Disgusting news bias revealed in report.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mda01aqt, Jun 25, 2004.

  1. mda01aqt macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
    #1
    'Researchers also found a strong emphasis on Israeli casualties on the news despite the number of Palestinian deaths being considerably greater.

    And the differences in language used by journalists for both sides were also noted.

    "Words such as 'atrocity', 'brutal murder', 'mass murder', 'savage cold blooded killing', 'lynching' and 'slaughter' were used about Israeli deaths but not Palestinian," the report said.

    "The word 'terrorist' was used to describe Palestinians by journalists but when an Israeli group was reported as trying to bomb a Palestinian school, they were referred to as 'extremists' or 'vigilantes'." '

    Q. life = life, or is israeli life > palestinian life?
    Q. I really wnat to know is people support israel for biblical (+ torah) reasons?
     
  2. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #2
    it's like there was more to your post, but it got deleted.

    got a link?
     
  3. LeeTom macrumors 68000

    LeeTom

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    #3
    I would believe it. The U.S. does NOT have a fair and balanced approach to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It's intolerable in the first place, but then when you add that Osama Bin Laden cited this as the reason Al Qaeda orchestrated 9/11, it becomes something more than intolerable.

    The U.S. and Israel are the only ones confused on the border issue, in my opinion. Israel has taken land outside their border since 1967, and has not only occupied Palestine, but Syria and Lebanon too. All the world would like to see them retreat into their 1967 borders.

    Unfortunately, Israel has the third-largest nuclear capability in the world, and has a huge arsenal of other weapons of mass destruction. Not because of their own research, but because we provided them with the weapons and training. In turn, we have escalated the situation 10-fold, and have, in my opinion, created the current reality of "terrorism" and holy war.

    Violence begets violence. Just ask the CIA where Saddam got his weapons and training from in the 1980s.

    Lee Tom
     
  4. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #4
    Has someone forgot that Israel was attacked in 1967. They then won that war and as a consession to winning the war as part of the peace agreement was ceded that land? In my view you attack me, I win, I now own your country as part of my own. They didn't go that far, they just wanted an increased buffer zone to insure their enemies wouldn't be able to use the high ground to lob rocket attacks at them as easily again. Ever heard the saying to the victor goes the spoils? Israel I think was generous in its peace treaty dealings after that war compared to how they could've been about it.

    A reminder
    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=18820&page=1&pp=25
     
  5. LeeTom macrumors 68000

    LeeTom

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    #5
    They've taken much more than their share of a "buffer zone" throughout the 1970s and 1980s.

    If I follow your logic, shouldn't we turn Germany over to Britain and the U.S.?

    The truth is, Israel has completely overpowered the Palestinians, and has continued to take over land to this day. The Palestinians have no army, no defences. They are scared, fed up, and beaten. The only way they know how to do anything is through these bombings. I'm not justifying murder of any kind, but their backs are against the wall... They have been in this situation for decades. It's time Israel takes the high road and goes back to within their borders, demolishes their new "settlements," and learns to live in peace.

    This is the real front to the war on terror, and we're losing.

    Lee Tom
     
  6. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #6
    Technically yes, that would include Panama, and Japan. However, one must realize realistic possibilities and problems including the fact that it is not nice to rule with a gun and had we taken over the entire country and made them a colony of America we would be making the same mistake that UK did with America. I say that Israel could have incorporated those countries into themselves as a conclusion to their war, doesn't necessarily mean it would've been a good idea for them to do so. It was a great idea though to take enough land to provide a safety buffer between them as well as removing the advantage of high ground.
     
  7. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #7
    If they were so scard tired and beaten they shouldn't of been committing all them terrostic acts trying to get Israel out of the Middle East. You cannot say the terroristic acts are a result of Israels treatment of the Palestinians. These terroristic acts have been going on for a very long time even well before 1967. Cause and affect doesn't work backwards.

    How can israel "learn to live in peace" if Hamas, the PLO, Jihad, and other terrorist organizations in Palestine refuses to let them. Israel has tried time and time again to sit down with these people and talk peace. Their answer is always another suicide bomber. So no it simply won't work.
     
  8. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #8
    This is what those innocent Palestinians teach their kids.
    for those who can read arabic here is the magazine itself I think. http://www.al-fateh.net/
    + more http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31943

    also here http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29535
    Yeah sure they want peace.
     
  9. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #9
    And when they do kill innocents they brag about it like it was a good thing.
    forum with 110+ pages of quotes like this I've been arguing on this particular subject for a very long time I'm known as Sly69 here. http://www.imesh.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=228316&highlight=palestinian+cartoon#228316

    They brag about how they are makign the infedels pay by killing a 7 year old girl. They didn't accidentally kill here while warring on their enemies, they think she is their enemy.
     
  10. mda01aqt thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
    #10
    sorry, zimv20 heres the link

    the link

    i think the arguement that the land is a buffer zone is a pathetic one, and even if they won the land through war, it is still considered illegal under international law. therefore either the sraelis are beyond international law or they should abide by it!

    i did my year 9 (14yrs old) history project on te israeli-palestine project (not claiming that i am an expert on the subject) but i remember reading that the israel pre-emptively attacked the Eygptian airforce (or Jordanian) if im not mistaken before the war started. therefore debateable who started it.

    The fact is that the arabs for centuries treated the Jews with respect from the start of te islamic faith, as a peace treaty was signed between the jews and the arabs. they were free to travel theough the muslim lands and were treated with equal respect. it is a shame that the israeli governments have destoyed this relationshp forming a region that 'hates' israelis within half a century, eventhough they are not all responsible or agree with the actions of their country.

    by the way i refuse to acknowledge israel as a 'jewish state', as that would be an insult to judaism,as the government cannot even follow the 10 commandments never mind the rest of the law written in the torah!

    Quote by Voltron, "How can israel "learn to live in peace" if Hamas, the PLO, Jihad, and other terrorist organizations in Palestine refuses to let them.

    voltron, there are also terrorist organisations within the west bank and gaza strip which are not palestinian, but jewish. you can argue that they probaly formed after the palestinians attacked them,.......but wouldnt that be aiding the palestinains arguement?
     
  11. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #11
    Actually on that thread I posted a fellow poster, kid, who lives in Israel posted a timeline of all the terrorist actions against them. It went back way before the 1940's that the arabs were terrorizing the Jews. I would look it up and post it but I have time constraints. It should be there on that link around page 100+ or - a few pages.
     
  12. mda01aqt thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
    #12
    Voltron, I must say that the figures you showed were sad to see, but these are not facts, there may be no underlying truth but may just be propaganda trying to justify the Israeli governments perspective of Palestinians being barbaric. If I look hard enough on the Internet I probably could find ‘information’ stating the opposite. You have to remember that the war did not involve the Palestinians but the surrounding Arab countries. The question has to be asked why the Palestinians should pay for someone else’s mistakes, if anyone even suggests that they are all Arab, therefore the Palestinians deserve their fate, is obviously showing their lack of intelligence.

    You also have to remember the first terrorist act recorded in British mandate Palestine, was committed by the immigrant Jewish population.
     
  13. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #13
    But are the Palestinians paying for the Jews mistakes or for their fellow Arabs mistakes? I think they are looking the wrong direction they should be looking for recompensation to the countries who gave their lands away, not at the ones who received their land.

    A favorite metaphor of mine. If the US decided to attack Mexico and lost the war. Mexico would then have the right to declare all of the US as property of the Mexicans. Now I doubt they would do that, they would probably only want Texas. Ok now all Texans have to leave Texas. Mexico would be in their right to drive them out like cattle up to and including the use of lethal force. Now then if Texans want compensation for the loss of their property they would be wrong to try to get it from Mexico who received that property as the price for piece. It would be up to the US to compensate the Texans or not as they saw fit.
     
  14. mda01aqt thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
    #14
    please dont use jews, the israelis are not innocent as ur trying to make them out to be. the arabs have invested billions of dollars intot he palestinian terrorities just to find out that the missiles, helicopter gunships, tanks and bulldozers destroy what they invested in. The EU has said the same.

    well the surrounding arab states made a mistake by trying to form a coalition against israel, but like i said in the last post, had israel provoked them?

    your favourit metaphor also work by accepting the law of the jungle, and totally sweeping aside international law.

    the metaphor is also flawed, as your would have to include another countries or countries which attack mexico. so the metaphor would include that cuba and the dominican republic attacked mexico does that give the mexican the right for US land? only a unintellectual person would say yes.
     
  15. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #15
    This is the most disgustingly biased account of the Six Day War and its fallout I have ever read.

    I'm going to refer you to an encylopedia to read a more balanced view. Please, read all sides rather than believe the right wing blather you read on frontpagemag (whose primary contributer, David Horowitz, is as big an anti-muslim racist as any palestinian anti-semite).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War

    Taft
     
  16. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #16
    Nice link includes stuff like
    I guess you have a problem is Israel trying to stop the guerilla, terrorists, raids on their civilians.
    Israel like I said was fighting for their survival.

    So what is the problem here of the version I posted vs the version you posted?
    I guess the right wing "blather" of Horowitz was right on the money after all. Looks to me he used the same source you did.
     
  17. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #17
    I had a big ol' reply written up to this post, but the forum closing for the Big Event nuked it. Darn. Here is my condensed version...

    You'll notice that all of my responses share a common theme: you need to dig deeper. Not to be condescending, but your comments show a unabashed ignorance of Israeli actions from the creation of their state until today. Sure, if you ignore all of the actions that Israel has made for the last 50+ years, it is easy to see Egypt, Jordan, and the Palestinians as pure evil. Fact is, Israel HAS acted in the last 50+ years and not all of those actions have been in the interest of peace or fair to the Arab peoples of the region.

    That being said...

    I have no problem with Israel protecting their citizens whatsoever. But you, once again, are looking at only half of the story. From wikipedia's entry on the Suez crisis

    So Israel was launching raids of their own during the aftermath of the Israel's war of independence. Further, Israel, with the aid of Britain and France, planned and executed an attack on Egypt in 1956. What a peace loving and wonderful nation Israel is! But this isn't to say Egypt was all good. Far from it. What was going on was a struggle for power, regional dominance, and ultimately, survival. But remember: Israel wasn't the only country fighting for survival.

    Egypt, for example, built the Aswan High Dam for their increasing power needs. However, this posed a serious danger to Egypt as well: a well place Israeli bomb could potentially take down the dam, likely raising Egypt and almost all live in it. The stakes were very high for Egypt.

    Jordan, as another example, was militarily very weak when compared to either Israel or Egypt (especially around the time of the Six-Day War). Given that most Arab nation at the time were in fierce competition with one another, Jordan feared not only Israel's might, but Egypt's as well. This posed a serious problem for them during the Six-Day War. Religious ideology aside, Jordan really had very little to gain from the Six-Day War and was in great peril from all sides. If they didn't involve themselves on the Arab side and Egypt had won the war, Egypt would likely have plowed through Israel and taken Jordan for themselves. If they did involve themselves, and Israel won, they faced the same fate.

    Really their involvement was a gamble for survival. They saw Egypt as the more powerful of the two nations and allied themselves with Egypt.

    Which makes the following quite specious...

    Yeah, so was everyone else. And all of them were willing to resort to dirty tactics to be the "last man standing."

    No he wasn't right. He, like you, likes to revise history to only include the atrocities and moral misteps of the Arab world. Problem is, Israel resorted to most of the same tactics throughout their history as the Arab world has used on them.

    Some might say, "what goes around comes around." I just say that none of them have any kind of moral high ground or justification for their behavior. Sure, they are all trying to survive. But at the same time, they have shown no ability to consider paths to peace.

    Taft
     
  18. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #18
    Still Israel can't make peace with those who refuse to make peace with them. So what if a section of Palestinian population wants to make peace, the militant ones overrides that. Until the terrorists are defeated it is easy to overlook any of Israels mishaps in dealing with them.
     
  19. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #19
    So much for the delicate art of diplomacy and treaty construction. :rolleyes:
     
  20. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #20
    It is also a very flawed analogy.

    As any historically accurate source would tell you, Israel was the first country to attack in the Six-Day War. This WAS in response to aggressive moves by Egypt and Jordan's acquiescence to Egypt's defense agreements. However, to keep things in context, in the years before the Six-Day War there had been considerable build-up in hostilities from both sides (See: Suez Crisis).

    To say that Israel was "attacked" would be a bit disingenuous. They and Egypt were enemies and mutual hostility had been building for some time. Further, despite PhilOfMac's assertion, and Voltron's backing of that assertion, Egypt did not declare war on Israel (nor did any other Arab country).

    Quite frankly, I'm sick of hearing this line from the rabid pro-Israel camp.

    Taft
     
  21. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #21
    And from the Palestinian perspective, it is easy to overlook the actions of the suicide bombers given all of the oppression Israel has reigned down upon the Palestinians.

    Can't you see that this attitude, from BOTH sides, is exactly what is stalling the peace process?

    Taft
     
  22. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #22
    Changing the Israelites position of defending themselves or retaliating against terrorism would only get more Jews killed. Because Hamas isn't going to voluntarily change their stance. So whether or not Israel would doesn't matter, unless perhaps the Palestinians started policing their own and showing the world they are willing to punish the ones in their society who refuse to stop the violence. Then Israel would have no choice but to back off.

    However in this type of arguments I've had in the past there are those that think that means Israel should allow Palestinians back into their lands for medical care, or for jobs etc. They forget that these are two different countries and Israel is not required to provide jobs or medical care for those who don't live in their own country. Not only should Palestinians police their own they should govern their own if they are to be their own country.
     
  23. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #23
    Riiiigggghhht. Because 40 years of Israeli crackdowns, occupancy and oppression have had absolutly no economic or social impacts on Palestine, right? Again, you completely forget that Israel has been an active part of this problem.

    Let me ask you this. Let's say you were a common person living in an area which was taken over by a foreign nation. That nation kept you in settlements which required you to live in a shack or ramshackle house. That nation kept you oppressed, which severely limited your freedoms, your access to medical care or education, etc. In short, you had little to live for.

    What would you do? Would you sit around a say, "oh, this isn't so bad!" Or would you want to fight for you liberation?

    I am not defending terrorism or Palestinian tactics. What I'm saying is that a people without hope for the future is a breeding ground for hate and violence. Israel is a large part of the reason Palestinians have no hope for the future.

    Taft
     
  24. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #24
    You don't fight for your freedom by blowing up school buses.
    If I didn't leave and return to my country of origin as documented by my passport and visa as they should have then yes I probably would fight. Fight the military not the civilians.
     
  25. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #25
    Answer what I asked you!!!!!!! This is no longer a request. This is an ultimatum. I am willing to debate you, but only if you engage in the debate in fair capacity.

    I flat out said I wasn't defending the tactics of the Palestinians. I was simply saying that when you give a people no hope for the future, violence inevitably ensues.

    Engage in this debate in a fair manner, or get the heck out. I'm just so sick of it.

    Taft
     

Share This Page