These are not news sources. These are propaganda outlets for the global jihad. The reality is that a “Palestinian” jihadi murdered two people in a Tel Aviv bar. He fled, he was found, he fired on officers, and he was killed. If he hadn’t attacked, nothing would have happened at all. But the establishment media never misses an opportunity to demonize the foes of jihad.
BexarKat says
How many libs will look at the Reuters headline and claim that the Israelis were shooting at a dead Palestinian?
maria says
Boycott both Reuters and Guardian. There are Fox news, Newsmax
gravenimage says
After Tel Aviv jihad massacre, Reuters and the Guardian demonize Israel
……….
Note the phrasing, “Israeli forces kill Palestinian after Tel Aviv shooting leaves two dead”.
The Israelis are active agents, deliberately killing a “Palestinian”. But the shooting simply passively “left two dead”–it is not as though the “Palestinian” gun man had anything to do with it.
Then, note how they claim that the Israelis killed the gunman *after* the shooting–but this is an utter lie, belied in the small print following the headline. The gun man continued to shoot, at this point targeting the police. That is, the gun man hadn’t surrendered or even just stopped shooting–he as trying to kill police and whoever else he could target.
But this kind of biased coverage is grimly par for the course for much of the MSM these days.
Infidel says
Guardian demonizing Israel is like water being wet. But I don’t respect any British institution either – be it Reuters, AP, BBC or anything else
TheNatureOfEvil says
I keep trying to understand but fail to, about, how these news outlets are able to get away with consistently malicious reporting? Is there no way to compile a detailed analysis of their consistently harmful ‘journalism’ and seek a legal recourse? Please, if someone can guide me, I’ll be grateful.
gravenimage says
Except in cases of actual libel–difficult to prove in a court of law–there is no legal standard for reporting.
And harmful as this is, it’s a good thing that there are not legal recourses against reporting, because this would almost certainly be used not against this kind of thing, but against the “politcally incorrect” who tell the truth.
TheNatureOfEvil says
Thanks gravenimage.