Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Article on war in lebanon from a perspective other than foxnews

  1. #1
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    156

    Article on war in lebanon from a perspective other than foxnews

    http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...cle1219241.ece

    jets moses will undoubtedly dismiss this as anti semitic not realizing that arabs themselves are semites. Well i guess calling me anti-semitic makes me a selfhating arab? not likely.

  2. #2
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,400
    There are two sides to every conflict - unless you rely on the US media for information about the battle in Lebanon. Viewers have been fed a diet of partisan coverage which treats Israel as the good guys and their Hizbollah enemy as the incarnation of evil. Andrew Gumbel reports from Los Angeles
    I guess these guys haven't flipped the station to CNN the past three weeks who've been burning the midnight oil for the hizz...


    If these were normal times, the American view of the conflict in Lebanon might look something like the street scenes that have electrified the suburbs of Detroit for the past four weeks.

    In Dearborn, home to the Ford Motor Company and also the highest concentration of Arab Americans in the country, up to 1000 people have turned out day after day to express their outrage at the Israeli military campaign and mourn the loss of civilian life in Lebanon. At one protest in late July, 15,000 people - almost half of the local Arab American population - showed up in a sea of Lebanese flags, along with anti-Israeli and anti-Bush slogans.

    A few miles to the north, in the heavily Jewish suburb of Southfield, meanwhile, the Congregation Shaarey Zedek synagogue has played host to passionate counter-protests in which the US and Israeli national anthems are played back to back and demonstrators have asserted that it is Israel's survival, not Lebanon's, that is at stake here
    good comparison removing the bombs, rockets, artillary rounds, etc...

    Such is the normal exercise of free speech in an open society, one might think. But these are not normal times. The Detroit protests have been tinged with paranoia and justifiable fear on both sides. Several Jewish institutions in the area, including two community centres and several synagogues, have hired private security guards in response to an incident in Seattle at the end of July, in which a mentally unstable 30-year-old Muslim walked into a Jewish Federation building and opened fire, killing one person and injuring five others.
    which got about 30-seconds of play by the liberal media in this country...

    On the Arab American side, many have expressed reluctance to stand up and be counted among the protesters for fear of being tinged by association with Hizbollah, which is on the United States' list of terrorist organisations. (As a result, the voices heard during the protests tend to be the more extreme ones.) They don't like to discuss their political views in any public forum, following the revelation a few months ago that the National Security Agency was wiretapping phone calls and e-mail exchanges as part of the Bush administration's war on terror.

    could it just be they see the hizz for nothing more then what they are?? a bunch of scuzlim terrorists??

    Speaking for an entire group and giving the incinuation that they don't want to share their views for fear of being eavesdropped on lends a lot of credibility to this story.....

    They are even afraid to donate money to help the civilian victims of the war in Lebanon because of the intense scrutiny Islamic and Arab charities have been subjected to since the 9/11 attacks. The Bush administration has denounced 40 charities worldwide as financiers of terrorism, and arrested and deported dozens of people associated with them. Consequently, while Jewish charities such as the United Jewish Communities are busy raising $300m to help families affected by the Katyusha rockets raining down on northern Israel, donations to the Lebanese victims have come in at no more than a trickle.
    Funny- I don't see the author's name anywhere or I'd search to get his views on the terrorist plot which was revealed last week....

    The point is not that this viewpoint is necessarily wrong. The point - and this is what distinguishes the US from every other Western country in its attitude to the conflict - is that it is presented as a foregone conclusion. Not only is there next to no debate, but debate itself is considered unnecessary and suspect.
    So let's see...to this point the article has done nothing but bash Israel, Fox News and decried a lack of free speech for muslims living in Dearborn, Michigan and the author wants to b!tch about "forgone conclussions" and "no debate"?????

