Jews Now Being Blamed by Media for Harassing Nonexistent, Modern-Day Joseph and Mary
Even if you're the mainstream international media, you can't spend all your time making up stories of Israeli massacres so that you can compare Jews to Nazis. But that won't stop intrepid reporters from blaming Jews for things they definitely didn't do. Just in time for the holiday season: Jews responsible for maybe harassing Mary and Joseph on their way to Bethlehem - not in the Bible, but last week(!!):
To enter this little city in the West Bank, visitors must pass through a new $8 million security terminal. By some accounts, if Mary and Joseph were to travel from Nazareth to Bethlehem today, they'd have to pass through more than a dozen military checkpoints.
Jews are now being blamed for something that they didn't do in a situation that doesn't exist. Yes, if Mary and Joseph were alive today, they'd have to go through security checkpoints just like everybody else. But we also have a feeling that if Jesus was alive today, he'd be kind of pissed off that Palestinians have been engaged in systematic attacks against Christians in the Holy Land. Well, not really because Christianity wouldn't exist yet, but if... well, you see how spinning these stories can get complicated. What a dumb argument.
But this begs the immediate question: if Jews tried to prevent Jesus from getting into Israel, does that get them off the hook for killing him:
This is the Western educated, moderate Basher Assad trying to suck up to the Pope on the Pope's visit to Syria: "They [Israelis and Jews] try to kill all the principles of divine faiths with the same mentality of betraying Jesus Christ and torturing Him, and in the same way that they tried to commit treachery against Prophet Mohammad."
We actually have a relatively more important critique of this idiotic story:
The entire city is now cut off by the wall — Israel's security barrier. Israeli officials say the 25-foot high wall has been successful in preventing terrorism, but residents of Bethlehem claim it is frightening tourists.
We don't mean to get all 'grammatical,' but the word "but" is meant to imply that you're about to contradict something you just said. For instance, we said that we didn't want to get all grammatical, but then we did. Or another example: "liberals believe that marching down streets with giant puppets will stop wars, but in fact they just look like idiots". That has nothing to do with this post, but it's a nice reminder.
So when you're reading a sentence and you encounter that word, you expect evidence to the contrary (definition). Correct use of 'but': "Israeli officials say the 25-foot high wall has been successful in preventing terrorism, but in fact terrorism has increased since it was built". Of course, it would be a lie, but at least it would be passable English. On the other hand, if the author didn't use the word "but," he couldn't give the impression that he was contradicting something said by Israeli officials - and maybe he'll get lucky and readers reader will forget what 'Israeli officials' said by the end of the sentence.
The really infuriating thing, of course, is that the author both knows that the security fence has contributed to a massive decrease in violence and blames Israel for building it anyway:
"They saw the wall, they are afraid to come," said Ramsey Jaha, owner of Bethlehem Souvenir Shop. "Maybe they think we have problems inside."
But this has been the most problem-free year since the outbreak of Israeli-Palestinian fighting five years ago. This Christmas, an estimated 30,000 visitors flocked to Manger Square and the Church of the Nativity, on the site where Jesus is believed to have been born.
Follow this carefully: if there was violence, then tourists wouldn't travel to Bethlehem. But because of increased Israeli security measures (read: the security fence), this has been the quietest year so far - and so naturally Israel is to be blamed for the lack of tourists.
To enter this little city in the West Bank, visitors must pass through a new $8 million security terminal. By some accounts, if Mary and Joseph were to travel from Nazareth to Bethlehem today, they'd have to pass through more than a dozen military checkpoints.
Jews are now being blamed for something that they didn't do in a situation that doesn't exist. Yes, if Mary and Joseph were alive today, they'd have to go through security checkpoints just like everybody else. But we also have a feeling that if Jesus was alive today, he'd be kind of pissed off that Palestinians have been engaged in systematic attacks against Christians in the Holy Land. Well, not really because Christianity wouldn't exist yet, but if... well, you see how spinning these stories can get complicated. What a dumb argument.
But this begs the immediate question: if Jews tried to prevent Jesus from getting into Israel, does that get them off the hook for killing him:
This is the Western educated, moderate Basher Assad trying to suck up to the Pope on the Pope's visit to Syria: "They [Israelis and Jews] try to kill all the principles of divine faiths with the same mentality of betraying Jesus Christ and torturing Him, and in the same way that they tried to commit treachery against Prophet Mohammad."
We actually have a relatively more important critique of this idiotic story:
The entire city is now cut off by the wall — Israel's security barrier. Israeli officials say the 25-foot high wall has been successful in preventing terrorism, but residents of Bethlehem claim it is frightening tourists.
We don't mean to get all 'grammatical,' but the word "but" is meant to imply that you're about to contradict something you just said. For instance, we said that we didn't want to get all grammatical, but then we did. Or another example: "liberals believe that marching down streets with giant puppets will stop wars, but in fact they just look like idiots". That has nothing to do with this post, but it's a nice reminder.
So when you're reading a sentence and you encounter that word, you expect evidence to the contrary (definition). Correct use of 'but': "Israeli officials say the 25-foot high wall has been successful in preventing terrorism, but in fact terrorism has increased since it was built". Of course, it would be a lie, but at least it would be passable English. On the other hand, if the author didn't use the word "but," he couldn't give the impression that he was contradicting something said by Israeli officials - and maybe he'll get lucky and readers reader will forget what 'Israeli officials' said by the end of the sentence.
The really infuriating thing, of course, is that the author both knows that the security fence has contributed to a massive decrease in violence and blames Israel for building it anyway:
"They saw the wall, they are afraid to come," said Ramsey Jaha, owner of Bethlehem Souvenir Shop. "Maybe they think we have problems inside."
But this has been the most problem-free year since the outbreak of Israeli-Palestinian fighting five years ago. This Christmas, an estimated 30,000 visitors flocked to Manger Square and the Church of the Nativity, on the site where Jesus is believed to have been born.
Follow this carefully: if there was violence, then tourists wouldn't travel to Bethlehem. But because of increased Israeli security measures (read: the security fence), this has been the quietest year so far - and so naturally Israel is to be blamed for the lack of tourists.
