August 05, 2006

MORE SIGNS THAT ISRAEL MAY BE WINNING: HEZBO PROPAGANDA FROM THE NYTIMES GETTING DESPARATE

        The 43'd Steet branch office of Hezbollah psy-ops, otherwise known as the New York Times, is increasingly nervous. So far their editorial board hasn't been able to get the cease fire Hezbollah needs in order to regroup and strengthen its ability to kill Jews. No matter how many Op-Ed pieces and editorials, Gail Collins, Bill Keller and Co. write demonstrating their lofty moral superiority, they can't seem to persuade the dumb cowboy in the White House to abandon Israel. Further, their hypocritical pacifism--always condemning violence by our side, while empathizing with the need for violence by our enemies--has failed to stop Israel from fighting back against genocidal foes. Nor has the Times succeeded, despite the (swiftly debunked) sob stories of "atrocities" inflicted on innocent Lebanese.
        The Israeli battle plan: first pound Hezbollah from the air, then use ground forces in multiple ways---commando strikes behind enemy lines, infantry movements to attack fixed Hezbos from multiple directions, special forces flushing the rats out of their tunnels and then killing them-- shows new signs of working. Israel is making good use of time, gradually, daily and relentlessly increasing the pain, up to the point where it will grind down even the most fanatical jihadi. You can praise Allah all you like, but it won't help against IDF special forces or an Israeli smart bomb.
        Israel haters like Hassan Nasrallah, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and their media apologists around the world are clamoring to rescue Hezbollah with an immediate cease fire. The Times is now practically wetting its diapers as the unfolding ground assault by the IDF threatens their anti-Israel, anti American agenda: "Risks escalate as Israel fights a ground war" they ominously warn us. Oh, really? War brings risk? People get killed in wars? We never thought of that. The Times however, is rather selective in the risks it emphasizes. It introduces its Vietnam redux, body count to try sapping the will of Israel to fight on. It is worried that diplomatic solutions (tr.: Save Hezbollah) will be hampered by Israel's offensive. Another way to clarify the Times's agenda is to think of other possible headlines one might have legitimately written based on the known facts: Risk to Hezbollah terror organization increases as Israeli campaign proceeds. Or one could even have written: IDF campaign aims to diminish risk to innocent Israelis. The Israeli strategy does however, greatly increase the risk of death--for Hezbollah terrorists. Of course, the Times never, ever considers the risk to Jewish innocents of allowing continued rocket fire from those who wish to exterminate them. The continued IDF offensive does increase the risk to New York Times, Bush hating appeasers and anti-semites around the world, who were counting on Israel backing down to world opinion. But the Times has started a daily body count of dead Israeli soldiers killed in action. This is obviously designed to weaken support for the ongoing war. The numbers of Hezbos killed, probably much larger, is never mentioned. Nor are numbers of Israeli children deliberately murdered by jihadis mentioned. The body count, so effective in sapping our collective will during the Vietnam war doesn't seem to be working now. Perhaps that's because, given the defense and weaponry they're up against, Israeli casualties have been extremely low. The Times stupidly expects readers to be horrified; instead, all but fundamentalist liberals feel admiration for the courage and effectiveness of the IDF.
         So we suspect the Times's strategy is failing. The daily photos of weeping Lebanese on the front page, the minimizing of civilian Israeli suffering, the celebrations of the prowess of Hezbos in continuing to rain rockets down on Israel. The puff pieces on Nasrallah, celebrating his leadership skills. The a-historical body counts that never mention the enemy losses, or how many died taking Okinawa. It's all too obvious and by now we know who the real target is --George Bush, for his refusal to join the chorus of Israel haters at the UN. It's all too much for the appeasers, this insistence that once war has been launched against an ally, it's important to help that ally gain victory.
        We think the increasing level of hysteria and pro-Hezbollah propaganda spilling onto the front page of the Times is evidence that Israel is slowly but surely winning and the enablers of terror in the mainstream media are slowly but surely losing.