HR gets back to some of it's old tricks in just plain old fabrication.
Human Rights Watch has condemned Israel for allegedly using white phosphorus weapons unlawfully in the conflict ......media including The Guardian, Times of London, Christian Science Monitor and CNN have repeated HRW's claimsWhat, the media has reported claims!! The nerve of them. Will HR demand that they also stop reported the claims of IDF spokesmen?
However, this charge has been disputed by the International Red Cross, which stated that it had no evidence to suggest that white phosphorus is being used improperly or illegally by Israel.
They then provide an excerpt from an AP story quoting an ICRC expert. But they leave out an important point he made,
However, Herby said evidence is still limited because of the difficulties of gaining access to Gaza........And the BBC,
Yet again, journalistic professionalism is thrown out of the window in the BBC's desperate attempts to attack and sully Israel
How?
The article states that "BBC journalists in Gaza and Israel have compiled detailed accounts of the claims." Who are these BBC journalists in Gaza? On the basis that foreign press have not been allowed access to Gaza, one can only assume that these supposedly neutral observers are, in fact, PalestiniansOMG! The BBC actually takes the word of Palestinian journalists and reports the views of Palestinian eyewitnesses. Don't they know that all Arabs are liars?
Don't you just love the smell of bigotry in the air in the morning?
Which takes us back to the white phosphorous story. HR continued by noting a Ynet news story claiming that one Hamas mortar that landed in Israel contained white phosphorous. The story quoted a 'security chief' from a regional council. Though HR hasn't the slightest doubt about the word of "this supposedly neutral observer" who is, in fact, Israeli [cue: audible intake of breath].
|