Thursday, June 29, 2006

But Israel is Still the Cruel and Heartless One, Right? 

Sometimes these terrorist press conferences get so outrageous I wonder how the reporters can sit through them. Do they sit quietly, simply transcribing the threats like Terror's secretarial pool? Or do they ask tough, probing questions that somehow manage to illicit threat after cold-blooded threat -- and then faithfully report them all without the questions, context or criticism? What must these press conferences be like to allow blatant evil to be so publically proclaimed, then only to be amplified and publicized by a freedom- and justice-loving media?

Take for instance this recent press conference convened by a Palestinian terror spokesman, Abu Mujahed of the Popular Resistance Committees (PRC), the group that kidnapped Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit. What exactly this PRC group represents other than unrelenting violence against Israel and its people remains a bit unclear to me; the only important point we all are supposed to understand, though, is that they are not -- repeat NOT -- the same thing as Hamas. Because if Hamas were to openly kidnap Israelis -- as opposed to merely advocating and applauding such behavior while piling on to the ransom demand bandwagon --, it would be understood as an act of war, and that would be so much more inconvenient for the media's pre-determined story line. So forget Hamas; PRC it is.

I'll convey here a few lines from Mujahed's press conference in which he outlined a few points about how the kidnapped soldier might be treated, but I'll add a few probing questions from the media that I assume they MUST have asked, rather than just sit silently transcribing the threats:

Abu Mujahed, spokesman for the Popular Resistance Committees (PRC), said in a statement that Israel should stop wasting time if it wanted to resolve the crisis over Shalit's abduction.

Mr. Mujahed, Patsy Powderpuff, Apologetic Reporting Foundation, I'd like some details about this Israeli waste of time. Are they wasting time to avoid your offers of peaceful coexistence as implied somewhat in non-Israeli interpretations of the Prisoners' Document? Or do they not want to resolve this crisis at all, perhaps using the confusion to coverup something else? And can you say anything about how the kidnapped soldier is reacting to the delaying tactics of his own government?

'Possibility one: the missing soldier, for one reason or another, is dead and maybe there is a morgue available for his body or maybe there is not,' Abu Mujahed said at a news conference.

Patsy Powderpuff, ARF, again here, can I get a followup? So basically, you're saying that the Israelis have destroyed the morgue? And can you confirm for me whether the Israeli soldier was killed in the morgue blast itself? Is he dead for sure?

'Possibility two is the soldier is still alive but is suffering a serious injury. Medication might be available or might not be available ... '

Patsy Powderpuff again. One more followup if I may then sir? If the soldier is still alive, can you give any information about the extemt of the injuries he sustained in the Israeli morgue attack, and does this mean the Israelis took out hospitals as well? Or blockading humanitarian deliveries of medical supplies? No, wait, maybe they confiscated all the medicine, even from the pharmacies?

'Possibility three is that he is fine but that a long time will pass [before he is released].

Patsy Powderpuff again. This is the last one. I promise -- infidel's word -- just kidding; as a journalist I have to be impartial so obviously I don't consider myself "on the Infidels' side." If the missing soldier is fine, even after all the indiscriminate bombing of Palestinian morgues and hospitals, can you explain why he wouldn't want to be released "until a long time has passed"? Would you say that the longer he is with you, the more he understands your cause -- kind of a Patty Hearst thing? Are the Israelis risking a PR debacle as their own kidnapped soldier eventually realizes the cruelty and injustice of his own people?

'Wasting time is not in their interests,' he said.

AbbaGav from AbbaGav News Network. One question. You say it is not in our interest to waste time. Yet if the soldier is dead as you threaten, then wasting time is not the issue. And if he is fine but will not be released for a long time, then it is you who is wasting the time. So it seems that you are telling us he was injured in your attack and then taken from "Israel proper" into Gaza. And it seems that you are threatening not to give medicine to the captive you have injured and refuse to release. So my question is not for you, it is for the rest of the world. How long will you excuse this? When will you demand civilized behavior from a group that demands its own sovereign state?
Obviously, the world's press doesn't have room to print everything. So they just convey the terrorist's essential threats, and leave intuiting the context as an exercise for the reader.

If you really, really liked this -- or even really, really hated it -- there's lots more: