Better version of my video Presentation available at Youtube

A look at the way France2 handles the evidence, an insight into how Pallywood can fool the Western media… it’s apparently full of fools.

Pallywood Strikes Again2

For a better view, see the version up at Second Draft, and if it’s also poor quality, download it. It’s worth watching a quality version.

10 Responses to Better version of my video Presentation available at Youtube

  1. […] The Augean Stables – Better version of my video Presentation available at Youtube […]

  2. abu yussif says:

    mamma mia, you’re a mac user! first al-durrah is a hoax, now this…

    (oh, great job on the video. i like the fact that mohammed al-durrah’s father’s abdominal wounds he was showing were from surgery he received in the 1990’s at an israeli hospital. yes, it WAS israel’s fault!)

  3. oao says:

    when muslims lie so blatantly in contradiction to clear evidence and the MSM and its audience are so gullible to buy everything, how are the muslims supposed to interpret this in light of their indoctrination with islamic supremacy and the inferiority and weakness of the infidels?

  4. Eliyahu says:

    oao, you know that it’s not gullibility as such. There’s a policy of what to report, how to report it, what nomenclature to use [“activist” instead of “terrorist”] and what not to report, etc.

    do you think ted turner is dumb or just a crook? As far as bbc is concerned, it is openly a UK govt agency.

  5. Jonathan Levy says:

    Hi Richard.

    Very interesting post. I was particularly intrigued by the comparison between the dust cloud of the bullets hitting the wall above the Al-Dura couple, and the dust cloud of a bullet which _was_ in fact fired from the Israeli position. It’s at timestamp 6:00 in your video. I think this merits more attention – it would be really nice if you could display them side-by-side, or superimposed, with the frames synchronized on the moment of impact. You could then play them forwards and backwards several times, so the differences in the location/shape of the dust clouds would be glaringly obvious.

    However, I find the discussion of the bullet hitting the ground to be less convincing. I’m referring to the case of the “sudden leg injury without blood, with rescuers dragging him about by the ‘injured’ leg”. This is the bullet which hits at 2:20.

    First, it is not at all clear to me how the direction from which the bullet comes has been determined. All I see is a small cloud of dust which appears on the ground. Yes, it moves a little to the left, but that’s hardly enough (for me, anyway) to determine the direction, and the slightest gust of wind might account for that movement.

    Second, from what I remember of the geography of the intersection (gained mainly from watching the videos on the second draft website), the arrow as it appears in the video does in fact come from the general direction of the Israeli position.
    If I am not mistaken, the position of the camera during these shots (2:20 – 2:25) is as follows:
    The camera is positioned on the same street as the Al-Dura’s barrel, on the same side of the street as the barrel. The barrel itself is next to the wall to the left of the camera (out of shot), either slightly behind, or in front. The camera is facing towards the intersection. The road beyond the intersection can be seen in the distance.

    This would place the Israeli position at about 1-2 O’clock of the current heading, which is more or less where that arrow comes from.

    The rest of the arguments are much more convincing, and quite clearly stated.
    – The man is dragged to the ambulance by his “injured” leg.
    – There is no sign of blood in several shots where we might expect to see blood.
    – The ambulance and evacuators arrived within a second of his “injury”.

    These are sufficient to suggest that the man is not, in fact, seriously injured as Enderlin claims him to be. These are also enough to support your main point, that Enderlin should have identified these suspicious elements, and that his bias blinded him to them.

    However, an argument strong enough to stand on its own should not be made to also rest on weaker evidence. It is quite possible, for example, that warning shots were fired from the Israeli position at the ground several meters away from a man opening the door of a vehicle (which might contain anything); that the man used the opportunity to feign an injury; or that perhaps a ricochet, or some fragment did strike him in the leg, causing him to fall; and that the nearby ambulance evacuated him as it evacuated so many other false Pallywood casualties.

  6. Eliyahu says:

    Jonathan, the photos of the wall were enlarged and it is possible to see that the bullet holes in the wall above father al-Durah are perpendicular to the wall, that is, the holes are at a right angle to the wall. Hence, for this reason too they did not come from the Israeli position. They were in line in fact with the cameraman, probably somebody behind him and/or above him did the shooting.

    btw, why is the loving father, so concerned to protect his son, next to the wall rather than the boy being next to the wall. As it was the boy was more exposed than his father.

  7. Jonathan Levy says:

    Eliyahu –
    I have little doubt that the bullets which hit the wall behind the Al-Duras did not come from the Israeli position. In my comment I am referring to a bullet which hits the ground in a scene unrelated to the Al-Duras.

    The reason I am posting critical comments is not because I believe that the scene is genuine. It is because I believe that two mistakes are being made in trying to prove that the scene is faked:
    1) Weak arguments are being mixed with strong arguments.
    2) Strong arguments are not being made as convincingly as possible.
    I am afraid that this will undermine the effort to prove that the scene is staged, because opponents will naturally focus on the weak arguments.

    Let me use your example (“holes are at right angle to the wall”) do demonstrate what I mean by #2.

    If there is (as you assume) a big difference in the appearance of a bullet hole in a wall when the bullet is fired at right angles, as opposed to a 30 degree angle (or whatever the angle with the Israeli position is), then this would be a very convincing proof. I have read on the internet that the holes are different. But I have not *seen* the difference. I have seen the holes in the Al-Dura’s clip. I have not seen holes generated by firing at right angles, and holes generated by firing at 30 degree angles. It is also necessary that the material of the wall and the range match the geography of the Netsarim junction.

    If it were possible to have pictures of these holes side by side – or even a video of the firing – it would make that point a thousand times more convincing.
    It may be that this test has already been done, but the photographs are not widely available – or perhaps it is just I who is unaware of them. :)
    In this case, a link would be very much appreciated.

  8. SOKRATES says:

    No doubt Richard Landes (Mr Goebbles we say) easily can turn you over to Holocaust-deniers if he want to.

    About Richard Landes:
    – Wanting propaganda, not the truth
    – Zionist, Nazi or som kind of rasist
    – Denies reality

    Richard Landes makes mockup-videoes.

    Denying palestinian suffering is not much different from denying Holocaust.

  9. abu yussif says:

    “SOKRATES” – palestinian suffering is largely self-inflicted. arabs who live under israeli law are the most free and happy in the region. i heartily affirm palestinian suffering, but because of the genocidal nature of the palestinian movement (not to mention how they treat each other in a power/money grab while “suffering”), what they are doing cannot be compared to the holocaust in most any way.

    if only palestinians would care more about the notion of “peace” and the basic wellbeing of their own people rather than their bloodthirsty lust for real estate. if only. admittedly, it is hard to muster up feelings of sadness for palestinians because of this. but they do have my pity.

  10. […] position, we know they fired (France2 has isolated one shot from their position which I treat in my discussion of their use of the evidence. But there is no evidence that they fired during the sequence that Talal filmed of the father and […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *