Wilfull Misinterpretation: Israel's Warning to Lebanon

"Hezbollah Shrine to Terrorist Suspect Enthralls Lebanese Children"
By Robert F. Worth, A 12
Wednesday, September 3, 2008

Writer Robert F. Worth reports on Hezbollah's newly opened and popular attraction in southern Lebanon -- a shrine to noted, recently assasinated terrorist Imad Mugniyah, and Hezbollah's war against Israel. Yet it is Worth's attempt to provide background that should cause consternation to any informed observer of the Middle East.

The one thousand word article provides vivid details of the ghoulish exhibit. Open until after 1 a.m., overflow crowds and schoolchildren arrive to take in Hezbollah's "carefully honed message of heroic resistance," aptly stated by Worth. Mugniyah's blood-stained clothes behind a glass case, the shrapnel-scarred shoes he died in, and a fake skeleton in a torn Israeli uniform and helmet are just three of the eerie items on display. Worth also notes the exhibit's blaring soundtrack "mixing the sounds of bombs and machine-gun fire with mournful operatic voices and warlike speeches."

"At first glance," Worth writes, "the exhibit could almost be taken for an outdoor children's museum." About halfway through the article, after Worth highlights Mugniyah's resume, the article takes a scary turn. Worth looks to explain the "tense moment in Lebanon":

"Israeli leaders have issued warnings that they would carry out a more devastating attack than the 2006 war if Hezbollah were to lead Lebanon's government."

What? "Leading a government" is all it takes to provoke Israel into full-scale war? And some argue Israel is the besieged nation? Of course, Worth's summation of recent events is embarassingly insufficient.

Hezbollah has turned Lebanon into a battleground for its next war with Israel. The terror group has stockpiled Iranian weapons, upgraded and expanded an elaborate network of rocket launchers and bunkers throughout southern Lebanon, made public their war intentions against Israel and in the process intimidated UNIFIL personnel whose desire to confront Hezbollah was already suspect. On August 12, the Lebanese parliament approved a national unity cabinet along with a policy that keeps Hezbollah armed and unchecked.

A few weeks ago, in a visit to a Home Front Command headquarters, Prime Minister Olmert addressed the problem by issuing a clear public warning to Lebanon that if it were to turn "into a Hezbollah state, we would no longer place any limitiations on ourselves."

Olmert continued, "In the Second Lebanon War we had much greater means and capabilities which we avoided using since we fought against a terror organization and not a country."

Hezbollah's al-Manar TV correctly interpreted the Israeli warning. On August 20, Hussein Assi reported in an article on al-Manar's website "if Hezbollah fighters attack again as the dominant force in Lebanon, Israel will hit back harder than before." Hezbollah itself understands that what elicited Israel's warning was not simply their leading the Lebanese government, but their belligerent acts.

These events were widely reported. They're not only relevant, but necessary facts to be included in an article devoted to Hezbollah's martyr theme park. Just four more words could have amended the sentence. "...if Hezbollah were to lead Lebanon to war against Israel," (my emphasis added) is a sentence Worth could have used to sufficiently described Israel's recent warnings to Lebanon. It would have also made the article fit to print.

Either ignorance or wilfull misrepresentation are to blame for Worth's lapse of judgment, which was not insignificant. In this piece, The New York Times essentially stated for its readers that Israel is prepared to bomb its northern neighbor because it does not care for its government.

Since the article was on Hezbollah's crowning PR achievement, a sentence or two on Hezbollah's goals would have also filled out the readers' understanding. Instead, readers are told the exhibit is meant to "dramatize the group's bitter conflict with Israel." Bitter conflict over what? Over captured territory, prisoners, Israel's existence?

At the end of the article, Worth quotes a visitor who brought his wife and two children. The visitor, Ahmed, came to "teach" his kids about "the culture of resistance." Ahmed continued to explain "I want them to see what the enemy is doing to us, and what we can do to fight them, because the enemy is not merciful." After reading that Israel bombs nations whose leaders it dislikes, what uninformed reader would disagree with Ahmed's assessment?

DB


* Al-Manar source: http://www.almanar.com.lb/NewsSite/NewsDetails.aspx?id=54002&language=en