Wednesday, June 28, 2006

More Blatant Bias Towards Israel

After coming home from work, I flipped on the internet, and the first thing I saw on CNN.com was a picture of a powerplant at flames, against a backdrop of a night sky.

I thought, "Oh no", and I was right. I scrolled down to read the text, and it declared that Israel had invaded Gaza only a few hours before, to find the missing soldier and to pressure his release with the threat and action of military force.

So I immediately turn to the news channels, to see what was going on. Like the Iraq war, I felt an immense physical need to be in the middle of the action, to catch the play by play.

So I was more than a little dissapointed to hardly be able to find anything on the TV about it. There was a banner scrolling across CNN that said Israel had invaded Gaza, and that was it. No reports, no live interviews, no men on the ground.

Later in the evening, I checked the news channels again. I don't remember which one it was, but I found one with a british-accent having male newscaster who was doing a live interview with the spokeswoman for the IDF, or Israeli Defense Forces.

I found the interview to be a microcosm of the world opinion of Israel. The broadcaster, rather than being concerned with the welfare of the missing soldier, or the lives of the other invading soldiers, or the missing soldier's family, instead focused on what the IDF was actually doing, and literally ignored all of the other information and circumstances to try and catch the spokesperson in a sophmoric logical fallacy.

Basically, the spokesperson was saying that Israel had invaded Gaza to get the soldier back.

So the broadcaster asks, "So, you know exactly where the soldier is?"

Spokesperson: "You know I can't give that kind of operational intelligence right now."

Broadcaster: "So you don't know where he is, and this military action is meant to pressure Hamas and the Palestinians to give him up."

"Spokesperson: "Let me remind you, we have tried every diplomatic channel possible to get him back, and nothing has worked, so this is our only option."

Broadcaster: "You didn't answer my question. Do you, or do you not know where the missing soldier is?"

Spokesperson: "As I said before, I can't release that information."

Broadcaster: "Well, what I'm trying to figure out is, is the intention of the invasion to use specific intelligence of the soldier's exact whereabouts to extract him, or is this meant to put pressure on the Palestinian Authority to give him up?"

Spokesperson: "Ummm, we are doing all that we can to go in there and get him out, while at the same time exerting pressure on the PA to help get him released."

Broadcaster: "I seem to be repeating myself. I'm trying to establish whether you have exact intelligence as to his whereabouts, or whether this military action is only meant to exert pressure on the PA. Which is it?"

At this point, the conversation devolves into the spokesperson saying the same thing over and over again, defending the operation, while the broadcaster continually makes light of her statements, trying to get her to say they know exactly where the soldier was, or they don't know where he was and this was just meant to pressure the PA.

Do you see what I mean? There's this whole WAR going on, Hamas blatantly makes an attack and kidnaps a soldier, IDF responds, and this broadcaster only cares to ask about intelligence the IDF obviously can't give! It was a shameless display of open hatred towards Israel, and sympathy for the attackers. Not once was any blame laid on Hamas for the instigation of this by the kidnapping of the soldier.

I report, you decide.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home