The Sydney Morning Herald reaches a level beyond equivalence:
Herald Correspondent Ed O'Loughlin in Gaza meets the Palestinian group that answers Israel blow for blow.
Hamas. The “Palestinian group” they’re talking about is fucking Hamas.
Posted by Tim Blair at June 21, 2003 05:12 AM | TrackBackSounds like a Reuters report
Posted by: Joel at June 21, 2003 05:19 AM*snort* "blow for blow", indeed. Sounds like a headline written by someone who's never been within a thousand miles of Israel.
Talk with some Israeli soldiers, and get a feel for how hard they work (and how much danger they put themselves in) to avoid hitting civilians. Visit an Israeli hospital, and see the care given to treating WOUNDED TERRORISTS. Then go to a suicide-bombing aftermath, and see how hard Hamas works to DELIBERATELY target civilians. (I hardly need mention that Palestinian hospitals do not treat Israelis, ever, combatants or not.)
Then let's talk about "equivalence".
Daniel
Posted by: Daniel in Medford at June 21, 2003 06:07 AMThe "blow for blow" thing is ok if you're in an Irish Standup/Knockdown or something, but Hamas is gonna lose their asses if they try trading blows one-for-one with the IDF.
Not that that idea bothers me.
Posted by: mojo at June 21, 2003 08:10 AMIs this the same "Armed Factions" that NPR (National Public Radio) in the U.S. talks about all the time? It's amazing that your media and our government funded media find the strangest terms for "Terrorists".
Posted by: Robert Swaim at June 21, 2003 08:43 AMIs this the same "Armed Factions" that NPR (National Public Radio) in the U.S. talks about all the time? It's amazing that your media and our government funded media find the strangest terms for "Terrorists".
Posted by: Robert Swaim at June 21, 2003 08:43 AM'Group'? My God, my bridge club is a group. We occasionally mutter about the extortionate rent on our club rooms, not target women and children.
Posted by: Craig Ranapia at June 21, 2003 09:18 AM
Yeah, but if year after year after year, the Zionist Israelis came in and stole your Aces and Threes, you'd probably take up arms.
"Yeah, but if year after year after year, the Zionist Israelis came in and stole your Aces and Threes, you'd probably take up arms."
Absolutely, and the first people I would target would be their women and children, its only natural, right?
(well it is for murderous cowardly sicko's like hamas anyway)
Hamas Blow: Blow up INNOCENT men, women and children. Just today, (Saturday), they shot at and killed a guy travelling in his car, for no fucking reason!
Israeli Blow: Target these fucking terrorists.
Hmmm... if I were these camel-shagging Mohammeds, I'd get my arse out of the Middle East, 'coz the IDF aren't gonna take this shit lying down.
Posted by: Douglas at June 21, 2003 08:52 PMThe Palestinians have an uncanny ability to make bad decisions and poor choices. Nothing is going to bring them around. Why not simply wipe out the pockets of concentrated evil? Hamas would certainly wipe out the Jews if it had the means.
Posted by: ZsaZsa at June 22, 2003 12:50 AMYes, how inaccurate.
I was going to write a parodic, over-the-top sarcastic comment here. But then I realised that, with sites like LGF around, this is all really past parody.
So let me just make the point that by any dictionary definition, Hamas is both 'Palestinian' and a 'group'.
So, to be clear, this statement is objectively true. You're criticizing this report not for lack of objectivity, but rather for lack of subjective judgement. Maybe that's right, but please let's not pretend that this an obvious case of horrible media slanting. It's actually a case, if anything, of overly-objective reporting.
Posted by: ByWord at June 22, 2003 02:25 AMIt's also objectively true that they are terrorists and murderers. Using ByWord logic, we may reach the following objectively true minimalist journalistic definitions:
The Manson Family: "a Californian group"
Hitler: "a vegetarian"
The Black Panthers: "a political group"
John Wayne Gacy: "a homeowner"
The Type 35 Bugatti: "a car"
Idi Amin: "a person of wide-ranging dining experience"
NAMBLA: "a men's group"
And so on.
Posted by: tim at June 22, 2003 02:40 AMHamas "answer Israel blow for blow"?
Anyone ignorant of the events in the Middle East might think that Hamas are simply responding.
Posted by: Don at June 22, 2003 06:25 AMHamas "answer Israel blow for blow"?
Anyone ignorant of the events in the Middle East might think that Hamas are simply responding.
Posted by: Don at June 22, 2003 06:25 AMThe whole "blow for blow" thing is also a work of fiction, crafted by the Western media in an effort to paint the suicide bombers as a romantic figure that can defeat all the high-tech weapons in the world with their willingness to die.
Hamas has never struck a single blow in response to anything Israel has done. They constantly send bombers into Israel, regardless of cease-fires and peace agreements. The vast majority of those bombers are caught, or fail to kill anyone besides themselves, and these bombers the media is only too happy to conceal.
The attacks by Hamas are continuous. There is no "matching" involved.
Posted by: Tatterdemalian at June 22, 2003 09:02 AMWell, see, it all started when that sneaky kid David went up against the heroic warrior Goliath...
Posted by: John Anderson at June 23, 2003 07:07 AMYes, terrorism is bad. Just don't mention the Stern Gang.
Posted by: Bon Scott at June 23, 2003 01:24 PM