Taking the Freedom Flotilla: What it Reveals
News Commentary – May 31, 2010
Israel’s storming of vessels in a flotilla of ships carrying much needed aid to Gaza has sparked outrage around the world.
Although Israel claims its marines were attacked with knives and batons as they boarded the ships, the fact that they were still in international waters made any attempt to seize the ships an act of piracy. So in purely legal terms, the activists were entirely justified in fending off any attempt to seize their vessels.
Original estimates that 10 activists were killed have now been revised upwards to a possible total of 19 dead.
Whatever the final number of fatalities though, the whole episode is a public relations disaster for Israel. Even though their governments may make disapproving noises about the incident, growing numbers of Westerners are beginning to view Israel in an increasingly grim light.
Zionist brutality is now seen on par with the Nazi’s making the term Zionazi an apt description for modern Israel.
It also makes the Israeli marine commandos claim that they faced a “lynch mob” when they boarded the ships seem particularly hollow. Because they were engaged in an act tantamount to piracy on the high seas and the activists were well within their rights in trying to protect the ships and their cargo.
Nonetheless, Israel is still trying to protest its innocence. Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak said on Monday afternoon that the Flotilla’s organisers were to blame as the boarding party only opened fire after the activists on board attacked them.
Which doesn’t negate the fact that those on board the six-ship flotilla were trying to protect the 10,000 tonnes of aid aboard from an act of piracy.
If nothing else though how media outlets cover the incident reveals much about where they stand regarding Zionism.
No media outlet can ignore the outrage without exposing themselves as Zionist fronts. So it’s not a question of whether media outlets ignore the incident but how they cover it.
Predictably, the BBC reported the incident prominently but news anchors asked if the flotilla’s interception was not “understandable” given that rockets from Gaza have bombarded Israel, “some 20 this past month”, and the ships “might” have had such munitions aboard.
Ignoring the fact that Mossad operatives may have fired the rockets; the flotilla’s organisers would have made a point of excluding any cargo that invited the intervention of an Israeli boarding party. To do otherwise would have been self-defeating BUT that didn’t stop the BBC from asking the question.
Stupid as it may seem it introduced an air of balance into the coverage while providing spurious justification for Israeli actions.
And if that was the intention it did so subtly, almost subliminally.
Alex Jones is another case in point. Regular contributor to this website, Br Nathanael Kapner maintains that Jones is a “Zionist shill” with connections with the Bronfmans.
We reserve judgement on that but his coverage of the Israeli seizure of vessels today is interesting.
As we said no media outlet can ignore the incident and Alex Jones website infowars was no exception. Appearing below the day’s 25 top headlines came a piece by Kurt Nimmo on the incident. Then, below a report on how Rand Paul survived a smear campaign and reports on Memorial Day Alternatives and how Michigan was considering a law to licence journalists came an AFP report on the convoy seizure.
The top story across the planet and you would almost think that Alex Jones was trying to brush it under the carpet.
Last updated 02/06/2010