Fairfax Publications Bias

[Reffo]

One has to wonder what the agenda of the Fairfax Publication is, when it comes to Israel. Here is their latest article in the Herald ...

Palestinian peace brokers caved in to Israeli pressure

PALESTINIAN negotiators privately agreed that only 10,000 refugees and their families - out of a total refugee population exceeding 5 million - could return to Israel as part of a peace settlement, leaked confidential documents reveal.

Contrast that to the report by Haaretz ...

Abbas deemed it 'illogical' for Israel to absorb 5 million refugees, Palestine papers show

The second round of disclosures on Monday shed more light on the Palestinian negotiators' willingness to settle on a right of return for a total of only 100,000 out of some 5,000,000 refugees and their families.

Sources close to the negotiations said that the Palestinians had in turn requested that 10,000 refugees be allowed to return every year over the course of ten years – bringing the total to 100,000.

So the Herald talks about the return of 10,000 refugees but even the Haaretz which never shrinks from criticising Israel, talks about a demand for the return of 10,000 refugees, every year, over a 10 year period which amounts to 100,000 by anybody's count ...

So what is with the Herald? Ignorance? Shoddy reporting? Inability to do the maths? Inability to check out the facts? One thing is for sure, whether by mistake or by intent, they always seem to err so as to make Israel look least reasonable ...

And one more thing: Nowhere in their article does the Herald point out that the PA, Abbas and Erekat are in denial. They deny the truth of the allegations leaked by the Al Jazeera documents.

Why does the Herald omit to report on that? Don't they consider that denial to be significant? Even if the PA, Abbas and Erekat are lying, their denial has significance. It means that either they did not mean what they allegedly offered or that they know full well that they had no mandate to offer it. Either way, the offers were meaningless and at best they show that we always knew. The Arab leaders are not serious. They say differernt things to different audiences. It confirms that Israel has no real partners for peace amongst the Palestinian Arabs.

Contrast the Palestinian Arab double talk to the far reaching peace offers made by two of Israel's past prime ministers. Both Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert stand by their offers and they don't deny making all the far reaching concessions because they know full well that the Israeli people are ready and willing to make sacrifices for peace. But not without seeing concessions from the Palestinian Arabs too. Yet it seems that every time there is even a hint of such concessions, the Palestinian Arabs can't run fast enough from them and deny any hint of concessions, even when the concessions don't go far enough. That is why there isn't peace in the Middle East yet ...

Now back to the Herald and other Fairfax Publications. Someone should tell them that omitting pertinent facts and telling only half truths is tantamount to lying ...

[Reffo]

Who are they trying to kid? Der Sturmer and Pravda would be proud of the shoddy standards set by the Fairfax Publications ...

Yet these are their claims ...

The Sydney Morning Herald code of ethics

Our editorial management shall be conducted upon principles of candour, honesty and honour. We have no wish to mislead; no interest to gratify by unsparing abuse � or indiscriminate approbation. The Sydney Morning Herald, April 18, 1831, April 18, 1831

Read on, their disconnect from reality just gets worse ...

[Reffo]

The Herald is at it again ...

http://www.smh.com.au/world/debate-d...skin=text-only

They selectively quote from the Washingtont Post in the above article. What do you think they edited out? They forgot to mention that both of the so called moderate presidential candidates in Egypt indicated that they consider Israel the enemy/adversary and that they consider the Camp David peace deal null and void. The Herald seems to be extremely reluctant to present things as the actually ARE when it comes to the Arab Israeli conflict. At least when it comes to presenting the Arabs as war mongers. Contrast that to the Herald's willingness to present Israel as the villain at every opportunity. For example, I have read several articles in the Herald in the last few days lamenting the hunger strike of Palestinian prisoners who are under administrative detention in Israel ...

Here is the original Washingtom Post article ...

http://mobile.washingtonpost.com/rss...iGU_story.html

i would like to know why the Herald decided to cut this bit out from the Washington Post Article ...?

In a dramatic move, Aboul Fotouh called Israel an “enemy” of Egypt and promised to revise the peace treaty with the neighboring state, which has been a linchpin of Middle East peace. The words will probably resonate with many Egyptians angry at Israeli policies towards Palestinians but are sure to worry U.S. officials.

“Israel is an enemy, built on occupation. It owns 200 nuclear warheads and doesn’t respect international decisions,” Aboul Fotouh said. “The agreement with Israel should be revised, and that which is against Egypt’s interests should be removed immediately and what is in our interest should stay.”

Moussa said the treaty should be slightly revised but stopped short of calling Israel an enemy

Obviously the Herald does not want Australian readers to know what is on the mind of Egypt's potential future leaders when it comes to Israel. That way, it will be easier for the Herald to reflexively blame Israel once again when Egypt undoubtedly would end up triggering another war with Israel. Isn't that what the Herald always does? It always blames Israel for everything that goes wrong in the Middle East.