Kidnapped By Israel

[Violet_Crumble]

Few readers of a British newspaper would have noticed the story. In the Observer of 25 June, it merited a mere paragraph hidden in the "World in brief" section, revealing that the previous day a team of Israeli commandos had entered the Gaza Strip to "detain" two Palestinians Israel claims are members of Hamas.

The significance of the mission was alluded to in a final phrase describing this as "the first arrest raid in the territory since Israel pulled out of the area a year ago". More precisely, it was the first time the Israeli army had re-entered the Gaza Strip, directly violating Palestinian control of the territory, since it supposedly left in August last year.

As the Observer landed on doorsteps around the UK, however, another daring mission was being launched in Gaza that would attract far more attention from the British media - and prompt far more concern.

Shortly before dawn, armed Palestinians slipped past Israeli military defences to launch an attack on an army post close by Gaza called Kerem Shalom. They sneaked through a half-mile underground tunnel dug under an Israeli-built electronic fence that surrounds the Strip and threw grenades at a tank, killing two soldiers inside. Seizing another, wounded soldier the gunmen then disappeared back into Gaza.

Whereas the Israeli "arrest raid" had passed with barely a murmur, the Palestinian attack a day later received very different coverage. The BBC's correspondent in Gaza, Alan Johnstone, started the ball rolling later the same day in broadcasts in which he referred to the Palestinian attack as "a major escalation in cross-border tensions". (BBC World news, 10am GMT, 25 June 2006)

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=22&ItemID=10537

[Poppyseedman]

1. Interesting article highlighting the

fact that the "media" is never really completely non-biased in it's objectivity and reporting.

People rarely see how the story is reported reflects on the personal bias of these reporting the "facts"

This article opens that reality up.

Words do have meanings.

[bemildred]

2. The IDF "soldiers" "arrest" "bargaining chips".

Palestinian "terrorists" "kidnap" "hostages".

[pelsar]

3. and the hypocrasy...

when the kassams fall, and israel retailiates with shell fire...the complaints (here and elsewhere) are that 'its against intl law, etc)...and that israel should arrest them.

so israel actually does have a raid and actually does arrest them...and now?

more complaints.....

conclusion: the palestenains should be able to shoot missles on israeli cities without being bothered with any israeli response, (so killing and terrorizing israelis is better than any alternative....)

and if i dont understand something or I am missing something, please feel free to correct me.

[bemildred]

4. Yes, the selective use of language is very hypocritical. nt

[pelsar]

6. but...

i thought israel was SUPPOSED to arrest those who are responsable for the kassams....so now i understand that they shouldnt?..if they're kidnapping them, then thats illegal.


i'm confused, should israel arrest those responsable for the kassams or not?...use any language you want......

[bemildred]

8. Deliberate misuse of language is often confusing.

Sometimes it is even intended to confuse.

[Violet_Crumble]

10. It's all in the language, isn't it?

I think Hamas are catching on, if what I read about them actually naming the raid that captured the soldier Operation somethingorother is right. I got a bit of a snicker at that one. It just sucks that none of them can come up with catchy operation names :(

[Lefty48197]

5. You can expect a few Iraeli pizza parlors to be blown up now too

by those brilliant military tacticians from Hamas.

[pelsar]

7. zmag readers...

so as i understand it:

israel should not shell gaza to stop the kassams...

israel should not enter gaza to arrest those responsable for the kassams..

so tell me zmag readers.....does israel have any options to prevent the kassams from gaza from landing in israeli cities...or do the zmag readers feel that its best for all that the missle shooters shouldnt be bothered by the IDF and should shoot at will

and the conclusion: killing and terrorizing israelis is preferable to the alternatives. Now i understand that my conclusion may get some mad, and i will be happy to form a different one, assuming that perhaps some realistic options can be listed?


(btw ashkelon is a city has a population of 104,000)

i can recall when israel started shelling, the cries here was that its against intl law and israel should arrest them....ok, so israel did that and i understand that, that too is "against intl law". seems to me the only thing that, according to zmag that is not against intl law, is israel defending itself (or the result of no defense-killing israelis by palestenians...)

anybody for the realistic "legal" alternatives?..or will silence by the response?

[pelsar]

9. just curious...

if all of those who are so busy critizing any and all of israels responses would like to make a suggestion that might stop the kassams, that will no doubt fall in the future as they have in the past....