# are the US media to biased toward Israel ? (video) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 15, 2006, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-us-media-to-biased-toward-israel-video/368820 "2006-08-15T13:39:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 157
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2006, 7:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-us-media-to-biased-toward-israel-video/368820/157 "2006-08-21T07:27:21Z")
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](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_National_Charter) > [@](#): > > … > In August 1993, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin insisted on changes to the Charter as part of the Oslo Accords. Following Yasser Arafat’s commitment to “submit to the Palestinian National Council for formal approval” the changes to the Charter confirming that “those articles of the Palestinian Covenant which deny Israel’s right to exist, and the provisions of the Covenant which are inconsistent with the commitments of this letter are now inoperative and no longer valid” [6] in the September 9, 1993 letters of mutual recognition, the PNC met in Gaza and voted on 24 April 1996. The decision was adopted by a vote of: 504 in favor, 54 against, and 14 abstentions. > … > Observers who had previously been skeptical of Palestinian claims that the Charter had been amended continued to voice doubts. In an attempt to end the confusion, the Wye River Memorandum included the following provision: > … > These commitments were kept, leading President Clinton to declare to the assembled Palestinian officials on 14 December 1998 at Gaza: > > _“I thank you for your rejection—fully, finally and forever—of the passages in the Palestinian Charter calling for the destruction of Israel.”_ > … > Despite President Clinton’s optimism, the events of 1998 did not entirely resolve the controversy of the Charter. A June 1999 report by the Palestinian Authority’s Ministry of Information on the status of the Charter made no mention of the 1998 events and leading Palestinians continue to state that the Charter has not yet been amended. So while there is some residual controversy, it is clear that your original opinion was misguided. Now: > [@Wierddave](#): > > > [@Sevastopol](#): > > > > Now your earlier claim that Israel would instantly make a lasting peace once that happened is shown to be false. Instead what happenned? Arafat’s Israeli partner in peace was assassinated by a terrorist. That’s right a terrorist assassinated the Prime Minister of Israel. Lucky the terrorist was Jewish, otherwise his family home would be bulldozed and the surrounds bombarded by the IDF. Anyway: Israel turned aggressive afterwards. Hard to believe. Jew assassinates Jew; Palestinians suffer, but there you have it. No. The Gaza evacuation, while expertly sold as charitable in the US, was a mere strategic redeployment of Israeli troops and settlers into the parts of Palestine Israel really wants to steal and hang onto permanently. > > …Balh, blah, blah. On one hand you accuse me of being brainwashed,… 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? --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-us-media-to-biased-toward-israel-video/368820)._