Robert wrote:
In the present case, we see why deletion is bad. We
are
left with a horribly broken presentation in which readers
are unable to discover why it might be that, despite the
PLO officially no longer calling for the destruction of
Israel, and Arafat himself announcing a right to exist, the
majority of Palestinians polled support the destruction of
Israel.
We can only come to understand that better when we come to
understand Arafat's duplicity, and the anti-Israel
propaganda that is rampant in the Palestinian culture. But
because some supporters of Palestine are uncomfortable with
that material, it is censored from Wikipedia. No, I don't
think censorship is too strong a word."
This seems like a blatant attempt to manipulate a text, or a series of
assumedly accurate facts in support of propaganda for the Israeli POV.
The phrase "when we come to understand Arafat's duplicity" (without so
much as a hint of the more conditional "if and when...") suggests an
uncompromising closed-minded, view of Arafat's duplicity that is not
prepared to accept any evidence to the contrary. I say this without
prejudice to whether or not that evidence exists.
Certainly there is anti-Israeli propaganda coming from Palestinians, but
then so too is there as much anti-Palestinian propaganda from Israelis.
As the adage goes, Robert's complaints are a case of "the pot calling
the kettle black".
Ec