And when the media does cover the Islamic war on the West they get it wrong. The daily Mail has been an excellent source of updates, photo and news on Islam's attack on the West and the Jews in Mumbai.
Take this article: Rabbi's wife was 6 months pregnant and 2 year old Moshe was beaten
COMMENT FROM DAVID AND ATLAS:
One has to be oh-so vigilant! Even this largely-sympathetic and informative article has inaccuracies which could easily have been verified, along with subtle nuances which have the effect of reducing the general impact and humanity of the story. For example, there is the photo caption stating: "They were expecting their second child, Mrs Holtzberg's father said today," when in fact it was her fourth. The father would never have said second. The fact of their previous children has been widely enough noted elsewhere in the media, something this paper could easily have found and in fact should have had at their fingertips by the time this piece was penned. It had been reported that their first child had died (at age 3 1/2, as I recall) from a genetic disease (Tay Sachs?), while their second is presently under care and treatment in an Israeli hospital for the same disease. Moishe was their third.
It takes just a little imagination to realize all the soul-searching and heartache, not to mention research, these loving young parents must have gone through before deciding to have more children (by the way, I haven't seen Sarah Palin's comments on this atrocity reported anywhere).<
And, in the 2nd paragraph, it EUphemistically refers to these islamist jihadi terrorhoid depraved murderers merely as militants.
And, in the 3rd paragraph it refers to ZAKA as Israel's ultraorthodox recovery service, when in fact ZAKA serves the entire population regardless of religious affiliation.
And, in another caption they refer to it as a murder spree. It is war. Was Normandy a "murder spree"?
And, in another report, referring to the father's eulogy, they
translate 'We will fight them with torches!' When the more
correct translation would be light (although to their credit
they did explain that the meaning was Gd's teachings.)
And, why do they have to keep referring to the captioned mourners as
ultra-orthodox. They are mourners, like anyone else, and
besides, you can see from the photo thay many wore black. Other than
noting the presence of "Israeli dignitaries" the implication was that this was a
loss only to the "ultra orthodox" community, when it fact it is the entire
Jewish nation that grieves worldwide. And what is up with that ultraorthodox description? These folks are delicious, good natured Jews. Ultra is nonsense.
I counted the use of the term "ultra-orthodox" SIX times in the article.
Or, to the captioned grieving women as "Religious Jewish women grieve" - what has that moniker got to do with it? I, and every other Jewish and non Jewish woman is greiving for these glorious people.
And, little noticed is that Sandra Samuel (what a non-Indian sounding name! I wonder how she got it?), the Indian woman called his "nanny" is in fact -- from the accounts I read -- the cook, who has de-facto become his nanny, making her role and devotion all the more remarkable and laudable, Gd bless her.
And, It's not as if this paper doesn't do research, as reflected in the following paragraph at the end of the article: "She had spent the past few months touring India , and had planned to fly from Mumbai to Israel on Monday - the 18th birthday of her son, Manuel - before she was killed, according to the Israeli Foreign Ministry Web site." One cannot help wondering why they didn't get all their facts right, they had plenty of time to prepare background for this article. No, sad to say, some other subtle insidious mind-set appears to be at play here.
Yes, one has to be oh-so vigilant!