What Media Bias? Part 111

March 1, 2008Mark Noonan

The headline:

33 Palestinians Killed in Israeli Raid in Gaza

The actual story:

Israel pulled its troops and settlers out of the tiny seaside territory in late 2005, but militants proceeded to fire rockets from the abandoned territory at Israeli communities.

Hamas, which is sworn to Israel’s destruction, took control of Gaza by force from the rival Fatah in June.

Israeli government spokesman David Baker said Israel was ”compelled to continue to take these defensive measures” to protect more than 200,000 Israelis living under the threat of Palestinian rocket barrages.

Militants ”hide behind their own civilians, using them as human shields, while actively targeting Israeli population centers,” Baker said. ”They bear the responsibility for the results.”

The actual story is buried on page two of the report. The headline should read, for mere accuracy, Israelis Respond to Hamas Attacks – but that would be fair and accurate, and the MSM doesn’t allow that in reporting about Israel.

Kahn March 1, 2008 / 10:20 pm

Arctic, so after that nice long rant – you can’t actually find a Hamas peace proposal can you?

Thats really all that needs to be said AF.

Diana, can YOU do your usual cut-n-paste job and show us the Hamas peace proposal? Can you?

Look, just show it to us. We’ll read it, discuss it.

(Derisive ending comment self-deleted)
Diana Powe March 1, 2008 / 10:26 pm

Kahn,

Do you live in Israel?
Gozer the Carpathian March 1, 2008 / 10:30 pm

DP Does it matter?
Kahn March 1, 2008 / 11:10 pm

Wow Diana, no I live in Virginia.

Ummm, do you live is the Palestinian Territories?

But that means you couldn’t find anything, could you Diana? Come on now, admit it. You are the cut-n-paste queen. You looked all around and could not find anything. Right? Come on now, stop stalling. Give it up….
Kahn March 1, 2008 / 11:20 pm

tic tic tic tic, ding! Change subject NOW! Accuse the conservatives of something!
Freedom1 March 1, 2008 / 11:37 pm

Well said, Michael, JS, and Phnx!

The rank anti-Semetism of the MSM is nauseating. The fact that, “Hamas…is sworn to Israel’s destruction” is completely ignored by the left. It’s the 1930’s all over again.

Hey, Mark, I can’t believe you haven’t posted this already since this is yet another media bias story-

“Survey Says: 64% Believe Mainstream Media Are Out of Touch: More Americans turning to Web for news”– Reuters

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Nearly 70 percent of Americans believe traditional journalism is out of touch, and nearly half are turning to the Internet to get their news, according to a new survey.

While most people think journalism is important to the quality of life, 64 percent are dissatisfied with the quality of journalism in their communities, a We Media/Zogby Interactive online poll showed.

“That’s a really encouraging reflection of people who care A) about journalism and B) understand that it makes a difference to their lives,” said Andrew Nachison, of iFOCOS, a Virginia-based think tank which organized a forum in Miami where the findings were presented.

Nearly half of the 1,979 people who responded to the survey said their primary source of news and information is the Internet, up from 40 percent just a year ago. Less than one third use television to get their news, while 11 percent turn to radio and 10 percent to newspapers.
Kahn March 2, 2008 / 12:35 am

Well, I was just checking up on this string before bed to see if Diana or Arctic Fox had posted that Hamas peace proposal. I was hoping to review it.

Ah well. Maybe it’s still in translation…
Diana Powe March 2, 2008 / 12:38 am

Kahn,

No, I didn’t look. The point which you adroitly missed is that what is genuinely relevant to the question of whether or not Israel should negotiate with Hamas is what Israelis want, not Americans. They live there. We don’t.

So bloviate all you want about Hamas, but for the Israeli people, it matters.
Kahn March 2, 2008 / 1:12 am

Oh – is THAT what you meant when you asked me if I lived there? But then YOU must live in the Palestinian territories then? Maybe I didn’t miss your point, but thought it was stupid? Well yah, that is what I thought.

You can’t find a Hamas peace proposal because there isn’t one and never has been one. Nor have they ever responded positively to ANY peace proposal. But when challenged you run and hide or change the subject. You also Arctic Fox… you couldn’t find that proposal either?

Their idea of a peace proposal is ” Hey, hold still while I shoot you!”

To suddenly say my opinion is irrelevant because I don’t live there, while you’re in the middle of talking total crap – and YOU don’t live there is intellectual cowardice. I’m trying my best here to not use derogatory language.

Judging from your earlier posts then, you support Hamas, a criminal organization dedicated to the extermination of the Israeli nation. Just to clarify your position for you.
Diana Powe March 2, 2008 / 1:40 am

Kahn,

No, I don’t support Hamas or not support Hamas because I don’t live in Israel. Your opinions about whether the state of Israel should negotiate with Hamas, which is in the position its in because it was elected by the Palestinians, don’t mean a thing because you aren’t affected by the question. For you it’s just an opportunity to opine as to what other people ought to do to suit your ideas about their country. For actual Israelis, who have to live with the consequences of their choices (unlike you living in Virginia), their apparent preference is for Israel to negotiate with Hamas. If you want to tell Israelis how to live their lives, I suggest you write a letter to the editor of Haaretz. Perhaps they’ll print it so that their readers will know what they need to do to please you.
Arctic Fox March 2, 2008 / 1:42 am

Thought I’d check in before bed, only to find Kahn running his mouth off again.

So… Using “the google” under ‘Hamas peace plan’ turns up:

If you want to understand the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a nutshell, just look at the New York Times editorial pages of November 1, 2006. Amazingly enough, the Times ran a full op-ed column by a top official of the Hamas party, Ahmed Yousef, a senior adviser to Palestinian prime minister Ismail Haniyeh. Yousef repeated the same offer Hamas has been making for years. In Arabic it’s called a “hudna.”

As Yousef explained, a hudna is “a period of nonwar but only partial resolution of a conflict.” It “extends beyond the Western concept of a cease-fire and obliges the parties to use the period to seek a permanent, nonviolent resolution to their differences.” A hudna “affords the opportunity to humanize one’s opponents and understand their position with the goal of resolving the intertribal or international dispute.”

“This offer of hudna is no ruse, as some assert, to strengthen our military machine,” Yousef pleaded. And he offered several reasons to believe it: “A hudna is recognized in Islamic jurisprudence as a legitimate and binding contract. . It goes back to the Koran itself. . When Hamas gives its word to an international agreement, it does so in the name of God and will therefore keep its word. Hamas has honored its previous cease-fires, as Israelis grudgingly note with the oft-heard words, ‘At least with Hamas they mean what they say.'”

But what do they say and mean? In Israel, opinions differ.

To offset its radical move of giving op-ed space to Hamas, the Times published, on the very same day, a letter from the rising star of Israel’s far right, Minister of Strategic Affairs Avigdor Lieberman. He claimed to know what Hamas says and means: Their declared aim is “to eradicate all Jews from Tel Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem” – in other words, to destroy the Jewish State – “and until they achieve that goal, they will not lay down their arms.”

At the other end of Israel’s political spectrum, there are Israelis who have been urging their government for years to accept the long-standing Hamas offer of hudna. They are outraged to see a superhawk like Lieberman get the portfolio of Minister of Strategic Affairs. Zehava Galon, a leader of the left wing bloc in Israel’s parliament, called the appointment “a terrorist attack on democracy.”

Did you get that? The only person calling for the destruction of Israel is a minister in Israel’s interpretation of what he thinks Hamas might think. But guess what? That’s what your “biased against Israel” press reported, not as what an Israeli minister said but as what Hamas said.

Interestingly enough, the author goes on to report:

So the Times gave space to both ends of the political spectrum. That seems balanced. But the next day, in its letters column, the Times ran four letters in response. Though one applauded the Hamas offered, three denounced it, following Lieberman’s lead, as bald-faced lying propaganda from a group dedicated to destroying Israel.

For those who think actions speak louder than words, the Times also ran a news story about a major Israeli assault on Gaza that day, killing 8 and wounding over 40. And it reported on a cabinet meeting that would consider Lieberman’s plea much harsher measures against the Palestinians.

For now, the Israeli cabinet has decided to hold off on harsher treatment, sticking to the present course, which has killed some 250 Gazans in the last four months (while losing only three of their own soldiers). But they can count on the present course scuttling any chance for hudna and peace talks.

This whole scenario has been played out before. Back in June Hamas leaders offered a hudna. On the same day, the Israelis began the renewed military action in Gaza which continues to this very day. Israeli leaders surely understood then what they still know now. Their policy has an absolutely predictable outcome. The angry Palestinian public will reject its own leaders’ plans for peace.

Indeed, the Hamas leaders have had to trim back their offer. In June, they offered a hudna that would automatically be renewed for an indefinite time. Now they are limiting it to 10 years. But in Middle Eastern politics, 10 years is close to an eternity.

So it appears time and again it’s Hamas that’s wanted peace, and Israel that’s ignored it.

A ceasefire, a “hudna”, is offered by Hamas. Israel promptly attacks them. Same picture over and over again.

