… and these three pieces only served to remind me of why:
Check this bit in the article out:
The IDF says the bulldozing was meant to stop the activities of militants in the area. It adds that the bulldozer driver could not see or hear Corrie and its own investigation found no Israeli soldier was to blame.
Nothing in the article about what other, mutiple, activists saw or observed that day… though there is plenty of published information with their statements. Either the nice reporter didn’t do her homework or she didn’t bother. The rest of the article portrays the human side of the brave activist and how difficult it has been for her parents (something which I’m obviously not disputing)… but I find it difficult to believe that a reporter from a land where all politicians and journalists attack channels like Al Jazeera and accuse them of portraying the story from one side, amongst many other things, could have missed something I noticed in as long as it took me to read the article.
A lackluster piece about the recent Israel/America schism (or not, according to the writer) which included these lines:
Only time will tell if what began with a slap in the face over an announcement over one housing development will be seen one day as the wake-up call that forced a moment of truth in the Middle East peace process — and whether Netanyahu had the courage to turn this crisis into an opportunity to achieve real peace and security for Israel.
What? Did you run out of interesting material and so decided to write such a ridiculously naive article where you actually say that any Israeli leader (particularly one who has been voted in a second time… with time in between to reflect on his first term) actually wants peace?!
Also, it’s not just ONE housing development. It was one housing development this time and hundreds more since 1967… but, of course, your readers will nod their heads and say: so what’s wrong with one development? Why is Obama annoyed? What’s wrong with these Arabs?!
What about these lines?
President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met for more than three hours Tuesday evening amid a dispute over Israel’s decision to build new Jewish housing on disputed land in East Jerusalem.
Netanyahu’s visit to Washington comes as Israel and the United States find themselves at odds over Israel’s plan to build new housing on disputed land in East Jerusalem — a plan he defended sharply Monday night. Israel’s announcement two weeks ago that it plans to build 1,600 apartments in an area claimed by both Israelis and Palestinians
Palestinian leaders have refused to rejoin peace talks until Israel freezes the construction of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. But Netanyahu said “everyone knows” the neighborhoods where the new housing units will be built “will be part of Israel in any peace settlement,” and the new construction “in no way precludes the possibility of a two-state solution.”
FYI, my western readers, East Jerusalem is not disputed land. It was captured illegally during war. If you think it wasn’t captured illegally and think that Israel gets to pick and choose what statutes and decisions that are binding, by International Law that Israel has agreed to, then I think that all suicide bombers, the rocker launchers and militants are totally within their rights to do what they’ve been doing for years.
Mr. Ben-Ami, who wrote the second article mentioned here, should have probably read this last piece before his piece was posted on the CNN website. I think there’s your answer Jeremy. Netanyahu said pass on the peace. Why? Because apparently not “everyone knows” that East Jerusalem has been theoretically annexed to Israel (though on the ground, that is the de facto state of things).
Moving on to this piece.
The writers says that
Despite the toe-to-toe standoff with the United States, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had dinner with Biden in Washington and met President Barack Obama, though he fiercely reiterated Israel’s right to build on land claimed by the Palestinians while he was in the United States.
Notice how Netanyahu’s quote is not preceded or followed by quotation marks? That means our writer was probably paraphrasing… was it Netanyahu that explicitly added the bit about the land being claimed by Palestinians? Or, was it the writer’s own little expenditure of effort and willingness to be daring and sound just like a lawyer when using the word “claimed”.
Let me just help the man out: it’s not claimed, fool. It’s the Palestinians’ right as per the law. The same law that allowed the people that call themselves Israeli now to “claim” that they had any right to this piece of land in the first place.
I think Egypt, Italy and Greece should claim Palestine too… after all, the Ancient Egyptians (preceding Judaism), the Romans and the Greeks once ruled this land as well… for hundreds of years. Hell, maybe we can have France and England claim it… remember the crusades?