Submitted by Barry Rab(Israel), Sep 19, 2003 at 14:28
How much of this situation has come about because of media spin, deception and propagation of the lies of others in covering the Middle East and so providing a semblance of morality to the "hidden agenda" of those promoting and financing a covert operation?
I refer to the BBC, AP, Reuters and European media in particular where even with their access to facts they have molded the story to their "idea".
(One need only see their use of unaccredited sources for material, their lack of acknowledging effectively "inacuracies" etc,)
The BBC only received notoriety when the British saw themselves on the receiving end.
Or would this have come about in spite of the media?
If the media had been honest and sincere, could these groups have appeared so brazenly in the manner they did and under cover of American academia?
Sincerely. Barry.
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.