Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
July 28, 2014

NBCNews Buries Its Own Journalist's Eyes, Modifies Gaza Story

About an hour ago I copied a piece from NBCNEWS to later use it as part of a (different) blogpost. It was headlined: Strikes Near Gaza's Shifa Hospital, Refugee Camp Kill or Hurt 30 (emphasis added)

Israeli strikes hit within yards of Gaza's main hospital as well as at a refugee camp on Monday, leaving at least 30 dead and wounded.

The explosion near Shifa Hospital around 5 p.m. local time (10 a.m. ET) caused some damage to the outpatient clinic, according to witnesses including an NBC News crew on the ground in the area. There was no immediate confirmation of deaths or injuries.

Another strike occurred at the Al-Shati refugee camp in northern Gaza. At least 30 dead and wounded were brought to Shifa Hospital in ambulances, civilian cars and on motorcycles. A NBC News team in the area said the strikes were in "close succession."

The Israel Defense Forces told Haaretz that a “preliminary investigation has found the Israeli army did not fire at the Shifa Hospital, and the fire is believed to have been Hamas.” The IDF could not immediately be reached to clarify that account on Monday. However, a NBC News journalist witnessed the attack on the hospital and said it had been fired by an Israeli drone.

The piece now, under the same URL and headline (link above) reads:

Missiles or rockets struck within yards of Gaza's main hospital and a nearby refugee camp Monday, leaving at least 30 dead and wounded.

The Israeli military denied reports its forces were responsible for the strikes, saying they were the result of rockets misfired by Palestinian militants.

The explosion near Shifa Hospital around 5 p.m. local time (10 a.m. ET) caused some damage to the outpatient clinic, according to witnesses including an NBC News crew on the ground in the area. There was no immediate confirmation of deaths or injuries.

Another strike occurred at the Al-Shati refugee camp in northern Gaza. A Palestinian health official says at least 10 people, including children, were killed in Monday's strikes. An NBC News team in the area said the strikes were in "close succession."

The Israel Defense Forces said in a statement that failed rocket launches were to blame.

"A short while ago Al-Shifa hospital was struck by a failed rocket attack launched by Gaza terror organizations. A barrage of three rockets that were aimed towards Israel, struck the hospital. At the time of the incident there was no Israeli military activity in the area surrounding the hospital whatsoever. "

Early reports from the ground said an Israeli drone was responsible for the attack.

An Israeli strike, witnessed by an NBC journalist as being fired by a drone, turns into anonymous "missiles or rockets" in the second variant of the piece. This after the IDF came up with some of its typical "they did it" stories.

The NBC journalist who witnessed the drone turns into anonymous "early reports from the ground".

There is no correction remark attached to the story.

Posted by b on July 28, 2014 at 16:49 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page

@88 "When it comes to the notion of Exceptionalism, the Protestant Fundamentalists merely borrowed the already existing bullshit embedded in the (Jewish) Old Testament"

That's a good point foff. But I still think Christian Zionism can be traced back to the Reformation. And that is the point bevin is making in his usual polite, scholarly manner.

Posted by: dh | Jul 29 2014 20:09 utc | 101

the Zio-Nazi fascist government is not a curious relic of the days of Mussolini and Hitler

hilarious you should make that claim, because the Zio-Nazi gov't is currently lead by Likud - and Likud was formed by Menachim Begin.

In Poland in the 1930's Menachim Begin used to be a member of a Jewish fascist group called Betar.

One of the things Betar were well known for was parading around in Black Shirts and for making a right-armed salute identical to the one made famous by the Nazis

In fact here is a photo of BETAR in BERLIN in 1936. http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=snlx5k&s=7#.U9f-1NdEK9U

Those not in the employ of Tel Aviv will note that 1936 is AFTER the NAZIS came to power -

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 20:10 utc | 102

And that is the point bevin is making in his usual polite, scholarly dishonest manner

That's not what he is doing at all - he is attempting to shift all the blame for Jewish Fascist Racist Supremacism (Zionism) onto non-Jews (in his usual polite, scholarly dishonest manner)

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 20:12 utc | 103

@103 SOME of the blame foff. Be honest.

