Snapped Shot

This is an up to the minute News Flash !!!

TERRORIST LIE !!!! TERRORIST LIE !!!! TERRORIST LIE !!!!

Elder over at EOZ found that the Times Online Sunday version had an article up that attempted to determine the whereabouts of the kidnapped Israeli soldier Galid Shalit. Galid is one of the Israeli soldiers that was kidnapped prior to the start of the Lebanon "disruption" in 2006. He is currently still being held by Hamas.

It is amazing to read this article, which I highly suggest that you do, and not keep a straight face. This person, admittedly from Britain (but still), actually believed that she could go to the hotbed of anti-Israeli terrorism and be given complete and friendly access to a possibly dead kidnapped Israeli soldier.
Continue reading »

You know the saying: "We don't make deals with terrorists."

Even Israel in its early years utterly refused to cave in to terrorists even to the point of conducting massive military raids against terrorists holding hostages. They just would not give the terrorists the inkling of an idea that they could get away taking Israeli hostages.

But, these days are different. These days, Political Correctness runs amok. These days, liberal idealism and pocketbook diplomacy rule. Take the recent action in Israel.

From Yahoo News:

The Israeli government agreed Sunday to free a Lebanese gunman convicted in one of the grisliest attacks in the country's history in exchange for the bodies of two Israeli soldiers killed by Hezbollah guerrillas.

The German-mediated deal was a rare political victory for embattled Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and closed a chapter from Israel's inconclusive war against the Lebanese militant group two years ago.

These were the two Israeli soldiers that whose capture led to the Lebanon War (ummm, skirmish\incident) of 2006.

According to cr(AP), this is a victory for Olmert. Releasing a vile, despicable, reprehensible, violent, deadly, (any more descriptors Cletus?) Hezbollah terrorist in exchange for two dead soldiers, soldier body parts and a report on another airman killed in the crash of his plane in 1986. And, explain to me how this closes a chapter when they are releasing a known, convicted, and admitted terrorist?

Now, to give you an idea what this animal did, read this: Continue reading »

Far be it from the press to suggest that there's any controversy surrounding Qana, but it would seem that the Associated Press is absolutely delighted to provide us with pictures of people who hate Israel. Unquestionably, of course:



Aussie Dave has more, as usual.

Ugh. This is exactly the type of "propaganda victory" I said the Israeli government needed to avoid a few days ago:



Of course, neither Mohammed Zaatari nor the Associated Press have presented any evidence on either side, to confirm or deny whether this man is telling the truth. They merely report his Hezbullah propaganda verbatim, without a moment's thought.

How's that for in-depth journalism?

To the dopes in the Israeli government that cooked up this harebrained scheme: If you're going to release a Hezbullah fighter in hopes of getting back a citizen or soldier you care about, make sure it's the meanest, baddest, absolute most terrifying-looking thug that you can find. That way, the press can't pull crap like this atrocity on you later.

(Plus, if you release a total thug, you have two advantages: Namely that he is (a) most likely not the smartest one of the bunch, and (b), he'll be downright trivial to identify should you ever run into him again.)

Paging all clue-enabled Israelis: Please report to the Government immediately. They've been going it without you for far too long now. Continue reading »

Israel has handed yet another photo-op to the enemy. While I think their intentions were honourable—Who, after all, can fault the Israeli government for recovering an Israeli citizen who died in the water, and whose body ended up in Hezbullah's possession. Or for trying once more to save Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev from their captivity?

I certainly won't, but I will point out that, as predictably as the tides in the sea, the Israelis allowed Hezbullah to win yet another battle in the propaganda front, trotting out supposed "relatives" of the dead to receive their bodies on the border—all in the convenient sights of the international photographer corps.



That guy on the left is a Hezbullah "handler" if I've ever seen one, and he sure seems intent on making sure that everyone sees that this woman is in an obvious state of mourning. I'll have the rest of the pictures from this event following the break, as usual.

To my handful of Israeli readers:—You've got to get it through your Government's thick head that situations like this are golden opportunities for Hezbullah to trot out their puppets in front of the cameras for a quick media victory. It is the Israeli government's job to ensure that opportunities like this are denied your enemies! They offer you no quarter, so why should you offer any to them? (Other than drawing-and-quartering, that is...)

Oh, and as a "funny" aside, it's interesting to note that there was zero international outcry over Hezbullah's desecration of a civilian corpse. Or at least, so little of an outcry that I can't even recall this unfortunate event in the least! Once again, the United Nations falls silent when atrocities are perpetrated against the Jews. Continue reading »

Lo and behold, it's interesting to note that most of the area "damaged" by the IDF during last year's war with Hezbullah are still not rebuilt. Of course, those of you have been paying attention would already have known this.



Perish the thought that Hezbullah keeps its areas of Lebanon in disrepair permanently for the sake of easily-manipulated wire agency photographers...

Update: Ah, it's good to see that Hezbullah has their priorities in order. And that their Divine Marketing Agency is preparing for war yet again:

Continue reading »

It would seem that the wire services are mourning the death of Hezbullah fighters in last year's war. No word on if and when any coverage will be given to the Israeli soldiers who died during the conflict.



What a nice, down-to-earth guy, huh? It should be noted that, while it's factually true that he was "killed" during the conflict, you'll note that none of our news agencies elect to identify him dying as a Hezbullah fighter. Don't you think knowing that would change the readers' perspective of this "sympathetic" propaganda push?

By the way, if you're sharp, you might notice in the third picture down in our extended series (following the break), that Reuters has annotated the caption with: "To match feature:LEBANON WAR/HEZBOLLAH." What's interesting about this? It's entirely possible that this is an acknowledgement that the scenario was orchestrated and provided to Reuters by Hezbullah's media office. How much better would this news coverage have been if this fact were acknowledged up front, rather than as a sidebar?) Continue reading »

So, here's a nice, shining, real-life example of "irony" for you:

Chutzpah: Your band of thugs comes to town, sets up shop around the local populace, and antagonizes the large military presence in the next country over.

Inevitable: When said next country over finally gets annoyed enough, they come and bomb you into the stone age.

Irony: After the country which your band of thugs has infested has been bombed to smithereens, you complain that it isn't paying you fast enough to rebuild it.

Hezbullah really is a funny bunch.

Whenever they're in a pinch, the Party of God never fails to ratchet up God's Propaganda. The United ... make that Useless Nations does nothing to stop it. How else will they live up to their name and reputation, after all?



I will say, what's really disgusting is the obviously-photoshopped scowl on Ehud Olmert's face. I mean, it's not like there are any pictures showing him in full scowl in real life or anything, right? Continue reading »

Chris Anderson isn't going to like this report from Harvard (PDF, h/t LGF):

An open society becomes the victim of its own openness. During the war, no Hezbollah secrets were disclosed, but in Israel secrets were leaked, rumors spread like wildfire, leaders felt obliged to issue hortatory appeals often based on incomplete knowledge, and journalists were driven by the fire of competition to publish and broadcast unsubstantiated information. A closed society conveys the impression of order and discipline; an open society, buffeted by the crosswinds of reality and rumor, criticism and revelation, conveys the impression of disorder, chaos and uncertainty, but this impression can be misleading.

Charles points out, as I have on previous occasions, that the press felt no need to question Hezbullah's statements and public presentation. The very same press that accepted Nasrallah's talking points verbatim could be found questioning every statement released by Israel, and reporting every rumour about the IDF as fact.

How's that for "fair and balanced" coverage?

The press failed miserably in the Israel/Lebanon war. Instead of acting as the arbiters of debate, and trying to provide a factual pictures of events on the ground, they allowed themselves to be used as propagandists.

Chris likes to counter that the U.S. Army puts the same restrictions on reporters that Hezbullah did. If that's the case, Chris, then how do you explain this story getting out into the general public? If our Army were as censored as you like to suggest that it was, wouldn't stuff like that never hit the news?

If the press were interested in the "truth," I think we would've seen more skeptical coverage of Hezbullah in last summer's war. Like, for starters, perhaps asking them why they insist on hiding behind civilians.

See also: Hyscience, The Jawa Report, Ace of Spades HQ, EU Referendum, Michelle Malkin.

True art? Sounds vaguely familiar...

To nobody's surprise, the U.S. Treasury Department has designated the Hezbullah-affiliated group Jihad al-Binaa as a terrorist-supporting organization (h/t MEMRI). Snapped Shot readers may recall that "Construction Jihad" was pegged early on as a propaganda effort at best, something which has been reinforced more recently by complaints from local residents.

Terror-supporting organizations, setting up front groups to bolster their support and launder their cash? The shock!

I'm happy to see a delightful little bout of commonsense from our Government on this occasion.

Here's an enlightening look behind the curtain over at Reuters' Middle-East department.

When he was called from holiday to the Lebanon war he learned that several stringers on the front line in the south did not have Reuters cameras. Two office computers had viruses and were infecting others. No FTP server was available for accessing pictures for editing, so photographers were filing to the private email of the Beirut chief photographer. He didn't have the password so he couldn't access pictures directly. Add to that the fact that no one in the Beirut photo operation could write acceptable captions, and that he found someone unqualified and unauthorised in the office accessing the pictures, and the nature of the task he faced in the middle of a war begins to emerge.
...
Outgunned, beset by equipment problems and technical difficulties, swamped by the flow of pictures—many gory to the extreme—he worked all day and into the nights to select, edit, caption and file. Was it possible to have complete oversight in such conditions? Is it surprising two tampered pictures got through? He accepts responsibility for not spotting them, but could he not have expected backup from the Singapore photo desk? And if he didn't give the right answer at first when the questions began, was he protecting himself or someone else in the bureau?

Blaming the institution for the problems isn't exactly a new thing, but there's probably quite a bit of validity to what John's saying. To me, though, the issue now becomes one of identifying where the buck stops best. Are senior Reuters managers merely incompetent with financial planning? Or are they so institutionally biased against Israel that they don't recognize obvious propaganda when they see it?

Don't miss out on the comments, though. Eyal says it best: In some places people know how to manipulate the media – they know how to act and what is expected from them so that the photographer will get a good shot.

Update: Well shiver me timbers! It doesn't happen often, but I definitely celebrate when it does. Many thanks to the all-knowing AllahPundit for the generous hat tip and the kind words!

Chad at Freedom Zone has an excellent writeup on the myths surrounding Hezbullah's past charity drive that is well worth reading. Specifically,

The second myth this destroys is how Hezbollah intends to fight its war against both Israel/Infidels and the Lebanese government. The myth is that Hezbollah cares for the Shia in Lebanon and has the interest of all of Lebanon in their sights. The reality is far more mundane. They are camera prostitutes, selling their bodies for photos and television reports to confuse the world as to their intentions. Stick a camera in their faces in any of the rather obvious staged photo shoots, they greet you with open arms. Catch them off guard and they will forcefully tell you to cease with the photography. When all cameras are gone, they get back to what they do best, sowing seeds of hatred by mass deception.

Thank you for the very insightful article, Chad! You've masterfully put to words something I've only been thinking for a while.