The Story You Aren't Hearing About Israel

Did you hear about the two policemen who stopped to help a driver stuck with a flat--and were shot to death in the head at point-blank range?

Did you know about the 120-kilogram bomb planted in a parking lot adjacent to a shopping mall where thousands of people were milling about the stores, restaurants, and movie theaters?

No, of course, you didn't. These are just two everyday incidents of the ordeal confronted by people in Israel while the world and the political leaders look away. Outrages like these do not make it into the Western media, which exhibit the familiar phenomenon of monitoring only the conflicts that are the flavor of the month. And when they do turn to Israel, sporadically, it is with the excitement of thinking they can expose Israeli wrongdoing: the New York Times just drummed up a front-page story alleging the deliberate murder of innocent civilians by Israeli soldiers during the Gaza war, a poorly investigated report that turned out to be yet another urban myth and then was shamefully corrected by the Times only on the inside pages and only by blaming Israel for the false report. (Remember another urban myth alleging thousands of citizens massacred in the battle against terrorism in Jenin in 2002 when it turned out no more than 54 died, most of them combatants?)

Ordinary Israelis despair of the cruel bias. The policemen died because Israel eased restrictions on movement in the Nablus area of the West Bank. Hundreds survived in the attack on the mall near Haifa only because a woman reported hearing an explosion. Security found it was a detonator that expired without setting off a car bomb that would have lacerated the crowds with sharp metal and ball bearings.

The willingness to give a free pass to terrorism was, of course, manifest most luridly in the Gaza war. Hamas fired thousands of rockets with the short-term aim of murdering as many innocent civilians as possible in the service of the longer-term ambition to terrorize Israel.

Then, when Israel finally responded (with military restraint and humanitarian aid), it was faced with world demands for an unconditional cease-fire. Ironically, the fiercest criticism in the Arab world about Israel's conduct in Gaza stems from Israel's failure to achieve a decisive victory, for the Arab world rightly perceives not Israel but Hamas as a threat: It knows full well that Hamas is a fifth column for Iranian influence.

Once the cease-fire was achieved, the world lost interest in Israel. Except that now, in a fit of selectively lethal amnesia, it is on the verge of providing the selfsame murderous Hamas with a huge influx of funding that will rebuild the authority of a terrorist organization dedicated to killing Jews.

The tragedy for the Palestinians as much as the Israelis is that they do not have leadership strong enough to make peace. Hamas wants perpetual war: No one can doubt that it aims not to have a two-state solution but to have a "no state" solution--that is, to have the State of Israel stop existing. For its part, "moderate" Fatah is hopelessly corrupt and weak and seemingly incapable of reform or of enforcing law and order on its people. That is why an Israeli-Palestinian peace remains a dream today and why what Israel can offer the Palestinians is less than what any Palestinian politician is willing or able to attempt.

Even the language of peace is eroding. The Palestinians say they support two states for two peoples but refrain from saying that one of those is the Jewish people. Most recently, a major Palestine Liberation Organization figure, Mohammed Dahlan, asserted that the Fatah movement hasn't even recognized Israel thus far and that the Palestinian Authority's apparent "recognition" of Israel is to make the PA "acceptable" to the international community, in order to bring in international aid. Who can trust that?

There is justification for the widespread Israeli concern that if a Palestinian state were established, power in Gaza, and then in the West Bank, would soon fall into the hands of Hamas. After all, Hamas won 44 percent of the vote and the mayoralty in several major cities in the last West Bank election. Another unreported fact that reflects on what would happen if Hamas won: The most credible of the Palestinian-run news operations, the Ma'an News Agency, has posted three listings involving a total of 181 persons--all Fatah people--shot by Hamas in Gaza since December 2008.

The Fatah party is facing an election within a year, which may well be won by Hamas. If the Iranian-supported Hamas ultimately succeeds in its 20-year effort to be the principal voice of Palestinian nationalism, Israel will have a neighbor that truly speaks for Iran's goal of seeing Israel "wiped off the face of the Earth."

In a "unity" government, Hamas would undoubtedly be integrated in the security services, which would end Palestinian-Israeli security cooperation covering the majority of the West Bank cities. Hamas wants Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to stop negotiations with Israel and to embrace the political program that allows for "resistance" -- in other words, violence.

No wonder the Palestinian Reconciliation Conference in Cairo ended in failure. Even the lure of billions of dollars in aid has not brought Fatah Sunnis in Judea and Samaria, i.e., the West Bank, any closer to Shiite supporters of Hamas in Gaza. These are two parallel lines that cannot meet, and this division will persist.

And what of Israeli leadership? Now Israel has Binyamin Netanyhu trying to form a cabinet. The world may be skeptical about the will and political ability of a more conservative Likud government to make historic and dramatic decisions that involve painful concessions to the Palestinians in the interest of a two-state solution, but history suggests otherwise. It was Menachem Begin's Likud government that brought about the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty. It was Yitzhak Shamir's Likud government that began the peace process at the Madrid Conference in October of 1991. Netanyahu's Likud party and its reservations should not be dismissed lightly, for it was Netanyahu who predicted way back in 1994 that handing over territories to Palestinians would lead to the creation of a fundamental Islamic terrorist base adjacent to Israel.

Israel has taken many risks for peace. The response has been rocket fire, terrorism, more incitement, more vilification, more shedding of Israeli blood, and less security, not to mention an ongoing historic campaign to defame, denounce, denigrate, and delegitimize Israel in every international forum.

Contrary to many reports, Netanyahu has asserted that he is not opposed to a two-state solution, provided it does not put at risk the national security of the Jewish state. The key component would be a record of Palestinian determination and ability to fight terrorism and to live in peace with Israel. Like so many experts, Netanyahu feels that the chances of an enforceable, comprehensive arrangement are low to negligible. In the meantime, as a matter of law and order, he intends to oppose illegal settlements, be they in the West Bank or among Bedouins in Sinai. His major priority would be to promote prosperity on the West Bank, creating an incentive for the Palestinians to make a commitment to peace. He notes that Palestinians in the West Bank remained calm during the fighting in Gaza and didn't engage in mass protests.

Therefore, Netanyahu will focus on improving Palestinian life by lifting roadblocks (100 so far) and reducing checkpoints (they have gone down from 50 to 15) and making other improvements on the ground for the Palestinian community. In this he is supported by dovish Israeli President Shimon Peres, who now has doubts about Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza without first having established a peaceful and democratic Palestinian party to which it could hand the territory. That Palestinian party does not yet exist.

A Palestinian state cannot be created by terrorism. It can be created through the reformation of political and economic institutions so that they reflect democracy, market economics, and real actions to confront terrorism. When there is an effective, Palestinian-based security force with counterterrorism capability in the West Bank, the Israelis will then be prepared to withdraw their defense forces and the Shin Bet from operating there. Hence the importance of the U.S. effort, led by Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton, to develop a decent Palestinian security force. The new units have been enforcing order in the cities of Jenin and Hebron, which had been basically lawless. But it is not enough to target car thieves and robbers. The critical counterterrorism ability of the Palestinian security forces is still limited; above all, they must have the will to target terrorist cells and their networks.

Two modest paramilitary forces have been trained to police crime and enforce public order, but not to uproot terror groups. In fact, the PA has increasingly offered safe haven to terror groups. Brig.-Gen. Radhi Assida, the PA National Security Forces (NSF) commander in Jenin, revealed to the Palestinian website Ma'an on January 24, 2009, that PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad's NSF had agreed to provide protection to four senior Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) terrorists wanted by Israel. Assida also confirmed that PIJ operatives continue to receive monthly salaries from the PA Interior Ministry, just like their colleagues in the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades.

In the interim, Israel must not wait on events. Israel would be wise (despite the risks) to allow even freer movement in the West Bank; it should help to create more jobs and a better standard of living. Yes, the West must press Israel on these issues, but it must also press the Arab states. They should underwrite the training of PA security forces and invest sensibly in housing and agriculture.

Peace will come only when the Palestinians are liberated from their age-old hatred of Israel and Jews. As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has called for many times, there must be teaching, preaching, and celebrating, from childhood on, that hatred, disrespect, violence, terrorism, anti-Semitism, and war against Israelis and Zionists are unacceptable. Today, it is exactly the opposite.

A great Middle East authority, Prof. Bernard Lewis, recently pointed out in Foreign Affairs how easily the West is misled. In contrast to reports in English, he writes, "the discourse in Arabic--in broadcasts, sermons, speeches, and school textbooks--is far less conciliatory, portraying Israel as an illegitimate invader that must be destroyed." Israel cannot make peace with those whose first priority is to blow up Israeli women and children and who deny the nation's right to exist. As Lewis puts it, "There is no compromise position between existence and nonexistence."

The sad but realistic fact is that we are much closer to the establishment of two Palestinian states, one in the West Bank and one in Gaza, than to reaching a two-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians.

Comments

[AnotherMcIntosh]

When Israel made an unprovoked attack on the U.S.S. Liberty, a US intelligence gathering ship, was this an accident or was it done to interfere with our ability to keep uncover the events as they were happening during the the 6-day war?

[BubbaC33]

The US investigated and found it to be a regrettable friendly fire incident.

[LincolnParkChicago]

What investigation came to that conclusion? I don't think that is true.

[HermioneGranger]

not really

[arvay]

A US flag and other identifying marks were clearly visible on the ship, and the Israeli pilots lingered to make sure of their target. This incident needs to be constantly brought to the attention of Americans. The arrogance of this little Prussia knows no bounds.

[DustinTime]

Yeah. Friendly fire accident. For hours, and hours, and hours... with Israeli fighter pilots who refused to fire on the Liberty, because the American markings and flag were perfectly clear, being ordered over the radio to attack.

Many involved on both sides have since come forward in the press to acknowledge there was a cover-up.

[soral]

Alright, so, presuming that Israel did secretly order their pilots to attack an American ship, and assuming there has been a massive cover-up since, in order to hide Israel culpability in the incident, why was it done? Why would Israel attack a US ship? Why would they later issue an apology, and admit that they made a mistake, if they were intent on covering their tracks from this heinous, deliberate act of murder?

It seems to me that you would have to accept at the outset the premise that Israel's military is simply murderous and malevolent to think that they would want to do this. But if you don't start with that idea, it gets pretty hard to prove what you write.

[Freenation]

2 interesting articles from thenation.com, sites like HP and thenation are probably one of the few MSM which gives you a balanced view of the whole situation:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090427/carey?rel=hp_picks

"Some analysts argue that this is manufactured hysteria, not so much a reflection of genuine Israeli fears as a purposeful diversion from other looming difficulties. The Netanyahu government is filled with hardliners adamantly opposed to withdrawal from, or even a temporary freeze on, settlements in the occupied territories, not to mention to any acceptance of Palestinian statehood. "

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090427/leibovitz?rel=hp_picks

"IDF morality play"

[jeanrenoir]

At times it seems as if the Israeli government operates with the kind of denial-of -reality blinders that Bernie Madoff so routinely wore as a matter of course, for decades. 9/11 was immediately followed by Bill Kristol's gleeful assertion, "This means WAR!" It suddenly seemed so great to have America in Israel's boat with it, now linked at the hip in a mutual all-out war against "terrorism­." Mainly because of the neocons' fiasco in Iraq, the American public doesn't feel so "joined at the hip" to Israel in a mutual war against terrorism now. America's sense of mutual interests with Israel is steadily diminishing, not growing, since the stupid war in Iraq took America's eye off the Taliban-Al Qaeda ball, and may end up losing both Afghanistan and Pakistan to a fundamentalist form of Islamic nuclear terrorism which will make Iran look like Turkey. Fewer and fewer Americans trust the judgment of the Israeli right or its American defenders. Israel had better "get real" about its political situation in an America no longer controlled by neocons, or its recklessness will end up making it as unsympathetic to most Americans as the hubristically reckless Madoff himself.

[Gershon Abramoff-Ouakrat]

Furthermore, I would like to pose a final question: Can a state function without an identity? Palestine is certainly not fertile ground for democracy as we experience it in the West. As any middle-eastern expert will tell you, Palestinians have not been allowed to deal with their fascist past (yes, there were Nazis in Arab countries, why should they be in a bubble while the rest of the planet experienced fascism?) Germany held the Nuremberg Trials, Italy and France fiercely brought to trial fascists imbedded in their countries after Mussolini and Pétain. What about Palestine? Europe, ever oscillating between feeling superior and feeling remorse about its colonist past has not supported the Arab's attempts to recognize their nazi roots. "They were not real nazis, their fascism was really a response to colonialism, etc." The first step towards democratic stability is democratic identity. The world should aid the Palestinians, as they have so many times demanded, to get rid of the lingering ghosts of the certified Nazis like Hadj Amin Husseini.

[LincolnParkChicago]

Einstein's letter to the New York Times accuses the Israel's founders of fascism. Perhaps Israelis need to attend to their own past.

"The current visit of Menachem Begin, leader of this party, to the United States is obviously calculated to give the impression of American support for his party in the coming Israeli elections, and to cement political ties with conservative Zionist elements in the United States. Several Americans of national repute have lent their names to welcome his visit. It is inconceivable that those who oppose fascism throughout the world, if correctly informed as to Mr. Begin's political record and perspectives, could add their names and support to the movement he represents.
Before irreparable damage is done by way of financial contributions, public manifestations in Begin's behalf, and the creation in Palestine of the impression that a large segment of America supports Fascist elements in Israel, the American public must be informed as to the record and objectives of Mr. Begin and his movement. The public avowals of Begin's party are no guide whatever to its actual character. Today they speak of freedom, democracy and anti-imperialism, whereas until recently they openly preached the doctrine of the Fascist state. It is in its actions that the terrorist party betrays its real character; from its past actions we can judge what it may be expected to do in the future. "

ALBERT EINSTEIN

New York, Dec. 2, 1948

Read it yourself here:
http://www.rense.com/general59/ein.htm

[Wake-up]

Wasn't Einstein actually a member of the Nazi Party??

This is a who cares...

[BubbaC33]

Einstein must have thought differently, he left his papers to Israel and gave money to Israel.

[Gershon Abramoff-Ouakrat]

Israel's radical past is extremely well documented, just as much as the Nuremberg trials. But, like I said, Israel has had a chance to move PAST this and emerge stronger. Irgun, or Etzel, was a radical militaristic group that conducted bombings in Israel, which were denounced by the Zionist Congress of 1946. This is no longer the case. The Israeli Parliament is now extremely diverse, in it are moderates parties with both Jewish and Muslim representatives, as well as political parties who claim that Israel should not be exist. They do so through the Parliament.

[Gershon Abramoff-Ouakrat]

The real issue is whethere criticizing Israel is anti-semitism? The line, at least to me, seems to be completely blurred -- which is why so many people have used that term in this forum. I'm sure everyone who posting here is anti-war and would love to see a dual state solution implemented as soon as possible. But the fact is, as Mort explains, a utopian dream -- at least at the moment.

The United States media, it is true, has been more sympathetic to Israel than to Palestine. But why should Israel not have a defender? Is it wrong to support an ally who is bombed constantly by shells and by slanderous words from across the globe?

Why is the media not paying ANY attention to the April 20th Durban II Conference in Geneva -- which will be boycotted by the United States? This anti-racism conference -- presided over by Libya, whose text is being written by the vice presidents of Cuba, Iran, Indonesia, and Pakistan -- will concentrate, as it has done in the past, on accusing Israel of "apartheid­." Instead of denouncing the plight of Indian Untouchables, Pygmies, survivors of the Sudan massacre and the Rwandian Genocide, the international community will once again focus on demonizing Israel. On these grounds it cannot be denied that today, being anti-zionist is synonymous to anti-semitism.

[Doctor Nick]

At least in the case of Indian untouchables, they have full democratic rights and even major affirmative action programs in the form of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe political reservations. That is a pretty far cry from the situation of the Palestinians today.

I think the Palestinian situation is unique because unlike the cases in Sudan, Rwanda, etc. where you will be forced to have a multi-ethnic state (and where the issue is getting the state to protect human rights) that is not an option here - we have a state, Israel, that in fact professes to believe in human rights but explicitly is against a multi-ethnic state, insisting on the Jewish character of the state. Which is fine, except that it requires them to either deprive Palestinians of equal rights while living under occupation, or to grant the Palestinians their own state. Maybe it is not just anti-semitism, but also a belief that the Israeli government is more likely to be influenced by global popular opinion and claims of morality, that makes Israel singled out. Israel gets judged by a higher standard because it professes a higher standard for itself - no one expects much from Sudan.

[LiteSleeper]

Exactly. Don't profess to be more civilized than your enemy and then be outraged that you are held to a higher standard.

[Pleneras]

No it's just used as a defense mechanism. They are not excluded from criticism but the constant cry has reduced the term to more than one definition.

[phute]

Third rate Jurisprudence.

[phute]

Reason away and patronise all you like - you still end up withan excercise in third rate Judisprudence. Might work in the Israeli courts - but elsewhere - nada.

[Margaretpoa]

There is nothing "completely blurred" about the difference between Israel and a Jewish person. What you seem to be suggesting is that all Jewish people support Israel and all Israelis are Jewish and it's simply not true. The only practicing Jew that I know feels pretty much the same way I do about it. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that if a country responds to kidnapping by indiscriminately slaughtering civilians and children that the nation is rogue. Or are you trying to tell me that all Jewish people are bloodthirsty war mongers?

[misaacm]

Well done Mort, but don't be surprised if the Huff Posters ignore your article to recycle their tired anti-Israel tirades. There will be peace between Israel and the Arabs (not just the Palestinians) when the Arabs give up their dream of destroying Israel. Israel has shown they will relinquish land for peace, as they did with the Egyptians. They are not willing to commit suicide.

This fight is not about land, it is about Arab pride. So when the Israelis give up land at the bargaining table, they don't get peace because Arab pride has not been satisfied. The Egyptians spun the peace plan as a victory coming out of the 73 war. Not accurate since they were bailed out by the Soviets, but a useful lie. When the drug of Arab pride no longer rules the Arabs, there will be peace.

[marco01]

It's not about land? Where have you been since '67, or '48 for that manner. Arabs were systematically expelled from their land since '48. Zionists stole more land in '67 and they don't want to give it back. Since '67 they have been engaged in a "squatter" action which attempts to cement their hold on the West Bank.

You say it is about pride? You would be a people with no pride at all if you just permit foreigners to steal your land and brutalize your people and then just acquiesce and surrender your land.

[misaacm]

A couple of points; if there are 4.3 million people in refugee camps and only 750 k fled the fighting in 1948 why haven't these poor people been resettled? There have been 40 million + refugees worldwide since 1948 only the Palestinians have not been resettled, blame their Arab brothers.

Which brings me to my next point, over 99% of the middle east, 10% of the world's land mass is under Arab Muslim control. If the Israelis are taking land, they aren't doing a very good job of it,

[special muppet]

You completely trivialize the suffering of the Palestinians. It's just about pride, you say. I think most Palestinians have very little pride left. They have unemployment at 80%, they can't travel freely, they can't get medicines or clean water, they rely on food aid to survive, many have lost family members, they live in constant fear of Israeli military action. There are 4.3 million of them living in refugee camps.

It's not about pride. It's about justice.

[LincolnParkChicago]

The impass has nothing to do with pride and everything to do with land. Stolen land. You will dismiss me when I say this so I will direct you to a quote by Israel's first Prime Minister:

1948 "What is necessary is cruel and strong reactions. We need precision in time, place, and casualties. If we know the family, we must strike mercilessly, women and children included. Otherwise, the reaction is inefficient. At the place of action, there is no need to distinguish between guilty and innocent." January, 1948 David Ben-Gurion diary entry. As the first Israeli Prime Minister, he is quoted as having said at some point: "If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?"

David Ben-Gurion
Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp. 121-122.
http://www.whatwouldgandhido.net/zionistquotes.html

[PharmDude]

A bias IN FAVOR of the Palestinians?!? Maybe in Bizarro America, but not these United States. And where in the world did Zuckerman get the laughable number of 15 checkpoints from? An article taken from the Ma'an News Agency (who Zuckerman self proclaims ‘The most credible of the Palestinian-run news operations’) says the following:

“There are currently 13 military checkpoints 39 earth mounds, 12 road blocks and 26 road gates preventing Palestinians from moving freely in the Nablus area alone.” (3/15/09)

There’s a bias alright Mr. Zuckerman. At least you got that right.

[seananomie]

Were the piles of 1000+ body bags, many of them half-size, lined up on the street 'drummed up by the New York Times'? Perhaps the burned out schools after the confict emblazoned with grafitti such as 'F--- Plaestine' and 'F--- Gaza' were drummed up by CNN. I don't think so.

If Israel did not spend so much time and money engaging in illegal land grabs ('annexations' if you want to be perfectly Orwellian about it), they may get a little more of my sympathy. From where I stand the true warmongers in the area are BOTH Hamas and the IDF. The only difference I see is that the IDF has a higher kill ratio.

[Wake-up]

You have to ask yourself:

"If Hamas (and a like) laid down their weapons, what do you think would happen? - Peace...

Now

"If Israel laid down their weapons, wht do you think would happen?" - Massive bloodshed.­..

[Freenation]

"If Israel laid down their weapons, wht do you think would happen?"

Where were you before...w­e heard HP readers are mostly anti-israel and anti-semetic and this was the final missing puzzle, this line I have seen in various places in media both US and UK with different aliases...

Takes no time to figure it is favorite among the megaphones and hasbara brigades..­.

Get something new, please....­...

[JoePenn]

You've got that reversed, again.

[SonnyBono]

"If Israel laid down their weapons, what do you think would happen?" - and yet another red herring from the Israeli lobby - I, for one, have never asked Israel to lay down their weapons, merely to stop using them to kill innocent men, women, and children and claiming that they are all terrorists or it is collateral damage. During the last incursion into Gaza, there were over 400 dead Palestinian children as a result of Israeli military action. That's a whole heck of a lot of collateral damage for a country that claims to be one of the good guys in the world.

[special muppet]

"If Hamas (and a like) laid down their weapons, what do you think would happen?"

The settlements would continue..­.

[ScreenName05]

Lets get to the real issue. Do Americans want to keep subsidizing the Israeli theocracy forever? Why are we there? Nothing that either side has said convinces me that the U.S. should spend one more nickle on Israel or Palestine. Spend our resources on renewable energy resources and teaching our kids. Say goodbye to the middle east and their silly problems forever. Americans need to stand up and say to their political leaders "get out of the middle east today", regardless of whether they are intent on killing each other or not. This game has been played for too long and needs to end.

[JerryLevy]

To call a country where all religions have complete freedom to practice and you are also free to be no religion a theocracy, well that just shows you have an inability to step back and look honestly and objectively at what Israeli society really is.

[maddie0001]

Jerry, a Reform Jew can't get married in Israel. A Jew and a non-Jew can't get married in Israel. They have to leave to country to get married. You call that complete freedom to practice?

[phute]

Take your blinkers off.

[marco01]

Hey Jerry,
There are Jews in Iran that freely practice their religion. By your standards, Iran is not a theocracy.

[Margaretpoa]

Oh yes, very nice. You have just shot down your own argument that all anti Israel sentiment must be anti Semetic. Such is the lot of hypocrites. Circular arguments always end in impossible contradiction.

[azbird]

Mort, a very good article. Finally some one tells the truth. I have written several posts supporting you, but they have only printed a few. Evidently I have insulted the HP for some reason.

[friedfish2718]

It is too bad that the Palestinians are cursed with bad leadership.

They should follow the example of the Japanese-Americans who were interned and whose properties were confiscated. Said properties were not returned after the war. The Japanese-Americans applied themselves, became industrious and, as a group, most highly educated and prosperous. The "reparations" many years later were largely symbolic.

Closed fist is met with closed fist and Israeli fist is harder and swifter. Open hand will be met with open hand. Any potential Palestinian "Mathma Gandhi" is quickly killed by brother Palestinians. Menachem Begin, when head of Irgun, gave orders not to harm any Jew, even those to betray them to the British, for he was fighting for everyone, no exceptions. Hamas is torturing and killing Fatah. And vice versa.

In the 1920's Jews constituted about 1/3 of the population (around Haifa and Tel Aviv) but generated 2/3 of the taxes. The Ottoman empire liked the tax revenues.

[coad5]

Japanese-Americans also have a country they can return to and draw strength from also.

[friedfish2718]

Not a good excuse.

Australia was one big prison. The original British brought to Australia cannot go back to England. The Diggers applied themselves and become prosperous.

The Pilgrims came to America. They could not go back for risk of prison and execution.
The Pilgrims applied themselves and prospered.

Africans came to America involuntarily. No country to go back to (until Liberia was established). With slavery abolished, some African-Americans become owners of a few railways (amazing!) in the 19th century. Now USA has a Black President.

[Randle]

What about the story that we aren't hearing because Israel bans foreign journalists from Gaza?

Since when also has the American media shown a 'cruel bias' against Israel? During the Gaza attack there were countless figures on the news networks relaying the same line whereby the viewer was urged to imagine 'if Canada/Mexico was firing rockets into America, wouldn't it just be natural for America to respond'.

Both Congress and the Senate passed resolutions offering their unequivocal support to Israel and laid the blame entirely at the feet of Hamas.

The whole Middle-Eastern narrative could not be more biased in favour of Israel - very clearly demonstrated by this article.

If the media does not report on the relatively small events that you refer to it is precisely because they are localised events. The attack on Gaza was quite the opposite, a major conflict lasting three weeks and resulting in a great number of deaths and destruction in Gaza, it is international news.

If journalists, unable to report from inside Gaza itself and questioning the perceived narrative - helpfully laid out in Israeli government presspacks - start to point out that the death toll and the level of destruction is greatly disproportionate, that is not bias, that is objective reality.

The most telling example of bias is to believe that there is a clear 'right' and 'wrong' in the issue, to unwaveringly believe that one is 'right' and then be completely closed to criticism.

[Nanaama]

Thank You !

[pcplz]

1st step......­...get the settlers out.
2nd step......­.get rid of the ghettos that have been created.
3rd step......­..get rid of the walls and let everyone use the roads.
4th step......­.

KEEP WALKIN

[from Idaho]

4th step.....S­end foreign aid to Gaza to rebuild after the Israeli attacks. Take the money from the Israel military aid we send.
5th step.... Tell Israel to back off the blockade of Gaza so its people can rebuild their lives.

[indyleftist]

Actually Mort, We've heard this story; Over and over again
Please, Give us a break. If you support the Israeli side of the conflict that's fine, argue that position, but don't pretend you are getting a bad shake in the American media. There is literally nobody in the American mainstream press that supports the Palestinian side of the conflict. Nobody. if you can name a single one I'd love to hear it
There aren't even really any that will say the two sides are equally wrong like there are in the European press.
There are however many, many people who say Israel is right and Palestine is wrong, totally
You aren't oppressed, please quit your complaining

As for your example of stories we didn't hear in America. We did hear them. Do a google search. It was covered by CBS, NBC, FOX CNN ect..
Until each Israeli rocket and bomb gets its own news story like each Palestinian rocket does your argument is just statistically illogical.

[EmeraldWorld]

Thank you! I see no anti-Israel bias in the media, I don't know what this guy's talking about.

[monelis]

Good job Mr. Zuckerman, to show that you are fair and balance journalist, not pro-Israel, you probably need to do another extensive reporting on daily life of Palestine in the occupied territories. I am pro-justice and don't have anything against Israel and as a matter of facts Israel and Jewish people are the most successful people on earth.

For example according to the latest religious population report in the USA; Jews are about 1.2% of total population. However this small group has produced 44 senators and House representatives, White House Chief of Staff, President Senior Advisers, Chairman of Federal Reserve, many Big Bank CEO's, many Newspapers, magazines, Hollywood movie studios and producers, Big Jewish Lobbyist group and on and on.....I do call this a successful group of people....­.

Now Israel is a successful country but I do not think people there have a relaxed conscious and they are always nervous and worried. I think the best solution for Israel and Palestinian is to seat down and split their differences and don’t try to pull a fast one and fool the people.

Everybody deserves a peaceful life no matter who they are.

[skialethia]

There are 43 Jews in the House and 13 in the Senate and then there is Aipac that exerts control of the majority of those who aren't.

[joeinvt]

More Muslims should run for public office. Democracy is a great thing.

[JerryLevy]

Monelis is right about one thing. While comprising about 2% of the American population, Jews account for over 9% of elected government officials. It shows how good America is and how people in this country vote on the person and the issues, not by race, religion, or gender. Stats like this make me so proud to be an American and further reinforce how great this country is. Blacks account for 13% of the population but 53% of America voted for Obama. Great country or what?

[Phoenixmoore]

Golda Meir was asked when there would be peace in the middle east. Her response: when the Arabs love their children more then they hate the Jews. True then, true now.

[phute]

Ah yes - the great Golda quote.
Rubbish then, rubbish now.

[Taxi]

Yes indeed, your quote is one of the many truly heinous and racist statements made by an Israeli leader about the suffering Palestinians.

To state that you love your children more than your enemy loves his/hers is the kind of propaganda intended to sub-humanize the 'other'.

The Aryans said the same of the European Jews, and look where that got us to.

That's why I find your self-satisfied comment utterly deviant and unacceptable.

[JerryLevy]

When one sees people whose revered religious figures exhort the masses to strap bombs around brainwashed 15 year olds to kill themselves (and commit genocide), when one sees rocket launchers put up next to elementary schools, and one sees 10 year olds being trained to use AK47s, one tends to think the Palestinians value of life is far less than that of the Israelis. Seeing is believing and this is the conclusion many people have. It is far from racist.