Israellycool

The phrase “hardline Jews” appears at least twice in recent AFP reports.

One is in a discussion of Peace Now:

Loathed or loved by many Israelis, Peace Now this week marks 30 years as a movement which has deeply influenced public opinion but not achieved its vision of peace with the Palestinians.

…The peace movement was a counterforce to hardline Jews who settled the West Bank and Gaza Strip after their occupation in the 1967 Middle East war.

Their usage of language certainly makes clear what AFP thinks of Peace Now and of “hardline Jews.” You will never see them refer to Peace Now as an “extreme Left group” or as being comprised of “hardline terrorist enablers,” both of which are more accurate than to consider them a “peace” group.

Today, we see the identical phrase used in a more curious manner, in a headline, no less:

Hardline Jews make night pilgrimages to West Bank tomb

NABLUS, West Bank (AFP) — Headlights pierce the misty night as the armoured bus packed with hardline Jews winds down the road from a hilltop settlement into the heart of the Palestinian town of Nablus.

Their destination is the burial place of the biblical patriarch Joseph, a pilgrimage site that has become a grim symbol of the region’s intractable conflict.

Nearly 100 men wearing black hats or skullcaps and clutching prayer books huddle in the bus, some reading prayers by the light of mobile phones.

“This is a path of devotion for God. I have gone this way dozens of times and will continue doing it,” says Benjamin Makhleb, a 23-year-old member of the Hassidic Breslav movement who had come from Jerusalem.

The tense silence that grips this cloak-and-dagger mission gives way to raptured singing and praying as the two buses pass through the checkpoint at the entrance to Nablus, under heavy military escort.

It is just past 2 am.

“This is the cradle of our existence as a Jewish people. Joseph’s Tomb is part of every Jew and it is shameful to see us having to sneak in here like thieves in the night,” says 23-year-old Nathan Azur.

“It saddens and angers me to see this,” says the bearded student from a town near Tel Aviv.

Everyone makes the journey for religious reasons, but for many extreme right-wing Israelis it is also an affirmation of what they see as the Jews’ right to control and govern their sacred sites in the Holy Land.

So the desire to have Jews control Jewish sacred sites is the definition, according to AFP, of being an “extreme right-wing Israeli.” Of course, this definition works well for those who want to see historic Jerusalem and the rest of Judea and Samaria - where essentially every major Jewish shrine lies - to be Judenrein.

Would AFP consider any Muslims who travel to pray at the Al Aqsa mosque in territory controlled by Jews to be “hardline Muslims” or would that be considered a normal, and normative, human right? Would AFP consider Palestinian Authority members who advocate the Arabization of all of Israel to be “extreme Palestinian nationalists”?

Goes to our friends at the AP:

A Palestinian demonstrator uses a sling-shot to hurl a stone at Israeli border police, not seen, during a protest against Israel’s separation barrier in the West Bank village of Bilin, near Ramallah, Friday, April 11, 2008. Israel says the barrier is necessary for security while Palestinians call it a land grab. (AP Photo/Muhammed Muheisen)

Come to think of it, is that even a sling-shot?

Yesterday I posted a large number of articles about a child killed in Gaza and compared how these “news” sources reported Palestinian Arab claims that the child was killed by an Israeli tank shell. Some of them took the Palestinian claims at face value, and the ones that noted Israel’s denials buried that information much lower in the article.

Well, today the Palestinian Center for Human Rights came out with their investigation of the issue, and, sure enough, the kid was killed by his peaceful Gazan neighbors:

On Sunday evening, 6 April 2008, ‘Abdullah Mohammed Bahar, 4, was killed and his brother, ‘Abdul Jawad, 8, was wounded when a mortar shell fell near their house in al-Boreij refugee camp in the central Gaza Strip.

According to investigations conducted by PCHR, at approximately 15:00 on Sunday, a mortar shell fell near a house belonging to Mohammed Suleiman Bahar, 51, in the east of al-Boreij refugee camp in the central Gaza Strip. As a result, two of the owner’s children were wounded when they were playing near the house: ‘Abullah, 4, wounded by shrapnel to the head and the chest; and ‘Abdul Jawad, 8, wounded by shrapnel to the head. The two children were evacuated to al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital in Deir al-Balah town, but ‘Abdullah died shortly after arriving at the hospital.

