Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Open Discussions

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-08-2004, 01:12 PM   #1176
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
Neil wrote:
Fanatics DON'T see a difference. This is my point...the fact that you (and I) do puts us out of the fanatic-camp.
Sorry, misundersood your post.

Regarding the Rachel Corry incident - I really don't want to go into that. If there was no military or retaliatory basis for that particular house destruction, I have no problem with those responsible answering for that. However, I don't see this as a counter-argument to my previous statement.
Quote:
Neil wrote:
The dead civilians are comforted by the knowledge that they weren't the targets, no doubt.
Neil, c'mon. Legitimate military operations often lead to civilian casualties. It is unfortunate and sad. All I can ask is for the military to be more accurate. I will not ask to cease retaliatory and preventive operations.
Quote:
Neil wrote:
Understand, I am not condoning suicide attacks: but fanatics (on both sides) see them as roughly equivalent, or the other side's attacks being worse.
Now I'm confused again - so are you saying it's a sign of fanaticism to claim that the suicide bombings are indeed worse (a childish comparison, but let's keep it simple) than the retaliatory and preventive military operations?

Daniel
 
Old 03-08-2004, 01:50 PM   #1177
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
Neil wrote:
Sorry, it's not so simple, as that. The IDF has done its best to force int'l observers out from the Occupied Territories. I have heard numerous eye-witness accounts that speak of systemitized violence upon Palestinians. The full story of this violence often doesn't make it onto CNN.
Many facts don't make it onto CNN. They make it to other information sources (unfortunately, often presented in a one-sided and inflammatory manner). Your link to the Haaretz article proves it. The facts are out there.
Quote:
Neil wrote:
The CNN report fails to mention that this was a provocative attack, meant to draw out the militants.
Are you saying CNN withheld this information because it reflects badly on IDF's actions? How's that?
Quote:
Neil wrote:
even by a cursory comparison with Ha'aretz--it is easy to see how CNN leaves salient details out, oversimplifies the Palestinian response, and accepts the foreign ministry account of the incident without further investigation.
Again, I fail to understand how not mentioning that the civilian casualties took place because militants were firing from within the stone-throwing crowd indicates a bias towards IDF's actions. If it was mentioned, I think it would provide a reasonable explanation to those unfortunate deaths.

The facts that can be drawn from CNN's article are:

- There was an IDF raid.

- The goal of the raid was to destroy Hamas militants.

- There was a relatively heavy exchange of fire.

- Several Palestinian boys, and a number of armed militants, were killed during the raid.

- A day before there was a blotched attack by Palestinian militants.

Everything else is interpretaion - by the PA representative, the Israeli spokeswoman, the IDF, whoever. You can choose to believe any of those outright, or you can choose to go to a local library and get some books on the history of the conflict (or browse through an infinite number of web sites) and then try to form your opinion. You might find that Haaretz is a source of objective information and well-founded criticism (which I happen to agree with), or you might conclude that it's a biased mouthpiece for the Israeli left (which a large portion of the Israelis agrees with).

Last edited by DanielR : 03-08-2004 at 01:54 PM.

Daniel
 
Old 03-10-2004, 11:52 AM   #1178
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
Many facts don't make it onto CNN. They make it to other information sources (unfortunately, often presented in a one-sided and inflammatory manner). Your link to the Haaretz article proves it. The facts are out there.
The facts might be out there, but not in American mainstream journalism.

Take another "Leftist" media-source: NPR (ha!) You certainly don't find the level of detail in NPR as you do in the Ha'aretz article I mentioned, regarding the Occupation.

Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
Again, I fail to understand how not mentioning that the civilian casualties took place because militants were firing from within the stone-throwing crowd indicates a bias towards IDF's actions. If it was mentioned, I think it would provide a reasonable explanation to those unfortunate deaths.

The facts that can be drawn from CNN's article are:

- There was an IDF raid.

- The goal of the raid was to destroy Hamas militants.

- There was a relatively heavy exchange of fire.

- Several Palestinian boys, and a number of armed militants, were killed during the raid.

