Comrade Asa, a brave British journalist, sent me this:
"The BBC did a segment reporting on the NYT report and video that showed
FSA fighters forcing an alleged "shabiha" prisoner into acting as a
suicide bomber.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/world/middleeast/syrian-rebels-coalesce-into-a-fighting-force.html
I'm reliably informed this went out on the main BBC TV news report at
10pm yesterday -- a well respected Amnesty International figure was on
live to condemn it.
The clip went up on the BBC site in the usual way, but as of today it
has been sneakily disappeared, with no explanation from their site: "404
- Page Not Found" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19342917
Attached is screenshot evidence the page existed on the BBC site.
Someone else uploaded the video to YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n76o-ilK2x8&feature=youtube_gdata_player
but that copy has already been removed too "due to a BBC copyright
claim". At the time of writing this email, the report is viewable here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZKrEtEaVnM
If this was really a copyright violation, wouldn't you think it was the
NYT's copyright being violated?"
PS If a title appears in quotations marks (as it does above) it means that I did not phrase the title but that the person who sent me the post or comment did.
"The BBC did a segment reporting on the NYT report and video that showed
FSA fighters forcing an alleged "shabiha" prisoner into acting as a
suicide bomber.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/world/middleeast/syrian-rebels-coalesce-into-a-fighting-force.html
I'm reliably informed this went out on the main BBC TV news report at
10pm yesterday -- a well respected Amnesty International figure was on
live to condemn it.
The clip went up on the BBC site in the usual way, but as of today it
has been sneakily disappeared, with no explanation from their site: "404
- Page Not Found" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19342917
Attached is screenshot evidence the page existed on the BBC site.
Someone else uploaded the video to YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n76o-ilK2x8&feature=youtube_gdata_player
but that copy has already been removed too "due to a BBC copyright
claim". At the time of writing this email, the report is viewable here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZKrEtEaVnM
If this was really a copyright violation, wouldn't you think it was the
NYT's copyright being violated?"
PS If a title appears in quotations marks (as it does above) it means that I did not phrase the title but that the person who sent me the post or comment did.
