Between lies

I promessed to return into Mr. North' s "analysis" but pictures keeps me going and going...

This is a copy taken from a chinese site related to Xinhua News Agency. It is slightly better than other copies analysed before:


The picture is clearly better. The shadows of the glasses can be well seen near the eyes and it is less trashed by JPEG. I made several enhancments of the other pictures I had and they could not give the same detail as this one. Still it shows many of the things seen on other pictures, the sharp pixelisation of details contrasting with the smoothness of other, the baby's hand behind the pants, the false colors of the skin and clothes... Besides it seems to lack focus as the others.

But it is not such a big trouble to try to "return" the focus to the picture. There are tools that restore it with a relative fidelity. Well I used two of these tools to get a more focused picture. The first tool was GreyCstoration. This tool tries to remove the noise while keeping the main features of the picture. It is much better than simple Gaussian blur becuase the second tool tends to restore all the noise seen at the picture. Now the second tool was Refocus-It . An excellent tool, with some limitations, that allows one to try to restore the focus of a blurred picture. And what I got? This:



The result shows a "rubber" texture over everything, the result of too much effort to use GreyCstoration. However we get things that were hard to see on the previous picture. As I remarked before, over Red Channel, Green Helmet seems stressed, the look more lost. Here, the processing of two tools over the whole picture shows a very similar protrait. But be aware! This is not a reproduction of the original picture! It is an enhancement showing details that seem to have been blurred or defocused. It just shows that the "original" news picture may be quite far from the true original. This enhancement does not free us from deliberate and accurate retouches, which seem to have been done at several places. It only remark us details that may have suffered slight retouches.

Anyway it shows a lie, more a pack of lies. Lies going from "Decisive Green Helmet in face of the aggression" up to "photos were staged and people posed". Between freelancer strategist Adnan Hajj and wheelchair strategist Richard North. And between these guys, the media: Internet, the papers, the TV, journalists and agencies . And in the very centre of the Lie: the auditory. Those who keep swallowing news, lying to themselves that the media informs them. People who don't give themselves any benefit of doubt to what goes around the news. These are the Homo Simpsoniens of this world. Which is nearly becoming the whole Mankind...

Return to the original work

I'm going back to the debunking of North's analysis as this was the original intent of my work. The man went too cheap to leave him just unbeaten from any side. His "analysis" deserve him the place of the cheapest Internet pseudo-debunker ever. The only big deed he had is that he got a strong media show to poison the masses.

This does not mean I'll forget the analysis of the pictures, as, without it, it will be hard to give a complete qualified analysis. But, I will not go into every detail of the pictures until I get some heavy artillery at hand. However, this does not hamper my work for now. As the man cannot even tell a face from another, or even colors. Worse, he cannot tell a unsleeved cloth from a shirt clearly carrying sleeves as one can see, directly, on his "analysis" of Qana. Besides he is quite smart to "forget" from what he started the debunk: photos times. On his "final" analysis, there is no word about the times. But not smart enough to know that his links give a hint where did he really get the material for his "debunks".

What is Green Helmet looking at?

On the photo he seems to look straight and his face looks really mean. As if he is judging everything and everyone. But comparations, made after attempts to restore the picture to a "pre-JPEG" status and made between Red, Green and Blue channel, it seems that there is sharp differences at the eyes nose and mouth.

The tool made this difference more remarkable at Red Channel: the protrait is generally blurred at the face, it seems that he is looking a little bit out of the camera, to the left of it, the lips seem about to open and his general view is of a stressed guy. There, he looks "lost" to the posing.

Even before processing the line of the mouth seems too pushed. Did Adnan Hajj replaced "stressed Green Helmet" for "judging Green Helmet"? Quite possible.

For now it is hard to state this as strong evidence that the picture was doctored. To get a strong conclusion, one has to go through the very details of the algorithm. Frankly I experimented with a fresh new program and was more worried at cleaning out the noise to see how much the picture could have been reworked. Much less I tried to "reget" the original. In fact I don't think it is possible to restore it as we have only low-quality copies.

Anyway the result was that the picture carries strong differences between channels. Too strong to consider them "natural".

A summary of the analysis

1. The most visible things that anyone can see:

On most photos, Green Helmet's pants are dark blue and the shirt black. Here, the pants look like jeans and the shirt seems dasrk blue. Besides we see someone's knee on ther picture in some faded pink uniform. However, other photos show that Red Cross workers use uniforms with a saturated "red-orange" tone.

The stripe over the pants looks blueish and faded, while other photos show it bright white. Meanhwile, the jacket has saturated colors.

The stripe at the right leg, seems larger than the left one, which is closer to the camera.

The hand seen at foreground seems to have four fingers only. Under the missing finger one seems to see a large white feature at Green Helmet's leg.

The fingers of the hand seem blurred not because of movement, but looking like covered by a plastic bag, as the blur goes around the border of the hand and not in one direction.

Near Green Helmet's left shoe, the pants look like if they were transparent. A bit of the shoe and a half of a rock seem to be visible through them.

Green Helmet, himself, nearly doesn't cast shadows. There are two clear sources for light (and a possible third). If one looks at the arm of the boy behind Green Helmet, one sees a shadow growing from two directions, one from nearly the camera, the other from other source at its left. But one Green Helmet if is hard to find any good shadows.

Green Helmet looks younger and more shaved than in other photos.

2. Less visible things

If one compares this photo with other, supposedly taken before this one, one sees a similar hand at the foreground. However, that hand is clearly tanned. Here, the skin looks pale.

Green Helmet's face seems to be slightly tanned on many photos. The skin is slightly rugged and the beard is sharp (the last can be seen even on lower resolutions). Here the face is rosy, relatively smooth and the beard seems softer.

At the blurred hand, colors seem to change in contrastable patches from the hand to the arm.

The hand's palm, doesn't seem blurred.

The arm carries a reddish tone from the jacket.

All around the blurred hand's wrist, things carry a very "Van Goghish" look. This can not be a product of JPEG's work as distortions are not linear.

Things seen on processing

Fingers and the right side of the blurred hand are heavily pixelized at enhancement which suggests retouch.

Some sections of Green Helmet's faced are also heavily pixelized.

Ring finger seems slightly "bitten" at its lower section.

At Red Channel, all fingers seem to be visible in full form. However it seems that there is in fact a cause for blurring, caused by the simultaneous movement of Green Helmet's leg and the hand. Meanwhile, this does not explain a large deformation seen at index finger, the pixelization and the sudden disappearence of little finger.

Some enhancing tools suggest that the pants, near the palm of blurred hand, were heavily sharpened or they could be a patch from somewhere else.

A little bit far from the borders one can see blicks of orange (jacket, Green Helmet's cheek, the radio's antenna). Near the jacket, the pants show patches of violet. Most of the jacket shows a very sharp border whith all the rest of the picture. This border seems the have an equal width from the right side of Green Helmet's face and down to the radio.

Things in question

Green Helmt's face seems redrawn or heavily retouched. At certain processings of the image, the face looks much more like the picture from a comic book. However the boy at background, keeps showing a photographic effect, where shades of gray correspond to an iluminated object. One can even trace the source of illumination. However, on Green Helmet one sees only color patches.

The tip of Green Helmet's nose seems to have got its bit of "plastic operation".

The right side of Green Helmet's glasses seem to blick. Some processings suggest a lense much more of the "Top Gun" kind than Green Helmet's trademark elliptic lenses.

Also here, the upper armature seems missing right out of the face of Green Helmet. One sees only a prolongation of the lenses colors over the face "creating" the armature. However, near the eye, one sees a nearly invisible patch of brown, much of the same kind as the glasses armature. This patch is barely a product of JPEG as it is sharp enough. And also it is not a product of the boys jacket which goes much more for black.

The baby's hand seems to be in the background of the pants. However, Green and Red Channels show it more at the foreground. This is also hardly a sole product of JPEG.

WARNING!: Wild fakes on photos from Qana

Warning to everyone who tries to analyse and interpretate the Qana's photos: There are wild fakes among them. Yes, it does not sound news: Adnan Hajj... Again. But there are people who still are using his photos as "evidence" not even realising that most of the picture have been completely overworked. And the fakes are much wider than those seen before. Yesm, they are rough, terrible amateurish but some retouches are more elaborated than one may think at first sight.

What goes is an account of one such elaborated fake. It concerns the following picture:



Many people know it: "Green Helmet picking up the body of a baby from the debris". The general positions of people at the photo and their lookings are seen by some as the most striking evidence of posing for a camera. People use this photo as a proof that events at Qana were staged.

In fact, most of the picture is an attempt to produce a very elaborated fake.

I will not go after all the details I know now. First because I am writing about them on my debunk of Mr. North's article "Milking It? (it is at the end of the current version of the work)". Second, because there are details still demanding some further analysis. Third, because there is one single detail that shall be remarked apart of everything. As it turns us into a wild path of speculations. But first I give a generic account of what I saw:

1. The hand seen at the foreground. Someone tried to wipe it out of the picture. The "ghost" seen around it are not the result of blurring due to the hands movement, but the consequences of using tools to clear it from the photo.

2. However, the arm was sharpened and a strong coloration of red, specially at its border. One may visually see this at its upper edeg, where it "contacts" Green Helmet's jacket.

