Post Reply
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Both Sides Now......
2 years ago  ::  Jun 12, 2012 - 11:40AM #1
LeahOne
Posts: 16,352
As a number of posters have complained that some here 'do not present both sides of a situation' (are there ONLY two???), here are two very different reports on the same situation:

www.haaretz.com/news/national/golan-heig...   <- First 'one side''



www.sana.sy/eng/21/2012/06/12/424732.htm  <- And then 'the other'.



My challenge to everyone:  Pick ONE account as being the more factual in style and reasonable in content - and explain WHY that one is better....    
  
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 12, 2012 - 5:00PM #2
LeahOne
Posts: 16,352

OK, I admit freely that a wildfire in the Golan isn't as pressing a problem as so many others throughout the ME.


But isn't there ANYONE who's broad-minded enough to read both accounts and decide for themselves which they think may be more accurate?


Or is everyone who isn't posting to this thread intending to acknowledge my contention now that it's a no-brainer? 


(Apologies to all & sundry for shamelessly bringing this thread back to the top.....)

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 12, 2012 - 5:03PM #3
rocketjsquirell
Posts: 15,979

Actually they were good examples.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 12, 2012 - 5:50PM #4
Amin21
Posts: 4,643

I read it,


I thought it was a good example on a topic that shouldn't have been contraversial.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 12, 2012 - 7:57PM #5
Miraj
Posts: 5,021

I guess I missed the point because most news coverage is one-sided Innocent

Disclaimer: The opinions of this member are not primarily informed by western ethnocentric paradigms, stereotypes rooted in anti-Muslim/Islam hysteria, "Israel can do no wrong" intransigence, or the perceived need to protect the Judeo-Christian world from invading foreign religions and legal concepts.  By expressing such views, no inherent attempt is being made to derail or hijack threads, but that may be the result.  The result is not the responsibility of this member.


PhotobucketPhotobucket
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 12, 2012 - 9:48PM #6
rocketjsquirell
Posts: 15,979

Apparently suffering from a tin ear is not restricted to music. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 13, 2012 - 12:03AM #7
Miraj
Posts: 5,021

or, you have a really bad Memri.

Disclaimer: The opinions of this member are not primarily informed by western ethnocentric paradigms, stereotypes rooted in anti-Muslim/Islam hysteria, "Israel can do no wrong" intransigence, or the perceived need to protect the Judeo-Christian world from invading foreign religions and legal concepts.  By expressing such views, no inherent attempt is being made to derail or hijack threads, but that may be the result.  The result is not the responsibility of this member.


PhotobucketPhotobucket
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 13, 2012 - 9:54AM #8
rocketjsquirell
Posts: 15,979

I have an excellent Memri Smile It keeps track of just about everything, but if it isn't accessed it can't help.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 13, 2012 - 10:31AM #9
rocketjsquirell
Posts: 15,979

Special post:


Another example of biased news reporting - courtesy of CNN

yup garbage in and garbage out

CNN journalist Christiane Amanpour asks why the media no longer cover the Israel-Palestinian peace process. She interviews Hanan Ashrawi for the Palestinians, but opts not to have an Israeli guest. June 8 program: edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/internatio...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFUGmJI57Xw&feat...

Tin ear anyone?  


Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 13, 2012 - 11:02AM #10
rocketjsquirell
Posts: 15,979

And more information to help repair those with a tin ear . . .

Der Sturmer in the UK?
. . .
Yet there is such a foreign media outlet represented in Israel, publishing propaganda and openly supporting Israel’s worst enemies. It’s called The Guardian.

While I wouldn’t begin to credit The Guardian’s reporter on the ground as being the ultimate evil, perhaps Harriet Sherwood might like to reflect on the twisted ideologues at work in The Guardian’s London office.

The latest example sees The Guardian focusing on five years since Hamas won Palestinian elections and took over the Gaza Strip. Cue a sickening piece of propaganda by Gaza’s Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh:

    We as a people want to live in our homeland, the land of our ancestors, in freedom, dignity and democracy, and with a just peace that restores our rights. We do not want to attack anyone and do not accept anyone attacking us. As we have said on more than one occasion, the key to security is the end of occupation. As a people we have been historically wronged and subjected to dozens of massacres; tens of thousands of us have lost our children for no other reason than that we demand our rights as clearly stipulated under international laws.

Less than five months ago, Haniyeh celebrated Hamas’s 24th anniversary by boasting of the numbers of Israelis the terror group had murdered (civilians as well as soldiers) and the amount of rockets fired from Gaza aimed at Israeli civilian targets.

Does this sound like a man who does not want to attack anyone? As for “dozens of massacres” and “tens of thousands” having lost their children, this sort of language is straight out of the Joseph Goebbels playbook – tell a big enough lie and it will be believed.
. . .
I shouldn’t need to deconstruct Hamas propaganda but I can ask why The Guardian feels the need to give a platform to terrorism. Granted, the New York Times and LA Times have done the same in the past. But neither publication has demonstrated a consistent and obsessive hatred towards Israel to the point of open activism against the country.

Otherwise, how to explain The Guardian’s open criticism of the Palestinian Authority’s apparent willingness to compromise with Israel as outlined in leaked documents relating to Israeli-Palestinian negotiations?
. . .
The Guardian even went as far as to publish an op-ed in January 2001 titled, “Israel simply has no right to exist.” This, in a nutshell seems to typify The Guardian’s attitude towards Israel.
. . .
Why should we care? The Guardian is still the paper of choice of the liberal “chattering class” in the UK, influencing politicians, academia, the BBC and the elites. And the poison is spreading across the Atlantic through The Guardian’s popular website and Comment is Free blog site.
. . .
full article:
blogs.timesofisrael.com/der-sturmer-in-t...

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook