Here we go again...
.jpg)
Yesterday, an Israeli reserve battalion commander, three Lebanese soldiers and one Lebanese journalist were killed when Lebanese forces opened fire on IDF soldiers performing routine maintenance work by the security fence near the border.
The Israelis were using a crane on their side of the border with Lebanon to remove a tree in order to improve the line of sight and thus prevent Hezbollah terrorists from hiding in the undergrowth and carrying out attacks or kidnapping. The routine work had been cleared in advance with UNIFIL. The Israelis did not cross the Lebanese border. This was confirmed at an early stage by UNIFIL. Ha’aretz also reported the Lebanese confirming they had fired first:
The Lebanese Army was first to open fire in the recent fatal border clash with Israel Defense Forces soldiers, a Lebanese source told the Lebanese newspaper A-Nahar on Wednesday.
So this was an unprovoked attack by Lebanese forces upon the Israelis, with the salient facts of the incident confirmed by UNIFIL yesterday.
Of course, it was not reported as such. Many if not most media outlets reported the incident merely as ‘Israeli claims versus Lebanese claims’, or even gave preference to the Lebanese claims. And as so often, it appears that much of this misleading reporting can be put down to misleading wire service reports, which routinely find their way into even staff-bylined news reports.
As Honest Reporting has written:
As is so often the case in any incident involving Israel, official Israeli statements were ignored in favor of Lebanese accusations that the IDF had crossed into Lebanese territory, a theme taken up by wire services such as Reuters, which describes the crane being located on the Lebanese side of the border.’
Similarly, the Associated Press also wrongly stated the location for many hours after the incident before issuing a correction.
As Just Journalism has noted, while both the Guardian and the Daily Telegraph acknowledged UNIFIL’s statement that the Israelis had not crossed the border, Robert Fisk’s story in the Independent was wildly slanted to the point of absurdity:
Ignoring Israel's claims that it had been operating within its own border, and had in fact coordinated its maintenance work with UNIFIL beforehand, Fisk states simply that, ‘No one is exactly sure where the Israeli-Lebanese border is.’ UNIFIL's statement today would be meaningless if this were the case. Even whilst clarifying that the Blue Line does not necessarily run along the technical fence, Fisk observes only that, ‘from the Lebanese perspective’, the ‘technical fence’ is behind the border.
Fisk also cites the Lebanese narrative that had the LAF ‘open[ing] fire into the air’ when the IDF crossed the fence, precipitating Israelis return of fire targeting Lebanese troops. According to Fisk, it was only after Israel had killed three LAF soldiers and a Lebanese journalist that the LAF ‘on orders from Beirut, fired back and killed an Israeli lieutenant-colonel.’
At no point does Fisk present the Israeli sequence of events that was widely circulated yesterday and as described by IDF Lt Col Avital Leibovich in a conference call in which Just Journalism participated:
When asked about the LAF's claim that its forces first fired into the air, then at Israeli troops, Leibovich responded that it was not the Israeli maintenance crew itself that was first targeted by gunfire, but rather a gathering of senior IDF commanders who were standing nearby, a clear sign, she maintained, of a Lebanese 'provocation'.
Instead, Fisk writes suggestively that ‘Israel said the whole thing was a misunderstanding’, a claim clearly contradicted by Leibovich’s insistence that ‘we put responsibility [for the violence] on the Lebanese Armed Forces’.
But much more disturbingly still, what were the media doing there in the first place when this incident happened? As soon as it became clear yesterday that pictures of the incident were circulating virtually as soon as it had happened, the blogosphere started buzzing with suspicions that the ambush had been a staged and co-ordinated media event – something which also does not seem to have penetrated the consciousness of the mainstream media. Honest Reporting observes:
An AP report on the incident places Ronith Daher, a Lebanese journalist and the photographer of the above image, at the scene. Evidently, someone from Reuters was also there to take the previous image. But why were they there in the first place taking photographs before the incident even occurred?
After all, pruning foliage is hardly headline news on an ordinary day unless something out of the ordinary was expected. UNIFIL and through it, the Lebanese Army, had been notified of the IDF's routine maintenance and even UNIFIL now admits that the Lebanese fire was unwarranted.
Also according to AP, a Lebanese journalist with the daily Al-Akhbar newspaper, Assaf Abu Rahhal, was killed when an Israeli shell landed next to him in the border village of Adeisseh. Al-Akhbar is reportedly associated with Hezbollah and has been denounced by Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt as being funded by Syria and Iran. So what was Abu Rahhal doing in the area exposing himself to IDF counter-fire?
