Readers who peruse the comments will be aware that I’ve felt called upon to take a bit of a tough line with commenters lately. I’ve generally tried to be tolerant, barring personal attacks, but during the crisis in Palestine there has been a certain amount of disinformation and outright lies in some comments, in addition to personal abuse. I’ve allowed a certain amount, but if it gets repeated I’ve banned the perps. Anyone who wants can go elsewhere in search of misinformation if they need that to stay in their comfort zone—there’s plenty enough of that already—but that’s not what MIH is about. I was prepared to lose readers—some people just refuse information that challenges their prejudices. Surprisingly, the loss of readership has been quite minimal—about 2%.
I find the speculation regarding "the mounting evidence of friendly fire orders" by Max Blumenthal to be phrased very strangely. Assuming "all" of this commentary about Israeli helicopter gunships is even true -which I doubt very much -- this turn of phrase implies insidious bias.
Friendly fire is at times a byproduct of intense and extensive infantry and air-to-ground combat. But orders for "friendly fire" are absurd. I rarely attempt to extrapolate "deeper" meaning from a turn of phrase, but in this case I find that it is warranted. Mr. Blumenthal's commentary strikes me as puzzling to say the least. It lacks a bit too much "situational awareness."
I also find the use of the phrase "confirmatory detail" to be very strange. It all strikes me as an attempt to construct a far-too-detailed counter-narrative: it can't simply be that the IDF and Israeli government were caught by surprise on Oct. 7 -- no -- it must be extended to the Israeli's carelessly targeting on a "massive" scale. So, in summation, I find much of the commentary, excerpted and original in this posting, to be very questionable.
I get it. You didn't think that it was worthwhile to read about the Hannibal Procedure/Directive--which was bolded with a link. But you could have read all about it in the time it took you to write your comment. To have done so might have added to your own situational awareness.
No, my view is that despite such a directive, there is another, more plausible explanation. Take the following paragraph of Jonathan Cooke:
"To avert this scenario, Israeli commanders reportedly called in the attack helicopters on the military bases overwhelmed by Hamas on October 7. The helicopters appear to have fired indiscriminately, despite the risk posed to the Israeli soldiers in the base who were still alive. Israel’s was a scorched-earth policy to stop Hamas achieving its aims. That may, in part, explain the very large proportion of Israeli soldiers among the 1,300 killed that day." I note that Mr. Cook does introduce some equivocation into his analysis.
In any case, take the two words " fired indiscriminately." If the IDF was so concerned about the capture of soldiers, why would the fire only or even mostly be "indiscriminate." It would be heavy and intense, but also targeted to the degree possible -- at the buildings in some cases, that in some instances included Israelis hostages and Hamas "militants." But were many or even most of the Hamas foot soldiers also taking cover in these buildings, civilian and military, across the breadth and depth of the zones of their attack? There is evidence that many were killed out in the open, and yes, more than a handful likely were also killed taking shelter from the Israeli counterattack.
There is more than circumstantial evidence that the IDF called in/deployed "quick" reaction forces of any and all sorts. Take the video footage available of Flotilla 13 — the Shayetet (IDF naval commandos) retaking a Gaza border post -- readily available online. While the footage is from the perspective of Shayetet 13, and is just a few minutes long, there is no sign in this one engagement of helicopter gunships being deployed.
Then there is the Be'eri massacre: in this case twelve Shaldag airmen (IDF commandos) were airlifted by helicopter into Kibbutz Be'eri. "The Israeli military was not able to send any more reinforcements to Kibbutz Be'eri for 12 more hours. 5 members of the unit were killed and one injured," according to the Wikipedia article on the Be'eri massacre. This bit of evidence is from the Times of Israel and Ynet -- I think that dismissing it as Israeli "propaganda" would gravely damage any accurate assessment of this Be'eri incident. Although the after action report for the Be'eri attack and counterattack is likely incomplete, there is not yet strong evidence that IDF helicopter gunships were involved in eventually killing the Hamas attackers in this incident.
