Dear Elder!
The worst of all is, that the AFP photographer Musa al-Shaer postponed the photo Nr. 30 to 1:37 p.m., but the scenario is from before 8:00 a.m., as you will see on photo Nr. 46.
Here is the link to Yahoo:
http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Sa...c5189b49c75ab0/
The other photos are interesting also. Please look to the time carefully. We have a new Talal Abu Rahma or Adnan Hajj, be happy!
Thanks, Gudrun, my copy comes from a different collection, the CNN one:
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/TRAV...shot/
index.html
Of course, the timing is everything 
Not only the timing, but also the name of the photographer: Musa al-Shaer. The Arabic word "al shaer" means "the poet", "der Dichter", "le poet". Funny?
Yep. Reminds one of the famous "poetic license"...
Best.
In common:
Both are pictures of protestors who put on colorful costumes to protest on behalf of animals.
The organizations of both sets of protestors have the same origins and the same sources of funding.
All were taking advantage of AFP photo ops.
All have fake hair.
Differences:
Santa was trying to break through a military line and probably got arrested and released, and will later star in an Arab propaganda movie.
The candy girls will probably get offered movie contracts and later get arrested for vice and be released.
Santa put on extra clothes.
The girls traded in clothes for body paint.
Uh, both are phony?
The top picture shows that the Zionists don't just hate Muslims, they hate Christians, too. This should be a wakeup call to the whole world to unite against their aggression.
This post inspired a long soliloquy on my part:
http://contentious-centrist.blog...diam-i-
was.html
Ahmed: Aren't you projecting?
"In psychology, psychological projection (or projection bias) is a defense mechanism in which one attributes to others one’s own unacceptable or unwanted thoughts or/and emotions. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Psy...ical_projection
The santa is clearly not being tackled as the IDF fellow has hold of another guy and ole st. nick appears to be either stumbling into or leaning against their two conjoined arms. But tackle has a much more nefarious ring to it. Clearly not even an anti-santite much less anti-christian Ahmed.
I would say that our Santa here is throwing his weight to break through the cordon (that another guy is most probably another IDF soldier - usually these are officers who skip the bother of the helmet and the flack jacket).
I've seen Rod Liddle at work a few times and he's an incredibly dumb "journalist". Last year he made a documentary about atheism which should have had any atheist rolling on the floor laughing and pissing himself, so ridiculous were Liddle's musings. The whole thing sounded a little like a critique of the non-existent "The Protocols of the Elders of Darwin".
On another occasion (on Newsnight) Little Rod tried to defend the notion that people don't to a large extent define and express themselves through their clothes, ipods, mobiles, cars and general accessories. Roddy, look around you: it's not because you go around looking rather dishevelled (so do I, that's not my point) that others don't believe that "clothes maketh the man"; they do.
And now he's had another revelation: Palestinians try to get a little lime light now and again. WOW!!! Israelis of course never do that... (LOL)
Perhaps I shouldn't be surprised: The Spectator is now the new home of Melanie Phillips, a blowhard that would find anti-Semitism in an empty cookie jar.
Liddle is a joke.
Now, now, Gert, let's not throw out the baby with the water. Let's not kill the messenger, even as deserving as Mr Liddle and/or his employer. As an aside, I am not a reader of this specific media outfit.
Let's start point by point instead. First of all, the "little limelight". I would say that producing a much publicized scene of poor defenseless Santa roughed up by Jooz on the eve of Christmas smells like more than just a "little limelight". I would say that this is an attempt to play on one of the most sensitive cords of 2 billion Christian souls on our planet, but not being a Christian or adherent of any other organized "opium for the masses", I would let you finish this line of thought. Just a hint: "surely, they have already killed Jesus, now they...".
Next. Our "incredibly dumb" "journalist" happened to make a simple observation, I shall repeat it for the benefit of the more lazy part of the readers: "If we - or some other TV monkeys - had not been there, it would not have happened." Having a personal experience and a doubtful pleasure of escorting a British journalist and his cameramen out of a certain area, after they were caught paying the locals to produce a stoning of an Israeli army car or two, I happen to know a bit about the whole issue. My experience is far from being unique, I want to assure you. Today, though, the locals are so publicity minded that they only rarely have to be bribed. The mere appearance of a TV crew gets them going, and sometimes it is extremely interesting to see several TV crews from the main media behemoths converging on a certain spot even before the crowds gather an an event starts to unfold. You see, Gert, we are a small place here and the observations of this kind quickly become common knowledge.
Next. "WOW!!! Israelis of course never do that... (LOL)". I would dare you to point to a case when Israelis gathered to throw stones at a Palestinian police car for the media. No, don't respond to that, it was written just to irk you a bit.
But seriously, Gert: please give me some live examples of similar behavior. Do you know, by the way, that the standing agreement of all/most of our media is not to publish pictures/clips of our dead and injured and that TV crews are in most cases removed from the bombing scenes and ERs. While the Palestinian media thrives on such pictures, using them to the utmost. Yep - we deal in violence frequently, and in some cases gratuitously (watch this space tomorrow), but let me know when it is that we go for violence for the sake of TV cameras?
Mmm... allow me to disregard your further displays of displeasure with Spectator and Mad Mel...
"I would say that producing a much publicized scene of poor defenseless Santa roughed up by Jooz on the eve of Christmas smells like more than just a "little limelight"."
Yes, you would say that, indeed. In fact the story was soooooo important that the British media were overflowing with it (please note irony) and I just had to come here to read it once again. Snoopy, in real terms this was a non-story, PERIOD.
"But seriously, Gert: please give me some live examples of similar behavior"
Israel hogs the limelight as much as any other country involved in a low-level conflict. In every war there's a shooting part and a shouting part. Israel is very good at propaganda and even better at blatantly denouncing criticism as anti-Semitism. See for example the charming Mr Seaman.
You're simply partisan about this issue but you won't fool me.
1. AFP, CNN, Reuters - do these names mean anything to you, Gert? I know you are a Brit, but still...
2. You have succeeded admirably to contradict yourself in two sentences. The first was "Israel is very good at propaganda" and the second mentions Danny Seaman. Do yourself a favor, Gert, and search this blog here for Seaman. You may be surprised.
3. I shall fool you...
The last but not the least, Gert: google for "israeli soldiers santa" please and see what happens. Pay attention to wordage of some of the headlines too. Maybe it will tell you something...
Despite being a news buff, I haven't seen this story anywhere but here. Not even on Fox. It's not a big story, Snoopy, no matter what you say.
"You have succeeded admirably to contradict yourself in two sentences. The first was "Israel is very good at propaganda" and the second mentions Danny Seaman."
... is nothing more that puerile literalism and a cheap attempt at point scoring. Israeli propaganda exists. Mr Seaman exists. There is nothing mutually exclusive about these statements. Try a little inter alea for a change...
And no, you will not fool me, trust me on that...
The problem, Gert, in arguing with you is that you always prefer to stay in the safe area of general statements. Have you googled for that string? Have you taken the trouble to search for Seaman on this blog?
How can I explain to you that the conjunction of Israeli propaganda and Seaman produces something very poor? Of course, when you don't care to look for details behind the statements, even when being pointed to them, you will stay with generalities....
Commenting by HaloScan
