Gaza population density semantics distracts from illegal Israeli delegitimization of elected Hamas government

Israel media lobby groups like eyeonthepost. org and camera. org often complain about media missing critical context. What they apparently mean, in the case of Gaza population density with no freedom of movement of people and goods, is 'don't call Gaza one of the most densely populated places in the world' unless the context is 'good for Israeli political righties' such as Michael Berenhaus' letter praising "Praised, not condemned"  the IDF for low civilian casualties in its Pillar of Defense war.

[link dead by 2015 transcription of full text from paper copy of Dec 20, 2012 Washington Jewish Week that post author paid cover price of $1 for in 'brick and mortar' store]

"Praised, not condemned"

   One day, operation "Pillar of Defense" will be called the most humanitarian, precision-conducted campaign in military history.  With more than 1,350 sites hit by the Israeli Defense Forces, there were only about 50 civilian deaths - and this in one of the more densely populated areas in the world.  Further, some of these casualties were caused by Hamas' own rockets.  (It is estimated that more than 100 Hamas rockets aimed at Israel actually landed in Gaza).  

   Yet our local paper of record in the nation's capital, The Washington Post, had a front-page headline such as "Civilian Toll Up in Gaza Fighting" on Nov. 19 [2012].  For this kind of warfare, with Hamas firing rockets from civilian neighborhoods adjacent to schools, hospitals and mosques, the civilian toll was down, not up.  Compare this with Syria, where more than 40,000 are dead.  Before bombing, Israel sent out warning texts, tweets, emails, phone calls and leaflets.  Israel should be praised, not condemned.  

Michael Berenhaus

Potomac

5 years before, the camera. org Washington director disputed calling Gaza one of the most densely populated places in the world in the context of describing the effects of Israel's blockade and embargo on civilians who have nothing to do with rocket launches. The blockade and embargo is an application, by Israel, of illegal BDS tactics to delegitimize a freely elected Hamas parliamentary majority with resulting rights to form a government.

And the Israeli far-right-supporting blog posted, for the second time, a comparison of population densities of various cities and reduced Palestinian claims of poverty to simply high population density. The blogger completely ignored effects on Palestinian daily life from the constant prioritization of Israeli security over Palestinian human rights.

The Michael Berenhaus letter [link dead by 2015 transcription of letter above at first link mention] even understated the Palestinian death tolls. Others have put the death toll for the Pillar of Defense war at 169 Palestinians.

Police officers and other local government employees killed in the 2009 Cast Lead war have been falsely counted as militants or terrorists when they are in fact civilians. A form letter urging people to boycott Motorola cell phones read in part:

“Prior to Motorola Israel's sale of the GED [Government Electronics Division sold to Aeronautics Defense Systems ADS that produces drone planes], shrapnel bearing Motorola serial numbers was found by Human Rights Watch researchers amongst the rubble at the site of a destroyed Gaza police station that was hit by a bomb dropped by an Israeli UAV [drone]. This is troubling because under international law, municipal police officers are civilians under the laws of war.”

Berenhaus also repeats baseless speculation 

  "Further, some of these casualties were caused by Hamas' own rockets. (It is estimated that more than 100

Hamas rockets aimed at Israel actually landed in Gaza.)."

The baseless speculation was also done by the camera. org Snapshots blog distortion


[link dead by 2015 copy and paste of archive.org page view below retrieved at
 https://web.archive.org/web/20080419113536/http://blog.camera.org/archives/2008/04/gush_shalom_falsely_accuses_is_1.html  ]

April 13, 2008

Gush Shalom Falsely Accuses Israel of Killing 5-year-old

In a page A2 advertisement in Ha'aretz Friday (April 11), Gush Shalom falsely accuses Israel of having killed a five-year-old, Abdallah Bahar. The text reads:

5-year-old Abdallah Bahar Was killed this week In the Gaza Strip By army fire.

Not a single word about this
Was published by
Yediot Aharonot, Maariv
or any TV channel
Only Haaretz published a photo.

In the democratic State of Israel
There is no need for
A military coup d'etat
In order to muzzle the media.
The editors do it themselves.

But, as the Palestinian Center for Human Rights documents in an April 8 release entitled "Misuse of Weapons by Armed Groups and Security Personnel," Behar was killed by a Palestinian mortar shell which accidentally hit near his house.

Some questions:

1) Does Ha'aretz have any policy requiring the fact-checking of ads for factual accuracy? Will Ha'aretz print a correction about the ad which contains a false, defamatory charge against Israel? Ask Publisher Amos Schocken (aschocken@haaretz.co.il).

2) What evidence does Gush Shalom have that would negate PCHR's findings that Behar was killed by a Palestinian mortar? If none is available, will Gush Shalom retract its accusation? Contact info@gush-shalom.org .

Posted by TS at April 13, 2008 05:11 AM

of a Gush Shalom ad in Ha'aretz about who killed Abdullah B'har by keeping the dispute alive regarding who fired the explosive that killed him. http://www.theaugeanstables.com/2008/04/13/israeli-left-dupes-of-demopaths/ [link dead. screen shot below shows NGO Monitor aggregated theaugeanstables post.]  and

http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/_gush_shalom_and_b_tselem_invent_palestinian_victims_ [link dead as of 2015 screen shot from archive.org above] reposted and attempted to make Gush Shalom and B'tselem known more for controversy around their work than for their work itself. The effects of such 'controversy startups' establish a negative first impression (if wrong once one can never fully trust again) in people by introducing skepticism where it doesn't belong that weakens the subsequent influence on events that the 'controversy startup' objects may have.

.

Read http://www.maannews.net/en/index.php?opr=ShowDetails&ID=28647 

[link dead by 2015 screen shot when link retrieved from archive.org below]

for confirmation that Abdullah B'har was killed by an Israeli weapon not a Palestinian weapon. PCHR Gaza was legitimately criticizing 'both sides' without attributing blame to either Israel or Palestinian groups and it was that ambiguity that the author of the Snapshots Camera.org blog post was exploiting in order to attack the credibility of the Gush Shalom ad in Ha'aretz. NGO Monitor and the augean stables blog attempted to 'pile on' and impugn the credibility of B'tselem as well as Gush Shalom.

By keeping a dispute alive, the subject becomes 'controversial' and subject to the 'don't bring up'

'controversial subjects' 'rule' of 'polite conversation' and 'getting along with people' to suppress any

further dialogue beyond one's first impression that also complicates activism for a sustainable peace both 

Israelis and Palestinians can live with. Camera. org used a dead link to a PCHR report in their

snapshots blog that prevented readers from easily reading the report for themselves. I personally emailed the 

PCHR and 1 day later the link worked.