Posted by: dh | Jul 29 2014 20:19 utc | 104

MOST of the blame dh, be honest

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 20:23 utc | 105

I notice you didn't even bother to try claiming that the bevin was NOT trying to dishonestly shift the blame away from the Jewish Racist Supremacists though.

That at least WAS honest of you

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 20:25 utc | 106

Well his original post was pretty clear. He was tracing Zionism back to the Puritans. Jewish exceptionalism of course goes back much further than that. I don't think bevin let anybody off the hook.

I won't be replying to whatever pointless rejoinder you come up with.

Posted by: dh | Jul 29 2014 20:33 utc | 107

Actually my 105 is incorrect

He actually did say

The Zionism in Israel is entirely derived from the theory and practice of the Puritan leadership of English settlers in New England.

So he is actually attempting to divert ALL the blame from the Zio-Nazis onto Christians (in his usual polite, scholarly dishonest manner)

Nothing the Zio-Nazis have done in Palestine is inconsistent with the contents of the TORAH and how it discuss what should be done with the so-called AMALEK for instance.

And Modern Zio-Nazis have spent a lot of energy promoting crazy Rabbis that like to go around portraying Palestinians as AMALEK

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 20:34 utc | 108

I won't be replying to whatever pointless rejoinder you come up with.

good - save us both a lot of time and energy

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 20:35 utc | 109

Genocide in the Torah

The existential threat of Amalek.
By Shmuly Yanklowitz


In 2006 Conservative Rabbi Jack Reimer, Bill Clinton's rabbinic counsel during his presidency, created a stir when he associated Islamic fundamentalism with the biblical nation of Amalek.

"I am becoming convinced that Islamic Fundamentalism, or, as some people prefer to call it, 'Islamo-fascism,' is the most dangerous force that we have ever faced and that it is worthy of the name: Amalek. We must recognize who Amalek is in our generation, and we must prepare to fight it in every way we can. And may God help us in this task."war and peace quiz
Who is Amalek?

According to the book of Exodus, Amalek is the nation that attacked the weakest among the Israelites as they fled from Egypt. This transgression was not to go unpunished. The Torah has a harsh prescription for Amalek: annihilation.

"It shall be that when Hashem, your God, gives you rest from all your enemies all around, in the Land that Hashem, your God, gives you as an inheritance to possess it, you shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under the heaven. Do not forget it!" (Deuteronomy 25: 19; also see Exodus 17:14 and Numbers 24:20)

Blotting out the memory of Amalek was no mere psychological activity. The Israelites were expected to kill every Amalekite--man, woman, and child. But was this just a theoretical imperative or was it meant to be carried out?

The book of Samuel implies that it required actual fulfillment: "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox, and sheep, camel and ass,"(Samuel I, 15:3). King Saul struck down Amalek as he was commanded but he then took mercy upon King Agag and upon some of the Amalekite animals. God and the prophet Samuel harshly criticized Saul for not fulfilling God's word.

The point, of course, is that an invocation of Amalek is serious business. Rabbi Reimer wasn't issuing a literal call to arms, but by associating "Islamo-Fascists" with Amalek, Rabbi Reimer was referencing the Jewish tradition's genocidal instincts. Jewish authorities have struggled with this commandment for centuries, but the issue is perhaps even more urgent now.

The Torah is more than 1,000 years older than the Christian Bible

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 20:39 utc | 110

Public approval ratings for Netanyahu now over 80%, up 25% post Gaza invasion. Unlike Putin Netanyahoos due to genocide

Posted by: brian | Jul 29 2014 23:01 utc | 111

Probably a daft point of view, but it has often struck me that the typical immigrant to Israel has a "get out of jail free card" in the form of dual nationality. Dual nationals have little incentive to get along with their neighbours: they can behave as badly as they wish knowing they have boltholes should TSHTF.
My suggestion is: pressure governments to revoke dual nationality for Israelis.

