June 2, 2010 | 9:17 pm

Flotilla incident as justification for Israelis and Palestinians

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Follow JewishJournal.com on

The beat goes on for the flotilla raid aftermath. A lot of developments here. (The above video is from this story about a pro-Israel rally outside the consulate in L.A.) But my favorite bit of media about the incident is this satirical piece from blogger Wayne Myers:

What the attack shows, plain as day, is that my own opinions on the issue are the only correct ones, and everyone else is painfully wrong. The failure of everyone else to see how right I am can lead only to tragic consequences.

First, a little historical background. The side of the conflict that I support comprises nothing but honourable and courageous men and women. They are motivated by nothing more than a desire to defend their own families and rich culture. Their cause is right and these people are completely justified in every action, no matter what they do. By contrast, the other side is composed entirely of amoral murderous thugs who will stop at nothing to achieve their ends. Far from achieving a just settlement and a lasting peace, these thugs are only interested in perpetuating the cycle of violence and brutality.

(skip)

The biased reporting from the BBC should come as a surprise to no-one. Time and again they give those on the other side of the conflict an easy ride. At the same time they twist the words of those speaking for my side in order to make them look ridiculous, belittling the importance of our just cause. This is an insult - the facts of the situation are clear and easily found on Google. Yet the BBC seems to ignore facts, preferring instead to act as if they are actually part of the other side’s own propaganda machine. Is this what we pay our licence fee for?

The newspapers are no better. Only yesterday the Guardian printed an editorial article in the Comment Is Free section of its website which made me more angry than anything I have read on this subject in weeks. Unbelievable though it may seem, this article was actually trying to defend the indefensible. The piece made it seem as if the side of the conflict which I do not support had some kind of justification for its actions.

Read the rest here. Myers never says what side he supports, which is the whole point.