And I find the use of the often but not always unreliable Wikipedia's citation of the following as a source for some evidence of the events during the Be'eri massacre to be a a bit of a slight of hand:
Schweitzer, Oren (29 October 2023). "For Netanyahu's Government, Israeli Hostages Are Just a Propaganda Tool". Jacobin. Retrieved 30 October 2023. In the article cited, we have the following:
"During the fighting, according to another resident of the kibbutz who was away at the time, “at least 112 Be’eri people were killed.”
In the Wikipedia article we have the following:
"Porat said Israeli soldiers killed hostage takers and hostages alike, and that an Israeli tank blasted buildings in which hostages were held. According to another resident who was away at the time, "at least 112 Be'eri people were killed" during the fighting." There is more than an implied correlation that the 112 killed -- or many of them, or not an insignificant number -- were killed by Israeli fire rather than the fire/torture by Hamas members. There is talk of a lot of "crossfire:" I do not find this to be very strong evidence for the "Hannibal Procedure/Directive."
The above excerpted paragraph of Mr. Cook also implies that among the several hundred IDF soldiers/security personnel killed on Oct. 7 and in the 48-72 hours thereafter, many were killed directly or indirectly by this "Hannibal Procedure/Directive." The "may in part" phrase. I find that implausible.
From a certain perspective, it is seductive to think that since Hamas achieved strategic surprise, that then the Israeli government/IDF intentionally and willfully targeted its own personnel systematically and in large numbers. The Deus ex machina variation of a "Hannibal Procedure/Directive."
Some arguments by some commentators would appear to both like the IDF to be proven to have been "incompetent," but then their analysis pivots and depicts Hamas as somehow incapable of killing large numbers of IDF military personnel with small arms, RPG, and heavy machine gun fire. In my analytical framework, if they -- Hamas -- are capable of achieving strategic surprise, then they are also capable of killing hundreds of IDF military/security personnel with small arms and light weapons fire. And there is evidence that some Hamas units were equipped with and used heavy machine guns.
Surprise, in its tactical form -- not just strategic -- is exceedingly difficult to overcome. From my perspective, the above directly quoted paragraph of Mr. Cook is at least one section of his commentary/analysis that is unconvincing.
I’m leaning towards incompetence and hubris, more than malice as the cause, with Hamas getting inside their ooda loop.
I did not know about the Hannibal Procedure.
BBC I don’t see as pro Israeli, but pro globalist and Dei.
I’m surprised at the Biden Administration new focus on Islamophobia with Kamala in charge. It sounds like something from the Babylon Bee. They are trying to keep their Dei voters happy by throwing them a bone, while somehow keeping Jewish Donors happy.
"I’m surprised at the Biden Administration new focus on Islamophobia"
Why would that surprise you? I wrote about this quite recently--the Muslim vote is very important for Dems in several hugely important states. Just yesterday the Dem party in MI wrote to Zhou telling him that the war on Palestinians is likely to cause Dems to lose the state.
"You get what you vote for" translates into personalities and predictable policies. "Asians" vote overwhelming Dem, so they get what they vote for. No surprises.
At least in Ca affirmative action in college admissions is theoretically banned as voters approved, as Scotus finally did. This is a huge issue for certain Asian populations.
I find him to be a broken record, for the most part. I found over time that even when I agreed with him he offered little added value. And on matters of war and peace I disagree with him entirely and find his thinking shallow.
Haha. I'm afraid I'm a bit of a broken record, too, on lots of issues. But unless VDH has changed his tune recently he is - incomprehensibly - a full on anti-Russia warhawk. That's where he lost me.
But I will always appreciate his courage in publishing The Case for Trump in 2019. In many respects it legitimized principled support for Donald Trump.
Thanks, Mark for taking the time to respond when I know you have a lot on your plate as evidenced by the terrific material you post. I was a fan of VDH, but stopped reading him some time ago. I will read an occasional essay of his if the headline grabs me, but like you I started to find he was repetitious and there was little in the way of solutions just a repeat of the same points.
Thank you. I liked him, if for no other reason, than the fact that Kevin D Williamson attacked him when they both were at National Review. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and all that.
Mark, if your column were published in a newspaper, I’d be at the newstand at 5am to be sure to get a copy, hot off the press! I and many of your readers are, I think, thankful and appreciate your moral courage, devotion to finding the truth and intellectual integrity in the face of this despairingly complex situation - open to all shades of commentary and not failing to respond, in a pointedly positive way, to those more extreme in their long-held beliefs and convictions. For me, just anecdotally, I used to listen to Radio 4 in the morning! It was such a breath of fresh air! But one day I couldn’t take their reporting any more about the US (elections, Trump etc.) and turned it off, relieved not to hear the smug, posh tones of Michelle Hussein again!!! Then Russia, Covid (and now the origins), Ukraine…in maintaining your high moral standards you’ve been a bastion of rationality and sanity in a sadlly fallen world.
ML you express sentiments many of us feel regarding Mark’s work. I think this says a lot about how enjoyable and eager we all are to have a forum that endeavors to provide the sort of information that we all seek to make sense of the state of our world both domestic and International. I suspect most readers here are intensely interested in history and how it shapes our present and the effects it has on the future. The comments that follow provide us with a community of like-minded and divergent views and opinions and is generally a hospitable environment in which we can express our thoughts and feelings without the rancorous clashes often found on other blogs. Like you I await the next
Post and gobble it up enthusiastically and then wait to hear what others say. In addition, those, like you who appear often become almost like friends as we share and debate the articles and the situation we find ourselves in. Well said.
Mainstream liberal and mainstream non-liberal sites both have flaws. Sometimes it's clickbait topics, other times it's not wanting to offend the advertisers. I prefer debate to inform me in my pursuit of truth.
The BBC and Western MSM weave narratives, not truth, not facts, nor emotion. It's all about storytelling based on their perceptions of the "Global world order". Without narratives, anxiety will prevail with the general public. Their intent is to mold these narratives in a manner that brings calmness through control. The governments in charge dummy.
they deliberately targeted civilians, if scott or you can't see that, I think that's a failing, frankly this should be the end of the oslo delusion, so the international community that lavishes funds on the PA and the Strip will be an impartial arbiter, do tell, which denounces israel 100 x the rate it does to the Middle Kingdom or the Iranian regime
I've purposely limited my comments because the topic is so divisive. I've never been in combat but have 5 years active service and 25 years in state police so I've seen my share of brutal death. History teaches us that war is brutal, horrific, bloody and once engaged in can become a no holds barred affair that scars all involved.
Some estimates state that 10,000 French civilians died during the Normandy campaign. The lions share from Allied artillery and air power. Tens of thousands of Japanese civilians were burned to death by Curtis Lemay and our pilots engaged in fire-bombing Japan. In fact, Lemay planned to burn the whole country down if he had to. Was he wrong??
Japanese soldiers engaged in devilish brutality in combat and against captives. We paid them back by burning them alive, blasting them out of every cave and hole they hid in or sealing them in so they could slowly suffocate in their doom. Who was right in all that mayhem?? Given today's morality I guess all would be guilty of some sort of evil. Maybe this is all apples to oranges but...whatever.
Civilians caught up in all this crap is God-awful terrible and I feel for them ALL- Gazan or Israeli. War sucks but, is inevitable, as long as humans walk the earth. The only way to truly win them is to crush your enemies will and capacity to resist. Maybe the world should back off and let these people sort it out. To me (and I've been slapped down here a bit for stating this) - it's been going on at some level for a couple thousand years. Finish it and whatever side wins, we deal with it.
Isn't it rather late for that? The Western thumb has been on the scale for over a hundred years. If the West backs off, the Jews will probably face horrific decimation--at best. I don't want to see that. How about this: Instead of allowing a bloody sorting out, why not a truly international commission to formulate a human outcome?
Maybe that's an option. Reality is what it is though? Peacekeepers? How has that worked out long term? I started reading your substack because it made me think in ways I hadn't before - still does and I'm appreciative. I have learned here that the West isn't guiltless - far from it. Corrupt western governments - including ours - have done things that make my blood boil. What now? How can those same governments insert themselves between these two sides and have an outcome that is long lasting? I hope I'm wrong but I don't see it.
"Corrupt western governments - including ours - have done things that make my blood boil. What now? How can those same governments insert themselves between these two sides"
Why not bring in other governments? Oh, wait, we can't allow that, nor can Israel, because Israel has no guilt hold over non-Western governments.
Joseph -- I don't see universal "Jew hatred" in the present situation. I see disagreement by some (by no means by all) with some Israeli policies and actions, some of which disagreement seems to be deeply felt. But surely disagreement does not necessarily constitute hatred? Nor does criticism of Israel (whether or not legitimate) necessarily constitute criticism of Jews, nor of all Jews. Does it? I also see some negative stereotyping of Jews (especially on message boards which are far more tolerant than Mark about mindless screaming) which, like all stereotyping, is often unfair and untrue, and certainly not applicable to all members of a group. I also notice that many groups are subject to criticism in this our polarized world. Unfortunately I myself belong to some of these maligned groups. I also don't see how criticism of any group (or portion of a group) necessarily equates to hatred. And then, yes, there is some hatred. To my mind hatred is generally not a very constructive emotion. I think we are always better off trying to get to the bottom of our differences, rather than letting them fester and/or descend into 'hatred'. But, yes, sometimes human emotions, justifiably or unjustifiably, result in 'hatred'. In this case, to the extent it exists, I would only ask...with all due respect...why? If we could get to the bottom of 'why' we might be able to repair some of the deep divisions. Don't feel obligated to answer, Joseph, my observations are in most respects merely rhetorical.
For the record, I have deleted comments that are specifically anti-semitic. I sometimes ban the authors. Just as I ban commenters who deny the existence of Palestinians.
Sorry, that's paranoiac nonsense. I realize it runs deep, and I also realize you've exercised a lot of restraint in your comments thus far. But why not start on a new road--the recognition that two wrongs don't make a right.
There's an alarming rise in anti-semitism, Joseph. There are also a lot of people calling for the death of ordinary Palestinians too. Crazies on both sides.
Observation from a news junkie who tries to read *everything*--Drudge, MoA, many Substacks, MacGregor, Duran, MIH, and plenty more (note: a mix of the political spectrum)--initially, the Hamas bunch were rightly perceived as "the bad guys" on October 7th. One day later and for subsequent weeks, IL has overreacted and received condemnation globally. Now, everybody--Hamas, IL, the US Admin (esp.)--are the bad guys. The propaganda fog is lifting and the picture is coming in clearer.
There are no 'clean shirts' in this dirty laundry hamper. The barbarism on both sides has been horrific.
I'd almost like to move back to the UK in order join the millions who refuse to pay the BBC licence fee. As for atrocities, this all dovetails in with Larry Johnson's latest post at Sonar21 (graphic video) https://sonar21.com/israel-faces-mounting-diplomatic-isolation/
As Larry said yesterday, Israel may be winning the military conflict (even that is debatable), but it is catastrophically losing the the PR war. It seems that the Israelis have fallen into the same trap as the their US/UK neocon brethren of using the same bully boy tactics that once worked so well in the past, but which have now lost the power to shock and awe their increasingly sophisticated opponents.
I'm keeping my eyes on the LORD as my refuge and rock, so as to keep my serenity and not be led by blind emotion. To your point, Citizen Free Press was labelling Hamas as "pigs." Whipping everyone into a frenzy doesn't help. "Love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, soul, mind and strength" and "Love thy neighbor as thyself" are a good foundation as we are challenged with violence, immorality, despair, propaganda and atrocities on a daily basis.
I find the speculation regarding "the mounting evidence of friendly fire orders" by Max Blumenthal to be phrased very strangely. Assuming "all" of this commentary about Israeli helicopter gunships is even true -which I doubt very much -- this turn of phrase implies insidious bias.
Friendly fire is at times a byproduct of intense and extensive infantry and air-to-ground combat. But orders for "friendly fire" are absurd. I rarely attempt to extrapolate "deeper" meaning from a turn of phrase, but in this case I find that it is warranted. Mr. Blumenthal's commentary strikes me as puzzling to say the least. It lacks a bit too much "situational awareness."
I also find the use of the phrase "confirmatory detail" to be very strange. It all strikes me as an attempt to construct a far-too-detailed counter-narrative: it can't simply be that the IDF and Israeli government were caught by surprise on Oct. 7 -- no -- it must be extended to the Israeli's carelessly targeting on a "massive" scale. So, in summation, I find much of the commentary, excerpted and original in this posting, to be very questionable.
I get it. You didn't think that it was worthwhile to read about the Hannibal Procedure/Directive--which was bolded with a link. But you could have read all about it in the time it took you to write your comment. To have done so might have added to your own situational awareness.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal_Directive
No, my view is that despite such a directive, there is another, more plausible explanation. Take the following paragraph of Jonathan Cooke:
"To avert this scenario, Israeli commanders reportedly called in the attack helicopters on the military bases overwhelmed by Hamas on October 7. The helicopters appear to have fired indiscriminately, despite the risk posed to the Israeli soldiers in the base who were still alive. Israel’s was a scorched-earth policy to stop Hamas achieving its aims. That may, in part, explain the very large proportion of Israeli soldiers among the 1,300 killed that day." I note that Mr. Cook does introduce some equivocation into his analysis.
In any case, take the two words " fired indiscriminately." If the IDF was so concerned about the capture of soldiers, why would the fire only or even mostly be "indiscriminate." It would be heavy and intense, but also targeted to the degree possible -- at the buildings in some cases, that in some instances included Israelis hostages and Hamas "militants." But were many or even most of the Hamas foot soldiers also taking cover in these buildings, civilian and military, across the breadth and depth of the zones of their attack? There is evidence that many were killed out in the open, and yes, more than a handful likely were also killed taking shelter from the Israeli counterattack.
There is more than circumstantial evidence that the IDF called in/deployed "quick" reaction forces of any and all sorts. Take the video footage available of Flotilla 13 — the Shayetet (IDF naval commandos) retaking a Gaza border post -- readily available online. While the footage is from the perspective of Shayetet 13, and is just a few minutes long, there is no sign in this one engagement of helicopter gunships being deployed.
Then there is the Be'eri massacre: in this case twelve Shaldag airmen (IDF commandos) were airlifted by helicopter into Kibbutz Be'eri. "The Israeli military was not able to send any more reinforcements to Kibbutz Be'eri for 12 more hours. 5 members of the unit were killed and one injured," according to the Wikipedia article on the Be'eri massacre. This bit of evidence is from the Times of Israel and Ynet -- I think that dismissing it as Israeli "propaganda" would gravely damage any accurate assessment of this Be'eri incident. Although the after action report for the Be'eri attack and counterattack is likely incomplete, there is not yet strong evidence that IDF helicopter gunships were involved in eventually killing the Hamas attackers in this incident.
And I find the use of the often but not always unreliable Wikipedia's citation of the following as a source for some evidence of the events during the Be'eri massacre to be a a bit of a slight of hand:
Schweitzer, Oren (29 October 2023). "For Netanyahu's Government, Israeli Hostages Are Just a Propaganda Tool". Jacobin. Retrieved 30 October 2023. In the article cited, we have the following:
"During the fighting, according to another resident of the kibbutz who was away at the time, “at least 112 Be’eri people were killed.”
In the Wikipedia article we have the following:
"Porat said Israeli soldiers killed hostage takers and hostages alike, and that an Israeli tank blasted buildings in which hostages were held. According to another resident who was away at the time, "at least 112 Be'eri people were killed" during the fighting." There is more than an implied correlation that the 112 killed -- or many of them, or not an insignificant number -- were killed by Israeli fire rather than the fire/torture by Hamas members. There is talk of a lot of "crossfire:" I do not find this to be very strong evidence for the "Hannibal Procedure/Directive."
The above excerpted paragraph of Mr. Cook also implies that among the several hundred IDF soldiers/security personnel killed on Oct. 7 and in the 48-72 hours thereafter, many were killed directly or indirectly by this "Hannibal Procedure/Directive." The "may in part" phrase. I find that implausible.
From a certain perspective, it is seductive to think that since Hamas achieved strategic surprise, that then the Israeli government/IDF intentionally and willfully targeted its own personnel systematically and in large numbers. The Deus ex machina variation of a "Hannibal Procedure/Directive."
Some arguments by some commentators would appear to both like the IDF to be proven to have been "incompetent," but then their analysis pivots and depicts Hamas as somehow incapable of killing large numbers of IDF military personnel with small arms, RPG, and heavy machine gun fire. In my analytical framework, if they -- Hamas -- are capable of achieving strategic surprise, then they are also capable of killing hundreds of IDF military/security personnel with small arms and light weapons fire. And there is evidence that some Hamas units were equipped with and used heavy machine guns.
