Barnes declared that international press, human rights organizations are "abetting the terrorists" by reporting civilian casualties
On the July 24 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume, Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes stated that in the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict, the international media and human rights organizations are "dupes" that are "abetting the terrorists." Barnes was responding to a question from host Brit Hume, who asked whether syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer's assessment that Hezbollah is "deliberately trying to increase civilian casualties on both sides" to weaken Israel's hand meant that "the international media and the human rights organizations" that cover civilian casualties are "in the position of endangering -- in danger of becoming dupes." Barnes responded: "Yeah, they're abetting the terrorists in this case. Yeah, of course they're dupes."
From the July 24 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume, featuring Barnes, Hume, Krauthammer, and Roll Call executive editor and Fox News contributor Morton M. Kondracke:
HUME: In a sense, isn't it the case, though, that Hezbollah's military weakness, and the weakness of the Lebanese government, its military, and -- one might even argue -- its people are, in effect, strengths for Hezbollah in that you are going to get a lot of collateral damage because the way they operate, the way they're embedded in the population, the way they're located, the way they hide their weapons all makes that inevitable, and that has an effect on world opinion and you do have a disproportion now between the number of Lebanese who are dying and the number of Israelis who are dying? What's the effect of that?
KONDRACKE: Well, look, the publicity, the blood factor here and on TV and the newspapers is all against the Israelis and it's -- there are journalists that were camped out in Tyre or visited Tyre, both The Washington Post and The New York Times and NPR [National Public Radio] were talking about this family that got hit in a Mercedes while they were fleeing Tyre. And, you know, and the stories were perfectly heart wrenching about a young boy who was, you know, burned over most of his body. The fact is, though, that Tyre is the place from whence comes these rockets that are hitting Haifa. So, the Israelis are trying to knock out the rocket installations, and they hit civilians in the process.
KRAUTHAMMER: What's disgraceful in the coverage in the attacks on Israel is that Israel is deliberately trying to minimize civilian casualties on both sides and Hezbollah is deliberately trying to increase civilian casualties on both sides. Terrorizing Israelis, and trying to see that as many Lebanese civilians are hit as Hezbollah hides behind them as a way to demonize Israel.
HUME: So, does that put the international media and the human rights organizations in the position of endangering -- in danger of becoming dupes?
BARNES: Yeah, they're abetting the terrorists in this case. Yeah, of course they're dupes, I mean, they're showing what they show is real, but it doesn't reflect truly what's happening there. I mean, you can show some blown-out buildings, you can show some bodies, you can tell the story about the people in this Mercedes and obviously those things happen, but there's -- the truth is somewhere else.
Media Matters: The right-wing media's election analysis just ain't that good
The Friday Rush: For conservatives, $400 million buys defeat at the ballot box
The myth of Fox News' ratings spike
"I mean, they're showing what they show is real, but it doesn't reflect truly what's happening there."
"Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?"
Sorry, someone had to say it.
Pretty soon, simply mentioning the word "Iraq" will land you in hot water for "abetting the terrorists."
From the BBC website:
"The Israeli army has been accused of using Palestinian civilians as human shields in an operation in northern Gaza.
According to the Israeli human rights group, B'tselem, six civilians including two minors were subjected to the illegal tactic during an incursion into the town of Beit Hanoun last week."
That you never hear of that behavior by the IDF in the American press. This nation, the government and the media, are such whores for Israel that their can never be any legitimate dialogue about U.S. involvement in the region that criticizes either Israel or American support for Israel without being branded an anti-semite or pro-terrorist.
By Barnes' standard, any reporter who reports any war story is a "dupe" because no single story can encapsulate the entirety of the reality.
At least Barnes knows that civilian casualties are a bad thing, if only because they are bad PR for the administration.
No wait a second. He doesn't even get that. He appears to believe reporting civilian casualties is bad. Close, but no cigar!
The nerve of those civilians dying like that just to make our President look bad!
We must be protected from the truth and reality at all costs as it doesnt fit the rightwing agenda. The wingnut wing of the GOP has become a charicature. One where they absolutly refuse to accept reality because the so prefer the pretty story they have made up in their heads. One advantage of this is that tthen the catastrophic consequences of policies made in reality denial mode can ALSO be dismissed. It doesnt matter how factual it doesnt fit the story they have made up in their heads. Iraq is wonderful, I am going to vacation there next summer. This has caused them to embrace the enevitable tactic of actually goint to WAR with reality itself. Facts and reality are liberal plots to siphon away support for their fantasies you see, therefore they must be attacked in just the way Barnes ( the model for that see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil monkey that is such a popular knick-knack.) is duitifully espousing right here.
It takes a lot of energy to convince people not to believe what they are seeing or not to see what is really going on.
The Republican façade will soon collapse under the weight of the lies they have had to tell in order to maintain power. It is inevitable.
We can always turn to Lincoln: You can fool some of the people all of the time, etc...
terrorist-hugging America haters, the neocons could just nuke the place and take the oil.