    Often, the coverage has been hysterical and distasteful. In the days following the Israeli bombing of Qana, several pro-Israeli bloggers started spreading a hoax story that Hizbollah had engineered the event, or stage-managed it by placing dead babies in the rubble for the purpose of misleading reporters. Oliver North, the Reagan-era orchestrator of the Iran-Contra affair who is now a right-wing television and radio host, and Michelle Malkin, a sharp-tongued Bush administration cheerleader who runs her own weblog, appeared on Fox News to give credence to the hoax - before the Israeli army came forward to take responsibility and brought the matter to at least a partial close.
    okay- but let's not be an honest journalist and mention the obvious descrepencies/deceptions in the Q'ana story....

    As the conflict has gone on, the media interpretation of it has only hardened. Essentially, the line touted by cable news hosts and their correspondents - closely adhering to the line adopted by the Bush administration and its neoconservative supporters - is that Hizbollah is part of a giant anti-Israeli and anti-American terror network that also includes Hamas, al-Qa'ida, the governments of Syria and Iran, and the insurgents in Iraq. Little effort is made to distinguish between these groups, or explain what their goals might be. The conflict is presented as a straight fight between good and evil, in which US interests and Israeli interests intersect almost completely. Anyone who suggests otherwise is likely to be pounced on and ripped to shreds.
    We've experienced the "goals" of these groups first-hand; kill Americans and Jews...

    Part of the Republican strategy this year is to attack any media that either attacks them or has the temerity to report facts that contradict the official party line. Thus, when Reuters was forced to withdraw a photograph of Beirut under bombardment because one of its stringers had doctored the image to increase the black smoke, it was a chance to rip into the news agency over its efforts to be even-handed. In a typical riposte, Michelle Malkin denounced Reuters as "a news service that seems to have made its mark rubber-stamping pro-Hizbollah propaganda".
    Facts that contradict the party line?? No- more like making sh!t up and trying to pawn it off as facts or making it seem like something other than what it is...(see the new media bias thread started this evening)...

    funny- this clown is more incensed about the people complaining about the fake photograph rather then the fake photo itself...

    It is not just the US media which tilts in a pro-Israeli direction. Congress, too, is remarkably unified in its support for the Israeli government, and politicians more generally understand that to criticise Israel is to risk jeopardising their future careers. When Antonio Villaraigosa, the up-and-coming Democratic Mayor of Los Angeles, was first invited to comment on the Middle East crisis, he sounded a note so pro-Israeli that he was forced to apologise to local Muslim and Arab community leaders. There is far less public debate of Israeli policy in the US, in fact, than there is in Israel itself.
    Imagine that...representative of government speaking on behalf of the majority whom they represent...so let's get this correct...the congressmen from Dearborn can speak on behalf of his constituents but not the mayor of LA...got it...
    Last edited by Come Back to NY; 08-14-2006 at 11:29 PM.

  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Jets Till Death
    That article was just pathetic JTD. This idea that the entire American publics point of view should be nullified because of Fox News or President Bush is among the most pathetic arguments I have ever herd. It is not only untrue it is essential saying the writer is smarter than everyone else.

    I get my news from PBS, CNN, The BBC, The NYT, Washington Post, and the Internet, I even look in on Fox News once in a blue moon. I also look in on Al Jezeera occasionally and I look at both the right and left wing articles that often appear on this board. My guess is most people have their favorite sources but are exposed to both left and right wing ideas in the News on a daily basis whether they want to be or not.

    What you seem to be implying is that Americans who have the most choices in News of any people on earth are incapable of thinking for themselves. Many Americans and American Jews support Palestinian rights as do many Israeli Jews. They have been active in support both monetarily and by making their voices herd.

    Hezbollah has murdered Americans, hijacked American planes and the last I looked are not living under Israeli oppression on the West Bank or Gaza. What it really seems like to me is the Arab community in the US is far more monolithic in their support of any Arab group that kills Israelis than either the general population of the US or the US population of Jews or even the Israeli population of Jews. The idea that we are being brainwashed by Fox News is a joke. Dick Cheney screaming about Ned Lamont only proves the fact that Ned Lamont is a threat to his power. The fact is that threat disproves the entire point in that article which by the way was really pathetic. What it really appears like to me is the rhetoric of killing Jews and wiping out Israel is a universally accepted idea in Arab communities around the world?

    As far as charitable giving to Lebanon. It turns out in England that some of the recruits to the terrorist attacks that were just thwarted may have been turned on a charitable mission to Pakistan after the earthquake. There is little doubt that terrorist funding was funneled from earth quake relief to terrorist organizations. While it's a shame that people feel intimidated giving money to charities that go to help refugees in distress, it's also a shame that charitable giving is being laundered into weapons and training facilities to people who want to kill Americans? Maybe many Arab Americans have decided not to give to these charities because they know this and have a handy excuse? Maybe they are intimidated by surveillance? Maybe they have something to hide and don't want to draw attention to themselves? Maybe all 3 are in play?

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,534
    Quote Originally Posted by Jets Till Death
    http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...cle1219241.ece

    jets moses will undoubtedly dismiss this as anti semitic not realizing that arabs themselves are semites. Well i guess calling me anti-semitic makes me a selfhating arab? not likely.
    JTD, semantic arguments about arabs being semites are - bluntly - idiotic.

    The term "anti-semitism" doesn't mean "hatred of semitic people" it means "jew hatred."

    Does that make literal sense, considering that jews are not the only semites, that arabs are semites, and that arabs who hate jews are called "anti-semites" even if they only hate some semites (jews) and love others (arabs)? No, it doesn't make literal sense.

    But it does make perfect sense anyway, since the term was coined when the only semites europeans were in contact with on a daily basis were jews.

    The "I can't be anti-semitic because arabs are semites and I love arabs" argument makes about as much sense as saying "I'm not against blacks, because their skin color is really more brownish, generally, or maybe even ochre"

    It's the height of form-over-substance, I-have-no-response-so-I'll-play-word-games, solipsistic sophistry. And it should be beneath anyone who makes any claim to being a rational interlocutor.

    In other words, stop with that BS, ok?

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,534
    In Dearborn, home to the Ford Motor Company and also the highest concentration of Arab Americans in the country, up to 1000 people have turned out day after day to express their outrage at the Israeli military campaign and mourn the loss of civilian life in Lebanon. At one protest in late July, 15,000 people - almost half of the local Arab American population - showed up in a sea of Lebanese flags, along with anti-Israeli and anti-Bush slogans. . . .

    Such is the normal exercise of free speech in an open society, one might think. But these are not normal times. The Detroit protests have been tinged with paranoia and justifiable fear on both sides. Several Jewish institutions in the area, including two community centres and several synagogues, have hired private security guards in response to an incident in Seattle at the end of July, in which a mentally unstable 30-year-old Muslim walked into a Jewish Federation building and opened fire, killing one person and injuring five others.

    On the Arab American side, many have expressed reluctance to stand up and be counted among the protesters for fear of being tinged by association with Hizbollah, which is on the United States' list of terrorist organisations. (As a result, the voices heard during the protests tend to be the more extreme ones.)
    1) Jews are afraid because they've been killed for being jewish. Arabs are afraid because they may be "tinged by association with Hezbollah". And the article paints these as equivalents. M'kay.

    2) You know what it takes to not be tinged by association with Hezbollah? One rally that says "Hezbollah is wrong". No moral equivalence, no equivocation.

    3) "Many have expressed reluctance" so "the voices heard during the protests tend to be the more extreme ones." And "15,000 people - almost half the population - showed up at one protest." So were all 15,000 extremists? Or were they not really all that afraid of "being tinged with association with Hezbollah"? And how did these 15,000 react to the "extremist voices"? (not at all, as far as I can tell).

    Hmm, blatant inconsistencies within the first few paragraphs, clear indication of a desire to slant the article in one direction. But let's keep reading:

    They are even afraid to donate money to help the civilian victims of the war in Lebanon because of the intense scrutiny Islamic and Arab charities have been subjected to since the 9/11 attacks. The Bush administration has denounced 40 charities worldwide as financiers of terrorism, and arrested and deported dozens of people associated with them. Consequently, while Jewish charities such as the United Jewish Communities are busy raising $300m to help families affected by the Katyusha rockets raining down on northern Israel, donations to the Lebanese victims have come in at no more than a trickle.
    Wait, did I miss the article where the International Red Cross or Red Crescent were shut down as fronts for terror organizations? Both organizations allow for donations to be earmarked to particular causes, and are not all that hard to find.

    But the author would clearly like to blame Bush for the lack of donations, so . . . let's not mention that. Gee, the bias continues. Whod've thunk it?

    Onward!

    The Dearborn protests have received almost no attention nationally, and when they have it has usually been to denounce the participants as extremists and apologists for terrorism - either because they have voiced support for Hizbollah or because they have carried banners in which the Star of David at the centre of the Israeli flag has been replaced by a swastika.
    Wow - denouncing participants for voicing support for Hezbollah? The horror! And how could anyone voice disgust at the facile Israel=Nazi campaign of arab propagandists world wide? I just don't know . . .

    As the conflict has gone on, the media interpretation of it has only hardened. Essentially, the line touted by cable news hosts and their correspondents - closely adhering to the line adopted by the Bush administration and its neoconservative supporters - is that Hizbollah is part of a giant anti-Israeli and anti-American terror network that also includes Hamas, al-Qa'ida, the governments of Syria and Iran, and the insurgents in Iraq. Little effort is made to distinguish between these groups, or explain what their goals might be.
    Hmm . . . why might that be?

    "Hezbollah's spokesperson Hassan Ezzedin had this to say about the Farms: "If they go from Sheba'a, we will not stop fighting them. Our goal is to liberate the 1948 borders of Palestine...[Jews] can go back to Germany or wherever they came from.[18]" (Quote from New Yorker, 10/14/2002)

    Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah: "If Jews all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide." (NY Times, May 23, 2004, p. 15, section 2, column 1.)

    Nah - quotes like that couldn't have anything to do with it . . .

    Thus, when Reuters was forced to withdraw a photograph of Beirut under bombardment because one of its stringers had doctored the image to increase the black smoke, it was a chance to rip into the news agency over its efforts to be even-handed. In a typical riposte, Michelle Malkin denounced Reuters as "a news service that seems to have made its mark rubber-stamping pro-Hizbollah propaganda".
    And this picture: http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/184206.php

    Or these: http://powerlineblog.com/archives/014919.php

    And these: http://www.slublog.com/archives/2006...assion_of.html

    and so on . . .

  6. #6
    flushingjet
    Guest
    dont forget one of the five piles, er pillars of Islam is charity, or zakat

    so unless they do real, altruistic charitable works a muslim wont feel muslimy ror be regarded as a good one if they dont give

    its like any other charity
    you may or may not know where the $ is going
    but muslim "charities" are like Noraid
    did anyone have a doubt where noraid money was going

  7. #7
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,393
    Did the residents of Dearborn-istan protest when 1000s of innocent lives were taken on 9/11?

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,165
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it
    ..."I'm not against blacks, because their skin color is really more brownish, generally, or maybe even ochre"...
    Thats good, Doggin94it, thats REAL good

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,281
    I'd comment, but...

    At this point I think it would just be piling on.


  10. #10
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    156
    whose the guy in the pic?

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,281
    Quote Originally Posted by Jets Till Death
    whose the guy in the pic?
    Henry Rollins.

  12. #12
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    156
    googled it revealing hes the nutjob who opened fire in the jewish center.

  13. #13
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Jet Moses
    Henry Rollins.

    I'm thinking Mr. Rollins might take issue with that...

    You listen to Black Flag?

  14. #14
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,400
    Quote Originally Posted by Jet Moses
    Henry Rollins.

    wow...he looked a lot different when I saw him at Woodstock II in 1994!

    Last edited by Come Back to NY; 08-15-2006 at 06:39 PM.

  15. #15

  16. #16
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,281
    Was too, you boys.

  17. #17
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Come Back to NY
    wow...he looked a lot different when I saw him at Woodstock II in 1994!
    Did you get tickets to Woodstock II...or did you jump the fences, a la mexican, like me and my friends did?

  18. #18
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,400
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan
    Did you get tickets to Woodstock II...or did you jump the fences, a la mexican, like me and my friends did?

    what fence??? I just walked in....

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us