a little eschewed.

    Curiously, these heartless journalists, who have become tools for a movement, who are on the wrong side of history, are painting the Palestinians, no matter man, woman or child, as nothing more than nihilist who have no value for human life.

    This practice makes it easier for the Israeli’s to sell to their Soldiers that they are on the moral high ground. They say look the New York Times even agrees with us! If the Palestinians are not looked at as humans it is just target practice and nothing more.

    You see if the Palestinians are nihilist and have no value for life, why then should the IDF have value for the Palestinians lives? If the Palestinian sees another human shot by the IDF, they should just allow them to die as it was intended for them to die when the IDF soldier shot the person. If and when that Palestinian decides to save that wounded person, well they are now aiding and abetting a known terrorist and are fair game to be terminated also.

    This is not a manufactured lie thought up by the ingenious leaders of Hamas. No this is an accepted practice of the IDF that we all have witnessed too many times over the past months during the Great March of Return.

    The IDF makes no bones about not having a role as human rights defenders. On the contrary, they will tell you they have a role, just they will say what humans they will defend whether threatened or not. As opposed to what humans they will exterminate regardless of the threat or non-threat.

    This is unprecedented behavior! Never in human history have we seen such complicity on such a large scale where no one and I mean no one, will call out the IDF for their atrocities and war crimes. They ( the MSM) all have deemed the IDF, 007’s with a license to kill, whomever they damn well please.

    The Yellow journalism that is going on in respect to Israel and the IDF, across the board in the mainstream media, not just in the New York Times, truly harken back to the time when people thought that Hitler wasn’t a threat because he had a high shrill voice and made funny hand gestures.

    Every time I hear a report on Palestine and Israel, it becomes a litmus test on how honest of a journalist the reporter is, or if he is just another mouth piece for the hateful Israeli regime that now sits and dictates to the world what should shock them and how they shouldn’t believe their own eyes! They shouldn’t believe the images of children running away and being systematically murdered by Israeli Soldiers from their very safe positions!

    Don’t believe what you see is becoming the Likud Mantra and the fact that a world-renowned paper like the New York Times is playing their stooge is frightening on so many levels. There is something very nefarious about the way the New York times is handling anything Palestinian. This article is just one of the many examples that they no longer have the Journalistic integrity or the intestinal fortitude to be a honest journalist and a true friend to Israel who is becoming unchecked tyrants who murder at will as if there are no other options.

  15. iResistDe4iAm
    June 12, 2018, 11:34 am

    The country that places 650,000 Jewish men, women and children as human shields in strategically located, subsidised settlements on stolen land smack in the middle of war zones, is complaining about a supposed ‘human shield’.

    The 650,000 Jewish human shields are placed in illegal settlements deep inside the same war zones that Israel invaded and now belligerently occupies (occupied territories).

    The 650,000 Jewish human shields are placed deep inside occupied territories that are heavily populated by other people (Palestinians and Syrians) which Israel considers to be enemies, and with which it is still technically at war.

    The late Ed Koch (former mayor of New York City) preferred a different term to describe Israel’s human shields in populated enemy territories. He used the term “defense bulwark”.

    “You ask Israel to cease building settlements on the West Bank, which are intended not only to house Israelis, but to provide a defense bulwark when the Islamist armies of the surrounding states, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria – Assad or his opponents – and Iraq, again try militarily to crush Israel” ~ Ed Koch, 2013
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/163827

    So the country that places 650,000 Jewish civilians as human shields in illegal settlements smack in the middle of enemy war zones, is complaining about a supposed ‘human shield’.

Leave a Reply