A Reuters photographer was also on the scene in Adeisseh capturing the moments in the immediate aftermath of the IDF retaliation that led to the deaths of Abu Rahhal and three Lebanese soldiers. It is an open secret that parts of the Lebanese Army have been infiltrated by Hezbollah sympathisers and operatives. So information shared by Israel with UNIFIL and the Lebanese Army invariably finds its way to Hezbollah.
Was this incident a staged and pre-planned ambush as evidenced by the presence of photographers and journalists even before the exchange of fire? Were these journalists there precisely because they had advance notice of a potential flashpoint?
In an interview this morning with Israeli Army Radio, Hungarian diplomat Milos Strugar, political adviser to the UNIFIL commander, said that the work carried out by the IDF along the border with Lebanon took place within Israeli territory and was coordinated ahead of time with the Lebanese army through UNIFIL.
But David Frankfurter observes that UNIFIL’s role in yesterday’s incident raises more questions than it answers:
It is clear from the photographs and videos issued by international news agencies very quickly after the clash that the incident was prepared for and staged. Photographs and footage was prepared to be sent out within minutes before the truth surfaced, leaving an indelible media impression. It is also clear from the photographs that as the scene unfolds, until seconds before the actual firing takes place, the UNIFIL forces were relaxed and at ease with the snipers and RPG gunners taking careful aim at the Israelis. Then something strange happens. A video shown on Israeli TV, taken and directly translated to Hebrew from first footage gives the Lebanese version. From about 5 seconds into the video, UNIFIL soldiers start waving and shouting at the Israelis to ‘stop’, ‘stop everything’, ‘get down’ and ‘go back’. Were they staging a show for the cameras? Given that UNIFIL knew that the IDF was in Israeli territory and that there was no reason for the Lebanese to fire, why did they shout at the Israelis to stop? Wouldn’t it have been their job to uphold UN resolutions and tell the Lebanese to hold their fire?
Indeed. So why didn’t they? In an authoritative strategic analysis, Yosef Bodansky offers an uncomfortable answer to all these questions. For he suggests that this was not merely a Lebanese act of aggression with the connivance of UNIFIL but a Hezbollah operation:
1) The incident started as a pre-planned pre-meditated provocation against the Israeli patrol on the basis of information provided via UNIFIL. The mere invitation by the Army of the Al-Akhbar correspondent to cover the clash suggests that this was a pre-planned incident. The incident was conducted jointly by Lebanese Army forces and HizbAllah forces, proving that the close cooperation which HizbAllah leader Hassan Nasrallah had boasted about repeatedly is indeed working (at least with the Army’s Shi’ite units such as the 9th Division).
2). Earlier, on Monday, August 2, 2010, HizbAllah and Iranian media warned that the Israeli cabinet had considered ‘the prospects of an upcoming war on the Lebanese, Syrian and Gaza fronts in anticipation of tensions on the Lebanese domestic scene’ because of the impending indictment of senior HizbAllah officials by the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL). The HizbAllah, Syria, and Iran are calling on all Lebanese to ignore the STL and instead rally and close ranks behind the ‘Resistance’ in order to confront the Israeli threat. Under these circumstances, the incident on the Israeli-Lebanese border should be considered a made-to-order ‘proof’ of the HizbAllah and Iranian warnings.
... However, the main event in the aftermath of the clash is an anticipated major speech by Hassan Nasrallah. The speech was scheduled for 20:30 on August 3, 2010 (Lebanon time), but its exact time was being constantly changed. Senior HizbAllah officials predict that Nasrallah’s speech ‘will mark a turning point’ for Lebanon and the entire Middle East. They explained that Nasrallah would ‘focus on the national and Islamic dimension of the July [2006] war’ and its implications for the current situation in the entire region. Nasrallah’s speech, the Senior HizbAllah officials stress, ‘will mainly be devoted to talk about the meaning of victory against Israel’ in both past wars and in the historic confrontation still to come.
Given the above, the August 2, 2010, rocket firing from southern Sinai of Aqaba, Eilat, and a base of the US-led Multinational Force & Observers Organization in Sinai might also be part of this kind of made-to-order “proof” of Israeli aggression. Significantly, the six 122mm GRAD rockets fired from Sinai were made in Iran or North Korea, strongly suggesting that the perpetrators were Iran-sponsored main group rather than a Palestinian fringe entity.
About the strategic significance of these events and their possibly momentous consequences for the region and world peace, the western public is today -- thanks to the uselessness and worse of the mainstream media -- almost wholly ignorant.
Previous
Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Alex Massie | Coffee House | Faith Based
Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (59)
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
Popular Blog Posts
1 Yes campaign launch will cause problems — for the independence movement - Ysenda Maxtone Graham
2 Obama vs Balls - edited by Graham Storey, Margaret Brown and Kathle
3 Cameron's attack on Balls is strangely endearing - Lloyd Evans
4 Susie Squire to take over as Tory press chief - James Forsyth
5 What Farage's offer means for David Cameron - James Forsyth
Search this blog
Melanie Phillips is a Daily Mail columnist. She also writes for the Jewish Chronicle and is a panellist on BBC Radio Four's Moral Maze. Her most recent book is 'The World Turned Upside Down: The Global Battle over God, Truth and Power', published by Encounter.
For a complete set of Melanie's articles click here
Melanie Phillips blog archive
sponsored links
THE PRESENT FINDER
1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk
OLIVE BRANCH FLORISTS
Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844
RUFFS Bespoke Signet rings
62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk
Apollo Magazine | Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2012 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
Augustus
August 4th, 2010 3:59pmIf the Israelis gave UNIFIL notice of their intention to carry out work within the borders between the fences, were the Lebanese told? Time for
answers from the UN. That is if they can pull themselves away from their spectator sport of watching Hezbollah restock their
deadly weapons in breach of UN Resolution 1701.
Ricky
August 4th, 2010 4:03pmMelanie - take a look at the Biased BBC website. They not only echo your position but provide further evidence of Western judeophobia, particularly at the BBC.
The BBC is one of the most on-message propaganda services for terror bosses worldwide - with their romantic attachment to left wing causes and violent Islamic fundamentalism.
And as part of the BBC's insidious attempts to indoctrinate us all in an endless homage to their pet cause, we have been treated to a series on Islam and Science (BBC4).
Notably, the programme barely mentioned the fact that most scientific advances claimed by Islam actually originated in Greece or in India, such as algebra.
How about a programme on Science & Judaism - considering the huge number of Jewish nobel prize winners and the remarkable achievements in technology in Israel right now? Most unlikely, from the nation's State Broadcaster.
The number of Muslim Nobel Prize winners for Science - just one.
Yet another reason to dump the BBC and it's pampered, publicly funded revolutionaries.
The unfortunate thing is that their unpleasant bias against the Jews costs lives and encourages Israel's enemies.
LK
August 4th, 2010 4:10pmI suspect the attack was done by the (mostly Sunni/Christian) Lebanese army in order to win the approval of Shiites at a time of possible sectarian tension over the Hariri tribunal. The Shiites are extremely angry about the tribunal and seeing the army attack Israel could placate them to an extent.
Oflife
August 4th, 2010 4:35pmIsrael doesn't have any oil. The case for the de-Fence rests.
jim comfort
August 4th, 2010 4:47pmAs always Melanie says what is happening, and says it well. Well done Melanie.
TomTom
August 4th, 2010 4:52pmWere they Lebanese soldiers or Hisbollah in Lebanese uniforms ? Obviously Israeli artillery or mortars will need to deal with trees in future.
EDDIE
August 4th, 2010 4:54pmThank goodness that we can get the facts in detail from Melanie who is an outstanding ethical Journalist. I cannot think of anywhere else that I could find this out so quickly. I had not thought about the significance of the Journalist casualty who was present at the incident. I always knew that the UN would never honour their treaty obligations to disarm hezbollah. I used to read Fisk in The Times when that paper used to have an almost a daily two page spread on Israel ( never mind the rest of the world). He is still sending out the same sort of rubbish.
Ricky
August 4th, 2010 5:31pmAnother point about Hezbollah.....they are implicated in a series of political assassinations in Lebanon and the UN were about to announce it, but did not...and there is strong evidence that child soldiers were used by Hezbollah in the front line during the last Israel-Lebanon war.
A point not raised by Jeremy Bowen, of course. Or the human rights industry.
AY
August 4th, 2010 8:02pmUNIFIL forces there were Indonesians.
Israel must demand investigation from UN and Lebanon, compensation and punishing those who provided logistical support to terrorists. Call Goldstone, for dog's sake.
But IDF performed satisfactory, despite not powerful enough. The most valuable price from organizers' viewpoint should have been UNIFIL bodies, the more, the better. For that purpose, UNIFIL were placed among terrorists wearing Lebanese uniforms, who then opened fire. But IDF identified places of sniper ambush and did them first.
