FIGHTING BACK.
The headline in today’s UK Telegraph reads: “Blair: Terrorists cannot be beaten without force”.[1]
Blair’s quite right – that’s why the Palestinians are fighting the Israeli terrorists that occupy the West Bank and the Gaza and why the Iraqis are fighting the US terrorists and their allies that occupy Iraq.
SOME VERY UNSUBTLE PROPAGANDA FROM THE AUSSIE MURDOCH PRESS.
The Murdoch press just can’t help themselves. While it now seems that the rocket fired at the US Embassy was launched by a Greek left-wing group, The Australian, owned by the neoconservative Murdoch, just had to mention ‘Iran’ in the very first paragraph of their story despite the fact that Iran had absolutely nothing to do with it.
The headline read: “Rocket hits US Embassy”. The first paragraph of the story reads: “The US embassy in Athens was yesterday pierced by an anti-tank shell in what Greek police called an "act of terrorism", a day after America escalated its war in Iraq and warned Iran it would not "stand idly by" if Tehran continued to arm Iraq's insurgents.”[2]
Que?
ENDNOTES
[1] George Jones, ‘Blair: Terrorists cannot be beaten without force’, UK Telegraph, 12 January 2007. Available online: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=OKYIKNHLST2H3QFIQMGCFF4AVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2007/01/12/nblair112.xml Accessed 13 January 2007.
[2] ‘Rockets hit US Embassy’, The Australian, 14 January 2007. Available online: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21051496-601,00.html Accessed 14 January 2007.
AUSTRALIANS AT WAR
THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a compelling factual history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century. Click on image above for details.
4 comments:
In this case, why would you support Palestinian violence against Israel?
I didn't say I supported violence of any sort. I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy and stupidity of Western propaganda in the mainstream media.
Does your question infer that you support Israeli violence against Palestinians?
No, my question does not infer I support violence of any kind.
In the past, though, you have descrbed the Israeli side of the conflict as 'terrorist'. Indeed, you have argued that the only terrorism in the Middle East is that caused by Israel and the United States.
If, for the sake of argument, we accept your premise that Israel is a terrorist state, then the armed attacks and violence employed by the Palestinians against the Israelis is useless, right? Because, to quote Blair whom in this case you believe is 'quite right', "Terrorists cannot be beaten with force".
Is it true then that violence against the Israeli "terrorists" (as you would and have called them) is a bad way to gain freedom for the Palestinian people?
Are you unable to recognise cynicism when you see it? Quoting Blair in this context was being cynical.
Whether I think violence by Palestinians against Israelis that are committing violence against them as part of their ethnic cleaning program is ‘bad’ or not is neither here nor there, though I would support the right of the Palestinians to protect themselves against Israeli aggression. The Palestinians have the right of self defence against a nation that has invaded, occupied, oppressed and is now trying to ethnically cleanse them from their lands.
Israel is on property that does not belong to them. They should move back to their 1967 lines. Peace may then just be possible.
You should now declare yourself or your next post will be trashed.
Post a Comment