Reuters caught doctoring Images (Again) (Flotilla)

[The Grim Squeaker]

source

Home News Diplomacy & Defense
Published 01:12 08.06.10Latest update 01:12 08.06.10
Reuters under fire for removing weapons, blood from images of Gaza flotilla
News agency rejects charges of biased coverage, says it reverted to use of 'original set' of images once cropping discovered.

By Natasha Mozgovaya
Tags: Gaza flotilla IDF Hamas Gaza
The Reuters news agency has been accused of removing images of activists wielding weapons and bloodied and wounded Israeli naval commandos from photographs taken on board a ship headed for Gaza during deadly clashes last week.

Nine people were killed and dozens others, among them Israel Defense Forces soldiers, were hurt when the clashes erupted as IDF troops tried to board the Mavi Marmara ship in order to prevent it reaching its destination in Gaza.

The ship was one of six vessels that made up the "Freedom Flotilla," a convoy carrying aid that set out from Turkey in an attempt to break Israel's blockade on the Gaza Strip. Five of the boats in the convoy were boarded by IDF troops without incident, while passengers on the sixth fought the troops as they came onboard. All six boats were towed by the Israel Navy to the Israeli port city of Ashdod.

Reuters on Monday rejected accusations of biased coverage, adding that it had reverted to the use of "the original set" of images, once the organization realized that the photographs it had published had been cropped.

A Reuters spokesman told Haaretz: "Reuters is committed to an accurate and impartial reporting. All images that pass over our wire follow a strict editorial evaluation and selection process.

"The images in question were made available in Istanbul in following normal editorial practice were prepared for dissemination which included cropping at the edges. When we realized that the dagger was inadvertently cropped from the images Reuters immediately moved to the original set as well.”

This is not the first time that Reuters has been criticized for images that appear to be biased against Israel. During the Second Lebanon War in 2006, the news agency admitted that one of its pictures of destruction caused by Israel's bombing of Beirut had been altered with a computer graphics program.


More on this topic:
Reuters admits it tampered with bombing photo

They edited out the knives, weapons by accident. Riiight..

[Vympel]

I fail to see why anyone would bother to do that.

Aww, the poooooor widdle fascists were hurt with sticks whilst shooting people, lemme kiss diddumbs bum-bum better.

[bobalot]

This is hilarious, an article that accuses a news organisation of bias fails to mention the Israeli boarded the ships in international waters and used lethal force against protesters using mainly improvised stone age era weapons.

[loomer]

Fucking nailed it. When we got those photos I said they could be cropped easily for propaganda purposes, and here we are!

[Sephirius]

This is hilarious, an article that accuses a news organisation of bias fails to mention the Israeli boarded the ships in international waters and used lethal force against protesters using mainly improvised stone age era weapons.

Last I checked, a knife was a fucking lethal weapon, sometimes moreso than a gun. Ask any fucking LEO how deadly a knife can be in close quarters, hardly stone age.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Last I checked, a knife was a fucking lethal weapon, sometimes moreso than a gun. Ask any fucking LEO how deadly a knife can be in close quarters, hardly stone age.

A knife can be dangerous to modern soldiers, but that doesn't work in this situation. Fast-roping is not the thing you do with a ship of possible hostiles that you had previously been shooting at from your own ships.

You might not be keen enough to get this, but when people hear about weapons being shipped to Gaza they don't think decorative knives, it's RPGs, AKMs, RPKs, and various other assortments that Hamas can use against Israel. To call lead pipes and decorative knives weapons the same way you would scud missiles is not only deceitful but blatantly so.

[MKSheppard]

Aww, the poooooor widdle fascists were hurt with sticks whilst shooting people, lemme kiss diddumbs bum-bum better.

Try going up against people armed with blunt weapons with paintball guns. They had to get permission to go for their pistols, and took quite a few casualties before permission was granted for pistol use.

[bobalot]

Aww, the poooooor widdle fascists were hurt with sticks whilst shooting people, lemme kiss diddumbs bum-bum better.

Try going up against people armed with blunt weapons with paintball guns. They had to get permission to go for their pistols, and took quite a few casualties before permission was granted for pistol use.

Except trained riot police do this all the time. The Israelis were so fucking retarded they sent commandos to what should have been a police operation. They deserve the bad publicity just for being such utter dumb fucks.

[Vendetta]

Aww, the poooooor widdle fascists were hurt with sticks whilst shooting people, lemme kiss diddumbs bum-bum better.

Try going up against people armed with blunt weapons with paintball guns. They had to get permission to go for their pistols, and took quite a few casualties before permission was granted for pistol use.

He didn't say they were clever fascists.

[Gil Hamilton]

Do we got a source for this that isn't Israeli?

[Coyote]

It seems like folks are blurring the lines between the Israeli commandos being in physical danger, and the reason the Israeli commandos were there in the first place.

Confirming that the commandos faced lethal danger only shows that the pro-Gaza activists were not peaceful Gandhi-like/Zen/kum-by-yah types getting their heads knocked as they sat passively.

The commandos were in physical danger and met lethal resistance... however... I do agree that does not mitigate the fact that they should have avoided this type of confrontation in the first place, and made a provocative move that needlessly escalated the situation.

On the flipside, there were so many Gaza activists on the ship it would have been better of they'd simply dogpiled, subdued, and tied up the commandos for propaganda points-- but of course that's easier said in hindsight; I'm sure at the time they probably just expected to be shot at outright.

[The Grim Squeaker]

5 Seconds of googling yield these non Jew sources:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/reu ... lla-photos

http://www.thefoxnation.com/...flotilla ... lla-photos
http://dailyradar.com/beltwayblips/stor ... la-photos/

[Gil Hamilton]

Hah, well I suppose those right-wing tabloids aren't actually Israeli, so you sort of followed my request, though I'm curious as hell why you'd like to the freakin' Weekly Standard (a conservative opinion magazine) posting an editorial, a link that doesn't work to a Rupert Murdoch rag, and a third source that is QUOTING the first source. Did you actually read your links? Your third link is merely a political blog forwarding the exact text of the first and even LINKS to the first editorial!

How about you spend a few more than 5 seconds googling and actually post some real sources?

[CJvR]

They edited out the knives, weapons by accident. Riiight..

Well it isn't impossible. It just takes one upset fellow with photoshop in somewhere in the publication chain to do a bit of creative editing, for the cause. Someone need to get sacked it seems to secure Reuters from activist employees.

[Stark]

5 Seconds of googling yield these non Jew sources:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/reu ... lla-photos

http://www.thefoxnation.com/...flotilla ... lla-photos
http://dailyradar.com/beltwayblips/stor ... la-photos/

People asked for non-Israeli sources. What's this 'non-Jew' business? Is disagreeing with the obvious stagemanaging of the IDF anti-jew now?

Then again this IS the thread where someone declares a weapon 'not stone age' because it's dangerous. Flint axes are dangerous too buddy.

[Illuminatus Primus]

People have the right to defend themselves with force against aggression. Fuck the soldiers, fuck their masters, and fuck all their apologists. I would bring a knife too if I was participating in any protest against a bunch of jack-booted assholes with the history the IDF has. The sudden ultra-idealist right-wingers would have people all be ready to martyrdom (apparently now suddenly a good thing) over a totally understandable preparation for self-defense (given you are dealing with Israel) which was not even adequate or proportional (stone age weapons against armed thugs and tear gas).

[Molyneux]

People have the right to defend themselves with force against aggression. Fuck the soldiers, fuck their masters, and fuck all their apologists.

Pardon me if I'm incorrect, but - weren't they attempting to run a military blockade at the time?

[Illuminatus Primus]

People have the right to defend themselves with force against aggression. Fuck the soldiers, fuck their masters, and fuck all their apologists.

Pardon me if I'm incorrect, but - weren't they attempting to run a military blockade at the time?

An illegal blockade against a territory which Israel has all power over and will not permit statehood nor political rights (you can't blockade a place you won't even recognize as a state; that's what a blockade is) in which pwoor widdle Israel tried to enforce in international waters in a hamfisted and aggressive fashion. All blockades are objectively morally right and should not be challenged? Do you think the Jewish refugees had no right to run the British blockades for Palestine before 1948? What about British blockades of the U.S. in 1812? This laughable resort to legalistic idealism (which applies only to the power of the State, and not international law, curiously) on the part of people who NEVER hold up that standard IN ANY OTHER CIRCUMSTANCE is part for the course with apologists for terror everywhere.

Oh, and the sacred military blockade in international waters restricts such horrible terrorist contraband as materials for chicken coups and canning tomato paste. Can't allow any basic self-sufficiency or economic development for the Gazan population, eh? Better run to defend that blockade protecting Israeli producers' profit margins.

[Kanastrous]

People have the right to defend themselves with force against aggression.

Not-running an announced blockade is a better strategy for avoiding aggression against yourself, than running one. If you goal is actually to avoid aggression, that is; these people announced very clearly that their intent was not non-violent protest; their intent was to run a blockade. The two are fundamentally incompatible.

I'm not suggesting that they were fundamentally wrong in being there, but rather that it's fundamentally wrong to label them 'peace activists.' Taking on a navy and naval commandos is more like 'freedom fighter,' if we want to use a polite term, and 'freedom fighters' don't get to make the same moral claims as nonviolent 'peace protesters' - which is what the people involved with the flotilla publicly announced themselves, to be. Concurrently with labeling themselves 'peace activists.' Suggesting that where they are concerned, language means whatever they want it to mean, from moment to moment...

Fuck the soldiers, fuck their masters, and fuck all their apologists.

Wow, your reasoning and argumentative skills are amazing. Easily the equal of Binyamin Netanyahu's, even, for all that you're on opposing sides of the issue...

I would bring a knife too if I was participating in any protest against a bunch of jack-booted assholes with the history the IDF has.

Okay. Then you would be a fighter, a guerrilla, or whatever else you want to call yourself - so long as you aren't trying to pass yourself off as a peace activist, or a protester with any claim to being treated with the forbearance normally expected when dealing with 'peace' anything. Which the members of the flotilla publicly advertised themselves, to be. Although aboard the Marmara, at least enough people to fill the top deck clearly weren't.

The sudden ultra-idealist right-wingers would have people all be ready to martyrdom (apparently now suddenly a good thing) over a totally understandable preparation for self-defense (given you are dealing with Israel) which was not even adequate or proportional (stone age weapons against armed thugs and tear gas).

Do you have a theory as to why the only ship upon which the commandos were attacked, rather than offered compliance, was also the only ship on which there was gunfire, and killing? Got any ideas as to why the other ships' complements were not fired upon (aside from the pure and total coincidence that they didn't attack the boarders on their ships?)

Knives and clubs aren't about 'self-defense,' they're about photo-op. No one with over-room-temperature IQ is going to believe that they can effectively take on professional, well-equipped soldiers with such armament; the only reasons one does so are (a) total amazing stupidity, which I think we agree is an unlikely explanation or (b) to create said photo-op, complete with screaming headlines and ready-made vitriol.

I realize that you occupy a fantasy world in which no one contemplates sacrificing their lives for their cause. It's puzzling how you manage to catch enough news to be able to discuss, say, mid-east current events while totally missing the very, very long list of individuals who most deliberately set out to sacrifice their lives for their cause, left written documentation and videotaped statements confirming it, and whose relatives and political leaders praise their decision, after the fact.

But of course a man sees what he wants to see, and disregards the rest.

[Bakustra]

I would bring a knife too if I was participating in any protest against a bunch of jack-booted assholes with the history the IDF has.

Okay. Then you would be a fighter, a guerrilla, or whatever else you want to call yourself - so long as you aren't trying to pass yourself off as a peace activist, or a protester with any claim to being treated with the forbearance normally expected when dealing with 'peace' anything. Which the members of the flotilla publicly advertised themselves, to be.

This point has been made many times before, but perhaps it will not be ignored this time: where exactly did the individuals on the blockaded ship declare themselves peace activists? For that matter, why is "peace activist" incompatible with "self-defense", apart from the mind-numbing strawmen of pacifists constructed over the past century?

[Stark]

Wow, so if you kill yourself to make a point your evil or misguided and if you DONT you're a photo whore who should have known better than to try to deliver aid to Gaza?

Those crazy lying brutal Israelis ... Ll

[Gil Hamilton]

Do you have a theory as to why the only ship upon which the commandos were attacked, rather than offered compliance, was also the only ship on which there was gunfire, and killing? Got any ideas as to why the other ships' complements were not fired upon (aside from the pure and total coincidence that they didn't attack the boarders on their ships?)

Knives and clubs aren't about 'self-defense,' they're about photo-op. No one with over-room-temperature IQ is going to believe that they can effectively take on professional, well-equipped soldiers with such armament; the only reasons one does so are (a) total amazing stupidity, which I think we agree is an unlikely explanation or (b) to create said photo-op, complete with screaming headlines and ready-made vitriol.

You missed option (c) in there, that's only what they had on hand and armed soldiers were boarding their ship. Given previous Israeli behavior, the people on that ship had no reason to expect that the Israeli soldiers weren't going to start shooting them once they were aboard. Everything they had was readily on hand aboard a ship.

I realize that you occupy a fantasy world in which no one contemplates sacrificing their lives for their cause. It's puzzling how you manage to catch enough news to be able to discuss, say, mid-east current events while totally missing the very, very long list of individuals who most deliberately set out to sacrifice their lives for their cause, left written documentation and videotaped statements confirming it, and whose relatives and political leaders praise their decision, after the fact.

So you are saying that they deliberately only used things that they would have had on hand, just for a photo-op where they are the victim? That's pretty retarded.

But of course a man sees what he wants to see, and disregards the rest.

I hope you realize this statement goes two ways, correct, and appreciate that?

[Kanastrous]

You missed option (c) in there, that's only what they had on hand and armed soldiers were boarding their ship. Given previous Israeli behavior, the people on that ship had no reason to expect that the Israeli soldiers weren't going to start shooting them once they were aboard. Everything they had was readily on hand aboard a ship.

"Previous Israeli behavior?" Have the Israelis shot or killed anybody aboard an aid-for-Gaza ship, in the past? I have been unable to find record of the IDF doing more than boarding and obliging the crew to divert to an Israeli port.

If it's never happened before (can someone find evidence that it has?), then why should the people aboard Marmara have made that assumption? Once again, note that the people on the ships who didn't attack the boarders, didn't get shot at.

So you are saying that they deliberately only used things that they would have had on hand, just for a photo-op where they are the victim? That's pretty retarded.

Their whole cause revolves around victim-hood. Considering the response that the event has generated, I wouldn't call them 'retarded.' I'd call them darned smart. Retarded would be the belief that in going after trained, combat-equipped troops (well, troops whom you reasonably assume are combat-equipped, anyway) with such weapons, you actually stand any chance of success in driving them off - or in fact accomplishing anything at all, aside from getting wounded or killed..

Really, have this many people failed to notice the nexus between the Palestinian cause and the deliberate seeking of self-destruction, to further it?

But of course a man sees what he wants to see, and disregards the rest.

I hope you realize this statement goes two ways, correct, and appreciate that?

Sure I do.

[Kanastrous]

Wow, so if you kill yourself to make a point your evil or misguided

Not necessarily. It depends upon the degree to which an observer finds the cause for which you are killing yourself (or getting yourself killed) evil, or misguided, and how many innocent people you take with ouy. For that observer, of course.

and if you DONT you're a photo whore who should have known better than to try to deliver aid to Gaza?

Running a military blockade in slow, unarmed vessels without escort is exactly the sort of thing that intelligent people responsibly looking out for their own welfare know better, than to do. Attacking armed professional soldiers, all the more so, even if you don't think they have any business setting foot upon your ship. It can't be had both ways: if you know that what you are doing is dangerous, if you have been forewarned of the risks, then you don't get to claim the status of an abused innocent. Maybe you deserve respect as a courageous fighter for your cause who put his ass on the line for his beliefs, but that's a very different matter.

Those crazy lying brutal Israelis ... Ll

Well, how crazy and reckless, then, are the people who put themselves at the mercy of those crazy, lying, etc, etc?

[Xon]

Do we got a source for this that isn't Israeli?

This appears to be the original image, but funny enough Reuters has this(RTR2EUR8) as the source image. There is also this blog post hosted by reuters as well which admits that the photos where originally edited.

So yeah, they cropped the image. This isn't exactly the first time they have done something like this.