Israeli teargas versus Tunisian teargas, compare and contrast.

Here are two videos, the first is of anti fence protestors in Ni’ilin from December the 31^st, which they have filmed and placed on YouTube. The second is CNN footage from January 19, recording the nasty affects the massive use of teargas by the Tunisian police has on the CNN crew (H/T HonestReporting).

---

The differences are glaring:

The international anti fence protestors who oppose Israel’s effective security barrier are relaxed and cheerful before and during the protest. As if it is some kind of adventure. One of them plays the saxophone without any difficulty. While Ben Wedeman, CNN’s senior Middle East corresponded and a veteran of many wars and civil unrests is having a hard time adjusting to the Tunisian teargas; and that at a far greater distance from the teargas than the sax player.

As both he and Michael Holmes point out, it is nastier than what they have experienced in Israel. In Israel, as the first video shows, the protestors are suffering from the affects of the teargas only when they are very close to the canisters. And although there were many deaths reported in Tunis, none of them is from inhaling teargas.

Related links from Elder of Zion: 1, 2.

Max Blumenthal exonerates the IDF

Kudos to HonestReporting for giving attention to this video.
Imagine my surprise when the closing credits gave credit to non-other than Max Blumenthal. While I disagree with HonestReporting claim that the kids in this footage are more annoying than the vuvuzela, it is clearly not the “violent incursion” Max Blumenthal believe it to be. What we see here are far left activist inciting Palestinian children to harass Israeli soldiers on patrol in the village of Nabi Saleh. The confidence those children show in the presence of the soldiers not only shows a lack of fear of the IDF soldiers but a lack of knowledge of that fear. This is not IDF Vs. children the title he gave claim this scene to be, but IDF soldiers arresting far left provocateurs.




The restrain and discipline of these soldiers is something to be proud of. Maxi B is slipping, but true to his own selective self he did keep the subtitles out, so people won’t know that the cries the children made “khalas israil” means “finish off Israel.”

Demonstrating my argument, Jonathan Steele at the Guardian

Honestreporting points to this pro murder article by Jonathan Steele the Guardian senior foreign affairs correspondent. An article that proves exactly what I was worried about, in my previous entry. In it Jonathan Steele’s sympathies to the Palestinians crosses the line into pro murder advocacy when he says that all Arab must support Palestinian resistance, a “resistance” that is overwhelmingly the deliberate systematic mass murder of unarmed civilians. Even more so when, through someone else’s quote, says there is no moral ground for boycotting Hamas, according to such an argument it is moral for Hamas to murder women and children and to break the international agreements their Fatah rivals signed on; and to all those he added a twisted perception of the Israel US relationship.
But what is his starting argument? Lieberman’s statement of no to a Palestinian state. Now, it is true that Jonathan Steele and others like will say what they say, and argue what argue no matter who is Israel’s PM, but why should we make it easy for them?