the situation in israel

[hasmiek]

I was wondering how you guys think of the current situation in Israel...

[Harut]

i would really like to know Europeans percpective on the issue.

so, Hasmiek, if you could please tell us what you think and what other europeans think.

 

thank you

[hasmiek]

I think that Israel should leave the palistinian land, and the borders of before 1967 should be back.

 

I think Arafat is no sweetheart, and doesn't have a lot of power over his people (no good leader), but he is the leader of the palestinians, and Sharon has no right treating him like that.

 

I think if I were a Palistinian, with nothing-so nothing to loose, i would also probably be with a lot of anger within me...I think Israel should look at itself to see why so many young people sacrifice their lives in this war...

 

I think the Israelians are a big terrorists as the Palestianians and the Al queda's

 

And I think a lot more things; but i'm at work, and have to do stuff, so...remember i'm not a politician, and i'm not every european, and I don't know everything about this matter. I just find it very striking.

 

So what do you Americans think?

 

[ April 04, 2002, 01:44 AM: Message edited by: hasmiek ]

[Sip]

We Americans think that NBA basketball play-offs are around the corner, gas (fuel) is at a pretty stable price, people who went to Oscars wore very nice dresses, and it's time to do the taxes. Unfortunately, we don't think untill it's too late. The "news" here sucks!

 

Of course they always show the shocking images of a palestenian who blew himself up killing innocent people ... oh how horrible ... how can they do this ... But they never show or talk about the FULL story

[hasmiek]

oh c'mon Sip;

you seem to be an american citizen with a brainium. except when you start talking about carrots that is...but maybe that's a male thing...

[THOTH]

Hasmiek/Seaphan - both of your posts present some (fundamental) truths - but not the whole story. Seaphan is probably correct that most Americans do not much follow international news/goings on outside of the sound bite/ugly pictures level etc and most probably don't care much either way as long as gasoline prices don't go up too much (Do you drive Steaphan? Gas seems to already be going up quite a bit recently - no?). Not everyone is so uniformed and/or lacking in opinions however - even if the (mass media news) is perhaps lacking in many respects.

 

Hasmiek - I can agree with most of the things you have said concerning Arafat. I think that your declaration concerning Israel giving up "Palestinian lands" is perhaps a bit too simplistic. Obviously Israel is a nation that cannot just be dismissed. Likewise the extremely volatile and dangerous environment that Israel exists in cannot either be dismissed. Not living there I think it is difficult for us to appreciate how they might feel - hated and under siege such (rightly or wrongly). They have developed an extreme response to provocation that - at least on some level - has worked for them (they still exist). I certainly wouldn't want to live as they do and have to do the things they do to survive - but that's not my choice. In no way either can I support the tactics (and position etc of Sharon) that Israel has undertaken - though I can still, in a sense, support the State of Israel and her people as allies and (for lack of a better word) "westerners" who live (for the most part) by rule of law, Democracy, free markets etc etc.

 

At the same time I believe that the treatment that has been meted out to the Palestinian people has been atrocious and I think that the Israeli indifference to the conditions and rights of these people has been shameful. The Palestinians are often to blame as well. I understand the horrible refugee situation and how the heavy hand of Israel has lead to such radicalism among them. What concerns me is the lack of voices for moderation and anyone really attempting to achieve a workable solution to the problem(s). I thought Oslo and the recent peace efforts - though perhaps somewhat contrived - were a means of hope - a starting point for the future. I thought that perhaps the Jerusalem issue could be shelved for future discussion or such. I think Arafat seriously blundered when he thought he could force the issue. He played right into Sharon and the hard liner's hands. Now that is all ancient history - as Sharon & Co. wished for all along - but at what price?

 

To me this intense suppression of the Palestinians and dismemberment of their security/governmental apparatus can only lead to more chaos and can only inspire additional hatred and extreme counter reaction - it will in no way end the problems - only make them worse for all concerned. Soon I fear it will reach a degree where the other Arab nations may act - perhaps only with economic warfare at first - but can you imagine the consequences of oil embargoes and such on the world's economies now? What can the West be thinking to let Sharon pursue these extreme policies unabated - as if it could actually solve the problems (with no consequence)? And worse still cold be the prospects of larger war (though I don't see the Arabs having the guts/motivation for it just yet - that could change with sufficient internal pressure however...). So I am not optimistic. And I think it is a big mistake for Israel to be so cavalier about their actions against the Palestinians, the automatic support from the West (particularly you Europeans...once the oil runs out...), and (cavalier) concerning their future and ability to prevail under adverse circumstances. Sure, they have been victorious in the past (and the US has always been their for them) - but they are really a very small and vulnerable country and they should not forget this.

 

[ April 04, 2002, 07:17 AM: Message edited by: THOTH ]

[Arpa]

The majority of Americans may be watching their favorite soap opera, while others may be watcing the stock market and see their dollars turn into dust, some others may be worrying about who will will score the next touch down while most citizens are following the local developments to see if their local and school taxes will go up as their schools need much overdue repairs and upgrades. Schools in America are maintained mainly with local funds as there is no other America to send dollars to maintain the schools as in the Middle East.

The majority of Americans may be turned off by world events for a variety of reasons. America is a faraway haven divided by great waters, there is no imminent danger of the crisis spilling over, even if Spt. 11 may have been a wake up call. Most Americans are here primarily because they wanted to avoid the turmoil in Europe and the ME that has been brewing for all of the 20th century and before. Most Americans have found haven on these shores to escape wars, masscares, famines and poverty, and, even though many may still remember what it was that caused their migration yet by now they may have forgotten the real causes and the pictures from those parts have fuzzied so much that many don't understand why Jew and Arab are fighting, why Armenian and Azeri/Turk are still at each other. What is the difference of a Jew and a Paletsinian? How are Turks and Armenians different? Aren't they all some kind of gypsy?

 

Yet there are still those who may be following the events in the ME. They may be grouped in a few categories.

1. Of course there are the Jews. It is self explanatory

2. Those of Arab Heritage. Ditto.

3. Those who may be interested in current events and world histoy.

4. Those who may watch to get some signs of economic perspective, such as the price of gasoline etc.

5. People of various religious persuasion, such as local Muslims etc. but more so some misguided Christian fundamentalist, the likes of jerry Falwell and Patterson who still believe those fables and lies, they call them prophesies, that the "Second Coming" will not happen until Jerusalem is cleansed and the "Promised Land" is reclaimed by the "Chosen People". Of course, the Second Coming means a different thing for different people. The Christians believe that Jesus will come back... while to the Jew it means that the "real Messiah" will come and reestablish the Kingdom of God, the first Messiah, Jesus was an imposter. As prophesies go, it brings to mind the words of the nostalgic song Klilikia; Erb or batsvin drnern houso, Ev mer erkren pakh ta dzmer... Tsankam tesnel zim Kilikia...!

6. Then there is the Armenian who may be keenly interested in what is happening in Paletine as it may have repurcussions on their fate. Beside being so close geographically. However the Armenian may be in a dilemma. Which side best illustrates their quest? Is our fate similar to that of the Palestinian who was thrown out of their ancestral homeland that they had kept and mainteined against alll odds, all the way from the Crusades to Ottoman, British and others. Or is the Armenian quest similar to the Jewish one? A People who had been dreaming of a homeland for centuries? For the Armenian there may be valuable lessons to learn, to emulate and to avoid. It has been over 50 years and the propsect is getting bleaker and bleaker. Until recently the Paletsinians were using words and stones, now they are using real bullets, another 50 years the Jews will be a minoritya and probably crowded out. The reason for that is that the whole thing is based on fables, legends and wishful thinking. Israel may be called a democracy, it is in fact a theocracy based on race and religion...

To the Armenian; What are some of the mistakes to avoid and what to emulate?

[A.R.]

"Priest Says Israelis Destroy Bethlehem Church Door

 

Thu Apr 4, 7:11 AM ET

 

ROME (Reuters) - Israeli troops have destroyed a door into Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity and have battled with Palestinians holed up in the building, one of the priests trapped in the complex said on Thursday.

 

"The situation is very serious. The Jews have knocked down the door of the nativity church where all the Palestinians were," Father Ibrahim Faltas, custodian of the Bethlehem church, said in a telephone interview with RAI television news."

 

Go to URL for entire article:

 

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor..._dc_1&printer=1

 

************************************

 

Quotes and URL

 

"The situation at the Church of Nativity as well as three other churches in Bethlehem is very serious, dangerous and frightening," Father Ibrahim Faltas, a priest inside the Church of the Nativity, told United Press International in a telephone interview.

 

He said Israeli troops continued to encircle the church, where more than 150 people, including monks, nuns, men, women and children were taking shelter. He also said Israeli troops were besieging three other churches in Bethlehem -- Santa Maria, the Syrian Orthodox Church and the Silivian Church. More than 200 people were taking shelter there.

 

"The Israeli soldiers ... are shooting at the churches and the mosques," he said."

 

*****************************************

 

Israel has encircled the Church of the Nativity since Tuesday and has reported gunfire from inside, where they claim Palestinian gunmen are hiding. But Faltas said there are only civilians inside.

 

"The people ... are not armed," he said, adding their food and water supply had run out.

 

Some inside were wounded and needed "urgent medical aid."

 

Bethlehem Gov. Mohamed al Madani told UPI from inside the church that 12 people inside were hurt and two had just died. He said the Israeli army refused to allow ambulances inside to take the wounded to hospitals.

 

Go to URL for entire article:

 

http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=020420...02-074429-4344r

[Anshnork]

This is mainly directed to those who live in the US:

 

Do you believe that the American media is biased toward the Israelis? I've heard many argue that it is, but I've also heard others argue that the media is very biased toward Palestinians. I'd like to hear what you have to say.

[A.R.]

Anshnork, the American media is owned and run by Jews. The Jews controll Americans minds with the Jewish Propaganda spewing everyday from the Idiot Box we call Television. The Internet is a Jews worst nightmare because they can`t controll the internet. The american news should be called "Kosher News" Regards

[THOTH]

Ansnork - I don't think it is so simple as bais for or against - nor is it consitant. Remember - much news exists to be sensational and reports will be presented to be shocking or such - and its mostly just soundbites. I do think it is possible to get fairly balanced and at least somewhat in depth news if one is diligent enough (and don't rely just on the TV medium). And all of this talk of Jewsich control/influence in US media - while it certainly exsists - this point - and the influence is, I think, largely exaggerated/overated. Again - there are biases both ways - and if anythin I think perhaps Israel is often not given a fair shake - they are in an extremely precarious situation and it isn't always presented that way - IMO - but perhaps we are all getting numb to this. Likewise reports on Palestinians perhaps mor concentrate on the bad - the terroists etc - then any real presentation of the plight of the people. Just the same I think a lot of information is out there - try PBS. etc

[Anahid Takouhi]

April 5, 2002

 

The Siege of Bethlehem

 

"What Do You Mean God is Punishing Me? "

 

By Beth Daoud

 

Each time I come to Palestine I leave behind another piece of my heart. I am torn between whether to stay in Palestine indefinitely or to go back home when my ticket tells me it's time to go. America is my home, Palestine is my heart. I am touched deeply by the strength and character the Palestinians have and by the dignity Palestinians have as a people no matter how the Israelis beat them down.

 

I arrived in Tel Aviv full of hope and optimism. I have an undying belief that truth will always win through in the end no matter how twisted and incorrect the portrayal of the Palestinians is to the world, the truth is what is happening and can not be remained hidden forever.

 

The last couple of days at the Bethlehem Star Hotel have been difficult. It's been difficult in that we've been confined to the hotel while outside there is gunfire and loud explosions. I feel helpless because I am unable to help or protect the Palestinians at this time. Two days ago in Manger Square many Palestinians were shot and killed by the Israeli soldiers. Even now many of the Palestinians are lying in the streets injured and dying while the soldiers are denying ambulances and doctors to these people. An Israeli soldiers told a person from ISM that they were not going to leave Manger square until every Palestinian was dead. How does one human being become so cold and callous towards another human being? If this is what religion does to people I want no part of it.

 

I want to bolt out the front door of the hotel to reach the Palestinians not only in Manger Square but also the Church of the Nativity. I can only imagine the terror these 200 Palestinians are feeling trapped inside the church surrounded by tanks and Israeli soldiers. No one can get within two blocks of the Church of the Nativity, not even the press. This terrifies me because there are no witnesses to see what is happening. I am terrified for these innocent Palestinians.

 

This morning, with a group from the press, several of us attempted to get close to the church. We walked down a very narrow street which felt more like an alley. We made our way passed crushed bullet-ridden cars, destroyed store-fronts, broken water pipes spraying water everywhere and thousands of empty bullet casings under foot.

 

A young Palestinian man risked his life as he stepped from his front door on the second floor and waved us inside. He wanted to show us the bullet holes throughout the house. I went up to his house and he led me inside. The walls, windows and even the TV screen had bullet holes in them. As I bent down to comfort a small child of around a year and a half a commotion began outside. I peaked out the window and saw Israeli soldiers rushing at the press with their guns aimed. The soldiers hadn't seen me go into the house so I considered whether to stay with the family or leave with the press. I didn't have a phone or camera so I thought it would be best if I left.

 

As I was coming out of the house and starting down the stairs I locked eyes with an Israeli soldier. My eyes told his"I know what you're doing to the Palestinians. I am not afraid of you and will do everything within my power to stop

 

After he said that I came within a couple feet of him and I said,"What do you mean "God is punishing me?'' The soldier wouldn't answer the question and told me to get out of there, motioning with his gun to get out of there. So we started walking away and then a couple of the reporters stopped and took another picture and the soldiers got real angry and started pointing their guns at us and I noticed one of the soldiers had a canister of something. The press then began running out of there real fast and the soldiers then threw what appeared to be a green-colored-smoke bomb. The soldiers then retreated behind the smoke.

 

***

 

Beth Daoud is one of four Coloradans currently in Palestine as part of a larger international presence acting as human shields in Palestinians refugee camps, accompanying ambulances and getting the word out to the world. More of their experience can be found at http://www.ccmep.org/palestine.html

[Sip]

smilies/blush.gif I was hoping no one would see that carrot thing. But it was there ... everything was setup for the punchline ... I just couldn't resist smilies/blush.gif

 

About American media ... although AR is right that it is owned and operatred by the Jews, I haven't noticed a distinct biased. As thoth stated, the media here is about money ... advertising dollars ... they want to have as many viewers as possible for as long as possible. For a nation where the "weather" channel is the most watched cable tv channel (yes, go figure) ... that would mean a lot of things ... such as giving an update and the all important weather every 2 minutes between the killings in Israel and the civil wars in Africa. smilies/lol.gif

 

And this is of course talking about the more "serious" sources such as CNN and FOX News and this MSNBC. That's why I hate the news here... it is definitely biased towards the dramatic and the shocking!

 

Example: "WOW LOOK ... Mister So and So said Death To America in his speach today. His country decided to hate us today! They want us dead. THIS IS A HUGE SHOCK TO ALL OF US IN THE NEWS ROOM..."

 

It looks and sounds funny but that's how they report most things!

 

Another example: About 2 hours after the second plane hit the world trade center, CNN, in their great wisdom, decided to show Palestinian looking people jumping up and down screaming in joy and shooting their guns ... I think I was the only one at the time to realize that the planes hit here at 9AM. They were showing the video at 12PM local time. The people jumping up and down were in broad daylight ... THERE IS NO WAY THAT VIDEO HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHAT HAPPENED!!!(those parts of the world were still in darkness of night) ... Even if the video was true, it was in very poor taste to show people jumping off buildings and that video at the same time ... a really ugly moment in Journalizm I think (and sadly, this is only one example of countless many). Unfortunately, some naive and simple people, blinded by those images, shock, and confusion, went to streets looking for anyone that looked anything like those on TV and beat them to a bloody pulp (and killed in some cases)

 

[ April 05, 2002, 11:48 PM: Message edited by: Sip ]

[Sip]

That was a very nice breakdown of how things are. I really enjoyed reading it!

[A.R.]

Today's Media World Dominated by Powerful Pro-Israel Bias

 

An Israeli journalist points out that the "news" isn't a business; it's a way of keeping the "sheeple" in line with carefully-placed propaganda.

 

By Israel Shamir

 

The media world was well described in the brilliant novel by Evelyn Waugh, The Scoop. Though the main plot of the book unfolds in Africa, the relevant scene takes place on Fleet Street, at the office of the Daily Beast owner, Lord Copper. The media baron asked his foreign editor from time to time, is Yokohama the capital of Japan? Or does Hong Kong belong to us? The editor had two "safe" answers. When Lord Copper was right, he said, "Definitely, Lord Copper." When he was wrong, he said, "Up to a point, Lord Copper." That is the fork, from definitely to up to a point, of the permissible borders of mainstream media discourse. We journalists are dependent creatures. We would like to be honest and sincere, but we have to think of our mortgages and of our vocation. If we step over the borders established by the media owners, we would have to look for a different occupation altogether.

 

Speaking of Palestine, the borders are quite narrow. I would say they run parallel to the borders of internal Jewish Israeli mainstream discourse, from Meretz to Sharon. If we compare it with pre-Mandela South Africa, it is similar to the white mainstream discourse, from nationalist to progressive, not including the ANC. In my view, this discourse is exclusivist, even supremacist. It is based on sustaining Jewish supremacy in Palestine. It does not offer equality or even a safe future to the local inhabitants. But that is all you are allowed to say. You may support the creation of Palestinian reservations which puts you firmly in the Israeli "liberal" camp, or you can back mass expulsion and ethnic cleansing, and you will be called a hardliner or a hawk. These are the firm borders of the discourse. Whoever crosses the borders, and speaks for equality of a Jew and Gentile in the Holy Land, finds himself in the wilderness. His voice will be silenced, maybe for good.

 

I know this first hand. I live in Jaffa, a town with a mixed population. There are Palestinians, Mor oc cans, Israeli Ashkenazi Jews, Russians, and we all live together rather harmoniously. But a lot of people who were born in Jaffa live in refugee camps and they are forbidden to return just because of their religion or ethnicity. I find it morally impossible that a Jew from New York, Paris or Novosibirsk, like me, can come and live in Jaffa, while a local man, born in Jaf fa, may not come back home. I called for the return of the Palestinian refugees and immediately lost my job with Ha'aretz. That is the most liberal Israeli newspaper.

 

The case of Palestine coverage in the media is special for one reason. We have a peculiar vocabulary, developed for the local coverage. If I kill Ahmad, it would be reported that "Ahmad was killed by an Israeli." But if, God forbid, Ahmad would kill me, you would learn that "a Jew was murdered."

 

As in Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, an Israeli may kill; but if an Israeli is killed, he turns into a Jew. It is absolutely forbidden to speak about Jewish atrocities and murders. The Jews are forever victims. It often appears we have three nations in Palestine: Jews, Israelis and Palestinians. Israelis may commit crimes, but it is innocent-always innocent-Jews that are murdered. If you confuse these two words, and refer to a murderer as "a Jew," you will be called an anti-Semite, and probably you will lose your job.

 

It should not be too complicated to cover our story. It is not even as complicated as other places of world concern. The right of national self-determination inclusive of autonomy or independence isn't an easy right to realize, as Corsicans can tell you. Palestine should be easier to cover: it is not the question of national self determination, but of basic human rights. Kosovo? In Kosovo, Albanians were discriminated against and tormented by Serb authorities, but they always had the technical right to vote and the Yugoslav government never withdrew their citizenship. They were distant second-class citizens, but still citizens. Kurds in Turkey? They also can vote.

 

The coverage of Palestine should be easier, but it is not. A journalist may write and speak about marginal problems, like the Jewish settlers beyond the Green Line. But the basic power structure of Jewish dominance in Palestine may not be questioned. We may not say that the Palestinians have no right to vote; no right to move to other parts of their country and no right to return to their homes in the only country they have ever known.

 

In my opinion, the source of the media bias in covering the Palestinians is tremendously important. For it speaks volumes about the power structure of the United States and Europe. It gives us unique feedback from the obscure world of media lords. And, it goes without saying, that "establishment" journalists are not given much leeway on reporting on this valuable feedback. They are always too busy writing "definitely."

 

The reason is obvious. Too many of our media lords subscribe to the notion of Jewish supremacy, and they are spread around the globe. In England, there is Conrad Black, he actually owns many papers in Canada, the United States and in Israel. In our country, he owns The Jerusalem Post. When he bought this paper, he dismissed the staff and hired people of his opinions. He is a right-wing Zionist, a zealous supporter of Jewish supremacy.

 

In the United States, there are too many of them to count. But allow us to mention Mortimer Zuck erman, a media lord and the current head of the Presidents' Conference of American Jewish Organi zations, the big daddy of all Jewish groups in America. He is one of the richest men in America, he made his fortune speculating in real estate and owns the third largest "serious" American weekly magazine, US News and World Report. He also owns the popular plebeian tabloid, The Daily News, a major circulation in the New York and New Jersey market. His newspapers generally advocate the brutal rule of market forces. With one exception; they call for generous annual subsidy of Israel by American taxpayers. Two ex-prime ministers of Israel, Netanyahu of the war-mongering Likud and Barak of the slightly less hawkish Labor Party supported Zuckerman in his quest for the leadership of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations. This side of the Ku Klux Klan, this association of 52 heads of American Jewish organizations is the most bigoted body of men in American politics. Ha'aretz recently reported, that Mortimer Zuckerman had dismissed his shiksa wife, in order to get this coveted chair. As long as he stayed married to a non-Jewish woman, his colleagues, Jewish billionaires, would not trust him. And he is one of the most influential publishers in the United States.

 

On the other end of the planet, in Russia, the TV stations and newspapers also are under the ownership of Israeli citizens. One of them, Vladimir Gu sinsky, was forced to part with his TV station. But his extremely pro-Israeli staff was quickly hired by another channel, belonging to another Israeli citizen, Mr. Chernoi. In 1985, he was an accountant living on a salary of $100 a month. Today he is worth $5 billion, owns virtually all the aluminum plants in Russia, and lives in a nice suburb of Tel Aviv. Currently, he is under investigation for 34 murders, money laundering and membership in the Russian mafia. In a recent quip, he was quoted as saying that "the media is not business. The media is politics and influence." He uses his media empire to stifle all criticism of Israel in Russia.

 

I spoke recently to a young Russian military attaché in one of the Western capitals. He told me: your Israeli situation is similar to ours, but we have Chechnya a thousand miles away, while you have it next door. I asked him: do you want to say that Chechens have no right of vote? He was amazed. He did not know that the Palestinians have no right to vote. The media of Gusinsky, Chernoi, and Bere zovsky, that is three powerful media lords, all of them Israeli citizens, took care to cultivate his ignorance.

 

Even in Sweden, traditionally supportive of the Palestinian cause, since the national newspapers were bought by Jewish entrepreneurs, the coverage of Palestine became more and more lopsided. I do not know whether the new owners had to ask for it explicitly, or their chief editors just guessed their desires, but the results were the same.

 

This international group of Jewish media lords, from Washington to Moscow, is not subservient to the interests of Israel. But support of Israel is a part of their agenda. On the top of the list is globalization and neo-liberalism; what they call "freedom of market forces." On political matters, they tend to distrust democracy and personal freedoms while making constant demands for corporate liberties.

 

Mutual support is also high on their list of priorities. When Gusinsky was under investigation for embezzling funds, The New York Times and The Wash ington Post, that is the late Mrs. Kathryn Gra ham and Sutzberger, both published virtually identical lead stories and editorials supporting the "Independent Russian Press." Independent, appears to be a code word for "Jewish-owned."

 

This should be a serious cause for concern. When an Egyptian businessman bought Harrods in Lon don, the newspapers went into a fury. The headlines blared "our national heritage is being taken away by foreigners." In Israel, no outsider is allowed to own a newspaper. There was a rich Russian Jew, Gregory Lerner, who tried to buy a newspaper in Israel. He was sent to jail for six years for various mafia-related crimes. It is worth noting that, before he made his rush into the media, nobody cared about his offenses. An Iraqi Jew took over a newspaper, and very soon he found himself in jail. Because the media is not a business, it is the nerve system of a country.

 

In my opinion, the case of Palestine is much more important for you, for Europeans and Americans, than just another case of injustice. Because it proves that this international group of Jewish media lords have become a mite too powerful. In my experience, Jewish journalists can be as objective as any. Actually, the best coverage of Palestine is done by Jewish journalists, from Susanne Goldenberg of The Guardian to Gideon Levy of Ha'aretz. But it is easier to squeeze a camel through the needle's eye than to find an objective media lord. This problem can be solved without actually removing media from the hands of individual proprietors if newspapers would be treated like precious water sources and other all-important public utilities. That is, unless we want to delegate all these newspapers to the murky realm of ethnic press, and build from scratch a new network of free press.