[Logic]

Israelis better at manipulating media

Thoughts?

[Demonhood]

yeah - this thread is flamebait.

if you're going to start a new thread about the Israeli/Palestinian situation, please give your own thoughts. posting a link to a one sided argument and leaving it at that is inviting trouble. there are plenty of similar threads in here already, so make this one different somehow.

[voodoo]

ibl!

[Logic]

Originally posted by Demonhood:
yeah - this thread is flamebait.

if you're going to start a new thread about the Israeli/Palestinian situation, please give your own thoughts. posting a link to a one sided argument and leaving it at that is inviting trouble. there are plenty of similar threads in here already, so make this one different somehow.

Why is that inviting touble and how is it different from dhinkels threads that have been allowed or dcoltons latest threads?

Did you read the article or was it just because it is about Israel that you decided it should be closed?

[eklipse]

Well, at least give someone a chance to post a link claiming Arab manipulation of the media.

A useful discussion might ensue.


(and I stress the word: might)

[Demonhood]

Originally posted by Logic:
Why is that inviting touble and how is it different from dhinkels threads that have been allowed or dcoltons latest threads?

i locked one of zimph's threads yesterday

Did you read the article or was it just because it is about Israel that you decided it should be closed?

i did read the article. the only reason i posted here was because of the unusually high amount of abuse reports i've received today on threads with related topics. and i haven't closed this thread, have i?

[voodoo]

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.

___

it's an opinion piece and it looks like most of the people from Ohio are in bed now.

[Logic]

Originally posted by Demonhood:
i locked one of zimph's threads yesterday

One example
I didn't see you complain about this thread or the title of this thread.

i did read the article. the only reason i posted here was because of the unusually high amount of abuse reports i've received today on threads with related topics. and i haven't closed this thread, have i?

No, fortunately you haven't since I think it's interesting. But I hope certain topics won't be banned because of what a few idiots have posted.

[lil'babykitten]

Logic you stupid nitwit, you posted an article from Al-Jazeera? Al-Jazeera? That terrorist-saddam sympathising-pinko-commie organisation? WTF got in to your Mecca Cola?

....

Well, the author of the article has some qualifications in the field he is writing about:

"Dr Toine van Teeffelen received his PhD in discourse analysis from the University of Amsterdam on the subject of images of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in western popular literature. He presently is an educational consultant as well as a representative of peace movements in Palestine. His letters from Bethlehem are distributed by, among others,_the Electronic Intifada."

[Logic]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
Logic you stupid nitwit, you posted an article from Al-Jazeera? Al-Jazeera? That terrorist-saddam sympathising-pinko-commie organisation? WTF got in to your Mecca Cola?

Fox news were a bit dull today so I decided I'd try Al Jazeera

But as DH asked(and is right about) here is my opinion on this.

There is a war going on there, and in wars media is manipulated by both sides. One of the reasons we hear about biased reports etc. I agree with the Ph.D. on this but wonder what can be done about it. For me it is terrible that reporters are forbidden access to certain areas(after the Jenin massacre for example) since reporters should do all they can in reporting the horrors and joys of the world without any pressure from the governments and their agendas.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Demonhood:
yeah - this thread is flamebait.

The topic basically reads "The Jews control the media"

[fizzlemynizzle]

israel spending millions and having a finely tuned PR machine designed to appeal to its largest benefactor?

inconceivable.

from the article

Somehow the impact and scope of occupation were never really understood except after experiencing it first hand.

i don't think anyone who hasn't been there can imagine what it's like. i haven't and can't, at least. the concept of people blowing themselves up, military raids, rocketfire and bloodshed on the streets as a part of daily life.. no way. more violent than the height of the LA riots day in and day out. the funny part is both sides acknowledge it has to end, yet they both seem incapable of committing to it. just when they start to get close, something inciteful happens and the other side responds to it out of reflex and things go back to the way they were.

[Captain Obvious]

Just give the land over to the Vatican and kick everyone else out.
Screw the Jews, Muslims, Protestants and the Scientologists.
The Buddhists and Zoroastrians can come hang out though.

[vmarks]

Originally posted by Logic:
Fox news were a bit dull today so I decided I'd try Al Jazeera

But as DH asked(and is right about) here is my opinion on this.

There is a war going on there, and in wars media is manipulated by both sides. One of the reasons we hear about biased reports etc. I agree with the Ph.D. on this but wonder what can be done about it. For me it is terrible that reporters are forbidden access to certain areas(after the Jenin massacre for example) since reporters should do all they can in reporting the horrors and joys of the world without any pressure from the governments and their agendas.

There was no massacre in Jenin- that you believe there was one is proof of successful manipulation of the media by Arabs.

In fact, this is the first post in the thread that comes close to admitting manipulation could be successful by any party other than Israelis- it was coming dangerously close to being a "Jews own the media" thread.

The truth that I see is that Israelis are woefully inadequate at voicing their positions and actions in world media, while Palestinians are wildly successful. I am sure you find this odd, so please read on.

Here, from Joe Farah (Christian Arab), is a piece on Palestinians manipulating the media. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=32137

Here, through MEMRI, are several different editorial policies on terms used in Arab newspapers. http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD67704

It pays to look behind the headlines and sound bites.

“Two Women, an Israeli and a Palestinian, Give Birth After Being Shot at Checkpoints” was the headline over a 2/26/02 New York Times report, It sounds like another round of the “Israeli-Palestinian conflict”, part of the “cycle of violence”. But the car containing the Israeli woman was attacked by a Palestinian terrorist (called a “gunman”), while according to the Israeli army, the Palestinian car was shot at, after it had “burst through a temporary roadblock.” So the implied moral equivalence is not true. And the picture accompanying the article – an Israeli soldier standing over a kneeling Palestinian man – leaves no doubt that the editors designated Israel as the aggressor.

And what type of distortions are there in the Arabs' Successful Manipulation of the Media?

It is remarkable that every distortion in the following partial list demeans Israel and moderates the Palestinians:

1. Terminology which creates false symmetries, such as:
a. “the conflict, the cycle of violence, the violence” instead of Palestinian terrorism,
b. “bitter feud between Arafat and Sharon”, falsely equating a dictator with a Prime Minister
c. “Israelis Kill at Least 40 After Arab Kills 5 Teenagers” (New York Times 3/9/02 front page), equating the terrorist murder of 5 students with casualties mainly from gun battles
2. Terminology which sanitizes Palestinian aggression and terrorism, such as:
a. “intifada” (uprising);
b. “assailants, gunmen, fighters, suicide bombers”
C. Hamas terrorists are called a “group”
3. Inversions, such as:
a. the ubiquitous pictures of Palestinian women or children juxtaposed against heavily armed, often faceless, Israeli soldiers or tanks;
b. publicity and even “justification” for Palestinian suicide bomber terrorists while largely ignoring Israeli victims (Lehrer Newshour 3/19/02)
4. Double standards such as:
a. publicity to American but not Israeli victims of terrorism
b. “America Strikes Back” but Israel is in a “cycle of violence”
5. Omissions:
a. brainwashing of Palestinian children to become suicide bombers;
b. widespread Palestinian and Arab anti-Semitism;
c. normal life in Israel;
d. that every Palestinian attack is a violation of Oslo
e. parents of suicide soldiers are child abusers
f. PA using children as instruments of war
g. PA attacks on Jewish religious sites
6. Halftruths: news reports and statistics which:
a. fail to distinguish between intentional Palestinian killing and unintentional Israeli killings of civilians and
b. don’t differentiate between suicide terrorists and their victims, (ie. “1400 dead mainly Palestinians”);
b. news reports that fail to distinguish between the destruction of property and murder;
c. news reports citing “territories which Israel conquered in the 1967 war”, but missing the key word “defensive” (war)

Is there a breach of journalistic ethics in reporting on Israel in respect to independence? Reporters entering the territories to cover stories regularly employ Palestinian “fixers” for safe passage in and out of what is in effect, a Palestinian police state. The territories are not safe for Israeli journalists. Journalists filing reports perceived to be harmful to the Palestinian cause, will not be likely permitted to reenter and could encounter a problem while in the territories. Journalist are reminded of what is expected of them in a variety of ways. Newsweek’s Israel Bureau Chief Joshua Hammer was kidnapped along with British journalist, Gary Knight, on May 29, 2001 by Fatah Hawks, who released a statement demanding that the British and American governments cease their support for Israel (and stating that the journalists would be released in 4 hours, which they were). Rather than criticize his kidnappers, Hammer had positive words for them: “Despite the strong language, Hammer says he never feared his captors would hurt him or Knight. 'They never threatened us or pointed their guns at us,' Hammer says. 'They actually fed us one of the best meals I've eaten in Gaza.'" (http://www.msnbc.com/news/579892.asp). In his 7/9/01 report, Hammer seems to have gotten the message. His villains are “prowling” “armed Jewish settlers”, rather than Palestinians who have murdered scores of Israelis on West Bank roads. Hammer blames PM Sharon for “hoping” for violence to avoid making concessions. Journalists reporting from Nablus on the night of 9/11 were locked in a building by the Palestinian Authority and the life of an AP reporter who had photographed Palestinians celebrating was threatened. This intimidation was barely reported. It is not uncommon for journalists to be taken to a locked room and grilled by armed gunmen, so they “get the point”. As Thomas Friedman wrote about the PLO in the early 1980’s in “From Beirut to Jerusalem”: “no one had any illusions that they would tolerate any serious critical reporting”. “Any reporter who tells you he wasn’t intimidated or affected by this environment is either crazy or a liar” (p.70)

http://www.bjeny.org/pdf/5646736545.pdf

And that's just scratching the surface.

[itai195]

Both sides of this conflict are pretty adept at manipulating the media. Either way, I think it's disingenuous to claim that we can actually talk about 'the media' as a whole in any comprehensive manner. I don't follow all of the European and Asian media to know what goes on there and I'm sure very few people in those regions follow all of the US media either. This is much too general of a question to end up as anything other than flame-bait, though I'm sure you didn't intend it that way, Logic.

[daimoni]

.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by vmarks:
There was no massacre in Jenin- that you believe there was one is proof of successful manipulation of the media by Arabs.
<snip>

No wonder they want to silence you vmarks.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by vmarks:
There was no massacre in Jenin- that you believe there was one is proof of successful manipulation of the media by Arabs.

There was a massacre in Jenin - that you believe there was not is proof of successful manipulation of the media by Zionists.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
There was a massacre in Jenin - that you believe there was not is proof of successful manipulation of the media by Zionists.

Actually he proved there wasn't.

No manipulation.

vmarks again layed the smack down.

Now bite the pillow.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by daimoni:
Thank you, Demonhood.

I hate it when people play all demure as if they don't know exactly what they're attempting to do.

well that is pretty self rightous of you.

Oh well, keep the blinders on.

[Logic]

Originally posted by daimoni:
Thank you, Demonhood.

