IDF will occupy Gaza and uproot Hamas

[Sirotnikov]

I wouldn't want Cyber Gnu to miss this.

[Eli]

Btw, in the past weeks the Ein al Hilwe refugee camp had seen some battles between the Lebanese Army and the Al Quada members hiding there. They tried to take over the camp.

----------------------

Israel allowed another 13,000 Pals to pass the borders and work in Israel. The terract countdown had begun.

[Sirotnikov]

Err, I believe it was 33,000... or am I way off??

[Sirotnikov]

Funny, if you'd actually read real news instead of israeli propaganda, you would have known how this was reported. From the BBC, for example:'Senior negotiator Saeb Erekat said that in the six -week period in which there had been no suicide attacks, the Israeli army had killed 71 civilians, including the child killed on Thursday. '

At no point does the BBC pretend that this is BBC supported. They are reporting a statement by Saeb Erekat. Are you contending that Saeb Erekat ever said this?

Again and again we come back to why you must learn the basics if you ever want to be able to carry a debate.

It presents him as a viable source and does not ever challenge his information, like you would expect a real agency to do.

What the public has learnt from it is that 71 people were killed. Which is not true.


He very often contradicts himself more often than a 6 y/o but the BBC never say a word.

Not so with the Israeli spokesmen, who get less air time than the BBC reporters interviewing them.

[CyberGnu]

No it is not.

But when it publishes a story composed by Arafat (or Sharon for that matter) it becomes a mouth piece.

So you can't tell a news story from an editorial? Hmm, explains a large part of the problem here.

Since when have I got to find sources for your claims? That's your job.

I have a source of Israeli left winger, at the time the foreign minister, Ben Ami, saying that Arafat not only didn't make a counter offer, but refused to even have actual conversation on implementation, and didn't make any counter offers.

At another point, one of his aids, turned down a suggestion to put the agreements achieved in writing because Arafat told him not to.

When you make the claim that I never give sources, depiste the abundance of sources in the archive, I can only conclude that you are doing this to waste my time.

However, in a gesture of goodwill, I propose this: I dig up the reference, if you'll apologize for your accsuation afterwards. Are you man enough for that?

Ok.

What about the revolving door policy?

Already covered. The political situation grew intolerable when Israel did not live up to their part of the bargain, to the point where the prisoners had to be released.

Your claim that biased information is great, but you don't explain why do you prefer one bias over another. Especially when one bias is known and can be accounted, and another is hidden (international media) but is just as effective.

When have I claimed this? I have claimed that we should always strive for the LEAST biased information that is available, not prefering one bias over the other. For heavens sake, you haven't read a word I've written, have you?

As I also posted on the other thread, you seem to have a problem with graduality.

But that is the only thing that could actually prove it was never published.

And haven't you thought that JP has not better things to do than answer letters to people who can't find an article?

Nope. They could have confessed their fabrication rigtht there and then. Maybe it was naive of me to expect them to actually confess when confronted, but that is the only flaw on my part regarding this.

Second, it shows you have already assumed that this was never published before you sent the letters, thus your conclusion is faulty since you have already made it before consulting the facts.

No such thing. I had a hypothesis, which was born out by subsequent observations. Standard way of doing research.

[DaShi]

Die CBeast!

[CyberGnu]

After having read your posted articles, I have to applaud you for a good job.

I've also figured out why I couldn't find the same article. The search function at Die Welt is case sensitive. I copy pasted 'al-Quida' from the JP article (to make sure I spelled it the same way) and it gave me 0 hits.

Natan or Eli, don't remember who, did the same thing.

Searching for Al-Quida, however, gives several hits, including the one you posted.

I still consider the story a fabrication, but of Die Welt, not the JP. The main reason for this is that if true, Bush would have bombed palestine by now... And american media would have been all over the story.

You might want to consider the question of WHY this wasn't taken up by any other media. I believe it is because they elected to investigate it themselves before printing it, and concluded that it was false. The JP did no such thing.

[CyberGnu]

Dashi: ?

[DaShi]

I know. It's quite appropriate, and I didn't even read the posts before it.

[CyberGnu]

?

[Sirotnikov]

I still consider the story a fabrication, but of Die Welt, not the JP. The main reason for this is that if true, Bush would have bombed palestine by now... And american media would have been all over the story.

The American media DID know that there are al-qaida members in the palestinian camps. It was just played down by policy makers. Another proof of (shh) bias.

Sky news and BBC addressed a shootout between al-qaida and fateh forces in a lebanese camp.

If that happenned then... there must be al-qaida factions there!

Apparently fateh realised that the al-qaeda links are getting obvious, and decided to throw a shoot out to demonstrate they are "against terrorism" and to dis-associate themselves from al-qaida.

I believe it is because they elected to investigate it themselves before printing it, and concluded that it was false. The JP did no such thing.

Well, again - you are working according to your own prejudices. you don't like what you hear, plus your beloved and trusted "free media" hasn't played it up - so you chose to believe it was fake.

Why would die welt fabricate it?

meanwhile - you continue to slam die welt and JP with no evidence but your own conceptions and ideas. nice!

[Sirotnikov]

I believe it is because they elected to investigate it themselves before printing it, and concluded that it was false. The JP did no such thing.

Furthermore , it is interesting that you assume that they elected to investigate it.

I would assume that CNN and BBC would investigate Saeb Erecat's lies, but - whoops! they don't. They report it as it is.