"The CBC is a publically funded broadcaster."
hmmm, yes that is a good point.
"Probably you're mistaking an editorial position for a bias."
Canwest is shamelessly pro-israel, the simple fact that they produced and had the gall to show "Confrontation at Concordia" under the auspice of a documentary is more than enough proof in itself. Granted, like you said, Canwest is private as opposed to the CBC, so this is different.
I am not familiar with MacDonald, but the examples you gave don't seem too bad to me. What is wrong with suggesting terrorism should not apply to people under occupation? Personally I think any act of violence against civilians for political reasons is terrorism. But how on earth are McDonalds comments anti-semitic?
"He goes on to say that “if Palestinians have committed terror, the Israelis have certainly committed war crimes.”"
I think this is a fair statemnt.
Some of your other examples did sound biased though, maybe he is anti-semitic. I just get very suspicious when I hear anyone called anti-semitic. It seems anyone who dares question israel is labelled as anti-semitic.
You certainly live up to the promise of your tagline.
To suggest that the bias of Canwest is in any way morally equivalent to the long-standing perfidy, lies, and propaganda of the CBC is intellectually rotten, morally filthy, and politically rancid.
You succeed all round - now FOAD.
"Canwest is shamelessly pro-israel"
The Aspers are proudly pro-Israel. Canwest is a whole collection of newspapers and other media, each with its own editor and editorial dept. I'm familiar with only one of them.
Re. "Confrontation at Concordia" I haven't seen it.
I do know that at Concordia U, the thugs are all on one side of the issue and it's not the Israeli side.
"What is wrong with suggesting terrorism should not apply to people under occupation?"
First, there is no absolute right to resist occupation.
Israel occupied the West Bank & Gaza during a defensive war. It has absolutely no obligation to hand over sovereignty until the Palestinians agree not to repeat their past aggression.
Second, armed resistance to any occupation should always be a last resort. But the current Palestinian war against Israel is not a reaction to the occupation at all; it's a reaction to the peace offer that would have ended the occupation.
In short the Palestinians have no right to any kind of armed resistance.
Next, I agree that targeting civilians is always wrong. MacDonald is saying an exception should be made for people under occupation. They should be allowed to target civilians - men, women and children.
If you don't know what's wrong with it, I have a great sweatshirt I can send you. On the front it says: "I support terrorism" On the back it says: "Target civilians" above a big bull’s-eye.
"how on earth are McDonalds comments anti-semitic?"
You're getting my comments mixed up with someone else's. I've never said MacDonald is antisemitic. My jury's still out on that.
MacDonald is obviously prejudiced against Americans, though.
You write:
"He goes on to say that “if Palestinians have committed terror, the Israelis have certainly committed war crimes.'"
I think this is a fair statemnt."
I don't think MacDonald's position is fair at all. There are laws against certain acts committed in war. That's why we have the term "war crime." MacDonald is arguing against the UN adopting an enforceable definition of terrorism - in other words, he is arguing that non-state actors should be exempt from the rules of war (i.e. terrorism is okay for people "under occupation").
Under the rules MacDonald wants, if an Israeli soldier deliberately (or perhaps even accidentally) kills a non-combatant, that's a war crime. If Palestinians blow up a city bus or shoot children while their mother reads them a bedtime story, that's legitimate resistance.
Also, Israel does not commit war crimes. We do know that individual Israeli soldiers do sometimes commit crimes against Palestinians. We know this because Israel investigates reported abuses, prosecutes when there is sufficient evidence and convicts soldiers who are guilty.
Does the Palestinian leadership prosecute "militants" who murder Israeli civilians? Hardly. The leadership is directing the attacks. Their entire strategy has been to commit an on-going crime against humanity.
There is no equivalency between what Israel does and what the terrorists do. Israel attempts to minimize civilian casualties. The Palestinians attempt to maximize them.