Any major US news outlets take a pro-pali stance?

[New Chalcedon]

However, they then don't report Hamas' misdoings, or those of Hezbollah, or other extremists.

The US media does not report every last bad thing the Taliban does in the same way they report on casualties from US bombings. Do you think this is because the US media is actually secretly on the side of the Taliban? Do you really want the media to think of the actions of the Israeli government in the same terms that they think about the actions of Hamas?

The fact of the matter is that when it comes to the substantive issues of the conflict, the US public is for a number of cultural and historical reasons decidedly aligned with Israel, and there is every reason to suspect that this carries through to the US media. Not necessarily in a grievously biased way, but probably, for instance, in who reporters empathize most with and expect their audience to empathize with.

And by failing to report the ills of the Taliban (and, in the case of Israel, Hamas and Hezbollah), the media skews public opinion against the Israelis far more than the situation warrants.

Also, by reporting each and every bad thing that the Israeli government does (and ignoring the things their enemies do), the media makes their preference clear: they want Israel to be the bad guys, and Hamas and Hezbollah to be the "plucky freedom fighters". It sells more ratings, after all.

[Parthenon]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So it would be alright to rape, beat or kill your kids if we ever manage to invade the US? Cool!

Feel free to try. Here in the south a foreign army would be lucky to even make it a few yards without opposition.

Since there are no civilians in warfare we would most probably carpet bomb the lot of you or take out your food/water supplies.

Like I said, feel free to try. Geographically and economically, that would be nearly impossible for you. Most domestic food production takes place in the middle of the nation.

[Karsol]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So it would be alright to rape, beat or kill your kids if we ever manage to invade the US? Cool!

Feel free to try. Here in the south a foreign army would be lucky to even make it a few yards without opposition.

Since there are no civilians in warfare we would most probably carpet bomb the lot of you or take out your food/water supplies.

Like I said, feel free to try. Geographically and economically, that would be nearly impossible for you. Most domestic food production takes place in the middle of the nation.

Which isn't in the south, so it would be easily invaded according to you.

[Parthenon]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So it would be alright to rape, beat or kill your kids if we ever manage to invade the US? Cool!

Feel free to try. Here in the south a foreign army would be lucky to even make it a few yards without opposition.

Since there are no civilians in warfare we would most probably carpet bomb the lot of you or take out your food/water supplies.

Like I said, feel free to try. Geographically and economically, that would be nearly impossible for you. Most domestic food production takes place in the middle of the nation.

Which isn't in the south, so it would be easily invaded according to you.

The US military is comprised largely of southerners. You are going to be pretty hard pressed to find an area that won't be well protected. Vermont perhaps?

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So it would be alright to rape, beat or kill your kids if we ever manage to invade the US? Cool!

Feel free to try. Here in the south a foreign army would be lucky to even make it a few yards without opposition.

Since there are no civilians in warfare we would most probably carpet bomb the lot of you or take out your food/water supplies.

Like I said, feel free to try. Geographically and economically, that would be nearly impossible for you. Most domestic food production takes place in the middle of the nation.

So in short, 'might makes right'?

[New Chalcedon]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So it would be alright to rape, beat or kill your kids if we ever manage to invade the US? Cool!

Feel free to try. Here in the south a foreign army would be lucky to even make it a few yards without opposition.

Since there are no civilians in warfare we would most probably carpet bomb the lot of you or take out your food/water supplies.

Like I said, feel free to try. Geographically and economically, that would be nearly impossible for you. Most domestic food production takes place in the middle of the nation.

So in short, 'might makes right'?

Not a philosophy I like. But then, I'm surprised that Parthenon and I are on the same "side" in this. I deplore the vicious treatment of Israel by the American media, especially since 2006 or so.

[Gauthier]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So it would be alright to rape, beat or kill your kids if we ever manage to invade the US? Cool!

Feel free to try. Here in the south a foreign army would be lucky to even make it a few yards without opposition.

Since there are no civilians in warfare we would most probably carpet bomb the lot of you or take out your food/water supplies.

Like I said, feel free to try. Geographically and economically, that would be nearly impossible for you. Most domestic food production takes place in the middle of the nation.

So in short, 'might makes right'?

And he also conveniently ignored the part where Al'Qaeda declared war on the U.S. so by his definitions 9/11 would be a legitimate military strike.

[Parthenon]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So it would be alright to rape, beat or kill your kids if we ever manage to invade the US? Cool!

Feel free to try. Here in the south a foreign army would be lucky to even make it a few yards without opposition.

Since there are no civilians in warfare we would most probably carpet bomb the lot of you or take out your food/water supplies.

Like I said, feel free to try. Geographically and economically, that would be nearly impossible for you. Most domestic food production takes place in the middle of the nation.

So in short, 'might makes right'?

Without question. When the teacher has a gun two plus two is certainly three...

[Karsol]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So it would be alright to rape, beat or kill your kids if we ever manage to invade the US? Cool!

Feel free to try. Here in the south a foreign army would be lucky to even make it a few yards without opposition.

Since there are no civilians in warfare we would most probably carpet bomb the lot of you or take out your food/water supplies.

Like I said, feel free to try. Geographically and economically, that would be nearly impossible for you. Most domestic food production takes place in the middle of the nation.

So in short, 'might makes right'?

Not a philosophy I like. But then, I'm surprised that Parthenon and I are on the same "side" in this. I deplore the vicious treatment of Israel by the American media, especially since 2006 or so.

Most media seem to be on the side of israel, even if they are similar in action and political persuasion as the Hamas terrorists.

[Gauthier]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So it would be alright to rape, beat or kill your kids if we ever manage to invade the US? Cool!

Feel free to try. Here in the south a foreign army would be lucky to even make it a few yards without opposition.

Since there are no civilians in warfare we would most probably carpet bomb the lot of you or take out your food/water supplies.

Like I said, feel free to try. Geographically and economically, that would be nearly impossible for you. Most domestic food production takes place in the middle of the nation.

So in short, 'might makes right'?

Not a philosophy I like. But then, I'm surprised that Parthenon and I are on the same "side" in this. I deplore the vicious treatment of Israel by the American media, especially since 2006 or so.

And why would Israel give a shit what American media thinks when the American government has been giving them a blank check to do whatever the fuck they want since God knows when?

[New Chalcedon]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So it would be alright to rape, beat or kill your kids if we ever manage to invade the US? Cool!

Feel free to try. Here in the south a foreign army would be lucky to even make it a few yards without opposition.

Since there are no civilians in warfare we would most probably carpet bomb the lot of you or take out your food/water supplies.

Like I said, feel free to try. Geographically and economically, that would be nearly impossible for you. Most domestic food production takes place in the middle of the nation.

So in short, 'might makes right'?

Not a philosophy I like. But then, I'm surprised that Parthenon and I are on the same "side" in this. I deplore the vicious treatment of Israel by the American media, especially since 2006 or so.

Most media seem to be on the side of israel, even if they are similar in action and political persuasion as the Hamas terrorists.

Karsol, that makes no sense. Are you trying to say that Israel = Hamas or that media = Hamas?

[Karsol]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So it would be alright to rape, beat or kill your kids if we ever manage to invade the US? Cool!

Feel free to try. Here in the south a foreign army would be lucky to even make it a few yards without opposition.

Since there are no civilians in warfare we would most probably carpet bomb the lot of you or take out your food/water supplies.

Like I said, feel free to try. Geographically and economically, that would be nearly impossible for you. Most domestic food production takes place in the middle of the nation.

So in short, 'might makes right'?

Not a philosophy I like. But then, I'm surprised that Parthenon and I are on the same "side" in this. I deplore the vicious treatment of Israel by the American media, especially since 2006 or so.

Most media seem to be on the side of israel, even if they are similar in action and political persuasion as the Hamas terrorists.

Karsol, that makes no sense. Are you trying to say that Israel = Hamas or that media = Hamas?

Israel = Hamas...or at least share common ground.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So it would be alright to rape, beat or kill your kids if we ever manage to invade the US? Cool!

Feel free to try. Here in the south a foreign army would be lucky to even make it a few yards without opposition.

Since there are no civilians in warfare we would most probably carpet bomb the lot of you or take out your food/water supplies.

Like I said, feel free to try. Geographically and economically, that would be nearly impossible for you. Most domestic food production takes place in the middle of the nation.

So in short, 'might makes right'?

Without question. When the teacher has a gun two plus two is certainly three...

You know who disagrees with you? Jesus.

[Soheran]

Also, by reporting each and every bad thing that the Israeli government does (and ignoring the things their enemies do), the media makes their preference clear: they want Israel to be the bad guys, and Hamas and Hezbollah to be the "plucky freedom fighters". It sells more ratings, after all.

"[P]lucky freedom fighters" like the Taliban?

Have you considered that the media talks about Israeli government misdeeds in a different way from Hamas misdeeds because they accept it as a given that Hamas is a terrorist organization that has proven willing to indiscriminately slaughter civilians, and Israel (most of the time) is not?

Do you ever wonder if there might be a more plausible theory than the notion that advancing a biased, partisan view strongly contrary to the perceptions of a US audience and the US government actually does improve their popularity?

In the context of the US media's apparent hotbed of anti-Israel sentiment, what do you make of, say, Congress's repeated near-unanimous recitations of pro-Israel policy statements whenever a crisis happens? Is the US public just really really good at resisting propaganda (in a way that it entirely fails to express with respect to, say, health care reform)?

Partisans on both sides of this conflict need to stop seeing bias in all reporting that does not reflect their particular bias as intensely as they would like.

[Hydesland]

I think the BBC, as neutral as it is, is definitely not shy of broadcasting harshly critical reports on Israel at all.

edit: whoops didn't read the title properly.

[KenKenpachi]

Al Jazeera, airs in parts of the US, has an english office, mainly in areas where its in demand however.

[New Chalcedon]

Also, by reporting each and every bad thing that the Israeli government does (and ignoring the things their enemies do), the media makes their preference clear: they want Israel to be the bad guys, and Hamas and Hezbollah to be the "plucky freedom fighters". It sells more ratings, after all.

"[P]lucky freedom fighters" like the Taliban?

Have you considered that the media talks about Israeli government misdeeds in a different way from Hamas misdeeds because they accept it as a given that Hamas is a terrorist organization that has proven willing to indiscriminately slaughter civilians, and Israel (most of the time) is not?

Do you ever wonder if there might be a more plausible theory than the notion that advancing a biased, partisan view strongly contrary to the perceptions of a US audience and the US government actually does improve their popularity?

In the context of the US media's apparent hotbed of anti-Israel sentiment, what do you make of, say, Congress's repeated near-unanimous recitations of pro-Israel policy statements whenever a crisis happens? Is the US public just really really good at resisting propaganda (in a way that it entirely fails to express with respect to, say, health care reform)?

Partisans on both sides of this conflict need to stop seeing bias in all reporting that does not reflect their particular bias as intensely as they would like.

No, I don't think that Americans are somehow magically resistant to propaganda. However, I also note AIPAC's influence within Congress, as well as the various hostile responses - on university grounds, for instance - to the very mention of Israel. Having studied at American universities for part of my degree, I can recall quite clearly the posters all over campus extolling the "resistance fighters" of Hamas against the "genocidal jackboot" of Israel.

[Free Soviets]

Having studied at American universities for part of my degree, I can recall quite clearly the posters all over campus extolling the "resistance fighters" of Hamas against the "genocidal jackboot" of Israel.

ah, if only the prevalence of posters reflected a prevalence of views and activism, let alone political power. tibet would be free and the wolves would be overpopulated.

[New Manvir]

I thought you forgot an "N" and meant "Palin".

[Rolling squid]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So it would be alright to rape, beat or kill your kids if we ever manage to invade the US? Cool!

Feel free to try. Here in the south a foreign army would be lucky to even make it a few yards without opposition.

Since there are no civilians in warfare we would most probably carpet bomb the lot of you or take out your food/water supplies.

Like I said, feel free to try. Geographically and economically, that would be nearly impossible for you. Most domestic food production takes place in the middle of the nation.

Which isn't in the south, so it would be easily invaded according to you.

The US military is comprised largely of southerners. You are going to be pretty hard pressed to find an area that won't be well protected. Vermont perhaps?

Good luck with that. We're as gun crazy in Vermont as you are in the south. Try Massachusetts or New York.

[Gauthier]

No, I don't think that Americans are somehow magically resistant to propaganda. However, I also note AIPAC's influence within Congress, as well as the various hostile responses - on university grounds, for instance - to the very mention of Israel. Having studied at American universities for part of my degree, I can recall quite clearly the posters all over campus extolling the "resistance fighters" of Hamas against the "genocidal jackboot" of Israel.

Until the attitudes and protests of ordinary people and even media can actually affect the decisions of those in power, then in the overall picture it's irrelevant. No matter what people think of Israel, reality is the United States government gives Israel a blank check to do whatever it pleases.

[New Chalcedon]

No, I don't think that Americans are somehow magically resistant to propaganda. However, I also note AIPAC's influence within Congress, as well as the various hostile responses - on university grounds, for instance - to the very mention of Israel. Having studied at American universities for part of my degree, I can recall quite clearly the posters all over campus extolling the "resistance fighters" of Hamas against the "genocidal jackboot" of Israel.

Until the attitudes and protests of ordinary people and even media can actually affect the decisions of those in power, then in the overall picture it's irrelevant. No matter what people think of Israel, reality is the United States government gives Israel a blank check to do whatever it pleases.

Which has little to nothing to do with the question as asked.

Q: Do any major US news outlets take a pro-palestinian stance?

My A: Yes, if only by routine omission of the crimes of the various Palestinian terrorist organisations, whilst scrupulously reporting everything bad Israel does.

[Dyakovo]

Why would anyone take the side of a terrorist organization with a puppet government?

Because they're a US Ally. Wait, which side were we talking about?

...

The one that ruins every chance they get at creating a free and independent state by launching rockets at civilians from the safety of mosques perhaps? Coincidentally enough, its the same one that stages fake press videos with the intention of garnering world sympathy.

How about taking children as human shields and using a banned substance, white phosphorous, t take revenge for minor damage?

I have said it hundreds of times, there are no civilians in a war zone.

So you've been wrong a hundred times. Is that supposed to impress us?

[Gauthier]

So you've been wrong a hundred times. Is that supposed to impress us?

Note how quiet he gets in regards to using that statement as being able to justify 9/11 on behalf of Al'Qaeda.

[Gauthier]

Which has little to nothing to do with the question as asked.

Q: Do any major US news outlets take a pro-palestinian stance?

My A: Yes, if only by routine omission of the crimes of the various Palestinian terrorist organisations, whilst scrupulously reporting everything bad Israel does.

Or rather, they don't mention it because it falls under "No Shit Sherlock." Pointing out everything fucked up Hamas does isn't going to change anyone's opinion on them. Either preaching to the choir or falling on deaf ears. On the other hand, Israel constantly claims to be the sole democracy in the Middle East so when they do something that's rather undemocratic of course it's going to be pointed out.