Israel is a diverse nation made up of many diverse nationalities and religions. Many people may assume that members of one religion agree on each other being valid, practicing members of their shared religion, but this is unfortunately not the case. Judaism, for example, is practiced by people across the world from all different nationalities. Within Israel and Israeli society, the current dominant Jewish group is made up of Ashkenazi Jews, Jews who descend from Central and Eastern Europe. As this group makes up the majority of Jewish Israelis, one such minority group that experiences discrimination against them within Jewish Israelis are Ethiopian Jewish Israelis.
While the majority of Israelis see the daring rescue of thousands of Ethiopians as a source of pride and strength for Israel (Rosenthal, 150), Israeli society has fallen short of assisting Ethiopians. Many Ethiopians came to Israel not knowing not only Hebrew but also not knowing how to live and adjust to life in a more modernized, industrialized city and nation. This led to numerous cultural misunderstandings between Ethiopians and Israelis as they came to live in Israel. One simple misunderstanding was when a patient at the doctor's office gasped loudly so the doctor grew concerned about the patient potentially having asthma and a translator had to clarify that the man was simply saying yes in Amharic (Rosenthal, 152). Unfortunately, there have been less humorous misunderstandings as well.
Even though these Ethiopian Jews were known to the world in 1790, it wasn't until the year 1973 that the Sephardic Chief Rabbi declared that Ethiopian Jews were valid as real Jews and urged for them to be brought to Israel (Rosenthal, 155). Once Ethiopian orphans arrived in Israel, they were sent to religious boarding schools where they were made to feel ashamed of their culture and nationality, as well as being discriminated against for not being perceived as 'real Jews' (Rosenthal, 160). They were also discriminated against through being placed in lower level educational classes due to the false perception and belief that they were not smart enough to be placed with the other students (Rosenthal, 160). Tragically, Ethiopians also discovered that the blood they had been donating at Magen David Adom blood bank was been tossed into the trash due to a stereotypic fear that the African-born Ethiopians had HIV/AIDS (Rosenthal, 165). These Ethiopians felt incredibly discriminated against and launched a protest and marched their way to the prime minister's office in Jerusalem (Rosenthal, 165).
More serious to Ethiopians is the distinct discrimination and questioning they face in Israel about their Jewish roots and Jewishness. Similar to Spanish Jewry who were forced to convert or either flee or be killed, Ethiopian Jewry were forced to convert to survive (Rosenthal, 167). Also similar to Spanish Jewry, these same Ethiopians continued practicing their Judaism underground as Ethiopian crypto-Jews, known to the world as the Falash Mora. There are many in the Israeli government and in religious Israeli institutions who do not perceive these Ethiopians as "real Jews." Even more seriously, the consensus of the chief rabbinate in Israel is that Ethiopians should undergo a formal Jewish conversion to be considered authentic Jewish people, a belief that obviously upsets Ethiopian Jewry and distinctly discriminates against them. The Times of Israel recently reported that in the city of Petah Tikvah, the rabbinate present there routinely discriminates against Ethiopians by refusing to grant them a marriage license citing that they do not believe the Ethiopians are authentically Jewish. Similarly, many other nationalities in Israel experience a religious type of discrimination. The Times of Israel reported that Druze people, a minority religion within Israel, were feeling upset and actively demonstrated against the passing of the Jewish nation-state law which proclaimed Israel to be actively a Jewish settlement and made Hebrew the official language, downgrading the status of the Arabic language that Druze speak.
Overall, Ethiopians in Israel likely feel that the Israeli government does not respect them or regard them as "authentic Jews" due to the state of Israel discriminating against Ethiopians in regards to education, health, and religion. They are often falsely perceived to be less intellectual than their Israeli peers, stricken with disease from their home country, and as inauthentic Jews. Thus, it is no question that Ethiopians within Israel feel discriminated against. Of the three articles cited, two are from the Times of Israel which is a center-left leaning paper. The author of the first post about Ethiopians specializes in Palestinian conflicts with the IDF but appears to take a sympathetic view against those discriminated against which is likely why she sympathizes with Ethiopian Jewry. She also makes note in her article that this is the second time Ethiopians from that city in Israel have filed a complaint about discrimination, showing that this is likely a valid experience they are having. The second article is written by an anonymous staff writer from the Times of Israel. However, toward the end of the article they mention other reasons why Druze people are upset, like how there has not been the establishment of another Druze city since Israel was created even though the Druze population has grown 10X it's size. Thus, this shows a bias toward the Druze people.
Tuesday, May 7, 2019
Sunday, April 21, 2019
People of Israel (revised): Why are some communities within Israeli society intolerant of homosexuality and sexual permissiveness?
Israel is a nation made up of people of different races, religions, nationalities, and sexual orientations and behaviors. In a country only known for the amount of conflict it contains, as seen on CNN, Fox, BBC, and other news agencies worldwide, it comes as little surprise that there remains many internal conflicts within differing groups of people within Israel. In such a nation of contrasting and often opposing ideas, there exists a backlash to people with a more liberal viewpoint and take on sexual behaviors as well as on people with an LGBTQ+ identity. The reasons behind each individual community's backlash is actually less a unique reason, but rather an overarching reaction that stems from religious and cultural/traditional values.
Permissiveness in a society relating to sex can be defined as social norms becoming increasingly liberal in regards to sexual attitudes and behaviors such as dating, sex before marriage, cohabitation, and adultery. In Israel, more secular couples, such as Ashkenazi Jewish couples, are living together before marriage, as well as presumably engaging in pre-marital sex (Rosenthal, 27). In fact, approximately 26% of all Israeli couples are cohabiting before marriage (Rosenthal, 27), although this number varies in different populations and drops drastically in more religiously observant communities. Religious Jews do not tend to hold these liberal values. Pre-marital sex is viewed negatively in more religious communities in Israeli society, ranging from Orthodox Jews to Mizrahi Jews to Arab Muslims and Arab Druze. Orthodox Jews view pre-marital sex as a religious issue and believe that there must not be sex between a heterosexual couple until marriage (Rosenthal, 31). Similarly and conversely, Mizrahi Jews, Jews from the Middle East who tend to be more religiously observant than their European Ashkenazi counterparts, also view sex as a religious issue but tend to view pre-marital sex as an issue more so due to their cultural traditions (Rosenthal, 32-34). This is why, like in many traditional cultures, it's seen as more acceptable for men to be sexually permissive but is not seen as acceptable for women (Rosenthal, 32).
Sexual permissiveness is also against the norms of religious Arab groups like the Arab Muslims and Arab Druze that live within Israeli society. Arab Muslims, for religious reasons, desire women to be virgins until marriage (Rosenthal, 344). Muslim men offer a dowry gift or bride price to the parents of their future wife that is based on her "purity" relating to any rumors that may have spread about her sexual behaviors (Rosenthal, 344). Similarly, for religious reasons, the Druze people forbid marriage and sexual relations with anyone who is also not a Druze, which has lead the community to intermarriage due to its small numbers (Rosenthal, 294). It is interesting that while pre-marital relations in Israel remain stigmatized amongst religious groups that adultery remains fairly commonplace in Israel, even amongst traditional groups (Rosenthal, 335-339). Similarly, romance and the discussion of love and sex is common to tune into via Israeli television, radio, magazines, and newspapers (Rosenthal, 31), even in more religious communities such as the Arabic magazine Lilac. Sexual behaviors are also regulated in regards to LGBTQ+ identities.
According to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Israel is one of the "most inclusive societies in the world" for LGBTQ+ people. In fact, Israel bans workplace discrimination against sexual orientation and LGBTQ+ people have always had the freedom to serve openly in the IDF (Rosenthal, 359). In Tel Aviv, LGBTQ+ people can safely and openly walk in the streets and express their love (Rosenthal, 359). However, similar to more religious groups within Israel having an issue with sexual permissiveness, these same religious groups also overlap with having an issue with LGBTQ+ individuals and an LGBTQ+ identity. Mizrahi Jews tend to not be supportive of members of the LGBTQ+ community (Rosenthal, 359-360), likely due less in part from religious reasons but more so due to traditional cultural values from their respective home countries. These homophobic ideologies do not just come from the Middle East. Many Russian immigrants to Israel, both Jewish and gentile, bring along their homophobic beliefs carried over from former anti-gay laws kept in place by the Soviet Union (Rosenthal, 361). Some groups in Israel hold religious views over tradition in regards to LGBTQ+ identities.
As for religious reasons, the Orthodox community in Israel tends to be against the LGBTQ+ community because they believe it is against Judaism (Rosenthal, 362). This argument stems from two points; the first being the more commonly quoted phrase from Leviticus that some argue prohibits sex between two men. However, I would argue that the disagreement actually stems from the phrase "be fruitful and multiply." Now, Israeli society is heavily marriage family, and child oriented. The Total Fertility Rate is, out of all Western nations, greatest in the State of Israel (Demographic Statistics, page 3). Israel also holds over 1.5 million couples with only 23% not having children (Demographic Statistics, page 3) whereas in the United States, for example, a shocking 61.5% of couples don't have children. I propose that another large reason as to why most Orthodox people don't support LGBTQ+ people is because they believe they cannot have children with their partners and are therefore going against what they see as G-d's will. Nurit, a lesbian Orthodox women living in Israel, says that in the Orthodox community, the number of gay men and women who marry is much higher than in the secular world (Rosenthal, 362). This was also observed in the recent uptick in anti-LGBT funded public billboards in Israeli cities. One of these billboards read "Father and mother equals a family." This is obviously in opposition to LGBTQ+ parents, but also in opposition to single parent households. I think this relates both to the Orthodox community being against the LGBTQ+ community for religious reasons as well as for childbearing reasons because the sign implies there is no way to have children outside of a father and mother pairing. Thus, they would be against the LGBTQ+ community for being unable to have children with their partners. A reporter who tracked down the groups who funded these signs. Unsurprisingly, the funders were Jewish people from the religious right, ultra-Orthodox nationalists, and Jewish people with ties to Chabad, a religious Hasidic movement. For similar religious reasons, many Arab Muslims are against the LGBTQ+ community and individuals in Israel as well, claiming that it goes against Islam (Rosenthal, 364).
Rosenthal is publishing from a book that she wrote titled the Israelis which she did research on for several years into the different populations of people that represent Israel. She works as a journalist, and therefore knows how to interpret and analyze data and can be seen as a reliable source. In her novel, she interviews directly with the particular group of people she is analyzing, getting a first person account. Therefore, this and her citing numerous sources in her bibliography and annotative notes section makes her a reliable source. The Israeli Ministry of foreign affairs is likely slightly prejudiced towards Israel when it makes the bold claim that Israel is one of the most inclusive society is in the world for LGBTQ+ plus people. However, further down their webpage it details a list of LGBTQ+ Rights and organizations guaranteed in Israel, at least showing that the state has some approval of these individuals. The demographic statistics pages come directly from the Israeli census as well as the United States Census, based on facts and figures and likely to be very reliable assuming that people self-reported correctly. Lastly, the article on anti-gay billboards in Israeli cities was published by Ha'aretz newspaper. Ha'artez news tends to form a left-wing type of writing and audience. However since this article was investigating something such as gay rights that the left-wing supports, it is likely that they did their research correctly so as to attack and/or argue against right wing parties that are responsible for this. Therefore taking this into account, as well as the fact that Ha'aretz news is considered a reputable source due to their fact checking and sources cited within their article, it can be concluded that this is also a reliable source.
Permissiveness in a society relating to sex can be defined as social norms becoming increasingly liberal in regards to sexual attitudes and behaviors such as dating, sex before marriage, cohabitation, and adultery. In Israel, more secular couples, such as Ashkenazi Jewish couples, are living together before marriage, as well as presumably engaging in pre-marital sex (Rosenthal, 27). In fact, approximately 26% of all Israeli couples are cohabiting before marriage (Rosenthal, 27), although this number varies in different populations and drops drastically in more religiously observant communities. Religious Jews do not tend to hold these liberal values. Pre-marital sex is viewed negatively in more religious communities in Israeli society, ranging from Orthodox Jews to Mizrahi Jews to Arab Muslims and Arab Druze. Orthodox Jews view pre-marital sex as a religious issue and believe that there must not be sex between a heterosexual couple until marriage (Rosenthal, 31). Similarly and conversely, Mizrahi Jews, Jews from the Middle East who tend to be more religiously observant than their European Ashkenazi counterparts, also view sex as a religious issue but tend to view pre-marital sex as an issue more so due to their cultural traditions (Rosenthal, 32-34). This is why, like in many traditional cultures, it's seen as more acceptable for men to be sexually permissive but is not seen as acceptable for women (Rosenthal, 32).
Sexual permissiveness is also against the norms of religious Arab groups like the Arab Muslims and Arab Druze that live within Israeli society. Arab Muslims, for religious reasons, desire women to be virgins until marriage (Rosenthal, 344). Muslim men offer a dowry gift or bride price to the parents of their future wife that is based on her "purity" relating to any rumors that may have spread about her sexual behaviors (Rosenthal, 344). Similarly, for religious reasons, the Druze people forbid marriage and sexual relations with anyone who is also not a Druze, which has lead the community to intermarriage due to its small numbers (Rosenthal, 294). It is interesting that while pre-marital relations in Israel remain stigmatized amongst religious groups that adultery remains fairly commonplace in Israel, even amongst traditional groups (Rosenthal, 335-339). Similarly, romance and the discussion of love and sex is common to tune into via Israeli television, radio, magazines, and newspapers (Rosenthal, 31), even in more religious communities such as the Arabic magazine Lilac. Sexual behaviors are also regulated in regards to LGBTQ+ identities.
According to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Israel is one of the "most inclusive societies in the world" for LGBTQ+ people. In fact, Israel bans workplace discrimination against sexual orientation and LGBTQ+ people have always had the freedom to serve openly in the IDF (Rosenthal, 359). In Tel Aviv, LGBTQ+ people can safely and openly walk in the streets and express their love (Rosenthal, 359). However, similar to more religious groups within Israel having an issue with sexual permissiveness, these same religious groups also overlap with having an issue with LGBTQ+ individuals and an LGBTQ+ identity. Mizrahi Jews tend to not be supportive of members of the LGBTQ+ community (Rosenthal, 359-360), likely due less in part from religious reasons but more so due to traditional cultural values from their respective home countries. These homophobic ideologies do not just come from the Middle East. Many Russian immigrants to Israel, both Jewish and gentile, bring along their homophobic beliefs carried over from former anti-gay laws kept in place by the Soviet Union (Rosenthal, 361). Some groups in Israel hold religious views over tradition in regards to LGBTQ+ identities.
As for religious reasons, the Orthodox community in Israel tends to be against the LGBTQ+ community because they believe it is against Judaism (Rosenthal, 362). This argument stems from two points; the first being the more commonly quoted phrase from Leviticus that some argue prohibits sex between two men. However, I would argue that the disagreement actually stems from the phrase "be fruitful and multiply." Now, Israeli society is heavily marriage family, and child oriented. The Total Fertility Rate is, out of all Western nations, greatest in the State of Israel (Demographic Statistics, page 3). Israel also holds over 1.5 million couples with only 23% not having children (Demographic Statistics, page 3) whereas in the United States, for example, a shocking 61.5% of couples don't have children. I propose that another large reason as to why most Orthodox people don't support LGBTQ+ people is because they believe they cannot have children with their partners and are therefore going against what they see as G-d's will. Nurit, a lesbian Orthodox women living in Israel, says that in the Orthodox community, the number of gay men and women who marry is much higher than in the secular world (Rosenthal, 362). This was also observed in the recent uptick in anti-LGBT funded public billboards in Israeli cities. One of these billboards read "Father and mother equals a family." This is obviously in opposition to LGBTQ+ parents, but also in opposition to single parent households. I think this relates both to the Orthodox community being against the LGBTQ+ community for religious reasons as well as for childbearing reasons because the sign implies there is no way to have children outside of a father and mother pairing. Thus, they would be against the LGBTQ+ community for being unable to have children with their partners. A reporter who tracked down the groups who funded these signs. Unsurprisingly, the funders were Jewish people from the religious right, ultra-Orthodox nationalists, and Jewish people with ties to Chabad, a religious Hasidic movement. For similar religious reasons, many Arab Muslims are against the LGBTQ+ community and individuals in Israel as well, claiming that it goes against Islam (Rosenthal, 364).
Rosenthal is publishing from a book that she wrote titled the Israelis which she did research on for several years into the different populations of people that represent Israel. She works as a journalist, and therefore knows how to interpret and analyze data and can be seen as a reliable source. In her novel, she interviews directly with the particular group of people she is analyzing, getting a first person account. Therefore, this and her citing numerous sources in her bibliography and annotative notes section makes her a reliable source. The Israeli Ministry of foreign affairs is likely slightly prejudiced towards Israel when it makes the bold claim that Israel is one of the most inclusive society is in the world for LGBTQ+ plus people. However, further down their webpage it details a list of LGBTQ+ Rights and organizations guaranteed in Israel, at least showing that the state has some approval of these individuals. The demographic statistics pages come directly from the Israeli census as well as the United States Census, based on facts and figures and likely to be very reliable assuming that people self-reported correctly. Lastly, the article on anti-gay billboards in Israeli cities was published by Ha'aretz newspaper. Ha'artez news tends to form a left-wing type of writing and audience. However since this article was investigating something such as gay rights that the left-wing supports, it is likely that they did their research correctly so as to attack and/or argue against right wing parties that are responsible for this. Therefore taking this into account, as well as the fact that Ha'aretz news is considered a reputable source due to their fact checking and sources cited within their article, it can be concluded that this is also a reliable source.
Saturday, April 13, 2019
Third Blog Post
Last week on April 4th, The Times of Israel published an article titled "With Netanyahu's help, far-right party member could become MK" by anonymous authors labeled as AFP and the Times of Israel staff. This article summarizes the recent controversy in Israel where a man by the name of Itamar Ben Gvir, a member of the controversial Otzma Yehudit party, may become a member of the Israeli Knesset. This party has been controversial for several reasons. As documented in their own words their party platform explains that they want to work to remove who they see as the enemies of Israel. However, this policy of theirs extends to Arab citizens of Israel who they wish to see permanently removed if they consider them as an "enemy". They also want to gain control over the Temple Mount which currently is held by the Palestinian Authority. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wants to work toward a coalition of right wing groups to help his Likud party gain the most votes in the Knesset, the Israeli Parliament. The followers of Oztma Yehudit follow a now assassinated rabbi and their group was declared a terrorist organization by the United States, European Union, and even by the state of Israel. Netanyahu led a recent deal that merged Otzma Yehudit with two other far right parties. If left alone it was seen as unlikely that the party would reach the required 3.25 percent necessary to be represented in the Knesset in the first place. However, due to the new combination, it has become much more likely. The leader Michael Ben Ari was recently disqualified by the Israeli Supreme Court for several comments he made that were deemed as racist which led Ben Gvir as the only major party member who could join the Knesset.
The facts in this article seem to be reliable because they are backed up by several other sources. The Oztma Yehudit party goals are clearly listed in their own words on their political platform PDF. The Oztma Yehudit party also wants Israel to annex the West Bank, which would anger the Palestinians living in the region. The Jerusalem Post also reported on the party being racist as well as the Times of Israel, the New York Times, and Y-Net News. Thus, given the Supreme Court banning the group from the Knesset due to comments made to incite racist violence, it is very likely that people would view this group as racist. The US Department of State lists the group Yeshivat HaRaayon HaYehudi as a terrorist organization. This group recently merged with Oztma Yehudit.
The precise author of this piece is unknown as their name was not listed as the author and was likely a piece that was sold to the Times of Israel. However, it is known that the Times of Israel is a more right leaning paper. It is notable that the author used a quote from an Israeli citizen in the beginning of the article where they argue that Oztma Yehudit is not racist. This shows a potential bias that the author may agree with by choosing to include this quote. However, later in this article the author notes that Oztma Yehudit's leader was banned from the Knesset by the Israeli Supreme Court for racist statements which shows that they maybe believe that their statements were racist. The author did not say the statements were believed to be racist but rather plainly stated that the Court said they were racist which shows that the author might agree with the Court's decision. The article follows up with following the past history of Oztma Yehudit and how its supporters have incited violence. The author also mentions that the group is considered a terrorist group by others but they note that Arab human rights groups are the ones considering them as terrorists as opposed to other organizations who consider its former group as terrorists such as the United States and the European Union and Israel. I think this shows the author is more of a centrist who wants to show both right wing and left wing perspectives on Oztma Yehudit.
The facts in this article seem to be reliable because they are backed up by several other sources. The Oztma Yehudit party goals are clearly listed in their own words on their political platform PDF. The Oztma Yehudit party also wants Israel to annex the West Bank, which would anger the Palestinians living in the region. The Jerusalem Post also reported on the party being racist as well as the Times of Israel, the New York Times, and Y-Net News. Thus, given the Supreme Court banning the group from the Knesset due to comments made to incite racist violence, it is very likely that people would view this group as racist. The US Department of State lists the group Yeshivat HaRaayon HaYehudi as a terrorist organization. This group recently merged with Oztma Yehudit.
The precise author of this piece is unknown as their name was not listed as the author and was likely a piece that was sold to the Times of Israel. However, it is known that the Times of Israel is a more right leaning paper. It is notable that the author used a quote from an Israeli citizen in the beginning of the article where they argue that Oztma Yehudit is not racist. This shows a potential bias that the author may agree with by choosing to include this quote. However, later in this article the author notes that Oztma Yehudit's leader was banned from the Knesset by the Israeli Supreme Court for racist statements which shows that they maybe believe that their statements were racist. The author did not say the statements were believed to be racist but rather plainly stated that the Court said they were racist which shows that the author might agree with the Court's decision. The article follows up with following the past history of Oztma Yehudit and how its supporters have incited violence. The author also mentions that the group is considered a terrorist group by others but they note that Arab human rights groups are the ones considering them as terrorists as opposed to other organizations who consider its former group as terrorists such as the United States and the European Union and Israel. I think this shows the author is more of a centrist who wants to show both right wing and left wing perspectives on Oztma Yehudit.
Wednesday, March 27, 2019
Second Blog Post
This week on March 24th, The Jerusalem Post published an article titled "What's Happening in Gaza?" by author Khaled Abu Toameh. This investigative piece explores the motives behind the recent Palestinian-led protests in the Gaza Strip. Earlier this week, protests erupted in Gaza about economic hardships experienced by the Palestinians living there, under Hamas controlled territory. Initially, apparently Hamas had ignored these protests as they believed they were similar to protests from 2018 against Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) where Hamas sent out supporters to protest economic hardship but instead blamed Abbas, who is the current President of the PA. However, these protests were different since they appeared to be partially pro-Fatah protestors who were demonstrating against the corruption within Hamas that has led to the economic hardships currently being experienced in the Gaza Strip. After the first day of protests revealed this, Hamas sent out its security forces to apprehend, arrest, and put a stop to these protests and protestors. Several Palestinians were observed being beaten harshly by these forces and had to be hospitalized for their injuries. Hamas maintains that these protests are inauthentic and a conspiracy led by both Fatah and the PA to ceed Hamas from power as well as stop future planned authentic protests, mainly against Israel, from the region. Fatah denied these allegations and asserted that these protests are real. Since then, both Fatah and the PA have been trying to portray this as an intifada against Hamas on social media by various posts showing people being beaten by Hamas as well as being recorded stating that they were beaten by Hamas. However, it soon emerged that some of the photos used were actually taken from Iraq and Egypt, and therefore people not wounded by Hamas. Fatah got hate for spreading false information and people fired back by saying that Fatah also uses security forces with the same objectives in West Bank. In Gaza, representatives making up 12 Palestinian factions met up during the protests and demanded that Hamas remove their police forces from the streets and to release the people they arrested. Hamas, for their part, was condemned domestically in Israel as well as by many international groups which led to the organization releasing a rare lengthy apology. It is also reported that last week one of Fatah's primary spokesmen Alef Abu Seif was kidnapped, beaten, and wounded in Gaza and has since been sent to a hospital in Ramallah to recover. Since this, Fatah, the PA, and the PLO have accused Hamas of war crimes against Palestinians in Gaza.
The facts presented in this article appear to be reliable for several reasons. Primarily, the Jerusalem Post is known to be a valid news company in the first place. Second, the author Toameh is linked by name to this article and with a single click on his name one can access other articles he has written for the Jerusalem Post. While the website does not give a brief biography of him to see where he has studied, specialized in, or how long he has worked for the JP, it does allow one to view the other articles he has worked on. His earliest work is from September of 2018 and the majority of his articles focus on Gaza, Hamas, and Arabs in Israel which show that he does have some experience researching the topic of this article and reporting on it. As for the specific information reported on in this article, given that it was noted that internationally Hamas was condemned for their use of force in suppressing protests in Gaza, I began to look for these international condemnations. The UN released a statement condemning Hamas's actions in Gaza as well as the New York Times. These two notable sources supported this article's assertion that first, protests were taking place in Gaza against Hamas and second, that Hamas sought to undermine and disrupt protestors by using violent methods from their private police force and lastly, that the international community condemned these actions that led to the harm of Palestinian civilians. It was interesting to me that this reporter made a special distinction that Hamas does not usually apologize and that their lengthy statement was notable so I looked up Hamas's statement. They did in fact write a lengthy apology which I was surprisingly able to access on my device. Their apology in both length and that toward the end they blame the PA for what they believe was a PA-led and funded protest against Hamas to oust them from power. Therefore, given that this article appears to be properly researched and reported, it can be concluded this article is reliable.
This article seems reliable with the information it contains as it seeks to explore the perspective of Hamas, Fatah, and the PLO from relatively unbiased reporting.The reporter does give their opinion and future predictions from the evidence they gathered toward the end of the article. They postulate that the goal of both Fatah and Hamas is to oust of the other form their respective controlled territory so that the other can then go in and take control of the other's former area. This is not an unusual conclusion to draw considering that the PA used to control Gaza prior and would likely like to control it again. Taomeh also appears to be fond of making future predictions about the situation in Gaza, saying toward the end of the article that he believes that should more protests return to the Gaza strip that it would only widen the divide already present between Palestinian civilians who prefer the authority of Hamas versus the authority of the PA. In regards to the bias of the newspaper publishing this article in the first place, the Jerusalem Post is known to be a slightly more conservative paper. It should be acknowledged that this meaning of conservative is in regards to the term being used in the context of what conservative means in the state of Israel as opposed to what conservative means for the United States of America. Lastly, toward the end of the article when Taomeh notes that Fatah, the PA and the PLO accesses Hamas of war crimes he quotes a Fatah official who calls Hamas terrorists and then quotes a PLO official who compares Hamas to the Gestapo. Due to him deliberately choosing to include these specific quotes as opposed to just noting that they accused Hamas of war crimes suggests that he does not favor Hamas and their methods, at least for this particular occasion and is on the "side" of Fatah, the PLO, and the PA in not supporting Hamas's action in Gaza.
The facts presented in this article appear to be reliable for several reasons. Primarily, the Jerusalem Post is known to be a valid news company in the first place. Second, the author Toameh is linked by name to this article and with a single click on his name one can access other articles he has written for the Jerusalem Post. While the website does not give a brief biography of him to see where he has studied, specialized in, or how long he has worked for the JP, it does allow one to view the other articles he has worked on. His earliest work is from September of 2018 and the majority of his articles focus on Gaza, Hamas, and Arabs in Israel which show that he does have some experience researching the topic of this article and reporting on it. As for the specific information reported on in this article, given that it was noted that internationally Hamas was condemned for their use of force in suppressing protests in Gaza, I began to look for these international condemnations. The UN released a statement condemning Hamas's actions in Gaza as well as the New York Times. These two notable sources supported this article's assertion that first, protests were taking place in Gaza against Hamas and second, that Hamas sought to undermine and disrupt protestors by using violent methods from their private police force and lastly, that the international community condemned these actions that led to the harm of Palestinian civilians. It was interesting to me that this reporter made a special distinction that Hamas does not usually apologize and that their lengthy statement was notable so I looked up Hamas's statement. They did in fact write a lengthy apology which I was surprisingly able to access on my device. Their apology in both length and that toward the end they blame the PA for what they believe was a PA-led and funded protest against Hamas to oust them from power. Therefore, given that this article appears to be properly researched and reported, it can be concluded this article is reliable.
This article seems reliable with the information it contains as it seeks to explore the perspective of Hamas, Fatah, and the PLO from relatively unbiased reporting.The reporter does give their opinion and future predictions from the evidence they gathered toward the end of the article. They postulate that the goal of both Fatah and Hamas is to oust of the other form their respective controlled territory so that the other can then go in and take control of the other's former area. This is not an unusual conclusion to draw considering that the PA used to control Gaza prior and would likely like to control it again. Taomeh also appears to be fond of making future predictions about the situation in Gaza, saying toward the end of the article that he believes that should more protests return to the Gaza strip that it would only widen the divide already present between Palestinian civilians who prefer the authority of Hamas versus the authority of the PA. In regards to the bias of the newspaper publishing this article in the first place, the Jerusalem Post is known to be a slightly more conservative paper. It should be acknowledged that this meaning of conservative is in regards to the term being used in the context of what conservative means in the state of Israel as opposed to what conservative means for the United States of America. Lastly, toward the end of the article when Taomeh notes that Fatah, the PA and the PLO accesses Hamas of war crimes he quotes a Fatah official who calls Hamas terrorists and then quotes a PLO official who compares Hamas to the Gestapo. Due to him deliberately choosing to include these specific quotes as opposed to just noting that they accused Hamas of war crimes suggests that he does not favor Hamas and their methods, at least for this particular occasion and is on the "side" of Fatah, the PLO, and the PA in not supporting Hamas's action in Gaza.
Friday, March 15, 2019
Current Events Blog Post #1: Wonder Woman vs. Bibi
This week on March 11th, Haaretz posted an article titled "Wonder Woman vs. Bibi: Gal Gadot Takes Stand in Row Over Jewish-Arab Equality" by author Itay Stern. The article describes the recent social media exchange between Wonder Woman's leading Israeli actress Gal Gadot and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Gal's personal friend and fellow actress Rotem Sela went on Instagram responded to comments made by the Culture Minister of Israel, Miri Regev. Regev wrote a "warning" about certain Israeli political parties potentially cooperating with Arab political parties. Sela responded essentially saying his comments were ridiculous and there was no need for any sort of warning because she did not believe it mattered that the two parties were of different races. Sela's Instagram post soon became flooded in a wave of polarizing comments and Gadot came to her support by posting a photo herself with the phrase "Love thy neighbor as thyself" and spoke of peace talks between Jews and Arabs in Israel. Several other Israeli female models and actresses chimed in with their support as well. However, the very next day, Netanyahu fired back with a social media post of his own where he stood in front of the Israeli flag and declared that Israel is the state of the Jewish people alone.
This article seems reliable with the information it conveys overall. Since it does not link to the actual social media accounts and posts in question, I decided to look for them myself. From Gal's official Instagram, mysteriously the post in question has gone missing. As if it had, perhaps, been deleted by her social media management team. Various other news articles such as the Washington Post, NBC, and AP News all reported on the incident in question but none of them had any physical evidence such as a screenshot of the post on their pages. However, given that multiple reputable news outlets reported on this, it can be reasonable concluded that it actually occurred. Interestingly, I could not find the post from Netanyahu either. Various news agencies discussed it, but none provided any sort of link or screenshot of the incident. However, again, it can reasonably be concluded that the event in questions actually occurred. Since the event described is very detailed with dates of when each post was made and when each response was posted, I think the reporter did research into this event so as to best report on it. Similarly, whenever Stern wrote about what an individual posted on social media he directly quoted them for what appears to be their full statement, if not most of their statement. This is observed given that Stern did not stop a quotation, leave three ellipsis, and then resume quoting which could potentially allow for a statement to be misunderstood or deliberately altered so as to convey a meaning different that it was intended too.
First, it should be noted and acknowledged that the newspaper company who posted this, Haaretz, tends to have a more liberal viewpoint on sociopolitical issues such as the ones presented by Sela, Gadot, and Netanyahu. This is actually very apparent by the quotes that Stern decided to include toward the end of the article. After quoting Bibi's response, Stern makes the decision to quote the current Israeli Minister of Education Naftali Bennett who responded to PM Netanyahu's comments by essentially saying it was ridiculous of him to focus on the social media comments of celebrities rather than paying attention to the real, physical threat of looming terrorists. Immediately proceeding Stern quotes Ahmad Tibi, a famous Arab Muslim politician in Israel who notes sarcastically that Bibi would be surprised to know that Arabs are people who want to be equal citizens to other people living within Israel. Lastly, Stern quotes Israeli lawyer Ayman Odeh who also supports the initial comments Sela posted. I think that the combination of Stern choosing to include these three specific responses as well as writing them one after the other and choosing to not include what I presume are positive statements supporting Bibi shows that Stern as an author doesn't like Bibi. Not only does he appear to not favor Bibi, he always appears to support the same viewpoint that Sela had where he believes that the Arab citizens of Israel should be allowed to have just as free of a voice in government as the Jewish citizens.
This article seems reliable with the information it conveys overall. Since it does not link to the actual social media accounts and posts in question, I decided to look for them myself. From Gal's official Instagram, mysteriously the post in question has gone missing. As if it had, perhaps, been deleted by her social media management team. Various other news articles such as the Washington Post, NBC, and AP News all reported on the incident in question but none of them had any physical evidence such as a screenshot of the post on their pages. However, given that multiple reputable news outlets reported on this, it can be reasonable concluded that it actually occurred. Interestingly, I could not find the post from Netanyahu either. Various news agencies discussed it, but none provided any sort of link or screenshot of the incident. However, again, it can reasonably be concluded that the event in questions actually occurred. Since the event described is very detailed with dates of when each post was made and when each response was posted, I think the reporter did research into this event so as to best report on it. Similarly, whenever Stern wrote about what an individual posted on social media he directly quoted them for what appears to be their full statement, if not most of their statement. This is observed given that Stern did not stop a quotation, leave three ellipsis, and then resume quoting which could potentially allow for a statement to be misunderstood or deliberately altered so as to convey a meaning different that it was intended too.
First, it should be noted and acknowledged that the newspaper company who posted this, Haaretz, tends to have a more liberal viewpoint on sociopolitical issues such as the ones presented by Sela, Gadot, and Netanyahu. This is actually very apparent by the quotes that Stern decided to include toward the end of the article. After quoting Bibi's response, Stern makes the decision to quote the current Israeli Minister of Education Naftali Bennett who responded to PM Netanyahu's comments by essentially saying it was ridiculous of him to focus on the social media comments of celebrities rather than paying attention to the real, physical threat of looming terrorists. Immediately proceeding Stern quotes Ahmad Tibi, a famous Arab Muslim politician in Israel who notes sarcastically that Bibi would be surprised to know that Arabs are people who want to be equal citizens to other people living within Israel. Lastly, Stern quotes Israeli lawyer Ayman Odeh who also supports the initial comments Sela posted. I think that the combination of Stern choosing to include these three specific responses as well as writing them one after the other and choosing to not include what I presume are positive statements supporting Bibi shows that Stern as an author doesn't like Bibi. Not only does he appear to not favor Bibi, he always appears to support the same viewpoint that Sela had where he believes that the Arab citizens of Israel should be allowed to have just as free of a voice in government as the Jewish citizens.
Monday, March 4, 2019
About me!
 |
| The process of moving a beehive over to a one of our hives. |
Hello! I figured I would upload a brief about me so you can get to know the person behind this blog. Like my username suggests my name is Michelle and I'm currently a senior in undergraduate studying Biology. This blog is a project for my Israel's history and People class. As the photo and previous post suggests, my two favorite animals are cats and bees! I currently work in studying honeybee nectar and honey from their hive! I hope you enjoy my blog! uwu
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)