We are used to the anti-Israel crowd passing off Syrian kids as palestinian. Now a BBC reporter gets in on the act.
Heartbreaking RT@ihazemi Pain in #Gaza twitter.com/iHaZeMi/status…
— Jon Donnison (@JonDonnison) November 18, 2012
The link takes you to this photo:
..which is a photo from June taken in Lebanon.
Donnison has since apologized, but accuracy is still not on his agenda.
A photo I retweeted from another journo yesterday showing children injured was NOT in Gaza as I said but apparently from Syria. Apologies.
— Jon Donnison (@JonDonnison) November 19, 2012
Here’s the photo caption:
Shams al-Mohamad, a 6-year-old Syrian girl, lies on a stretcher as she looks at her sister Marwa at a hospital in Tripoli, northern Lebanon, June 14, 2012. According to their mother, Shams and Marwa were wounded two days ago when a shell hit their house during fighting between Syrian troops and anti-government forces in the Syrian town of Qusair. REUTERS/Omar Ibrahim (LEBANON – Tags: POLITICS CIVIL UNREST SOCIETY)
But correction or not, I fear the damage has been done.
What world we live in that “journalists” don’t lose their jobs over incidents like that.
Did you see LGF is libeling you?
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/41210_About_That_So-Called_Pallywood_Video…/comments/#ctop
LGF’s still online? I thought it shut down long ago for lack of readers.
What a master of turncoating the proprietor of LGF is. I’d say, the Grand Master of that art. But I’ll spare you the gory details; have a gander at The Diary of Daedalus for all the comparisons between the mid-2000s and present-day LGF.
His recent posting the past months seemed odd when I know him from the flotilla stuff.
Got it! Another lie!
I was having trouble answering the “proportionality” argument, but if one can believe Wikipedia (admittedly a big if), proportionality is in relation to military advantage, not what the other guy did to you.
So the whole thing is fake. Plus it is based at least partially on the pro-terrorist additions to the Geneva Protocol which the US refused to ratify and Israel (for once sane) refused to sign. (The PA did, but it’s not like they have to keep any agreement they sign.)
As I said on another thread, my understanding is that it is as much force as is needed to deter future attacks, with some leeway.
Ill ask my military friend who hates Jews and Muslims equally. He sides with Israel because of its military superiority.
Could you give me some reference; this doesn’t seem likely. The Geneva Protocols are to make people play nice, not to ban war.
I’m happy Israel didn’t sign that stupid addition; I think Reagan refused to submit it. (Wikipedia is misleading as to the status in the US, mixing up the US itself with the President.)
“if it was Mexico shooting artillery into San Diego there would be a response most likely air strikes and counter battery fire”
People in Mexican army uniforms HAVE attacked the US, although Mexico claims the they are drug people dressed up as soldiers.
We would basically destroy the entire infrastructure of the capital and work out way from there. Israel basically does the opposite; we supply them.