Again, why the complaints that reports are one sided, when there are (sic) two sides to this story? There is nothing wrong with reporting from the Palestinian perspective--clearly there is a desperate need for many international journalists to be come involved enough to do just that.

This war is laregely being reported on the Jerusalem sidelines by the American mainstream press, who have taken over nearly every available news outlet on the West Bank. Yet for some reason, they don't seem to be able to interview any Palestinians for their stories!

The Palestinian side of this story is not being told, and the reporting is profoundly Israeli and US centric. Profoundly.

If non-American journalists can report from the West Bank, why not the American journalists, with their armored cars, their superior satellite technology, etc? With that kind of reporting power, why aren't we hearing the Palestinian side? Christiane Amanpour haranguing the Palestinian negotiators safely outside the warzone doesn't amount to reporting, period.

How about a united outcry from the community of international journalists regarding Israeli censorship? Answer: because the Israeli government says they will be stripped of their credentials to report on Israel at all. Why no outcry over that side of the story? Why is that side of the story not getting on the three major US network broadcasts, hmmm?

Why isn't the European press asking these questions in their own capitals, of their own governments? There have certainly been enough demonstrations in their own countries to justify looking into the one-sided (ie pro-US/Israeli) reporting among their colleagues.

Of course telling the Palestinians' side of the story is one-sided. To criticize that reporting as being one-sided is de facto admission that we only want to hear one side of the story told--the Israeli/US side of the story!

Not very balanced or objective reporting, now is it?