Media Fails to Ask: Who Really Wants Peace?
September 27, 2011 13:42 by Simon Plosker
While events at the United Nations on Friday generated many column inches in the international media, very few read between the lines and looked carefully at the actual contents of Palestinian PM Mahmoud Abbas’s and Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s speeches.
Instead, we were treated to headlines proclaiming the “historic” moment as Abbas called for a Palestinian state, and photographs of celebrations in Ramallah. But what if Abbas’s and Netanyahu’s speeches called into question the misleading media narrative that Israel is the obstacle to peace?
A “word cloud” of the contents serves to illustrate what both leaders chose to emphasize. Take a look at how Netanyahu emphasized “peace” (44 times in fact) and mentioned the Palestinians on many occasions. Contrast this with Abbas, whose speech contained nothing in the way of conciliatory language with little emphasis on peace (26 times) or addressing Israel, the state with whom the Palestinians must make peace with.
Word Cloud of Netanyahu's UN Speech
Word Cloud of Abbas's UN Speech
While Netanyahu reached out his hand to Israel’s neighbors and the Palestinians, Abbas not only dispensed with any conciliatory statements but actually came out with statements and claims that the media chose to ignore.
- Abbas referred to 63 years of Palestinian suffering under “occupation” – the implication being that the birth of the Israeli state in 1948 is the real issue rather than Israeli control over the West Bank and Gaza Strip which began in 1967 following the Six Day War.
- Abbas spoke of the importance of the Holy Land to both the Christian and Muslim religions failing to even acknowledge the undeniable and historical connection of the region to Judaism.
- Abbas spoke of Israeli “ethnic cleansing” and “apartheid” and then had the gall to claim that he was not interested in delegitimizing Israel. Of course, such language has been at the forefront of efforts to do just that.
Indeed, while Netanyahu’s speech got very little coverage, why are question marks raised over the credibility of his words while obvious signals in Abbas’s speech are virtually ignored?
HEAR HR’S MANAGING EDITOR DISCUSSING THE MEDIA AND THE UN SPEECHES
HonestReporting Managing Editor Simon Plosker appeared on Rusty Mike Radio, Israel’s English-language station, to discuss how the media covered the speeches at the UN.
Click here or on the image to listen.
Barbara Paolucci
4:19 pm
Sep 27, 2011
I think its important to make public the fact that there was a treaty between the Arabs and Jews known as the Balfour Treaty – signed in 1917 long before the UN took up statehood for Israel, granted in 1947. Palestinians need to enter into a binding treaty with Israel before the UN can even entertain the idea of granting statehood to Palestine.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
81 
6
David Pinto
5:12 pm
Sep 27, 2011
The first poster refers to a treaty signed in 1917 between Arabs and Jews known as the Balfour Treaty. To the best of my knowledge, there is no such treaty. I believe the poster is referring to the Balfour Declaration, which said:
His Majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
49 
0
Ana
4:29 pm
Sep 27, 2011
After Abba’s speech, there were thunderous applauses which brought tear sto my eyes to see that the whole world is set on the destruction of Israel. No one seems to see the real motive behind the Palestine’s desire for Statehood. Why Jerusalem, which is the Capital of Israel? Why not some other land? Wake up people, Wake up Israel, there will never be any peace in the Middle East until the Prince of Peace comes and set up His Throne in Jerusalem. All Israel would gain from the so-called peace with the Arabs, would be another Gaza which brought their enemy rockets closer to Israeli homes and killed and maimed more of Israel’s citizens. As the Holy Bible states “All nations will turn against Israel” in the end time, but fear not GOD ALMIGHTY WILL fight in your defense and guess who will win? People, stand with God’s people whereby you will be blessed. Remember in the Book of Genesis, God promise to bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel. Wouldn’t you rather be blessed of God than to be curse? God call’s Israel the “Apple of His Eye”, think it over and then you decide. God bless!!!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
59 
5
Erica Fineberg
4:31 pm
Sep 27, 2011
Israel has got to have the worlds worst PR. Why is this information not being distributed to all the journalists who have battered Israel. The only US based paper that had some lean towards Israel is the Wall Street Journal. Preaching to the choir (Israeli media) will not reach the world. The only way to get Israel some positive points is to bombard the international media with the truth on a consistent and on-going basis. Why is this not being done?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
57 
1
John
9:05 pm
Sep 27, 2011
Israel’s PR is not the issue. Bombarding the world media will not help either. Israels predicament as well as the predicament of the Jews is that we are viewed as “Scapegoats” for anything that goes wrong or when someone or some group cannot get it’s way. This kind of thinking has been going on for many hundreds/thousands of years and the media which is dominated by mostly left wing journalists who continue to foster such thinking.
