Wednesday May 13, 2009

Living with Rockets: Humanizing Hamas: An NYTimes objective gone wrong

Posted by Anav Silverman
Comments: 12
BOOKMARK or SHARE: technorati digg del.icio.us reddit newsvine facebook What's this?
Print  |  
Decrease text sizeDecrease text size
Increase text sizeIncrease text size

The New York Times recently published an interview with Hamas's political chief, Khaled Mashaal, entitled Addressing US, Hamas Says It Grounded Rockets. In the interview, the Times takes a very sympathetic approach to Hamas leader, who was just elected to his fourth term as Hamas's political bureau chief, the post he has held since 2004. The Times attempts to portray a new more "moderate" Mashaal, in the hopes that Hamas is actually turning a new leaf.

In the article, The Times quotes Mashaal as asking Americans to disregard the Hamas charter, (steeped in anti-Semitic declarations), while also stating that Iran does "not control or affect Hamas policies." The Times also quotes Mashaal saying that Hamas has no interest in bringing strict Muslim law into Gaza.

Indeed the fact that Iran provides Hamas with of hundreds of million of dollars annually was not raised by the interviewers, nor the fact that Mashaal has called jihad against Israel numerous times. And what about Hamas's reinstatement of stricter Sharia laws into the Gaza Strip judicial system back in December 2008?

The New York Times seemed particularly awed by Mashaal apparently stating that Hamas had halted rocket attacks against southern Israel - the declaration became the headline for the Times article. 

Two days after the NY Times published Mashaal's interview, Hamas, also known as the Islamic Resistance Movement, fired rockets into Israel.

On May 6, four mortar rockets slammed into the Sha'ar HaNegev region, causing no reported damages or injury. Later in the day, two more rockets were fired, including a Kassam that landed in a coastal area just south of Ashkelon.

Hamas's military wing, Iz Al-Din-al Kassam Brigades, claimed full responsibility for four of the rocket attacks on their website. Although the rockets were aimed at civilian populated areas in the western Negev, the Hamas military website claimed that the mortar rockets were fired at Israeli soldiers stationed in central Gaza east of the Al Bureij camp.

Indeed, this sort of misleading reporting goes along the lines of The New York Times' coverage of the current Mideast conflict. Instead of pointing out Khaled Mashaal's significant role inspiring jihadist terror that has killed and wounded thousands of Israelis, The Times prefers to portray Mashaal as a glorified resistance fighter who has softened over time and currently seeks a peaceful solution to return to the 1967 borders.

Ironically, Mashaal himself was not such a fan of The Time's finished report. 
 
The Al Qassam website stated that Mashaal himself claimed that The New York Times had inaccurately quoted him in reporting that Hamas had completely halted the rocket fire. Geo TV, a Pakistani-based news outlet reported that Mashaal issued a statement to the station, stating that the "US newspaper manipulated facts in the interview." According to the Geo TV website, Mashaal said that the Hamas struggle would continue and that in regard to the halt in rocket fire -- "what was reported is not true."

Hamas's inconsistent rhetoric is nothing new to the Israeli public. Mashaal is obviously aware that fully supporting the Hamas charter in an interview with a US newspaper - one which the US President himself reads - is not the best policy for fostering US support for his government.

On the other hand, he has a worldwide audience that includes not only US President Barack Obama, but Muslim nations and radical Islamist leaders. Mashaal also has his own religious and ideological convictions which he fervently follows. One cannot forget that Hamas is an offshoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, a terrorist organization that has advocated Islamic government in the Arab world for 80 years now.

The rocket fire against Israel is not merely defensive or resistant, as media sympathetic to the Hamas cause will call it. As Mashaal revealed in The Times interview, Hamas calculates everything - including rocket fire against Israeli civilians where the strategy itself is considered "not a goal, but a method."

Although The New York Times article noted that only six rockets were fired at Israel during April, the authors conveniently neglected to mention that a total of 200 rockets were fired under Hamas-controlled Gaza since the mid-January ceasefire - one which ripped through an Ashkelon school and another that damaged two Sderot homes in late February.

In addition, Hamas militants have 160 tunnels dug beneath the Sinai border that are currently used to smuggle in longer range rockets, anti-tank missiles and small all-terrain vehicles according to an Ha'aretz report on April 22.

The New York Times can choose to present any narrative it wants of the Mideast conflict. But by ignoring the rocket reality plaguing Israelis and the jihad agenda that defines the Hamas party, The Times is construing a meaningless political facelift on a Hamas government that resolutely seeks Israel's defeat. 

Afterall, it was Mashaal himself who stated after Hamas's political victory in February 2006 on Al Jazeera TV that Israel is "fighting against the army of Allah, against people who care for dying for Allah, dying for honor and prestige more than they care for life itself."

BOOKMARK or SHARE: technorati digg del.icio.us reddit newsvine facebook What's this?
Print  |  
Comments: Post your own comment
1  |   elliot washington, Thursday May 14, 2009
new york times aka 'jihad journal'--democrat rag soft on terror reflecting attitudes of those now in power with support of high school drop outs and college professors and illegals courtesy of acorn and in my state felons can now vote.....would that be democrat?
2  |   AlanRockville, Thursday May 14, 2009
Mr. Dershowitz, thank you for adding to the "facts" of the issues. What you say is the reason I never rely on one media source. With the Internet, I can look at the NY Times, JPost, Haaretz, Daily Star (Lebanon), even Al Jazeera and PressTV, and get a full range of info and facts and sort them out for myself. BTW: Am I allowed to use a calculator for the math equation below? :-)
3  |   Roz-USA, Thursday May 14, 2009
Unfortunately, the Times, always sympathetic to Palestinian terrorist groups, is now even more so, and this is reflected not only in the news articles, but especially by the unopposed, rather radical anti-Israel views of Roger Cohen, a favorite editor of theirs. I hope those who log on to their opinion webpage have a link to this blog, as I've read several blogs criticizing Cohen's opinions. And please, submit a letter to the editor criticizing their inaccurate piece.
4  |   DavidM USA, Friday May 15, 2009
The NY Times has been whitewashing terrorism for many years. Terrorist leaders and spokesmen regularly contribute op-eds to the NY Times editorial page. NY Times editors solicit their views. Supporters of Israel are rarely published in the op-ed page and are relegated to letters to the editor and only published alongside anti-Israel letters. NY Times columnist Roger Cohen devotes almost all of his columns to Israel bashing and wrote an infamous column about how happy the imprisoned Iraninan Jews are. It is no surprise the NY Times is close to Chapter 7 bankruptcy.
5  |   Randy B USA, Friday May 15, 2009
I hate to see newspapapers in trouble in this country USA of the free press. But If the NYTIMES goes broke and ceases to exist I will applaud! As far as I am concerned with their way out left leanings that are actually traitors to THe USA! Let Suadi Arabia bail them out...it wouldnt make any editorial difference.
6  |   Jen USA, Saturday May 16, 2009
This may have been a "NY Times objective gone wrong". I agree the NYT column was not objective. But... what the hell is wrong with humanizing Hamas? They are human with inherant human rights. Are we to believe that dehumanizing individuals in Hamas is right? Look at what dehumanizing groups (Jews, Gypsys, Homosexuals, Anarchists, non-conforming Catholics) by the Germans did. The holocaust didn't start with mass executions, it started with slights and slanders. Words matter. Mr. Silverman, through your choice of words, you have put your personal bigotry on display. Shame.
7  |   Roddy Frankel, Saturday May 16, 2009
To #6, Jen: A clarification. Of course members of Hamas are human beings. No one denies that. Perhaps the word "humanizing" should have been replaced with the words "sympathizing with" Hamas. That is the intent of Mr. Silverman's argument. He, and I, believe that when humans make bad choices, when their behavior is inhumane, they should be chastised, reprimanded, and punished for their acts. They should not be tolerated, appeased, coddled, and publicized in the media. Rewarding bad behavior only leads to more of the same. That should be obvious to everyone.
8  |   McQueen, NY, Sunday May 17, 2009
#6 Your post makes no sense. No one is saying the Times needs to de-humanize Hamas, but if, as you say, they are human, there is no need to humanize them. Yes, they are human beings: murderous lying human beings, as many human beings are.
9  |   Joeseph T USA, Sunday May 17, 2009
Hamas may be "human beings"..but their mentality is like a crocodile! Mc Queen and Roddy Frankel say it right.. Hamas is even worse than Hitler and his gang of butchers. Hamas et al Islamic jihadists (if they had the power) would kill every "infidel" in the free world. The control of Jerusalem by Jews (and Christianity de facto) invalidates the whole religion of Islam.
10  |   Anav, Sderot, Sunday May 17, 2009
Please note the last sentence of the article where Khaled Mashaal states that dying for Allah is more important than life itself. Hamas terrorists have killed and wounded thousands of Israelis with that concept in mind. The same goes with the rocket attacks that have terrorized thousands of southern Israelis. Any newspaper that sympathizes with leaders of a terror organization like Hamas is basically legitimizing its policies and humanizing its leadership--a leadership that hides behind its civilians when in battle, as we saw in Operation Cast Lead.
11  |   Jen USA, Monday May 18, 2009
Roddy, It would have been better to use the word "sympathize" rather than "humanize". But Mr. Silverman did not use this in his argument. Instead, he showed himself to the world to be a bigot and undermined his argument, in the process. What a missed opportunity.
12  |   Bonnie Canada, Thursday Aug 13, 2009
Humanize? I just watched a video on-line. It was a big celebration for 450 adult hamas men getting married to children aged 6 - 9 years old. This was their 'reward' for all that they have done. These pint-sized brides, dressed in white, each holding the hand of the delighted groom was difficult to watch. They have a concentration camp mentality.
Add your comment remaining characters
Name and Location *

NOTE: Comments are moderated and will not appear on this blog, until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting.

For more information, please see our
Readers' Submission Policy.

E-mail * (will NOT be published)
Your Blog/Website
--------------------------------
* All fields are required

About this blog

Living with Rockets A glimpse into life under fire as told by inhabitants of Sderot, young people who devote their time to volunteer in the city and by writers from the Sderot Media Center.

Search this blog

Archives
Combined feed for all JPost.com blogs

Most Popular

  1. Mr. President, bring the troops home
    Posted in Koch's Comments by Ed Koch
    Thursday Nov 19, 2009
  2. Interfaith dialogue - naïve or necessary?
    Posted in Guest Blog by Ruth Wasserman
    Sunday Nov 22, 2009
  3. Who will take care of my fruit trees?
    Posted in Making Aliyah by Jonathan Feldstein
    Sunday Nov 22, 2009
  4. Our base is broader
    Posted in Green-Lined by Yisrael Medad
    Sunday Nov 22, 2009
  5. The shawl and the hood
    Posted in Reform Reflections by Rabbi Michael Marmur
    Sunday Nov 22, 2009

Top Rated Posts

Recent Comments

Tom - Australia: Bollocks! I have every sympathy with the residents of Sderot, but don't you think you are aiming your wrath in the wrong direction? Is was the Israeli government that refused Goldstone access to Sderot (or any other part of Israel for that matter), the West Bank and Gaza. (Egypt gave access to Gaza.) It was the Israeli government that refused to participate in discovering the truth surrounding and leading up to the events of the 2008/2009 Gaza incursion. While we may agree that what Sderiot has had to put up with is unacceptable, it is a bit late to call the Goldstone enquiry incomplete.
Hong Kong: Judge Goldstone, you made your choice when you agreed to take on this nefarious assignment. As a Jew, and a supposed 'Zionist', you should have, in the interests of objectivity, declined this assignment. You knew you would have to be extra 'heavy-handed' on Israel, so as to fulfill a particularly personal need to appear 'objective' in the eyes of our enemies and the rest of the world. So you chose to 'sell out' the Jewish Nation instead. No Sir, you will go down in Jewish History as one who preferred to betray his own people for a little praise from our enemies. I pity you.
DevorahR: Goldstone and company should hold the hearings in Sderot. It would enhance their point of view.