The Daily Snarl
This is what appears on AbuKhalil's website today:
"A report written by Israeli Journalist, Gideon Levi, and published by Haaretz Hebrew Language daily, accuses the Israeli military of deliberately executing two Palestinians, who were recently shot by the army at the Ennab roadblock, east of Anabta near the northern West Bank city of Tulkarem. The two Palestinians, identified as Naji Al-Balbisi, 18, and Amer Ibrahim Nassar, 17, were shot by several rounds of live ammunition from a close range. At least four Palestinians have been injured."Here is a detailed report of what happened:
According to the IDF, a half-hour before the Wednesday incident the soldiers stationed at the checkpoint identified four armed Palestinians who were approaching them. In response, the soldiers prepared for a possible engagement by loading their weapons with live ammunition and rubber bullets.One of the Palestinians hurled a Molotov cocktail at the soldiers, who then immediately opened fire on the Palestinians.One Palestinian was killed and the soldiers then chased after the three remaining suspects, who fled on foot. The soldiers continued firing, killing a second suspect and lightly wounding a third. The fourth suspect managed to escape.A soldier was also injured in the incident and was taken to a nearby hospital. There was no report of his condition.“This was a planned attack on a position that has already been assaulted in the past,” a senior source in the Central Command told Ynet. “The force encountered real danger during the chase and that is why shots were fired. The incident lasted only a few seconds and we have a detailed record of the chain of events,” he added."
Nobody could guess, from AA's type of "reporting" that the incident involved more than the simple act of arbitrary and brutal killing of two innocent Palestinian youths. No context. No explanation. AA seems to count on his readers' intelligence and sentiments not to be curious about such irrelevant details. What matters is that two Arabs were shot to death by Jews. That is an outrage in and of itself. Haven't the Jews learned that they are not allowed to respond to and prevent any threat of violence against them by similar violence? That they do not have the human right to protect themselves against their would be murderers?
BTW, anyone who chooses to believe anything Gideon Levi writes ought to know this about him. Not that such a sentiment would be abhorrent to our rage-engorged friend.
Another little snarl by the great moralist from California state university:
Note the ugliness of the language, the dismissive tone and the integral contempt for the king (whose entire fault begins and ends, for AA, in one major crime: maintaining the peace treaty with Israel).
Jordan's King asked for more bribes to cover the cost of hosting Syrian refugees--as if they are being hosted in his palace.
Here is the real story that prompted this piece of flying excerement:
The Civil War in Syria has driven thousands of people out of the country and into Jordan. This has resulted in major problems in Jordan as they try to figure out what to do with all of the Syrian refugees. Recently, President Barack Obama made a public announcement offering $200 million in U.S. aid to help with the Syrian refugees in Jordan.
... more than 460,000 Syrians have fled their country in search of refuge within the Jordanian borders. This number is estimated to double in the upcoming months if the turmoil in Syria continues.
Putting these numbers into perspective: 460,000 people make up approximately a tenth of the Jordanian population. Doubling the number of Syrian refugees, causes an almost 25% increase in the number of people in Jordan.
This increase in people will have serious effects on the economic situation in Jordan. Some economists predict a nearly 30% unemployment rate by the end of the year as more and more Syrians pour into the county. This many refugees are also predicted to cost over $1 billion. Yet, King Abdullah pledges to not turn away any refugees, asking “how are you going to turn back women, children or the wounded?”
One wonders at the extent of the professor's animus. Doesn't he care for very real and suffering refugees? Does he care only for third and forth generation "refugees", like the Palestinians? And how come his multitudinous readers do not ask these basic questions from the provider of "news"?