Guardian

Guardian/Reuters suggests Palestinian terrorists weren’t buried by Israel with proper dignity


The first sentence in the 2nd passage of a Reuters/Guardian story about Israel’s decision to return the bodies of 80 Palestinian suicide bombers who murdered dozens of Israelis to the PA, Israel returns bodies of Palestinian militants, May 31, is remarkable.  

The report begins:

Israel has transferred to Palestinian authorities the bodies of dozens of Palestinian militants, saying it hoped the move would help restart peace efforts.”

Now, here’s the second passage:

“The militants had been buried, some of them for decades, in a desolate Israeli military cemetery for “enemy combatants” in the occupied West Bank. They included several suicide bombers.” [emphasis added]

These murderers of innocent Jews evidently weren’t afforded the dignity owed to them.  

And, if the narrative needed any further moral framing, here’s the photo accompanying the text.

Viewing the family of a Palestinian suicide bomber (Samer Hammed), you’d almost think they were mourning an innocent victim, rather than the cold-blooded killer who blew himself up near Tel Aviv’s central bus station in March 2006 in hopes of murdering as many Israelis as possible.

Ten civilians died in the blast.

Does the family of Samer Hammed carry with them any hint of remorse over the unimaginable grief Hammed’s cruelty wrought?  

Did Reuters or the Guardian even consider illustrating their story with a photo such as this?

At the funeral for David Shaulov, (one of Hammed’s victims), his mother, Irena, left of center, embraced his grief stricken pregnant wife, Radmila

David Shaulov

Categories: Guardian

Tagged as: ,

23 replies »

  1. What a disgusting rag is the Guardian. What it is guarding – it’s right to bias and propaganda? It’s dissemination of Jew hatred?

    • I had friends in Europe ask me why Israel had kept corpses for so long. It seemed bizarre at best.

      • It’s extremely disturbing to see Israel keep corpses of Palestinian combatants! Hezbollah did the same with corpses of Israeli soldiers some years ago. In both cases it’s not only disturbing, it’s sick. it reminds you that both countries are located in the Middle-East, not in Europe. I know many Israelis who were shocked to learn their retainec corpses. It’s a blatant violation of the spirit of the Israeli democracy.

  2. “The militants had been buried, some of them for decades, in a desolate Israeli military cemetery for “enemy combatants” in the occupied West Bank.

    I suggest the British to bury the 7/7 perpetrators in the St. Paul cathedral or maybe a memorial site in the lobby of the Guardian offices – giving the option for the public to piising on their grave.

    These Palestinian terrorists are called militants in the Guardian – the terrorist description can be assigned only for persons killing other than Jews.

    • These Palestinian terrorists are called militants in the Guardian – the terrorist description can be assigned only for persons killing other than Jews.

      This is not just bullshit – it’s incredibly stupid bullshit.

    • I wonder what M. Levick would say if Britain had executed the Irgun and Lehi terrorists who killed so many innocent civilians at the King David hotel and at the Jerusalem train station in the 40s, and had retained their corpses for years?

      Which reminds me that Lehi / Irgun booby trapped the corpses of young British soldiers who they had previously abducted, tortured and assassinated.

      Ben Gurion despised Irgun and Lehi terrorists and disapproved of their acts, however he did not move a fingert to have them judged and sentenced for their acts. Israelis had to live knowing that these terrorists may be living on their streets.

  3. Firstly, many weren’t enemy ‘combatants’ but cowardly, disguised, suicide bombers, and secondly, there is nowhere desolate enough for these people to be buried.

    Some years ago, the then head of Reuters admitted that their reporters toe the Palestinian Arab line for the sake of their health and safety, and you know, it shows in their reports.

    Perhaps those reports ought to be prefaced by something like: “as passed by the Ramallah Censor’s Office”.

    Then we’d all know to take them with a salt cellar full of salt.

    • Too true cityca
      Israel should have taken adopted the US method and dropped their remains in the Med .

  4. This post is just silly. Firstly the report is from Reuters and is just a re-hash of that agency’s own account, which also includes the phrase “desolate Israeli military cemetery for “enemy combatants”.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/05/31/uk-palestinians-israel-bodies-idUKBRE84U08220120531

    Secondly it seems to draw the implication that “These murderers of innocent Jews evidently weren’t afforded the dignity owed to them.” from the use of the single word ‘desolate’. This word can have several meanings, but a typical primary definition would be: “Deserted of people and in a state of bleak and dismal emptiness.”; not an inappropriate description for a graveyard you might think, and no suggestion of deprivation of dignity.

    • Why was there a need, then, to couch in “some of them for decades”, if not for the purpose of ingeminating the “sinisterness” of Israel’s action?
      Could anyone assume, that for acts committed as far back as the 1970s, those terrorists would not have been buried for decades? Were they due to spring into life, but for Israel’s “wickedness”?

      • This is even dafter than the main post. Some have been buried for decades presumably because they died decades ago. How sinister is that?

        • How does it add more information to the report, from a hermeneutic standpoint?(Does it elaborate on who the “militants” are? why are they dead? what was their objective in doing what they have done?)
          Of what use is it there, other than to generate further antagonism toward Israel?
          And I would urge you to keep your asinine views to yourself, regarding the validity of my comments.

          • “Does it elaborate on who the “militants” are? why are they dead? what was their objective in doing what they have done?”

            No, it doesn’t do these things because the intelligent reader has a basic idea of the answers. It does remind us about the duration of this aspect of the conflict, which is udeful information.

            Methinks I detect a touch of paranoia in the air….

            • “An intelligent reader”? I don’t think that the average person has a clue; especially one on a Reuters/AP diet, and the verisimilitudes therein;
              There have been cases of blatant distortion carried out by those wire services specifically, including the airbrushing of photos; Conveyance of statements and declarations which mirror the writer’s opinion, NOT the actual facts, and so forth.
              If there had been clear-cut, unbiased journalism emerging from the Middle-East, one that knew how to be sympathetic to both the Israelis and Pals., and offer their points of views in a coherent and equal manner, there would’ve been no need for the kind of critique we have here. Knowing the reality on the ground however, it becomes necessary.
              And “paranoia”, is ALWAYS in the eye of the beholder…

    • sencar, you could interpret it that way, but the Guardian has got form on maligning Israel, and by extension, Jews in general. It gives the game away with the photo, the purpose of which is to connect the reader with the tragic human dimension of having one’s remains interned by the diabolical Zionist occupation regime. Elemtary propaganda. An intellectual like you shouldn’t be so modest in pretending not to understand.

  5. Guardian/Reuters suggests Palestinian terrorists weren’t buried by Israel with proper dignity

    I see no evidence in the article to back up that accusation.

  6. The fact that they are now being moved would imply quite strongly that the place where they have been buried, and the manner in which they were buried, was in some way innapropriate

    • Strange, I saw no such implication. I assumed it was simply a question of the bodies being allowed to return to the relevant families.

  7. Don’t you just love the term “Palestinian militants” used to describe these killers?

    It would be interesting to know how many innocent people these 80 “militants” murdered between them.

  8. Dear Andy, could you please let us know which term you would use to describe Baruch Goldsdtein?