By the way Ian, what's up with adding the tag "arts" to this report? That apparently is how you see it. From a pure semantic point of view, it is a selective narrative with a clear one-sided point of view, vs an objective reality, so in that regard it is tagged properly: as a work of art.
Shame on all of you for turning a blind eye to people who are not guilty of firing rockets, nor electing Hamas. But they do not exist in your "reporting", or your movie of the report.
Ian Fisher, do you consider yourself a journalist or a propogandist shaping the narrative for consumption? You even go so far as to use the ambiguous term "citizens" being killed. It must be horrifying if you were to properly identify them as PALESTINIAN CITIZENS ... but no, that word is practically not even existent in this report. It's as though they don't exist as people. Just an emorphous blob that blames Israel for their family's deaths. The NYT sold the war in Irag, and now this one.
This, Ladies & Gentlemen, is the so-called LIBERAL MEDIA, the NYT. The segment consists of a voiceover report @ a hospital stating Palestinians blame Hamas for drawing fire in their neighborhoods, yet, in past, months later the Palestinians blame the Israelis. Then the report speaks of Hamas's objective to obliterate Israel. Then Israel's objective as unclear, but poss to eradicate Hamas. NOT ONCE IN THIS REPORT is any info provided re PALESTINIAN CITIZENS who are NOT Hamas, yet slaughtered.
agreed
samer721 3 years ago
I think you're just trying to anger some people for no reason.
You can look at the videos and see the injured people for you're self.
Who knows, maybe if things didn't turn out the way you did, you could of had been injured or killed by white phosphate for no reason.
samer721 3 years ago
terrible coverage
lighthammar 3 years ago
HANG HAMAS!!!!!
knappy014 3 years ago
FREE FREE PALESTINE!
unitedloveall1 3 years ago
FREE PALESTINE!
unitedloveall1 3 years ago
The hospital shots are clearly staged. There's no blood and everyones clothes are clean.
I wonder how long before the NYTimes starts advertising for Maxim on their fromt page.. lol
AdognamedOp 3 years ago
By the way Ian, what's up with adding the tag "arts" to this report? That apparently is how you see it. From a pure semantic point of view, it is a selective narrative with a clear one-sided point of view, vs an objective reality, so in that regard it is tagged properly: as a work of art.
Shame on all of you for turning a blind eye to people who are not guilty of firing rockets, nor electing Hamas. But they do not exist in your "reporting", or your movie of the report.
quicksite 3 years ago
Ian Fisher, do you consider yourself a journalist or a propogandist shaping the narrative for consumption? You even go so far as to use the ambiguous term "citizens" being killed. It must be horrifying if you were to properly identify them as PALESTINIAN CITIZENS ... but no, that word is practically not even existent in this report. It's as though they don't exist as people. Just an emorphous blob that blames Israel for their family's deaths. The NYT sold the war in Irag, and now this one.
quicksite 3 years ago
This, Ladies & Gentlemen, is the so-called LIBERAL MEDIA, the NYT. The segment consists of a voiceover report @ a hospital stating Palestinians blame Hamas for drawing fire in their neighborhoods, yet, in past, months later the Palestinians blame the Israelis. Then the report speaks of Hamas's objective to obliterate Israel. Then Israel's objective as unclear, but poss to eradicate Hamas. NOT ONCE IN THIS REPORT is any info provided re PALESTINIAN CITIZENS who are NOT Hamas, yet slaughtered.
quicksite 3 years ago