3. Green Helmet's left arm seems distorted. Yes, his arm complexity is slightly uncommon, and on other pictures one can see his arms with same sort of "Popeye effect". But, no matter this fact, it seems that the lower section of the arm and upper are not in positions one may expect.

3. I tried to scale the picture to have a better view of it. For this, I used a tool that uses 2D DCT algorithm for scaling as it gives much better results than the Cubic Interpolation seen on Photoshop or Gimp. The result was amazing. Green Helmet's jacket, sections of the face, the radio and part of the tee-shirt were sharply pixelized, with clear visible squares in place of soft changes of colors. The phenomena could not be seen at the remaining picture, which pattern correlates to the usual results of 2D DCT algorithm. This highly suggests two things: either these sections were submitted to rough enhancements or these sections came from other photo which had a slightly different resolution. Noting that the radio's antenna seems to "cut" the frontier of the jacket in a suspect way, the last hypotesis has a reason to exist.

However, there is one detail that is more shocking than the above ones. On the picture one sees the hand ofthe baby. It seems slightly behind Green Helmet's blue pants.An enhancement gives a more questionable view, but, still, it seems behind the pants:


The detail of the hand


However:


Blue channel


Green channel


Red channel

For the average people I explain. The large majority of computer pictures are in fact greyscale pictures divided on three channels: Red, Green and Blue. Much like the TV sets most people have. Now on the Blue channel we can see a remarkable shadow over the hand. This shadow is nearly visible at the Green channel, however, the hand seems more over this side of the pants. But on Red channel we can clearly see that the pants ARE behind the hand. Besides the grays gradations, on all channels, are always suggesting that the hand is, in reality, in front of the pants. However, Blue channel shows clearly a mask over the fingers of the baby. Considering that the pants are dark blue, there is a clear evidence that someone tried to mask the hand behind them.

Here is an animation showing the sharp contrast seen at the channels:



Now a question. Why would Adnan Hajj give himself the touble to push the baby's hand behind Green Helmet? An attempt to give him a full "star spot"? Or to mask the contrasts made by other pastings over the picture? Several questions may arise but there is one quite troubling:



This picture comes from Mr. North's article "Act 1, scene 1". Here we clearly see that the hand is in front of Green Helmet's pants. In fact, this and several other details are the basis for people to consider that these pictures were "staged" for the press.

Personally, I agreeded with Mr. North's views on this specific set of pictures, no matter my sharp criticism on many other things he does. On a preliminar analysis of the pictures, made before he published his article, my conclusions were nearly dot to dot with his analysis of this set. However, I knew that one of the pictures was made by Adnan Hajj and I knew that his "Green Helmet rising the baby for the photo" is also widely retouched. So when I went on the detailed analysis of his article "Milking It?", I decided to run every possible analysis before giving a result.

While doing it, I noted the wide retouches, stopped the analysis and went for a picture better than the one published by Mr. North. And, this is the result.

Mr. North is not to be blamed whatsoever on this makeup. The photo I analysed came from sources not related to Mr. North in any way. Specifically: Yahoo!News. Besides it came to me when Hajj's works were still not known to everyone, and we still were under the massive whoopla of Mr. North "times debunking".

Why Hajj would take the trouble to "push" the baby under Green Helmet? Did he know the other picture? And if so, for what purpose he "pushed" him behind? Yes, the baby is not on the same position on the pictures. And Mr. Green Helmet does seem to have made a step behind on one of them. Besides, it seems that he rose and sat between pictures, if one considers the folds at the pants and hypotesis that we are part of the "genuine" photo. But what is real here? Why people moved? And what does it mean all these retouches? An attempt to give them "more visual efffect"? Then, why the hand?

Are we seeing an attempt to "stage" the staging? For whom?

No matter this, I highly recomend to everyone: be very suspect of Qana's photos. We have fakes there. Deliberate ones. Yes, we are seeing, again, Adnan Hajj "trademark". However I know that some photos were subjected to enhacements, one carries a signal of possible blurring. And we have "White Tee-shirt" over many pictures without his bloodied tee-shirt but with a strange brownish spot instead.

Yes, there are ways to find out things and everyone has a right for it. But if you don't have some little knowledge of imaging don't try to interpretate what you see at Qana. First learn a little bit and then go for the hunt. But, never forget to hold up that little bit of scheptics at the backyard and don't run to fast conclusions. Even I, nearly missed the hand. Fortunately one channel showed the pixelization of the jacket more sharply than the others (thanks for the jacket being poisoning orange). And that's when I noted the "blicking" at the hand while crossing the RGB channnels.
PS: I am really against advertisings but spread this news as possible as you can. We may have something much more complex than Hezbollywood's and Mr. North's "Plan 9's" scripts. Whatever it is, people, keep the faith on that famous phrase:

"There is no spoon..."

Frankly, it was the very first thing to come to my mind when I saw the jacket.

KEYNOTES: "Milking it?" - New draft

Here goes a new version on the analysis of Mr. North's article "Milking It?":

KEYNOTES: "Milking it?"

Three parts are mostly complete. I started the fourth part but I couldn't complete it. Besides it is quite raw for the moment. Hope to do it at the end of the week. And I have to correct the language. It has been a long time since I wrote something at this volume.

Frankly this work goes quite large. It is already 24 pages vs. a small article. Yes, I am no less prolific than Mr. North but, I go for the technical aspects and "features", not for the cheap debunking and fast publicity.

Yes, there are no photos. At least, for the moment I don't want to put them there. Besides everyone knows where they come from. And, as I said before, I am not of the kind "look here, go there".


Enjoy it...

Between the mad, the hatred, the war and Qana

Humans are amazing beings. They love to pick every piece of their lives, their History, their beliefs and poblems... and turn all upside down. Such way that we came to extravagant questions as if the Mongolian Empire ever existed, was Cesar the Khan, if the Crusades were Napoleon wars and whatever... Some even use Maths, to "prove" these stories....

But what is more funny is that people go for these tales... They seem innocent. Until one sees people hyperdriving the Holocaust, others denying the very existence of nazi extremination camps.

Sincerly I don't give a dime for what Israel does to give Holocaust a top spot on Nazi crimes. There were the gypsies who were exterminated at a level much higher than the jews. But they don't have magnates or states to speak for them. And, till now, they are one of the most marginalized nations on Earth. Maybe there are reasons for it, maybe not. But that does not avoid us to remind what happened to them at the hands of Hitler and his accolytes.

Israel's Holocaust boost distorts History. Because it forgets that tens of millions of people were also exterminated, killed and starved to death. They were also shot, gassed, burned and raped. And they were not jews. But even with jews, Israel and its lobbies fail to show us the whole picture. Portraits of Holocaust shows us people being driven like cattle to ghettos and camps. They show us the streets, the platoons, the railroads, the camps, the stoves... But does anyone remembers that there was also the countryside, the villages, the mass graves, the shootings, the gassing trucks? Does anyone remembers that, in Belorus, the jewish community was wiped out? Why this side of the nazi enormities is not mentioned? Maybe because on that side of the story we have also gypsies, slavians and nearly anyone who fell under Totenkopf hands being shot, burned and gassed?

The Holocaust overdrive plants its seeds. Now, we have people "revising" it. There was no Holocaust! None, nil, nada. Hitler was a relatively hot head fellow who couldn't deal with his neighbors. If jews died on the mess it was because they fell in the middle of it, like anyone else... No, Hitler hated them but was not after them in the way some draw it. It was just... War...

Today there is a rise of sympathy for Hitler. And, naturally, for his Totenkopf religion. Yes, a religion. The religion of the reincarnation of Devil himself, of Satan, of Iblis. Holocaust "forgets" that behind the "Skull and Bones" symbol there was a whole system of faith. The faith on Superman. The faith that was about to wipe 99% of Mankind, including jews, slavians, asians, africans and even germans. Hitler wanted to create a "new" Man. And was ready to sacrifice everyone for it. Up to the point that, when the Soviets reached Berlin, he stated that germans had to be exterminated because they failed to their fate. He even died on his beliefs.

And today, we see the reborning of the Totenkopf. Under the hand of the man who cannot face God. He cannot stand even a joke or caricature on Him. But he is ready to joke with the fruits planted by the very same reincarnation of the Devil. He is ready to be that same Iblis who cannot face God on his eyes but seeds hatring among the people. Specially over those who suffered most under the nazis, the Europeans.

The name of this man: Akhmenijad.

Holocaust overdrive gives him an advantage point. Muslims seem not to have suffered a lot under Hitler. Yes, it seems. But, it only seems. As we shall remember the War was made not only by Hitler himself. And not only against the jews. It was against the World. And in the most populated muslim country, Hilter's friends considered its natives as unworthy cattle. But who remembers this? The "Ummah" is a great word. As it appears and vanishes at the very moment any "islamic" politician needs it. Including the Ladens of this world. Here "islamic" politicians are no better than their western brothers when using "Democracy".

Anyway, Mr. Akhmenijad keeps an advantage. We didn't have extermination camps burning arabs. And Stalin invaded Iran, while a good piece of the Middle East and North Africa was colonized by brittish and french. So, now he has ground to rise the New Totenkopf. Besides he has an historical advantage. He is in Iran, the true motherland of the nation once called Arians. Which Hitler used as the "fathers" of his religion. No matter that, in fact, he is much more a cousin to the mongols, as many Europeans. But this didn't stop him as it does not stop Akhmenijad. Truly, he tries to give a very "islamic" portrait of his views.

Muslims? How can Muslims dare to make the "Sieg Heil" salute? How can they dare to copy the SS style and behaviour? That can be seen today on the pictures and video shots, specially among so called shiite partisans. I shall note, shiites have nothing to do with it. Ali would curse these people for the whole Eternity and beyond. Because what these people are doing is the very same reincarnation of Evil itself. Hassan al Sabakh and his Assassins did not dare to rise the apolegeptics of Death, the way these guys are doing. These ones are rising the spectre of the Totenkopf, the Dead Head.

Who made them? Israel. If there is someone to kick, Israel can kick itself on his back. They were the hand the fed the monster wishing to destroy them. Because there was no need to distort the past. And there was no need to overdrive. But they did it. They overdrive the "reason" of their existence. The they overdrive their own existence for the last half century.

Yes, no matter the errors, the Beast shall be destroyed. There is no doubts on this. Before it comes strong enough to build its first "Temple" in the homeland of Moloch, there is a utter need to drive it to its knees. But, does that mean Israel keeps the right to overdrive? That it can bomb at his will what comes to its hand? No, because that's feeding the beast even more. She does not need Israel, she needs dead. And, while Israel will feed them, they will be satisfied.

Qana is the hallmark of Israel's overdrive. People died there. How? How many? When? By who? These are questions that shall be answered. No matter the details, Israel has its blame on the events, even if Hezbollah blowed the people there. Because it was Israel who started the war on a all-scale overdrive, not Hezbollah. These provoked it, but Israel went out in a way that was too much wide and wild. There was a moment when they could have put all Western Asia afire. Fortunately, among the Islamic world there are not only hot heads but also reasonable people.

Anyway there were vicitms at Qana. Someone did it and has to pay for it. However the overdrivers came and started a campaign that reaches a level as if there was no Qana's tragedy at all. Yes, someone may have grounds to consider that someone "advertized" the tragedy. Yes, it is correct to bash such people. But that, does not gives anyone the right to forget the victims. Doing it is the same as keeping the Holocaust overdrive. Which will bring us to people who will claim that Qana was either completely wiped out, or there was no such city at all. And which will take us into the point when someone pushes a new trigger fully convinced he will not pay for the consequences.

Today Akhmenijad's accolytes think that way. Today, they opened the "Holocaust caricatures" museum. While I consider that Israel has a duty to look at the mirror for bringing things to this level, still, I sound the warning that is rumbling, today, in Russia:

"The events of the Great Patriotic War are not to be questioned..."

Hope these guys understand the meaning...

Blockbuster

An Oscar for Mr. North. He made the script of his life...
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/corruption-of-media.html

Oooops, before getting an oscar he needs to pass the critics, right?

So, let's help Mr. North getting it...

"Act 1, scene 1"
The first photo is new for me. So I ain't gonna comment it for now.
Second photo, yes there are signs of posing. Besides Green Helmet is looking straight at the objective. But whoever is there, the only person making good-looking faces is Green Helmet.
Well, that's a step near to the Oscar

"Act 1 scene 2"
I commented already on this one. No changes... Oscar? Hmmmm...

"Act 1 scene 3"
This time Mr. North seems to have the sequence right. However he doesn't see anything.

On first photo people seem arguing and the older guy seems quite somber. The "stripped tee-shirt man" (with army trousers btw, look further) is not conforting our Green Helmet but giving a quite expectant look towards the baby and the older man. Yes, Green Helmet seems to give some drama here. But, again he seems solo.

On second photo Green Helmet is showing drama. Right. However, Mr. North, is your budget really that bad? You cannot even buy an average monitor? Green Helmet is not looking at the camera. His eyes go straight to the baby (maybe he is afraid of another dust shower like the one Mr. North missed completely at his Act 1, scene 2?)

On third photo both men look surprised, they look above their heads and seem to listen to someone. Anyway all things show they are facing something they didn't expect. Btw, note the army trousers on "stripped tee-shirt man".

Oscar... Oscar... Ahhh Oscar... Well, sometimes, such scripts get Oscars...

"Act two"
I already commented it but, there are a few new pictures and one thing I forgot before. Mr. North! Is your budget that HORRIBLE?! You can't buy even a monocle??? The sleeves you jerk, the sleeves... I ain't even talking about the color of the shirt. Or her face... But the sleeves you idiot. That's like dressing pink shorts on Chewbacca for the last scene...

Ok, for the moment you don't get an Oscar. But I think Holywood can hire you for "Plan 9's" remake...

More to follow(TM - Mr. North)...

Isn't a Festival?

Mr. North does love his cinematogrpahic terms... And loves scriptwriting... He shall contact Green Helmet... They would make the blockbuster of the season...

Yes... He "forgot" his timings... The chronometer stopped working. But that doesn't stop him... For example:

"Clearly, these are not simultanous shots taken from different vantage points. They are posed separately, the two photographers each being given their own unique shots."
Act 1, Scene 2
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/corruption-of-media.html

The body was posed... No doubts about that. Staged? Give me a break! One guy did here a thing that he cannot repeat. Ever. Even if he is the Houdini of Hezbolywood camera tricks. Even if the man worked for Lucas, Spielberg and Hitchcock for all life. It is impossible to do the same thing, under the same conditions and know every corner of what is going on around. Impossible.

The true sequence of shots:

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4640/388/320/green%20helmet%20004.jpg
almost instantaneous
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4640/388/320/Reuters%20Qana%2002.jpg
1-2 seconds
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4640/388/320/qana%20victim%2001.jpg

However:
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4640/388/1600/dead%20baby%20afp.jpg
This one is more difficult. The damn watermark blows things a little bit. Besides "Doctor" Hajj also spoils things with his doctoring. Anyway, it is a few seconds from the sequence. Probably it comes up first. However on feature doesn't fit well. It could be after those shots.

So, while we can see a clear posing, I would stop quite far from staging claims. Apart of showing the body, this is the most natural sequence one can see. So natural that makes me wonder if Mr. North came from other dimension in the Universe...

Why?.. Pick the pictures and do the homework. You don't want? Want: "now see here, see there... now look here, now let's go there"? Bow the Cow pal... This ain't the butcher's alley. I don't lead people. I show only the way to go...

KEYNOTES: "Milking it?"

Well here it goes.

KEYNOTES: "Milking it?"

The work is presently divided on three parts. The first one is complete, the second needs some retouches on language and the third is very raw for the moment.

I publish it in its present status and completely as I think that people shall have a value of Mr. North's analysis. As Mr. North readies another "revealing" analysis, I decided it is time to publish my stuff before more snake oil comes up. I know that I don't have the reach this guy has, but I hope that some will think twice before reading another "analysis" from this guy.

Frankly when I finished part one of my work something come to my mind. A feeling of "Los Alamos syndrome": what we have done?..

Years ago we, big average and small guys pushed for the Internet. On my little corner there were also bitter fights. We fought for a more dynamic technology, we fought for a much more flexible network, we fought for a more free network. We fought against pitty commercialists and wild anarchists. We fought against the State and against the uber-liberalists. We fought against secret services and against hackers, terrorists, crooks and thieves. We didn't allow anyone to win, however we gave everyone the Internet.

Today, I have an uneasy feeling that I am like a small Los Alamos scientist... "What have we done?" We believed that the Internet would give information to the people. We thought that people would grow up a little bit more. However Internet fell. Today Internet users are not people who finished or nearly finished University. It is people that barely finished school. It is not people who can work with computers. It is people that barely knows what is a computer. It is not people with a little of technical litteracy. It is people completely illiterate on nearly everything. For them, Internet is not a library of knowledge. It is a Temple of Information. Which some people smartly and wisely use to reach the masses.

That's how Mr. North gets his "five minutes of glory". This "Think Tank reputed member", draws up a story out of nothing, lacking the very bit of literacy to do it well, and people go for him. And the media reaches him and claims that he is an "expert" or even a "professional photographer". Because the media is made of people "no less" literate than Mr. North's...

Yes, some things do help Mr. North... There are fakes, there are stagings there is a infowar running around. But Mr. North got it from the wrong side. However the media seems to have an interest on it...

Anyway, no matter the clear interests of the media and Mr. North, one thing is amazing. People are eating it... In big pieces. And they seem to want more and more... Aleluhia Mr. North, give us more of your "information"...

It gives me a strange feeling I am one of those who created the Bomb... And gave it to Mr. North in a Christmas package...

Yes, I'm going against Mr. North. And I know that I am right. More right than anything else. People may think: "Oh well it is your position, anyway information is relative..." Yes, it is relative. So, some may consider that Mr. North is right while others say I am... So we came into a problem of faith: "Why you don't believe..." And we seem we get stuck here...

But there is a problem. I can deny everything. I can deny Qana, the tragedy, the bodies, the pain, the staging, the show, the people and the media. I can deny the war, Lebanon, Israel, the US, Russia, the World and the Universe. I can deny Socrates, Marx, Christ, the Prophet, God, Allah, Buddha and every Devil Mankind ever imagined or believes. I can even deny the very Existence of everything...

But I cannot deny one thing. It is so deeply embedded on us that cannot deny it, wether he believes on Science, Religion or whatever. There is one thing it is undeniable on our World. So undeniable that we cannot prove neither deny it, yet we all know it exists. And it is the only demonstration of reality that no one can ignore. What follow us from the very start of existence until our death and beyond. What follows everything we see and tells us what is Present, Past and Future.

On his work, Mr. North denied it... So I keep the hunt. Because:

"Those who trade Reality for a bit of Faith, loose their Right to Existence..."

I will not be among them...

Mr. North's telltales

Mr. North pretends he knows what happened at Qana. He pretends so much he goes upperuberhyperdrive on everything. What he doesn't realize is that he doesn't see a hell of what is in front of his eyes. Nothing, nil, nada...

But he is Hell too convinced he sees everything. And specially reality. And he is making the real story of the day... He can draw every bit of the story without any doubt.

One guy came here stating: "Dr North is a well reputed member of a conservative think tank in the UK. Why not believe him, even if you are more of the liberal kind as I am?"

I can't believe him. First because he made a mess out of the times without any solid base for it. Second because he started inventing "stories" that don't fit with anything seen on the pictures. Third because he is too well convinced he knows what happened. And fourth because he is using a real fake to make his own fake.

But how can he be so sure if some of the pictures are not the photos taken at Qana? Uh-Oh? Some of them are doctored! What!? That's it people. And the "real story" is not so simple to be seen at Qana's photos.

The evidence? Adnan Hajj. Yes, the same Adnan. The Baby being rised by Green Helmet. The man even left the "fingerprint" of the tool at the photo. And it is not the red spot seen on Green Helmet's shirt...

And btw... No matter the retouches, that's a single sequence of events. One and only one. All photos were taken when Green Helmet rose the baby once. How I know it? Well, take some effort by yourself to see the pics. There's one single detail that shows it and it is an all pictures, even the one Adnan doctored. Green Helmet rose the kid with all photographers around him, shooting wildly and...

Welcome to the real world.

Bloodthirst

I came into a comment of Mr. North I cannot run away from. This post:

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/horrors-of-war.html

Goes a little bit out of Qana's context. But it is his reasoning is quite extreme to leave it away:

To a very great extent, therefore, children finish their education imbued with the idea that "war is bad" – violence is bad, without in any way understanding the historical contexts in which wars have been fought, or realising that, bad though it most certainly is, there are worse things than war.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/horrors-of-war.html

Even considering this guy served in the military, he has a lot to grow up. War is bad, there's absolutely no doubt about it. No questions, no buts, no exclusions. The is only one thing:

War is a necessity...

Frankly, I don't remember exactly who stated this reasoning. Besides it is not so simple as it may seem. There was a development to why it is a necessity. A very weighed one. And it was said not by any journalist, comentator or expert but by someone who has been on the heat of the war. Anyway two things I remember from it:

1. Drop the moral judgements when you are at war as moral is virtually non-existent. You have a fight and not a judgement to make.

2. But, before it, try everything to stop a war before you come to the brinking point. That's the best you can do to win.

From what I saw from a war, I think that these are good things to bear with yourself. However, Mr. North seems to have learned his war lessons at Rome's Coliseum... What he says leads to think it is not even war that drives him. It's bloodthirst.

Mr. North, the "expert"

On "Liars!", Mr. North writes (bold mine):
In normal times I am uneasy about making such a direct accusations, but the quality of my own work, my own motivation and my good faith has been questioned, and even mocked by that patronising little slime Shane Richmond while his employers in The Daily Hezbollagraph have studiously avoided reporting on the Reuters photographs withdrawal. Meanwhile, the bulk of the US and UK media has gone into denial mode, hoping the issue will go away.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/liars.html

That's the problem of Mr. North. The quality is raw, the motivation questionable and the good faith mischievious. IMHO Mr. North is playing the very same game he accuses other people of. He also manipulates arbitrarly photos, creates his own interpretations and pushes his position to the verge. The only good thing on Mr. North is that events correlate with his story. Nothing else!

Could it be that Mr. North knew from the very start that "Green Helmet" was staging a dirty show for the press. Well, Mr. North is no little person. And, sincerly there's no need to be a big person. A phone call from a friend, the "I heard that...", and here you go. You have something on the sleeve.

Is that a good reason to start a campaign the way Mr. North may have done? A propaganda campaign so that things will be pushed to the verge and we all get the real facts? No, because the real story will be mixed with fantasy, with the speculations and the misconceptions. Besides, Mr. North's "good faith" is uberbiased and his "story" turns everyone into one side, his side of things. Which may not be even the side of his partners, partisans and supporters, considering the overdrive he did. And we get no "real story" at all. We get a mix between facts and fiction, seen over one side of the mirror. Which may have very serious repercussions for the future.

Some people may consider that the propaganda game, if it happened, had its results and "no one judges the winner". I heard such thigs before: "All means are good just if you get what you need". Or nearly all means for the politically correct. Yes, propaganda plays always dirty because, from the very start, it is dirty by its nature. And there's no way to change it and everyone of us, in one way or the other, conciously or not, have played it. But there should be limits. Or else everything becomes just words and nothing else. And there could be a moment when someone would wish that his words would not be taken as "just words". Even Mr. North. As such overdrives may bring us to the moment when "On this game the rules are that there are no rules at all".

My work, my motive and my good faith? My work is security expert, my motive... I saw how "experts" blew up a whole conflict out of nothing, much the same way Mr. North is overpushing things.

It happened quite long ago, however I discovered the real fact quite later. There was an accident. A small stupid and, by all levels, a terrible stupid accident. There were no guns, bombs knifes or even matches on it. Just a stupid crash. I was there so I know every detail of it. And I know that the accident didn't have anything related to any of the problems that were going back then. But the accident happened in the wrong place, the wrong time and with the wrong people. Things were already quite on the verge. And one stupid overpositioned expert, not knowing anything about it except the damage cried "terrorist act!". And he went even further by inventing the terrorists, the bomb and even the how much explosive it carried. Next day all the media was hysterical. It was an overdrive of extreme proportions. But that was the least of the worst. The worst was that other "experts" in some lost island, saw the overdrive, picked their own "story" and pushed it into some pitty politicians. In the end, the other side of the conflict got the money it wanted so much to push the conflict overboard.

Lots of people died on that conflict. Quite a lot. All because the Mr. Norths of that time were so prolific to draw a story based only on their pure fantasy and managed to push it to the media and politicians. Only several years later I discovered it because the one of the leaders of the enemy faction told in his memories that "there was a diversion, back then, and we got the money for it. However we really didn't know who really did it".

Someone may ask why people didn't stop it, if it was a simple and stupid accident. Well, try to stop the media when it goes overdrive. It's unstoppable. That was not the only case I saw, when the media blows a crisis out of nothing. In my life I had a few cases, truly, not related to armed conflicts, whatsoever, but quite serious btw.

The new war at Lebanon seems to have started also on overdrive. According to one intelligence think tank - Stratfor, it was not Hezbollah itself that picked the two israeli soldiers. It were some hot head hezbollites that decided to act by themselves. However things went nuts quite fast. Israel pushed things to the verge and Hezbollah leadership reacted by picking the blame for itself. Those guys are like that: "who doesn't love a good fight?". And we saw the start of the war.

And it seems that the whole war is about this: overdrive. Sides have been overdriving things overboard. And the media, the experts, Mr. North specially and his "alter-ego" Green Helmet are delivering everything overboard. Up to the point the masses are uberhysterical. A look at Internet is enough to see it.

Up to what point? When Syria, Iraq and Turkey will be on the mess? When Jordan and Egypt can not stay away out of the conflict? When Iran finally gets a reason to mess things up to a all-scale war? When any words will be "just words, nothing more?" When the only rules is no rules whatsoever?

My good faith? Well I am a Russian. Several years ago we had a damn Cold War going on. We sent spies to the US, lots of them. And the US tried to pick up the spies, lots of them. And we keep sending and they keep catching them. It was a conflict and everyone had its right to fight it. But, does that mean that Senator McCarthy had the right to do what he did, the way he did it?

Lebanon's media show overdriven

Sincerly I'm shocked:

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/green-helmet-exposed.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vPAkc5CLgc&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Foutcut%2Eblogspot%2Ecom%2F2006%2F08%2Fndr%2Dlsst%2Ddie%2Dgrne%2Dbombe%2Dplatzen%2Ehtm

There is very little doubt about a staging. And there is little doubt that they were using one and the same body for the two "cuts". The body's posture, the cloth and its dimensions generally fit on both shots. Besides, it seems that on each cut we get a different number of persons and journalists shooting each scene. However it is less than possible that these were two different scenes under different conditions. People at background changed too little in their positions.

Could this be a very elaborate fake? If so, it has been done with highest professionalism. No matter the resolution gives lots a good piece for doubts, however, we have very elaborate views of "Green Helmet". So, there is a very high level of probability that we are seeing him here. Truly, there's still a question if this was done in Qana itself, as most people are hard to recognise and the place does not correlate with anything I saw before.

