A commenter links to this LA Times article, which includes the false information that Ha’aretz reported and a seeming confirmation that Israelis were evacuated before the bombings in Amman. Observe:
The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that Israelis staying at the Radisson on Wednesday had been evacuated before the attacks and escorted back home “apparently due to a specific security threat.”
Amos N. Guiora, a former senior Israeli counter-terrorism official, said in a phone interview with The Times that sources in Israel had also told him about the pre-attack evacuations.
“It means there was excellent intelligence that this thing was going to happen,” said Guiora, a former leader of the Israel Defense Forces who now heads the Institute for Global Security Law and Policy at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. “The question that needs to be answered is why weren’t the Jordanians working at the hotel similarly removed?”
First, we have the Ha’aretz report, which has been pulled and replaced with this:
There is no truth to reports that Israelis staying at the Radisson SAS hotel in Amman on Wednesday were evacuated by Jordanian security forces before the bombing that took place there.
The Israelis were escorted back to Israel by Jordanian security personnel only after the attacks had taken place, contrary to earlier reports.
That should be enough for the LA Times. But apparently, it is not. So let’s pull their bullshit apart some more.
Amos N. Guiora, a former senior Israeli counter-terrorism official, said in a phone interview with The Times that sources in Israel had also told him about the pre-attack evacuations.
Check out his bio. He was a JAG in the IDF. That’s right, an attorney. Not an agent. Nor does Guiora mention who his sources in Israel may be. For all we know, they read the same Ha’aretz article, or got the same bullshit from their source, who was fed it from someone with an agenda. He then goes on to add, in perfect Zionist Conspiracy fashion, that if the Israelis got out early, why didn’t they warn the others?
Well, first of all, the Israelis were not evacuated. THE STORY IS A LIE. So, since they were not evacuated, there is no reason why the Jordanians should have been.
But here’s my big question: If this story is true, why was it not on any of the other Israeli news sites? This is big news! Israeli intelligence saved Israelis from being murdered in a terrorist attack.
Of course, detractors will say the reason that it is not in the other newspapers is because it makes Israelis look like bloodthirsty monsters who only care about Jewish lives.
Once again, we have a perfect example of anti-Semitism on every level. A mistake was made and corrected, but a pet Jew is trotted out to prove that there’s really a conspiracy after all, and it’s in another big media outlet–the Los Angeles Times!
Yeah, the perfectly “friend of Israel” Times – the newspaper that is so vehemently anti-Israel, it was boycotted by Los Angeles Jews in protest of its bias. Let’s look at what they would say: It’s a two-source piece of infomation, therefore it’s right.
But one of their sources is Ha’aretz, and Ha’aretz has completely corrected the story and said that the previous version was a lie. So now we are left with the questionable Times source (who is also a professional source for various news media; as they say, money talks), his unnamed sources, and, well, zero factual evidence. But then we have to parse this quote:
“The question that needs to be answered is why weren’t the Jordanians working at the hotel similarly removed?”
No, the question that needs to be answered is: Why weren’t all of the hotels at risk evacuated of all the guests? The answer has to be: Because there was no specific prior knowledge of attacks on those hotels.
I call bullshit on this “source,” I call bullshit on this story, and I call bullshit on the Times. Captain Ed has updated his post.
That should be enough for both the LA Times and for commenter Steve M. But apparently, it is not. So let’s pull their bullshit apart some more.
I strongly object to your inference here. I have been misinterpreted and clearly miusunderstood. I read your piece, having corresponded already with Norman Geras (of http://normblog.typepad.com/). In no way was I implying that such an evacuation was likely to have taken place and I made this point to Norman Geras. My disgust with the Haaretz article was such that I even sent an email to its author Yoav Stern asking for an explanation (I’m still waiting for the reply).
When I came across the quote by Amos Guiora in the LA Times, I immediately commented on it on your blog (and by email to Norm) in the hope that it would be of some value in understanding how this sort of damaging news story gets published. Incidentally, I knew nothing about Mr. Guiora (why would I?) and nor did I, an English Jew, know of the reputation of the LA Times for being anti_Israel, let alone of the boycott by LA Jews.
I understand that this sort of rumour is upsetting for you – it is for me too – but I was just a messenger here. I would appreciate it if you would clarify that your ‘So let’s pull their bullshit apart some more’ comment is not associated with me, as the implication that I am either anti-zionist or anti-semitic is far from the truth and, to be frank, deeply upsetting.
Thank you.
Steve,
I read intentions into your comments that weren’t there. I apologize. I have edited the post and removed any reference to you except for being the commenter bringing it to my attention.
I get a lot of comments like that, and jumped to the wrong conclusion this time. My apologies.
Meryl, thank you.
Pingback: Israpundit
Pingback: Soccer Dad