Haven't read through all the comments (I am beginning to think it is impossible to do so on any day when the word 'Israel' appears in Glenn's column). Great reference -- Keshev Center for Protection of Democracy in Israel -- Thanks. I took the liberty of sending the URL to the public editor of the New York Times with a plea that he use it as a yardstick to critically evaluate his paper's reporting.

But mealy-mouthed half-truths are how The Game is played!

The most recent version of The Game:

A Zionist posts the usual half-truth justifications for all things Israel. In this version of The Game, the half truth of choice is "Israel is responding to Hamas' rockets", while completely failing to mention the blockade of Gaza.

Objective readers see this omission and call the Zionist out on its half-truth. "Hey, what about the blockade?" The Game is now in motion.

The Zionist then states more half truths and obfuscations, usually along the lines of "look over here, at Egypt" or "Look over here, at the Native Americans!" or whatever, and the objective reader goes back and forth with the Zionist. The post count ratchets up, but nothing new gets discussed. The Game goes on and on.

The Game can be seen in action on pretty much every thread regarding Israel. My contention is that mealy-mouthed half truths are listed on purpose, as a strategy, in order to draw people into The Game and distract from any real discussion. The Zionist likes playing The Game, and is used to it. It knows that what it is saying is a half truth, and wouldn't have it any other way.

in the Jabalia refugee camp in Northern Gaza.

The UN opened the school to shelter residents displaced by the Israeli campaign. The UN provided IDF with exact coordinates of all the sites in Gaza where they were sheltering civilian displaced persons. The IDF has so far targeted and hit three of them. Today's strike caused the largest loss of life at a UN facility so far reported.

The IDF spokeswoman on al Jazeera said that the IDF's preliminary "investigation" said that a mortar round had been fired from the school and that the IDF had fired one tank round in response and that probably Hamas had booby trapped the school with explosives and they exploded and killed the people. Too bad.

Then she went on and on about "8 years of rockets!!!!"

Sigh.

I could get behind that. We have a black President now so it will either a giant comet or a killer asteroid.

Precisely. These war cheerleaders learned their lesson well, didn't they? Wars are best fought out of sight, out of earshot, out of mind, lest the public get restless with the unscripted loops of death and destruction.

Multiple examples of WP use.

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2009/01/04/nasr.gaza.arab.persp.cnn

Hard to see how these are smoke rounds, which are considered legal. These are relatively indescriminant and used over urban residential blocks.

Israel could claim they are using WP for smoke only, but to claim they are not using it at all is simply unbelievable.

My guess is that they're thinking that the tactic of The Big Lie, used to such great effect by their spiritual predecessors in an earlier Reich and the present moribund US maladministration, can never fail or go wrong.

Speaking of using tactics from the Reich, this quote is always relevant, especially to GG's blog entry about the disconnect between the American People and their leaders when it comes to war:

Naturally, the common people don't want war;*** ***That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. ...voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

-Hermann Göring

Boy, you got that right.

The military has tightly controlled the "news" since the Vietnam days. I think "tightly controlled news" may just be another phrase that means propaganda.

I am off the lunch now; but I know that Israel (and the US) has made getting a meal a very difficult task all over the middle east. (and Iran next?)

Clearly to their ilk, Hewitt, Scheißer242, et. al., it is OK to put a bullet in the head of one who steps on their shoe, as long as those people are evil.

Please IGNORE -- The Satanic Jews of Hollywood

It is a TROLL who drops in here occasionally only to disrupt whatever conversation is going on at the time.

Do not reply to it.

Glenn Greenwald:

But I think for a lot of people -- on every side of political debates -- being exposed to new facts, or facts presented in a compelling way...

You seem to find compelling facts pretty important, Glenn. That's good.

But let me ask you, where was your commitment to facts when you posted the link to that debunked video the other day? Yes, I know you wrote that you couldn't "vouch for its authenticity," but that begs the question: if it couldn't be presented as fact, why did you post it? Saying it was reflective of what we see in Gaza right now was feeble and lackadaisical. Had Hugh Hewitt tried something similar, you'd be all over him, and rightly so.

Weak disclaimers can't cover your stunning lack of journalistic integrity there. You hold the mainstream media to the loftiest standards, yet you casually chucked your orthodoxy out the window to suit your needs. And when caught, you didn't even have the grace to truly address what you'd done. You simply moved on.

If it was a minor faux pas I probably would have overlooked it. But that video was repackaged for one reason alone: to inflame more violence. And yet you blithely posted the link, contributing to the atmosphere of hate and violence you so energetically decry. It crossed the line from journalism into misinformation and propaganda.

With apologies to Stephen Colbert, if "truthiness," in pursuit of your goals becomes acceptable, what separates you from the people you so roundly criticize? You routinely lambaste the media for their shoddy reporting and then you pull a stunt like that? It's kind of mind-boggling.

And not for nothing, but I noticed you never replied to my letter on page 68 of your Orwell piece. I know that section devolved into pretty much mindless banter, and maybe you didn't catch it, but I'd ask you to read it now, before this thread is taken over. I asked you some questions about facts I posted regarding your lack of any substantive discussion over Iran and some of the other actors in this insanity. It's an extremely important facet of this mess and you never write about it. It's another reason I'm given pause as to your journalistic integrity on this subject.

Facts are important, Glenn. And your so-called adherence to them took a major hit the other day. It would be nice to hear you admit as much.

And if you think all I'm doing is castigating you because I see these issues differently, I'd ask you to please go to page 35 of my posted letters. There you'll find a letter entitled, "Shoddy Reporting," where I praised you. It's why I'm so truly disappointed now.