In mainstream US media coverage of the Israeli assault on Gaza, the attacks by Hamas are labeled ‘terrorism’ while those by Israel are labeled ‘self defense’. But as Glenn Greenwald says, the sheer statistics of the current assault on Gaza reveals how the US media uses those labels in a purely propagandist manner.
In American media discourse, when Palestinians overwhelmingly kill soldiers (95% of the Israeli death toll) who are part of an army that is blockading, occupying, invading, and indiscriminately bombing them and killing their children by the hundreds, that is “terrorism”; when Israelis use massive, brutal force against a trapped civilian population, overwhelmingly killing innocent men, women and children (at least 75% of the Palestinian death toll), with clear intentions to kill civilians (see point 3), that is noble “self-defense.” That demonstrates how skewed U.S. discourse is in favor of Israel, as well as the purely manipulative, propagandistic nature of the term “terrorists.”
“…with clear intentions to kill civilians…”
They’re pretty bad at it then. Consider ~2000 IDF air strikes plus large ground forces for a couple of weeks and a death toll of (last report I saw) 1050. This is terrible, but it is demonstrably not evidence of intended genocide, intent to kill as many Palestinians as possible, or anything like that.
What it suggests strongly to me is that Israel is trying to minimize civilian deaths, and is actually doing that quite well.
I suggest no judgement on whether Israel is justified or not, but terms such as genocide, carpet bombing of civilians, and clear intentions to kill are being thrown around far too loosely.
The linked article said nothing about intent to kill as many Palestinians as possible. It said “intent to kill civilians,” full stop, and went on to discuss why criminal intent does not even require active desire, but can be inferred from simple recklessness.
To use its analogy, if you fire at random into a crowd of people and kill someone, you’ve shown intent to cause harm. Even if you were not consciously aiming to kill someone, and even if you could have killed many more people by means of a bomb or something.
Conversely, Hamas could kill far more Israelis by means of suicide attacks than by randomly aimed rockets, but the rockets still show intent to kill civilians.
It’s because Jews are practically Christians (and we need them for the End Times), whereas Muslims are heathens.
Also “they made us do it”.
Labeling one side in a conflict as “terrorists”, the other as “defense force” is an old game since Colonial days. There have been propositions to define “terrorism” as a matter of means and tactics (“inflicting terror”). But media all around the globe prefer the definition “armed and against the government in power”. Which would include the folks outside the Bastille, the Boston tea party, G. Washington and Simon Bolivar. In the second half of the last century most anti-colonialist liberation organizations were labeled “terrorists”, until they won.
Quantitative arguments give a certain idea of what kind of strategies are implied.
What strikes me as much more interesting than this labeling is the inconsistency of the legal status of Palestine and its inhabitants. If there is no state of Palestine, then the population should de jure be Israeli citizens, and be given the vote and other citizens’ rights. Which they are not, a somewhat Boer South Africa solution.
If there were a State of Palestine, then international law would forbid aggression and incursions like the one that’s taking place now.
Tertium non datur
What is going on now is a “slow genocide” according to Ilan Pappe, a historian in Israel. He can say this in Israel, but not in the US.
That’s a big part of the problem. The real evil is taking place in our backyard, not in the war zone. The spinmeisters who suppress speech and manufacture consent by buying into our political system.
Around here 140 years ago, a massacre was when a few uniformed soldiers got killed, and a battle was the extermination of a whole village of Apaches or Cheyenne.
Things don’t change much…..
Scott Belyea @1:
You have misunderstood, unless you imagine that “…with clear intentions to kill civilians…” means “…with clear intentions to kill as many civilians as possible…”.
(It doesn’t)
Semantics aside, it is time for the US to decisively disconnect from Israel and let it self-destruct on its own.
And yes, give green cards to all high-tech Israelis that don’t already have second passports….
@ 1 Scott Belyea
The word “genocide” neither appears in the OP, nor the linked articles.
Also, I question your assessment that killing three civilians for every one non-civilian is “doing quite well” at minimizing civilian deaths.
@ 9 aashiq
Yes, it is past time the US disconnected from Israel. But no, Israel will not self-destruct. It is by far the dominant military and economic power in the region, and has not depended on US aid for some time.
It’s very simple, MS. Our guys practice self-defense. The guys at the other side are terrorists.
I don’t think America or other powers should simply withdraw, but should put pressure on both sides to agree too and implement a serious two state solution.
Britain and the US bear much of the responsibility but so do some of the former Soviet states whose antisemitic nationalism has driven many Jews to go to Isreal, thus increasing the speed and extent of the continuing Zionist colonization project. Same for the Middle Eastern counties who expelled Jews who naturally went to Israel in large numbers.
The oil rich states who fund extremist elements among the Palestinians (though I’m not hostile to guerilla resistance as such, supporting uncompromising fanatics is irresponsible). Worse still, some Arab states, even the wealthier ones, who could provide a decent life for the Palestinians who sought refuge there treat them and their children as perpetual refugees or an underclass of undesirable aliens. They have enough in common with their host nations to assimilate easily and are kept in artificial poverty and isolation.
The world community is morally obliged to:
1) Stamp out antisemitism whatever one thinks of lsrael. No country should ever again expel Jews or treat them so they want to leave in large numbers.
2) Wherever Palestinian exiles live for a significant length of time, they should be treated as citizens.
3) First World nations who accept immigrants should have an especially generous policy toward both Palestinians and Isrealis.
4) Discourage dual citizenship in Israel unless the person has strong personal ties to both countries like marriage to a citizen.
5) Criminalize the practice of outsiders going to Israel/Palestine to fight for their preferred side in volunteer units.
6) Real economic and political pressure on both sides to participate in the peace process which must include the goal of a Palestinian state. Shut down organizations which fan the flames of violence in the region with money and propaganda.
I thought terrorism is specifically to provoke terror in a populace to get them to do some political aim.
I understand that terrorism has kind of become a BS catch-all term for explosions, but I don’t think just slaughtering civilians is terrorism. That’s just slaughtering civilians.
Hahaha, right. All that blood libel stuff is water under the bridge.
I understand that terrorism has kind of become a BS catch-all term for explosions, but I don’t think just slaughtering civilians is terrorism. That’s just slaughtering civilians.
Pretty sure the political aim is ‘land theft’ with a slice of ‘opression’.
Also, “stop electing Hamas”.
I may be off on the terminology, but I remember when I was in school hearing the histories of the fighting between early colonial Canadians and the natives who lived here before us. I had to ask my mom what was different between a “battle” (when white people slaughtered natives) and a “massacre” (when natives slaughtered whiet people). That was the first time I remember actually getting that whole “history is written by the victors” thing.
There’s a big irony in that cartoon at the end there because that is exactly what the Arab side has always wanted and boated it would do to the Jews. Yet now, if the cartoon is right, its just what’s happening to the Arabs here.
Except, of course, theres a different answer or three to the “go where?” question posed.
There are plenty of Arab nations that could -- if they choose take in the Gazan refugees. Jordan, Egypt, Dubai, Kuwait, Quatar, Yemen, Oman. The world is NOT short of Arab and Muslim nations that can can absorb the population of Gaza and even Israel is happy to have Arab Israeli citizens as long as they agree to cut the terrorist crap and live in peace accepting the Jewish states right to exist and be safe and happy. How hard a solution is that? Win win. Which is why the hate-filled horrors of Hamas will never accept that solution natch.
@16. Dunc. : Yep. More even just -- Hamas stop firing rockets and being terrorists.
Preferably agree to a reasonable peace offer and ideally just surrender and go elsewhere and give up the nonsense that is Islam but really just STOP your Jihadist Terrorist crap.
That, above all else is why people have been dying for pretty much nothing here.
Of course many more have been and continue to die in Syria and Iraq and Africa becoz islamists be Islamists and that gets rarely -- if ever -- a word here from Mano Singham but yeah. That. Stop Jihadist Islamist Terrorism please. Too much to dream of or request of the world?