Umfrageergebnis anzeigen: Auf wessen Seite seid ihr (eher)???
- 133. Du darfst bei dieser Umfrage nicht abstimmen
Auf Seite der Israelis!!!
Eher auf Seite der Israelis
Bin ganz neutral
Eher auf Seite der Palästinenser
Auf Seite der Palästinenser!!!
Erstellt von jugo-jebe-dugo, 26.10.2004, 13:16 Uhr · 3.644 Antworten · 162.927 Aufrufe
Endlich erwacht die Welt, der Druck gegen die israelische und amerikanische Regierung wird immer größer.
Ich warte nur bis einer kommt und die alle im Video als Anitsemiten betitelt...
Zitat von Styria
Israel überschreitet seit Jahrzehnten rote Linien in dem es immer wider Zivilisten bomardiert und erschiesst.
(nicht Selten erschiessen Israelische Soldaten aus nächste Nähe unbewaffnete Frauen und Kinder)
Trauen sich offenbar nur gegen die wehrlose Bevölkerung vorzugehen.
Wie in Der "Opperation Gegossenes Blei": haben über 900 Zivilisten und gerade mal 500 Hamas-Kämpfer getötet
Nicht vergessen: "Eine der bessten Armeen der Welt"
Nach dem grausamen Vorgehen Im Gazastreifen hatte Olmert sakastisch die IDF als "moralischste Armee der Welt" bezeichnet.
Du kannst türken nicht mit araber vergleichen kleiner.
Zitat von Styria
Wir haben sehr viel Kriegserfahrung schon seit 500 jahren. Türkische befreiungskrieg, Korea, Zypern sind die 3 letzten kriege der türkei.
Israel wird nichtmal mit Hamas und Hisbollah fertig
Mut ist Zahlen überlegen.
dem ist nichts hinzuzufügen.
Zitat von LION
Wie man aus einem Juden einen Palästineser macht.
Even more remarkable is that Arab groups have adopted Grossman's photo to use in their own propaganda campaigns, cynically using a bloodied Jew as a symbol of the Palestinian struggle.
An official Egyptian government website (Egypt State Information Service) is using the Grossman photo on its "Photo Gallery" of "Scenes Disturb World conscience".
The Palestinian Information Center, www.islam.net incorporated Grossman's photo onto its homepage banner. The graphic was removed from the site, but is reprinted here:
Additionally, some Arab groups have called for a boycott of Coca-Cola, for doing business with Israel, and have circulated a series of posters to state their case. One poster shows Grossman's bleeding face juxtaposed with the Coca-Cola logo, and the tag line: "By supporting American products, you're supporting Israel."
Snopes.com reports that, ironically, since Ramallah is home to a Coca-Cola bottling facility that employs about 400 local residents (and indirectly creates employment for hundreds more), and Coca-Cola industries throughout the Middle East are operated as local businesses, any boycott of Coca-Cola in Middle Eastern countries is likely to cause more monetary harm to Arabs and Palestinians than it is to Americans or Israelis.
Snopes.com notes another irony: Pepsi is also on the Arab boycott list, with claims that the name "Pepsi" is an acronym for 'Pay Every Penny to Save Israel' or 'Pay Every Penny to the State of Israel.' As the Associated Press once noted, "Calling Pepsi a 'Jewish product' is ironic, given that Pepsi was one of many multinationals that wouldn't do business in Israel during the 40-year Arab commercial boycott of the Jewish state."
And of course the biggest irony of all is that the image chosen in the poster to represent Palestinian suffering was none other than Tuvia Grossman who nearly beaten to death by a Palestinian mob.|
On the day the Intifada broke out, Tuvia Grossman was riding a taxi to visit the Western Wall. He was unwittingly thrust into the international limelight -- and nearly killed in the process.
On September 30, 2000, The New York Times, Associated Press and other major media outlets published a photo of a young man -- bloodied and battered -- crouching beneath a club-wielding Israeli policeman. The caption identified him as a Palestinian victim of the recent riots -- with the clear implication that the Israeli soldier is the one who beat him.
