The US media is notoriously pro-Israeli, Celtic Soul, just like our government is. The mainstream US press merely acts as mouthpiece and megaphone for the Zionist lobby in Washington in this regard.

Now, that said, I read the Washington Post everyday. I do use it as a main source of US government propagandist reporting. What do I mean by that? I mean that I don't expect to read any legitimate criticism of US government policy in that newspaper, regardless of which political party is in power, or who the president is at any given time.

Occassionally, I am surprised to read fair and accurate reporting of events there, as elsewhere in our quasi-official government mainstream propaganda machine, but not often. Which is why I read around 10 newspapers a day, but only two of them from the US. I read newspapers/news websites in English from around the world nearly every day.

European reporting on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is, as a rule, more balanced. When trying to ascertain what is happening on the ground in the Middle East during times of crisis, I often go to more than 10 websites to get information from different perspectives. The best website I have found which presents the Palestinian view with clarity and integrity, is the Electronic Intifada website. Yes, it is one-sided--it is a quasi-official Palestinian Authority website which is every bit as accurate as anything I've seen in the Washington Post. It is also a very well maintained website with a high journalistic standards.

But for a view of the so-called "generous" Israeli offer from Barak, try reading the article in the following post, published about a year ago in UK paper The Guardian.