The Zombietime Hoax

Post Reply New Topic

Some time ago, the Israeli forces attacking Lebanon attacked some ambulances. The excuse, as always, was they they were secretly terrorist or human shield ambulances, so any attacks were justified. A pro-Israel kid wrote a blog about it, including a bunch of altered pictures, and claimed the reports from eyewitnesses and from police, human rights organisations and aid agencies, from NGO observers, et cetera, were all some vast anti-Israel conspiracy. Now the pro-Israel crowd were more than willing to leap on to this blog as a means to support the usual line "Israel never does anything bad, they must have been terrorists, or it just never happened at all". Apparently a blog is all it takes for some.

However, Human Rights Watch quite easily debunked the blogger's hoax claims.

Then we have the news about the injured driver of the ambulance, including his own words about what happened.

And the blogger Jews Sans Frontiers has a few extra links about the story.

Zombie thoroughly debunked the so-called "Human Rights Watch" debunking.

I could throw out the evidence that Zombie wrote up himself... but since all you're capable of is link-dumping and then saying "YOU DIDN"T READ THE LINKS" when people dismiss you, I'll just dump you some links.

http://www.zombietime.com/fraud/ambulance/hrw/ Zombie himself debunks it all.

http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article.php?id=1132 HWR and Amnesty International claims utterly discredited

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 ... 84,00.html More confirmation that the claims of a "drone" had nothing to do with reality

Citizen Media Watch pokes more holes in HRW's story

1. NGO Monitor is an Israeli organisation dedicated to defending Israel. That's all it does, no matter what. In fact it is staffed by members of Israel's government. Clearly they have a bias. And clearly you didn't read the rubbish on their page.

2. That article about a drone attack doesn't poke holes in anything. It merely discusses a drone attack on a Hamas position.

3. Zombietime wrote a blog, which was debunked. Then he wrote another blog, and that is your evidence? A blog supporting a blog, written by the same author, who is just some pro-Israeli kid?

...rofl...

...so did you even read the page?

I love it. Your only argument, the last wobbling leg of your credibility, is saying "but Zombie can't be right because he's wrong!" You can't step to his claims, you can't personally debate let alone debunk a thing he says - all you can do is say that because he personally refuted HWR's report, it "can't possibly count".

I'd like to see you explain why the so called Israel "missles" left perfectly neat, drilled holes in the sidewalk rather than burned craters, for starters.

Actually I have read it, and it's complete nonsense from a kid who doesn't know anything about military matters.

The reason the missile left such an hole is that they possibly used a SPIKE missile. Nobody will ever know now, but a SPIKE is a possibility. Now using an anti-tank missile against a van is like hitting a spiderweb with a sledgehammer. It just passes through, minimal damage. The SPIKE would have passed through the sheet of aluminium, hardly noticing it. Now in case you don't know (which does indeed seem the case), those sorts of warheads carry a shaped charge. The explosion is shot ahead in a very narrow jet of molten copper. In fact the SPIKE has two such warheads, so the first will take care of any problems from Explosive Reactive Armour, and the second will shoot through the remainder. So what we have here is a missile designed specifically to attack from above, which is carried by Israeli helicopters. And when it strikes, the missile shoots a jet of molten copper directly ahead in a narrow stream. That being the case, my guess is it hit the ambulance, then maybe detonated the first, small warhead on its way through the van, which probably punched through the floor, and then the main warhead blasted its jet of molten copper down into the road.

Why do I know this stuff? Because I'm ex-military, and missiles were part of my job.

So you're claiming that an explosion like this...

http://www.eurospike.com/movie/GILHIT1A.MPG

Leaves a hole like this.

http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/qa ... age010.jpg

Pfft.

So much for your military background. Since it never came up earlier and since it took me so little effort to prove it wrong, I'm calling you a liar and saying straight out that you have no military background and you just made that up to lend credence to your claims.

1. The SPIKE in the film is striking a very massive, very hard, armoured target. Back to the sledgehammer and spiderweb. If you hit a spiderweb, there will be very little transfer of energy. You hammer will just keep swinging. However, if you make the same swing with the same hammer against a brick, there's a big bang, a lot of energy transferred. That is the difference. And of course, if you'd actually watched that film, you'd know that you never actually see any explosion throughout the entire film. It shows nose-camera shots aplenty, and that's it. However, right at the very end, you see about two or three frames of a burning target vehicle. For your educational benefit, let me explain what happens with such munitions. The jet of molten copper I mentioned earlier shoots inside, melting its way through the armour. Once inside, that HOT liquid splatters everywhere, burns everything, and turns the inside of the tank into a furnace.

2. Actually I mentioned my military service in that Aspergers Singles thread. So I guess you're out of luck on that also.

Then why wasn't the underside of the ambulance melted by the wave of molten metal?

Where were the burn marks on the inside of the ambulance?

Where were the burn marks on the road?

What happened to the metal after it cooled off?

Your spider web analogy fails because in this case the spider web (ambulance) was less than a foot away from the wall (road), and would surely get caught up in the "energy transfer".

If you really mentioned your military career in the Aspergers Singles section, fine, I stand corrected, but even if it is real, it doesn't make you any less wrong.

Because the warhead shoots that jet of molten metal ahead, not all around. Thus the neat little hole in the road,


IF that is what happened (and I'm only saying a SPIKE is a possibility, not what actually happened), there wouldn't be much, if any, because the only interaction between missile and van would be kinetic damage, since the warhead probably only affected the road below.


The hole.


I don't know. I don't even know if anyone has looked in the hole.


Ok, go find a spiderweb with a wall behind it, and swing a sledgehammer at it. The hammer won't be slowed at all by the spiderweb.


Yeah, pro-Israel bloggers trying to justify their aggression are to be trusted more than people who have worked hands-on with missiles. *nods*

So what you're saying is that a missle went through the roof of an ambulance, didn't explode, mutilated the people inside the ambulance without exploding and finally drove into the ground leaving a neatly drilled hole, depositing its payload inside said hole.

Even though...

...said payload was never produced by Hezbollah

...The SPIKE missles are clearly seen to, you know, explode on contact

...the damage inside the ambulance is too extensive to have been made by a missle punching through the top and exiting through the bottom, yet not anywhere near extensive enough to have survived hot temperatures, let alone an explosion.

In this case, yes, the words of a person running a website - by repeatedly referring to it as a pro-Israeli blog, you prove that you've never read it for yourself - that person's words are infinately more credible than yours.

Zombie provides photographic and video evidence.

You say "Even though what I'm saying contradicts physics and common sense, it's true and the fact that I worked with missles proves it".

What about the person who worked on construction and said he can authenticate that those holes were drilled with a blunt asphalt drill? Are his words 100% credible beyond refute because he worked in a particular area? Because if we're to take your word over clear evidence, then we have to take his word too, and since his word directly contradicts yours... well you see where this is going.

The warhead would have shot down into the ground. There would still be damage around that site (ie, to the ambulance) due to fragments of the missile itself splattering all over the place after detonating at ground level.


If you mean "Hezbollah never recovered the molten metal from inside the ground and used it as evidence", then I would suggest that we're talking about sending in a forensic evidence examination crew into an area where this happened. The IDF was bombing the hell out of the area, and in fact admitted to dropping a million or so cluster munitions on civilian areas. Sending a crime scene team in to check dig into the hole for tiny droplets of metal is not likely.


Not in the film to which you linked.


The only really high temperature is from the warhead itself, the the jet of molten metal shooting forward into the ground. The energy of missile fragments blasting all over the place would be responsible for the majority of the ambulance damage.


Yes, I've read it. Yes, the kid is pro-Israel. And no, simply being the author of a blog does not make the kid a credible source of information.


Actually he provides entirely wrong things, and people viewing them don't know what they're looking at. For example, at one point he shows ambulance 782 and makes some whacky claims about the patient in the back not being able to lose his leg as he did when it was struck. People like you saw the picture and were easily impressed. However, in reality, the guy lost his leg in ambulance 777. Mister Zombietime conveniently forgot to tell you and other gullible readers that he was showing the wrong ambulance.


Not at all. I've explained the physics for you. You have completely arse-backwards ideas about physics and such, and I can only assume you know even less about that subject than you do about military matters.


You mean how the blog author himself claimed that some anonymous person sent in message stating: "I know a drilled hole when I see one. Someone took a cement drill with a dull blade and made those holes after the fact. Gimme a break."? 1: There is no way anyone can know whether that hole was made before or after the incident without an examination of the inside of the hole. 2: This Israel website shows a very similar hole from a missile strike, although in this case it entered soft ground. Note that the hole is VERY similar. Sorry, but blog-boy's anonymous email claims are ridiculous.

Mmmm, dissection. A whole lot of pointless, isn't it? Everyone will form his own opinion based on his beliefs and how he received the information. But does it matter? Why be so concerned with what's happening to other people? In the end, aren't you the only one that matters? So long as you're alright, it shouldn't matter what others do.

Humans are social animals. It's natural to care about other humans. And we all have ethics, morals, et cetera. Part of mine includes the belief that it's very wrong for insane governments and their military forces to wander around blowing up civilians.

So now the missle exploded into shrapnel with all the heat being directed into the ground? The video I linked does show an explosion, around the 3 second mark, although its primary point was to debunk another one of HRW's claims, that the missiles were fired from drones. But here's a nice picture of a SPIKE explosion.



As you can see from this picture, when the missile strikes something hard - in this case a tank - it releases a fireball.

If the missile did punch through the ambulance and hit the road below, the ambulance would still be right in the middle of that fireball.

Once again, that is striking a very massive, armoured object. It isn't going through. In that picture, as is VERY obvious, all the energy is being expended outside the vehicle due to impact on the surface.

The road under the ambulance, if not as hard as the tank, is still hard enough to produce a near identical reaction that would engulf the ambulance in a fireball.