Will we be seeing any corrections from the many media that - as always - reported the lying Palestinian “witnesses” and “medical sources” without skepticism and gave them more credence than Israeli claims that are almost inevitably vindicated?

Previous examples of Palestinian Arabs blaming Israel for deaths they committed themselves here, here, here, here and here, just to list a few.

A dead donkey is seen in front of Israeli police vehicles on a road near the West Bank village of Salem near Nablus April 7, 2008. An Israeli bus carrying settlers ran over and killed a Palestinian shepherd near the West Bank city of Nablus on Monday, local Palestinian residents said. REUTERS/Abed Omar Qusini (WEST BANK)

Hmm. A picture of an Israeli vehicle in front of a dead donkey, to illustrate a story about a palestinian allegation that an Israeli bus ran over a palestinian. What possibly could Reuters’ Abed Omar Qusini be trying to say?

Clue: the fact he placed the words “local Palestinian residents said” (which indicate it is a claim made by palestinians, and not a verified fact) only at the very end of the long caption is likely related.

A child was killed in Gaza yesterday. How does the media report it?

Comparing the spin that the stories get, and the relative placement of various details, is a very valuable way to see how each media outlet is biased.

AP:

Palestinian Abdullah Buhar, 8-years-old, …was killed Sunday by shrapnel during clashes between Israeli forces and Palestinian militants on the border line that separates the Gaza Strip from Israel. It was not immediately clear whether he was killed by Israeli forces firing into Gaza, or by a misfired mortar launched by Palestinian militants.

AFP:

Abdullah Bhar …was shot dead by Israeli tank fire in the central Gaza Strip today, Palestinian medical sources have said.

Reuters:

[A] 5-year-old Palestinian boy, Abdullah Bhar, … was killed during fighting between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian militants in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip on Sunday, medical workers and militant groups said.

CNN:

Israeli forces in central Gaza exchanged fire with Palestinian militants Sunday, killing a child and wounding four of the child’s family members, according to Palestinian security sources.

An Israeli military spokeswoman confirmed Israeli forces were operating near al-Bureij refugee camp and that they came under fire from armed militants inside a home.

The spokeswoman said she had no details on casualties.

…[paragraph 7] - The Israeli military said the shot was fired by Palestinians in Gaza.

YNet:

Palestinian medical sources in the Strip reported that the children were hit by shrapnel from Israeli shells fired at their house during the clashes. The IDF launched an investigation into the Palestinian claims.

AKI:

A five-year old Palestinian child was killed on Sunday, as Israeli forces clashed with militants returning fire in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.

The incident took place in the al-Bureij refugee camp and medics say that the boy, Abdullah Bhar, died of shrapnel wounds from an Israeli tank shell.

Militants claimed they responded by firing anti-tank missiles at Israeli forces.

The Palestinian branch of the Defence for Children International, a Geneva based rights group, claims that 49 children have been killed in the Gaza Strip by Israeli forces since the beginning of 2008.

Iran’s Press TV:

A five-year-old Palestinian boy has been killed and another wounded in an explosion in the central Gaza Strip, medical officials say.

The dead child, Abdullah Buhar, was hit by shrapnel in his head and chest near al-Bureij refugee camp, the officials said on Sunday.

The Israeli army confirmed there was fighting in the area, saying its forces opened fire but it was unaware of anyone being hurt.

Xinhua:

A 5-year-old Palestinian child was killed and two injured on Sunday in an Israeli artillery shelling on central Gaza Strip, medics and witnesses said.

Al Alam (Iran):

An 8-year-old Palestinian boy has been martyred by an Israeli mortar shell in the central Gaza Strip, medical officials said.

The boy, Abdullah Buhar, was hit by shrapnel to his head and chest, the officials said on Sunday.

Television footages showed emotional scenes as Buhar’s mother mourned over her son’s body.

Arutz-7:

In reponse to Arab claims that a 5-year-old boy was amongst the dead, the IDF spokesman said that soldiers had not seen civilians near the scene of the battle. The IDF spokesman did not rule out the possibility that the child was accidentally killed by terrorists, and may have fallen victim to a misfired mortar shell.

Jerusalem Post:

Earlier Sunday, Palestinian doctors reported that a young boy had been killed in the Gaza Strip. The officials said the boy was hit by shrapnel to his head and chest; however it was not clear whether he was killed by Israeli forces operating in the area or by Palestinian gunmen who may have misfired a mortar shell.

Ha’aretz:

A 5-year-old Palestinian boy was killed on Sunday when an Israel Defense Forces shell exploded near his home in the al-Bureij refugee camp in the central Gaza Strip, Palestinian officials said.

Medical workers and militant groups said the boy, Abdullah Buhar, was killed during fighting between IDF soldiers and Palestinian militants in the Hamas-controlled Strip.

The medical workers, who examined the boy’s body in a Gaza hospital, said he was killed by a shrapnel fragment from an IDF tank shell.

The militant groups said they fired anti-tank missiles and mortar bombs at IDF troops during the fighting near the refugee camp.

An IDF spokeswoman confirmed troops exchanged fire in the area with armed
Palestinians but said they were unaware of casualties.

Uruknet:

Palestinian boy Abdullah Bhar …was shot dead by Israeli tank fire in the central Gaza Strip today.

Daily Star (Lebanon):

A Palestinian boy was shot dead by Israeli tank fire in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip on Sunday, Palestinian medical sources said. Abdullah Buhar, whose age was given as either five years or eight,was hit by shrapnel to his head and chest, the officials said.

Doctors said a 16-year-old boy also was wounded in the same incident between the border with Israel and the Bureij refugee camp in central Gaza, the sources said.

The Israeli military confirmed that there was fighting in the area, saying its forces opened fire at a group of militants who attacked them. But it said it was unaware of anyone being hurt.

Ma’an:

Shrapnel from an Israeli tank shell killed a five-year-old Palestinian child and injured two others in Al-Bureij refugee camp in the Gaza Strip on Sunday afternoon, witnesses and medics said.

Palestinian medical sources identified the deceased child as Abdullah Bhar.

On Saturday, Israeli soldiers shot and killed a 35-year-old Palestinian farmer in the northern Gaza Strip. [EoZ - Ma'an has had a full 36 hours to correct this lie.]

Unfortunately, I found nothing from the BBC, Sky News or the New York Times.

Yesterday, the Jerusalem Post reported about Palestinian Media Watch’s allegation that the palestinian Ma’an News Agency - funded in part by the Netherlands and Denmark - promotes hatred of Israel.

Marcus and Crook monitored the Ma’an news agency’s Arabic and English news coverage of the last few terrorist attacks in Israel and found that it repeatedly honored murderers as “martyrs” and referred to areas of pre-1967 Israel as “occupied Palestine.”

They also found that stronger anti-Israel terminology was used in Ma’an’s Arabic Web site than in its English one.

“We find it surprising and unfortunate that the governments of the Netherlands and Denmark continue to fund this hate journalism without demanding a change,” Marcus and Crook wrote. “Hate incitement, including denial of Israel’s existence and glorifying terror, is universally accepted as a paramount cause of continued Palestinian terror. These governments, together with governments who have blindly funded Palestinian schoolbooks, bear direct moral responsibility for the continued hatred that is being ingrained into future Palestinian generations, and bear a moral responsibility for the terror and its victims.”

Here’s the Dutch response:

Frans Makken, the head of mission at the Dutch representative office in Ramallah, said such problems were rare at Ma’an and that his office would take steps to ensure that they did not reoccur.

“When this has come up before, we took it up with Ma’an,” Makken said. “It was just a mistake of words. It happens rarely, if ever. Our office is involved in connecting people. If there has been a slip-up, we will bring it up with them. They are young journalists and their translations are being improved all the time.”

Makken said this was only the second complaint his office had received in his three years in his post, the first being when the suicide bomber in a January 2007 terrorist attack was referred to as a “martyr.”

“[The usage of such words] was not on purpose,” Makken said. “It is something we are trying to avoid. The charter of the project [funding Ma'an] is to promote mutual understanding, which is the opposite of incitement. It is very far-fetched to say that Denmark and Holland are inciting terrorism.”

And here’s how Ma’an itself deals with the allegations:

“The PMW report cites two main discrepancies between Ma’an’s English and Arabic coverage: the use of the terms Shahid/Istishhadi and the characterization of some Israeli forces/areas/actions as being occupation.

The term Shahid, as translated in the Hans Wehr Dictionary of modern Arabic (page 572), may refer to one killed in action or a martyr. Istishhad is given to heroes or martyrs. The second term implies intent – one who engages in battle, for instance, rather than one who is simply victimized by it. In the Palestinian cultural/religious tradition, the martyrdom aspect is significantly different from the Judeo-Christian understanding. Those who die as martyrs may be defending their wives or their property, not necessarily engaging in the Western notion of a holy crusade. The PMW interpretation, while undoubtedly held by some religious individuals is not necessarily the general interpretation of these terms.

Our use of the occupation concept stems from international law and internationally-recognized boundaries. In simple terms, Israeli forces operating in Tel Aviv may be considered Israeli security forces, while those in Bethlehem are occupying forces. Tel Aviv falls on the Israeli side of the “Green Line”. Bethlehem does not. That distinction is the crux of our decision-making.

I think it’s fair to say that Ma’an is not promoting “mutual understanding” per the charter of the project funding them. Anyone who has been reading my blog for a while will be familiar with their record of anti-Israel bias which goes well beyond the examples listed in the PMW report.

Because I am a giver, I will provide you with a stark example from today.

Israeli forces shot and killed a 35-year-old Palestinian farmer named Ra’fat Mansour and injured another Palestinian man during an ongoing attack on the area near the cemetery in the northern Gaza Strip, medics said.

Medical sources added that Mansour was dead when he arrived at Al-Awda hospital. The other man, Muhammad Mansour, is reported to be injured mildly.

Mansour is the second farmer, and the third unarmed Palestinian civilian to be killed by Israeli forces near Gaza’s border wall.

But there’s a slight problem with the report - it’s not true.

Palestinian medical officials said Saturday that a Gaza farmer was killed close to the territory’s fence with Israel.

While the officials said the man was killed an IDF tank shell, local residents told the Associated Press the farmer was killed after a rocket fired toward Israel by Palestinian gunmen fell short and hit him.

Spokespeople for terrorist groups did not immediately comment on the death on Saturday.

The IDF said that it was not aware of such an event, and only knew of an incident where an anti-tank missile was fired at troops patrolling near the border fence, who did not respond.

Even the palestinian Ramattan News Agency, which - like Ma’an - regularly reports falsehood against Israel, quoted witnesseses who verified this version of events.

Palestinian medics said that a Palestinian farmer was shot dead while another was injured by the Israeli army in eastern Jabalia refugee camp, northern Gaza strip.

Sources said that the farmer Rafat Mansour, 33, was hit by an Israeli projectile while he was working in his field near the border line with Israel.

Eyewitnesses said that Mansour was killed when a homemade Palestinian rocket hit him, after some Palestinian militants exchanged fire with the Israeli army.

In other words, Ma’an reported the incident as a clear case of Israeli killing a palestinian, despite the presence of witnesses who said otherwise. Something is being promoted here, and it is clearly not mutual understanding.

If I were Denmark and Holland, I would be asking some serious questions right about now.

The authors of “Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think” continue to produce articles with bits and pieces of their worldwide poll of Muslims with furious spinning to make Muslims look as much like Westerners as possible. This is not surprising - co-author John Esposito has written a number of apologetic books for Islam, including “Islam: The Straight Path“, and the other author Dalia Mogahed is Muslim herself. The idea that this book would be objective is laughable, and I’ve already shown some dishonesty in how the authors present their findings.

A new op-ed by the authors in the Los Angeles Times illustrates their dishonesty as well:

For instance, Gallup found that 72% of Americans disagreed with this statement: “The majority of those living in Muslim countries thought men and women should have equal rights.” In fact, majorities in even some of the most conservative Muslim societies directly refute this assessment: 73% of Saudis, 89% of Iranians and 94% of Indonesians say that men and women should have equal legal rights.

Notice the sleight-of-hand - changing the question from one of “equal rights” to one of “equal legal rights” when asking people in Muslim countries. When Muslims are referring to legal rights, they are not thinking about religious rights. Which means that if you would ask Muslims whether women should be able to have up to four spouses as men are allowed to, the answers would not be the same as to the question they asked. Yet if they really supported equal rights as Esposito and Mogahed claim, then they would by definition support polyandry as much as polygamy.

What about Muslim sympathy for terrorism? Many charge that Islam encourages violence more than other faiths, but studies show that Muslims around the world are at least as likely as Americans to condemn attacks on civilians. Polls show that 6% of the American public thinks attacks in which civilians are targets are “completely justified.” In Saudi Arabia, this figure is 4%. In Lebanon and Iran, it’s 2%.

Again, in this case it appears that how the question is asked is far more important than the supposed answers. Since the authors show that 7% of Muslims condoned 9/11, and other polls show that a far higher number condone attacks on Israeli civilians, the cherry-picking of the answers from Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Iran proves only that the people answering the poll are more likely to support individual, real world attacks against civilians than some abstract concept of attacking civilians. The fact that there are no Americans publicly celebrating Muslim deaths is proof enough that the methodology for this question was flawed.

Looking across majority-Muslim countries, Gallup found no statistical difference in self-reported religiosity between those who sympathized with the attackers and those who did not…. On the other hand, not a single respondent who condoned the attacks used the Koran as justification. Instead, they relied on political rationalizations, calling the U.S. an imperialist power or accusing it of wanting to control the world.

The authors create a division between politics and religion that is nonsensical in much of the Islamic world. Islam is more than just a religion; it is also a political movement, and the absence of Koranic justification for 9/11 does not necessarily indicate one way or the other that terror-supporters are less religious.

In other words, all that the poll indicates is that the level of religiosity does not indicate a propensity to terror. The implication from the authors that the more religious tend to be more against terror attacks is not borne out, based on the limited information given here.

If most Muslims truly reject terrorism, why does it continue to flourish in Muslim lands? What these results indicate is that terrorism is much like other violent crime. Violent crimes occur throughout U.S. cities, but that is no indication of Americans’ general acceptance of murder or assault. Likewise, continued terrorist violence is not proof that Muslims tolerate it. Indeed, they are its primary victims.

This is astonishingly dishonest. Terrorism, by definition, is political, and can only thrive when the political environment - in this case, the Muslim and Arab cultures that permeate these lands - allow it. Comparing it to violent crime is an incredible distortion, and one that has absolutely no basis in any of the polling numbers given here - it quite literally made up.

(cross-posted at EoZ)

..has to be this one from the New York Times:

In Gaza, Hamas’s Insults to Jews Complicate Peace

Gives new meaning to the phrase “dying from complications.”

Update: The article itself is decent in its reporting of Hamas incitement, but completely misses the mark when it talks about Fatah:

Such incitement against Israel and Jews was supposed to be banned under the 1993 Oslo accords and the 2003 “road map” peace plan. While the Palestinian Authority under Fatah has made significant, if imperfect efforts to end incitement, Hamas, no party to those agreements, feels no such restraint.

I was about to go through some examples of recent Fatah incitement, but I noticed the always-prolific Carl has already done the job, pointing out some examples like this:

In fact, Fatah’s media has never stopped inciting to ‘martyrdom’ and has made no effort to end incitement against Israel and Jews. Recall this from just two weeks ago:

The official Palestinian Authority daily newspaper describes the murderer of eight yeshiva students in Jerusalem as a “groom” and his burial as his “wedding celebration.” The story in Mahmoud Abbas’s Al Hayat Al Jadida goes on to evoke the neighborhood Jabal Mukbar’s “week of anticipation… preparing themselves for the wedding procession.”

The term “wedding” is the expression commonly used in PA society, and in PA schoolbooks as well, to describe the death of Shahids - Martyrs for Allah. According to Islamic tradition, they will wed the 72 Dark- Eyed Maidens (Virgins) of Paradise.

The article then reports the “shocking news” for the “thousands who were waiting” that the Israeli Army had decided to force a pre-dawn burial to prevent community celebrations of the murders and the murderer. It bemoans the fact “that the groom was buried in the [early] morning without a celebration and without a wedding procession.”

However, the PA daily vows that the wedding celebrations will continue:

“The wedding will not end this way… it will last three consecutive days in which [the town] al-Sawahra will welcome all of those who come to congratulate the groom and will hang his portrait embracing the nation’s flags.”

AFP “reports:”

The World Health Organization lashed out at Israel on Tuesday for denying or delaying travel permits for critically ill Gaza Strip residents, saying the right to health appeared to be optional for Palestinians.Ambrogio Manenti, who heads the WHO’s West Bank and Gaza office, said case studies of patients who died while waiting for permits to travel to Israel for treatment “show nonsense, inhumanity and, at the end, tragedy”.

“The right to health appears to be optional for Palestinians,” he added.

…Between October 1 and March 2, 32 patients died in Gaza after the permits they requested were delayed or refused, the WHO said.

The number of patients who were denied permits rose from just over three percent in January 2006 — when the Islamist Hamas movement won Palestinian parliamentary elections — to almost 36 percent in December 2007.

“From a health perspective this is something unacceptable. I think my organisation should stigmatise this behaviour,” said Manenti.

But Captain Shadi Yasin of the Israeli military liaison office for Gaza insisted the WHO report was “completely wrong.”

Israel “gives high priority for all urgently needed treatment in Israel and the West Bank for Gaza people and for the entry into Gaza of medicine and medical supplies,” the spokesman said.

AFP includes details (not shown here) of two cases where Israeli actions supposedly led to the deaths of Gazans. But it does not go into details of Israel’s side of the story, besides a general denial.The German news agency DPA covers the same story and adds a few sentences you would never see in the AFP version. Something called “context:”

The denial of permits rose from 3 per cent in the beginning of last year, to nearly 36 per cent in December, Manenti pointed out.In absolute terms, nearly 670 Gazans were nevertheless treated in Israel in December 2007, compared to an in fact smaller number, under 360, in December 2006.

…A 22-year-old female Palestinian suicide bomber on her way for treatment in Israel killed three Israeli security guards and a civilian at the Erez border crossing between Israel and the northern Gaza Strip in January 2004. The woman had told the guards she had a metal plate in her leg to circumvent the metal detector.

A similar suicide attack was thwarted at the Erez terminal in June 2005, when a 21-year-old Palestinian woman tried to cross into Israel using her medical travel documents, but soldiers found a bomb belt on her.

So, three facts that AFP couldn’t bring themselves to mention but DPA did: in absolute terms, Israel is treating more Gazans than ever; and that on at least two occasions Gazans used their freedom to travel to Israel as a means to try to kill as many Israelis as possible.

Another fact that neither of them managed to mention is that Egypt also shares a border with Gaza and that Egypt has been far more reluctant to treat sick Gazans than Israel has. It is unclear whether WHO even mentions Egypt as having any responsibility for this problem.

(cross-posted at EoZ)

One mural, two foreign press photographers with an eye for propaganda.

The AP’s Mohammed Ballas decided to go for the “angry palestinian boy driven to violence” angle:

I am not sure if it was intentional or not, but the boy is kicking the weapon of the IDF soldier depicted in the mural, and not at any of the soldier’s body parts, suggesting the boy is being careful not to hurt the “soldier.”

In contrast, the AFP’s Saif Dahlah went for the “palestinian boy just minding his business” route.

Again, perhaps it is a coincidence (perhaps not), but the boy just happens to be positioned in a way that it looks like the IDF “soldier” is about to strike him with his weapon.

You see what I’m getting at here?

By the way, what would make it an even more obvious case of staged photography is if the boy depicted in both these photos was the same boy (think Green Helmet Guy, or, in this case, White Cap Boy). While both are wearing what seems to be identical pants and a white cap, it is hard to tell from the facial features whether he is one and the same.

There are certain things in life that are certain. You know, things like death, taxes…AP photographers showing their bias against Israel.

Case in point: here’s AP photographer Muhammed Muheisen on today’s terror attack.

The body of a Palestinian is seen, following a knife incident in the West Bank settlement of Shilo, near Nablus, Monday, March 31, 2008. In West Bank violence Monday, a Palestinian who tried to stab Israeli hitchhikers near a Jewish settlement was shot and killed by an armed Israeli civilian, Israeli police said. One of the hitchhikers opened fire after the Palestinian pulled a knife, police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said, calling the shooting self-defense. (AP Photo/Muhammed Muheisen)

Leaving aside the fact that he has seen fit to take a picture of the terrorist’s lifeless body, allow me to translate key parts of the caption:

Knife “incident” = terror attack perpetrated with a knife

“West Bank violence” = terror attack perpetrated by a palestinian

“Pulled a knife” = pulled out a knife to kill

And the cherry on top is the last part of the caption when Muheisen mentions the police spokesman “calling the shooting self-defense.” As if it was something else.

Update: Besides being an AP photographer/propagandist, Muheisen also dabbles in blog commenting.

Hollywood actor Kevin Spacey, to be precise.

Kevin Spacey accuses BBC of unfair bias in TV shows

Kevin Spacey today accused the BBC of “crossing the line” by unfairly promoting West End musicals at the expense of other theatre productions with its talent show programmes.

Yep. Now they’ve crossed the line.