| Submit your comments on this article |
| Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
| Did The New York Times Publish a Hoax? |
| 2024-10-16 |
| [HotAir] Yes. In response to our previous posting about headshots on Paleo kids. Pics at link I am not a ballistics expert and don't play one on TV. I didn't even sleep in a Holiday Inn Express, so what I write here is based entirely on the analysis of others. But I am pretty sure they are right, given the balance of the evidence and the provenance of the opinion piece published by the New York Times. At issue is a piece published by the Times in which 65 medical personnel who have worked in Gaza during the Israeli operation accuse soldiers of deliberately targeting Gazan children, shooting them in the head. There are lurid stories and X-ray images that purport to show bullets lodged in the head and neck of children. Those X-rays appear to be--according to doctors and ballistics experts--totally fake. And even I, a layman, can call bulls**t on them due to obvious problems that a 10-year-old can spot. Look at the linked photos in the above tweet, and you will immediately notice a few things: there are no entry or exit wounds, despite the claim that a military rifle supposedly shot these children with a bullet designed to penetrate armor. The bullets show no deformation and appear to have been placed under the body. I could be wrong, but lots of people in the law enforcement, military, and forensics fields have pointed these facts out. People have also done experiments using the same weapon and bullets on models, and there is no way that any of these children would have survived as claimed or that images of the wounds would appear that way on any type of medical images. It's not one or two people who are trying to debunk the claims being made in the pages of the Times; it seems to be everybody with any knowledge of ballistics or gunshot wounds piling on. The Times begs to differ but offers nothing more than an assurance that their robust fact-checking operation didn't let anything get past them. They have "layers and layers" of fact-checkers, just like Dan Rather did, so nothing gets past them! Snipers scoff at the images and the stories because they know the effects of military bullets striking heads. The bullets almost certainly would pass through the head, causing massive trauma in both the brain and the exit wound. |
| Posted by:Frank G |
| #7 I stopped in to see which NYT story was passable as truth. Apparently, none, it is a story requiring a suspension of belief greater than thinking The Acolyte earned a second season. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2024-10-16 11:44 |
| #6 None of the bullets appear to have normal wear and tear of a shot bullet in the pretend X-Rays |
| Posted by: 3dc 2024-10-16 11:42 |
| #5 Leaving aside the lack of entrance/exit wounds, something I noticed, purely from an imaging perspective, is that the x-rays show a lot of fine anatomical detail, but the outlines of the bullets had a bad case of the "jaggies" - a sign of image-processing bumfoolery. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2024-10-16 09:26 |
| #4 Is a bear Catholic? Does the Pope... |
| Posted by: Mercutio 2024-10-16 08:41 |
| #3 Frequently. What is it this time? |
| Posted by: ed in texas 2024-10-16 07:50 |
| #2 'A', just 'a' hoax. The proud holders of Duranty's Pulitzer? |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2024-10-16 07:44 |
| #1 They're all Hoaxes. Better question, Has the NYT ever published the truth? |
| Posted by: Seeking Cure For Ignorance 2024-10-16 02:58 |