Max's Article
Response by: Max Frizalone
1. Summary
This article is about the Israeli offensive, Israel recently launched offensive missles in what they call "Self Defense" or "Anti Terrorism". These recent offensive bombings are in response to the rockets fired by Palestinian militants in Gaza who fired a recorded 40 or more rockets toward Israel last Sunday. Unfortunately this offensive has caused the Palestinian government to stop the current peace talks with Israel "for the time being". In response to Israels offensive which killed a reported 110 people, the Palestinian people protested, and in the progress a 14 year old protester was killed, in an incident with an Israeli solider. The Israeli offensive was aimed to take out militant bases and rocket creation facilities and they say they tried their hardest to avoid killing citizens, but being that Gaza is the worlds most dense area, they ended up killing some. Conalisa Rice has a scheduled meeting this week to talk to Israeli and Palestinian officials to get more peace talks started. Israel hopes to resume these peace talks, but will not let up its defenses and will continue to defend its land.
2. Reactions
A. How does this article relate to one of the AP World History themes?
This article Directly relates to the AP World History theme "Development and Interaction of cultures", because this article is mainly about the interaction between Israel and the Palistinan people. This interaction may be in the form of terrorism rockets, or Israeli offensive bombing, but no matter how you view it this crisis has forced these 2 cultures to interact with each other through war. Hopefully this interaction forces the 2 establishments to form a peace policy.
B. Evaluate the historical background of the issue (i.e. explain the history of the issue)
This issue has long rooted problems, starting at the UN's decision in 1947, to split Palestine into 2. One part of Palestine would become present day Israel. The Palestinians felt that their rightfully owned land had been taken from them, whereas the Israelis claimed the land was their own dating back to the time of Moses, and Kanan. Israel later went on the offensive in the 1967 war and took over more land which they were forced to return in the later half of 1967. In 1982 a cease-fire was arranged between the Israelis and the P.L.O. troops (Palestinian troops) which was broken in 1983. War continued until 1991 when in Madrid another peace treaty was signed, and the "Land for Peace" formula was instated. This peace treaty was broken in 2000, and Israel built a wall around the Gaza strip. This wall was later ruled illegal. In 2005 Israel removed all citizens and troops from the Gaza strip, and war has still continued.
C. Identify the point of view of the article – who is writing it?
The points of view are from 2 CNN reporters, who I consider neutral parties. Neither of the reporters show any signs of bias throughout the entire article. One reporter was a female, Shira Medding, and one was a male, Ben Wedeman. Both reporters are Americans and are outsiders.
D. Discuss any indication that the author’s Point of View is impacting how the issue is being reported, i.e. any evidence of bias in favor of or against a party involved in the issue?
I can't seem to find any evidence of bias in this article. They both seem to cover both sides of the story, and all opinions are given fair background. There is no evident bias in this article. There are quotes from both parties representatives, which both try to prove a point.
E. What point of view is missing within the article? Who would you want to hear from to gain a full understanding of the issue?
I feel that the real people's voices are missing. They only seem to quote government officials, not one solider or civilian is even spoke of. I feel that to get to the core of the problem you must get to the general public, which this article fails to do. If it was too hard to grab a citizen who wants to express his or her opinions, then a solder from the front lines of Gaza, or a Palestinian militant would of at least gave the reader the feeling that this was a general opinion and not one of their government.
F. Share your own reactions and insight into the article
I am ashamed to say that this article shocked me. I personally haven't been able to keep up on the news, so I loved writing this current events blog. I personally think that this is a pressing issue and that the people of Israel must start to speak out against the violence towards the Palestinians. Even though they are constantly attack by these people, they must stay strong and prove that they truly are aiming for peace by refraining to resort to the level of their enemy. They call it self defense, but attacking an enemy city is offensive any way you look at it. Through protest, by both parties their governments will be forced to form a treaty, hopefully one that lasts longer than those in the past.
~Max Frizalone
Feel free to comment.
Response by: Max Frizalone
1. Summary
This article is about the Israeli offensive, Israel recently launched offensive missles in what they call "Self Defense" or "Anti Terrorism". These recent offensive bombings are in response to the rockets fired by Palestinian militants in Gaza who fired a recorded 40 or more rockets toward Israel last Sunday. Unfortunately this offensive has caused the Palestinian government to stop the current peace talks with Israel "for the time being". In response to Israels offensive which killed a reported 110 people, the Palestinian people protested, and in the progress a 14 year old protester was killed, in an incident with an Israeli solider. The Israeli offensive was aimed to take out militant bases and rocket creation facilities and they say they tried their hardest to avoid killing citizens, but being that Gaza is the worlds most dense area, they ended up killing some. Conalisa Rice has a scheduled meeting this week to talk to Israeli and Palestinian officials to get more peace talks started. Israel hopes to resume these peace talks, but will not let up its defenses and will continue to defend its land.
2. Reactions
A. How does this article relate to one of the AP World History themes?
This article Directly relates to the AP World History theme "Development and Interaction of cultures", because this article is mainly about the interaction between Israel and the Palistinan people. This interaction may be in the form of terrorism rockets, or Israeli offensive bombing, but no matter how you view it this crisis has forced these 2 cultures to interact with each other through war. Hopefully this interaction forces the 2 establishments to form a peace policy.
B. Evaluate the historical background of the issue (i.e. explain the history of the issue)
This issue has long rooted problems, starting at the UN's decision in 1947, to split Palestine into 2. One part of Palestine would become present day Israel. The Palestinians felt that their rightfully owned land had been taken from them, whereas the Israelis claimed the land was their own dating back to the time of Moses, and Kanan. Israel later went on the offensive in the 1967 war and took over more land which they were forced to return in the later half of 1967. In 1982 a cease-fire was arranged between the Israelis and the P.L.O. troops (Palestinian troops) which was broken in 1983. War continued until 1991 when in Madrid another peace treaty was signed, and the "Land for Peace" formula was instated. This peace treaty was broken in 2000, and Israel built a wall around the Gaza strip. This wall was later ruled illegal. In 2005 Israel removed all citizens and troops from the Gaza strip, and war has still continued.
C. Identify the point of view of the article – who is writing it?
The points of view are from 2 CNN reporters, who I consider neutral parties. Neither of the reporters show any signs of bias throughout the entire article. One reporter was a female, Shira Medding, and one was a male, Ben Wedeman. Both reporters are Americans and are outsiders.
D. Discuss any indication that the author’s Point of View is impacting how the issue is being reported, i.e. any evidence of bias in favor of or against a party involved in the issue?
I can't seem to find any evidence of bias in this article. They both seem to cover both sides of the story, and all opinions are given fair background. There is no evident bias in this article. There are quotes from both parties representatives, which both try to prove a point.
E. What point of view is missing within the article? Who would you want to hear from to gain a full understanding of the issue?
I feel that the real people's voices are missing. They only seem to quote government officials, not one solider or civilian is even spoke of. I feel that to get to the core of the problem you must get to the general public, which this article fails to do. If it was too hard to grab a citizen who wants to express his or her opinions, then a solder from the front lines of Gaza, or a Palestinian militant would of at least gave the reader the feeling that this was a general opinion and not one of their government.
F. Share your own reactions and insight into the article
I am ashamed to say that this article shocked me. I personally haven't been able to keep up on the news, so I loved writing this current events blog. I personally think that this is a pressing issue and that the people of Israel must start to speak out against the violence towards the Palestinians. Even though they are constantly attack by these people, they must stay strong and prove that they truly are aiming for peace by refraining to resort to the level of their enemy. They call it self defense, but attacking an enemy city is offensive any way you look at it. Through protest, by both parties their governments will be forced to form a treaty, hopefully one that lasts longer than those in the past.
~Max Frizalone
Feel free to comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment