Experts: Reuters Vehicle NOT Hit by Missile

Back and forth and back again. I called shenanigans, Confederate Yankee backs it up with expert testimony. And unlike some other experts, these ones aren't anonymous commenters:

Looking at the picture received through the link on your email, the damage on the vehicle was sustained very long time ago and probably not by the rocket, or it was already tempered [sic] with[.]
Anyway, I don't know what happened, but I'm sure not buying the story Reuters is selling.

UPDATE: John at Powerline, who has been going back and forth with me in e-mail over this, weighs in:

would think that a forensic examination of the vehlcle could answer the outstanding questions once and for all, and either validate or refute the claims made by Reuters. Clearly, there is enough doubt about those claims to warrant a full investigation.
Indeed. And JY Blog on the rust issue.

Personally it looks more like debris on the truck to me--specifically, the kind of debris left after a hunk of concrete lands on your truck--but thats just me. And the photos Allah has posted seems to show just that. The other photos are after the vehicle has been moved and in daylight, so it could be rust under the debris shown in that photo. Or not.

Posted by: Rusty at 01:36 PM

Comments

1 Why exactly would we believe ANYTHING brought to us by Reuters.
Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me!

Posted by: seanmahair at August 30, 2006 01:47 PM

2 Why exactly would we believe ANYTHING brought to us by Reuters.
Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me!

Posted by: seanmahair at August 30, 2006 01:47 PM

3 Bull! Israel So totally did bomb the ambulance. They used that weapon that Mega Man used in the old Nintendo game…I think its called a rust bomb!

Posted by: massachusetts republican at August 30, 2006 01:52 PM

4 Is it me or is this post getting the Ambulance attack and the Reuters attack confused?

I don't think that's rust on the Reuters truck, that looks more like dirt.

Anyways, as has been said, the Reuters truck was not the target as the press continue to report. Now as AFL shows on the other thread, many people don't care for such distinctions. Apparently they think in war that anyone who gets hit by you as you fight was meant to be killed, regardless if you were deliberately targetting them.

Anyone with a brain knows who you are targetting is what matters when "innocent" bystanders get in the way. I put the quotes by innocent, because these people work for an "Arab" news outlet, have access to real time information from Palestinean terrorists on where to be to get good footage, and LIED about who was targetted.

After all the Israeli attacks I am sure the Reuters crew knew that if they were the target, they would be dead.

Posted by: Naieve at August 30, 2006 03:57 PM

5 I does look allot like concreate. If it hit it was not a direct detination against the shell of the vehicle.

I also have a theory about what damaged Ambulance 782. I broke it down with an analysis in Photoshop CS.

http://codemite.com/images/ambulance/

Posted by: Egfrow at August 30, 2006 05:43 PM






Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.0039 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0028 seconds, 13 records returned.
Page size 8 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.