Puzzled in Gaza

[shira]

I’m a poet, an English Jew and a frequent visitor to Israel. Deeply disturbed by the reports of wanton slaughter and destruction during Operation Cast Lead, I felt I had to see for myself. I flew to Tel Aviv and on Wednesday, January 28, using my press card to cross the Erez checkpoint, I walked across the border into Gaza where I was met by my guide, a Palestinian journalist. He asked if I wanted to meet with Hamas officials. I explained that I’d come to bear witness to the damage and civilian suffering, not to talk politics.

What I saw was that there had been precision attacks made on all of Hamas’ infrastructure. Does UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon criticize the surgical destruction of the explosives cache in the Imad Akhel Mosque, of the National Forces compound, of the Shi Jaya police station, of the Ministry of Prisoners? The Gazans I met weren’t mourning the police state. Neither were they radicalized. As Hamas blackshirts menaced the street corners, I witnessed how passersby ignored them.

THERE WERE empty beds at Shifa Hospital and a threatening atmosphere. Hamas is reduced to wielding its unchallengeable authority from extensive air raid shelters which, together with the hospital, were built by Israel 30 years ago. Terrorized Gazans used doublespeak when they told me most of the alleged 5,500 wounded were being treated in Egypt and Jordan. They want it known that the figure is a lie, and showed me that the wounded weren’t in Gaza. No evidence exists of their presence in foreign hospitals, or of how they might have gotten there.

From the mansions of the Abu Ayida family at Jebala Rayes to Tallel Howa (Gaza City’s densest residential area), Gazans contradicted allegations that Israel had murderously attacked civilians. They told me again and again that both civilians and Hamas fighters had evacuated safely from areas of Hamas activity in response to Israeli telephone calls, leaflets and megaphone warnings.

<snip>

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1235898327903&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

Link shows blank page. here is a more complete version of the article:

http://www.theglobeopinion.com/article/puzzled-gaza

[shira]

1. the rest of the JPost article (shortened version)

cont'd...

Seeing Al-Fakhora made it impossible to understand how UN and press reports could ever have alleged that the UNWRA school had been hit by Israeli shells. The school, like most of Gaza, was visibly intact. I was shown where Hamas had been firing from nearby, and the Israeli missile’s marks on the road outside the school were unmistakeable. When I met Mona al-Ashkor, one of the 40 people injured running toward Al-Fakhora - rather than inside it as widely and persistently reported - I was told that Israel had warned people not to take shelter in the school because Hamas was operating in the area, and that some people had ignored the warning because UNWRA previously told them that the school would be safe. Press reports that fatalities numbered 40 were denied.

I WAS TOLD stories at Samouni Street which contradicted each other, what I saw and later media accounts. Examples of these inconsistencies are that 24, 31, 34 or more members of the Fatah Samouni family had died. That all the deaths occurred when Israel bombed the safe building it had told 160 family members to shelter in; the safe building was pointed out to me but looked externally intact and washing was still hanging on a line on one of its balconies. That some left the safe building and were shot in another house. That one was shot when outside collecting firewood. That there was no resistance - but the top right hand window of the safe building (which appears in a BBC Panorama film Out of the Ruins” aired February 8) has a black mark above it - a sign I was shown all day of weaponry having been fired from inside. That victims were left bleeding for two or three days.

I saw large scoured craters and a buckled container which appeared to have been damaged by an internal impact (its external surfaces were undamaged). Media accounts of Samouni Street don’t mention these possible indications of explosive caches (although the container is visible on media footage). The Samouni family’s elder told me during a taped interview that he had a CD film of the killings. As far as I’m aware, no such film has been made public. He also told me that there are members of his family who have still not been found.

The media have manufactured and examined allegations that Israel committed a war crime against the Samounis without mentioning that the family are Fatah and that some of its members are still missing. They have not considered what might flow from those facts: that Hamas might have been active not only in the Samouni killings but in the exertion of force on the Samounis to accuse Israel.

THE GAZA I saw was societally intact. There were no homeless, walking wounded, hungry or underdressed people. The streets were busy, shops were hung with embroidered dresses and gigantic cooking pots, the markets were full of fresh meat and beautiful produce - the red radishes were bigger than grapefruits. Mothers accompanied by a 13-year-old boy told me they were bored of leaving home to sit on rubble all day to tell the press how they’d survived. Women graduates I met in Sajaya spoke of education as power as old men watched over them.

No one praised their government as they showed me the sites of tunnels where fighters had melted away. No one declared Hamas victorious for creating a forced civilian front line as they showed me the remains of booby trapped homes and schools.

From what I saw and was told in Gaza, Operation Cast Lead pinpointed a totalitarian regime’s power bases and largely neutralized Hamas’s plans to make Israel its tool for the sacrifice of civilian life.

Corroboration of my account may be found in tardy and piecemeal retractions of claims concerning the UNWRA school at Al-Fakhora; an isolated acknowledgment that Gaza is substantially intact by The New York Times; Internet media watch corrections; and the unresolved discrepancy between the alleged wounded and their unreported whereabouts.

The writer is a poet and freelance writer who lives in London. Her collection Boukhara was a 2008 Smith/Doorstop prize winner. She also translates the poetry of Semyon Lipkin, the Russian World War II poet.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[henank]

3. Repeating a lie does not make it true

No, for the millionth time, no. Gaza is not the Warsaw Ghetto. It does not even remotely resemble it. Therefore, sadly for you, Israel cannot be compared in any way to the Nazi regime, try as you might.

In Warsaw, "Over 100,000 of the Ghetto's residents died due to rampant disease or starvation, as well as random killings, even before the Nazis began massive deportations of the inhabitants from the Ghetto's Umschlagplatz to the Treblinka extermination camp ... Between Tisha B'Av (July 23) and Yom Kippur (September 21) of 1942, about 254,000 Ghetto residents (or at least 300,000 by different accounts)<1> were sent to Treblinka and murdered there...
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_ghetto).

Since the population of Gaza has increased dramatically over the last few years there is no comparison.

Furthermore, since Israel sends to Gaza food, medicine, and provides it with electricity, I further challenge you to provide any proof whatsoever to your raving accusations.

There are many more proofs and evidence but I won't waste my time or the other posters here talking to a person so blind in his bias.

[shira]

6. and this article clearly shows why Israelis and others worldwide

do not trust the MSM at all, doesn't it?

This article is quite devastating to the normal MSM narrative.

[Jim Sagle]

4. DU I/P feels like a ghetto to me.

Your denial is typical of those who manufacture "progressive" consent along with their own facts.

[Scurrilous]

5. In pictures: Gaza's Samouni Street

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/picture_gallery/08/middle_east_gaza0s_samouni_street/html/1.stm


Looks fine to me. Gigantic cooking pots and grapefruit sized radishes abound! :thumbsup:



US congressmen express shock at Gaza devastation

<snip>

"US Democratic representatives Brian Baird and Keith Ellison expressed shock at the plight of the war-shattered Gaza Strip during a rare visit to the Hamas-run Palestinian enclave on Thursday.

"The amount of physical destruction and the depth of human suffering here is staggering" Baird said in a statement issued jointly with Ellison during their visit which coincided with a similar trip by US Senator John Kerry.

The visits were the first by US lawmakers since Hamas, an Islamist movement Washington blacklists as a terrorist organisation, seized control of the overcrowded territory in June 2007.

Ellison, a representative from Minnesota, harshly criticised restrictions on the delivery of desperately needed goods into the coastal strip that has been under a crippling Israeli blockade imposed after the Hamas takeover.

"People, innocent children, women and non-combatants, are going without water, food and sanitation, while the things they so desperately need are sitting in trucks at the border, being denied permission to go in," he said."

more


Blair shocked by Gaza destruction

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7917326.stm


UK MEP shocked at Israel’s devastation in Gaza

http://www.muslimnews.co.uk/news/news.php?article=15764


Israel’s doctrine of destruction: Bombs to ‘send Gaza back decades’

<snip>

"In the last days before Israel imposed a unilateral ceasefire in Gaza to avoid embarrassing the incoming Obama administration, it upped its assault, driving troops deeper into Gaza City, intensifying its artillery bombardment and creating thousands more displaced people.

Israel’s military strategy in Gaza, even in what its officials were calling the “final act”, followed a blueprint laid down during the Lebanon war more than two years ago.

Then, Israel destroyed much of Lebanon’s infrastructure in a month of intensive air strikes. Even in the war’s last few hours, as a ceasefire was being finalised, Israel fired more than a million cluster bombs over south Lebanon, apparently in the hope that the area could be made as uninhabitable as possible.

Similarly, Israel’s destruction of Gaza continued with unrelenting vigour to the very last moment, even though according to reports in the Israeli media the air force exhausted what it called its “bank of Hamas targets” in the first few days of fighting.

The military sidestepped the problem by widening its definition of Hamas-affiliated buildings. Or as one senior official explained: “There are many aspects of Hamas, and we are trying to hit the whole spectrum because everything is connected and everything supports terrorism against Israel.”

That included mosques, universities, most government buildings, the courts, 25 schools, 20 ambulances and several hospitals, as well as bridges, roads, 10 electricity generating stations, sewage lines, and 1,500 factories, workshops and shops.

Palestinian Authority officials in Ramallah estimate the damage so far at $1.9 billion, pointing out that at least 21,000 residential apartment buildings need repairing or rebuilding, forcing 100,000 Palestinians into refugeedom once again. In addition, 80 per cent of all agricultural infrastructure and crops were destroyed. The PA has described its estimate as “conservative”.

None of this will be regretted by Israel. In fact the general devastation, far from being unfortunate collateral damage, has been the offensive’s unstated goal. Israel has sought the political, as well as military, emasculation of Hamas through the widespread destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure and economy.

This is known as the “Dahiya Doctrine”, named after a suburb of Beirut that was almost levelled during Israel’s attack on Lebanon in summer 2006. The doctrine was encapsulated in a phrase used by Dan Halutz, Israel’s chief of staff, at the time. He said Lebanon’s bombardment would “turn back the clock 20 years”.

The commanding officer in Israel’s south, Yoav Galant, echoed those sentiments on the Gaza offensive’s first day: the aim, he said, was to “send Gaza decades into the past."

more

[azurnoir]

9. dupe delete n/t

[azurnoir]

10. Well obviously anyone who spends

5 whole hours in Gaza I mean she was there from 9:30 am to 2:30pm, is an expert and their word should be taken over that of any "Hamas stringer" you know like Keith Ellison or Tony Blair. And those oh so juicy tidbits she heard as she was leaving my gosh I am surprised Hamas did not take her hostage so she could not report on those alone.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

7. BULLSHIT.

[shira]

8. yes, MSM reporting based on Palestinian (Hamas) stringers is bullshit.

[Idealism]

11. I don't understand how this is even possible

Given the hundreds of pictures documenting the devastation in Gaza. If everything isn't as bad as this author is trying to tell us, then why has the EU put the price tag of damage at $2.1 billion?

There were reports of Egypt letting the the badly injured through the Rafah crossing to be treated at their hospitals and Israel taking some of the near-dead through the border crossing, so again I don't know where this statement comes from:

Terrorized Gazans used doublespeak when they told me most of the alleged 5,500 wounded were being treated in Egypt and Jordan. They want it known that the figure is a lie, and showed me that the wounded weren’t in Gaza. No evidence exists of their presence in foreign hospitals, or of how they might have gotten there.

This line is a nice addition though:

The Gazans I met weren’t mourning the police state. Neither were they radicalized. As Hamas blackshirts menaced the street corners, I witnessed how passersby ignored them.

See! Gazans are not upset with the Israeli government, they aren't screaming "Death to Israel!" in the street every minute of the day- so I guess its all okay. I guess Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Palestinian Center for Human Rights, et al are either lying or ignorant. Which is it?

[shira]

12. she's saying that while there was damage, death, and injury

much of the reporting by the MSM, based on Palestinian stringers loyal to Hamas, was overexaggerated - with retractions slow or never materializing. Even after MSM reporters came into Gaza after OCL. For example, the totally bogus UN school compound hit with 40 casualties wasn't retracted in most major MSM outlets. It's like al-Dura, the Jenin hoax, etc. The lies are very rarely retracted and most people remember them, are still outraged by them, and have no idea they're false or misleading stories.

[Idealism]

13. Got any more hoaxes? Or just the same 3 from the past decade?

Oh, and the "white flag hoax" is a true story- hate to break it to you and CAMERA.
The MSM retracts only sports misprints, if you haven't noticed. I don't know what tree you or the author is barking up here.

I wouldn't call Al Jazeera loyal to Hamas, either.

You miss the point of this article, I believe. It was attempting to exonerate Israel for their actions.

[shira]

14. aren't those enough? how many hoaxes does it take for the MSM to stop taking Hamas claims seriously

And now the "white flag hoax" is a true story?

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=55&x_article=1624

Which of the many various reports of that incident do you choose to believe, and how do you know which one is correct? I mean, come on, those conflicting reports are an embarassment to Journalism.

[Idealism]

15. Jenin was in Gaza? Al Dura was in Gaza?

So three not so factually accurate claims in a decade? I can think of more inaccurate IDF statements in the past 3 months than that. How long until the MSM stops taking their claims seriously?

When McClatchy covers it, its real.

[shira]

16. no, those are 3 very big hoaxes that were never retracted....there are countless other ridiculous

stories that have never been retracted and far more that have never been reported fairly or in context.

You can spend hours here:

http://www.camera.org/index.asp

Now rather than pretend that CAMERA is just some biased pro-Israel rag that can easily be dismissed without giving it the time of day, try to take into consideration the need for journalist integrity and media accuracy. You'll find hundreds of articles there pointing out factual errors, too many to be considered honest mistakes.

[Idealism]

17. If I linked you to Electronic Intifada, wouldn't you call it a Pro-Palestinian rag?

Why is CAMERA appropriate to you in this situation? It is all "He said, she said" crap by both sides.

Three very big hoaxes is not how I would classify Jenin, the white flag incident, nor the UN compound bombing. The UN has had 4 buildings bombed, even if the 5th wasn't true- the other 4 are. Jenin saw dozens upon dozens die on both sides, to call it a hoax is to say that it never happened- which is obviously untrue. Jenin was a bloody needless operation, no matter the semantics of how many died. God himself is the only one who knows what happened to Al Dura, I fear, and I feel the same sympathy for him no matter if it was an Israeli bullet or Palestinian.

[grassfed]

18. Reem Salahi

This will be dismissed by the usual characters but follows your point:
http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2009/03/almost-every-palestinian-i-met-in-gaza-believes-that-israels-recent-attack-will-only-be-followed-by-.html

But let us play the devil's advocate and agree that the majority of Israel's attacks were completely reactionary and only consequent to Palestinian militant firing. Let us assume that Israel was justified in its attacks against al-Fakhura school, in its demolition of the American School, the best school in Gaza, in its destruction of the UNRWA warehouses which housed tons of humanitarian aid, in its shelling of the Palestine Red Crescent Society, in its obliteration of the Samouni home in the Zeitoun neighborhood of Gaza City where hundreds of family members had taken refuge after being directed to do so by the Israeli military, resulting in the killing of 48 to 70 members of the same family (I visited this area during the mass memorial for the Samouni family and it still reeked of rotting bodies and phosphorus), in its eradication of the Gaza City police station, in its shooting at UN cars, clearly marked with the large blue letters, and at ambulance drivers, in its destruction of the Islamic University of Gaza on 28 December, in its bombing of the Gaza media building, and the list goes on and on. Yet, let us momentarily assume that Israel was the victim in all of this madness, as it claims it was, and that in fact the Palestinians are the ones to blame.

How then, does Israel explain the executions, the shooting of Palestinians point blank in cold blood? How does it justify Israeli soldiers shooting Kassab Shurrab with seven bullets across the chest as he came out of his car with his hands to his side, especially as one of the Palestinian hostages sitting blindfolded by the soldiers heard the commander tell the soldier in Hebrew to shoot the civilians that were driving down the road. What about the two daughters of Khaled Abed Rabu, Amal, two years old, and Suaad, seven years old, murdered by an Israeli soldier using a semi-automatic rifle before their father's eyes as the other Israeli soldiers ate chips and chocolate?

Or Sameer Rashid Mohammad Mohammad, a 43-year-old UNRWA worker, who was separated from his family by Israeli soldiers and taken to a separate room and shot in the chest? For four days after killing Sameer, Israeli soldiers held his family hostage and would make the family prepare the murdered Sameer food. Only when the Israeli soldiers left their home, did Sameer's children see that their father was executed and by their father's dead and bleeding body were piles of food.

How about Farah al-Helo, 18 months old, shot in the stomach when her family was forced to evacuate from their home at 6:30pm by Israeli soldiers who assured them of their safety? Only 50 meters down the road they were shot at by other Israeli soldiers. Farah, with her intestines spilling from her stomach, died on the side of the road a few hours later as the same soldiers that had assured their safety watched.

Further, how can Israel explain its use of the Palestinians as human shields? Upon entering a village, Israeli soldiers would separate the men from the women. Sami Rashid Mohammad Mohammad, Sameer's brother, was taken as a hostage and forced to accompany the Israeli soldiers for four days. He was handcuffed and blindfolded and made to walk in front of the Israeli tanks and soldiers as bullets would whiz by. At other times, he was made to sit on his knees in an open field for hours while Israeli soldiers would shoot from behind him and often at his feet. These Palestinians were nothing more than entertainment for the soldiers, a child's play toy. When I asked Sami whether he saw any Palestinian militants during his time as a human shield, he laughed and said that he only saw Israeli soldiers with their blackened faces and camouflage outfits.

[shira]

19. do you understand the difference between CAMERA and EI?

CAMERA exists as a media watchdog. It's goal is to keep journalists, writers, and commenters on all that is Israel accountable for their claims. You do believe in journalistic honesty and integrity, don't you? Who else out there do you trust if not CAMERA, to see to it that the media is held accountable and does a credible job of fact-checking? Anyone? Can you name even one organization that you respect which is up to that task?

EI is nothing like that. They don't even claim to hold the media accountable and honest.

[Idealism]

20. This is the problem here, you don't accept Palestinian journalists as legitimate

That their writers somehow only lie, and make up fantasy first-hand accounts, or something in your mind. Just yesterday you told me that you wish someone would "correct the lies" by the "Hamas stringer journalists" that report out of Gaza, dismissing their accounts as "ridiculous". That is an incredible generalization that is at least ignorant and possibility racist.

In contrast, you see an obviously pro-Israel nonprofit as something to be taken as gospel. CAMERA specializes in double speak on a regular basis, and I guess ever since they said in 2005 that "there had been no new settlements" and that at Oslo "no one promised the freeze settlements," it is hard to take them seriously as unbiased. I look at EI the same way. Not worth wasting your time being preached to, when they both have such transparent agendas.

[shira]

21. no, Hamas stringers are not legitimate

Those who report against Hamas end up, kidnapped and beaten, kneecapped, or dead. There is no freedom of dissent vs. Hamas and they don't give the press liberty to report anything they wish. To Hamas, Israel is always bad, Palestinians are always victims of Israelis, never Hamas, and there is no other story to be reported. Were you totally unaware of this?

As for CAMERA, please come up with specific and cited examples of their biased "double speak". Let's really see if CAMERA requires a watchdog to report against their dishonesty or inaccuracies, shall we?

[Idealism]

23. There you go again: All Pro-Palestinian journalists are Hamas stringers...

Then again, you have claimed that UNRWA is an arm of Hamas in the past, and that the UN is anti-Semitic down to their last member...

I guess ever since they said in 2005 that "there had been no new settlements" and that at Oslo "no one promised the freeze settlements," it is hard to take them seriously as unbiased.

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=10&x_article=1277
Jimmy Carter's "Settlement Freeze" Lie

They have zero credibility with anyone but the most ardent apologists for the occupation and murder.

[shira]

24. I'm talking about Gaza

and especially Palestinian stringers in Gaza who MUST be loyal to Hamas or else suffer the consequences. But there are non-Palestinian Western journalists in Gaza who must ALSO toe the line or else risk kidnappings, beatings, etc. You are aware that journalists in Gaza do not have freedom to report objectively? Please answer this time.

I'll look into the CAMERA claim and get back to you. Thanks.

[Idealism]

26. I would like to see some articles on the subject

Do you have any, or is this just a hunch?

[shira]

43. articles on PA intimidation of the press/journalists

Here's just one internet search that you could do with different keywords to find dozens of different articles:
http://www.menassat.com/?q=en/search/node/hamas+press+freedom

Promising Freedom, Hamas Pressures Journalists
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/10/world/middleeast/10gaza.html?_r=3&ref=middleeast&oref=slogin

Many articles here, including Eason Jordan's "News we kept to ourselves":
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=17&x_article=448

Kidnapping of Alan Johnston (BBC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_of_Alan_Johnston

======================

Obviously, I could link you to dozens of more examples.

So what do you think now of Hamas' stringers and their advocacy journalism that you once believed was so objective, honest, and accurate?

[Idealism]

44. Seems like you group the PA and Hamas together for these purposes

Secondly, Alan Johnston was kidnapped by the Army of Islam and Hamas then arrested an Army of Islam spokesperson and negotiated a trade deal. Johnston was then released. How does that say anything about "Hamas pressuring journalists" when Hamas a) did not kidnap Johnston and b) arrested those responsible and got Johnston freed?

Interesting that both sides beat journalists who are proponents of their opposition... Hamas is the focus of one of these articles, and the main testimony comes from a pro-Fatah writer (no surprises there), where as the PA accusations of brutality come from a former journalist of theirs who resented being under the PLO's fingernail... I wonder where his loyalties lie?

There is more press freedom in Gaza than in dozens of other areas of the world, but of course I would prefer to see a secular democratically elected regime in charge other than Fatah. The media suppression is an unfortunate escalation of Fatah and Hamas sympathizers it seems- something a newly elected unity government would hopefully fix!

[shira]

46. read this, tell me what you think

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=17&x_article=193

[Idealism]

48. Not familiar with the situation this article spoke about

It is a bit old, but no matter. The PA is again cited, if anything it seems there are more accounts of journalist pressure from the PA than Hamas, but I am sure they are equally bad at this.

When you compare this to other countries it doesn't sound so bad, but when you compare it to the US or Israel obviously it sounds much worse. Egypt, for example, has a fierce lid on dissent in their media, although some dissenting opinions are allowed to be published. North Korea, China, Erithea, Iran, etc all have much worse freedom of the press than the West Bank and Gaza.

[shira]

49. if you read the entire article, which is cited quite well

is it any wonder why CAMERA or HonestReporting are in business and Israelis have MAJOR issues with MSM outlets coverage of the I/P conflict? Can you at least admit that it's VERY difficult for any MSM journalist to be objective and report fairly on the conflict?

Why is it now so difficult to believe the OP, "Puzzled in Gaza", now that you know something about advocacy journalism, intimidation of the media, and loyal PA stringers?

[Idealism]

62. There is always disinformation out there in any issue

It isn't just the I/P conflict that has problems with factual reporting- everything does. CAMERA and HonestReporting are two orwellian examples of getting their "side of the conflict out." After all, what incident has both sides ever agreed on in this?

CAMERA only attempts to correct the misinformation on the Israeli end, uncaring about the lies about Palestinians. Remember the "white phosphorous rocket?" hoax that the Israeli media and CAMERA claimed over and over? Yeah, they haven't retracted that story yet.

[shira]

68. it goes further than just factual reporting

there's strong evidence of media INTIMIDATION by the PA going back years. It's easy to slam the Israeli govt if you're a foreignor or an Israeli journalist like Gideon Levy, but can you admit it's very difficult slamming the PA if you have an MSM outlet in the territories, or if you're a Palestinian living there? They run the risk of being beaten, kidnapped, or worse - don't they? Or is this not such a big deal in your opinion?

[Idealism]

69. In a world full of brutality and injustices, the potential for things

is always secondary to what is actually happening. I find it odd how you conflate Hamas and the PA together when the need arises, and treat the PA as the victims of Hamas violence when it suits you. They both have held campaigns against the other sides supporters, and even CAMERA indicates the intimidation aimed at journalists is far greater from the PA than Hamas.

[shira]

73. Hamas is part of the PA just like Fatah.....Fatah is not the PA

The PA intimidated during Fatah rule and now during Hamas rule. I showed you clear evidence of their intimidation of Western media. It exists. And it appears you're ignoring the evidence.

[Idealism]

75. You are mistaken

Hamas is not part of the PA

They acquiesced to a unity government with the PA after the 2006 elections, but broke off and expelled them out of Gaza following the civil war.

Fatah is part of the PLO, which is part of the PA.

[shira]

92. you're still ignoring media intimidation

shall we pretend that this media intimidation of western journalists doesn't contribute to very biased MSM reports on all that is I/P?

Let's review.

What is very likely to happen if Hamas or Fatah doesn't like or agree with MSM reporting with journalists and correspondents based in the occupied territories?

[Idealism]

93. The one report gleamed about Hamas does not a trend make

The PA seems much worse with intimidation than Hamas, but again, I fail to see why you harp on this. No one is claiming that Gazan society is the thriving democracy that the United States or Canada is. If you look throughout the Muslim world, corruption and tyranny are endemic problems. Look at this from Hamas's point of view: they are told the way to bring about change is to run in the election and change the Palestinians lives through politics, they win the election and are immediately shunned by the people who told them to have elections in the first place. Immediately they are ostracized by the world. In a region where representative democracy was all but unheard of outside of Israel, the people tried and were rebuked for their efforts by the same people who told them that democracy is how they will reach their goals. Apparently democracy to the US and our allies only means if the people we like win the elections.

There are far worse problems in the are than the limited cases of media intimidation. Most of the articles CAMERA has were about the PA, and they were mainly from 2000-2002 it seems- which in the I/P relations is an eternity.

[shira]

101. just one report on Hamas? it's not just Hamas vs. Fatah journalists, as if that's okay

Hamas vs. Reuters journalists
http://www.pchrgaza.ps/files/PressR/English/2007/59.2007.htm

Hamas vs. German reporters
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/german-broadcaster-says-hamas-tortured-cameraman/2008/08/01/1217097469167.html

Hamas vs. NYT correspondent Taghreed el-Khodary
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/weekinreview/25bronner.html?_r=2&pagewanted=2&ref=weekinreview

Hamas vs. Agence France reporters
http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/steven_erlanger_forgets_hes_a.php

[Idealism]

104. If you read the last part of my part

Maybe you would not see a reason to post that

[shira]

105. media intimidation has been a fact of life there for a long time

let's not pretend that the Western MSM has not been affected by it and feels comfortable reporting against either Hamas or Fatah.

[Idealism]

107. It isn't as if AIPAC and CAMERA try to censor the MSM for Israel's benefit

Try not to pretend this is a one-sided issue. People have lost their jobs over things like this, but I suppose that is much preferable than losing your life or being beaten. The point is why should either occur?

[GoesTo11]

115. Kudos for backing up your statement with ample evidence

after being challenged to do so. Credibility, baby.

[shira]

25. just read the CAMERA article

what exactly do you find objectionable with it? Looks like Carter was wrong about Begin.

[Idealism]

27. So says the Israeli government, which I don't quite believe

They have an agenda which has skewed prior agreements. You keep parroting the talking point about Taba, proof that this propaganda works.

Seems a bit odd that after all the run up to the Camp David talks, all you could get out of Begin was a 3-month settlement freeze claim. I am very suspicious of this, especially given the propensity of Israeli officials to twist their words.

[shira]

28. so you have no evidence that CAMERA cooked up some bullshit about a 3 month

freeze on settlements? It's just your hunch?

[Idealism]

29. Freeze on settlements worked out real well, I'd say

They can call it whatever they like, but the number of settlers has done nothing but go up each year. I see no evidence of a freeze here, do you?

http://www.fmep.org/settlement_info/settlement-info-and-tables/stats-data/population-in-israel-and-west-bank-settlements-1995-2005

These aren't the most recent, but you get the idea. These figures also don't include settlers in East Jerusalem, which would bring the total today to over 500,000.

[Shaktimaan]

31. That information is over a decade past the time discussed in the camera article.

It doesn't really prove anything. Besides, if the freeze was only for three+ months then you wouldn't expect to see static numbers in an annual chart.
I don't see what your issue with the article is aside from the fact that you find their claim dubious.

Is that really a main example of your evidence against CAMERA?

[Idealism]

34. No, the "no new settlements" line has been repeated often enough

to harp on that.

They also claim that there are no roads that allow only Jewish registered drivers from operating a vehicle on them, which there are.

[Shaktimaan]

37. No there aren't.

That's absurd. Back that up please.

[Idealism]

39. Not according to first-hand reports

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Trouble+spots.(LETTERS)(Letter+to+the+Editor)-a0139554714

Palestinians with West Bank (blue) and Gaza (white) license plates are routinely prevented from traveling on the network of roads built by Israel to bypass Palestinian population centers and connect Jerusalem and Israel with the settlements. I have traveled on these roads and been turned back by Israeli military checkpoints when in cars with these types of license plates. However, Israelis have no such restrictions, provided they travel in vehicles with Israeli license plates. Palestinians with Jerusalem license plates can sometimes access the roads, but they too are routinely turned back. Given these military practices, I stand by the story as written.

[pelsar]

40. you wrote JEWISH drivers...

arab israelis...i.e. non jewish drivers drive on the "jewish roads".....guess that makes your claim wrong.

[Idealism]

42. Too bad there are zero Arab Israeli settlers

Which makes your claim disingenuous

[pelsar]

52. so wrong....so many times....

arab israelis are constantly in the westbank......they do a lot of business there with the Palestinians.

i guess you didnt know that....and since its such a basic fact of the westbank and the relations between israel and the Palestinians one obviously wonders just what do you actually know?

[Idealism]

63. Point me to the number of Arab Israeli settlers then

If you claim there are these people.

Some Arab Israeli's leave Jerusalem and aren't allowed back into the city, either. One such doctor 60 Minutes highlighted has been denied reentry into Jerusalem on 20 different attempts in the past year.

[pelsar]

80. you claim was "JEW ONLY ROADs"

like i wrote, israeli arabs have lots of business in the westbank......and use those roads...they are not jewish, its such an everyday fact, that there is nothing to report.

[Idealism]

82. Really?

Got any percentage of what you think the roads are used, with a breakdown of Arab and Jewish travelers?

Didn't think so.

[Behind the Aegis]

83. Percentages? Is that how desperate you are?

:rofl:

One, that's right, ONE Israeli Arab using the road means it is not a "Jew only" road!

Got any real point?

Didn't think so.

[Idealism]

84. He was the first to bring the notion up, where are you condemning his post?

Oh that's right, you only see what you want to see.

[Behind the Aegis]

85. Sounds like you are the one suffering from that disease.

Got any more "Jew-only road" type propaganda? I am sure you do, it will eventually surface, get shot down and you will whine how it was all the work of Zionists who hate the truth.

[Idealism]

98. Were those roads in the best nationalist interest?

No, considering only a fraction of the population, and almost none of 20% of the population, use them. Considering that Israeli Jews use the road overwhelmingly more than Israeli Arabs, this is almost a shameful waste of money. Concrete is not cheap, it costs about $1.2 million per mile per lane to lay down a road. All for the benefit of very very few percent of the population, seems like there could have been money spent better elsewhere. I would like to see the government try to alleviate poverty instead of building settlements and roads that very few use.

There are no technically Jewish-only roads, but think about this: If the US built a bridge from Alaska to Russia, of course everyone can travel on it, but why the hell would they unless they lived in Alaska? It is still stupid. It is still a waste of money.

[Shaktimaan]

110. You aren't getting it.

We aren't defending the roads from a practical point of view. We are challenging your labeling of them as "Jew only" roads because it alters the focus of the debate from legitimate criticism in order to (wrongly) smear Israel. Labeling these roads as "Jew-only" is just a transparent attempt to portray Israel as a racist state. And this is far from an isolated example... there are countless similar lies being propagated to the same end. Which is why I am such a stickler for accuracy during these debates.

Think about it. When you first heard that Israel restricted their roads to Jews only, why did you consider it unfair? Probably because the notion of segregating roads according to religion was disgusting to you, and an obvious example of institutionalized discrimination against non-Jews.

The term is used to muddy people's perceptions for propaganda purposes, not to educate people as to the actual issues. The term is solely used to smear Israel, it is untrue, unfair and unethical. Can you really defend the use of an untrue propaganda term that implies a racist policy where none actually exists?

[Idealism]

111. If you read the last part of my post

it describes the uselessness of these highways.

Like I said: if the US government builds a highway connecting, say, the Aleutian Islands to Alaska, of course all US citizens can use the road- hell somebody might drive up from California to do so, but that doesn't mean the roads aren't predominantly used for a very small percent of the population (ie Alaskans and Aluetians).

The practical use of these roads, for all intensive purposes, hinders Palestinians from expediently traveling through the West Bank, while simultaneously predominantly benefiting Jewish Israelis.

[pelsar]

86. you made the claim.....try backing it up......."jew only roads"....

this is just one more in a long long long list of attempts to produce an image of israel that doesnt exist....the more interesting question, which i doubt will be answered here, is simply why?

why the need to make up stuff an pretend that its true?.......or perhaps you actually believe that its true....but then there is no shortage of religions, cults and other true believers - which i believe to be the case here.

____

in answer to your question, just as there are no stats on how many jews, non jews drive on the tel aviv- hafia road, there are non in the westbank....those kind of stats have no worth in a democratic state.....which is why we know what you wrote is nothing more than a religious type belief.

[Shaktimaan]

54. Why do you do this?

The roads are restricted according to nationality, not religion. Your post here directly contradicts your statement that roads are restricted to Jews alone. So clearly you are aware that what you wrote was not true.

The roads are segregated this way because of security concerns. The fact of the matter is that people were being shot at and killed prior to the decision to restrict certain roads to members of either nationality. Now you can agree or disagree with this policy, there are certainly arguments to be made for either side. But what you did was misrepresent the policy, describing it as though it was based on religious concerns (which would be considered both disgustingly bigoted and pointless by almost anyone), instead of just explaining the actual situation (which has more nuanced ethical facets.) You wrote this even though you were quite aware that your accusation was not even true in a de-facto sense, let alone a legal one.

You and I have discussed this practice before, and you agreed with me that exaggerating or misrepresenting information has no place in a reasonable discussion of these issues. The facts are convoluted enough and the issues volatile enough to make debating them difficult without introducing hyperbole in an attempt to muddy the debate.

The change you made is hardly an inconsequential one either. It was intended to reflect the motive behind the policy as being something other than what it actually is. 20% of Israelis are Arab, another 4 or 5% are other various non-Jews. All of whom are allowed to use these roads. So why wouldn't you just say "Israeli" and be accurate instead of using the word "Jewish" even though it made you wrong? Why is it so important that you label the roads as "Jew only"? Because then its motive could only be bigotry and apartheid; because then its actual justification (security) ceases to make sense and could only be interpreted as a whitewash.

Right?

Bottom line, when you make dishonest remarks like these it hurts both your overall position as well as the quality of any discourse going on. It hurts your position because it makes you look unsure that the actual law is bad enough to criticize on its own, without altering both its letter and spirit. It hurts the discussion because instead of talking about the real issues we end up spending time arguing over a stupid factual point. Stupid because it is easy enough to just look up. (Doubly stupid because you knew it wasn't true before you even posted it.)

What's the point, Idealism? Come on, you're better than this.

[pelsar]

56. Idealism? Come on, you're better than this? - i disagree

........there are reasons why one exaggerates, makes up stuff, is not interested in facts etc. For one thing, such arguments are far more emotional based and are designed to get support for a particular viewpoint. and the system works, having facts and doing research is both time consuming and requires quite a bit of energy...not for everyone, but the worst part is, that one might discover that one is actually wrong, and for some that is simply unacceptable.

i wouldnt know if this is the case here, but i have noticed it elsewhere.

option two which i believe is far more "acceptable" is the double standard, this allows for exaggeration, fudging of facts, accepting "non acceptable behavior" from a group because (they arent smart enough, or cant understand....)

[Shaktimaan]

57. For me, it is the most frustrating thing about having these discussions.

People will make the most absurd assumptions about the conflict, usually based on a small piece of information they gleaned from somewhere, thinking that as long as they know which side to root for they are free to fill in the blanks as far as pesky details go.

When I read Carter's book I think I began to get an idea of the degree to which this happens. It's like the actual facts of the matter don't matter at all. They can be disregarded or even replaced with something you just made up, and for some reason it's considered acceptable. What in the world is the point of having a discussion on a board like this if people aren't interested in sticking to factually accurate history? It is so weird to me. I've had some wild slurs thrown at me for doing nothing more than insisting on accurate facts (if those facts didn't fit someone's philosophy.)

In this case, I thought the weirdest thing was that Idealism continued to argue his point even after it became clear that his "Jew only road" thing was fictitious. It's like how people keep insisting to you that Israel broke the ceasefire with Hamas last November, even after you carefully fill in the details for them, explaining the actual situation in depth and everything. Two days later it's as though they never heard any of it.

[pelsar]

58. i've got lots of time spent on absurd assumptions...

i think my favorite was the rafah crossing......gaza/egypt border. Long after israel left gaza, long after the cameras installed were destroyed, long after the europeans refused to work there, long after egypt opened and closed it as they chose...posters STILL claimed that israel controlled it.

but the best was that egypt couldnt bring in supplies because there was no infrastructure that could take the trucks!! the claims really get to be absurd. And your right, after its finally proven, its all forgotten and a new claim appears absurd as the last.

It's like the actual facts of the matter don't matter at all.

face it, its a belief, a religion, a cult...where history and facts are not to be bothered with......

[Sezu]

67. It's like the actual facts of the matter don't matter at all.

That's how you know it's propaganda....the big lie.

[Idealism]

65. There are zero Arab Israeli settlers,

the roads are to the settlements, the roads are used by a wide wide margin only by Jewish Israeli's, Palestinians can't use them, if Arab Israeli's move along the roads, they are often not allowed back into say Jerusalem once they leave.

[pelsar]

79. wow!....the imagination knows no bounds!!

the roads are to the settlements, the roads are used by a wide wide margin only by Jewish Israeli's, Palestinians can't use them, if Arab Israeli's move along the roads, they are often not allowed back into say Jerusalem once they leave.

i assume you have a link, testimonials, percentages of jew and arab israelis traveling, maps showing the roads, etc......or did you just make this up because its sounds incredibly racist and its important to portray israel as a racist country- irregardless of the facts

_____

i think this is a good example of my previous post.....

[Idealism]

81. Not like it will matter, but here

In the past when I prove you wrong, you quickly change the subject, so why will this be any different?

In this video they interview an Arab Israeli doctor who temporarily moves out of Jerusalem to take a job, then is barred from returning. He applies I believe 20 times in a year or so for reentry and the authorities ignore his request.

The roads connect to the settlements. The settlements have virtually no Arab inhabitants. Find me proof of otherwise, if you keep claiming that I am wrong.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/23/60minutes/main4749723.shtml

[pelsar]

87. so wrong..so many times...once again....

the Dr in the interview is not an israeli citizen.....Arabs born in E. Jerusalem are given the choice of accepting israeli citizenship or not (designed to make it easier for them in terms of the political situation). He obviously chose not to, hence entering israel as a non citizen is dependant upon govt permission, as in all countries throughout the world.

shall we remember how you are wrong this time as well?

_____

and your "jew only road"....try some logic and you'll have to learn something as well: Ready?

The roads connect to the settlements

yes they do....because the newer roads connect the main cities, go around the smaller villages and connect to the secondary roads that reach the settlements. The settlements dont have israeli only roads directly from jerusalem to settlement a,b,c etc. as you seem to be claiming (yes?)

sorry to bother you with those facts again....since you made the claim....i believe you were going to show us a map?
____

btw, i have yet to recall when you proved me wrong....perhaps a link (this should be interesting, nor do i change the subject to "run away".....you can always remind me that i missed a question and i shall return to it-always.

___

[Shaktimaan]

109. This is getting a little ridiculous.

In the past when I prove you wrong, you quickly change the subject, so why will this be any different?

