Saturday, April 7, 2007

"ISRAELI GI"?

MSNBC and Associated Press share the credit for this online abomination of a headline,

“CAPTORS OF ISRAELI GI ISSUE LATEST DEMANDS.”

What the heck is an “Israeli GI”? This may be the first time “GI” has been applied to anything but an American soldier. Gee, could there be a subtle message intended?

Part of the AP/MSNBC “Israeli GI” article:

‘RAMALLAH, West Bank - After months of deadlock, the captors of an Israeli soldier handed over the names of Palestinian prisoners they want freed in exchange for the hostage, a senior Palestinian official said Saturday.
‘The release of Israeli Cpl. Gilad Shalit is seen as a precondition for any possible progress in Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts. A swap could also help the new Palestinian unity government, a coalition of the Islamic militant Hamas and the moderate Fatah movement, in its quest for international acceptance.’


Questions:

1. Why is the “Israeli GI” a “hostage” rather than a “prisoner” like all the Arabs Israel has kidnapped and held?

2. Why is the release of one Israeli soldier a precondition for “peace efforts”, rather than Israeli release of its thousands of Palestinian prisoners?

8 comments:

Naj said...

When you have "power and money" you take prisoners. When not, you take "hostages" so you can exchange them for power and money!

In using this terminology, Israel is establishing the hierarchy of the power. Just as did the Britons!

Fleming said...

Keen observation, Naj.

joice said...

After Naj's great comment, all I can add here is about the power of words and names given to things. It is their way to invent the truth and make the world see events through their eyes, their perspective, their myopia... their lies.
Good morning!

Fleming said...

Joice, very well said.

Isn't it strange that a propagandist who nonsensically combines the slang word for an American soldier with a soldier of the Jewish religious state can expect to create a sense of sympathetic identification rather than laughter?

The "Israeli GI" reminds me of the kind of hybrid monster described in Homer's "Iliad": "lion-fronted and snake behind, a goat in the middle".

(I have to promote my other blog, FLIGHTS OF PEGASUS, by recalling that the most famous hybrid monster, the Chimera, was slain by a hero flying on the back of Pegasus -- who, come to think of it, had the advantages of both horse and bird.)

You've reminded me of another Zionist misuse of names -- applying the term "settler" to Jews confiscating and building on Arab land. The Zionist apologist knows that the U.S. mind will associate "settler" with the intrepid settlers and cowboys of the old American frontier, as romanticized by Hollywood and novelists. The hidden message is, "If American settlers could take land from the Indians, why shouldn't Israelis take the land of Palestinians?"

Léo Martin said...

Hmm... After reading your post and subsequent comments, I have decided to classify you all as left-wing extremist subversive anti-Semite terrorists...

Uncle Sam will mete out the proper reward for your behaviour.

Fleming said...

Leo, at last I know what I am!

As you're in the classification business, I hope you'll read a lot of VIEW FROM THE MOON from the beginning before reaching your final conclusion . . . which will be the same as your initial conclusion.

(I still don't know what left-wing means.)

Léo Martin said...

Hehe, I'm really just kidding... Actually I very much appreciate the deconstruction of discourse you have undertaken with this particular post. It reminds me that it's quite important to question why certain words or labels are used in media reports, especially when clearly there are double standards in the way they are applied to one or another group (terrorism vs resistance, prisoner vs hostage, and so on)
Quite the subversice activity, my friend :P

Fleming said...
This comment has been removed by the author.