Propaganda Blitz: How Mainstream Media Is Pushing Fake Palestine Stories | MintPress

Scott

Verified User
This story's almost a month old now, but it brings up points that are worth remaining (which is probably why it was republished today on Scheerpost). Below is an excerpt detailing 1 fake mainstream news story, but it also covers others...

**
October 13th, 2023

Alan Macleod

EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS, ZERO EVIDENCE

One case in point is the claim that, during their incursion into southern Israel, Hamas fighters stopped to round up, kill and mutilate 40 Israeli babies, beheading them and leaving their bodies behind.

The extraordinary assertion was originally reported by the Israeli channel i24 News, which based it on anonymous Israeli military sources. Despite offering no proof whatsoever, this highly inflammatory claim about an enemy made by an active participant in a conflict was picked up and repeated across the world by a host of media (e.g., in the United States by Fox News, CNN, MSN, Business Insider, and The New York Post).

Meanwhile, the front pages of the United Kingdom’s largest newspapers were festooned with the story, the press outraged at the atrocity and inviting their readers to feel the same way.

Extraordinary claims should require extraordinary evidence, and a story like this should have been met with serious skepticism, given who was making the claim. The first question any reporter should have asked was, “Where is the evidence?” Given multiple opportunities to stand by it, the IDF continually distanced itself from the claims. Nevertheless, the story was simply too useful not to publish.

The decapitated baby narrative was so popular that even President Biden referenced it, claiming to have seen “confirmed” images of Hamas killing children. This claim, however, was hastily retracted by his handlers at the White House, who noted that Biden was simply referencing the i24 News report.

The story looked even more like a piece of cheap propaganda after it was revealed that the key source for the claim was Israeli soldier David Ben Zion, an extremist settler who had incited race riots against Palestinians earlier this year, describing them as “animals” with no heart who needs to be “wiped out.”

Manipulating the U.S. public into supporting the war by feeding them atrocity propaganda about mutilating babies has a long history. In 1990, for instance, a girl purporting to be a local nurse was brought before Congress, where she testified that Iraqi Dictator Saddam Hussein’s men had ripped hundreds of Kuwaiti babies from their incubators and left them to die. The story helped whip the American public up into a pro-war fervor. It was later revealed that it was a complete hoax dreamed up by a public relations firm.

**

Full article:
Propaganda Blitz: How Mainstream Media Is Pushing Fake Palestine Stories | MintPress News
 
The right does not require proof. If they say it and it harms the left or those they do not like, it must be true. I got blistered for doubting that story on JPP. It was too damn convenient in timing and horror. The fact is Israel is allowing babies to die in hospitals and from bombs.
 
Last edited:
The right does not require proof. If they say it and it harms the left or those they do not like, it must be true.

Speaking as someone who considers himself to be somewhat of a hybrid between left and right, I've seen both left and right believe things with little if any evidence. It just depends on the issue. I'm glad we agree on this one though :-).

I got blistered for doubting that story on JPP. It was too damn convenient in timing and horror.

It reminds me of a saying, something like "the truth can spread halfway around the world before the truth can get its pants on". It's pretty easy to spread false rumors, while the truth frequently takes time to be revealed.

The fact is Israel is allowing babies to die in hospitals and from bombs.

Looks like it's also dropping most if not all of the bombs as well. It's all pretty sad.
 
This story's almost a month old now, but it brings up points that are worth remaining (which is probably why it was republished today on Scheerpost). Below is an excerpt detailing 1 fake mainstream news story, but it also covers others...

**
October 13th, 2023

Alan Macleod

EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS, ZERO EVIDENCE

One case in point is the claim that, during their incursion into southern Israel, Hamas fighters stopped to round up, kill and mutilate 40 Israeli babies, beheading them and leaving their bodies behind.

The extraordinary assertion was originally reported by the Israeli channel i24 News, which based it on anonymous Israeli military sources. Despite offering no proof whatsoever, this highly inflammatory claim about an enemy made by an active participant in a conflict was picked up and repeated across the world by a host of media (e.g., in the United States by Fox News, CNN, MSN, Business Insider, and The New York Post).

Meanwhile, the front pages of the United Kingdom’s largest newspapers were festooned with the story, the press outraged at the atrocity and inviting their readers to feel the same way.

Extraordinary claims should require extraordinary evidence, and a story like this should have been met with serious skepticism, given who was making the claim. The first question any reporter should have asked was, “Where is the evidence?” Given multiple opportunities to stand by it, the IDF continually distanced itself from the claims. Nevertheless, the story was simply too useful not to publish.

The decapitated baby narrative was so popular that even President Biden referenced it, claiming to have seen “confirmed” images of Hamas killing children. This claim, however, was hastily retracted by his handlers at the White House, who noted that Biden was simply referencing the i24 News report.

