Jon Stewart Creates Sea Change on Middle East Coverage
Not long ago, no mainstream media personality would ever allow himself to be associated with anyone who suggests that diplomacy, not war, is the way to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Being thought of as not 100% down with the government of Israel was a career killer. And, if it wasn't, media and show business figures believed it was and that was the same thing.
That era ended with the rise of Jon Stewart, the most trusted television personality in America (and the only one the kids pay attention to). Unlike the Jewish organizational figures who are always screaming that the sky is falling on our Jewish heads, Stewart is anything but scared of his own, or anyone else's, shadow.
Because Jon Stewart is so utterly at home as an American and as a Jew, he can say what he thinks about the Middle East. And that seems to be be that diplomacy is better than killing people and that no lobby should inhibit debate on an issue that affects all Americans.
Jon Stewart, all by himself, has created a sea change in the mass media's approach to the Middle East. Once others in the business see that Stewart says what he thinks -- and not only survives but thrives -- others will do it too.
And who will be the beneficiaries: Americans, Palestinians and, most of all, Israelis. Israel will not survive if it stays on its current course. Stewart understands that and feels compelled to help save Israel from its suicidal policies. And Stewart matters.
My friends and I have been involved in the struggle to help secure Israel for decades. Jon Stewart is the most effective ally we've ever had. In the names of the American people, the Jewish people and the State of Israel, I thank you!!!
Check out yesterday's Daily Show interview. Stewart received a slew of threats when the word went out that he was going to air this segment. He went ahead anyway. J Street and J Stewart all in one week. Bad times for the lobby!
MJ Rosenberg is Senior Fellow on foreign policy at Media Matters Action Network
Mustafa is my dream candidate for President of Palestine.
Would he win if he ran in January? Probably not. But he should run anyway.
October 29, 2009 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Jon Stewart mentioned Iran a couple of times. Once about the threat she poses to Isreal -- "wipe off the face of the earth", and "devloping nuclear weapons", and once about Jews of Iran being forced to leave.
Wipe Off The Map
===========
Just for the record, No Iranian official has ever threatened Israel. First of all the concept is absurd. Supposedly Ahmadinejad, in 2005, quoted Khomeini who said in 1980 that they have a desire to anahilate nuclear-armed Israelis if/when Iran gets the means, which Mossad estimates to be at the ealiest in 2014.
Please, regardless of how often this nonsense is repeated, try and think about it from Turkish, Brazilian, Russian, and Chinese vantage point.
a) what kind of idiot would invite a totally justified pre-emptive holocaust upon themselves?
b) If true, how useless are nukes that even in the face of such provocation and existential threat Israel cannot use her >200 nukes to do something about the threat? Again what kind of idiot would pay any price to acquire such useless weapons?
"The fact that he compared his desired option - the elimination of "the regime occupying Jerusalem" - with the fall of the Shah's regime in Iran makes it crystal clear that he is talking about regime change, not the end of Israel."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/jun/14/post155
"Ahmadinejad did not use that phrase in Persian. He quoted an old saying of Ayatollah Khomeini calling for 'this occupation regime over Jerusalem" to "vanish from the page of time.'"
http://www.juancole.com/2007/06/ahmadinejad-i-am-not-anti-semitic.html
"As we have stressed time and again, while the Islamic Republic of Iran has never threatened nor has nay intention to threaten other nations, nonetheless and in response to any aggression, it will not hesitate to act in self-defense to protect itself and its people in accordance with its inherent right under Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations."
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=91475§ionid=3510304
Developing Nuclear Weapons
==================
In a September 17, 2009 press statement, IAEA stated:
”With respect to a recent media report, the IAEA reiterates that it has no concrete proof that there is or has been a nuclear weapon programme in Iran.”
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/MediaAdvisory/2009/MA200919.html
Jews Forced to Leave Iran
================
Yad Vashem has been considering bestowing its highest honor on a diplomat known as the "Schindler of Iran" for saving Jews during the Holocaust
"Sardari, who headed the Iranian consular office in Nazi-occupied Paris in 1941, saved many Jews during the Holocaust by issuing them blank Iranian passports.?
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411423481&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull
Please also see
http://www.bibijon.org/iranimage/#Israel
November 1, 2009 7:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here is another example of a story that is part of that sea change.
October 29, 2009 10:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, reporting on this would be a sea change. See http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=236070
Who are the terrorists again?
October 30, 2009 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Definitely. Good to see someone noticing this.
But I still think the coverage of Israel and Palestine could be a bit better and the response would lean towards supporting diplomacy more. As it is now it still often sounds like some sort of inevitable conflict that will never be resolved and is totally one side or the other's fault.
