Mediefallit

Arabere, Diverse, Hamas, Israel, Muslimer, Pressen, Terror, islam — Drokles on August 7, 2014 at 8:41 am

Hver gang Israel slår igen mod de terrororganisationer, som har svoret at udslette Israel med alle jøderne, adopterer medier og politikere terroristernes løgne helt ukritisk. Hvis palæstinensiske ‘kilder’ taler om massakrer, ja så rapporterer medierne om massakrer og inviterer eksperter til at gætte på, hvor længe Israel og sekundært USA kan holde til verdenssamfundets pres.

Man holder sig ikke i skindet til den gamle sang om at sandheden er det første offer i en krig. Man ser ikke på erfaringer man allerede har fra, hvem der er troværdige og hvem der har det som sit mål at lyve. Man har ingen opfattelse af at den ene part er et retssamfund mens den anden er en terrororganisation. Man ser ikke på modus operandi, at det er israelerne der tager det på sig, hvilket er helt unikt i militærhistorien, at advare fjendens civile, mens Hamas bevidst og ganske stolt praler af at skubbe deres civile foran sig. Ingen historie om at Hamas modus operandi er krigsforbrydelser.

Man stiller ikke Unwra til ansvar for at det er deres ambulancer der bruges til at fragte terrorister rundt til nye positioner, at deres skoler bruges som våbenlagre og deres hospitaler som hovedkvarter. Ingen scoop historie om FN som krigsforbryder. Og man foretager intet research, intet som helst der kunne retfærdiggøre en femmer i mediestøtte.

Douglas Murray undrer sig i Spectator over at journalister i Gaza end ikke oplyser deres publikum om forbehold

I wonder if any readers have an answer to this question: Has anybody, throughout this whole conflict around Gaza, heard any reporter inside Gaza, at any time, preface or conclude their remarks with ‘reporting from Gaza, under Hamas government reporting restrictions’?  I don’t watch television news all the time and so may have missed it, but I don’t think I have heard this said even once.

Which is strange. When reporting from a dictatorship like Gaza it used to be the norm that reporters would preface or conclude any report with some variant of this formula.  Doing so was a neat way to send the warning to viewers that you were reporting from a place where the authorities were censoring what you could say.

Before the 2003 war in Iraq, for instance, reporters broadcasting for television or radio from inside Iraq nearly always made reference to the fact that they were reporting under restrictions imposed on them by Saddam Hussein’s government. This often meant a Hussein goon was standing nearby checking that nothing untoward was said.

Daniel Schwammenthal tilføjer i The Commentator sarkastisk

In many ways, CCTV coverage of the conflict without the networks’ editorial picture selection and emotional but information-lacking voice-overs would probably do a better job at informing the public.

Yes, we would still see the destruction caused by Israeli shelling but the CCTV cameras would also catch Hamas terrorists firing from civilian areas, show how the IDF is dropping leaflets warning civilians ahead of bombings and broadcast how civilians are used as human shields — all important elements of this war usually missing from the coverage.

En del af forklaringen på fordrejningerne finder Schwammenthal i frygt for Hamas

On Tuesday, Italian journalist Gabriele Barbati sent out the following tweet: “Out of #Gaza far from #Hamas retaliation: misfired rocket killed children yday in Shati. Witness: militants rushed and cleared debris.”

Despite the fact that Hamas rockets have a high rate of misfiring and civilians are often caught in the middle of intense urban warfare, every Palestinian civilian casualty is automatically assumed to have been caused by Israel. And so when a strike killed several children in Shati refugee camp, the media rushed to blame Israel even though the IDF said it did not target this site.

Israel’s investigation concluded that a Palestinian rocket fell short, and instead of killing their intended civilian targets in Israel, killed the Palestinian civilians.

Mr. Barbati’s reporting not only supports Israel’s version of the events, it raises a far greater question. Are foreign journalists working under the constant threat from Hamas and thus “self-censoring” themselves? Is this why we don’t see coverage of Hamas terrorists firing rockets from civilian areas, the use of human shields and other war crimes?

Palestinian journalist Radjaa Abou Dagga, for example, wrote an article for French newspaper Libération, published July 23, detailing how Hamas intimidated him, forcing him to leave Gaza, and how Hamas terrorists use a section of Shifa hospital, just a few meters from the emergency room, as their offices, confirm the earlier Washington Post story.

The next day, Mr. Dagga asked Libération to remove his article from their website, apparently out of fear for his family still in Gaza. Other Western journalists have been caught removing Hamas-critical tweets without explanation while others have been prevented by Hamas from leaving Gaza.

Sandheden vil, trods mediernes almene vrangvilje, altså ud og hurrah for inderne

Og hurrah for franskmændene

4 Kommentarer »

  1. Journalister har blod på deres hænder. At belønne en part for at anvende løgn som tilskynder til at fortsætte en adfærd der kræver yderligere liv er mord. Plain and simple.

    Comment by Fairness — August 7, 2014 @ 6:25 pm
  2. De er i hvert fald enablere.

    Comment by Drokles — August 8, 2014 @ 3:25 am
  3. Hvem har i så fald rollerne. Eller hvilken rolle får
    dem der må lade livet. Jeg tror du blander begreberne.
    “Enabling can take many forms, but most of them come down to protecting someone from the consequences of his or her poor choices.”
    Jeg vil kalde journalister der bevidst lyver i denne sag mordere ved stedfortræder.

    Comment by Fairness — August 9, 2014 @ 3:16 pm
  4. Så langt der er tale om bevidst løgn er der selvfølgelig også tale om medskyldighed. Jeg kan blot ikke gennemskue om der er tale om bevidst løgn eller om hele det talende mellemlag med journalisterne i spidsen ikke blot er en selvrefererende skare af medløbere, der lidt efter lidt optager venstrefløjens propaganda bon-ord i deres vokabular.

    I går så jeg denne omtale til en dokumentar på DR2, der nok ikke beroliger dig synderligt

    “Dokumania: En verden som ikke er vores

    Libanesisk dokumentarfilm fra 2012.

    De fleste af os tager vores identitet for givet og stiller sjældent spørgsmålstegn ved, hvem vi er, og hvor vi kommer fra. Anderledes med palæstinenserne, der konstant må bevise deres identitet, fordi deres eksistens som indbyggere i et land, der ikke længere eksisterer, enten bliver fornægtet eller udfordret. Filminstruktøren Mahdi Fleifels film er…”

    Palæstinenserne kommer altså fra et land der engang har eksisteret. Og i dag eksisterer Israel, som vi alle ved. Israel har altså udslettet Palæstina kan vi jo konkludere.

    Comment by Drokles — August 13, 2014 @ 8:23 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Kommentér indlægget...

Monokultur kører på WordPress