Independent

Robert Fisk says Hamas more moral than Israel


(This report, via Elder of Ziyonrepresents a classic example of the Western media’s increasing acceptance of a narrative which actually suggests  some sort of equivalence between open, progressive, democratic states (whether it be Israel, the U.S., or others) and inherently reactionary, totalitarian, terrorist movements – such as Hamas and Hezbollah.  Such insidious moral inversions are utterly shameful.)


In what may be a new low for Robert Fisk, which hardly seems possible, he starts off his latest screed this way:


The death of five Israeli servicemen in a helicopter crash in Romania this week raised scarcely a headline.

There was a Nato-Israeli exercise in progress. Well, that’s OK then. Now imagine the death of five Hamas fighters in a helicopter crash in Romania this week.We’d still be investigating this extraordinary phenomenon. Now mark you, I’m not comparing Israel and Hamas. Israel is the country that justifiably slaughtered more than 1,300 Palestinians in Gaza 19 months ago – more than 300 of them children – while the vicious, blood-sucking and terrorist Hamas killed 13 Israelis (three of them soldiers who actually shot each other by mistake).

See rest of post, here.

Categories: Independent

19 replies »

  1. Yes, imagine if a sovereign state had cooperated with a bunch of terrorists who have shot 12 000 missiles into a civilian population. There would quite rightly have been quite an unproar

  2. Screed it is, and after reading it three times other than alot of vicious anger I find it to be a total disconnect….a game of telephone

  3. Mr Fisk could surely get a job in a circus with such impressive contortionist abilities.
    I guess he’ll have to join David Cameron on this week’s ‘Westerners doing their best to speed up the coming of the Caliphate’ charts.

  4. Fisk is an odious slime ball writer who is most comfortable when he’s swimming in muck with the nastiest Islamists that radical Islam produced.
    Just uttering his name,makes you retch.They deserve each other.And for good measure throw in the Guardian.

  5. Over the years Fisk has gradually shifted from justifiable criticism of Israel to, well, this kind of crap.

    Did we know this? Did we vote for this?
    Precisely the questions I was asking re. e.g. Austria’s entry. Was Fisk similarly incensed then? Was he then calling for a referendum? I doubt it.

    He also refers to the “indefatigable David Cronin”. Christ alive. Has he even seen Cronin’s latest madness?
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/21/john-lydon-pil-palestinians

    Although Fisk would probably give Cronin a medal for this other anti-Israel rant:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jan/28/libertydemocracybrutality

    But re. The Indpenent I’m surprised CiFW hasn’t yet taken issue with this odious stab at Hasidim in London:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/christina-patterson/christina-patterson-the-limits-of-multiculturalism-2036861.html

  6. I’m still nonplussed by the issue of the helicopter crash. Surely what he objects to is the fact of Israelis’ training with NATO at all. Not that nobody paid any attention to the crash. And what is all that about how much longer a Hamas crash would be investigated? That it would investigated longer because it would be suspected of terrorism?

    One cannot but feel that Fisk is hanging his anti-Israel animus on a event which, apparently, revealed to a wider audience the fact of Israeli training with NATO.

    Ah. Perhaps he means that, given Hamas is a proscribed organisation, if it were found to be cooperating with NATO, it would have been far more newsworthy.

    No doubt. But, so what? What Fisk objects to is that no one allegedly cared Israel was i.e. did not share his world view.

    He sounds more like a crusty Mandate Palestine British Colonial official sounding off against the Jews every time. His high colonial seat is in Lebanon. Where, by virtue of his being Lebanon’s Great White Hope, he has more right and security of residence than most native born Lebanese Jews.

  7. Only two points.
    1. For suggesting that the 2001/09/01 tragedy in NY was America’s fault and that it even deserved it, the famous actor John Malcovich stated that if he ever met Fisk, fisk would not survive this meeting. Yep, this is the truth. Good for you John!
    2. Just before this shameful rubbish, Fisk published an outright anti.-Semitic piece on the Independent that we regular readers of Robin Shepherd’s blog anaylsed for long. He peppered his thesis with terms like “you know who” many times in his piece and intimating that Jews control American foreign policy and Obama. I recommend you see for yourself on the Independent’s website it was published in the last week of July or around.

  8. What i do not understand is how what Fisk wrote could be construed as anti semitic?

    Do you people actually know what that means?

    “Antisemitism (also spelled anti-semitism or anti-Semitism) is prejudice against or hostility towards Jews, often rooted in hatred of their ethnic background, culture, and/or religion. In its extreme form, it “attributes to the Jews an exceptional position among all other civilizations, defames them as an inferior group and denies their being part of the nation[s]” in which they reside.[”

    I do not see how questioning and critisising the actions of Israel instantly equates to anti semitism.

    What he is pointing out is how the argument is framed – Hamas = evil, Israel = righteous – which is a silly argument to make.

    Because obviously – anyone who kills civilians is wrong. Full stop. End of story.

    What he is pointing out is that whilst hamas are framed as evil and bloodthirsty – they were responsible for 13 israeli deaths – mostly soldiers

    Whereas Israel who is framed as good and righteous killed 1300 people, mostly civilians.

    How does this equate to anti semitism? This is pointing out the facts.

