|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
 Posted - 08/29/2006 : 00:31:07 [Permalink]
|
OK, Sago, I looked at some samples of the Green Helmet Guy in the blogs. What is your point? The fact the people are holding dead children up for the cameras? And your point is? What, the child didn't die being crushed in the bombed building? Arabs in many of those areas do that all the time. They want the world to see, unlike Bush who orders the coffins of returning dead soldiers from Iraq hidden from the view of Americans. We can't see our own war dead returning because we might not like the reality of Bush's war and speak out to have it stopped. These people want the world to see what has happened.
Beyond that, I see no "staged" photos. A staged photo would be a child who didn't die in the bombing being covered in dirt to make it look like the child did die there. Holding up a dead child for photos is not a "staged photo" in my definition. Clearly it gives people an excuse to discount the death as unimportant. Tell me why holding the child up for all to see makes the death any less tragic or changes the results of the bombing?
As far as Reuters withdrawing photos, you'll have to find a link to the actual source. I'm not going to chase that one down. Clearly Reuters could have many reasons for not using photos. And I've never seen them use 900 photos of any single subject so just where did they withdraw them from?
Dude, I hear you denying and denying but haven't seen the evidence there were military targets Israel was aiming at. I understand you want evidence there wasn't a Hezbollah rocket amidst the civilian infrastructure. But in all your review of the same evidence I looked at, where was there any evidence the target was military? Israel has not made any more than the blanket claim the damaged infrastructure was collateral damage. Did you see evidence there were rocket launchers in the food markets? Was there evidence there were rocket launchers on the bridges, in the airport, ? The only time I saw Israel make that claim was after the Qana civilian deaths and they showed the rockets being fired from somewhere they claimed was nearby. But that evidence was shown to be a day earlier as I recall. Hardly likely there were still rockets around 24 hours later. Just what military targets were the Israelis aiming at? Show me the evidence. I'd rather believe you than not believe you but the evidence suggests massive collective punishment was the goal. |
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 08/29/2006 00:31:30 |
 |
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2006 : 01:38:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
As far as Reuters withdrawing photos, you'll have to find a link to the actual source. I'm not going to chase that one down. Clearly Reuters could have many reasons for not using photos. And I've never seen them use 900 photos of any single subject so just where did they withdraw them from?
Reuters did indeed voluntarily withdraw 920 photographs by a freelance Lebanese photographer after it was uncovered that he had digitally manipulated (i.e. Photoshopped) some of his photos in order to make them more visually compelling.
In the two cases I saw, the photographer composited in a soldier who wasn't in the original shot and increased the amount of smoke over the city in the other. It was pretty amateur work, too. You could clearly see the repeating patterns in the altered smoke:
Because manipulating any image without disclosing that fact is a serious breech of ethics, Reuters did the right thing and pulled all photos submitted by this guy from their service (whether there was specific evidence of manipulation in each case or not).
Well, as you can imagine, the right-wingers loved this story. Instead of it being about one bad apple who acted improperly, they spun this as an ongoing example of how eager liberals were to lap up anti-war propaganda. You see, all that "extra" smoke apparently turned an innocuous photo of a surgical air strike into a horrendously evil scene of emotionally-charged carnage...or something.
Liberals were once again duped while only the intellectuals who rely on FOX news saw through the anti-Semitic "propaganda."
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 08/29/2006 10:25:40 |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2006 : 04:29:36 [Permalink]
|
BBC
quote:
The shell is huge, bigger than the young boy pushed forward to stand reluctantly next to it while we get our cameras out and record the scene for posterity.
The AP also refuses to release originals of pictures to easily dispute claims on their photo staging
here
Staging is part of history...... Washington crossng the Deleware, Iwo Jima...... It is every day..... How many protests are staged with paid protesters? Not so difirent............
It is all ludicrous......
My take on the war....... Hezbolah, who has many members within the government of Lebanon crossed into Israel. They did this HOPING that Israel would attack. After the Gaza incident, they thought Israel was going to treat them difirently???? If an action is knowingly entered into to cause a military response, it is an act of war.
War is harsh, and ugly. War causes death to innocents. The aim in a war is to defeat the enemy. The enemy is defeated by killing them, and denying them supplies. Bombing roads and airports denies them supplies to feed their machine. Destroying water and electricity denies them supplies to feed their forces.
Hezbolah should not even have had arms..... One Accord and a couple of UN Resolutions demanded their disbandment.
Oh, yeah... UN Resolutions...... A lot of them are not even worth using as toilet paper.......
My only complaint is that Israel did not finish the job yesterday, that someone is going to have to finish tomorrow, after they have regrouped, rearmed, and reentrenched. War should be fought to decisive victory. This shit should have been handled in the 70's and 80's.........
Peace only works when both sides want it.
Peace
Joe |
The Circus of Carnage... because you should be able to deal with politicians like you do pissant noobs. |
| Edited by - Original_Intent on 09/08/2006 05:17:28 |
|
|
|
Sago
New Member
USA
30 Posts |
Posted - 09/07/2006 : 13:12:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
OK, Sago, I looked at some samples of the Green Helmet Guy in the blogs. What is your point? The fact the people are holding dead children up for the cameras? And your point is? What, the child didn't die being crushed in the bombed building? Arabs in many of those areas do that all the time. They want the world to see, unlike Bush who orders the coffins of returning dead soldiers from Iraq hidden from the view of Americans. We can't see our own war dead returning because we might not like the reality of Bush's war and speak out to have it stopped. These people want the world to see what has happened.
The point is that you believe only what you want to believe.
The other point is that you were not even aware of what was front page news all over the world at the time. Namely that there were countless examples of staged propaganda when there didn't really need to be staging at all if the events were as described. The ambulance is a good example of pure and simple lies bought hook line and sinker by the apologists for the real terrorists, like you. There were plenty of others, but you seem blissfully unaware.
What you want is for the world to believe what you wish to have happened.
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 09/07/2006 : 14:55:28 [Permalink]
|
Sago said:
quote:
The ambulance is a good example of pure and simple lies bought hook line and sinker by the apologists for the real terrorists, like you.
I would agree that beskeptigal is mistaken in her opinion of the events discussed in this thread, but calling her an apologist for terrorists is going a bit to far.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 09/07/2006 : 18:09:43 [Permalink]
|
Original_intent, you forgot the " " around the links. Could you please edit them?
The URL-tag should read like this: [URL="link"]
This is a difference from most php-powered forums, where the citation-marks should not be used. Our forum is run by Snitz-software in asp code. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2006 : 05:17:54 [Permalink]
|
Gotcha
Peace
Joe |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2006 : 08:48:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Sago:
The ambulance is a good example of pure and simple lies bought hook line and sinker by the apologists for the real terrorists, like you.
For someone concerned about the use of hyperbolic language, I think that the above quote is hypocritical to the extreme.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2006 : 13:08:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sago
The point is that you believe only what you want to believe....
Everyone does that to some degree, the brain has to assign weight to contradictory evidence. I know how well read and informed on the Mid-East I am and I think I have demonstrated that in my time on this board. You OTOH have not.
But that aside, nothing in the attempts to influence media coverage by either side has anything to do with my conclusion about what the evidence indicates Israel was actually targeting. There is a continuum from targeting the Hezbollah military, to the infrastructure used by Hezbollah, to the infrastructure clearly more civilian, to civilians themselves. So we are talking here, about where it is reasonable to draw that line and still say you are targeting Hezbollah and the rest is collateral damage. In addition, it is worth determining what the motive was for each target.
Hersh has proposed the motive, to make things so miserable for the Lebanese that they blame Hezbollah for bringing on the destruction and turn against Hezbollah. Hersh presented as evidence the inside information he got about the Bush admin involvement in the Israeli plan and in the Israeli decision to carry the plan out.
The border skirmish and kidnapping of 2 Israeli soldiers, the event which triggered the war, was not significantly different from many previous incidents.
The war ended (sort of) without getting the soldiers back when world opinion turned against Israel for an overkill response.
Bush said in an interview after the war, in his typical state of denial, that "the Lebanese people would eventually see Hezbollah was to blame".
The rhetoric from the Bush admin to vilify Iran is heating up.
Israel has yet to offer a defense that the targets were all chosen to hit Hezbollah military infrastructure, weapons or fighters. Nor has any goal been given for hitting such things as grocery stores.
These facts strongly support Hersh's premise. Israel was targeting civilian infrastructure with the goal of turning Lebanese against Hezbollah. Bush encouraged the Israelis to do it. Bush hoped to see the hoped for result result and planned to use the same tactic in Iran with the idiotic stupidity that he believes the Iranian people would turn then against the Mullahs should it happen.
It also appears Bush is in denial the tactic failed. And he is moving forward with some plan to attack Iran. The neocons have been in denial their plans are failing in Iraq as well. |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2006 : 13:23:16 [Permalink]
|
Oh, about that you are either with us or you are with the terrorists, Ho hum... Anyone with a grade school education should understand the fake argument of offering two options when there are many more than two. It might have sounded good with a bullhorn on top the WTC rubble, but the context there was about countries harboring terrorists, not about people disagreeing with how the terrorists are fought.
Bush/Rove propaganda 101: Pretend it's Bush's way or no way. Repeat as nauseum.
Those of us who use more than a knee jerk to evaluate the world know there are many ways to combat terrorism besides the neocon way. We can also see the neocon way is failing miserably and in fact is making things worse.
It might interest you to know I think the Palestinians are idiots as well to be using terror tactics. Ghandi's grandson was on Democracy Now this morning.
quote:
JUAN GONZALEZ: What was the response of President Arafat, who had spent his whole life in armed resistance, basically, to free his people?
ARUN GANDHI: Well, one of the questions that he asked me was, well, suppose you were given the leadership, what would you plan to do? And I said, look, I can't give you an offhand answer to this question, because it needs to be studied properly. I need to be here. I need to understand the problems here. But one thing that really comes to my mind here, I said I had just been to Amman, Jordan, where I had met with more than half a million refugees, Palestinian refugees, who were living for more than a decade in awful conditions. And they were frustrated and angry, and they wanted to come back to Palestine and live a peaceful, normal life there. And I told Mr. Arafat, I said, suppose you were to go there and lead this half a million people, men, women and children, in a march to Palestine, and no armaments or anything, just say that we are coming back to live in peace and harmony in our homeland, can the Israelis kill so many people and live with their conscience? I said the whole world would wake up and stop this action.
|
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 09/08/2006 13:24:49 |
|
|
|
Sago
New Member
USA
30 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2006 : 18:03:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
Sago said:
quote:
The ambulance is a good example of pure and simple lies bought hook line and sinker by the apologists for the real terrorists, like you.
I would agree that beskeptigal is mistaken in her opinion of the events discussed in this thread, but calling her an apologist for terrorists is going a bit to far.
I don't think many "apologists" do so with that in their mind. They think that simply saying suicide bombing is a bad thing saves them from the label, when they then proceed to explain how the killers were driven to such extremes only by the "policies" of the West.
Or, to be more current in this thread, how Israel deliberately targeted civilians in order to, perhaps, according to CT logic, turn the rest of Lebanon against the terrorists called Hizbullah who have the control of half of the country, if not of the population.
The claim is that some 1000 civilians died. If Israel had targeted civilians I happen to think that only an apologist for Hizbullah would think that 10,000 wouldn't have died in day one, if that were the case.
Officially, ZERO, or near enough Hizbullah terrorists were killed. Anyone think any of those bodies were included in the total?
Lebanese propagandists in green helmets caught posing bodies of dead children, covered in dust with no other injury, and no other bodies in sight....ambulances hit by missiles that put holes in the roof and cause no other damage....body counts that shrink from day to day....really really dumb attempts to enhance and fake photos that the vanguards of western journalism, like Reuters, don't even notice, until the bloggers do their thing.....and apologists like beskeptical buy it hook line and sinker.
Propaganda is a tool of war. I don't actually criticize Hizbullah for using it, only the sorry apologists who buy it and then lay claim to the word SKEPTIC in their name.
Sorry for being so infrequent here. Frankly I find the mechanics of this forum software somewhat cumbersome and hard to browse in spare moments. Perhaps I'll get better, perhaps not.
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2006 : 18:52:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Sago:
Sorry for being so infrequent here. Frankly I find the mechanics of this forum software somewhat cumbersome and hard to browse in spare moments. Perhaps I'll get better, perhaps not.
Do you use the "Active Topics" button on the upper menu of every forum page? |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2006 : 15:01:30 [Permalink]
|
Sago, you speak with authority but have yet to address where the targeting civilian infrastructure hypothesis came from. Why not read Hersh's article in the New Yorker before arguing like we are all just giving our personal opinions here?
http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/060821fa_fact |
|
|
|
Sago
New Member
USA
30 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2006 : 18:54:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
quote:
Sago:
The ambulance is a good example of pure and simple lies bought hook line and sinker by the apologists for the real terrorists, like you.
For someone concerned about the use of hyperbolic language, I think that the above quote is hypocritical to the extreme.
What's hypocritical? I meant what I said. Apologists can be deliberate or ignorant, or just plain fools; otherwise well defined long ago as the "useful idiots"; I'm sure you know by whom. Le plus ca change le plus c'est la meme choise. |
|
|
|
Sago
New Member
USA
30 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2006 : 19:09:40 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
Sago, you speak with authority but have yet to address where the targeting civilian infrastructure hypothesis came from. Why not read Hersh's article in the New Yorker before arguing like we are all just giving our personal opinions here?
http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/060821fa_fact
Your issue with "civilian infrastructure" is based on your obvious biases from the begining. Tell me this; how is it that Beirut airport is already open? Do you think it accidental that Israel only put a few hole in the runways because they are bad shots? Holes that could be filled in a day or two?
Tell me also what countries you know of that have roads and bridges exclusively reserved for "military" (terrorist groups or not) use, and others for civilian? Tell me of any rational war strategy that involves allowing free travle for your oponents?
Tell me how it came about that most of Lebanon continued to have electric power for the duration?
Tell me where you think Hezbulla hid their weapons?
Tell me what their uniforms looked like?
Tell me what OUTRAGE you expressed about 4000 missiles with reduced explosives to allow for more ballbearings, shot randomly into Israeli civilian areas!!
Don't quote me cutsie insights from the New Yorker to justify how you oppose anyone who opposes terrorists.
You have my contempt.
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
