Sar Shalom
In February of 2008, then Sen. Biden attended a state dinner in Afghanistan. During that dinner, Biden discussed the corruption in Afghanistan and the threat it posed in allowing the Taliban to gain support from the public. Karzai responded by giving his assurance that corruption was being brought under control. After about 45 minutes of listening to Karzai deny obvious reality, Biden put down his napkin, got up, declared "this dinner is over," and instructed his accompaniment to leave with him.
In the East, denying obvious reality is an endemic part of the honor-shame mentality. One of the more notable manifestations of this is various Palestinian officials declaring that they are descended from Canaanites/Jebusites/etc., that there never were any Jewish Temples in Jerusalem, or that the Jews have no history in the Land of Israel at all. Is there anyone who might ask now candidate Biden if Abbas, or any other Palestinian official, were to insist on any of the above, whether he would respond the way he responded to Karzai in 2008? If he answers unequivocally in the affirmative, it would provide some indication that he might end the coddle-coddle-coddle attitude towards the PNM and thereby have a positive impact for Israel.
The Day of the Dhimmi is Done - Michael Lumish, PhD, proprietor. (mike.lumish@gmail.com)
"In the East, denying obvious reality
ReplyDeleteis an endemic part of the honor-shame
mentality" should be corrected to:
"In the Arab/Muslim world, denying
obvious reality is an endemic part
of the honor-shame mentality."
This is an important fact, which is
why I made the effort to correct it.
I don't know whether or not it extends beyond the Muslim world, but Afghanistan, the starting point for the discussion, is not Arab. Thus, it might be accurate to say "In the Muslim world...." However, I'm not sure about the benefits of doing so.
DeleteEric Starkman
ReplyDelete(Los Angeles-based writer and journalist) said:
“The mainstream media has abandoned all pretense of objectivity.
Whereas in the past journalists viewed themselves as unbiased chroniclers of the news, their focus today is on manufacturing it and dominating the ensuing conversations.
A journalist’s influence today isn’t determined by the quality or accuracy of their reporting, but rather the size of their Twitter following and the frequency of their television appearances.”
SOURCE: Why Crown Heights
Hate Crimes Aren’t Newsworthy
by Eric Starkman, 2019 February 17,
in The Algemeiner:
www.algemeiner.com/2019/02/17/why-crown-heights-hate-crimes-arent-newsworthy/
===================================
“Indeed, Palestinians rarely make an appearance
in The [Washington] Post, unless it’s to
serve as the perennial victim — and this too is
contingent on portraying Israel, and only Israel,
as the oppressor.
When Palestinians suffer at the hands of their
[own] leaders, the [Washington] Post
is nowhere to be found.”
SOURCE:
article by Sean Durns, 2019 March 6
The Media Only Cares about
Palestinians If Israel Can Be Blamed
www.algemeiner.com/2019/03/06/the-media-only-cares-about-palestinians-if-israel-can-be-blamed/
===================================
“But the Western press shows little proclivity
for reporting on topics that might cast the
PA [Palestinian Authority] in a bad light.”
SOURCE:
article by Sean Durns, 2019 March 6
The Media Only Cares about
Palestinians If Israel Can Be Blamed
www.algemeiner.com/2019/03/06/the-media-only-cares-about-palestinians-if-israel-can-be-blamed/
On June 1, 2006, former New York City mayor Ed Koch wrote an opinion piece in the [New York] Times titled “The New York Times’ Anti-Israel Bias,”
ReplyDeleteasserting that “the British Broadcasting Corporation
[BBC] and the New York Times consistently carry
news stories and editorials that are slanted against Israel and sympathetic to the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.”
SOURCE: Unfreedom of the Press
(chapter 6, page 157) by Mark R. Levin,
published by Threshold Editions, year 2019, NYC,
ISBN 9781476773094 * ISBN 1476773092
===================================
Matti Friedman
[Former Associated Press Reporter] wrote:
“Hamas’s strategy is to provoke a response
from Israel by attacking from behind the cover
of Palestinian civilians, thus drawing Israeli
strikes that kill those civilians, and then
to have the casualties filmed by one
of the world’s largest press contingents,
with the understanding that the resulting
outrage abroad will blunt Israel’s response.
This is a ruthless strategy, and an effective one.
It is predicated on the cooperation of journalists.
One of the reasons it works is because
of the reflex I mentioned.
If you report that Hamas has a strategy based on
co-opting the media, this raises several difficult
questions, like:
What exactly is the relationship between the media and Hamas?
And has this relationship corrupted the media?”
SOURCE:
What the Media Gets Wrong about Israel
by Matti Friedman, 2014/11/30
www.TheAtlantic.com/international/archive/2014/11/how-the-media-makes-the-israel-story/383262
SOURCE: Unfreedom of the Press
(chapter 6, pages 159-160) by Mark R. Levin,
published by Threshold Editions, year 2019, NYC,
ISBN 9781476773094 * ISBN 1476773092
===================================
Mark R. Levin
(a lawyer and best-selling author) said:
The examples of the [New York] Times’ and mass media’s hostility toward the Jewish State is not even a matter of indifference, as it was during the plight of European Jews in the 1930s and 1940s, which was horrifying.
Instead, there is frequently open and affirmative hostility toward the Jewish State, despite the fact that the small country, a democracy and an ally, faces daily threats of extermination from terrorists groups and surrounding terrorist states, including, if not especially, nuclear-weapons-obsessed Iran.
After examining more than a year’s worth of recent coverage by the [New York] Times, Gilead Ini of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America [CAMERA] concluded that
the [New York] Times:
“consistently flouts the rules of ethical journalism.
And it does so as part of a campaign to protect anti-Israel activists and steer public opinion against the Jewish State.”
SOURCE:
The ‘Times’ and Israel: A Review of 2018
by Gilead Ini, February 2019
www.CommentaryMagazine.com/articles/the-times-and-israel-a-review-of-2018/
SOURCE: Unfreedom of the Press
(chapter 6, page 163) by Mark R. Levin,
published by Threshold Editions, year 2019, NYC,
ISBN 9781476773094 * ISBN 1476773092
************************************************
ReplyDeletePLEASE HELP SUE THE TERRORISTS IN COURT:
************************************************
www (dot) IsraelLawCenter (dot) org
www (dot) TheLawFareProject (dot) org
************************************************
PLEASE HELP DELETE INTERNET ANTI-SEMITISM:
************************************************
www (dot) AntiSemitismTaskForce (dot) org
************************************************
PLEASE HELP FIGHT ANTI-ISRAEL MEDIA BIAS:
************************************************
www (dot) camera (dot) org
www (dot) HonestReporting (dot) com
www (dot) memri (dot) org
************************************************
THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!
************************************************
The Palestinians are official victims. No Dem would dare subject them to a reality test because....slippery slope, sounds like a right talking point, etc etc. Thank G-d Trump's admin has some time left to devastate the Palestinians and their fellow travelers even more. The cancelling of UNRWA funds by more and more countries because of corruption charges is a great sign.
ReplyDeleteJoe Biden likes to play the tough guy. He's built a career on coming and saying, "enough ribbarobbareallyrum, I'm in charge now." Just imagine if he weren't a plagiarizer and could get facts straight.
ReplyDeleteRemember, he screamed and yelled at the Israelis on Obama's behalf when the Jerusalem municipal government gave preliminary approval for housing, known in unfriendly circles as "settlements," in Jerusalem. And I believe it was in a part of the city that Israel was going to keep in any proposed negotiated settlement. Screw him.
I remember, Jeff.
DeleteOn the other hand, let's hope that with actually being the president Biden will rise to the occasion. I also think that this administration will have set some precedents that the Democrats will not be able to overturn. (Although I will always wish that this had all happened under someone else...the baggage will always be in the way! And spare me why this man was the "only" one who could have done this...)
ReplyDeleteSheldon,
DeleteYou are hilarious.
"Although I will always wish that this had all happened under someone else..."
It won't have.
Jeff, I am entirely serious. We will never know, will we?
DeleteSheldon, do you think that Biden can beat Trump? It looks as if the only other two Democratic candidates that could possibly win the nomination are Sanders and Warren, neither one of which -- or so I suspect -- are likely to.
DeleteI am not really sure, and this is causing my attitude toward the 2020 election. In 2016, the worst possible matchup happened; that is, the matchup everyone feared happened. Either the "businessman" without political experience would win or the former first lady, who was nothing like her husband, would. I couldn't hold my nose and select either, so, as a president would let a bill pass without his/her signature, I wrote in as a protest vote.
DeleteIt seems that in 2020 the Democrats are wanting to be more extreme. They want to be even MORE leftist, even when that didn't work in 2016. I am not really happy about Biden (and I wish he had run in 2016), but I would not be surprised if the Democrats nominated Sanders or Warren, thus making Trump more likely to be re-elected.
But we never expected 2016 to play out like it did, so maybe we shouldn't expect 2020 to play out like we think it will. Unlikely, but still strange things can happen in both parties (yes, even with Trump--a VERY small likelihood, so save your sarcasm) and we may still be surprised when the conventions roll around. As I said, I am in an "a plague on both your houses" mood, and I suspect I am not alone. We are in for it for the next four years whoever wins.
The book to read about this phenomenon is Ruth Benedict's book The Chrysanthemum and the Sword. It isn't about Arabs, it's about Japan. And I think her conclusion, that Japan was an honor/shame culture, is not quite right. It was a win/lose culture. Compromise was not an option, negotiations had to be on Japan's terms.
ReplyDeleteJoseph, so what conclusion concerning the conflict do you draw?
DeleteThey won't compromise until they lose.
DeleteActually, until they have to admit they lost.
Delete