Pallywood Returns: Palestinian Doctors and Human Rights Group B’Tselem Smear Israel with a Likely Faked X-Ray (PJM Exclusive)
They want an investigation, claiming the IDF fired real bullets into a crowd. Instead, the investigation should be of the accusers — the evidence is almost assuredly a fraud.
March 23, 2010 - 12:06 pm
Instead, we see the profile of a bullet that appears to be nearly perfectly intact though rotated nearly 180 degrees, with the base of the bullet near the back of the skull and the point of the bullet towards the front. This is very unlikely behavior in a 5.56mm bullet, as a bullet having significant velocity to tumble end-over-end will also fragment violently.
It would be useful to see the full-sized X-ray that is claimed to be that of Osayed Qadus’ skull. Unfortunately, we are reduced to looking at the larger of the small media versions posted online, including this one by Ynetnews.
A larger, high resolution version of the X-ray may go a long way towards supporting or denying the contention that I am about to make.
Based upon the relative size differences between the basic types of weapons in this conflict, it is often fairly easy to tell one type of bullet from another, even in a grainy, low-quality image. Unless Osayed Qadus was cursed with having an unusually small skull, the bullet shown would seem to be too large to be an Israeli bullet. Neither the size nor the atypical behavior of the bullet makes it believable that the bullet we see in this image was fired from an Israeli weapon.
This opens up a host of issues.
If the bullet is not a 62-grain 5.56mm NATO bullet fired from an Israeli weapon, then where did it come from? The most logical and likely alternative is that the bullet shown is the 123-grain 7.62mm bullet fired by the AK-47, the weapon preferred by Palestinian forces: legal, criminal, and terrorist.
But even claiming this bullet was fired by an AK-47 is very suspect. Even more so than the 5.56mm round fired at low velocity, the 7.62×39 round had developed a reputation for boring straight through a target without fragmenting or tumbling. Nor is it likely that a 7.62mm round fired at short range would penetrate only partially through the skull.
If we must eliminate Israeli weapons from being the cause of this wound, and find it problematic to suggest that an AK-47 was used at close range, then what alternatives are we left with?
As bizarre as it may sound, the most logical deduction that can be made is that the bullet was placed in or under Osayed Qadus’ skull by hand for purposes of creating a fraudulent X-ray, or that this X-ray is not of Qadus at all, but of someone else shot by an AK-47 at a much longer range.
A higher-resolution version of the X-ray might help us determine if this bullet was ever fired, but we do know one thing with a fair degree of certainty. This X-ray is not evidence that Israeli troops fired live rounds at unarmed Palestinians.
If anything, it exonerates the IDF.
What it appears to be is evidence of a “professional” media all too willing to accept fraud at face value.