January 4, 2009, - 1:12 pm

VIDEO: Former Israeli Amb. Dan Gillerman on Al-Jazeera English re HAMAS

By Debbie Schlussel
While Former Israeli Ambassador to the UN Dan Gillerman does okay here, the Al-Jazeera International a/k/a Al-Jazeera English (the English version of the Terrorist News Network) anchor gets his anti-Israel propaganda in. Still, perhaps worth watching.
Neither asked, nor answered is the point I raised about all this, last week: The rockets have been shot at Israel for several years now. Why now? A Tzippi Livni/Ehud Barak campaign commercial, less than two months before elections in which both seek to become Israeli Prime Minister. That’s why. But the Al-Jazeera guy doesn’t want to acknowledge the rockets, and Gillerman doesn’t want to admit Israeli politics.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly, PDF & Email






8 Responses

Israel’s ground offensive in Gaza has not resulted in a lot of enemy deaths. If today’s politically correct warfare rules held during World War II, the Germans and the Japanese would have received the benefit of the doubt in the last stages of the war simply because they were weaker than the Allies! The relative strengths of the combatants tells you nothing about which of them is justified in waging the war. Then again, in the Middle East, the truth matters very little. What’s important is what can found to use as a club to beat the Jews with. And Israel gets blamed – surprise – just for winning a war!

NormanF on January 4, 2009 at 2:12 pm

The channel is not called “Al-Jazeera International.” It’s called Al-Jazeera ENGLISH (there is no word called “International” anywhere). The Arabic version is as International as the English one, given Arabic version is widely available (if not more).
[AK47: I CALLED IT AL-JAZEERA ENGLISH ONCE, WHEN I WAS ON IT (AND PREVIOUSLY ON MY SITE). THE A-J PEOPLE CORRECTED ME. BUT, FOR YOUR SAKE AND OTHERS WHO MIGHT WONDER, I WILL CALL IT BOTH. DS]

AK47 on January 4, 2009 at 4:34 pm

Israel, like the US, is a democracy so politics enters most decisions/policy.
In late November and certainly by Christmas, Hamas unleashed longer range rockets, putting a greater number of Israelis in range. I think Christmas saw something like 60 rockets fired. I also think that Israel has very good intel on Hamas from both inside Hamas and in the Fatah folks. So, politics enters into the fray on all sides. Certainly Barak, Livni and Olmert acted for political reasons, but that is just reflecting the growing anger of the Israeli body politic over Hamas’ enhanced Grad’s with longer range… and their lack of fear of using them….
Hamas probably calculated Israel would, once again, do nothing… out of fear of Obama, fear of world opinion, fear of Lebanon part deux, fear of failure

biorabbi on January 4, 2009 at 6:15 pm

Has any one seen Bill Clinton ??
I clearly remember him stating that he would be
right there in the trenches with his trusty long
rifle if Israel was ever attacked !

Hawkins on January 4, 2009 at 9:29 pm

I hate those “gotcha” question of “7 UN relief workers were killed….were they also launching rockets at you?” I am glad the former Israeli ambassador answered and didn’t back down from the question like most politicians in this country.
The Middle East is unstable KING HUSSEIN COBRAMA,
what do you to say about the situation? Uhhhhhhh, this is not the Israel I once knew, I must throw it under the bus.
The COBRAMA/HILLARY foreign relations show coming in 16 days. Seems like a far contrast when Reagan was coming into office.

californiascreaming on January 5, 2009 at 12:08 am

the choices are simple, the muslims should be able to understand, we follow you, YOU give us no choice in that matter, we kill each other,..choice #2… you follow us, we wil respect the eachothers right to exist and believe as he wishes. your right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins. go beyond that point and here i come! look out stupid! fair warning.

oppressiondetester on January 5, 2009 at 2:34 am

I would give Ambassador Gillerman a C- at best. He does not exactly want to acknowledge the rockets either (using the very vague term ‘terror base’ when he could have been much more specific. Although maybe if he had been more specific he might have felt he would have to go into the political reasons for the timing of the attack.
He was also rather weak on the UN, which has enabled terrorists both by its general pronouncements and by its actions on the ground. I can never understand those nitwit commentators in the US, includng some conservatives who –every time a new Secretary General is nominated — go along with the administration in speculation that this or that one will be pro US or pro Israel. You can’t head up the UN unless you are anti-US & anti-Israel. Of course Ban is anti-Semitic. The UN is not only obsolete, but a weapon of our enemies. Any conservative who doesn’t acknowledge that is no better than Jacoby who you mention elsewhere, and a former ambassador should be able to speak a little more frankly about that than Gillerman did.

c f on January 5, 2009 at 3:30 am

I am a Conservative. All my Conservative friends are pro Israel. It is the Liberals who have
turned against Israel. Jacoby is a rare exception
( in this particular instance ).

Hawkins on January 5, 2009 at 10:48 am

Leave a Reply for biorabbi

Click here to cancel reply.

* denotes required field