One of possible actions for future (as it is clearly only a beginning), - is to keep an eye on most expensive military hardware in possession of Lebanon, and after next provocation take it out all at once - with or without warning. And then ask Obama (as it is most likely American-made) - WTF dear ally, is it an intended use of Your contribution to peace and stability.
One thing is really astounding that hard to comprehend - do these imbeciles really want war?
Neil Turner
August 4th, 2010 8:20pmYou're right Melanie.
Sky reported this tonight in their usual "six of one, half a dozen of the other" style
I had already seen the Honest Reporting piece, so had braced myself
The Media is the perpetrator here. Also, no condemnation from the UN or UK Government of the Lebanese actions
NumberCruncher
August 4th, 2010 8:43pmI have complained to the BBC as follows:
"Title: Reporting of an incident in which Lebanese soldiers opened fire on Israeli engineers in Israel failed to report up to date information, thereby giving the impression that Israeli forces were in some way responsible.
At approximately 0830 hrs 4 Aug 10 I heard a news report, the latest I heard in a series of reports that morning on the Todau Programme, that there had been an exchange of fire between Lebanese and Israeli troops on the Israel/Lebanon border. The report stated that (I paraphrase) the Lebanese Government had stated that it would defend itself against any Israeli aggression, the Israelis deny any wrongdoing, and Hezbollah had stated that it would back the Lebanese forces in fighting Israeli aggression.
This item, and others in the same programme, did not report news already available through open sources from at least 2205 hrs the previous evening, that UNIFIL had stated that the Israelis were on the Israeli side of the border, no incursion had taken place and the Lebanese had fired first and without provocation. It did not state other information freely available prior to its broadcast: that the Israelis had informed UNIFIL of their intent to clear scrub from land within Israel but on the Lebanese side of the security fences, that a wide strip of land exists between the security fence and the Blue Line, and that the Israelis had been accompanied by UNIFIL soldiers and civilian media. I choose not to refer to published speculation of Lebanese/Hezbollah intent on this occasion; the simple facts of Israeli action confirmed by UNIFIL are enough.
Instead, Lebanese and Hezbollah vitriol had been faithfully reported along with a bland denial from Israeli sources. This is either journalistic ineptitude or bias against Israel."
I will let you know what the response is. Ms Phillips: please keep up the good work.
Jes
August 4th, 2010 9:30pmWhat did "call me Dave" say.
"As a friend of Israel" Did he issue a condemnation of both sides
Adam B.
August 4th, 2010 11:00pmAccording to the BBC, "clashes erupted" - as if spontaneously. No mention that the Lebanese fired first, no mention that they had a Lebanese press corps there waiting, who had obviously been tipped off in advance that something was going to happen, and credence given to Lebanon's version of events.
They even said that the clashes were "caused by Israel" because Israel was cutting down a tree - (within its own borders!)
The BBC stinks.
david elder
August 4th, 2010 11:09pmIntrepid agent Robert Fisk again triumphs over the forces of evil, this time by moving the border. Is there anything this man cannot do? Maybe the US can hire him to solve its southern border security problem - agent Fisk can simply shift the border so the illegals are still stuck in Mexico even if they're halfway to Washington.
Sam Vega
August 5th, 2010 12:11amThe link purporting to verify the confirmation by UNIFIL that IDF did not cross the border is in fact to an article in The Jerusalem Post. This shows an aerial picture of the scene, which is not contemporaneous and cannot settle the matter one way or the other. It says that a UNIFIL representative "reportedly confirmed" their version of events.
It may well be the case that Israelis were fired upon while standing on their side of the border. I consider it highly likely. But if Ms. Phillips' account is true, it deserves better presentation than this.
Seamus
August 5th, 2010 12:21amFirstly Milos Strugar is Serbian and not Hungarian. Secondly the Blue line is still a disputed line and a point which was declared in the UN statement. This is an obvious point given that Israel still occupied parts of Lebanon and therefore the Blue Line is still not a legal demarcation but merely a boundary. As such this was an isolated and unfortunate attack which has left families without sons on both sides of the border. As ever an investigation will have to follow and reparations should be paid accordingly. However one should note how willing and quickly Israel are to comply with an international investigation compared to a month ago following the flotilla raid.
David SI
August 5th, 2010 3:51amSeamus, for the purposes of this incident, there isn’t any contention whatsoever about the blue line as you claim. The Blue Line is a border demarcation between Lebanon and Israel published by the United Nations on 7 June 2000 for the purposes of determining whether Israel had fully withdrawn from Lebanon. UNFIL confirmed that the tree in question was on the Israeli side of that line. It also confirmed that UNFIL had been notified 6 hours beforehand by the Israeli authorities that they would be working on the tree. It is clear that a sniper shot a Lt.Colonel of the IDF that was standing nearby without any provocation whatsoever.
