Cowardice in the media means that cowards in the IDF are conveniently ignored.
Some of the sickening testimony and video footage on twitter reveal the depravity of the self proclaimed ‘most moral army in the world’. Delusions and denial spring to mind when we consider the boasting of the higher echelons of the Israel Defence Force who claim the moral high ground.
There was no need for them to prepare the sniper practice for the ‘elite’ marksmen and women. The fences that were already built would contain the prisoner-like ‘inmates’ of Gaza. The most moral army in the world managed to stop the largely peaceful protesters from harming themselves on the razor blade barbed wire by executing them instead.
Israeli officials absolve themselves of any crime by claiming some of the victims were members of Hamas. So what? Does that give them the right to execute these suspects without trial? All the confident statements in the world won’t clear the IDF of multiple summary executions. What on earth gives them the right to do what no other civilised country in the world would do? Accusing them of terrorism won’t allay criticism from the many millions of people who expect the authorities to abide by the law, just as they do. No decent human being could agree that this is the right way for a modern ‘democracy’ to conduct themselves.
What does the media offer in describing the events? Pictures of crowds inside the fences that contain them, with a high probability of the photos being taken from similar vantage points as the snipers. Both taking entirely different types of shots.
When it comes to Israel, unimaginable crimes are ignored or briefly reported. When the Palestinians are accused, the magnifying glass is used. But there is much more that is hidden from the prying eyes of Westerners. We don’t have access to the details of what happens in the military courts that Israel uses only for Palestinians. But almost as guilty as the military judges are the pathetic cowards who are supposed to find out what goes on inside these secretive trials. The media don’t even try to find out on what basis there is a 99% conviction rate. It strikes me as odd that investigative journalists can organise complex and expensive traps to discover a third rate celebrity behaving badly but are unable to reveal the daily discrimination and prejudices inflicted on the Palestinians..
Is it useless journalists that steer clear of sensitive Israeli stories? Or maybe real investigative journalists know its a waste of time reporting on the continual and persistent injustices endured by the Palestinians? There have been a number of writers who have been told that they are being too sympathetic towards the Arab perspective.
Jonathan Cook is one of the few who stuck to his principles. The award winning writer worked for The Guardian as well as other newspapers but it appears his last article for them was around 2007. From what I recall, his perception of the Israel-Palestine conflict was not in keeping with the owner or editor of the newspaper and since then has been a freelance writer and author as well as maintaining a blog.
It seems that most journalists these days are either pre warned about what is acceptable or the quickly realise that honesty regarding some events can be dangerous to their career. To stand your ground would most certainly end your journalistic aspirations in mainstream media and no matter how talented you are, the description associated with you might contain something that would warn any future employer off publishing you. This isn’t a conspiracy theory, the statistics speak for themselves. The only writer who gives any semblance of fair reporting when it concerns Israel is Robert Fisk and I suspect he knows how far he can go. If the balance of probability was apparent, there would be a 60-40, perhaps 40-60 split of media outlets that would consistently sympathise with the warring factions. Currently, I am not aware of any of the major news or media outlet writers, apart from Fisk, who take a balanced view, never mind empathise with the Palestinians. The real fear must be that if you are even-handed, you risk being smeared as anti semitic.
The big question is whether they should allow principle to get in the way of a successful and financially rewarding career. I have a feeling that Jonathan Cook is one of the few who could tell us from experience what the cost has been.