Ampersand from Alas, a Blog points out there are actually two sides to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict.



"From StopTheWall.org's FAQ, answering the question "why does the Israeli public support the building of the Wall?"



"The majority of the Israeli public has supported the Wall, following the pretext of “security”. The idea of unilateral separation appeals greatly to those in their society who do not want to admit or take responsibility for their government’s racist actions."



That's probably true. But, y'know, it's just barely possible that the idea of unilateral separation also appeals greatly to those in Israeli society who'd rather not be blown to fucking pieces on a bus by some anti-semitic moron with a martyr complex and an explosive belt!!!"



On another link, Ampersand points out that there are some large non-violent protest going on right now in Palestine:



"This is a general pattern I've noticed in press coverage of Palestine and Israel. If a single Palestinian terrorist murders a dozen Israelis, that gets press coverage all over (as it should). But when thousands protest peacefully, it's ignored. The result is to spread the myth that the Palestinian resistance consists of nothing but terrorism."



A correlating question I have: I understand a story on these protests is not as "sexy" as filming the carnage from another suicide bomber. But doesn't the dearth of coverage on these organized non-violent events make the press indirectly complicit in continuing terrorist attacks? By rewarding only the terrorists with coverage they ensure the bombings continue as a tactic.