Welcome to PatsFans.com

Hamas breaks week-old cease fire

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PatsFanInVa, Jan 27, 2009.

  1. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,099
    Likes Received:
    215
    Ratings:
    +325 / 6 / -8

    Week-old Gaza cease-fire is breached - CNN.com

    CNN's headline is in the passive voice... yet Hamas broke the cease-fire.

    Prior to Israel's reaction, CNN nonetheless took the liberty of accompanying the story with two photos, one of a ruined mosque, and one of a mourning Palestinian crowd.... despite the fact that the story was Hamas killing a soldier on patrol, during a cease-fire, at that time without even news of an Israeli response.

    Now that Israel has fired back, the story reports in the lead sentence that Hamas did this and Israel did that, not even "then." As if the two events were simultaneous. The preponderance of readers who see a headline and a first 'graph say "oh who knows," and skips the "buried lead" of the story, paragraphs into it, by which one can untangle who broke the cease-fire.

    So much for the "Zionist press" theory.

    Anybody want to speculate on the exact mechanism by which Israel FORCED Hamas to break the cease-fire?

    PFnV
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2009
  2. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,806
    Likes Received:
    83
    Ratings:
    +184 / 3 / -10

    I've already stated my position clearly. Wipe Hamas off the face of the earth. They are not the same as a country with a standing army. That just foolish rationale.

    Rule: If you're not a country, then you don't need an army. Imagine if every ethnic group in American felt they needed an army! :rolleyes:
  3. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,099
    Likes Received:
    215
    Ratings:
    +325 / 6 / -8

    Full disclosure: I do not think the headline was ever in anything but the passive voice. That was my mistake, and I edited my post to reflect it. CNN refused to assign responsibility both times, not just the second time.

    Other aspects of the story still irritate me.

    PFnV regrets the error.

    PFnV
  4. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,851
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +39 / 2 / -0

    The audacity to claim the western media has been anything other than a Public Relations firm for Israeli policy is pretty amazing.

    ZNet - Israel's Lies

    ZNet - BBC & Gaza

  5. PatsWSB47

    PatsWSB47 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,777
    Likes Received:
    68
    Ratings:
    +110 / 0 / -1

    #12 Jersey

    Until Hamas comes up with a better stated position than the elimination of Israel I'm not going to worry too much about whether or not the coverage has been fair. It's tragic yes but Hamas can end this now.
  6. Lifer

    Lifer Banned

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    3,293
    Likes Received:
    26
    Ratings:
    +26 / 0 / -0

    Since the stated goal of Hamas is the destruction of Israel then it would make sense the cause of the break in the cease-fire by the terrorist organization was to carry on its mission of destroying Israel..

    sometimes things are so simple.
  7. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,099
    Likes Received:
    215
    Ratings:
    +325 / 6 / -8

    Really, Wildo?

    Then why did CNN run the story that "the cease-fire is broken," and then bury the lead?

    Why did they run the story with two pictures suggesting Israeli aggression against Palestinians?

    Why not run a picture of Hamasniks rigging explosives, or a picture of Hamasniks in ski masks brandishing their weapons?

    No, they chose to run pictures that fits the standard narrative of Israelis inflicting suffering, no matter what the actual story was.

    I am sure the BBC should really help charities collecting money to funnel through Hamas -- oh they didn't mention that Hamas will not allow independent distribution of relief aid? How did that detail slip?

    It's really nice that a blogger on Z-net thinks otherwise, and of course I know that you think otherwise. That's fine. There's a significant number of well-scrubbed little Western faces on my television everynight, decrying the horrible murderous Israelis (through the "zionist" media, yet,) and that's fine too. There are always loud liars and there are always those prepared to believe them -- for example the phantom "massacre" in Jenin, and the photoshopped smoke in Hizbollah-friendly "journalistic" sources. There were also those "extra" dead, who ran from "atrocity" to "atrocity" for posed horror photos. We're not idiots, Wildo.

    PFnV
  8. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,672
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    I have something to say about this conflict that might very well solve all the problems...Oh, crap! I had it on the tip of my tongue!:mad:
  9. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,851
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +39 / 2 / -0

    A blogger? How frivilous.

    Henry Siegman - Council on Foreign Relations

    Deepak Tripathi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    As for "burying the lead," I guess it depends on whether you think this is the lead;

    or this:

    Both look like pretty accurate assessments to me. Israel slaughters 1,300 Palestinians while losing only 13 of it's own, then DECLARES a cease fire which Hamas is expected not to breach. "That's it we're done killing now, cease fire time!" And you are angry because you don't think a CNN article emphasized that Hamas broke the cease fire that Israel declared?

    What if Hamas throws up a few mortars and then says, "cease fire time," is that the standard by which everyone is to be judged or does only Israel enjoy this unique position of murder without repercussion? I can see the CNN headline now; "Israel Breaks Hamas-declared ceasefire following Hamas military operation." What arrogance.

    Where are the Palestinian sources in that article? I see quotes from Olmert and Justice Minister Daniel Friedman, but certainly no other voices. And the opening sentence clearly states that Hamas broke Israel's declared "cease fire" but I suppose you expect them not to mention Israel's response or what has led up to this? Just chuck it down the memory hole.....

    As for this talking point, unfortunately it's not born out by the facts:

    Last edited: Jan 27, 2009
  10. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,099
    Likes Received:
    215
    Ratings:
    +325 / 6 / -8

    Stipulated: a couple of guys with credentials hold opinions you like. Now back to today's news.

    Really, Wildo? For a news story -- not an opinion screed -- that's a tough call to you? Why not start the story "Israel, which was attacked by five Arab armies upon the day of its founding in 1948, has been attacked once again"?

    The standard style for writing a news story is to report the event that is its subject, telling the who, what, where, when, and (if it is objective and reliable,) the why... and then explain such things as previous events that have a bearing on the event.

    The topic of the story is the breaking of a ceasefire. It doesn't "depend" on any such subjective bullcrap how you report an event that quite clearly and obviously transpired this morning. It is pure propaganda to insist that CNN write a story on the military operation commencing in December, when today's story is the breaking of the ceasefire at the end of the operation.

    The standard practice, for everybody from AP to Zinsser to Strunk and White, is to give preference to the active voice, not the passive voice, specifically because passive voice detatches all accountability and renders copy unreadable.

    So somebody had a very good reason to act as if the ceasefire was broken by... what? A force of nature? The nature of the universe? And that very good reason is the anti-Israel bias of the media in covering these conflicts (this is very similar to the coverage in the Hizbollah war.)

    No, "cease fire" wasn't "broken," as if it fell off a shelf or something. Hamas broke the ceasefire. It was an affirmative act by a belligerant party. That's the "Who" and the "What." We also know the "Where" and the "When". As to the "Why," that would be where the story COULD go next. This is certain: We know who did it. But the anti-Israeli press does not want that headline.

    Israel and Hamas both "DECLARED" unilateral cease fires. (But CNN conveniently chose not to relay that fact. Effective.) Well, cease fires are not treaties. The only thing enforcing them is more war. So if Hamas wants more war, this is how to get it.

    But war kills babies and puppies, remember?

    I am angry because the press is basically being used as a cat's paw by those who glorify and embrace violence and hate. And some of our best idiotically compete to go beyond the press in this pursuit. That you stump for them through other means is what mystifies me.

    That is precisely what Hamas does; i.e., Israel and Hamas both ceased fire previously. And it's not "a few mortars." It's thousands of rockets, over the course of years. That's something that some other guy far away should ignore, I suppose -- Heaven forbid it were us.

    Hmmm. 90 minute after Hamas attacks, Israel counter-attacks.

    Versus....

    A week after the end of hostilities, Hamas chooses to attack Israel.

    Is that really the same thing?

    Oh I'm sure they'll make some **** up soon, and you'll latch right onto it.

    Last edited: Jan 27, 2009
  11. Michael

    Michael Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,006
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    So much for peace and harmony breaking out around the world once the brilliant unifier took office. :rolleyes:
  12. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,851
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +39 / 2 / -0

    Such insight as usual. Thanks for your brilliant contribution.
  13. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,099
    Likes Received:
    215
    Ratings:
    +325 / 6 / -8

    LOL seriously
  14. Michael

    Michael Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,006
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey


    My pleasure. :itsok:
  15. KontradictioN

    KontradictioN Do you even lift? PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Messages:
    26,578
    Likes Received:
    368
    Ratings:
    +969 / 24 / -44

    No Jersey Selected

    Israel is going to wipe Hamas off the face of the Earth or wipe out the entire Palestinian region trying. Hamas watches this country bulldoze it's way over the border and kill them and their citizens because Israel's media does not tie it's military's hands behind it's back. The offensive is widely effective while the troops remain in place. Then our media's heart bleeds for the "victims", Israel pulls out leaving thousands of Palestine's PEOPLE dead. Hamas walks over the dead bodies then breaks the cease fire again? They're begging for an ethic cleansing and Israel has the propensity to give our media the finger and proceed. Very smart move here.
  16. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,099
    Likes Received:
    215
    Ratings:
    +325 / 6 / -8

    Actually, I disagree that Israel has that "propensity." But certainly attacking Israel now is just an attempt to reinitiate hostilities (although they've already declared victory upon the end of the Israeli offensive.)

    It's our own media spin that says the Israelis are engaged in (or want to engage in) "ethnic cleansing." Unfortunately for our media and our university activists, there is no analysis that can compare these wars to "ethnic cleansing." The characteristics are just not there. We're not talking about the hundreds of thousands dead that any definition of "ethnic cleansing" assumes. We're talking about 1300 people, about half militants and the remainder purposefully put in harm's way by militants.

    We cannot say that of Dresden, Srebenica, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Auschwitz, Darfur, Rwanda, or the Congo. Self-defense against a force that hides among civilians is not the same thing as purposefully slaughtering the civilians.

    So, I certainly hope that Israel keeps an eye on the distinction, even if the masters of hyperbole in our media and academic community spend all their best efforts obscurring it.

    PFnV
  17. KontradictioN

    KontradictioN Do you even lift? PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Messages:
    26,578
    Likes Received:
    368
    Ratings:
    +969 / 24 / -44

    No Jersey Selected

    Aye. I see what you're saying. But exercises in ethnic cleansing didn't take place over a two week time period.
  18. PatsFanInEaglesLand

    PatsFanInEaglesLand Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,793
    Likes Received:
    40
    Ratings:
    +82 / 5 / -9

    #37 Jersey

    :mad:

    Seriously, Michael is right.
  19. Lifer

    Lifer Banned

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    3,293
    Likes Received:
    26
    Ratings:
    +26 / 0 / -0

    seriously??
  20. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,851
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +39 / 2 / -0

    And this is different from any source you quote how?


    No it's not a tough call, it's completely biased in favor of Israel. Anyone outside of Israel and it's American sugar daddy can see that. This is about recent events and what led up to them, not the entire rehash of Israel and Palestine.

    And the article clearly states that Hamas set off a bomb followed by an Israeli counter attack in the first case of violence since last week. The fact that you want the emphasis to be on the ceasefire that Israel commanded is your hangup. For the rest of us, this is a response to Israel's 1,300 person massacre. And a relatively insignificant response at that.

    Subjectivity is asking us to believe that an army invading another country, killing hundreds of innocent civilians and then demanding a ceasefire under the threat of occupation is a mutual agreement that wipes the slate clean.

    Accountability is incredibly subjective in this case. Regardless, so as not to allow you to cloud the issue with an appeal to the authority of a self-proclaimed arbiter of good journalism, this:

    is an active voice like any other lead found in journalism today. You maintaining that it doesn't place the right level of emphasis on an Israeli-forced cease-fire is the "subjective bullcrap" you want to infuse the story with.

    So you want them to justify motives for the attack? Oh wait, they did exactly that by discussing the events that have led up to this violence. Unfortunately for you, Israel's mandates aren't a guideline for journalism so the fact that you want this to be the lead:

    doesn't change the fact that it's a properly structured inverted pyramid that later mentions mostly Israel's side of things. (i.e. "but we declared a cease fire?!?!").

    The violence is the story, not the Israeli declared cease-fire.

    Again, the Israeli-declared ceasefire being broken is not the lead, the continuation of violence is. To make it the lead you are requiring journalists to take their orders from Israel's dogma.



    Bullshit, Israel invaded Gaza, killed 1,300 and then demanded a cease fire. What was Hamas going to do, say no? The fact that Israel calls what is normally known as "withdrawal" a "ceasefire" has no bearing on the story that Hamas struck back. Talk about imperialist doubletalk. I do like the ominous superiority you express here though.

    and war is peace etc.. I don't stump for Hamas, nor do I stump for Israel. I stump for Palestinians and against the doctrine of western imperialism that says might is right regardless of disproportionate violence. Sorry, but you can't have "peace" when you maintain apartheid and terrorism in ways Hamas is nowhere near capable of.

    I wonder what the score is. Last I checked, it was 1,300 (600 civilians) to 14; 11 of which are Israeli soldiers (i.e. not terrorism).

    "a few mortars" or an "explosive device" is what THIS story is about. It's not a rehash of the entire history of the conflict, a conflict that has seen far more Palestinians die than Israelis.

    The article made it clear that this was the first response by Hamas since last weeks violence so this point is moot.

    You mean like latching on to Hamas taking less than 1 out of every 9 humanitarian Aid trucks that up until recently Israel wouldn't allow into Gaza? Or Latching onto the terms of violence that Israel dictates?

    This statement,

    is a statement of mission and purpose by the Israeli government. No such statement is found from Hamas or any Palestinian.

    And this statement,

    Is a defensive argument against repercussions from Israel's crimes. No such argument is heard as to why Israel SHOULD face lawsuits for the human rights violations and the voice clearly speaks from the point of view of the Israeli government.


    No, you are still assigning blame to one side by emphasizing the order of events on a micro level in order to give credence to the Israeli-mandated cease fire. The story is the ongoing violence between Israel and Palestine, not Hamas breaking the Cease fire. I can't find another western article that doesn't have the lead you wrote by the way.
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2009

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>