Guardian

Guardian logic used to blame Israel for ceasefire violation in one tweet


If you’ve been following our recent posts, you’re aware that the Guardian live blog on the Gaza War posted two entries a few hours ago that somehow managed to blame Israel for breaking the ceasefire which took effect this morning.

They made this claim despite the fact the dozens of rockets were fired at Israeli cities by Hamas since the time of the ceasefire, while Israel (who had accepted the ceasefire) held its fire for six hours until finally retaliating after it was clear that the Islamist group had no intention of standing down.  (As we noted, US Secretary of State John Kerry forcefully condemned Hamas earlier in the day for violating the terms of the agreement.)

Well, a Guardian deputy editor named Phoebe Greenwood doubled down on the Guardian claim a few hours ago, and the rhetorical somersault she employed to defend the indefensible was truly something to behold.

Here it is, along with a response (above Greenwood’s Tweet) by Yiftah Curiel, spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in London:

tweet

As one commentator suggested, Greenwood’s argument goes something like this.

  1. Israel accepted the ceasefire and held its fire for six hours, hoping Hamas would do the same.
  2. Hamas ignored the ceasefire and continued firing dozens of rockets at Israeli towns.
  3. Israel finally retaliated against Hamas rocket attacks which showed no signs of winding down.
  4. Ergo, Israel violated the ceasefire.

This is of course the time when we typically employ a rhetorical flourish, encapsulating the substance of the post in a few pithy lines.  

However, on this occasion, given the jaw-dropping nature of the logic used by Greenwood, we find ourselves for once truly speechless.

 

18 replies »

  1. Regarding intellectual abilities Phoebe Greenwood is a perfect match to the Guardian.

  2. I wondered what had happened to the ex Iraqi Information Minister, under Saddam Hussein, known as ‘Comical Ali’ in the UK and ‘Baghdad Bob’ in the USA.

    Now I know.
    He has put on a wig and changed his name to Phoebe Greenwood.

  3. I would like to say im surprised, but im not. Nothing the Guardian writes or comments on surprises me anymore. THEY ARE ANTISEMETIC PRO HAMAS. They have to live with the LIES THEY TELL.

  4. A very novel concept of seizefire that was agreed not between two firing parties but between one firing party and his friend. Now the second firing party is accused of breaking the seizefire giving the first firing party moral cover. That yankee goes back to Washington, knowing well he does not need to stop the genocide as genocide is now been sanitized. Great Hasbara but hey it is not working. What next for the Zionists.

    • “seizefire”
      What are you waffling on about you illiterate twat?

      “What next for the Zionists”
      They could drop leaflets in English which is clearly a language that is as incomprehensible to you as the concept of truth is.

    • “that was agreed not between two firing parties…”
      Correct, Hamas never agreed to a ceasefire, and therefor none was broken.

      “… but between one firing party and his friend.”

      Are you suggesting that Egypt and Fatah are Israel’s friends? Now I know you are an idiot for certain.

      “Now the second firing party is accused of breaking the seizefire giving the first firing party moral cover.”

      No, the first firing party (Hamas) is accused of never attempting to resolve the matter and continue to fire at civillian targets with intention to hit civillians.
      The moral cover is a given from te word go as a result of intentional firing at civillian only targets.
      You see, had Hamas attempted to hit militery bases or militery installations one could excuse something. But they don’t and never have.

      “That yankee goes back to Washington, knowing well he does not need to stop the genocide as genocide is now been sanitized.”

      Now i know you are also broke since you have no money to buy a dictionary and check what the word genocide means.
      Shall I spell it to you in Urdu?

      “Great Hasbara but hey it is not working.”

      If you refer to your work you are both incorrect and correct.
      You are incorrect that your explanation is great hasbara (explanation). It is a rubbish one.
      You are correct though that your explanation isn’t working.

      “What next for the Zionists.”
      Work, work and more work.
      Ever invoating for a better world, unlike you, you simpleminded loafer.
      They stole my… they drank my… they ate my…. Enough already. Grow up and earn some living.

      • “What next for the Zionists.”
        Work, work and more work.
        Ever invoating for a better world, unlike you, you simpleminded loafer.
        They stole my… they drank my… they ate my…. Enough already. Grow up and earn some living.

        Great answer ,so true

  5. They still can go one step further. How about “Israel breaks cease fire by shooting down Hamas rocket”. I can’t wait for that one.

    Stan

  6. Let’s face facts – nothing counts until Jews finally get fed up and shoot back. That’s when things are counted.

    As for the Guardian – anybody that thinks that they have hit rock bottom doesn’t know how big a steam shovel they have.

    • “nothing counts until Jews .. shoot back”. Exactly.

      The BBC’s lead article on this today (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-28320901) contains a graph purporting to show the “timeline of attacks”. It begins on the day Protective Edge began, therefore ignoring the 100s of rockets and mortars fired on Israel by Hamas in 2014 alone.

      Unbelievable.

  7. Phoebe Greenwood, Glenn Greenwald, what`s happening behind the trees?? The production of blockheads?