more on censorship (and again, im insufficiently informed to know whether this reported example of censorship in 2009 has any relevance to today. and to form an opinion about the appropriateness of censorship about the Hannibal procedure or directive in any given context, let alone about the procedure itself). My point: in addition to the ethical questions about information and misinformation during warfare, I think we need to give a lot of thought to the question of what the public can know and conclude based on media reports, and the issue of our responsibilities to be informed: from 2009: Several Israeli military correspondents, apparently briefed by the army, reported that the Hannibal procedure had been invoked in Ben-Melechs case. The use of the procedure was also confirmed by Zvika Fogel, a former deputy head of the armys Southern Command, an area including Gaza. He told the Reshet B radio station: The Hannibal procedure is definitely the right procedure. We cannot afford now some soulmate next to Gilad Shalit. However, in an apparent sign of continuing sensitivities on the issue, English-language editions of Israeli newspapers did not mention the procedure. The Jerusalem Post, Israels only major newspaper produced in English, excised a reference to the procedure included in an early report on its website, and the armys spokesman avoided answering questions about whether the procedure had been used in Ben-Melechs shooting. Read more: thenational.ae/news/world/israelis-shot-mental-patient-under-controversial-military-directive#ixzz39IttcOPo Follow us: @TheNationalUAE on Twitter | thenational.ae on Facebook
Posted on: Sun, 03 Aug 2014 05:47:00 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015