Along Israel’s border with Lebanon, east of Metulla, some bushes were pushing in on the border fence. The fence is set in slightly from the border precisely so that Israeli soldiers can work on it. The IDF called UNIFIL and informed the UN that this work was going to be done today so that they could tell the Lebanese army that there was no aggression going on but just routine maintenance. Soldiers from UNIFIL came to observe and can be seen standing next to Israeli soldiers in the photos. Photographers were also standing by to film the operation.But Lebanese soldiers opened fire on the Israelis who were working and in no way acting aggressively. The fact that journalists were standing next to the Lebanese soldiers shows that they knew Israel was going to do this maintenance and were observing. After the Israeli soldiers were ambushed, they returned fire.
One Israeli officer was killed, another seriously wounded; three Lebanese soldiers and a Lebanese journalist for a Syrian-backed pro-Hizballah newspaper were killed. Interesting question: why would a reporter be in the far south of Lebanon to watch people trim trees, unless he knew that there was going to be a shooting attack by the Lebanese side? (No Israeli reporters had been informed or invited of the routine maintenance operation.)
So how did Reuters and Yahoo report this? By saying that Israeli soldiers had crossed into Lebanon and been fired on, thus implying the Lebanese army was acting in self-defense! Other news agencies merely reported: Israel says the soldiers were inside Israel; Lebanon says they were on Lebanese territory.
So an obvious case of non-provocation is turned, by the lapdog media, into a case of he-said, she-said.
Even when Israel is right, they’re wrong.