Surprise, in its tactical form -- not just strategic -- is exceedingly difficult to overcome. From my perspective, the above directly quoted paragraph of Mr. Cook is at least one section of his commentary/analysis that is unconvincing.
Two Different Views:
https://victorhanson.com/one-sick-war/
https://voxday.net/2023/11/03/mailvox-why-international-opinion-matters/
And a post that is suspicious of the Israelis initial response:
https://voxday.net/2023/11/02/green-flag-confirmed/
I’m leaning towards incompetence and hubris, more than malice as the cause, with Hamas getting inside their ooda loop.
I did not know about the Hannibal Procedure.
BBC I don’t see as pro Israeli, but pro globalist and Dei.
I’m surprised at the Biden Administration new focus on Islamophobia with Kamala in charge. It sounds like something from the Babylon Bee. They are trying to keep their Dei voters happy by throwing them a bone, while somehow keeping Jewish Donors happy.
"I’m surprised at the Biden Administration new focus on Islamophobia"
Why would that surprise you? I wrote about this quite recently--the Muslim vote is very important for Dems in several hugely important states. Just yesterday the Dem party in MI wrote to Zhou telling him that the war on Palestinians is likely to cause Dems to lose the state.
The politics of hate crimes, what is focused on, and what is ignored is interesting.
https://public.substack.com/p/california-spent-110m-to-stop-asian
"You get what you vote for" translates into personalities and predictable policies. "Asians" vote overwhelming Dem, so they get what they vote for. No surprises.
The cognitive dissonance required on Asians backing the Asian Hate Issue, while ignoring the usual race of perpetrators surprises me.
Higher Education seems to do a great job of brain washing most Asian graduates to be good little dei believers. A possible example:
https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/11/how-did-student-patrick-dai-become-radicalized-at-cornell/
At least in Ca affirmative action in college admissions is theoretically banned as voters approved, as Scotus finally did. This is a huge issue for certain Asian populations.
I never, ever, read VDH.
Interesting reveal, can you say why?
I second the request for your thoughts on VDH.
I find him to be a broken record, for the most part. I found over time that even when I agreed with him he offered little added value. And on matters of war and peace I disagree with him entirely and find his thinking shallow.
Haha. I'm afraid I'm a bit of a broken record, too, on lots of issues. But unless VDH has changed his tune recently he is - incomprehensibly - a full on anti-Russia warhawk. That's where he lost me.
But I will always appreciate his courage in publishing The Case for Trump in 2019. In many respects it legitimized principled support for Donald Trump.
Thanks, Mark for taking the time to respond when I know you have a lot on your plate as evidenced by the terrific material you post. I was a fan of VDH, but stopped reading him some time ago. I will read an occasional essay of his if the headline grabs me, but like you I started to find he was repetitious and there was little in the way of solutions just a repeat of the same points.
Thank you. I liked him, if for no other reason, than the fact that Kevin D Williamson attacked him when they both were at National Review. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and all that.
Mark, if your column were published in a newspaper, I’d be at the newstand at 5am to be sure to get a copy, hot off the press! I and many of your readers are, I think, thankful and appreciate your moral courage, devotion to finding the truth and intellectual integrity in the face of this despairingly complex situation - open to all shades of commentary and not failing to respond, in a pointedly positive way, to those more extreme in their long-held beliefs and convictions. For me, just anecdotally, I used to listen to Radio 4 in the morning! It was such a breath of fresh air! But one day I couldn’t take their reporting any more about the US (elections, Trump etc.) and turned it off, relieved not to hear the smug, posh tones of Michelle Hussein again!!! Then Russia, Covid (and now the origins), Ukraine…in maintaining your high moral standards you’ve been a bastion of rationality and sanity in a sadlly fallen world.
ML you express sentiments many of us feel regarding Mark’s work. I think this says a lot about how enjoyable and eager we all are to have a forum that endeavors to provide the sort of information that we all seek to make sense of the state of our world both domestic and International. I suspect most readers here are intensely interested in history and how it shapes our present and the effects it has on the future. The comments that follow provide us with a community of like-minded and divergent views and opinions and is generally a hospitable environment in which we can express our thoughts and feelings without the rancorous clashes often found on other blogs. Like you I await the next
Post and gobble it up enthusiastically and then wait to hear what others say. In addition, those, like you who appear often become almost like friends as we share and debate the articles and the situation we find ourselves in. Well said.
