My previous blog detailed the horrific attack on a Sudanese hospital by murderering savages, who slaughtered something like 460 people there – for no other reason than that they were available for the slaughter.
I pointed out the inexcusable lack of coverage by much of our mainstream media…and pointed out that, if the attack were by Israel/Jews, it would have been very different.
In that regard, I urge you to remember Israel’s alleged “destruction” of a hospital in Gaza a week and a half after hamas’ massacre. It was a huge story all over the news. The New York Times, in particular, made it the lead story – complete with photographic “proof” of Israel’s degeneracy.
Except….
Tell you what: rather than rewriting it, here is my entire blog showing how fast media were to nail Israel for this non-existent bombing, and what actually did happen:
THE “HOSPITAL BOMBING” & THE NEW YORK TIMES “APOLOGY”
Here, in its entirety, is the New York Times’ six-days-after-the-fact explanation (not apology) for putting up a headline and story instructing its readers that Israel bombed a Gaza hospital and killed hundreds of people (I’ve put the key paragraph in bold print):
Editors’ Note: Gaza Hospital Coverage
By
On Oct. 17, The New York Times published news of an explosion at a hospital in Gaza City, leading its coverage with claims by Hamas government officials that an Israeli airstrike was the cause and that hundreds of people were dead or injured. The report included a large headline at the top of The Times’s website.
Israel subsequently denied being at fault and blamed an errant rocket launch by the Palestinian faction group Islamic Jihad, which has in turn denied responsibility. American and other international officials have said their evidence indicates that the rocket came from Palestinian fighter positions.
The Times’s initial accounts attributed the claim of Israeli responsibility to Palestinian officials, and noted that the Israeli military said it was investigating the blast. However, the early versions of the coverage — and the prominence it received in a headline, news alert and social media channels — relied too heavily on claims by Hamas, and did not make clear that those claims could not immediately be verified. The report left readers with an incorrect impression about what was known and how credible the account was.
The Times continued to update its coverage as more information became available, reporting the disputed claims of responsibility and noting that the death toll might be lower than initially reported. Within two hours, the headline and other text at the top of the website reflected the scope of the explosion and the dispute over responsibility.
Given the sensitive nature of the news during a widening conflict, and the prominent promotion it received, Times editors should have taken more care with the initial presentation, and been more explicit about what information could be verified. Newsroom leaders continue to examine procedures around the biggest breaking news events — including for the use of the largest headlines in the digital report — to determine what additional safeguards may be warranted.
That, folks, is not an apology. That is not even a retraction – because, even here, The Times does not specifically state the claim it led its readers to is wrong.
Arrogance, anyone?
Oh, and then there is this other matter that somehow was not mentioned at all.
Here is the headline and the picture – yes, folks, there was a picture this non-apology failed to mention – The Times is now trying to duck away from:
As you can see, Times readers were not just told a hospital was bombed and hundreds were killed, they were shown the bombed-to-hell remains of a building and surrounding structures as well.
The problem? This picture does not – NOT – show the hospital or the hospital grounds. I don’t know what picture they dredged up to pretend it was, but here are actual satellite and ground pictures of the area after the blast occurred:
As you can see, other than possible minor damage to the front of a couple of buildings, every one of them is structurally intact. The explosion impact, and almost all the damage, is in the parking lot.
So not only did the New York Times totally mislead its readers about what happened and who caused it, The Times also put up a bogus picture to support the BS it was handing them. And the fact that this picture was bogus is not so much as mentioned in its non-apology.
Remember when the New York Times was considered a great newspaper? When people looked to it for accurate rather than agenda-driven information?
If so, I congratulate you on your memory.
\I said it before, and I’ll say it again. If it’s not Jews, it’s not news.
