Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - How much do you trust what the media tells you?

roachboy · 01-04-2009, 03:40 PM

dc--thanks for the first line above.

i don't want to blur the threads together, so will only say a couple quick things:
a) i posted a pretty extensive analysis concerning egypt and it's border with gaza. the situation is complicated, but two things are evident--mubarak will shed no tears if hamas is smashed because of the links to egypt's internal political opposition (which mubarak has waged a police war against for some time)--but at the same time if civilian casualties get too high, this de facto acceptance of the israeli action is likely to come apart.

i was initially baffled by egypt's actions and tried to figure out what lay behind them, given available information.

there are 7 entry points into gaza, however. israel controls 6, egypt 1---let's not be silly about pointing at egypt alone to explain the consequences of siege.

2. on casualty rates---i also posted to the thread earlier in the week, during the bombardment, that the numbers were problematic as a base for determining much because no male over 18 is being counted as a civilian.
i saw a press conference given by a un representative on wednesday night during which a donnybrook erupted about this---the obvious question is what the hell do you mean that no male over 18 is a civilian--the response was that under current circumstances it is not possible to make determinations about that category, so "civilian" right now means women and children.

a little while ago, the united nations reported that over 20% of the casualties so far have been civilians so defined--women and children.

to my mind, the operation as a whole is unacceptable--these numbers are unacceptable. that's why i post the numbers without qualification---when the differentiation is announced (men vs women/children) i post that.

within the category of males over 18 you, dc, have no idea how many hamas and how many not-hamas people are dead or wounded. no more than anyone else does.

that's the reality of the numbers.
you can prefer to believe as you like, but know that you are basically projecting when you do it. i do not pretend to know how many hamas how many not-hamas--but the women and children who are ONLY dead or wounded because of the siege---that's unacceptable.

i'm happy to defend the usage of the category siege, or talk about anything else with this--but in the other thread.

01-04-2009, 03:40 PM	#25 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	dc--thanks for the first line above. i don't want to blur the threads together, so will only say a couple quick things: a) i posted a pretty extensive analysis concerning egypt and it's border with gaza. the situation is complicated, but two things are evident--mubarak will shed no tears if hamas is smashed because of the links to egypt's internal political opposition (which mubarak has waged a police war against for some time)--but at the same time if civilian casualties get too high, this de facto acceptance of the israeli action is likely to come apart. i was initially baffled by egypt's actions and tried to figure out what lay behind them, given available information. there are 7 entry points into gaza, however. israel controls 6, egypt 1---let's not be silly about pointing at egypt alone to explain the consequences of siege. 2. on casualty rates---i also posted to the thread earlier in the week, during the bombardment, that the numbers were problematic as a base for determining much because no male over 18 is being counted as a civilian. i saw a press conference given by a un representative on wednesday night during which a donnybrook erupted about this---the obvious question is what the hell do you mean that no male over 18 is a civilian--the response was that under current circumstances it is not possible to make determinations about that category, so "civilian" right now means women and children. a little while ago, the united nations reported that over 20% of the casualties so far have been civilians so defined--women and children. to my mind, the operation as a whole is unacceptable--these numbers are unacceptable. that's why i post the numbers without qualification---when the differentiation is announced (men vs women/children) i post that. within the category of males over 18 you, dc, have no idea how many hamas and how many not-hamas people are dead or wounded. no more than anyone else does. that's the reality of the numbers. you can prefer to believe as you like, but know that you are basically projecting when you do it. i do not pretend to know how many hamas how many not-hamas--but the women and children who are ONLY dead or wounded because of the siege---that's unacceptable. i'm happy to defend the usage of the category siege, or talk about anything else with this--but in the other thread. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite