Missile story iv

The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info

Last updated on March 6th, 2018 at 12:31 am

A righteous tip o’ the hat to Bonjour Triteness, who suggests a complete picture of the Red Cross ambulance attack may only be achieved by combining Martin Chulov’s two reports:

* The “first ambulance”, no. 782, was speeding in a convoy AND stationary;

* The six people on board the convoy were all severely injured except Shalin the driver AND only two were severely injured;

* Shalin was protected by the driver’s canopy AND by the vehicle’s rear ramp;

* The ambulance/convoy was struck by a rocket/s AND missile/s fired by an Apache helicopter that was also a drone;

* The missile pierced the centre of the red cross on ambulance 782 AND “an explosion thundered” into the ambulance;

* Shalin “remembers nothing” after the flash-bang-crunch of the crash AND he remembers that “then there was a battle for the next hour” and “we hid in a building convinced we were going to die”.

The Australian’s readers aren’t impressed:

Chulov stands by his original story? Then why did he change all of his original details?

And from Tony Parkinson, now media advisor to Alexander Downer:

I’m sure I’m not the only reader of The Australian to have been mystified once confronted by the photographic evidence of these attacks: a single hole in a roof; the vehicle otherwise intact, and little sign in the vehicle’s interior of explosion or fire. As a former war correspondent with The Australian, I witnessed the scenes of devastation on the so-called Highway to Hell outside Kuwait City during Operation Desert Storm in 1991. Hundreds of molten wreckages littering that battlefield had been struck by missiles fired by US Apache helicopters. If, indeed, this ambulance in Lebanon had taken a direct hit from an Apache assault helicopter, the outcome was like no other I had seen …

I have no quarrel with Chulov wishing to stand by his story. I simply make the point that it has become a different story to that he reported on July 26.

Readers of this site are also sceptical. Dan Lewis:

It’s funny. I would have thought the lefties could use this as a rare chance to really lay the boot into Murdoch and News Ltd (owners of The Australian).

It seems, however, they may be too distracted laying the boot into Jews.


If you look at the hole in the roof of that ambulance it is quite obvious that those evil Zionists have developed the ultimate WMD – air to surface angle grinders. No muslim emergency services vehicle will be safe! Not even SPECTRE could come up with something so diabolical. God help us all.

Francis H.:

Could Chulov be so clueless not to notice that the story had changed so completely, and precisely in a way to explain the doubts raised by the blogs?

And Currency Lad:

The wider context for today’s embarrassing leader is the newspaper’s campaign to discredit Alexander Downer – whose resignation an unnamed editorialist for The Australian has called for over the AWB affair … Their resentment boiled over today with this hilarious attempt to argue that the people who told Chulov a pack of lies must now be believed because he checked with the liars a second time.

Previous posts on this matter herehereherehereherehereherehere, and here.

Posted by Tim B. on 08/31/2006 at 02:01 PM
(61) Comments • Permalink