Gilead Ini Profile picture
Aug 15, 2019 5 tweets 2 min read Read on X
A "Muslim ban" against "two"(!!) very specific(!!) people is self-evidently…not…that. Not is it a "female ban" or "ban" on people whose last names end with a consonant. Not did Obama didn't implement a "Hindu ban" when he banned Modi.
One other thing, @Ilhan. If denying entry to two Muslims is a "Muslim ban," what's it called when you advocate for the boycott of 7 million Jews?
Autocorrect hates Jews.
One silver lining to this latest burst of shouting about Israel is that we get a way to identify those with zero shreds of credibility. Who? No, not those who oppose the policy on principle. Not those who support it on principle. But those pretending it's somehow a "Muslim ban."
Good point. The country has also prevented Jewish anti-Israel agitators (see: Ariel Gold) from entering. So… "Jewish ban."

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Gilead Ini

Gilead Ini Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @GileadIni

Nov 27
The online campaign to blame Jews for what attackers characterized as a "Jew hunt, which included miscaptioned video that spread on X, made its way to mainstream media.
(🧵)
⇝ The New York Times insisted it had video of Israelis chanting that there are no children in Gaza. Were they duped by the widely circulated miscaptioned video?

After initially stonewalling, the paper informed @CAMERAorg it had no such video, and published corrections. 🧵
⇝ The Media Line claimed it had video of the same chant. After @CAMERAorg called for substantiation, it admitted it had no such video. It quietly corrected its piece to refer to a "reported" chant.

⇝ Same claim, and same stealth correction from the Jewish Chronicle. 🧵
Read 11 tweets
Sep 4
The @nytimes anti-Israel bias isn't organic.

It's not an authentic reflection of events.

The paper intentionally hires extremists.

Yet another example: To help cover Israel after Israelis were slaughtered on Oct. 7, the NYT turned to… a former Electronic Intifada editor. Image
2/ Electronic Intifada is a pro-Hamas, PRO-OCT 7, rape-denying outlet. Here they describe Cassel as their former editor.

And yes, Cassel also worked for Al Jazeera (which I sometimes call the Holocaust denial network, owing to their habit of denying the Holocaust). Image
3/ Seems Cassel was going back and forth last November between producing content for Al Jazeera and for the NYT.
Image
Image
Read 9 tweets
Jul 2
1/ Among those hired by the @nytimes to cover Israel-related topics:
* The "How great you are, Hitler" guy
* Someone who denied Hamas murders civilians
* Someone who said she can't even look at Israelis and that her “objectivity got thrown out the window"

And now introducing…🥁
2/ Another radical anti-Israel hire by the @nytimes.

Bora Erden, an anti-Israel activist, who was hired days after the Oct. 7 massacre to cover Israel and anti-Israel activists.

Who is Erden?
3/ In May 2021, after a round of fighting prompted by Hamas's launch of indiscriminate rockets into Israel, Erden signed a letter to support the so-called "Palestinian struggle against Israeli colonial rule and its apartheid system." socialtextjournal.org/free-palestine…
Read 7 tweets
Jun 19
1/ Wikipedia's volunteer editors, so many of whom are naked partisans, blacklisted ADL as an unreliable source.

The Wikipedia that traffics in fake quotes. Image
2/ This Wikipedia: Image
3/ The Wikipedia that overflows with citations of Al Jazeera, which traffics in Holocaust denial and incitement to anti-Jewish violence.

Read 7 tweets
Jun 11
1/ The @nytimes regularly sanitizes anti-Israel protests.

Its coverage of Saturday's protest in D.C. conceals that demonstrators held a banner supporting Al Qassam—Hamas's armed branch behind the Oct. 7 slaughter—while chanting that Hezbollah should "kill another Zionist now."
2/ Also ignored by the NYT is a sign that said "stand with Hamas."

3/ The paper did cite—then immediately allowed someone to sanitize—a couple other slogans.

"Intifadas" were outbreaks of deadly violence against Israelis. Image
Read 23 tweets
Apr 30
1/ This, in the @nytimes today, is false. Image
2/ This, about Cal Poly, in the @nytimes today, is also false. Image
3/ The @nytimes seems to be sugarcoating the demonstrators' demands to conceal their extremism and dress them up merely as anti-war activists.

They are anti-Israel activists to the core, and little more.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(