Posted by: Cortes | Jul 29 2014 23:02 utc | 112

The problem is, bevin in places overstates and distorts the respective proportions of American ruling class control and of the ethnic nature of Zionism---but if you tell Robert Gates (check his interview with Charlie Rose the other night) that, he and Dick Cheney will call you anti-semites before they will offer anything but the most carte blanch-iest sanctions of Israeli state terror against Gazans.

Sizer did mention Scofield.

Bevin clearly blames the perpetrators themselves as well as the Robert Gateses. It is all a question of proportion.

"The Israeli people caught up in hysterical lynch mob violence and blinded by the racism of imagined superiority as much as the racism of hatred, have now committed themselves irrevocably; there can be no more sentimental linking of the terrible things that have happened to Jews in the past with crude rationalisations for the establishment of this colonial state. The present outweighs the past. The guilt for what is being done at this moment is inescapable and it cries out for punishment."

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/07/29/terrorism-israelgaza-context/

Greenwald, also unfairly maligned on this site as a phony also blames the perpetrators. God, his "fake" partner, Edward Snowden might blame them too.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jul 30 2014 0:30 utc | 113

there's an online petition to get Bob Schieffer of CBS fired...

http://org.salsalabs.com/o/641/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=16181

Posted by: crone | Jul 30 2014 1:55 utc | 114

the difference between bevin and Priceless, nee l.o.l., Tor, f.o.f.f. etc etc, is simple - bevin hates imperialism, murder, theft in all its forms, while our "friend" hates it only when it is done by those whom he personally hates. Afterall, he has no problem pussyfooting naziism, attacking with outright Nazi/Svoboda lies the Socialist project, or even going after minor figures like Greenwald while letting a fascist like Sharon rest peacefully. These are - to the fascist - acceptable displays of force from "the betters", "the strong", "the smart". But of course he is disgusted to see bevin hold to principles as opposed to personality. Which is why he spends all his time going after bevin while he has hardly a peep in opposition to the fascistcrimes occurring in Ukraine, Syria, and Gaza. Make no mistake - this fixed paranoid gets more excised over seeing begin draw together all manner of crimes without pinning them on the objects of his hate than he does seeing a thousand murdered in Gaza, or a thousand of those "drunken, fetal alcohol syndrome Russians" (his words) be killed in the Ukraine.

Posted by: guest77 | Jul 30 2014 2:37 utc | 115

OK so when begins the jihad on israel? if they can attack a state like syria, whos govt wasnt attacknig its people.why are not jihadis zeroing in on the unholy land?
we see huge ralllies for palestine, yet no action. So keen to go aid their fellows in syria, silent on Gaza..
jihadis still pour into syria....youd think some would detour thru israel

Posted by: brian | Jul 30 2014 7:53 utc | 116

Western created Takfiris and Zionists. Which is worse?

http://rt.com/news/176528-islamic-state-iraq-video/

Very difficult to say.

Posted by: Amar | Jul 30 2014 8:48 utc | 117

A very interesting revelation here, by Brzezinsky himself. A must-read for all the "believers" here:

http://osnetdaily.com/2014/07/brzezinski-outed-as-lord-protector-of-muslim-brotherhood-in-gaza/

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 30 2014 12:02 utc | 118

The problem is, bevin in places overstates and distorts the respective proportions of American ruling class control and of the ethnic nature of Zionim

Posted by: truthbetold | Jul 29, 2014 8:30:21 PM | 113

Bevin's problem is that he never misses an opportunity to deflect blame AWAY from the Jewish Zio-Nazi racists and onto Christians - he does it every time he has an opportunity. As if the poor Jewish Zio-Nazis are nothing but poor slaves of those nasty Christian overlords, forced against their will, to mimic the historical genocidal actions of those nasty nasty christians