- A day before there was a blotched attack by Palestinian militants.

Everything else is interpretaion - by the PA representative, the Israeli spokeswoman, the IDF, whoever.
But, the major spin on this event in US media, and events in the OT in general, come from a ditto-head repetition of what the IDF statements.

Journalism is supposed to present a wide range of views, not just one view. Certainly, the oversimplification of the Palestinian perspective into what the PA says ignores the complex Palestinian response, both of this incident and of the Occupation, in general. Oftentimes the Palestinian's do not agree with their government, yet all we get over here in the States is propagandized images of suicide bombers being celebrated, and pictures of ppl dancing in the streets, on 9-11. US media often oversimplifies the day-to-day hardships of the Occupation.

When was the last time you read a "man-on-the-street" account of the Occupation, from the Palestinian perspective, on US media? OTOH, I read about the terrors and the tragedy of suicide bombings on Israeli civilians, all the time.


Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
You can choose to believe any of those outright, or you can choose to go to a local library and get some books on the history of the conflict (or browse through an infinite number of web sites) and then try to form your opinion.
I cannot speak for you, but my local libraries (since I use several) have an incredible pro-Israeli slant, in regards to their books in stock.

Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
You might find that Haaretz is a source of objective information and well-founded criticism (which I happen to agree with), or you might conclude that it's a biased mouthpiece for the Israeli left (which a large portion of the Israelis agrees with).
A large portion...? Hmm.

But IAC, my major contention is that the US media does a poor job of covering the IDF Occupation, often leaving out salient details that might sway the viewer to sympathize with the Palestinian's and often accepting the IDF PR spin. CNN is hardly an exception: more likely the norm.

Last edited by Neil Mick : 03-10-2004 at 11:58 AM.
 
Old 03-10-2004, 01:49 PM   #1179
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
Neil wrote:
The facts might be out there, but not in American mainstream journalism.
Ok, since I don't have numbers on minutes-per-coverage, I'm not going to argue.
Quote:
Neil wrote:
Take another "Leftist" media-source: NPR (ha!) You certainly don't find the level of detail in NPR as you do in the Ha'aretz article I mentioned, regarding the Occupation.
I remember you mentioning your dissatisfaction with NPR before, Neil. Yet again, my impression is that reports about lives of Palestinians are regular. NPR also broadcasts BBC which is highly critical (again, my impression) of the Israeli policies.
Quote:
Neil wrote:
Oftentimes the Palestinian's do not agree with their government, yet all we get over here in the States is propagandized images of suicide bombers being celebrated, and pictures of ppl dancing in the streets, on 9-11.
I take it that "all we get here in the States" is an overstatement used for dramatic effect? Surely it's not all you get, is it? I don't watch mainstream news much, but I honestly don't remember the last time I saw those pictures. Maybe it's just me though.
Quote:
Neil wrote:
When was the last time you read a "man-on-the-street" account of the Occupation, from the Palestinian perspective, on US media? OTOH, I read about the terrors and the tragedy of suicide bombings on Israeli civilians, all the time.
I sometimes visit an Israeli internet forum, mostly frequented by people of centrist or right-wing beliefs. Most of them claim the exact same thing about mainstream media bias, only vice versa. It doesn't prove anything, just goes to show how subjective such claims are. It's hard to argue on this without conducting a thorough inspection of CNN reports over the last 3 years.

Just for fun though, I conducted the following Google searches:

"ordinary Palestinians" site:cnn.com : 150 hits

"Palestinian victims" site:cnn.com : 19 hits

"ordinary Israelis" site:cnn.com " : 16 hits

"Israeli victims" site:cnn.com : 26 hits
Quote:
Neil wrote:
I cannot speak for you, but my local libraries (since I use several) have an incredible pro-Israeli slant, in regards to their books in stock.
Darn, those Jewish conspirators are everywhere!

How about Amazon?

Daniel
 
Old 03-10-2004, 03:09 PM   #1180
James Giles
Dojo: North Florida Aikikai
Location: Tallahassee, Florida
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 53
United_States
Offline
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
Darn, those Jewish conspirators are everywhere!
I was raised up believing that the Jews and Christians have basically the same religious beliefs, but the recent media reaction to Mel Gibson's "Passion of the Christ" kind of gave a wake up call to me about not only who seems to be running the American media, but the fact that Jews and Christians don't share the same religious beliefs after all (???).

And it is not the fact that I disagree with Jews for not believing in Jesus Christ, but I do disagree with their intolerance of others who choose to believe in Jesus Christ or Mohammed or whoever.

My immediate thoughts were that if Jews are so intolerant of Christians over here in the U.S., just think how intolerant they may be of Islam and the Palestinians over there in Israel.

And since they own the press (it seems??), why should they let anything get out to the American public that makes Israel look bad?

I do think it is absolutely horrible that innocent Jews are killed by suicide bombers, but perhaps both the Palestinians and the Jewish civilians are both victims of an intolerant, tyrannical Zionist government?

Perhaps Israel not Iraq should be liberated from a tyrannical government or better yet, perhaps the U.S. should stay home and let Israel fight its own wars? Maybe I am wrong here, but I am just speculating.
 
Old 03-10-2004, 03:53 PM   #1181
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
James Giles wrote:
the recent media reaction to Mel Gibson's "Passion of the Christ" kind of gave a wake up call to me about not only who seems to be running the American media, but the fact that Jews and Christians don't share the same religious beliefs after all ...
My impression was that the whole ordeal was initiated by certain Jewish organizations (Anti-Defamation League for instance) raising concerns that this film would trigger anti-jewish sentiments. I for one would not make such a fuss about it, especially if I wanted to minimize the possible anti-jewish reactions over this. In any case, what in coverage of this topic made you reach those conclusions? Would you prefer the media ignored the issue completely? Or covered it in a different manner, and if yes, how?
Quote:
...I do disagree with their [Jews] intolerance of others who choose to believe in Jesus Christ or Mohammed or whoever...
And what would be the examples of this intolerance? I hope this is not based on the 2000 years old incident, is it?
Quote:
...just think how intolerant they may be of Islam and the Palestinians over there in Israel...
Again, do you know of any specific examples that would justify such a heavy suspicion? Just in case you're only speculating, here's something you might find interesting:Arabic in Haifa schools
Quote:
...perhaps both the Palestinians and the Jewish civilians are both victims of an intolerant, tyrannical Zionist government?..
Both Palestinians and Israelis are victims of a very old and complex conflict. It takes a long time and a substantial effort to fully understand it.

Last edited by DanielR : 03-10-2004 at 03:57 PM.

Daniel
 
Old 03-10-2004, 09:39 PM   #1182
James Giles
Dojo: North Florida Aikikai
Location: Tallahassee, Florida
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 53
United_States
Offline
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
In any case, what in coverage of this topic made you reach those conclusions? Would you prefer the media ignored the issue completely? Or covered it in a different manner, and if yes, how?
Yes Daniel, I have heard a series of reviews by Jewish writers and reporters in the press put down the movie and say that it is grotesque, violent, bloody and anti-semitic, as if they are trying to keep people away from the movie. But the exact opposite is happening, people are flocking to see the film like there is no tomorrow. Everyone I have talked to, says that there is nothing at all in the film that is anti-semitic.
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
And what would be the examples of this intolerance? I hope this is not based on the 2000 years old incident, is it?

No, not that I know of anyway (the 2000 year old incident). But then again, I only go by bits and pieces that I hear on the news. It started around Christmas time, when I heard a series of reports that the Jewish communities around the nation are offended by Christmas nativity scenes, but yet they put up their minoras (sp?) and their religious icons all over the place including the public schools.

It seems that the heaviest resistance to Christianity is coming from the Jewish community, NOT the Islamic community, and the recent reaction to the Mel Gibson film just fits in with everything I have already heard to this point. But, like I say, I know the media is good at instigating trouble and fabricating lies. Don't get me wrong - I am just trying to find out the truth about matters.
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
Both Palestinians and Israelis are victims of a very old and complex conflict. It takes a long time and a substantial effort to fully understand it.
I really wish I could understand the conflict over there. I think every American should be educated in every way about what is going on over there, because I think that is the real issue for us being in Iraq and sending our soldiers over to the Middle East; it is issues with Israel, and not WMDs.

I also believe it was our involvement with Israel that drew terrorists to attack us on 9/11. I would really love to understand the conflict between the Israelis and the Islamic peoples and what is feeding the fire of that conflict for so long.

As far as I can tell, someone is being very hard-headed and stubborn, and I cannot determine if it is Israel,the Muslims (Palestinians etc.), or both. I can't understand why grown adults cannot act reasonably and live in peace and quit killing each other.
 
Old 03-10-2004, 11:16 PM   #1183
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
I remember you mentioning your dissatisfaction with NPR before, Neil. Yet again, my impression is that reports about lives of Palestinians are regular. NPR also broadcasts BBC which is highly critical (again, my impression) of the Israeli policies.
Wrong. Consider this:
Quote:
"Morning Edition" anchor Bob Edwards on January 3 stated that U.S. envoy Anthony Zinni was coming to the region during "a time of comparative quiet." In another report the same day, correspondent Linda Gradstein referred to "the relative calm of the past few weeks." Other NPR reports have mentioned the "recent calm" (1/5/02) or the "fragile period of quiet" (1/7/02).

What NPR means by this was spelled out most explicitly by Linda Gradstein in a January 4 report on the envoy's mission. "You know, there's been actually three weeks of relative quiet," she said. "Only one Israeli has been killed in those three weeks, as opposed to 44 Israelis who were killed when Zinni was here last time in November and early December."

What Gradstein didn't mention-- and what someone who relied on NPR for their Middle Eastern news would have little idea of -- was that this has been in no way a period of calm for Palestinians. In fact, in the three-week period that Gradstein referred to, at least 26 Palestinians were killed by occupation forces-- more than one a day.
Quote:
Neil wrote: Oftentimes the Palestinian's do not agree with their government, yet all we get over here in the States is propagandized images of suicide bombers being celebrated, and pictures of ppl dancing in the streets, on 9-11.
Quote:
I take it that "all we get here in the States" is an overstatement used for dramatic effect? Surely it's not all you get, is it? I don't watch mainstream news much, but I honestly don't remember the last time I saw those pictures. Maybe it's just me though.
OK, I was being a little dramatic, to make my point. The media does not paint a very

3-dimensional image of the average Palestinian.
Quote:
I sometimes visit an Israeli internet forum, mostly frequented by people of centrist or right-wing beliefs. Most of them claim the exact same thing about mainstream media bias, only vice versa. It doesn't prove anything, just goes to show how subjective such claims are. It's hard to argue on this without conducting a thorough inspection of CNN reports over the last 3 years.

Just for fun though, I conducted the following Google searches:

"ordinary Palestinians" site:cnn.com : 150 hits

"Palestinian victims" site:cnn.com : 19 hits

"ordinary Israelis" site:cnn.com " : 16 hits

"Israeli victims" site:cnn.com : 26 hits
And this, on CNN and Israel:

Quote:
But a behind the scenes story coming recently out of CNN suggests that some media are being pressured to designate certain perspectives on Israel and the occupied territories as "unacceptable" Phyllis Bennis, head of the Middle East Project at the Institute for Policy Studies.
(audio interview,,,a fascinating acount of Israel putting pressure on CNN)

I dunno, Daniel. I also checked CNN search, and I got very different results. Were you searching on the CNN site...(also, I put my terms in quotes, to get an exact-phase match)

"ordinary Israeli's": 106 hits

"ordinary Israelis": 41 hits (spelling seems to matter)

"ordinary Palestinians": 56 hits

"Israeli victims": 593 hits

"Palestinian victims": 366 hits

It's looking like a 2:1 ratio, isn't it? But, it's only a rough survey.
Quote:
Darn, those Jewish conspirators are everywhere!

How about Amazon?
Now, why'd you go and bring the C-word into it...?

Last edited by Neil Mick : 03-10-2004 at 11:22 PM.
 
Old 03-11-2004, 07:48 AM   #1184
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
James Giles wrote:
I have heard a series of reviews by Jewish writers and reporters in the press put down the movie and say that it is grotesque, violent, bloody and anti-semitic, as if they are trying to keep people away from the movie. But the exact opposite is happening, people are flocking to see the film like there is no tomorrow. Everyone I have talked to, says that there is nothing at all in the film that is anti-semitic.
James, please understand that certain Jewish groups and Jewish people in general are very sensitive to this issue. Anti-semitism is on the rise, and some people think that the way Jews are portrayed in this movie could add oil to the fire. So IMO the concern stems from long years of persecution of Jews by other religions, not from Jews being intolerant of Christian beliefs.
Quote:
James Giles wrote:
I also believe it was our involvement with Israel that drew terrorists to attack us on 9/11.
Even if this is true, would you say the best course of action now is for the US to withdraw its involvment and let the Israel and the Arab countries fight it out?

Daniel
 
Old 03-11-2004, 09:59 AM   #1185
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
Neil wrote:
Quote:
DanielR wrote:
my impression is that reports about lives of Palestinians are regular. NPR also broadcasts BBC which is highly critical (again, my impression) of the Israeli policies.
Wrong. Consider this:
Ok, ok, I get it, I wanna play too:

WRONG. CONSIDER THIS.

Sorry, but I'm not following this logic. You're saying that my impression (which covers a prolonged period of time) is wrong, and to prove this you give an example of one unbalanced report. We can exchange links till kingdom comes, but, as I said before, I think such discourse is pointless unless we have the full statistics.
Quote:
Neil wrote:
I dunno, Daniel. I also checked CNN search, and I got very different results. Were you searching on the CNN site...(also, I put my terms in quotes, to get an exact-phase match)
I tried CNN's search, they don't seem to support quoted phrases for exact search but rather search for these words anywhere in the document. Google, on the other hand, performes this search correctly and only presents documents where the exact phrase appears.
Quote:
Neil wrote:
Now, why'd you go and bring the C-word into it...?
What's wrong with the word? Ok, let's call it a plot. Or a scheme. My understanding of your claims is that there's a focused effort of pro-Israeli individuals and groups to deprive the American public of truthful information on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. How do you call it?

Last edited by DanielR : 03-11-2004 at 10:01 AM.

Daniel
 
Old 03-11-2004, 01:28 PM   #1186
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Mass media is influenced by its owners, ad buyers, competitors and a gazillion of other things. No one source can claim objectivity, although some try (even put it in their motto, which makes them look even more ridiculous). Is there a Jewish lobby - sure. There are many other kinds, too. This is the state of affairs today, and one has to make an effort to make any sort of sense out of the bits and pieces of anything resembling credible information. You may choose smart commentators to side with, preferably those without an apparent vested interest in the issue (I wouldn't recommend an IDF or PA spokesman). If someone comes and shatters their clams with solid undisputed facts, then you move on.

Last edited by DanielR : 03-11-2004 at 01:32 PM.

Daniel
 
Old 03-11-2004, 02:31 PM   #1187
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
What's wrong with the word? Ok, let's call it a plot. Or a scheme. My understanding of your claims is that there's a focused effort of pro-Israeli individuals and groups to deprive the American public of truthful information on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. How do you call it?
OK, let's get ONE thing clear, before we proceed, shall we? I need to clarify my position a little, before I answer ythe rest of your points.

Plot, scheme, machination: whatever, I am not talking about some funky Jewish plan to blind the American public as to the realities of the military Occupation.

The differences are more nuanced, and significant. But, let me state categorically that:

1. I support the right of Israel to exist, as a state. To argue otherwise is nonsensical. For one: Israel is protected by the greatest military power in the history of the planet, with enough firepower to counter any single bloc of allied countries. To argue for the demise of Israel is to argue against reality.

2. I also support the right of Israel's existence on human-rights grounds. I am opposed to ANY policy that fails the human rights test, and forcing Israeli's to pack up and leave, fails that test.

3. I do not subscribe to any vague suggestions of uber-Zionist plots circulating around the world, whereby every Jew is a willing pariticipant in this conspiracy, against all others (when we finally met face-to-face: Opher and I had an interesting chat on this topic).

4. Having said this, I feel the need to distinguish between Zionists (as in: those who feel that Israel has a right over all other nations to push toward a "greater Israel") and ordinary Israeli's (many of them, Arab) who just want to get on with their lives.

So, when you say that
Quote:
a focused effort of pro-Israeli individuals and groups to deprive the American public of truthful information on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
you miscategorize me. I wouldn't call the US gov't's squelching of full transparency to the 9-11 Commission a "plot:" I'd call it an obstruction to due process.

I don't call the Israeli gov't's machinations against CNN exec's a "plot," either. I'd call it just another example of spin-making.

So please: if you're fishing to box me into the "world Jewish conspiracy" camp: we can just cease chatting, right now. I take offense to such allegations, as that distorts my intention.
 
Old 03-11-2004, 02:36 PM   #1188
James Giles
Dojo: North Florida Aikikai
Location: Tallahassee, Florida
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 53
United_States
Offline
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
So IMO the concern stems from long years of persecution of Jews by other religions, not from Jews being intolerant of Christian beliefs.
I understand Daniel. It just seems that since the Jewish peoples have experienced this persecution themselves, they would not to turn around and dish out the same persecution to other religious groups (i.e. Christians etc.)
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
Even if this is true, would you say the best course of action now is for the US to withdraw its involvment and let the Israel and the Arab countries fight it out?
Yes, in a certain way I do think that would be the best course of action. I think the American involvement inflames an already touchy situation.

Not only does the U.S. offer no solution to the problem, but its involvement in Israel's affairs draws animosity from Israel's enemies against innocent American civilians who have no part of the conflict whatsoever. I think this is very wrong.

Now we have terrorists groups that are seeking nuclear, biological WMDs to wipe out the U.S. because we support Israel. I don't think it is worth it.

It is like those barfights you see in the movies. Two guys get into a fight and then a third guy gets involved. The next thing you know its one big barroom brawl.

That is what is happening here, but instead of a barroom brawl it becomes WWIII and possibly nuclear annihilation. Not a pretty picture.

The U.S. should stay out of it. I can see that coming next though: U.S. soldiers in Israel fighting Palestinians. This thing is going to escalate into something very nasty if the U.S. doesn't wake up and think about it.
 
Old 03-11-2004, 02:50 PM   #1189
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
Ok, ok, I get it, I wanna play too:

WRONG. CONSIDER THIS
Great. After reading your link, what I'm left with is generic claims of pro-Palestinian bias, opened with a picture of a Palestinian kid who's rock-throwing exploits were omitted from the mainstream.

But...how this compares with the month-long FAIR study which notes how NPR TOTALLY ignored the daily deaths of Palestinians (versus the mentioned "period of quiet" for Israeli's) is beyond me.

Let me break it down for you.

1. You stated that
Quote:
my impression is that reports about lives of Palestinians are regular.
2. I produced a link that refuted that notion, and pointed out that in a 1-month period: Palestinian deaths are virtually ignored, mislabelling the period as a "time of quiet."

3. You produce a link that vaguely attests to pro-Palestinian bias, with the most concrete element being an ommitted pic of a rock-throwing kid.

4. What, exactly: #3 has to do with #2 is totally beyond me.
Quote:
I tried CNN's search, they don't seem to support quoted phrases for exact search but rather search for these words anywhere in the document.
Try using quotes around the phrase, on CNN. Maybe that will help: it worked, for me.

And, as a final note: you really should have listened to that audio interview. While you may not agree with it, Phyllis Bennis documents a case whereby the Israeli gov't attempted to put pressure on CNN exec's, threatening them with their jobs. Does the PA have that same kind of clout? I don't think so.

Bennis also brings up a highly salient point: the Israeli gov't and the PA are in no way comparable, power-wise. The Israeli gov't has tremendous lobbying clout in DC, as well as tremendous military power in the IDF. The lobbying-power of Palestinians in DC is laughable (the largest pro-Arabic lobbying group in DC has to fight just to get office-space, and I believe is considered a terrorist organization). Comparing them as if they were just two rival powers is misleading, and inaccurate.

Last edited by Neil Mick : 03-11-2004 at 02:53 PM.
 
Old 03-11-2004, 03:29 PM   #1190
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
Neil wrote:
I'd call it just another example of spin-making.
That's semantics, isn't it? Ok, spin-making it is, then.

Let me ask you this: do you doubt that I can produce a link to some organization (which of course claims it's THE fair and balanced media watchdog) that will accuse NPR, the very same Linda Gradstein, of spinning the news the other way?

Daniel
 
Old 03-11-2004, 04:09 PM   #1191
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
That's semantics, isn't it? Ok, spin-making it is, then.
In this case: semantics, with intention, behind it.

At least, the martial art we both study stresses that intention is all-imortant, right? Do you atemi to show an opening in nage's defence, or do you atemi to punch out nage's lights?

The difference is more than just semantic.
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
do you doubt that I can produce a link to some organization (which of course claims it's THE fair and balanced media watchdog) that will accuse NPR, the very same Linda Gradstein, of spinning the news the other way?
In the words of my least favorite President: "bring it on!" I don't DOUBT that you can produce a link: I'm more curious to see what you present. We'll see, if the accusations measure up, on both sides.

(BTW, you failed to note the differences of power between the PA and the Israeli gov't. What about this facet, then?)

Last edited by Neil Mick : 03-11-2004 at 04:13 PM.
 
Old 03-11-2004, 04:51 PM   #1192
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
Neil wrote:
the martial art we both study stresses that intention is all-imortant, right? Do you atemi to show an opening in nage's defence, or do you atemi to punch out nage's lights?
No lights-punch-out'ing was intended.

I won't "bring it on". Again, I have no interest in this line of argument, I consider this link-throwing pointless. I have already conceded that there are all kinds of influences on the media, which translate into influence on media consumers. I continue to maintain that a reasonable person will always question what s/he is being fed by the media (including FAIR), and take reasonable effort to obtain as balanced a picture as possible by looking for additional sources of information and expert opinions on the subject of interest. In any case, I have somehow managed to maintain a non-black-and-white view of the issue, without any secret know-how.

Daniel
 
Old 03-11-2004, 05:04 PM   #1193
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
Neil wrote:
you failed to note the differences of power between the PA and the Israeli gov't. What about this facet, then?
Apologies, I promise to be more attentive in the future
Quote:
Neil wrote:
...the Israeli gov't and the PA are in no way comparable, power-wise. The Israeli gov't has tremendous lobbying clout in DC, as well as tremendous military power in the IDF. The lobbying-power of Palestinians in DC is laughable (the largest pro-Arabic lobbying group in DC has to fight just to get office-space, and I believe is considered a terrorist organization). Comparing them as if they were just two rival powers is misleading, and inaccurate.
Comparing them in what context? Media influence? I have no knowledge on the subject, but yes, I'd suspect the Israelis have more muscle. Military power? Yes, IDF is superior. And?

Daniel
 
Old 03-11-2004, 06:43 PM   #1194
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
James Giles wrote:
I think the American involvement inflames an already touchy situation.

Not only does the U.S. offer no solution to the problem, but its involvement in Israel's affairs draws animosity from Israel's enemies against innocent American civilians who have no part of the conflict whatsoever. I think this is very wrong... The U.S. should stay out of it. I can see that coming next though: U.S. soldiers in Israel fighting Palestinians.
The US cannot force a solution, but it's probably the only country that can mediate. I also doubt that it would do much good to the US's image to back out to get in good graces of Islamic terrorists.

I don't know if it's ever going to come to the US soldiers on the ground. Although a peace-keeping force might be a viable option, and the US military would be much more welcome than, say, Belgian, that's for sure.

Daniel
 
Old 03-11-2004, 09:25 PM   #1195
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
No lights-punch-out'ing was intended.

I won't "bring it on". Again, I have no interest in this line of argument, I consider this link-throwing pointless. I have already conceded that there are all kinds of influences on the media, which translate into influence on media consumers.
I like this term "media consumers." It evokes an aspect of the media often ignored...that news shows are merely that...primarily designed for infotainment-consumption. Very good.

But, no problem about not wanting to pursue this "line of argument." It interests me: but I have no agendas to "win," and if you prefer, we can just drop the point.
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
I continue to maintain that a reasonable person will always question what s/he is being fed by the media (including FAIR), and take reasonable effort to obtain as balanced a picture as possible by looking for additional sources of information and expert opinions on the subject of interest.
If only this were so, of the population in general. But, if you consider the number of ppl in the US who swallowed the media-driven

"anti-war=anti-American" pablum, then I come to the uncomfortable conclusion that most of us are not "reasonable ppl."
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
In any case, I have somehow managed to maintain a non-black-and-white view of the issue, without any secret know-how.
I have always enjoyed our discussions, Daniel: even when we hold polar-opposite opinions. It never descends into name-calling, and that in itself makes me value the exchange, more.
 
Old 03-11-2004, 09:29 PM   #1196
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
Comparing them in what context? Media influence? I have no knowledge on the subject, but yes, I'd suspect the Israelis have more muscle. Military power? Yes, IDF is superior. And?
And, oftentimes in mainstream media, they're presented as if they are two otherwise equivalent nation-states.
 
Old 03-11-2004, 10:02 PM   #1197
James Giles
Dojo: North Florida Aikikai
Location: Tallahassee, Florida
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 53
United_States
Offline
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
The US cannot force a solution, but it's probably the only country that can mediate. I also doubt that it would do much good to the US's image to back out to get in good graces of Islamic terrorists.
I think you are right Daniel. I just saw the news about the train-bombing in Spain and the terrorists responsible claim that the U.S. is next on their list.

I guess we have no choice left other than to join forces,cooperate together and seek out and destroy these murderers before they get us first.
 
Old 03-11-2004, 11:30 PM   #1198
James Giles
Dojo: North Florida Aikikai
Location: Tallahassee, Florida
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 53
United_States
Offline
Daniel, I also wanted to say that I apologize if I came across a little harsh regarding the Mel Gibson movie issue.

It is amazing how religion can be such a devisive force between people that ordinarily can cooperate and get along together.

I think Neil Mick was right when he said that the Bible, Koran, etc. should be considered in historical context, otherwise you end up with people killing each other in the name of their God. Pretty sick stuff really.

That is the good thing about Aikido I guess. People can get together, laugh, train and have a great time regardless of religious beliefs etc. I am all for that!
 
Old 03-12-2004, 07:01 AM   #1199
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
James, no offense taken. As I said, IMO the whole thing was blown out of proportion.

Daniel
 
Old 03-12-2004, 07:41 AM   #1200
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
Neil wrote:
oftentimes in mainstream media, they're presented as if they are two otherwise equivalent nation-states.
And so, Linda Gradstein should begin her reports with the following: "For those of our listeners who lived under a rock for the past 56 years, we remind that Israeli military is the 13th strongest in the world".

Seriously though, in terms of the ongoing conflict, how do you think the fact of inequality should be reflected in the coverage?.

Daniel
 

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are you knew there Aikido in IRAQ? Wissam J. Faraj General 5 02-14-2006 06:45 AM
Iraq Aikido makuchg General 21 11-06-2005 04:36 AM
Help for soldier in Iraq?? ServinginIraq General 12 11-23-2004 10:10 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:44 PM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2018 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2018 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate