John Pilger on the state of journalism today
"The enduring tragedy of Palestine is due in great part to the silence and compliance of the so-called liberal left. Hamas is described repeatedly as sworn to the destruction of Israel. The New York Times, the Associated Press, the Boston Globe—take your pick. They all use this line as a standard disclaimer,and it is false. That Hamas has called for a ten-year ceasefire is almost never reported. Even more important, that Hamas has undergone an historic ideological shift in the last few years, which amounts to a recognition of what it calls the reality of Israel, is virtually unknown; and that Israel is sworn to the destruction of Palestine is unspeakable. There is a pioneering study by Glasgow University on the reporting of Palestine. They interviewed young people who watch TV news in Britain. More than 90 percent thought the illegal settlers were Palestinian. The more they watched, the less they knew—Danny Schecter's famous phrase."
posted by joladies at Saturday, July 21, 2007
4 Comments:
All Hamas has to do to convince us that there has been an "historic ideological shift" is to rewrite its constitution that calls for the elimination of Israel.
Jordan has made the choice for peace by recognising Israel. Why doesn't Hamas do the same?
So far as Israel seeking the destruction of Palestine is concerned, Pilger needs to explain how this could be so seeing that Barak offered Arafat a state in 90% of the West Bank and Gaza in 2000 which was rejected by Arafat.
Peter - thanks for engaging ... in the interests of peace suggest you look into the study of Glasgow University on the reporting of Palestine for your answer to your question ... not quite sure that it was as simple as offering 90% of West Bank and Gaza ... if Barak was truly interested in peace he would have declared an end to occupation in Palestine. That would have required releasing all of the land you are talking about ... not a percentage of a percentage. A good book out now to read on all this myth making on both sides is: "Married to Another Man: Israel’s Dilemma in Palestine" by
Ghada Karmi
London-Ann Arbor: Pluto Press, 2007
PS: Jordan Times book review by Sally Bland ...
"The phrase chosen for the book’s title harks back to historical archives. When Vienna’s rabbis sent representatives to Palestine to ascertain whether it was a suitable site for establishing a Jewish state, the envoys cabled back: “The bride is beautiful, but she is married to another man.”
This is the crux of the Zionism dilemma in Palestine: “How to create and maintain a Jewish state in a land inhabited by another people. Either the ‘other man’ had to be totally eradicated, or the Jewish state project had to be abandoned.” (p. 260)
J
I must say from my experience of young people in Edinburgh there is nothing like the ignorance that John Pilger's survey charecterises to Glascow youth! And it is true that it takes two to tango. I find it hard to believe that any Hamas activist has abandoned the dream of the destruction of Israel and a change in its constitution would be step in the right direction. Arafat achieved that with the PLO and it did help with negotiations with the Israelis.
Force will not ever bring a solution-either for Israel or for Palestine.
Post a Comment
<< Home