The real problem is that the fool actually dismiss any explanation that involves laying the blame for Jewish Zio-Nazi behaviour at the feet of the Jewish ZioNazis themselves. This is not the first time this subject has come up and it is not the first time he has behaved in exactly the same fashion - ranting that it's ALL the fault of someone else and claiming anyone that disagrees with him is an Anti-Semite/Racist

but if you tell Robert Gates (check his interview with Charlie Rose the other night) that, he and Dick Cheney will cal, l you anti-semites

Yes - exactly like bevin - he too calls people Anti-Semites when they point out Jewish ZioNazi complicity for Jewish Zio-Nazi crimes - he has already done it 2 times in this thread alone. Curious that those nasty Imperialists Gates and Cheney behave exactly the same way as bevin when the subject comes up for discussion, ain't it?

Sizer did mention Scofield.

Yes, Sizer did, and I was wrong to say he didn't. The result of reading too quickly.

BUT, it was very very easy to miss Sizer's reference to Scofield as it was the briefest mention possible - mentioning his name only and only mentioning that he had met Darby, nothing more. No mention of WHO Scofiled was and his place in the story of Christian Zionism.

Anyone reading Sizer's piece would be left with the impression that John Nelson Darby was a far far more influential figure in the rise of Christian Zionism in the US than Scofield. Such a view would not only be merely mistaken, but downright ludicrous.

Scofield is far too important a character in the story of Crhistian Zionism to be dismissed in this manner. Scofield is one of the most important figures in this story. And Sizer treats him like a non-entity.

Why is that?

No true scholar would treat Scofiled's role in the creation of Christian Zionism in such a cursory manner.

Scofield is responsible for creating the Scofield Bible, used by Christian Fundamentalists in place of a real bible (or what passes for a real bible anyway). Scofield's bible is chock full of footnotes re-interpreting the passages in the bible in a Pro-Zionist fashion.

That is it's only purpose.

For this he was handsomely rewarded by Jewish Zionist and Wall Street banker Samuel Untermeyer.

So far your friend bevin remains silent on the thorny question of why Jewish Zionist and Wall Street banker Samuel Untermeyer paid Scofield to re-interpret the CHRISTIAN Bible. Along with Mr Sizer, your friend bevin wants to pretend that never happened.

IMO Sizer leaves out Scofied's and Untermeyer's roles in creating modern Christian Zionism simply because it makes a bit of a mockery of his neat little "Ultimate Blame lies with those horrible Christians" theory.

Bevin is attracted to Sizer's theory because, like Sizer, bevin is firmly in the "Ultimate Blame lies with those horrible Christians" camp as he demonstrates here every time the subject comes up. Just like that other fake Anti-Zionist, Chompsky

Bevin clearly blames the perpetrators themselves as well as the Robert Gateses. It is all a question of proportion.

Yes and as usual his proportions are massively skewed in favour of the Zio-Nazis - here's what he actually said:


The Zionism in Israel is entirely derived from the theory and practice of the Puritan leadership of English settlers in New England.

It's his opening statement so, yes, he IS actually attempting to divert ALL the blame from the Zio-Nazis onto Christians (in his usual polite, scholarly dishonest manner)

And this despite the fact that is can be easily demonstrated that the Zio-Nazis have more than enough genocidal impulses pre-programmed into their own religious works, and thus into their culture. It can be easily demonstrated that ALL (or almost all) the genocidal passages in the religious works of Christians are actually borrowed from the pre-existing genocidal passage in the Hebrew holy books.

Bevin, with his pathological desire to go hunting for Christians to pin the blame on instead of on the Zio-Nazis, ignores completely the pro-genocide culture to be found in the Hebrew holy books.

Modern Christian fundamentalism is essentially the result of a collaboration between a Jewish Zionazi Wall St Banker and a convicted fraudster - but you won't find any mention of that in bevin rants. None whatsoever. Your friend bevin ain't interested in that part of the story because it would complicate his pathetically simplistic "Blame the christians" bullshit.

Jews were at well represented in every Imperialist enterprise in the last 400 years - in the decision making processes, in the role of financiers, and on the ground as well. One would NEVER know any of that from reading a bevin rant on the subject - for bevin it's all "Christians, Christians christians" and dare anyone question that he'll retreat into Gates and Cheney m ode and scream Anti-Semite like a good little well- trained fake left dogmatist

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 30 2014 12:28 utc | 119


As for Greenwald - who but you and the gimp77 cares? Greenwald has nothing to do with this discussion.

Greenwald's job is not to protect Israel. It's to fool people into thinking that he and Snowden are anti-establishment heroes (and there's fools enough here claiming exactly that) - if he has to take swipes at Israel to maintain that false-image, then so be it.

And poor useless old gimp77, obviously still butt-hurt after losing argument after argument, due mainly to his own stupidity of engaging in arguments on subjects he knows almost nothing about.

Not surprising really when one considers that as a US Union Organiser (or so he has claimed, but then he lies so much who knows if even that is true?) he clearly never achieved a thing in all his years " organising" -green with jealousy when he meets someone more knowledgeable who can actually think for themselves, rather than trail along after bevin, eager to act as his little pit-poodle lapdog, spouting moronic lies and equally moronic fake-left dogma.

Possibly the most useless political organiser on the planet. A north american lefty, not one of them are any use for anything, except running interference for Zio-Nazis like he has been pre-programmed to do

First he defended CIA Stooge Sy Hersh,

then he leaped to the defence of CIA Stooge Gleen Greenwald

he even leaped to the defence of CIA stooge Juan Cole

One thing is for sure whenever there's a CIA stooge to be defended there will one find Gimp77 defending them

Why is that this site's two most vociferously ineffectual North American Lefty pseudo-intellectual commenters always seem to be defending the CIA Stooges?

That they continue to do so loooooong after it has become obvious to even the dimmest of of dim-bulbs that the CIA Stooges they are defending are clearly CIA Stooges, is the icing on the cake though

The most gimp77 ever achieved was asking some geek aquaintance to program "I agree with bevin" into one of the function keys on his keyboard.

Not an original thought in his poor empty little head and he really hates anyone else that does.

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 30 2014 12:39 utc | 120

OK so when begins the jihad on israel? if they can attack a state like syria, whos govt wasnt attacknig its people.why are not jihadis zeroing in on the unholy land?
we see huge ralllies for palestine, yet no action. So keen to go aid their fellows in syria, silent on Gaza..
jihadis still pour into syria....youd think some would detour thru israel

Posted by: brian | Jul 30, 2014 3:53:37 AM | 116

Brian, stop with the highly relevant intelligent questions - you'll just upset the fake-left dogmatists..

they're addicted to their "Coincidence/Incompetence" theories because it helps them resist any original thought - having consumed so much fake-left dogma over the decades, they don't have any space left in their poor little noggins for actual intelligent reasoning

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 30 2014 13:12 utc | 121

a thousand of those "drunken, fetal alcohol syndrome Russians" (his words)

Posted by: guest77 | Jul 29, 2014 10:37:18 PM | 115

Poor confused doddering old gimp

Newsflash for the Gimp:

Not everyone that kicks the copious crap out of your ignorant ass in an argument is me.

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 30 2014 13:15 utc | 122

@ brian: this IS a jihad on Israel right now, paired with cleansing of Arabs in the process. But you will only realize it after Israel ceases to exist (if the "elites" plan works, that is). See my link above and read all the linked articles too.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 30 2014 15:19 utc | 123

From Zero Hedge:
"Shocked" White House Slams "Fabrication" After Israel TV Leaks Damning Transcript Of Obama-Netanyahu Phone Call
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-29/shocked-white-house-slams-fabrication-after-israel-tv-leaks-damning-transcript-obama

So what happened next? Something rather stunning according to the US State Department, and which according to BBC reporter Paul Danahar, constitutes "a severe violation of a private discussions" - Israel’s Channel 1 decided to publish a Hebrew transcript of a portion of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama’s telephone conversation which took place on Sunday, in which Obama was insistent that Israel unilaterally halt all military activities in the Gaza Strip. As is quite clear by now, Israel rejected, and the bloodshed continued.