Dweedle Dee, Dumb, Dumber, and Dumberest... without a day of military duty between them... "reporting" on those persky civilians that are caught at ground zero and die. And only to make Bush and the Israelis look bad. They should jail the remains of the dead for treasonous behavior. How much longer before this country is restored to its sanity?
Those Lebanese are running out in front of the Israelis and committing mass suicide just to make Israel look bad?
is going one step to far
Regardless of it going too far, a similar argument has been promoted by Rush Limbaugh.
The right-wing is a farce of itself.
Echoing retracted Bush administration characterization, Limbaugh labeled Gitmo suicides a "PR move"
all the major new stations I have watched over the last week are all showing the same civilian casualties. Over and over, that is all you see. All you hear about is the overwhelming force Israel is using. What you are not hearing about, is the reason this has come to play. You do not hear from Israeli citizens. So, to me it seems very one sided. I do not want to go as far as to call them terrorists though.
It certainly IS being talked about. The topic of the thread though is Barnes snivelling about FACTUAL reporting. The tactic is pathetic. A quote attributed to Jefferson ( which is disputed) "To believe an uninformed people will remain free is expecting that which has never been and never will be" When dems had power the riechwing was all for freedom now that they have power freedom is far too much bother. That and the rights aversion to facts would be funny if it werent so pathetic
They are reporting factual stuff here. But as he said, they are primarly reporting one side. So, the REST of the truth is out there.
I dont know where you get your news but the context has been in every report I have seen. They talk endlessly about the Hezbollah kidnapping and terrorism in general. It looks like YOUR idea of a balanced story is the side YOU want to hear and if ANYTHING else is mentioned it becomes one sided
I get most of my daily news from the allegedly "liberal" NPR, NYT, and Washington Post, and I was well aware of the Hezbollah kidnapping that set off the current violence. I think you may be mistaken, EC.
about the major TV networks. You and I both know a mojority of people get the news from there. ABC, CBS, FOX ect.....
perhaps the reason why the majority of the civilian suffering footage is Lebanese or Palestinian is because THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE DYING!!!! Sure, Israel has suffered a few casualties, but no more than 30, half of those being IDF members, while over 300 Lebanese civilains have died, not to mention the untold non-fatal suffering occuring in Gaza and Lebanon.
Civilans, but how do you know they are not connected with the terrorists? You do not!
How utterly convienient. Hey look at that terrorist baby over there blown to smithereens, and that terrorist crippled old man he wont need that wheelchair anymore. That is a pathetic attempt at an appology for civilian deaths. Hey how about I come to your house and kill YOU. I mean you MIGHT be a serial killer.
so you are saying none of the 300 civilians killed where terrorists....... how convenient.
civilian casualties with a hey they MIGHT is singularity stupid. What would YOU say if YOUR family were killed by your nieghbor who then said well they MIGHT have been the ones threatening my wife? The Israelis MIGHT just want the water. IDF forces MIGHT just LIKE killing civilians can you PROVE they dont? Do I believe those things no but it shows how incredibly white hot ignorant it is to use the MIGHT excuse for killing people.
what you mean by, " incredibly white hot ignorant "
Which word you did not understand?
people murdered in their homes or fleeing into Syria are terrorists, just like every single Iraqi killed has been a terrorist. Go back to your cell in the insane asylum.
Such a position is the cause for such hatred of Israel and America in the Arab world. The policy of indiscriminate punsihment and jailing by the U.S. military in Iraq of anyone fitting a general description was perfect ammunition for the insurgency.
According to a new book by the Washington Post's senior Pentagon correspondent Thomas Ricks entitled "Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq":
"Feeding the interrogation system was a major push by U.S. commanders to round up Iraqis. ... Sometimes units acted on tips, but sometimes they just detained all able-bodied males of combat age in areas known to be anti-American.
The problem was that the U.S. military, having assumed it would be operating in a relatively benign environment, wasn't set up for a massive effort that called on it to apprehend, detain and interrogate Iraqis, to analyze the information gleaned, and then to act on it. ...
Senior U.S. intelligence officers in Iraq later estimated that about 85 percent of the tens of thousands rounded up were of no intelligence value. But as they were delivered to Abu Ghraib prison, they overwhelmed the system and often waited for weeks to be interrogated, during which time they could be recruited by hard-core insurgents, who weren't isolated from the general prison population....
Lt. Col. David Poirier, who commanded a military police battalion attached to the 4th Infantry Division and was based in Tikrit from June 2003 to March 2004, said the division's approach was indiscriminate. ... 'Every male from 16 to 60' that the 4th Infantry could catch was detained, he said. 'And when they got out, they were supporters of the insurgency.'"
But according to YOU, that behavior is justified. You are an idiot.
I am a idiot, and you a Liberal with a Mental Disorder. Oh, I feel better now.
He can present a compelling logical argument. You have nothing but obfuscation and wordplay. Cons try that here. They ultimately realize that logic counts, and that is an arena they cannot compete in.
competing in some arena with you guys. I am not drawn by a party line like many fools abroad and elsewhere. All I have is my logic, and common sense. Maybe different then yours, but who is to say your is superior to mine?