Isn't that exactly what you're doing here though? Our original debate was about whether CAMERA is credible. To show that they aren't you accused them of denying Jew-only roads. When it was shown that Jew-only roads do not actually exist you changed the topic to a complaint about whether the roads go to Arab areas of the Wast Bank or not. Now you're discussing Arab residents of Jerusalem's residency rights. You have yet to give an example of CAMERA giving false information or even admit that the Jew-only roads accusation is a myth.

In this video they interview an Arab Israeli doctor who temporarily moves out of Jerusalem to take a job, then is barred from returning. He applies I believe 20 times in a year or so for reentry and the authorities ignore his request.

No, this man isn't an Arab Israeli. He's a Palestinian who used to have permanent residency status for Jerusalem. You see, when Israel annexed East Jerusalem it gave the Arab residents there a choice between becoming Israeli citizens or getting Perm. Res. status, (which is similar to a greencard here in America. It gives the recipient most of the rights a citizen has, except they vote in Palestinian elections instead of Israeli ones.) Permanent Residency status only remains valid for as long as the person continues to live in Jerusalem though. This guy moved away for a few years and allowed his status to lapse. He could have applied for Israeli citizenship to avoid this. (But then once he moved to the west bank for those four years he would technically have been breaking both Palestinian and Israeli law. The punishment for an Israeli buying real estate inside PA controlled territory is death.)

The roads connect to the settlements. The settlements have virtually no Arab inhabitants. Find me proof of otherwise, if you keep claiming that I am wrong.

Why would I try and prove otherwise, everything you wrote here is true. But so what? What exactly do you think that it implies? We were discussing whether Jew-only roads exist... what about these two facts disproves my argument in any way? I honestly don't see where you are going with this at all.

The roads connect to the settlements, but they also connect to the Arab areas of the WB too. Otherwise what do you think the Palestinians were using them for up until they were barred from using them a few years ago? If the roads in question solely connected Jewish areas to each other then why would anyone care if they were Jew-only anyway?

This is getting crazy. There are legitimate issues to protest regarding these roads. You just aren't seeing them because your understanding of the situation seems to be primarily a mishmash of anti-Israel propaganda and your own incorrect assumptions. When these roads were first built Israel argued that they were constructed primarily for use by the Arab residents of the WB. Sure they went to the settlements and the Israelis used them too, but they were not built solely to connect the settlements to Israel. So if you really want to complain about this issue then complain about how Israel built a road system that was supposedly intended to be primarily used by Palestinians only to confiscate it after construction was finished, leaving the Palestinians stuck with their already existing (and severely substandard) roads. Building these roads caused problems for the farmers and homeowners who lost property that was confiscated for its construction. But since it was done for a cause that would benefit the Palestinian greater good it was tolerated. It's absurd for Israel to now requisition these roads for Israel's use alone after the Palestinians were the ones forced to sacrifice so it could be built.

That said, they still aren't Jew-only roads. Israeli Arabs can and do use them. And Israeli Arabs don't need a permit to live in Jerusalem. By law they are allowed to live wherever they want, be it East Jerusalem, West Jerusalem or wherever. They can leave the country and are not barred from returning.

I am not at all surprised that you hold such radical opinions on the conflict considering your understanding of the situation. If what you thought were actually true then most of us would agree that Israel was a racist, apartheid state. But you really need to get your facts straight before passing judgment on this stuff. It is unfair of you to argue so vehemently against Israel's policies unless you have a decent grasp of the actual facts.

[Shaktimaan]

88. You aren't making much sense here.

There are zero Arab Israeli settlers

This is probably true. But that does not necessarily mean that 100% of Israeli settlers are Jewish either. (Remember, many settlers are Russian immigrants.) How do you suppose non-Jewish settlers travel between Israel and their home if the roads are "Jew-only"? For that matter, how do the Thai construction workers get to the settlements?

the roads are to the settlements

Sure. The roads go to the settlements. They go lots of places... to Israel, to Palestinian cities and towns, etc. It's a highway, it connects many different destinations. So what?

the roads are used by a wide wide margin only by Jewish Israeli's

Wait a minute, I thought that these roads are "Jewish ONLY"? Have you actually finally realized that isn't the case? Hallelujah! So, yeah they're mostly used by Israeli Jews. But that is the case of any Israeli road. After all, 75% of Israel's citizens are Jewish, doesn't it stand to reason that most of the people using the roads would be Jewish? Again, so what?

Palestinians can't use them

Correct. Palestinians use Palestinian-only roads that Israelis are not allowed on.

if Arab Israeli's move along the roads, they are often not allowed back into say Jerusalem once they leave.

Um, WHAT? What does "move along the roads" mean exactly? Do you just mean, "use them"? You think that if Israeli Arabs use the Israeli only roads they are then punished for it by not being allowed back into Israel? (Or just Jerusalem?) This is the weirdest accusation that you've made thus far. It's just as false as the others, just weirder. I seriously hope I'm misunderstanding you.

Look, I'm not sure exactly what you think, but Israelis aren't restricted in where they can travel or live because of their religion or ethnicity. Israeli Arabs can come and go as they please just like Israeli Jews. I am not sure what you've heard but it seems pretty clear that you've either been grossly misinformed or just misunderstood something you read somewhere.

I don't know how to explain this issue any more clearly... there are two sets of roads in the OPT. One for Israelis and one for Palestinians. Palestinians are not allowed to use the Israeli-only roads and Israelis are not allowed to use the Palestinian-only roads. If an Israeli Arab wants to go to a West Bank town to visit his relatives or for a business meeting then he uses the Israeli-only roads. Afterwords he is still allowed back into Israel... Jerusalem, Tel-Aviv, Haifa, wherever he wants to go. No one locks him out of the country because he decided to use the road that he is required by law to use.

[shira]

47. so you have zero evidence of CAMERA propaganda, right?

[Idealism]

64. Just one of the many lies:

"However, it should be noted that in recent days Palestinians have fired at least one mortar with a white-phosphorus warhead into Israel, so if the warehouse was hit by white phosphorous (which starts fires that are difficult to extinguish), it may well have been fired by Hamas. "

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=2&x_article=1599

Great job at factually reporting, CAMERA.

[shira]

70. Haaretz reported this....where's evidence the claim is false?

[Idealism]

71. If you knew how much of a hassle it is to store WP before use

then you would understand how this is a bogus claim, which is why it was not repeated. Ynet posted an article on it, I don't know if Haaretz did, but the next day it was never brought up again because it is impossible that any Palestinian group had white phosphorous and has the facilities and technology needed to store it properly. Once WP is exposed to oxygen, it is worthless to try to store it.

I see no "factual reporting" on getting to the heart of this matter from CAMERA, or else they would know that about WP. What I see is them stating that because there was one unsubstantiated claim of Palestinians firing a WP-filled projectile that means that the burning warehouse could have been set on fire by Hamas or Islamic Jihad, thereby exonerating the IAF for bombing the warehouse.

[shira]

74. so you have no evidence that the claim is false

just your hunch, that's all.

And Haaretz did report it.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1055561.html

It may be a weak claim, but it hasn't been refuted by any reputable source. It's okay if you don't trust CAMERA, although you still haven't come up with reason not to.....my question to you is what's out there that's better and less biased, and which tries to hold media accountable, accurate, and honest in all that's I/P?

[Idealism]

77. Refuted by whom?

There are no "media watchdogs" for Palestinians. There is no one that holds the Israeli media account for their reporting negatively about Palestinians, CAMERA et al only steps in when it feels that Israeli's are being incorrectly portrayed.

There is no one to speak for these people, unfortunately, but the rantings of places filled with emotional irrationality like Electronic Intifada, and those claims are easily dismissed (even though there are some parts of truth to them, they are wrong more often than not).

Can you find me any articles that CAMERA has up that corrects any wrong information being published about Palestinians? That would be a find, indeed...

[shira]

91. so CAMERA is pretty much the only game in town holding media accountable

And you still have no evidence showing CAMERA to be a dubious propaganda source.

[Idealism]

94. I just gave you the WP bogus claim

CAMERA holds only Israeli falsehoods to the fire. They turn a blind eye to every other country in the region, which is odd considering their name mentions the "Middle-East" not just Israel.

