This deranged lunacy is arguably more honest than the evasive language of Freedland, Schama, Howard Jacobson et al.
I thought antisemitism was hating Jews because they are Jewish. A truly awful thing. Extending the definition this far readers it meaningless.
I had to unfollow Schama due to his extraordinary lack of empathy for ordinary Palestinians.
Not sure Freedland, Schama and Jacobson's writing is honest, not even with themselves. They think they're liberals, but it's liberal like 'liberal' whites in apartheid South Africa.
The recent Guardian article by Jacobson is depraved. He uses the now familiar trick of using its Jewish character to inoculate Israel from condemnation. Jacobson asserts that focusing on the deaths of Palestinian children repeats the old “blood libel” - ignoring that they cannot be Hamas terrorists
A year after the 7 October attack, the myth of ‘blood libel’ persists in the media coverage of Gaza violence
Blatantly so. Quite absurd.
Someone in the IDF might have innocently & accidentally dropped a box of bullets and the kids perhaps were unfortunately just running really fast.
I feel like being so deranged and desperate that you call anyone even *observing* the mass murder of children antisemitic, is only successful in making genuine antisemitism seem morally righteous. Perhaps that's the point; reinvent the existential enemy to revitalise the Zionist cause.
it feels deeply insane how mainstream coverage of idf "misconducts" (war crimes let's be honest) went from exonerative passive voice to outright fiction-writing
Crazy that you're reading about the 65 bullet wounded children in the opinion section and not the news section.
It seems obvious the kids were shot by IDF; the mention of single-shot head wounds implies deliberate targeting by snipers which would require some more investigation. But it’s obvs plausible and the way the NYT reported it was fine