"Maybe different then yours, but who is to say your is superior to mine?"
Just about every argument I see you in you fail to back up your arguments and resort to sarcastic whining. If your logic isn't inferior, then you're doing something terribly wrong.
Baseless assertions may be Savages raison d'etre and so far your entire bag of tricks but they do not, REPEAT, do not constitute a logical or cogent argument.
"All I have is my logic, and common sense." -EC
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You poor b*st*rd.
You can't judge the "rightness" of either side by the number of civilian casualties at all. Look at the Nazi's, they had many more deaths than the combined forces against them, but did that make them on the right side of the struggle? Of course not.
The fact is that the Hezbollah hides among civilians, they have no interest in their well being. Also, they manipulate intelligence going out to intentionally target civilians - in order to propagandize their effort even more.
They want Israel obliterated from the face of the earth. What do you expect Israel to do with that staring them in the face.
Both have plenty to be concerned about, but there is no moral equilivency between the two.
To oppose Israels illegal invasion of Lebanon in the first place. Israel has been killing civilians wholesale for a long while. They are not white hats in this issue.In fact there arent any white hats in this context. The root of the problem though is Israel illegally settling occupied territory it isnt Palestinians occupying Israeli territory its Israel occupying Palestinian territory since 1967. And in violation of the fourth geneva convention on occupation building settlements there. In their own words facts on the ground to steal the land. I am no fan of Hezbollah but lets not pretend Israel is white and pure here. They have done their share of provocation and have shown massive disregard for innocents and committing attrocities.
This is the crux of the arguments against Israel... they took the land after WWII. Of course this mentality leads to conflict, not peace, until every single Israeli is dead or gone from the land. Israel was set up after WWII by the UN... as in UNITED NATIONS! It was allocated because the Jews needed a place to go... home wasn't an option, and most of the other countries didn't want them in their backyard!
Now we could debate how fair it was to set up Israel in that area... but what's that going to get us? No where. People need to MOVE ON already... constantly returning to this part of the issue only serves one purpose, and that is more war.
The Islamic-fascists continue to keep people angry in an attempt to maintain power and control, and divert attention away from the real social issues their people face. Anyone who has visited Israel knows the hard work the people of that land put into making the desert into a function country, complete with cities, industry, and agriculture. Why aren't more of the surrounding areas like this? Because it is much easier to lust after what has already been built, than put forth the sacrifice and effort to do it yourself.
Israel is a Jewish State, but is not exclusively for Jews. It might surprise some people to know that there are many different religions living peacefully throughout the country. There is no religious requirement for its citizens, only the ability to get along with one-another.
But you won't hear that from Hezbollah, because they were created to prevent just that. To keep the people angry, to gain power and money for their leaders, and to inspire more Islamic militants. They use civilians to hide their weapons, with the intention of providing a moral quandary for their enemies: If they respond, they kill civilians and loose the PR war - if they do nothing, they further their cause.
Israel is gambling that people will see through Hezbollah's use of human shields, and recognize this is not an act of hateful aggression, but a fight for peace... a fight to maintain a country without constant fear of attack. And isn't that worth fighting for?
I agree with your synopsis of the situation. How long can you justify the fighting when the issue of the existance of Israel has been clearly established. It is gut wrenching to see the casualties. But if I was Israeli I would expect my government to protect from these attacks much like many of us supported our US government going into Afghanistan after we were attacked. The deaths of these people lay at the feet of these terrorist organizations that continually destroy the peace.
INSIDE the green line. Israel has much to answer for with their oppression of the Palestinians aggression and State terrorism against their nieghbors and the occupied Arab citizens. And refusing what has been the international consensus outside the US and Israel since 1976 when we vetoed the UN security counsel resolution that would have mandated this solution. Israel inside the Green line. A Palestinian State. Israel with guarantees for water and security.
You are again right. The issue is not the existence of Israel, but what many regard to be an illegal expansion of Israel beyond UN borders.
That is the position many American liberals have taken on the issue.
Where the issue gets confused is when the American liberal position is conflated with the Palestinian/Hezbollah postition.
I have talked to many Palestinians and I do believe they want the destruction of the Israeli state. They will easily admit it. I regard that position as irrational and unhealthy to say the least.
People should be able to look at both sides of the conflict and see things they disagree with. The problem in America is that the media only really present the Israeli point of view. I would presume that is because the Palestinian point of view has a glaring elephant in the room where they want the destruction of Israel. It has the unfortunate effect of invalidating most of the Palestinians' otherwise valid arguments.
You raise an excellant point. I think many of us have issue with the "destruction and elimination " philosophy that they have towards Israel. Speaking for myself I do see that some of the issues aren't black and white but I also think these groups don't want peace. Others have establish peace with Israel in the region. But anytime it appears to be progrees being made or an easing of violent tensions they strike out at Israel and cause the process to crumble.
