Monday, July 14, 2008

Inventing Reality

Not long ago the man who hides behind the deceptive name Ibrahim ibn Yussuf stated in a comment that "according to the UN, Israel broke the truce seven times before the first Palestinian breach". This puzzled me a bit, because it was the first I'd heard of it. But then again, I was in Australia at the time, mostly not connected to cyberspace, so perhaps I'd missed something? I challenged Ibrahim in the comments to cite his source. He didn't, so I sent him an e-mail about this and other matters. He responded about the other matters but not this, so I asked again. He never responded. Eventually I informed him I'd write about his failure to substantiate his own serious allegation, but he was silent. So I went looking myself, and think I've identified his source: a person who hides behind the name Lawrence of Cyberia, here. I know that faux-Ibrahim regards faux-Lawrence as a reliable source because he's told me so in the past. I also admit that I'm becoming ever more baffled by what is apparently a widespread phenomenon of people who engage in intensive criticism of Israel while insisting on remaining anonymous. But that's a subject for another day.

Faux Lawrence offers no more substantiation for his statement than faux-Ibrahim does, which is interesting because his blog gives the appearance of being well footnoted. It's also a strange statement on its own: what does it mean, "according to the UN"? That's sort of like saying "according to the British government", except that the UN is far more diffuse than the British government. Who in the UN said? When? If there were precisely seven Israeli infractions, what were they? When? Where? Who did the counting? How do we know they're really infractions and not something else, such as, perhaps, Palestinian men approaching the border fence, being warned away and eventually being shot at when they refuse to stop their menacing maneuver?

So I went to the source: the UN website. Sure enough, there is a document there in which "the UN", or rather an official of the UN, tells what she thinks is going on:

But while calm had prevailed for several days, Palestinian militants fired one mortar and three rockets at southern Israel on 24 June, with the Islamic Jihad claiming responsibility for the rocket fire in response to the Israel Defense Forces killing of one of its members in the West Bank. A Palestinian farmer had been injured in Gaza by the Israel Defense Forces on 23 June, and in a separate incident another farmer had been reportedly injured by Israel Defense Forces fire on 25 June. Another rocket had been fired from Gaza into Israel on the same day, and today, two mortar shells were fired. In response, Israel closed the border crossings for the past three days.

Let's look at that paragraph (and you're welcome to follow the link and read the entire document. I don't think I engaged in any cherry picking).

First, note that she puts the Palestinian infractions first. Then she adds two Israeli actions, one the day before the Palestinian quadruple breach of the calm, and the other, "reportedly" happening the day after the Palestinian breach. The single Israeli breach is depicted quite sparsely: A Palestinian farmer had been injured in Gaza by IDF forces. How? In what context? We're not told. So perhaps it was an Israeli breach, and perhaps it wasn't. Something must have caused the UN person to put it after the Palestinian breaches in her report.

The other six Israeli breaches of the calm? Well, according to this UN report, which deals with an entire month, they didn't happen.

So what does this tell us about faux-Ibrahim and faux-Lawrence? That they're gullible? That they pass on hearsay they picked up somewhere without checking it, because if it's detrimental to Israeli it must be true and certainly is valuable?


Anonymous said...


Look, as far as I'm concerned, people who wear tablecloths on their heads, are just magicians, carrying around their acts. Where, instead of rabits, they "give birth" to fanciful news.

It's really not a threat.

Nor is it "accurate" ... the way "being there" would be accurate ...

And, given all the kakamamie arguments that have flown around Jews, and actually cost lives, this one doesn't even come close to the "blood in the Passover Matzah, which is so stupid, ya gotta wonder how anyone ever got enough people around to believe it. But believe it, they did.

Besides, boy, has the world changed!

Where in Europe when Jews were attacked, they were afraid to fight back; you can see that in Israel there are no such impediments.

When mayhem breaks out? Spontaniously, a Mosher Plesser pops onto the scene.

Ya know? Hollywood "told us" there were good guys. They made movies, where by the last reel, the good guys would show up. And, you'd see them on the bedsheets, that were used in darkened room, bringing these films, and their stories, to light.

Now? Life, itself, provides the examples. And, quick as a flash, the Internet provides the U-TUBE link, so you can view this, too.

For America, where the old films were made, the good guys went out West. Which had no law or order. And, BINGO. If you waited "long enough" the good guy road in on a horse.

I'm not so concerned at what the arabs tell one another. I'm not even concerned when they photo-chop-shop their flying missiles. Because? Someone else comes along, grabs the same software. And, suddenly the missilies are heading back from where they came.

This is not war!

And, this isn't even how wars start!

Though things have certainly changed. As in the past, when you "bought the Brooklyn Bridge," you were new in town. And, you were looking to invest. So you could make a nice profit.

You'd still do better "buying the Brooklyn Bridge" than you would be if you believed the arabs are really, really peaceful people.

Because, here? IF the arabs were really, really peaceful people, there wouldn't be any problems going into Irak, to rid them of Saddam. Or even to go into Lebanon, where they never said thanks that arafish was put on a boat, and deported to Tunis.

Maybe, what's missing? Arabs haven't, as yet, learned how to say thank you. The language deficit of savages. Where wearing a tablecloth on your head is considered stylish.

Again, it takes a free country to allow every outlandlish idea to pass. And, here, I should know! Because I really, really, really enjoy my freedoms.

Far be it from me to tell a tablecloth to change his point of view.

Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf said...

Just for the sake of accuracy, on July 8, 2008, at 7:15 PM, I responded to your request in another comment to this post. My source was neither Lawrence of Cyberia nor the UN, but, the news portal of the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot.

Your claim that I "never responded" is just as false as the many claims of yours regarding Israel and Palestine that I've been debunking.

Lydia McGrew said...

The whole thing is a joke. A "reported" injury of a "farmer" (what else does the farmer do in his spare time?) is somehow equivalent in terms of breaching the pretend "ceasefire" to _mortars_ and _rockets_?

Anybody who thinks that is nuts and not worth talking with.

And remember that these guys think that closing the crossing is also a breach of the "truce." Just like firing rockets at Sderot, y'know. Moral equivalency is their middle name.

Anonymous said...


All you have to do is step back, folks, to notice that a tablecloth has entered the room, in full regalia.

Why is that?

Doesn't Islam teach these maniacs where home plate is? And, there's no home plate, here.

As to their kakamamie stories; I've already posted here, above, that Olmert probably won't take advantage of the return of Kundar to the Lebanese stage. But I see a wonderful SMASHEROO of a party buster; if that stage gets hit with missiles, and all the turkeys go around plotzing from the Israeli chutzpah.

I know I would do this.

On the other hand? I carry no responsibility.

But I do think these trades where the stinking muslims return bones, and get back murderer terrorists, is missing the point between right and wrong.

Too expensive a trade for bones.

And, what's worse, it creates the predicament for the future. Where Nasrallah wants to kidnap more "stragglers." He'd probably settle for hikers; if his minions can't snap up anyone else.

But IF there was an air show of interference ... dropping down on Nasrallah's parade ... WHILE HE IS OUT AND ABOUT. And, not tucked underground. (Which, I think, the Mossad uses as ways of handicapping potential threats.)

What makes you think it would be wrong to level that Welcoming stage? Hmm?

You've been brought up way nicer, then, than me.

As to the "tablecloth" ... what do I care what it says? There's nothing new to anti-Semitism under the sun. And, most of those losers don't know that time runs out. And, they get nothing to show for their actions.

Just ask hitler's head. Which was on exhibit in Berlin. When a german came in, within minutes of the show's opening ... and twisted off its waxed head.

Let me offer a suggestion. Put the head on the desk, and let people ask it questions.

Here's mine: Hey, stinker. What wonders did you work for the germans? I'm listening. And, I think "you lost the whole ball of wax."

I also think the Catholic Church is on its last legs. (And, if it wasn't for Michaelangelo, they'd have nothing to show for 2000 years.

While Pope John Paul II came out with an ode to celibacy. So one man, not in tune with the People, began the Swan Song.

It's just that this plays out on God's stage. And, he's never been known to wear a watch. Or to talk to humans. WHich means muslems don't get "course corrections" any time soon.

But I'd still love to see a "passing Israeli Air Force parade above Nasrallah's head. I think he'd crap in his pants, before he went to "lights out."

Oh, yeah. Tell the muzzy, "thanks for coming." Fear isn't one of the things your story-telling produces.

Anonymous said...


Ya know, propaganda is not new.

Our faux-Ibrahim isn't so different from Tokyo Rose. Back in WW2. When the Japs thought they'd weaken American resolve. And, so they spent propaganda money to broadcast to the American ships at sea, out on the Pacific.

It was actually treated as a joke. This husky voiced Japanese lady would come over the airwaves. And, the American sailors would alert everybody that she was "on." Her schtick involved telling the men that while they were doing battle (against the Japanese), all their ladies, wives and mothers, too, were out having sex with whoever was left in town. (Keeping the milk man busier than the cow. So to speak.)

After the war, which America won, Tokyo Rose was chased down. And, put on trial. And, while the rest of Japan recovered, she just aged in a cell. Lucky that she wasn't hung.

I use this example to show ya that when the propaganda is received, it doesn't fall on deaf ears, exactly. But it doesn't cause distress, either.

So there's a tablecloth out there who thinks gazoo is full of victims. And, given that life in gazoo is as bad as the raw sewage flowing through, this is definitely true.

But it also brings to mind what Americans used to say about Native Americans; where "a good indian is a dead indian." And, where Ben Franklin, when he wrote his autobiography, called those indians, savages.

History isn't kind to savages.

Good example would be to follow Darwin's Theory. Which states that in life the survival of the fittest stands the best chances of adapting to its environment.

Oh, Ya'acov, Ibrahim the fake tablecloth didn't think you'd call him short. Though I doubt he'll run out of (fake) complaints anytime soon.

Heck, native Americans didn't think it would rain if they didn't dance. Savages have disconnects, apparently.