Fake claims at Whale Oil about mainstream media news coverage

Whale Oil has criticised mainstream media for years, claiming to be some sort of great new alternative –  ironically while relying a lot on MSM content for many of their posts.

On Tuesday they blasted MSM for not covering a story from a long time continuation of Israeli-Palestinian conflicts, but author SB either didn’t check basic facts, or deliberately posted fake claims.

The post from Tuesday: The mainstream media won’t cover this story so Whaleoil will

by SB on May 7, 2019 at 8:00am

Sadly when Israelis are being killed, their houses destroyed and their lives under constant threat from terrorists the Mainstream media do not care. They only lift their head up to write an article when one of the countless rockets fired from Gaza lands in Gaza and kills their own children. Then the media rocks up to show the bloody corpse of the Palestinian child and claim that it was a rocket from Israel that caused the child’s death.

The best way for Whaleoil to bring you up to speed with what has been going on is to put together the below collection from social media as without it you would have no idea that anything of note was happening thanks to the disinterest of the mainstream media.

The problem with this is that New Zealand media had been covering this days beforehand.

Sunday 5 May:

Monday 6 May:

The local real media had moved on from this story by the time SB got around to saying something about it, feeding fake comments:

Ian: ” Thank goodness we have Whaleoil . . . MSM also starve us of any news from South Africa as well as Israel, unless it can portray white people and non-muslims as evil and aggressors.

WIN: “The first I heard about the attacks was a post on WO Backchat two nights ago, which prompted me to look at overseas news sources for info. Amazing it’s ignored by NZ MSM.”

John doe: “Well done SB. Please keep following up. The biggest event in the world in the last 34 hours and silence from our MSM. They are a disgrace and should be called out as such. I simply can not understand how they can not impartially report on this terrorist attack on the only democratic state in the region.”

avionz: “Thank you for keeping us up to date with this situation SB. Our mendacious media either avoid mention of Israel or spew biased propaganda. Thank goodness for the people on WO who think for themselves and are ready to point out the hypocrisy from our leaders, the media and the UN. Shalom.”

Sailor Sam: “This is not confined to NZ, the left wing propaganda machine that is the government owned ABC has no mention of it at all, lots about baby Sussex though.”

Also false.

All of those reports make it clear Israel reacted to rockets fired from Gaza.

Even The Daily Blog posted on the rocket initiated escalation days before WO:

There is plenty the media can legitimately be criticised for without making fake claims.

Israel-Hamas truce talks ‘advanced’

Some hope of a de-escalation of ongoing hostilities between Israeli forces and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

Reuters: Hamas says indirect Gaza truce talks with Israel ‘advanced’

U.N.- and Egyptian-mediated talks on a deal to tamp down tensions between Israel and the Gaza Strip are in “advanced stages”, a senior member of the Palestinian enclave’s dominant Islamist Hamas group said on Wednesday.

“We can say that actions led by the United Nations and Egypt are in advanced stages and we hope it could yield some good from them,” Khalil Al-Hayya, deputy Hamas chief in Gaza, told Al Jazeera television.

Neither Hamas nor Israel, which last fought a war in 2014, appears keen on another full-blown conflict. But public demands by either side for a detainee release by the other appear to have been a stumbling block in securing a long-term truce.

The remarks were echoed by a top Israeli lawmaker, suggesting a possible breakthrough after four months of confrontations and clashes that stirred mutual threats of war.

Avi Dichter, the committee of the Israeli parliament’s foreign affairs and defense committee, struck a cautiously upbeat note on Wednesday. “I very much hope that we are on the brink of a new day on the matter of Gaza,” he told reporters.

In return for calm in Gaza, Israeli officials said on Sunday they would reopen a commercial border terminal that had been shuttered in response to the fire damage, and expand a Palestinian fishing zone.

Netanyahu called off a trip to Colombia this week to attend to the Gaza truce talks, and was due to convene his decision-making security cabinet on Thursday to discuss the negotiations.

So there’s efforts being made and some hope of a calming down of a volatile and violent situation.

This is a long way from solving all the problems in Israel, but it’s a positive move and shows a willingness by both sides to avoid all out war.

Neither the United Nations nor Egypt have publicly detailed their proposals for Gaza, beyond saying they should bring extensive economic relief for its 2 million Palestinians, many of them plagued by unemployment and failing public utilities.

Good to see the UN trying to bring opponents together and resolve problems there. They usually get a lot of criticism and little credit.

Also good to see Egypt helping.

Farrar on Israeli settlements

David Farrar has posted his thoughts on the UN vote on Israeli settlements (he thinks it was unfair to Israel) but he thinks the settlements are an ongoing problem for Israel.

Personally I support Israel around 95% of the time, especially when it comes to their own security. But I’ve never been persuaded that settlements on occupied territory are a good idea, or will lead to a two state solution. A one state solution is worse for Israel as that would mean having to give citizenship to those living in those areas and Jews would become the minority in Israel.

Hamas are evil and Fatah corrupt and the Palestinian leadership bear most of the blame for there being no peace settlement. They have rejected some very good offers in the past, and I remain sceptical that their leadership are interested in a two state solution.

There’s certainly some serious problems on the Palestinian side. But Israel doesn’t help the situation, especially with the provocative settlements.

In my view the settlements are wrong and provocative. Israel surrenders the moral high ground when they persist with them. The settlements are not the cause of the conflict, but they aggravate it and make peace much harder.

And while some have portrayed the UN vote as the world against Israel there’s a lot of opposition within Israel to the settlements.

The settlement policy is divisive even in Israel. Most acts of the Israeli state have widespread support (such as military action against Hamas) but the settlements are a policy most associated with the Likud party. They do have majority support, but also significant opposition.

There have been some polls inside Israel on them. They have found:

  • 42% say the settlements hurts security and 27% helps security
  • 41% say Israel should leave the West Bank/Judea and Samaria and 48% are against

Farrar’s suggestions for solutions (which hi is not optimistic about):

  1. There should be a two state solution
  2. Palestine should be given territory equal in area to the pre-1967 borders based on the original mandate.
  3. The territory for Palestine must be good enough to allow them to form a viable prosperous state, not just a series of enclaves, and be agreed between the two parties.
  4. The settlements should cease as every extra settlement is less flexibility for agreeing final boundaries.
  5. The Palestinian leadership of Fatah and Hamas must agree in words and actions to the right of Israel to exist and cease terrorism
  6. Palestine would be a demilitarised state
  7. Jerusalem is the most difficult question and is the biggest challenge (after the fact the Palestinian leadership has little interest in peace). In theory it serves as the capital to most countries, with all citizens allowed in all of the city, but different areas under different control.

To get anywhere near solutions like this it would take significant changes in attitude from both the Israelis and the Palestinians. Neither look likely to go there at this stage.