FALSE REPORTING BY TB JOSHUA CRITICS ON SCOAN BUILDING

Today something incredibly revealing happened in the blogosphere. Something we would not have believed even if we were told. The vocal TBJ critic blog who assert themselves an authority in everything TB Joshua and SCOAN published an article on the SCOAN tragedy. In the article, they posted a photo of the collapsed building to undermine the theory of a controlled demolition with the caption:

SCOAN say that the collapse must have been a controlled explosion because it was “rapid, total and near-symmetrical”. Does this photo support the theory?

The revealing fact of this sordid attempt to debunk the theory of controlled demolition is that the photo they used WAS NOT AT ALL the photo of the synagogue rubble, but another photo of a separate collapse elsewhere. A fact which a commenter by the name Andrew pointed out to them in these words:

1. Andrew says:November 3, 2014 at 6:46 am
@TBJwatch, please, that photo you posted in this article is not the photo of the building that collapsed at SCOAN, PLEASSE, why must you mislead people with it. that was not a photo of the collapsed building. that building that collapsed, collapsed totally, what is wrong with you guys? what is your problem, Just what are you planning to achieve with this? in your search for a photo to use in this post, you ignored all the live photos of the disaster taken by different journalists and even news crews and go over a limb to use a different photo from that of the collapse. may God judge this evil machination of yours, may God judge, may God judge since there is a God

To which the critic watch blog replied:
• tbjoshuawatch says:November 3, 2014 at 7:08 am

@Andrew – apologies for that, you are in fact correct. The photo we used had been widely used in articles about the SCOAN tragedy, but on further investigation it turns out to not be a photo of that. We have no intention to mislead people, and sincerely apologise for using the wrong image. We are removing it immediately.

To many, this may not seem like much, but if you have been following their articles numbering over ten since the SCOAN tragedy, you would agree that this is a massive deal.

How come an acclaimed authority on this subject, having published close to ten articles on the building collapse, cannot rightly distinguish a dissimilar photo from an actual photo of the collapse rubble? even with the more than obvious striking differences?

Here are the differences below that escaped the notice of the vocal critic blog and their legion of supporters.

1. The photo they used only showed the partial collapse of a building, whereas the SCOAN guest house collapse was total.

2. The photo they used showed a building not roofed, still in construction, whereas the SCOAN guest house was completely roofed.

3. The photo they showed as the SCOAN building was a three storey building, whereas the collapse building was a six-storey building.

If they could not rightly identify a photo of the collapse rubble which is sprawled on the internet, and in error posted a false photo, how then can they rightly discern and distinguish the facts of this tragedy from the ongoing rumors?

We leave that for you to judge who consider them “A comprehensive resource on TB Joshua and SCOAN.

The lame idea of an excuse they gave for their error was this:

tbjoshuawatch says:
November 3, 2014 at 7:08 am
@Andrew – apologies for that, you are in fact correct. The photo we used had been widely used in articles about the SCOAN tragedy,…”

So they went ahead to use it without even knowing for certain or at least finding out if it was the real photo; despite this lopsided reporting and sheer negligence, they earlier in the comments replied a commenter saying:

• tbjoshuawatch says:November 3, 2014 at 4:22 am

@mandela if you read our article, you'd see we have done our research…

..and a proceed of the said research was the posting of a fake photo to overcome the truth, for which they were duly reprimanded by a reader.

This is foolproof evidence that these writers are far from reality. Even, why speak us of reality when they did not even know the truth? If they had known how the collapse rubble really looked like, they would NEVER have mistaken a false photo for the true one. When you know the truth, what is false is easy to tell. These critic bloggers did not even know how a real photo of the rubble looked like; yet they assert themselves as knowing the circumstances and facts surrounding the collapse. Very impulsive.

After replacing the photo with the original picture, why did they not leave the original quote underneath intact: which said:

SCOAN say that the collapse must have been a controlled explosion because it was “rapid, total and near-symmetrical”. Does this photo support the theory?

They could not because they know very well that the actual true photo of the rubble very well tells all that needs to be told of the tragedy, but they would rather not admit because of their prejudice. Neither they nor their legion of anti-Joshua commeters could discern all of this, what a blow. One of their most prolific commenters even had the guts to say this:

Jesse says:

November 3, 2014 at 2:05 pm
@ Andrew, What difference does it make what picture you use. You fall over a picture ?????

On a final note, the question remains, can people who could not do so little as identify a fake photo of the collapse rubble, rightly tell you of the truth of the tragedy's cause? If you think so feel free to listen to them; but for us, this mistake of theirs is a whistle blower of their evil machination, audible to the deaf, lucid to the blind and tangible to the paralytic.

If you still believe that writers who needed their readers help to identify a false photo of the collapse rubble can tell you any truth of the collapse, feel free to listen on. You may even laud them for owning up to such a malignant error, but then it is less to their glory for admittance and more to their shame for such depth of ignorance on this subject.