In case you haven't noticed I have already retracted my statement about a couple hundred countries to the the "worlds reputable newspapers"
You are only being obstructive/obstinate , and letting your own bias against the western newspapers from acknowledging that Iran's leadership did, and continues to make inflammatory speeches against Israel.
Its not just the Western Press, the remark was made by Ajad at a Conference called " A world without Zionism" which I remember watching on "El Jazerra". Subsequent debates on the matter shown on "El Jazerra" , revealed that the term "Wiped off the Map" was first used by the IRNA, which is Iran's propaganda dept. world newspapers/ television picked up on the "quote" and ran with it.
In fact the Iranians have never denied the making of an inflammatory statment their defence merely consisting of..." taken out of Context" " exaggerated the statement" or Ajad didn't say it, he was merely quoting the deceased ayatollah Khomenei and so on.
If you still want to pursue the matter I suggest you write to the "Washington Post" and ask for a transcript of Lally Weymouth's interview with Ajad made in Sept 2006. ( I cant give you a direct link otherwise I would).
In it Weymouth continually asks Ajad about the statement in question to which he continually sidesteps. Now what does that suggest .... ?
honestly, there's no need/interests/passion for us to be anti-western media. there's no fun doing that. it's simply the fact that they ARE indeed biased.
u want examples?
if u look up on globe and mail on 8/8/2008 or 8/9/2008, the headlines for the cover story of beijing's olympics opening ceremony reads "totalitarian success"that's 2/5ths of the cover page photo, which depicts the flag party raising the flag. the idea is so obvious it's bias. and to strengthen my point, when the uyjhur massacres happened, the entire paper went on to do nothing but blame the hans. the "suppression" vs "peaceful protests"
and that's canada
there are simply way more stories
i'll give u an example
read all about it
also don't forget the infamous incidents where they labelled han victims as "the minorities" when clearly the han names are right above the bed, and the patients are hans themselves.
then u have those photos of government units trying to bring victims to safety being labelled as "protestors taken away", and that infamous photo of an old woman in front of a column of government units. that was intentionally prepared to remind others of the 6/4 event
wt the west does was simply to badmouth the chinese, or whoever they're ignorant against.
i wont be surprised they' deliberately tried to antagonize the iranians, after all with the president being not a favorite one by the west.
in my viewpoint, i dont trust tehran, but i definitely wont trust teh western media. only the average iranian knows wt's going on. the political event? who knows the truth to it, but definitely one thing for sure: can't just trust one side of the story, esp. believing solely the reports by those reported by the west.
Also on March 24, Toronto Star asked in an online poll: "Is China a good country to host the Olympics?" Online results show that 76% say yes and 23 say no. However, when the newspaper published the result the next day, it became "Yes 17%" and "No 82%".
A campaign to write to Mike Duffy and the Toronto Star was launched online.
One poster wrote: "Now I understand why China didn't allow these western media to go into Tibet. No matter if they are in Tibet or not, they have already made up their mind about how they would fabricate their lies... (a Chinese old saying) Don't worry about not finding a reason if you are determined to charge people."
-------------
The west should stop using its rhetoric of democracy and liberty and force it upon other countries.. I wanna borrow a few lines by Paul Well of the Macleans when he writes about the Georgian/Russian conflict:
What’s killing Georgia today — besides hordes of Russian soldiers and irregulars — is Western rhetoric about democracy and liberty, and the reluctance or inability of assorted peddlers of that rhetoric to check it, now and then, against reality.
China blamed for master-minding patriotic protests
The Times of India published an editorial title "Counter View: Chinese have a right to protest". Quite interesting.
....Although the protests may be stage-managed, as some have suggested, there is every indication that the depth of nationalistic fervour in China has taken even the government by surprise. Restraint is being urged at every step, though the government has stopped short of outright condemnation. In any case, these protests are as legitimate as those in Paris or London. Portraying the outcry as merely a sham is to ignore the danger that an alienated China poses to the world. If the Chinese are feeling offended, perhaps it is time for the rest of the world to try to understand their grievance.
Pushing China into a corner is unlikely to help the world. It will merely achieve a growth in militant Nationalism that will, in a sense, allow the government to continue its human rights violations. In other words, an image of China as a nation beset by unfair attacks might lead to it becoming even more hostile to the views of the western world.
The divide between how the Chinese view themselves and how they are perceived in the world should be narrowed instead of making it wider. It will be wise, therefore, to engage China on different terms and avoid tensions from spiralling out of hand over the Olympics, which the Chinese are justifiably proud of being called upon to host.
Compared to a commentary appeared in Time:
The biggest risk for the Chinese government is that the protests simmer until the Beijing Summer Olympics begin in August. The authorities hope to show the world how China has changed in the three decades since Deng Xiaoping launched economic reforms. But it will be difficult to present a friendly, progressive face to the world if citizens are indulging in anti-foreign antics.
Okay.
When Chinese protest, it's indulgence. When Tibetans protest, it's for freedom.
This is how the Wall Street Journal portrays the protests:
Condemnation of Chinese government policies is being received in China as attacking the nation as a whole, arousing public resentment. The most vocal responses are seen overseas as government-sanctioned nationalism run amok, further reinforcing negative images of China.
When Chinese protest, they further reinforce negative images of China. When Tibetans protest, they put China's human rights record into the light.
From NYT:
In a sign that the government was still allowing anti-foreign sentiment to spill over into rare street demonstrations, thousands of people rallied on Sunday in front of Carrefour markets in six cities, including two, Harbin and Jinan, where there had not been protests earlier.
...In recent days, the government has called on citizens to temper their fury at the West, but it has not acted to halt public demonstrations, which have been stoked by newspaper editorials, Internet postings and text messages sent to millions of cellphones.
On Sunday, the state-run People’s Daily newspaper called for a cooling of passions, although it stopped short of condemning the demonstrations or the spreading boycott campaign against French goods. “As citizens, we have the responsibility to express our patriotic enthusiasm calmly and rationally and express patriotic aspiration in an orderly and legal manner,” the newspaper said in a front-page editorial.
When Chinese protest -- peacefully -- they are brainwashed nationalists. When Tibetans protest -- violently -- they are fighters against oppression.
When China says the Dalai Lama is behind the Lhasa riots, it is China's attempt to vilify His Holiness. When Chinese protest, it is China who master-minding the whole thing.
So what do you want? You want to see the protesting Chinese being shot down as the way the Tibetan propaganda told you the Tibetans were? (I'm not saying China's state-owned media aren't hammering out propaganda. But please be aware that propaganda is from both sides; another article on propaganda in here.)
As the above Times of India editorial suggests, many westerns still believe these massive protests are sponsored by the Chinese government. The Chinese are still being seen as brainwashed nationalists with no ability to think independently. How sad.
On the Tibet issue, WSJ says:
Protests advocating Tibetan independence mystify most Chinese, who have been taught all their lives that Tibet has long been part of China. And the deeply emotional Chinese response to the Tibet protests has also surprised some Westerners.
The western media should also asked if they have been taught all their lives that Tibet has never been part of China.
The following paragraph seems to be used as balancing, but the phrase "albeit still limited" is still judgemental. "Limited" in what standard? Who set those standards? Why can't you reflect on the fact that China has made a lot of progress in merely 30 years? Compare the current state with what it was.... not comparing with the West who has enjoyed industrialization and economic development for over 100 years.
Many Chinese who are critical of their own government also feel Western condemnations of China fail to acknowledge its advances in recent decades, from lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty to expanding the freedoms -- albeit still limited -- that Chinese enjoy.
To the West: please try to understand why we are angry. Think about if you were us.