Why is it that CAMERA in all their wisdom can't find simple science enough to rebuke the lame attempt to smear Palestinians with using WP against themselves? Anyone with a degree in the subject knows more than they do on this subject it seems.

[shira]

96. prove the WP claim to be bogus

where's your evidence

[Idealism]

100. So you believe the story?

Do you know anything about WP?

[shira]

102. once again, you have nothing credible to bring against CAMERA

no evidence or proof of anything that shows they are not committed to honesty, accuracy, and accountability in the media.

[Idealism]

106. So you don't know anything about WP and just blindly believe CAMERA, got it.

There is something to be said about blind acceptance... it creates dittoheads.

White Phosphorous, once exposed to oxygen, catches fire, making it difficult to properly store. The hotter it is, the harder WP is to remain unexposed. Also, if it gets dampness of any kind while being stored, it is worthless and won't catch fire. How would Hamas get WP? How would they store it? With what laboratories? They do not have the technology, which makes this story false.

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts103.html

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/wp.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorous

Why does CAMERA not fact-check this? Oh thats right, its about Palestinians being smeared and now Israel. Have you found me any articles of CAMERA correcting falsehoods directed at Palestinians? I'll be waiting for a long time I guess.

[Shaktimaan]

114. can you please clarify your argument for me?

If I understand your position correctly, you are saying that the Palestinians could not have possibly used any WP weapons because they lack the technology to construct them, (due primarily to the difficulty of working with WP), correct?

So your logic train is as follows: Palestinians lack the tech to produce WP mortars. Therefore they could not have possibly used any WP mortars as the Jerusalem Post and CAMERA both asserted. Hence, the JP and CAMERA have both reported undeniably false information.

Would you say I summarized your position correctly here, or am I missing/misunderstanding anything? I am not trying to be snide BTW, I just want to be certain that I'm not misinterpreting your argument in any way.

[Idealism]

116. If you read the links I posted

or personally know anything of WP and its uses/issues, you would come to this same conclusion I believe. It is near impossible for the Palestinians to have WP tipped missiles. The reason I posted this is that Shira claims CAMERA isn't pro-Israeli, and that their press releases are beyond reproach. I told her they only correct an article when Israel is the target of some perceived defamation, although some of these corrections is unwarranted. If CAMERA really did care about being factually accurate, they would look into claims instead of reprinting anything that may exonerate the IDF. The thing that most disgusts me is them trying to justify why a UN warehouse was on fire, it went like this:

"However, it should be noted that in recent days Palestinians have fired at least one mortar with a white-phosphorus warhead into Israel, so if the warehouse was hit by white phosphorous (which starts fires that are difficult to extinguish), it may well have been fired by Hamas. "

CAMERA in this article is just an apologist for the IDF setting fire to the UN warehouse, possibly with WP. They use an isolated, unsubstantiated incident that is HIGHLY improbable to even have occurred, then they use this unfounded claim to then shift blame for the UN building being hit by the IDF, to Hamas being the likely perpetrator of this offense. Nevermind the fact that the UN warehouses are full of necessities like food that Hamas members need to survive...

[Shaktimaan]

32. why is that so suspicious?

Do you really think that Sadat cared all that much about the Palestinians? It was a token gesture to try and placate the Arab League to some small extent. All of the important concessions were between Egypt and Israel. Egypt certainly wasn't about to agree to less for themselves in order to secure the Palestinians anything.

And at the end of the day you're talking about a VERBAL AGREEMENT. If this was anything important, meaning anything that the Egyptians truly valued, then why wasn't it included in the written agreement? It isn't as though Carter is exactly trustworthy when it comes to recalling exact facts with any degree of accuracy.

[Idealism]

33. He cared enough to start the Yom Kippur war...

I would say that would put this to rest.

To be honest, I don't trust governments of any type of historical details, as they always portray themselves in a better light...

[Shaktimaan]

38. huh?

You think that Sadat started the Yom Kippur War for the sake of the Palestinians?

really? OK, why?

I would say that would put this to rest.

What would? That you think that Sadat fought the war for the Palestinians? (OK, are you fucking with me?)

Look... if that was really the case, (and I can't believe that actually seems logical to you), then why didn't he bother to advocate for them when the subsequent peace treaty was drawn up (beyond accepting some murky, possibly non-existent, easily deniable verbal commitment?) What do you think? Sadat fought (lost) a war over an issue that wasn't even important enough for him to actually put into writing?

I would say that would put this to rest.

[Shaktimaan]

30. There's a big dif between EI and CAMERA

Tom Friedman himself has praised CAMERA as an accurate source. There are pro-settler media sources that would serve as better counterpoints to EI, whose reporting is often flat-out incorrect.

As for the Hamas stringer statements, I'm pretty sure that the problem with Palestinian journalists operating out of Gaza is not that we do not trust them because of their race, (and frankly, I resent the implication greatly), but rather that reporting negatively on Hamas can prove to be a very dangerous decision. The press in Gaza is not free, Hamas wields great influence over it.

I don't trust "The new light of myanmar" either but it is not because I am racist.

[Idealism]

35. Tom Friedman is a neoliberal shill

and is highly anti-Arabic period. He cheered for the necessity of the Iraq War right up until the majority of Americans changed their minds.

[Shaktimaan]

55. Anti-Arab?

OK, look... Friedman is an award winning NYTimes journalist who focuses almost exclusively on the middle east. He lived in Beirut during the war and Jerusalem during the intifada. He's won three Pulitzers: the first for covering the civil war in Lebanon (focusing on the Sabra and Shatila massacres) and the second one for covering the first intifada. He also met with King Abdullah of saudi arabia to try and convince him to bring a proposal like the Arab League's subsequent one to the table. He's since been a big supporter of that plan.

He is anything but anti-Arab.

I've read several of his books and his one on the ME conflict, "From Beirut to Jerusalem" might be one of the best, most unbiased accounts I've ever read of that period of time, if not of the conflict in general. (And I've read more than a few books on the subject.) Have you ever looked at it? It is a seriously good book, I highly recommend it. It's right up there with Shlomo Ben-Ami's book, "Scars of War, Wounds of Peace." (You don't consider him anti-Arab, do you?)

He's certainly pro-Israel, for whatever its worth. Is that considered anti-Arab nowadays? Does it matter that he's Pro-Palestinian as well? (Can someone be both Pro-Palestinian and anti-Arab?)

But set all that aside for now. Whatever you might think of him doesn't even matter here. The fact remains that he is a very highly respected journalist working for what is probably the most respected newspaper in America. You may disagree with his opinions, but Friedman has credibility. He does not rely on sources that give factually dubious information. (Much less endorse them.) The fact that journalists of his caliber are comfortable using CAMERA as a source speaks volumes as to their credibility. As does the fact that despite there being scores of people who pore over their documents in the hopes of publicizing any error, very very few of them have found much at all.

Compare this with EI. In any given document they post I can pull out factual errors, misleading history, you name it. NO journalists use them as a source for anything. (Unless it is an article on faulty reporting.)

If CAMERA is such an untrustworthy source then just give us some solid examples of them being dishonest or something. Even places like the NYTimes makes mistakes on occasion. (Hey, they hired Jayson Blair, right?) And they are considered to by pretty trustworthy. So if CAMERA is really so bad then it should be super-easy for you to find a mess of mistakes, lies, misrepresentations or whatever from them.

Look, if you want, just go to the CAMERA site and grab a single article from this week. I'll do the same with EI. We can compare the two and see which is being more inaccurate or disingenuous.


One last thing. Friedman may support economic globalization but he's hardly a proponent of Reaganomics. His economic insights focus on how to best protect our interests within the framework of a fast-changing world. I don't know what your problems are with his economic philosophy, but I always found his arguments to be pretty astute.

[iconicgnom]

22. This is sick.

This is "denial" right up there with that of Zundel, but it isn't just denial of recorded fact still being compiled by many many sources, it's also a flatout lie.

I don't see how a lie can get worse than this.

[Jim Sagle]

36. Your comment is much worse. It's The Anti-Truth.

[shira]

51. No, here's what's sick

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=17&x_article=193

And it's strong evidence as to why "Puzzled in Gaza" isn't a lie or an example of denial.

