Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
RoofGardener

... and here is the News..

20 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

OK... just a little mischief on my part, but to illustrate a serious point.

I'm often critical of the way news in the middle-east seems to be twisted so as to give the worst possible slants on Israel, whilst minimising criticism of its neighbours. If Saudi does "X", it is under-reported, or sort of "laughed off" as being "Oh... those crazeee Arabs...". If Israel does the same thing, it is howls of protest, special sessions of the UN, calls for Sanctions, and page after page after page of newstype.

Here is my "Imaginary" (but - in my opinion - typical) British newspaper reporting on four GENUINE recent events in the Middle East.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Daily Bugle

Middle-East roundup.

Kerry criticises Israel - blames it for breakdown on peace talks.

See pages 2,3,5-9, 11.

Special feature pages 21-28

Editorial comment page 4

Interview with Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority, page 15-16

The UNHCR on why Israel is the Source of Evil - page 30-32

Calls for sanctions (advert by Friends of Palestine) - page 7

Response by HAMAS and Hezbollah (page 38)

Kerry also says Palestinians just as responsible - page 48

Response from Israel: removed due to lack of space.

Other ME News

Saudi Arabia: Health minister fired over increase in MERS. Page 10.

World cup 2022 - Qatar reassures FIFA over temperature concerns: installs solar-powered cooling system in stadiums. Page 50

Brunei: New laws make penalty for homosexuality Stoning to Death. Page 51

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of those four stories (Israel, Saudi, Qatar and Brunei), which do YOU think would deserve the most attention from the world ?

Remind me again about the "Jews" apparently controlling our media ?

Edited by RoofGardener
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK... just a little mischief on my part, but to illustrate a serious point.

I'm often critical of the way news in the middle-east seems to be twisted so as to give the worst possible slants on Israel, whilst minimising criticism of its neighbours. If Saudi does "X", it is under-reported, or sort of "laughed off" as being "Oh... those crazeee Arabs...". If Israel does the same thing, it is howls of protest, special sessions of the UN, calls for Sanctions, and page after page after page of newstype.

Here is my "Imaginary" (but - in my opinion - typical) British newspaper reporting on four GENUINE recent events in the Middle East.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Daily Bugle

Middle-East roundup.

Kerry criticises Israel - blames it for breakdown on peace talks.

See pages 2,3,5-9, 11.

Special feature pages 21-28

Editorial comment page 4

Interview with Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority, page 15-16

The UNHCR on why Israel is the Source of Evil - page 30-32

Calls for sanctions (advert by Friends of Palestine) - page 7

Response by HAMAS and Hezbollah (page 38)

Kerry also says Palestinians just as responsible - page 48

Response from Israel: removed due to lack of space.

Other ME News

Saudi Arabia: Health minister fired over increase in MERS. Page 10.

World cup 2022 - Qatar reassures FIFA over temperature concerns: installs solar-powered cooling system in stadiums. Page 50

Brunei: New laws make penalty for homosexuality Stoning to Death. Page 51

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of those four stories (Israel, Saudi, Qatar and Brunei), which do YOU think would deserve the most attention from the world ?

Remind me again about the "Jews" apparently controlling our media ?

Well, Gardener, you must know that the Jews in America traditionally voted democrat. In recent times, that support

has been heavily swung to the republicans. And the media is controlled by liberals, *no doubt*, so Israel does not

get the Obama/Clinton-esque red carpet treatment by the media as much as they once did.

With that said, with news accounts that I have read over the Kerry missive, it is clear that the media

displayed Kerry as a "bumbler" for making such a bad statement.

In general, I think that would mean they are showing sympathy to Israel, and not supporting

Kerry's faux pas, that exhibited Israel as an Apartheid country

(even though they are LOL)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhh.... I didn't mean to critique the Kerry statement per se - I was just randomly grabbing that as a recent news story. Sorry if I confused the issue by doing so.

Out of curiosity, which of the four news stories did YOU think warranted the most attention ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhh.... I didn't mean to critique the Kerry statement per se - I was just randomly grabbing that as a recent news story. Sorry if I confused the issue by doing so.

Out of curiosity, which of the four news stories did YOU think warranted the most attention ?

If the CDC doesn't clamp down on MERS it could easily become the story of the decade.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the CDC doesn't clamp down on MERS it could easily become the story of the decade.

To be sure, but the CDC will do whatever is possible. They are one of the US bureaucracies I tend to admire and I am glad they are there.

Nevertheless, the possibility remains of a microbe evolving that has three characteristics: First, 100% lethality within a few days (such bugs exist today so we know it is possible). Second, a short but not too short incubation period so infected people have the chance to spread it before they know they are infected (this is of course the nature of almost all infectious diseases). Third, extremely high infectivity (like measles where any exposure at all and you are infected).

The appearance of such a microbe, with modern transport and so on, could wipe out the race in a week or so and we would not even see it coming.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be sure, but the CDC will do whatever is possible. They are one of the US bureaucracies I tend to admire and I am glad they are there.

Nevertheless, the possibility remains of a microbe evolving that has three characteristics: First, 100% lethality within a few days (such bugs exist today so we know it is possible). Second, a short but not too short incubation period so infected people have the chance to spread it before they know they are infected (this is of course the nature of almost all infectious diseases). Third, extremely high infectivity (like measles where any exposure at all and you are infected).

The appearance of such a microbe, with modern transport and so on, could wipe out the race in a week or so and we would not even see it coming.

A pandemic like the 1918 flu is long overdue and the results would be devastating on many levels. I've had injury to my lungs from blood clots and I have a deep fear of anything that impedes my breathing - these diseases are my worst nightmare!
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am hopeful, as far as influenza goes, that a generalized vaccine against all strains will become available soon. There are however a lot of other types of bugs out there, and we have no guarantee the vaccine I mention will indeed come.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow... I'm amazed you picked up on the MERS thing (serious though it is), and didn't notice that the Sultan of Brunei has just signed in laws making the punishment for homosexuality stoning to death ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow... I'm amazed you picked up on the MERS thing (serious though it is), and didn't notice that the Sultan of Brunei has just signed in laws making the punishment for homosexuality stoning to death ?

I see not where one has anything to do with the other. By he way I thought he was imposing Sharia law in general, not just as pertains to homosexuals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

They don't relate - it was just four recent news stories.

My point was that If Israel had introduced stoning to death for homosexuals, then NATO armed forces would already be en-route with a UN mandate for regime change.

Brunei does it, and nobody even comments .

Why is that ? :(

Oh.. and you are absolutely correct Frank.... he IS introducing (or rather... tightening up) Sharia. It is also death by stoning to criticise or offend Islam in any way whatsoever. (being non-Muslim would probably suffice to the Religion of Perpetual Offence) :P

Edited by RoofGardener
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't know that NATO had ever sent troops anywhere to prevent executions of homosexuals, and I dare say if Israel started doing it there would be an outrage but nothing else. This however is one of the reasons I tend to favor Israel over Muslims when they have disputes; Israel is more civilized while the Muslims are borderline and prone to this sort of thing.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't relate - it was just four recent news stories.

My point was that If Israel had introduced stoning to death for homosexuals, then NATO armed forces would already be en-route with a UN mandate for regime change.

Brunei does it, and nobody even comments .

Why is that ? :(

Oh.. and you are absolutely correct Frank.... he IS introducing (or rather... tightening up) Sharia. It is also death by stoning to criticise or offend Islam in any way whatsoever. (being non-Muslim would probably suffice to the Religion of Perpetual Offence) :P

If you had brought the story up on it's own, people would no doubt comment. As it is, people are more likely to comment on issues which may be more likely to affect them. MERS is one such issue.

There are plenty of comment on a daily basis made regarding issues in Muslim countries, just as there is plenty of comment on a daily basis made about Jewish countries. That you pay particular attention to one set of negative comments may be more suggestive of your own cognitive bias, than any bias on the part of the general public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Gardener, you must know that the Jews in America traditionally voted democrat. In recent times, that support

has been heavily swung to the republicans. And the media is controlled by liberals, *no doubt*, so Israel does not

get the Obama/Clinton-esque red carpet treatment by the media as much as they once did.

With that said, with news accounts that I have read over the Kerry missive, it is clear that the media

displayed Kerry as a "bumbler" for making such a bad statement.

In general, I think that would mean they are showing sympathy to Israel, and not supporting

Kerry's faux pas, that exhibited Israel as an Apartheid country

(even though they are LOL)

First of all Earl - no, they are not, yet...

This is the only time I can recall agreeing with Kerry on anything. On this, he has it correct. He said Israel would BECOME an apartheid state - not that it was one now. His logic is something I have stated here several times. if nothing changes then the Palestinians will vastly outnumber the Israelis in a few years. At that point the option will be to let them all vote and lose the Jewish character of Israel or to impose some separate and unequal status. I think a war will come before that time which will change all the facts on the ground but this is just an assumption on my part. No doubt he was saying what he already thinks of Israel but the Palestinians are not citizens of Israel and as such cannot be subject to apartheid. The Palestinians who ARE citizens of Israel have the vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with And Then.

Kerry's remarks - when taken in the total, and not cherry-picked halfway through a sentence - are entirely accurate. If a one-state solution was imposed on Israel, then the ONLY way that nation could survive - as a Jewish state - would be to introduce a system of apartheid. Thats just the logic of demographics.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None deserve my attention.

The 'Middle-East' is a cesspit of hatred, intolerance & violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The UNHCR on why Israel is the Source of Evil - page 30-32"

I had to do a search just to make sure this wasn't a real headline. Close though, lol.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow... I'm amazed you picked up on the MERS thing (serious though it is), and didn't notice that the Sultan of Brunei has just signed in laws making the punishment for homosexuality stoning to death ?

True true, but just how many lives will that take? Probably not many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all Earl - no, they are not, yet...

This is the only time I can recall agreeing with Kerry on anything. On this, he has it correct. He said Israel would BECOME an apartheid state - not that it was one now. His logic is something I have stated here several times. if nothing changes then the Palestinians will vastly outnumber the Israelis in a few years. At that point the option will be to let them all vote and lose the Jewish character of Israel or to impose some separate and unequal status. I think a war will come before that time which will change all the facts on the ground but this is just an assumption on my part. No doubt he was saying what he already thinks of Israel but the Palestinians are not citizens of Israel and as such cannot be subject to apartheid. The Palestinians who ARE citizens of Israel have the vote.

Agreed, but let me ask you this - and I was thinking of making this a thread of its own:

If Christians in America voted to oust people of any other religion, would you be in favor of it?

That's the $million question

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess that might illustrate the difference between Muslims and others, and why Muslims aren't trusted. The Israelis have not voted to out the Palestinians, but if the shoe were on the other foot we know what would happen.

It's something like voting Communists into power. Communists teach a one-party state and see multi-party systems as inherently corrupt and incompetent. So if you vote Communists into power, expect them to stay in power.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, but let me ask you this - and I was thinking of making this a thread of its own:

If Christians in America voted to oust people of any other religion, would you be in favor of it?

That's the $million question

Never. I am not against freedom for all. But I am against the freedom of any ONE group gaining preeminence to the harm of others. In America and most of the west today Islam is doing precisely this. It is a religious political system that is about total dominance of all other cultures. The sooner people admit this reality the sooner they can stand non violently against the extremists who take their book literally.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.