I hate it when people play all demure as if they don't know exactly what they're attempting to do.

I know exactly what I'm trying to do. Unfortunately some here try to tell me what I'm trying to do.

Can you stay on topic or are you just going to continue with the ad hominem?

ad hom·i·nem __ _P___Pronunciation Key__(hm-nm, -nm)
adj.
Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason: Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their opponents' motives.

[vmarks]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
There was a massacre in Jenin - that you believe there was not is proof of successful manipulation of the media by Zionists.

For thee benefit of kittens whose paws fail to click on links:

TROUBLE IN THE HOLY LAND

By David Kupelian
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
<snip>

Playing to the camera

It's often said that the Palestinians make up in public-relations savvy what they lack in armaments. Indeed, they are notorious for playing to the overly sympathetic and often one-sided international media's camera, and complete fabrication is an honored weapon, employed effectively and often.

Remember the Israeli military incursion last April into the Jenin refugee camp in the West Bank – a major terrorist enclave? Remember the claims of hundreds and even thousands of dead, the result of a brutal "massacre" by Israelis?

Here's how Douglas Davis, London correspondent for the Jerusalem Post, reported the situation:

When Israeli troops broke up the terrorist infrastructure in Jenin which had produced at least half of the suicide bombers, European politicians, journalists and human-rights campaigners joined in a chorus of "Massacre." Saeb Erekat, one of Arafat's top aides, provided the justification when he spoke of at least 3,000 dead. Abu Ali added the local color when he led willing journalists to the ruins of what had been his home and where, he said, nine of his children now lay dead. The media's rush to judgment turned into a stampede. As further proof of the "massacre," the good people of Jenin staged a series of highly emotive funeral processions (the parades ended only when a "body" was twice tipped out of its stretcher on the way to the cemetery, at which point the "martyr" stood up and walked off in disgust).

With barely a glance at the cautionary Israeli officials, Phil Reeves wrote in the [London] Independent of "hundreds of corpses entombed beneath the dust," the London Evening Standard's Sam Kiley reported "staggering brutality and callous murder," the [London] Times's Janine di Giovanni accused Israel of using terrorism as an excuse to attack children, while the Guardian's award-winning Suzanne Goldenberg added breathlessly that the destruction "is almost beyond imagination."

When the thousands of bodies failed to materialise, the Palestinians revised the numbers downwards and the journalists realized the game was up. Some simply cut their losses and moved on to fresh pastures. But among those who could not bear to abandon a winning storyline was a British television reporter who perched in the midst of the rubble to intone solemnly, "No one knows what happened here, but it is certain war crimes were committed." Oh really?

Within days of Israel's departure, talk of a massacre ceased and Saeb Erekat's 3,000 dead was reduced to 52 (all nine of Abu Ali's children, bless them, are fighting fit).

There have been no retractions by the papers and television stations which published the original, unsubstantiated nonsense.

[Splinter]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
There was a massacre in Jenin - that you believe there was not is proof of successful manipulation of the media by Zionists.

ok if you wont belive vmarks and his links/comments and history lessons will you belive a first hand account? my brother was there that day that time in his nice little apc you want to know what happened there? ask him hell tell you exactly. but no undoubtdly you will say he is IDF they know hwo to lie they are pigdog hybrids he is lying he wasnt really there.

[fizzlemynizzle]

http://www.honestreporting.com/artic...ted_it_All.asp

http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/isr..._Media_War.asp

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by vmarks:
For thee benefit of kittens whose paws fail to click on links:

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by fizzlemynizzle:
http://www.honestreporting.com/artic...ted_it_All.asp

http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/isr..._Media_War.asp

That is just pathetic.

Thanks for posting that.

[gadster]

Originally posted by vmarks:
For thee benefit of kittens whose paws fail to click on links:

TROUBLE IN THE HOLY LAND

By David Kupelian
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

Today's headlines from WorldNetDaily.com, the house of journalistic excellence:
Gibson film violates 'hate crime' statutes?

According to a statement from the Messiah Truth Project Inc. – a nonprofit group that says its purpose is to "combat the deceptive missionary techniques of evangelical Christian denominations and the Messianic movements" – "The Passion," through "purposeful rewriting of the Christian Gospel mythos has, itself, become an anti-Semitic diatribe." The organization claims the movie has caused crimes against Jews, synagogues and Jewish cemeteries "throughout the U.S."

In making its case, the Messiah Truth Project cites Adolf Hitler's description of a 1934 performance of the Oberammergau passion play in Bavaria as "a convincing portrayal of the menace of Jewry." The group says the use of extreme graphic violence against Jesus in the film, at the urging of the Jewish crowd, displays a "clear prejudicial bent" against the Jewish faith.

The group has set up a petition that can be signed online. The petition states:

"Gibson's 'The Passion' violates state and federal hate crime statutes for the purposeful encouragement of anti-Semitic violence. We implore U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft to evaluate action against the perpetrators involved and those responsible for the work itself."

While the petition states a goal of 50,000 signatures, just 250 people had signed as of yesterday.

In its statement, the Messiah Truth Project failed to cite specific incidents of violence attributed to a perpetrator who had viewed the film.


And David wonders why there is "Trouble in the Holy Land"? The pillock.

[Zimphire]

Eh, The Gibson family aren't known for them charity to the Jewish community.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Logic:
Why is that inviting touble and how is it different from dhinkels threads that have been allowed or dcoltons latest threads?

Did you read the article or was it just because it is about Israel that you decided it should be closed?

Bah!

[Logic]

Originally posted by Splinter:
ok if you wont belive vmarks and his links/comments and history lessons will you belive a first hand account? my brother was there that day that time in his nice little apc you want to know what happened there? ask him hell tell you exactly. but no undoubtdly you will say he is IDF they know hwo to lie they are pigdog hybrids he is lying he wasnt really there.

Trust a IOF soldier or HRW? Let see...

Here's the full report: HRW report

I. ABOUT THIS RESEARCH A Human Rights Watch team of three experienced researchers spent seven days in Jenin from April 19, 2002 to April 28, 2002 to research this report. The team interviewed over one hundred residents of Jenin refugee camp, gathering detailed accounts from victims and witnesses and carefully corroborating and cross-checking their accounts with those of others. Human Rights Watch investigators also collected information from other first-hand observers of the events in the Jenin refugee camp, including international aid workers, medical workers, and local officials. The research also included information from public sources, including Israeli governmental sources, about the incursion. However, the IDF has not agreed to Human Rights Watch’s repeated requests for information about its military incursions into the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Although Human Rights Watch’s research has been extensive, we do not pretend that it is comprehensive. Further inquiry is still in order, particularly as the excavation process proceeds, and if Israel ultimately decides to make its soldiers involved in the operation available for interview.

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. Israel also has a legal duty to ensure that its attacks on legitimate military targets did not cause disproportionate harm to civilians. Unfortunately, these obligations were not met. Human Rights Watch’s research demonstrates that, during their incursion into the Jenin refugee camp, Israeli forces committed serious violations of international humanitarian law, some amounting prima facie to war crimes.

At least 140 buildings—most of them multi-family dwellings—were completely destroyed in the camp, and severe damage caused to more than 200 others has rendered them uninhabitable or unsafe. An estimated 4,000 people, more than a quarter of the population of the camp, were rendered homeless because of this destruction. Serious damage was also done to the water, sewage and electrical infrastructure of the camp.

Among the civilian deaths were those of Kamal Zgheir, a fifty-seven-year-old wheelchairbound man who was shot and run over by a tank on a major road outside the camp on April 10, even though he had a white flag attached to his wheelchair; fifty-eight year old Mariam Wishahi, killed by a missile in her home on April 6 just hours after her unarmed son was shot in the street; Jamal Fayid, a thirty-seven-year old paralyzed man who was crushed in the rubble of his home on April 7 despite his family’s pleas to be allowed to remove him; and fourteen-year-old Faris Zaiban, who was killed by fire from an IDF armored car as he went to buy groceries when the IDF-imposed curfew was temporarily lifted on April 11. Some of the cases documented by Human Rights Watch amounted to summary executions, a clear war crime, such as the shooting of Jamal al-Sabbagh on April 6. Al-Sabbagh was shot to death while directly under the control of the IDF: he was obeying orders to strip off his clothes. In at least one case, IDF soldiers unlawfully killed a wounded Palestinian, Munthir al-Haj, who was no longer carrying a weapon, his arms were reportedly broken, and he was taking no active part in the fighting

As in prior IDF operations, soldiers forced Palestinians, sometimes at gunpoint, to accompany IDF troops during their searches of homes, to enter homes, to open doors, and to perform other potentially dangerous tasks. In Jenin, such coerced use of civilians was a widespread practice; in virtually every case in which IDF soldiers entered civilian homes, residents told Human Rights Watch that IDF soldiers were accompanied by Palestinian civilians who were participating under duress. The forced use of civilians during military operations is a serious violation of the laws of war, as it exposes civilians to direct risk of death or serious injury. Human Rights Watch has so far found no evidence that Palestinian gunmen forced Palestinian civilians to serve as human shields during the attack. But Palestinian gunmen did endanger Palestinian civilians in the camp by using it as a base for planning and launching attacks, using indiscriminate tactics such as planting improvised explosive devices within the camp, and intermingling with the civilian population during armed conflict, and, in some cases, to avoid apprehension by Israeli forces.

During “Operation Defensive Shield,” the IDF blocked the passage of emergency medical vehicles and personnel to Jenin refugee camp for eleven days, from April 4 to April 15. During this period, injured combatants and civilians in the camp as well as the sick had no access to emergency medical treatment. The functioning of ambulances and hospitals in Jenin city was severely circumscribed, and ambulances were repeatedly fired upon by IDF soldiers. Farwa Jammal, a uniformed nurse, was killed by IDF fire while treating an injured civilian. In at least two cases, injured civilians died without access to medical treatment. Direct attacks on medical personnel and the denial of access to medical care for the wounded constitute serious violations of the laws of war.

But the presence of armed Palestinian militants inside the camp, and the preparations made by those armed Palestinian militants in anticipation of the IDF incursion does not detract from an essential fact: Jenin refugee camp was also home to more than 14,000 Palestinian civilians. The IDF had an obligation under international humanitarian law to take all feasible precautions to prevent a disproportionate impact of its military incursion on those civilians.

In numerous cases, they used Palestinian civilians and detainees as human shields as they moved from house to house, and, as Human Rights Watch has documented in previous incursions elsewhere in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, forced civilians to perform the most dangerous tasks of entering and checking buildings during house-to-house searches.