Lies about Israel and Jews have been told so many times that they are considered gospel truth by many groups. Once people are so poisoned by this, they become automotons that cannot think objectively or think for themselves. If a highly regarded journalist says something is so, then it is taken as gospel truth, even if what is said is unbalanced.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
24 
1
» Media Fails to Ask: Who Really Wants Peace? Freedom Alert!: Defending American Freedom by exposing Radical Islam, Socialist, Liberals, and all the Enemies of Freedom, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness!
4:47 pm
Sep 27, 2011
[...] article can be viewed at Media Fails to Ask: Who Really Wants Peace? on [...]
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
4 
0
Dr. Harry Hamburger
4:50 pm
Sep 27, 2011
Who wants peace is not the real question. How can there be peace between the arabs and Israel when Israel does not exist? Every country in the world has defined borders, which defines their particular territory. Since 1948, Israel has NEVER declared a border, rather they have continuously given land for peace, which resulted in more wars. Now that the Palestinians have declared they wish a country, it is time for the Israeli government to declare what their borders are. Untill then, Israel only exists in the mind of it’s enemies, which is no existance at all!
Hot debate. What do you think?
11 
15
katt
5:05 pm
Sep 27, 2011
The Balfour Declaration/Treaty was mentioned. Gee, wasn’t Jordan set aside as a ‘homeland’ for the ‘palestinian’ people (if that’s what they call themselves, OK then) So, why are they not living there?!!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
54 
1
Roger G. Bensman
5:12 pm
Sep 27, 2011
Here are the two cogent points:
1. Around our circle, we use exclusively the media terms OLD and NEW MEDIA. To get into the 21st century, you will use these terms as well. Allow me to define. Old Media comprises a steadily shrinking and declining uninfluential media consisting of such outlets as the LA and NY Times newspapers(both in insufferably terrible financial condition and small numbers of readers), New Yorker and Newsweek in the magazine category, ABC,NBC,CBS, CNN, MSNBC in the TV category. Insignifican presense on the ‘Net and radio.. Basically they all play to a steadily smaller (20% and getting littler) audience. They don’t count for much anymore.
The New Media consists of news papers like the Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, New York Post, TV such as Fox 1 and 2, CNBC Kudlow Hour, magazines such as the National Review and Weekly Standard, ‘Net presence, such as PajamasMedia, Beck, and Breitbart, and others, radio talk dominated by Conservatives. This New Media plays to audience of probably 60%. Its influence is growing, financially strong, and doesn’t give anybody, lefty or righty passes. They tend to be pro-Israel. For Jews who are not of the Self-Loather category, the New Media is the place to be.
2. As to who wants peace, who really cares. Israel has the best peace it is ever going to get and we Jews are strong enough and confident enough to control our own destiny here in the 21st Century. Go back to revisit just what the unners can in fact do for an entity. Here is what the UNSC can do: they can ENABLE an entity to DECLARE itself a State. The unners cannot create one. That is what happened back in ’47. The Jewish entity(Yeshuv) declared itself an independent soverign state and prepared to defend that new Country. It applied for membership in the unners and was accepted. End of story. The arab entity(no name in fact) was ENABLED. It never got the chance to declare itself anything. The arab countries nixed that and went to war against Israel. They lost. The opportunity passed.
Fast forward to the 21st Century. There is no land left in the old defunct Mandate. the eastern portion is taken up by a sovereign state called Jordan and the western area is all Israel, with leftover arabs squatting on lost lands called Administered Territories of Israel.
3. The ramallah/gaza arabs can obtain an ENABLING resolution to establish a state—-which in the recent Wall Street Journal, TheAbbas stated he did not want—and then those arabs must declare a state. There is no unsettled land. In event they go for land Israel controls, they end up with a state under Israel jurisdiction! Good luck on that. Dead end. They go to the UNGA, they get an upgrade on observerstatus, call it non-voting memberstate with no boundaries or under Israel control again.
That is what TheAbbass wants, so he can continue the war against the Jews byond military and into the specialized unner agencies, forums, courts, committees, gatherings, and the like with complaints, forms of lawfare, diplofare, and pr-fare, arrest warrents, and so forth. Again, good luck with that. Israel is strong and can handle that. So, again, a dead end.
Lastly, there is the issue of pressure on Israel to withdraw and allow the full-blown establishment of a terrorist state at war with it. Could happen, but I don’t think so. One Holocaust is sufficient for our People and even the Self-Loather Jews like Livni might have to stand shoulder to shoulder with all of Israel to preserve The Land.
We await further news……
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
28 
0
Kristy Lonestar
5:24 pm
Sep 27, 2011
Abu Mazen wants nothing more than to “push Jews into the sea” and that is why he refuses to recognize Israel. If the Arabs had wanted land, they could have had it decades ago, but they chose not to pursue statehood. Two Jordanian kings have stated that “Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan”, so why those Arabs who live in Israel aren’t living in Jordan is beyond me.
Think about it. The Arab World has what, 22 countries? Most are enemies surrounding tiny Israel, and they have so much more land than the Jewish people! Israel has already given way too much of her land for peace, as the boundaries of Israel that God promised to Abraham extend into Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. And they want MORE land? No.
The “Palestinians”, in truth Arabs who live in Israel, don’t even call Jerusalem by her rightful name. Jerusalem is al-Quds to them, and is not even their holy site. Mecca and Medina are, and they turn their backs to the Jewish holy site while they face east to Mecca to pray. How dare they insist that Jerusalem be their capital?
While some delegates of the UN walked out during Ahmadinejad’s speech, many more stayed. Abbas got standing ovations and Bibi got none. That tells me that the United Nations has no business here in America, and we should cut off all funding to them immediately, as well as evict them from New York. They want another building here? Paid for by American taxpayer money? I don’t think so, and will do everything I can to prevent it.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
48 
2
Henry Federman
5:52 pm
Sep 27, 2011
The Arabs are just following the old nazi adage that if you tell a lie big enough and often enough people will believe it.It seems to be working,a lot of countries are falling for it,I just read that now they are claiming that Jesus was a Palestinian and so was Judah Ben Hur they claim he was a palestinian patriot.Eventually some people will believe that.Israel better start with better propaganda,I thought that we Jews were smarter than that to be taken over by that kind of garbage!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
24 
0
Nigel Blumenthal
6:16 pm
Sep 27, 2011
Henry, you write “I thought that we Jews were smarter than that to be taken over by that kind of garbage!”.
Most of us are. It’s the rest of the world that we need to worry about. And they clearly are not.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
24 
0
Ros
6:27 pm
Sep 27, 2011
I don’t think that this has anything at all to do with Israeli PR. Look, Bibi just gave a blinder of a speech at the UN. Full of the truth. Full of facts that relate to the situation as it is. Apart from those ‘friends’ of Israel who believed him, the rest turned their faces away or else walked out. There’s just so much that Israel can do on the PR front. We just have to understand that the world hates Jews. Hates our success and our remarkable ability simply to survive. You have to wonder at ‘newspapers’ like the Guardian that spews out anti-Israel and anti-Semitic articles and pieces day in and day out. Who’s paying their editorial for that? Nobody wants good news stories. Even Tim Marshall at Sky, probably the most balanced newspaperman around, says that they are a ‘hard news’ channel and won’t publish good news stories about Israel.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
22 
0
Stanley Tee
7:52 pm
Sep 27, 2011
Ros, I agree completely. The biggest problem is that because Netanyahu’s speech was “full of the truth” and “full of facts”, the rest of the world considers him right wing! That’s the true sickness here. Tell the truth instead of the politically correct, generally accepted nonsense, and you are a fundamentalist.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
16 
0
Isabella1709
7:05 pm
Oct 12, 2011
Israel’s plight does not fall on deaf ears within the conservative community in America. We recognize that the progressives have dominated collegate journalism and communications programs for decades and consequently todays media is dominated by these people that only see their own ultra liberal point of view. Prior to talk radio and Fox News we of course had the same problem, and to a great extent still do. Our message of small government and fiscal responsitility is demonized by the main stream media that is finally losing it’s grip on the public, but it has taken economic cricus and a blatantly marxist president for people to wake them up. The vote is still out on the Jewish community that consistantly and inexplicably always votes liberal, and is still only down to 50% that still support Obama. Go figure.
I continually point this out to my supposedly conservative newspaper yet still they import stories on Israel from the Associated Press and never bother to research them for accuracy. No wonder Americans only get the Palestinian point of view. Yet the other major newspaper here is so far to the left that is out of the question just for local news. No wonder they are all going out of business.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
Brent Pudsey
7:02 pm
Sep 27, 2011
The world needs to be less bias and more willing to look at the issues throughly to avoid media bias. It is disconcerting that a leader such as Abbas can be considered concilatory and tolerant when in fact he offers no peace , but only strained discussion. This is why the international community needs to act to protect Israel from a sworn enemy who refuses to acknowledge her existence.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
13 
0
Mary
8:04 pm
Sep 27, 2011
The main problem is that history is forgotten: Israel did not just begin with the UN partition in 1948 nor was is establishment the result of WWII. Below is an excerpt from the Balfour Declaration (a letter not a treaty)
“His Majesty’s Government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”
That said, remember that we Jews have always been subjected to anti-semitism. The Israeli govt lost the media campaign years ago. People like to latch on to an “oppressed population” and the arabs have fed into that. The Israeli govt felt that their campaign could be better served by dealing directly with legislaturers not with the general population. As a matter of fact, the term “Palestinian” has not legally existed since the end of the mandate and the creation of the State of Israel; it is just another PR term. The fact that a “Palestinian” state was turned down as recently as 2000 says alot. Their charter, their arab-language TV and newspapers and other documents all call for the destruction of Isael. But the general population only hear sound bites.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
13 
0
r.eluchans
11:56 pm
Sep 27, 2011
the media didn’t forget to ask who wants peace; the are supporting the arabs illegally occupying the land of Israel; they do not want to base their report on historical facts, and just go where they can make more money selling the “news” regardless if that is a bucnh of lies like Abbas told UN, maliciously’. We know what the arabs want: to get Israel out of its land and installe an islamic state, based on “holy imuslim dictators’: arab spring?…palestinian spring?.. give me a break!
western media seem to have lost all moral values at this point…disgusting!
The Weatern nations appears to be in total decadence..and Muslims will take advantage of it; and the UN?: big joke…a disfunctional organization which forgot what ethics mean
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
6 
2
Sanford D. Horn
2:21 am
Sep 28, 2011
Veto Palestinian Homeland
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
September 19, 2011
There have been myriad on-line petitions asking signatories to demand the United Nations deny granting statehood status to the so-called Palestinian people. I have not signed a single one of them.
Before anyone become apoplectic in a knee-jerk reaction that I, a strong, lifelong supporter of Israel, would support such a lugubrious notion of granting any sense of legitimacy to a group who continues to have as part of its charter the ultimate destruction of the State of Israel, one must understand the fatal flaw of the petitions.
The petitions call for a two-state solution with a Palestinian homeland side by side with Israel upon a change in the Palestinian Authority charter as well as a recognition of the Jewish state and its right to exist.
This is a flawed process as it is rewarding the bad behavior of the so-called Palestinian people – decades of terror/homicide attacks and bombings on innocent Israeli men, women and children. And I say so-called Palestinian people as what exists are generations of refugees rejected by nearly two dozen Arab nations who could easily have absorbed these people years ago and avoided the constant bloodshed that has existed between the attackers and the attacked.
Historically speaking, the so-called Palestinian people should be calling Jordan their home. And it begs the question, if 22 nations have rejected their Arab brethren, why should tiny Israel, roughly the size of New Jersey, be responsible for giving a home to people hell bent on the destruction of Israel and the Jewish people?
The United Nations, already an irrelevant body for years, will no doubt attempt, to the best of its so-called powers, grant statehood to the so-called Palestinian people later this week. The Obama administration, via Secretary of State Hillary Clinton MUST use its veto via the Security Council to prevent this from occurring.
This upcoming vote clearly is a hand-wringer for Obama personally, as has been evidenced by his support of a Palestinian homeland and his vile treatment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. On the one hand, Obama, who already has a fractious relationship with Israel and American Jewish voters, needs to display some backbone and instruct Secretary Clinton to cast a veto. Yet, he personally would like to do just the opposite – and this is what Jewish voters MUST remember come November 2012.
Should the unthinkable occur, and the so-called Palestinian people be granted this undeserved homeland, the United States should immediately rescind the roughly $500 million in aid given to them. Why the so-called Palestinians are given one red cent of American tax-paying dollars in the first place is unconscionable.
Additionally, the United States should not just leave the UN, it should boot the entire insignificant organization out of this country, demand all debts be paid under the penalty of withholding additional aid to any nation failing to acquiesce. Obama claims he is seeking cost-cutting ideas. The United States provides roughly 25 percent of the funding that keeps the typically anti-American United Nations afloat. There are 193 member nations. All things being equal, and Obama is a major advocate of spreading the wealth around, the United States financial obligation should be around one half of one percent, not the backbreaking 25 percent it kicks in at present.
The League of Nations failed and the time has come to say adios, sayonara, ciao, viszlat, zai jian, yasou, totsiens, aloha and shalom to the United Nations. Buh-bye.
Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
11 
1
philip
11:01 am
Sep 28, 2011
1) There were no ‘Palestinians’ until 1967 when Arafat made the name ‘official’. Until then they were all Jordanians For whatever reason, Arafat’s statement was not questioned.
2) While there has always been antisemitism, it is now supported more and more by more and more. Very Scriptural in the end times.
3) Hold on there dear Israel – your Messiah will return with glory and power!
From one of Shaul’s ‘new men’.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0
Harvey Rogers
7:33 pm
Sep 28, 2011
I am seriously concerned with the possibility that the world is in jeopardy of being destroyed.
So much of the world irrationally favors the Muslims vs Israel that the Muslims will be emboldened like the Nazi’s and the Japanese militarists were in the 1930′s. Both of them had the impression that the democratic world lacked the will and strength to successfully oppose them. This confidence caused them to take steps toward world conquest.
When the free world finally banded together and and forcefully opposed them, reality set in. In 1945 Japan and Germany lay in smoldering ruins, more than 40 million people were dead, mjillions were seriously injured, millions had undergone catastrophic suffering, an untold millions of innocent people were in such terrible condition that they would soon die. People lackied food and clothing and had psychological problems that would impinge on the rest of their lives.
There are many who believe that this could have been avoided to a large extent if the evil governments had been confronted and stopped early on. I share that belief. Today as the evil forces state their intentions and take steps to implement their aims the world fails to take the necessary actions to stop them. In the case of the current evil regimes the same principles as in the 1930′s holds true.
Either stop them now, or pay the extreme cosequences later. Now the consequences could well be worse due to the A- Bombs that could start flying and poison the atmosphere and end all life on the planet.
All it takes is one evil madman, (Adminidijad) to put the forces in motion.
Harvey Rogers
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
4 
0
Eric
3:52 am
Oct 02, 2011
This isTHE most important issue in the debate regarding Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“DO THE PALESTINIANS SEE PEACE AS A VALUE???”
The answer is unfortunately NO!!!
If you see peace as a value you are willing to pay a hefty price for it.Israel has time and again given up large territorial areas for peace. The Palestinians have never been required to make concrete land concessions for peace.
The only way to be sure the Palestinians are truely committed to peace is if they are willing to accept only 50% of The WB.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0