Israeli family is hiding during a rocket attack.
At the onset I’ll admit that I’m not objective. But because I’m not objective I try to be aware and not fall into the predictable stance of “my position is the right one”.
Those who know me well, often get frustrated by my ability to see both sides (just ask my Democratic friends), and my tendency to by doubtful about “The Truth”.
And yet, yesterday 11/16/2012 and this morning 11/17/2012, the language, use of words and pictures in the Los Angeles Times made my blood boil, and I said to myself : “No more!”
A bloodied Israeli baby is rescued
Edmund Sanders who writes for the LA Times is so overtly unobjective that if there was a medal for biased journalism he would get it.
Let’s look at Friday’s edition:
The above mentioned reporter uses the following statement about Israeli casualties:
“In Israel, a bloodied infant in a pink jumpsuit was gingerly rescued from the rubble of an apartment building where three other residents were killed by rocket fired from Gaza. The three deaths in Kiryat Malachi were the first on the Israeli side.”
Here’s the paragraph about the deaths in Gaza:
“About the same time, bereaved young parents to the south in Gaza City buried their 11- month- old boy, who had just learned to say “Mama.” The boy, Omar Misharawi, was killed Wednesday in an Israeli attack. The explosion tore through the family’s home, killing him and his pregnant aunt as the family dived for cover. “He was just a few steps behind, ” said his stunned mother, Ahlam Misharawi, 24. “He was right behind me.”
So let’s contrast and compare:
Israeli baby was saved and not hurt but a Palestinian baby died.
Israeli baby has no name, the 3 Israelis who were killed have no name, but the Palestinian baby and mother have names.
The Palestinian baby was attacked by Israel, but Israelis were killed by a rocket.
There is no mention of anything personal about the Israeli casualties, no names, age, gender, burial information, relatives or words about them, just a dry statistic!
Of the Gaza’s casualty, we get to hear words that would immediately reach our gut, and tug at our heart. We know the age of the baby, we know that he started to talk, we know about his young mother, we relate to them; and because of the personal information we hurt for them.
I hurt for them too. I hurt for the baby and the horrific pain of the parents. But …
I also hurt for the 3 dead Israelis whom the Times let remain nameless and featureless. I hurt for them because they have family and relatives as well, and they were also in the middle of something … in the middle of living when a Hamas rocket killed them.
If Hamas (or anyone) is going to tell me their goal and mission is to destroy me, am I supposed to just wait and see? I think not. Nor do I have an interest in being a nameless or faceless statistic – just one of “3 residents.”
And then there’s the photo of an Israeli missile in a response to the rockets. But we all know that a picture is worth a thousand words. No picture of any Hamas rocket and its damage, despite the fact that hundreds of them were fired!
And no mention that Israel got into this war very reluctantly; that it spreads hundreds of leaflets alerting the Palestinians of an incoming attack and urged them to hide; to move out of the city for a while because Israel’s goal is not to kill innocent civilians, but to destroy Hamas’s weapons and terrorists. Yes, it’s bad there, quite bad. I dream of peace.
And then there’s today. Saturday in the Los Angeles Times edition:
“An Israeli official says an invasion could be launched within days if Palestinians keep firing rockets.”
Let’s look at some other possible headlines instead of this, just some of my ideas, not Edmund Sanders headline.
We could have seen the following: “Hamas fires rockets 10 miles from Jerusalem, the city they claim as their capital.”
Or: “Despite Israel adhering to cease fire while Egyptian PM visits, Hamas continues its assault.”
Or: “Hamas continued rocket assault may result in escalation.”
But these are not the headlines. It’s about Israel and invasion.
But to add insult to injury the pictures this morning were shameful. One can imagine that the Times has hundreds if not thousands of pictures of the conflict. You know how it is today with digital cameras, it does not even cost the price of paper!
But the one picture from the Israeli side is of , and I quote: “An Israeli man drinks a beer in the kitchen of his house in Kfar Aza, which was hit by a rocket fired by militants in the Gaza strip. Israel bombarded Gaza on Friday with more than 250 airstrikes.”
And then you see a picture of an Israeli man drinking beer! Not water, not Coke but beer. Not a picture of destruction, of Israeli children huddling in their bunkers, but of a man drinking beer? Of all the pictures that the LA Times photographer took, that’s the one depicting the grave situation?
I don’t know Edmund Sanders who reports for the LA Times, but I’m glad I’m not meeting him today…