An example of zero tolerance for disinformation, but not at NPR

"This is an example of zero tolerance for disinformation,” the official said. “If this goes unchallenged, then it becomes the conventional and accepted wisdom. It needs to be corrected.”

TS..
CAMERA Snapshots..
10 September '13..

In the Friday, Aug. 30 edition of NPR's "The Diane Rehm Show," substitute host Steve Roberts allows an egregious false charge against Israel to pass without challenge. In a discussion about potential international strikes in Syria, the confounded "Frank" of Charlotte, N.C., who confuses Syria's Basher Assad with Egypt's Anwar Sadat, pipes in at 35 minutes, 29 seconds into the show:

Oh hi, okay. I was wondering where Sadat (sic) or the guy from Syria where he got his chemical weapons from and I'd like to make a comment. Okay, during the Israeli invasion of Gaza they used chemical weapons that actually killed children. That's a war crime. Are we going to be bombing them too? That's what I'd like...

Neither the host nor any of the three guests (Abderrahim Foukara, Washington bureau chief of Al Jazeera Arabic; Elise Labott, CNN foreign affairs reporter; and Howard LaFranchi, foreign affairs correspondent at The Christian Science Monitor) made any attempt to refute Frank's false charge.

Instead, taking a page out of C-SPAN's book, host Roberts states:

Thank you very much. What do you think, Abderrahim?

Al Jazeera's Foukara then addresses the question about the source of Assad's chemical weapons.

It's unfortunate that a caller who has trouble distinguishing between Sadat and Assad made it past the show's screeners. (Of course, it's possible that he misled about his intended comments.) It's also a pity that a show that promises "thoughtful and lively discussions" let a blatant falsehood stand.

As the British Observer stated in a correction Sunday (Sept. 8):

Benson - Media Smokescreen Ties the IDF’s Hands

Pesach Benson..
Honest Reporting/Backspin..
26 January '12..

Here’s a classic example of media coverage tying the IDF’s hands.

The IDF’s debating the use phosphorus shells in future Gaza action. According to the Jerusalem Post, the debate focuses on PR damage, not operational considerations.

The shells — made in the US and approved for NATO use — are legal to use in populated areas to illuminate or mark targets and to create a smokescreen for troops. But that’s not what the army brass is concerned about.

The JPost writes:

Images of the exploding shells – appearing like a white octopus – featured widely in the press during Operation Cast Lead and it took the IDF days before it confirmed that it was using shells that contain white phosphorus in Gaza . . . .

While the shell’s use is said to be critical in assisting ground operations in urban terrain like Gaza and Lebanon, there is an ongoing debate within the IDF whether it should be used in a future operation in Gaza due to the potential public relations damage it could cause Israel.

Earlier this month, The Jerusalem Post revealed that the IDF General Staff had instructed the Southern Command to complete preparations for a large-scale operation in Gaza within the coming months.

“There is no question that the use of the shell caused Israel’s image unbelievable damage, since a number of NGOs claimed that its use was a war crime,” one defense official said this week.

Let’s clear the air.

Phosphorous shells fired into Israel downplayed

Just Journalism
16 September '10

Coverage in the broadsheets today has addressed the news of increased violence emanating from Gaza, including reports that two of the 10 rockets launched at Israel from the strip on Tuesday carried phosphorous warheads.

Articles in The Independent, The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph all reported the use of the phosphorous shells which were fired into the Eshkol region but none of the articles led with this point. The Times, Financial Times and the BBC News website failed to mention it.

When Israel used phosphorous in Gaza in 2009, it was headline news in the British broadsheets, with The Times claiming to have broken the story and Israel facing accusations of war crimes. Yet today’s scant coverage in the media about Gaza’s use of phosphorous against Israel did not contain any reference to war crimes.

(Read full report)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Does Anyone Care That Hamas Is Now Using Phosphorus Bombs?

Daled Amos
16 September '10

The Goldstone Commission was concerned about how phosphorus bombs were used during Operation Cast Lead--but that was only because Israel was using them, even though they were used for the smoke and not for the damage it can cause.

Hamas was also using phosphorus bombs during that very same time. On January 14, 2009, Haaretz reported: For the first time, Gaza militants fire phosphorus shell at Israel:

Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip on Wednesday fired their first phosphorus shell into Israel, which exploded in an open area in the Eshkol area in the western Negev.

No injuries or damage were reported.

The phosphorus shell came as Gaza militants fired at least 16 rockets at southern Israel throughout the day Wednesday, causing no casualties.

White phosphorus is not considered a chemical weapon. Militaries are permitted under laws of warfare to use it in artillery shells, bombs and rockets to create smoke screens to hide troop movements as well as bright bursts in the air to illuminate battlefields at night.

However, the substance can cause serious burns if it touches the skin and can spark fires on the ground.

Human Rights Watch on Sunday accused Israel of firing artillery shells packed with white phosphorus over populated areas of Gaza during recent fighting, including a crowded refugee camp, putting civilians at risk.

Israel maintains that it uses munitions in complete accordance with international law.

(Read full post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Cloud of Questions Over Ha'aretz's White Phosphorous Story

Tamar Sternthal
CAMERA Media Analysis
01 February '10

If the prominent, page-one headline and lead article in Ha'aretz today are to be believed, Human Rights Watch's March 2009 report accusing Israel of the indiscriminate use of white phosphorous against the civilian population during the Gaza Strip fighting last winter — a war crime — got a slight boost.

The double-decker headline, spanning six columns, announces: "Two IDF officers disciplined for using white phosphorous in Gaza offensive." The subhead gives additional detail: "Army's internal probe into shelling of UNRWA facility found that two officers 'exceeded their authority in a manner that jeopardized the lives of others.'" The headlines are followed by a five-column AFP photograph depicting exploding white phosphorous shells over the Gaza Strip, with inset headshots of Ilan Malka, Yoav Gallant, and Eyal Eisenberg (the two officers allegedly involved and the head of the southern command).

The article by Anshel Pfeffer (not pictured above, it begins below the photograph), begins:

An Israel Defense Forces brigadier general and another officer with the rank of colonel endangered human life during last year's military campaign in the Gaza Strip by firing white phosphorous munitions in the direction of a compound run by UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, the Israeli government says.

The finding acknowledges, at least in part, allegations by international organizations. It was contained in a report that the government provided to the United Nations over the weekend in response to last September's Goldstone Commission report.

Gaza Division Commander Brig. Gen. Eyal Eisenberg and Givati Brigade Commander Col. Ilan Malka, were the subject of disciplinary action by GOC Southern Command Maj. Gen. Yoav Gallant after headquarters staff found that the men exceeded their authority in approving the use of phosphorous shells that endangered human life, the Israeli government report said.

(Read full report)
.