The victim's true identity was revealed when Dr. Aaron Grossman of Chicago sent the following letter to the Times:
Regarding your picture on page A5 of the Israeli soldier and the Palestinian on the Temple Mount -- that Palestinian is actually my son, Tuvia Grossman, a Jewish student from Chicago. He, and two of his friends, were pulled from their taxicab while traveling in Jerusalem, by a mob of Palestinian Arabs, and were severely beaten and stabbed.
That picture could not have been taken on the Temple Mount because there are no gas stations on the Temple Mount and certainly none with Hebrew lettering, like the one clearly seen behind the Israeli soldier attempting to protect my son from the mob.
man kann nicht immer die augen schließen man muss handeln.ich habe jetzt gelesen das sich israel wieder aufrüstet udn waffen usw aus amerika kauft.
Beirut 2008 Originalbild
Flairs (Täuschkörper zur Rakentenabwehr eines Flugzeuges) werden plötzlich zu Raketen
The other instance of digital photo doctoring was discovered by Rusty Shackleford at The Jawa Report on August 6. The original Reuters caption for this photo was "An Israeli F-16 warplane fires missiles during an air strike on Nabatiyeh in southern Lebanon." As Shackleford pointed out, first of all, those are not missiles depicted in the photo -- they're defensive flares. But more importantly, the photo had been doctored to show three flares, when in fact there had only been one.
This image, also shown on the Jawa Report, demonstrates that the clone tool had again been used to copy portions of the photo and paste them in repeatedly elsewhere. In this case, the trails of one flare were copied and lengthened to make it look like there had been three flares. Click on the link above for a detailed explanation and several more photos proving the case. The photo-hoaxster in this instance was again Adnan Hajj, proving beyond doubt that he was very familiar with how to alter images in Photoshop. Ynet News featured an article on this photo manipulation as well.
In the next example, as discovered by the Drinking from Home blog, a Lebanese woman somehow had her house destroyed twice, two weeks apart, by the Israelis. In this first photo, Reuters claims, "A Lebanese woman wails after looking at the wreckage of her apartment, in a building that was demolished by the Israeli attacks in southern Beirut July 22, 2006. REUTERS/Issam Kobeisi."
But wait! Here she is again, in a photo supplied by AP: "A Lebanese woman reacts at the destruction after she came to inspect her house in the suburbs of Beirut, Lebanon, Saturday, Aug. 5, 2006, after Israeli warplanes repeatedly bombed the area overnight." As Drinking from Home points out, it's definitely the same woman. The photo captions, supplied by two different news agencies, contradict each other: one says her home was destroyed on July 22, the other on August 5. Which leads one to question whether the woman had anything to do with the building at all, or if she was just asked to pose in front of it for drama's sake. Either way, the editor's captions are necessarily untrue, since her home obviously couldn't have been demolished twice. The photos may or may not be authentic, but at least one of the captions is a falsehood. Ynet News also featured an article about the discrepancy.
A zombietime reader named Paul writes in to say that this photo that appeared on the cover of the July 22 edition of the London magazine The Spectator as an illustration for this article seems to shows the exact same woman yet again, wailing for the third time over a completely different destroyed home. (It appeared on the cover of the Socialist Worker as well.)
A close-up of the somewhat low-resolution image appears to faintly show the distinctive scar on the woman's left cheek, confirming it is her despite the different outfit. As Paul writes, "Once again we see the -- unmistakable -- eyebrowless Wailing Woman coming home only to find her third Beirut apartment destroyed. Different location of course, and this time she is wearing an up-market outfit: aqua silk scarf, checked coat, sling bag over her shoulder and holding car keys. She has apparently just got out of her car, seen the damage, slung the bag over her shoulder -- as you do when you discover your apartment is no more -- and gone for it, the double hand Heavenwards Wail."
Zombietime reader Tom P. sends this AP photo (from a link that is now expired, unfortunately) that had the following caption: "Lebanese Asma Srour walks on the rubble of her extended family's house, destroyed during the month-long Israeli forces' offensive in the southern border village of Aita al-Shaab, Lebanon, Saturday Aug. 19, 2006. (AP Photo/Lefteris Pitarakis)." The scar on her left cheek once again suggests that it is the same woman a fourth time posing in front of a destroyed home (though identification is not absolutely certain).
Natürlich, Hamas und Hizbollah waren immer so friedlich und haben nie auf israelisches Gebiet geschossen.
Zitat von ivan2805
Wobei das 2006 eine Ironie war, es kamen bei den Raketen von Hizbollah auf ihre Glaubensbrüder (der Norden Israels hat auch einen hohen Anteil an Araber)
Wenn man angegriffen wird, dann wird halt zurückgeschlagen.
These pictures of a Hezbollah gunman -- as pointed out by Hot Air, jester_6 and Riehl World View -- not only appeared on the cover of the July 31 edition of U.S. News and World Report, but were captioned, "A Hezbollah gunman aims his AK 47 at a fire caused by an explosion in Kfarshima, near Beirut, Lebanon, Monday, July 17, 2006. Lebanese TV stations broadcast video pictures Monday claiming to be an Israeli military aircraft falling to the ground in the area, but Israeli military said no aircraft was shot down over Beirut and there was no immediate confirmation of the cause of the explosion." The photos were taken by both Reuters and AP photographers.
But a close-up reveals that the fire, as the gunman and the photographers must have known, was nothing more than tires burning in a garbage dump. The gunman was pointing his weapon at the tires merely for dramatic effect.
It turns out the fire was in fact
as it spun through the air and landed in the dump. Hezbollah made the best of the incident by using the resulting fire as a backdrop to a posed photo shoot with willing Reuters photographers.
As revealed in these two posts at Little Green Footballs, the photographer who took the photos of the burning tires, Bruno Stevens, supplied accurate captions when he turned in his photos, but his editors at Time intentionally altered the captions to be factually wrong. One can only speculate as to their motivation.
More self-contradictory captions -- along with another bit of possible staging -- was uncovered by Cathy Brooks, a reader of Power Line, in a series of photos also taken by Hajj and released by Reuters. As the full series of photos displayed at Power Line shows, one of the "citizens" running pointlessly back and forth across the Qasmiya Bridge in an earlier photo magically becomes a "civil defense representative" in this picture, which had this caption: "A Lebanese civil defence representative runs shortly after Israeli warplanes bombed Qasmiya Bridge near Tyre in south Lebanon July 12, 2006."
Power Line's analysis finishes with a final photograph of a completely different damaged bridge, which is also identified as the Qasmiya Bridge with this caption: "A Lebanese citizen gestures near the ruined Qasmiya Bridge near Tyre in south Lebanon shortly after being bombed by Israeli warplanes July 12, 2006."
So which one is the Qasmiya Bridge? One of the captions has to be wrong.
But the main thrust of the Power Line article -- that one of of the damaged cars was dragged around as a prop -- turned out to have an innocent explanation. In a later photo, the exact same damaged car seems to be quite a distance away, once again on its roof. However, Seerak, an astute photo expert on Little Green Footballs, pointed out in this detailed comment that the photographer was likely to have been alternating between powerful telephoto and wide-angle lenses, which produce only the appearance of the car being moved. The foreshortening is so extreme that the untrained eye at first doesn't notice the identical elements at different scales in the backgrounds of the various pictures. And for some, it's hard to believe the effect could be produced simply by different lenses. The Dog of Flanders blog also is convinced that the top photo was taken with a telephoto lens, accounting for the apparent movement of the car. Several photo experts emailed to say essentially the same thing.
Von Memedo im Forum Aussenpolitik
Letzter Beitrag: 09.10.2014, 18:35
Von tramvi im Forum Kriminalität und Militär
Letzter Beitrag: 16.05.2012, 14:28
Von jugo-jebe-dugo im Forum Aussenpolitik
Letzter Beitrag: 25.07.2008, 15:05
Von jugo-jebe-dugo im Forum Aussenpolitik
Letzter Beitrag: 15.04.2007, 20:46
Von jugo-jebe-dugo im Forum Aussenpolitik
Letzter Beitrag: 15.04.2007, 15:46