There is a faction with the Palestinians and in Lebanon that wants Israel gone. I didnt mean to imply differently. I am not convinced that they constitute the majority opinion of the Palestinians. Just as, in polls, a majority if Israeli citizens prefer giving back the confiscated land on the West Bank for peace. The OFFICIAL position of the Arab states including the PLO when they were a viable entity IS however not the destruction of Israel as the 76 and 82 peace inititives rejected by Israel and the US show. As I keep saying I just dont see a white hat anywhere. What Hamas and Hezbollah are DOING is counterproductive. I also think what Israel is doing is counterproductive for THEM. The violence they have been inflicting on civilians for quite some time is NOT solving their problem. I am concerned very much for Israel, they cannot indefinitly survive on hostility they only get to lose ONE war and its over for them. That will not happen anytime soon because of their militray might and our support but in the long run, allowing the Palestinians some justice and dignity, making peace with their neighbors is their ONLY chance for long term survival.
I believe your way was attempted...in Lebanon...and look how well that worked out. Agreements were reached. Israel pulled out. UN resolutions were put in place. And it didn't stop Hezbollah from striking at Israel in clear violation of all agreements and resolutions. Hezbollah killed 8 soldiers by crossing into Israel territory and kidnapped 2 as well as launching rockets across the border. If Lebanon can not or will not contain Hezbollah as was the agreement then Israel has every right and responsibility to step in and take control and stop it. Yes the civillian casualties are heartbreaking but they should be laid at the feet of Hezzbollah for striking Israel, Lebanon for its partnership with Hezbollah, and the international community for not stepping in and enforcing the resolutions and agreements that were put in place to promote peace. Israel made concessions and their people were killed because of it. Israel can not do what you ask and retreat from the areas because the governments in the areas are incapable of standing up to the terrorists and enforcing the peace. It is to deny reality to say if they just pull back all will be well and they will be safe.
It divorces Lebanon from the Palestinian issue. That cannot be done. Hezbollah came into Israel in reaction to Israeli provocation in Gaza. There has been reasonable peace between Lebanon and Israel since they left until this recent shelling of Gaza which has gone on nearly nonstop since Israel left there. You say they tried it in Lebanon and it hasnt worked. Has unremittant violence worked for Israel? If violence attrocities and military action could solve this problem it would have been solved long ago. Israel has tried THAT route too, how has it worked out for them? I am saying the only way to isolate the extremists is to take the VALID complaints away that the moderat Muslim voices in the region are sympathetic too. They MUST leave the occupied territory because ITS NOT THEIRS. It is the moral and ethical thing to do. They had NO RIGHT to settle it in the first place. THAT is the provocation that enrages and radicalizes the whole region. In the end if Israel EVER expects long term security it must be based on mutual understanding which cannot be had by saying, ok we took what WE want now lets talk about peace. Divorcing the whole argument about Israelis attrocities committed against their Arab nieghbors also does this discussion no good. You keep acting like all the violence and attrocities are coming from one direction and this just isnt true
Let me explain MY motivation here. It is twofold. First I am always looking at what is morally right not WHO is doing it. I will always criticize immoral or unethical acts even when my friends commit them. Having said that my strongest sentiment, and my heart is with Israel. I have read many Jewish writers, I am impressed with thier sense of moral imperatives. Their sense of justice. I think it is a strong part of their self identity as a people and culture. I think that in the long term they MUST do what is right. That cannot be seen as the stealing of Palestinian land. Israel can only lose one war and they are done. They can win this one, the next one, ten more down the road in the next 100 years but if they continue down the road of continual hostility. Of saying they just hate us so no agreements are reached. No one is reasonable except us so we cannot even talk to them. Eventually they will lose a war and THAT will be the end of their national dreams. THAT is the eventuality I am most concerned with. What they NEED is security that will not come with actions such as we are witnessing in Lebannon. That will only come when they REALLY talk to an Arab conference and lay out what they need and what they are willing to concede. That must be occupied territories. In the short term its obvious Palestinians have much more to fear from Israel than Israel has to fear from the Palestinians now is the time to do this sort of talking. Now is the time to find a common ground both can live with, saying the other side isnt even human they just want to kill is an excuse NOT to do what MUST be done. A permanent war state cannot be maintained forever by Israel. It is a prescription for their destruction. THAT is my major concern
First the problem is NOT that Israel exists at all. Arabs have floated several peace treaties in 71. 76, 82, all of which were fine that Israel is now part of the region. The UN mandate created Israel in 48 and gave about 78% of the land to the Jews and 22% to the Arabs of the region. That wasnt good enough for Israel and in 67 they took more land. THAT is what is now under dispute. They had no right under international law to settle the occupied territories. That is explicitly in violation of the fourth geneva Convention on occupation.
Israel wants peace on THEIR terms which seems to include Lebanon in chaos and whatever part of the West Bank they decide they want to keep regardless what the UN mandate set up.
There is an argument that life had become intolerable in Europe after WW2, one I understand. The Arabs might legitimatly ask why THEY should shoulder the cost of that problem since they werent involved in the oppression of WW2. That is all irrelevant now. Israel is there, they arent going anywhere. The Arab world understands they arent going anywhere and that there isnt anything they can do about it, with Israels nuclear arsenal and the backing of the US. The PLO wrote a peace plan in 1976 according to Israels own ambassador to the UN. It included peace with Israel inside the green line. The Saudi peace plan of 82 was basically the same thing. The Palestinians are like everyone else they need their dignity they would be willing (outside a few extreme nutbags that could be easily isolated once peace is negotiated) accept Israel inside the green line but see it as an attack on their very dignity and identity that Israel is saying no we want MORE of your land.
Hezbollah was NOT created to drive the Jews into the sea they were CREATED when Israel illegally invaded Lebbanon in 1982 they did not exist before that. We would throw a fit if Jews were being oppressed ANYWHERE in the way the Israelies routinely oppress the Palestinians. Destroying thier homes and agricultural groves which have in many cases existed for generations. Mass arrests without trial, shooting children. Targetting civilians. As I said there are no white hats in this conflict. Both sides need to accept that they arent going to get whatever they want and come to an agreement that allows Israel to feel safe and the Palestinians to feel they have been given some justice and dignity and Lebanon feeling safe from Israeli coersion, bombings, invasion and interference in their affairs which has been going on since at least the 70's when Israel was committing piracy on the sea to divert ships bound for Lebanon into their Marionite Christian ally ports and away from the ports controlled by the Arabs.
What anti-Israeli website are you getting your information from?
1- "That wasnt good enough for Israel and in 67 they took more land." You fail to mention this land was taken after Israel was invated in the Six Day War. If your assertion is that the taking of this land was unprovoked, than you are wrong. Additionally, much of this land was previously occupied by Jews until 1948 when invading Arab armies forced them to leave... It was only returned to them after the war in 1967. Check your facts here: [link to www.palestinefacts.org]
2- "Israel wants peace on THEIR terms..." That's correct. Their terms are that they have the right to exist and live without constant attack! Hezbollah wants them to die... Simple as that.
3- "The Palestinians are like everyone else... outside a few extreme nutbags that could be easily isolated..." Are you kidding me?! The 'extreme nutbags' you talk about... Are those the ones that were ELECTED into the Palestinian government? The elected Hezbollah parliament members in Lebanon? The 'nutbag' in Iran calling for Israel's demise? Are those the 'few nutbags'? How would you isolate them? By declaring war on them and killing them? Isn't that what's happening now?
4- "...Israel is saying no we want MORE of your land." No their not! They just gave back a big chunk of land in hopes of creating peace... but that didn't work. But why should Israel give back any land? Hezbollah has shown not attempts to curb the violence, or offer a peaceful solution to the problem... They only want Israel off the map. So why should Israel offer its people anything positive? You don't give people who obviously cannot control themselves more responsibility. Show me Hezbollah acting like responsible, peaceful people, and then maybe we can talk about what to do with the land.
5- "Hezbollah was NOT created to drive the Jews into the sea they were CREATED when Israel illegally invaded Lebanon in 1982..." Again, the facts. Israel invaded Lebanon after the PLO in that area violated a UN peace treaty, and continued to carry out terrorist attacks on Israelis. [link to www.palestinefacts.org]
Yet again... The bottom line is that Israel keeps hoping for peace... Keeps fighting for it... And has been met with nothing but resistance from people whose lust for power is only exceeded by their lust for blood.
I am not sure what people think Israel should be doing. If they don't defend themselves and take steps to contain the attacks and prevent further attacks then they would be failing their people. It seems many think they should just allow their people to be continually harrassed by violence and terrorism and do nothing to stop those who want their total destruction and nothing less.
It contained more propaganda like telling us Israel was invaded in 1967 which is pure delusion. THAT NEVER HAPPENED. There might have been a self defense motive at least that can be argued though I have read three high ranking Israeli military officials who at the time disputed even that but there is NO DISPUTE that Israel invaded Egypt, Syria, Jordan and the occupied territories NOT the other way around. What they must do is find peace which is not going to be attained at the barrel of a gun or by having their snipers target Children which Amira Haas, an Israeli journalist says her source, an Israeli sniper ADMITTED they were instructed to do. Israel CAN ratchet down the violence, there have been times of relative peace and during those time Israel has not lessened the oppression of the occupied Arabs nor taken the steps toward peace that are necessary. THAT is the dynamic that brought Hamas into power. ( an oversimplification, Fatah was corrupt as well as ineffective but overall a fairly valid statement)
You, yourself, are using propaganda put out by the other side and because you say it came from a jew that makes it unimpeachable. Come on saying these claims came from a jew or an Israeli is not lending weight to the accusation any more then for me to do likewise and quote accusations by Arabs that agree with Israel's position. You are also using semantics to argue your case. Saying it is not an invasion but only had elements of self-defense. Fine we will go with your word "self-defense. Are you saying they shouldn't defend themselves because their enemy may be weaker then they are. Well apparently the "weak" enemy doesn't make their people any less dead. You are getting yourself bogged down in history and who is more right or wrong. We have to look at what is going on now and it is undeniable that the terrorist organizations have taken over these areas and they must be removed if there is any hope for an end to the violence. You are also wrong in that Israel has made peace with other countries in the region that they had violent histories with. So to say it is Israel that is stopping peace in the region is incorrect. They have established agreements and those that are abiding by them do not have these problems.
