Avraham Burg essay - Page 5

[RowansDad]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 3boys4us
[B]Sorry Rd I don;t agree with your links -

Rene

Sooooooo, is Frontline and the CSMonitor pro-Israel too? That may come as a surprise to the folks at Camera:
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_co...&x_article=531

Sheeeesh. Might wanna oil that knee jerk you've got there Rene!

The links we provided to help Thao possibly suss out some answers/ideas to her questions at the end of her post (the one before mine).

I'll grant you that the Camera folk are purty vociferous in their defense of Israel and how it is portrayed in the media but I've got a soft spot for their skewering of Christopher Hedges piece in Harpers a couple of years ago: http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=6&x_article=4

[3boys4us]

Sooooooo, is Frontline and the CSMonitor pro-Israel too? That may come as a surprise to the folks at Camera:

You know that they are considered pro-Israel and that several mainstream news orgs have stopped using Camera and that Camera is listed on several pro-Israel lobbies: The America's Pro-Israel Lobbyand Kahane.org (a website devoted to the late Rabbi Kahane). Stanford and FAIR.org both have Camera listed as a pro-Israel new media group . or perhaps better described as a news monitering website devoted to anti-Israeli bias.

MidEastWeb.org is more balanced I admit.

I have no problems with CS minitor and Frontline. My problem is sometimes I like to check references before I go off.

[RowansDad]

So WHAT if they are pro-Israel? Does that ipso facto mean they're "wrong"?

Again, Thao had asked generally why, if the settlements et al., were costly to Israel in blood and treasure, were they not being dismantle.

The link was provided for a pro-Israel perspective.

[captain optimism]

Mideast web= CAMERA?

What?

The MidEast Web includes Israelis and is not anti-Israel, but they do criticize the Israeli government and they are pro-peace and in favor of the rights of Palestinians to self-determination and a state. They have a lot of both Israeli and Palestinian peace activists writing for their site. I think you should examine what they say about themselvesbefore you compare them to CAMERA.

CAMERA is a pro-Israel group that criticizes the media, mainly the media in the US. Their litmus test for being pro-Israel is so narrow that they are ridiculous. For example, they complain if a network reports on Israeli casualties of suicide bombings without using the word "terror."

In general I tend to trust groups that include Israeli and Palestinian peace activists. They are most concerned with what is happening on the ground, and least likely to totally demonize either Israelis or Palestinians. I also read the Israeli and Palestinian press websites. (I don't read Arabic but there is a lot of stuff available in English. )

Also, you should know that anyone can link to anything, so being linked by ultra-right-wing fanatics or whomever doesn't say anything. At least not to me.

[RowansDad]

Timely editorial in today's NYTimes:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/12/opinion/12FRI1.html

In particular:

"Consider the cost. At a time when Israel is suffering soaring unemployment, a slashing of welfare benefits and a crisis in its state education budget, it is devoting hundreds of millions of dollars to the roads, housing and security needed for 235,000 settlers. They enjoy mortgage subsidies, aid to build and maintain schools and clinics, and whole army units for their defense, since they are such ripe targets for terrorists."

[Thao]

And this, from the abovementioned article:

The longer Israelis continue to settle in the West Bank and Gaza, the harder it will be to cleanly divide the land between two nations with separate identities. Talk of two states will end. Two options will remain: an apartheid state run by a heavily armed Jewish minority, or a new political entity without a Jewish identity.

I completely agree. I remain puzzled as to why anyone thinks the settlements are a good idea.