Yesterday, Saturday January 3, the LA times ran a cover story in response to the current surge of violence in Palestine. It focused on the split between Fatah and Hamas, leaving the details of the conflict to a separate story adjacent to the page 8 continuation. Throughout, there was a glaring omission of what I think anyone attempting an analysis of the state would consider integral: that Hamas is the democratically elected majority party in the Palestinean parliament. This paragraph in particular struck me:
"Both Israel and Abbas' government worry about Hamas' considerable popular support in the West Bank and its potential to challenge Fatah's supremacy in the territory."
That was a pretty awkward bush-beating. Assuming the paper is trying to bring some background to the topic for an unfamiliar audience (which I'd say is clear given the other backstory that is given), to leave out the fact that "considerable popular support" is not only flag-waving mobs, but a legitimate parliamentary majority.
This is irresponsible journalism at it's worst. It doesn't simply drive for a point, it omits facts that not only have great relevance, but are also contraindicated by the jist of the article; people are not going to assume "oh, Hamas must control the legislature, via the most recent election", they are going to assume they are a rogue organization who maintains control purely through force and exploitation of general anarchy and public fervor.
Please don't infer that I'm trying to assign some kind of moral highground to Hamas. They are labeled a terrorist organization with good reason. I've seen their propaganda, and blatant is the word. The issue becomes the conflict between elections and morals, which has implications both for Palestine and the world. I have not arrived at any conclusions about the issue. But it's a pertinent fact.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment