Just when I think I may start subscribing for the full week, the NY Times becomes very disappointing with its coverage of the conflict in Gaza. Today's front page has a photo of Israeli soldiers taking a break and an article about Ehud Barak's rising political stature as a result of Israel's bombing and invasion of Gaza. Then there is a little note at the bottom referring to an article regarding the bombing of a UN school in Gaza where numerous children and other civilians were killed.
Just where is the Times's morals in this? The bloodshed of Palestinians at the hands of Israel warrants much more attention than an Israeli politician's prospects or some Israeli soldiers at rest (or the loss of a few fallen Israeli soldiers written about inside). The Palestinian strife was buried in today's paper.
And no letters published about the conflict/invasion in the opinion section yet. Two days ago, the editorial board had a very lame editorial about what it calls Israel's "incursion" into Gaza. Plus, Thomas Friedman yesterday had a ridiculous op-ed that focused on the geopolitics of the conflict, allowing him to ignore the suffering of the Palestinians and as usual throw blame at the Arabs. I did read though some excellent online reader comments disagreeing with each.
Over the days of the conflict I've noticed in the ongoing articles an effort here and there to somehow equate the suffering of each side.
I could not read today's paper.
5 hours ago
No comments:
Post a Comment