The Ghost of Snapped Shot

Or, welcome to my low-maintenance heck.

Shocka: Reporters are "Spoiled Crybabies"

Was there ever any doubt?

"There was no ban," [on journalists entering the Gaza Strip –Ed.] Seaman declared, "Israel did not want to endanger the lives of the workers at the crossings so we didn't open them, not for humanitarian reasons and not for foreign journalists."

"Those spoiled crybabies just didn't want to put a little effort in [to getting into Gaza]," he said "We never arrested anyone who went in, nor are we running after them now," which proves that it wasn't an actual Israeli policy.

"In hindsight, next time we should make it an actual policy. This week proves it. All of the reporters have been let in and they are accepting everything everyone says at face value. Maybe 3% are calling and asking for an Israeli response, or talking to the IDF spokesman. They are a fig leaf for Hamas.

This incident serves as yet another in an endless series of reminders that much of what you see on the TV screen is complete bull. Why should we believe the press, given that they seem to be so unwilling to actually report things inconvenient to their repetitive narratives?

Thanks to Carl in Jerusalem.



#1 captainfish 27-Jan-2009
[i]"Their coverage right now is a disgrace to the profession. Instead of reporting, they are settling scores. Reporting without both sides, without a context is an abuse of the profession," he declared."[/i]

The most truthful thing I have ever read online.

[i]"However, a week after a fragile cease-fire went into effect, media experts the Post spoke with agreed that the decision had been a good one."[/i]

... but were afraid to say so before??? Why didn't they say so before? I know the regular media wouldn't report this, but someone should have.
Powered by Snarf · Contact Us