Palestine TV curbs anti-Israel tone

[tinnypriv]

Palestine TV curbs anti-Israel tone
BBC Monitoring, July 9 2003

BBC Monitoring has observed that the official Palestinian television channel has cut back substantially on anti-Israel rhetoric since the ceasefire declared by Palestinian militant groups on 29 June.

...

Palestinian and Israeli officials agreed to set up two committees "to reach an understanding of the concept and forms of incitement," according to the Palestinian news agency Wafa.

"Such programmes are now almost extinct. Instead of incitement and hate passages, the channel broadcasts quiet songs as well as songs in praise of Arafat," says Israel Radio's Arab affairs correspondent.

...

For instance, a phone-in talk show presenter cut off several callers last week after they attempted to express support for suicide attacks or call for the return of lands the Palestinians say were confiscated after Israel became an independent state in 1948.

Palestine TV subsequently broadcast a talk show on incitement which included an unprecedented music video dedicated to Israeli-Palestinian peace.

...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3053565.stm

[Gimel]

1. Israel needs...

the BBC to tell it how the the Palestinian media talks? I think not.

[Violet_Crumble]

2. No...

And nowhere did the article say anything about Israel needs to listen to it. It'd probably be tempting for some right-wing groups and individials in Israel to pretend that this article doesn't exist and to claim that the exact opposite is happening...

Violet...

[bemildred]

3. It's a trick!!!

Lies all of it!
BBC is part of a giant, hidden anti-Israel conspiracy!
Run, run while you can, they are going to come for us all!

[Cassandra]

4. They might be coming for us all but

they're traveling on the "yellow cake" road and may not get here. ;-)

[bemildred]

6. Yeh, being an evil dictator is a lot trickier than it used to be. nt

.

[Herschel]

5. Fine

Now may we change the tone of the Palestinian terrorists?

[Equinox]

7. That comment is not really necessary, IMO.

However, the way I see it, you may remove the extreme elements within Palestinian society by removing the reason they exist. I believe withdrawing to 1967 borders and improving the social conditions within the society will severly limit the extremist elements and strengthen the moderate and peaceful ones.

I see extremes within both societies "terrorizing" each other. Would you agree?

[The Magistrate]

8. A Sound Comment, Sir

The "ultras" of both sides hold the people of both sides hostage in this matter. Certainly the surest way to reduce the support extreme elements enjoy in either polity is to reduce the agravations which convince many people those elements are necessary. What would drastically reduce support for armed irregular bodies in Arab Palestine is an end to settlement activity: what would drastically reduce the support enjoyed by Likud in Israel is a cessation of violent attacks against the people of Israel.

Welcome to the forum, Sir. You bid fair toward making a useful contribution to our disscussions here.

[drdon326]

9. hey, hey, hey ...welcome back.

we missed you

don

[Darranar]

11. Yes, welcome back...

Your wise words have been missed on this forum.

[bemildred]

26. Welcome back, Sir.

The provision of alternate useful activities for all those
young people would seem like a good thing, too. You know,
schools, jobs, teen centers, things like that.
:-)

[Andromeda]

30. Magistrate...

I hope you're feeling better and I'm glad you're back. Your posts always provide the objectivity and sane analysis this forum needs.

[Darranar]

10. I basically agree...

I do not think the Israelis should give up East Jerusalem or the Golan Heights, for various reasons, but the reast of the conquered land that has not yet been given back should be returned and made into a Palestinian state.

I also agree that the extremists within both societies are responsible for most of the violence, and need to be stopped. In the case of the Israelis, the settlers need to be removed, and the right-wing bloc in the government needs to be weakened. In the case of the Palestinians, the terrorist infastructure and organizations need to be destroyed.

By the way, welcome to the forum! Your views on the matter seem to be reasonable, and another reasonable voice is important.

[tinnypriv]

12. Where is East Jerusalem?

n/t

[Darranar]

16. The Old City

is what I am refering to here. The part of the city that Israel liberated/conquered in 1967.

[tinnypriv]

18. Right

The Old City is a very small area of East J. So, if you mean to say that Israel should be allowed to keep the Old City, that is a very different matter than saying it should be allowed to keep all of East J.

Further, what Israel defines as Jerusalem is Greater Jerusalem incorporating West J, East J and the surrounding "neighbourhoods" (read: settlements). When it says it is keeping the city united, it means it is intending to annex territory almost to Jericho.

[Darranar]

20. I will clarify my point...

The Old City and the new-East and West-should be united as the capital of Israel. The settlements for a few miles around Jerusalem should also be kept, as a barrier against those wishing to strike at the capital. No more than that should be kept of the West Bank.

[tinnypriv]

22. Right

For a few miles you say? Okay.

I'll make it easier. You can tick which ones you propose Israel should keep (what to do with the predominately Arab East J we'll put aside):

Talpiyyot
Har Homa
Gilo
Ma'ale Adummim
Kefar Adummim
Mizpe Yeriho
Vered Yeriho
Ramat Shlomo
Ramot Allon
Pisgat Ze'ev
Neve Ya'aqov
Almon
Mishor Adummim

Two more: should Israel be allowed to keep Giv'at Ze'ev and Ari'el?

Oh, and what boundaries would you define for these settlements? Would they be Israeli territory? If so, what method do you propose for Palestinians wishing to travel between Abu Dis and, oh Hizma (to pick one at random)?

What of the Palestinains in East J (I assume you'd want it annexed). Should they get Israeli citizenship?

You say "no more than that" should be kept of the West Bank. Are you therefore opposed to the planned separation wall, which has taken huge swathes of land around Qalqiliya?

Sorry for so many questions.

[Darranar]

24. Can you find a map?

Israeli settlement geography is no specialty of mine. I believe that the Palestinians of East Jerusalem have Israeli citizenship already (they are among the Israeli Arab population.) I think they should keep it and should not be moved.

Yes, I am against the planned seperation wall.

The area around Jerusalem should be kept, any settlements within should be kept, and any Palestinians within should be offered Israeli citizenship.

[tinnypriv]

27. Here you are

http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/Land_Grab_Map.asp

Like I said, pick which ones you think Israel should be allowed to keep.

[Darranar]

29. Thanks...

that map still lacks names. Israel should keep most of the red and black areas on the map near East Jerusalem, and maybe a tiny bit of the blue, but no more.

[tinnypriv]

28. In addition

You're incorrect - the Palestinians of East Jerusalem are largely not Israeli citizens. They have identity cards, but not citizenship. The small number who are citzens are those who have pledged alligence to the state of Israel.

There are numerous problems with that, and important legal discriminatory differences between identity cards/citizenship (matters related to international law, Knesset elections etc, too detailed to go into here).

For more information I suggest you study the central Israeli Supreme Court decision on this topic ('Awad, by Justice Barak).

[Equinox]

13. Thank you all for the welcome.

I believe that there must be away where the "moderates" on both sides can meet and shake hands. It's advantageous for both societies.

I agree with the poster above that the extremists on both sides have hijacked the notion of peace for their own nefarious ends.

[Herschel]

14. Incorrect

Israel bowing to Palestinian terror by retreating to the 1967 borders is not only a fantasy, but an invitation to more terror. It may well embolden the terrorists and those that support them. You believe they will love Israel then? Please! No, Palestinians are not victims of terror. You know the difference.

[Darranar]

17. It wouldn't be bowing to terror, my friend...

it would be making a move for peace. Though I agree that the action could incite more terror, many moderate Palestinians would be happy then. The PA-sponsored terrorism would hopefully stop, and the terrorists that do act will be (hopefully) condemned by the entire international community, sincerely and with haste. They will also lack a considerable amount of the support they have now, even if it is only sympathy, as is seen occasionally on these boards.

Though it is true that Palestinians are not victims of Israeli terror, or at least not as much as they are made out to be, they are victims of terror: Palestinian terror, in more ways then one. Many of the innocent Palestinians who die are shot not by israelis but by Palestinians. Additionally, Araft and other corrupt terrorists in the PA exploit the people and manage to pocket quite a bit of the foreign aid that should be pouring in to the area.

[tinnypriv]

19. Define "many"

Figures please.

I have the actual figures right here. We can compare.

[Darranar]

21. Sorry...

I don't memorize this stuff whenever I read it, and if I find a website that has them, you'll accuse it of bias.

I would go as far to say that half of the Palestinian civilians killed died in "collateral damage" by Palestinian terrorists.

[tinnypriv]

23. I'm absolutely astounded

I really don't have any words to say to that, other than: check the red cross figures for yourself.

BTW, I wouldn't accuse any site of "bias" (not sure I've used the term, I don't think it means much). I'll take into account what it has previously published, who owns it etc. but if it has a record of publishing verified facts or reasonable interpretations of fact, then I'll take it seriously (as should others).

For instance, I often cite Israeli sources. Maybe a fanatic anti-semite would say that displays "bias", but surely no serious person would. The same applies visa versa.

For example, somebody not interested in debating a topic could attack me for often citing "6 Days of War" by Michael B. Oren. He is a conservative, right-wing Israeli-American who has praised Ariel Sharon for showing "restraint" and who thinks the USS Liberty attack was an accident. Same goes for citations to Benny Morris, who thinks forced transfer of the Palestinians is morally acceptable.

I can only point out that this is just an internet forum and nothing can be proved (nor can it in real life). You simply select stated facts from sources and determine their credibility for yourself. I'm not sure there is any magic formula to short-cut doing that. Honest people, however, recognise that. Others do not.

[Darranar]

25. To the Red Cross...

what is the difference between a Palestinian shot dead by an Israeli or one shot dead by a Palestinian terrorist? There are no accurate facts on the matter, due to the fact that there is no real way to distinguish the dead based on who killed them. I surmise based on what I have read on Jenin and other such battles along with what I know about confusion in battles and friendly fire.

[Herschel]

15. "PA Incitement Against Israel Continues"

http://www.thejewishpress.com/news_article.asp?article=2616

"Although Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom said last week that Anti-Israel incitement within the Palestinian Authority had dropped, Itamar Marcus of Palestinian Media Watch told The Jewish Press Tuesday that the quantity of incitement may have diminished, but not the quality.

“We have seen a measure of positive change in the degree of anti-Israeli incitement and hatred,” Shalom was widely quoted as saying. But Marcus pointed out that Shalom may have been referring only to the amount of time Palestinian TV has allotted to incitement.

If Palestinian TV previously allotted three hours for incitement, now it airs only one hour, but the message is the same: the destruction of Israel and the glorification of the suicide bombers, Marcus said. Nothing essentially has changed in terms of educating the “Palestinian street” not to hate Israel and work for its destruction, he added.

Marcus cited as an example a graduation ceremony at a Palestinian school last week in which the children were singing songs calling for the destruction of Israel.

The event, which was aired on Palestinian TV, included a song with the following words:

“With words and with a rifle we will sing. From Jerusalem to Gaza, Ramallah, Al Bira, Haifa, Jaffa, and Ramla. There is no alternative even if they promise us the Garden of Eden. The sound of the submachine gun is heard. We will live and die only that our homeland should return to us. I am a Palestinian. My weapon is the stone and the knife.

Marcus noted that there is no sincere desire on the part of the Palestinian leadership to change the message; if there were, the schoolbooks could be rewritten overnight. They could include Israel in maps used in Palestinian schools and teach recognition of Israel. Right now, he said, they actively teach non-recognition and hatred."

Some so quickly believed this had changed. Oh, my.