1
   

Is this important man lying...........you decide.

 
 
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 12:32 pm
Quote:
Top Israeli news anchor attacks occupation

Chris McGreal in Jerusalem
Wednesday June 1, 2005
The Guardian

The revered anchor of Israel's Channel One news programme for more than three decades has caused controversy by making a personalised documentary in which he concludes that Jewish settlements are endangering the country and that the occupation of Palestinian land is a crime.


"Since 1967, we have been brutal conquerors, occupiers, suppressing another people," Haim Yavin, who was a founder of Channel One and once its chief editor, says in the programme.

Even before the five-part series opened last night, settler leaders were calling for the 72-year-old, known as "Mr Television", to be sacked, because they said he was no longer objective.

The documentary would be sensitive in Israel at any time, but particularly now in the weeks before the government plans to remove thousands of Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip and a small part of the West Bank.

Channel One turned down the documentary and it is being shown on a rival channel that recently lost its licence and is about to go off air.

The series is a the result of Yavin's visits during more than two years to the West Bank and Gaza Strip, carrying a small camera to film ordinary people - some of the 400,000 Jewish settlers, Palestinian residents and Israeli soldiers - in the territories.

"My intention was to get the personal feelings of the settlers, of the Palestinians," Yavin told the Guardian yesterday. "It has strengthened my former opinion that we have to come to terms with the Palestinians; they are not all terrorists.

"Some of my friends on the left hate the settlers. I don't hate them, I appreciate them. I even like them, but I say in the documentary that I think they are wrong and they are endangering us."

The experience has left Yavin more pessimistic about the prospects for peace. "I think the majority of Palestinians and the majority of Israelis want peace and they're willing to divide the country," he said. "But there's such mistrust. Hamas terrorism did such damage to both peoples that I don't think it can be repaired."

He not only questions the settlements and the occupation, but the commitment of successive governments, including Ariel Sharon's, to curbing Israel's hunger for land and the expansion of its colonies.

"This merrymaking will never be stopped," he said. "I regard this as a Greek tragedy. I don't see any solution."

Settler leaders have reacted furiously to the series, saying it will "divide Israeli society". The head of the settler council, Benzi Lieberman, has called for Yavin to be removed as Channel One's news anchor.

"Even if his opinions and the manner in which he presents them may be considered legitimate, his continued serving in the objective newscaster's position constitutes a blow to media ethics and professional integrity," he said.

Among those filmed by Mr Yavin is an Israeli soldier in Hebron who wonders how his compatriots can remain silent in the face of the "horrors" the army commits, and the settlers who ask him why he's not shooting Palestinian children.

Some settlers tell Yavin that the Palestinians must be given a deadline to leave the occupied territories or be forced out. "Otherwise we should just bomb and kill them," says one woman.

· Jerusalem city council has issued orders to demolish the homes of hundreds of Palestinians in an area that Israeli settlers want to be turned into a Jewish neighbourhood.

The council, which has initially ordered 88 buildings to be razed, says it intends to make the Silwan area, just outside the Old City walls, a national park. Palestinian officials say that the real intent is to clear the area for settlers.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 782 • Replies: 7
No top replies

 
Equus
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Jun, 2005 05:12 pm
He's entitled to his opinion. Since it apparently IS his opinion, the only way he'd be a liar would be to say something else. Whether his opinion 'holds any water' is another matter.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Jun, 2005 05:16 pm
It would appear, Oh Thou Horse-Man, from the type of threads which Stevewonder has posted in the past, that this member is obsessed with Israel and allegations of their illegal activities. I suggest to you that your analysis will not mean much to this member.
0 Replies
 
stevewonder
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Jun, 2005 06:11 am
obsessed is such stong word
Setana thank for your comment.
I have always understood democracy rto be about the fredom of exchanging ideas. The great thing is that people are free to analyze the article or opinion and refute it or agree with it. wether someone agrees or disagrees with my post or any one elses it is all about making your own mind up.

The description of this form is about getting news you would not normally find, its my experince that some american news stations do not do just to the concept of fair unbiased journalism, i hope i am able to give people information that they might not otherwise come accross.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Jun, 2005 09:50 am
You are welcome for my comment. I note that you avoid altogether the burden of this:

Equus wrote:
He's entitled to his opinion. Since it apparently IS his opinion, the only way he'd be a liar would be to say something else. Whether his opinion 'holds any water' is another matter.


Your most recent response, in which you write: "The great thing is that people are free to analyze the article or opinion and refute it or agree with it."--is grossly disingenuous. You write of a person's freedom to react, but then list only two alternatives, refutation or agreement. Equus has already demonstrated yet another valid reaction--questioning this as a news item, identifying it as an "op/ed" piece. In such a case, it is quite relevant to point out that Yavin has made contentions which he has not demonstrated. Assertion is not proof. As it happens, i am inclined to agree, for the most part, with this assessment. That does not alter, however, the character of the assertions as opinion, and not fact.

To return once more to your silly statement: ". . . refute it or agree with it."--no, that is not the case at all. Mr. Yavin has made assertions. If Mr. Yavin expects to be believed, or, rather more to the point, if you expect Mr. Yavin's assertions to be believed as being the truth, then you need to prove as much. Those who make a contention are obliged to provide the proof if others are expected to believe them--no one is obliged to either disprove or believe. In your simple-minded world of black-and-white, i know such a concept is difficult to understand.
0 Replies
 
stevewonder
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Jun, 2005 02:24 pm
setanta

i think perhaps from the tone of your writting you seem somewhat upset.

In all honesty i disagee with Yavin on many points, he makes many points which i disagree with, but i believe his observations and account are true.

Setanta:

In your arrogant mind had it not ocured to you that people have the option of a making a comment and in your narrow mind did it not occur that people quite often exercise the right not to vote in the polls stated?

It is entirely my perogative to place any options i like on a poll, we can draw a hundred issues, i could have said who thinks this guy Yavin is an alien?

the choice is yours
1) to vote
2) not to vote
3) make a comment, even about the vote
4) or none of the above

you see setanta how freedom actually work?
the first poster has made his/her point very clearly and articuated it very well.

we need to make a distinction between Yavins observations and conclusions.

The question is do we believe what he is saying he has observed about Israeli settler etc, is true since his integerity has been questioned and his programme has been refused by channel one.

then secondly we can say wether we agree with his conclusions which are his opinions and they are not necessarily defind as true or false.


which raises the question if he was stating an opinion as a journalist and was not lying about his observations why has their been demands for him to be sacked?

Are those people calling for his resignation demanding anyone with an opinion be removed?

What does this say about free speech?

sounds like ome people on this forum...?!
0 Replies
 
TruthNOTlies
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Jun, 2005 08:46 pm
I find it interesting (But TOTALY EXPECTED in ref.Traits No.8) that Haim Yavin is being vilified for exposing what is the anti Israel establishment's line. I suggest that this reference provides a technical tool to objectively evaluate information and provide a way of pursuing the REAL TRUTH whatever it may turnout to be!
An interesting question is why Mr. Yavin is NOW releasing this documentary ?
I feel he is old, (72) sickened by the censorship of information he's been privy to and a reasonably moral person who has suppressed his conscience for self presivation..At 70-72 there is really nothing that can be done to him that matters ..His career speaks for itself and his life at 3 score and 10 years (Human Biblical Life span). Maybe God (I'm a heathen) Haim believes (2 years so far) is giving him extra life to repent!

<http://home.datawest.net/esn-recovery/artcls/disinfo.htm>

0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Jun, 2005 01:55 am
stevewonder wrote:
setanta

i think perhaps from the tone of your writting you seem somewhat upset.


If i had a nickel each time someone with whom i disagree decides that my disagreement is evidence that i am upset, i'd retire tomorrow. You grossly overrate the significance of this thread.

Quote:
In all honesty i disagee with Yavin on many points, he makes many points which i disagree with, but i believe his observations and account are true.


Which is precisely the point, you believe, you do not prove. Therefore, one is lead back to the point that Equus makes, this is an opinion piece. This lead me to the point i will restate, which is that one is neither obliged to believe nor disprove what the gentleman has written.

Quote:
Setanta:

In your arrogant mind had it not ocured to you that people have the option of a making a comment and in your narrow mind did it not occur that people quite often exercise the right not to vote in the polls stated?


To arrogate is to take a privilege to which one is not entitled. I am as entitled as anyone else posting at this site to comment on the contents of a thread. I see that you quickly descend to insults--of course it occurs to me that people choose not to vote. I chose not to vote. I then chose to state explicitly why i chose not to vote. If you consider that evidence of narrow-mindedness, i suggest that you will never find any member at this site to be broad-minded. Everyone here has a habit of commenting upon the things which they read in threads.

[qutoe]It is entirely my perogative to place any options i like on a poll, we can draw a hundred issues, i could have said who thinks this guy Yavin is an alien?

the choice is yours
1) to vote
2) not to vote
3) make a comment, even about the vote
4) or none of the above

you see setanta how freedom actually work?
the first poster has made his/her point very clearly and articuated it very well.[/quote]

I have done the same. This had lead you to assume that i am upset, to say that i am arrogant for doing exactly what you have described in your point number three above, and insult me as being narrow-minded for having done so.

Quote:
we need to make a distinction between Yavins observations and conclusions.


No, we don't. The distinction is self-evident.

Quote:
The question is do we believe what he is saying he has observed about Israeli settler etc, is true since his integerity has been questioned and his programme has been refused by channel one.


No, that is simply the question you wish to exercise. This is your stalking horse, your bête noire. The editorial decisions of Channel One, apart from being matters upon which we are insufficiently informed to make firm conclusions, are not necessarily matters which do or should arouse us to vigorous debate.

Quote:
then secondly we can say wether we agree with his conclusions which are his opinions and they are not necessarily defind as true or false.


Or we can simply choose to note that he has expressed an opinion, and reserve judgment. You are the one who has insisted upon a true/false dichotomy, it is ironic that you now acknowledge that truth or falsity is not necessarily to be determined from the statement of an opinion.

Quote:
which raises the question if he was stating an opinion as a journalist and was not lying about his observations why has their been demands for him to be sacked?


That is perhaps a question raised in the minds of those who care about this man and what he says. It is not to be immediately and automatically assumed, no matter how likely it appears, that this is the sole reason he has been "sacked." It may well be--but there is not sufficient information available to us to make that assumption.

Quote:
Are those people calling for his resignation demanding anyone with an opinion be removed?


Why are you asking me, i am not responsible for the gentleman's employment prospects.

Quote:
What does this say about free speech?


It says very little indeed, given that we have so little information to go on; far to little for a reasonable judgment. It seems that you would like to suggest that this represents a crisis of free speech. However, absent a detailed review of the gentleman's career and relationship to his former employers, it would be foolish to leap to a conclusion of that nature.

Quote:
sounds like ome people on this forum...?!


Certainly, do not miss another opportunity to cast aspersions on others who choose neither to agree with you, nor to ascribe to this the significance which you have chosen to give it.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Is this important man lying...........you decide.
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 3.13 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 07:34:48