web analytics
October 21, 2014 / 27 Tishri, 5775
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘CNN’

Hamas Is Fooling Everyone, Everywhere (Video)

Wednesday, November 28th, 2012

Is Hamas really on its way to moderation and pragmatism, as some Western political analysts and diplomats have come to believe?

And what do some Hamas leaders mean when they say that they are ready to accept a Palestinian state “only” in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem?

These questions were raised after CNN recently aired an interview with Hamas “political leader” Khaled Mashaal.

Mashaal told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour: “I accept a Palestinian state according to 1967 borders with Jerusalem as the capital, with the right of return [of millions of Palestinians to Israel].”

The Hamas leader’s remark has since been misinterpreted by some Westerners as a sign that the radical Islamist movement, which was established 25 years ago with the declared goal of destroying Israel, has now abandoned its ideology and is on its way to endorsing a softer approach.

But while Mashaal was speaking on CNN, several Hamas leaders in the Gaza Strip were talking — in Arabic — about their intention to pursue the fight against Israel until the “liberation of all our lands, from the sea to the river.”

Mashaal’s remark is nothing but an attempt to mislead the international community into believing that Hamas has endorsed the two-state solution and is willing to live in peace alongside Israel.

In reality, Hamas has not changed or relinquished its dream of replacing Israel with an Islamist state that is funded and armed by Iran.

What Mashaal is actually saying is that because Hamas is aware of the fact that it cannot achieve its goal of destroying Israel now, it will take whatever land the Israelis give it and then continue the fight to “liberate” all Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

No one better than Mashaal himself expressed this view in the same CNN interview, where he stated: “Palestine, from the river to the sea, from the north to the south, it is my land. And the land of my fathers and grandfathers, inhabited by the Palestinians from a long time ago…but because of the circumstances of the region, because of the keenness to stop the bloodshed, the Palestinians today, and Hamas, have agreed on a program that accepts the 1967 borders.”

What Mashaal and other “moderate” Hamas leaders are saying is this: “Give us a Palestinian state now in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem so that we could use it as a launching pad for eliminating Israel.”

In an interview with Al-Jazeera this week, Mashaal admitted for the first time that Iran has been providing Hamas with weapons and money. He also revealed that Arab and Islamic countries, as well as individuals and organizations, have also been supporting Hamas militarily and financially.

Today it has become clear to most Palestinians that a future Palestinian state would be run by Hamas or Islamic Jihad. These two groups’ popularity has increased among Palestinians, especially in wake of their self-declared “victory” over Israel during the recent Israel-Hamas conflict.

Hamas’s effort to depict itself as a “moderate” movement reached its peak this week when Mashaal phoned Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to voice support for the request to upgrade the status of a Palestinian entity to non-member observer in the UN.

Mashaal’s phone call was again misinterpreted as a sign that Hamas was willing to accept a state only within the pre-1967 lines.

But as Hamas officials later explained, the fact that Mashaal had welcomed Abbas’s statehood bid did not mean that the movement was prepared to give up “one inch of Palestine.”

Hamas is engaged in a subtle campaign to win the sympathy of the international community by appearing as if it is ready to abandon its dream of destroying Israel. Mashaal’s remarks should be seen in the context of a new Hamas tactic aimed at turning the radical Islamist movement into a legitimate and recognized player in the international and regional arenas.

Those who have been misled into believing Hamas’s lies should be referred to the movement’s charter, where it is clearly stated that “The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine has been an Islamic Waqf throughout the generations and until the Day of Resurrection, no one can renounce it or part of it, or abandon it or part of it…the liberation of that land is an individual duty binding on all Muslims everywhere. When our enemies usurp some Islamic lands, Jihad [holy war] becomes a duty binding on all Muslims.”

Hamas Killed the Baby, Egyptian FM Kissed the Dead Baby, CNN Blamed Israel

Sunday, November 18th, 2012

The death of a baby is tragic, always.  But for the terrorists in Gaza and their supporters, the death of a child provides an irresistible public relations bonanza. Even when the killer of the baby isn’t their enemy, but their own weapons.

So when the Egyptian Prime Minister, Hesham Kandil, paid a visit to Gaza as a show of support for his fellow Islamists, a dead four-year-old child, Mahmoud Sadallah, was furnished for the photo opportunity.  The staging was perfect: Kandil, gently laying a kiss on the dead child’s forehead, while Ismael Haniya, a Prime Minister of Hamas, holds the child aloft, as dozens of concerned men look on in the background.

Kandil fought back tears as he said to reporters gathered to record the moment, “What I saw today in the hospital, the wounded and the martyrs, the boy … whose blood is still on my hands and clothes, is something that we cannot keep silent about.”

CNN referred to Mahmoud as the “symbol of the war in Gaza.”  Kandil told the cameras,”I saw the child who was martyred,” and called on Israel to halt “the offensive.”

CNN, The Mirror (UK) and other media, including Norway’s Dagbladet showed the touching scene.

But there is one problem: Israel isn’t responsible for Mahmoud Sadallah’s death.  Hamas is.

Sadallah was brought to Shifra Hospital in Gaza City after having been struck while playing outside of his home.  Although his family members told reporters that Mahmoud was killed in an airstrike from Israel, the facts don’t add up.

Israel agreed to a ceasefire during the time the Egyptian Prime Minister was in Gaza. Terrorists from Gaza continued firing during Kandil’s visit, but Israel held back, and certainly did not fire anywhere near where Kandil was visiting.

In addition, no one saw the strike, although there were reports that an explosion was heard.  The damage was consistent with that of a much smaller weapon, such as a qassam or morter shell.

But what really seems to point away from Israel having been responsible is that although there was evidence of what caused the explosion, that evidence was immediately removed from the area and has not been seen since.

Lebanon’s Daily Star had this to say:

Mahmoud’s family said the boy was in an alley close to his home when he was killed, along with a man of about 20, but no one appeared to have witnessed the strike. The area showed signs that a projectile might have exploded there, with shrapnel marks in the walls of surrounding homes and a shattered kitchen window. But neighbors said local security officials quickly took what remained of the projectile, making it impossible to verify who fired it.

But the pictures have been taken and the CNN video has aired.  Hamas now has its own Mohammed Al-Durah-style fake martyr with which to demonize Israel.

Peres to CNN: ‘No Country in the World Would Agree’ to Rockets

Tuesday, November 13th, 2012

In an interview with CNN last night, President Shimon Peres said that if “Gazan mothers want to sleep at night, they must understand that all mothers want to sleep at night” including Israeli mothers.

He also said that “no country in the world would agree” to being bombarded with rockets.

Here’s what Peres said in the Interview:

“There is a permissiveness, they will learn there is no permissiveness, to kill. And if they want to run their lives properly and … their people properly, they cannot be permissive in killing and shooting at us.”

“It’s not just killing. We cannot afford that a million mothers will not have a night’s sleep because they have to watch their babies [to make sure they will not] be hit by rockets.”

“No country in the world would agree to it. Without exception.”

“We shall try to stop it by all the means we can mobile and use. And We can.”

“We don’t think that we are defenseless. We are restrained. We don’t take initiatives. We are careful to respect human life and we shall be careful. But if they want that the Gazan mothers want to sleep at night. They must understand that all mothers want to sleep at night with their babies.”

Here’s the video clip:

So What Did Obama Call the Benghazi Attack?

Thursday, October 18th, 2012

Since the debate there’s been a lot of analysis as to whether the President designated the attack on the U.S. embassy in Bengahzi, Libya, an act of terrorism.

Throughout most of his speech on September 12th, Obama did call it an “attack” and then later in the speech after discussing the attacks of September 11th, 2001, he said:

Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned…. As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it…  No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.

So it wasn’t clear that he was referring to the Benghazi attack as a terror attack or whether he was speaking about the 9-11 attacks or both. The New York Times reported this morning that on Sept. 13th, at a campaign speech, Obama had said:

And we want to send a message all around the world — anybody who would do us harm: No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world….

As they didn’t give the context of the statement, we are left to trust them that he was talking about Benghazi.

Then for about a week, administration officials described the attacks as part of a protest-riot against the the U.S. over the “Innocence of Muslims” video which got out of hand. As Romney attempted to point out during the debate, U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice called it “a spontaneous, not premeditated attack response” which was attended by “some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons.” (Here’s a link to a catalogue of quotes from the administration about the attack from the Times).

CNN points out that when he was on “the View,” Obama was asked about how Hillary Clinton had called the attack an act of “terrorism” and whether that was the case. Obama responded saying, “we’re still doing an investigation….”

This looks like a case of semantics overshadowing the main point. Obama did not believe the attack was an act of terrorism. He and his administration’s initial reaction was to play down its significance of the attack. Remember, this is a President who banned the use of the term “War on Terror” in his administration. That’s the point Romney is making and that’s what the discussion should be about.

***

Here’s a good explanation of what the President was referring to when he said “act of terror” in the Rose Garden:

And here’s the debate’s moderator Candy Crowly explaining what she said:

CNN No Longer Available in Israel

Thursday, September 20th, 2012

Satellite broadcaster YES announced Wednesday that CNN broadcasts will no longer be available after December 31.

Yes issued a statement saying that it would investigate a replacement for the 20-year staple of Israeli news buffs, but that customers could avail themselves of other English-language news broadcasts, including Fox News, BBC World, Sky News, and Bloomberg.

HOT cable dropped CNN last year, replacing it with MSNBC.

‘Innocence’ Actress Says the Cast Was Duped, Muhammad’s Character Was Named ‘George’ (Video)

Thursday, September 13th, 2012

The 80 cast and crew members employed by the makers of the movie that has provoked the Islamic world said told CNN on Wednesday that they were “grossly misled” about the film’s intent and expressed regrets over the violence the movie has been causing.

“The entire cast and crew are extremely upset and feel taken advantage of by the producer,” they said in a statement to CNN about the movie, “Innocence of Muslims.”

“We are 100% not behind this film and were grossly misled about its intent and purpose,” continued the statement to CNN. “We are shocked by the drastic rewrites of the script and lies that were told to all involved. We are deeply saddened by the tragedies that have occurred.”

Four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, were killed Tuesday in Benghazi, Libya by a terrorist team taking advantage of the local outrage over the film, which ridicules the prophet Muhammad.

A casting call published in July 2011 in Backstage magazine and in other publications listed the movie title as “Desert Warrior,” and presented it as an “historical Arabian Desert adventure film.”

An actress in the film who asked not to be identified said the original script did not include a character named Prophet Muhammad.

The actress said she spoke on Wednesday with the producer, who is identified in the advertisement as Sam Bassiel. “He said he wrote the script because he wants the Muslims to quit killing,” she said. “I had no idea he was doing all this.”

The AP has since verified the man’s identity as Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, age 55, a Coptic Christian.

“I would never be involved in a film to ever hurt or bring harm to anybody,” the bactress told CNN. “This makes me sick to my stomach to think that I was involved in that movie that brought death to somebody else.”

According to the actress, the character of Muhammad was named George during the shooting.

A member of the production staff who worked directly on the film and has a copy of the original script told CNN it does not mention Muhammad or Islam.

The Wall Street Journal identified the filmmaker as Sam Bacile, an Israeli-American real estate developer. The Journal reported that, in its telephone interview with Bacile, he characterized his film as “a political effort to call attention to the hypocrisies of Islam.”

“Islam is a cancer,” he told the newspaper. “The movie is a political movie. It’s not a religious movie.”

“This guy is totally anonymous. At this point no one can confirm he holds an Israeli citizenship and even if he did we are not involved,” ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said. “No Israeli institution, government department or office has any involvement in this. This guy acted on his own behalf.”

Consultant Steve Klein told CNN he worked with Bacile on the movie and said the filmmaker had gone into hiding.

James Horn, a friend who has worked with Mr. Klein in anti-Muslim activities for several years, told the NY Times that he believed Mr. Klein was involved in providing technical assistance to the film and advice on the script. Mr. Horn said he called Mr. Klein on Wednesday. “I said, ‘Steve, did you do this?’ He said, ‘Yep.’ ”

“He’s very depressed, and he’s upset,” Klein told CNN on Wednesday regarding Nakoula Basseley Nakoula. “I talked to him this morning, and he said that he was very concerned for what happened to the ambassador.”

Klein said it was not the film’s fault that protests had turned bloody.

An online trailer for the film depicts Muslims very much the way Nazi propaganda movies depicted Jews and their plot to “conquer the world.”

Muhammad is shown as a womanizer, child molester and bloodied killer.

The movie, which was posted in July on YouTube, got more notice after Egyptian television aired segments and anti-Islam activists, including Egyptian-born Coptic Christian Morris Sadek, promoted it online.

Florida Qoran burning pastor Terry Jones said he had been contacted to help distribute the film.

“The film is not intended to insult the Muslim community, but it is intended to reveal truths about Muhammad that are possibly not widely known,” Jones told CNN.

“It is very clear that God did not influence him (Muhammad) in the writings of the Qoran,” said Jones, who blames Muslims’ thin skins, rather than the film, for the riots and murders.

Atheists Target Religious Jews in Williamsburg

Sunday, March 4th, 2012

A national organization calling itself American Atheists is planning to unveil its anti-religious billboards Monday in heavily Muslim Paterson, NJ and in heavily Jewish Williamsburg, Brooklyn, according to CNN.

“You know it’s a myth … and you have a choice,” the billboards declare, in Patterson in English and Arabic, and in Brooklyn in English and Hebrew. Next to the text on the Arabic billboard is the word Allah, and on the Hebrew sign is the Hebrew word for the Tetragrammaton, which Jews are not permitted to pronounce.

Including the “Shem ham’forash” in the Hebrew billboard is particularly provocative, since it is sacred and so may not be erased in print, presenting protesters with a dilemma.

According to Dave Silverman, president of American Atheists, the motive behind the signs is purely humanitarian, as they are intended to reach atheists in the Muslim and Jewish communities who may feel isolated because they are surrounded by believers.

“Those communities are designed to keep atheists in the ranks,” he says. “If there are atheists in those communities, we are reaching out to them. We are letting them know that we see them, we acknowledge them and they don’t have to live that way if they don’t want to.”

The effort to discourage faith in these two devoted, monotheistic communities, receives a special meaning because it is being launched on the week of Purim, a celebration of the Jewish victory over Amalek. In Jewish sources, the function of Amalek in Jewish history is to encourage doubt in the heart of faithful Jews.

The late Christopher Hitchens depicted well the despair that has been driving atheist activists in the face of threats to their lack of faith (Atheists and agnostics make up only between 3% and 4% of the U.S. population): “Our theocratic enemy is in plain view. Protean in form, it extends from the overt menace of nuclear-armed mullahs to the insidious campaigns to have stultifying pseudo-science taught in American schools.”

But while Christian and, to a lesser extent, Muslims have been entangled in a conflict over the separation of Church and State in America, Jewish institutions have largely been staying out of those battles, and the Hasidic Jews of Williamsburg have certainly not been involved in pushing a national agenda of any kind. Posting an intrusive and insulting billboard in the midst of their neighborhood is nothing short of an unprovoked attack.

And knowing the mettle of the Hasidim of Williamsburg, they are sure to come up with a proper response.

Silverman told CNN the signs advertise the American Atheists’ upcoming convention and an atheist rally, called the Reason Rally, in Washington next month.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/jewish-news/atheists-target-religious-jews-in-williamsburg/2012/03/04/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: