Friday, March 15, 2013


 In the same article commented on in my last posting;
there was the following paragraph:
 "Israel considers a nuclear-armed Iran to be an existential threat, citing Iranian denials of the Holocaust, its calls for Israel's destruction, its development of missiles capable of striking the Jewish state and its support for hostile Arab militant groups. Tehran says its nuclear program is peaceful and designed to produce energy and medical isotopes, a claim that Israel and many Western countries reject."
How does CBC really know what Israel "considers"? Why don't they write "claims to consider"?
There are strong reasons for believing that Israel is hyping this so called existential threat from Iran for other reasons, and that Israei leaders know very well that Iran is no existential threat to Israel. Indeed several leading military and intelligence officials from Israel have publicly said as much. How does CBC know better than them?
In the same paragraph CBC pretends to provide some balance by writing that Iran says its nuclear development is peaceful, but then immediately catagorizes this as a "claim" that has been rejected.
For CBC, Iran only makes "claims" that are easily dismissed, while Israel states only God's truth. Can someone explain why this is?
Also it is funny to see the following sentence in the same article:

"Israel has repeatedly threatened to act militarily should Iran appear to be on the verge of obtaining a bomb"
Over 15 months ago CBC published an article which I discussed in one of my first postings in early February. In this article CBC falsely published that the IAEA had declared that Iran was on the nuclear brink, when the IAEA had said no such thing. Now in this article 15 months later, it seems that, since Israel has not yet attacked Iran, that Iran is still does not even "appear to be on the verge of obtaining a bomb."
Does CBC have its own definitions for what "on the brink" or "on the verge" mean? Or does CBC just choose words according to what has the best potential for facilitating a war on Iran?

No comments:

Post a Comment