Two suspects are detained following shooting at Tel Aviv shopping centre

[Morch]

Good article about this by Robert Fisk. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/palestinian-killers-wanted-to-provoke-israel-s-new-defence-minister-into-fulfilling-his-blood-a7072771.html

No, it isn't.

Here are a few pointers why:

Fisk premise is that the attack was a calculated attempt to provoke Lieberman. Considering Lieberman assumed his office a mere 9 days previous to the attack, it is highly unlikely that the two events are related. This sort of attack takes a bit more than picking up a knife and stabbing someone. There were similar attacks in the past, when other Ministers of Defense were in charge, describing it as a personal message sort of thing does not account for that.

The main story is Palestinian terrorists murder innocent civilians? Nah...let make the headline into Lieberman being the "blood thirsty" party. "Ever since Avigdor Lieberman was appointed to his new post by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the world – and especially the Palestinians – have waited to see if he would fulfill the bloodthirsty threats he made during Israel’s 2015 election" - Lieberman first major action in office was to affirm equal rights for bereaved gay couples, the second was a mass approval of Palestinian travel permits for the Ramadan. As for "had it been uttered by a Palestinian leader about Israelis – would have brought world condemnation upon the Palestinians" - similar things were said by Palestinian leaders in the past, usually without much world condemnation beyond the usual mumbling. Them pesky facts again.

And that's from someone preaching about accuracy in journalism...

Can go on, but why bother. Look up Fisking.

einous the better. Mortar attacks at civilian areas are good, but body counts are better - especially civilians.

2. The Israeli government is forced to respond to ensure the people feel safe - the worse the terror attack the stronger the response.

3. The more people that die in the Israeli response the better for Hamas as they use it for political credit.

Hamas will happily sacrifice Palestinian lives to win the political war.

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

Robert Fisk is a credible source of information.

He holds more British and international journalism awards than any other foreign correspondent, and has been British International Journalist of the Year seven times.

I looked up ​"Fisking" ​but couldn't find a thing. Maybe you could provide a link.

So other than praise for Fisk, you do not have anything of substance to add? Like addressing the post, for example?

Robert Fisk is a journalist, not a source by himself. Nothing on the link provided is attributed to a source, and as Fisk was not on the scene, and did not have access to the perpetrators, his theory is guesswork, at best. Fisk's articles (or opinion columns) express a set of views, which does not vary much regardless of details and facts.

Fisking is a relatively new slang word, which carries two meanings:

The word is derived from articles written by Robert Fisk that were easily refuted, and refers to a point-by-point debunking of lies and/or idiocies.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fisking

Or

In the www arena where the world speaks invisibly to itself, a new word has appeared: ‘fisking’, meaning the selection of evidence solely in order to bolster preconceptions and prejudices. Just as cardigans or mackintoshes are named after an inventive individual, so fisking derives from the work of Robert Fisk, the Middle East correspondent of the Independent, stationed these many years in Beirut.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2003/11/the-dangers-of-fisking/

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fisk

If I remember correctly, Fisk threw a fit over this, not unlike Trump's small hands thing.

[DeaconJohn]

Good article about this by Robert Fisk. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/palestinian-killers-wanted-to-provoke-israel-s-new-defence-minister-into-fulfilling-his-blood-a7072771.html

No, it isn't.

Here are a few pointers why:

Fisk premise is that the attack was a calculated attempt to provoke Lieberman. Considering Lieberman assumed his office a mere 9 days previous to the attack, it is highly unlikely that the two events are related. This sort of attack takes a bit more than picking up a knife and stabbing someone. There were similar attacks in the past, when other Ministers of Defense were in charge, describing it as a personal message sort of thing does not account for that.

The main story is Palestinian terrorists murder innocent civilians? Nah...let make the headline into Lieberman being the "blood thirsty" party. "Ever since Avigdor Lieberman was appointed to his new post by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the world – and especially the Palestinians – have waited to see if he would fulfill the bloodthirsty threats he made during Israel’s 2015 election" - Lieberman first major action in office was to affirm equal rights for bereaved gay couples, the second was a mass approval of Palestinian travel permits for the Ramadan. As for "had it been uttered by a Palestinian leader about Israelis – would have brought world condemnation upon the Palestinians" - similar things were said by Palestinian leaders in the past, usually without much world condemnation beyond the usual mumbling. Them pesky facts again.

And that's from someone preaching about accuracy in journalism...

Can go on, but why bother. Look up Fisking.

einous the better. Mortar attacks at civilian areas are good, but body counts are better - especially civilians.

2. The Israeli government is forced to respond to ensure the people feel safe - the worse the terror attack the stronger the response.

3. The more people that die in the Israeli response the better for Hamas as they use it for political credit.

Hamas will happily sacrifice Palestinian lives to win the political war.

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

Robert Fisk is a credible source of information.

He holds more British and international journalism awards than any other foreign correspondent, and has been British International Journalist of the Year seven times.

I looked up ​"Fisking" ​but couldn't find a thing. Maybe you could provide a link.

So other than praise for Fisk, you do not have anything of substance to add? Like addressing the post, for example?

Robert Fisk is a journalist, not a source by himself. Nothing on the link provided is attributed to a source, and as Fisk was not on the scene, and did not have access to the perpetrators, his theory is guesswork, at best. Fisk's articles (or opinion columns) express a set of views, which does not vary much regardless of details and facts.

Fisking is a relatively new slang word, which carries two meanings:

The word is derived from articles written by Robert Fisk that were easily refuted, and refers to a point-by-point debunking of lies and/or idiocies.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fisking

Or

In the www arena where the world speaks invisibly to itself, a new word has appeared: ‘fisking’, meaning the selection of evidence solely in order to bolster preconceptions and prejudices. Just as cardigans or mackintoshes are named after an inventive individual, so fisking derives from the work of Robert Fisk, the Middle East correspondent of the Independent, stationed these many years in Beirut.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2003/11/the-dangers-of-fisking/

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fisk

If I remember correctly, Fisk threw a fit over this, not unlike Trump's small hands thing.

Robert Fisk's reputation as a credible journalist stands in spite of these lame attempts to discredit him.

Anybody in a prominent position who dares criticize Israel comes under a firestorm of personal abuse and attack.

[Morch]

No, it isn't.

Here are a few pointers why:

Fisk premise is that the attack was a calculated attempt to provoke Lieberman. Considering Lieberman assumed his office a mere 9 days previous to the attack, it is highly unlikely that the two events are related. This sort of attack takes a bit more than picking up a knife and stabbing someone. There were similar attacks in the past, when other Ministers of Defense were in charge, describing it as a personal message sort of thing does not account for that.

The main story is Palestinian terrorists murder innocent civilians? Nah...let make the headline into Lieberman being the "blood thirsty" party. "Ever since Avigdor Lieberman was appointed to his new post by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the world – and especially the Palestinians – have waited to see if he would fulfill the bloodthirsty threats he made during Israel’s 2015 election" - Lieberman first major action in office was to affirm equal rights for bereaved gay couples, the second was a mass approval of Palestinian travel permits for the Ramadan. As for "had it been uttered by a Palestinian leader about Israelis – would have brought world condemnation upon the Palestinians" - similar things were said by Palestinian leaders in the past, usually without much world condemnation beyond the usual mumbling. Them pesky facts again.

And that's from someone preaching about accuracy in journalism...

Can go on, but why bother. Look up Fisking.

einous the better. Mortar attacks at civilian areas are good, but body counts are better - especially civilians.

2. The Israeli government is forced to respond to ensure the people feel safe - the worse the terror attack the stronger the response.

3. The more people that die in the Israeli response the better for Hamas as they use it for political credit.

Hamas will happily sacrifice Palestinian lives to win the political war.

