spideygirl

1of42: "maybe major news organizations are better positioned than you to know what actually constitutes journalistic integrity?"

Ah, if only that were the case!

My references are not vague. I thought it was common sense that most major media outlets have been pounding on the Bush administration and its military action in Iraq (thereby encouraging the enemy). Do I need to connect all of the dots? Bush leaving office in 1/09 has some wondering if Israel will attack Iran beforehand. Why would that be? Why would Israel want to start a war with Iran before Bush leaves office? And if Israel considers Bush a good ally, how might that nation feel about the mainstream media undermining his efforts to plant the seed of democracy in the Middle East?

And I am not getting into a two-person debate with you again, pal.

Hanna

I will let others have the last word on the subject:

If you Google "Jews control media," the first 8 hits are explicitly anti-Semitic web sites. The 9th hit is a recording of President Nixon complaining to Billy Graham about the Jews in charge of Newsweek. And the 10th hit is a letter from the Anti-Defamation League to CNN protesting a journalist's failure to challenge a commentator who referred to Jewish media control, stating:

--The myth of "Jewish controlled" media has long been a staple of anti-Semites. This anti-Semitic canard is now widely accepted in the Arab world and pervasive in the Muslim and Arab Media, along with the myth of "Jewish control" of the U.S. government. We hope that, in future, when confronted with such outlandish and stereotypical statements by one of your peers, you would immediately challenge the statement and make clear to your audience that this is anti-Semitism.--

Hindoo

Personally, spidey, I don't think the mainstream media has been nearly hard enough on the Bush administration in regard to Iraq. As I've said before, we had unfinished work to be done in Afghanistan and had no business altering course midstream and invading another country--no matter how vile the despot in charge of said country. ... As for Israel and Iran. Didn't they take out nuclear devices there a number of years back, or was that Iraq? (I'm so senile these days, please excuse!) ... I love Israel with all of my heart, most especially its feisty and defiant people. Their national personality is such that they'll ultimately do what they're going to do, regardless of who's president. And incidentally, I know from several visits to family in Israel that a pretty fair number of Israelis are not all that intoxicated with admiration for Bush, even if he is allegedly a "friend." Their love for the U. S., however, seems to know no bounds. I saw a t-shirt being sold there with a picture of a fighter jet and the words: "Don't worry America, Israel is behind you!" Like I said, feisty. They don't know how small and vulnerable they are, which in the end, makes them strong.

Hindoo

Agreed, Hanna. "Jews controlling the media" has long been part of the anti-semitic rant, but I don't feel spidey meant it that way in her post. If I had thought that, I would have taken offense immediately ... but somehow, I didn't.

Hanna

Hindoo, I see your point. But I think that if you innocently spread an ethnic slander -- let's say about black people and their fondness for watermelon -- and a member of the group takes offense, there are respectful and dismissive ways to react to that offense.

I also think that if you're going to participate in a debate about what Jews should and shouldn't be doing in relation to Israel, you ought to come prepared with some basic cultural literacy on the subject. If you've never heard of this slur, then you can't be very familiar with the prejudices Jews have to cope with on the world stage and the history that brought us where we are.

1of42

spideygirl: You must be living in a very special place indeed to seriously assert that being opposed to the Iraq war constitutes propaganda against Israel. A very special place...

spideygirl

That's a tidy simplification, 1of42. A very special, and tidy, simplification.

spideygirl

Hanna: Your phrase "Jews control media" - Doesn't it sound different out of context? Yes, it is always possible to twist what others are intending. I personally think it is more honorable to debate the issues, rather than detract from them with extraneous nonsense.

I first heard that many individuals of Jewish heritage were high up in media organizations while in college. It was for an introductory political science class, and the professor was Jewish.

It is absurd and strange to overreact in a bizzarre way to the notion that many ethnic groups which came to our shores congregated in more than average numbers in certain fields. If it is true that there are people in a position to at least give Israel a fair shake in the news, even if it is out of subjective sentiment, so be it. That works for me.

I haven't done a study on the topic, but I believe there are still very many people who are Jewish and who control different media outlets. It is also true that from many of these sources comes a barrage of anti-Iraq, anti-Bush sentiment. This is not good for Israel.

Hanna, it is all kinds of amusing that my pro-Israel position is convoluted in your post to the extent that an association with anti-Semitism was made. Wow - with friends like this, does Israel need enemies???

Personally, this exchange is a different, but perfect example, of how those who should be doing the best job to support Israel end up lobbying against it. Accuse those who support Israel the most of being anti-Semitic. What a brilliant and constructive position.

What have we come to that a person who claims to be Jewish would rather label a person anti-Semitic rather than have them support Israel in a way which differs from the way that they would like it supported?




Hanna: "We hope that, in future, when confronted with such outlandish and stereotypical statements by one of your peers, you would immediately challenge the statement and make clear to your audience that this is anti-Semitism."

Such a gigantic pile of baloney. There certainly were outlandish statements made, but not by me.

spideygirl

Hindoo: "Their love for the U. S., however, seems to know no bounds. I saw a t-shirt being sold there with a picture of a fighter jet and the words: "Don't worry America, Israel is behind you!" Like I said, feisty. They don't know how small and vulnerable they are, which in the end, makes them strong."

I love all of that.

The Iraq war is a different topic now. We'll go more rounds on it another time.

spideygirl

Hanna: "But I think that if you innocently spread an ethnic slander -- let's say about black people and their fondness for watermelon"

Oh dear.

If I were a person who liked to take offense, this might be a good place to start. To compare a relatively respectful political debate, and difference of opinion, to a very real example of racism, shows an incredible amount of insensitivity.

Let’s not dilute examples of extreme slurs by trying to compare them to nothing of the sort. There are better and less harmful ways to win an argument.

DonnaL

Spideygirl, I'm sorry, but I am really quite flabbergasted that you are apaprently unaware that the concept that "Jews control the media" (as opposed to owning and/or publishing some number, but not by any means a substantial percentage, of media outlets in this country) is one of the most common anti-Semitic slanders there is.

First, it's untrue and always has been. Other than the New York Times, what precisely are you talking about? Is Rupert Murdoch Jewish? Who "controls" more media, Rupert Murdoch or the Sulzburger family? Is the Los Angeles Times owned by Jews? Or, instead, by the Chicago Tribune? Was the Chandler family that used to own the LA Times Jewish? Do you think the Chicago Tribune has ever been known as a "Jewish paper"? Speaking of famous newspaper families, was William Randolph Hearst a Jew? Do you think the Washington Post is controlled by Jews? Are General Electric and Vivendi, which own NBC, "Jewish companies"? How about the Walt Disney Company, which owns ABC? How about Time Warner? Do you honestly believe that Sumner Redstone, who indirectly owns a controlling interest in CBS through a couple of corporate layers, decides what news gets broadcast on CBS? Etc., etc.

So, I don't care what you were told in college; you should check your facts before you make such broad factual assertions. *Especially* when they happen to coincide so unfortunately with tired anti-Semitic cliches.

I do accept, of course, that you had no ill intent, and were repeating this canard from ignorance. But if you were setting out to have people discount what you say, you couldn't have done a better job. It would help if you weren't refusing, with such defensiveness, to acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, you were engaging in stereotyping, even if unintentionally. I don't think anyone was trying to accuse you of being anti-Semitic. I'm certainly not.

Second, "control" is a loaded word, because (regardless of its legal meaning) it is, and always has been, used to imply that when Jewish people *do* own a media outlet, they slant the news to further Jewish interests. I suppose you think that all those hundreds of mysterious Jewish-controlled newspapers and broadcast companies out there are deliberately hiding from us what a wonderful President we have, and what a marvelous success the war in Iraq has been?

The fact is, those media outlets out there that I *do* believe are biased against Israel tend to be British -- the Guardian, the BBC, etc. None of them, so far as I am aware, owned by Jews!

Yes, you're free to say what you like. But others are equally free to tell you that they think it's remarkably presumptuous of you to be lecturing Jewish people -- who, perhaps, have a somwhat better grasp of Jewish history, and the history of Israel, than you do? -- on what positions they should or shouldn't be taking, or on what is or isn't good for Israel. I suppose that the many, many people in Israel who believe that it's bad for Israel (and "the Jews") to be in a perpetual state of war, that it's bad for Israel to keep territories that will inevitably result in Jewish people being a demographic minority in Israel (hardly a consummation devoutly to be wished in a Jewish state), that the establishment of a Palestinian state is a goal to work towards (as the Israeli government itself believes!), or that it was an enormous mistake for the United States to begin a war that has seriously destablized the entire region, are traitors?

Finally, a helpful suggestion: it is decidedly not a good idea to refer to Israel as the "fatherland" of the Jewish people. In my entire life, I have never heard an Israeli, or a Jewish person anywhere, referring to Israel that way. I suppose you are also unaware that the word "fatherland" is inextricably associated in many people's minds with Germany? (Sort of like "motherland" is associated with Russia?) And, therefore, that referring to Israel as a "fatherland" has a distinctly unpleasant sound to many Jewish people? Including me? (Speaking of insensitivity.)

Donna

spideygirl

DonnaL: "Spideygirl, I'm sorry, but I am really quite flabbergasted that you are apaprently unaware that the concept that "Jews control the media" (as opposed to owning and/or publishing some number, but not by any means a substantial percentage, of media outlets in this country) is one of the most common anti-Semitic slanders there is."

I never commented on whether or not there is a slur related to Jews controlling the media. This was a notion brought up by another post in order to slam my pro-Israel position by injecting a smoke screen into the debate. We went from bringing up an unrelated matter which the poster clearly knew was unwarranted, to then adding the falsehood that I in some way deny that the unrelated matter even exists.

I am quite sure that there are those who use any number of slurs against all sorts of people on this planet. That was not the topic of my discussion, nor is it now.

My point is very clear if you look back to my posts on this thread, so I'll not repeat it. I am not going to lend credibility to what I consider to be a huge pile of baloney by defending myself against it further.

But for you, DonnaL, I'll make the simple point once again: There certainly are Jewish people who are in controlling media positions which could be used to help Israel, and in my opinion they have chosen to help undermine political efforts which could be advantageous to that nation (blindsided by American liberal politics).

This opinion has nothing to do with the slur that Hanna brought into this discussion.

Why should I even post? My opinions can be made up for me. Let me get this straight. I have gone from a pro-Israeli supporter to someone who denies that there is discrimination against the Jews. This is becasue my support for Israel dared come from the conservative direction. Next I will be a Holocaust denier. Wow - liberals really will go to any extent to win an argument.

A Jewish person who will slam a pro-Israel position just to advance a liberal American agenda. This is why I worry about the fate of Israel as far as support from this country goes. If Israel can't even count on American Jews for consistent support, to where can it turn?!

I actually think the real issue here, beyond the smoke screen, is COMPLACENCY.

And by the way, I certainly do have the right, along with any other American, to give my opinion about what is or isn't good for Israel. Coincidentally, I happen to align closely with the nation of Israel on that topic, but no matter. American politics as far as Israel or any other nation goes is a matter of concern for any citizen.

I am not Jewish, and I like to think of Israel being a fatherland for all Jews around the world. It makes me happy that American blood was shed for that to finally be a reality. If someone chooses to apply their liberal political aggression to falsifying an insult over that, then so be it. I think in the real world we are all very able to see a person's intentions if we choose to do so (particularly when a record of their opinions is a few clicks away right here on CC).

spideygirl

DonnaL:

The last thing I will do is start cowering when I come up against liberal left bully tactics. I actually think it is unAmerican to start accusing a person of being a bigot when clearly they are not, just to shut down a position with which one disagrees (quite a popular thing for many on the left to do). I value free speech too much to not call this as I see it.

I don't drink the liberal agenda Kool-Aid, and while I find phony political correctness and falsification of insult to be mildly amusing, I won't dignify it with the sensitivity it does not deserve.

The word "fatherland" (or "motherland", or in some instances "old country") is something I would and do use to apply to any nation on this planet for any group who came from there. My immigrant grandparents did the same (and no, they were not from Germany or Russia). To have a panic reaction to that truly is nuts (or downright insincere).

ilsa belter

Not Jewish here so forgive me for chiming in, but a) yes, referring to "Jewish owned media" is one of the most known far right-wing anti-Semitic conspiracy theories as far as I know, and b) I can see how "fatherland" is a rather insensitive term in this context. I was astonished that Bush used the term "homeland" security after 9/11--even that term had some kind of vague inference to Nazi Germany to me. I still don't like it.

Hindoo

But what about the conservative agenda Kool-Aid? There seems to be a fair number of people out there a-sippin' away on that!