PDA

View Full Version : Israeli Media Coverage



richardberman
06-21-2002, 07:55 AM
We are all liberals, in the very best meaning of that word. We are quick to anger when we think the strong
bully the weak. The sight of heavy tanks moving against what appear to be civilian populations disgusts us.
Our deepest instincts lead us all to side with the oppressed against the oppressor. What has been happening in the Middle East in recent days has done terrible damage to the image and reputation of Israel. I fear there will be worse to come.

But that's one of the problems of news as transmitted by TV We see the images - grim and stark - but are given no context with which to explain them. We side with the man in the street against the men in the tank without anyone reminding us why he's there or what his purpose might be.

Let me tell you a little story which might help you understand why, to use the leader writers' favourite word these days, Israel is being so 'intransigent' - refusing to jump to attention and obey when the world, sickened by the violence it sees on its TV screens, cries’ Halt!'

In May 2000, after considerable international pressure, Israel withdrew from northern Lebanon. It had gone there in the first place to protect its borders against Palestinian guerrilla organisations winch had previously occupied the frontier zones and almost daily attacked Israeli communities in range of their big guns and mortars.

Before leaving, Israel asked the United Nations to define the exact border between Lebanon and Israel - now called the Blue Line - so there could be no future misunderstanding. It sought and received assurances that it would not be attacked.

Some hope. Though repeatedly told that all the Lebanese Shiite Party of God (Hezbollah) wanted was to regain Lebanese territory, on the day (not the following day or the following week) that the Israelis moved out Hezbollah fighters moved in. Immediately, with arms imported from Iran, they once again launched attacks on Israel, killing residents and kidnapping Israeli soldiers. They have placed 8,000 Katyusha rockets on the border. Last week alone they launched 400 mortar bombs on Israeli targets. And the Blue Line? The much-vaunted Saudi Arabian peace initiative demands, among other things, that Israel leaves 'remaining occupied Lebanese territory'.

If one accepts the internationally agreed ,UN-sponsored Blue Line, there is no 'remaining occupied Lebanese territory'. If one doesn’t, what should Israel negotiate make of those international agreements they are constantly being urged to sign up for?

This is not a small point. it goes to the very core of this terrible and bitter dispute. Israel wants peace - needs peace. As every Israeli knows to the core of their being, the Arabs can lose war after war after war and live to fight another day. By contrast, the first war Israel loses will be the last it will fight because Israel, the world's first Jewish state for 2,000 years, will simply cease to exist.

It cannot, therefore, afford to do what the world urges it to do - sign up for peace, accept Arab good faith and hope that all will work out in the end.

True, a lot of combat-weary Israelis would like that to happen. A lot of Jews in this country agree. It is hard to go on fighting. It is easier to follow the line of least resistance and pray that somehow things will be all right in the end. But governments can't operate on a wing and a prayer.

One does not need to love Ariel Sharon, and I most certainly do not, to understand what Israel is doing.

Look at the 'Declarations of Principle' which Yasser Arafat and the assassinated Israeli leader Yitzhak Rabin agreed in Oslo and shook hands over on the White House lawn on September 13, 1993.

Central to that agreement was that Arafat's Palestinian Authority would confiscate unauthorised weapons and outlaw terrorist organisations. It would cease incitement against Israel in the Palestinian media and at public meetings. There was nothing very novel in that. The British Government insisted absolutely that before any talks could start with the IRA there had to be a sustained ceasefire. It may be unfashionable to say so but democratic governments cannot negotiate at the point of a gun.

Arafat hardly tried. His bad faith was evident from the start.

Occasionally, under pressure, he has denounced the obscenity of the suicide bombing campaign but never in terms which even begin to do justice to the abhorrence which all decent people must surely feel for a campaign specifically designed to kill ordinary people - women, children, anyone in range. There is evidence that some of the bombers have been supported by his organisation. I had planned to list those suicide attacks in this letter. I don't know how many you remember, but I take a close interest in the subject and I thought there may have been about 20 at the outside.

The actual number is 67, of which no fewer than 29 have taken place since that most terrible of suicide missions, September 11, 2001. I'd need about three pages to list them all.

No wonder Israeli public opinion accuses the world of double standards. The difference between flying an aeroplane into a New York skyscraper and getting on a crowded bus in Tel Aviv with a bomb strapped to one's body is only one of degree. The carnage has been truly awful. Since September 2000, 470 Israelis have been killed in terrorist outrages. That would be the equivalent here of more than 4,000 people.

Hardly any Israeli families are not directly affected.

Unable any more to rely on Arafat, who they believe is actually actively encouraging terrorism, the Israelis have moved into the West Bank to sort things out for themselves, root out the terrorists, destroy their infrastructure, take their weapons and either capture or kill their leaders. It's not pretty Our soft old world recoils from such a show of military power but the Israelis think there is no alternative.

The Palestinians are adept at manipulating Western journalists who eagerly swallow their stories of massacres by Israeli soldiers, of ordinary civilians murdered by brutal invaders. All I ask you to do is suspend judgment consider who the real killers are likely to be. Would these be soldiers from a democratic country whose standards of discipline though of course not perfect stand comparison with the very best of what we'd expect from our military or would they be people who have a record of total disregard for the values which we hold dear?

Western journalists have not been allowed to go into places like Jenin with the Israeli Army and are outraged claiming that this evidence means it has something to hide. Can anyone point to me a single instance in the past 30 years of an Army patrol going out in northern Ireland accompanied by newspapermen or the TV cameras? Are the Press with the Royal Marines in the mountains of Afghanistan?

There was no massacre. Artillery and aircraft were deliberately not used even though this put Israeli lives at risk. A huge number of stories which have appeared in Western newspapers picked up from Palestinian ones are demonstrably false.

The truth is that building after building in Jenin were booby trapped, sometimes with people inside. Some local Palestinians, were used by their own side as hostages held in these places. Even though old people and-- children were being used as human shields, the Israeli troops took the greatest care not to harm non-combatants. Incidentally once areas were declared safe from booby traps ambulances were allowed through.

NewsGuy
06-21-2002, 08:40 AM
richardberman,

Very well said.

Is this your original writing?

peacelover
06-21-2002, 11:55 AM
Richard

I haven't got time to reply in depth now, but...

"Some local Palestinians, were used by their own side as hostages held in these places. Even though old people and-- children were being used as human shields, the Israeli troops took the greatest care not to harm non-combatants. Incidentally once areas were declared safe from booby traps ambulances were allowed through."

I don't know your source of information for this. I know it is Israel's side of the story, although quite why they should be automatically believed is beyond me. If you have an objective source for it, then fair enough.

I know you won't accept thousands upon thousands of Palestinian testimonies as evidence, but on the view that Israeli actions in the West Bank were not acceptable is the UN, most of Europe, and most importantly, the independent human rights orgs that have reported on the incident.

Your defence of Israel on this occasion is one perspective, but it certainly cannot be considered fact.

"But that's one of the problems of news as transmitted by TV We see the images - grim and stark - but are given no context with which to explain them. We side with the man in the street against the men in the tank without anyone reminding us why he's there or what his purpose might be."

I don't know where you live, but in Britain, I have rarely seen a report whereby the fact that Israel is either 'rooting out terrorism' or 'acting in self-defence' (neither of which fool the world who can see that it is doing neither).

By contrast, a media poll showed that only around 10% of the population knows that Israel occupies Palestinian territories, or knows anything about te complaints of the Palestinian people. So basically, they imply that Palestinians are blowing up people just for sake of havng a country, but mentions nothing of the way Palestinians are treated daily by Israel, of the oppression and humiliation.

Whilst you might deny that either of these things happen, an impartial view must acknowledge that all the independent associuations I can think of have criticised Israel's treatment of pals, and the news ought to at least acknowledge this, and make the public aware of these complaints.

"One does not need to love Ariel Sharon, and I most certainly do not, to understand what Israel is doing."

One only has to have a human heart to sympathise with the victims of Sharon. Yes, the suicide bombings are awful, but does this mean you cannot sympathise with Palestinians as well? Can we not choose to sympathise with PEOPLE rather than Israeli or Palestinian?

Sharon is on record with his statements of how he wants a greater Israel. He wants these military policies, make no mistake about it. He allows - advocates even - expansion of settlements, and yet we are expected to swallow that Israeli incursions into the territories are exactly what he says they are. Hmm.

In any case, the military policy you seem so keen on does not work, it simply DOES NOT WORK

This has been proven time and time again.

In any case, I, along with the majority of the world's population, did object to Israel placing an entire population under curfew, raiding every single house, arresting ten times as many men than were on the wanted list and taking them away while their families wondered where they were and if they were coming back. And that's if we accept Israel's version of events!!

It's all very easy to say you're 'stopping terror' (or kidding yourselves that it will work), but that's easy for you to do because it's not Israelis who are being screwed around and terrorised in this attempt. Israel does not have the right to completely abandon the human rights of the majority of the Palestinian population in order to make an attempt to POSSIBLY stop suicide attacks against ISRAELIS. Call me old-fashioned, but the Palestinians need every bit as much consideration as the Israelis, and whilst I want suicid ebombs to stop, I know, and always did as did so many others, that those incursions were never going to manage it, and there was an awful lot of Palestinian suffering for something which was going to fail.

"The British Government insisted absolutely that before any talks could start with the IRA there had to be a sustained ceasefire. It may be unfashionable to say so but democratic governments cannot negotiate at the point of a gun."

Seeing as you brought Britain up as an example, they never ever reacted by punishing the Irish population for the actions of the terrorists.

So you want a ceasefire to negotiate. Well it won't happen. Yes nthat's wrong and it's frustrating, but that's terrorism for you.

Because if you refuse to negotiate while attacks persist, the attacks will continue.

So unless the moral highground of knowing you won't negotiate unless they stop is a valid enough reason to stand by and let suicide bombs happen (while at the same time increasing oppression of a population and encouraging more), then I think we need to sod the 'no bombs' clause, and see about stopping them, rather than just condemning them.

You criticise Arafat, if you don't know about all the things Sharon has said and done, before and during his role as PM of Israel, I will happily list them for you.

But like I say, I don't know where your authorative source on Jenin comes from, but your rose-tinted view of Israeli actions certainly hasn't convinced me, or indeed too many other people.

Iori Yagami
06-21-2002, 12:02 PM
Originally posted by peacelover
Richard


I don't know where you live, but in Britain, I have rarely seen a report whereby the fact that Israel is either 'rooting out terrorism' or 'acting in self-defence' (neither of which fool the world who can see that it is doing neither).


Why of course not, the IDF soldiers are being the good nazis they are suppose to be, and they do it just for fun. Wait, can`t type any more, must give my hitler poster a good night kiss, and shoot some arabs.

Mediocrates
06-21-2002, 12:16 PM
Yes, the suicide bombings are awful, but


We need to carve those words in letters 50 miles long so they can viewed from space because they will be the last testament of earth.

peacelover
06-21-2002, 01:48 PM
Iori Yagami:

Do you want to try to discuss intelligently, or do you just want to hysterically overreact to everything I say, and make assumptions that require unfathomable leaps of logic?

I say that I don't agree with Israel's reasoning behind the military incursion, you repsond saying that that must therefore mean I think they are all 'Nazis' and kiss pictures of Hitler before they go to bed at night.

You might not agree with what I'm saying, and that is your right, but please use the more conventional method of challenging my points with your own, rather than just being deliberately ridiculous, otherwise we won't get anywhere.


Medicorates, will this do:

SUICIDE BOMBINGS ARE TERRIBLE ACTS OF TERRORISM WHICH CANNOT BE CONDONED

I find it amusing how people think a person who sympathises with the suffering of the Palestinians, rather than denying it, must therefore not care about suicide bombings

elke
06-21-2002, 09:11 PM
I don't know your source of information for this. I know it is Israel's side of the story, although quite why they should be automatically believed is beyond me. If you have an objective source for it, then fair enough.

Human Rights Watch has declared the following:
"The presence of armed Palestinian militants inside Jenin refugee camp, and the preparations made by those armed Palestinian militants in anticipation of the IDF incursion, does not detract from the IDF's obligation under international humanitarian law to take all feasible precautions to avoid harm to civilians.... Although warnings were issued on multiple occasions by the IDF, many civilians only learned of the risk as bulldozers began to crush their houses...At least twenty-seven of those confirmed dead were suspected to have been armed Palestinians belonging to movements such as Islamic Jihad, Hamas, and the al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigades. Some were members of the Palestinian Authority's (PA) National Security Forces or other branches of the PA police and security forces."

Here is the link:
http://hrw.org/reports/2002/israel3/israel0502-01.htm#P49_1774

One has to wonder about why they would only set up a report based only on the Israeli actions: after all, what would be a more serious violation: an intentional setup of boobytraps and materiel in a civilian residential center, or "inadequate precautions to prevent civilian casualties"? Think about it: who had the choice here - the terrorists or the IDF - where this battle would take place? But even so, this should give you the answer as to "why Israelis should be believed". That's because they are not habitual liars, like the Palestinian leadership.

Sharon is on record with his statements of how he wants a greater Israel. He wants these military policies, make no mistake about it.

He is also on record as the one who dismantled the Sinai settlements, the one who jumped in to save the 1994 Israel-Jordan peace treaty, and the one who went against his "party line" as a proponent of the 2-state solution.

all the independent associuations I can think of have criticised Israel's treatment of pals,

The independent associations also criticize Spain and other European and third-world nations, not to mention US. Yet no one else is demonized to the same extent as Israel.

Iori Yagami
06-22-2002, 05:03 AM
Originally posted by peacelover
Iori Yagami:

Do you want to try to discuss intelligently, or do you just want to hysterically overreact to everything I say, and make assumptions that require unfathomable leaps of logic?

I say that I don't agree with Israel's reasoning behind the military incursion, you repsond saying that that must therefore mean I think they are all 'Nazis' and kiss pictures of Hitler before they go to bed at night.

You might not agree with what I'm saying, and that is your right, but please use the more conventional method of challenging my points with your own, rather than just being deliberately ridiculous, otherwise we won't get anywhere.




I`m not overreacting at all. You wrote that Israel doesn`t fool anyone with those incurrsions. The logical assumption would be, that you meant that they are done just in order to harm civilians. Intentionally harming civilians is a nazi thing to do. Well, for the sake of the discussion, lets say it`s an immoral thing to do. You blamed Israel, and said that it uses immoral actions against civilians, without posting any proofs that back your statement. Am I supposed to agree to your statements, just because you present yourself as a so called "pacifist", a peace lover? I`m beyond that.
You reap what you sow. Unless you gonna make sense, you ain`t gonna get any normal replies for me.

ibrodsky
06-22-2002, 05:27 AM
I find it amusing how people think a person who sympathises with the suffering of the Palestinians, rather than denying it, must therefore not care about suicide bombings

I find it more than amusing when someone comes along and says that they are against terrorist attacks but they are also against Israel's alleged mistreatment of Palestinians.

The fact you ignore is that Israel has been trying to make peace with the entire Arab world since 1948. Israelis have dreamt for decades of the day when Jews and Arabs will not only live side-by-side in peace, but will cooperate to build a better life for both peoples.

In contrast, Israel's Arab enemies sit around plotting the destruction of Israel (and some even dream of destroying the West). Just a few days ago there was a conference in Egypt on the peace-loving topic "After the Demise of Israel."

During the Oslo "Peace Process" Israel let the Father of Modern Terrorism back into the territories. Israel withdrew from Palestinian cities. Israel agreed to the creation of an armed Palestinian force to keep law and order and fight terrorism. Israel offered the PA 97% of the WB plus part of Israel to compensate for the lost 3%. They offered to share Jerusalem. And most important, Israel prepared its own people for peace.

What did the poor, oppressed Palestinian people do? They created an entire culture around terrorism. They taught their children that the most noble thing you can do is grow up to blow yourself up amongst a crowd of Jews. They created an armed force not to fight terrorists, but to fight Israeli moms and kids at pizza parlours, elderly Jews at a Passover Seder, and people commuting to work on buses. (They claim Israel prevents them from fighting terrorists, but they have no trouble gunning down suspected "collaborators.") The Palestinians demanded the right to implant another million Arabs in Israel. They formed alliances with Iran and Iraq. They spontaneously celebrated the attacks of 9/11 as well as numerous massacres of Israelis.

To put it in a nutshell, while Israel prepared its people for peace, the Palestinians' leaders prepared its people for Jihad.

You may feel sorry for the Palestinians. But polls consistently show that a majority of the Palestinian people are immoral: they support mass murder attacks against Jews for the crime of being Jewish.