Monday, May 13, 2013
But I guess this photo isn't worth publishing:
Let's break it down a bit further;
The policeman is armed, probably with a standard M16A2, also, almost definitely with a magazine in already, although as he is not wearing a helmet, I assume that he does not have a round up the chamber. He is not even touching his weapon.
Now let's see how many members of the 'International Press' are in this image, discounting the one who took the photo;
At least five that I can see.
So this policeman is having the following done to him that any law enforcement agent I know would arrest someone for:
1. Someone in his face, not keeping a respectful distance
2. Touching him, whilst not illegal, is exceptionally close to 'assaulting an officer'
3. Initiating a fight with a law enforcement agent. This man holding the flag doesn't look to me, that his purpose is to give the nice officer a hug. 'Incitement'
With at least 6 members of the international press present, the photo and video footage of this policeman showing exceptional restraint doesn't get any air time. I guess he just needs to follow the stereotypical image of an Israeli thug and needs to bash this man around the head to get his 15 minutes of fame.
I can promise you that if the man holding the flag were to do what he is doing to an American or British policeman he would already have been laid out flat on the floor with the 'bracelets' being put on his wrists.
I guess the truth just hurts too much...
Friday, September 21, 2012
Here it is:
Monday, February 1, 2010
I have copied, in it's entirety Neptunus Lex's blog post of January 25th. I think you'll appreciate what he has to say. Personally I enjoyed reading the opinions expressed in the comments on his site:
The British medical periodical “Lancet” was once a beacon of science and reason in a world that badly needed both. Sadly, politically-motivated research led to an utterly rubbished 2004 article claiming that 100k Iraqi citizens had died violently in the year since the US invasion and occupation.
That should have been bad enough. But now they’ve doubled down:
It’s official. Britain’s premier medical journal Lancet has been completely Palestinianized. It no longer bears any relationship to the first-rate scientific journal it once was. Perhaps Lancet is no longer a standard-bearer but has become a follower in the global movement in which standards have plunged, biases have soared, and Big Lies now pass for top-of-the-line academic, scientific work…
Their study is titled: “Association between exposure to political violence and intimate-partner violence in the occupied Palestinian territory: a cross-sectional study.” And yes, they have found that Palestinian husbands are more violent towards Palestinian wives as a function of the Israeli “occupation”—and that the violence increases significantly when the husbands are “directly” as opposed to “indirectly” exposed to political violence.
Read the rest, ponder the plight of women in Araby and mourn the loss of objectivity.
Image via Wikipedia
Oh, for what it’s worth – George Soros provided around half the funding for the Iraqi mortality survey published by the Lancet. The Palestinian domestic violence article?
This study was funded by the Palestinian National Authority as well as by the Core Funding Group at the University of Minnesota. The Palestinian Authority is not a disinterested party. But even worse: The data was collected by the Palestinian Central Bureau. These are the people who told the world that Israeli soldiers shot young Mohammed al-Dura, committed a massacre in Jenin, and purposely attacked Palestinian civilians (who just happened to be jihadists dressed in civilian clothing or hostage-civilians behind whom the jihadists hid).
Once again, the science seems less driven by an objective analysis of the facts so much as the preferences of those holding the purse.
Read the original post here, with all of the links alive and kicking!