Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Rise of Anti Semitism

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Originally posted by woody
    what is worse is that if a person express’s an opinion about Radical Muslims or Palestinians we got shot down…But if an anti-Semitic opinion is expressed the majority of people turn away and accept it.
    Both muslims (radical or otherwise) and jews (radical or otherwise) are guilty of playing the "you can't criticise my country - that's racism!" card. Both sound like idiots when they do it.

    If I criticise actions of the Saudi government I shouldn't get accused of being anti-Muslim.

    If I criticise actions of the Israeli government I shouldn't get accused of being anti-Jewish.

    I also shouldn't have to clarify every freaking time that when I'm criticising a particular government I'm not criticising a particular religion or the adherents of that religion. And I shouldn't have to think "hmm, sounds like the 'some of my best friends are...' excuse" when I do it.

    Same applies to journalists. Some have an axe to grind, most don't. I'm sick of hearing individual articles analysed in an attempt to prove that Journalist X has an anti-whatever agenda. Childish as ****.


  • Options
    #33
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Originally posted by woody
    I have seen a lot of Anti-Semitism in Ireland not just on boards but in the Irish Media and also the European Media in General.
    Please call it racism or similar, but don't call it Anti-Semitism. It's not any more special than any other type of prejudice, so don’t try labeling it as such. Europe has had enough.


  • Options
    #34
    Mighty_Mouse
    Registered Users Posts: 1,882 ✭✭✭Mighty_Mouse


    The Operation was no different to Operation Motorman in Derry in the 1970’s when the British Army re-established rule in the no-go areas. But this was on a larger scale

    Not many people agree with the above operation either.


  • Options
    #35
    Ajnag
    Closed Accounts Posts: 691 ✭✭✭Ajnag


    Originally posted by woody
    .

    The “Operation” in Jenin was proven by the UN to be not on the scale that was reported by the West or the Palestinians and that the actual Figures given by the later was both inaccurate and also bodies were actually placed there by themselves to cause much uproar.

    This Operation was in response to a Wave of Suicide attacks killing many people in Israel both Israelis and non-Israelis…

    I dont remember such a u.n report, but If you have a link It would be most welcome.Same for the claim that bodies were placed there, sounds more like justification and propaganda to me, If not downright ridiculous.

    In the meanwhile this may help your memory...
    http://hrw.org/reports/2002/israel3/index.htm#TopOfPage

    and no doubt the suicide bombings were in response to territorial robbery and the bulldozing of civilian homes.It in no way justifys the suicide bombings, how ever It just shows what a pointless violent spiral this has become, with both sides unwilling to see reason, and more intrested in raising the ante.

    Originally posted by woody

    In response to the Ultra-Othrodox Jews and them wanting the destruction of Palestine and a Greater Israel, I believe your facts are wrong and someone saying they are going to only cease an operation after all Palestinians are dead is maybe the view of one person and the majority of the IDF are highly professional Soldiers, unlike the Security Forces of the PA and the Radical Islamic Groups.

    Extremists are the same reguardless of race, colour, nationality or otherwise.There are extremist Jews in the knesset who want only for the full and complete destruction of the palistinians.

    http://www.rense.com/general29/lib.htm

    Yeah just like the soldiers of bloody sunday were professional. :rolleyes: Soldiers Take orders and if the orders state genocide, then History has shown that soldiers follow the order given.Also the professional conduct of The Idf seems some what questionable, given that they have inguaged in torture, fired missiles in to crowds of civilians to get one target, and have ran over one western protester with a bulldozer, and shot another only to claim that one bullet came from 2 different locations simultainously.


  • Options
    #36
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Originally posted by ReefBreak
    I have loads of examples....

    Example 1:
    <deals with Israel and palestine, not Jews in general>

    Example 2:
    <deals with Israel and Palestine, not Jews in general>


    I'm still looking for the examples of anti-Semiitism.

    At best, you have provided examples of anti-Israelism, where people's attitudes towards the suffering endured by the Israeli's is typically tempered by their attitude of "Israel is wrong and Palestine is right in their actions".

    I wouldn't question for a heartbeat that there are plenty of people who are anti-Israeli. The number of people willing to blindly dismiss any news article which sheds Palestine in a bad light as "IDF propaganda"*, and anything that casts Israel in a bad light as "undeniably true"* shows this is pretty much a given.

    However, there is no indication that these people are anti-Israeli because they are anti-Jewish - or at least, no indications that anyone has been able to show.

    Now this is typically where the allegations of latent anti-semitism come in. The "anti-Israelites" don't actually know they are anti-Semitic, but are so in reality, and it just manifests itself against the people of Israel.

    Fair enough...if thats what you want to believe...you're free to do so. I assume that anyone who does believe that will also accept the counter-argument : that anyone who supports the actions of the Israelis against the Palestinian people and criticises only the Palestinians for their actions and who appears to hold Palestinian life less dearly than Israeli - that such a person is anti-Muslim?

    So, if someone in is anti-Semitic for criticising Israel, or for believing generally that Israel is wrong and Palestine is right (to reduce things to simplistic levels), then surely that means someone who believes generally that Palestine is wrong and Israel is right (again, reducing things to such simplistic levels) must be anti-Muslim - even if only to a "latent" degree.

    I'm wondering how many of the levellers of anti-Semitism allegations would be willing to accept that. Precious few I'd imagine, but all I'm doing is applying their logic to the same situation from the opposite perspective.

    jc

    * or words to that effect


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Originally posted by Ajnag
    I dont remember such a u.n report, but If you have a link It would be most welcome.

    A google for "Jenin UN Report" yields :

    http://www.un.org/peace/jenin/

    I assume this is the report being referred to. And it does conclude that the death-toll was - as far as could accurately be determined - 52 (very close to or bang on the Israeli estimate) and not 500+ (as claimed by Palestinian authorities).
    Same for the claim that bodies were placed there, sounds more like justification and propaganda to me, If not downright ridiculous.

    I saw nothing in that report about such a claim. There is reference to the claims that the Israeli's were removing bodies (so teh true death-toll would not be known), but there would appear to be no evidence to support the claim.

    This report is not a complete vindication of Israel's actions though, nor should it be construed as one.

    jc


  • Options
    #38
    sovtek
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,485 ✭✭✭sovtek


    Originally posted by bonkey
    A google for "Jenin UN Report" yields :

    http://www.un.org/peace/jenin/

    I assume this is the report being referred to. And it does conclude that the death-toll was - as far as could accurately be determined - 52 (very close to or bang on the Israeli estimate) and not 500+ (as claimed by Palestinian authorities).



    I saw nothing in that report about such a claim. There is reference to the claims that the Israeli's were removing bodies (so teh true death-toll would not be known), but there would appear to be no evidence to support the claim.

    This report is not a complete vindication of Israel's actions though, nor should it be construed as one.

    jc

    Of course they weren't allowed to enter Jenin to make the report...
    The report was written without a visit to Jenin or the other Palestinian cities in question and it therefore relies completely on available resources and information, including submissions from five United Nations Member States and Observer Missions, documents in the public domain and papers submitted by non-governmental organizations. The Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs wrote to the Permanent Representative of Israel and the Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations requesting them to submit information but only the latter did so. In the absence of a response from Israel, the United Nations has relied on public statements of Israeli officials and publicly available documents of the Government of Israel relevant to the request in resolution ES-10/10.


  • Options
    #39
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Originally posted by sovtek
    Of course they weren't allowed to enter Jenin to make the report...

    Indeed.

    This does not make Israel automatically guilty, however.

    Not that you are implying it does, but I'm sure there are those who would be only too happy to.

    jc


  • Options
    #40
    daveirl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,483 ✭✭✭✭daveirl


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #41
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Originally posted by daveirl
    Back to RTE News, they do have an awful habit of not using the word terrorist. Sure wasn't Yassin just some nice 'spiritual leader'.
    RTE tend to shy away from using the word "terrorist" in any case. As do quite a few other news organisations.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    daveirl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,483 ✭✭✭✭daveirl


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #43
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,080 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Originally posted by daveirl
    Back to RTE News, they do have an awful habit of not using the word terrorist. Sure wasn't Yassin just some nice 'spiritual leader'.

    Along with Reuters and any half respectable news outlet.
    Originally posted by The Corinthian
    Please call it racism or similar, but don't call it Anti-Semitism. It's not any more special than any other type of prejudice, so don’t try labeling it as such. Europe has had enough.

    Dam right.


  • Options
    #44
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Originally posted by daveirl
    Back to RTE News, they do have an awful habit of not using the word terrorist. Sure wasn't Yassin just some nice 'spiritual leader'.

    He was the "spiritual leader" of Hamas ... calling him so is accurate news reporting.

    Would you prefer they called him the "evil spiritual leader" of Hamas?
    Originally posted by daveirl
    Fair enough but they didn't even use militant to describe Yassin!!

    It is not RTE's job to pass comment on the aggressive character of Yassin. He was the spirtual leader of Hamas, and RTE reported it as such (along with everyone else). He was killed by IDF, and RTE reported as such. They didn't say it was a good thing or a bad thing, just like they didn't say he deserved it or not.

    You seem to be confusing supporting Hamas with not condemning them. It is not RTE News' job to condemn any organisation. If you want that I suggest you watch FOX News


  • Options
    #45
    ReefBreak
    Registered Users Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭ReefBreak


    Originally posted by Wicknight
    Would you prefer they called him the "evil spiritual leader" of Hamas?
    Considering his opinion on murdering innocent civilians, then yes, I would.


  • Options
    #46
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Originally posted by ReefBreak
    Considering his opinion on murdering innocent civilians, then yes, I would.

    So your objection isn't that RTE is bias, but that they are not biased in your direction?

    I suppose if they don't call him "evil" they are anti-semetic too :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #47
    Lemming
    Registered Users Posts: 14,148 ✭✭✭✭Lemming


    As soon as a media reporting entity uses words with religious conatations, it loses all right to claim impartiality or unbiased reporting. Why do you think RTE never report on child sex abusers or their ilk calling them "evil monsterous creatures"?

    Impartiality swings both ways ........


  • Options
    #48
    uberwolf
    Registered Users Posts: 7,580 ✭✭✭uberwolf


    Yes, but it's a constant within RTE. I'm certain RTE values Palestinian lives over Jewish lives, and that, to me, is Anti-Semitic.

    can you not distinguish between Israel and Jews?
    I've seen examples of anti-semitism on numerous occasions on RTE - on Prime Time on a couple of occasions and on the RTE News last week, after the killing of Yassin.

    You perceived anti-Israeli reporting? or anti-semitic, were there jewish tanks rolling into the occupied territories? or Israeli ones?
    Considering his opinion on murdering innocent civilians, then yes, I would.

    as pointed out the bias doesn't suit your views and consequently it is to be condemened, not purely as it is a bias.


  • Options
    #49
    ReefBreak
    Registered Users Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭ReefBreak


    Originally posted by Wicknight
    So your objection isn't that RTE is bias, but that they are not biased in your direction?

    I suppose if they don't call him "evil" they are anti-semetic too :rolleyes:
    These are your words, not mine. I want balanced reporting from RTE, not to come down on one side or another. It wasn't that they didn't call him "evil" that bothered me, it was the fact that they displayed almost amorous sympathy for him. It's similar to the naked admiration that Tommy Gorman holds for SF/IRA, but that's for another thread.


  • Options
    #50
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Originally posted by ReefBreak
    I want balanced reporting from RTE, not to come down on one side or another. It wasn't that they didn't call him "evil" that bothered me, it was the fact that they displayed almost amorous sympathy for him.

    They didn't show any sympathy for him IMHO

    What they also didn't do was show any anger towards him, or sign they were happy he was dead IMHO

    That is the sign of a good news agency.

    Can you show any reports of the www.rte.ie/news site that you think were "sympathy" for him?


  • Options
    #51
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    RTE News - www.rte.ie/news
    EU foreign ministers, the Palestinian Authority, many Arab countries and the Vatican have condemned Israel's assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, founder of the militant group, Hamas.

    The Israeli Army said Yassin was responsible for numerous terror attacks which had killed foreign and Israeli civilians.

    Someone want to explain how that is sympathatic to Yassin?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    ReefBreak
    Registered Users Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭ReefBreak


    All comments above are referring to RTE television news, not their website, which seems to be a bit more balanced. Their TV news allows for a bit more scope and opinion. The RTE TV and Radio news editors are well known (for a long time) to be quite left-wing, and slightly sympathetic to various left-wing causes such as the IRA, and Palestine. Sometimes you have to read between the lines (if you know what I mean) to see it however. Eoghan Harris, Kevin Myers, and a few others have written about the bias in RTE on numerous occasions in the past.


  • Options
    #53
    shotamoose
    Registered Users Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭shotamoose


    Originally posted by ReefBreak
    Eoghan Harris, Kevin Myers, and a few others have written about the bias in RTE on numerous occasions in the past.

    And of course they are always fair and scrupolously biased. No axes to grind there!

    Until you actually provide some evidence in support of all these claims about RTE's broadcast reporting, they're just your biased opinion.


  • Options
    #54
    mr_angry
    Registered Users Posts: 3,312 ✭✭✭mr_angry


    Originally posted by ReefBreak
    Sometimes you have to read between the lines (if you know what I mean) to see it however.

    Ah right. So this anti-semitic reporting is "between the lines" is it? Good job we're all so adept at mind-reading, otherwise we'd never see evil racist RTE for what it really is... :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #55
    ReefBreak
    Registered Users Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭ReefBreak


    And of course they are always fair and scrupolously biased. No axes to grind there!
    Harris can be quite belligerent, but Myers is easily my favourite journalist in Ireland by a country mile.
    Until you actually provide some evidence in support of all these claims about RTE's broadcast reporting, they're just your biased opinion.
    I can't provide evidence here. And yes it is indeed my biased opinion - who's opinion would it be but my own? ;) And it wouldn't really be my opinion if it wasn't biased towards what I think is correct. And I do think I'm correct. That's really all I can say about RTE's reporting.


  • Options
    #56
    ReefBreak
    Registered Users Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭ReefBreak


    Originally posted by mr_angry
    Ah right. So this anti-semitic reporting is "between the lines" is it? Good job we're all so adept at mind-reading, otherwise we'd never see evil racist RTE for what it really is... :rolleyes:
    I was referring to the editorial slant that a news station takes over a period of time. For example, you may not realise from a first read of the Sunday Tribune that it takes a slightly left-wing view, but you would over a period of time. Similarly with RTE. However, sometimes the slant just sticks out like a sore thumb, such as Richard Downes report from the Gaza Strip in the aftermath of the Yassin killing.

    [Edit]...or Tommy Gorman's report from Stormont after the RUC raided Sinn Féin offices in the aftermath of the Stormont Spy Ring affair. Crikey, the guy was practically in tears for the plight of SF.


  • Options
    #57
    shotamoose
    Registered Users Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭shotamoose


    Originally posted by ReefBreak
    Myers is easily my favourite journalist in Ireland by a country mile.

    Maybe because his prejudices match yours?
    And yes it is indeed my biased opinion - who's opinion would it be but my own? ;) And it wouldn't really be my opinion if it wasn't biased towards what I think is correct.

    Exactly. And citing some columnists (who are under no obligation whatsoever to be impartial) who happen to agree with you as evidence against a news organisation which is at least supposed to be impartial hardly convinces.
    And I do think I'm correct. That's really all I can say about RTE's reporting.

    I don't actually know, but I had thought it was possible to get transcripts of past programmes out of RTE? Seems to me that since it's such an important issue - accusing the national broadcaster of anti-Semitism, that is - it would be worth a try.

    Otherwise, simply flinging the accusation at them with great fanfare before admitting that you haven't actually got any evidence to back it up says more about your bias and integrity than it does about their's.


  • Options
    #58
    mr_angry
    Registered Users Posts: 3,312 ✭✭✭mr_angry


    Originally posted by ReefBreak
    I can't provide evidence here. And yes it is indeed my biased opinion - who's opinion would it be but my own? ;) And it wouldn't really be my opinion if it wasn't biased towards what I think is correct. And I do think I'm correct. That's really all I can say about RTE's reporting.

    Thats fine. As long as you don't expect to convince anyone by your arguments, which so far seem to revlove around "I don't have any evidence, but I just KNOW RTE are anti-semitic because I 'read between the lines'".


  • Options
    #59
    ReefBreak
    Registered Users Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭ReefBreak


    Actually, I do have evidence, but it involves getting transcripts or video from RTE. The other evidence comes in the form of articles written by various journalists (and politicians) down the years that agree with me.


  • Options
    #60
    shotamoose
    Registered Users Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭shotamoose


    Originally posted by ReefBreak
    Actually, I do have evidence, but it involves getting transcripts or video from RTE. The other evidence comes in the form of articles written by various journalists (and politicians) down the years that agree with me.

    I think a transcript or two would do nicely.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Originally posted by ReefBreak
    All comments above are referring to RTE television news, not their website, which seems to be a bit more balanced. Their TV news allows for a bit more scope and opinion.

    The people who do the website are the people who do the TV and Radio ... maybe the reason you can't find bias is because their isn't any ;)
    Originally posted by ReefBreak
    The RTE TV and Radio news editors are well known (for a long time) to be quite left-wing, and slightly sympathetic to various left-wing causes such as the IRA, and Palestine.
    According to who, Eoghan Harris?? Please :rolleyes:
    Originally posted by ReefBreak
    Sometimes you have to read between the lines (if you know what I mean) to see it however.

    You can read anything you like into "between the lines" .. next you will be saying it wasn't what he said but how he said it :rolleyes:


Advertisement