Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (18071)	2/5/2002 8:30:07 PM
From: tekboy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

that and the fact that the Eurotrash are often anti-Semites... :0) tb@justbecauseneoconsareparanoiddoesn'tmeannobodyisfollowingthem.com

To: JohnM who wrote (18071)	2/5/2002 9:24:07 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

I suspect I should thank you for nothing, as the saying goes, or, more apt, keeping me occupied with those lovely, nutty Hanson posts You're welcome ;-) I think both might be better explained by mass media and government views, assuming you mean by "attitudes" in that sentence, public opinion This doesn't answer the question why European coverage is so different from American; it just moves the question around a bit. Both America and Europe are democracies, in which there is feedback between public, media, and government attitudes. Yes, you've given your opinion on CNN and it still mystifies me. I noticed that Halkin's article on anti-Semitism, which I posted on this thread, mentioned the same December CNN report that caught my attention at the time. The scene was a Hamas funeral in Gaza. The coffins were covered with green Hamas flags and attended by masked Hamas militia. CNN Voiceover: "Cries for revenge in Gaza today as Palestinians bury four victims of Israeli gunfire." The fact that the "victims" were Hamas terrorists who died with Kalishnikovs in their hands and explosive belts around their waists, shooting at Israelis in an attempt to inflict mass civilian casualties, was never mentioned. Personally, I don't consider such coverage as tilted AT ALL towards Israel; quite the reverse. As for the Said point, I meant simply that he uses the first portion of that long essay that I think Kevin posted, to vent his anger, then turns in the last half to propose ways forward which I thought meshed well with the Israeli reservists recent petitions. That seems to be a common pattern; Said has done it in all his essays (that I've read), and so has Hanan Ashrawi. I read it, correctly or not, as being de rigeur for Palestinian intellectuals who must carefully establish their bona fides in the anti-Israel fight before edging cautiously into criticism of the leadership. Couldn't be more different from Israeli intellectuals, who come out swinging from Round One. that Bush's momentarily high public opinion polls contributes to his pro-Sharon stance. That has a big affect, at least for the moment. Won't last. How? by freeing Bush to follow his natural inclinations? I think the US would prefer to be seen as a mediator; it has much more freedom of movement that way, and that's what it tried to do last fall. But Arafat's idiocy in running a terrorist campaign after September 11th is forcing the US to either back Sharon or officially adopt the stance that anti-US terror is bad, but anti-Israel terror is OK. The US is backing Sharon, and I think this is a strategic decision related to conducting the War Against Terror, not a poll-related decision. If you believe Debka, and I do, a US-Turkey-Israel-Egypt-Jordan-Oman anti-Terror alliance is falling into place in the Mideast.