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 (48716)	10/1/2002 10:02:13 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

If Grossman is going to correct "fictions", he should do it with facts. Instead, he seeks to replace Israeli fictions with Palestinian fictions. There is no history of "33 years of roadblocks" (why 33, btw, not 35? does he date from 1969?). Before the first intifada, there were no checkpoints, no marker at the Green Line; people came and went. The checkpoints arose as a result of the intifada. For more accurate reporting, I recommend Tom Friedman's From Beirut to Jerusalem; he has a chapter written from the West Bank right around the start of the first intifada. Edit: I also notice (thanks spiral3) that Grossman sets up a straw man argument: According to this story, the Palestinians suddenly exploded in September 2000 in an uncaused natural eruption, spewing out lava and ash and igniting the entire region. This has never, ever been the Israeli story. The Israeli story is that the intifada was a planned military operation, and they have good evidence, some from the mouths and docuemnts of PA officials, and from creation and use of the Palestinian "militias" (so that Arafat wouldn't have to 'taint' his regular troops with terrorism). Arafat got himself in a tight spot when he "threw the table over at President Clinton" in Camp David (to use his own words), and decided "to escape by racing ahead", and Prof. Sayigh put it in his 2000 essay, "Arafat and the Anatomy of a Revolt". The ground was primed for unrest, but that doesn't mean a two years war was inevitable. The PA planned and executed the intifada, to try to negotiate by diplomats at the table AND bombs in the street.

To: JohnM who wrote (48716)	10/1/2002 10:07:41 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Found this interesting piece on Andrew Sullivan today. It seems that Howell Raines freely confesses to his friends what he's up to with the New York Times; now, if only he would be as honest with his readers: THAT BAD TIMES LINK: Funny how that page I linked to on the New York Times forum on Maureen Dowd mysteriously disappeared shortly after I put it up. But I think it's reappeared now here. I've no idea why. It doesn't look like my mistake. Anyway, in case it gets lost again, here's the passage I was referring to: wharrison2 - 06:12pm Sep 27, 2002 EST (# 30450 of 30463) kate_nyt 9/27/02 5:48pm Kate I, for one, don't hate the Times but do not have a lot of respect for Howell as an editor of the "news" sections of the paper. I have a friend here in town, Phil Clapp, who runs the leftwing National Environmental Trust. He's socially quite friendly with both Howell and Sulzberger, Jr. He told me straight from his own lips that both of them confirmed to him at a luncheon that under Howell's leadership they intended to use the news sections to attack the Bush administration. Howell didn't see any problem with this as part of deciding what's "news" is editorial judgments on what pieces to run and how to couch them. Now that's just the plain unvarnished truth whether The American Prospect wants to admit it or not. The Washington Times is an unvarnished paper of the right that doesn't mince words in advertising its partisanship. Almost all of the British and European press is run that way too. I see nothing wrong with the Times representing liberal thinking in this country as well but just be honest enough about it to admit it. Now why would anyone remove that from the Times' site?