Discussion: There is two sides to every story (both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinians – their stories are biased just as this one)

This had to be done, especially because of the race between the pro-Israel and pro-Palestinians and how they try to rule the media and also the public opinion. I have not intended to bend you into either direction. Who? Where? What? Nah, I won’t answer that. The thing I will do is instead look into how biased we can be, and also little insight we sometimes have. In the end I will just ask a simple question.  Does that sounds feasible in our day and age? If not, well, still have a blessed journey through my very simple piece.

We live in a time and day where wars are happening. There are certain rules to the proceedings right? Still, when we discuss them we still take sides. Hiram Johnson senator in US from 1917-1945, he said: “Truth,’ it has been said, ‘is the first casualty of war” (…) “Among the calamities of war may be jointly numbered the diminution of the love of truth, by the falsehoods which interest dictates and credulity encourages” (WikiQuote, 2014).

Even Protagoras said: “there two sides to every story, and one truth. Tell the story, and get out of the way; let the reader figure it out” (Cousineau, 2010).

Now I won’t go to ethical or historical down. Because then my thoughts we’ll be gone in the wind. Like tiny little leafs that being caught with the rush of the wind.

I am writing this because in my own country there is hard headed discussion about the innocence and righteous war for either Israel or the Palestinians on the Gaza stip. They are both going at it like every drunken uncle at the barbeque. Both blaming each other just like they are doing on the stip. Sending grenades from neighbor to neighbor and it never ends.

Why I am saying this like that, because the bickering and discussing over the matter, like you doesn’t give the cause anything, neither to you nor the other guy who disagree. We know that both side of the story. It’s hard from a far even in our day and age to know who is actually accurate. We trust in this media, sometimes government controlled as such. Which even has some reporters that can be biased. Let me get serious! We are all a bit biased. Like I am biased on the matter of which leader in Uganda I respect the most – not Yoweri K. Museveni but Dr. Kizza Besigye. So when people are saying directly all the time and addressing each other, they seem like their forgetting this.

Especially when we know that the truths are the first to die in a war. Therefore the story that is going to be told shouldn’t have the issues of falsehood in them, but still they might not be the whole picture. The whole picture isn’t clear until the weapons have been put into a storage unit and the sad loss on each side is counted. Like Protagoras said: there are two sides to every story. That is because there is to side’s view to what they saw and felt occurred during the events.

Zdenek Urbánek said in the 1970s Checkoslovakia: “In one respect, we are more fortunate than you in the west. We believe nothing of what we read in the newspapers and watch on television, nothing of the official truth. Unlike you, we have learned to read between the lines, because real truth is always subversive” (Pilger, 2006). This was in the 1970s Iron Curtain and when the Soviet was under the rule of Stalin and staying strong. We can just live into the words that he is saying. Can we imagine it or will it all ends into an Orwellian nightmare?

What I am not saying is that we should be bleak about the factors and the injustice that is happening worldwide. It’s natural to react to people losing their lives and people living under circumstances way beyond what we should wish for our worst enemy. More of what I am asking for both parties in a discussion, as viral as the discussions between pro-Israel or pro-Palestine. Act real please! You both can’t have all the information and the whole facts on the situation on the ground. The last piece of the history we got is from the last strongest part, which took the core measurement and got on top.

The, Who? Where? What? We all live in different places all around the world. We have had different teachers, different parents, different childhoods, eaten all kind of foods, drinking local kind of drinks, being a part of some faith, political views, this all will be a part of margins of error in our judgment on recent events. Wouldn’t we hear a different view on Russian annexation from a Slovakian then a brother from Greece? Wouldn’t the thoughts on Ukraine be different seen by a brother in Sierra Leone versus Chinese? It might be the same even, but if the context and our luggage in our mind and our conscious should have any indication, then it should at least differ a bit.

The stories from direct line might be tainted as much as the outsiders discussing it. They have deal with losses, with victories and also being in the fire day after day. We from afar can never feel that pain or loss. That’s another reason why we should be a bit careful to discuss the matter at hand.

Especially we all should know that when we pick and make cases, articles, blogs, we’re all usually picking certain links and quotes. Or copy/pasting certain sources and making a case on the matter. To put our view into the world and develop a understanding on the matter from the different places and writers, journalist and commentators, as I do often, I hope they have caught and asked the right questions to the ones close to the matter at hand. So the story will not only be shallow piece. But actually something that shade a little bit of light on the matter at hand. I know in my pieces that I am biased. If a writer says that they are neutral. Then their lying to you and most importantly; nobody can be non-biased. You can work towards that goal. It’s a nice mission, but kind of impossible. More impossible then a mix of Matrix, Mission Impossible and Crank movies into wild goose chase where none of the actors can’t see the forest for the trees.

So please when we discuss matter that are deep, conflicted and sometimes out of reach where our knowledge doesn’t stand to deep. Could we please take a few sips of brew, before we throw stones, then since we’re sitting and drinking the brew (we might start to actually have a conversation…).


Cousineau, Phil – ‘The Oldest Story In the World’ (Utgiver: 2010) Phil Cousineau.


Pilger, John – ‘The real first casualty of war’ (24.04.2006) Link: http://johnpilger.com/articles/the-real-first-casualty-of-war


Wikiquote – ‘Hiram Johnson’ (13.04.2014) Link: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hiram_Johnson

MPS – Mission Impossible 4: Ghost Protocol

Dette er god gammeldags action-film. En forsettelse på en serie som er blitt produsert av 3 store resissører. Nå er det Brad Bird som er kjent for animasjoner som Up! & flere andre. Med produsenter har han med seg J.J. Abrams og Brian Burk. Så filmen burde fra alle mulige standpunkt være på trygge hender. Ikke laget av Uwe Boll eller andre som bare sprenger hus får å se kult ut. Disse folkene sprenger biler, vinduer osv. Fordi det er viderefortellende historie som bygges videre på sprengingen av huset, bilen eller bare dreper en random agent.

Som skrevet tidligere dette er den 4 filmen i rekken. Mission Impossible er allerede en anerkjent action serie. Derfor kommer det automatisk forventninger til filmen. At Tom Cruise som Ethan Hawke skal gjøre noe usannsynlig. Ja, han og sine venner redde verden enda en gang. Det kan jeg si uten å fortelle for mye. Noe som nesten er som Tugg Speedman (Ben Stiller). Her er den:

(Ikke se dette klippet lengre enn til 1:10 fordi etter dette, er det bare reklamer for kanalen!)

Dette er en film som tar opp ett ganske klisjefylt tema. Good Guy Vs Bad Guy. Terrorister som ønsker å sprenge noe. Å fredlige agenter som ønsker at de ikke sprenger noe. Right? Denne filmen inneholder dette. Russere er badguys. Svensker er badguys. Nordmenn er ikke der. I India er de enten spinnrike eller så har de solgt seg ut. Anil Kapoor som Brij Nath spiller en vittig bi-karakter i filmen(og har sikkert flest filmroller enn rest av settet!). Utenom Cruise og Kapoor. Spiller Jermey Renner som Agent Brandt. Paula Patton som Agent Carter og Simon Pegg som Agent Dunn(Benji).

Andre kule bi-roller er leiemorderen Lea Seydoux (Sabine Moreau). Micheal Nyquist (Kurt Hendricks) og Samuli Edelman (Wistrom). Disse er Bad-Guys! Veldige gode Bad-Guys! Noe som jeg ikke vil fortelle mye om. Dette viser bare om hvordan denne filmen har en del galskap.

Filmen spilles i Russland, Budapest, Dubai, India og San Fransisco. Med helt umulige oppdag. Derav navnet: Mission Impossible. Hvis du skal ha en morsom film med stilige action-scener.

Skal ikke fortelle noe mer. Du bør se den selv. Snurr film. Peace.

MPS – Motion Picture Sh**.

Mission Impossible 4: Ghost Protocol – ImDB Link


Dette er andre poster med Lea Seydoux som leiemorderen “Sabine Moreau” (Hun har også tidligere spilt i Inglorious Bastards).

(Ja, jeg tok 2 Russiske plaketer istedenfor vanlige Engelske Postere).. Enjoy.


%d bloggers like this: