Thursday, February 5, 2009
More Rockets, No Less Support
Ha'aretz reports that mortar fire from Gaza continues. Not surprising, considering the latest poll from the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion, in which 39% of Palestinians polled continue to support rocket fire on Israel.
Civilian Watch
This will be the first in a running series of posts documenting the deaths of innocent civilians in separatist-group-versus-state conflicts. Throughout the course of the Gaza war, the Palestinian death toll was prominently displayed on front pages across the country. I became curious: are there other separatist-group-versus-state conflicts in other places where civilian life is lost that don't receive the press coverage that Israel perpetually receives?
While this is the first post, my hope, of course, is that it will be the last; civilian death in time of war is a tragedy of the highest order. But, since civilian death is seemingly inevitable in a time of war, I'd like to keep track -- as macabre as that sounds -- both to document the loss of life and to expose news sources for not covering other conflicts as heavily as they cover the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Simultaneous with the Gaza war -- yet far from the front page -- was another war that took place in Sri Lanka. The Tamil separatist group has been fighting the state there, and, after a brutal campaign, Reuters (via the New York Times) reports today that over 250,000 Tamil remain displaced from their homes. Yesterday, the Times reported that the Sri Lankan army shelled a Tamil hospital, which led sick hospital patients to flee, their destination unknown. More than 12 people were killed in the hospital on Tuesday. In contrast to Israel's shelling of the area near the UNRWA school, there was no apparent provocation from the area surrounding the hospital.
The number of civilian casualties throughout the course of this conflict is not readily available. This shows the lack of access given to the media in Sri Lanka at the moment, another difference between the way Israel handled the war and Sri Lanka has. The death toll could be high -- the AP got footage of the dead from inside the war zone on Monday -- but we can't be sure.
Why isn't there a larger outcry? Why isn't this conflict generating story upon story in the press?
While this is the first post, my hope, of course, is that it will be the last; civilian death in time of war is a tragedy of the highest order. But, since civilian death is seemingly inevitable in a time of war, I'd like to keep track -- as macabre as that sounds -- both to document the loss of life and to expose news sources for not covering other conflicts as heavily as they cover the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Simultaneous with the Gaza war -- yet far from the front page -- was another war that took place in Sri Lanka. The Tamil separatist group has been fighting the state there, and, after a brutal campaign, Reuters (via the New York Times) reports today that over 250,000 Tamil remain displaced from their homes. Yesterday, the Times reported that the Sri Lankan army shelled a Tamil hospital, which led sick hospital patients to flee, their destination unknown. More than 12 people were killed in the hospital on Tuesday. In contrast to Israel's shelling of the area near the UNRWA school, there was no apparent provocation from the area surrounding the hospital.
The number of civilian casualties throughout the course of this conflict is not readily available. This shows the lack of access given to the media in Sri Lanka at the moment, another difference between the way Israel handled the war and Sri Lanka has. The death toll could be high -- the AP got footage of the dead from inside the war zone on Monday -- but we can't be sure.
Why isn't there a larger outcry? Why isn't this conflict generating story upon story in the press?
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Contentions, Lagging Behind
Commentary Magazine's blog, Contentions, typically provides some of the best insight on the web, particularly into issues relating to Israel and global politics. But today, two of its bloggers were guilty of not keeping up with the news cycle.
First is Emanuele Ottolenghi. While the post is generally correct, Ottolenghi mistakenly links to an old JPost article (from Jan. 22) that reported on an article in Corriere della Serra, an Italian paper. The piece in the Italian paper claimed that no more than 500-600 Palestinians died in the 22-day Gaza war. Yet even Israeli news sources (from Jan. 26) and the IDF refuted this claim. The commonly reported number of deaths -- 1100-1300 is standard -- is correct. As for the number of civilians who perished, that's still up in the air.
Second, David Hazony recycles very old news, in what, it appears, he thinks is a 'scoop.' In a post titled "Gotcha," Hazony reports on Mads Gilbert, the Swedish doctor who, it turns out, doesn't only support Hamas, but also didn't think 9/11 was all that terrible. The problem is that on January 6 -- nearly one month ago -- CAMERA reported on this very fact.
First is Emanuele Ottolenghi. While the post is generally correct, Ottolenghi mistakenly links to an old JPost article (from Jan. 22) that reported on an article in Corriere della Serra, an Italian paper. The piece in the Italian paper claimed that no more than 500-600 Palestinians died in the 22-day Gaza war. Yet even Israeli news sources (from Jan. 26) and the IDF refuted this claim. The commonly reported number of deaths -- 1100-1300 is standard -- is correct. As for the number of civilians who perished, that's still up in the air.
Second, David Hazony recycles very old news, in what, it appears, he thinks is a 'scoop.' In a post titled "Gotcha," Hazony reports on Mads Gilbert, the Swedish doctor who, it turns out, doesn't only support Hamas, but also didn't think 9/11 was all that terrible. The problem is that on January 6 -- nearly one month ago -- CAMERA reported on this very fact.
Step Back, George Packer
Today, George Packer of the New Yorker wrote a blog post on the zine's site about the different ways presidents handle troubled subordinates. He writes,
Forget about the embarassingly cloying nature of this post. What's more noticeable is Packer's lack of context. Instead of comparing the Daschle/Geithner/Killefer issues with similar transition troubles Bush and Clinton faced, Packer's only example for either one is Bush's defense of Alberto Gonzales -- already an established Cabinet official.
A more apt comparison would be Bush's handling of Linda Chavez, who was (now, as it turns out, wrongfully) pilloried for helping an illegal immigrant ten years before her nomination to Labor Secretary in 2001. Or Bernard Kerik, who withdrew amid scandal after being nominated as Homeland Security chief. Both of these officials were handled in roughly the same manner as Obama handled Daschle. In all of these cases, the President tried to hang on to the nominee for as long as he could, until the nominee finally had to capitulate to public pressure. Packer shouldn't try to manufacture a distinction between presidents when it isn't really so clear-cut.
"Clinton showed that he was ready to cut anyone loose who caused him political trouble, and this opportunism weakened him more than the troubled appointee could have. Bush responded with stubborn loyalty, which became the same thing as indifference to competence and integrity, poisoning his Presidency. There's a third way, projecting true strength, and that's to live up to your principles, which is what Obama just did."
Forget about the embarassingly cloying nature of this post. What's more noticeable is Packer's lack of context. Instead of comparing the Daschle/Geithner/Killefer issues with similar transition troubles Bush and Clinton faced, Packer's only example for either one is Bush's defense of Alberto Gonzales -- already an established Cabinet official.
A more apt comparison would be Bush's handling of Linda Chavez, who was (now, as it turns out, wrongfully) pilloried for helping an illegal immigrant ten years before her nomination to Labor Secretary in 2001. Or Bernard Kerik, who withdrew amid scandal after being nominated as Homeland Security chief. Both of these officials were handled in roughly the same manner as Obama handled Daschle. In all of these cases, the President tried to hang on to the nominee for as long as he could, until the nominee finally had to capitulate to public pressure. Packer shouldn't try to manufacture a distinction between presidents when it isn't really so clear-cut.
Welcome!
Thanks for joining me on my maiden voyage in the blogosphere. To torture the metaphor even further, I'll be sailing in treacherous waters, replete with harsh conditions (geo-politically speaking) and unfriendly, adversarial ships (in the form of authors and bloggers who might not share my point of view).
The aim of this blog is both to monitor daily, news-making occurences relating to Israel and to try to get a grasp on longer-term trends with larger global consequences. While the blog is, as its name shows, a hobby at this point, my hope is that it will develop into something meaningful and eye-opening.
Some practitioners of the art of the blog tend to use it so that they can rant and rave about a particular injustice. That's not my goal; though there's a chance I could rant from time to time, I will try to write concise posts that are substantiated and link to other equally substantiated blogs or news sources.
Finally, this blog won't solely focus on Israel and the Middle East, despite the punny name. I'll also be writing about national politics and culture -- high and low -- and I'll take liberties with viral videos. But I won't abuse that right.
The aim of this blog is both to monitor daily, news-making occurences relating to Israel and to try to get a grasp on longer-term trends with larger global consequences. While the blog is, as its name shows, a hobby at this point, my hope is that it will develop into something meaningful and eye-opening.
Some practitioners of the art of the blog tend to use it so that they can rant and rave about a particular injustice. That's not my goal; though there's a chance I could rant from time to time, I will try to write concise posts that are substantiated and link to other equally substantiated blogs or news sources.
Finally, this blog won't solely focus on Israel and the Middle East, despite the punny name. I'll also be writing about national politics and culture -- high and low -- and I'll take liberties with viral videos. But I won't abuse that right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
