We just posted about the curious use of the following photo to illustrate a story by Chris McGreal on Nov. 7, titled ‘ Obama’s in-tray – Israel/Palestine.
While our post pertained to McGreal’s false claim that Israeli PM Netanyahu refused President Obama’s request to institute a 10 month settlement building freeze, the photo looked familiar so I spent some time after our post was published trying to trace it’s origins.
It was used six days ago, Nov. 2, in a ‘Comment is Free’ piece, advocating a bi-national solution, by David Wearing.
It was also used to illustrate a 2007 Guardian report by Conal Urquhart.
However, then I came across what appears to be a photo of the same Palestinian pictured above evidently climbing the very wall he’s then seen, in other photos, standing on. The photo which dates back to Nov. 15, 2005 is posted at a site called ‘American Intifada‘.
Here’s a closer look:
He certainly seems to be the same man seen in the photos above.
Sure enough, a final search finds a direct hit for that date, Nov. 15, of the man once he somehow climbed up to the top of the security fence.
The photo will turn 7 years old on Nov. 15, and there seems to be little doubt that we’ll see this iconic symbol of Palestinian ‘resistance’ for years to come.
Related articles
- Chris McGreal lies about Israeli building freeze (cifwatch.com)
- PCC to rule that Guardian’s Conal Urquhart ‘significantly misled’ readers in flotilla story (cifwatch.com)
- Round-up of the Guardian’s Israel coverage – September 2012 (cifwatch.com)
- Rachel Shabi has “fresh hope” that the Jewish state may cease to exist (cifwatch.com)
- Do you support Arab progress? Then, listen to genuine Arab liberals & reject Guardian’s analysis. (cifwatch.com)
- What the Guardian won’t report: Fatah FB page posts pic of mother placing suicide belt on her child (cifwatch.com)
- Guardian interviewee casually suggests Israel is attempting to ethnically cleanse Palestinians (cifwatch.com)
- Antony Loewenstein imagines a Hamas-approved future ‘After Zionism’ (cifwatch.com)
- The Guardian: 1 photo, 22 words, no context and so much disinformation (cifwatch.com)
- The end of Israel will have to wait: On the patient anti-Zionism of the Guardian Left. (cifwatch.com)
Applied Art: the old tool of the left, used by the Soviets, Maoists, Cubans and the Arab nationalists-trained at the Lumumba Univ. of Soviet agitation. The nationalist cause becomes more legit with a nice art-work. They trained the photographers to pose, stage and arrange for photo opportunities and clever graphical set-ups, to make a case for heir “plight”, while controlling the media and the numerous outlets where this propaganda material is shown.
Eh? What’s your problem with Lumumba? You a fan of Mobutu or what??
What’s your problem with flags? Israelis love waving the Israeli flag, Palestinians love waving the Palestinian flag, Brits love waving the British flag.
The point being ?
“The point being?”
Anti-Israel propaganda.
Jeff, how can a Palestinian or a British flag be “anti-Israel propaganda”?
Well spotted. What I don’t get is that journalists must surely know about Google’s image search.
For those not in the know: paste the URL of the image into the search box:
I’d perform an example here – but the URL is too long!
Why do you want to forbid a Palestinian from climbing up a Wall built partly in the palestinian territory? Are you against freedom of expression?
What’s the smiley for –slaps–forehead–?
Which Palestinian territory?
The have-been Jordan one?
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=289948
Fritz, have you never attended classes in history and geography?
I never attended right extremist circles or Arab tell-taling schools, only earned a degree in history and political science, poor me.
You better learn something useful for your life, pottery could do it, otherwise gifted one.
Fritz , Israeli settlements are in violation of article 49 (6) of the 4th Geneva Convention. Article 49 (6 ) of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits a state from transferring parts of its own civilian population to territory it occupies, does not merely prohibit the occupying state from forcefully transferring parts of its population; it also prohibits any action by the occupier which facilitates such transfer.
The International Court of Justice, the ICRC and several resolutions of the UN Securoity Council confirmed that settlements are illegal.
Last week, ICRC officially confirmed that Israeli settlements are illegal:
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/the-levy-report-vs-international-law-1.474129
I can understand the chagrin about the photo but not about its age. It is meant to be iconic. Would you have the iconic photo of the raising of the US flag over that island whatever its name in WW2 on account of its age ? I ask again. The point being ?
‘That island whatever its name’? The respect for the iconic photo just drips offa ya, doesn’t it?
What, you still call it Sulphur Island or something?