StatCounter

Thursday 6 January 2011

Are these two instances really identical?

The BBC report the woes of The Samaritans in Israel and the Palestinian Territories; it's an interesting article but I was struck by this opening section:
'On 8 November 2001, during the second intifada (uprising), Joseph Cohen, a 56-year-old Samaritan, was driving home from the Palestinian town of Nablus.

"When I was almost home, I came across two Palestinian boys and they shot me," he says. "The blood ran from me like water."

He lost control of his car and drove into an Israeli roadblock. The Israeli soldiers shouted at him to stop.

"But I couldn't stop the car. And so they also shot me."

There are probably few people in the world who have been shot by both Palestinians and Israelis within minutes of each other.'
Am I alone in spotting that whilst two Palestinian boys shot at him for no reason, the Israeli soldiers shot at a car that, to their eyes, refused to stop at a roadblock. Are the two cases really identical?


UPDATE:
Following comments from several anonymous users regarding my use of the word 'identical', I would like to say this:
Maybe I chose my words poorly. My point was that whilst this man was indeed shot by Palestinian 'boys' and Israeli 'soldiers' on the same day; the Palestinian 'boys' were carrying out an unprovoked attack whilst the Israeli soldiers were responding to what they perceived as a potential attack.

The original article does not say that these were identical and neither did the Samaritan, however it was the equating of an unprovoked shooting by Palestinians with a 'to them' provoked attack by Israelis that caught my eye.

In my defence I was very busy when I read the original article and then posted mine, maybe I could have worded it better.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's not saying they're identical, though, is it? It's merely saying he was shot at by both Israelis and Palestinians and that it's pretty rare. I don't see your point.

Anonymous said...

They are not identical, and nowhere does the article say they are. You are seeing bias when there is none there. This is because you are biased yourself?

Not a sheep said...

Maybe I chose my words poorly. My point was that whilst this man was indeed shot by Palestinian 'boys' and Israeli 'soldiers' on the same day; the Palestinian 'boys' were carrying out an unprovoked attack whilst the Israeli soldiers were responding to what they perceived as a potential attack.

The original article does not say that these were identical and neither did the Samaritan, however it was the equating of an unprovoked shooting by Palestinians with a 'to them' provoked attack by Israelis that caught my eye.

In my defence I was very busy when I read the original article and then posted mine, maybe I could have worded it better.

Grant said...

Yes, it is a typical BBC trick to portray the two events as if they are equivalent.
You can be sure that, if the boys had been Israelis, the occupant of the car Palestinian and the soldiers Palestinians, the BBC would have reported it differently.
Classic BBC bias.