It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Criticism
If Americans Knew published a study critical of The New York Times coverage of Israeli and Palestinian deaths, and met with then New York Times Public Editor Daniel Okrent to discuss their study.[2][18] In subsequent column Okrent mentioned the meeting and If Americans Knew's assertion that "The Times conscientiously reports on the deaths of Israeli children but ignores the deaths of Palestinian children", but dismissed If Americans Knew's conclusions, writing "The representatives of If Americans Knew earnestly believe that the information they presented to me about the killing of Palestinian children to be 'simple objective criteria.' But I don't think any of us can be objective about our own claimed objectivity." He also stated that "representatives of If Americans Knew expressed the belief that unless the paper assigned equal numbers of Muslim and Jewish reporters to cover the conflict, Jewish reporters should be kept off the beat" and said he found that "profoundly offensive." [19] Weir denied this, indicating that If Americans Knew had suggested that The New York Times team of reporters and editors covering Israel-Palestine be as diverse as possible.[18] If Americans Knew's study of The New York Times has also been criticized by the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA), for "selective and biased use and interpretation of information" and "flawed methodology".[20]
The Anti-Defamation League has called If Americans Knew one of several "anti-Israel organization[s]",[21] and further asserts that "Weir's criticism of Israel has, at times, crossed the line into anti-Semitism." They cited Weir's use of a quotation by Israel Shahak that characterized beliefs of certain Israelis as “such a ruthless and supremacist faith.”[22] Weir herself stated that she considered this quoted characterization as not pertaining to the mainstream of Judaism,[23] and has demanded that the ADL correct what she termed "defamatory and inaccurate statements." [24] The ADL voiced concern about an article written by board member Paul Findley in which he blamed America's relationship with Israel for the September 11 Attacks.[25]
Andy Newman, in a Op-ed in The Guardian, stated that "an article by Alison Weir... defends the unsubstantiated and implausible claims made by the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet about Israeli soldiers murdering Palestinians in Gaza to harvest their organs. Weir implied, with no evidence, that Israel is at the centre of international organ smuggling. She then explicitly argued that the medieval "blood libel" – that Jews kill Christian children – has a basis in fact."[26] The 'Aftonbladet claims' refer to Donald Boström's accusations of Israeli organ harvesting. Weir responded in a letter to the editor, stating: "My article contains considerable additional information on Israeli organ trafficking and its subsidy by the Israeli government, many of its 37 citations from Israeli media. Perhaps for Mr Newman this constitutes "no evidence".[27] She added that, at the end of one[28] of her two articles on Israeli organ trafficking [28] she had included a short section in which she quoted Israeli media reports that a prominent Israeli professor of medieval Jewish history had published a book on the subject, referring to Ariel Toaff's book, which had argued that the medieval blood libel may have had a basis in purported medieval Jewish ritual murders.[28]
Originally posted by Razimus
There are clearly Anti-Semites that are also Anti-Zionist, they do exist, period.
DConcerning that site you claim is gold, it is ran by a lady that is clearly biased.
If Americans Knew published a study critical of The New York Times coverage of Israeli and Palestinian deaths, and met with then New York Times Public Editor Daniel Okrent to discuss their study.[2][18] In subsequent column Okrent mentioned the meeting and If Americans Knew's assertion that "The Times conscientiously reports on the deaths of Israeli children but ignores the deaths of Palestinian children", but dismissed If Americans Knew's conclusions, writing "The representatives of If Americans Knew earnestly believe that the information they presented to me about the killing of Palestinian children to be 'simple objective criteria.' But I don't think any of us can be objective about our own claimed objectivity." He also stated that "representatives of If Americans Knew expressed the belief that unless the paper assigned equal numbers of Muslim and Jewish reporters to cover the conflict, Jewish reporters should be kept off the beat" and said he found that "profoundly offensive."
If Americans Knew's study of The New York Times has also been criticized by the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA), for "selective and biased use and interpretation of information" and "flawed methodology".
The Anti-Defamation League has called If Americans Knew one of several "anti-Israel organization[s]",[21] and further asserts that "Weir's criticism of Israel has, at times, crossed the line into anti-Semitism."
The ADL voiced concern about an article written by board member Paul Findley in which he blamed America's relationship with Israel for the September 11 Attacks.
Originally posted by Blaine91555Israel only strikes after being attacked. Hamas and the Hezbollah initiate the attacks and then Israel responds.
Hamas has declared it wishes to kill all Jews and want's them gone. Hamas and Hezbollah are funded by Iran and it's weapons are provided by Iran.
I see no chart laying out the weapons and money coming to Hamas from Iran. Don't we need all the facts?
Israel has better and more lethal weapons. Hamas simply lobs thousands of random missiles into any area, even civilian area's.
If Hamas had better weapons, the body count on the Israel side would be massive. Israel would already be gone and Jews wiped out as is the stated goal in the Charter of Hamas. They make no secret genocide is their goal and it's no secret that they have heavy financial backing from Iran.
]
Why does Hamas hide in areas where the children are? Don't they care about their own families? They hide among women and children because they know it will protect them. However Hamas does not care where their missiles land.
If Hamas gets better missiles and continues to launch them by the thousands into civilian area's, don't you think the body count in Israel will balloon way higher the other way?
Should those graphs not show the level of funding and value of the weapons that Iran gives to Hamas and Hezbollah?
There is no right side in this. It's all madness. For either side to claim moral superiority is for both sides to lie in my opinion.
What is your solution?
What percentage of Jews are you saying are Zionists?
Do you support Hamas and their goal of genocide?
If you were on the receiving side of thousands of missiles from a group that want's you and all your people dead, how would you react?
Originally posted by BiggerPicture
So how come there isn't an English/American equivalent for anti-muslim antisemitism,
if aunty Zionism is anti-jewish antisemitism?
(how convenient, of Roths & Royals, lol)edit on 4-4-2012 by BiggerPicture because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by AsktheanimalsSemitic is a general term for people from the Middle East, mostly Muslim but also Christians as well.
It does not include Europeans who have moved to Israel.
Originally posted by Blaine91555First my compliments. I expected another hate thread and find a reasonable debate. Very refreshing.
I wonder, how would you propose the Israelis accomplish peace with Hamas in control of one area and Hezbollah always lurking in another? What would you do? How do you propose that Israel solve this problem?
Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by eboyd
Facts are funny things. They can be used by two opposing sides by changing context.