You write as if this were a crime scene enacted on some third rate detective series in which an investigation (and reparations!) makes clear the identity of the culprit (‘Voice-over: “And this time folks, Israel’s going to be more cooperative that previously!”) . But this isn’t a new episode of CSI. Instead, it’s part of an ongoing war which is in danger of exploding very shortly. Whilst your ‘keystone-cops’ investigation into this latest skirmish may bring a smile to faces of the respective combatants, they – unlike you - are under no illusion about what’s really happening and what the consequences will be.
Raoul Schur
August 5th, 2010 6:09amDavid Cameron condemned BOTH sides in a knee-jerk reaction. Is he going to retract? Or is he simply trying to conform to the hopefully questionable anti-Israel image that Shimon Peres painted.
Bob
August 5th, 2010 6:10amThe BEEB is a far left, fruit juice drinking, museli eating,
open toed with socks sandal wearing, fat gutted overhanging the belt organization, that supports and nurses anything that is against Britain and the British in particular, and Western Civilization in general.
And when it come to Israel NO NIT IS TOO SMALL TO PICK
It is run by elderly relics from 1930's Cambridge who fagged for Burgess and MacClean etc, and who put on a show of being in touch "wiv yoof" to shove their twisted vision of
multiculty Britain down the throats of the young and impressionable.
phil
August 5th, 2010 9:43amHas the expression "to be fisked" now passed as common usage into the Oxford dictionary?-Would it have the description "to be informed" or "to be "deceived" ?
Tanja Strugar
August 5th, 2010 9:51amMilos Strugar is Serbian, not Hungarian.
Adam B.
August 5th, 2010 10:27amSeamus, why did the Lebanese open fire, with a crowd of journalists on hand? It's not just "one of those things."
Okey
August 5th, 2010 10:35amIt is no exaggeration that the way many sections of the Western intelligentsia have been treating Israel in recent years is similar to the way in which the Nazi propaganda apparatus did, though the early and medieval church must also be held accountable for instilling such enduring hatred into Western culture.
RR
August 5th, 2010 10:59amI asked one of my peace loving (akaIsraeli-hating) friends how man peace walls there were throughout the world - she said one, in Israel. She didn't even know about the one in Belfast - but that's par for the course.
Andy Gill
August 5th, 2010 11:34amCiFWatch has an image of a Guardian headline reporting this incident. The Guardian shrieks "Israel Continues Uprooting Trees on Lebanon Border after Fatal Clash"
http://cifwatch.com/2010/08/04/the-guardian-or-the-onion/
Presumably to avoid further ridicule, the Guardian has now changed that obscenity to read "Tree that sparked deadly border clash on Israeli side, says UN"
The original headline clearly demonstrates how biased the Guardian's Middle East coverage actually is, and reveals a virulent prejudice against Israel.
MArk2
August 5th, 2010 12:44pmThe BBC is now reporting the UNIFIL finding story but you have to be a bit handy to find it. Its just below one about Ahmendinejad nearly getting shot. I wonder if that order would have been the same if Israel had got the worse of he UNIFIL report!
Michael White
August 5th, 2010 1:27pmIntriguing that The Guardian first blamed Israel, then the tree, and now the fence:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/04/lebanon-israel-need-proper-border-agreement
I wonder who else could be to blame?
Diomalco
August 5th, 2010 2:03pmIf the oil wells run dry, Israel will get all the support needed.
Si, N
August 5th, 2010 2:51pmHas the BBC mentioned Israel's continuous breach of resolution 1701?
GaryO
August 5th, 2010 3:24pmNumberCruncher, nice work.
Adam B.
August 5th, 2010 6:08pmSiN, no-one has been in breach of resolution 1701 more than Hizbollah, which has massively rearmed since 2006 - it was a key condition that Hizbollah would not rearm. Now it has more rockets than it did before the summer of '06, approx. 40,000, many of which have the whole of Israel in range.
The Lebanese army staged this incident, which was completely unnecessary, for the cameras, probably as appeasement to the state within a state which has been created by Hizbollah - especially at a time when Hizbollah is being blamed for the assassination of the Lebanese PM, Rafik Hariri.
jacky shovlar
August 5th, 2010 6:22pmWould it not be better for either Isreal and lebanon to talk to each other before doing anything close to the border? Or for someone to clear a half mile or so of all the vegetation along the border. What people seem to forget is that people with guns make mistakes, open fire when they shouldn't, kill civilians by accident, and sometimes deliberately.
