See the same Fake News liars that told yeaqrs of Russia lies, no0w lying aboiut the savages of Hamas :
The US media’s moral blindness over Hamas is showing, and it isn’t pretty
In the clearest moral test in a generation, much of the U.S. media is failing. And not just by a little — they are failing spectacularly.
On Oct. 7, the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas murdered an estimated 1,400 Israelis, many of whom were civilians, and kidnapped nearly 250 others to use as hostages. From the air, land and sea, Hamas terrorists targeted men, women, children, infants and the elderly.
Some Israelis were shot. Some were burned to death. Some were killed with explosives. Some were tortured and maimed. Some were raped and then murdered. The list of atrocities, many of which have been confirmed independent of Israeli officials, goes on and on.
Israel has since responded with military force, vowing to root out and destroy Hamas.
In this specific moment, when Israel is responding militarily to the greatest single-day slaughter of Jews since Adolf Hitler’s suicide, the question of who committed evil and who is justified could not be any clearer. Indeed, it is rare that a story as clear-cut as this falls into one’s lap.
Yet despite the uncomplicated nature of this precise situation, and despite the universally shared principle that murder and terrorism are, in fact, wrong, many journalists and editors appear to be morally confused.
Some scribes seem to be losing sleep, agonizing over such deep ethical dilemmas as, “Is ethnic cleansing — sorry, ‘decolonization’ — a legitimate form of protest?”; “does the terrorist organization that rules the Gaza Strip really owe it to the people it governs to provide basic utilities, including clean water?”; “can we really say that an Israeli infant was ‘beheaded,’ when it’s probably more accurate to say that the infant’s head was blown off by a rifle or a grenade?”; “is there a way around the idea that the Palestinian slogan, ‘From the river to the sea’ is an explicit call for a genocide?”; “do we really need to vet or fact-check statements and accusations that come from Hamas?”
The approach of many journalists to the current moment — a combination of “both-sides-ism” and kid-gloves treatment for Hamas terrorists — is not just morally repugnant; it’s absurd. It’s absurd because many of these same journalists spent the last several years boasting about their own moral clarity and willingness to speak out against evil, while scolding the rest of us for failing to do the same. It wasn’t so long ago that many of these same journalists laid out, in explicit detail, why it’s so dangerous to say there are “very fine people on both sides” when the story is one of civilians versus violent extremists.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opin...p&cvid=7331d55e653f4e51bf52cc06cca270ef&ei=10
The US media’s moral blindness over Hamas is showing, and it isn’t pretty
In the clearest moral test in a generation, much of the U.S. media is failing. And not just by a little — they are failing spectacularly.
On Oct. 7, the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas murdered an estimated 1,400 Israelis, many of whom were civilians, and kidnapped nearly 250 others to use as hostages. From the air, land and sea, Hamas terrorists targeted men, women, children, infants and the elderly.
Some Israelis were shot. Some were burned to death. Some were killed with explosives. Some were tortured and maimed. Some were raped and then murdered. The list of atrocities, many of which have been confirmed independent of Israeli officials, goes on and on.
Israel has since responded with military force, vowing to root out and destroy Hamas.
In this specific moment, when Israel is responding militarily to the greatest single-day slaughter of Jews since Adolf Hitler’s suicide, the question of who committed evil and who is justified could not be any clearer. Indeed, it is rare that a story as clear-cut as this falls into one’s lap.
Yet despite the uncomplicated nature of this precise situation, and despite the universally shared principle that murder and terrorism are, in fact, wrong, many journalists and editors appear to be morally confused.
Some scribes seem to be losing sleep, agonizing over such deep ethical dilemmas as, “Is ethnic cleansing — sorry, ‘decolonization’ — a legitimate form of protest?”; “does the terrorist organization that rules the Gaza Strip really owe it to the people it governs to provide basic utilities, including clean water?”; “can we really say that an Israeli infant was ‘beheaded,’ when it’s probably more accurate to say that the infant’s head was blown off by a rifle or a grenade?”; “is there a way around the idea that the Palestinian slogan, ‘From the river to the sea’ is an explicit call for a genocide?”; “do we really need to vet or fact-check statements and accusations that come from Hamas?”
The approach of many journalists to the current moment — a combination of “both-sides-ism” and kid-gloves treatment for Hamas terrorists — is not just morally repugnant; it’s absurd. It’s absurd because many of these same journalists spent the last several years boasting about their own moral clarity and willingness to speak out against evil, while scolding the rest of us for failing to do the same. It wasn’t so long ago that many of these same journalists laid out, in explicit detail, why it’s so dangerous to say there are “very fine people on both sides” when the story is one of civilians versus violent extremists.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opin...p&cvid=7331d55e653f4e51bf52cc06cca270ef&ei=10
