Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 15:38:38 -0400
From: Ted White <tedwhite at compusnet.com>
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Political Inventions
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

ronkean at juno.com wrote:

> On Tue, 09 Apr 2002 03:31:33 -0400 Ted White <tedwhite at compusnet.com>
> writes:
> >
> > ronkean at juno.com wrote:
> > > When the Washington Post reports on violence in Israeli occupied
> > > Palestine, the term 'Palestinian gunmen' is routinely used to
> > describe Palestinians carrying or using guns, and the term 'Israeli
> > soldiers' is
> > > used to describe Israelis carrying or using guns.  Of course both
> > of those terms are not incorrect, but the subtle implication seems to
> > be that the 'soldiers' are somehow more legitimate than the
> > 'gunmen'.
>
> >
> > The "gunmen" are not uniformed and appear to be private citizens or
> > members of a local militia at best.  "Gunmen" is the best reasonably
> > neutral descriptive term for them.  And since the Israeli soldiers
> *are*
> > soldiers, in uniform, what better reasonably neutral term for them is
> there?
> > I think the relative "legitimacy" of each term is wholly subjective;
> *I*
> > don't read them as you suggest.
> >
> > --Ted White
>
> Perhaps the Post is trying to be objective in using the phrase
> 'Palestinian gunmen'.  Since the Post often uses the term 'gunman' to
> describe an unknown person who commits crime using a gun, I thought their
> choice of words was a bit slanted.  But if the Post were to call them
> 'Palestinian freedom fighters' or 'Palestinian resistance fighters', many
> would find that prejudicial against Israel.  I have heard complaints from
> people who are sympathetic to Israel that the Post tilts in favor of the
> Palestinians, as well as complaints from avid anti-Zionists that the Post
> is controlled by 'Jews' and does not tell the truth about the conflict.
> It's impossible to please everyone.

Too true.

--Ted White