[iconicgnom]

53. Citing a source 100% devoted to Israeli war propaganda is fair enough.

What isn't fair, what isn't healthy (aka "is sick") is the synchronous disregard for Palestinian rights, and lives, exhibited by these sources, and by those who cite these sources.

synchronous, coincidental, ... whatever.

[shira]

59. all ad hominem from you, denial of facts - why should we be surprised?

tell me this, then....is it fair to question your regard for Palestinian lives when they are victimized mainly by their own leadership? I've just shown you strong evidence that the PA has ridiculous influence over the MSM. Who does that propaganda really serve other than Hamas, or years ago, Arafat? Are you proud of that or does it not concern you? It certainly doesn't serve common Palestinians, does it? Do you care about that? Palestinians suffer under Hamas now but the MSM isn't allowed to report on that for fear of ______ (you name it). But that doesn't bother you, does it, so long as the focus stays on Israel?

ok, look - it's obvious you don't want to talk facts, honesty, and accuracy. so if you have specific short-answer questions to ask me WRT my views, to see whether I'm "sick or twisted", care, etc....go right ahead. But will you then debate facts, journalistic integrity, and accuracy of claims? If not, why not?

[iconicgnom]

60. wacko.

[Idealism]

72. Hamas victimizes Palestinians less than Israel does, obviously.

The body count tells you that, shira. Try to stick to less grandiose claims please

[shira]

76. wartime body count is not a fair comparison

From the mouths of Palestinians themselves, WRT the PA victimizing them more than Israelis


=================

"The journalist adds: "There are two options today that could take us out of this situation: Someone strong in the Gaza Strip who does not care about a confrontation with the clans, or an Israeli occupation. Many people in the Strip hope that Israel will reoccupy it because these phenomena were not prevalent during the Israeli occupation."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/853107.html

=================

"The whole world seems to be talking about the future of the Arabs of Jerusalem, but no one has bothered asking us. The international community and the Israeli Left seem to take it for granted that we want to live under Mr. Arafat's control. We don't. Most of us despise Mr. Arafat and the cronies around him, and we want to stay in Israel. At least here I can speak my mind freely without being dumped in prison, as well as having a chance to earn an honest day's wage."

The Daily Telegraph (London), Jan. 28, 2001.

=================

"The hell of Israel is better than the paradise of Arafat. We know Israeli rule stinks, but sometimes we feel like Palestinian rule would be worse."

‘Abd as-Samiya Abu Subayh, quoted in The Washington Post, July 25, 2000

=================

Bassem Al-Nabris
Palestinian poet from Khan Younis, Gaza Strip

"If a there was a referendum in the Gaza Strip 'would you like the Israeli occupation to return?' half the population would vote 'yes'... But in practice, I believe that the number of those in favor is at least 70%, if not more - much higher than is assumed by the political analysts and those who follow . For the million and a half people living in this small region, things have gone too far - in practice, not just as a metaphor. with the internal conflicts, but even earlier, in the days of the previous Palestinian administration, which was corrupt and did not give the people even the tiniest hope. The fundamentalist forces which came into power also promised change and reform, but got a siege, with no security and no making a living... If the occupation returns, at least there will be no civil war, and the occupier will have a moral and legal obligation to provide the occupied people with employment and food, which they now lack."
http://www.elaph.com/elaphweb/elaphwriter/2007/5/236709.htm

===================

"People in Gaza are hoping that Israel will reenter the Gaza Strip, wipe out both Hamas and Fatah, and then withdraw again... They also say that, since the massacres, they miss the Israelis, since Israel is more merciful than who do not even know why they are fighting and killing one another. It's like organized crime, . Once, we resisted Israel together, but now we call for the return of the Israeli army to Gaza."

Faiz Abbas and Muhammad Awwad:
Al-Sinara (Nazareth), May 18, 2007

====================

[Idealism]

78. Why is a body count not a "fair comparison?"

There are many more dead than you will find who write about violence at the hands of either the PA or Hamas

[shira]

90. what do you think about those reports by Palestinians

who believe most Arabs in the territories would vote and prefer to have Israeli occupation rather than Hamas or Fatah?

[Idealism]

95. Not sure what report you are referring to

Back to the subject: just by sheer numbers, Israel has terrorized the Palestinians more than Hamas or Fatah combined. That is indisputable.

[shira]

97. see post #76

it is believed by Palestinians that most Palestinians prefer Israeli occupation over Hamas and Fatah. What do you think about that?

[Idealism]

99. I have never heard of such a thing

It is possible of course, but I doubt that referendum would pass in Gaza today. Perhaps in the West Bank, where Fatah is seen as ineffective AND collaborators it might, but Gaza I think is firmly Hamas territory after their lame showing of resistance.

Not sure if that matters though, look at the US under Bush. He had what, 26% approval rating through the last year of his term? Didn't change much. Democracy is a slow process

[shira]

103. of course you haven't

and what those Palestinian writers claimed was that due to Hamas' vicious rule, most Gazans would rather have the IDF back, as bad as that was - but still better than Hamas. Read the REASONS why in post #76, in those quotes.

[iconicgnom]

112. I wouldn't expect "bodycount" to matter much to you. n/t

[Shaktimaan]

61. 2 questions...

How do you know that it's a lie?

What exactly about it makes it the WORST lie ever?

[iconicgnom]

113. That's something I couldn't possibly explain to you, "Shaktimaan"

From reading your messages I detect that to you it's all about words to be played with. That you already have your cause, so to you words are only tools to win it, not to actually *communicate* with. Inevitably, ridiculous games with semantics result, simply because these games are ends in themselves. Bullshit to pass the time, to fill a DU forum with, while settlements are built and Zion is fully established.

[azurnoir]

41. What is "amazing" to me is that so many "Democrats"

here cling to the word of a virtually hitherto unknown British women who's only claim to fame seems to be writing this piece on Gaza, Google Yvonne Green, over that of a Democratic Senator and former Presidential candidate and two Democratic congressmen, not to mention a number of relief organizations.
However whatever gives comfort.

[shira]

50. read this article

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=17&x_article=193

and then you'll find out why "Puzzled in Gaza" makes a helluva lot of sense.

[azurnoir]

66. Ah yeah

So you are saying that Ms Green was oh so brave and that our politicians are lying I mean the PLO or the PA or someone might kill them if they did not say as they were told right?
from the camera article

October 19, 2000 by Alex Safian, PhD

In the Palestinians’ Pocket: Journalists Doing PR For the PA

In a revealing episode, Italy’s state television network RAI has had to recall its correspondent from Jerusalem after he sent a letter to the Palestinian Authority stressing his support for the Palestinian cause. The journalist, Riccardo Cristiano, explained that, contrary to rumors, his station was not responsible for video of the brutal October 12th murder of two Israeli men by a Palestinian lynch mob at the Ramallah police station. The letter, apparently intended to be confidential, was published Monday in the official PA newspaper Al-Hayat Al-Jadida. (AP, October 18, 2000)

Another journalist, Nasser Atta, a Palestinian producer for ABC, was filming the carnage when “youths came to us and they stopped us with some knives, with some beating.” Interestingly, Atta did not tell his story on the main ABC newscast – Peter Jennings, well known for his hardline anti-Israel bias, never mentioned what happened to the ABC producer, or to the other journalists, on his World News Tonight telecast. Of course, had Israelis assaulted a cameraman, there is little doubt it would have led Jennings’ broadcast. Atta instead told his story on Nightline. While Ted Koppel too is often biased against

Ms Green is indeed brave she could be targeted I mean the UK is quite dangerous for Jews these days, at least according to some here or she could be a mediocre writer looking to make a name for herself

[shira]

89. Did you read the 2nd link from the OP

It was just an eyewitness account of what she saw, both good and bad. The JPost article is different and has opinions in it. Maybe that's why you don't like it. Read the original account.

If she were with a newspaper or big media outlet, this article would never have been published for fear that the media outlet would either never be allowed to report again from Gaza, or that its correspondents might face harrassment or worse.

[azurnoir]

108. The Globe article was the one I read

to be honest I did not bother with the JPost account, I read the Globe prior to your posting the rest pf the JPost article.

[grassfed]

45. Name cards on empty desks serve as reminder of friends killed during Gaza airstrikes

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28830112/