Skip to main content

The US media’s six lies about Hamas

by Joyce Chediac

The Israeli government killed more than 60 Palestinian people demonstrating at the Gaza border, and wounded 12,000. According to Amnesty International, “Eyewitness testimonies, video and photographic evidence suggest that many were deliberately killed or injured while posing no immediate threat to the Israeli soldiers.

Israel and the U.S are trying to hide the reality of this massacre and war crimes against unarmed population by shifting the focus and the responsibility to Hamas, the Palestinian organization which administers the government in Gaza. The U.S. corporate media are willingly assisting in this vilification of Hamas, often repeating as fact the exact same boldface lies found in Israeli and U.S. press releases, and even in the exact words. Here are a few.

Lie one: Hamas is responsible for the death of more than 60 Palestinians by irresponsibly encouraging them to demonstate at Gaza’s border with Israel.

Lest there be any confusion, Palestinians weren’t killed by Hamas, but by Israeli soldiers under the orders of Israeli generals with Remington M24 sniper rifles gifted by the Pentagon. The media blames Hamas for everything that happens in Gaza because it is the government there. In the same way, Assad is blamed in the press for every death in Syria, even though the U.S. armed and trained the opposition. And the Maduro government of Venezuela is blamed by CNN and Fox for the economic hardship there even though Washington has economically sanctioned that country, and funds a rightwing opposition.

Lie two: Hamas is a terrorist organization that doesn’t recognize Israel’s ‘right to exist.’

The country that is not allowed it’s “right to exist” is Palestine. Since the Oslo Accords, there have been 19 years of U.S.-brokered talks between Israel and the Palestine Authority to establish a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. During the time Israeli has moved 100,000 settlers to the West Bank, and steadily annexed huge tracts of land so that on a map the parts that remain under Palestinian control look like the holes in Swiss cheese. Israeli troops storm anywhere at will, regularly killing, arresting and jailing Palestinians for indeterminate periods. Israel has waged major war on Gaza twice, and is strangling it with a siege.

Palestinians have also raised having a democratic secular Palestine with the right of return for refugees and equal rights for all. Israel has not only rejected this idea, but declared itself to be an exclusively Jewish state even though 20 percent of Israeli citizens are Palestinian. Israel prevents Palestinian refugees from returning to their land and homes simply because they are not Jewish. Israeli apartheid has been declared a war crime under international law, and called worse than South African Apartheid by South African activists. In truth Israel won’t even recognize that Palestinian people have a “right to exist.”

Lie three: Hamas called the demonstrations and is responsible for provoking Israel.

The protest was a mass outpouring, begun by an individual, marking the 70th anniversary of the forcible expulsion of Palestinians from the country and the replacement of Palestine with Israel. The goal of the protest was to end to the siege of Gaza and to exercise the people’s right to return to lands just over Gaza’s border which was owned by their families before the expulsion 70 years ago. The protest was endorsed by and participated in by every group political group in Gaza, and civil, legal, and social service groups. Tens of thousands of people came out to the encampment and protests, from the very old to the very young. People lived there, there were cultural and children’s programs, there were marriages there.

Lie four: Armed Hamas terrorist were cowardardly hiding among the people.

The protests were heavily covered by Palestinian and other media, even though Israeli discouraged this by killing two reporters wearing clothing clearly identifying them as press, and wounding many other reporters. Participants posted many photos and videos of the events on social media. Some Palestinians used slingshots to hurl stones in the direction of the Israel snipers, behind two fences, earth fortifications, and tens or even hundreds of yards away. Only one side had the guns. NO one was “hiding among the people.” This WAS the Palestinian people.

Lie five: Israel was legitimately defending its borders.

Israel is the only state in the world which has never declared where its borders are. This is because it has plans to expand permanently into Arab lands. At one time or another it has occupied and/or annexed all of historic Palestine as well as territory of all of its neighboring countries—Syria (the Golan Heights have been annexed), Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt. Boarders, it seems, are only for the Palestinian and other Arab people.

In much the same way, U.S. corporations and military penetrate and bomb countries, violating borders at will. But when the victims of this devatation seek shelter in the U.S., they are “violating U.S. borders.”

Lie six: Hamas is using the demonstrations to deflect from its own incompetence and failure to provide a decent life in Gaza.

One does not have to agree everything Hamas does to know that Israel is responsible for the terrible living conditions in Gaza. Israel, not Hamas has besieged that strip of land for 11 years. Israel, not Hamas, bombarded Gaza in 2011, and again in 2014, killing thousands of civilians, including many children, and deliberately destroying much housing and the civilian infrastructure. It’s Israel that has reduced Gaza to only four hours of electricity a day, and denies it essential food items and even clean drinking water.

Source:


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How neoliberalism manufactured consent to secure its unlimited power

From David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism
Part 3 - The corporate-backed institutions behind the rapid and artificial ideological transformation of the American society in favor of neoliberalism
In the US case I begin with a confidential memo sent by Lewis Powell to the US Chamber of Commerce in August 1971. Powell, about to be elevated to the Supreme Court by Richard Nixon, argued that criticism of and opposition to the US free enterprise system had gone too far and that ‘the time had come –– indeed it is long overdue –– for the wisdom, ingenuity and resources of American business to be marshalled against those who would destroy it’. Powell argued that individual action was insufficient. ‘Strength’, he wrote, ‘lies in organization, in careful long-range planning and implementation, in consistency of action over an indefinite period of years, in the scale of financing available only through joint effort, and in the political power available only through united action and n…

Mystery solved: here's why the Western mainstream media suddenly 'discovered' the war in Yemen

globinfo freexchange
Why it took so long for the Western mainstream media to 'discover' the war in Yemen and the war crimes committed by the Saudi coalition in full co-operation with the US?
One might think that the humanitarian disaster there - caused also by the blockade of goods for the relief of the civilians - has become so obvious, condemned multiple times by the UN, that the media finally forced to speak about it.
In previous article we attempted to explain the 'unexplained phenomenon' and the fact that CNN surprisingly returned to the issue to openly condemn the US support to the Saudi coalition atrocities against civilians in Yemen.
Yet, despite that the Saudi regimes have been, traditionally, the best allies of the Western neocolonialists, this time, the US had serious reasons to overthrow the Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS). And, surprisingly enough, at the center of this underground conflict lies an attempt by the US to privatize Aramco, Saudi Arab…

CIA had an agent at a newspaper in every world capital at least since 1977

Joel Whitney is a co-founder of the magazine Guernica, a magazine of global arts and politics, and has written for many publications, including the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. His book Finks: How the C.I.A. Tricked the World's Best Writers describes how the CIA contributed funds to numerous respected magazines during the Cold War, including the Paris Review, to subtly promote anti-communist views. In their conversation, Whitney tells Robert Scheer about the ties the CIA’s Congress for Cultural Freedom had with literary magazines. He talks about the CIA's attempt during the Cold War to have at least one agent in every major news organization in order to get stories killed if they were too critical or get them to run if they were favorable to the agency. And they discuss the overstatement of the immediate risks and dangers of communist regimes during the Cold War, which, initially, led many people to support the Vietnam War.
globinfo freexchange
James Jesus Angleton wa…

Recent US elections confirmed that progressives will have to fight two monsters at once: Donald Trump and corporate Democrats

failed evolution
Nancy Pelosi's speech after Democrats took the House in recent US elections was not just a huge disappointment. Many progressives became furious about her empty speech, which was full of the most obsolete political generalities and cliches.
But it was not just that Pelosi didn't want to committ that Democrats will fight for specific issues - in favor of the vast majority of Americans - that returned in the political debate by Bernie Sanders and the progressive movement.
She actually 'gave the finger' to the progressives straight and clear.
If you don't believe it, just check her own words: “... we will strive for bipartisanship. [...] we have a bipartisan marketplace of ideas that makes our democracy strong ...
Translation: ‘We will do business as usual. The bipartisan dictatorship will remain strong and under the control of the plutocratic elite. Nothing will change, don't bother.
That's all you need to know.
Here is another evidence that the c…

In 1961, US experts knew that the Soviets had only four ICBMs

globinfo freexchange
In a discussion with Paul Jay of the Real News, Daniel Ellsberg revealed that the US discovered - through a top-secret operation -that the USSR had only four(!) ICBMs back in 1961. This meant that the Soviets were very far from becoming a serious threat for the West. However, the false picture of the 'Soviet threat' remained powerful in order to permit the US to justify its frenzy nuclear armament race.
Ellsberg explains:
The estimate of 40 to 60 [Soviet intercontinental ballistic missiles] - which was pretty much in 1962 at the time of the missile crisis based on a lot of satellite photography - was much lower than was estimated earlier, from ‘58, ‘59, ‘60.
The Air Force had a higher estimate. Even the CIA official estimate in 1961 was well over 100. The State Department estimated like 160. The Air Force was much higher than that. And in August of 1961, the then commander of Strategic Air Command, Thomas Power, believed that there were then 1000 Soviet ICBMs…

Trump proves he is completely clueless on what's the real reason behind the mass layoffs epidemic in big businesses and how to deal with it

globinfo freexchange
Donald Trump's response to recent General Motors' decision to close plants and slash jobs, proves that he is completely clueless on what's the real reason behind the mass layoffs epidemic in US big businesses and how to deal with it.
The media circulated what Trump thinks to do about it, including threats against GM to impose auto tariffs, or, his most beloved action: penalties on foreign cars.
Yet, perhaps the most hilarious part in the whole story, is that one of the key frontline tools of the global neoliberal capital immediately published an 'in your face' article to make Trump realize that he is completely powerless too, against the forces of the markets. Here are some interesting parts:
... market forces are tough to beat, even if you’re president. Trump captured the White House thanks in large part to the story he told -- that he could reverse America’s industrial decline. He promised to bring back manufacturing and fossil-fuel j…

Another US slow motion coup in Latin America: astonishing details on how the neoliberal-fascist complex destroyed Leftist leaders in Brazil and brought Jair Bolsonaro to power

globinfo freexchange
Greg Wilpert of the RealNews, spoke with Brian Mier, editor for the website Brasil Wire, about the recent developments after right-wing extremist Jair Bolsonaro won the presidential election in Brazil.
Mier revealed astonishing details on how the neoliberal-fascist complex in Brazil (fully backed by the US), undermined and destroyed the most popular leaders of the Workers' Party (PT), Lula da Silva, Dilma Rousseff and even Fernando Haddad, in order to bring Jair Bolsonaro to power.
The purpose of this slow motion coup was what has been always for the US empire, especially in Latin America: to secure and broaden the absolute domination of the US and the Western corporate monopolies and destroy any Leftist resistance against the neoliberal status quo.
As Mier explained:
On the eve of the Supreme Court decision - which ruled on whether Lula should be imprisoned or not, exceptionally, in a moment when his appeals were still going on, contrary to hundreds of other poli…

How neoliberalism manufactured consent to secure its unlimited power

From David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism
Part 4 - Neoliberalism's second big experiment after Chile: the financial coup by the banking mafia to take over New York
One line of response to the double crisis of capital accumulation and class power arose in the trenches of the urban struggles of the 1970s. The New York City fiscal crisis was an iconic case. Capitalist restructuring and deindustrialization had for several years been eroding the economic base of the city, and rapid suburbanization had left much of the central city impoverished. The result was explosive social unrest on the part of marginalized populations during the 1960s, defining what came to be known as ‘the urban crisis’ (similar problems emerged in many US cities).
The expansion of public employment and public provision –– facilitated in part by generous federal funding –– was seen as the solution. But, faced with fiscal difficulties, President Nixon simply declared the urban crisis over in the early 1…

Exploiting Khashoggi's assassination: the neoliberal predators hang over Saudi Arabia

globinfo freexchange
A month ago we gathered some information to explain the sudden 180 degrees hostile turn by the Western neoliberal status quo against the current Saudi regime.
We discovered that the US corporate dictatorship and the Wall Street mafia heavily invested on the rapid neoliberalization of the Saudi Arabian economy, with the privatization of the state-owned oil company Aramco at the heart of this plan. Suddenly, Mohammed bin Salman decided to step back from the deal.
It would be worth to note that Aramco was standing at the top of the global list of the largest oil and gas companies for 2017 with a revenue of 465.49 billion US dollars.
It seems that the neoliberal regime didn't abort its plans concerning Saudi Arabia and silently seeks to "replace" bin Salman with a more faithful puppet, exploiting, of course, the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi.
Digging a little bit more, we found plenty of evidence in the Western mainstream media, in recent years, showing …

How neoliberalism manufactured consent to secure its unlimited power

From David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism
Part 1 - Construction of political consent across a sufficiently large spectrum of the population
How was neoliberalization accomplished, and by whom? The answer in countries such as Chile and Argentina in the 1970s was as simple as it was swift, brutal, and sure: a military coup backed by the traditional upper classes (as well as by the US government), followed by the fierce repression of all solidarities created within the labour and urban social movements which had so threatened their power.
But the neoliberal revolution usually attributed to Thatcher and Reagan after 1979 had to be accomplished by democratic means. For a shift of this magnitude to occur required the prior construction of political consent across a sufficiently large spectrum of the population to win elections. What Gramsci calls ‘common sense’ (defined as ‘the sense held in common’) typically grounds consent.
Common sense is constructed out of long-standing pr…