Article

2004-02-26

Israelis, in Raid on Arab Banks, Seize Reputed Terrorist Funds

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Geoffrey M. LaMear 2004-02-26 10:11:33 AM|| || Front Page|| [11137 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I heard coverage of this raid on NPR yesterday. The bias has never been clearer. The time devoted to interviewing/espousing Palestinian commentators and civilians was at least three times more than the time alotted the Israeli viewpoint; there was zero contextualizing of the facts of Palestinian financial corruption (Totenberg or whoever noted that the total was $9 million shekels=$700K vs. the BILLIONS Arafat has embezzled); and zero discussion of the Palestinian terrorist attacks that Israeli suffers from on a DAILY BASIS.

Posted by mjh 2004-2-26 10:27:03 AM|| 2004-2-26 10:27:03 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Army of Steve posted first -- see below. We strike again!

Posted by Steve White 2004-2-26 11:18:05 AM|| 2004-2-26 11:18:05 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 That's pretty harsh there, mjh. If you're really interested, hit npr's website and check out what the Ombudsman has said on the same subject. NPR's coverage of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has been consistently fair. NPR receives complaints about the same coverage from BOTH sides at once. Remember, this is a very difficult and highly charged issue and their unbiased view bothers those who would prefer they vilify one and champion the other. Note: In yesterday's coverage, they stated the facts as they gathered them with no declaration of sympathy for the Palestinians or the Israelis. Do a little research and then come back and re post.

Posted by chainhead 2004-2-26 11:39:39 AM|| 2004-2-26 11:39:39 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 chainhead...I'm not talking about their overall coverage, although their treatment of this story does shed some light on that. Did they even mention the rampant financial corruption that has filtered hundreds of millions of dollars from the PA accounts to Arafat's personal fortune? Do you think any story about the PA banking system should exclude this very relevant fact? Especially when, in the story that I heard, they mention the issue of Israel's wall going up (an issue which is not directly related to an Israeli raid on terrorist accounts in PA banks).

That's not fair. That's not balanced. That's not unbiased. But thanks for trying...

Posted by mjh 2004-2-26 12:33:01 PM|| 2004-2-26 12:33:01 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 BTW, chainhead...I don't appreciate the patronizing tone of your comment. Just because I choose NOT to confer moral equality on the actions of Palestinians and Israelis does not mean I am un-enlightened or poorly researched on the subject.

Further, invoking complaints from both sides of an issue does NOT imply fairness of coverage, when one side of a debate exercises no judgment or restraint in issuing complaints of any kind, while the other has become sufficiently inured to issuing complaints due to the breathtaking lack of sympathy and appreciation their restraint garners from lefty academics and the "enlightened" intelligencia of the post modern, western elite. A class of which you are, no doubt, a proud member.

Posted by mjh 2004-2-26 12:39:12 PM|| 2004-2-26 12:39:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Let me be clear, mjh. My comments were not on your education or views, only on NPR's coverage. I mentioned the fact the neither is happy about NPR's coverage as indicative of the near impossibility of covering the subject in a way acceptable to all, or nearly any.

Additionally, the Israelis didn't claim they conducted their operation due to funds going to pad Arafat's, but in search of funds linked to other terrorist groups. In this regard, I don't see not mentioning Arafat as a huge error on their part.

I don't appreciate being arbitrarily placed in any group simply because I challenge your assertion re NPR. However, I do apologize for anything that came across as patronizing to you. My comment concerning research was only concerning the subject of NPR's coverage, again not your relative education/intelligence.

Posted by chainhead 2004-2-26 1:22:46 PM|| 2004-2-26 1:22:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 Fair enough, chainhead. As you note, it is a subject about which passions flare easily. My patience is thin for the people known as "trolls"...which you clearly are not. I appreciate your input and apologize if I offended by pigeonholing you.

I do take issue with NPR not mentioning Arafat's embezzlement, as they addressed the overall solvency of the PA banking system and implied that Israel's operation was putting that at risk. IMHO, Arafat's looting has put all PA institutions at risk, and merited some mention.

It's frustrating to me that this man who claims to represent a people, and yet impoverishes them for his own enrichment, gets a free pass.

Of course, I may be injecting my own biases and emotion into the debate.

Sorry for flying off the handle. I hate ad hominem attacks, it's a sign of a weak argument, so I apologize.

:)

Posted by mjh 2004-2-26 1:34:59 PM|| 2004-2-26 1:34:59 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 haha.. thanks for the response, mjh. I can appreciate your thin patience for trolls. I agree with you about Arafat. I still don't know why he hasn't been challenged, in any real way, concerning his involvement in the assassination of Noel and Moore (+1 Belgian) in Khartoum back in 1973. Nobel Peace Prize? How much can one man change? Apparently, not much.

Posted by chainhead 2004-2-26 2:13:56 PM|| 2004-2-26 2:13:56 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 im a liberal, who often likes NPR. im not one of the routine liberal bashers here, as many will attest - i voted for clinton twice, and may yet end up voting for Kerry.

That said, i think its abundantly clear that NPR's coverage of the middle east is strongly biased against Israel. I too have seen the ombudsman site - indeed i have complained to them. The fact that people have complained its too pro-Israel tells you nothing, without knowing whos complaining or what their complaint is. I have been on one site where someone said (only half in jest) that the BBC was too pro-American, since it didnt proclaim every day that Bush and Blair were war criminals.

NPR has some folks in the National Bureaus (Daniell Schorr and Scott Simon) who seem sympathetic to a Labor, dovish Israeli point of view. The coverage coming from the NOR reporter in the middle east however, is not even sympathetic to Israeli doves (at least mainstream ones) but is reflexivly hostile to Israel. This is because NPR's foreign editor is Loren Jenkins, who made his career reporting on the Sabra-Shatilla massacres, which he blames on Israel, and which is the lens through which he views the entire mideast.

IIRC, the ombudsman site suggests there is internal controversy in NPR about the mideast coverage (presumably schorr, Scott and some of the other DC folks vs Jenkins) but that the pressure from pro-Israel folks makes it hard to conduct this discussion. Maybe thats true, although its suspiciously self-serving.

Posted by liberalhawk 2004-2-26 2:49:44 PM|| 2004-2-26 2:49:44 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 What would really send them into a hissy fit would be to give the money to the homicide victims. Also I think that this is a great way to conduct the war on terror. Lets say we go over and make a BIG withdrawal from the 1st Terrorist Bank of Beirut!

Posted by Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) 2004-2-26 5:05:41 PM|| 2004-2-26 5:05:41 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 The notion you can report news in a balanced way without bias is false. The problem is not there is bias. The problem is UNIFORMITY of bias in the mainstream media. This is why Fox drives the Left nuts. It breaking with the uniformity of bias and presenting a different bias.

Speaking as a news junkie who now gets 90% of his news from sources like Rantburg, although with not necessarily the same biases as RB. I like the fact I can now choose the bias I want to hear and that may be more than one bias on a single topic.

Posted by phil_b 2004-2-26 6:15:12 PM|| 2004-2-26 6:15:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 NPR = Not Politically Reliable
NPR = Not Particularly Relevant

Whatever term you use, they are a bunch of socialist sympathizers and enablers.

Posted by badanov 2004-2-26 6:53:18 PM|| [http://www.rkka.org] 2004-2-26 6:53:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 I appreciate the dialogue that this subject has drummed up. I realize I am erring to say NPR or any news service can give a truly unbiased view of situations as they really are, but I do think NPR is trying to do the subject justice. Thanks for the information about the correspondents and their backgrounds. I think I need to do a bit more research myself. Haha.. full circle.

:)

Posted by chainhead 2004-2-26 9:48:35 PM|| 2004-2-26 9:48:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 "Unbiased journalism" was invented out of whole cloth in the 1890s, to sell more newspapers.

I started listening to NPR in the early 90s, when I got tired of all the commercial radio stations and just wanted to leave the radio on one station without listening to advertisements. I was shocked at how much time they devoted to Isreali issues. To suggest that they are somehow unbiased is disingenious.

Posted by gromky 2004-2-27 8:01:21 AM|| 2004-2-27 8:01:21 AM|| Front Page Top

08:01 gromky
07:06 Shipman
02:06 SON OF TOLUI
02:02 SON OF TOLUI
01:31 SON OF TOLUI
00:28 Polonius
00:06 Lucky
00:05 Tibor
23:40 Steve White
23:20 GK
23:20 Matt
23:20 CrazyFool
23:18 tu3031
22:55 anymouse
22:53 Old Patriot
22:37 tu3031
22:36 Rawsnacks
22:08 True German Ally
22:04 True German Ally
22:00 Anonymous
21:54 Cyber Sarge
21:52 whitecollar redneck
21:51 Denny
21:48 chainhead