Missile story vii

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 August 9th, 2017 at 09:10 am

The Australian’s Martin Chulov claims:

On July 24, with photographer Stewart Innes, we spoke to Qassem Shalin, who was recovering from a minor wound to his chin that nurses had bandaged to stop it from turning septic. We also visited Ahmed Mohammed Fawaz, whose lower left leg had been amputated and whose severe burns ironically had saved his life by sealing blood vessels and arteries.

Left leg? The San Francisco Chronicle’s Christopher Allbritton says right leg. The Guardian’s Suzanne Goldenberg says right legYour own lyin’ eyes say right leg:
Chulov also believes Zombietime is based in Florida.

(Via Dan Riehl and Saint)

Posted by Tim B. on 09/02/2006 at 06:11 AM
    1. Bad news. It looks like the left arm is gone as well.

      Posted by AusDoug on 2006 09 02 at 06:26 AM • permalink


    1. I know nobody cares much about the rust but I’m interested.  If you look at this report on average weather conditions in Beirut or this one (which appears to show that nothing much has changed with Lebanon’s max and min July temperatures since 1983 despite all the global warmening) you will notice two things.

      First, Chulov said that humidity doesn’t drop below 70% in Lebanon in summer.  In fact, according to these sites, the mean relative humidity there doesn’t reach 70% during the summer.  Of course it may very well get above 70% on some days but on average it doesn’t.  So he has been sloppy or has made stuff up.

      Second, you will see that min and max temps and associated relative humidities for Beirut in July are roughly comparable to those for September where I live.  The pm relative humidity is higher there but it gets hotter here so there’s probably roughly the same amount of water vapour in the air.

      Therefore I would like to report that after two days exposure to similar atmospheric conditions to those that obtain in Lebanon in July (the length of time between the supposed ambulance bombing incident and the publication of photographs of the rusted ambulance roof) my paint-scraped-off-area of verandah post remains bright and shiny.  When I rubbed the spot some rust dust came off on my finger which surprised me because it was completely invisible to the naked eye.

      I have, by my rubbing intervention, buggered up the experiment so that’s the end of it.  But I would like to close by reminding people that Chulov did have a photographer with him when he did his first round of interviewing and ambulance-viewing.  As someone else has said, where are the photographs?

      And thank you, AusDoug, for the laugh.

      Posted by Janice on 2006 09 02 at 06:42 AM • permalink


    1. Didn’t see any signs of burns or burns treatment on the “victims” either. Yet ther’re both supposed to have severe burns…

      Posted by Toosmoky on 2006 09 02 at 06:45 AM • permalink


    1. My guess is that he lost his leg to a combination of peripheral vascular disease and bad medical practice. They do smoke a lot in the middle east you know!

      Posted by captain on 2006 09 02 at 06:47 AM • permalink


    1. Look, who cares if San Francisco is in Florida or elsewhere, or whether it was the left leg, right leg, or off stump.

      Those are just facts, and facts can prove anything remotely true. they’re irrelevant to the story.

      The important things was that the Jews deliberately attacked helpless ambulances, deliberately mind you, probably with guided plastic turkeys.

      Verdict first, trial afterwards, and stories changed to whatever fits the lede.

      Not so long ago, I for one assumed that reporters generally told a pretty fair approximation of the truth. I still think most do. Certainly the few times I’ve been quoted the editing was light, and preserved context.

      Now, when the Age refers to objective forensic data (unmodified photos, videos) as “Evidence” with a sneer, and so many different contradictory versions all labelled a “confirmed story”, I really have to wonder at what passes for journalism in some MSM.

      The ICRC making an effort to hide the, frankly, incriminating, photos also gives me pause, as it should anyone who takes the time to view the whole sordid history of this affair.

      Good luck to anyone trying to find the truth carefully buried in the masses of obfuscation and persiflage designed to obscure the fact that MSM Got It Wrong, and did so by reporting without question words from people with a long record of lying through their teeth. And ignoring inconvenient Facts.

      Posted by Zoe Brain on 2006 09 02 at 07:10 AM • permalink


    1. Agreed Zoe.  We are falling into the trap of arguing over minor details.  It is not as if this issue is a close call.  The fact is that there is no way that any of the ambulances presented in the photos had been hit my a missile.  End. Of. Story.

      Posted by murph on 2006 09 02 at 07:18 AM • permalink


    1. maybe this helps

      here is an experiement on rusty nails
      placing them in various solutions (drinks in this case). Photo reflects about four days of exposure.
      How long had the ambulance been exposed when it was photographed?

      Posted by GeniusNZ on 2006 09 02 at 07:27 AM • permalink


    1. (sorry, I posted this at an older thread but it might be better posted here)

      As an attorney I often find it helpful when dealing with a complicated issue to list the possible categories an issue might fall within and then to determine which one the facts show it as falling into.

      Many people who are just now beginning to read about the attack on the Lebanese ambulance and the questions posed by blogs on the reporting of the incident might be asking what’s all the flack about?

      Well, for many years now claims has been made of various war crimes committed by Israel against innocent people in Lebanon, the West Bank, and Gaza.  It seems to me that these claims could fall under one of the falling categories:

      1.  Israel purposely targeted innocent people to inflict a great number of deaths and suffering.

      2.  Israel fought a battle but targeted civilians, not in an effort to intentionally kill innocent civilians, but nonetheless in a patently negligent fashion.

      3.  Israel fought aggressively in an action it did not seek out but, unfortunately, as a result of the fight, collateral damage was inflicted.

      4.  Israel did not inflict damage but an erroneous conclusion was made that it had, whether by a NGO or by the MSM, said conclusion arrived at through reasonable reporting standards and not under circumstances that show any bias or predisposition to accuse Israel unfairly.

      5.  Israel did not inflict damage but an erroneous conclusion was made that it had, said conclusion arrived at through shodding reporting by MSM or unsubstantiated claims by a NGO such as the ICRC.

      6.  Israel did not inflict damage but an erroneous conclusion was made that it had, said conclusion arrived at through purposely biased reporting by MSM or as a result of biased claims by a NGO.

      7.  Israel did not inflict damage but an erroneous conclusion was made that it had, said conclusion obtained through the manipulation by Hezbollah and allied parties and interests of the story with the cooperation, either knowingly or by gullibility, of the MSM for propaganda purposes.

      Israel’s actions are being watched and judged by all the people of the world.  If it is shown that it’s actions have been found to fall within category 1 or 2, support of the country and especially it’s actions in defending itself will decrease accordingly.  The world can only witness Israel’s actions through news reports published by the MSM.  Unfortunately very few of those are verified by other reliable non-MSM parties.  Consequently, the world has little choice but to rely on the professionalism, neutrality, and objectivity of the MSM to do so in a impartial and transparent fashion.

      Yet the articles on the purported attack on the Lebanese ambulance have drawn into question whether the MSM has fulfilled its responsibility in this area.  The articles appear to have the intent to show that Israel’s actions fall within category 1 or 2.  And yet inspection of the evidence would seem to indicate that they fall within category 5, 6 or 7.

      If that becomes the case, then we must ask ourselves whether the MSM is fulfilling its responsibilities to the world in reporting the facts in an accurate and impartial manner.  And further still, whether it has become a party to the war on the side of Hezbollah.  This is a very grave issue.

      Posted by wronwright on 2006 09 02 at 07:28 AM • permalink


    1. guided plastic turkeys

      Zoe, I’m still chuckling at this!

      I reckon they’d be a lot scarier with lasers attached to their heads (which is just the sort of thing those crafty Jooos have been known to do).

      Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 09 02 at 07:29 AM • permalink


    1. I would be leery of a left or right leg thing, the flip horizontal command in Photoshop is not uncommon.

      Posted by lemmy on 2006 09 02 at 07:36 AM • permalink


    1. There isnt much arguing going on here anyway.
      It is more a debate about exactly how badly wrong they are.

      To an extent even Chulov has to admit that. Or to put it in his language, Chulov is sticking by his story, he is just changing all the relevant details.

      Posted by GeniusNZ on 2006 09 02 at 07:44 AM • permalink


    1. #5 zoe, #6 murph:

      agreed. the rust thing, for example, is an interesting auxiliary point, but ultimately it is auxiliary. there’s no way that any of the stories could be correct. the other flaws and inconsistencies in the stories are way more than enough to sustain the charges against it.

      seeing as this is quickly turning into the australian version of the killian fiasco, i’ll point out that (to my mind anyway) the rust thing is analogous to the “was there a typewriter that could do that back in the early 70s” bit from killian. ultimately, it was irrelevant since no-one on a military base was going to be typing with such advanced equipment anyway.

      it’s a diversion, in other words, which is why the geniuses who bought this fraud are dissembling at full speed about the rust.

      Posted by benson swears a lot on 2006 09 02 at 07:45 AM • permalink


    1. The whole point of the story in the first place was that Israel committed a war crime by deliberately targeting ambulances.  The bottom line, whether it was the right or left leg, whether rust forms immediately on some of the bright, shiny metal, while leaving other parts of the bright, shiny metal bright and shiny, doesn’t matter.  Neither one of those ambulances was “deliberately targeted” by anything resembling a missile, whether fired by and Apache helicopter or a drone.  The simple fact is that such a light vehicle would have been blown to bits and anyone riding inside would have been blown into more than two bits; no one would have lived to tell the tale, whether they were wearing armored vests and helmets or not, riding in front or not, or “protected” by a ramp or not.

      As Mr. Bolt’s expert said, this sort of gullibility comes from a complete ignorance of all things military.  The very least the MSM can do is send correspondents who have some idea about what they are looking at.  What good is an eye-witness account from someone who hasn’t the knowledge to identify what he sees and must take the word of those with a dog in the hunt.  Wanting something to be true doesn’t make it true.

      I did find one alleged fact very curious, for which no explanation has been given that I’ve read.  What was the driver’s mother doing in an ambulance that was running around a war zone?

      Posted by saltydog on 2006 09 02 at 07:50 AM • permalink


    1. another thing I want to mention, is that the criticisms of the stories fall into three main categories:

      1) the stories don’t match the pictures (e.g. “missile strike” even though there’s no evidence of one in the pictures)

      2) the stories vary from reporter to reporter
      (e.g. one says left leg, another says right leg)

      3) even stories from the same reporter are inconsistent (e.g. chulov’s rubbish dispatches)

      add other categories as necessary

      Posted by benson swears a lot on 2006 09 02 at 07:52 AM • permalink


    1. Didn’t see any signs of burns or burns treatment on the “victims” either. Yet ther’re both supposed to have severe burns

      Indeed.  Anyone burnt severely enough on the L (R?) leg to cauterise all the blood vessels severed by a missile (thus saving the person from bleeding to death) must have had equally severe burns on the R (L?) leg.  But where is the cage that will hold the bed clothes up off the patient’s terribly burned and hideously painful R (L?) leg?

      Then there is the son who suffered serious wounds to, “the back of his head”.  Apparently the “rear of his scalp [was] opened up” yet there he is being nursed in such a position that he is resting the weight of his head precisely on the allegedly wounded, opened-up part.  And he’s supposed to have a brain injury and be semi-conscious but he isn’t in the coma position, hasn’t been intubated and is only wearing a face mask.  Brain injuries often cause brain swelling which causes vomiting which, in this boy’s nursing position, could lead to inhalation of vomitus and either quick suffocation a la Jimi Hendrix or that me-and-BobbyMcGee watsername woman, or a kind of pneumonia which is usually but not always fatal.

      Either Lebanese health care is stuffed or these people do not have the injuries they’re supposed to have.

      Posted by Janice on 2006 09 02 at 07:58 AM • permalink


    1. #13 saltydog:

      The whole point of the story in the first place was that Israel committed a war crime by deliberately targeting ambulances.

      this, incidentally, explains why the left etc are trying to dissemble away what is obviously a hoax: to admit that it was a hoax is to hand yet another victory to the blogs on the right, coming right on the heels of the acknowledged-by-reuters adnan hajj fauxtography scandal, nearly two years after the killian fiasco, etc.

      in other words, they’ve had enough losses, now they’re pushing back, regardless of the lies they’re defending.

      Posted by benson swears a lot on 2006 09 02 at 08:08 AM • permalink


    1. Thank you saltydog.
      I’m imagining I’m lying in an ambulance and a missile lands on the roof and blows a bloody great hole, tears all the headlining to shreds, removes my leg and the heat generated instantly cauterises the wound leaving the rest of the interior relatively unscathed.
      No, it all remains pretty implausible.

      Posted by chrisgo on 2006 09 02 at 08:10 AM • permalink


    1. Look, it’s a basic physiological fact that if a man turns up in a hospital with his lower left leg missing, the only possible cause is an Israeli missile/rocket/cluster bomb/grenade/explosion/bullet strike on the very center of the Red Cross on an ambulance that he may or may not have been in because of injuries he may or may not already have had.

      On the other ha—leg, if a man turns up in a hospital with his lower right leg missing, the only possible cause is an Israeli missile/rocket/cluster bomb/grenade/explosion/bullet, etc etc.

      Haven’t ANY of you people studied Jewish diabology?

      Posted by arrowhead ripper on 2006 09 02 at 08:12 AM • permalink


    1. btw, I predict that it will take less than seven days for the cries of “fake but accurate” to start appearing re this ambulance hoax.

      Posted by benson swears a lot on 2006 09 02 at 08:16 AM • permalink


    1. Janice – Compared to the other inconsistencies within the various MSM stories maybe the rust and the weather conditions are not of so much interest. However Chulov did refer to humidities in his second attempt and we should look at what he said, if only to address his scientific sloppiness. See here (Note Darwin gets a mention) and here.

      As to the photograph of Ahmed Mohammed Fawaz and his “severe burns”. He appears to have no burns (or wounds), severe or otherwise on his face, right arm and diagonally across his chest. And presumably on his back or else he wouldn’t be lying on it, given that his chest is burns free. So it looks like everything of interest in the severe burns department is exclusively below the uppermost sheets (wink, wink, nudge, nudge, say no more, say no more).

      When I was still in the Dept of Defence, I was fortunate (unfortunate?) enough to attend a briefing by the head of forensive science of the Australian Federal Police who led their investigation into the Bali bombings. The images of the suicide bomber at Paddy’s nightclub were pretty gruesome, all that was left were the legs knees down, torso waist up (entrails hanging) and nothing in between. Sympathy from me? No dickhead, you did it to yourself and given that everything below your chest and above your knees was blown to smithereens, the virgins in heaven were going to be a little disappointed.

      But the burns on the victims in the Sari nightclub were terrible, absolutely terrible. All over, wounds, burns all over. And I was only looking at images. The MSM (to give them some credit) considered that it would be too distressing to the relatives to publish. So they didn’t.

      Now look again at the image above. Severely burned? Obviously very intense but localised burning that could cauterise the veins and arteries in a severed leg but not show any signs of burning on a hip two feet higher.

      Posted by Whale Spinor on 2006 09 02 at 08:29 AM • permalink


    1. #20 – Obviously very intense but localised burning that could cauterise the veins and arteries in a severed leg but not show any signs of burning on a hip two feet higher.

      Of course! Oxy-acetylene!

      Posted by walterplinge on 2006 09 02 at 08:39 AM • permalink


    1. Odds are the fellow pictured lost his leg in combat, long before he was near the ambulance.

      Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 09 02 at 08:42 AM • permalink


    1. # Benson, I think you’ve got some of the reasons why the MSM and the ICRC are trying to bluster their way out of this. Usually the MSW and the left wing blogs will admit error when the evidence is this overwhelming. (Look at the Dan Rather and the Jesse Macbeth incidents. And a lot of left wing blogs have been quiet about this.)

      But I think there’s more to it than saving face. I think that to admit that they were hoaxed is admit that Hezbolla are habitual liars and that Israel is not recklessly killing Lebanese civilians. Admit that and they might have to admit that Hezbolla are not deserving of any support.

      But being the champions of the underdogs is part of the left’s self-image. If the underdogs are scum then the left are not acting virtuously in supporting them. For the left not to be able to see themselves as virtuous is too much to bear.

      Posted by Lloyd Flack on 2006 09 02 at 08:47 AM • permalink


    1. seeing as this is quickly turning into the australian version of the killian fiasco

      Or, for another apt comparison, let’s call it the Ambulance Diaries.

      Posted by PW on 2006 09 02 at 08:54 AM • permalink


    1. >What was the driver’s mother doing in an ambulance that was running around a war zone?

      In some reports it seems to be the mother of one of the (alleged) ambulance patients who was herself also (allegedly) hurt earlier in the night.

      >The very least the MSM can do is send correspondents who have some idea about what they are looking at.

      Come on now, be fair. Sarah Smiles knows her way around the local nightclubs. And being a lazy drunk is a great journo tradition.

      Seriously, this whole matter is huge. It’s far, far bigger than Dan Rather or Eason Jordan or Flat Fatima. We need to keep on it. I know that jaded bloggers aren’t at all surprised and think it’s par for the course (which it is), but this could really be a big expose. We need to keep on it and not let the left-wing media just bury it.

      For that reason it’s a good thing that The Oz and The Age felt the need to defend it (however pathetically). And all credit to Downer for bringing it up in Parliament, that’s what kept it going.

      Posted by Blithering Bunny on 2006 09 02 at 09:03 AM • permalink


    1. I call shenanigans on this whole thing.

      It stinks, they are at the least exadurating and at the worst complicit in an outright fabrication. Im not purchasing another Australian until they get Mr Chulov to go sit in a corner and get his story (s) straight.

      wronwright, I go for 6, and thats being generous.

      Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 09 02 at 09:11 AM • permalink


    1. #25,
      Parliament is not sitting.

      Posted by chrisgo on 2006 09 02 at 09:12 AM • permalink


    1. #8 – I’m not a lawyer and that’s why I had to read your submission ten times through. But to me at least, it makes a lot of sense. Why not try it on our local Rumpole of the South, Mr Horace Walter Jeremy Sear and beg for his considered opinion on it? Pro bono of course.

      Posted by Whale Spinor on 2006 09 02 at 09:13 AM • permalink


    1. About this drone thing.

      Aren’t they supposed to tootle along at 60,000 feet or so, using cameras, because they are supposed to operate in a stealthy manner?  The bullshit artists victims wouldn’t hear it (as the Age claims) on a quiet night, let alone the fact that if a missile had gone off in the same vehicle as the bullshit artists victims they would be deaf.

      And wasn’t the first story a hellfire missile fired from an apache helicopter fired dead centre into the cross on top of the ambulance……

      Posted by entropy on 2006 09 02 at 09:41 AM • permalink


    1. let alone the fact that if a missile had gone off in the same vehicle as the bullshit artists victims they would be deaf.

      Actually they would be dead, too.

      Posted by entropy on 2006 09 02 at 09:44 AM • permalink


    1. I think that Chulov’s point is that zombietime.com is hosted by “Hosting Matters”, which is located in Florida.

      Before we dismiss Chulov outright, I think it is important to note that he was largely responsible for getting Bashir caught in Indonesia.  Although some of his reporting has been unfair to Israel, including his article on the Gaza beach “bombing”, he is one of the few MSM reporters who recognise the threat of militant Islam.

      Posted by lewisinnyc on 2006 09 02 at 10:25 AM • permalink


    1. The fucking Mossad have obviously snuck into the hopital, reattached Fawaz’s left leg and sawed off his right in order to discredit Chulov.

      Oh yeah, and cured Fawaz’s burns too, the bastards.

      Posted by Conrad on 2006 09 02 at 10:26 AM • permalink


    1. #31 it doesn’t matter what his political allegiences are. He’s propagating false information, defending Hezbollah, and accusing Israel of non-existent war crimes. He needs to do a mea culpa (as does the Australian), not turn up the heat.

      Posted by daddy dave on 2006 09 02 at 10:56 AM • permalink


    1. #28 I’m not a lawyer and that’s why I had to read your submission ten times through.

      Sorry Whale Spinor.  Karl says the same thing when I try explaining things to him.  I tried to make it as as easy to understand as possible.  I’m basically making two points.

      First, we have to do what Sherlock Holmes does.  He lists the possible answers to any seemingly insolvable question and allows the facts determine which possibility is the probability.  In this case the question is, did this event happen and who is responsible for it?

      Second, the above possibilities can be assigned weights relating to Israel’s degree of culpability and egregious behavior. (can you tell I’m a tax attorney?) Actions that fall in category #1 are especially bad.  They can be given a weight of 100.  Incidents that fall within category 8 show no sign of unacceptable behavior by Israel.  Just the opposite, they show bad behavior by Hezbollah and/or the MSM and/or NGO/‘s.  We could give them a weight of -100.  (I’m also a CPA, that’s why I like assigning numbers) Add up the weights of all the incidents involving Isreal over an extended period of time, the higher the sum total the more unacceptable Israel’s actions appear to the world.  (Karl basically hates lawyers so I tell him I’m an accountant, everyone likes accountants)  That would likely translate into a steadily diminishing degree of support for the country.

      The Jeremy Sears and Anthony Lowensteins of the world are inclined to throw every incident that involves Israel into the first category.  When the facts show that they should, instead, go into categories 6, 7, or 8, they are inclined to say, “oh no, it’s neutral, let’s move on”.

      This is a quite hypocritical stance by Sears and Lowenstein.  It’s unacceptable and they shouldn’t be allowed to get away with it.(I explained this to my wife and mother-in-law this morning.  I told them that this is a scandal, larger than Dan Rather and Mary Mapes.  Their eyes glazed over, they nodded in agreement, and they changed the subject to the Back to School clothes sale at Macy’s)

      Posted by wronwright on 2006 09 02 at 10:56 AM • permalink


    1. A little OT:

      One of the comments in the Australian said that the ICRC is a more reliable source than a politician.

      It ought to be true, I wish it were true, but it isn’t.

      Posted by Andjam on 2006 09 02 at 11:33 AM • permalink


    1. From the discussions in the earlier threads, it’s clear that the photographic evidence does not support the original contention that a missile struck the ambulance.  From whence the missile came is immaterial.  No significant explosion occured inside the ambulance in the original photographs.

      Setting aside the conclusion that a missile didn’t strike the ambulance for a moment, comments on this thread (comments #3, 15, and 20), the injuries of the man in the photograph, while severe, appear not to be consistent with those of someone wounded by an explosion.

      91B30 commented on this sort of wound earlier.  While his statement is not conclusive, it does demonstrate, from a different perspective, that the injuries of the man are not consistent with an explosion inside a compartment.

      Ergo, the photographic evidence does not support the contention that Fawaz lost his leg from the missile explosion inside the ambulance.  Either the photo is not of Fawaz, or his lost his leg from another cause.

      Finally, the stories reported by the MSM are not consistent.  The “fog of war” might have accounted for part of this, but the gross inconsistencies from the same reporter have pushed aside that possibility.  If Chulov himself can’t get his facts straight (for whatever reason), let alone the rush of reporters to Lebanon weeks after the fact, the story is suspect.  This ignores the inconsistency from the witnesses, and the lack of corrobation for the entire story.

      There is every reason to believe that the entire story is a hoax.  There are very few reasons to believe the story is true.  Therefore, the evidence leans towards the story being a hoax.  Overwhelmingly so, in my opinion.  I accept it as a hoax.

      The next problem is the MSM involvement, who accepted the story at face value, and published it.  Once they were shown that the story is likely a hoax, they ignored it at first, and engaged in serious spin operations when they couldn’t.  They question the credentials of Zombietime, and dismiss the story due to that.

      But I can offer one simple action for the MSM, something that I’ve not seen yet in the news, and will raise their credibility:  show the photos and original statements to a genuine, non-anonymous, credentialed expert, or team of experts.  Let them respond to what Zombie said.

      Has anyone seen any attempt in the MSM to debunk Zombie’s original analysis?  So far, all that I’ve seen is a dismissal of the analysis because Zombie is anonymous.

      That and crickets chirping.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 09 02 at 11:37 AM • permalink


    1. wronwright, nice way to analyze the entire situation!  It also separates those who want to view the facts as facts (i.e., objectively) from those who are biased.

      Too bad I don’t live in Ohio, I’d hire you for my taxes.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 09 02 at 11:41 AM • permalink


    1. Something else from the Smiles story

      AHMED Fawaz sits in a wheelchair in a sweat-stained hospital gown, smoking a cigarette in sweltering heat.

      He was discharged from a Beirut hospital this week after losing his leg when a Lebanese Red Cross ambulance he was in with his family came under an Israeli air attack in south Lebanon on July 23.

      If Smiles it to be believed, Fawaz was transferred a second time from Tyre to Beirut. And one wonders why he is still wearing a hospital gown after his discharge. The Age report gives no indication Smiles even saw him but relied on ambo drivers again.

      In her report published by the SMH she adds this:

      For Mr Fawaz – a mechanic from Tibnin village with three young boys, Mohammed and his twin Ali, and Hussein, 10, – his new life without his leg is sadly no hoax. He sits at the top of a dark set of stairs, unable to move.

      Right, on top of stairs, in a wheelchair, where exactly?

      Our Ms Smiles is either a straight out snivvelling liar or else the editors of The Age/SMH can’t smell cut and paste crap if they fell over it.

      And people tell me I have no brains for believing in an “invisible friend”.

      Posted by saint on 2006 09 02 at 07:30 PM • permalink


    1. #13 On Chulov:  Although some of his reporting has been unfair to Israel, including his article on the Gaza beach “bombing”, he is one of the few MSM reporters who recognise the threat of militant Islam.

      I can’t buy this.  Didn’t Chulov learn anything from rushing in with his pants down like Human Rights Watch did over the Gaza beach set-up?

      Chulov thinks he knows ‘irony’.  Try some definitions Mr Chulov:
      1. ‘simulated ignorance in discussions’.
      As in ‘Chulov is an experienced investigative correspondent.’

      2. ‘a situation in a play that is understood by the audience but not grasped by the characters.’
      Example: Chulov is in a war propaganda ‘play’ situation, acting as a naive correspondent.

      Posted by Barrie on 2006 09 02 at 07:36 PM • permalink


    1. First, #31 not #13. Sorry.
      Now #36. jeffs, Andrew Bolt is part of the MSM in Oz, and he did what you suggest, getting a result exactly congruent with Zombietime.
      The neglect of this classic war hoax by the world’s press is extremely suggestive of their bias,  because it is an egregious claim of a despicable Israeli war crime if both true and deliberate, as claimed in all their reports.

      Posted by Barrie on 2006 09 02 at 07:51 PM • permalink


    1. #2 regarding rust, I said in an earlier thread that all the rust analysis was just confusing, and unless there was a coherent, saleable point, we should leave it alone. That’s all. Since then it seems to have been boiled down nicely by a few people into a straightforward piece of evidence.

      Posted by daddy dave on 2006 09 02 at 09:12 PM • permalink


    1. Re #40, Barrie:

      Now #36. jeffs, Andrew Bolt is part of the MSM in Oz, and he did what you suggest, getting a result exactly congruent with Zombietime.

      True, Barrie.  But Andrew is a smart and rational member of the MSM —- surely a minority these days, given the evidence before us.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 09 03 at 02:17 AM • permalink


Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.