Posted on 08/29/2006 12:08:31 PM PDT by Alouette
International journalists discuss Lebanon war coverage; NYT bureau chief: Israel 'not interested in Lebanese deaths'
A number of journalists claimed during a convention in Jerusalem Monday evening that Israel and the IDF were mostly to blame for the way the foreign media covered the Lebanon war.
The panel of journalists, largely from the international media, convened to discuss their coverage of the war, at a conference arranged by the Media Line agency's Mideast Press Club.
"Journalists' access to the battlefield is controlled exclusively by the IDF," said Simon McGregor-Wood, Chairman of the Foreign Press Association, and Bureau Chief of ABC News.
"We are very disappointed that the IDF didn't give us more opportunities," he added.
Wood's claims of restricted battlefield access seemed undermined, however, by the London Times' Stephen Farrell, who said: "I spent most of the war within five miles of the border… you have to get up and put your face right up against the glass, and if you can, to put your head through the glass."
Farrell told the panel that the best way to report the war was to witness it first hand, and recounted using binoculars to watch clashes between Hizbullah forces and the IDF.
Responding to the Reuters photo scandal, Farrell said: "I'm not sure I like the allegation that it's local staff who are unreliable. Over the last few years we've seen… apparently respectable, white western American, British, everybody… being sacked and disgraced… integrity is integrity is integrity, whether it's Arab, Israeli, or western."
The New York Time's Jerusalem Bureau Chief, Steven Erlanger, expressed surprise that Israel's view of the war was different to that of its critics, and said that Israelis didn't "quite grasp how the war was perceived outside of Israel."
He lamented the lack of "proportionality" in the war, adding: "This is a charge that came against Israel from the United Nations… the French, the Italians."
The New York Times bureau chief also said that Israelis "were not interested in whether 1,000 Lebanese civilians needed to die," adding that the question of "whether Israel fought a proportional war is not much of interest here (in Israel)."
Erlanger added that during the war, he "took General Yadlin (who briefed the press on IDF operations) too seriously."
'You are free to say what you like about us'
Erlanger told the panel he turned down an offer by the IDF Spokesperson Unit to gain access to IDF efforts aimed at enabling humanitarian aid to reach Lebanon, saying he was not interested in the story.
While other panelists said Hizbullah placed dictatorial control over colleagues reporting from Lebanon, Ernlanger maintained that the only threat faced by his own colleague in Lebanon was posed by "Israeli missiles."
The Associated Press' Chief Jerusalem Correspondent, Ravi Nessman said the casualty count in Lebanon was impossible to confirm: "All we can do is report what everyone's telling us."
"We don't know, even now, the death toll (in Lebanon), still weeks later, it's totally disparate. Did 800 people die, did 1,200 people die. We still don't exactly know," he said.
"We have to rely on the Red Crescent or other rescue officials," Nessman added. "Getting an accurate count is very difficult. We are forced unfortunately to rely on rescue services, because we don't have the capacity to know exactly how many people died," he conceded.
Nessman downplayed the Reuters doctored photo scandal, saying: "It was probably one guy… everyone's working very hard. Everybody is tired. Everybody is overworked. It's very unlikely that the photo editors sat there and said, these are doctored photos, get them on the wires… I'm sure it slipped through. They're trying to do as credible a job as possible."
Nessman also claimed that "there was one real photo scandal in this war, and there were dozens of non-scandals that cropped up."
"Pictures have been faked as long as there have been pictures," remarked the Times' Farrell, citing "commercial imperative" as a factor in the doctored images.
Al-Jazeera's Jerusalem Bureau Chief Walid Omary said his news network had been vilified in Israel, and wrongly accused of abating Hizbullah.
"Al-Jazeera tried to keep good balance in covering this war," Omary said.
"You are free to say what you like about us, in the same way we are free to say what we like about you," the ABC's Simon Wood told the audience, which largely consisted of US immigrants to Israel.
Warning! This is a high-volume ping list.
I'm under a tornado watch. Israels' fault!
In the view of these "journalists" everything from global warming to the kitten coughing up a hairball is "Israel's fault." Unless they're talking about Bush, then its all "Bush's fault." These "journalists" are probably still ticked off that their hotels ran out of Evian and Perrier.
"We are very disappointed that the IDF didn't give us more opportunities,"
How much more opportunity does the MSM want to start telling the truth?
No that would be Karl Rove, his puppet, Pres. Bush, and theri diabolical weather machine. Hey, they supported Israel, so there is a connection for the hate! Yea me!!
"While other panelists said Hizbullah placed dictatorial control over colleagues reporting from Lebanon, Ernlanger maintained that the only threat faced by his own colleague in Lebanon was posed by "Israeli missiles." "
Translation: most media concedes Hezbollah dictated the news, but New York Times can't.
Really? How much access did the Hezzies and the Lebanese government give you, other than for fauxtography sessions?
"The question of whether Israel fought a 'proportional' war is not much of interest here (in Israel)."
No, it isn't. That's because never in the history of warfare has anyone ever heard of the concept of "proportional" war until you jerks in the MSM concocted it as "standard" for Israel to meet.
Funny how the faked photo's always seem to put Israel in a bad light.
No bias though.
/S
High volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. also
2006israelwar or WOT
..................
He lamented the lack of "proportionality" in the war, adding: "This is a charge that came against Israel from the United Nations… the French, the Italians."
The New York Times bureau chief also said that Israelis "were not interested in whether 1,000 Lebanese civilians needed to die," adding that the question of "whether Israel fought a proportional war is not much of interest here (in Israel)."
It is truly frightening how so many get a window to the world through such a mind-bendingly idiotic lens.
This man has no clue about what the true goal of any professional soldier is:
Accomplish the mission without shedding one drop of blood belonging to your men. Professionals do not seek the stand up duel with machine guns at 50 paces or the glorious human wave assaults that are two way carnage -- these "proportioanl actions" mean failure to a professional.
A professional lives for the blind side hit, the ambush, the sucker - punch, the knee in the groin, and the salt in the eyballs upon the enemy.
The professional soldier will consider the day that his men shoot every enemy in the back without him even being aware that you are there, and all of your boys living to ripe old as a success.
Proportional war, indeed. Why did'nt this idiot just come right out and say?
"The Israelis did'nt give the Hez Ballickers enough chances to kill a lot of Israelis"?
"Journalists' access to the battlefield is controlled exclusively by the IDF," said Simon McGregor-Wood, Chairman of the Foreign Press Association, and Bureau Chief of ABC News."
In contrast to the free access to staged scenes Hezbollah promoted.
The charge of lack of proportion means - we would be happy if more Israelis died.
consider this:
While other panelists said Hizbullah placed dictatorial control over colleagues reporting from Lebanon, Ernlanger maintained that the only threat faced by his own colleague in Lebanon was posed by "Israeli missiles."
Erlanger is The New York Times Jerusalem Bureau Chief. Steven
That is, without a doubt, the most absurd thing I have ever heard. "Proportionality" in warfare is a doctrine for losers. I'm sorry Isreal didn't kill a larger proportion of hezbullah.
"Kind hearted people might... think there was some ingenious way to disarm and defeat an enemy without too much bloodshed, [but] pleasant as it sounds, it is a fallacy that must be exposed." - Karl von Clauswitz, On War, 1832.
"If the enemy is to be coerced you must put him in a situation that is even more unpleasant than the sacrifices you call on him to make. The Hardships of the situation must not of course be merely transient--at least not in appearance. Otherwise the enemy would not give in but would wait for things to improve...." - Karl von Clauswitz.
"Let us accept the risk of repaying cruelty with cruelty, of answering violence with more violence. It will be easy for us to overtake the enemy and to draw him back within the limits of moderation and humanity." - Karl von Clauswitz, On War, 1832.
"It would be futile — even wrong — to try and shut one's eyes to what war really is from sheer distress at it's brutality." - Karl Von Clauswitz, On War, 1832.
"You must win by seizing upon the enemy's disorder and derangement, and by not according him even a little of recovery." - Miyamoto Musashi, A Book of Five Rings, 1645.
"Grab 'em by the nose and kick 'em in the pants!" - General George S. Patton.
"Throughout history, many campaigns have been lost by stopping on the wrong side of a river." - General George S. Patton. War As I Knew It. 1947.
"The moral effect of discontinuing an attack is very bad for the troops." - General George S. Patton. War As I Knew It. 1947.
Battles are won by frightening the enemy. Fear is induced by inflicting death and wounds. Death and wounds are produced by fire." - General George S. Patton, Jr., letter of instruction, April 3, 1944.
"Catch the enemy by the nose with fire and kick him in the pants with fire placed through movement." - General George S. Patton, Jr., letter of instruction, 3 April, 1944.
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is: "To so use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum time.'” - General George S. Patton, Jr., letter of instruction, 3 April, 1944.
"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his." - General George S. Patton.
Many of them are Marxist Homosexual JINO lunatics. They hate real Jews, conservative Americans and what is right in this world.
Mr. Erlanger should remember the dictum: 'tis better to be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.
This man is obviously incapable of adult thought processes.
Oh, so it has been a common practice, then...???
This is the voice of a man who has employed fake photos...frequently. And sees nothing wrong with it...
A moment of honesty. From a media accustomed to lying.
These people are unbelievable! They are so steeped in their agenda that they wouldn't be able to discern the truth in the unlikely event they should find themselves in the same room with it. What a strange, isolated and echoing world they live in.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.