Israel: Fire UN official over false Gaza photo

                In an article by Herb Keinon entitled Israel: Fire UN official over false Gaza photo, Israel Ambassador to the United Nations, Ron Prosor, demanded the dismissal of UN official Kuhlood Badawi. Kuhlood Badawi is an information and media coordinator for OCHA. OCHA is the UN's office for the Coordination of Humanitarian affairs. Badawi had posted a picture on twitter of a young girl covered in blood being carried by her father. Along with the picture she tweeted, "Palestine is bleeding. Another child killed by #Israel...Another father carrying his child to the grave in #Gaza." It falsely claimed that the little girl was killed by an IDF strike. The photo was taken in 2006 and was unrelated to Israel.

                        Prosor sent a letter to the undersecretary general of humanity affairs. In Prosor's letter, he angrily claimed her tweet was false and was the top tweet of the day regarding news linking to Gaza. Prosor goes on to mention that OCHA deviates from the original intent of the organization, which is to remain impartial. The spreading of misinformation erodes the credibility and integrity of the organization, especially in the Israeli public. The twitter comment demonizes Israel and contributes to the incitement and conflict. He called for Kuhlood Badawi to be fired and for OCHA to disassociate itself from her twitter.    

            The Foreign Ministry has also had its complaints against the OCHA organization. They view OCHA as a very one-sided. Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor felt that OCHA betrayed its original humanitarian mission for pro-Palestinian propaganda. He felt this "fabrication" hit a new low for OCHA. He states that "It is intolerable that UN money pays for this." When OCHA was approached to respond about the incident, a spokeswoman in Jerusalem said that she was not allowed to comment on the matter, and to try the New York department. The spokeswoman there was unaware of Prosor's letter and said she would look into it. No further response had occurred by the time it went to press. 

            I feel that the author remained fairly neutral given the lack of cooperation or knowledge from OCHA. The article has the possibility of being perceived as taking the side of Prosor and Palmor, but I do believe the author was doing a good job of only stating what they commented and not giving his own opinion. The author also mentions in the article the attempt to try to contact OCHA before press time was up. If anything, the author was a bit lazy in giving the reader a more detailed background. With that being said, I feel that the author poorly informed the reader of what happened in the picture. According to a post on the Israel Defense Forces site, the little girl had fallen off of a swing and was badly injured, not killed. This background is crucial in informing the reader that it had absolutely nothing to do with Israeli/Palestinian politics. The author does mention that the injury is unrelated but leaves a grey area that allows for the reader to assume it might have had something to do with civilian casualty from a previous attack. 

             The author also didn't use many sources in his article. Though the author did get quotes from Prosor and Palmer, and attempted to get them from OCHA, he failed to mention how pro-Israelis and pro-Palestinians both have tweeted faulty claims, pictures, and videos. In an article by Ruth Eglash, she perfectly lays out the ongoing online battles from both sides. Both trying to discredit and uncover fake, or doctored images from one another. She mentions Diana Alzeer, a Palestinian blogger/twitter user, who responded to criticism against her for reposting the image, after apologizing, said that a twitter post by IDF spokeswoman Avita Leibovich, who falsely put a video up of "a barrage of Grad rockets ranging 40km, fired by Jihad into Israel" from last October proved to be an inaccurate posting on the side of the Israelis. The author of this main article could have done a better job in pointing out these online battles from both sides, to show that it is an ongoing information sharing dilemma, not just a one-off fluke. Although there is a possibility that the author may have left out that kind of information for a more subversive attempt to sway the reader into his own one-sided view.

Israeli decision to release Khader Adnan in April "Insufficient"

In the article, Israeli Decision to Release Palestinian Detainee in April"Insufficient", a thirty three year old Palestinian baker and father of two named Khader Adnan has agreed to end his hunger strike after sixty six days. Khader Adnan has been on a sixty six day hunger strike in protest to his arrest on December 17 of last year at his home in the village of Arrabe, in occupied West Bank. His hunger strike was initially started against what he felt was a wrongful treatment regarding his detainment. Israeli military allow Israeli authorities to detain Palestinian's without a trial if they feel that they are a security threat in his alleged affiliation with the Islamic Jihad movement. They are allowed to detain them from the occupied West Bank. On January 10, Khader Adnan was given a four month detention order. He has been held there since on the verge of death due to his hunger strike. Along with Adnan, there are around 309 Palestinians being detained with more than 20 of them from the Palestinian Legislative Council. One has been detained for over five years.

            Israeli authorities have made a deal to release Khader Adnan on April. Since Adnan is very weak and unhealthy from his hunger strike, which he has agreed to end, he may not live to be released on that date. Amnesty International is urging Israeli authorities to release Khader Adnan before April in hopes to get him the urgent medical attention he needs to stay alive. Amnesty International is arguing that he does not cause a security threat in the condition that he is in and to let him be released. They are also urging Israeli authorities to release other detainees. They have asked Israel to end these administrative detentions in what it feels to be a violation of internationally recognized right to a fair trial. Human rights physicians have reported that as of February 19, Khader Adnan had still been shackled to a hospital bed despite Israeli authorities saying that they had been removed. A hearing set for Tuesday in the Israeli Supreme Court was cancelled due to an agreement made by Adnan's lawyer and the Israeli authorities.

            According to Joseph Dana in an article written for the National, he asks the question of why Israel has not released any evidence against Khader Adnan. Adnan is a spokesmen for a radical Islamic movement who has been arrested several times yet Israel keeps quiet despite "harsh international criticism". According to another article by Richard Falk, Adnan is being called a "terrorist" without charges or proof. His role as a spokesman for Islamic Jihad have been more neutral and no links to his past of violence or advocating violence. The author goes on to point out that even though Jihad had used violence in its past, it has abandoned that practice some years ago.

            The author of the original article, Israeli Decision to Release Palestinian Detainee in April "Insufficient", seems to be showing the reader the urgency of Khader Adnan's medical need. They are showing you a humanitarian picture and are showing Khader Adnan as a victim of being in a detention, regardless of it being his own self inflicting protest that has him on the brink of death. The author is showing us the Amnesty International side of this argument. Mainly referencing or sighting only quotes from Amnesty International and no other side. Then again, it is difficult to give the viewpoint of the Israeli authorities when they are tight lipped about the situation. The failure of this article is that it gave no in depth back story on Khader Adnan. It gave the reader a line or two mentioning his 'alleged' affiliation with Jihad and that authorities came to his home to detain him. I needed to go to outside sources to find more in depth detail about his background and the character of this man. I felt the article was specifically giving you a "shock" read telling the reader how he is on the brink of death, which may be true, but not much else about how he got there in the first place.