NPR hides an atrocity but highlights the reaction

  • Thread starter Thread starter St.James
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

St.James

Guest
**NPR hides an atrocity but highlights the reaction
******Ali Abunimah

4 January 2005

Dear National Public Radio,

NPR’s Morning Edition today featured a report by Peter Kenyon about the upcoming election for Palestinian Authority president in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. Kenyon’s report was informative but did little to challenge the dull conventional wisdom that Palestinian reform rather than an end to Israel’s military tyranny is the key to peace, and failed to address in any detail the substantial obstacles Israel, the Palestinian Authority and the international peace process industry have placed in the way of genuinely free and fair elections. Nor did NPR pay attention to the reality that the majority of Palestinians, who live in forced exile, have been denied the opportunity to vote or to return home and participate, while Afghan refugees were allowed to vote outside their country, and Iraqi exiles are also scheduled to vote if their country’s elections are held. Why does no one involved in the peace process industry want Palestinian refugees to have a say in their own future? Hmmm…

Most disturbing, however, was Morning Edition host Steve Inskeep’s lead-in to Kenyon’s report. Inskeep introduced the report thus:

“Sunday’s election for Palestinian president could provide clues to the future of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The frontrunner is Mahmoud Abbas. He’s seen in the west as a potential partner for peace talks. He’s calling for demilitarizing the struggle against Israeli occupation and he criticized some violence just today, but also today Abbas described Israel as the “Zionist enemy.” He has to appeal to Palestinian voters, many of whom recently supported the Islamist Hamas in municipal elections.”

This intro highlighted the phrase “Zionist enemy,” and suggested that it was a deliberate appeal to Palestinian extremism. But Inskeep did not mention the shocking context in which Abbas used this, for him, uncharacteristic language. What Abbas actually said, at a campaign appearance was, “We came to you today, while we are praying for the souls of the martyrs who were killed today by the shells of the Zionist enemy in Beit Lahiya.”

The “martyrs” he was referring to were seven Palestinian children, the youngest of them aged 10, murdered by Israeli occupation forces in the northern Gaza Strip. The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) in Gaza reported today:

“According to preliminary investigations conducted by PCHR, at approximately 07:45 on Tuesday, 4 January 2005, [Israeli Occupation Forces] positioned in military posts between “Elli Sinai” and “Nissanit” settlements to the north of Beit Lahia fired a tank shell at Palestinian agricultural areas located to the south of the fence separating the two settlements and Beit Lahia. The shell directly hit a number of Palestinian children who were farming their land. Seven children, including 2 brothers, were killed.”

PCHR gave the names and ages of the dead as follows:

Their names are: Hani Mohammed Kamel Ghaben, 17; Mohammed Hassan Mousa Ghaben, 17; Rajeh Ghassan Kamel Ghaben, 10; Jaber 'Abdullah Ghaben, 16; Bassam Kamel Mohammed Ghaben, 17; Mahmoud Kamel Mohammed Ghaben, 12; and Jibril 'Abdul Fattah al-Kaseeh, 16.

In addition, PCHR reported that two more children, aged 15 and 17, and a 41 year-old male were injured in the attack. Israel, as usual, justified the massacre as self-defense and claimed it was firing at a “rocket-launching terror cell” and that the dead and injured were members of Hamas.

NPR often uses lead-ins to reports which have been filed earlier to provide updated information. But Inskeep made absolutely no mention of this atrocity, and NPR apparently decided that Abbas’ comment rather than the killing of seven children was the “news.”

Once again we are faced with the question: if seven Jewish children had been murdered in cold blood in this way would NPR have simply ignored it? Would it have reported that Israelis chanted “Death to the Arabs” (as they often do), without mentioning a minor detail like the killing of seven children?

…Is the fear of being labeled pro-Palestinian now so great at NPR that it has lost all integrity and perspective?

Yours,

Ali Abunimah
 
Hello, St James. Thank you for posting Ali Abunimah’s letter to NPR. It sounds like NPR really needs to read what he has to say and take stock of its approach to reporting…

I’m wondering whether NPR and the BBC have an arrangement, because neither one of them have ever reported fairly about the Palestinians *or *the Northern Irish Republicans…no wonder the Palestinians and the Northern Irish Republicans have always had an affinity for each others’ causes…as neither cause is portrayed factually in the media…
 
Is this the same story about the mortar attack from the area of a bunch of kids that the NYT reported on?
 
40.png
gilliam:
Is this the same story about the mortar attack from the area of a bunch of kids that the NYT reported on?
You are amazing:rotfl:I am getting so tickled, you have to be frustrated at this point. You guys keep baiting each other with these threads,and I am rolling:rotfl: :rotfl: This is truly a battle of wills.God Bless
 
40.png
Lisa4Catholics:
You are amazingI am getting so tickled, you have to be frustrated at this point. You guys keep baiting each other with these threads,and I am rolling This is truly a battle of wills.God Bless
gee, and I thought it was such a simple question. :confused:
 
40.png
gilliam:
gee, and I thought it was such a simple question. :confused:
He is waiting on the Iraq Children post:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: He has thrown in another bite:D I am crying I am so tickled:D Well:nope: Go get him.God Bless
 
40.png
Lisa4Catholics:
You guys keep baiting each other with these threads…
Actually, I’m trying to represent a valid perspective which is suppressed by the establishment media.

Gilliam is a very active advocate of the establishment perspective. Dialog with him gives me the opportunity to challenge the consensus view, and if I’m successful, to refute what the establishment media is ramming down our throats.

The internet is the only place where this is possible, for now …
 
St. James:
Actually, I’m trying to represent a valid perspective which is suppressed by the establishment media.

Gilliam is a very active advocate of the consensus perspective. Dialog with him gives me the opportunity to challenge the consensus view, and if I’m successful, to refute what the establishment media is ramming down our throats.

The internet is the only place where this is possible, for now …
What concensus? I am simply trying to show there is another side than calling people Zionist pigs and bigots.

Again, I am not against the Palestinians. I would not want to be in their shoes.
 
40.png
NightRider:
Palestinians *or *the Northern Irish Republicans…no wonder the Palestinians and the Northern Irish Republicans have always had an affinity for each others’ causes…as neither cause is portrayed factually in the media…
The similarities between these groups run very deep. Both have had their land stolen, been brutally oppressed, and subjected to government authority which treats them as a lower class.

In both cases no terrorism existed until these conditions came to be.

In both cases they were subjected to state terrorism by their oppressors.

In both cases they have been betrayed by the media.

Another interesting similarity is that In Northern Ireland, due to an uneven birthrate, the Irish will become the majority very soon. This will take the Loyalists strongest issue off the table.

Similarly, because of a lack of Jewish imigration and low birthrates, Jews will soon become a minority on Jewish occupied land unless they relinquish the occupied territories and go back to the 1967 borders. They must do this or their already disputable claim to being “the only democracy in the Middle East” will have to be taken off the table.
 
I have to agree with the perspective provided by the original post. I am a frequent consumer of NPR news/info and on many fronts they do an excellent job (especially in comparison to the dearth of viable options on the radio dial! But with respect to the Palestinan issue…their bias in reporting, both in terms of volume and content IS terribly slanted.

I recently tuned into a broadcast where a commentator/scholar from the Palestinan perpective was interviewed. (I wish I could remember his name as well as that of the interviewer). It seemed that NPR’s counterbalance of this effort was to allow only only callers who were opposed to everything this man had to say.

IF FOR NO OTHER REASON than the fact that US taxpayers provide millions in aid to prop up the Israeli defense and economy, NPR (along with other media outlets) should be pressured to provide a more critical assessment of the activities of both sides to this conflict and be accountable when their reporting is nothing more than agenda-pandering.
 
St. James:
In both cases no terrorism existed until these conditions came to be.
Blatant falsehood. Neither side are blameless, but this whole thing could have been avoided if not for the initial terrorism lead by one Haj Amin al Husseini ( palestinefacts.org/pf_mandate_grand_mufti.php )of Jerusalem against the backdrop of world war 2. Prior to his hate-mongering, Jewish refugees to Palestine only settled where they could find land to purchase peacefully. This is why the kibbutz system came into being and grew so famous for turning worthless desert into productive land; no one would sell them anything else.

Israel did not descend on Palestine like an invading army. They tried to settle peacefully, got tired of being attacked and pillaged and fought back. Extremely effectively. One can reasonably argue that today, Israel projects too much power in the name of self defense. But I would suggest they are more restrained than America would be in similar circumstances.

The topic of the rebirth of Israel is fascinating. For an easy to read fictional story that is faithful to the history of that time check out ‘The Haj’ by Leon Uris. It will whet your appetite to learn more. And history is not kind to the cause of Palestinians.
 
Island Oak:
IF FOR NO OTHER REASON than the fact that US taxpayers provide millions in aid to prop up the Israeli defense and economy, NPR (along with other media outlets) should be pressured to provide a more critical assessment of the activities of both sides to this conflict and be accountable when their reporting is nothing more than agenda-pandering.
Gee, considering the US taxpayers provide millions in aid to prop up NPR it would be a pleasent surprise if they presented anything without a particular slant!
 
Island Oak:
I have to agree with the perspective provided by the original post. I am a frequent consumer of NPR news/info and on many fronts they do an excellent job (especially in comparison to the dearth of viable options on the radio dial! But with respect to the Palestinan issue…their bias in reporting, both in terms of volume and content IS terribly slanted.

I recently tuned into a broadcast where a commentator/scholar from the Palestinan perpective was interviewed. (I wish I could remember his name as well as that of the interviewer). It seemed that NPR’s counterbalance of this effort was to allow only only callers who were opposed to everything this man had to say.

IF FOR NO OTHER REASON than the fact that US taxpayers provide millions in aid to prop up the Israeli defense and economy, NPR (along with other media outlets) should be pressured to provide a more critical assessment of the activities of both sides to this conflict and be accountable when their reporting is nothing more than agenda-pandering.
I only listen to NPR, and I find it interesting that many of my Jewish friends think it is very slanted toward the Palestinians and won’t listen to it any more. I find NPR to be very even-handed, and this was just one case that you cite. On my local public station most of the callers are lean toward the Palestinian cause.

Also, on this board, people use NPR’s name in vein constantly calling it left-wing. I think NPR gives all points a fair hearing and without all of the commercials.
 
40.png
manualman:
Blatant falsehood. Neither side are blameless, but this whole thing could have been avoided if not for the initial terrorism lead by one Haj Amin al Husseini ( palestinefacts.org/pf_mandate_grand_mufti.php )of Jerusalem against the backdrop of world war 2. Prior to his hate-mongering, Jewish refugees to Palestine only settled where they could find land to purchase peacefully. This is why the kibbutz system came into being and grew so famous for turning worthless desert into productive land; no one would sell them anything else.
.
This is the staple fiction of the Zionist lobby taken from the completely discredited propaganda work, “From Time Immemorial.”
From Time Immemorial … was a big scholarly-looking book with lots of footnotes, which purported to show that the Palestinians were all recent immigrants … And it was very popular — it got literally hundreds of rave reviews, and no negative reviews: the Washington Post, the New York Times, everybody was just raving about it. Here was this book which proved that there were really no Palestinians! Of course, the implicit message was, if Israel kicks them all out there’s no moral issue, because they’re just recent immigrants who came in because the Jews had built up the country. … That was the big intellectual hit for that year: Saul Bellow, Barbara Tuchman, everybody was talking about it as the greatest thing since chocolate cake. Well, one graduate student at Princeton, a guy named Norman Finkelstein, started reading through the book. He was interested in the history of Zionism, and as he read the book he was kind of surprised by some of the things it said. He’s a very careful student, and he started checking the references — and it turned out that the whole thing was a hoax, it was completely faked: probably it had been put together by some intelligence agency …

Finkelstein’s very persistent: he took a summer off and sat in the New York Public Library, where he went through every single reference in the book — and he found a record of fraud that you cannot believe. Well, the New York intellectual community is a pretty small place, and pretty soon everybody knew about this, everybody knew the book was a fraud … Well, as soon as I heard that the book was going to come out in England, I immediately sent copies of Finkelstein’s work to a number of British scholars and journalists who are interested in the Middle East — and they were ready. As soon as the book appeared, it was just demolished, it was blown out of the water. Every major journal, the Times Literary Supplement, the London Review, the Observer, everybody had a review saying, this doesn’t even reach the level of nonsense, of idiocy. …

Anyhow, by that point the American intellectual community realized that the Peters book was an embarrassment, and it sort of disappeared — nobody talks about it anymore.
Except, that is, for Zionists who post rave reviews about it on Amazon’s web site.

serendipity.li/zionism/joan_peters.htm
 
St. James:
In both cases no terrorism existed until these conditions came to be.
40.png
manualman:
Blatant falsehood. Neither side are blameless, but this whole thing could have been avoided if not for the initial terrorism lead by one Haj Amin al Husseini
I’ve made a perfectly fair comparison.

There was no terrorism in Northern Ireland or Palestine until the British empire became invloved.
 
40.png
bapcathluth:
I only listen to NPR, and I find it interesting that many of my Jewish friends think it is very slanted toward the Palestinians and won’t listen to it any more. I find NPR to be very even-handed, and this was just one case that you cite. On my local public station most of the callers are lean toward the Palestinian cause.

Also, on this board, people use NPR’s name in vein constantly calling it left-wing. I think NPR gives all points a fair hearing and without all of the commercials.
That is interesting. I too have Jewish friends who have not expressed that opinion. Obviously this is purely subjective. I am curious, how religious are your friends?

As a side note, the NPR station in Chicago has definitely begun to have more commerical content. Have others noticed that as well? It’s not just that the weather and traffic is sponsored by some corporation.
 
Interesting, looks like NPR’s Ombudsman says they lean more pro-Palestinian:

NPR’s Middle East Coverage (redux)

CAMERA is the Campaign for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America. It continues its long tradition of criticizing NPR’s coverage as biased toward the Palestinians. (www.camera.org)

A recent column in the Jerusalem Post by CAMERA’s Andrea Levin claims that NPR refuses to name the Israeli victims of terror in the recent Middle East conflict. (Levin’s article)

Ms. Levin and CAMERA have a point.

While NPR has mentioned the names of some Israeli victims, and has interviewed some survivors of terror attacks, NPR has reported more fully on the effect of the Israeli invasion on the lives of Palestinians.

NPR needs to do more to paint a clearer picture on the ghastly presence of death in the Middle East… to report on the loss and anguish of Israelis in Netanya and Nahariya just as it does on the Palestinians in Jenin and Jericho.

npr.org/yourturn/ombudsman/020531.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top