The story looked even more like a piece of cheap propaganda after it was revealed that the key source for the claim was Israeli soldier David Ben Zion, an extremist settler who had incited race riots against Palestinians earlier this year, describing them as “animals” with no heart who needs to be “wiped out.”

Manipulating the U.S. public into supporting the war by feeding them atrocity propaganda about mutilating babies has a long history. In 1990, for instance, a girl purporting to be a local nurse was brought before Congress, where she testified that Iraqi Dictator Saddam Hussein’s men had ripped hundreds of Kuwaiti babies from their incubators and left them to die. The story helped whip the American public up into a pro-war fervor. It was later revealed that it was a complete hoax dreamed up by a public relations firm.

**

Full article:
Propaganda Blitz: How Mainstream Media Is Pushing Fake Palestine Stories | MintPress News

Did U read the whole thing this time before bringing it to us?

This is pretty much required from the serious people.
 
This story's almost a month old now, but it brings up points that are worth remaining (which is probably why it was republished today on Scheerpost). Below is an excerpt detailing 1 fake mainstream news story, but it also covers others...

**
October 13th, 2023

Alan Macleod

EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS, ZERO EVIDENCE

One case in point is the claim that, during their incursion into southern Israel, Hamas fighters stopped to round up, kill and mutilate 40 Israeli babies, beheading them and leaving their bodies behind.

The extraordinary assertion was originally reported by the Israeli channel i24 News, which based it on anonymous Israeli military sources. Despite offering no proof whatsoever, this highly inflammatory claim about an enemy made by an active participant in a conflict was picked up and repeated across the world by a host of media (e.g., in the United States by Fox News, CNN, MSN, Business Insider, and The New York Post).

Meanwhile, the front pages of the United Kingdom’s largest newspapers were festooned with the story, the press outraged at the atrocity and inviting their readers to feel the same way.

Extraordinary claims should require extraordinary evidence, and a story like this should have been met with serious skepticism, given who was making the claim. The first question any reporter should have asked was, “Where is the evidence?” Given multiple opportunities to stand by it, the IDF continually distanced itself from the claims. Nevertheless, the story was simply too useful not to publish.

The decapitated baby narrative was so popular that even President Biden referenced it, claiming to have seen “confirmed” images of Hamas killing children. This claim, however, was hastily retracted by his handlers at the White House, who noted that Biden was simply referencing the i24 News report.

The story looked even more like a piece of cheap propaganda after it was revealed that the key source for the claim was Israeli soldier David Ben Zion, an extremist settler who had incited race riots against Palestinians earlier this year, describing them as “animals” with no heart who needs to be “wiped out.”

Manipulating the U.S. public into supporting the war by feeding them atrocity propaganda about mutilating babies has a long history. In 1990, for instance, a girl purporting to be a local nurse was brought before Congress, where she testified that Iraqi Dictator Saddam Hussein’s men had ripped hundreds of Kuwaiti babies from their incubators and left them to die. The story helped whip the American public up into a pro-war fervor. It was later revealed that it was a complete hoax dreamed up by a public relations firm.

**

Full article:
Propaganda Blitz: How Mainstream Media Is Pushing Fake Palestine Stories | MintPress News

Also your threadban list is obscene...another thing that is not seen from the serious people.
 
Did U read the whole thing this time before bringing it to us?

I think I didn't in this case. I certainly believe I read enough for the subject of this thread. Surely you're aware that some people don't even reference articles in their opening posts, let alone read good chunks of them. To name a recent thread in this forum, you didn't seem to have a problem with Taichiliberal simply quoting a few lines from Thomas Jefferson in a recent thread, which I thought was fine. I think threads just need to have a relevant subject. I personally always like to include an article, but I don't believe one has to read the entire article to get the subject of a thread.
 
I think I didn't in this case. I certainly believe I read enough for the subject of this thread. Surely you're aware that some people don't even reference articles in their opening posts, let alone read good chunks of them. To name a recent thread in this forum, you didn't seem to have a problem with Taichiliberal simply quoting a few lines from Thomas Jefferson in a recent thread, which I thought was fine. I think threads just need to have a relevant subject. I personally always like to include an article, but I don't believe one has to read the entire article to get the subject of a thread.

Be Better is always my advice.
 
Also your threadban list is obscene...

Not sure how you came to that conclusion. I actually have a linked post to almost all the people I thread ban, just in case I'd like to review or explain why I thread banned any of them. If you'd like to know why I thread banned anyone on the list, let me know.

To me, the bottom line is that there is a limit to just how much verbal abuse I'm willing to tolerate from others here on jpp. In most forums, all you can do is appeal to moderators and sometimes even that won't get you far, but here, at least, we can all decide who we let into our threads.
 
