Tuesday, September 12, 2006


The Guardian's readers' editor Ian Mayes whose newspaper was one of many involved in the Red Cross Ambulance Hoax has undertaken an examination of the story in OPEN DOOR.

On the basis of its own reporter's claim of there being "no doubt that the ambulances had been subjected to a recent attack consistent with what had been reported", the reports of Martin Chulov and Sarah Smiles of The Australian and The Melbourne Age respectively (both of which have been demolished elsewhere including on this blog) and the statement of a Red Cross spokesperson that he had "seen the ambulances and saw no reason to question that they had been subjected to an attack" has concluded -

"The zombietime version invites the conclusion that the Lebanese Red Cross conspired in an elaborate anti-Israel propaganda plot to dupe the world's media. I do not think that is proven at all."

Yeah right.

In fact, it's the original report on the damaged ambulances and the claim that it was caused by an Israeli air strike that has never been proven.

Mayes quotes an Israeli military spokesman as follows:-

"We had advised the civilian populations and other organisations like the UN and the Red Cross that it was a dangerous area and any movement had to be coordinated with the Israeli army. We don't know for sure if those two ambulances were hit by Israeli fire. We cannot confirm or not confirm.

"All we know is that we don't know of any incident when Israeli missiles would have hit a vehicle marked as being a vehicle from the Red Cross. We don't recognise hitting any Red Cross vehicles on that date in particular."

The Guardian version therefore invites the conclusion that Israeli military is not telling the truth about the incident and instead the Guardian is prepared to rely on the veracity of reports based upon statements made by at least one eyewitness who is a proven liar - THE AMBULANCE CHASERS [PART THREE].

All this proves is that, like the Australian and the Melbourne Age, the Guardian is more concerned with protection the reputation of its reporters than it is with uncovering the truth.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Keep on aiming at the hypocrites.

You're doing us all a service.