From another article I read only two bullets hit the building. And "precise" shots? How precise does a bullet need to be to hit a multi-level building? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/22/al-jazeera-shots-fired-gaza-office_n_5609163.html That article also says this... Yet they failed to link any source for that. Not saying it is or is not true, but if you're going to write as a journalist that a countries defense force officially confirmed it, maybe they should link some kind of source. I'm not trying to be an apologist here, but I am a man trying to show some caution. OF COURSE Al Jeazeera said they were being attacked with "precise shots", but don't say how many shots or where. The other articles I've read just said TWO shots hit the building, with a vague "Israel confirmed it" but no citations or sources that they did admit to it. Here, let's look at another article.... http://news.yahoo.com/al-jazeera-reporters-evacuate-gaza-offices-shots-fired-130900346.html So they saw the Israeli soldier who fired these two shots? But Al Jazeera said it was confirmed by the Israeli Defense? But Israel is saying they never said anything, and again, the Al Jazeera article sites zero sources. So it's not just Al Jazeera, but Israel is also apparently firing "precise shots" at the AP as well? How come the article isn't AP targeted by Israeli precise shots? Because that doesn't draw as much sympathy towards the Palestinian side... I'm not on either side of this conflict, as I don't have a horse in this race. But people need to wise up and realize that this war is just as much a war for control of the media and internet sentiment as it is for actual objectives. Hamas knows they will never beat Israel in a war, but they know they can draw sympathy and a negative view of Israel on the internet. "Two bullets hit Al Jazeera building" turned into "Two precise intentional shots confirmed as a threat from the Israel Defense forces warning they will kill journalists if they keep broadcasting. Again, not saying I know what happened either way, but read more about this than the article from Al Jazeera and it's unclear what actually happened. A building getting hit by a couple random bullets isn't unheard of in a war zone. The real sad part is everyone here (so far) has just swallowed this story as 100% fact. You ask me, yeah the building got hit by two bullets, but it could have been Hamas, could have been Iasrael, and either way it was probably just an accident. But that doesn't sound as profound as "ISRAEL ATTACKING JOURNALISTS!" Challenge everything you read when it comes to this conflict. Read multiple sources. Don't listen to anything coming out of either horses mouth.Al Jazeera English’s Nicole Johnston tweeted that the Israeli Defense Forces confirmed firing two shots at the news bureau.
Al Jazeera evacuated their newsroom in Gaza City on Tuesday, saying an Israeli soldier had fired two shots into the building.
An Israeli military spokeswoman said she was unaware of any such action, adding that there was a lot of gunfire in Gaza from all sides.
Al Jazeera works in the same tower block as U.S. media organization Associated Press
We all know who's winning that one. What's really confusing me this week is Israel's utter lack of effort toward any sort of positive PR. I can't tell if they really, truly don't care about what the world thinks as long as another missile never hits the dome, or if they're just clueless when it comes to exercising restraint and "limited warfare." Take the hospital business. Initially reported by the sorts of websites that have 'intifada' in the title (and also twitter, goes without saying). True? Probably, yeah. Exaggerated? Probably, yeah. But who knows, really. It's not hard to imagine Israel accidentally destroying a hospital -- yeah, they're fighting an urban war. It's also not hard to imagine them targeting one, since it's pretty clear most Israelis don't see Muslims as people at this point. But regardless, why haven't they done any PR control? Why aren't they playing the PR game at all? Basically the only thing Netanyahu has said that I've seen is, "we'll keep this up until we're fucking well finished." Uh... gee. What's Obama have to say about that? I mean, shit.I'm not on either side of this conflict, as I don't have a horse in this race. But people need to wise up and realize that this war is just as much a war for control of the media and internet sentiment as it is for actual objectives.
Al Jazeera is certainly not without bias, but that doesn't mean they forfeit journalistic immunity. However it's not a surprising move on Israel's part -- I would just expect them to do it with more caution and "tact." Actually that pretty much sums up the entire invasion ... I haven't yet been caught off guard by a single thing Israel has done, but the way they've done it is baffling. And putting Obama in a position that he hoped no doubt to graduate from office without encountering again.
I'm sorry did the Israeli foreign minister just confess to firing at an international news organization's office building, and nobody is doing shit?Al Jazeera "has abandoned even the perception of being a reliable news organisation and broadcasts from Gaza and to the world anti-Israel incitement, lies, and encouragement to the terrorists," Lieberman said.
You are correct. It's seems Israel has realized they can do literally anything without any semblance of repercussions. Does anyone here read Polandball? This is a joke and clearly not accurate (as is Polandball's strong point), but I always laugh at this one.
my favorite part about this is going to school and having to smile at people who are definitely cheering on war crimes and crimes against humanity. Also Polandball is hilarious, haven't visited the sub in ages.