Have been a self defense motive. At this point it is so muddled we will never be able to say for sure. Please dont put words in my mouth that is disengenuous. That still doesnt mean that claiming Israel was invaded was NOT propaganda it purely IS. There is no dispute on this issue. Israel did the invading. My point is the fact there MIGHT have been a self defense motive, which itself is disputed even in Israel in no way changes the FACT that saying Israel was invaded in 1967 is anything other than propaganda.
Exaclty WHAT that I said is propaganda. I pointed to an indisputably FALSE statement, can you show me a false statement I made? Amira Haas won the Anna Lind award. An international award winning Israeli journalist is my source and YOU just claim its propaganda? Short of going to Israel and investigating these things myself exactly what more is expected of me than taking an award winning Israeli journalist as my source? To avoid this charge of propaganda do I just need to take the rights word for what is happening? The pro whatever Israel wants side? I have read four books on this issue last year. All of them written by Jews. Now a Jew might be biased but ANYONE might be. I am only saying this isnt coming from Palestinian or anti Zionist forces Chomsky used to LIVE in a kibbutz IN Israel, his parents taught Hebrew school. Exactly what would be HIS motive to be anti Israel? Tanya Rhienhard TEACHES right now in a tel Aviv University exactly what is HER motive to be anti Israel. Seeing thing differently than YOU does not constitute propaganda. When I made that chage I pointed to an UNDENIABLY false statement which is a pretty good backup for a claim of propaganda. YOURS was baseless
Try it. Amazing you accuse me of getting my facts on some anti Israeli website then send me to a biased website. I read books on the issue. Every one written by JEWS. I guess you didnt know there is quite a peace movement in Israel.
1 It is insane to keep saying Israel was invaded in 1967. FACT. Israel invaded Syria, Egypt and Jordan in 1967 NOT the other way around.
2 Again Hezbollah did not EXIST before the illegal invasion of 82 into Lebanon. It is easy to just SAY they want to kill all the Jews, I dont think that is the reality. There hasnt been that many cross border incidents by Hezbollah before the recent violence against the Palestinians in Gaza. Just demonizing the Arabs is never going to solve this problem. Only finding common ground will. You can keep pretending that there is no common ground because all the Arabs want to kill all the Jews but the repeated peace treaties proposed, and the rejection of them without any negotiations by Israel puts that lie to rest.
5 more delusion. I read at the time there had not been a cross border incident in over a year when Israel began bombing then invaded Lebanon. They invaded to take out the PLO as a POLITICAL not military threat which was admitted in Ha'aretz:
[link to www.doublestandards.org]
In fact this invasion had long been anticipated in Israel. Three months earlier, in March 1982, the Israeli paper Ha’aretz had written:
Behind the official excuse of we shall not tolerate shelling or terrorist reactions’ lies a strategic view which holds that the physical annihilation of the PLO [Palestinian Liberation Organisation] has to be achieved. That is, not only must its fingers and hands in the West Bank be amputated (as is now being done with an iron fist), but its heart and head in Beirut must be dealt with. As Israel does not want the PLO as a partner for talks or as an interlocutor for any solution in the West Bank, the supporters of confrontation with the PLO hold that the logical continuation of the struggle with the PLO in the territories is in Lebanon. With the loss of its physical strength, in their opinion, the PLO will lose not only its hold over the territories but also its growing international status. [3]
If you really want to understand this dynamic I suggest you read Chomsky's Fateful Triangle, if that tome is to academic of a reading assignment his Pirates and Emporers or Middle East illusions can at least bring an end to some of the more delusional statements you have made like Israel was invaded in 1967
3Of course there were a minority of Jews on the West Bank for centuries just like there were Arabs in the area the UN gave to the Jews in the UN mandate. In 48 as soon as the UN created Israel there was a virtual civil war and the Jewish contingent was much more organized. To make it seem like the Arab states immediatly invaded to drive the Jews into the Sea is a misconception of what happened.
3 Yes Hamas got ELECTED. Israel was NOT giving Fatah anything and how long were the Palestinian people going to put up with Israel annexing their land and do NOTHING its been almost 40 years. Did Israel really think they were going to just TAKE more of the 22% of the land given to the Arabs and there would be no consequences? That is what happens when you keep stripping a people of their dignity they become more radicalized they vote in people the believe will do SOMETHING. There is a good argument that this whole violent reprisal which Israel has been planning for a while according to many sources is to punish the Palestinians for doing just that voting in Hamas.
4 Why give the land back. ITS NOT THEIRS. There have been many peace inititivies like the 76 PLO plan in the UN, the Saudi Peace plan, Israel wont even TALK about them. They gave back Gaza which they never wanted in the first place, what good is it to Israel, one of the most impovrished and densely populated areas in the world with virtually no natural resources this has ALWAYS been about the most desirable areas of the West Bank, that part Israel is STEALING right now. Hezbollah might not be able to make peace on their own but they also cannot make war on their own. The point is IF Israel is reasonable enough to pacify the majority of the Arab countries and the Palestinians along the lines of the international consensus and the Peace Plans offered by the PLO and Saudis the rejectionist elements can be isolated and dealt with. As long as Israel is intransigent and intent on taking what they please this will not happen and the support for the extremists will make peace impossible.
Solon, while you keep saying their is no white hat here you seem to cherry pick what facts you want to base your argument on. You repeatedly cite failed agreements that never took place. You don't mention the other sides proposals that had outside support that also were rejected. More importantly though you fail to recognize the agreements that WERE agreed to. There is no concession Israel can make that will satisfy those that call for its total destruction and if you doubt their majority in the area then just look at who they have put in their government. To not recognize that the Lenbanon conflict is not the fault of Israel who were abiding by the agreements, even though it put them in greater jeopardy by giving Hezbollah the time to amass more weapons to kill them with, is closing your eyes to reality. What do you think they should have done when Hezbolah violated the lines and invaded into Israel killing its people and taking hostages? I understand your distaste for the violence that erupted and I share that with you but what other choice did they have with respect to Lebanon?
I am not using my limited space to give the whole picture. That is because I am RESPONDING. The other side IS being given and I dont disagree. There are evil terrorists targetting Israel, our only disagreement is on the tactics Israel should use to end that problem. On the other hand I havent seen you aknowledge that Israel also has some culpability here, that they have also engaged in attrocities and oppression, I have freely and often admitted the Arab contingents have. The problems arent coming from only one side. Saying there is nothing Israel can do is an EXCUSE for Israel to do whatever they WANT. NOT a reasonable tactic to eventually lead to peace and justice. My point about the peace plans seems have gone right by you. IF as you keep saying these guys only want Israels destruction WHY did they propose mulitple peace plans all of which include peace with and recognition of Israels right to exist. A concept no other country has?
I wouldnt say the conflict was the FAULT of Israel I would say their provacative reaction beyond any reasonable proportion is not in their best interest. There are many other things they could have done. I am not a pacifist. I wouldnt have objected to a military raid aimed at freeing their captives. Of course it might have been more palatable if Israel hadnt been kidnapping Palestinians by the score BEFORE the Hezbollah kidnappings happened:
June 29th, 2006 | Posted in Press Releases, Bil'in Village FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Palestinians active in non-violent struggle against the illegal Israeli annexation barrier were taken from their homes in the West Bank last night. This happens at a time when media attention is focusing on the taking of one Israeli soldier by Palestinians, and the mass-taking of 64 Palestinian government officials last night, including 20 MPs and 8 cabinet ministers.
[link to www.ynetnews.com]
Hundreds of Palestinian 'suspects' have been kidnapped from their homes and will never stand trial Arik Diamant
It's the wee hours of the morning, still dark outside. A guerilla force comes out of nowhere to kidnap a soldier. After hours of careful movement, the force reaches its target, and the ambush is on! In seconds, the soldier finds himself looking down the barrel of a rifle.
A smash in the face with the butt of the gun and the soldier falls to the ground, bleeding. The kidnappers pick him up, quickly tie his hands and blindfold him, and disappear into the night.
This might be the end of the kidnapping, but the nightmare has just begun. The soldier's mother collapses, his father prays. His commanding officers promise to do everything they can to get him back, his comrades swear revenge. An entire nation is up-in-arms, writing in pain and worry.
Nobody knows how the soldier is: Is he hurt? Do his captors give him even a minimum of human decency, or are they torturing him to death by trampling his honor? The worst sort of suffering is not knowing. Will he come home? And if so, when? And in what condition? Can anyone remain apathetic in the light of such drama?
Israeli terror
This description, you'll be surprised to know, has nothing to do with the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit. It is the story of an arrest I carried out as an IDF soldier, in the Nablus casbah, about 10 years ago. The "soldier" was a 17-year-old boy, and we kidnapped him because he knew "someone" who had done "something."
We brought him tied up, with a burlap sac over his head, to a Shin Bet interrogation center known as "Scream Hill" (at the time we thought it was funny). There, the prisoner was beaten, violently shaken and sleep deprived for weeks or months. Who knows.
I could post things like this all day. This is the point. There is a double standard here. Israel kidnapped a Palestinian politician not long BEFORE Hamas kidnapped the soldier. Whatever is done to an Israeli citizen is rightfully condemned. Israel does the same thing routinely and because they are doing it to Arabs our press doesnt seem to notice. Its THIS kind of provocation that leads to or certainly adds to what the Arabs do and people like you want to pretend that its ALL the fault of the Arabs and because the Arabs are doing to Israelis what Israel routinely does to THEM it means the Arabs are just evil and cannot be talked to. I tell you that is a prescription for the eventual destruction of Israel.
I agree there are atrocities on both sides. So lets play your game. One of these defensless prisoners that Hezbollah wants released and was named in particular by Nasrallah ,as described in Newsweek, Samir Kunter who took part in a terrorist attack on the town of Nahariya was part of a group that shot an Israeli civilian named Danny Haran in front of his 4 year old daughter then smashed the little girls skull against a rock o n the beach. Haran's wife, hiding in a crawl space with their 2 year old tried so desperatly to keep the infant from screaming that the baby smothered to death. So do you think Israel should release this guy in the interest of "peace" ?But this who has the worse anecdotal stoy to tell is just a bid to play to emotions and not reality. You can believe some anonymous account that Israel TARGETS children but personally I will take it with a grain of salt. It sounds like the rantings of another poster who claimed the US gave Israel tanks for the purpose of running over Palestinian children. Sometimes attrocities happen without the intent to target due to getting caught in the cross fire of violence but to use it in this way is disingenuous at best. I doubt we are going to reach any agreement on this issue because you and I have very different takes on these terrrorist groups and what it is they want. But I did find your information and points interesting even if I do not fully agree. Thanks for the discussion.
This is DEADLY serious. You are wasting both our times telling me how bad the Arab terrorists are. I agree. Vile terrorist scum, no doubt. They must be marginalized by seperating them from the reasonable and moderate Arabs so they can be isolated and dealt with. This will not happen by Israel being unreasonable about the West Bank and committing the kind of acts that cannot seriously be considered self defense. How in the WORLD is a report by an international reward winning journalist dismissed so easily. Of course it is anonomous if he gave his name he would be put in jail, it is a source SHE believed and there is also the fact she ASKED to talk to him because when she went to the morgues to do her job she was TOLD by the professional forensics personell that there were too many children, there had to be some reason they were being targetted. THIS was what she was investigating when she confirmed exactly this report. Now she Writes for Ha'aretz what would be her motive to make up something so horrific. I know its hard to accept the government of Israel would do such a thing but this is absolutly solid. As solid as it gets beyond you eyewitnessing it for yourself. Here read her acceptance speech for yourself.
[link to 72.14.203.104]
No question there are extremist opinions on the other side, the statement you give is a good example. I do not believe I am spreading that kind of inflamatory motive based assertion. We may not ever agree, but think about this, you and I probably both have the same motives at the core here. What does that tell you?
Actually your motives are probably more altruistic then mine. I don’t look at this as an uninterested observer. I know that Israel can be a good ally and I don’t worry that they will target the US or US interest. I can’t say the same about the other side. The other side is allied with those that would do the US harm. You may say they have reason to be anti-American and target the US but that doesn’t make them any less dangerous to us. So I am bias in the sense that I give Israel the benefit of the doubt and a little more slack. So no doubt self-interest influences, in part, my opinion and positions on the issue. At the end of the day I feel safer with Israel in control and those that would do us harm held back.
"Look at the Nazi's, they had many more deaths than the combined forces against them, but did that make them on the right side of the struggle?"
They did? Including Russia?
What news channel are you watching?
The news keeps showing casulties on both sides and they are endlessly talking about Hezbollah. CNN even had a report called "Inside Hezbollah" which should have made the staunchest Likudinite happy.
BARNES: "...obviously those things happen, but there's -- the truth is somewhere else. "
How can this be, that a guy can say such transparent doublespeak on (inter)national media like this? Does he become a different person in between saying ,"obviously the death of innocents is happening" and "the death of innocence doesn't matter, though." (My paraphrase.)
How? Why? Because the truth is somewhere else. Where??? It sounds like we're meant to surrender to the judgment of the Decider (and Company) as to where the truth is. In fact, it sounds like deciding that this is truth and should be seen by all is a crime, i.e., "abetting the terrorists."
How can people hear it and accept it, say to themselves, a guy just told me War is Peace, Truth is Lies, and if I don't accept the sanitized version of the Truth, I'm a bad guy? How?
Ah - nice to see that Barns and Kondracke have the common touch enough to say that it's okay for people to be killed because they're in a Mercedes.
Maybe they wouldn't have been singled out if tried to escape in a Toyota or Chevy.
Doesn't matter to the typical Fox News demographic - the image that a Mercedes congers up is probably some pimped out S-Class. When in reality it may be some old - entry level model - that's cheaper than some Toyota and Chevy.
But as long as they're driving a 'Sade - then they must be the ones wearing the black hats in WW III.
eventually, but I'm still knocked over every time I see the pretend-journalists on a major cable news network going on another tirade about the press, and their shameless reporting of facts.
It's too insane to be good comedy.
You really are an idiot. If the "truth" as you call it is somewhere else, why don't you go find it?
Obscuring & distorting unpleasant truths is, at core, what propagandists do.
Barnes is unfamiliar with this distinctions because he is not... nor has he ever been... a journalist.
He's just a sold-out, lying hack.
"The Truth is Somewhere Else"
This would make a good tee-shirt.