I think I didn't in this case. I certainly believe I read enough for the subject of this thread. Surely you're aware that some people don't even reference articles in their opening posts, let alone read good chunks of them. To name a recent thread in this forum, you didn't seem to have a problem with Taichiliberal simply quoting a few lines from Thomas Jefferson in a recent thread, which I thought was fine. I think threads just need to have a relevant subject. I personally always like to include an article, but I don't believe one has to read the entire article to get the subject of a thread.

Be Better is always my advice.

I can certainly agree that we should all strive to better ourselves, but the issue here is how much time we should read articles for the purpose of using them in a thread. I personally think it's fine to only read a portion of them at times. I make a point of at least reading anything I quote, but I frequently don't see the need to read entire articles where I already agree with their main premises. I've certainly seen evidence that those who respond to my threads don't even read what I quote. It's usually alright, but it can be irritating when something they ask or say has already been answered or refuted by what I quoted in the opening post.
 
Not sure how you came to that conclusion. I actually have a linked post to almost all the people I thread ban, just in case I'd like to review or explain why I thread banned any of them. If you'd like to know why I thread banned anyone on the list, let me know.

To me, the bottom line is that there is a limit to just how much verbal abuse I'm willing to tolerate from others here on jpp. In most forums, all you can do is appeal to moderators and sometimes even that won't get you far, but here, at least, we can all decide who we let into our threads.

If you need more than five threadbans then you are the problem.
 
I can certainly agree that we should all strive to better ourselves, but the issue here is how much time we should read articles for the purpose of using them in a thread. I personally think it's fine to only read a portion of them at times. I make a point of at least reading anything I quote, but I frequently don't see the need to read entire articles where I already agree with their main premises. I've certainly seen evidence that those who respond to my threads don't even read what I quote. It's usually alright, but it can be irritating when something they ask or say has already been answered or refuted by what I quoted in the opening post.

Do not promote content that you cant be bothered to look at...this is not complicated.
 
Not sure how you came to that conclusion. I actually have a linked post to almost all the people I thread ban, just in case I'd like to review or explain why I thread banned any of them. If you'd like to know why I thread banned anyone on the list, let me know.

To me, the bottom line is that there is a limit to just how much verbal abuse I'm willing to tolerate from others here on jpp. In most forums, all you can do is appeal to moderators and sometimes even that won't get you far, but here, at least, we can all decide who we let into our threads.

If you need more than five threadbans then you are the problem.

Again, not sure how you came to that conclusion. If you think that anyone on my thread ban list shouldn't be there, I doubt I'd have an issue explaining why I did so. In another site that allows thread bans (there are very few, but I did used to post in such a forum), I've even reconciled with one or more people I'd thread banned. But it does take a bit of effort on their part, and generally speaking, those I thread ban have little interest in getting along with me better.
 
Again, not sure how you came to that conclusion. If you think that anyone on my thread ban list shouldn't be there, I doubt I'd have an issue explaining why I did so. In another site that allows thread bans (there are very few, but I did used to post in such a forum), I've even reconciled with one or more people I'd thread banned. But it does take a bit of effort on their part, and generally speaking, those I thread ban have little interest in getting along with me better.

I got educated...this is how I know....education was always the answer.
 
I can certainly agree that we should all strive to better ourselves, but the issue here is how much time we should read articles for the purpose of using them in a thread. I personally think it's fine to only read a portion of them at times. I make a point of at least reading anything I quote, but I frequently don't see the need to read entire articles where I already agree with their main premises. I've certainly seen evidence that those who respond to my threads don't even read what I quote. It's usually alright, but it can be irritating when something they ask or say has already been answered or refuted by what I quoted in the opening post.

Do not promote content that you cant be bothered to look at...this is not complicated.

I can certainly agree with that statement, but I suspect you aren't considering its implications. If I quote someone, I certainly want to draw attention to the statement(s) quoted, if not necessarily promote it. The thing is, articles can say a lot of things and people in forums have a limited amount of time, myself included. So while I do frequently read entire articles and sometimes even read entire articles that others post, I see no need to always do this, just as I don't expect many posters to always read the entirety of articles I quote either.
 
If you need more than five threadbans then you are the problem.

Again, not sure how you came to that conclusion. If you think that anyone on my thread ban list shouldn't be there, I doubt I'd have an issue explaining why I did so. In another site that allows thread bans (there are very few, but I did used to post in such a forum), I've even reconciled with one or more people I'd thread banned. But it does take a bit of effort on their part, and generally speaking, those I thread ban have little interest in getting along with me better.

I got educated...this is how I know....education was always the answer.

What are you claiming to know?
 
Back
Top