In fact, far from wanting to destroy Israel, a “hudna” actually recognizes Israel, as the author explains:

And Hamas leaders cannot say publicly the most important fact: In Muslim law, a hudna is offered only to a non-Muslim party that controls its own non-Muslim land. In other words (as I have noted in a previous column) by using the word “hudna,” Hamas leaders are implicitly recognizing the permanent existence of Israel. Ahmed Yousef himself wrote that the hudna would involve “an immediate end to the occupation and to initiate a period of peaceful coexistence.” That sounds like a veiled promise of a two-state solution.

So there you go, Kahn. Peace plans. From Hamas. Thwarted, by Israel.

I bet THAT doesn’t fit into your comfortable view of things.
Mark Noonan March 2, 2008 / 1:56 am

AF,

Not at all – Israel responds to attacks and cannot be held liable for Hamas hiding behind the skirts of women…Hamas, on the other hand, deliberately targets the unarmed.
Mark Noonan March 2, 2008 / 2:03 am

AF,

And that Hamas peace plan? Well, it was for 10-15 years and was supposed to be modelled on Mohammed’s peace agreement with his Arab opponents…a period of time to gain strength for a final trial of arms.

And, also, the agreement would require Israel to give up eastern Jerusalem, part of the Negev and control of most of Israel’s water supply…in other words, as long as Israel agreed to commit national suicide, Hamas will give them a temporary peace deal…
Arctic Fox March 2, 2008 / 2:13 am

Would you care to quote your sources for those rather sweeping comments, Mr Noonan?
Mark Noonan March 2, 2008 / 2:56 am

AF,

Here’s a good source on the Hamas attitude towards a “peace” deal with Israel:

http://www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org/node/1690

You want to trust people who strap bombs on children and say this is morally superior to Israelis targeting Hamas leaders….well, that is your business…
js March 2, 2008 / 7:57 am

Would a hudna with Hamas really mark “the success of peacemaking,” a “major breakthrough” toward a nonviolent future?

The answer lies in the historical meaning of the Muslim expression, Hamas’ track record, and the terms of the road map itself.

Hudna has a distinct meaning to Islamic fundamentalists, well-versed in their history: The prophet Mohammad struck a legendary, ten-year hudna with the Quraysh tribe that controlled Mecca in the seventh century. Over the following two years, Mohammad rearmed and took advantage of a minor Quraysh infraction to break the hudna and launch the full conquest of Mecca, the holiest city in Islam.

When Yassir Arafat infamously invoked Mohammad’s hudna in 1994 to describe his own Oslo commitments “on the road to Jerusalem,” the implication was clear. As Mideast expert Daniel Pipes explained, Arafat was asserting to his Islamic brethren that he will, “when his circumstances change for the better, take advantage of some technicality to tear up existing accords and launch a military assault on Israel.” Indeed, this is precisely what occurred in Sept. 2000 when Arafat & Co. launched a terror assault upon Israeli citizens.

As for Hamas, they have proven time and again their commitment to a tactical hudna — replenishing their strength during the quiet periods, then returning with increased deadliness. As recently documented by The Washington Institute, Hamas agreed to no less than ten ceasefires in the past ten years, and after every single one returned freshly armed for terror. Hundreds of Israeli citizens have paid for these hudnas with their lives.

http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/Hudna_With_Hamas.asp
js March 2, 2008 / 7:59 am

Expert: Dr. Hussein Labib

Date: 4/2/2005

Subject: “Hudna”

Question

I recently heard that the prophet mohammed was involved in shady peace dealings with other people apart from islam. Case in point ”

THE PROPHET’S PRECEDENT

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Islam-947/Hudna-2.htm
js March 2, 2008 / 8:02 am

This impression was left because two weeks ago, after Israel freed a Hamas cleric, Sheikh Hasan Yusef, from jail, the freed prisoner declared that Hamas would accept a long-term “hudna” in exchange for the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state on all lands that Israel acquired after the 1967 war. That would mean Israel’s withdrawal from the Old City of Jerusalem, the closure of the Jerusalem-Tel Aviv road, and the dismantling of Israel’s civilian and military presence in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (the West Bank).

Sheikh Yusef stated to the Israeli media that the “hudna” that he suggested would last for ten years.

Yet “hudna”, often mistranslated as a “ceasefire” or armistice, connotes no more than a temporary respite in the war between Islamic forces and non-Islamic forces.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=1BC840B8-CDEC-4C7D-BF44-B68E85DC211F
phnx March 2, 2008 / 10:24 am

Arctic fox

So you think that hamas wants peace. You are an ill informed moron!!! Read their charter. The following is a direct quote from their charter about how HAMAS views the peace process:

Peaceful Solutions, [Peace] Initiatives and International Conferences

Article Thirteen

[Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad: “Allah is the all-powerful, but most people are not aware.”

Peace is contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas). Can it be any more clear???!!!

Just what is it about this that you don’t understand??!! Don’t you believe them when they say this??!!
phnx March 2, 2008 / 10:29 am

AF and other terrorist apologists, the following is the Charter of Hamas, in which is enshrined their stated goal of the destruction of Isreal:

http://www.acpr.org.il/resources/hamascharter.html

From the Preamble:

“This is the Charter of the Islamic Resistance (Hamas) which will reveal its face, unveil its identity, state its position, clarify its purpose, discuss its hopes, call for support to its cause and reinforcement, and for joining its ranks. For our struggle against the Jews is extremely wide-ranging and grave, so much so that it will need all the loyal efforts we can wield, to be followed by further steps and reinforced by successive battalions from the multifarious Arab and Islamic world, until the enemies are defeated and Allah’s victory prevails.”

“Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors.”

From Article Seven:

“Hamas is one of the links in the Chain of Jihad in the confrontation with the Zionist invasion. It links up with the setting out of the Martyr Izz a-din al-Qassam and his brothers in the Muslim Brotherhood who fought the Holy War in 1936; it further relates to another link of the Palestinian Jihad and the Jihad and efforts of the Muslim Brothers during the 1948 War, and to the Jihad operations of the Muslim Brothers in 1968 and thereafter.”

“The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said:

The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! This will not apply to the Gharqad, which is a Jewish tree (cited by Bukhari and Muslim).”

“The Strategy of Hamas: Palestine is an Islamic Waqf

Article Eleven

The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine has been an Islamic Waqf throughout the generations and until the Day of Resurrection, no one can renounce it or part of it, or abandon it or part of it. ”

In otherwords, all of what is known as Isreal belongs to them.

Hamas in Palestine: Its Views on Homeland and Nationalism

Article Twelve

Hamas regards Nationalism (Wataniyya) as part and parcel of the religious faith. Nothing is loftier or deeper in Nationalism than waging Jihad against the enemy and confronting him when he sets foot on the land of the Muslims.

There is more but it its a wast of bandwidth to past it. It is an complete screed against judiasm and peace. Only a fool like you wuold beleive Hamas wants peace.
Kahn March 2, 2008 / 10:47 am

Artic, ALL that text and you couldn’t actually find the Hamas peace proposal?

“a hudna is “a period of nonwar but only partial resolution of a conflict.” It “extends beyond the Western concept of a cease-fire and obliges the parties to use the period to seek a permanent, nonviolent resolution to their differences.””

But yet, while this is in effect they keep shooting rockets? This is ONLY an OFFER of a cease fire. They don’t even cease firing AND there are no suggestions of what an actual peace treaty would look like.

ARCTIC, this is lame. What are the conditions under which Hamas will stop attacking Israel Where is the actual peace offer, not a cease fire offer?

Oh, and the use of the phrase “once again” means you have to show more than one time. AND – nice source, a newspaper dedicated to news for progressives – who I’ve never heard of. neither had you apparently, as you had to google it.
Kahn March 2, 2008 / 10:54 am

Well, I searched also. I DO find offers of cease fires, and of truces. BUT no actual offers to end the conflict.

Typically, when you look at the news surrounding an offer – Hamas escalates violence, Israel responds, and Hamas offers a truce while decrying the Israeli response. Note, during these “truces” and “cease fires” Hamas rebuilds their forces or often doesn’t even stop shooting.

There is NEVER an actual offer of peace. Half hearted (or even full hearted, if you wish) cease fires are ALL thats EVER offered.

ARCFTIC and DIANA – you ignorance is highlighted. You did NOT produce a peace offer – put up or shut up.
Diana Powe March 2, 2008 / 12:28 pm

Kahn,

I’m not an Israeli. You’re not an Israeli. Your views and opinions on whether the Israelis should negotiate with the elected government of Hamas are utterly pointless most especially in the face of reported public opinion in that country. You don’t have to live with the results. If you want to persuade someone you need to persuade the people of Israel otherwise you’re just another American with an opinion from the safety of afar. Now, if you should care to immigrate to Israel, then that would be a completely different matter. Since you’re so anxious about the issue, perhaps you should consider it.
phnx March 2, 2008 / 12:40 pm

Kahn,

Its pointless to discuss the middle east with these dhimmicrat surrender monkeys. Their mantra is peace at any cost. They would prefer to live peacefully as slaves subservient to their Islamofascist masters than to fight to defend the freedom they enjoy under democracy. God help us if they come to control all branches of government.