One newspaper criticising another newspapers reporting – can’t wait for teevee news to kick in. Got a cite for the Guardian editorial itself ?
I’m not sure that I completely agree with your interpretation, or that that is the inference that is supposed to be drawn. There have been many items in the news following suicide bombings in which the family, quite often the mothers, discuss how proud they are that their child was chosen to be a martyr. There have also been parents of young children stating that they hope their own young ones grow up to be martyrs as well.
I interpreted the “no normal human being” statement to refer to the culture of death that these children are growing up in. Rather than aspiring for their children to grow up and become doctors or lawyers or businessmen, living in a free Palestine, they aspire for them to detonate a bomb strapped to their body amongst as many civilian Jews as they can find. That is, admittedly, pretty sick.
For the record, here’s that Guardian leader (which at no point refers to what happened as a “massacre”):
Not quite as wrong as Jackmanii suggests, though still overly emotive. Though it does go on to say:
And 4 days later the Sunday edition (the Observer) said
I wonder if the NYT reported that, too…
pldennison - I guess we interpret these kinds of statements differently. For me, if the statement by the Mayor was made in the immediate aftermath of the child-dressed-as-a-bomber- photo revelation, then it holds a different connotation than if same was made without the implicit linkage (ie. earlier or some time after).
I’d also tend (generally speaking) to the view that the opinions of the parents of adult suicide bombers expressed in the aftermath of the death of their son or daughter aren’t helpful – their child has just blown themselves up into thousands of pieces and took a bunch of others with him. Rational, no. In denial and much more besides, presumably yep. IMHO. They may be hardened militants…I don’t know but they must surely be grieving.
As for mothers expressing their wishes that their child will grow up to do same – no friggin idea. I assume it’s part of the polarisation and dehumanisation endemic in the region and spoken about in the OP’s linked article.
To think that it could be rational is way, way beyond my life experience, or anything I’d care to consider at this point…
I think the * Guardian* went beyond “overly emotive”. jjimm.
After calling what happened in Jenin “every bit as repellent in its particulars” and “no less distressing” than 9/11 (extremely offensive to both Israelis and Americans, undocumented, and ultimately shown to be unfounded), the Guardian goes on to say:
“Jenin feels like a crime. No sentient person can sift this evidence of broken lives and homes; witness the dry-eyed children, their minds shocked and twisted beyond words; look upon the detritus of a frugal, refugee existence - tin plates in a kitchen sink, cheap bathroom tiles, abandoned sleeping mats - turned into ownerless rubbish by bullets, bulldozers and rockets; and not demand an urgent reckoning. Jenin already has that aura of infamy that attaches to a crime of especial notoriety.”
The Guardian, not withstanding the subsequent call for investigation, had obviously already made up its mind as to what happened.
I submit that that was a low point in British Middle East journalism, though far from the only one.
How about a 14-year-old suicide bomber?
Though in this case, it does sound like the emphasis is rather more on “suicide” than “bomber.”
As always, I appreciate your responses, naive though they be. I suspect that few, if any, of you have spent time in Israel or in the West Bank.
Ms. Goldenberg’s article contains a combination of arrogance, ignorance, bias, and stupidity. Frankly, the article is so bad, I cannot do justice to all that’s wrong. I shall do my best.
pldennison pointed out that the name of the thread was overblown, and I admit it. However, I the title was roughly accurate:
The article did spend an entire paragraph pointing out that Israelis call Palestinian bombers “animals.” The attitude of the Israelis toward the Palestinians was one of the author’s central points.
OTOH the article does not criticze Palestinian terrorism from a moral POV. It deplores the impact of the attacks – “they have done much to feed that impression [that Palestinians behave inhumanly]”. The article also sort-of justifies the attacks, claiming (incorrectly) that certain murdered Israelis were living in “illegal” settlements, and by including the quote, “I look at the intifada like a prison revolt.”
Over and over the article claims to find a parallel between the hatred of Israelis for Palestinians, and vice versa. If you had been in Israel ten years ago, as I was, you would have seen hatred expressed by Palestinans, but not by Israelis. Worry, yes; hatred, no.
In reality, the Arabs have been promoting hatred for years. Iraq has a powerful TV station that’s available throughout Israel. It just spews out hatred. The Arafat government has promoted hatred. I’m sure you posters are not anti-semitic, but anti-semitism is rife among the Arabs. It’s regrettable that Arab anti-semitism gets less media coverage than it deserves.
While Arab government promoted hatred of Israel and of Jews, Israel has accepted Arabs and Muslims as full citizens. Israel has also provided many benefits to non-citizen Palestinians. Israel has done a hell of a lot more for the Palestinians than any Arab nation has.
The Palestinian Authority and most other Arab regimes are brutal dictatorships. Their leaders promote hatred of Israel. (Despots find it useful to have scapegoats.) Ararfat called an intifada when he was offered a Palestinian State. Palestinians have been terrorizing Israeli citizens for two years. Now that Israelis have reacted to unproked mass murder with bad feelings, the author has found a parallel. * She seems to say: Israelis now hate Palestinians. They’re both the same. Of course, I’m on a higher moral plane than either of them.
I will add one specific example:
Let’s see. Palestinians are carrying suicide bombs to maim and murder civilians. Israeli soldiers have captured some terrorists and taken their weapons. The Israelis are smiling. They should be. They prevented anther Passover massacre or Hebrew University atrocity, and they did so by capturing, rather than killing, the perps.
But, Ms Goldenberg isn’t happy that these murderers were apprehended before they could kill innocent women and children. Not at all. What she finds “searing” about the situation is that these killers was: “their hands were bound behind their backs,” “they were blindfolded,” an Israeli soldier was “grinning” and he “loomed” over them.
The important thing to Ms. Goldenberg is that that photo reminds her something that happened somewhere else 150 years ago. Although her parallel shows how knowledgable and compassionate she thinks she is, she did not even notice that these Palestinians intended to commit mayhem against Israeli civilians. They would have done so, had they not been captured.
Without delving into the rights or wrongs of the situation, one would have to have a heart of stone with blinders to match not to acknowledge that there has been extraoridinary suffering on both sides. Every Palestinian and every Israeli has lost friends and family to terror; both sides hate and fear the other’s capacity for violence.
A Palestinian mother weeps for her dead son just as much as an Israeli mother weeps for hers. I think that’s something that December doesn’t comprehend. When the Palestinians celebrate a suicide bomber becoming a shahid, they’re not inhuman monsters; they are rejoicing in a blow struck against the hated other, and that their son has gone to Paradise, which is better than living in a futile, hopeless cesspit. It horoughly disagree with the Palestinian leadership and have little sympathy for their political plight, which is largely self-inflicted, but at the same time, I try not to lose sight of the reality that real people, real families are suffering needlessly because of the stupidity and shortsightedness of their governments. Just because Israel is fighting a corrupt. thuggish government does not excuse allowing Palestinian children to live in filth and be malnourished. Just because the Palestinians see Israelis as an evil occupier does nto excuse causing Israeli children to fear they will die leaving the house.
Hate, rage, fear: these aren’t inhuman. To the contrary, they are intensely human reactions to this situation.
Full disclosure: I am extremely pro-Israel, and seeing the Palestinians dance on 9/11 still affects me. I try to stay out of these threads because having december on one’s side, making inane, irrelevant, and ridiculously one-sided arguments is a sure way to get one’s viewpoint tainted by association.
Must resist urge to abuse rolleyes smiley . . .
Admit that you (constantly) do this to cause a shit-storm. This isn’t the first time, and you know it.
As for the rest of your arguments, buried beneath piles of your one-sided, feeble-minded inability to see any faults in those subjects which you hold dear, you have a couple of good points. A shame that few are going to bother arguing them due to your inflammatory behaviour.
And how long have you spent over there?
gobear:
Thank you for a reasoned even response to this topic, even if it is the pit 
Just one question. how did you feel about the images of palestinian men, women and children holding a vigil the next day for the victims of 9/11? I certainly remember both incidents, and were sickened by the dancing ones, and heartened by the vigil pictures.
Dude, you live in New Jersey! Don’t be holding youirself out as some expert, especially when you have been told off before by Dopers who actually live in Israel!
Well, of course not, you idiot. This is supposed to be reportage, not advocacy. Did you even read the article? It’s about the desensitizing effect of violence on both sides.
And yes, the article is critical of the Palestinian moral position
Learn to fucking read for comprehension, you mook. The anti-Jewish bias of Arab governments has nothing to do with this article. You seem to think that anything short of an unabashed pro-Israel/anti-Palestinian screed is “biased.” Being evenhanded in one’s reporting is not fucking biased!
I never saw any vigil picures, but hearing that some Palestinians cared about the 9/11 victims is heartening indeed is definitely heartening.
Just don’t think I’ve gone soft on you. I’m still no fan of Islam (or any religion), and I reserve the right to criticize (or praise) as the situation warrants.
From the reports on the news it seemed that the “celebrations” were because they had heard that someone had stuck it to the Americans so to speak, but when they actually saw the events and so many innocents dying the mood changed.
No cite, just memory of looking at the news on ~12th Sept.
I think it interesting that you use “palestinians” for one case and “some palestinians” for the other. But, its probably the closest I’ll get you to agree with me on teh matter
I never thought you had gone soft, I just think you are capable of good debate, and just because “its the pit” dosent mean that good debate has to be abandoned.
december: You are a ninny.
Well, they did also hold massive street celebrations following the bombing at Hebrew U. I don’t think it’s questionable that there are some seriously misplaced priorities in the culture.
Still, that doesn’t excuse december’s disgusting misrepresentation of the article. Those of us in the news and media business recognize objective reporting when we see it. But december doesn’t want objectivity; he wants nothing but pro-Israel reporting.
And don’t whip out “more pro-Israel than thou” on anybody here, december. Up until 5 years ago, my cousin Eric (a rabbi, as it happens), his wife and two daughters lived in Jerusalem. And my boss is in Israel nearly every year. In fact, he built a school there two years ago.
Well, the celebrations were so widespread that Arafat had to tell his people to knock it off for fear of the backlash from the American public. I suspect, though I have no evidence, that the number of celebrants was larger than the number of mourners. But, in the interests of objectivity, I can go along with “some Palestinians” in both cases.
And I think you are capable of good debate, too.
[quote]
You are so right, gobear.
One reason I found the article so repulsive is that the author didn’t seem to express sympathy to any of the individuals affected – Palestinian or Israeli. What I found in the article was her admiration for her herself. YMMV
If that was one of the reasons you found the article so repulsive, why didn’t you say so, you lying fuck?
For the record, I posted earlier, “Ms. Goldenberg’s article contains a combination of arrogance, ignorance, bias, and stupidity. Frankly, the article is so bad, I cannot do justice to all that’s wrong.”
jjimm, if you found out that I wasn’t just a bigot, you might have to analyze the article and think through the opints raised by my posts. That would be hard work. No wonder you’re so angry.