Diary of disturbing disinformation and dangerous delusions
This tweet:
We say: Rep. Tlaib clearly knows her call for a “free Palestine from the river to the sea” is repugnant, not to mention inflammatory.
That’s why she lies about what it means: Anti-Israel activists readily admit they use the phrase as a call to eradicate Israel — from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.
And Tlaib refuses to recognize Israel’s right to exist, yet pretends she wants “peaceful coexistence”? No wonder the House censured her.
This remark:
“Nobody’s hands are clean. . . . All of us are complicit.”
— Pres. Barack Obama, Saturday
We say: Imagine someone calling both sides complicit after 9/11. Americans would’ve seen that as morally vile.
Yet 10/7 arguably hit Israelis far worse. And Israel did nothing to provoke that barbarous massacre.
Only one side is complicit in that attack: Hamas. And Obama is guilty of trying to excuse it.
This claim:
“A child in Gaza [is] killed every 10 minutes.”
— MSNBC’s Mehdi Hasan, Sunday
We say: Pure Hamas propaganda, meant to halt Israel’s retaliation and protect the terror group from consequences for its 10/7 attack.
Hasan’s stats, after all, come from the “Gaza Health Ministry,” overseen by . . . Hamas; they can’t be trusted for a minute.
And if kids are dying, it’s because Hamas uses them as human shields and targets all who try to evacuate so they’re caught in the crossfire of a war Hamas started.
This story:
“Under Scrutiny Over Gaza, Israel Points to Civilian Toll of U.S. Wars”
— The New York Times
We say: It’s a Times two-fer: The paper slams wartime actions by America (in places like Hiroshima) and Israel (in Gaza) that led to civilian casualties — while also blasting Israelis for citing the US casualty record to justify Israel’s own.
Israel, the paper reports, says it’s trying to limit casualties. Yet the Times clearly sides with “human rights advocates” who “scoff at that,” accusing Israel of “war crimes.”
And by making this minor story the paper’s front-page lead, it leaves no doubt about its outrage.
Hmm: Would the Times prefer if a million people died in a ground war in Japan in World War II, or for Hamas to be left intact and free to slaughter Israelis endlessly?
Compiled by The Post Editorial Board