| Tweet |
(回答先: 最終解決を探る段階に入ったＢＢＣ記者ジョンストン氏誘拐事件：大岡裁きの三角トレードは成立するか？ 投稿者 馬場英治 日時 2007 年 4 月 17 日 05:19:21)
NAGASAKI MAYOR SHOT DEAD IN THIS EARLY MORNING. THE BACKGROUND YET UNKNOWN. STRONGLY CONDEMN TERROR AND VIOLENCE.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trilateral-Loss-Judgment on the Fate of the Missing BBC Reporter by the Chief of South Magistrate Office:
http://exodus.exblog.jp/5528086/
Disinformation like BBC Gaza correspondent Alan Johnston was executed by an obscure Islamic group which calls itself "The Brigades of Holy War and Unity" is running through the Internet. AFP online denied the rumor in the article published at 10AM on Monday Apr 16 [1]. It says, "Palestinian prime minister Ismail Haniya of Hamas said there was no proof that the claim by the little-known group was true..." Although Mr. Haniya is speaking in a very circumferential way, it is actually an affirmation by the Palestinian Authority that the claim by the group has no foundation at all, and on reflection we are able to perceive that Mr. Johnston is alive undoubtedly.
The origin of the duff gen circulating is various with each news source, like some says by E-mail to local journalists, others say by fax to news agencies in Gaza, or picked up the statement in the net. At any rate, all these are message sending methods with little costs with which a junior high schoolboy can do anonymously. The New York Times insists that the beginning is an E-mail sent to a journalist at the Palestinian Ramattan news agency in Gaza on Sunday [2]. The matter of question is for what the disinformation was distributed at the period. It is the point.
It is considered that the information flew into the net on Apr 15, but preceding the event, the BBC's director-general Mark Thompson met the Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, and was told that the journalist was apparently safe and well [3]. Further the president promised him to secure the release of the reporter [3]. There is no reason to doubt that it was a mere lip service based on a wishful speculation. The next day Apr 12, BBC developed a global scale on-air campaign unprecedentedly making the one month anniversary to call for the release of Jonston supported by the three big TV networks of CNN, Sky News, and al-Jazeela.
Along the lines of the statement of the group, it reads, "The whole world has mobilized for this journalist, while no-one has moved a single finger to come to the help of the thousands of our prisoners everywhere." [4] In this context the term "the thousands of our prisoners" shall be taken naturally as "Palestinian people prisoned in Israel". However if we take it in this way, then it comes to conflict with the phrase "We lay the responsibility on the PA presidency, Palestinian government, and the British government for the blood of its journalist son." [4] You may view like "Israel"="the West", but it is a bit controversial to say "Israel=Britain(BBC)" since the BBC is mostly viewed as rather favors the Arab side. Accordingly it should have been written like "We lay the responsibility on the PA presidency, Palestinian government, and the Israeli government for the blood." Indeed it is obvious that Britain=BBC was just a victim involved and with no responsibility to be blamed in the total situation.
Certainly, for any group if it states in a statement like "We lay the responsibility on the Palestinian government and the Israeli government for the blood", the world would be upset. It can be said that every intangible riddles of the events (the abduction) are contained in this paradox, but beforehand we shall check another significant point tracking back to the date Apr 6. On the day Apr 6, AFP already hit the scoop "Abbas confident Israeli soldier, BBC reporter will be freed 'soon'" [5]. Do you understand? This is a highly political and somewhat metaphysical decision arranged by PA in the terribly crucial time sequence, i.e., a barter trade with Alan Johnston and Gilad Shalit who is an Israeli soldier 19 years captured by a Palestinian armed faction on June 25 in 2006.
That is, a synopsis of the ending of the reporter abduction case was determined already at the time of Apr 6. However it is known that to solve a n-body problem for n>2 is mostly impossible, while in this case we have to solve actually multi-body problem of n>3. Involved parties are Britain (representing the broadcaster), Palestine (with the armed faction as an inner/outer party), Israel, and a certain Arab country as the mediator. Then I asked Ooka-Echizen-no-kami, the chief of the South Magistrate Office, how would he have resolved? Here is his answer.
Let Palestinian Authority be [P], Israeli government [I], and the mediator country [M]. Then proceed with the following steps.
Step1: [P] releases Johnston, and collaterally [I] releases initial group of female, minor and ailing prisoners.
Step2: [P] transfers Shalit to [M], and collaterally [I] releases a further group of Palestinian prisoners.
Step3: After an appropriate time [I] releases additional prisoners, including Palestinian political leaders, then Shalit returns home.
This solution is an improved version of the deal described in HAARETZ issued on Apr 9 in 2007 titled "PA: Talks over Shalit swap have taken 'big step' forward". Below is the deal proposed in the article[6].
#1. Transfer of Shalit to Egyptian authorities, in exchange for freeing an initial group of minor and ailing prisoners.
#2. Transfer of Shalit to Israel and the release of a further group of Palestinian prisoners.
#3. After a few months - an additional prisoner release, including leading Palestinian political figures. According to the sources, "There will be no deal without Marwan Barghouti."
Perhaps you can easily see the difference, and understand why it doesn't work and how the Ooka's alternative solution does better. Who do you think is acting the role of Ooka among the parties? My guess is Britain/BBC since their loss is net loss as Ooka had paid his real money.
Trilateral-Loss-Judgment(Sanpo-1-ryo-zon): Ooka Echizen-no-kami was a chief of the South Magistrate in Edo-era well known by a lot of famous judicious decisions that he made. Once a plasterer accidentally picked up a purse on the street, in which there were a seal, a letter, and three gold-coins. He looked the letter and got the address of the owner, a carpenter. He visited the carpenter and handed back the purse, then the carpenter said "I'm willing to receive the seal and the letter as they are mine, but the coins are not. Bring them back your home!" This bold words of the carpenter made the plasterer very angry and they quarreled harshly and interminably. After all both of them appealed to the Magistrate associated with their landlords. After hearing the case, the judge Ooka decided to seize the money, and adding a coin from his purse on the coins he said "I would give each of you two gold-coins for your reward". He explained the judgment as "Each of you was able to get three coins but received only two, hence your loss is one, as well as I've lost one. Thus the trilateral loss of one coin for each person."
[1]Palestinians say no proof BBC reporter killing claim is true (AFP News/Stories, 2007-04-16)
[2]BBC Can’t Confirm Killing of Reporter in Gaza (The New York Times, 2007-04-16)
[3]Reporter's family pleads for release (THE SCOTSMAN, 2007-04-13)
[4]Militants say BBC man executed (The Herald, 2007-04-16)
[5]Abbas confident Israeli soldier, BBC reporter will be freed 'soon' (YAHOO NEWS, 2007-04-06)
[6]PA wants 1,400 prisoners for Shalit; Israel considers freeing Barghouti (HAARETZ, 2007-04-09)
- 日本語版はこちら（ただし，機械翻訳） 馬場英治 2007/5/17 14:57:58
(0)
投稿コメント全ログ コメント即時配信 スレ建て依頼 削除コメント確認方法
題名には必ず「阿修羅さんへ」と記述してください。
掲示板,ＭＬを含むこのサイトすべての
一切の引用、転載、リンクを許可いたします。確認メールは不要です。
引用元リンクを表示してください。