Is it true the New York Times has published the Palmer´s Report? What does it finally say?
A long-awaited United Nations review of Israel’s 2010 raid on a Turkish-based flotilla in which nine passengers were killed has found that Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza is both legal and appropriate.
“Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza,” the report says in its opening paragraphs. “The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.”
The report is hard on the flotilla, asserting that it “acted recklessly in attempting to breach the naval blockade.” Turkey, who was the official sponsor of the flotilla, is of course hysterical because it makes Turkey and Erdogan personally responsible for the breach of the International Law and siding with the provocateurs and bandits.
The report, expected to be released Friday, also found that when Israeli commandos boarded the main ship, they faced “organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers” and were therefore required to use force for their own protection. But the report called the force “excessive and unreasonable,” saying that the loss of life was unacceptable and that the Israeli military’s later treatment of passengers was abusive.
Turkey is particularly upset by the conclusion that Israel’s naval blockade is in keeping with international law and that its forces have the right to stop Gaza-bound ships in international waters, which is what happened in the 2010 episode because it makes Turkey the easy target for the accusations of sidingwith the terrorists and of breaching the Intwernational Law, which, if Israel decides to sue Turkey, will mean Turkey will have to pay billions of dollars in compensation. Besides, it gives a serious blow to the international prestige of Turkey.
So, when will Turkey apologize before Israel?
How do I become a photographer for the New York Times?
Now, keep in mind, that I'm younger than you, but I have been looking at the different paths to that type of job for months upon months now.
I think that a degree in photography is pretty much a must. I think all art based industry are fueled by people having connections, so I'm only looking into going to school in areas that have that type of community; NYC, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, etc. Also, virtually no one goes directly to working at highly prestigious publications like the New York Times. I think the best thing you can do is do everything you possibly can to get other people to see your work. Try to get published in really small publications that may not even fit your work that well. Create a flickr account and interact with other photographers. Just, whatever you can do to get noticed.
That is my best advice, and it's all pretty obvious stuff. but I tried, right?
How much would the addition of the New York Times be of the Titanic of 1912?
Most likely it would have sold for about 3 to 5 cents.
My best guess for an appraisal would be that it might sell for about $100-$200, if it's in good condition, and if it's bought by a serious collector. You should look on E*Bay where lots of sellers post old historical newspapers for sale. Watch some of those auctions and you'll see what they typically go for and you'll get a good general idea, before you start putting down any money on a serious appraiser.
What is a legitimate alternative to the New York Times?
The only newspaper I subscribe to is the Wall Street Journal. A little dry but good old fashioned unbiased reporting. It is strongly bent towards economic news. It's a tad expensive but hey, if you want quality journalism...
If you want general interest, fashion news, gossip, or slanted reporting, it's not your paper. If you're blindly Liberal, two choices: read the Journal and learn, or scream loudly in denial. This paper really doesn't pander to any political bent.
The NY Times as you've discovered is awfull. I periodically read it when visiting my folks. They really don't like it either but it's marginally better than the S.F. Chronicle (Comical as it's known around here) and the L.A. Times. Obviously, they're poor rags and a waste of reading time.
For news of international importance, I look to Canada's press and the BBC to get away from the U.S. viewpoint (on-line, both). Periodically, I'll look at Israel's press when a coworker gives me a head's up.
We miss an enormous amount of news and perspectives of real importance here due to our press. There's too much the U.S. press completely ignores or slants these days.
Hope this helps.
What is the number for the new york times and the arizona republic?
It all depends on which department you want to contact.
New York Times - Contact Us:
Arizona Republic - Contact Us:
When did the new york times start printing color photography?
According to Wikipedia:
"[The New York Times] stayed with an eight-column format until September 1976, years after other papers had switched to six, and it was one of the last newspapers to adopt color photography, with the first color photograph on the front page appearing on October 16, 1997."
Prior to that, on June 6th, 1993, full color was used for the first time in the Sunday Book Review section, according to New York Times' corperate website. "Other Sunday sections – Travel, Arts and Leisure, and Real Estate – soon follow[ed]."
I've seen no reference to the VJ Day photograph mentioned above in my research.