Thanks for that Geezer. I suspected it was discharging fuel, but why would it be doing that whilst on a search mission over a large area of ocean?
As you probably rightly say - lazy reporting by the BBC. Which poses the question, how many other images does the BBC broadcast that are not entirely accurate reporting? If the BBC is using library pictures then it should have the integrity to clearly say so in its 'report'. I suggest that where the article is concluded by stating “Mike Wooldridge reports”, is actually no such thing – it is a manufactured artificial construct of video jigsaw pieces spliced together to create a story to the BBC's liking.
This reminds me of those wild-life shots where the BBC was later found to have used in-zoo shots of polar bear cubs, whilst deceitfully leaving the viewer to assume that the BBC had gained actual live footage of cubs in the wild. It should leave us asking, how much more that the BBC broadcasts can be relied upon to be truthful reporting.
To regard this as lazy reporting on behalf of the BBC is providing the BBC with an excuse it doesn't deserve – it is deceit. We have MPs wrongfully claiming expenses and being described as a 'mistake' worthy only of an apology, and banksters committing large scale fraud and continuing to rake in huge bonuses. We live in an age where deceit, lies, and wholesale theft have become the new standard of morality, and it appears to be affecting the whole of officialdom; the political, corporate, and media arenas.
When the BBC, or any other media, broadcasts pictures of human bodies supposedly cut-down by bullets or bomb blasts, how are we now to believe anything the BBC broadcasts? I recall those TV images of the BBC reporter stating that the World Trade Centre had collapsed due to the terrorists flying aircraft into them, and the building could clearly be seen still standing in the background behind the reporter saying the building had collapsed. Frankly, I no longer trust anything the BBC reports.
|
