PDA

View Full Version : What Isn't Mentioned About ISM Deaths in the Middle East


Nie Trink Wasser
17th April 2003, 02:21 PM
"At the time of his injury, Tom Hurndall was armed, wearing tiger fatigues, and shooting at a Israeli Defense Force outpost, taking cover behind a nearby building between shots.

Those of you reading about Tom Hurndall in the American or British media might start at this last sentence. After all, you read a dramatically different version of events in your weekend papers, which probably went something like this:

At the time of his injury, Tom Hurndall was unarmed, dressed in the bright orange jacket of the International Solidarity Movement, and steering two Palestinian children away from a firing Israeli tank-mounted machine gun.

That sound better? The first story, which cast Tom Hurndall as an armed combatant, was based on a Sunday, April 13th report of the Israeli Defense Forces. The second story, which cast Tom Hurndall as a heroic rescuer of defenseless children, was based on 'eyewitness' reports from Tom's fellow activists in the International Solidarity Movement. This second story got picked up by Reuters, who wrote that the Israeli Defense Force critically wounded a "British peace activist helping Palestinian children cross a street under gunfire." It also got picked up by the Associated Press, who also claimed Hurndall was helping "children out of the line of fire." With the aid of these two newswire services, the second story made its way into almost every major American paper by Saturday, the day after. "

- Brian Sayre (http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=7361)

pgwenthold
17th April 2003, 02:47 PM
So which version is correct?

Why should the Israeli Defense Forces be believed instead of the ISM?

Not that the ISM should necessarily be believed, either, but I see no fundamental reason why we should accept the IDF version.

Segnosaur
17th April 2003, 02:55 PM
Originally posted by pgwenthold
Not that the ISM should necessarily be believed, either, but I see no fundamental reason why we should accept the IDF version.

Personally, I distrust any facts coming from the pro-Palestinian side, for 2 reasons:

- Israel is a democracy, with freedom of the press. Although the west bank is 'occupied', Israel is limited in their activities by the fact that it is a free society. (In other words, any serious wrongdoing by Israel would eventually be exposed. In the west bank, the Palistinians can supress anything they wish.)

- The experience of Jenin:
Palestinians: Thousands dead! Slaughtered.
Israel: About 50 dead, mostly terrorists
Palestinians: Hundreds dead. Murdered.
Israel: About 50 dead
Palestinians: Ok, about 50 dead