So I was pondering the subject of Justice in the AoM book, and one of the pieces of advice was to read and watch reputable news sources. I know this can be a touchy subject about skewness, but what I usually try to do is to go on sites like CNN and Fox and read the headlines to get a broader picture of what is going on. I also prefer reading than watching. Is it better to get the Google mash up. For my local news I usually go to the Eagle Tribune which has the been the go to paper for years in my area.
Permalink Reply by Chuck Knight on Are you flirting with me? If so, I'm flattered, but not interested.
Permalink Reply by Cisco Carson on Not flirting. I am hot for one guy here though. no homo.
Permalink Reply by Liam S. on ok
1. It's being presented as media bias because anything which suggests a dual state or any sympathy towards palestinians is being considered anti-Israel.
2. There is a very distinct difference between being used a human shield and harboring terrorists.
And nobody is arguing that terrorist bombings are anything but despicable.
Permalink Reply by Nick H on (yay, I can add a comment for now).
Wow, talk about picking and choosing to make your argument. The article lists stories (some from over a decade ago) all from only a single Irish national newspaper (there are several) which I've found is the most left-leaning of all Irish dailies (the independent). The ban mentioned in the article (which is being supported by the Labour party, no mention whether the more rightwing FG will support it) is not on all Israeli goods but from goods from the Israeli settlements. One does not need to know much about world history to understand why, out of every nation on earth, you'd find people in Ireland who might have an issue with nations building settlements on lands already occupied by other nations (seeing as how as we speak there are young men in Belfast rioting over whether the Union Jack should be put up all the time in their gov't building). Re-read the article. Some of their complaints is about Ireland holding views about the peace process popular among many (including some fair portion of Israeli parties) but not but some of the more hawkish supporters of Israel. As I mentioned, to these people this is interpreted as being anti-Israel. Support for a Palestine state = anti-Israel, opposition to the settlements = anti-Israel. etc. Also, the article ends with mentioning about Ireland refusing Israeli refugees during the war. If that makes a nation anti-Israel then you better put the US and Canada in that group too since they also refused them.
Anyway, I should stop. If you want to continue then maybe start a new talk on TGD or something. I think that link supports my view.
Permalink Reply by Cisco Carson on I brought up Ireland because you cited them as a neutral party, they aren't. It doesn't matter the time frame of some of the stories, how long do you think this confict has been going on? Look at history to see why it's at the point it's at now.
Permalink Reply by Nick H on How long do you think Ireland's own issue with settlements has been going on? The Plantation of Ulster dates from the 1600s so that should give you a hint. Asking this country to support a government that supports the Jewish settlements is about as probable as asking an American to support a government seeking to create a Communist state. Several of Israel's parties representing a large portion of the population agree with this 2-state, no settlement stance (all the left parties, and the very popular centrist party, Kadima).
As I said, depending on ones own viewpoint, Ireland's (and many other nation's) view can be seen as either neutral or anti-Israeli.
Permalink Reply by Nick H on Here's a link to the story that the link you provided selectively picks from. As you can see it is not an anti-Israel attack asking the EU to ban Israel products but an attack on the more radical settlements.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2012/0515/12243161314...
"“I think we may have to look at the question of banning products from settlement areas into the EU. We have always resisted the idea of boycotts in relation to Israel. But I think a distinction has to be drawn here between Israel and the settlements.”"
Mind you, the comment was made by TÁNAISTE Eamon Gilmore who is leader of the leftwing Labour party and the junior leader in Ireland's coalition government with the rightwing Fine Gael. His position (and power) is similar to Nick Clegg's in the UK.
I was thinking this links into the OPs questions. Personally I hate all these bloggers and quasi-news sites that keep popping up. They create news by selectively taking parts of real newsmakers' stories to fit their agenda. Personally I rather get my news from professional journalists.
Permalink Reply by Cisco Carson on That was ONE story.
Permalink Reply by Nick H on Can't seem to add on comments on this thread. You and I disagree on Ireland. Fine. I'm not Irish but I do live here so maybe I know less than someone who reads about this place from across the ocean (and yes, that is sarcasm). Funny that such an anti-Jewish nation like Ireland has an Orthodox Jew as their Minister of Justice and Minister of Defence, but whatever. No point in beating a dead horse (hence why this stuff belongs on TGD).
As for bulldozing and terrorists. First of all, I had a friend in college who was a Palestinian (but born and raised in Kuwait) whose uncle was killed when an Israeli bulldozer flattened his house to make way for a settlement a number of years back. No terrorists, no human shields. Just a guy who didn't think someone else had the right to take his property and give it to some other people who just got off the boat from North Africa (something which if we remove the religious and ethnic labels is something I think many of us in the west can agree with). Second, as Liam said, no one, regardless of their stance on issues in the Middle East would support terrorists, human shields, or the like. That is a false argument.
But once again. We will disagree. It will spin and spin, and others will go. Uggg, stupid politics. Hence, this belongs on the Great Debate so it can be properly ignored:)
Permalink Reply by Cisco Carson on You're kinda crappy with sarcasm, i'd stick with the direct approach. You bring up Shatter, the one token Jew, yet it's Shatter who criticized the Irish State for it's treatment Jews. As for your friend, since he's Palestinian, I'd like to know what part of the story he's leaving out or what he doesn't know himself with the full story of his uncle, I have a feeling he's not impartial with how he related it to you, call me crazy. Liam and I agree to disagree, it's not a false argument...but anyhoo...
Dallas the Phallus added a discussion to the group WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE
Jack Bauer replied to Jonny's discussion Was putting my dog to sleep the right thing to do?
Lawless replied to Vincent's discussion Appropriate Interview Suit?
Paul replied to Jonny's discussion Was putting my dog to sleep the right thing to do?
Sloan replied to Jay Moore's discussion Dealing with an ex post break up
Matt joined Ben Effinger's group
© 2013 Created by Brett McKay.
Powered by
