You’re kidding, right? As I see it, the US/World media is obsessed with Israel and is perpetually champing at the bit to report anything and everything even slightly unsavoury that Israel is even perceived to be doing. If Israel builds a house on disputed territory, it’s the end of the world. Meanwhile, I look to the North (I happen to be in Israel at the moment), and I know what’s going on just over the border in Syria – real, live, brutal, relentless, extreme, insane war crimes. Yet the world wrings its hands over this-or-that-settlement that many, many Israelis oppose, and that may STILL be negotiated and ultimately dismantled for the promise of Real Peace. If you want to talk War Crimes, Israel is not the place to start.
I agree, Israel is constantly under the microscope. It’s hard to see how anyone could seriously believe otherwise.
I am very eager to learn which of Israel’s supposed “war crimes” is being ignored by the US media.
Netanyahu: I’ll strengthen settlements during next 4 years
Steal some more. Apparently Israelite are, in the majority, good with that.
Peace is just around the corner no doubt —though sanity is asking for an emergency call.
Bombs away and no apologizes from either side. Sad but real.
Fuck Israel and their Likud/neocons extremist, backers.
I dunno, you’d have to ask them. It may be that the majority opinion is not extreme, doesn’t roil the emotions, and doesn’t get much play on TV while the opposition is small, fanatic, and vocal. Why is there no anti-Westboro Baptist Church protestors, following them around and yelling and screaming at them? Because the rest of us know who looks like the extremists and the WBC is small, and therefore ignorable.
I think their continued settlement land grab while surrounding Palestinian homes with walls and fences amounts to something that should be handled by international criminal courts. On the same token, Israeli demolitions of Palestinian homes as a terrorist deterrence definitely rises to a crime.
World media is, but the US not so much. It is not really given sufficient coverage, I think, here in the US. As for Syria, that’s an active war zone, its harder to get news crews in there and news out. And I would dispute your contention that we’ve not had enough coverage in Syria.
Right, which suggests that the majority opinion is pro-Israel, which is exactly what polling reveals. Thus, it doesn’t take a sinister lobby to make U.S. politicians take Israel’s side: they are serving their electorate by doing so.
I think the Israeli/Palestinian conflict does roil the emotions, just look at this thread! I posit that an American, pro-Palestinian lobby would have no trouble organizing if there were significant numbers of Americans who were pro-Palestinian. But there aren’t.
Pro-Israeli sentiment in the U.S. is neither extreme nor small, of course.
Both of these have gotten a tremendous amount of coverage in the media. He was demanding you name things ignored by the media and you’ve failed to do so.
Moreover, the second example you give is an extremely odd claim, since the US does exactly the same thing to a vastly, vastly greater degree and no one to the best of my knowledge has ever called it a war crime and it has gotten significantly less coverage in the US media.
For those unaware of what I’m referring to, the US regularly seizes the apartments and houses of people guilty of the crime of having drug dealers live with them. Countless grandmothers, almost all of them African-American or Hispanic have been tossed out of their homes because of the actions of their teenage grandsons living there.
I won’t pretend that I approve of the decision by the Israelis to blow up the houses where suicide bombers were living, but it strikes me as far, far less offensive that seizing the apartment of some poor woman because her nephew or grandson sells people a substance that they want.
Moreover, I’m willing to bet you can find far more threads decrying house demolitions in Israel/Palestine than you can find criticizing the US policy.
You can of course easily prove me wrong by linking to a number of threads of people attacking this policy.
So, you think we don’t see enough coverage of the situation in Israel, but you think we have enough coverage of the situation in Syria even though it’s significantly less.
Considering the fact that we see far more coverage of the situation in Israel, this claim is utterly bizarre.
Assest forfeiture, for any who are curious.
I disagree with you, but let’s assume for the sake of argument that this is a crime.
I did a Google News archive search for the words “Israel” “demolition,” and “deterrent.”
Here are a few quotes from a page of hits I picked at random so you can see that a high percentage of the articles are speaking directly about the issue you raise:
If you look, you will see that there are literally thousands of news articles about this issue.
I did not count, but I’m pretty confident that there are at least 10 news articles for every house demolished.
But perhaps American media are not reporting on this issue?
Well, let’s limit the search to the New York Times. I did that. Here are some snippets:
So here’s a question for you:
How many news articles would there have to be for you to be satisfied that this issue received sufficient media coverage?
Please just give me a number.
You can be pro-Israel but still disgusted by some of the things they do. Demolishing houses of terrorists, putting up walls just because you can are not things I would support Israel on. Unfortunately, too many people who are pro-Israel think that you have to support them in everything they do. I want Israel to give up some land, stop building walls, allow limited returns, etc. but I also want Israel to survive as a country though I wouldn’t go so far as to say they always have to be a Jewish State. They can be a state, what they choose to do with it is not relevant to this discussion
They were formed only recently, and only in response to the WBC’s nascent protestations at soldiers’ funerals, something they hadn’t done before. When they were doing their equally disgusting public trolling against just gays, there were no PGRs. They’ve expanded since then, and I love what they do, but let’s not kid ourselves and think they stand for the exact opposite of what the WBC stands for and not simply just disgusted with their actions
I think those things have had significantly less media coverage than is sufficient. He can demand whatever he wants, but my desire is to make it known that coverage that may be seen as anti-Israel do not appear enough in our media and these are just two things that should be talked about a lot more, especially since continued obstruction of the peace process is actively being practiced by these unending settlements
The US demolishes Palestinian homes of terrorists when there are still family living there? That’s news to me. If it happened, then yes, it would be a crime
And you don’t consider this a crime? But lets explain so everyone can know the circumstances. The US can seize property if its being used for drugs, but you are either making it up or exaggerating when you claim that they belonged to teenagers living with their grandparents. Property seizures require the police to convince a judge that there is a preponderance of evidence that the property is connected to criminal activity, which is a higher standard than simply probable cause. Moreover, the properties can be given back if a suit later shows that it wasn’t as connected as the police thought, or the homeowner would experience undue hardship. What generally happens is that the houses seized belonged to the drug dealers themselves, and yes, something they have grandmas living with them, but they didn’t belong to the grandma. What you are sneakily implying, that the majority of it turns out the way you describe, does not happen at a significant rate. And again, there is another difference. If drug dealers are operating out of their houses, using it to store, manufacture, and sell drugs, then the house may be seized. But just because a criminal lives in the house, and you’ve gotten rid of the criminal, doesn’t mean the house should be taken or bulldozed. Strapping on an explosive vest or throwing rocks at tanks should never cause your house to be razed to the ground. What the Israeli’s are doing is criminal
I think there is more coverage of Syria, which has been talked about for months since it blew up, every change in situation monitored, than Israel with its continuing destruction of Palestinian property. Also, don’t forget that Syria is a dangerous war zone, and until just a month or so ago, the US didn’t take an official stance on which side it supported. Maybe you’re watching too much Fox News
Given our 24 hour news cycle, do you really think a few articles over the course of how many years is sufficient? You don’t link to any of those quotes, for all I know they are all from the same article. Do they range from days or months or years? And how many anchors have gone on TV to discuss Netanyahu’s continuing obstruction of the peace process and attempts to punish the latest Palestinian move by calling for more settlements? How many people are willing to call a spade a spade and say Netanyahu is making the peace process impossible with his childish tantrums? Sooner or later, Palestine will be an independent state. Israel can either be a partner or try to prevent it and see it trading and partnering up with the likes of states it doesn’t like.
For you and Ibn, I have a question. What do you wish to see happen as a result of the UN declaration? Do you wish Palestinian will take that back, submit to Israel, pledge that it can take any land it wants and beg for a small chunk of dirt? Maybe publicly execute its own members, suspected or not, to prove to Israel its serious about peace? We can’t take the vote back, so what are your plans moving forward? If I were Palestinian, am I supposed to just hope that Israel doesn’t gobble up my land with settlements and fences before we can talk about it?
Such as? (feel free to name anyone posting on the Dope, for example, who has said Israel can do no wrong).
What qualifies as for you as “sufficient”? (“A lot more” is not a substantive answer).
Do we have too much hyperbole hampering efforts to reach consensus on this issue? Too little? Just enough? What do you think? 
I don’t know about seizing homes owned by grandma, but I do know they can evict her from public housing for things totally beyond her control. This was the case that finally convinced me that the Supreme Court was full of shit:
You’re better off asking for a cite or posting one of your own instead of saying other posters are “making it up or exaggerating.”
Yog, I recommend doing research next time before accusing me of lying.
Yes, countless grandmothers have, as Tony pointed out, been thrown out of their homes because they had someone living or visiting who, without even their knowledge was selling drugs.
The fact that you believed so strongly this didn’t happen that you accused me of lying is also pretty strong evidence that your claim that Israel gets a softer touch from the American media.
As you demonstrate, far more media coverage is paid to Israel throwing Pslestinians out of their homes because they allowed a suicide bomber to live their than are aware of the US doing the same to minorities in the US who have drug dealers live there.
It’s also worth noting there’s a pretty obvious racial double standard involved because I’ve never heard of any suburbanites getting kicked out of their homes because their morbidly obese 20-something, unemployed son was selling weed out of the basement.
The terrorists are operating out of the houses that are being bulldozed.
As for the asset forfeiture cases, here are a few:
A South Houston hotel, the Red Carpet Inn, was seized by federal agents after patrons were accused of drug trafficking. Although Acting U.S. Attorney James DeAlley admitted the government was not accusing the hotel owners of participating in illegal activity, he claimed that the business was giving “tacit consent” to the drug dealers. DeAlley was quoted as saying, “Along with property rights go responsibility and the owners here weren’t living up to their responsibility.”
Deborah Tedford, No Vacancy for Drug Dealers: Feds Seize Hotel, Houston Chronicle, February 18, 1998.
James Hoyle’s 72- year -old mother’s home was seized by FBI agents and DC police officers when her nephew Mark, who was staying there overnight, was suspected and later charged with drug dealing. More than 15 FBI agents, armed with what appeared to be automatic weapons, placed Mark under arrest and began searching the house. After handcuffing Ms. Hoyle, they took all of her televisions, VCRs, family photos, personal papers, and an automobile. It took twelve police officers to tear the built-in television set out of the wall. One of the police officers was caught on camera saying: “How do you like your new house?” The warrant was based on an informant’s claim that he made a drug deal with Mark on the front porch years earlier.
Asset Forfeiture. Testimony before Subcommittee on Legislation and National Security of the House Comm. On Government Operations, Sept. 30, 1992 (testimony of James Hoyle).
I don’t think anyone here is dumb enough to say those words specifically, but given any topic in which Israel is featured, there are people like brazil or Finn who never once say a bad thing about Israel, or they do but only in the context of how much worse the opposition would be. It would be like if I said I was against pedophiles, but defend every pedophile that’s ever pitted by saying they were misunderstood or there were other circumstances. I would like to see brazil criticize Israel on a major issue, something he thinks that they are very bad on, worse than the Palestinians, to the level where it is criminal. Have they done nothing like that in their history, brazil?
So if I can’t quantify coverage of an issue into an exact number, then it cannot be either enough or too little? Psh, try again. That’s almost as bad as Bricker “just asking questions” while demanding people give him exact definitions to legal terms.
Well, the government has a lot of ways of getting your house. The Kelo decision is just one of them. I don’t agree with them all and would also feel that the US is criminally liable, but of course legally they aren’t. That doesn’t mean I cannot feel the same about Israel.
How about this? They are both in the wrong. Neither the US should seize houses with innocent occupants nor the Israeli’s should demolish houses for terrorists having lived there. It doesn’t matter to me if a father or a brother is a terrorist, even if his family supports him, the responsibility for the bombing remains with the bomber. If the Israeli’s want the house, let them take the family to court and prove that is true for all instances.
[QUOTE=Terr]
It doesn’t matter. Arrest the terrorists, but leave their family out of it
[/QUOTE]
But you can read their minds?
I can recall Finn and others who you would regard as “pro-Israel” specifically criticizing Israel’s settlement policies as wrong and counterproductive. So it is incorrect to say that they “never once say a bad thing about Israel”, just that they are not as critical as you think they should be.
So again, why is it you feel that ludicrously hyperbolic statements like “too many people who are pro-Israel think that you have to support them in everything they do” are useful?
O.K. Cite a particular event that you think constitutes criminal/immoral behavior by Israel, and compare the number of words/news space devoted to that event by major U.S. newspaper and online broadcast news sites to the number of words/news space that qualifies as enough coverage in your view (explaining how you arrive at that decision would be a welcome bonus).
Thanks.
Not only have I, I have on the Dope in the public record. Your claims are fictitious. Further, the idea that I only would criticize Israel “in the context of how much worse the opposition would be” is simple fantasy.
What’s more, I’m so certain that I’ve criticized Israel on the Dope and your claim is full of nonsense, that I’ll make a bet with you. If I haven’t, as determined by the 2/3 judgment of any three mods you pick, I will pay for a custom title for myself that reads “I slavishly support everything Israel does.” If you’re wrong however, you pay for a custom title for yourself that reads “Bombast and bluster retard rather than promote honest debate, I need to cut that out.”
Deal?
This echoes unpleasantly of my brother-in-law, who denigrates “People who believe that Israel can do no wrong.” The trouble is, I’ve never met anyone who actually believes that! I’m pro-Israel, but am first in line to groan when they do something horrid or awkward or harmful or wrong. I’m in the group who believes that expanding settlements in the West Bank is making peace harder to arrive at.
It seems to be a useless piece of hyperbole. Are there really any people at all who believe that Israel never, ever makes a bad national decision? I hope never to meet one!
I do, but it’s kind of a moot question given that there are hundreds if not thousands of articles on the subject. Which you could easily verify by doing the same Google News Archive search I did.
Anyway, please answer my question. It was a serious question not a rhetorical question: Roughly how many news articles would there have to be for you to conclude that the issue is sufficiently reported on? I’m trying to understand your position here. I’m trying to learn where the goalposts are.
Same question as before:
(1) What exactly did Netanyahu do or not do recently to obstruct the peace process?
(2) How many news articles would there need to be on the subject for you to agree that the issue was getting sufficient attention from the press?
Again, I’m trying to nail down your position.
You really believe that the news media should be reporting your opinions as fact?
I kinda doubt it. The main problem is that the Arabs don’t actually want a 23rd independent state. What they want is for there not to be a Jewish state.
Yes of course. The Palestinian Arabs agreed not to make unilateral attempts to change the status of the disputed territories. They have broken their agreement and should apologize.
What I would also like for them to do is to announce (1) that they would like to accept the most recent statehood offer; (2) all Palestinian Arabs everywhere would be welcome and encouraged to immigrate; (3) all Jews who happen to be living in the proposed state are welcome to stay as citizens with rights similar to those of Arabs who are living in Israel.
Well first you need to define what you mean by “my land.”
As I asked in another recent thread, what exactly is “Palestinian Land”?
Do uncultivated parts of the former Ottoman empire count as “Palestinian land”? If non-Arabs immigrated to the area in or around what is now Israel, and started using uncultivated land, have they just misappropriated “Palestinian land”?
After the Arabs chased all the Jews out of Gaza City, Eastern Jerusalem, and Hebron, did those areas become “Palestinian land”? And are they “Palestinian Land” forever?
Are there any places in or around Israel which are NOT “Palestinian land”? If so, what? And how did they become so?
I really would like a clear definition of “Palestinian land.”
Wow! That is one unbelievably courageous opinion to hold. You, my friend, are breaking new grounds here. I mean, to think like this, to make a stand like that, to draw a line in the concrete poured into foundation of new homes in occupied teritories, that is no ordinary feat. I’m sure as soon as the news of your displeasure reaches Israel shores, Netanyahu and his goons will rethink the whole strategy. Who knows, with such a sharp skills, you might be even called to advise on peace process so let’s hope you and equally skilled former UK PM Tony Blair will get along.