Baby Snipers...Propaganda? Or are they just that evil?

[Jekyll's Guest]

All I can say is I'm glad they're faking these things in Photoshop instead of actually shooting their own kids to leverage stronger support for regime change efforts.

Someone should probably tell those tech wizards that bullets tend to deform when they enter bodies. That one looks fresh out of the packet.

I can't wait to see the 'chainsaw in the rectum' fake.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Yes, I think it's the same x-ray. They don't let you get so clear a view of it, but just about everything I can see of it is in exactly the same position.
<snip>
What it is not, is a picture of both of them.

Rolfe.

That's quite right. Some degree of chicanery must be going on here.

I'm also certain the two are the same (it's a little tricky with transluscent images, but the parallels are way too steep to be two different images). I'm going with it being used for the girl first, re-cycled with the boy, not the other way around. If I understood right, the girl, along with the boy missing one arm and the other locked in a cast, were filmed in Turkey, having been evacuated. It can be imagined the girl had some genuine injury or health problem to warrant that trip.

The question is, was she shot near the heart? (we can be sure the boy wasn't, at least not by the evidence of this particular image)

You simply can't tell whether that bullet is in the rib cage or not. That's what I keep telling you. You get NO depth perception on an x-ray at all.

Actually, come to think of it, it would be simplicity itself to fake the damn thing by getting the child to lie on the bullet, or to place it on top of her while the film was taken. Looking at the pictures, my guess would be on top. An expert radiologist might be able to tell by looking at the actual film. Of course you couldn't fake a pair of films like that, you'd never get the lateral view to line up.

So it could be faked, far easier than using Photoshop, or if could be a real picture of a child with a bullet in a relatively superficial position. It could even be a picture of a dead child.

It could be a genuine picture of either of these children.

Could be, I'll concede. And I've got my biases. But it just doesn't look right.

While we're on inside or outside the rib cage ("relatively superficial," and in contrast to inside the rib cage), I understand the lack of 3-D view from the image alone. But we could use just the one and logic to get a best guess. We have two options for an actual bullet appearing to be inside the girl's chest, without that being so:
1) it was laid on the girl's chest, which is fakery of course
2) it was actually fired into her, and lodged in her body, but outside her rib cage.

And then it's worth asking just what there is outside the ribs of a 4-year-old to lodge in? A bullet just under the skin would be possible, but not worth an x-ray. That's to look for broken bones and hard things inside one's body, right?

And both kids were said to be nearly killed by the bullet coming close to both their hearts. That's well inside the rib cage. So I'm going with it supposedly showing just that.

But until we agree on that, could we agree, if this things is inside anyone's chest, and entered with a fired bullet's force, along a path roughly implied by its orientation here, there should be visibly broken or at least distorted ribs? I have presumed as much, but you've got a better knowledge base to work with.

Someone should probably tell those tech wizards that bullets tend to deform when they enter bodies. That one looks fresh out of the packet.

Well, if it managed to hit no bones, or somehow failed to enter the chest cavity at all, wouldn't it have little to deform it? Or to stop it for that matter? But there it is, stopped and yet not deformed. Instinctively, that don't look right, of course. And the angle ... what were they thinking?

 

[little grey rabbit]

I think the decision was made some days ago that it was going to need ground troops to go in to ensure the insurgents victory.

So the Great Western Hate machine has been cranked up a notch or two and the HRW and the journalists have been sent in to prepare the ground for the troops to go in.

 

[gumboot]

But I see no reason why anyone would specifically target innocent children unless they're massacring civilians in general, and the casualty figures indicate that's not happening.

Children are quite small and tend to move more rapidly and randomly, making them very difficult targets. Shooting at children is an excellent way to improve your marksmanship.

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

Children are quite small and tend to move more rapidly and randomly, making them very difficult targets. Shooting at children is an excellent way to improve your marksmanship.

What, are all the stray animals too much of a challenge? Or are the snipers members of ALF?

 

[little grey rabbit]

I think the decision was made some days ago that it was going to need ground troops to go in to ensure the insurgents victory.

So the Great Western Hate machine has been cranked up a notch or two and the HRW and the journalists have been sent in to prepare the ground for the troops to go in.

hehehe
Right on cue, the headline in the Observer
Nato must send in troops to save Misrata, say rebels
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/16/libya-muammar-gaddafi

In fact the decision was made some days ago when the EU foreign policy chief, Baroness Ashton, said the EU would need to send troops to Misrata. So all the media and human rights organisations are doing are providing the cover for a policy decision already taken.

Expect lots of pictures of children from here on in. As far as civilian casualties, the Libyan government is doing exactly what the US military did in Fallujah. Provided civilian evacuation camps outside the war zone. So long as these have been set up and there is provision for civilians to evacuate to them or by sea to Benghazi, then civilian casualties are the responsibility of those who chose to fight in an urban environment and not allow civilians to leave - ie the insurgents following a policy of human shields.

We can already see that Amensty and HRW are providing a more sophisticated leadership to the insurgents campaign. The cluster munitions story (munitions found of course by a New York Times journalist). The Libyan government's denials seem sincere, firm and believable to me.

And of course trotting out the old classic from Sarajevo - the bread queue massacre. Human Rights Watch have dined out on variants of those stories for years - and working for HRW is very good career move if you like expensive dining.

I am not saying it is impossible for civilians to be killed in a bread queue. I am just saying it happened within 48 hours of significant media and human rights organisation presence turning up in Misrata.

The Great Western Hate Machine grinds on...

Its funny how things move. At the very beginning people in Benghazi protested in the street saying "No UN No Fly Zone - we can do this ourselves." Then it was UN No Fly Zone - but we can do the rest ourselves. Then it was we need a "No Drive Zone" - but we can do the rest ourselves. Now it looks like we need NATO troops - but then quickly leave and let us have all the top jobs and control the oil wealth.

Its been a long, bitter shut out in the cold for 40 years for the Benghazi elites, when some upstart came along in 1969 and said the oil wealth should be shared fairly.

 

[Caustic Logic]

I can't do much to verify any of the specifics behind it yet, but neither can I disagree with your overall impression of the situation, Rabbit.

And just as we were starting to realize the nonsense about a Benghazi bloodbath one month ago was alarmism to escalation, now we're to see insanity, brutality, and looming "genocide" in Misrata, and probably to mark another bizarre escalation. Doesn't help that the government is apparently giving us plenty of that news themselves with these rocket attacks. Nor that the rest (vast majority) is rebel-sold cotton candy (a little sugar, color added, then lots of spin and hot air).

Did the proper blog article about the issue at hand:
The Sniped Tykes of Misrata?
Crimes Against Reality in Libya, part 3:
http://12-7-9-11.blogspot.com/2011/04/sniped-tykes-of-misrata.html

Here's my attempt to "correct" the version attributed to the girl, next to the one that was "shared with HRW" by the boy's family. Artifacting and resolution account for every small difference, being the same covers the majority of spots that do clearly correlate.

Peace.

 

[geni]

We can already see that Amensty and HRW are providing a more sophisticated leadership to the insurgents campaign. The cluster munitions story (munitions found of course by a New York Times journalist). The Libyan government's denials seem sincere, firm and believable to me.

You are aware that the cluster munitions in question are both legal and consistent with standard millitry equipement?

Its been a long, bitter shut out in the cold for 40 years for the Benghazi elites, when some upstart came along in 1969 and said the oil wealth should be shared fairly.

Yes we could probably do without the gadaffi properganda. In any case the historical Benghazi elites don't appear to be involved and didn't get their hands on much of the oil wealth anyway (production was far lower prior to the early 70s).

 

[McHrozni]

Its been a long, bitter shut out in the cold for 40 years for the Benghazi elites, when some upstart came along in 1969 and said the oil wealth should be shared fairly.

And then proceeded to share it with himself only, giving the crumbs to specific minorities in order to secure their support, yes?

Incidentally, could you link me up with whomever is paying you to spread this ****** I heard that Quackdaffi paid up to $2000 to foreginers to come at a rally in his support back in 2008, I wonder what his going rate is now. Free dough is always welcome.

McHrozni

 

[Caustic Logic]

And then proceeded to share it with himself only, giving the crumbs to specific minorities in order to secure their support, yes?

Incidentally, could you link me up with whomever is paying you to spread this ****** I heard that Quackdaffi paid up to $2000 to foreginers to come at a rally in his support back in 2008, I wonder what his going rate is now. Free dough is always welcome.

McHrozni

Which country had the highest living standards in Africa, fully on par with most European countries by all major measures except getting to vote for increasingly deceptive government "servants" who vote in free market pillage at first chance of kickbacks?

And you suspect these multi-billions in military intervention are being poured in by multiple governments just to help free people? Without an eye to re-arranging the economic scene to offset the cost and maybe even bolster the flailing economies that made the sacrifices? (oh that's right, those effects might take years to show up, so no way is it a motive). People ask how we can afford this, but the elites, always better informed about future trends, are asking how we can afford to miss out.

Don't get me wrong, I love democracy and free markets, and the chance to have foreign companies innovating your oil industry, and to protest and make your voice heard by picking the (hoped) lesser of two shysters, and I hope they can get that chance.

It's only sad to know their standard of living will surely fall in a way that leaves them upset and probably rebellious. But the next rebellion, against the new indebted pro-western government, won't be allowed. After all, from then on, you can just vote in change, like we did here in 2008, and there's no excuse to "protest" your way to regime change like they are now.

In short, I suspect you don't know anything more about the real situation there than LGR or I, and possibly less. You're surely more versed in one set of facts (the bad things we've been told about Libya over the years) than I am, but seem almost completely unaware of the other.

And I was paid $2,000 to say that. No other reason to speak against the prevailing mindset that's engineered here by government think tanks, corporate owned media, and human rights groups that lend their names to distortions and outright fakery at key moments that help justify escalated "Human Rights" warfare.

Cheers.

 

[McHrozni]

Which country had the highest living standards in Africa, fully on par with most European countries by all major measures except getting to vote for increasingly deceptive government "servants" who vote in free market pillage at first chance of kickbacks?

The Caliphate and Ottoman Africa were probably the only contenders, with contemporary Europe of course. In contemporary Africa, no country qualifies.

And you suspect these multi-billions in military intervention are being poured in by multiple governments just to help free people? Without an eye to re-arranging the economic scene to offset the cost and maybe even bolster the flailing economies that made the sacrifices?

Relevance? We are talking about the nature of Quackdaffi regime, not motives for intervention, which may be multifaceted.

And I was paid $2,000 to say that.

Cool. Can you set me up with an agent?

McHrozni

 

[Caustic Logic]

The Caliphate and Ottoman Africa were probably the only contenders, with contemporary Europe of course. In contemporary Africa, no country qualifies.

Oh, nit-pick over whether it's exactly on par with Europe or not. I recall finding that it was pretty close on average, but I'm no expert. I think you know the closest to such a description, by a long-shot, is/was Libya.

Relevance? We are talking about the nature of Quackdaffi regime, not motives for intervention, which may be multifaceted.

Darn right it's multi-faceted, otherwise two-faced/many-faced. The nature of the regime was squeeze oil exports for maximum benefit of the people, aside from other often arbitrary restrictions, that had western oil companies refusing to work there in recent years. [see here] That will change under the new rules, and you can bet this is a major motive. Largest oil reserves in Africa, prob. the best or among the best at sharing that wealth with its population, only country in Africa worth this scale of intervention to prevent "genocide."

It might even explain the almost absurd credulity afforded every breathless rebel prediction of mass slaughter. I think we've gone off-topic enough, let's stick to what we agree on - the X-ray evidence of snipers shooting kids that's riling up the world is bogus. We just disagree on whether they should be riled to regime change anyways.

 

[McHrozni]

Oh, nit-pick over whether it's exactly on par with Europe or not. I recall finding that it was pretty close on average, but I'm no expert.

Pre-war GDP was less than half EU average, unemployment hovered at around 30%, one third of population lived in poverty.

I think you know the closest to such a description, by a long-shot, is/was Libya.

How about Italy? Sure, it isn't an African nation, but that's nitpicking isn't it?

It might even explain the almost absurd credulity afforded every breathless rebel prediction of mass slaughter.

What do you expect to happen, should Quackdaffis' forces take Bhengazi?

I think we've gone off-topic enough, let's stick to what we agree on - the X-ray evidence of snipers shooting kids that's riling up the world is bogus.

It looks bogus to me. If an indenpendant expert tells me otherwise I will change that opinion.

We just disagree on whether they should be riled to regime change anyways.

So Quackdaffi may silence opposition with threats, arbitrary arrests, rape, murder, he may fire rockets into a city, hide his forces among civilians, mask his forces as civilians to ambush opponents ... etc, but as long as he doesn't order snipers to target children, he should be allowed to rule his country?

Strange standards. Alas, you are a very strange person, so this is not entirely unexpected.

McHrozni

 

[Caustic Logic]

One last rebut

Pre-war GDP was less than half EU average,

Per capita? And no, Italy is not an African country. Libya was far and away no. 1 in Africa for things like life expectancy, infant mortality, education, literacy, health care, and I thought per capita GDP.

unemployment hovered at around 30%,

Nationwide or in the east? I do acknowledge the fruits didn't get to that side so much. That's part of why I could see partition as a solution. Benghazi and east, coastal only, just enough share of the nation's oil to get by on okay. No rewards should be extracted, ideally, to minimize the appearance of ulterior motives. It's one thought.

What do you expect to happen, should Quackdaffis' forces take Bhengazi?

Well, as has been said, we need to take advantage of this rare chance to out Gaddafi and his whole system. If Benghazi had fallen in late March, that chance would evaporate. That, I believe, was the danger world elites moved to avoid.

Some people would have died, too, depending on the last fighting. If they'd been given serious hope that someone would rescue their mission and help them usher in a new Libya, many would fight hard to reach that hope. If we'd been clear to them that you can't overthrow your government by force and we wouldn't help, I suspect a quicker, cleaner surrender would have ensued.

But I admit it's possible (or obvious depending on your psychosis) that the government would have decided to order a mass extermination, once the fighter were helpless. It doesn't make much sense, but it doesn't have to if it's ascribed to Quackdaffy. He's, well, insane. And his mindless zombie servants by extension.

But motives manifest in actions. We did not stop at saving Benghazi, but pounded gov't forces back, allowing rebels to re-take cities they'd already lost. Armed civilian residents had chased them out of one town already (Bin Jawad was it?). But we helped them re-take these cities, with further violence on both sides, only to have them lost again, with more death.

Depending how you calculate it, we've probably cost more lives, even on the civilian side, than we saved by prolonging this thing. But the chance at total regime change has been maintained, with these bombs and even more with words.

The sniped tykes x-ray:

It looks bogus to me. If an indenpendant expert tells me otherwise I will change that opinion.

I'd recommend, now that you've seen it, that you demand such expert not just tell, but show you how what I've shown is wrong.

So Quackdaffi may silence opposition with threats, arbitrary arrests, rape, murder, he may fire rockets into a city, hide his forces among civilians, mask his forces as civilians to ambush opponents ... etc, but as long as he doesn't order snipers to target children, he should be allowed to rule his country?

What a cartoonish list. Okay, it's not as bad as it could hav been, but silencing opposition with rape? Examples? I think that's almost the exact opposite of the al-Obeidi story (not an area of expertise yet). If it's some other thing as well, I should know that.

But look, we're going off too much on side issues. I only meant people should not rightly be fired up, all over again, over this highly questionable new atrocity. But they will. We love children, we hate Gaddafi, and collectively, we are gullible and stupid. Take that realization back to some of the other atrocities, and you might be able to get a faint sense of where I'm at. (more full of question marks than exclamation marks).

Regime change is more obvious than ever after those stories of children shot emerged, and that's just not honest. But it doesn't matter, so long as it achieves the objective.

Strange standards. Alas, you are a very strange person, so this is not entirely unexpected.

McHrozni

I do try. Peace.

 

[McHrozni]

Per capita? And no, Italy is not an African country. Libya was far and away no. 1 in Africa for things like life expectancy, infant mortality, education, literacy, health care, and I thought per capita GDP.

Nice shift of goalposts.

Nationwide or in the east? I do acknowledge the fruits didn't get to that side so much.

So you agree Quackdaffi didn't share the oil wealth nearly as fairly as you previously implied?

If we'd been clear to them that you can't overthrow your government by force and we wouldn't help, I suspect a quicker, cleaner surrender would have ensued.

The Libyan rebels started off by demanding no foreign intervention take place. They only began calling for foreign forces after they realized they had no chance to defeat Quackdaffi. So in other words, you could kill the revolution that way, but you couldn't prevent it.

But I admit it's possible (or obvious depending on your psychosis) that the government would have decided to order a mass extermination, once the fighter were helpless. It doesn't make much sense, but it doesn't have to if it's ascribed to Quackdaffy.

Actually it makes perfect sense once you realize you want to maintain law and order for longer than a few weeks.

We did not stop at saving Benghazi, but pounded gov't forces back, allowing rebels to re-take cities they'd already lost.

Which makes perfect sense, seeing as that the only alternative would be to permit Bhengazi to fall a week or two later.

Neither of these two points requires the gift of foresight. Are you just trolling?

Depending how you calculate it, we've probably cost more lives, even on the civilian side, than we saved by prolonging this thing.

Quackdaffi was promising death to every person that doesn't support him.

I'd recommend, now that you've seen it, that you demand such expert not just tell, but show you how what I've shown is wrong.

Why? I don't disagree with you. This particular case is irrelevant.

Okay, it's not as bad as it could hav been, but silencing opposition with rape? Examples? I think that's almost the exact opposite of the al-Obeidi story (not an area of expertise yet). If it's some other thing as well, I should know that.

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/77824...litics,gaddafis-men-use-rape-as-weapon-of-war
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/03/29/501364/main20048232.shtml

Just so you know, this isn't exactly new:

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2006/02/26/libya-women-girls-locked-indefinitely-without-charge

But look, we're going off too much on side issues. I only meant people should not rightly be fired up, all over again, over this highly questionable new atrocity.

Because all the previous attrocities aren't worth mentioning after a while?

McHrozni

 

[little grey rabbit]

"Fog" of journalism

At the same time, official communications have been punctilious about citing the "protection of civilians" as justification for any action, even when that seems far-fetched. The appearance of legality must be maintained, but the linguistic gap between presentation and reality only widens. The first British-funded evacuation ship out of Misrata offered a particularly heinous example. Described as a ship full of the wounded and amputees, it actually transported 31 injured men, including four amputees, and almost 1,000 stranded foreign workers.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...l-thinking-must-yield-to-realism-2271060.html

versus

The Ionian Spirit usually ships *holidaymakers around the Greek Islands. Now it ferries the injured and desperate from the horror that is Misrata.

If you want to see and indeed smell the dreadful effects of war, a single journey on this boat would leave you in no doubt.

The Ionian Spirit has been commissioned by the International *Organisation for *Migration to evacuate the thousands of foreign workers now trapped.

The final passengers arrive, barely conscious, in bullet-riddled ambulances under *blankets and bloody bandages.

The lower deck has been transformed into a makeshift hospital staffed by young *volunteer doctors from Benghazi. It seems every blanket that is pulled back reveals some horrific wound or bound stump, caused by the relentless explosions that are tearing Misrata apart.

A 27-year-old now facing life without arms or legs, a 32-year-old missing part of his face, a 20-year-old with a chest *punctured by bullets.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-st...ith-the-wounded-from-misrata-115875-23078216/

 

[egslim]

Quackdaffi was promising death to every person that doesn't support him.

He also promised worldwide terrorist attacks, and to 'set the Mediterranean on fire'. A promise from someone with a trackrecord as a chronic liar is meaningless.

I see no reason to believe Gadaffi was going to massacre Bengazi, that's just a fantasy.
- He did not massacre any of the other cities he captured.
- It would be a very hard sell to his own supporters.
- People can simply show their 'support' for him by waving the right colour flag.

 

[McHrozni]

He also promised worldwide terrorist attacks, and to 'set the Mediterranean on fire'. A promise from someone with a trackrecord as a chronic liar is meaningless.

Except that massacring helpless civilian population once you capture their cities is a lot easier to do than any of those things.

I see no reason to believe Gadaffi was going to massacre Bengazi, that's just a fantasy.
- He did not massacre any of the other cities he captured.

Seeing as that most of them were essentially evacuated before his forces, I don't find that exactly surprising. How many refugees have returned from Tunisia back to his benevolent rule exactly?

McHrozni

 

[little grey rabbit]

Quackdaffi was promising death to every person that doesn't support him.

In the same way the Bushitler promised death to everyone in Iraq who didn't support the occupation.

ie: Not at all.

In anycase I think you will find the army is largely autonomous from Gadaffi and was intending to carry out the Benghazi operations to the same standards they have shown elsewhere.

I find the propensity for Americans to shamelessly lie to support their vicious assaults on ethnicities they secretly despise and loathe both fascinating and troubling.

What can be done about the American problem?

 

[McHrozni]

In the same way the Bushitler promised death to everyone in Iraq who didn't support the occupation.

ie: Not at all.

When did Bush say that anyone in Iraq who didn't support the invasion didn't deserve to live?

If he never said that, please admit you were lying.

In anycase I think you will find the army is largely autonomous from Gadaffi and was intending to carry out the Benghazi operations to the same standards they have shown elsewhere.

Like in Misrata? A medieval style siege, snipers, heavy altillery fired indiscriminately into civilian areas ... but you fully expect them to be very concerned about the well-being of civilians, once they conquer the city of course.

You've been dead wrong on all other predictinos, so I suspect you're dead wrong on this one as well.

McHrozni