March 13, 2002
10:51 AM   Subscribe

Raffaele Ciriello killed in Ramallah early Wednesday. Ciriello ran the marvelous and heart-wrenching site Postcards from Hell (previously discussed, and currently down).
posted by apostasy (19 comments total)
 
...and back up again.

I particularly enjoy the Massoud bit. And the Afghan frontlines section has what is one of the greatest combat photos I've ever seen (halfway down the page, bazooka + kitten).
posted by apostasy at 11:02 AM on March 13, 2002


His work outstanding. Sad, very sad. The report makes it clear that he was between gunmen and soldiers hunting them down.
posted by Postroad at 11:55 AM on March 13, 2002


His work outstanding. Sad, very sad. The report makes it clear that he was between gunmen and soldiers hunting them down.
posted by Postroad at 11:55 AM on March 13, 2002


His site is down, but well represented in the wayback machine
posted by BentPenguin at 12:04 PM on March 13, 2002


it's like the world lost an eye...
posted by kliuless at 12:28 PM on March 13, 2002


Damn. I was just at his site on Monday, admiring his work. One more window into the world's turmoil shattered.
posted by laz-e-boy at 1:58 PM on March 13, 2002


Inna Lilla Hi Wa Inna Elaihi Rajeoon.

Life - It is from God, and to him it returns.

Loved his work. May God bless him.
posted by adnanbwp at 4:35 PM on March 13, 2002


It's very sad..but it happens a lot i think..I mean you go into a warzone, you've more then one chance to die.

I think that's sad as is the death of every common person on earth, but this time media has picked it up because he was a journalist. There's something wrong in that..what about the people killed in palestinian terror attacks ? They're heroes to me because they were common people..they knew they were in a warzone, but I think many of them didn't have an "opt-out" chance, because of money problems, likely.

That's the good think about the war photographers..they make you think about YOU in another distant, dangerous places. Any God would welcome Ciriello.
posted by elpapacito at 5:02 PM on March 13, 2002


wow - i still have an email from ciriello in my inbox. he gave me his GSM # and i was going to call him this week...may god bless those who live dangerously.

"Feel free to reach me at any time on my GSM +39 xxx 6336848.
I plan to move to Gaza strip on second next week.

Best,
A. Raffaele Ciriello
"
posted by subpixel at 5:31 PM on March 13, 2002


The report makes it clear that he was between gunmen and soldiers hunting them down.

No, according to the report, a hotel in which 40 foreign journalists were staying came under Israeli tank fire. The journalists say Israeli claims of a gunman in the hotel are false. The report could be wrong...but it does anything but provide "clear" justification for the death of Raffaele Ciriello.
posted by Zurishaddai at 7:08 PM on March 13, 2002


I think that's sad as is the death of every common person on earth, but this time media has picked it up because he was a journalist. There's something wrong in that..what about the people killed in palestinian terror attacks ?

I'm not so sure about that. I think part of the reason why it's being covered so heavily is that he was killed by Israelis. I don't think it would have been quite so jolting (at least in the American press) had he been a victim of a Palestinian suicide bomber.

I read something a week or two ago where a journalist (can't remember which one) referred to the relationship between the Palestinians & Israelis as one fraught with "irreconcilable differences." He said that he thought that much of the international community - those with no first hand experience of the situation - harbored a comforting but fallacious notion that solving the conflict was simply about getting people to the negotiating table and getting them to understand the other side. He speculated that this would never happen because there are contingencies on both sides that will tolerate nothing less but the total elimination of the other, and insisted that peace would never come about without a major third party intervention.

I agree that intervention is necessary and more than that, I don't intervention alone (at the level we've been intervening) is enough. If the intervening party is the U.S. - and it no doubt *will* be - there's also a level of third party enforcement required in order for a negotiated settlement to stick, and I don't see how it can be avoided.

If we're serious about brokering peace, "peacekeeping" will be necessary and there's a thin line in the public's mind between peacekeeping and "occupation." When the first bullet is fired, that line is crossed. And that first bullet is invariably fired. Given that, it's realistic to expect that American bullets would, at some point, probably kill Israelis and I don't think the U.S. is ready to deal with that. It would drastically change our relationship with Israel. It's a lot more convenient to just make a half-assed effort, avoid getting really involved, and wishfully cross our fingers.

ciriello's death highlighted the fact that we're dealing with belligerent forces on both sides and I'm sure a lot of U.S. officials are breathing a sigh of relief that Ciriello wasn't American because they'd be forced to take a stronger position - particularly against unfair aggression by Israel - instead of just sending Zinni in for another round of handholding and hoping the situation works itself out.
posted by lizs at 8:07 PM on March 13, 2002


I know it would be a shame to let his death pass without using it for propaganda in the ongoing conflict, but I think there's a simple reason Raffaele Ciriello's death is getting big coverage: He was a well-known photojournalist.
posted by rcade at 8:45 PM on March 13, 2002


I'm not saying it was the only or most important reason, rcade - i just think it was a factor. "Well-known photojournalist" seems like a bit of an oxymoron when you're talking about what's news to *middle America* and I was really referring to the mass media coverage. I know he was a great photojournalist. You know he was a great photojournalist. But if last week you had asked 20 people on the street of any suburban American town who Raffaele Ciriello was, I doubt you'd get correct responses.

Discussing an aspect of his death that might raise some pertinent issues with regard to American perception of and interest in the Palestinian/Israeli conflict is not tantamount to "using his death for propaganda." I present an honest opinion hoping to elicit honest feedback, and suddenly I have some nefarious agenda?
posted by lizs at 9:10 PM on March 13, 2002


lizs: I'm American, Jewish, and liberal. For most of my life, I believed peace would be possible and that this generation would take up the challenge of sharing that which can't be divided. Since Arik Sharon visited the Temple Mount and set off the current hostilities, I've become much more conservative and protective of Israel. It's instinctive; I'm sick of people killing Jews.

And that's not going to change because of this. But I'm stunned enough, and sad enough, to think about it all. What I find interesting in my reaction is that even as I wince at the atrocities committed by Israel, I support Israel. Amnesty International can show me a list of Israel's violations, and I will still feel, viscerally, that Israel should do whatever it takes to keep itself together as a nation.

What makes me sad is knowing that there are plenty of good, decent Palestinians who feel the same way about Palestine and that the vision of Palestine requires the eradication of Israel.

And that another journalist has been killed.
posted by swerve at 9:55 PM on March 13, 2002


I will still feel, viscerally, that Israel should do whatever it takes to keep itself together as a nation

The problem is not that you believe this. The problem is that you have been convinced that "do whatever it takes" is killing people and harassing them in every possible way.

The problem is that because of the overwhelming odds that Israel faced to become an indpendent, successful, strong, Jewish nation, many are blinded by the reality that making concessions is not losing. In fact, making real concessions to the original inhabitants of the land in this case will be winning. A moral victory and a democratic victory.

The problem is not people who will do whatever it takes. The problem is when they don't understand that force in this case is more likely to tear the nation apart in the long term. What is needed are people who can reject the extremists and bring justice and liberty to all people, regardless of race or religion. There are probably more people like this on the Israeli side, truth be told. That is why many Israelis feel they have 'no partner for peace.' But this is more a function of power than anything else. The stronger party will always have more who are willing to 'do whatever it takes' to make a real, lasting peace, because it is their peace to give.
posted by chaz at 10:42 PM on March 13, 2002


In fact, making real concessions to the original inhabitants of the land in this case will be winning. A moral victory and a democratic victory.

*yawn* Been there, done that. Not a victory by a long shot.

The stronger party will always have more who are willing to 'do whatever it takes' to make a real, lasting peace, because it is their peace to give.

This is exactly wrong; an offer of real, lasting peace (or at least lack of conflict) is the Palestinians' one real bargaining chip. As long as they refuse to bring that to the table, then no Israeli concession will magically make it appear.
posted by boaz at 5:43 AM on March 14, 2002


"irreconcilable differences."

i think like lizs and chaz say, unless you reconcile the differences there's no real hope of lasting peace or lack of conflict. just the way it's headed it looks like a version of the "final reconciliation" or something.
posted by kliuless at 7:33 AM on March 14, 2002


But if last week you had asked 20 people on the street of any suburban American town who Raffaele Ciriello was, I doubt you'd get correct responses.

You could ask 20 people on the street who their governor is and you might not get a correct answer. That's not a good test for whether someone is important enough to merit widespread media coverage.
posted by rcade at 11:29 AM on March 14, 2002


You could ask 20 people on the street who their governor is and you might not get a correct answer. That's not a good test for whether someone is important enough to merit widespread media coverage.

If you're a business that sells newspapers, it's a damn good test. If media coverage was driven by actual importance and newsworthiness, my suburban parents would know where East Timor is and I would have never heard of Chandra Levy. Sad, but true.
posted by lizs at 6:20 PM on March 14, 2002


« Older INS grants visas to deceased hijackers   |   The editor-at-large of The Spectator has... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments