MY MEETING WITH DAN RATHER

My Meeting with Dan Rather by Elliot Mathias Since Arabs view the world differently, who's to say that we're right and they're wrong?

My recent encounter with CBS News anchor Dan Rather and his producer made me realize that much of the anti-Israel coverage in the media -- which treats Israel with a double-standard unparalleled anywhere else in the world -- is attributable to factors other than anti-Semitism.

I met his CBS producer at a building in Jerusalem's Jewish Quarter that overlooks the Temple Mount where she wished to film from. We proceeded up to the roof which afforded a masterful view of the centerpiece of the Old City. Sprawled out in front of us was the Temple Mount, the place where the two ancient Jewish Temples stood, and currently the shared location of the Western Wall and the Al-Asqa Mosque. Behind the Temple Mount is the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives, with the rugged hills of the Judean Desert in the background.

This is the focal point of the entire Arab-Israeli conflict. In fact, Palestinians call the current conflict the "Al-Asqa Intifada."

As we stood side-by-side taking in the extraordinary view, the producer turned to me and said in a sort of apologetic tone, "You'll have to excuse my ignorance, but what exactly are we looking at?"

"The Temple Mount!!" I wanted to scream. "It's the most important spot in the entire region!"

I controlled myself and began my first history lesson to a national news producer. I explained how the Jewish people built a Temple in this spot 3,000 years ago, and how, after its destruction, a second Temple was built in the exact same location.

I explained how Jesus visited this second Jewish Temple, which stood until the Romans ultimately destroyed it in the first century. I explained how the Muslims came to Jerusalem in the mid-seventh century, soon after the creation of their religion, building the Al-Asqa Mosque and the Golden Dome. I explained to her that the Western Wall is the remaining retaining wall of the second Jewish Temple.

As I went through these historic points, the producer was taking furious notes on her yellow writing pad, trying to record the details of this place so integral to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

A few minutes later, Dan Rather arrived. He climbed the stairs to join us on the roof. As he reached the top stair, he looked out at the view that was spread before him. "Oh, I've been here before," he said. Then, looking at his producer, he quietly asked, "What is this that we're looking at?"

My stomach plummeted again. Not Dan Rather, too?! The expert on world events who is watched by 30 million nightly viewers can't identify the Temple Mount? I knew American viewers were in big trouble.

The producer read the notes on her yellow pad, filling Mr. Rather in on all the details of the place in front of them. During the film shoot, Rather held this same yellow pad of paper in his hand, reading from it on air. So much for in-depth research and media accuracy.

After Dan Rather left, I spent some time with his producer, discussing her viewpoints of what was currently happening in Israel. After seeing the tone of her news segment, I was concerned. I began to question her about accuracy in reporting.

Her answer was even more shocking than what I had already observed. "The thing is," she told me, "it is impossible to be objective in this situation. The fact is that there is no objective truth -- neither side is right or wrong."

"Wait a minute," I asked her. "When a Palestinian straps on a belt of dynamite lined with nails and walks into a pizza shop, blowing up innocent people, that wouldn't be objectively wrong?"

"Of course I would think that is wrong," she answered me. "But the Palestinians believe this is a legitimate form of warfare. And they would say the Israelis are doing the same to them by killing innocent civilians when they retaliate militarily. Who am I to say what is right or wrong? Who am I to say that the Palestinians are wrong in their beliefs?"

"But don't you think there's a difference between a person blowing himself up in a restaurant, and a military that responds by searching for and killing terrorists. Granted that innocent civilians are killed in both circumstances -- but in one situation the innocents are targeted, and in the other situation they are regrettably caught in the line of fire?"

"Well, that's a very Western way of looking at things. You see I'm Christian and American. I see things the way you do as an Israeli -- we have the same moral framework. But the Arabs view things differently, and who's to say that we're right and they're wrong?"

At this point we both realized we weren't going to get any further in the conversation, and we politely thanked each other and parted ways.

This experience gave me new insight into why so much of the media seems biased against Israel. Not only, as I saw with my own eyes, was even the top echelon some of the media unprepared and lacking knowledge of the basic history and make-up of the conflict, but they also possess an extremely dangerous philosophy -- a belief that there is no objective right and wrong.

The world today is being shaped into two conflicting civilizations. This has been happening minimally for decades, but more probably for centuries, and has now become most evident since September 11. One civilization, led by Judeo-Christian ethics, values life with the utmost sanctity. Individual rights and freedoms, equality of the sexes, and peace amongst nations are pillars upon which this half of the world stands.

The other civilization holds very different ideals: the glorification of death and war, totalitarian control of the masses, and oppression of women. The latter civilization sees the former as a direct threat to its way of life and is willing to sacrifice its own children to destroy the other.

This clash of civilizations is being fought on many fronts, including the battlefield. But for most of us non-soldier-types, the war is being fought in the recesses of our own conscience.

Many world leaders, like President Bush and Prime Minister Sharon, have identified this clearly as a fight against evil. But there are others, many of whom are influential in the media, who don't believe that the values of the Western world are "objectively good." Reuters news service refused to call the September 11 attacks "terrorism," finding that even too much of a moral stretch.

This clash calls upon us all to must make a clear choice. Are we confident in our own values and morals? Do we know that they are objectively good and thus worth defending and fighting for?

Unless we can answer these questions with full determination and conviction, we will remain deeply threatened by those who seek to destroy us. Because one thing is certain: The other side has the determination and conviction to carry on their crusade.

Author Biography: Elliot Mathias is the Director of Hasbara Fellowships, a program co-sponsored by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Jerusalem Fellowships of Aish HaTorah, which educates and trains university students to be pro-Israel activists on their campuses. For more information about the program, visit www.goisrael.org. Elliot graduated from Northwestern University and is originally from Buffalo Grove, Il.

Similarly retiring Anthony Lewis said the most important lesson he'd learned in 50 years at The New York Times is that "certainty is the enemy of decency and humanity in people who are sure they are right, like Osama bin Laden and John Ashcroft."

But is Anthony Lewis certain of that?

And these are the same buffoons who ridiculed Governor Bush for not knowing the lastest names of the changing rulers of several third world countries?

And gave Dan Quayle no rest for "tomatoe".

And who are the nastiest, most biased dirtbags who ever came looping through your living room on a hippopotomus.

Accurate read:

Bernard Goldberg, Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News, Regnery, 2002.

Frequency???...Heck

Kenneth couldn't even find the radio dial if his hand was on it

Excellent post!

It is very telling that neither Dan Rather nor his producer knew they were looking at the most significant site in the city, the Temple Mount. Seems like they would have read a book on the history or at least had someone present who had a sense of history. How else could they inform the public in America?

The moral relativism might be a convenient way to hide their ignorance, or at least to try to hide it.

"Thou shalt not" is an imperative, not an opinion or a request.

Exactly. God did not send the Ten Suggestions down from Mt. Sinai.

Thanks for a great post, Tom, and thanks for the ping, kayak.

I didn't think I could have any less respect for Dan Rather than I had before..........I was wrong.

I doubt if Anthony Lewis is certain about anything. He sounds like a man with his feet firmly planted in mid-air.
Maybe he hangs around too many lawyers. One of the fastest ways to become a relativist is to consult with a lawyer for an hour.

I have been giving alot of thought to why the liberals are supporting the Palistinians over the Israelis and besides the conclusions that I mentioned earlier I have been wondering if the Muslims states could be considered Fascist.

Fascism was just another form of socialism developed by Mussolini which took elements of Marxist communism but used a state control of private industry to benefit the workers, rather than direct control by the workers themselves. Mussolini used nationalism as both the stimulant for change and the unifying cohesive force. The Muslims states use Islam. That is the only difference.

"...I have been wondering if the Muslims states could be considered Fascist."

That's the closest political label I can think of. Hitler used religious symbols in his power-grabbing, after all, so there's historical precedent for the intertwining of Fascism and religion.

My gosh.....they did not know the Temple Mount!!!!!!!! I have to say, that is extremely disturbing to me....no wonder the people who are supposed to be informing us have a leftist agenda...they don't know any facts so of course liberalism will appeal more....it DOES emotionally. But conservatism has the truth of experience and history on its side....the facts support it. Ignorance would lead an idealist toward the left and if our news media doesn't know much, no wonder they are liberal.

Spend time on FR and Dan would realize how little he knows....it certainly does the trick for me. I feel like a total idiot on some threads with people that have 10 Ph.D's behind their name who actually know what they are talking about on complex subjects.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.