Thursday, August 31, 2006

The utter paranoia and neurosis of the American Right

For those of you who either find it too painful to trawl through the propaganda of the American Right or who might not feel it warrants investigation I came across a link to a blogger who has posted an analysis of the Israeli strikes on the two Lebanese ambulances that happened on the night of the 23rd July.

This pituary retard seems to think that the shrapnel-riddled shell of the ambulance and the injuries to six ambulance workers and three civilians - an 11-year-old boy, an elderly woman and a man, one of whom lost a leg in the incident . . . . . was a hoax.

Yes, you have read that correctly. A HOAX.

And not only has this appallingly twisted piece of propaganda been propagated freely across the internet by similarly fascistic websites and bloggers but it is obviously an absurdly flawed piece of analysis. But these people don't seem (or want) to care. Amongst the vitriol and messages of hatred and death directed at the Islamic religion, the UN, Europe and anyone elese who might possibly have ever hinted at not being quite in total agreement with everything America has ever done ever I find smug, congratulatory messages about how clever they all are not to have been duped by this piece of liberal, leftie, tree-hugging communist propaganda. (Sorry for the long sentences but I am "on one").

In response to this I drafted an email to the author of the analysis, one Zombie, which was bounced back to me several times and which I eventually despaired of ever dispatching successfully. Therefore I have chosen to post it here inthe hope that someone will read it, understand the position and possibly spread a message of resistance to this absurd and polemic piece of internet reporting.


I started reading you're analysis of the Ambulance strike as a matter of perverse curiosity to see exactly how any educated, rational individual could go about criticising an organisation as well respected as the ICRC and I was not disappointed.

My objections to your analysis are:

1: You're insistence that the damage to the ambulance is not consistent with a "missile" strike.
- The damage to the ambulance is relatively minor and is a long way from the total destruction that you have showed in your shots of other vehicles destroyed by Israeli missiles. This is because the ambulance was probably not hit by a hellfire or other, similar anti-armour missile. Instead the damage indicates that the ambulance was struck by either a small, unguided rocket, such as the M261 2.75" rocket launcher or a cannon shell fired from the M230 30mm cannon- both of which are common to US Apache gunships and, I presume, Israeli ones. Such weapons are preferred against "soft" targets such as civilian vehicles and there is no reason for a helicopter pilot to 'waste' a hellfire missile on an ambulance.

2: You're statement that the hole in the roof of the ambulance was the result of removal of an air vent and not an explosion.
- I do not deny that there was likely an air vent fitted in the roof, however as you point out, there are numerous other holes, tears and patches of paint that have been stripped off (your "white patches" are, in fact, areas of bare metal that have been stripped of paint). So why the multiple shrapnel holes, the buckling of the roof and the internal destruction? It is clear that an explosion has caused this damage and probably blown away the air vent- you can see that the screws that used to hold it in place have been torn away with considerable force and the pitting and tearing of the roof is consistent with a single explosion.

3: You're allegation that the "rust" on the roof is not compatible with a recent event causing the damage.
- Rust can occur within a matter of days and, indeed, in close proximity to the sea (you can clearly see the beach less than a couple of hundred metres away in the background of one picture) salt spray carried by the wind will aid this process and allow it to occur almost overnight.

4: You allege that the damage is inconsistent with an internal explosion.
- This is because, as an amateur such a s myself can clearly see, the explosion occurred outside the ambulance. The pitting on the roof and the way that metal edges are folded in indicates this to be the case. M261 2.75" rockets can be equipped with airburst fuses allowing them to explode prior to contact with a target. The man who lost his leg was most likely hit by a piece of shrapnel and not the rocket itself, which disintegrates upon detonation.

5: Your state that there is no evidence of fire in the ambulance but the injured ambulance man reported seeing fire.
- You try and accurately recall details after being hit by a high explosive device, muppet! Things get lost in translation too, there may have been a bloody great flash and a bang but no actual flames, however this may not translate accurately.

Honestly, I could go on poking enormous holes in your aburd analysis but I doubt I will achieve anything by it. I can't believe you have the gall to criticise not only people who venture into combat zones inorder to provide aid to the wounded but also the International Committee for the Red Cross- the guardians of the Geneva Convention and an organisation of outstanding moral stature. Your criticisms amount to the most disgraceful conspiracy theorism. Your allegations that the press were duped is no more respectable as you conveniently ignore the realities of wartime reporting and the lack of motivation for any humanitarian worker to exaggerate their position.

You should be ashamed.

I also posted some comments on the Right-Wing blog neo-neocon which may amuse anyone with a passion for humanism and a desire to live life on a platform of logic, rationality and equality.


  1. Did you notice that the ceiling liner hanging down inside the ambulance has no shrapnel holes?

    Go back to and see his updated analysis.

  2. Alex, I have responded here:


Feel free to share your opinions of my opinions. Oh- and cocking fuckmouse.