Sunday, June 18, 2006

 
Let's compare 2 articles concerning the same thing. The Gaza beach explosion that killed a bunch of pali's taking a day off from firing missles at Sderot.
  1. This one appeared on my yahoo home page. Olmert rejects international probe into Gaza beach deaths
  2. This one is from the Jerusalem Post. PM: No int'l inquiry into Gaza blast
Bear in mind that most people in our short attention span world only read the first few paragraphs of any article, unless it really grabs their attention. Now from here on out, I will refer to them as article 1 and article 2.

Article 1
JERUSALEM (AFP) - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert rejected calls for an international inquiry into a blast on a Gaza beach nearly two weeks ago in which eight Palestinians were killed.
"We will never agree to become subject to an investigation by international bodies," Olmert told ministers during a weekly cabinet meeting.

Israel denied any responsibility after the deadly June 9 incident in which seven members of the same family were killed while picnicking on the beach in the northern Gaza strip.

Article 2-
Israel will not agree to an international investigation into the blast on a Gaza beach 10 days ago that killed seven Palestinian civilians and which the IDF said was not caused by IDF artillery fire, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said at Sunday's cabinet meeting.

"We will never agree to be the subject of an international investigation," Olmert told the cabinet. "The world is not always willing to accept what we say, but nobody can cast doubt on our investigation. I accept it completely," Olmert said of the IDF investigation that determined the deaths were not caused by IDF fire on Gaza.

These are the first 2 paragraphs, with the bolding was added by me. Notice the quotes from Olmert. In article 1 they left out the end part of the quote where Olmert mentions that Israel investigated the incident. So if you were a casual reader you could be thinking from Article 1 that Olmert is just thumbing his nose at the international community. However, when you see the same quote in Article 2 you see the rest of it where he says there was an investigation. Now lets look at some more paragraphs.

Article 1 paragraphs 3 and 4.

Israel denied any responsibility after the deadly June 9 incident in which seven members of the same family were killed while picnicking on the beach in the northern Gaza Strip.
An internal military inquiry into the incident, ordered by Defence Minister Amir Peretz, absolved Israel of any involvement.

Article 2 paragraphs 3 and 4.

"I believe the IDF, and I trust [Defense Minister Amir] Peretz and the army," Olmert said. He stressed that neither British Prime Minister Tony Blair nor French President Jacques Chirac criticized the IDF's defensive operations in the Gaza Strip during his meetings with them last week.

Culture and Sport Minister Ophir Paz-Pines' question about whether it would not have been wise to have had civilians involved in the investigation into the blast, led to a heated discussion of the matter as well as a report Saturday in The Times of London alleging that the deaths were caused by an IDF artillery-shell.

These paragraphs aren't bad either way. However, article 1 leaves out where Olmert says that 2 world leaders whom met with Olmert last week never expressed a problem with Israel's defensive actions. That is a pretty decent sized ommission.
Now if you continue reading both articles you see this at the end of article 1.

Peretz told cabinet colleagues the world was wrong in its assumptions about the cause of the deaths, suggesting they might have been caused by unexploded Israeli ordnance or a Palestinian landmine left over from before Israel's withdrawal of ground troops last year.

"It may turn out that the blast was caused by old IDF (Israel Defence Forces) explosives on the beach. Things are still being examined. I hope that within several days we will have a complete picture," the minister said.

Look at the end of article 2.

Meanwhile Sunday, Sueddeutsche Zeitung- a leading German daily - published its own investigation into the incident casting doubt on the authenticity of pictures taken of the scene immediately following the explosion.

According to the article, the pictures taken by a Palestinian cameraman at the scene of the explosion contradicted Palestinian claims that an IDF shell had killed the family of seven on June 10. The paper also raised the possibility that the entire scene was staged by the cameraman in an effort to frame Israel.

The newspaper also doubted the Palestinian claim that the girl who survived the explosion was not injured since she was in the water when the alleged IDF shell exploded. In the cameraman's footage, however, the girl is fully dressed and her clothes, the newspaper claimed, were dry.

See the difference? In article 1 the reporter uses a quote to basically imply that Israel might still be responsible if it was old ordinance. However, when you see the end of article 2 that there are doubts recently published in Germany questioning the claims of the Palis. Those are 2 radically different endings, that people who finished the articles, would get. Article 1 also mentions how Israel regulary shells Gaza in order to stop Palestinian rocket fire but Article 2 actually names the town that's getting shelled (Sderot). Know what the difference is? It's the fact that Article 2 puts a name to a place that is under bombardment, that makes a huge difference to the subconscious. Think about it, Palestinian rocket fire vs. Sderot being attacked by rockets. Which would gather your attention more?
Comments: Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?