The rust on the roof. In a recent post by AP, an expert submitted information that said such rust could occur quickly in the aftermath of a munitions strike because of the removal of both paint and preparatory coatings on the metal. Now, look at this close-up of the ambulance roof. Notice where there is no rust? Yes, at the vent flange, where there is also NO PAINT OR OTHER COATING ON THE METAL. And everywhere there is rust is where there had been paint, but was damaged or pocked.

I believe now as I believed then, this ambulance rolled over or had some other accident, was taken out of service, and later the idea to use it in a fauxtography session came about. By then rust already covered the damaged areas on the roof, and all that was needed was to pull the vent to create a missile impact hole. But if that isn’t so, it’s still true that the vent was removed LONG AFTER the rest of the damage to the roof occured, else the unprotected metal of the vent flange would be covered with rust, and that metal is PRISTINE.

Fraud, stinking fraud.

heh.

None of the photos submitted as proof show any evidence of an angled missile strike that would be expected if the missiles were fired from any known airborne platform, they show supposed evidence of a strike straight down from the top which isn’t even indicative of a gravity assisted bomb, let alone a powered missile strike. Even the photos of the supposed holes left in the pavement show evidence of a strike that was straight down. That just doesn’t happen with a missile attack.

No know missile platform is designed to fire straight downward. What were the authors of the report thinking, that a missile hangs pointing straight down from under the platform and can be fired downwards? No, they are hung horizontal and are fired outward as the trust from missile would effect the launching platform adversely if fired straight down. Think about it, what would the exhaust from a missile do to a drone if fired downward? It would most likely destroy the drone as the exhaust from a missile travels at a very high speed and is very hot.

I’ve sen advanced antitank missiles that do fire their warheads downward, but they do so by the use of high explosives firing an inert mass like metal downward as they pass over the target, they do not travel in a downward trajectory and they leave a hell of a lot of shrapnel laying around to be recovered. According to the HRW report, none of these missile types were used. Instead, some new type of inert missile was used, but one again, these missile would strike at an angle and not straight down from the top.

Also, any type of inert missile, whether it’s a SPIKE missile or any other type, would leave traces of metal and other compounds at and around the impact site, and this has not been found. So, all the report does is raise further questions, including the question of what research HRW used to determine what constitutes a missile strike and what knowledge the researchers actually have about the capabilities and restriction that a missile has and what effects it would cause on the target.

This is a very poor report and does not appear to be fully researched. It looks to me that HRW created this report with the prior belief that a missile strike occurred and then tried to provide evidence of such a strike by suggesting that an unknown type of missile was used. This shows a biased investigation whose sole purpose was to support and defend a preexisting conclusion. This is hardly an objective report and should not be considered as such.

Of course the other question is how you get such nice, clean impacts. I’ve seen workers busting up concrete and asphalt roads and sidewalks, and I’ve busted up sections of sidewalk myself. A hit hard enough to do that kind of damage shatters and cracks even asphalt (softer) around the impact point.

As stated above, that kind of energy doesn’t just disappear.

Folks, that kind of energy doesn’t just disappear into thin air when it hits the ground. It goes places. It does things. Violent things.

Ragnar…heh.

In light of this stunning presentation of common sense, I would like to offer an comparison/contrast of those photos with the damage to an automobile from a stupid deer.

http://dahrjamailiraq.com/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=Lebanon_Red_Cross_Ambulance_Target_Israel_Air_Strike&page=1

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap021118.html

click on picture for a close up view. You can see the wooden floorboard that was impacted, though not greatly, after the rock smashed through the rear end of the car and went through it completely.

See previous.Zombie responds to Human Rights Watch report on ambulance hoax Allahpundit Good reading, especially on a slow news day. The crux of HRW’s argument is that certain types of low-yield missiles could have caused the damage seen in photos…

Here are some more pixs if you haven’t seen them.

http://dahrjamailiraq.com/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=Lebanon_Red_Cross_Ambulance_Target_Israel_Air_Strike

How about Jamil Hussein? He doesn’t seem to be too busy in Baghdad these days.

On the gripping hand, maybe they are both wrong (but I doubt it).

Make a completely false report. When challenged make up something completely false yet more believeable (for the person making the false report to believe). When challenged again make up something else more plausible. Challenged again, make up something else…

…Thereby never having to admit the first report was completely false to begin with. I’ll call it the “MSM face saving gambit.”