Dear Sara, amv"sh
The campaign I understand is to put pressure on the Times to report the negative consequences of the Disengagement. After reading an article in yesterday's Times related to Gilad Shalit, I am a bit concerned. The Times article appeared in the International Section A8 entitled "Israel Rejects Hamas Terms for Exchange Of Prisoners" By Greg Myre. (my husband picks up stray copies on the train) In this article they portray Olmert as being very forceful in his unwillingness to negotiate with Hamas while the Hamas spokesperson on the other hand Mr. Khaled Meshal, the exiled director of the Hamas political bureau, in a news conference in Damascus, Syria shows a strong willingness to negotiate. "The solution is simple: exchange prisoners," Mr. Meshal said. "There will be no freedom for the Israeli prisoner without an exchange involving Palestinian detainees."
the Times article continues...
Mr. Meshal was also critical of the U.S. and other Western countries for placing so much emphasis on one Israeli soldier when Israel was holing nearly 9,000 Palestinian prisoners.
...
Meshal continues and says that Corporal Shalit had been seized in a "clean military operation" and that Hamas considered him a prisoner of war.
The Times reporter(s) are very slick. I am afraid this campaign might cause the Times to have a balanced article of all the "Palestinian refugees" in the same breath as the unfortunate conditions of the Jewish refugees from Gush Katif. I am not an avid reader of the Times but it is for legitimate reasons that the Times is being boycotted by Dov Hikind. Recognizing the TImes for who they are, the question is what is the best way to put pressure on them that will report the disengagement in a negative light rather than twist it to appear justified. I don't really have an answer. Perhaps you guys do.
Sincerely,
Robin
No comments:
Post a Comment