"the age" - shmith, the shmok

  1. 5,748 Posts.
    It's not often that a TV critic should raise the media bias ire. But Michael Shmith ('Israel's Ambiguous Democracy' 21/8) has managed to go beyond the role of TV reviewer.

    Shmith's analysis of the controversial BBC documentary about Israel's nuclear capabilities reads like an opinion piece from the Lebanese Star or the UK Independent.

    In Shmith's opinion, Israel and Iraq are no different, in fact Israel is worse. He implies that Israel is not really a democracy.

    Let's forget that Iraq was a dictatorship ruled by a fine chap with no qualms about genocide, ethnic cleansing or suppression of basic rights. But, Shmith thumps the podium, where are the functioning Weapons of Mass Destruction?

    Then he points to Mr Vanunu's incarceration as proof that Israel is no democracy. Really? What would he do with someone convicted of treason in Australia?

    I suppose we should anoint them as a media 'expert' or appoint them Governor of Tasmania?

    Shmith displays the exact level of ignorance that is rife throughout the media when it comes to Israel and the intense hatred of Israel by her Arab neighbours. You would think that Israel dominates the region, when in fact it occupies 0.01% of the least hospitable and mineral poor land mass.

    Those nice Iranians have announced that the moment they have the Bomb, Hitler's Final Solution will come to fruition. Does Shmith think that the oil rich Arab nations refrain from attacking Israel because of 'friendship' and 'good will'? It's those pesky nuclear warheads.
    And it's surprising that Shmith doesn't bring up the results of the last elections in Iraq and in Israel.
    Israel elected a loose coalition of four diverse parties for a three year term. But Sadaam was elected unopposed with 99.7% of the vote for his fifth consecutive seven year term.

    So which is the democracy, Mr Shmith?

    Or are you still confused?
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.