    Someone please explain how this is anti semitic

  9. Mo when facts are carefully chosen in order to make a point and when other even more relevant points are deliberately ignored then one should look suspiciously at motives.

    If someone for instance disregards the suffering of a civilian population under eight years of constant missile barrage and says in effect, ‘So what if they suffered, they’re still alive, aren’t they? and only 13 of them died’ then the motive might either be a pathological lack of human compassion or a lack of compassion for that particular public.

    “Because obviously – anyone who kills civilians is wrong. Full stop. End of story.”

    and obviously – anyone who attempts for eight years to kill civilians is wrong. End of story.

    The lack of compassion or comprehension of the suffering of this particular public is what is known as antisemitism.

  10. Hi Mo

    Whereas Israel who is framed as good and righteous killed 1300 people, mostly civilians.

    A new kind of civilians I would add – about 800 of them with equipped with Kalashnikovs…

    How does this equate to anti semitism? This is pointing out the facts.

    When bigotted lies about Jews are introduced as facts then we call it anti-Semitism…

    Because obviously – anyone who kills civilians is wrong. Full stop. End of story.

    Bullshit. If a civilian wants to eliminate me, my family and my people and I remove him/her – it is called rightful selfdefense – it is a basic human right even for Jews Mr. mo…

    What he is pointing out is that whilst hamas are framed as evil and bloodthirsty – they were responsible for 13 israeli deaths – mostly soldiers

    I understand that for you 13 murdered Israeli is a number that can be characterised as “only”… Tough luck mo…

  11. The reason that Fisk gets right up the Zionists nose is that he tells the truth. Fisk is the sand in your vaseline and for that I thank him.

  12. “Fisk gets right up the Zionists nose is that he tells the truth.” heh heh right up the nose is where you’d find him – snot about to be sneezed right out.

    Fisk is one of the only people in the world who still believes that there was a Jenin ”massacre” when even Hamas has admitted they lied.

  13. @Zenk

    “The reason that Fisk gets right up the Zionists nose is that he tells the truth. Fisk is the sand in your vaseline and for that I thank him.”

    If Hitler were alive today, I’m sure you’d say the same thing.

  14. Israel has been occupying Palestinian land against UN sanctions (i.e. security council resolution 242 and 338) and has violated ICJ rulings as well as the 3rd, 4th, and 5th articles of the Geneva Conventions since 1967. Period. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to find this information out.

    Fisk is simply doing what he does best; he’s telling the truth.

  15. Moooo,

    1. You know very well about Hamas and human shields. Yet you willingly gulp the lies of an apartheid era judge.

    2. Evidence, not from the IDF:
    A. “Hamas, with training from Iran and Hezbollah, has used the last two years to turn Gaza into a deadly maze of tunnels, booby traps and sophisticated roadside bombs. Weapons are hidden in mosques, schoolyards and civilian houses, and the leadership’s war room is a bunker beneath Gaza’s largest hospital, Israeli intelligence officials say.
    Unwilling to take Israel’s bait and come into the open, Hamas militants are fighting in civilian clothes; even the police have been ordered to take off their uniforms. The militants emerge from tunnels to shoot automatic weapons or antitank missiles, then disappear back inside, hoping to lure the Israeli soldiers with their fire.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/world/middleeast/11hamas.html?_r=1
    B. According to Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, on the first day of the war Hamas ordered its gunmen to take off their uniforms to avoid being detected by the IDF. The Hamas gunmen who participated in the fighting against the IDF were all dressed as civilians and the majority arrived at hospitals without their weapons or any other signs revealing their status as gunmen.
    http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1232292909104&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
    3. It doesn’t come as a surprise that you choose to ignore the fact that Hamas has been targeting Israeli civilians ever since it was created.
    Your systematic ignorance of facts and disgusting justification of Islamofascists renders you either one of the following:
    1. Useful Idiot
    2. Pet of Islamofascists
    In either case, you make me sick.

  16. Hi al-gharquad

    Mr. Mo can’t accept sources like the NYT- it is owned by “Zionists”
    Can’t accept the IDF as a source – they are obviously some lying juices. But he happily accepts Hamas as a reliable mine of information.

    Mo I suggest you see this newest from Hamas: http://current.com/news/92666243_hamas-presents-the-liberation-of-tel-aviv.htm

    “I understand that for you 13 murdered Israeli is a number that can be characterised as “only”… Tough luck mo…”

    Mo says – i never said “only”, never once, every single death, every loss of life is a tragedy. INCLUDING the 1300 Palestinians AND the 13 Israelis

    You wrote:
    What he is pointing out is that whilst hamas are framed as evil and bloodthirsty – they were responsible for 13 israeli deaths – mostly soldiers

    Whereas Israel who is framed as good and righteous killed 1300 people, mostly civilians.

    If this doesn’t mean “only” then the word certainly doesn’t exist at all.

    BTW Hamas killed not the 13 soldiers “only” but hundreds of civilians in Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv and kept tens of thousands of Israelis in shelters. True these events are from Israeli sources only – maybe they didn’t happen at all – certainly you won’t read a word about this penned by Mr. Fisk.

    Regarding bigotted lies MO – do the words “Jenin massacre” say anything to you? They were coined and propagated by Fisk. He’s using this expression even now – after it has been debunked and proved as being pure and distilled bullshit.