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

[Islamic North America]

It seems that there are excitedly pro-Israel ones (Fox of course comes to mind) and ones that are sort of neutral-leaning-towards-Israel (CNN?) but nothing on the other side that actually matters (some local pirate radio don't count). This true?

I am not aware of any major pro-Palestinian news stations, either. But I think that's just what we get for being pals with Israel for so long, for better or worse.

Well, that and the Jews control all the media in this country of course.

Hitler would be proud of your theory, lol.

[Dododecapod]

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, to take revenge for minor damage?
WHilst I disagree with the Palestinians, they seem more in the right than the damned Israelis.

WP is not a banned substance.

[New Chalcedon]

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.

Which means that the person on the street gets all this bad publicity about Israel, and little to none about Hamas.

Which, I think you'll concede, has at least the potential to shape opinions in the future.

[Gauthier]

Which means that the person on the street gets all this bad publicity about Israel, and little to none about Hamas.

Which, I think you'll concede, has at least the potential to shape opinions in the future.

Or more likely it'll be "Hamas does shit? Wow, and I just found out the sky's blue too!" Again, the percentage of people who aren't actually aware of Hamas being a terrorist organization in the West is rather nonexistent.

[New Chalcedon]

Which means that the person on the street gets all this bad publicity about Israel, and little to none about Hamas.

Which, I think you'll concede, has at least the potential to shape opinions in the future.

Or more likely it'll be "Hamas does shit? Wow, and I just found out the sky's blue too!" Again, the percentage of people who aren't actually aware of Hamas being a terrorist organization in the West is rather nonexistent.

And I think you may be surprised as to just how cynical so many people are when it comes to officially-deisgnated "terrorist" organisations. Also, the news that Hamas was using Palestinian children as human shields and stockpiling weapons in mosques was rather startling to me, at least.

[The Parkus Empire]

News that is biased toward anti-West terrorists is rare. Although some people might consider Israel to use terrorist tactics (which most major militaries do), it is hardly anti-West.

[Barzan]

*whispers* Methinks the OP hasn't heard that all the media in the US is owned and run by the Elders of Zion who, naturally, support their own kind as part of their world-domination efforts.

[Lord Tothe]

Gotta go to the alternative media for pro-Palestinian coverage.Too bad in all the vilification of the Palestinians, it's rarely mentioned that the Gaza Strip is little more than an open-air concentration camp. I can't blame factions there for resorting to unfocused violence.

*edit* of course, I would hope that a non-violent solution could be found so there are options besides genocide or exile for either side. While understandable, terrorism isn't excusable.

[Barzan]

Gotta go to the alternative media for pro-Palestinian coverage.Too bad in all the vilification of the Palestinians, it's rarely mentioned that the Gaza Strip is little more than an open-air concentration camp. I can't blame factions there for resorting to unfocused violence.

*edit* of course, I would hope that a non-violent solution could be found so there are options besides genocide or exile for either side. While understandable, terrorism isn't excusable.

I think that The Economist is quite balanced on Israeli-Palestinian issues, as is the Financial Times. Add the BBC as well. They aren't all "Palestinians are always right, Israeli Jews always wrong", but they are pretty reasoned and balanced, citing wrongs and rights by both sides. Al-Jazeera is also a good source for Palestinian viewpoints, though I find them to be a bit biased.

[Armacor]

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.

Im confused...

You said first:

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

presumably referring to the PLO in the negative.

Then you said:

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

Which appears to indicate that you see the first as ok... - ie PLO positive...

please clarify.

[Lord Tothe]

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.

Im confused...

You said first:

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

presumably referring to the PLO in the negative.

Then you said:

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

Which appears to indicate that you see the first as ok... - ie PLO positive...

please clarify.

Indeed. Do belligerent parties get to trample everyone in their path without concern because a handful think the whole region needs to be fought over? There are indeed civilians in every war zone, and every civilian who suffers property loss, injury, or death is the victim of a war crime.

[Armacor]

wait... i worked it out...

It was a typo - he must mean there are no CHILDREN in warzones...

[The Parkus Empire]

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.

Im confused...

Maybe because he isn't a soldier, so he doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about?