Under Protocol I, Article 51(4), indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Israel is not a party to Protocol I, but the provisions prohibiting indiscriminate warfare are considered to be norms of customary international law, binding on all parties in a conflict, regardless of whether it is an international or internal armed conflict. 4

The organization also found instances of IDF soldiers deliberately impeding the work of medical personnel and preventing medical assistance to the wounded with no apparent or obvious justification of military necessity. Such cases appear to be in violation of the prohibition against “willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health.” 19

IDF soldiers in Jenin engaged in the practice of human shielding, forcing Palestinian civilians to serve as “shields” to protect them from Palestinian militants. The practice of human shielding is specifically outlawed by international humanitarian law. The in appropriate use of civilians for other military purposes was also widespread during the IDF operation in Jenin. In almost every case where IDF soldiers entered civilian homes in the camp, the residents told Human Rights Watch that the IDF soldiers were accompanied by Palestinian civilians.

They took me and my son. They put me in one corner and [my son] in the other corner [of the balcony]. The soldier put his gun on my shoulder. I was facing the soldier, we were face to face, with my back to the street. Then he started shooting. This situation lasted for three hours. My son was in the same position— he was facing the soldier, the soldier had his gun on his shoulder, and was shooting. 84

On Saturday, April 6, after two days with the soldiers, Abu Sariya was ordered to go knock on the door of a home by the soldiers, while the soldiers hid themselves on the opposite side of the street. As he ran across the street, another group of IDF soldiers located on the roofs overhead opened fire on Abu Sariya and seriously wounded him in the leg. The two groups of IDF soldiers then began arguing. Rather than taking the seriously wounded Abu Sariya to the hospital, the soldiers provided him with some first aid—bandaging the wound—and then ordered four Palestinian youngsters to carry him away. Unable to reach the hospital, the Palestinian youngsters were forced to leave Abu Sariya at a private home in the Hawashin/Damaj area of the camp. Abu Sariya was forced to stay four more days without medical treatment, unable to leave because of snipers in the area, until IDF soldiers announced on Tuesday, April 9, that everyone in the area had to leave their homes. 89

[Logic]

The entire journey, a mere 500 meters as the crow flies, took Aziz and the soldier twelve hours. When he reached the western edge of the camp with the soldiers, Aziz Taha was forced to take off his clothes and was severely beaten. I was in my underwear, nothing else. They put me in a house and let me sit down. They made fun of me, spit on me, and starting asking me questions, but when I answered they would just mock me. While I was there, one soldier urinated on me, he cursed at me, but this is nothing, because then he did more. I have nine scars on my legs, so when I stripped they saw them and said you were fighting two months ago, although the scars were much older. They started beating me then with something metal, it was very painful. They also used the plastic ligatures they were using as handcuffs. They [tied a bunch of them together into a whip] and used them to beat me on the soles of my feet. 91

It is a fundamental principle of international humanitarian law that the wounded, sick, and infirm are entitled to particular protection and respect during armed conflict. Israel’s obligations to ensure medical access were succinctly expressed by Rene Kosirnik, head of the local ICRC delegation, in a press briefing in Jerusalem on April 22: As long as Jenin refugee camp was occupied by the Israeli Defense Force, the first responsibility lies with the IDF to save lives. It is the responsibility of the force concerned to deliver services, to care for friend and foe. That is the rule. 109

Whenever tanks saw the ambulances, they blocked their way. They also shot at them on several occasions. They knew those in the camp needed help, but the tanks at the entrance to the camp forbade our passage. After this we went to the ICRC and asked them to urgently intervene. 111 After several hours, the ICRC called back and said that the Israeli authorities had informed them there was no prohibition on PRCS access to the camp, and that PRCS ambulances were free to go there. This official position, however, was not reflected by the actions of soldiers on the ground. The PRCS again tried to respond to the many calls for help it was receiving from residents within the camp but, Dr. Dababna said: Whenever we sent ambulances the tanks would shoot at us and tell us to go back. We repeated this several times: calling, being informed permission was granted, and then being shot at. It was like they were tricking us. But there were so many injured and dead we just began to try anyway.

On April 3, the first day of the attack, IDF fire killed a uniformed nurse, twenty-seven-year-old Farwa Jammal, who had come to the assistance of a wounded civilian on the outskirts of the camp. As the nurse and her sister were trying to reach the wounded man, they came under IDF fire. The nurse was killed with a gunshot wound to the heart, and her sister was severely wounded (see above, “Attacks on Civilians”).

By the end of the IDF operation in Jenin camp, enormous media controversy had arisen over the question of assistance to the wounded and the disposal of the dead. The IDF, rejecting calls for the participation of independent monitoring or humanitarian groups, announced its intention to collect and dispose of the bodies of those killed, some via burial in a remote cemetery in the Jordan valley, but this was opposed by local human rights organizations, who brought a court injunction to prevent the burials from going ahead. While Human Rights Watch found no evidence to confirm allegations that the IDF had conducted mass burials prior to April 15, the IDF’s six-day prohibition of medical access to the injured and sick in Jenin camp is a clear violation of the Israeli obligations under international humanitarian law.

UNRWA officials were prohibited from delivering supplies to the camp from April 2 to April 15, despite the fact that food, medical supplies and other emergency items were stored in close proximity. Two UNRWA trucks entered the camp for the first time in the late afternoon of April 15, but could travel only fifty meters due to the rubble and destruction. UNRWA staff began to unload the trucks, but IDF soldiers forbade them from doing so. As dark fell, UNRWA staff decided to withdraw rather than encourage camp residents to put their lives at risk by trying to get to the food in the dark and under curfew. 129

On April 9 in the Hashawin area, Samia Abu Sha‘ab described how his father was shot dead by IDF soldiers after trying to get bulldozers to stop destroying their home while they were inside: “The bulldozers started destroying the outside half of our house. Half of the house was very destroyed. My father went out to see what had happened. He spoke to the driver of the bulldozer and explained that his family was inside. The bulldozer stopped.” 134 Shortly afterwards, Samia’s father, Muhammad Abu Sha‘ab, was shot dead by an Israeli sniper as he stood inside his half-destroyed home (see below). The family was forced to flee the home and had to abandon the corpse of their father inside. When they returned after the offensive, their home had been bulldozed and they had to use a bulldozer to recover their father’s remains.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), which promotes adherence to the Geneva Conventions, took the unusual step of speaking out publicly about the extent of destruction of the civilian infrastructure in Jenin camp and the inadequate safeguards taken by the IDF to protect civilian life and property in the camp. Rene Kosirnik, the head of the ICRC delegation, stated: When we are confronted with the extent of destruction in an area of civilian concentration, it is difficult to accept that international humanitarian law has been fully respected.... If you suspect your [military] operation will cause disproportionate damage to civilians or civilian property, then you have to stop the operation. 136

IDF soldiers discovered Lina and her mother at the house on April 10 and ordered them to leave that afternoon. “A soldier came back and told us to go to the mosque. He said they were going to lay explosives in the area because there was still resistance in the area.” 139 Lina asked the soldiers to help her carry her mother, but they refused, shouting at her to shut up. Lina told Human Rights Watch: My mother was screaming from pain and distress. I tried to carry her, but I couldn’t, I was too weak. I tried to go back to my house, but it had been destroyed by the bulldozer. The camp was empty and all the people had gone away. I dragged my mother through the road, full of glass and rubble and heavy shooting. I saw someone’s leg, blown off, on the street. I dragged her for an hour. Her feet were bleeding and she was screaming. I went into a house but it was half gone and there was a dead body in there. 140

Kamal Tawalba, a forty-three-year-old father of fourteen children, offered one of many compelling accounts that showed how IDF tanks and helicopters made little distinction between legitimate military targets and civilian homes. He told Human Rights Watch that he was alone with his family at his home on the morning of Saturday, April 6, and had harbored no Palestinian militants in his home: “There were no fighters in my house. I have fourteen children and would never have taken such a risk.” The family was asleep on the bottom floor of their home when a tank shell hit the floor above them, setting the house on fire. He and his family tried to leave, but were prevented from doing so when IDF soldiers shot at them: “I went to the gate and started calling to the IDF soldiers to allow us to go out. I tried to ask for help—I held two children in my arms—but they started shooting at the windows.” 145 A few minutes later, two TOW-missiles hit the top floor of his home, causing more destruction: “After two minutes, two more missiles came to the house from an Apache helicopter. I can tell the difference [with the tank shells] because we could see the wires from the Apache helicopter [guiding the missile]. I took my small baby—there was so much dust—and I went outside without caring about the soldiers. A soldier started shooting at me and told me to put the children down. He took me in the street and told me to take off my clothes.” 146

Fathiya Sa‘adi vividly remembered the Arabic-language warning that came blaring from IDF loudspeakers on Wednesday, April 10, at about 9:30 a.m., ordering civilians to evacuate their homes. She repeated the message verbatim to Human Rights Watch: Inhabitants of the refugee camp of Jenin! We want to inform you that the Israeli soldiers have occupied the camp and it is completely under Israeli control now. We have destroyed your resistance. Now, you must immediately leave your houses, or we will destroy the whole camp over your heads by plane and by tanks. 156

[Zimphire]

Logic It's already been proven to be a lie.

Trying to convince us that the lie is somehow true makes you look a bit zealous in your efforts doesn't it?

[daimoni]

.

[Logic]

Originally posted by daimoni:
Thank you, Demonhood.

I hate it when people play all demure as if they don't know exactly what they're attempting to do.

Heh. So this is what I get when/if I don't agree with you.

[daimoni]

.

[Logic]

Originally posted by daimoni:
Well I'm glad you know exactly what you're trying to do... because if so, you just proved Demonhood's (and my) point.

Now go look up the words logic and reason and you'll be well on your way.

What I was trying to do was to get a discussion on how the media plays in all this. But I guess since the title was "anti-semitic" it's too much for some to handle.......

Get a life.

[daimoni]

.

[Logic]

Originally posted by daimoni:
I never claimed your title was "anti-semetic". There's no need to drag those words in there and you know it. Well, I thought you knew that.

Now hold on a sec (while I get a life).

Then how could this turn into a flame fest?

I'm sure both vmarks and Zimph have said something about this being the usual "the Jews control the media" and that would be saying that the title is anti-semitic.

So if you didn't think this was "anti-semitic" then explain to me how this was meant as flamebait?

:holds on to chair:

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Logic:
I'm sure both vmarks and Zimph have said something about this being the usual "the Jews control the media" and that would be saying that the title is anti-semitic.

Yes I have. I tend to speak my mind.

"Israelis better at manipulating media" is just a PC way of putting it.

[vmarks]

Originally posted by Logic:
Then how could this turn into a flame fest?

I'm sure both vmarks and Zimph have said something about this being the usual "the Jews control the media" and that would be saying that the title is anti-semitic.

So if you didn't think this was "anti-semitic" then explain to me how this was meant as flamebait?

:holds on to chair:

You seem to have an excellent command of the English language.

Yet, you persist in not reading the posts that I write. If you insist on using my name and referring to words as having been said by me, at least go to the trouble to read what I have said.

In this very same thread, if you read up, you will find that I wrote:

"In fact, this is the first post in the thread that comes close to admitting manipulation could be successful by any party other than Israelis- it was coming dangerously close to being a "Jews own the media" thread."

Close to. As in, avoided.

You innocently remark that all you wanted was a discussion, but your actions show otherwise.

discussion

n 1: an extended communication (often interactive) dealing with some particular topic; "the book contains an excellent discussion of modal logic"; "his treatment of the race question is badly biased" [syn: treatment, discourse] 2: an exchange of views on some topic; "we had a good discussion"; "we had a word or two about it" [syn: give-and-take, word]


Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University

For an exchange of views to take place, you must actually read and analyze other people's responses, particularly the responses that contain content counter to your own assertions.

Now, you can post any way you damn well please, but don't tell us you intended to have a discussion when your actions show anything but.

[daimoni]

.

[gadster]

Originally posted by vmarks:
You seem to have an excellent command of the English language.

Yet, you persist in not reading the posts that I write. If you insist on using my name and referring to words as having been said by me, at least go to the trouble to read what I have said.

In this very same thread, if you read up, you will find that I wrote:

"In fact, this is the first post in the thread that comes close to admitting manipulation could be successful by any party other than Israelis- it was coming dangerously close to being a "Jews own the media" thread."

Close to. As in, avoided.

Of course we know that Jewish interests don't control the media, Arafat does!

Look at all the positive publicity he is getting.

'Arafat, starts with "A" - must be OK' special feature by our Feng Shui expert.

He is the guy who liberated Iraq, right? He runs FOX NEWS right? Massive shareholder in the CNN and ABC.

Right?

Right?

[Logic]

Originally posted by daimoni:
Oh, great. You're going to start throwing chairs now.

"Here, friend. Let me buy you a drink". </Obi Wan voice>

Calm down. You were the one who told me to hold on to something

Dude. It all boils down to the one sided argument link and leaving it at that. If you really wanted to open a discussion on how the media plays into this conflict, fine. I'd love to participate in one with you, and I'll take your word for it that was your intention. It just didn't come off that way.

Well, I apoligise if came off that way. It was not my intention.

The most obvious difference is how the Europeans and how the Americans view this conflict and many other. Is it because of the media or just some huge divide in how we look at things? I'm not sure.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by daimoni:
Heh. So this is what I get when/if I don't agree with you.

LOL yes. I guess.

In case you haven't noticed the pro-Sharon nutties have such intense fits of anger whenever someone posts a thread that criticizes Israel's behaviour in the least. So much that mods almost always cave in and lock threads or reprimand the thread poster.

That is not to say that the mods never react when the pro-Sharon nutties post threads.. yet I can't help but it is a bit more uphill for us that don't like how Sharon is doing things.

That is why I found it very self righteous of you to waltz in here and post how dismayed and shocked over what you perceive what is the original posters intention.

The article isn't a one-sided drivel written by a blinded zealot. Mind you it is of course just one man's opinion, but not as slanted as you might think.

That is why I 'slammed' you.

[vmarks]

Originally posted by gadster:
Of course we know that Jewish interests don't control the media, Arafat does!

Look at all the positive publicity he is getting.

'Arafat, starts with "A" - must be OK' special feature by our Feng Shui expert.

He is the guy who liberated Iraq, right? He runs FOX NEWS right? Massive shareholder in the CNN and ABC.

Right?

Right?

You mean, Fox News, whose Carl Cameron bought into the "Israelis committed 9/11" conspiracy theory nonsense and fueled it with his insistence on reporting it?

You mean CNN whose reporting was so biased towards the Arab world and Palestinians that they risked being removed from the cable line-up in Israel-- So their response to the allegations of bias was to run a weeklong special on Israeli military victories, bias in the opposite direction? Obviously, they have no problem with being biased, and are so unprincipled that they don't particularly care which bias they use when under fire. They quickly reverted back to their bias in favor of Palestinians following that one week.

You mean ABC, who regularly uses the list of distortions I posted above, and will repost here for your pleasure?


Terminology which creates false symmetries, such as:
a. “the conflict, the cycle of violence, the violence” instead of Palestinian terrorism,
b. “bitter feud between Arafat and Sharon”, falsely equating a dictator with a Prime Minister
c. “Israelis Kill at Least 40 After Arab Kills 5 Teenagers” (New York Times 3/9/02 front page), equating the terrorist murder of 5 students with casualties mainly from gun battles
2. Terminology which sanitizes Palestinian aggression and terrorism, such as:
a. “intifada” (uprising);
b. “assailants, gunmen, fighters, suicide bombers”
C. Hamas terrorists are called a “group”
3. Inversions, such as:
a. the ubiquitous pictures of Palestinian women or children juxtaposed against heavily armed, often faceless, Israeli soldiers or tanks;
b. publicity and even “justification” for Palestinian suicide bomber terrorists while largely ignoring Israeli victims (Lehrer Newshour 3/19/02)
4. Double standards such as:
a. publicity to American but not Israeli victims of terrorism
b. “America Strikes Back” but Israel is in a “cycle of violence”
5. Omissions:
a. brainwashing of Palestinian children to become suicide bombers;
b. widespread Palestinian and Arab anti-Semitism;
c. normal life in Israel;
d. that every Palestinian attack is a violation of Oslo
e. parents of suicide soldiers are child abusers
f. PA using children as instruments of war
g. PA attacks on Jewish religious sites
6. Halftruths: news reports and statistics which:
a. fail to distinguish between intentional Palestinian killing and unintentional Israeli killings of civilians and
b. don’t differentiate between suicide terrorists and their victims, (ie. “1400 dead mainly Palestinians”);
b. news reports that fail to distinguish between the destruction of property and murder;
c. news reports citing “territories which Israel conquered in the 1967 war”, but missing the key word “defensive” (war)

[itai195]

Originally posted by gadster:
Of course we know that Jewish interests don't control the media, Arafat does!

