fuck israel

Originally posted by sawdust restaurants:
Spare me.

And yes, the Palestinian side isn't much better; still, though, I'm going to be more derisive towards the Israeli bias simply because their propaganda--not their legitimate gripings, of which there are many, but their propaganda--is far more prevalent in the Western world.

Just from this post, it's easy to tell which side's propaganda is in fact more prevalent overall.

Originally posted by Debaser:
What about the idiot guide pointing out the Palestine was originally the entire area of what is now Israel and Jordan? If you consider that, then the Jews have less than 25% of Palestine. Are the Jews not allowed to even keep this small area of Palestine? I do feel bad for all the mistreatment and injustice done to the Israel-Arab citizens. But looking at the big picture, the fact that the Arab leaders still balked at peace proposals in which Israel was willing to hand over almost 90% of the disputed lands, I have doubts about the true motives of the Arab leaders of whether they want to restore the palestinians to their homeland (of which they already have over 75%) or really do they just want to expell the jews from the middle east entirely.

Really, I wouldn't make a reference to that page if you want to be taken seriously. I agree that there is a great deal of hostility towards Israel from the Arab world, but this is merely going to be propagated by their attitude toward Palestinians. The problem isn't necessarily who owns the land (although many Arabs would disagree strongly, and it is an issue once self-government comes into it) - it's how the people within the disputed territories are segregated. Israeli settlements are dispersed throughout, and amenities such as electricity, and irrigation, are diverted into these settlement areas. Of course, the Palestinian communities are then hugely disadvantaged, and there is nothing they can do about it. They are also subject to checkpoints and searches, made to carry ID papers, and are punished more severely than Israelis from the same area, for similar crimes. Not to mention any construction in these areas is deemed illegal, and demolished. You cannot have two peoples living in the same area, but afforded different rights based on their nationality. Because of this, Israel is very much seen as an occupying power, and therefore the target of much hostility. Until they change their attitudes to the general population of Palestine, they cannot claim to be the innocent victim in all of this. It's one thing to have terrorists acting on behalf of innocent people, it's another to have the government of an innocent people instigating terrorist attacks. No quarter given to the terrorists, no quarter given to the 'counter-terrorists.'

Good points. Well I'm trying to research this because I'm intensely curious to really know what is going on. But its getting ridiculous when I find one pro-israel resource (http://www.eretzyisroel.org/) that accuses and shows blatent examples of CNN being biased and pro-arab and then I turn around and find a huge pro-palestine resource (http://www.zmag.org/ZNET.htm) that accuses and shows blatent examples of CNN becing biased and pro-israel. wtf. I dunno what is the truth. But check out both of these huge sites thoroughly if you want to some major brain spinning...cuz I cannot tell which is right...eh they both sound right....propaganda...whatever...

Originally posted by Debaser:
Good points. Well I'm trying to research this because I'm intensely curious to really know what is going on. But its getting ridiculous when I find one pro-israel resource (http://www.eretzyisroel.org/) that accuses and shows blatent examples of CNN being biased and pro-arab and then I turn around and find a huge pro-palestine resource (http://www.zmag.org/ZNET.htm) that accuses and shows blatent examples of CNN becing biased and pro-israel. wtf. I dunno what is the truth. But check out both of these huge sites thoroughly if you want to some major brain spinning...cuz I cannot tell which is right...eh they both sound right....propaganda...whatever...

yea its insanely hard to find anything completely credible and unbiased.

Originally posted by Debaser:
Good points. Well I'm trying to research this because I'm intensely curious to really know what is going on. But its getting ridiculous when I find one pro-israel resource (http://www.eretzyisroel.org/) that accuses and shows blatent examples of CNN being biased and pro-arab and then I turn around and find a huge pro-palestine resource (http://www.zmag.org/ZNET.htm) that accuses and shows blatent examples of CNN becing biased and pro-israel. wtf. I dunno what is the truth. But check out both of these huge sites thoroughly if you want to some major brain spinning...cuz I cannot tell which is right...eh they both sound right....propaganda...whatever...

You have to look around a lot, weigh up what you're reading and decide for yourself. To be honest, the only way you can really know is to read as much as you can, get as many sides to the story, then work out which is credible and which is bullshit. Try www.counterpunch.org - there's a lot of intelligent editorial from various international sources, generally liberal but well argued.

You people need to read posts more closely. All I said was that I'm going to be more vocal about Israeli propaganda because it's more prevalent in American media. It's not that Palestinian propaganda is better or worse. It's that America's pro-Israel, and that's overwhelmingly what you see in the media today; even as we condemn Sharon's military offensive, we make sure that we know how bad Palestine is. At the very least, the legitimate arguments for Palestine need to come out, and they need to come out in the mass media more frequently; people are too fucking lazy to get up off their ass and learn about it any other way. The possibility is slim, yes, Clint, but as a journalist, it makes me sick to my stomach.

However, I never said I support the Palestinians. I wouldn't exactly say I'm completely pro-Israel, but I certainly don't support Arafat and his terrorist's methods, either.

------------------
But how this is, sweet maid, I know not, and I cannot know; I ponder, and I cannot ponder; yet I live and love.

[This message has been edited by sawdust restaurants (edited 04-09-2002).]

well, the basic fact is that ALL journalism is propoganda, all communication is propoganda. this post here is propoganda. you cannot, cannot, speak to someone without speaking through some sort of bias. that's what separates us from creepy haley joel osmond. or something. u know. we're people and we have feelings.

the problem is that in one way or another, BOTH sides of the conflict are fighting a defensive war. in some way. like you can say, wouldn't it be easy if israel just pulled out of the west bank and the gaza strip...well there's ONE fact, and that's that jerusalem is IN the west bank, the OTHER problem is this term you keep hearing on the tv, which is "indefensible borders" -- the issue israel has to deal with is whether or not they'll even EXIST in ten years. or 5 years. it's not simply land-hunger. i don't really understand why they're safer with the west bank, but i'm not a military strategist. so whatever. the problem is that saddam hussein refers to israel as "that zionist entity". now, i don't know what the fuck ariel sharon thinks he's doing right now, what point he's trying to get across, but...yeah. there isn't going to be any peace until the "israel must be destroyed" and "jews eat babies" propoganda stops. and that's not gonna stop until those countries get a legitimate government.

i don't know

shhhh

Originally posted by sawdust restaurants:
At the very least, the legitimate arguments for Palestine need to come out,

Okay, what are the legitimate arguments for Palestinians to be in Jerusalum? Everybody and their mama knows about the Jews being there 5,000 years ago whatever and its the holiest city in the bible.... And we all have heard about the complete desolation that Palestinians live under Israel occupation there, but I wanna know what historical/religious significance does the West Bank have for Palestinians? I read that the Koran does not even mention Jerusalum once in it, and that the prophet muhammed never visited there...

I'm just searching for another reason why the Palestines want it other than the "we were there first" arguement...

Originally posted by Samsa:
well, the basic fact is that ALL journalism is propoganda, all communication is propoganda.

So, a fact can be propoganda? I think you're confused about the difference between editorializing and actual fact.

Maybe for people who have lost any sense of an absolute, even facts can be propoganda. It certainly seems to be the direction our public (and global) discourse is taking. But then that's when you get into various ideas about relativity, the realm where facts are just incidental.

Most people who have any sense of reason left in them can find facts for themselves and logically and reasonably come to a conclusion that is superior.

None of you are as smart as your think you are.

Originally posted by Best Looking Boy:
None of you are as smart as your think you are.

That's such a stupid thing to write. Arguing and defending your opinions coherently, without resorting to swearing and personal attacks, is not equivalent to thinking that you're really smart.

Originally posted by tweedyburd:
So, a fact can be propoganda?

yes it can be propoganda. Lets say Shaq scores 51 points this evening against the clippers. If I announce "Shaq dominated the game today scoring 51 points which single handedly destroyed the clippers defense" or on the other half if i say "Due to the clippers injured lineup Shaq bagged 51 points against a weak clippers defense"

at that point you have made a fact propaganda and in the middle east issues there is always some opinion thrown on it.

And sawdust..... there is an overabundance of the Palestinian side of the story. All I hear on the news is "Israel kills X amount of palestinians as the palestinians refugees are left without food in water, locked in their home, as Israel defys the worlds crys to pull back"

tell me how the fuck that isnt Palestinian propaganda?

Originally posted by PkPhuoko:
And sawdust..... there is an overabundance of the Palestinian side of the story. All I hear on the news is "Israel kills X amount of palestinians as the palestinians refugees are left without food in water, locked in their home, as Israel defys the worlds crys to pull back"

When a word ends in a consonant followed by a y, you change the y to an i and add -es.

And what you're talking about has only been recently, by the way, with the Israeli offensive. Before, it was almost completely pro-Israeli news. And then the next thing you hear is about Arafat's reign of terrorism and how America is still Israel's ally. Fair? I think so, but it's still reporting America on Israel's side.

And your point about Shaq is irrelevant. I'm not talking about a slant on the news; slants are unavoidable, no matter how much you try to erase them. But we're talking egregious, blatant bias, which is completely different.

I agree with you that it has gotten better recently, but there's a reason for that, now, isn't there?

don't fuck israel, fuck sharon.

------------------
this is a fun game of spanking the peopple that make your life miserable. When you spank the character that you choose to punish, the face expression of the character will change as they scream and twitch in pain. The funny face expressions will make people laugh and relieve the stress.

Originally posted by PkPhuoko:
yes it can be propoganda. Lets say Shaq scores 51 points this evening against the clippers. If I announce "Shaq dominated the game today scoring 51 points which single handedly destroyed the clippers defense" or on the other half if i say "Due to the clippers injured lineup Shaq bagged 51 points against a weak clippers defense"

No, that's incorporating editorial voice into a lead or 'hard news'. The first example didn't report all the facts, like the Clippers defense being injured, for one. That is a decaf version of propoganda, but that doesn't mean you can't communicate the same facts in a more objective tone. "Shaq scored 51 points today, as the Lakers defeated a defensively injured Clipper line-up." That's not propoganda by the most desparate stretch of the definition.

Furthermore, both statements you gave as examples are both factual. It's just obvious that one voice favors one over the other, and vice versa. However, that doesn't change that they're facts. Propoganda is spining facts for an agenda. And that's what's going on with boths sides of the media both here, and especially in the Middle East.

Originally posted by sawdust restaurants:
When a word ends in a consonant followed by a y, you change the y to an i and add -es.

And what you're talking about has only been recently, by the way, with the Israeli offensive. Before, it was almost completely pro-Israeli news. And then the next thing you hear is about Arafat's reign of terrorism and how America is still Israel's ally. Fair? I think so, but it's still reporting America on Israel's side.

And your point about Shaq is irrelevant. I'm not talking about a slant on the news; slants are unavoidable, no matter how much you try to erase them. But we're talking egregious, blatant bias, which is completely different.

I agree with you that it has gotten better recently, but there's a reason for that, now, isn't there?

umm i wasnt talking to you bout the shaq thing but yes the shaq thing is perfectly relevant.

But make up your mind mr. sawdust.... is the palestinian side being told or not? in the past 12 hours you've changed your mind and there wasnt really much going on today.

and who gives a fuck about spelling? heres a bunch of bad grammar

thems, yous, person's, dolphinic

Originally posted by PkPhuoko:
umm i wasnt talking to you bout the shaq thing but yes the shaq thing is perfectly relevant.

Read what tweedy posted.

And yes, the Palestinian side is being told, but I still think the Israeli side is more prevalent. If Israel were to pull out of Palestine, we'd be back at square one again.

Originally posted by sawdust restaurants:
Read what tweedy posted.

And yes, the Palestinian side is being told, but I still think the Israeli side is more prevalent. If Israel were to pull out of Palestine, we'd be back at square one again.

So if the Palestinian side were prevelant I assume you'd be supporting an upstage of the Israeli side?

Originally posted by Clash City Rocker:
don't fuck israel, fuck sharon.

damn right. i dont know why or how legally he was able to reenter their government after what happened the last time he had polital power.

And its not propoganda to say Israel killed X number of people and the Palestinians are without food and water when that is the case, especially when we have supplied Israel with weapons and money for "defense"

------------------
PhantomFM

Originally posted by tweedyburd:
So, a fact can be propoganda? I think you're confused about the difference between editorializing and actual fact.

Maybe for people who have lost any sense of an absolute, even facts can be propoganda. It certainly seems to be the direction our public (and global) discourse is taking. But then that's when you get into various ideas about relativity, the realm where facts are just incidental.

Most people who have any sense of reason left in them can find facts for themselves and logically and reasonably come to a conclusion that is superior.

facts are never propoganda, but the communication of the fact almost always is. there's always a choice to be made, how it is worded, (even if colorful words aren't used), for example. the propoganda is also in the simple decision to communicate one certain fact and not another.

Originally posted by PkPhuoko:
So if the Palestinian side were prevelant I assume you'd be supporting an upstage of the Israeli side?

As far as propaganda goes, yes. Both sides deserve equal treatment.

The Idiot's Guide was still quite ridiculous, though.

Originally posted by NinjaTurtle:
maybe we should stop helping any of them

it's highly dubious whether US involvment in the middle east is helping anybody

Originally posted by Samsa:
the propoganda is also in the simple decision to communicate one certain fact and not another.

Gotcha. You're right on about that.

where is ytsach rabim* when you need him?

*i know i butchered the spelling on this one.

------------------
this is a fun game of spanking the peopple that make your life miserable. When you spank the character that you choose to punish, the face expression of the character will change as they scream and twitch in pain. The funny face expressions will make people laugh and relieve the stress.

Originally posted by smiling politely:
That's such a stupid thing to write. Arguing and defending your opinions coherently, without resorting to swearing and personal attacks, is not equivalent to thinking that you're really smart.

It was a nice way to open the 3rd page of babble though.

[This message has been edited by Best Looking Boy (edited 04-11-2002).]

Originally posted by Best Looking Boy:

It was a nice way to open the 3rd page of babble though.

[This message has been edited by Best Looking Boy (edited 04-11-2002).]

wow. that's the SEVENTH meaningless post of dribble you've made on this thread. i fully recommend anyone to scan through the three pages and check them out. you've gotta work hard to be that lame

------------------
PhantomFM

Originally posted by scouse_dave:
it's highly dubious whether US involvment in the middle east is helping anybody

Perhaps, but the US gets the bad end of the deal both ways really. We might not be helping anything by being there, but if we take an isolationist stance, we get criticized for that too.

I've been watching this all alot lately, and I really can't think of any good way to end all of it. Being a Christian, I believe that there will never be peace there. That's what the Bible says, I think. Don't remember the exact verse.

------------------
AIM: JenniferZero

censored25: Dont be sad, Jesus loves your ass

Originally posted by BeautifulLoser:
Perhaps, but the US gets the bad end of the deal both ways really. We might not be helping anything by being there, but if we take an isolationist stance, we get criticized for that too.

I've been watching this all alot lately, and I really can't think of any good way to end all of it. Being a Christian, I believe that there will never be peace there. That's what the Bible says, I think. Don't remember the exact verse.

Well you isolate yourselves and then intervene at the wrong times. That's why you're always crtiticized.

Originally posted by ZERO:
Well you isolate yourselves and then intervene at the wrong times. That's why you're always crtiticized.

how can we know its wrong? We're the ONLY country that ever intervenes... it'd be different if other countries showed us a right way to do it but sadly we're the only country that ever does anything outside talk.