Why did Israel jail the pregnant woman?

The media likes to boast that they are the “first rough draft of history.” Part of that claim is that they are disinterested parties just reporting the facts as they are. Rafael Broch of Just Journalism had an excellent op-ed in Ha’aretz demonstrating the falseness of that claim.

But the media is more active than we may realize, and journalists profoundly affect what we understand about international law. One way is through the language that journalists popularise in their reports and broadcasts.

The first reference to war crimes by the British press in relation to the Gaza conflict came less than 48 hours into Israel’s operation. It was a quotation from a Hezbollah militant in Lebanon, claiming the assault was a “war crime and represents genocide”.

What is most interesting is not the readiness of the journalist to include war crimes allegations in his report so soon, but that the journalist saw it fit to quote the legal judgement of an avowed enemy. Somewhere in the mind of the journalist is the logic that these soundbytes convey drama and sell papers.

And so every Israeli self-defense is subject to a filter, which suggests that each such action might well be a violation worthy of condemnation if not punishment.

Consider the other side of the coin. On Friday Israel released twenty female security prisoners in exhange for a video of captured soldier, Gilad Schalit. Schalit has been held for three years and not allowed any visits by the Red Cross. How did the Associated Press orient its story? On the plight of the prisoners!

Women make up only a tiny minority of more than 7,000 Palestinians held in Israeli prisons, but they often pay a high personal price for what has largely been a supporting role in the Palestinian uprising.

Some have raised babies behind bars, and others have watched their families torn apart in their absence.

Now notice in these opening paragraphs there’s nothing about what the women may have done to deserve incarceration. It’s as if the Israelis arbitrarily picked the women off the street.

Fatima Ziq, 41, was pregnant when she was arrested in May 2007 as an alleged accomplice in a foiled suicide bombing. She returns to Gaza City with a toddler — her ninth child — who has known only prison life.

Zhour Hamdan, 45, was a married mother of eight when she was picked up in 2003, also as an accomplice in an aborted bombing. Her husband has remarried, and her children were forced to fend for themselves.

“Our mother was the heart of our family,” said one of her daughters, Neveen, 22. “When she was arrested, our entire life changed.”

“Alleged accomplice?” Was she not tried and convicted? And the only reason she’s being released is because the action she abetted was unsuccessful. Does the article ask what kind of society impels pregnant women to be actively involved in the destruction of innocents?

As far as Zhour Hamdan, was she abandoned by husband because of her absence or on account of her age? If her husband abandoned their children too, what does that say about her husband?

But if glossing over the crimes the women were involved in wasn’t bad enough, the AP goes further:

The release of prisoners is an emotional issue for both sides.

Palestinians view the prisoners as heroes fighting Israeli occupation at great personal cost, and virtually every Palestinian family has current or former detainees in its midst.

In contrast, many Israelis see the inmates as terrorists.

Israelis “see” these inmates as terrorists? Please. They are, by definition, terrorists. They attempted to kill civilians. Their success in doing so isn’t really relevant to what they are. It’s not a subjective judgment. That Palestinian society views them as heroes, says something about the society and about the apologists who glorify the terrorism.

The Israeli public is divided over whether to release large numbers of prisoners in exchange for Israeli captives. Some argue that such releases only drive up the cost of future exchanges and increase the dangers of future attacks.

“Some argue?” Well it’s more than an argument. It’s documented that a portion of those terrorists who are released early return to terrorism and innocents again pay the price.

As Meryl noted, there have been other articles of this ilk about Gilad Schalit or more generally.

The media may claim that they report the news, but what they report is a narrative, shaped by ideology. It has the effect of shaping opinion to fit the views of “journalists” and advocating for their preferred causes. It is generally not what we would consider “news.”

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

About Soccerdad

I'm a government bureaucrat with delusions of literacy.
This entry was posted in AP Media Bias, Israel, Israel Derangement Syndrome, Israeli Double Standard Time and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Why did Israel jail the pregnant woman?

  1. Harri says:

    How about a headline reading “Pregnant woman’s terrorist activity lands her in jail. Husband abandons her and their eight children”. That would be more accurate.

    And just who has provided clothing, food and medical care for the babies of these women who engaged in hostile terrorist activities while pregnant? Not the UN one could assume.

  2. Diane says:

    Believe it or not, some of us Americans stand firmly on the side of Israel. I am embarrassed by those (including our president) who do not. The media is so one-sided it’s ridiculous! God Bless the Holy Land and God’s Chosen People Forever!

  3. a.r. robbins says:

    These women tried to kill not only innocents, ut themselves and their unborn children! Whatever time
    they spent in prison was deserved and unfortunate that their families paid the price, however if they
    had been able to complete their suicide missions then their families would have paid the ultimate price.
    Give Isreal a break- these people have been under fire for centuries- they have had enough and we
    should support them as a nation.

  4. Seth Xavier says:

    Please you tell me who is not a “terrorist” in a war.

  5. veronica says:

    i wish the the world would be educated to the fact the state of israel has a right to exist !!!!!!!!! till then we will never have peace in the middle east !!!!!!!!! gilad schalit should have been released in this exchange not just a video appearing to be alive !!!!!!!!!! will abbas be a sadat or an arafat ????? netanyahu asked the right question !!!!!!!!!!!!!

  6. charles agaim says:

    ah when is this isreal and muslim countries will settle there differences , you all should remenber , we all are human being made by God . no man have the autourity to take another man life????1 love isreal and gaza people

  7. Troy says:

    Well technically they are failed terrorists, not actual terrorists since their actions did not lead to terror, but the issue goes further than merely putting a positive spin on terrorism. They are reluctant to accurately describe these women, because they are muslim. I mean Comedy Central, a channel that lampoons EVERY religion possible, censored an episode for fear of getting in trouble with the Imams. We (especially in the west) go out of our way to express our religious tolerance by feigning objectivity. The fact is simple, remove islam and judaism and there is no conflict. Remove all religions and most of our issues go away, maybe with the exception of North Korea. No one religion is morally correct here, however islam is the worst offender due to the virtually silent moderates.

  8. Henry Silvas says:

    It is the fault of anyone who engages in a criminal act to be punished as a criminal, even a failed one. Even in our own backyard women give birth behind bars, if you commit a crime justice will prevail. For an impoverished “terrorist” woman to be on her 9th child well that is the real crime. These “men” of Islam marry children some as young as 12 years old and not out of love but for a price whether it be livestock or money. That is the crime. I’m not a very religious man although I believe in God above but it does not take much to know the difference between right and wrong. I will guide, preach to or advise someone on faith but I will not destroy myself and take along innocent people for the ride to shove my ideals down anybody’s throat. Islam is very dangerous, in the wrong minds. People forget we all have free will to believe in whatever we want. Nobody should force or scare any other human being into believing what they feel is the truth. The Middle East surely bought themselves time by having vast amounts of oil. If we did not rely on their resources the world would not tolerate their sick games and pointless wars for as long as we have.

  9. Regina says:

    Yes, by all means remove religion. Then we could find something else to fight and war over…..which we WOULD do! Religion is not the problem. Mankind is the problem. Let’s all be REALLY responsible global citizens and kill ourselves off. Then the rest of creation could live in peace! (I’m not serious, don’t panic!)

    Truth exists, God exists…..religion is a reflection of the various ways in which men have tried to FIND those two things. (I believe they are one and the same.) What’s missing is a historical perspective in the press. Research Israel and you will find that nobody wanted it until the Jewish people began to return from the diaspora and redeem the land. And it WAS literally redeemed, even from death, if functional usefullness measured land in that way.
    I no longer look for “unbiased reporting”. I just wish that the press would be more upfront about what their bias IS…..at least that way it would be easier for us to sort out opposing viewpoints on issues with which we’re unfamiliar. (Except, of course, that most people don’t believe they ARE unfamiliar with the issues! After all, they listen to CNN.) Sigh……….

  10. Stephen says:

    It’s political correctness gone insane. Making them look like the victims because they are female and have children, and surprise, surprise, little mention of Islam. It is bad enough that in developed countries, women who actively participate in criminal activities are often given sweet deals or even let off the hook entirely, but for terrorists, that’s another level entirely. They are like Nazis and Communists, consumed with hate, seeing an ‘evil’ group of people to destroy and thinking that the people in question both deserve it and in some cases are to be ‘eliminated for being inferior’. There are many different levels of terrorism….one could be a terrorist for raising a child to be a suicide bomber, one could be one for being part of a conspiracy, a plot, one could be one through giving financial aid or for knowingly helping those on the run hide from authorities.

    It’s beyond pathetic to see people pleading for their release, if anything they should be executed for a multitude of charges including conspiracy to commit murder and high treason.

    I know this will offend many, especially the politically correct appeasers, however given history, current events, projected demographics and Islamic Theology (an oxymoron) the Islamic World looks like the building blocks of the Empire of the AntiChrist (several good books on that).

  11. Paul M. says:

    Well, Troy…just because they failed in their mission doesn’t make them ‘failed’ terrorists. Just like the PC crowd to try and make a distinction where none exists. Those terrorists who ‘fail’, have not failed. For one, they succeed in adding to the general feeling of public fear. Terrorists don’t have to kill anyone to be successful.
    And this ‘political correctness gone insane’ Stephen is nothing at all new. It has been going on for centuries, and it is the PC, and NOT religion, Troy, that has brought us to the disgusting place we are at this moment in time.

  12. Michael Lonie says:

    “4.Please you tell me who is not a “terrorist” in a war.”

    Soldiers who abide by the laws and customs of warfare are not; laws as codified by the Fourth Geneva Conventions, for example. That would include Israel and the USA but not the Palestinian Arabs, who violate those laws by their deliberate attacks on civilians, failure to fight in uniform or other distinguishing marks visible from a distance, and other violations as with Gilad Shalit.

    If Israel wanted to act the way her enemies do there would be no Arabs left in Gaza or Judea and Samaria.

    “6.ah when is this isreal and muslim countries will settle there differences , you all should remenber , we all are human being made by God . no man have the autourity to take another man life????1 love isreal and gaza people”

    I suspect Israel’s enemies would disagree with you that the Jews are also human beings made by G-d. “Sons of apes and pigs” is their favored description, IIRC.

    As for when they will settle their differences, it will be when Israel’s enemies are willing to let Israel exist. Arab countries that have made peace with Israel, and kept it, have had nothing to fear from Israel, for decades in the case of Egypt. And that is despite the coldness of Egypt’s peace with Israel, which Egypt underlines by its government-run media spewing forth immense quantities of loathsome, antisemitic propaganda, like a 41-part TV series based on that old fraud, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”

    The conflict will end only when Israel’s enemies want it to end, and there is nothing Israel can do to forward the time, except defend herself and her people resolutely. If Israel does not fight there will be another Shoah of 5.5 million more Jews, once Israel’s enemies get the upper hand. That is what they have always promised, that is what Hamas, Hezbollah, and the PLO declare as their aims, that is what Iran’s Pharaohs declare as their aim. And the whole world, just about, denounces Israel for resisting this attempted genocide. There is something about armed Jews defending themselves against genocide that makes an awful lot of people nervous, even drives them to hysteria, and I can only wonder why.

  13. edboy 1969 says:

    i say peace be with you all ……..

  14. Wow! In one case, instead of being blown to bits in the mother’s womb, the kid is alive and being taken care of. In the other case, instead of a dead mother, the family has a live mother in prison. Their lives changed? Dad remarried? Hello? What if she were DEAD? How would things be any different.

    This twisted logic is just plain insane. My head hurts.

Comments are closed.