The transcript, as shown by the Times of Israel was as follows:
The following is an English translation of the Hebrew account of the talk given in the report:

Barack Obama: I demand that Israel agrees to an immediate, unilateral ceasefire and halt all offensive activities, in particular airstrikes.
Benjamin Netanyahu: And what will Israel receive in exchange for a ceasefire?
BO: I believe that Hamas will cease its rocket fire — silence will be met with silence.
BN: Hamas broke all five previous ceasefires. It’s a terrorist organization dedicated to the destruction of Israel.
BO: I repeat and expect Israel to stop all its military activities unilaterally. The pictures of destruction in Gaza distance the world from Israel’s position.
BN: Kerry’s proposal was completely unrealistic and gives Hamas military and diplomatic advantages.
BO: Within a week of the end of Israel’s military activities, Qatar and Turkey will begin negotiations with Hamas based on the 2012 understandings, including Israel’s commitment to removing the siege and restrictions on Gaza.
BN: Qatar and Turkey are the biggest supporters of Hamas. It’s impossible to rely on them to be fair mediators.
BO: I trust Qatar and Turkey. Israel is not in the position that it can choose its mediators.
BN: I protest because Hamas can continue to launch rockets and use tunnels for terror attacks –
BO: (interrupting Netanyahu) The ball’s in Israel’s court, and it must end all its military activities.

One can quickly see why the US would quickly disavow any credibility of this report: after all it wouldn't look very good for the leader of the free world if the leader of another state, one which on top of it all is reliant on the former for continued military and economic support, flat out rejected what amounted to a demand from the US. As expected the denial was prompt with the US administration calling the quotations "fabrications", "shocking", and "disappointing"

Despite the denials, Israel's Channel 1 refused to retract the leaked statement. Worse, it revealed the source of the leak as a "senior American official."
Despite rejections by American and Israeli officials, Channel 1?s Or Nahari insists that the transcript leaked to him by a “senior American official” is authentic, but acknowledges that the quotes he published were merely an excerpt from a long conversation.


Posted by: pantaraxia | Jul 30 2014 15:21 utc | 124

Oy;The Zionist Jews are innocent victims of Christianity.You really want us to scroll on eh?
Pathetic and mendacious BS.
Comparing 16th century people,stuck in their unscientific and brutal existence of kill or be killed,to modern peoples allegedly learned and sophisticated,is an exercise in stupidity,and apples to oranges.The Ziomonsters eschew enlightenment and the commonality of humanity,and are a regressive evil force.

Posted by: dahoit | Jul 30 2014 15:23 utc | 125

Another thing that pleases the Zionist imperialists is when righteous indignation climbs down to banal BS.

Posted by: dahoit | Jul 30 2014 15:29 utc | 126

And,BTW,any one who puts Old Testament hatred ahead of New Testament humanity,aint a Christian,despite their claims of being one.

Posted by: dahoit | Jul 31 2014 14:45 utc | 127

Yes, so-called "Christian" Zionists are not really "Christian" at all - they focus almost exclusively on the Old Testament, which is a Jewish Religious work, and are therefore far more Jewish than "Christian"

"Christian Zionism" is a completely deceptive misnomer, a deliberate one IMO, conjured up by the likes of Jewish Zionist Wall St Banker Samuel Untermeyer.

They are little more than sect that claims to be "Christian" but in fact rejects the Christ-related part of the Bible, The NEW Testament, in favour of the Jewish Part of the bible - therefore they are essentially Jewish

In the Gospels Jesus explicitly REJECTS Judaism as a false religion. He identifies the Pharisees as murders and liars

In focusing on the Old Testament the so-called "Christian Zionists" are in fact rejecting Christianity completely and embracing what Jesus rejected : the false religion of Judaism - which is pretty much what one would expect from a group that resulted from the collaboration between a Jewish Zionist Wall St Banker and a convicted fraudster

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 31 2014 16:29 utc | 128

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.