Posted on 04/20/2002 7:23:43 AM PDT by pabianice
The Massacre That Wasn't--II
American journalists haven't been nearly as bad as their British counterparts in reporting on phony charges of an Israeli massacre in the "refugee camp" at Jenin, but they haven't always distinguished themselves either. A case in point is today's Washington Post story, which reports:
Palestinian officials have backed away from earlier charges of a massacre in Jenin. But much about the battle remains a mystery. Mohammed Abu Ghali, director of the Palestinian Authority-run hospital in Jenin, said he is aware of 37 bodies recovered from the camp; 23 of them, he said, are waiting to be claimed by relatives from shallow temporary graves in a dirt lot next to the hospital.
What's wrong with this passage is its placement in the story--it's the fifth paragraph from the bottom. The headline is "In Jenin, U.N. Envoy Witnesses 'Horrifying' Scene." That envoy, Terje Roed-Larsen, is quoted as saying: "Israel has lost all moral ground in this conflict."
Buried even deeper--it's the last paragraph--is this detail:
"It's been incredibly difficult to tell the difference between fighters and civilians," said Peter Bouckaert, a senior researcher with Human Rights Watch in New York, who evaded Israeli checkpoints to sneak into the camp. "I think it's clear that in the end what actually happened in Jenin will fall somewhere in between what the Palestinians are alleging and what [the Israeli army] claims. But only an independent authority can establish what actually happened."
Even Human Rights Watch, in other words, acknowledges that the Israelis are not totally in the wrong, while the Palestinians have dropped their hyped-up "massacre" charges. And yet the Post leads with the United Nations blasting Israel--a dog-bites-man story if ever there was one.
Of course it's true that the scene from Jenin is, as the Post puts it, "a landscape of wretchedness and destruction," with homes bulldozed and dozens, though apparently not hundreds, of people--likely including some innocents--dead. But the devastation both was necessary and is less extensive than advertised. The Jerusalem Post notes:
Brig.-Gen. Eyal Shlein, commander of the troops in the Jenin area, stressed that the area where the buildings were destroyed occupies only a 10th of the camp's total area, a radius of 70 meters by 100 meters. All the destroyed buildings were booby-trapped by the Palestinians or used as fortified positions in attacking soldiers, he said.
Both London's Independent and the U.N. manage to prove themselves even more hostile to Israel than the Arabs are. "Israelis Try to Pin Blame for Jenin on Suicide Bombers," reads today's Independent headline. Oh, those crafty Jews, maligning the innocent suicide bombers. The Independent doesn't mention, as the New York Times does, that "Israeli forces in Jenin had caught 10 would-be suicide bombers who had already videotaped their farewell statements."
The Independent also quotes a U.N. official who "said he did not believe the camp had been heavily booby-trapped." Yet the Egyptian newspaper Al-Ahram carries an interview with an Islamic Jihad bomb maker identified only as Omar, who confirms that they were:
"Of all the fighters in the West Bank we were the best prepared," he says. "We started working on our plan: to trap the invading soldiers and blow them up from the moment the Israeli tanks pulled out of Jenin last month."
Omar and other "engineers" made hundreds of explosive devices and carefully chose their locations.
"We had more than 50 houses booby-trapped around the camp. We chose old and empty buildings and the houses of men who were wanted by Israel because we knew the soldiers would search for them," he said.
"We cut off lengths of mains water pipes and packed them with explosives and nails. Then we placed them about four metres apart throughout the houses--in cupboards, under sinks, in sofas."
The Times also notes in passing that the siege at Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity is in fact a hostage situation:
Also on Thursday, a young man who escaped from the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, where about 250 Palestinians have been holed up for more than two weeks, was shown on television saying that there was disagreement among the people inside. The young man, who was being treated by the Israelis after he had been shot, said that some wanted to leave but that Palestinian Authority officials insisted that all should either stay or leave together. The army also released footage taken from the air showing what it said were men pursuing someone trying to vault the wall of the church compound and pulling him back inside.
Maybe they've got different editions on Saturday? I only get the online edition.
If they're not emailing me the whole publication, I'll be more than a little sadly misled.
Thanks,
kj
The very first body examined by outsiders had injuries consistent with a massacre.
If I can't find it tonight, I'll email what you got to WSJ and ask 'em why they didn't send me the same edition.
And my subscription is paid up until 2004.
kj
The very first body examined by outsiders had injuries consistent with a massacre.
You mean a bullet wound? Decapitation? Two shots to the left temple while hands bound behind back? What are you talking about here? Specifics, please, and how exactly they differ from injuries consistent with a heated battle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.