Yes, I heartily agree. Cheers!
Everything about this makes Bibi look bad, one has to wonder whether factions orchestrated this to roll him out.
Mainstream liberal and mainstream non-liberal sites both have flaws. Sometimes it's clickbait topics, other times it's not wanting to offend the advertisers. I prefer debate to inform me in my pursuit of truth.
People post the dumbest comments regardless of any iota of truth. For the sole purpose of trying to be right. jmho
The BBC and Western MSM weave narratives, not truth, not facts, nor emotion. It's all about storytelling based on their perceptions of the "Global world order". Without narratives, anxiety will prevail with the general public. Their intent is to mold these narratives in a manner that brings calmness through control. The governments in charge dummy.
they deliberately targeted civilians, if scott or you can't see that, I think that's a failing, frankly this should be the end of the oslo delusion, so the international community that lavishes funds on the PA and the Strip will be an impartial arbiter, do tell, which denounces israel 100 x the rate it does to the Middle Kingdom or the Iranian regime
"they deliberately targeted civilians, if ... you can't see that"
Narciso, what's with your reading comprehension problem? I *quoted and bolded* these passages:
* Hamas undoubtedly committed war crimes on October 7 – not least, by taking civilians as human shields.
* Worse atrocities may have happened too,
* The issue is whether such atrocities were planned and systematic
* Video filmed by uniformed Hamas gunmen makes it clear they intentionally shot many Israelis
What more do I need to do so that you won't miss such passages? Or--more to the point--what do YOU need to do to avoid missing them?
The fact that Hamas targeted civilians shouldn't be the beginning or the end of the discussion.
"If ... you can't see that"
I've purposely limited my comments because the topic is so divisive. I've never been in combat but have 5 years active service and 25 years in state police so I've seen my share of brutal death. History teaches us that war is brutal, horrific, bloody and once engaged in can become a no holds barred affair that scars all involved.
Some estimates state that 10,000 French civilians died during the Normandy campaign. The lions share from Allied artillery and air power. Tens of thousands of Japanese civilians were burned to death by Curtis Lemay and our pilots engaged in fire-bombing Japan. In fact, Lemay planned to burn the whole country down if he had to. Was he wrong??
Japanese soldiers engaged in devilish brutality in combat and against captives. We paid them back by burning them alive, blasting them out of every cave and hole they hid in or sealing them in so they could slowly suffocate in their doom. Who was right in all that mayhem?? Given today's morality I guess all would be guilty of some sort of evil. Maybe this is all apples to oranges but...whatever.
Civilians caught up in all this crap is God-awful terrible and I feel for them ALL- Gazan or Israeli. War sucks but, is inevitable, as long as humans walk the earth. The only way to truly win them is to crush your enemies will and capacity to resist. Maybe the world should back off and let these people sort it out. To me (and I've been slapped down here a bit for stating this) - it's been going on at some level for a couple thousand years. Finish it and whatever side wins, we deal with it.
"let these people sort it out?
Isn't it rather late for that? The Western thumb has been on the scale for over a hundred years. If the West backs off, the Jews will probably face horrific decimation--at best. I don't want to see that. How about this: Instead of allowing a bloody sorting out, why not a truly international commission to formulate a human outcome?
How would you enforce a commission? Both sides are vicious. Like putting your had into a dogfight.
Maybe that's an option. Reality is what it is though? Peacekeepers? How has that worked out long term? I started reading your substack because it made me think in ways I hadn't before - still does and I'm appreciative. I have learned here that the West isn't guiltless - far from it. Corrupt western governments - including ours - have done things that make my blood boil. What now? How can those same governments insert themselves between these two sides and have an outcome that is long lasting? I hope I'm wrong but I don't see it.
"Corrupt western governments - including ours - have done things that make my blood boil. What now? How can those same governments insert themselves between these two sides"
Why not bring in other governments? Oh, wait, we can't allow that, nor can Israel, because Israel has no guilt hold over non-Western governments.
The only constant is Jew hatred. Kill the Jews
I’m not calling for genocide. I’m expressing the opinion of what is going on in the world. What they want to do to us.
That view puts you in a box from which there's no escape. Why place yourself in a no-win position?
Let’s agree to disagree. I’ll comment on other issues.
Joseph -- I don't see universal "Jew hatred" in the present situation. I see disagreement by some (by no means by all) with some Israeli policies and actions, some of which disagreement seems to be deeply felt. But surely disagreement does not necessarily constitute hatred? Nor does criticism of Israel (whether or not legitimate) necessarily constitute criticism of Jews, nor of all Jews. Does it? I also see some negative stereotyping of Jews (especially on message boards which are far more tolerant than Mark about mindless screaming) which, like all stereotyping, is often unfair and untrue, and certainly not applicable to all members of a group. I also notice that many groups are subject to criticism in this our polarized world. Unfortunately I myself belong to some of these maligned groups. I also don't see how criticism of any group (or portion of a group) necessarily equates to hatred. And then, yes, there is some hatred. To my mind hatred is generally not a very constructive emotion. I think we are always better off trying to get to the bottom of our differences, rather than letting them fester and/or descend into 'hatred'. But, yes, sometimes human emotions, justifiably or unjustifiably, result in 'hatred'. In this case, to the extent it exists, I would only ask...with all due respect...why? If we could get to the bottom of 'why' we might be able to repair some of the deep divisions. Don't feel obligated to answer, Joseph, my observations are in most respects merely rhetorical.
For the record, I have deleted comments that are specifically anti-semitic. I sometimes ban the authors. Just as I ban commenters who deny the existence of Palestinians.
You can comment on anything you want. I just don't like to see you succumb to a destructive emotion. These aren't easy issues.
Sorry, that's paranoiac nonsense. I realize it runs deep, and I also realize you've exercised a lot of restraint in your comments thus far. But why not start on a new road--the recognition that two wrongs don't make a right.
I realize you've been here a long time, but I won't tolerate calls for genocide.
There's an alarming rise in anti-semitism, Joseph. There are also a lot of people calling for the death of ordinary Palestinians too. Crazies on both sides.
Observation from a news junkie who tries to read *everything*--Drudge, MoA, many Substacks, MacGregor, Duran, MIH, and plenty more (note: a mix of the political spectrum)--initially, the Hamas bunch were rightly perceived as "the bad guys" on October 7th. One day later and for subsequent weeks, IL has overreacted and received condemnation globally. Now, everybody--Hamas, IL, the US Admin (esp.)--are the bad guys. The propaganda fog is lifting and the picture is coming in clearer.
There are no 'clean shirts' in this dirty laundry hamper. The barbarism on both sides has been horrific.
I'd almost like to move back to the UK in order join the millions who refuse to pay the BBC licence fee. As for atrocities, this all dovetails in with Larry Johnson's latest post at Sonar21 (graphic video) https://sonar21.com/israel-faces-mounting-diplomatic-isolation/
As Larry said yesterday, Israel may be winning the military conflict (even that is debatable), but it is catastrophically losing the the PR war. It seems that the Israelis have fallen into the same trap as the their US/UK neocon brethren of using the same bully boy tactics that once worked so well in the past, but which have now lost the power to shock and awe their increasingly sophisticated opponents.
Once we label the other side as "animals", we feel justified in doing anything to them. This is the result of 70+ years of hatred on both sides.
Wasn't one of the lessons from WWII to *not ever* fall into the trap of labelling people as animals? Our elites are playing with fire.
I'm keeping my eyes on the LORD as my refuge and rock, so as to keep my serenity and not be led by blind emotion. To your point, Citizen Free Press was labelling Hamas as "pigs." Whipping everyone into a frenzy doesn't help. "Love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, soul, mind and strength" and "Love thy neighbor as thyself" are a good foundation as we are challenged with violence, immorality, despair, propaganda and atrocities on a daily basis.
Agreed. CFP has gone full war pig, as has American Thinker.
Yes. The Federalist, American Greatness and American Spectator to a lesser extent, too.
As the Clash sang back in 1978: "All the peace maker turned war officer"
War is ugly.