Baalbeck

The only reaction I could come up with last night as the news came in about the Israeli raid on Baalbeck was, "Crap. We're all screwed." Seriously. This is going to all end so badly, so, so badly. Already today we've seen the rockets going into Israel increase to the highest number yet in retaliation. Hezbollah says that Israel only succeeded in arresting? kidnapping? abducting? civilians, five to be exact, while Israel says that they're Hezbollah officials. Great. Because, it wasn't kidnapping people that started all of this. Nope, it wasn't at all. This is all crap. How many people have to die to prove that violence doesn't work? Ghandi is rolling in his grave.

The one segment that really got to me last night was the segment on children in Israel collecting Katyusha rockets. That is an absolutely terrifying idea to try and fathom. Anything with children always gets to me. The motherly instinct kicks in and I get all mushy and protective. No child should ever have the opportunity to become so familiar with violence and the tools used to inflict it. I am, however, thankful that Anderson has decided not to overlook the plights of children like the family profiled. But, I also see the other side to the reason he is reporting it. Often you hear Anderson talk about the "sliding scale of sorrow," and how you have to pick and choose which stories are sad enough to strike a chord. Children collecting rockets strikes a chord.

New in the 360 blog: White House denies giving green light to Israel. Are they stupid? Or do they just think that we're stupid? Because last time I checked, sending bunker busting missiles and M109s to Israel is definitely a "green light," at least in my book. American diplomacy at the United Nations has the power to make or break a ceasefire. So far, all they've done is break them. American diplomats have rejected all other international attempts to create a resolution and a ceasefire. Now, Condi says they could create a resolution by the end of the week. Why's that? They could have had one two weeks ago. Is it because international opinion is starting to weigh heavily against Israel and the United States that they've changed their tune so durastically? I just want to go smack some people upside the heads, because they're being morons. That is all.

The more time is spent on this story, the more I wonder what it is that really decides what stories get the most coverage. Of course, on the "sliding scale of sorrow" a war is pretty freakin' bad, but there are things that are just as bad going on but don't get barely any coverage at all. While watching last night, along the bottom on the headline scroll, one of the headlines was something along the lines of "Rebels in Darfur rape and murder to try and gain... something something." I only just caught it out of the corner of my eye. Why does Darfur only get a scroll along the bottom, and an occasional 30 seconds news piece?

To put it into perspective, the ME Crisis has essentially had 24 hour coverage for three weeks. Around 550 Israeli and Lebanese civilians have died. So, that's like 26 people a day. The conflict in Darfur has had little to no coverage over the last three years. It has been declared a genocide by the American government and has been called the "world's greatest humanitarian crisis" by Kofi Annan. An estimated 400,000 people have died from the government-supported violence, more die from starvation. Approximately 100 people die a day in Darfur. Women are raped as a means of ethnic cleansing, children are murdered, and entire villages are destroyed. Where the hell is the international coverage on that, huh? I'm pretty sure that scores high on the "sliding scale of sorrow."

So where is the coverage? ER, the NBC primetime drama, covered more of what's going on in Darfur this year than the news media did. If ER can film in Darfur, you can get a fucking news team there, so that's not it. The only thing I can really come up with that seems to make any sense is that it's Africa, and who really cares what's going on in Africa? Not viable trading partners, no oil, the only ones we really need around are South Africa and Egypt. This is why I'm going into journalism. Frustration and disgust.

From the Canadian in me: the Prime Minister has said he is unsure as to whether or not Canada will be able to commit troops to an international force in Lebanon. I've come to realize Harper is excellent at stalling. We're all tied up in Afghanistan. Really? Okay. Well, I'm fine with that. We do have troops there, and we don't want to stretch ourselves too thin. We don't have a huge military, and Canadians are stationed all around the world. My cousin is currently in Holland. But, I hope Mr. Harper doesn't become a two-faced backstabber by sending troops to Lebanon. He has already said that Canada will only commit troops to Darfur if it is an international force through the UN. So, remember that Mr. Harper. If you have to choose Darfur or Lebanon, choose that which came up first, or else you will have a very angry Canadian on your doorstep. The entire country knows where you live.

Thanks to legionpossessed via acoopervision for the screencap.