Maybe it was a set up for Lebanon to shoot isrealis, with los of biased witnesses, but i'd like a little more information. It would be nice to think that Israel always tells the truth but sadly it doesn't. Lebanon - well i wouldn't trust what they say at all.
Mike Dommett
August 5th, 2010 6:28pmThe UN. Useless?
Well, largely yes. It has no armed forces, it has no funding of its own. It can do what the UN members agree it can do, and what the UN members will pay for. This means any response is likely to be late, and ineffective. Bit like the EU. When you have to get so many people to agree and sign up to anything, nothing happens fast.
When was the UN last on a mission where they had permission to fire and stop any killing? Korea, of course, when the USSR was not turning up and china was Chang Kai shek. Because the permanent members of the security council can block anything they don't like. And we don't mind dictators as long as they support us. The others are the same. This you get Libya and Zimbabwe in seats of authority as buggisn turn comes round.
If we want an effective UN and UN forces we need to make changes. And i can't see us in the UK ever doing that
Augustus
August 5th, 2010 6:30pmSi,N - Resolution 1701 (11/08/2006) was adopted because of the Security Council's "concern at the continuing escalation of hostilities in Lebanon and Israel since Hizbollah's attack on Israel on 12 July, 2006".
Furthermore it also prohibits
"the sale or supply to any entity in Lebanon of arms or related material." So it is Lebanon which is in breach because it is widely known that Hezbollah has been re-stocking
its arsenal which it gets from Iran, Syria and China. These include long-range missiles capable of hitting Tel Aviv.
So much for your pretentious comment!
alyson wilson
August 5th, 2010 6:31pmReading the comments about the BBC here makes me realise how we need Fox News over here as soon as possible. Jeremy Hunt is a good aly in this, and he will clip the BBC wings so we can hear the truth instead through Rupert Murdoch
Steve
August 5th, 2010 6:46pmSi N,
How exactly is Israel supposed to be perpetrating a "...continuous breach of resolution 1701..."
Have you any idea what you are talking about or is this something you've read in the Guardian?
T1Brit
August 5th, 2010 10:59pmIt was definitely staged - it is to muddy the waters after 1: the hamas rockets that landed in Jordan ( embarrassing), killing a taxi-driver last week and 2: the upcoming revelation that hezbollah was involved in the murder of the Lebanese PM Rafic Hariri.
Lee Jakeman
August 6th, 2010 3:51amYou could sum up today's "objectivity" thus:
"Which Jew fired first?"
JohnW
August 6th, 2010 4:46am"...makes me realise how we need Fox News over here as soon as possible..."
If only. I mentioned this to Mel a few years ago and was told it was against the law in the UK to set up such a channel in competition with Al Beeb. I cannot understand why this should be.
Derek BLADES
August 6th, 2010 12:37pmI found this snippet interesting: "Also according to AP, a Lebanese journalist with the daily Al-Akhbar newspaper, Assaf Abu Rahhal, was killed when an Israeli shell landed next to him in the border village of Adeisseh."
I am sure it did not land there by accident. Are we to understand that IDF troops fire at will into Lebanese territory killing whomsoever they deem to be terrorists? Does the Lebanese army claim the same latitude?
John Holland
August 6th, 2010 3:32pmYeah- Fox News. That's really what we need. Swivel-eyed carpet-chewing not even really pretending to be news. However biased the BBC might be, anyone who thinks Fox is less so isn't even trying. Yes, it agrees with you. According to my dictionary though, that is not the simple definition of objective truth you like to think it is.
Anyone, "Okey", who seriously thinks there's a commensurate equivalence between the reletavely pro-Arab bias of much of the Western intellegencia and the Nazis' gassing of 6 million Jews is historically illiterate and morally bankrupt.
Adam B.
August 6th, 2010 4:48pmNo Derek - the journalists were called to witness the event, before it happened. They were with the Lebanese troops to get a good scoop. The Lebanese opened fire on the Israelis who were within Israel's own borders. Israel responded with a single tank shell, killing three Lebanese troops, apparently snipers, and one of the journalists who was with them.
Lebanese culpability. Case closed.
Bernadette Lacroix Bjornson
August 6th, 2010 4:52pmAs in the case of the "Sabine Women"-the only way to solve this sorry proplem is to force instant inter marriage.This will not be of any use-that is until the children are born.
The children will be beautiful and as a tree is a symbol of peace-the children should be the promise of hope.
Derek BLADES
August 7th, 2010 12:35amAdam B. should read the blog more carefully. It starts with these words “Yesterday, an Israeli reserve battalion commander, three Lebanese soldiers and one Lebanese journalist were killed…..” But on reading further it turns out that a fifth Lebanese man was killed “when an Israeli shell landed next to him in the border village of Adeisseh.” This fifth person - Assaf Abu Rahhal – is alleged to have been “funded by Syria and Iran”and the blog asks, in bold to give emphasis, “So what was Abu Rahhal doing in the area exposing himself to IDF counter-fire?” This fifth casualty was not reported by UNIFIL as being related to the border incident. Curious! Perhaps deaths by Israeli shells landing next to people is such a run of the mill event in the border area that UNIFIL no longer bothers to mention them.
Incidentally, UNIFIL seems to have come out of this business rather well. They accurately reported the incident, making it clear that the Israelis were in their own territory and that the Lebanese were the first to fire. Moreover, the UNIFIL troops made valiant attempts to defuse the incident by telling the Israelis to get back when it became apparent that the Lebanese were preparing to open fire. Even though these particular troops were Indonesians, (Moslem soldiers shock horror) I believe we should all recognise that the United Nations is providing an indispensable service in the Middle East. Not just feeding the Gazans but also striving to keep the peace between trigger-happy warriors along Israel’s borders.
Ian Hills
August 7th, 2010 5:25amI wonder how many media people should be gaoled for the crimes of "incitement to violence" and "incitement to murder"? Their long propaganda campaign for the IRA having succeeded in the admission of its political wing to the government of Northern Ireland - as sanctified by terror judge Savile - they can now concentrate more fully on helping Hizbollah and Hamas to drive all the Jews into the sea. Even if these media terrorists never face gaol in this country, they should certainly be extradited to Israel to face trial for similar offences. By the way, how many people know that the BBC helped set up Al Jazeera?
Adam B.
August 7th, 2010 11:29amBlades makes an extraordinary accusation:
"Perhaps deaths by Israeli shells landing next to people is such a run of the mill event in the border area that UNIFIL no longer bothers to mention them..."
Really? Perhaps then you can provide examples of this - or is this just your prejudice speaking?
For the most part, UN troops in the Middle East are useless - I have seen them getting drunk in the bars of Tel Aviv or Netanya, and are especialy good at looking for prostitutes. That's usually all they do.
Derek BLADES
August 7th, 2010 12:18pmIan Hills asks "...how many people know that the BBC helped set up Al Jazeera?"
I did not know it but that explains a lot. Al Jazeera is topical, it employs intelligent interviewers and reporters, has excellent world-wide news coverage and is, in short, a professional news service of the highest standard. It just seemed to pop up from nowhere but was firing on four cylinders from day one. The BBC World Service (radio and television) sets the global standards for fair and impartial news reporting and I am delighted to learn that the BBC provided professional guidance to Al Jazeera. That must explain how it has achieved such high standards in so short a time.
Adam B.
August 7th, 2010 3:40pmThere has been a recurring pattern expressed on this blog - those who have an irrational and obsessive hatred of the Jewish state think the BBC is great.
Why would that be?
John Holland
August 7th, 2010 6:28pmAdam B.- Your'e right, any form of criticism is indeed synonymous with
irrational and obsessive hatred.
That is an excellent premise with which to frame any debate. Anyone who suggests otherwise is worse than a Nazi.
Josef
August 7th, 2010 8:16pmYet another biased piece of reporting on this incident by the BBC. One thing I have never been able to understand about this public funded broadcaster, with it's pro Islamic 'fighters' agenda is why this reverence for doughty resistance against the Israeli 'agressor' was never replicated in it's own backyard war with the IRA. Here the IRA were routinely desribed as 'terrorists' with no attempt being made to investigate what motivated them. British army atrocities and collusion with anti catholic death squads was glossed over and never investigated either. Double sttandards or what?
fulcra1537
August 8th, 2010 1:22amJosef
Shome mishtake surely?....
To my certain knowledge the BBC was never in some sort of state of private war with the IRA as you seem to imply.Your thesis is pure nonsense.
BBC reporting throughout the troubles maintained a consistent anti Unionist bias and it was after the BBC interviewed Martin McGuinness in 1988 that the then Conservative government placed a ban on the transmission of the voices of both Republican and Loyalist paramilitaries
Then there was the Panorama programme "Death on the Rock",which purported to anticipate the findings of an inquiry set up for that purpose and more or less indicted the military for the preemptive killing of 3 IRA operatives who were planning to perpetrate a major atrocity on Gibraltar in 1988.
The IRA through its Sinn Fein mouthpieces,who well knew how to play the soft guilt ridden middle class liberal conscience which is the hallmark of so much of the BBC's output,consequently had its aims regularly force fed to a public audience it was at the same time doing its best to kill and maim
Your contention concerning British Army atrocities and official collusion with Loyalist death squads is both lazy and insulting.Counter insurgency is invariably a dirty business
and unpleasant decisions sometimes have to be taken in order to save lives. At Gibraltar that meant the deaths of 3 experienced and highly dangerous terrorists,unarmed or not, in exchange for the saving of many more lives had they been allowed to execute their plans unmolested.In that light it was a pretty fair exchange.
steve bronfman
August 8th, 2010 2:19amObviously Hezballah was trying to start a conflict to take the attention away from the soon to be UN report on the Harari Murder (they and/or Syria committed). They did exactly the same thing prior to the last Lebanon War.
Dipper
August 8th, 2010 9:42amTom Marshall (Sky Foreign Affairs Editor) discusses Gaza on his podcast "pimping my blockade". He makes many of the points made here by Melanie and others about Gaza.
Adam B.
August 8th, 2010 10:47amI notice Blades has not provided an example of his accusation.
John Holland, it would help if you were acquainted with prior exchanges before jumping to conclusions.
phil
August 8th, 2010 5:51pmJohn Holland
August 7th, 2010 6:28pm
your quote "Adam B.- You're right, any form of criticism is indeed synonymous with
irrational and obsessive hatred.
That is an excellent premise with which to frame any debate. Anyone who suggests otherwise is worse than a Nazi."-----------------OR maybe just a smart alec mr hollamd?Adam B although undoubtedly biased is usually right ,can we say the same about your comments?
Dipper
August 8th, 2010 9:38pmTim Marshall obviously ...
Josef
August 9th, 2010 12:29amFulcra I537.
As this blog often brings out criticisms regarding the misreporting of Israel's actions by the BBC it is certainly appropriate that attention is focussed on double standards within that organisation.
This has obviously hit a sore spot with you given your blinkered rant on the Northern Irish troubles!
Whatever you say, it is a matter of record that the BBC gave the British Army a soft ride during their deployment in Northern Ireland. When you state that reference to British Army atrocities is 'Lazy and Insulting, you obviously missed the Brtiish Prime Minister's recent unambigious apology in the House of Commons for the murder of civilians in Derry by the Parachute Regiment during 1972.
If you take time to consult the BBC archives on this event you will find that the Army's contention that they were responding to 'terrorist' actions on that day was pretty much completely accepted by the BBC in its reporting of the atrocity.
This uncritical coverage of British Army activities was a feature of BBC news footage throughout the troubles. Again a trawl of their archives will support this contention, despite occasional honourable exceptions such as the Panorama programme that you mention. When did you last hear the BBC refer to the Taliban or Hezbollah as 'terrorisrt'? This appellation was routinely used to describe IRA members. And in fairness, with justification in most cases. But why the double standards?
However enough of the Northern Irish Troubles as this blog concerns Israel. What is really troubling about some of the postings on this blog, including that of Fulcra 1537 is the evident fact that support of Israel has now almost universally become a right wing cause.
Time was when Israel was seen a a truly liberal cause , evidenced by the assasination of the great civil rights liberal Robert Kennedy in 1968 by a Palestinian, because of Kennedy's support of Israel.
I am would describe myself as a 'liberal conservative' in my outlook. This perception informs my viewpoint on the recent subjugation of Catholics in a part of the United Kingdom, just as much as it sees the absolutley unfair treatment of Israel at the present time by those who should know better.
The illogical stance of most current 'liberals'when it comes to the Middle East will change no doubt as the Facist Islamification of the West continues to develop
Does anything Melanie or others say make the slightest difference to what happens over there?
The great USA & Isreal duped many into thinking everything was yasser Arafat's fault,well he has been dead for a few years now & what has changed?
NOTHING!
Why waste time trying to change the unchangeable or fix the unfixable?
JOHN ROOSEVELT
August 22nd, 2010 9:41am" August 9th, 2010 6:51pm
Does anything Melanie or others say make the slightest difference to what happens over there?
The great USA & Isreal duped many into thinking everything was yasser Arafat's fault,well he has been dead for a few years now & what has changed?
NOTHING!
Why waste time trying to change the unchangeable or fix the unfixable?"
Another scholar of history! Please make us all privvy to how you know this with such certainty and I will tell Hilary to slap Bill right away - for his pernicious lies :))