Scriblerus the Gharkad tree
has only 6 branches,

i would ascibe this as the main reason the media barely is covering the gaza slaughter issue's..[the reason for the distorted media lens]

i recall in the old tesiment the stars of media and sharon must fall

might be relitive in these times

http://www.uwm.edu/People/woodsa/chart.html

In 1983,50 corporations controlled the vast majority of all news media in the U.S. At the time, Ben Bagdikian was called "alarmist" for pointing this out in his book,The Media Monopoly.

In his 4th edition, published in 1992,he wrote "in the U.S., fewer than two dozen of these extraordinary creatures own and operate 90% of the mass media" -- controlling almost all of America's newspapers, magazines, TV and radio stations, books, records, movies, videos, wire services and photo agencies.

He predicted then that eventually this number would fall to about half a dozen companies. This was greeted with skepticism at the time. When the 6th edition of The Media Monopoly was published in 2000, the number had fallen to six.

Since then, there have been more mergers and the scope has expanded to include new media like the Internet market. More than 1 in 4 Internet users in the U.S. now log in with AOL Time-Warner, the world's largest media corporation.

In 2004, Bagdikian's revised and expanded book, The New Media Monopoly, shows that only 5 huge corporations -- Time Warner, Disney, Murdoch's News Corporation, Bertelsmann of Germany, and Viacom (formerly CBS) -- now control most of the media industry in the U.S. General Electric's NBC is a close sixth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentration_of_media_ownership

us media is controlled by 5 coorperations

http://www.corporations.org/media/

Dear ‘one under god’, thank you for the information that Garkhad tree has only 6 branches. Clearly this only highlights the extent to which malevolent forces must be involved in Israel’s continued existence. How else to explain how 7 million people are able to hide under 6 branches. It must be the devil’s work.

Alas, the death of irony! QED.

PaulL, Thanks for your post. You say "my sentiments are admirable", for which I thank you, but does it not follow, therefore, that yours are not? You have listed several points regarding why Israel feels threatened, and I cannot disagree with the essence of the points you are making. Both sides feel threatened by the other, both with good reason. There is conflict. We are not denying this. I am proposing better efforts towards peace, resolving the conflict, without resorting to violence. A very difficult ask, I admit, but one which is nevertheless possible. The difference between you and me, I think, can be summarised by as follows: I want to continue attempting that peace process, you are exhausted by it all and wish to resolve by force, resulting in death, maiming and injury. I hope you are not right, though I cannot guarantee that you are wrong.
I am still buoyed by the fact that we did come reasonably close back in 1994 when Arafat, Rabin and Peres shared the peace prize. That foundered over the carve up of Jerusalem (religion is always a problem!) and then Rabin was assassinated by a right-wing Israeli (a hero to many Israelis today, because they did not, and do not, want concessions made).
Perhaps, soon, the right mix of leaders will arrive; leaders who search for justice and peace, rather than victory. They are certainly not there now, nor in sight. Bush was never a help, and the likes of Netanyahu, Olmert and their cohorts can smell the blood of victory. Abbas seems as if he could be right for the occasion; most Palistinians do seem to have had the fight crushed out of them. Obama is not likely to make things much better, because he too will rely on the votes of American Jews.
You can tell I am not terribly optimistic, but as you agree, "my sentiments are admirable" so they deserve support.
By the way, I wonder what happened to Polycarp. I answered his "challenge", but when I issued the same one back, he has gone quiet.

Paul,L ... I watched SBS and ABC News tonight, as probably you did too, and as I saw the bodies of dead and injured people, and listened to the UN representative tell of the horrors of the bombing of the UN schools (I don't know why Hamas just don't rule off areas, put signs on them saying "militants only", tell Israelis GPS coordinates and fight like men with their rockets against IDF) I thought of you. You seem like a reasonably pleasant chap, educated enough to string words together in a meaningful, coherent way, and logical enough to decide "it's either long term small scale warfare or a bloody none-shall-survive, bully-boy", yet you exclude categorically the wish for a third way, the ever striving for a peaceful solution. All the world seems to be opposed to the violence, except Israel, the US, and you and your fellow-travellers. I cannot really believe that someone such as you, with the benefit of education and an ability to empathise with others and understand their point of view (even if that ability is not used to its full) can endorse the torture of these people. Have you ever had a limb ripped off your body without anaesthetic and no relief from agony or infection, or cannot you imagine what it may be like? Paul, with respect, it is people like you from whom the Israelis draw their succour. Read some of the other posts here from people advocating the death and destruction approach, and you will realise that you are not like them. Or perhaps you have a religious background, so you think a god is managing this?
At least Obama made some encouraging, though non-committal noises tonight.
Did you support, incidentally, the Russian demolition of Chechnya? Do you believe that the relative peace there, with hatred still simmering, was worth the killing of tens of thousands (and that was only the first uprising)? I doubt that you did. But our media gave a different spin on that. We had sympathies with the underdog on that occasion.
Sleep well, my friend.

HarryG,

You say >> ‘You have listed several points regarding why Israel feels threatened, and I cannot disagree with the essence of the points you are making”

Actually my point was not merely that Israel is threatened. My point is that they have do not have a partner in peace. My point is that Hamas, at this stage, feels that it is in the box seat and therefore has nothing to gain by agreeing to a negotiated peace.

You say >> “. I am proposing better efforts towards peace … A very difficult ask, I admit, but one which is nevertheless possible”

This is an opinion. It is an opinion with which I and many others disagree. As I’ve stated above, besides Israel agreeing to leave the Middle East, Hamas is not interested in a negotiated peace. If you accept this fact as I do, you see that Israel’s choices are severely limited. Basically they can wear the rockets, or they can try and stop them.

You say >> “I want to continue attempting that peace process; you are exhausted by it all and wish to resolve by force …”

No. That’s simply not right. I am not exhausted by the peace process. I legitimately believe it has failed because the Hamas leadership are pursuing total victory. Therefore, they are not interested in a permanent negotiated peace. I believe there is strong evidence to support such a conclusion.

I do not wish for war.

I do not hope that Hamas are wiped out.

I believe that Hamas bears the lion’s share of responsibility for this regression to violence

I believe that Israel has been pushed against a wall with no good choices left.

I do hope that civilians are spared the brunt of the war.

You say >> “the likes of Netanyahu, Olmert and their cohorts can smell the blood of victory”

NO. They’re under no illusion that they are going to eliminate Hamas. They are fully aware that this is not a long term solution and that any victory will be tactical and short lived.

TBC

CONT’

This would be counter productive behaviour if Israel had within its power an offer which Hamas would accept.

But alas it is not so.

You say >> “All the world seems to be opposed to the violence, except Israel, the US … Obama … will rely on the votes of American Jews.

NO. You are neglecting the fact that Palestine has the unconditional support of the largest voting bloc in the UN, the Arab league/Islamic conference. You would also do well to realise that most of the countries backing Palestine do so to avoid raising the ire of their people and losing votes/support. In many European countries it is electoral suicide to support Israel over the Palestinians, whatever the facts. Indeed such support could stir up actual violence, ala the Danish cartoons. This goes doubly for any Islamic or Arab country. Then there are the nations which wish to do harm to the US and its allies, and voting against Israel in the UN achieves that aim.

So I hope you can see that there is no such thing as an independent, non-political response to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

You say >> “I cannot really believe that … you … can endorse the torture of these people. Have you ever had a limb ripped off your body … “

This is a fallacy. I don’t endorse the “torture” of these people. In fact to use such asinine language brings you discredit. Did the allies torture the civilians of Cologne when they took it after crossing the Rhine in 1945? And they took infinitely less care.

Do you imagine that Israelis don’t feel the same pain when one of Hamas’ hundreds of rockets actually hits its target?

You say >> “Paul, with respect, it is people like you from whom the Israelis draw their succour”

With respect, it is also true that Hamas draw succour from people like you. Western activism on this issue encourages Hamas to believe that they can attack Israel at will, and know that the softies in the west will limit any retaliation