I was apparently misguided in my belief that it would be possible to point people in the right direction and allow them to discover things for themselves.
Firstly to Weirddave:
Wikipedia on the Palestinian Charter
So while there is some residual controversy, it is clear that your original opinion was misguided.
Now:
Which facts do you now contend are unfounded:
-
Arafat’s Israeli negotiating partner was assassinated;
-
by a terrorist
-
who is Jewish?
-
Israeli politics became less conciliatory to Palestininans afterwards?
-
Since the start of the Gaza evacuations, Israeli expansion in the West Bank has exceeded the Gaza withdrawl?
Valteron, generally how it works is that when you make a claim like ‘Israel is the only democracy in the middle east’ you can back it up. For example you can glance at, ooh say the large countries in; the Northern or Western Middle East. confidently declaring them not to be democracies. Showing evidence if necessary.
Now, overall the question is constant: How does it come about that in this day and age people with access to the internet can voice such easily demonstrable errors of fact; as Weirddave and Valteron have done? Where do these opinions come from? An agency of some sort seems the likely answer.
Now, someone has mentioned the phrase ‘evil Zionist’. The people behind this probably don’t see themselves as evil. More of a ‘lyin’ for zion’ thing. I would fondly imagine that the newly alerted SD readership might spot this when it happens again. However experience tells that these lifetime exposures to disinformation are not rapidly overcome by the simple, true facts. I would like to inquire of W and of V, how they came to believe these things?