October 30, 2009 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Designer silk tie
Looking for a fine mens necktie, see our gifts and accessories including our custom designed silk necktie with self tipping, double loops. Gentleman Joe neckwear has a eye for detail and quality. We are a progressive Online store that has it’s finger firmly on the pulse of the latest fashion and style trends in the new Millennium. We believe that Individual expression is the purest form of cutting edge style and we celebrate your choice to be different. We also understand that there is a certain strength in tradition and without it we would lose our sense of history and foundation. As we grow we will be incorporating many other cutting edge products that will interest those fashion savvy Office tycoons ( gentleman ) and every style conscious metro-wise boy in between. Designer silk necktie Best deals on neckties
Make sure you check back with us often. We are continually sourcing the world for all the accessories that we believe will impress you, at the most reasonable prices coupled with the best services that we can afford you. Here are the varieties of ties we have: Black Necktie - Geometric Dots, Black Necktie - Herringbone, Navy Blue - Solid Striped Necktie, Pink Necktie - Hot ans Solid, Black and Blue Striped Necktie, Blue and Orange striped Necktie, Blue Bengal Striped Necktie, Bold Yellow Striped Necktie, Charcoal Striped Necktie, Black and Silver - Necktie, Brown and Black Tiles - Necktie, Classic Geometric - Silk Necktie, Pink and Blue - Necktie, Red with Squares - Necktie, Green Plaid - Necktie, Black and Grey Plaid - Necktie, Black Squares / White Dots - Necktie, Lots of Purple - Necktie, Blue Paisley, Burgundy with Daisies - Necktie, Maple Leaves - Necktie, Small Crosses - Necktie etc.
October 29, 2009 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
FYI, I just clicked on "Report Abuse" for this commercial spam; recommend others do same, just to ensure that the Webmaster sees it.
October 29, 2009 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I did this and nothing has happened. His 'comment' is still there.
October 29, 2009 11:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The "Report Abuse" button is just that; a report/alert gets sent to whomever runs this thing; it doesn't zap the abusive comment immediately, otherwise there would be a whole lot of malicious mischief going on here.
Having said that, I'm surprised the comment is still here, given how many hours ago I clicked on the button. Could be that they just suspend the spammer's account without removing any of his/her already posted comments. [I've only hit the "Report Abuse" button one or two other times, but don't remember what happened in those cases, other than not seeing the commenter again.]
Anyhoo, thanks for reporting. Very easy to do, even if it doesn't provide immediate gratification beyond the act of clicking. Hopefully they will at least kill the account.
October 30, 2009 12:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
I clicked too, about a minute ago.
October 30, 2009 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
When Jon Stewart said to Tucker Carlson and Paul Begala:
...he crossed the line from being a 21st century Mort Sahl to being the smartest, and most fearless, political observer on television.
I'm delighted he has entered this fray.
October 29, 2009 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
the televised version was the edited version. the original unedited version is no longer available on the dailyshow website. i could no longer find it. the editor has cut out anna balzar's voice in mentioning denying palestinians water, israel destroying homes, and the BDS movement. whoever did the editing in the backroom performed their hasbara function. you can read the comments about the portions edited out in the message board at dailyshow.com.
another annoying thing was that john stewart had a tendency to cut her off, something he does not usually do with guests. i think some of the pressure got to him. adam horowitz was there for the preshow and he mentioned that the dailyshow had gotten alot of flack before the interview and were seriously considering cancelling it. in the pre-show john stewart said that usually they get flack after an episode is shown but with this one they got it before.
all in all though, kudos to john stewart. he could have taken the easy way out and cancelled. he did not. had he cancelled, it would have backfired on him. smart guy!
October 29, 2009 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
correction: the extended interview is available on the dailyshow.com
October 29, 2009 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jon Stewart is Walter Cronkite - he of communist TET victory fame - reincarnated. That's why you believe, that's what you wish for.
October 29, 2009 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
An amazing talent for missing a point. In your case, two, and compounded by conflating the unrelated.
You "conveniently" forget, Cronkite had seen a lot of war before Tet. He knew very well what he was seeing, and the truth (or lack of it) in what the briefers were dispensing in the Five O'Clock Follies. (Google it.)
October 29, 2009 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cronkite reported an American victory as an American defeat. Those are the facts (His broadcast was recorded and is available. The military defeat of the Vietnamese is well-documented). It's also true that his report very significantly reduced our war fighting capabilities. Both Bui Tin and Vo Nguyen Giap commented on the importance of American public opinion in determining the outcome of the war.
If you have different information then link it. Don't tell me to Google it.
October 29, 2009 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Military defeat of the Vietnamese? Well documented? I do not think you understand the meaning of the word defeat.
October 29, 2009 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The TET offensive resulted in no strategic gains for the North Vietnamese and around 8000 dead and many more wounded as opposed to very few losses on our side. That's a military defeat.
However, the United States military had been claiming that the North Vietnamese were incapable of mounting such an offensive, so its credibility was damaged. Walter Cronkite then reported that the war could not be won militarily, that we were in a quagmire, that diplomacy was the only course of action available to us. Given his influence, that pretty much determined the course of the war.
That's well documented. Now what have you got that's different...besides stupid, smart-ass, bone-ignorant remarks?
October 29, 2009 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Well-documented" on Rambo Couch Potato Idiot websites maybe. Let's see some credible documentation in a real book by a serious historian that with close to half a million soldiers over there for the better part of a decade and more bombs dropped than in all of World War II, and the VC still trekking through the jungle anyway, America lost in Vietnam because of something Cronkite said on TV once. It's put up or shut up time, Fantasy World Spiderman.
October 29, 2009 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Tet offensive was one prolonged engagement. The north suffered losses, but it was by no means crippled.
Are you conflating Tet with the entire conflict? That's pretty specious. That would be like stating that the NVA won because of Khe Sanh.
Without a stable and popular southern government, Viet Nam would fall to the NVA without consistent support of US guns and butter. That is not a victory by any stretch.
And you don't know the first thing about war. Idiot.
October 29, 2009 10:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please educate yourselves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Saigon
If this was a victory for the USA, I would hate to see what a defeat would look like.
When one combatant deserts the field of combat and the other takes charge, the one leaving is normally considered the defeated, and the one remaining is usually considered to be the victor.
.
October 30, 2009 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
If only Napoleon had had you around. He could have spun his retreat from Moscow as a victorious homecoming.
October 29, 2009 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you a genius who'se found a way to connect his asshole directly to his mouth...or just an ordinary lawyer?
October 29, 2009 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Peanuts! Peanuts! Get your peanuts here!
October 29, 2009 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't ask you about your diet. I asked for a subtantive response. Come on, you're a lawyer. Show your stuff.
October 29, 2009 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
(Sound of furious Spider eating his own keyboard...while Michael Savage's radio show blares in background.)
October 29, 2009 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll tell you what I damned well please and you'll take it and like it. I have one hell of a lot more information available to me than you seem to, much of it firsthand source material you will likely never see.
You're not only a fool, you're an arrogant fool - the worst kind.
Believe what you want. Since you're seemingly immune to facts, I'll just laugh at you and your flimsy attempts to misrepresent what Vietnam was and how the Tet attacks figured into it.
October 29, 2009 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
You haven't said shit...except that you know more than me. Prove it.
October 29, 2009 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can't handle the proof!
October 29, 2009 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Old Grouch, I understand the urge--but don't feed the trolls.
October 29, 2009 5:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm asking posters to support their assertions with facts. Is that called "feeding the trolls" in progressive-speak?
October 29, 2009 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
You first, vermin.
October 29, 2009 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which statement do you wish me to support?
October 29, 2009 5:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rather than waiting here's the most obvious source for claims of a North Vietnamese military defeat but propaganda victory
The Tet Offensive was a military campaign during the Vietnam War that began on January 31, 1968. Forces of the National Liberation Front for South Vietnam, or Viet Cong, and the People's Army of Vietnam, or North Vietnamese army, fought against the forces of the Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam), the United States, and their allies. The purpose of the offensive was to strike military and civilian command and control centers throughout South Vietnam and to spark a general uprising among the population that would then topple the Saigon government, thus ending the war in a single blow.
The initial attacks stunned allied forces and took them by surprise, but most were quickly contained and beaten back, inflicting massive casualties on communist forces. At Huế intense fighting lasted for a month and the Vietcong executed thousands of residents in the Massacre of Huế. Around the U.S. combat base at Khe Sanh fighting continued for two more months. Although the offensive was a military defeat for the communists, it had a profound effect on the American administration and shocked the American public, which had been led to believe by its political and military leaders that the communists were, due to previous defeats, incapable of launching such a massive effort
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tet_offensive
I don't completely agree with all of it, particularly the motivation for it. I'm sure the North Vietnamese were aware of the effect such an attack would have on the American public and that influenced their thinking. I can support that assertion.
Now, big mouth Grouch. What have you got that I can't handle? I say nothing. I doubt you're capable of thinking coherently enough to put together linked arguments.
October 29, 2009 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's Cronkite complete report made after the TET offensive (again using the most obvious source)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Cronkite#Vietnam_War
He doesn't report our victory. Instead he says the best that can be hoped for is a military stalemate...and that diplomacy is the only solution.
So Zippurpuss, aka shit for brains, and Old Grouch, aka bag of excrement, what have you got?
October 29, 2009 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the Bui Tin interview
http://www.viet-myths.net/BuiTin.htm
Come on all you progressive "big brains" don't just sit there with your thumbs in your mouths.
Show me SOMETHING.
October 29, 2009 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
All this frantic Wikipedia cut and paste offers not a shred of proof for your nitwit Rambo Myth beliefs based on kook conspiracy theory websites, Spiderman. So the communists lost a few thousand men or whatever it was (note the lack of statistics) during Tet. So F-ing what. They were prepared to lose millions over hundreds of years. It was their country, they'd been fighting the Chinese, the Japanese, and the French longe before John Wayne ever heard of John Birch, let alone posed in a green beret. Americans did not care that much, and never in million years ever would. Cronkite or nor Cronkite.
Of course there was the Curtis LeMay option for Indochina: to save the country it was necessary to megaton the hell out of it. Somehow, I don't think the LatterDay Rambo Chronic Maximum C- in History students would be happy with that.
Big Bad Mad Spider has got his poor brainwashed head hopelessly tangled in the Mother of all Web of Lies here.
October 29, 2009 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
They were prepared to lose millions over hundreds of years.
You are a complete fucking lunatic. An absolute idiot.
October 29, 2009 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are full of bluster when your ignorance of basic history is exposed. When your hypocritical scream for documentation is thrown back at you, you flail away at Wikipedia trying in vain to come up with some. When that too falls flat on its face, you resort to childish and baseless name-calling. Some of us here are a bit surprised at having over-estimated your IQ and maturity, but your behaving like a maniac is hardly a credible response. Limp away to lick your wounded legs, if more than 1 or 2 of the 8 are left, Spiderman.
October 29, 2009 10:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Spider obviously formed his opinion about Tet fom right-wing websites, and then desperately dredged up the relevant Wikipadia article.
But he isn't necessarily wrong.
The rather mediocre Wikipedia entry has a very good footnote about Vietcong and NVA intentions...
And that's as far as I'm going on an off-topic thread under Rosenberg's ridiculous over-estimation of Jon Stewart.
October 29, 2009 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not bad Jurgenson. Certainly a mile ahead of that diseased maniac PTroub. But still not right.
The clues were all there in the articles I posted but you rattle-brained, partisans just cannot see straight when challenged.
You're right that the motivations for the attack are disputed with Bui Tin saying one thing and the Wikipedia sources another. For me, Bui Tin is persuasive; the North Vietnamese leadership would have been mad to discount American public opinion.
Walter Cronkite certainly did not cause us to lose the war. I never said he did. What he did do was characterize a win as a loss and report only one side of an argument that was raging in the Pentagon and the White House. TET made it clear that we could not win with the troops in the field and that a massive call-up was required, budget cuts had to be made, and new taxes levied. Johnson wouldn't do it, couldn't do it. His whole strategy had been to fight the war on the cheap...and that strategy had failed.
Had our leadership known what Bui Tin knew they would have come to a different conclusion and fought the war in a different way. But that kind of knowledge is never available in real life.
Which brings me back to my original post. Rosenberg wants Jon Stewart to play the part of Cronkite, to report that the Arabs can't be beaten and the Israelis must be forced to withdraw behind the '67 lines. It's crap. Rosenberg is crap.
October 29, 2009 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Tet offensive is an exceedingly complicated subject, and all sorts of factors like the American annihilation of Hue should probably be memorialized whenever Tet is mentioned, but there's still one very simple question which goes to the heart of the matter:
Could the fool Westmoreland and his staff of boobs beat Giap, no matter how much political support the war retained?
No.
October 29, 2009 8:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
And here I thought you were reasonable.
October 29, 2009 8:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
A typical Likudnik in action here. When all other tricks fail, lie like hell.
Spider 1: "Cronkite reported an American victory as an American defeat. Those are the facts (His broadcast was recorded and is available. The military defeat of the Vietnamese is well-documented). It's also true that his report very significantly reduced our war fighting capabilities. Both Bui Tin and Vo Nguyen Giap commented on the importance of American public opinion in determining the outcome of the war."
Spider 2: "Walter Cronkite certainly did not cause us to lose the war. I never said he did."
We cannot ask the "real" spider to "please stand up" here, because he hasn't got one of eight legs left to stand on.
October 29, 2009 11:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Read President Johnson's reaction to Cronkite's report for an accurate assessment of its effect.
Had Cronkite accurately reported that, while TET was a shock, we had rallied and won and victory was still within our grasp although by no means a sure thing, Johnson would have been faced with a much different reality.
But that reality was still very, very difficult. He could not win without a major change in strategy, a very expensive change which would have required him to level with the American public about the true costs of the war. His advisers were split on whether even this drastic move - calling up the reserves, levying new taxes, curtailing his domestic programs - would guarantee victory. Nor could he see his way clear to an additional troop levy given the level of opposition to the war at home.
Bui Tin makes clear that, had Johnson gone ahead, had he called up the reserves, provided the needed funds and lifted the political constraints which prevented a real fullscale attack on the Ho Chi Minh trail, the Communist position would have become untenable.
No one can say with any certainty what would have happened next. Would we have had a Korean style solution? Would the South have found better leaders? Would the Russians or Chinese have intervened?
Too complicated for you? I know you'd rather believe our cause was never just, the war was always hopeless, the communists were invulnerable and invincible, their losses no matter how great (their losses ARE detailed in the links I posted. you just can't read) could always be repaired. It just ain't so.
And that's the still the problem with the progressive position, with Rosenberg's position. It just ain't so.
October 29, 2009 11:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Bui Tin makes clear that, had Johnson gone ahead, had he called up the reserves, provided the needed funds and lifted the political constraints which prevented a real fullscale attack on the Ho Chi Minh trail, the Communist position would have become untenable."
This is pure speculative fantasy, and proves nothing, even if it came from a credible source, but is Bui Tin credible? Here's what good old Wikipedia says:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bui_Tin
“In a 2000 PBS American Experience forum, he maintained that no American POWs had been tortured during their captivity in North Vietnam during the war.”
And the link for that statement:
American Experience: Return With Honor: Online Forum
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/honor/sfeature/sf_forum_1115.html
What happened to the Vietnamese soldiers, (who tortured American POWs), after the war ended? Were they ever charged with War Crimes?
Matthew Smithers
New Haven, CT
Answered by Bui Tin
According to my knowledge, there isn't any Vietnamese soldiers who had captured and tortured American soldiers. Perhaps this only apply to American pilots who parachuted down to Vietnamese soil and were captured. Or in the cases of those American soldiers who slaughtered civilians and burnt down their houses, there may have been a few who cursed or threw stones at those soldiers, all due to the feverish anger and desire for vengeance inside.
Inside the prisoner's camp, there are government officials, military journalists, and other lieutenant (as well as military officials) who quickly engage in the process of questioning the prisoner to obtain information on strategy of bombings, massacre, attacks, and the enemies' military plans for the following days (i.e. when are the next attacks? what are the next targets of the bombing?). This process may involve a few physical hits like a slap across the face, or threats, in order to obtain the specific confessions. That type of "torture" isn't considered by the Vietnamese to be a violation of the law or justice, in fact, it is deemed to be necessary. That may not be publicly acknowledged, but it is realistically accepted. They do not see that [type of torture] to be a war crime.
I also know that after being imprisoned in the camp "Hanoi Hilton Hotel" a few American pilots proved to be strong-willed and possessed a lot of perseverance. When they had to undergo political reeducation, they refused to accept those brain-washing ideals (for example, they refused to accept that America is a country that had violated many crime wars) but those pilots, like Stockdale, Denton, were punished and were confined into small jail cells. Those treatments, according to me, is a violation of the International Agreement on Prisoner of War, but the Vietnamese refused to accept this fact.
History IS complicated. So is lying about it to cover up one's ignorance, when one is called out on it
October 30, 2009 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.fva.org/0400/story05.htm
Wikipedia also has a rough biography of the man.
October 30, 2009 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, Grouch, you bag of shit. I still haven't heard from you. You said me first. I complied. Where are you? And you, Zippershit. Where are you?
I've now given you at least two sides of the argument and still you have nothing to say. Who said "progressives" have big brains? No brains is more like it.
October 29, 2009 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who is Zippershit? I, for one, have no interest in your Tet topic. Now, go back to your mom's basement.
October 29, 2009 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Zippershit is Zipperupus who challenged me earlier. But you'll do just as well.
October 29, 2009 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ooooh, fiesty!
October 30, 2009 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Way off-topic! Quite an effective way to derail the discussion from the subject of the diary and to discourage lurkers from learning more about a controversial topic.
October 29, 2009 9:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you still wet your pants? Yours is the kind of argument that defines you as a child.
First, those who think it way off topic can ignore it.
Second, I said Rosenberg wanted to cast Stewart as a reincarnated Cronkite...meaning he thought Stewart was influential enough to sway the public with bad or misleading info. That was hardly off-topic...and it was not I who insisted upon defending Cronkite.
October 29, 2009 9:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like a typical child, when your ignorance was exposed (on Tet and Vietnam) you ranted and raved and called people names. Anything to avoid admitting your obvious mistake in opening your big mouth when you didn't know what you were talking about.
October 29, 2009 11:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
you ranted and raved and called people names
Here's how the name calling got started. To my assertions I got the following replies
"An amazing talent for missing a point. In your case, two, and compounded by conflating the unrelated. You "conveniently" forget.."
and
"Military defeat of the Vietnamese? Well documented? I do not think you understand the meaning of the word defeat."
To which I replied
"Now what have you got that's different...besides stupid, smart-ass, bone-ignorant remarks"
Grouch replied with
"I'll tell you what I damned well please and you'll take it and like it. I have one hell of a lot more information available to me than you seem to, much of it firsthand source material you will likely never see. You're not only a fool, you're an arrogant fool - the worst kind. Believe what you want. Since you're seemingly immune to facts, I'll just laugh at you and your flimsy attempts to misrepresent what Vietnam was and how the Tet attacks figured into it."
The format confuses the issue so you'll have to follow the time stamps to verify what I've said.
The rest of your post is pure delusion as well.
October 29, 2009 11:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
There has been no "sea change" of any sort whatsoever on this issue, except in the minds of the lunatic fringe of anti-semites. These people insist on claiming that they have some sort of support from people when there isn't the slightest evidence of that at all. But if they want to continue to delude themselves, that's their privilege. In the real world, virtually the entire world continues to strongly support Israel and its valiant campaign to protect women's rights, human rights, democracy and the rule of law. The entire world, including Muslim Arab states such as Egypt, continue to support the blockade of Hamas. And there isn't a single solitary country that supports the farcical and anti-semitic BDS campaign. Not one. It would be political suicide for any politician to support the actions of bigots. But, like I say, the anti-semites can continue to live in their fantasy world. It doesn't matter. No one takes them seriously, and they will have no impact on the I-P conflict, except to cause the Palestinians to continue to suffer. But then, they don't care about the Palestinians, do they?
October 29, 2009 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your obvious and deeply felt caring for the Palestinians is bringing tears to my eyes!
October 29, 2009 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Deja vu? Do you get the feeling that if Mikepenis lived in Alabama in the 1960s he would be telling us that the "Northern Agitators" and the "Communist NAACP" weren't doing the local blacks any favors?
All bigots are the same. They only have concern about the "other" when the other is docile and knows his/her place.
Notice that Mikepenis hasn't noticed the recent stories about Israeli terrorists destroying olive groves in the West Bank. Notice he hasn't noticed how Israel is using water as a weapon in Gaza and the West Bank.
I bet the saddest day of his life was when F.W. de Klerk handed over the presidential seal to Nelson Mandela.
October 29, 2009 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
the world is watching, including european parliamentarians:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-Rcp3vWNUs
October 29, 2009 8:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
thanks for useful information!
Best regards, Mary, CEO of youtube download
December 16, 2010 8:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
In the real world, virtually the entire world continues to strongly support Israel..
every year, for the past few decades, the UN votes on the "Peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine" in the last one in, 164 nations voted in favor to 7 against. [ LINK 1 ] [ LINK 2 ]
guess who voted against? United States, Israel, Australia, Nauru, Belau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands.
support Israel and its valiant campaign to protect women's rights, human rights, democracy and the rule of law
that would be correct with the following changes:
its valiant campaing to protect jewish women's rights, democracy for jews and and rule of law for jews.
oh yeah... put your worn out anti-semitic card back in your pocket.
October 29, 2009 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Blue: Could you pass on a question to Mikepenis?
If the whole world supports Israel who does the USA have to veto so many UN resolutions?
October 29, 2009 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
"The entire world, including Muslim Arab states such as Egypt, continue to support the blockade of Hamas."
Farcical. The USA pressured Egypt to do that. In fact, the US threatened to cut aid to Egypt if it did not close the border.
That is hardly "support."
October 29, 2009 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uh huh. You mean, like Turkey?
Turkey confirms it barred Israel from military exercise because of Gaza war
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/12/turkey-israel-military-gaza
Here's futher sea change:
Report: Turkey PM says Lieberman threatened to nuke Gaza
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1123646.html
How long can a rogue nuclear power in the ME threaten innocent lives before the world intervenes?
October 29, 2009 8:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
How long can a rogue nuclear power in the ME threaten innocent lives before the world intervenes?
As long as you continue to beat your mother.
October 29, 2009 9:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
You said you wanted facts. There they are.
October 29, 2009 10:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
"rogue" and "innocent" are not facts. They're very political characterizations. That you can't see it says all that needs to be said.
October 30, 2009 12:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Israel is most definitely a rogue nuclear state, in that it is outside of the official nuclear club, and is not party to the NPT. Israel is also in violation of the Symington amendment, which prohibits most U.S. foreign aid to any country found trafficking in nuclear enrichment equipment or technology outside international safeguards.
In the past, Israel had a figleaf of cover by pretending not to have nuclear weapons, however, the cat was let further out of the bag last year by Israeli officials.
There are most certainly innocent people within Gaza. That you think they are guilty and tacitly show your approval for nuking them shows your extreme moral bankruptcy.
October 30, 2009 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll give you one country: Turkey - there are more but you can go find them.
PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan says Israel broke 6 mo. Truce before attack on Gaza
Israel Should Be Barred From UN
The choice is really not about supporting Israel or Palestine. It's about rejecting war and seeing it as a not capable of bringing peace. As a whole Israel isn't capable of thinking outside that box, and needs a new perspective. Apparently they will have to be drug along into it kicking and screaming all the way. Change is hard, even when you know it's the right thing to do.
I saw a kid on TV yesterday that was going to get an H1N1 shot and he was screaming his guts out. The nurse shoved one of those nasal antiviral things up his nose and said you're done. He was left with a surprised look on his face, speechless. I believe that's how it's going to be for Israel. Can't you get behind that?
October 29, 2009 10:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's so moving to read pro-Israel pro-peace comments started with the original MJ post down to Dave Bowman's post.
October 29, 2009 9:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope MJ deletes this thread.
October 29, 2009 9:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
But lally, it's sooo true to form!
October 29, 2009 11:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
the hasbara pushback:
Daily Show under fire for covering Israeli-Palestinian conflict
hey MJ, you're mentioned in the article.
October 29, 2009 9:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
J.S is a brilliant, often courageous, very funny entertainer who has often poked a much needed hole in a lot of inflated egos and topics in need of ridicule.
The Middle East is such a topic.
So, is MJ Rosenberg and Joke Street.
Stewart vs the politics of oil, drugs, history, weapons dealers, and human beings being human beings...
History wins.
24/7
"From the crooked timber of humanity, no staight thing will ever grow..."
--- Emanuel Kant.
"History is all thud and blunder..."
--- James Joyce
So it goes...
October 29, 2009 11:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
RE: Anna Baltzer & Mustafa Barghouti on “The Daily Show”
SEE: “Daily Show under fire for covering Israeli-Palestinian conflict”, By Daniel Tencer, 10/29/09
(excerpt) Jon Stewart’s comedy news show The Daily Show is reportedly under fire from pro-Israeli groups for giving airtime to two pro-Palestinian figures on Wednesday night…
…According to a letter reportedly written by Baltzer and circulated by blogger Eric Johnson, the show “was overwhelmed with angry emails and phone calls prior to the appearance, and up until the last minute it seemed like they might cancel.”...
...The segment drew criticisms from a number of pro-Israeli activists and commenters. “Jon Stewart [had] a couple of disgraceful guests on his show on Wednesday night for a night of Israel bashing,” wrote blogger Israel Matzav. “No, there’s no pro-Israel counterpoint (perhaps he will try to convince us that ISM activist Baltzer – who is Jewish – is meant to provide balance)...
...Baltzer is now urging Daily Show viewers to send letters of support to the show, in an effort to keep the show from being dissuaded from covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the future...
ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://rawstory.com/2009/10/daily-show-israelipalestinian-conflict/
[NOTE - 'Comedy Central' is part of 'MTV Networks' which is part of 'Viacom'.]
VIACOM CONTACT - http://www.viacom.com/contact/Pages/default.aspx
FOR 'SUBJECT' - select 'Viewer Services'
FOR 'SELECT A SHOW OR CATEGORY' - select 'Comedy Central'
MESSAGE - (You may enter up to 500 characters)
As always, we appreciate your feedback.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST IN VIACOM AND OUR FAMILY OF BRANDS.
Viacom Inc.
1515 Broadway
New York, New York 10036
(212) 258-6000
October 30, 2009 12:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
I've changed my mind about deleting this thread.....
The JTA has an article about this show and it is rather appreciative of Jon Stewart's portion of the show. In the tradition of Goldstoning, it's clear that the target is the young, earnest & Jewish Anna Baltzer.
http://blogs.jta.org/telegraph/article/2009/10/29/1008829/debating-israeli-palestinian-issues-on-the-daily-show
Interesting that the campaign to stifle was pre-emptive in this case.
October 30, 2009 3:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a Palestinian take via Ma'an:
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=235807
The article goes on to discuss the edited portions of the segment.
October 30, 2009 3:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/01/26/dropping-a-dime/
October 30, 2009 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Since I don't have the time or the inclination to watch Jon Stewart, I will continue to read what is being posted. Although I am familiar with the name, I find it ironic that a comedian or stand up comic, reaches closer to the Truth, but then, I would expect a "good" stand-up comic to exceed Mort Sahl.
Now, I don't know if this post will make it to the board since my last of a few days ago was censored by the managers/moderators. And yet, I didn't find this surprising since my difference of opinion was on the 'branding' of J-Street.
Just a Passing Thought from here in the Sonoran Desert.
Jaango
October 30, 2009 10:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
You should check out a few clips. He might surprise you.
And yes, it is damn ironic, and a sad statement about our media that Comedy Central is where many go for real news and analysis on TV.
October 30, 2009 10:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
And this thread is a trainwreck.
October 30, 2009 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
my last of a few days ago was censored by the managers/moderators
That's highly unlikely. Did you try to put more than two links in a single comment? If so, ones get an automatic message from that comes with this software that says it's being held by management for approval, but no one here ever takes care of that, and it never gets published. It's simply a spam filter to block spam with lots of links and has nothing to do with content. If you get that message and then you break up the comment with more than two links into two comments, and try again, it will publish.
Moderation here is very rare and doesn't include dealing with individual comments, in my experience of using the site for several years. They depend upon the abuse reports from users and then either say something about a discussion getting out of hand directly on the thread or contact individuals via email. They have banned people after warnings via email but never make announcements about doing it, users only know about it by hearing from those people themselves.
October 30, 2009 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Artappraiser,
Thanks for your response.
The censored message had the statement "Previewing your comment" and ultimately did not make it to the board.
And again, another post to this thread received the same message, and as yet, has not made it to the board.
In the past, this statement has appeared and it's taken anywhere from 24 to 48 hours to post. And I find no fault with time delay.
As to "links" I do not post with links since I find it unnecessary, given the wealth of the Knowledge Base.
And again, my Thanks.
Jaango
October 30, 2009 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
You get Previewing your Comment when you hit the preview button. The preview is for you, to check your comment for mistakes before you publish it. You can preview over and over by hitting it again, which I suspect you have been doing. But you can only publish it by hitting the "submit" button; it won't be published until you do that.
There is no holding of comments here, no one checking them before they are published. Any rare moderation has always been done after comments are published. Longtime readers know management doesn't even read most of the comments threads; actually, they told us straight out they put in the "report abuse" buttons because they didn't have time to read them and must rely on readers to report problems.
If it is not the case that you are hitting "preview" instead of "send," you should not presume you are being "censored," and should instead contact management about a technical problem. They don't pre-censor here, they don't have time to even read what people post.
October 30, 2009 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jaango, Given the absolute dreck that makes it on here without even being flagged let alone censored, I tend to agree that there is probably a technical reason why some of your comments are not posting properly. Hope you can fix the problem; your Sonora perspective offers an interesting and underepresented view here.
October 30, 2009 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK glad to see someone is making sense of it all Wow!
RT
www.complete-privacy.at.tc
October 30, 2009 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjxYPMm4Ru4
A Sea change?
You mean from when Stewart was making jokes about how there will never be peace in the Middle East...
Funny stuff...
So it goes...
October 31, 2009 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was very pleased to find this site.I wanted to thank you for this great read!! Hulu Downloader | iPad Converter
August 17, 2010 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
. Thank you very much for sharing . m2ts files converter from m2ts converter
August 17, 2010 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Like a typical child, when your ignorance was exposed (on Tet and Vietnam) you ranted and raved and called people names. Anything to avoid admitting your obvious mistake in opening your big mouth when you didn't know what you were talking about rezultate live.
September 14, 2010 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I still think the coverage of Israel and Palestine could be a bit better and the response would lean towards supporting diplomacy more. As it is now it still often sounds like some sort of inevitable conflict that will never be resolved and is totally one side or the other's fault. Imobiliare | Dezmembrari auto
February 5, 2011 9:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Having said that, I'm surprised the comment is still here, given how many hours ago I clicked on the button. Could be that they just suspend the spammer's account without removing any of his/her already posted comments. anunturi gratuite
February 5, 2011 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
This article is very interesting. Thank you very much for sharing .
Best regards, Katya, CEO of facebook, openfiler iscsi slow
March 24, 2011 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of high availability virtualization
April 27, 2011 4:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
car shipping, auto transport, car transport, car transportation, vehicle shipping, car shipping.
April 28, 2011 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink