Our previous UN disputes Lebanese claim Israel violated border review was very brief.
We just pointed out the full scope of the news that you might not have had.
You removed this report from your collection (after it found readily acceptance around the Web) and rewrote history under the new title “Flare-up over tree accents Israel-Lebanon tension.” This was posted at 1:19 PM. Then we wrote to you. Then you republished the report at 5:08 PM with three extra paragraphs about a meeting that then had taken place with representatives of the Israeli and Lebanese armies and UNIFIL.
But you added nothing from what we sent, nor to the identical 7:29 PM EDT version.
This is serious.
The purged report by 6 reporters and edited anonymously is worthy of any con artist.
But that still could be an oversight or unintentional imperfection.
However, after ignoring the content of our email, the defect becomes deliberate.
Let’s go into some details to see how serious a fraud this is.
The most read and so the most important part, the headline was biased to start with.
You HAD TO restate the (false) “claim Israel violated border”?
Why not: “UN validates Israel’s border claim”?
The only thing that could save this report after that, would be its first line.
Well, the opening clause is deceptive too.
It pretends that the dispute was about legality of Israel’s maintenance at the border.
It completely ignores that this was routine work, as always coordinated with UNIFIL.
UNIFIL had notified the Lebanese army, that cynically used this to set up an ambush.
A sniper attack on senior Israeli commanders, not even close to these border works.
You pretend that this was a border attack and ignore anything Israel had said about it.
You became the fig leaf for a sniper attack. How low can one fall?
Then you continue to label this a “clash,” obscuring that there was a clear aggressor.
You compound this falsehood by pointing out that “how volatile the border remains.”
Volatile borders don’t kill. A decision was made to try to kill Israelis.
Israel does not “occasionally” cut down shrubs and trees there, but regularly.
Your first quotes on what happened are for…. the Lebanese army and “a witness.”
You print the lie “U.N. peacekeepers intervened to ask the Israeli to stop cutting the tree, but Israel refused” and add that UNIFIL has not commented on that. So any lie that is not condemned verbatim you can print as undisputed truth?
Then comes a brilliant paragraph. Look at that. Anyone with too little time on his/her hands will at least see this line: “Both sides claimed the tree was in their territory.”
There it stands, proudly & small. Among all the wordy paragraphs this is an eye catcher.
AP, this is not bringing the news, this is manipulating the reader.
They both claimed it, but one was lying and you knew it.
You just wrote the UN confirmation in your verbose introduction.
But you go from strength to strength, and even improve on this one.
Then you go on to state that “Lebanon acknowledged that the tree was south of the Blue Line” but you describe the demarcation as “an official, U.N.-drawn boundary, drawn in 2000 following the end of a two-decade Israeli occupation of south Lebanon that began with a war in 1982.”
Never missing a chance to manipulate the public!
The Blue Line was not imposed on Lebanon.
Rather, it was agreed upon and ratified as UN Resolution 1701, by Lebanon too.
But you don’t write “Lebanon violated UN Resolution 1701.”
(And you happily insert “Israeli occupation of south Lebanon” leaving out that that was Israel’s self-defense against terrorist Hezbollah, always ready to label Israel aggressor.)
No, you have even better in store for us.
“Lebanese Information Minister Tarek Mitri said his country disputes the Blue Line demarcation in certain areas, including the village of Adeisseh where the clash took place, and saw Israel’s act as a clear provocation.” (Now, THAT is chutzpah.)
In other words: it would not matter that it was south of the Blue Line.
Only after that lie, you let UNIFIL & Israel explain that this was south of the Blue Line.
O, yes, Israel get quoted too – from paragraph # 8.
On and on AP goes, but not a word about the sniper attack that this was on Israeli commanders not even close to the excuse tree for the shooting.
Meanwhile Mitri, the Lebanese minister, maintained that Lebanon had not been notified in advance of the pruning, while it had cynically used the info to set up the ambush.
Giving all the cameras and journalists in the area, we see that THEY were notified.
Despite our earlier warning that the murderers were probably from Hezbollah, you don’t hesitate to deny that.
Brazenly, you round off by describing “Wednesday’s funerals.”
We read about Lebanese Sgt. Abdullah Tufeili’s 3-year-old daughter, Zahraa, and 6-year-old son, Mohammed Jawad.
It seems that the Israeli murder victim was not laid to rest (but he was) and not an iota about his four children that lost their father to hatred of Jews.
AP, no one needs to disgrace you.
You do it all by yourself.