Palestinian woman on hunger strike for 3 weeks. She’s not in Israel, so the Guardian yawns

The following was written by McGonagall at the blog, Israel, Norway and the Jews:

“I don’t think the following strategy for dealing with Palestinian inmates on hunger strikes in Israeli prisons would be wise for Israel; if they were to follow Norway’s example here, I am pretty sure we would have very angry condemnations from the FM, the general press and the usual suspects from the NGO’s. Double standards, anyone?”

Here’s an excerpt from the report at the Norwegian English newspaper, The Foreigner:

Both family members and doctors are worried that the woman, who began her protest three weeks ago, could die at any time.

Nevertheless, the ethics council for the hospital concluded, Monday, that doctors must not force feed her, and that the woman can continue as long as she can continue to communicate.

The woman began her hunger strike after her asylum application was denied, she feels that returning to the Gaza strip is too dangerous for her husband and three-year-old son.

“She is sure that it is dangerous for us in Gaza, where we come from. She believes it is better to die in Norway than we lose each other in Palestine”, her husband told [Norway’s] TV2.

Sure enough, a quick glance at the GazaPalestinian territories and Norway pages of the Guardian doesn’t turn up a thing about the 31-year-old Palestinian hunger striker. 

For some reason, the Guardian hasn’t followed the story at all, yet alone published the kind of sensational reports they did about Khader Adnan and Mahmoud Sarsak, two Palestinian “hunger strikers”, held by Israel, affiliated with Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

I simply can’t imagine why. 

28 replies »

  1. Actually it took weeks before the Guardian bothered to report on Khader Adnan, Hana al-Shalabi or Mahmoud Sarsak. Like most media organisations, it was terribly loud in its silence for a very long time. Palestinians aren’t very important to the mainstream media, the Guardian included.

    • “Palestinians aren’t very important to the mainstream media, the Guardian included.”
      Very true Mary, and not just the ‘mainstream media’ but to others as well they are just sticks to beat Israel with in their desperate attempts to de-legitimise Israel.

    • The Israeli process of administrative detention is a violation of human rights law.

      Either you charge the people you detain, or you release them. This is a basic principle in democracies.

      • “This is a basic principle in democracies.”
        Oh, you mean “Democracies” like the EU, the US, the UK, and within the European Union-France, Germany- all of which use Admin. detention?
        Wow, so Israel’s standards match most of the Western world’s. I guess we can move on with our lives.

        • So what are you waiting to demand an immediate end to the practice of administrative detention in Israel, which violates human rights law?

          • I am personally waiting until the Palestinians stop their vicious and evil attempts to murder civilians and remove from power a terrorist group whose stated aim is the destruction of Israel.

            Then I’ll care.

          • I am waiting for the EU, US & other western nations to stop their usage of the practice. Then, I would be the first to concur with you about the need to curb it, here, in Israel.
            Till then, it’s not an “exorbitant”, or “grievous” norm. It is used worldwide, by the most Democratic countries, and for good reason. Terrorism doesn’t play by “democratic” rules, and measures must be taken to protect law-abiding citizens, however outlying they may seem, UNTIL the threat is defeated.

            • No one in Western Europe does administrative detention. This practice is a violation of human rights law, and EU countries do abide by human rights law.

                • Commentary 101 sorry to disagree with you, but I believe you are wrong to accuse Nat of lying.
                  To tell a lie is to tell an intentionally false statement, which presupposes that they know the truth.

                  Nat doesn’t know the truth. Now whether this is due to ignorance or stupidity I’ll leave you, and others, to decide. Remember ignorance, unless it is deliberate, can be cured. Stupidity is forever.

          • From your tone, Nat, I sure hope you’re doing something about the Palestinians using fear and hate to demonize Jews that choose to live in the Middle East. Because you sound fierce, bro.

        • This does not, of course, make it a good idea, but it does make the ‘basic principle in democracies’ thing ring a little hollow.

          It’s not that I like the concept of administrative detention all that much. It’s just that I don’t see people beating down doors to explain how Australia is in violation of human rights law all the time.

      • Nat – it gets truly tiresome when you raise the same arguments again and again on thread after thread. The other day, you posted on two threads (from 2011) an identical pointless post about the relative status of a Guardian journalist and a CifWatch commentator.

        Now you are posting identical points on at least two threads that I have seen about the terrible nature of administrative detention and how it’s just not the democratic way, old boy.

        Do we really have to re-hash the same points every time you decide to deflect attention from the point of the article by running out one of your stock phrases?

        • And B’Tselem makes it clear that the practice of administrative detention as used by the current Governement of Israel is in breach of international law.

          • Yes, indeed. But it’s really all a matter of opinion and the opinion’s of B’Tselem’s lawyers haven’t been tested before any judicial authority and measured against contrary legal opinions expressed by others. Having an opinion on any legal matter doesn’t automatically endow it with the mantle of absolute truth.

  2. Israel should be held to account- it’s perhaps the only thing that the Guardian gets right!

    • For what?
      Has the Guardian ever held the EU “to account”? Waxed eloquent on the abuse by English authorities in Admin. detention, or otherwise?
      Why don’t we start with equal, egalitarian coverage first?

    • The Guardian should be held to account (and will be held sooner of later) because of it’s incessant incitement against Israel and the Jewish people and giving forum for outright antisemitic terrorists and ideologues.

      • “The EU reiterates its long-standing position on the use by Israel of administrative detention without charge. Detainees have the right to be informed of the reasons for their detention”

        They are

        “be subject to a fair trial without undue delay.”

        the laws of Administrative Detention require that the detainee be brought before a judge within a short period of time. Detentions must be based upon evidence and all detainees – including members of terrorist organisations – have Habeas Corpus rights before the High Court of Justice.

        • The practice of administrative detention violates human rights law and does not make any sense anyway. Why not simply charge the people who are being detained? If they’ve been arrested, it means that the IDF of Shin Bet have files on them and should be able to have them charged. Many people in Israel agree the practice does not make sense and should be amended,

          • You see, this is actually a place where a discussion could start. Unfortunately, I’m still giggling about how Western Europe doesn’t use administrative detention, because they follow all human rights laws and internet conventions…