I've debated quite a bit with folks over at Mark Glesne's blog, since most of posts and comments come from the perspectives of the political and religious right. I'm not opposed to everything on the right-hand side of issues, but since I lean towards the left on the political compass, there's a lot of issues that I bit compelled to challenge.

I commented quite a bit on Israeli's relationship with Palestine, particularly with Hamas, and how the blame for the sudden escalation in violence really falls on both parties. The knee-jerk reaction of most folks on the right-hand side of politics and religion is to defend Israel's right to protect itself against terrorists who seem bent to disrupt Israel's peaceful way of life. Their feeling is often that Israel is the victem in the conflict. For the religious-right, Israel is "God's chosen people," which to them means that Israel is never wrong, and that any attack against Israel is really an attack on religious principles, and that Israel is continually being persecuted by wicked nations.

I think the religious-right needs to gain a bit of understanding of the massively superior military power that Israel possess, and how Israel hardly needs support in defending itself against terrorists. Furthermore, it would be handy if Americans would read the news from agencies outside the US, as it's rare that friends write scathing articles about one another. Israel is a close ally of the US, and our mainstream news tends to reflect that relationship.

Kidnapping

Most news agency reported that the Palestinian group Hamas kidnapped Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier. It's key to pay attention to the words being used by our media, because perception most folks pick up tend to be created by way the media spins the information.

From Zmag:

Reporting of the June 25 capture of an Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, by Palestinian militants at an army post at Kerem Shalom near Gaza demonstrated the same bias. The BBC, ITV News, the Guardian, Independent and most other media described the incident as a "kidnapping". We emailed Guardian journalist David Fickling:

"In today's article, 'Israel detains Hamas ministers,' you write:

"'Israeli troops arrested dozens of Hamas ministers and parliamentarians today as they stepped up their campaign to free a soldier kidnapped by militants in Gaza at the weekend.' (http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1808570,00.html)

"Why do Israeli militants 'detain' and 'arrest', whereas Palestinian militants 'kidnap'?" (Email, June 29, 2006)

Fickling replied:

"There is a well-attested distinction between arrest - an action carried out by a state as the first step of a well-defined legal process - and kidnap, which is an action carried out by private individuals with no defined outcome, enforceable purpose, or rights of review or release." (Email, June 29, 2006)

In reality there is no "well-defined legal process" protecting the Hamas politicians "arrested" by the Israelis. Of what crimes have they been accused? Are we to believe that they have any rights of review or release whatever? Quite the reverse; the press reports that the subsequent bombings of empty Hamas political offices were intended as a clear signal that Hamas's leaders can be assassinated if Israel so desires.

More than the spin placed on "abduction" and "arrest" is the fact that most mainstream media failed to address the kidnappings that Israel conducted the day before Hamas kiddnapped the soldier

Few readers will be aware that on June 24, the day before the "kidnapping", Israeli commandos had entered the Gaza Strip and captured two Palestinians claimed by Israel to be members of Hamas.

Nor have the press suggested that the one-sided nature of the killing in the weeks leading up to the capture of the Israeli soldier might have "sparked" Palestinian actions.

Noam Chomsky talks a bit about this as well an interview on Democracy Now, and also states the following:

What's happening in Gaza, to start with that -- well, basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election.

The Hamas election seems to have led to Israel's kidnapping (ahem... arrest) of Palestinians reported to be members of Hamas, which lead to the capture of Gilad, which led to Israel's attacks on Hamas leadership, which has escalated into Gaza, which may potentially involve Syria and Iran.

So who's to blame? Probably everybody. But the folks who are going to suffer most (as is generally the case in war) are the innocent civilians have have nothing to do the conflict whatsoever.