Did Reuters Crop a Photo to Remove a Peace Activist's Weapon

[Proto Profile]

Did Reuters Crop a Photo to Remove a Peace Activist's Weapon?

A Turkish newpaper has released photos taken by the “peace activists” aboard the Mavi Marmara, showing them attempting to take injured Israeli soldiers hostage.

Here’s one of the pictures; notice the knife held by a “peace activist” in the lower right corner:



And here’s the same photo as released by Reuters earlier today:



That’s a very interesting way to crop the photo. Most people would consider that knife an important part of the context. There was a huge controversy over whether the activists were armed. Cropping out a knife, in a picture showing a soldier who’s apparently been stabbed, seems like a very odd editorial decision.

Unless someone was trying to hide it.

One picture cropped to remove a knife might be explained as incompetence or a simple mistake.

But now we have two pictures from the “peace activists” that were cropped by someone at Reuters to remove knives in the hands of the activists, as they attempted to take soldiers hostage.

Reuters has published this picture from the activists:


The picture is a cropped version of this photo from the IHH website (IHH is the Islamist group whose members rioted aboard the Mavi Marmara):


What did the Reuters photo editor crop out? A big knife and a big pool of blood.


And it gets worse. I took the photo into Photoshop and increased the exposure to lighten the dark areas, and discovered that they didn’t just crop out the knife and blood — they also cropped out another badly injured Israeli soldier lying on the floor.


And this would not be the first time that Reuters has been caught altering photos for propaganda purposes.

they did it in 2005 as well after israeli air raid in Beirut .
fake:

original:


http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article ... sts_Weapon

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article ... l_of_Blood

[Mayafan Profile]

zionism is the problem
not the people who want there land back

by the way the occupists started shooting before they
entered the marmaris according to an israeli pm who was on board of the marmaris.

[Proto Profile]

like you have any idea what Zionism really means

[Proto Profile]

according to an israeli pm who was on board of the marmaris.

yeah the same arab pm that claimed that there wasn't any violence from the peace activists...
we all saw how reliable her claims was .

[Jfriss Profile]

zionism is the problem
not the people who want there land back

by the way the occupists started shooting before they
entered the marmaris according to an israeli pm who was on board of the marmaris.

The British or the Turks?

I want you to tell me about their flag, the borders, the regime, the currency, some details would help

[Eliakim Profile Website]

Did Reuters Crop a Photo to Remove a Peace Activist's Weapon?

A Turkish newpaper has released photos taken by the “peace activists” aboard the Mavi Marmara, showing them attempting to take injured Israeli soldiers hostage.

Here’s one of the pictures; notice the knife held by a “peace activist” in the lower right corner:



And here’s the same photo as released by Reuters earlier today:



That’s a very interesting way to crop the photo. Most people would consider that knife an important part of the context. There was a huge controversy over whether the activists were armed. Cropping out a knife, in a picture showing a soldier who’s apparently been stabbed, seems like a very odd editorial decision.

Unless someone was trying to hide it.

One picture cropped to remove a knife might be explained as incompetence or a simple mistake.

But now we have two pictures from the “peace activists” that were cropped by someone at Reuters to remove knives in the hands of the activists, as they attempted to take soldiers hostage.

Reuters has published this picture from the activists:


The picture is a cropped version of this photo from the IHH website (IHH is the Islamist group whose members rioted aboard the Mavi Marmara):


What did the Reuters photo editor crop out? A big knife and a big pool of blood.


And it gets worse. I took the photo into Photoshop and increased the exposure to lighten the dark areas, and discovered that they didn’t just crop out the knife and blood — they also cropped out another badly injured Israeli soldier lying on the floor.


And this would not be the first time that Reuters has been caught altering photos for propaganda purposes.

they did it in 2005 as well after israeli air raid in Beirut .
fake:

original:


http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article ... sts_Weapon

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article ... l_of_Blood

Pics?

[Septeloid Profile]

:roll:

like you have any idea what Zionism really means

ZIONISM:
the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, advocated, from its inception, tangible as well as spiritual aims. Jews of all persuasions, left and right, religious and secular, joined to form the Zionist movement and worked together toward these goals. Disagreements led to rifts, but ultimately, the common goal of a Jewish state in its ancient homeland was attained.

The term “Zionism” was coined in 1890 by Nathan Birnbaum, founder of the first nationalist Jewish students' movement Kadimah, in his journal 'Selbstemanzipation' (Self Emancipation)

Zionism has been opposed by a wide variety of organizations and individuals. Arab states continue to reject the Zionist philosophy which underwrote the creation of Israel and in particular allege that the displacement of some 700,000 Arab refugees in the 1948 Palestinian exodus[25] and the subsequent conflict is the inevitable consequence of the re-establishment of the Jewish State.

Haredi Jewish communities are non-Zionist but willing to participate in Israeli coalitions. A minority, (the Satmar Hasidim and the small Neturei Karta group) are strongly anti-Zionist.

During the last quarter of 20th century, classic nationalism in Israel declined. This led to the rise of two antagonistic movements: neo-Zionism and post-Zionism. Both movements mark the Israeli version of a worldwide phenomenon:

* the emergence of globalization, a market society and liberal culture
* a local backlash.

Neo-Zionism and post-Zionism share traits with "classical" Zionism but differ by accentuating antagonist and diametrically opposed poles already present in Zionism. "Neo Zionism accentuates the messianic and particularistic dimensions of Zionist nationalism, while post-Zionism accentuates its normalising and universalistic dimensions".[27] Post-Zionism asserts that Israel should abandon the concept of a "state of the Jewish people" and strive to be a state of all its citizens,[28] or a binational state in which Arabs and Jews live together while enjoying some type of autonomy.

Source: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Zionism/zionism.html
&
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism

[Proto Profile]

Pics?

hmmm . the pictures where there few minutes ago

well ,don't know what happened to it , check the link to the original article :

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article ... sts_Weapon

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article ... l_of_Blood

edit , now i can see the pics again , do you ?

[Proto Profile]

:roll:

like you have any idea what Zionism really means

ZIONISM:
the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, advocated, from its inception, tangible as well as spiritual aims. Jews of all persuasions, left and right, religious and secular, joined to form the Zionist movement and worked together toward these goals. Disagreements led to rifts, but ultimately, the common goal of a Jewish state in its ancient homeland was attained.

The term “Zionism” was coined in 1890 by Nathan Birnbaum, founder of the first nationalist Jewish students' movement Kadimah, in his journal 'Selbstemanzipation' (Self Emancipation)

Zionism has been opposed by a wide variety of organizations and individuals. Arab states continue to reject the Zionist philosophy which underwrote the creation of Israel and in particular allege that the displacement of some 700,000 Arab refugees in the 1948 Palestinian exodus[25] and the subsequent conflict is the inevitable consequence of the re-establishment of the Jewish State.

Haredi Jewish communities are non-Zionist but willing to participate in Israeli coalitions. A minority, (the Satmar Hasidim and the small Neturei Karta group) are strongly anti-Zionist.

During the last quarter of 20th century, classic nationalism in Israel declined. This led to the rise of two antagonistic movements: neo-Zionism and post-Zionism. Both movements mark the Israeli version of a worldwide phenomenon:

* the emergence of globalization, a market society and liberal culture
* a local backlash.

Neo-Zionism and post-Zionism share traits with "classical" Zionism but differ by accentuating antagonist and diametrically opposed poles already present in Zionism. "Neo Zionism accentuates the messianic and particularistic dimensions of Zionist nationalism, while post-Zionism accentuates its normalising and universalistic dimensions".[27] Post-Zionism asserts that Israel should abandon the concept of a "state of the Jewish people" and strive to be a state of all its citizens,[28] or a binational state in which Arabs and Jews live together while enjoying some type of autonomy.

Source: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Zionism/zionism.html
&
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism

here is some more info :

Zionism — What it is and isn’t

Historically, Zionism is a movement that began in the 19th century, a kind of patriotic awakening like that of many other national groups. Its practical realization received great impetus from European antisemitism: Zionists like Herzl believed that Jews living as minorities would always be persecuted, and that the only way they could live normal lives would be as citizens of a Jewish state, like Frenchmen or Germans in their states. Many (but not all) early Zionists believed that the Jewish state should be in the historical Jewish homeland, the land of Israel.

You can read more about the history and development of Zionism here.

What it is

Today, since the establishment of the State of Israel, Zionism has come to mean the view that the Jewish state is fully legitimate and belongs to the Jewish people; that it is in some sense the center of Jewish life (even though many Jews and even Zionists don’t live there), and that it must be protected and supported.

Zionism demands that Jews have the rights of self-determination and self-defense. It has been called the “movement of national liberation for the Jewish people” since Jews living under unfriendly regimes around the world have migrated to Israel in order to be able to exercise their basic human rights (often including the right to life).

Zionism does not specify exactly what the borders of the state should be. Zionist arguments can be made for keeping all the territories or for withdrawing to the Green Line.

Zionism does not require that civil rights of non-Jewish minorities living in Israel be limited in any way, but it does demand that the State of Israel have a Jewish character. Israel is a democratic Jewish state. Despite what anti-Zionists may say, these characteristics are not contradictory.

Zionism and Israel are under attack ideologically and physically today in a way which is almost unprecedented, due to a confluence of geopolitical and economic factors, religious issues, antisemitism, and advances in media technology.

What it isn’t

The word ‘Zionism’ is one of the most misapplied in any language. It is a magnet for antisemitic speakers and writers, who have used it to mean whatever they like in the service of their hateful agendas.

Zionism does not imply that Jews are superior to Arabs or anyone else. It does not imply that Jews have a privileged relationship to God. There are religiously observant and secular Zionists; indeed a Zionist doesn’t even have to be Jewish. It has nothing to do with racism, communism, capitalism, atheism, militarism or indeed any other ‘ism’. Zionists do not wish to conquer the world, or even the Middle East, nor do they wish to secretly control the behavior of various nations.

Zionism per se is not significantly different from the desire of other groups — the French, the Germans, even the Palestinians — to live in their own homeland. As embodied in the democratic State of Israel it is arguably more enlightened than many national ideologies.

http://fresnozionism.org/zionism-what-it-is-and-isnt/

and thanks to corn for pointing me to this article .

[Jfriss Profile]

zionism is the problem
not the people who want there land back

by the way the occupists started shooting before they
entered the marmaris according to an israeli pm who was on board of the marmaris.

The British or the Turks?

I want you to tell me about their flag, the borders, the regime, the currency, some details would help

Where did he go? why he didn't answer me, I'm curious..





.