Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Zionist Mainstream media
Options
-
04-12-2010 7:29pm#1I didn't want to post in the other thread as somethings are better left to die. The point of this thread is that some people for reasons best know to themselves don't seem to realise that there is a pro-Zionist agenda in the mainstream media - in particular in the US. With that in mind I have kept an eye out for good examples of Zionist propoganda/hasbara. Here are two:
Manufacturing consent through omission.
november 17, 2010
“PUT THE PALESTINIANS ON A DIET” - MEDIA BURY DOCUMENTS REVEALING ISRAEL’S DELIBERATE POLICY OF NEAR-STARVATION FOR GAZAIsrael has been forced to reveal what Palestinians and other observers on the ground have known for a long time: that the blockade of Gaza is state policy intended to inflict collective punishment, not to bolster Israeli “security”.
An Israeli human rights group has won a legal battle to compel the Israeli government to release three important documents. These outline state policy for permitting the transfer of goods into Gaza prior to the May 31 attack on the peace flotilla in which nine people were killed by Israeli forces. The group, Gisha – Legal Center for Freedom of Movement, is demanding Israeli transparency. Meanwhile, Israel refuses to release documents on the current version of blockade policy which was “eased” after international condemnation following the flotilla attack.
The released documents, whose existence Israel had denied for eighteen months, reveal that the state approved “a policy of deliberate reduction” of basic goods, including food and fuel, in the Gaza Strip. Gisha Director Sari Bashi explains:“Instead of considering security concerns, on the one hand, and the rights and needs of civilians living in Gaza, on the other, Israel banned glucose for biscuits and the fuel needed for regular supply of electricity – paralyzing normal life in Gaza and impairing the moral character of the State of Israel. I am sorry to say that major elements of this policy are still in place.” (Gisha: Legal Center for Freedom of Movement, ‘Due to Gisha's Petition: Israel Reveals Documents related to the Gaza Closure Policy’, October 21, 2010; http://www.gisha.org/index.php ?intLanguage=2&intItemId=1904&intSiteSN=113)As Saeed Bannoura of the International Middle East Media Center reports, the Israeli government imposed a deliberate policy:
“in which the dietary needs for the population of Gaza are chillingly calculated, and the amounts of food let in by the Israeli government measured to remain just enough to keep the population alive at a near-starvation level. This documents the statement made by a number of Israeli officials that they are ‘putting the people of Gaza on a diet’.” (Saeed Bannoura, ‘Israeli government documents show deliberate policy to keep Gazans at near-starvation levels’, International Middle East Media Center, November 6, 2010 21:32; http://www.imemc.org/article/59843)
Bannoura adds:“This release of documents also severely undermines Israel's oft-made claim that the siege is ‘for security reasons’, as it documents a deliberate and systematic policy of collective punishment of the entire population of Gaza.”When Israel and the United States were reacting to Hamas’s election victory in Gaza in January 2006, long-time Israeli government adviser Dov Weisglass stated:“The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger.” (‘Hamas readies for government, Israel prepares sanctions’, Agence France Presse, February 16, 2006)The released documents contain actual equations used by the Israeli government to calculate the exact amounts of food, fuel and other necessities needed to do exactly that. (‘Submitted to Gisha in the framework of a Freedom of Information Act Petition, AP 2744/09 Gisha v. Defense Ministry’, Appendices B, C and D;http://gisha.org/UserFiles/File/HiddenMessages/ DefenseMinistryDocumentsRevealedFOIAPetition.pdf)
The policy is all the more disturbing, indeed repellent, given that almost half the people of Gaza are children under the age of eighteen. One might reasonably conclude that Israel has deliberately forced the undernourishment of hundreds of thousands of children in direct violation of international law and the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Media Response? A Polite Silence
Our searches of the Nexis newspaper database show that, as far as we could determine, not a single UK newspaper has reported the release of these damning Israeli documents. We widened our searches to include all English-language publications covered worldwide by Nexis. We found just two: one from the Palestine News Network on October 21 and one in Palestine Chronicle on November 6.
We were so surprised by the uniform silence across the English-language press that we asked US-based media analyst David Peterson to check our findings. He was able to do so, spelling out his search results as follows (email to Media Lens, November 11, 2010):
Major World Publications: zero
All News (English): two (the same two that we found, as mentioned above)
Broadcast Transcripts: zero
A search of the Factiva database (covering all major English-language newspapers and wire services) found the same results. Peterson commented:“No mentions in any of the major English-language newspapers or wire services of the fact that someone had revealed the actual Israeli government policy towards the Gaza Palestinians is to force a ‘deliberate reduction’ in their access to the necessities of everyday survival.”It takes a peculiar form of social malaise for this astonishing media silence to be maintained in ostensibly free societies.
The Fiercely “Independent” BBC
On November 11, an online BBC article reported on the Gaza blockade but made no mention of the released documents. (Jon Donnison, ‘UN: No change in Gaza despite easing of Israel blockade’ BBC news online, November 11, 2010 Last updated at 00:25; http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11731695)
Reporter Jon Donnison wrote:“The UN says there has been ‘no material change” for people in Gaza since Israel announced it was ‘easing’ its economic blockade of the Palestinian territory.”Jon Ging, the head of UN operations in Gaza, said few people had noticed any difference:“There's been no material change for the people on the ground here in terms of their status, the aid dependency, the absence of any recovery or reconstruction, no economy.”Ging continued:“The easing, as it was described, has been nothing more than a political easing of the pressure on Israel and Egypt.”The BBC gave the final word to Yigal Palmor, a spokesman for the Israeli foreign ministry:“Why is the border blockaded? Because the territory has been overtaken by a declared terror movement."This assertion that the Gaza blockade is motivated by security concerns went unchallenged.
World News Today, presented by Zeinab Badawi on BBC4, broadcast a piece by Donnison along similar lines to his article. (BBC World News Today, BBC4, Thursday, November 11, 2010, 7pm;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwxZXfRTdj0)
We wrote to Jon Donnison and asked whether he was aware that the Israeli human rights group Gisha had obtained Israeli government documents confirming that the collective punishment of Gaza is based on politics, not security. We asked him:“Have you reported the release of these documents?We emailed again on November 16 but have received no response to date.
“Will you be pursuing it in a new article?” (Email, November 11, 2010)
And manufacturing consent through lies.
'6
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2Umn4Dc7_IComments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Ah, this is the article I read initially and is the one to which I am referring. It makes no reference to the revealed Israeli documents as stated. The follow-up article which you linked to above however does, so again, I don't really see the problem outside an initial poorly researched article. In fact, given that the reporter in question had to have the leaked documents pointed out to him, surely it's a positive thing they were included in the follow-up piece?Brown Bomber wrote: »I'm a little confused here. Is this the article we are discussing?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11868589
Again I was referring to the original article, one which was subsequently updated when additional information was supplied. If they were initially omitted why would they then be included in the follow-up a little over two weeks later?Brown Bomber wrote: »It's irrelevant if you or I think that something is pro or ant anything. The simple fact is that a war crime, clearly laid out in official documents and obtained and released by a human rights group was wilfully ignored.
As it is unquestionably newsworthy the only reasonable conclusion is that they were omitted for a reason.
Just so we're on the same page here, are you making a distinction at all between the two states? It seems that it's in Israel's best interests to be seen as opposing a radical Islamic terrorist group in Hamas whereas the US seem to be encouraging it only through their support of Israel. I believe the difference to be quite important in this case.Brown Bomber wrote: »I think you misunderstood my point. I was saying that both Israel and the US have encouraged radical Islam.
True however it was significantly tightened post-elections.Brown Bomber wrote: »First of all the blockade has nothing to do with Hamas. It began before Hamas came to power.
In the sense that they don't want any more rockets fired into their territory, yes I do think they want peace. In the sense that said peace may lead to discussions which result in Israeli concessions then I'd agree they probably don't want to be in that position.Brown Bomber wrote: »Secondly your assuming Israel actually wants peace, which IMO they do not as it doesn't suit their objectives.
They still desire a Palestinian state however, something which the Israelis will never agree too, regardless of how many concessions are made.Brown Bomber wrote: »Hamas were willing to make concessions and compromise on the June 67 borders in a 2 state solution. This is why Operation Castlead - to prevent peace.
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
From a news point of few the difference may be irrelevant.
Such an empty, vacuous statement.
From a "news point of view" (ignoring the fact that no such thing exists) it shouldn't make any difference if a people starved or were intentionally starved by a brutal occupier in your opinion.
My my...I have no idea as I don't decide what is newsworthy and what isn't.
Translation: You don't know what is important in the world because you don't own a media outlet or are a media editor or otherwise have influence within the media industry.
WTF?...
You have a functioning brain capable of independent thought don't you!!
(for clarity I am suggesting you do here)Personally I have no issue differentiating. But we're taking about what's newsworthy and what isn't on any given given day.
On the contrary Meglome. It was you who brought famine into the discussion to compare it with an official state policy. Famine, awful as it is has nothing at all to do with this.
Post 1 - Gisha. You don't need links after that just a base knowledge and common sense.Okay so where are the links to the information that 1.4 million people are actually starving?
I'll provide you with the base knowledge; the common sense is up to you.
During Operation Castlead 2008/2009 Israel systemathically destroyed Gaza's means of food production (see Goldstone Report). Destroying farmland, farm animals, mills etc. They even left calling cards. This is 60 metres in diameter.
Gaza is subjected to an illegal siege, no imports come in. Gaza is almost wholly reliant on what passes through the Israeli blockade. The population of Gaza is 1.4 million. That is where the 1.4 million came from.Is that the BBC documentary I asked you about five times to explain how exactly it was biased. Let me spell this out to you. Talking to all sides and getting the opinions of all sides isn't biased. It's the total opposite of biased. But when you are predisposed to believe one side over another I can see how it might appear biased. I may not like what the Israelis often do but I don't assume they are always lying or always wrong.
ffs...here we go again.
Did I or did I not post in that very same thread the UN report into the massacre that completely contradicts and discredits the BBC "documentary"?
I assume you never took the ten minutes to read it then? If not the only rational explanation is denial.
What more could you possibly ask for to prove it was biased?Of course you've sidestepped, you're saying that 'Zionists' are responsible for keeping the story down but you have no proof of that whatsoever.
What proof exactly do you need?
Zionist war crimes were covered up in the press.
Who do you think is responsible for covering them up? ... Al Qaeda? The IRA? Pablo Escobar?This The Israeli policy has been to put the squeeze on the Gaza strip for some years.
And yet more apologetic language.
You claim to be neutral on this right?
Try 40 years.
And now you've reverted back to saying absolutely nothing.AIt may not have been news they were officially doing it with food too but it's certainly not news it's happening.So rather than 'Zionists' being involved I'm saying that unless people are actually dying from starvation the overall story has been heard many times in the media. So it's media apathy rather than conspiracy.
No it has not.
If you are going to compare it to something this is closest I can think of.Denial of Holodomor is the assertion that the 1932-1933 Holodomor in Soviet Ukraine did not occur.[95][96][97][98] This denial and suppression was made in official Soviet propaganda and was supported by some Western journalists and intellectuals.[96][97][99][100][101]
...The Soviet party line was echoed at the time of the famine by some prominent Western journalists, including Walter Duranty and Louis Fischer. The denial of the famine was a highly successful and well orchestrated disinformation campaign by the Soviet government.
Again your conflating (purposely or otherwise) famine, which is a newsworthy event in itself with a policy of forced food reduction.
You and I could be locked up for doing such a thing to a ****ing dog yet in your view the media en masse automatically should be apathethic to the forced reduction of food to a people of 1.5 million, half of those being children.Okay but lot's of things get reported each and very day. These things will vary from country to country, region to region. How is that caused by 'Zionists' exactly?
Yes lot's of things do get reported every day, that's why it is called news. Yet somehow in the natural order of things documents obtained proving a war crime was committed against 1.5 million people collectively is not one of these "lots of things".
Unbelievable statement.
I urge you to watch this documentary based on Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent. It'll be educational and worthwhile, I promise you.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5631882395226827730#I never even suggested it was. I said it was human nature not to want to hear about it every day. Very different thing.
My apologies. I misunderstood you.
I still disagree however. I for one don't want to be wrapped in a bubble reading about X Factor when 1 and half million people, my fellow brothers and sisters in this world are being intentionally near-starved by an officially sanctioned state policy of collective punishment.I believe that people should take personal responsibility. So Israelis should take some personal responsibility for their governments actions. Though like here in Ireland that doesn't mean they all voted for that government or directly supported its' actions.
This is a side issue but I'll give you this example from Ethan Bronner in the NY Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/world/africa/13iht-13israel.19301993.htmlBut that is still distinctly a minority view. Polls have shown nearly 90 percent support for the war thus far, and street interviews confirm that Israelis not only favor it but do so quite strongly.
The "war" is Operation Castlead with it's litany of war crimes. Again see the Goldstone Report for details of the atrocities.
Incidentally. If you do take the time to read that article you will see it is replete with Zionist propoganda.
Hardly surprising since his son is a member of the IDF. Neutrality eh?Because you use the word Zionist like parents used the bogeyman with their children. Some sort of monstrous imaginary figure that should be feared.
You do realise it is anti-semitic to hold the view that all Jews are Zionists?
I use the word in it's proper context. You due what I can only conclude is your own ignorance on the subject don't realise this. Would it bother you so much if I used for example "Social Democrat"?
This is how ludicrous your thinking on this is.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement