Comments on: Guardian of the Truth Lie http://www.israellycool.com/2006/09/12/guardian-of-the-truth-lie/ Down Under Punditry in the Middle East Fri, 05 Sep 2008 17:27:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2-beta By: Anonymous http://www.israellycool.com/2006/09/12/guardian-of-the-truth-lie/#comment-7433 Anonymous Wed, 13 Sep 2006 15:11:44 +0000 http://www.israellycool.com/2006/09/12/guardian-of-the-truth-lie/#comment-7433 OK, let's say you are a reporter. You have two stories that you have just witnessed and written about. One involves an ambulance ALMOST getting hit by a missile, the other about TWO ambulances actually getting hit with heavy casualties being sustained. OK, let’s say you are a reporter. You have two stories that you have just witnessed and written about. One involves an ambulance ALMOST getting hit by a missile, the other about TWO ambulances actually getting hit with heavy casualties being sustained.

]]> By: Pajamas Media http://www.israellycool.com/2006/09/12/guardian-of-the-truth-lie/#comment-7434 Pajamas Media Wed, 13 Sep 2006 14:04:06 +0000 http://www.israellycool.com/2006/09/12/guardian-of-the-truth-lie/#comment-7434 <strong>The MidEast and the West 151, September 13, 2006</strong> Not sold: Aussie Dave is not convinced by the Guardian's response to Zombie's accusation that the Red Cross ambulance incident in Lebanon was a hoax. (Israellycool) Israeli northern commander resigns: Major-General Udi Adam’s request to retire was ac... The MidEast and the West 151, September 13, 2006

Not sold: Aussie Dave is not convinced by the Guardian’s response to Zombie’s accusation that the Red Cross ambulance incident in Lebanon was a hoax. (Israellycool) Israeli northern commander resigns: Major-General Udi Adam‚Äôs request to retire was ac…

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.israellycool.com/2006/09/12/guardian-of-the-truth-lie/#comment-7432 Anonymous Wed, 13 Sep 2006 01:42:36 +0000 http://www.israellycool.com/2006/09/12/guardian-of-the-truth-lie/#comment-7432 I picked the same area to quote: "A Guardian picture archivist with a special interest in images from areas of conflict, who carried out extensive research for me, concluded that there was cause for doubt about the nature of the munitions involved and the manner of their delivery, but not in the reality of the attack." This is consistant with Zobie's assessment: 1. Something happened to the ambulance. 2. What happened is unknown. The time, the source, and the nature of the damage is unknown. What Zomie showed was that the damage was not the result of an Israeli air-to-ground attack. This article is devoid of substance. Very bad journalism. It adds nothing except inuendo. I picked the same area to quote:

“A Guardian picture archivist with a special interest in images from areas of conflict, who carried out extensive research for me, concluded that there was cause for doubt about the nature of the munitions involved and the manner of their delivery, but not in the reality of the attack.”

This is consistant with Zobie’s assessment:

1. Something happened to the ambulance.

2. What happened is unknown. The time, the source, and the nature of the damage is unknown.

What Zomie showed was that the damage was not the result of an Israeli air-to-ground attack.

This article is devoid of substance. Very bad journalism. It adds nothing except inuendo.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.israellycool.com/2006/09/12/guardian-of-the-truth-lie/#comment-7431 Anonymous Wed, 13 Sep 2006 01:04:03 +0000 http://www.israellycool.com/2006/09/12/guardian-of-the-truth-lie/#comment-7431 "A Guardian picture archivist ... concluded that there was cause for doubt about the nature of the munitions involved and the manner of their delivery, but not in the reality of the attack." I think the archivist is saying "The ambulance wasn't hit with a missile, and it wasn't hit with something fired from a helicopter, but the photos themselves do not give me reason to doubt that the ambulance was attacked." If this is what the archivist is saying then the statement is absolutely correct - the photos don't prove that the ambulance was not attacked, just that it was not attacked in the way reported. The Guardian's sources are liars, and the story (which was entirely based on their reports) ought to be retracted. “A Guardian picture archivist … concluded that there was cause for doubt about the nature of the munitions involved and the manner of their delivery, but not in the reality of the attack.”

I think the archivist is saying “The ambulance wasn’t hit with a missile, and it wasn’t hit with something fired from a helicopter, but the photos themselves do not give me reason to doubt that the ambulance was attacked.”

If this is what the archivist is saying then the statement is absolutely correct - the photos don’t prove that the ambulance was not attacked, just that it was not attacked in the way reported. The Guardian’s sources are liars, and the story (which was entirely based on their reports) ought to be retracted.

]]>