NY Times Pushes Hamas Propaganda…

[Locutus]

via Zip

Then again, it’s not like the NYT’s anti-Israel bias is a secret.
Via WFB:

The New York Times has again attempted to negate the presence of terrorists in the Gaza Strip. Reporter David Carr claims that two senior Hamas terrorists killed last week in precision Israeli airstrikes were in fact journalists.


The report, sensationally titled “Using War as Cover to Target Journalists,” contains serious factual errors that render the accusation that Israel “targets journalists” false. The Times reports:


Yet al-Kumi and Salama were not journalists—in fact, they had spray-painted “TV” on their car in an attempt to disguise themselves as journalists and thereby prevent the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) from firing on them. The disguise didn’t fool anyone except for David Carr and the New York Times. Who in fact were they?


Muhammed Shamalah, commander of Hamas forces in the southern Strip and head of the Hamas militant training programs, was targeted by an Israeli air strike while driving a car clearly labelled [sic] “TV”, indicating it to be a press vehicle, abusing the protection afforded to journalists.


Keep reading…
​

NY Times Pushes Hamas Propaganda… | Weasel Zippers

NYT's David Carr thinks terrorists are journalists because they spray-painted "TV" on their car | Washington Free Beacon

Using War as Cover to Target Journalists - NYTimes.com

 

[CDNBear]

Nothing new there. Hamas uses schools, mosques, kids, women, and ambulances to hide themselves.

 

[earth_as_one]

Israel considers all Al-Aqsa TV employees to be militants.

As far as I can determine, these people do not carry weapons, nor have they ever carried out any attacks against Israel. Al-Aqsa TV is extremely poorly funded. They have no security, make their own flak jackets, use crappy video equipment. Their production quality is extremely poor and amateurish. Painting TV on their crappy falling apart car fits with their description as a poorly funded organization.

Al-Aqsa TV is rabidly antisemitic and pro-death and destruction. Probably the most accurate description of this organization is that they are part of Hamas propaganda efforts, which is most likely why they were targeted.

 

[Goober]

Israel considers all Al-Aqsa TV employees to be militants.

As far as I can determine, these people do not carry weapons, nor have they ever carried out any attacks against Israel. Al-Aqsa TV is extremely poorly funded. They have no security, make their own flak jackets, use crappy video equipment. Their production quality is extremely poor and amateurish. Painting TV on their crappy falling apart car fits with their description as a poorly funded organization.

Al-Aqsa TV is rabidly antisemitic and pro-death and destruction. Probably the most accurate description of this organization is that they are part of Hamas propaganda efforts, which is most likely why they were targeted.

So you agree that Israel had the right to take them out?

 

[CDNBear]

Israel considers all Al-Aqsa TV employees to be militants.

As far as I can determine, these people do not carry weapons, nor have they ever carried out any attacks against Israel. Al-Aqsa TV is extremely poorly funded. They have no security, make their own flak jackets, use crappy video equipment. Their production quality is extremely poor and amateurish. Painting TV on their crappy falling apart car fits with their description as a poorly funded organization.

Al-Aqsa TV is rabidly antisemitic and pro-death and destruction. Probably the most accurate description of this organization is that they are part of Hamas propaganda efforts, which is most likely why they were targeted.

Just because you missed this part in your impatience to demonize Israel...

Yet al-Kumi and Salama were not journalists...

Muhammed Shamalah, commander of Hamas forces in the southern Strip and head of the Hamas militant training programs, was targeted by an Israeli air strike while driving a car clearly labelled [sic] “TV”, indicating it to be a press vehicle, abusing the protection afforded to journalists.

 

[Goober]

Just because you missed this part in your impatience to demonize Israel...

Using war as a cover to target journalists, or journalists as a cover for waging war? | IsraPort.org

Carr is making a really sickening assumption: that when the IDF targets so-called “journalists” that they are trying to stifle the free exchange of ideas. It doesn’t even cross his mind that the “journalists” themselves are actually militants.

In the case of Mohamed Abu Aisha, he clearly was a uniform-wearing member of Islamic Jihad:

 

[darkbeaver]

I wonder if these apologists for the Israeli murderers will go to the Holy land and lay down their bodies for their cause or if they will just be content to sit on the side of the field and watch in rapt admiration the murder of women and children? Israel can have them' in fact when Canada is clean again I'm going to insist that all who helped Israel get themselves there where their tiny little hearts and their tiny little minds really reside. Surely they would be welcome in the desert miracle.

 

[Goober]

I wonder if these apologists for the Israeli murderers will go to the Holy land and lay down their bodies for their cause or if they will just be content to sit on the side of the field and watch in rapt admiration the murder of women and children? Israel can have them' in fact when Canada is clean again I'm going to insist that all who helped Israel get themselves there where their tiny little hearts and their tiny little minds really reside. Surely they would be welcome in the desert miracle.

You going to Gaza?

 

[taxslave]

You going to Gaza?

Nah he is like EAO. Just promote the murder of innocent Israelis and spread lies when ever Israel gets pissed off enough to fight back a bit.

 

[MHz]

"The report, ****************,” contains serious factual errors that"

Is that unlike all the 'errors' that every outlet follows when the WH barks? (as in Iraq lies )

You going to Gaza?

Why doesn't g00gle-earth have updated street views of Gaza, or do they, I never though of looking there for photo's and vids.

Nah he is like EAO. Just promote the murder of innocent Israelis and spread lies when ever Israel gets pissed off enough to fight back a bit.

You could get a job working the net for the IDF with reporting skills like that.

 

[damngrumpy]

If he wears a uniform he is a target that is the way of a war. Journalists who use their position
to assist either side are also targets. As for Hamas they are people who hide behind little kids
women and who ever is a shield. They fire their missiles from family neighbourhoods and they
expect no retaliation?
Again this war is thousands of years old, there are more Islamic people than Israelis yet they are
still there and the Arabs don't get it, This will end when the sun no longer gives light and one lone
insect give a defiant finger to the fading sun

 

[petros]

They bombed several media outlets (12) claiming to be just taking out their antennas.

 

[earth_as_one]

So you agree that Israel had the right to take them out?

That's debatable. I can understand why the IDF would want to take them out. But technically they are journalists... barely.

Using war as a cover to target journalists, or journalists as a cover for waging war? | IsraPort.org

Carr is making a really sickening assumption: that when the IDF targets so-called “journalists” that they are trying to stifle the free exchange of ideas. It doesn’t even cross his mind that the “journalists” themselves are actually militants.

In the case of Mohamed Abu Aisha, he clearly was a uniform-wearing member of Islamic Jihad:

Yet the OP claims " commander of Hamas forces in the southern Strip and head of the Hamas militant training programs,"

So which militant group is it? Islamic Jihad or Hamas? Sounds to me like these sources don't have their stories straight.

 

[gopher]

via Zip

Then again, it’s not like the NYT’s anti-Israel bias is a secret.
Via WFB:

The New York Times has again attempted to negate the presence of terrorists in the Gaza Strip. Reporter David Carr claims that two senior Hamas terrorists killed last week in precision Israeli airstrikes were in fact journalists.


The report, sensationally titled “Using War as Cover to Target Journalists,” contains serious factual errors that render the accusation that Israel “targets journalists” false. The Times reports:


Yet al-Kumi and Salama were not journalists—in fact, they had spray-painted “TV” on their car in an attempt to disguise themselves as journalists and thereby prevent the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) from firing on them. The disguise didn’t fool anyone except for David Carr and the New York Times. Who in fact were they?


Muhammed Shamalah, commander of Hamas forces in the southern Strip and head of the Hamas militant training programs, was targeted by an Israeli air strike while driving a car clearly labelled [sic] “TV”, indicating it to be a press vehicle, abusing the protection afforded to journalists.


Keep reading…
​

NY Times Pushes Hamas Propaganda… | Weasel Zippers

NYT's David Carr thinks terrorists are journalists because they spray-painted "TV" on their car | Washington Free Beacon

Using War as Cover to Target Journalists - NYTimes.com

There are just as many, if not more, links which say the precise opposite ~ that the NY Times is pro Israel and anti all else.




OpEdNews - Article: New York Times Pro-Israeli Bias

Pro-Israeli Bias at the NYTimes « Antiwar.com Blog

Systematically Biased Reporting | Adbusters Culturejammer Headquarters

Israel-Palestine on Record: How the New York Times Misreports Conflict in the Middle East: Richard Falk, Howard Friel: 9781844671090: Amazon.com: Books


New York Times Pro Israeli Bias | Philadelphia Independent Media Center





Therefore, let the reader determine for him/herself which is correct.

 

[Cliffy]

Therefore, let the reader determine for him/herself which is correct.

What is correct is whatever fits the individuals ideology. The truth cannot be known without personal observation. Relying on others to tell you what is going on is just being lazy. If it is not important enough to warrant your personal observation, it is not really worthy of your attention or opinion.

 

[petros]

What is correct is whatever fits the individuals ideology.

Or fits the sports team. This thread is the same as yelling "I'm drunk, I'm deaf, I wanna be a ref" at a game.

 

[gopher]

What is correct is whatever fits the individuals ideology. The truth cannot be known without personal observation. Relying on others to tell you what is going on is just being lazy. If it is not important enough to warrant your personal observation, it is not really worthy of your attention or opinion.

Good comment. I'm sure Locutus will agree once he reviews those reports.

 

[Locutus]

The press (and especially ones that consider themselves self-important and are revered as the be-all and such) need to apply the Prime Directive of non-interference. I don't care which party their editorial board blows. Dig?

Another case-in-point...all is well, praise the economic recovery and post-election barry huggathoners:

CNN: All Adults in America Went Shopping on Black Friday Weekend | The Weekly Standard

 

[earth_as_one]

If you believe its fair and proper that the the IDF can kill these "reporters", then all those "embedded" or "in-bedded" reporters on the front lines with Western Forces should be fair game too.

 

[petros]

If you believe its fair and proper that the the IDF can kill these "reporters", then all those "embedded" or "in-bedded" reporters on the front lines with Western Forces should be fair game too.

Bombs away!