A prominent US media figure does the same. (And @rezaaslan didn't under his retweet after people informed him of the facts.)
Aaand @imraansiddiqi seems to have deleted his tweet. Now that he seems to acknowledge the info he shared was incorrect, maybe his Twitter followers deserve to be informed?
3/ Twitter takes trends that had existed before, in some measure, and amplifies them exponentially. So it is with anti-Israel disinformation. Now new. But now it's haywire. Countless thousands of people think Israel sprayed feces on the al Aqsa mosque.
4/ The quiet deletion of an offending tweet does nothing, except perhaps protecting the Tweeter by hiding the offense.
Here's another example from today -- the PLO itself spreads the lie that Israelis killed this man, then deletes the tweet.
It's not just CAIR officials, the PLO, and Twitter activists. Members of Congress participate, too. nypost.com/2020/01/29/rep…
A copy of the now-deleted tweet that started this thread:
Typo key for this thread:
Under=Undo
Now=Not
To those who solved the puzzle, well done! And to everyone who's read this, thanks, as always, for playing "Trying to interpret the incessant typos Gilead's tweets."
"IN"! The incessant typos IN Gilead's tweets. I'm resigning.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
2. Rocket attacks on Israeli civilians, and sniper attacks on Israeli soldiers, are characterized as expressions of Palestinian "impatience" with Israel. camera.org/article/in-ny-…
3. Hamas rockets that target and successfully kill Jewish civilians are called "stray rockets," as if they misfired and unintentionally struck their target. camera.org/article/in-ny-…
1/ Hi @IKershner, could you clarify by what criteria the @nytimes classifies historical attacks on Tel Amal as "resistance"?
Opening fire on Holocaust survivors living and farming legally in their village is terrorism, or at the least an "attack."
2/ Just yesterday, those perusing the @nytimes read about Jewish "resistance" fighters who fought Nazis in death camps. That's not the same as, e.g., killing an innocent Jew as he was tending the fields. jta.org/1937/11/19/arc…
3/ The paper doesn't need to call the attackers "brigands," as it did in a contemporaneous (April 1937) report on an assault on Tel Amal. That sounds a bit dated.
But it could certainly use the word "attack" instead of the noble-sounding "resistance." @IKershner
1/ There's a letter circulating "from journalists, to journalists" that calls for abandoning journalistic objectivity in favor of anti-Israel activism.
Most signers are from fringe sites (Jewish Currents, the Intercept, Mondoweiss), but some (!) are mainstream news reporters.
2/ The names in that latter group—the handful from The @BuzzFeed, @washingtonpost, @latimes—should amount to a list of reporters that news organizations promising objective, impartial, and fair reporting should bar from touching anything related to Israel, Hamas, or the conflict.
3/ There's nothing at all noteworthy about journalists from Al Jazeera/AJ+ signing the letter:
For some strange reason, Al Jazeera has cult status in some Western circles.
It shouldn't. It should be viewed with contempt.
Here's an updated "greatest hits" list to underscore that point:
2/ To set the stage:
Most recently, a the network accepted an award from Hamas, an antisemitic terror organization known for its suicide bombing attacks on Jewish civilians, for what Hamas viewed as Al Jazeera's excellent coverage.
3/ Al Jazeera once threw a birthday party for Samir Kuntar, a Lebanese terrorist convicted of bludgeoning to death a 4-year-old Israeli girl and shooting her father.