Meanwhile, further down the page of the Gulf News, it is back to normal.  Here is their take on the Jericho prison siege:

The barbaric offensive by Israel on the Jericho prison, literally under the noses of the two Western great powers, explains once again why the peace process in the Middle East remains a mirage.

Well, no.  The attack did not take place under the noses of two Western great powers, because those monitors had been withdrawn by the British government through fears for their safety.  Jack Straw, the British foreign secretary, said in parliament on Tuesday that he had seen the conditions under which the monitors were working deteriorate to the point where he was going to withdraw them in the autumn, but took the risk of keeping them in situ.  The Quartet (US, EU, UN, and Russia) had warned the Palestinian Authority that the situation was unacceptable, and their security concerns were not being addressed, yet these warnings went unheeded.  Then earlier in the week, the armed guard who were responsible for the monitors’ protection was withdrawn without warning or reason, hence the monitors, fearing for their safety, were withdrawn.  Hence, when the attack to place, there were no noses of Western powers anywhere near.

As long as the Israeli government continues to flout international laws, build new colonies, starve the Palestinians and target their leaders, no roadmap will ever help the process reach its final destination.

True.  And as long as the Palestinians renege on previous agreements regarding the imprisonment of terrorists, threaten the lives of international monitors, and set fire to the British Council building, then indeed – no roadmap will ever help the process reach its final destination.

In attacking the prison and arresting Ahmad Sa’adat and others, with perhaps the blessing of the United States and Britain, Israel again undermined the leadership of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

Firstly, the US was in no way involved in this as their monitors were not around at the time.  So we can end this piece of low-grade hack journalism here and now.  Secondly, there is no evidence whatsoever that the attack on the prison was carried out with the blessing of the UK, and both parties have denied any collaboration in full.

The attack showed him unable to protect his people. It also provided Palestinian factions, some of which do not recognise the peace process, with more reasons to continue their armed struggle.

What curious logic!  Mahmoud Abbas was shown to be unable to control his own people, yet somehow this has turned into protect his own people.  And in confronting an armed Palestinian faction which did not recognise the peace process, Israel has somehow given it an extra reason to continue with its armed struggle. 

The attack also shows the double standards of US and British policies. Sa’adat and other activists were being jailed in a local prison based upon international guarantees that Israel would not target them. These guarantees, however, do not seem to matter when it comes to Israel.

Either the Gulf News has not done the basic research expected of a national newspaper, or it is deliberately misleading its readers.  The international guarantees in place which prevented Israel from attacking the prison also required Ahmad Sa’adat and others to be held in certain conditions which would be verified by international monitors.  The reports from the monitors have repeatedly stated that the Palestinians have never fully implemented their obligations under the agreement, and this culminated in those who control the prison threatening the lives of the monitors and preparing to release the prisoners.  Only once this international agreement was in tatters and the prisoners about to be released did Israel respond.

I was wondering how the Gulf News was going to spin this story when I was watching the events unfold on TV.  The answer seems to be by turning all conventions of logic on their head, leaving out half the story, presenting events in the wrong chronological order, inventing collaborations between Britain and Israel, and displaying moral indignation at a story which bears little relation to reality.

Business as usual, then.