Follow by Email

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

The Irene: More Prevarication from CNN

In a story entitled "Israelis intercept aid boat to Gaza" ( which briefly received top online billing, CNN describes how the IDF brought into Ashdod's port a 30-foot catamaran carrying 10 persons:

"The Israeli navy took over an aid vessel that attempted to sail to Gaza on Tuesday despite a blockade to the occupied territory, a spokesman for the Israel Defense Forces said.

No one was injured when the navy took over and boarded the boat, named the Irene, and the navy was taking the boat to a port in Ashdod, the IDF spokesman said.

. . . .

The boat, named the Irene, set sail Sunday from Cyprus with 10 passengers and crew, including Jews from the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Israel.

. . . .

The boat's cargo includes children's toys, musical instruments, textbooks, fishing nets, and prosthetic limbs, the organizers said. They plan to deliver the goods to the Gaza Mental Health Program.

. . . .

In May, Israeli forces intercepted an aid flotilla headed to Gaza from Turkey. Violence broke out, resulting in the deaths of nine people.

. . . .

Israel has maintained its troops used force on the activists in May after they were attacked by those on board one boat, but passengers on board that boat insist Israeli troops fired on them without provocation."

An "aid vessel"? Exactly whom is CNN trying to fool? Examine the size of the vessel, consider the space needed for the passengers and crew, and decide for yourself exactly what meaningful "aid" the ship was bringing to Gaza's 1.5 million people. Next decide whether this constitutes headline material or propaganda intended to highlight a publicity stunt.

CNN quotes Mavi Marmara passengers who say that "Israeli troops fired on them without provocation." How does CNN today take these claims seriously, given the video clips showing the Mavi Marmara's passengers attacking the boarding Israeli soldiers with clubs?

Not to be outdone by CNN, The New York Times also provided the story with top online billing (, and Robert Mackey quickly seized on the opportunity to write up this non-event in "The Lede" (, providing videos and a map.

By the way, I never received any response from The New York Times concerning Mackey's misreporting of a rape in Israel (see:

Journalistic ethics at both The New York Times and CNN long ago went the way of the dodo bird.


  1. Hi, Jeffrey!

    For me, this Jewish flotilla is the most striking example of what Left ideology can do to people. Did you read about the guy on this ship whose daughter was killed by suicide bomber? Now, he demands immediate surrender to hamas.
    How do you understand these people? Do you know somebody like this? What kind of people they are?

  2. at Commentary's Contentions today:
    "A Ridiculous Misnomer
    J. E. Dyer - 09.30.2010 - 3:45 PM
    "It’s way past time for mainstream news outlets to stop referring to the “flotillas” mounted against Israel’s blockade of Gaza as “aid ships.” They are nothing of the sort, ...It’s time for the Western media to stop retailing the fictional narrative that they have anything to do with humanitarian aid."

    One of the tragedies of American media is that it has become hyper-partisanized. Ergo, if Commentary makes a point, the NYT et al must make the opposite point, especially on anything to do with Israel.

    As much as I try to ignore Robert Mackey, who truly does take the NYT to new lows, I just read his post on the court decision on Ayodha.
    The Hindus are now enraged with Mackey!

    (I await moderator approval of my comment where I test drive the concept of "Islamic Imperialism")


  3. JG, just for the record, Robert Mackey's moderator decided my comment on Ayodha was NOT acceptable. The only NYT blog that censors me.

    There are only 24 approved comments, so censorship of this is obvious. My test run of the narrative of "Islamic imperialism" and "absence of reciprocal tolerance" regarding religious sites just in case Mackey tackles the Temple Mount someday...:

    K2K's censored comment:

    "If the Hindus believe this spot was the birthplace of Ram, it should be Hindu again, despite the hundreds of years of Islamic imperialism.

    Why is Islam the sole religion that insists that once a place has a mosque, it must be forever Islam?

    Is there a single example of tolerant reciprocity by Muslims regarding religious sites?

    If the Muslims in India are not satisfied with this excruciating Solomon-like resolution in splitting the land, then they should relocate to Pakistan, which was meant to be the solution to undoing centuries of Muslim imperialism against the great Hindu civilization of so much of India."