Look at all the positive publicity he is getting.

'Arafat, starts with "A" - must be OK' special feature by our Feng Shui expert.

He is the guy who liberated Iraq, right? He runs FOX NEWS right? Massive shareholder in the CNN and ABC.

Right?

Right?

You're deluding yourself if you're claiming that the Palestinians/Arabs aren't also engaged in PR and media manipulation. I've seen enough pro-Palestine and pro-Israel bots protestesting in grocery store parking lots and college campuses to know that neither side is innocent in this respect.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by vmarks:
For thee benefit of kittens whose paws fail to click on links:

Heh. See you like to provide all these wonderful links and quotes etc etc and then claim that they are the 'historical truths' the 'genuine explanation' the only explanation. Why? because they support your point of view of course. It doesn't matter what we're talking about, *you* are the only one who is right. Well sorry but I've got news for you, you are not the holder of the worlds historical truths. Furthermore nearly all your arguments can be countered as many of us, particularly eklipse, have done on several occasions. Logic (thanks) posted a counter to your claim that the Jenin massacre never happened, information taken form a credible organization the HWR. I'm sure you'll come back with a huge post telling us how full of sh1t the HWR is etc etc, that you are right and that we are brainwashed by Arab media - which is a joke in itself considering the amount of influence the Arab media has in the world (miniscule).

We can go on trading arguments and counter-arguments all day, doesn't get anywhere. I'm evaluated the information I've read from both sides and come to a personal conclusion. Have you?

[eklipse]

Originally posted by vmarks:
http://www.bjeny.org/pdf/5646736545.pdf

"HOW TO FIGHT THE ARAB PR AND MEDIA WAR AND MAKE ISRAEL’S CASE"

LOL!

Are those lecture notes from a course people can take on 'Defending Israel at all Costs'?

That would be brilliant - not only are Israelis experts at manipulating the media - they even teach courses on it!

[daimoni]

.

[vmarks]

Originally posted by eklipse:
"HOW TO FIGHT THE ARAB PR AND MEDIA WAR AND MAKE ISRAEL’S CASE"

LOL!

Are those lecture notes from a course people can take on 'Defending Israel at all Costs'?

That would be brilliant - not only are Israelis experts at manipulating the media - they even teach courses on it!

As much as that tickled your funny bone, that isn't what that document is.

It's author is Samuel Bahn.

Samuel H. Bahn is an independent analyst and speaker on Israel and the media. As Israel Media Consultant to the Board of Jewish Education of Greater New York, he is a frequent presenter of his program, “Getting Media Smart About Israel,” at teacher’s conferences and at schools. He was affiliated with CAMERA from 1988 TO 1991, when he served as founder/director of its New York Chapter.

The power of US media coverage to shape world events should not be underestimated. Pictures of US soldiers being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu in 1993 were followed shortly by US withdrawal from Somalia. Minimizing Palestinian aggression as a “cycle of violence,” downplaying official Palestinian incitement and anti-Semitism, and bringing Israeli democracy down to the level of the Palestinian dictatorship have significant consequences. Such distortions support demands that Israel not take the steps to defend her citizens that she feels are necessary and encourage even more Palestinian terrorism and movement even farther away from peace. They weaken ties with allies, especially with US Jews, who are the most sensitive to “news” about Israel. And by distorting radical Islamic terrorism against Israeli civilians as merely another episode in the “cycle of violence”, they may have contributed to the US’ lowering its own guard.

After 50+ years, the “newspaper of record,” The New York Times, has finally admitted getting the story of the Holocaust wrong. This admission came first, briefly, in a 1996 exhibit at the New York Public library and more comprehensively in a November 14, 2001 full page article by former NYT Executive Editor Max Frankel. However, The New York Times did not puruse the implications for the Jews of Europe of this distorted coverage. The Jewish community cannot afford to allow another such lapse in the all-important media coverage.

Why do the media take sides, against their own code of ethics, in this area?

For the past 30+ years, Arab propaganda has done an excellent job of portraying the Palestinian Arabs as victims of the Israelis, even though their chief oppressors are their own leaders and the Arab states. Reporters, who are often poorly educated in this area, and who tend to favor “victim” groups, generally have bought into this line.

The US Jewish community and Israel have done a poor job in countering this Arab propaganda, educating our youth in the facts, making the case for Israel, and responding to anti-Israel distortions. Arab activism is becoming a powerful force and is intent on winning what James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, describes as the “media war”.

The need for Arab oil, the petrodollars and power available to Arab states from the sale of their oil, and anti-Semitism would appear to play a minor role, since the media is so diverse.

Palestinian Authority intimidation of journalists: Reporters who try to provide fair coverage of Palestinian violence and other “unpleasant” news have been detained, beaten, and threatened with death. Most media bury stories of the intimidation of journalists, further eroding their independence and credibility. Reuters’ shameful public refusal to use the word “terrorism” out of concern for the safety of its journalists has not disqualified it as a major news source. Well-known Israeli journalist Ehud Yaari estimates that 95% of news from the territories comes from Palestinian sources. Since the Palestinian Authority brooks no dissent, we should request in our communications that such news not be reported, unless independently corroborated.

http://www.caje.org/learn/terror-bahn.htm