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

Robert Fisk is a credible source of information.

He holds more British and international journalism awards than any other foreign correspondent, and has been British International Journalist of the Year seven times.

I looked up ​"Fisking" ​but couldn't find a thing. Maybe you could provide a link.

So other than praise for Fisk, you do not have anything of substance to add? Like addressing the post, for example?

Robert Fisk is a journalist, not a source by himself. Nothing on the link provided is attributed to a source, and as Fisk was not on the scene, and did not have access to the perpetrators, his theory is guesswork, at best. Fisk's articles (or opinion columns) express a set of views, which does not vary much regardless of details and facts.

Fisking is a relatively new slang word, which carries two meanings:

The word is derived from articles written by Robert Fisk that were easily refuted, and refers to a point-by-point debunking of lies and/or idiocies.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fisking

Or

In the www arena where the world speaks invisibly to itself, a new word has appeared: ‘fisking’, meaning the selection of evidence solely in order to bolster preconceptions and prejudices. Just as cardigans or mackintoshes are named after an inventive individual, so fisking derives from the work of Robert Fisk, the Middle East correspondent of the Independent, stationed these many years in Beirut.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2003/11/the-dangers-of-fisking/

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fisk

If I remember correctly, Fisk threw a fit over this, not unlike Trump's small hands thing.

Robert Fisk's reputation as a credible journalist stands in spite of these lame attempts to discredit him.

Anybody in a prominent position who dares criticize Israel comes under a firestorm of personal abuse and attack.

Most of his critics are actually US and non-left wing UK, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict being a sideshow when it comes to his writing.

So once again, nothing to offer other than blanket statements aimed at defending imagined slights to Fisk's honor?

[DeaconJohn]

Robert Fisk is a credible source of information.

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

oh dear .. why just ignore facts .. liberman's first order after getting the defence ministry was to open the borders to 82000 palestinians for ramadan .. now after the attack he has rescinded the order

He holds more British and international journalism awards than any other foreign correspondent, and has been British International Journalist of the Year seven times.

I looked up ​"Fisking" ​but couldn't find a thing. Maybe you could provide a link.

So other than praise for Fisk, you do not have anything of substance to add? Like addressing the post, for example?

Robert Fisk is a journalist, not a source by himself. Nothing on the link provided is attributed to a source, and as Fisk was not on the scene, and did not have access to the perpetrators, his theory is guesswork, at best. Fisk's articles (or opinion columns) express a set of views, which does not vary much regardless of details and facts.

Fisking is a relatively new slang word, which carries two meanings:

The word is derived from articles written by Robert Fisk that were easily refuted, and refers to a point-by-point debunking of lies and/or idiocies.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fisking

Or

In the www arena where the world speaks invisibly to itself, a new word has appeared: ‘fisking’, meaning the selection of evidence solely in order to bolster preconceptions and prejudices. Just as cardigans or mackintoshes are named after an inventive individual, so fisking derives from the work of Robert Fisk, the Middle East correspondent of the Independent, stationed these many years in Beirut.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2003/11/the-dangers-of-fisking/

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fisk

If I remember correctly, Fisk threw a fit over this, not unlike Trump's small hands thing.

Robert Fisk's reputation as a credible journalist stands in spite of these lame attempts to discredit him.

Anybody in a prominent position who dares criticize Israel comes under a firestorm of personal abuse and attack.

Most of his critics are actually US and non-left wing UK, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict being a sideshow when it comes to his writing.

So once again, nothing to offer other than blanket statements aimed at defending imagined slights to Fisk's honor?

Fisk's "​honor" ​is the least of my concerns.

It is his credibility as a professional journalist that I am interested in.

His reputation and the many international awards that he has received defend him from attacks by pit bulls with an agenda.

[Morch]

So other than praise for Fisk, you do not have anything of substance to add? Like addressing the post, for example?

Robert Fisk is a journalist, not a source by himself. Nothing on the link provided is attributed to a source, and as Fisk was not on the scene, and did not have access to the perpetrators, his theory is guesswork, at best. Fisk's articles (or opinion columns) express a set of views, which does not vary much regardless of details and facts.

Fisking is a relatively new slang word, which carries two meanings:

The word is derived from articles written by Robert Fisk that were easily refuted, and refers to a point-by-point debunking of lies and/or idiocies.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fisking

Or

In the www arena where the world speaks invisibly to itself, a new word has appeared: ‘fisking’, meaning the selection of evidence solely in order to bolster preconceptions and prejudices. Just as cardigans or mackintoshes are named after an inventive individual, so fisking derives from the work of Robert Fisk, the Middle East correspondent of the Independent, stationed these many years in Beirut.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2003/11/the-dangers-of-fisking/

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fisk

If I remember correctly, Fisk threw a fit over this, not unlike Trump's small hands thing.

Robert Fisk's reputation as a credible journalist stands in spite of these lame attempts to discredit him.

Anybody in a prominent position who dares criticize Israel comes under a firestorm of personal abuse and attack.

Most of his critics are actually US and non-left wing UK, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict being a sideshow when it comes to his writing.

So once again, nothing to offer other than blanket statements aimed at defending imagined slights to Fisk's honor?

Fisk's "​honor" ​is the least of my concerns.

It is his credibility as a professional journalist that I am interested in.

His reputation and the many international awards that he has received defend him from attacks by pit bulls with an agenda.

Well, when your "concerns" include responding to the post discussing his linked column, rather than singing Fisk's praises - do share.

[Pakboong]

This particular case is odd to me because of the act of an off duty Israeli policeman who took one of the terrorist to his house and left him with his wife and in-laws while he returned to the scene to involve himself into what was going on. He later realized his mistake and returned to his home and apprehended the second terrorist who he apparently found initially wandering around the crime scene in search of a drink of water.

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Tel-Aviv-cop-accidentally-invited-terrorist-into-his-home-after-attack-456370

In the meantime, the mayor of Tel-Aviv and Harretz have publicly blamed the occupation for the terror. We know for example that this particular iteration of the conflict has killed 207 Palestinians and 32 Israeli's and nothing seems to have any impact on stopping the slaughter. Usually the victim is the one with the larger loss number but this one has been reversed for decades.

Who is to say that this attack wasn't in retaliation for one of the many Israeli F-16 attacks or any other act that caused the death of the 207 Palestinian dead?

[Morch]

This particular case is odd to me because of the act of an off duty Israeli policeman who took one of the terrorist to his house and left him with his wife and in-laws while he returned to the scene to involve himself into what was going on. He later realized his mistake and returned to his home and apprehended the second terrorist who he apparently found initially wandering around the crime scene in search of a drink of water.

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Tel-Aviv-cop-accidentally-invited-terrorist-into-his-home-after-attack-456370

In the meantime, the mayor of Tel-Aviv and Harretz have publicly blamed the occupation for the terror. We know for example that this particular iteration of the conflict has killed 207 Palestinians and 32 Israeli's and nothing seems to have any impact on stopping the slaughter. Usually the victim is the one with the larger loss number but this one has been reversed for decades.

Who is to say that this attack wasn't in retaliation for one of the many Israeli F-16 attacks or any other act that caused the death of the 207 Palestinian dead?

Err...."particular" how? You regularly hint at conspiracy on many related topics

As for "who is to say..." - I'll say it. There were no F-16 attacks in the West Bank, where the terrorists came from. The vast majority of Palestinian deaths in the current so-called Stabbing Intifada were not the results of airstrikes. Lumping together Palestinian attackers and innocents killed is nothing but the usual cheap propaganda.

[Morch]

More details emerge:

The route to terror: Police reveal how gunmen got from Hebron to Tel Aviv

http://www.timesofisrael.com/terrorists-arrived-in-tel-aviv-by-taxi-from-beersheba-police-say/