In a world of balanced reporting, these would be easy questions to answer. Test yourself:
In what part of the world has a perceived occupier shot more than 80 civilians this summer?
More significantly, in what part of the world have some 200,000 (two hundred thousand!) civilians been forced out of their homes, with thousands of casualties?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Can you imagine if Israel had a law that allowed soldiers to shoot "anyone suspected of being a separatist"? The uproar would never cease. But Indians, being "brown" and not "white" like those Jews (because you know, Jews have always been "white"), are entitled to their wacky, exotic barbarism. =/
(Full disclosure: I tend to side with India in the Kashmir dispute. But people we agree with don't always act the way we wish they did.)
Talking about human rights violations, how about the cover-up of several cases of rape of women foreign activists by Palestinians in Sheikh Jarrah and Bil'in, for example? Rather than stoop down to complaining to the Zionist police, these paragons of virtue and morality of the radical left preferred to give advice to the women: dress modestly when you come to protests (!)
Are the European Union and the NIF funding the rape of foreign activists? Providing those poor Palestinians with fodder for their libidos?
This issue has been brewing for months. And nobody cares.
Sylvia
I do care!
but reading your reminder made me realize why keeping up the "caring" may be so hard
could it be that there are too many issues one has to keep juggling in one's mind concerning "them"?
it is said that the human mind is capable of handling 7 at the most at the same time - how much easier then to turn your mind to the easily memorable limited number of issues one has to remember, if one wants to keep Israel on the gridiron roast. To try an image for it: what "we" remark upon has the effect of snow-balls with maybe once in a while a pebble hidden in it, while "their" remarks easily reach cannon-ball-of all-sizes-effectiveness due to the same things repeated again and again (that's why companies put lots of money into getting their brands known - familiarity creates trust)
to prove my point here is a fisking of a BBC-report on the Mavi Marmara - to be read only if you are in a despair-proof mood
btw with one horrified eye I read a Telegraph-headline this morning claiming that Obama did his settlement freeze stunt again i.e. Israel will probably have to cave to save face for her most mighty supporter - the "west" is a bunch of stupid appeasers once again - all the "others" will read that as another victory for their side over the US - (if a boss lets his well-regarded secretary be humiliated by his competitor he has opened the hunt on his chair)
Silke
BBC wilfully violates own charter in blatant display of bias over UN report slating Israel
http://www.robinshepherdonline.com/bbc-wilfully-violates-own-charter-in-blatant-display-of-bias-over-un-report-slating-israel/
one more question:
Sebastian Haffner claims that the "left" lost out to the Nazis because they couldn't agree on theory and thus made it easy for the Nazis to take them out group by group.
What if it wasn't so much dogma but if it was to many issues/behaviours/incidents worthy of attack?
i.e. while the Nazis seem to have had no problems in getting their followers in line with stories streamlined into slogans the "left" remained stuck in their more reality based narratives.
Question:
is there a way one can do effective sloganeering while still keeping one's self-respect?
(I just read Dorothy Sayers "Murder must Advertise" where she dives into the dilemmas sloganeering provides quite a number of times).
Silke
Post a Comment