[PEN-L:32368] Manufacturing a massacre

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

Salon.com, November 19, 2002 Tuesday

Manufacturing a massacre

By Eric Boehlert

Initial reports said Palestinian gunmen brazenly fired on Jewish
worshipers in Hebron. The reports were wrong -- but the U.S. media has
yet to correct them.

The headlines over the weekend were startling, even for the Middle East,
where the Israeli-Palestinian war seems trapped in escalating cycles of
violence. On Friday evening in the predominantly Palestinian city of
Hebron, gunmen hiding in houses and olive groves ambushed Jewish
worshipers as they walked home from Sabbath prayers, spraying them with
gunfire and even tossing grenades into the unarmed crowd. Israeli
soldiers, who escort the worshipers every Friday night, rushed into a
dark dead-end alley to try to help. After a four-hour gun battle, 12
Israelis were dead. Government officials, led by the hard-line foreign
minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, quickly dubbed it the "Sabbath Massacre."

The gun battle was alarming -- and made headlines worldwide -- not only
because Israel's military suffered its heaviest one-day loss in years
but also because of the demented idea that gunmen would open fire on
unarmed worshipers as they walked home from prayer.

No doubt that's what provoked outrage from Pope John Paul II, who
expressed anger over the "vile attack, just as people had finished
praying." Also, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan leveled one
of his strongest attacks against Palestinians and the "despicable
terrorist attack that killed Jewish worshipers on their way to the
Sabbath Eve prayers." The American press rushed to report the gruesome
details. "Ambush; 12 Israelis Murdered at Prayer," read the New York
Post's Saturday banner headline. According to the Post news account,
"The attack began when Palestinian snipers hiding in houses fired
automatic weapons and tossed grenades at dozens of Jews on their way to
one of Judaism's holiest sites."

The New York Times, citing Israeli army officials, reported that
"Palestinian snipers ambushed Jewish settlers walking home from Sabbath
prayers." So, among others, did the Boston Globe: "Militants ambushed a
group of settlers." So did Newsday: "Palestinian gunmen in the West Bank
city of Hebron ambushed Jewish settlers."

It's now clear that none of those initial press reports from Hebron were
accurate. In truth, Jewish worshipers returning home were not fired upon
by Palestinian gunmen, who instead waited until the civilians were
behind settlement gates before they started shooting at Israeli
soldiers. None of the worshipers died. The 12 Israelis killed were
security guards or soldiers. Three Palestinian gunmen were also killed.

It's one thing if the early, erroneous press accounts simply reflected
confusion surrounding a chaotic event like an ambush. But over a
three-day period, American news outlets had a chance to correct or at
least clarify what happened in Hebron, but few of them did.

With a dozen Israelis dead, the distinction between who the Palestinian
gunmen shot at may seem trivial. But there is an important difference,
particularly in how the world sees the conflict, between opening fire on
unarmed worshipers and targeting trained soldiers, who many Palestinians
see as part of an illegal occupying force. It's crucial that the press
be able to make clear distinctions between armed combat and acts of
terrorism against civilians, especially as the United States leads a
global war on terrorism.

What became clear by Saturday in Israel was that the ambush did not
occur as originally described by government officials. Or as described
by one self-professed witness who phoned Israel's Army Radio and, in a
live interview, insisted "the group of Jews were slaughtered." His
early, vivid accounts lent credence to the idea of a civilian massacre.
On Monday, however, the man admitted that he'd been in Tel Aviv during
the Hebron attack and had misled the media with his phony accounts.

Even before the man's arrest, Amos Harel, writing Sunday in the Israeli
daily Ha'aretz, declared: "What happened in Hebron on Friday night was
not a 'massacre,' nor was it an attack on 'peaceful Jewish worshippers'
returning from prayers. The attack actually began several minutes after
all of the worshippers had already returned safely. Those killed Friday
were killed in combat. All of the victims were armed fighters, who were
more or less trained."

The Jerusalem Post reported that the first ambush shots did not ring out
until after the "all clear" had sounded on the soldiers' radios,
"meaning worshipers had been safely escorted to their homes after
Shabbat prayers." Speaking with the Israeli press, Matan Vilnai, a
former Israeli general, told reporters over the weekend: "It wasn't a
massacre, it was a battle."

And in Sunday's Washington Post, which was virtually alone in putting
the Hebron events in perspective for U.S. news consumers, the paper
quoted the leader of the Israeli settlement in Hebron, who explained
civilians were not targeted in the alley gun battle: "It was a pure
military event. The worshipers had passed a quarter of an hour before."

Yet many news organizations failed to clarify that point. On Saturday,
the Los Angles Times reported that "Palestinian gunmen ambushed Jewish
settlers." In its follow-up story on Sunday, when it was clear the
paper's original dispatch was not accurate, the Times ignored any
mention of settlers being attacked -- or not being attacked -- in the
Hebron battle.

Again and again that pattern was repeated over the weekend, as
newspapers ignored or obfuscated the facts. After telling readers in its
Saturday headline that 12 Israelis had been "murdered in prayer," the
New York Post blurred the facts on Sunday, referring vaguely to Israelis
(meaning soldiers) being ambushed.

In Saturday's edition, the Boston Globe reported in the first sentence
of its article that "Palestinian gunmen killed 12 Israelis and wounded
15 in an attack yesterday on worshipers." In Sunday's editions, the
Globe mentioned obliquely that "no civilian worshipers were among the
casualties," without spelling out that the settlers mentioned in
Saturday's editions were never attacked.

Even the New York Times, which probably allocates more resources to
covering the Middle East than any other newspaper, seemed confused about
the events in Hebron -- either that, or it was unwilling to correct its
initial mistake. Like every other outlet, the paper first followed the
lead of Israeli government officials and reported that worshipers had
been ambushed. On Sunday the Times, still citing the Israeli army's
version of events, wrote the attack was "a carefully planned assault on
Jewish settlers" and went into detail about how the ambush was triggered
by passing worshipers.

It was not until Monday that the Times, in the 11th paragraph of its
third Hebron ambush story, finally explained to readers: "The Israeli
Army initially said the attack was on Jewish worshipers, but it appears
to have been directed at security forces who guard settlers."

Even then, the newspaper did not pursue the question of whether members
of the Israeli government purposely misled reporters about the ambush
for political gain.

It's worth noting that the first reports of a so-called civilian
massacre originated from the office of Netanyahu, Israel's newly
appointed foreign minister. On Friday night, his spokesman told
reporters that Jewish worshipers on their way to prayers were brutally
attacked and murdered by Palestinian terrorists.

The former leader of the right-wing Likud Party, Netanyahu recently
joined Ariel Sharon's coalition government, but he will challenge Sharon
for the prime minister's post in the January elections. It's possible
that, by initially hyping the attack as the "Sabbath Massacre,"
Netanyahu was trying to pressure Sharon to drive Palestinian leader
Yasser Arafat into exile, a provocative move Netanyahu has been
advocating for months. Sharon didn't do that -- but in what some
observers see as a concession to Netanyahu's far-right conservative
challenge, he did approve the creation of additional, and controversial,
Jewish settlements in Hebron following the ambush.

No doubt the initial, false claims that Palestinians massacred
worshipers helped ease the way for that move. All the more reason the
press should be asking pointed questions about Hebron.

--

The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org