But, even if this is not Qana, it gives a solid ground to consider that someone played dirt at Qana. More that a simple media stage.

Now Mr. North is probably feeling victorious. He got what he wanted.

Well, congratulations Mr. "Infowarrior" North you picked up your "Green Helmet" with the pants off. But, between us, that does not make you more innocent than before. I noted how cleverly you use the pictures like a hand of cards. Cleverly for the man of the street but not for someone who looks twice at them. However, your game smells necrophilic. You playing with the dead Mr. North. And with children. So you are no less guilty on this game.

Was it "First Post!", Mr. North? For the five minutes of fame?

For the masses you may be the hero of the day. For me you keep being a target. The only difference is that you may have a friend now... Mr. Green Helmet. You both make a damn couple.

Are Qana photos retouched?

I state from the start. What will follow here is not recognizing Mr. North for his "debunk". I have all the reasons to presently consider Mr. North a manipulator no less mischievious than the media "retouchers". However, this does not mean that there is no base to the idea that Qana's tragedy was also abused by the media itself. In fact we have a few moments that were clearly used and abused by the media. The most clear are:

The baby being shown to everyone.
A paparazzi behaviour from certain journalists, which was fixed on the cameras.
Pictures taken clearly with signs of people posing to the camera.

But, for now, I cannot see anything more serious than this. The "staging" is mostly an invention from Mr. North, that he creates by manipulating the shots at his own will. However, is there anything else?

We saw that pictures were being faked. Besides, not only pics about the war on Lebanon. We have already a fact of a "innocent" retouch on a photo concerning the pipeline problems in Alaska. Presently, most fakes and "fakes" seem to be far from Qana's shots. Is this true?

I have to recognise that it seems to exist some "touch of art" on Qana's shots. The fact comes from this picture laying on Corbis database:

http://pro.corbis.com/images/42-17139224.jpg?size=67&uid={e2a0abe1-5dde-4b1a-af7f-cbf8eec515ad}

One can see that "White Tee-shirt man" clearly has a bloodied stain on his shirt. Any other copies of this picture are not so clear as this one. For example, on Mr. North's site one may see the same photo with only a slight suggestion of the stain:

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4640/388/1600/qana%20022.jpg

On the whole, this copy seems to have been slightly reworked by an instrument that "kills" a little bit the coloration and lightens the picture.

Meanwhile, on Mr. North's beloved pic:

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4640/388/1600/RC%20001.jpg

One also may see a suggestion of a stain. But it is less convincing here. Meanwhile, I have to note one thing: Mr. North claims to have called an expert, who said that the shirt may have been blurred. I, myself, have noted that the right side of the shirt (not in relation to the shot but to the man) seems to carry a sign of blurring. Truly, if it happened, it mixed with JPEG and the low quality resolution so, one cannot be absolutely sure of it. Anyway, Mr. North claims that blurring was used to cover up writings, while I cannot see the slightest suggestion of it. I can note that the sign of blurring lays a little above the place where the stain could be and carries an yellowish coloration.

There could be a possibility that someone could have used imaging tools to "low" the effect of the bloodied shirt would have on a person seeing the pic. The original coloration of the shirt would "divide" the visual effect between the bodies and the "White tee-shirt" man. Lowering the stain would concentrate the visual effect on the kids bodies. The same effect may have happened on the other photo where the same shirt may "dilute" the whole effect of a body being carried out. If such things were used, then one shall consider the pictures faked. No matter the "innocence" of the intent, pics are not showing the reality of the event per se.

Frankly this thing happened then I can only say that the media got quite necrophilic. This would mean that they are leading our eyes to "eat" the bodies.

Mr. North - the infowarrior

Well I am some sort of an infowarrior. While the Middle East conflict doesn't concern me directly, the knowledge allows me to see when people play their roles real dirt. Note, I didn't call for objectivism or "Truth" whatever these words mean. But Mr. North did. You can see it on his blog. And he looks very sincere on playing a fair game. One may consider him an innocent man if he swallows the story right from start. Or consider a jerk if looks at the way he tells "the story".

But is there a third chance? That Mr. North is playing a malicious game? That he is a infowarrior concerned with what is going on at Middle East? Well, people could point to his job and his boss, or to the things he has been doing lately as a uberconservative writer. But, frankly, I think that's the worst way to search for the dirt. An american can not be a s-o-b just because he is a US citizen. Besides, if an american does something wrong, still, there is a question how far his guilt is related to be american. Btw Mr. North loves to much to play the nationality game. But, who doesn't. The easiet way to start a conflict is to harass your neighbor for being your neighbor.

To find if Mr. North is guilty of wrongdoing, one has to forget lots of ephitetes or "labels" he may think of. Doing it, one falls into that same game Mr. North has been playing all along. And doesn't come better than Mr. North.

Now what can we do to find that Mr. North is guilty or not? It's simple and complex at the same time. See what Mr. North has been doing all along. He has been writing long stories about Hezbolywood. Hearthbreaking tales on how poor dead mints are used and abused by the terrible Hezbollites "Green Helmet", "White Tee-shirt" and Red Cross fellows. With the full cooperation of the "retouch" media.

For some, it sounds foe conspiration. For others a telltale. But is it innocent or made up for a special purpose? I prayed for the sake and health of Mr. North that it was the first case... No... it's the second... I would say "Gotcha" but no... I wouldn't. I still hoped that Mr. North was not a "death marketeer" as if he was, he had gone too far. However Mr. North occurs to be a Death Marketeer. He has been advertising death and gore to everyone, at the expence of everyone's intelligence.

Frankly I didn't think it would be so simple. But it occurs to be. Truly, a full and unquestionable proof will take some time to be worked out. This guy is really prolific, the Hell damns him...

The facts

Go to "Milking it".
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/07/milking-it.html

Look at the very first photo of the post.
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4640/388/1600/AP%20Qana.jpg

We see the "girl in orange" lying on the ground. This is the very same photo that Mr. North "forgot" no mention in his "debunk" of the Red Cross workers. Its her. There's a white strip on the trousers. Besides other minor details are there, like the way the left hand is closed.

Did Mr. North "forgot" this photo or didn't note it? No. He did saw it (bold mine):

Anyhow, it is now clear that the body of the "girl in orange" is not what is wanted. It is unceremoniously dumped outside, and is later stretchered off to the waiting fleet of ambulances.
From "Qana - the Director's Cut"
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/qana-directors-cut.html

So Mr. North did note that her body was, later, laying outside.

Now, on the last masterpiecepiece of Mr. North we see a whole story with pics and video, the "Lights, camera, action!"

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/lights-camera-action.html

Here, there is no single reference to the "dump" fact. People are carrying up and down the girl. It may sound as a lapse of Mr. North but (sorry for the long citation):

Now we must digress slightly to show the normal evacuation route for casualties laid out in this area. This we can illustrate from video footage taken from Arab TV, showing a Red Cross worker carring a different body. As can be seen can be seen from the video and a composite of four "grabs" shown left (double-click to enlarge), the route is straight down the hill to a corner, where the bearers turn left and then continue down a long road. (Eventually, they come to another corner, whence they turn left again which brings them to "Stretcher Alley".)

Returning to the girl in orange pyjamas, we find her body in the arms of a different Red Cross worker - and there is something odd about the location.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/lights-camera-action.html

Congratulations to Mr. North! He would become an excellent actor on some eastern bazaar! Why? Because he turns the story to create a whole continous sequence of his own. He first mumbles a lot about the girl being brought up by some worker, then turns us into a strange speculation where the girl was placed, turns us into a complete different theme and suddenly returns all of us into the story with "a different Red Cross worker".

First. He does not identify the carrying worker.
Second. He mumbles several speculations about where the girl was placed.
Third. He turns us into a story the seems but is not directly related to the main theme.
And fourth. He brings us back to the story in a show of "continuity": "Returning... we find her." And continues his speculative trend with a "different Red Cross worker"
And fifth. All over the story no reference to the "dump". But he knows she was layed on the ground! So why Mr. North doesn't tell it?

Because this would break the idea of staging, the "cut, cut,cut" sequence he wants to sell. That's why. If he mentioned it, then anyone could consider another sequence of events, probably much more realistic and less cinematic. But this is what Mr. North doesn't want. So he avoids any reference to the "dump".

What he did is a typical media trick. "I lead you to see what I want you to see". Surrepticaly, Mr. North is leading his readers to what he wants to show. It's not the first time he does this. One shall note a detail. The photo with "White Tee-Shirt", the red cross man and this girl seems to be one of the most beloved for Mr. North. It appears three times on his blog with two radically different stories to tell (and two slightly different in qualifying "White tee-shirt" man):

"Alright explain this one!":
The second photograph of this pair has a Red Cross worker to the fore, holding the body with which "White Tee-shirt" (background) is to make his "camera run". There is another inset, with the picture expanded as large as it will go without losing definition. Again, look at the tee-shirt. Once again it looks like there is writing across the front.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/alright-explain-this-one.html
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4640/388/320/WTS%20001.jpg

"Qana - the director's cut":
Well, here he is again, this time inside the wreckage and again he is not actually doing anything but watching. But it seems he is doing more than that. We get the distinct impression he is looking for particular bodies. The one in the arms of the Red Cross worker, the body of the "girl in orange" is not one of them. Mr "White Tee-shirt takes no interest in it and shows no emotion.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/qana-directors-cut.html
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4640/388/320/qana%20004.jpg

"Lights, camera, action!":
To see how this played out, we must go to the sequence at the start, where the body of the girl in Richmond's picture - clad in orange pyjamas - is recovered from the wrecked building. We see this in the photograph on the left, where a bearded Red Cross worker is handling the body, with "White Tee-shirt" in attendance although, in this scene, not taking a great deal of interest.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/lights-camera-action.html
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4640/388/320/RC%20001.jpg

So, first he has picks the girl, then he is indifferent and shows no emotion and finally doesn't take a great deal of interest... What's next Mr. North? She is his beloved concumbine?

BTW. About the "different Red Cross worker". Well it is not about these events but it may show the what was the division of work at the place:

http://pro.corbis.com/images/42-17139786.jpg?size=67&uid={339505f4-c4ee-457a-83be-6187340b7b66}

We see behind a worker much like the "bearded Red Cross worker" and in fronr our "different worker". In places where shit happens, rescuers are strictly organised.

The Keypoints and a note on media drive

The mess Mr. North created is so much that it is time to get some hands on it. His behaviour does call for some caustic remarks on him, however one may mess the facts with my IMNSHO (In My Not So Humble Opinion). So to avoid this I will remark several posts with a "KEYPOINTS" word. There I will put only the facts and the moments where Mr. North does a job no better than Adnan Hajj.

Am I comparing Adnan Hajj to Mr. North? No I'm telling the man is much worser than Hajj. I explain why.

Hajj didn't make the war. He used it. Yes, we may speculate that there's someone behind him. Well, possibly. But, presently, we know that:

1. Hajj retouched the photos.
2. He was caught up and the media went overdrive on him.
3. He seems to have confessed it to his bosses.
4. He was punished.

So, what we know of Hajj is that he, at least, tried to take a profit of it. By making the show more "bestial" for the audience. But the media is like that. If Rome's Coliseum still worked, it would be no surprise for me, if the media showed from every angle the show.

Now let's see Mr. North. He does the same thing as Hajj. He is using the war. For what? At least for web hits as one can read on his blog. He is eager to reach a million hit mark. Is there anything else? Possibly, but I will not speculate here my suspicions. Now, what I know of Mr. North?

1. Mr. North used the photos in a deliberate manner, not even taking the care to double check them.
2. He created a whole story by himself, contradicting himself sometimes.
3. He doesn't recognise his own errors.
4. The media is going overdrive over his speculations and multiplying them.
5. He still has to be debunked for that, or else we are just giving more ground for the Hajjs and Norths of this world.

The speculations of Mr. North are wild and cheap. But why the media is not after him but just overdriving him? I think I know why.

As an expert on my field, I had to deal with journalists. They don't want facts. They want sensation, the hot show and the scandal. And, for that, they are ready for everything. They ambush you, they pick you up somewhere and bomb an avalanche of "hot" questions. And even if you dare to say a three word phrase, that will be more than enough for them. I saw how one colleague did that mistake. Next day a popular newspaper had its second page half covered with an article that started "Expert John Doe said "What's the Hell about?"". The article was bashing him from left to right and everyone of us in our field for incompetence. The World was about to end and we could only say "What's the Hell about?"

Imagine half-page just because you dared to open your mouth. That's why when such people com to me and ask me I simply say: "Went on travel..."

Now what this has to do with Mr. North? Simple. Mr. North created a nearly soundless "debunk" of Qana's massacre. As Mr. North is not the last person in this world (he is a member of a powerful think tank btw), the media picks his junkery and overdrives it (a little at its own cost, still they did do a show there). It's a scandal! Qana's was staged up! Oh, My! Besides, the media is happy with Mr. North. He speaks in megatonnes. So they push him to the highlights. And Mr. North likes the show and overdrives even further, for his million mark hit. And the media drives him even further.

But there will be a moment when things go puff. People, like me, are noting how Mr. Norton is going on his creating "drive". The media does not have interest on it, of course. For now they need Mr. Norton, but later they will come over him. They will show blogs like this or even pick up a freelancer "in situ" which will tell "the real story behind". And then Mr. North will know what the phrase "How dare!" means to the media. He would wish to be under that building. Well under. Because the media will pick up not only him but what is behind him (no matter if they did have a part on it or not). And this will be another drive to go further...

Why I am remarking this? Well I just passed over several news and sites about EU Referendum and the BIG DEBUNK he made... But I was looking for "Qana" and not Mr. North. So I got the message. That will not stop me of debunking this jerk but I will not be sympathethic to our mass overdrivers. If things will come hot, "he's on travel"...

Oh, btw... I did see the show nearly a day before Mr. North started his overdrive... Sincerly... I noted a three photos taken from different angles when "White Tee-Shirt" started crying. Quite fashionable photos. And immediately the little lamp came up: "and here is the media for another show..." But, I saw it so many times that I didn't care. As I will not care in the future. What I care, now, is not for Mr. North, Mr. Hajj, Israel or Hezbollah. I don't even care too much for the children that died there. Nothing can help them now, apart of giving some justice to their tragedy (which they cannot use anyway). But I hope that, one day, it will not be so easy to create such involuntary actors for the Mr. Norths, Mr. Hajjs of this world.

Mr. North going overdrive again

On "Lights, Camera, Action":

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/lights-camera-action.html

Here, he again puts his own story running again wild. The paparazzi behaviour the media played there gave him plenty of fodder to run. And, again, he ignores the fact that the child was laying for sometime on the ground. It should be noted that, here, there is ground for suspicions. Photos show several bodies covered by clothes. But her body is almost uncovered and one may suspect that sheets were taken off for the shot of her body.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060730/photos_ts_wl_afp/ebc13d8d5433407c5f17545dc45646b9

But whatever did happen there, it does not stop Mr. North. He has a story to tell. And he loves it so much that he makes a crass error:

We know the girl's body is eventually placed in the ambulance because we also see shots of it being posed with a variety of other characters such as this one, in the uniform of a Lebanese soldier. We can also guess that this sequence came after "Green Helmet's" camera run, as the girl's body he carried is visible in other pictures.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/lights-camera-action.html
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4640/388/320/RC%20012.jpg

That's not one and the same body Mr. North. The body of the "girl in orange" has her face compressed. This one is seen quite intact. Besides, "girl in orange" is well covered by cement dust and that's not so easy to wash out (specially, if one is dealing with a body). Maybe Mr. North should come with a better one? Because, here, he is deliberately making up his story once again. Let's remind that a few posts ago he claimed that "White Tee-Shirt" picked this girl for the "running show". That's far from truth, as the clothes were completely different. He noted that and didn't ever mentioned the "gaffe", even when he created "director's cut". Now, he is using again the same body and picking randomly other photos to give it a sequence (and reduce the body count?).

I wouldn't admire if Mr. North will claim the bodies were dolls in the near future...

Apart of this there is also another point to show on this new story. Frankly, I still doubt the precise point where the bodies where being taken (if it was one point). But Mr. North seems to have already decided:

(Eventually, they come to another corner, whence they turn left again which brings them to "Stretcher Alley".)
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/lights-camera-action.html

What about this one:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060730/photos_wl_me_afp/f1256431672b0be2040c1faf96363d95

Milking it... But where's the milk?

Here:

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/07/milking-it.html

Mr. North makes us a good show of times. However, he doesn't show by the little bit where he picks ups these times. From Yahoo!? Well, it seems as he carries some screenshots from the site.

If so, Mr. North's timestamp remarks are mooth. Times there are clearly publishing timestamps. And worse it has been always like that (I dare to state it as I know this fact from long ago).

But, if this is the real fuss, it makes Mr. North's position even worse, as it shows his bias to find something for his goodtaste and miss the completely the reality. Wanna see? Note that I didn't pick up ALL photos. But I assure you that the sequence becomes more dense...

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060806/photos_wl_me_afp/47e78254e746863b5caa890f696c4891
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060801/481/9489c474c8d44d36b5f8f99f24b8526a
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060801/481/a2b0c08be4784a4c90cbfe4decfa8266
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060801/ids_photos_wl/r1234218897.jpg
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060731/photos_wl_me_afp/ce457320e5892da73ec0db7b1a935968
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060731/photos_wl_me_afp/bba4c27c5f348c016f947bac518436bb
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060731/photos_wl_afp/ead1fa4c81d04b500449ee38dffb46ae
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060731/photos_wl_me_afp/2eb063d91b2a2338dd08d3cf0a40455b
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060730/481/cd09faa58a6646d2a5745b601e38b90d
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060730/481/7a0a534f4f2e4d6cbdd2b9533802c281
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060730/481/41494163baf1480aa90a89d3bf52d90e
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060730/481/638a8afa2d8d48a5b26f8b799d700cd3
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060730/481/1d0ec465a0974faa9d74cce3fd1f4e30
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060730/481/34d72ce139b34ff28c1d9894638f97db
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060730/481/48ecac21919b40a1b3eae20f8a6c8dd0

Paraphrasing one old proverb... It's the media, stupid!
They spread the photos over a timeframe. So that you slowly, but surely, eat the story. They don't want for you to swallow it immediately and go for your affairs. There's publicity on the bottom pal! If given on a bunch you easily get fed up... So the media feeds you slowly... One for the daddy, another for the dog...

And if you feel a slight sense of shock... Don't worry. The media fed you the same way in 9/11, the Colombia's dive, the mega-tsunami and at New-Orleans going under water... That's why I know it that the timestamps are dead stuff... First, they give you a small bunch in a fast but not-so-fast sequence, for the appetite. And then slowly feed you until the story dries down and you would like more to see tits and a... (which they promptly may feed you).

Oh btw... If you wanna have a chance to see something good, real and unbiased, pick always the very first shots right after the event. Everything else, comes up with that touch of art called "Always Coca-Cola"... However, Qana's shots are not this case. The photos came up long after the tragedy itself.

The "secret" of Stretcher Alley

One may wonder why these people were running with the dead kids over an alley between debris. Mr. North leaves that one for us to guess.

Why we cannot have a picture that could say: "these guys where doing their job", or "it's a whole make up!"? Because the media was too interested on emotions, on the show. And one can see it on the photos. Cameramen and photographers nearly jumping over the people there, people in one and the same place being shot from different angles. We have the famous baby scene (but not the way Mr. North puts it). There is even a clear picture of "paparazzi" behaviour when one journalist jumps in front of the running "White Tee-Shirt".

The place? The place is rocks and nothing more. Why shot it? You don't make the frontpages with a bunch of cement dust and broken steel.

Fortunately, some journalists decided to practice a little bit of scenic tourism... They photographed several details at several angles, some of them done after the mess with the wounded and dead... There is even "Stretcher Alley" seen from below. I don't have the time and the will to post them. Besides, I ain't here for another show, specially with corpses and necromaniac conspiracies. If one wishes to check go over Yahoo! and Getty. Maybe you will find new facts I even didn't see. Besides, doing it, one may note another secret of Mr. North: the timestamp "game".

And what about the "secret"? The alley was the clearest path to go through the debris. And , even then, light machines would probably stuck there. Frankly, the only shots showing machines passing through the alley, had a UN transporter poping through it.

So, the alley was not a place for a "stage". It was clearly the best path to get out from the trashcan layed around. The other question is if someone showed a little bit more of emotion for the camera, while crossing the mess.

Still, Mr. North has a point on his sleeve. The "pictoresque" pictures are still far from being understood. But the "stretcher alley" becomes less fashionable.

From the show to Mr. North

We have at least four media shows at Qana. The chronology is hard to calculate for the moment but, it is not hard to get them:

The parade of bodies - I didn't see any remarks about it but the media did a good effort to show the bodies near the building and the people going around them. Probably, no second intentions were behind it.

The baby being shown to everyone - yes, this is a show. The body was rised so it could be shot from several angles.

"Stretcher Alley" - Yes, at least the media did overcome itself there. People and bodies were shot from several angles and quite frequently.

The bodies being unloaded - Yes, here we can also see that the media took a serious effort for the show.

There is also a few shots showing "Green Helmet" and "White Tee-shirt" on backgrounds that one cannot determine. With those bodies that Mr. North claims to be part of the staging. Interesting to note that the moment "White Tee-shirt cries" on some of these shots, he cries in the direction of the photographer right in front of him, one can note this by the shadows on the ground and one photo showing both men.

Now, is this a ground to prove Mr. North's story? No. Because Mr. North clearly ignores photos, details on photos (very important ones btw), clearly sees his own mistakes and keeps the mouth shut (or the fingers away from the keyboard) and, on the top of all, creates a story. A story that does not fit with anything we can see there. That only comes up because it is driven by the fact that a show did occur. But the interpretation is completely arbitrary. No matter the truth of the showmaking, Mr. North's story is clearly an invention he made up by himself. He accuses BBC of overdrive. But he, himself, overdrives even further.

Hope not purposedly. That's difamation no matter the background that supposedly supports it. And that's criminal.

Meanwhile Mr. North becomes a pro...

He is being called a professional photographer on some media... He is rising fast. From professional lobbyist (Bruges Group) into professional photographer. So why he didn't see the dirty hand of White Tee-Shirt or the "Green Helmet" behind him when he should? Why he claims that Green Helmet "lost" the phone when one can see the tip of the antenna on the photo?

Yes, it is undeniable that someone staged a show at Qana. But who? The locals? Hezbollah? The media? Maybe all of them altogether? Probably. However, that show is not what our Mr. "Professional Photographer" has been telling around. He is playing his own "Director's cut".

CORRECTION: Mr. North

Well, the originals were on Russian when I first read it. So I messed "North" with "Norton". Besides, they called him "Robert" while he is "Richard".

"White Tee-Shirt" - missing photo

First, a correction!

Well it seems that it is harder to find photos better than 400x300 on Yahoo! If am well remember from a past incident, it seems that one could get some nearly 640x480 on that portal.

So, this could give a point in favor to Mr. North... Yes, quality gives a wish for better.

Meanwhile I found something Mr. North may not have seen or wish no to see:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060730/481/a234ea20ab2a439987d0da3835095209

The body he is covering is also seen here:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060730/481/a3997ccd51034406a3af1df317669462

Well there could be several interpretations to it, but I don't wanna play here a necrophilic question on the "egg or chicken" theme everyone's on. I only note that on this photo, our "White Tee-shirt" seems to play a role that doesn't fit too well on Mr. North "Director's cut". Besides... Either Mr. North "retoucher" is damn pretty good or it seems that he needs to change his "expert"... His story is getting really hairy...

Mr. North "surrendering"?

He seems to surrender:
It is better to get a confession out of the way first. Today I came as close to resigning from the blog and all that surrounds it as I have ever done and ever hope to do. Why so, I hear some of our readers ask, are you not winning against the MSM?
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/what-we-are-up-against.html

But what interestes me most is not this but this:
Before all our readers say “well, duh”, I shall elucidate. The point was very clear. The fact that a writer was a dissident and, therefore, not published did not mean he (or she) was a good writer. In fact, he (or she) might be just as bad or even worse than the ones who were accepted and published in “Novy Mir” or “Literaturnaya Gazeta”.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/what-we-are-up-against.html

You nearly took the words of my mouth! Correct Mr. North. And being dissident didn't mean that someone was completely healthy of mind (As Miss Novodvorskaya) or avoided being a crook with political ambitions (like Mr. Limonov). And you going away doesn't mean that the story ends here. You also made your own staging and you guilty of it Mr. North. And specially you are very guilty because you didn't stop at the facts and run for sensationalism. Using a child's tragedy. You are no better than the media or the "death marketeers" in place.

So this blog will continue until Mr. North's debunkery is completely debunked.

The writing on white tee-shirt

Frankly I prefer to think that Mr. North is an innocent jerk trying to get his "five minutes of fame". Even if I know that he works in a serious "think tank". However, either he is quite a jerk (I may accept this as think tanks and institutes are not a vaccine to personal stupidity) or he does play the real dirty role of his own screenplay.

"Writing on white tee-shirt". We can see this "fact" on "Director's cut" and "Alright, explain this one!":

And it is in this frame that we see the teeshirt (inset) which seems to have writing on the chest. An expert has contacted us and agrees, telling us that it seems to have been electronically blurred to obscure the message it conveys.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/qana-directors-cut.html

Look at it closely, with an inset as large as I could make it without losing definition (also, slightly larger above). The garment appears to have writing across the chest.
(...)
Again, look at the tee-shirt. Once again it looks like there is writing across the front.

The marking is not distinct, but it is there is two separate photographs, each showing the torso at a different angle. Can it be shadow of folds in the shirt?
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/alright-explain-this-one.html


First, Agencies publish photos with resolutions two or more times better than those seen on EU referendum. I wonder if Mr. North believes only on low-res captions. A bigger photo would avoid 90% of the doubt Mr. North puts on his blog.

But that's half the road. Well I took Mr. North's photos and analysed them. Yes, there is a strange blurring. On the right side of the shirt. All other "marking" is just shadows, nothing else. What makes it three times funny. First because we have a shot near the site made when this guy was showing his right side to the camera. Nothing there. Second because this guy is a supposed Hezbollite, and Mr. North leaves us an utter feeling that something bad for publicity could be there. Ooops, semites write right to left, Mr. North, so to read the whole stuff this guy has to rise his hand to the camera. Third, we have on thing Mr. North forgets, even if he has an "expert" to contact with. JPEG leave artifacts on the photos. And Reuters, AP and AFP are no good on JPEG quality. So following the artifact marks one may try an analysis of the "truthfulness" of the photo. At least there is nothing showing deliberate "retouchings" on the photos. Either the "retoucher" is top professional or Mr. North is wishing for too much from his "expert".

Besides, one thing shall be noted. JPEG's artifacts create some "order" that people frequently messes with things. Many people hunt for "roads" on Mars that are just the product of JPEG tricks. In the same way, artifacts could create a "sense" of writing on the shirt. However I could not see that JPEG could have played such trick here. Either Mr. North was seeing other photos or he sees to much. The darkenings on the shirt are nothing more than the shadow of the folders. So, a point for you Mr. North, you are seeing Martians even where I can't have a hint of them.

Frankly, there's blurring, as I said on the right side of the shirt. This side besides is yellowish, which contrasts a bit with the rest of the shirt. Maybe stain that was cleaned for the media show?

On the meantime there is something that Mr. North forgot to mention. On this photo it seems that the right hand of this guy is real dirty. Coloration correspond mostly to the one we see over the corpses. Now if we see the classical "screaming photos" this guy has this hand relatively clean.

So Mr. North, you see almost clearly writings but can't glance the dirt?

To end this story, I recomend to see the more carefully this photo and the one with the "poor man in black struggling" with two corpses. There is a suggestion of a stain on the lower part of the shirt of our so called "main actor". One cannot be absolutely sure of it but it seems that we are seeing one and the same shirt.

Media make ups

I shall note one thing. Serious media does make up a lot of things. Even to the point when "retouches" photos for "more effect". And there's nothing new here. This didn't came to us on digital era but its has been quite a long time around. Since photography came up, a new profession arose with it - "retouching". On most cases we see as innocent practice on enhanced copies of blurred originals. But there have been serious cases of deliberate falsification. The most famous, the gradual disappearence of communist veterans in soviet official photos during the Big Purge of the 30's. Besides it was done quite professionaly as some people realised when came up to several "versions" of one and the same shot.

Yes, it happens but not only on "evil states" but also in democracies. And not only by evildoers but also for more innocent purposes. Once I read an article on Newsweek or Time where they showed several pics "made world famous" which in reality suffered their litle retouch. Some where quite innocent as the fall of one athlete where object was removed from the front of his nose for "more effect". Others were less innocent as the originals showed some politician not in the best way it could be.

Anyway, there is one thing that everyone shall take into account. Digital era didn't create the "hand of the reotuching wizard". It made its work much simpler and its detection much harder. Apart of Qana's story, which I deliberately avoid to make a judgement for now, the photos that where found by many people are very raw "retouches". Subprofessionals can do something better in a bigger order of accuracy and probably for the same time the Reuters guy did. So, be aware of anything you see. Don't eat it like a BigTasty... Look around the photos, and avoid what the scripwriter tells you to see.

A word about errors...

I edit this blog in the small free time I have, so it is hard to avoid typos, misspellings and crass gramatical errors. I'll try to correct them but I remerk I will correct only the grammar not the content. If I make a mistake and "errare humano est" I will splicitly remark it.

I someone doesn't like this, just save my blog and tell me when I changed the meaning of something I published...

"White tee-shirt" chooses a body...

On "Director's cut" we read:

Well, here he is again, this time inside the wreckage and again he is not actually doing anything but watching. But it seems he is doing more than that. We get the distinct impression he is looking for particular bodies. The one in the arms of the Red Cross worker, the body of the "girl in orange" is not one of them. Mr "White Tee-shirt takes no interest in it and shows no emotion.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/qana-directors-cut.html

However, on a earlier post we read:

The second photograph of this pair has a Red Cross worker to the fore, holding the body with which "White Tee-shirt" (background) is to make his "camera run". There is another inset, with the picture expanded as large as it will go without losing definition. Again, look at the tee-shirt. Once again it looks like there is writing across the front
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/alright-explain-this-one.html

The comment refers to one and the same photo. But on one comment he is about to pick his "corpse of fame", on the later he is completely indifferent to it.

Interesting... Mr. North titled the earlier post as "Alright explain this one". Yes Mr. North... Could you explain this one?

Green Helmet went naked!

This seems the loved one of Mr. North. On his blog we see a photo where a guy very similar to Green Helmet takes off his "trademark" stuff and poses with the dead girl in front of an ambulance.

Even then, one of the stars could not resist a repeat performance. It was obviously hot work running up and down the hill, and back up again, so off comes the trade-mark helmet, the radio, the flack jacket and the fluorescent waistcoat. "Green Helmet" au naturelle now poses once more with his prop. But he is only going through the motions when it comes to projecting emotions once more and he lacks conviction. But hey! The front pages are already in the bag, so this is just one for the scrap book.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/qana-directors-cut.html

And in the next paragraph:

And at last the body of the poor mite that was once a pretty child is laid rest temporarily in the back of the ambulance. Even then, her mortal remains are publicity fodder, providing a poignant reminder of the tragedy, without the artifice of poses. This is the only natural pose in the whole sequence, but it lacks the drama the editors need. The picture ends up as a filler for internet archives.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/qana-directors-cut.html

Very emotional... Quite gory... However, Mr. North forgets two details. A "previous" photo, where we see the so called "man in black", posing in the same place as our naked "Green Helmet" did. There, we see a hand in the background. The position of the hand seems receiving and not delivering. However we cannot be absolutely sure about it. But it is a half-point to the next fact: we can be pretty sure that naked "Green Helmet" was made after the "girl in ambulance". Why? Look at all photos of this girl. We have lots of them, either on Mr North's blog or on several other sites. Nearly all photos show a mouth with bloody lips and nostrils. Including those when she was inside the ambulance. As we have some good shots, we can see that during the trip over "stretcher alley" and inside the ambulance, her mouth doesn't change too much. But, when we see naked "Green Baret", we see a gust of blood dropping from her mouth. A clear and undoubtful gust comes out. Inside the ambulance we don't see the slightest suggestion that she had that gust over there. We see one and the some bloodied mouth mostly as we could see on "earlier" photos.

Now Mr. North, what's your next "interpretation"?

Oh my! Green Helmet vanished!

On Stretcher Alley, Mr. North writes:

Now we have the final "iconic" shot – "White Tee-shirt" again. Over his left shoulder is the triangular piece of wreckage, but the camera angle is different. From what I can work out (and would welcome observations) he looks to me further down the slope, which would mean that this photograph is taken a few moment earlier. He is not running, and he is not "screaming", but shows enormous anguish. And "Green Helmet" is nowhere to be seen – although we know he is close by.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/stretcher-alley.html

Maybe he's a Jedi? No, no... Mr. North stages, once again, the Qana Gory Festival of his fame... However, if one looks at the edge of the "White Tess-Shirt" left shoulder one sees what? The Green Helmet by itself! Hovering around... No word about the man...

But there is a problem here. A little later, Mr. North does realize that the Green Helmet is hovering nearby (Qana - the director's cut):

By now, "Green Helmet" has got in position for a dual shot, although from this angle you can only just see the crown of his helmet over "Tee-shirt's" left shoulder. Even then, the pose is magnificant - head thrown back in anguish, the corpse cluched to the bosom and a soulful expression all combine to give just the note that is needed. Many editors find this is just right and rush to print it.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/08/qana-directors-cut.html

The same position as in the previous post and he does see Green Helmet coming up from behind... However, the "hidden meaning" posted in the earlier post remains. And Mr. North does not make a little effort to "refind" Green Helmet or make some correction to his clear mistake. At least on the blog. Yes, he has a forum around there but, presently for me, is more than enough to see the front page.

Where is the phone?

This was the trigger showing that EU Referendum does also play its own staging, so I start with it:

On "Milking It" Mr. North claims:

Interestingly, in this sequence, the pocket radio is missing. And, although the positioning of the child looks the same, the angle of the shot looks to be about ninety degrees from the first, but in each case, the "worker" is facing towards the camera. The shots are clearly posed

http://www.eureferendum.blogspot.com/#115429339722244068

Pretty interesting. Yes, a good piece of the photos about this corpse show, clearly, that the baby was shown in a way that photojournalists could shot it. There are absolutely no doubts about that. But Mr North ain't satisfied by this. He wants to demonstrate that the shots were made at different times under several "cuts". And he claims that the radio is missing...

Sincerly Mr. North, you are either too confident of yourself or completely blind... Just look more carefully at your own pic where, supposedly, the phone is missing.

Besides this ain't your last "ooops"... There are others you even realize but you carefully silence...

Qana Gory Festival

It seems that for some Qana tragedy is some sort of Holywood blockbuster for dodos. They claim that several pics taken at Qana were staged for media purposes or, worse, for Hezbollah propaganda.

While I don't have any sympathies either to Hezbollah or Israel on they stupid runup for dominance on Middle East, still, what happened in Qana shall not be ignored simply because someone either overcome his own expectations. What I mean? Well Israel bombed the wrong place and Hezbollah took the advantage of it. It's not hard to see it. And, frankly this is usual business. War has this gory aspect when sides start shows to push everyone to its side.

However Qana is getting into something more macabre. Some sort of festival is running up about it. We now have some sort of "Director's Cut" running wild over the net claiming how Hezbollah staged up the show of little children killed by the Israelis... The show is getting already too far. And not because there's something unethical about showing corpses but because the blog EU Referendum is making its own staging of the show. Unfortunately, Hezbollah did help a little Mr. North for the show and people are eating it like Huge Macs without seeing the discrepancies, second thoughts and arbitrary interpretations made by this gentleman in his blog.

So this blog is about it. Show Mr. North that staging such way is far from pretty. Your Qana Gory Festival is getting too far.