Protest rally, including Hamas, Fatah, at Erez

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
76,879
4,125
1,815
GAZA, (PIC)-- National and Islamic forces topped by Hamas and Fatah movements on Wednesday organized a rally at the Beit Hanun (Erez) crossing in northern Gaza to protest the Israeli imposed security belt along the Strip's borders.

PIC reporter said that hundreds of citizens took part in the rally that voiced demands for national unity and support for prisoners in Israeli occupation jails and for holy shrines.

Mahmoud Al-Zak, coordinator of the popular campaign against the Israeli buffer zone in Gaza Strip, said that the rally was organized in coordination with the popular campaign against the separation wall in Bilin in the West Bank.

A Fatah leader delivered a statement in the name of national and Islamic forces asking all forces to stick to national constants and to unite in face of the Israeli occupation.

Representatives of Hamas and Fatah met on Tuesday in the presence of representatives of PFLP, DFLP, people's party, Palestinian Arab front, and Islamic Jihad in northern Gaza district to prepare for national rallies against the Israeli occupation.

Protest rally, including Hamas, Fatah, at Erez

This was reported in the MSM but the link appears to be broken.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/2010042...uYXRlX3N1bW1hcnlfbGlzdARzbGsDcml2YWxwYWxlc3Rp
 
This was reported in the MSM but the link appears to be broken.

Once you scratch the surface, you keep finding things like this:

Ethan Bronner is the New York Times Jerusalem bureau chief. As such, he is the editor responsible for all the news coming out of Israel-Palestine. It is his job to decide what gets reported and what doesn't; what goes in a story and what gets cut.

To a considerable degree, he determines what readers of arguably the nation's most influential newspaper learn about Israel and its adversaries, and, especially, what they don't.

His son just joined the Israeli army.

According to New York Times ethics guidelines, such a situation would be expected to cause significant concern. In these guidelines the Times repeatedly emphasizes the importance of impartiality.

This is considered so critical that the Times devotes considerable attention to “conflict of interest” (also called “conflict with impartiality”) problems, situations in which personal interest might cause a journalist to intentionally or unconsciously slant a story.

The Times notes that family affiliations may cause such a conflict; as an example, it explains that a daughter’s high position on Wall Street could be problematic for a business reporter.

In situations where such a familial affiliation is considered significant, the journalist may be moved to a different area of reporting.

Ethan Bronner’s situation, therefore would appear to be sticky, at the very least. It is difficult to imagine that a son fighting for the foreign nation an editor is charged with covering does not constitute such a potential conflict with impartiality. Apart from Mr. Bronner signing up with the Israeli military himself, it is difficult to imagine a clearer example of familial partisanship.

Yet, to date, Bronner and the Times have refused to address his situation.

...

Linkie:
Alison Weir: Ethan Bronner's Conflict With Impartiality
 
This was reported in the MSM but the link appears to be broken.

Once you scratch the surface, you keep finding things like this:

Ethan Bronner is the New York Times Jerusalem bureau chief. As such, he is the editor responsible for all the news coming out of Israel-Palestine. It is his job to decide what gets reported and what doesn't; what goes in a story and what gets cut.

To a considerable degree, he determines what readers of arguably the nation's most influential newspaper learn about Israel and its adversaries, and, especially, what they don't.

His son just joined the Israeli army.

According to New York Times ethics guidelines, such a situation would be expected to cause significant concern. In these guidelines the Times repeatedly emphasizes the importance of impartiality.

This is considered so critical that the Times devotes considerable attention to “conflict of interest” (also called “conflict with impartiality”) problems, situations in which personal interest might cause a journalist to intentionally or unconsciously slant a story.

The Times notes that family affiliations may cause such a conflict; as an example, it explains that a daughter’s high position on Wall Street could be problematic for a business reporter.

In situations where such a familial affiliation is considered significant, the journalist may be moved to a different area of reporting.

Ethan Bronner’s situation, therefore would appear to be sticky, at the very least. It is difficult to imagine that a son fighting for the foreign nation an editor is charged with covering does not constitute such a potential conflict with impartiality. Apart from Mr. Bronner signing up with the Israeli military himself, it is difficult to imagine a clearer example of familial partisanship.

Yet, to date, Bronner and the Times have refused to address his situation.

...

Linkie:
Alison Weir: Ethan Bronner's Conflict With Impartiality

You clearly have not read one word from Bronner as had you done so, you'd know of his record of pro-Pallie coverage and coverage often critical of Israel.

In fact, I have spoken with Bronner regarding his uneven coverage of Middle East affairs.

Does Allah forbid you from reading newspapers published by the infidel, Mustafa? You won't go to Paradise, right? LOL
 
You clearly have not read one word from Bronner as had you done so, you'd know of his record of pro-Pallie coverage and coverage often critical of Israel.

In fact, I have spoken with Bronner regarding his uneven coverage of Middle East affairs.

Does Allah forbid you from reading newspapers published by the infidel, Mustafa? You won't go to Paradise, right? LOL

USMB's own Zio Forrest Gump with more claims of "celebrity" encounters... *snicker*

Anyway, as usual, you make a lot of stupid assumptions. Then you tilt away at your strawmen, trying to distract attention from the subject in hopes of derailing the discussion into your preferred format of third-grade insultfest.

The point, which you wish to ignore, is that a prominent news organization (which would present its coverage as objective and unbiased) has selected as its Bureau Chief in charge of reporting on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a person who has an immediate family member fighting on one side of that conflict.

I think we know what your (and many people's) response would be if the New York Times appointed a regional Bureau Chief to oversee its coverage of the conflict who happened to have a child serving in a Palestinian resistance group.

And certainly Bronner is no Avigdor Lieberman, but only a bigot like you would perceive him as pro-Palestinian. Others read his articles much more carefully, from outside the Zio bubble, and the pro-Israel slant is there - perhaps subtle, but pervasive. Tikun Olam has published quite a few articles exposing the bias in Bronner's reports:

What Ethan Bronner Won’t Tell You About Israeli Support for the Gaza War | Tikun Olam-???? ????: Make the World a Better Place

Ethan Bronner’s Pro-IDF Stenography Continues | Tikun Olam-???? ????: Make the World a Better Place

Ethan Bronner’s Mediocrity and Ir David Land Grab | Tikun Olam-???? ????: Make the World a Better Place

Bronner’s Mischaracterization of Hamas Continues | Tikun Olam-???? ????: Make the World a Better Place

There's plenty more.

And Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting has also repeatedly criticized Bronner's journalism, and questioned the ethics of his serving in such a position:

Linkie:
Does NYT's Top Israel Reporter Have a Son in the IDF?
 
You clearly have not read one word from Bronner as had you done so, you'd know of his record of pro-Pallie coverage and coverage often critical of Israel.

In fact, I have spoken with Bronner regarding his uneven coverage of Middle East affairs.

Does Allah forbid you from reading newspapers published by the infidel, Mustafa? You won't go to Paradise, right? LOL

USMB's own Zio Forrest Gump with more claims of "celebrity" encounters... *snicker*

Anyway, as usual, you make a lot of stupid assumptions. Then you tilt away at your strawmen, trying to distract attention from the subject in hopes of derailing the discussion into your preferred format of third-grade insultfest.

The point, which you wish to ignore, is that a prominent news organization (which would present its coverage as objective and unbiased) has selected as its Bureau Chief in charge of reporting on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a person who has an immediate family member fighting on one side of that conflict.

I think we know what your (and many people's) response would be if the New York Times appointed a regional Bureau Chief to oversee its coverage of the conflict who happened to have a child serving in a Palestinian resistance group.

And certainly Bronner is no Avigdor Lieberman, but only a bigot like you would perceive him as pro-Palestinian. Others read his articles much more carefully, from outside the Zio bubble, and the pro-Israel slant is there - perhaps subtle, but pervasive. Tikun Olam has published quite a few articles exposing the bias in Bronner's reports:

What Ethan Bronner Won’t Tell You About Israeli Support for the Gaza War | Tikun Olam-???? ????: Make the World a Better Place

Ethan Bronner’s Pro-IDF Stenography Continues | Tikun Olam-???? ????: Make the World a Better Place

Ethan Bronner’s Mediocrity and Ir David Land Grab | Tikun Olam-???? ????: Make the World a Better Place

Bronner’s Mischaracterization of Hamas Continues | Tikun Olam-???? ????: Make the World a Better Place

There's plenty more.

And Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting has also repeatedly criticized Bronner's journalism, and questioned the ethics of his serving in such a position:

Linkie:
Does NYT's Top Israel Reporter Have a Son in the IDF?

Mustafa, shouldn't you be in mosque for the 5th time today praying for the defeat of the infidel and Allah owning the Earth, instead of posting nonsense about the kafir?

Allah is judging you, Mustafa, and he's not happy. No 72 virgins for you!
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top