0
   

The press didnt report the truth about the Fence

 
 
Reply Sun 11 Jul, 2004 10:57 am
The ICJ ruled that the fence Israel is erecting must come down,but they ommitted some facts from their reports.
They ommitted the fact that John Kerry,Hillary Clinton,and others SUPPORT the fence.
I wonder why they did that.
From the article..."Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry issued a statement expressing "deep disappointment" in the ICJ and affirming that "Israel's fence is a legitimate response to terror that only exists in response to the wave of terror attacks against Israel.... It is not a matter for the ICJ." And Senator Hillary Clinton said: "It makes no sense for the United Nations to vehemently oppose a fence which is a non-violent response to terrorism rather than opposing terrorism itself."

The whole article can be seen here...
http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/ICJ_Ruling_on_the_Fence.asp
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 7,778 • Replies: 189
No top replies

 
Equus
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jul, 2004 11:39 am
IMHO, Israel can build a fence if it wants to, but it should be on the Israel side of the 1948 treaty line delineating the 'west bank'.
0 Replies
 
Moishe3rd
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jul, 2004 11:53 am
Equus wrote:
IMHO, Israel can build a fence if it wants to, but it should be on the Israel side of the 1948 treaty line delineating the 'west bank'.

Why?
0 Replies
 
Equus
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jul, 2004 01:36 pm
Only my opinion. There are others more qualified than me to comment.

I don't claim to be an expert in the very complicated political issues involving the West Bank, but there is comparatively little argument about who rightfully owns the land on the Israel side of the treaty line. Except for East Jerusalem, I don't believe Israel has officially annexed the W.B. Putting the wall across disputed territory is at best controversial and at worst inflammatory.

What if the US put up a wall to keep out illegal immigrants from Mexico, but built it on Mexican territory? Possibly not a perfect analogy, but you should get my meaning.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jul, 2004 01:47 pm
Well, living in a country, which once was divided by a fence as well, I only can say, how the arguments are exachanged quite similarily:

- the GDR had built "the defense wall against the agitators and terrorists from the West"

- and here, in the West, we talked about the "death wall".
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jul, 2004 01:51 pm
But Walter, in your country you weren't having your shopping malls, sporting events, and busloads of school children fire bombed every day either.

The word is that terrorist attacks have dropped to virtually nothing where Israel's wall has gone up. To me that is much preferable to the two sides throwing rocks or machine gunning each other to keep things in check.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jul, 2004 02:30 pm
No, we only had 300 deads at the wall, 4,000,000 refugees from the GDR, hundredthousands of foreign troops on both sides and atomic missiles pointing at each of us.

Indeed, no reason to complain about that - I was only pointing at the similarity of the arguments.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jul, 2004 02:34 pm
Re: The press didnt report the truth about the Fence
mysteryman wrote:
The ICJ ruled that the fence Israel is erecting must come down,but they ommitted some facts from their reports.
They ommitted the fact that John Kerry,Hillary Clinton,and others SUPPORT the fence.
I wonder why they did that.
From the article..."Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry issued a statement expressing "deep disappointment" in the ICJ and affirming that "Israel's fence is a legitimate response to terror that only exists in response to the wave of terror attacks against Israel.... It is not a matter for the ICJ." And Senator Hillary Clinton said: "It makes no sense for the United Nations to vehemently oppose a fence which is a non-violent response to terrorism rather than opposing terrorism itself."

The whole article can be seen here...
http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/ICJ_Ruling_on_the_Fence.asp


I smell a duragtory post about Kerry Clinton etc. at the base of this. Why?
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jul, 2004 02:40 pm
BPB,
Before you assume something will be derogatory towards Clinton,I suggest you go read the article.If you had,you would see that it doesnt even mention Clinton at all.
Sorry to dissapoint you,but the world does not revolve around Clinton.
Instead of being on the defensive,GO READ THE ARTICLE.You might actually learn something.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jul, 2004 02:45 pm
I read the article thank you.

What is the point you are making, or shall I say alluding to?

This post has a bitchy tone I have grown to NOT associate you with. Having a pissy day?
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jul, 2004 02:55 pm
No,I was just trying to make a point about the press.
The press has tried to make it seem the EVERYONE supported the decision about the fence,when it isnt the case.
I guess I was wondering how much more,both good and bad,that the press hides from us or just refuses to tell us.
Sorry if it sounded bitchy.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jul, 2004 02:59 pm
I get it. Sorry dude, didn't mean to overreact myself there.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jul, 2004 04:03 pm
The whole palestine issue is on the things I disagree with in my party about. Abortion being the other.
0 Replies
 
Moishe3rd
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jul, 2004 08:07 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Well, living in a country, which once was divided by a fence as well, I only can say, how the arguments are exachanged quite similarily:

- the GDR had built "the defense wall against the agitators and terrorists from the West"

- and here, in the West, we talked about the "death wall".


Walter,
I understand what you are writing, but your contention seems to be that a blatant lie is equal to the truth.
The Berlin wall was not a "defense wall against the agitators and terrorists from the West."
It was built to keep the East Germans from escaping.

It was Goebbels who said, "Repeat a lie often enough, and it becomes the truth."

The fence that Israel is building is not to keep the Palestinians from escaping. It is to keep them from murdering innocents.

Quote:
Robert Frost wrote:

He only says, 'Good fences make good neighbors'.
Spring is the mischief in me, and I wonder
If I could put a notion in his head:
'Why do they make good neighbors? Isn't it
Where there are cows?
But here there are no cows.
Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
What I was walling in or walling out,
And to whom I was like to give offence.
Something there is that doesn't love a wall,


This is true. Something there is that doesn't love a wall.
But "ask to know" what is being walled in or out.
I think that that makes all the difference. Smile
0 Replies
 
Karzak
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jul, 2004 09:10 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
No, we only had 300 deads at the wall, 4,000,000 refugees from the GDR, hundredthousands of foreign troops on both sides and atomic missiles pointing at each of us.

Indeed, no reason to complain about that - I was only pointing at the similarity of the arguments.


And they are very similar. Germany built the wall, and the Palestinians built the fence.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jul, 2004 09:10 am
Moishe3rd wrote:

Walter,
I understand what you are writing, but your contention seems to be that a blatant lie is equal to the truth.
The Berlin wall was not a "defense wall against the agitators and terrorists from the West."
It was built to keep the East Germans from escaping.



Obviuosly, you didn't understand what I wrote.

Again: the GDR said, the wall was built to be a "defense wall against the agitators and terrorists from the West."

Since this is so wellknown, I abstain from giving links to prove (but at the German newsreel archive you even can find some GDR politicans quoting that on video.

Giving a quote from someone else doesn't necessarily conclute that this is the belief of the poser. (You perhaps overread that I gave the Western opinion as well?)
Quite contrary: at school, I won a few prices about this theme, and part of an univeristy exam paper in political sciences was published in a book.
0 Replies
 
Redheat
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jul, 2004 09:13 am
The issue of the US support of Israel crosses into both Parties. The Bush administration in it's effort to woe Jewish voters if very Pro-Israel and has allowed Sharon great lattitude. So confusion swirls around me when I see someone trying to make this a strictly Democratic issue.

I think the US has erred in it's staunch alligence to Israel while ignoring Palistine. This is one of the major reasons we fight terrorism today. It's not about them not "liking our freedoms" that's so simplistic, it's about our stance in the ME over several years. Those years included both Republican and Democratic administration so no one party is totally at fault. They both are equally to blame.

Clinton came close to bringing peace, Bush ignored the ME until he could no longer hide from it. Now he has went the other way and allowed Sharon freedom to do whatever he wants which in turn puts the US in even more danger with terrorist.

So what do we do? Fact is that BOTH parties will be more Pro-Israel because there is too large of a voting block there. The Jewish community VOTES! and that is where the power comes from (when the votes are actually counted)

I think Kerry shouldn't be so concerned with the Jewish vote but the reality is that he needs to be in order to win in Nov.

As far as the wall is concerned it's wrong. It was wrong when Germany did it and it's wrong now. It will only incite more hate and do nothing to help heal the wounds. We need to start looking at the ME through objective eyes and until we do there will never be peace, anywhere. What happens in the ME does influence what happens to us now. I understand the need for the Jewish side to secure themselves granted there are some who wish to wipe them off the face of the earth. However I think if you asked the people what they wanted it would be peace and they could live beside each other. It's the politicans and the leaders of the far right side of the spectrum that dictate what happens and that doesn't help anyone.

Any wall between people will only keep them apart and I don't think the goal is to keep Palestine and Israel apart. Plus there doesn't seem to be any consideration for the people who may not have taken up arms but will now. You can't keep a people oppressed and expect peace, sooner or later that pot is going to boil over. You can't also keep one side so much more powerful and expect things to level out. There has to be a give and take.

It's a complicated issue no doubt with no easy answers. However nothing will be accomplished until people do what's best for the region rather then whats best for their own self interest. That goes here for both parties, it goes for the Arab world as well. Fact is we will proably never see a resolution to this and we will only be dragged deeper and deeper into this war.
0 Replies
 
Moishe3rd
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jul, 2004 09:17 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Moishe3rd wrote:

Walter,
I understand what you are writing, but your contention seems to be that a blatant lie is equal to the truth.
The Berlin wall was not a "defense wall against the agitators and terrorists from the West."
It was built to keep the East Germans from escaping.



Obviuosly, you didn't understand what I wrote.

Again: the GDR said, the wall was built to be a "defense wall against the agitators and terrorists from the West."

Since this is so wellknown, I abstain from giving links to prove (but at the German newsreel archive you even can find some GDR politicans quoting that on video.

Giving a quote from someone else doesn't necessarily conclute that this is the belief of the poser. (You perhaps overread that I gave the Western opinion as well?)
Quite contrary: at school, I won a few prices about this theme, and part of an univeristy exam paper in political sciences was published in a book.

You are correct.
I do not understand your point.

The best that I can decipher is that the view from the East was the view of the GDR. Therefore, that was the "truth" as you knew it.
The analogy would be the view from the West Bank is the view of the PA; or Hamas; or Al Asqua; etc. And that is the "truth" as they know it.

If this is what you are trying to convey, then I understand that.

But the view from outside the West Bank ought to be the truth. And the "press" is not reporting the truth.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jul, 2004 09:24 am
Again: there is the view from the GDR ("the East"), who built the wall.

My second point is from the Federal Republic, where I lived and live ("the West").
0 Replies
 
Moishe3rd
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jul, 2004 09:32 am
Redheat wrote:
The issue of the US support of Israel crosses into both Parties. The Bush administration in it's effort to woe Jewish voters if very Pro-Israel and has allowed Sharon great lattitude. So confusion swirls around me when I see someone trying to make this a strictly Democratic issue.

I think the US has erred in it's staunch alligence to Israel while ignoring Palistine. This is one of the major reasons we fight terrorism today. It's not about them not "liking our freedoms" that's so simplistic, it's about our stance in the ME over several years. Those years included both Republican and Democratic administration so no one party is totally at fault. They both are equally to blame.

Clinton came close to bringing peace, Bush ignored the ME until he could no longer hide from it. Now he has went the other way and allowed Sharon freedom to do whatever he wants which in turn puts the US in even more danger with terrorist.

So what do we do? Fact is that BOTH parties will be more Pro-Israel because there is too large of a voting block there. The Jewish community VOTES! and that is where the power comes from (when the votes are actually counted)

I think Kerry shouldn't be so concerned with the Jewish vote but the reality is that he needs to be in order to win in Nov.

As far as the wall is concerned it's wrong. It was wrong when Germany did it and it's wrong now. It will only incite more hate and do nothing to help heal the wounds. We need to start looking at the ME through objective eyes and until we do there will never be peace, anywhere. What happens in the ME does influence what happens to us now. I understand the need for the Jewish side to secure themselves granted there are some who wish to wipe them off the face of the earth. However I think if you asked the people what they wanted it would be peace and they could live beside each other. It's the politicans and the leaders of the far right side of the spectrum that dictate what happens and that doesn't help anyone.

Any wall between people will only keep them apart and I don't think the goal is to keep Palestine and Israel apart. Plus there doesn't seem to be any consideration for the people who may not have taken up arms but will now. You can't keep a people oppressed and expect peace, sooner or later that pot is going to boil over. You can't also keep one side so much more powerful and expect things to level out. There has to be a give and take.
It's a complicated issue no doubt with no easy answers. However nothing will be accomplished until people do what's best for the region rather then whats best for their own self interest. That goes here for both parties, it goes for the Arab world as well. Fact is we will proably never see a resolution to this and we will only be dragged deeper and deeper into this war.

Redheat,
I suggest you do some serious study of Palestine, Islam, and Israel.
The reason we fight Islamic Fascist terror today has very little to do with Israel and everything to do with Islam.
I highlighted those parts of your post that are simply incorrect.
The wall is a useful tool, nothing more.
But as far as the source of violence, I offer you the following thoughts:

Israel and any problems related to it, in spite of what you might read or hear in the world media, is not the central issue, and has never been the central issue in the upheaval in the region. Yes, there is a 100 year-old Israeli-Arab conflict, but it is not where the main show is.
The millions who died in the Iran-Iraq war had nothing to do with Israel. The mass murder happening right now in Sudan, where the Arab Moslem regime is massacring its black Christian citizens, has nothing to do with Israel.
The frequent reports from Algeria about the murders of hundreds of civilian in one village or another by other Algerians have nothing to do with Israel.
Saddam Hussein did not invade Kuwait, endangered Saudi Arabia and butchered his own people because of Israel.
Egypt did not use poison gas against Yemen in the 60's because of Israel. Assad the Father did not kill tens of thousands of his own citizens in one week in El Hamma in Syria because of Israel.
The Taliban control of Afghanistan and the civil war there had nothing to do with Israel.
The Libyan blowing up of the Pan-Am flight had nothing to do with Israel, and I could go on and on and on.

The root of the trouble is that this entire Moslem region is totally dysfunctional, by any standard of the word, and would have been so even if Israel would have joined the Arab league and an independent Palestine would have existed for 100 years.
The 22 member countries of the Arab league, from Mauritania to the Gulf States, have a total population of 300 millions, larger than the US and almost as large as the EU before its expansion.
They have a land area larger than either the US or all of Europe.
These 22 countries, with all their oil and natural resources, have a combined GDP smaller than that of Netherlands plus Belgium and equal to half of the GDP of California alone.
Within this meager GDP, the gaps between rich and poor are beyond belief and too many of the rich made their money not by succeeding in business, but by being corrupt rulers.
The social status of women is far below what it was in the Western World 150 years ago.
Human rights are below any reasonable standard, in spite of the grotesque fact that Libya was elected Chair of the UN Human Rights commission.
According to a report prepared by a committee of Arab intellectuals and published under the auspices of the U.N., the number of books translated by the entire Arab world is much smaller than what little Greece alone translates.
The total number of scientific publications of 300 million Arabs is less than that of 6 million Israelis.
Birth rates in the region are very high, increasing the poverty, the social gaps and the cultural decline.
And all of this is happening in a region, which only 30 years ago, was believed to be the next wealthy part of the world, and in a Moslem area, which developed, at some point in history, one of the most advanced cultures in the world.

It is fair to say that this creates an unprecedented breeding ground for cruel dictators, terror networks, fanaticism, incitement, suicide murders and general decline.
It is also a fact that almost everybody in the region blames this situation on the United States, on Israel, on Western Civilization, on Judaism and Christianity, on anyone and anything, except themselves.

I should also say a word about the millions of decent, honest, good people who are either devout Moslems or are not very religious but grew up in Moslem families. They are double victims of an outside world, which now develops Islamophobia and of their own environment, which breaks their heart by being totally dysfunctional.
The problem is that the vast silent majority of these Moslems are not part of the terror and of the incitement but they also do not stand up against it. They become accomplices, by omission, and this applies to political leaders, intellectuals, business people and many others.
Many of them can certainly tell right from wrong, but are afraid to express their views.

The above is partially excerpted from A View from the Eye of the Storm by Haim Harari.

The problem is not the fence.
The problem is the neighbors.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The press didnt report the truth about the Fence
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 02:00:27