First, find out what isn't true…

July 13, 2014

Israeli propaganda FAIL! Photo fakes July 2014

Who does Israel think it’s fooling with fake photos?
1) The water pipes either side are completely un-damaged. It simply DOES NOT look like a rocket of that diameter has buried the majority of its length in the earth!
It’s OBVIOUSLY fake!
fake Hamas rocket - Hasbara

2) A rocket might have struck this house at some time, but there’s no signs of charring from a grad explosion WHAT SO EVER!!!
Is it a photo of demolition work?

See how Israel’s Magic Sofa Chairs resist the charring and shrapnel you’d expect to see from a rocket explosion large enough to cause this amount of damage!
fake rocket damage 2 - Hasbara

See how Israel’s Magic Sofa Chairs bury themselves under the rubble
fake rocket damage - Hasbara

The amount of damage it seems, was caused by the explosion of two gas cylinders allegedly set off by a grad rocket. Oddly there are no photos of the remnants of the alleged rocket. If it completely disintegrated, one would expect far more damage and a lot of charring.


Compare the kind of destruction wrought on Palestine to that on Israel

gaza destruction 01
gaza destruction 02
islamic university Gaza aug 2104
gaza destruction 05
gaza destruction 06

Destruction in Gaza ———- Destruction in Israel

The Palestinians have no where to flee the war zone, not even the sea. Under the 2005 agreement and the Israeli/Egypt Peace Treaty Israel has had all the crossings closed including those with Egypt. Only an Occupying Power has this right.

In the bigger picture, the Palestinians ask for far less than their LEGAL rights under the Laws and UN Charter which Israel is obliged to follow. Abbas offered in front of the world at the UN to concede 78% of their rightful territory for peace, Meanwhile while Israel offers nothing and makes demands that have absolutely no legal basis what so ever and continues its illegal expansionist policies.


June 7, 2010

AMAZING Mavi Marmara “weapons cache” discovery! A few suspect knives and slingshots.


(Adding information as the IDF story unfolds (sic) ) It is unfolding, in fact it’s falling to pieces.

06/04/2010 06:13 “the group they were facing was well-trained and likely ex-military after the commandos threw a number of stun grenades and fired warning shots before rappelling down onto the deck. “They didn’t even flinch,” he said. “Regular people would move.” “


Weird Paintball gun!


On careful reading, Israel was within it’s rights to intercept. San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994

However the nature of the intercept begs a few questions and the Israeli justifications are as full of holes as they are bizarre.

The Israeli’s claim the rappelling personnel wore asbestos gloves, making it impossible to use their weapons. Never heard of asbestos gloves in rappelling. One needs to be able to feel the rope, a light LEATHER glove is sometimes used so that the rope can be felt through the glove. Most folk’ll tell you it’s better to have full feel of the rope, no gloves at all. ( your life is in your hands, if you can’t feel the rope, it’s dangerous )

The rappelling rope passes through a figure 8 or belay device. A figure 8 twists the rope, because of the ‘lay’ of the internal fibres, eventually forming kinks/knots, same as an electrical extension cord develops knots when not rolled up using the ‘under over’ method

Modern military rappells on a rope usually use a belaying Device (BDs). Small, light weight, can be easily released, does not twist the rope, requires minimal hand pressure. I’ve used BDs & figure 8 AND taken photos/video, mid air, using my free hand and I’m no expert. In fact not at all fond of swing around on a rope mid air.

However looking closely at the video available, it seems they’re using a ‘silk’ rather than a rope as it varies in thickness. A ‘silk’ is a long length of cloth used by circus and burlesque performers.

The NY Times reports that the use of plastic/rubber bullets was planned and WERE fired from above.. “The crack of an Israeli sound grenade and a hail of rubber bullets from above were supposed to disperse activists, but instead set them in motion. ”

So again it seems the Israeli bullshit vendors have been busy at work..LYING….. again! One needs to double check ANYTHING put out by Israel concerning the Palestinians. They LIE and LIE and LIE again.

The some of the weapons seized – life threatening pepper spray Personal Pak

Giant knife :-) What a cutie. No doubt sharper but not as efficient as a bullet fired from out of the tiny knife’s reach

Israeli Govt website tries to show an alleged “Weapons Cache”
ShipBoard TOOLS
For the most part, they look like tools found on any ship. An axe is a tool on a ship. They’re in EVERY fire cabinet. A knife is a tool on a ship. Every sailor has one. The galley has heaps of knives. A hammer is a tool on a ship. So is a spanner. All ships carry sticks, (wood), broom handles, steel rods and pipes, ropes, cables, chain, angle grinders. It’s quite NORMAL ON A SHIP…FFS!! When you’re at sea you cannot just call into a hardware store.

The “weapons cache” seems to be nothing more than a few suspect knives and sling shots and

a ceremonial dagger used by the Imam in prayer meetings. Photo by a passenger, PRIOR to the intercept? Unless of course the IDF made him pose…Likely? No! Forgery? Looks like it

More on the dagger – cloning around for Israel

More Israeli BULLSHIT… From the Israeli Government web site “Flotilla leaders stated violence was premeditated”

What was QUOTED and what was actually said “We will definitely resist and we will not allow the Israelis to enter here.”….actually….“If Israel wants to board this ship, it will meet strong resistance. “

Hasn’t Israel ever heard of passive resistance and why does Israel need to lie?

Comments are closed. If you don’t get it from the existing comments, you’ll never get it

June 5, 2010

Faking it for Israel…(again). Pathetic propaganda 101. Alleged remarks from the Mavi Marmara


This has become a bit of a work in progress, as info is released. Last reviewed 5th July 2010 See also reviews in comments See Review 1

Samples taken from Haaretz
Audio conversion for analysis 44100 16bit wav mono
Samples taken from regions shown right bottom corner of the pics.
The analyzed wav file is 31.5 Mb. No I am not going to convert it to anything lower quality and/or upload it.

When I first started I said “Unless other information is made available, it seems likely to be another absolutely PATHETIC attempt at propaganda by some LYING IDF schmuck (who hasn’t got a clue about faking audio)”. The IDF have since released the alleged un-edited version of events. More ‘explanations’ = more ‘revelations’ (cute word, I think I’ll use it :-)

The IDF have patched together variety of transmits, designed to give the impression they were calling the Mavi Marmara. Yet NONE of the released transmits can be accurately attributed to either a call to the Mavi Marmara or from the Mavi Marmara

Rev 1
Revelations 1 : – All transmits from this ship should have the same transmit sound between words. (see earlier postings)
Rev 1 Defne Y, Defne Y, this Israeli navy warship calling you on channel 1 6 do you read me?”

Rev 1The Defne Y call sign will have it’s allocated call frequency recorded somewhere. It’s NOT the Mavi Marmara!

Revelations 2: – “..have had their good dayevening, sirr are you ready to invite us on board or not yet?”

Revelations 3 : – Note the transmission noise between words on this transmit……

…..compared to
Revelations 3 : transmit…..

These must be transmits on an intercept, from a different IDF vessel and a different Activist Vessel, not the Defne Y.

Revelations 4 : – Activist Vessel reply : “no not yet, we have Rev 1 ??change over a saddle board ?? minutes to 15 minutes time “

Revelations 5 : – Israeli Navy reply : “That’s good your stairs, that’s fine about that you have one off, time when you will should be stand by along aside the gangway with his lugguage and the passport after first the Rev 1 pilot will be come board, Ok?”

We know it was a large vessel, needing a ‘staired’ gangway.

However, the navy signal noise is not the same as that for the initial navy Defne Y, Defne Y call on the released transmits. and it’s a friendly boarding, with pilot and letting a passenger off!!


A) the IDF first releases a false accusation, purposefully edited to give the impression the transmission came from the Mavi Marmara. They claim it came from a ‘passenger’ of the Mavi Marmara. They know the inflammatory alleged statements will spread like wildfire (it is still spreading un-corrected) and these remarkably clear transmits will bolster their claim that the activists on the Mavi Marmara were aggressive. It’s PROPAGANDA.

B) the IDF releases an alleged unedited version of alleged transmits, in order to prove their ‘material’ is genuine, at the same time admitting their ‘claim’ of the origins is inaccurate.

C) the other transmits from activist vessels are cordial, all have interference and in places are almost un-intelligible

D) All the other vessel radio transmits are full of interference. Isn’t it AMAZING, that the derogatory remarks, are SO CLEAR? Clearer than anything else transmitted and with a different transmit noise from all the others. Almost as if they’ve been purposefully recorded and inserted.

E) the IDF has yet to explain how exceptionally clear onboard communications from passengers, got onto a maritime channel. Fact is, THEY CAN’T. An open channel would be totally flooded, rendered inoperable, an impossible mess. The IDF open channel is an open MARITIME channel, for vessel transmissions. Onboard communications are not on a maritime band.

Conclusion. The IDF proof does not ‘prove’ anything other than the now confirmed fact – their alleged material was edited to give the impression it came from the Mavi Marmara.

Link to this section

Earlier postings analyzing the first alleged transmits same methods/sample rates.

IDF video shows flotilla passengers tell Israel Navy to ‘go back to Auschwitz’ screams the Haaretz headline……Published 23:28 04.06.10

“Army releases audio recording of exchange between Israel Navy ships and passengers on the Mavi Marmara, the central ship of a Gaza aid flotilla raided by Israel on Monday”

It’s doubtful the messages came from the one ship’s radio, a spectrum analysis of the transmission ‘white’noise, i.e., taken from the small gaps of silence BETWEEN their words, shows three different levels of transmission ‘white’noise, with three very different frequency ranges. Furthermore, onboard/passenger communications are completely separated from a ships transmits. Completely different radio communications systems, band, frequencies.

“We have permission from the Gaza Port Authority…”

(alleged) “Go back to Austwitz”

(alleged) “We’re helping Arabs…”

Gap between words “We have permission from the Gaza Port Authority…”

Gap between (alleged) words “Go back to Austwitz”

Gap between (alleged) “We’re helping Arabs…”

Note the difference in the end of transmission noise. Frequencies different..
(alleged) “Go back to Austwitz “ – end of transmission

(alleged) “We’re helping Arabs…” – end of transmission

Unless other information is made available, it seems likely to be another absolutely PATHETIC attempt at propaganda by some LYING IDF schmuck (who hasn’t got a clue about faking audio)…See Review 1

Comments are closed. If you don’t get it from the existing comments, you’ll never get it

March 28, 2010

Petra Marquardt-Bigman purposefully misses the point, on behalf of Israel’s crimes against the Palestinians.

…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel,
then it’s a territory of the non-state entity of Palestine…

Petra Marquardt-Bigman typifies the insanity that has caused 62 years of grief for the people of Palestine.

From the Guardian’s CiF 28 Mar 2010 Obama’s other difficult partners

Ms Bigman asks

“Israeli PM Binyamin Netanyahu is presently seen as the chief obstacle to Middle East peace, but what of the Arab League?”

What of them? All they ask is that Israel abide by the law. The Arab League are not illegally acquiring territory. They’ve not illegally annexed anyone else’s territory. They’re not illegally instituting their civil law in illegally annexed “terriories occupied”. They’re not illegally building illegal civilian infrastructure for illegal settlers in illegally acquired and “territories occupied”. They’re not illegally selling land and illegally built homes for illegal settlers in “territories occupied”. They’re not holding any one else’s territory but their own. The territory they claim as rightfully theirs, has been acknowledged as rightfully theirs.

On the other hand, for the last 62 years Israel has and still is illegally acquiring other folk’s territories, ignoring International law and numerous UNSC resolutions. Yet Ms Bigman completely misses this disturbing and significant fact. So too the word ‘illegal‘. In order to justify her stance and point the finger every which way, it is simply is not allowed to enter the equation. The elephant cannot be acknowledged.

Having deleted the reason the US is currently asking Israel to uphold the law. Having completely ignored the reason that the Palestinians refuse to negotiate is because the elephant is still crapping on the carpet while saying it wants to negotiate without pre-conditions, except of course, the pre-condition to be allowed to keep crapping on the carpet and deny that it is.

Having completely missed the point in it’s entirety, Ms Bigman is like someone watching television from the back, with the power cord pulled from the socket, desperately trying to relate some sort of story to her readers, in order to shift the blame for all the elephant crap.

The crux of her finger pointing everywhere and anywhere but at the crapping elephant, is perhaps condensed into her final desperate attempt to skirt around the elephant.

“For their part, the Saudis and other Arab leaders seem content to look at the Arab Peace initiative as a “take-it-or-leave-it” proposition. As Prince Saud al-Faisal argued in an interview last year:”

“What can we do more than that? The land that is occupied is in the hands of Israel. We don’t have anything to offer Israel except normalization, and if we put that before the return of Arab land we are giving away the only chip in the hands of Arab countries.”

“The obvious problem with this argument is that, from Israel’s vantage point, it means that Israel is expected to give up land, and then hope that it will indeed get peace in return. It sure didn’t work out this way when Israel withdrew from Lebanon 10 years ago, or from Gaza five years ago. President Obama’s initial approach, which envisaged reciprocal confidence-building measures, was exactly what was needed; it is deplorable that there was no Arab support for his initiative.”

Her justification, while ignoring the stench of elephant poo, the fact that the Arabs States and the Palestinians actually do not have anything of Israel’s, is a concern that: after having cleansed the illegal settlers and their IDF body guards from “territories occupied” in Gaza. After having illegally had years use of free land, free water and cheap labour, while millions of dollars went into the pockets of illegal settlers and the fact that Israel is still illegally acquiring Palestinian territory, peace might not follow Israel’s withdrawal.

“Israel is expected to give up land, and then hope that it will indeed get peace in return. It sure didn’t work out this way when Israel withdrew from Lebanon 10 years ago, or from Gaza five years ago.”

A) Israel is not expected to ‘give’ anything. It is quite simply not Israel’s to give. Israel is expected to abide by the law

B) Israel still held Lebanese territory, (still claims Syrian territory).

C) Israel STILL occupies Gaza and the West Bank, still illegally claims 50% of the Palestinian’s rightful territories.

Of course it didn’t work Ms Bigman. Since 14th May 1948, Israel has been outside of it’s legitimate acknowledged boundaries. Claiming someone else’s territory. But let’s look at where Israel HAS stopped illegally claiming other folk’s territories.

Having skirted around and around, under and over the elephant, deaf to it’s trumpeting and blind to the dung she is treading into the carpet, Ms Bigman is as oblivious to it as she is to the fact that when Israel did withdraw from Egypt and Jordan, two of Israel’s deadly enemies. Who both objected to partition, who both fought wars with Israel over the Palestinian territories…




October 1, 2009

CiF on ‘alleged’ War Crimes. Israel vs the UN. Should Ehud Barak have immunity?

The Guardian CiF Afua Hirsch, Wednesday 30 September 2009The attempt to arrest the Israeli minister in Britain has rekindled a lively debate on diplomatic immunity from international law

First we should look at what International Law actually says. Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.

Preamble: The undersigned Plenipotentiaries of the Governments represented at the Diplomatic Conference held at Geneva from April 21 to August 12, 1949, for the purpose of establishing a Convention for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, have agreed as follows:

Part I. General Provisions
Art 1. The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances.
Art. 2. In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace-time, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.

The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.

Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.

The UK, as a signatory to the Conventions, is a High Contracting party.

Art. 146.The High Contracting Parties undertake to enact any legislation necessary to provide effective penal sanctions for persons committing, or ordering to be committed, any of the grave breaches of the present Convention defined in the following Article.

Each High Contracting Party shall be under the obligation to search for persons alleged to have committed, or to have ordered to be committed, such grave breaches, and shall bring such persons, regardless of their nationality, before its own courts. It may also, if it prefers, and in accordance with the provisions of its own legislation, hand such persons over for trial to another High Contracting Party concerned, provided such High Contracting Party has made out a prima facie case.

Each High Contracting Party shall take measures necessary for the suppression of all acts contrary to the provisions of the present Convention other than the grave breaches defined in the following Article.

In all circumstances, the accused persons shall benefit by safeguards of proper trial and defence, which shall not be less favourable than those provided by Article 105 and those following of the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 12 August 1949.

Art. 147. Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the present Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement of a protected person, compelling a protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power, or wilfully depriving a protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in the present Convention, taking of hostages and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.

Art. 148. No High Contracting Party shall be allowed to absolve itself or any other High Contracting Party of any liability incurred by itself or by another High Contracting Party in respect of breaches referred to in the preceding Article.

Art. 149. At the request of a Party to the conflict, an enquiry shall be instituted, in a manner to be decided between the interested Parties, concerning any alleged violation of the Convention.

If agreement has not been reached concerning the procedure for the enquiry, the Parties should agree on the choice of an umpire who will decide upon the procedure to be followed.

Once the violation has been established, the Parties to the conflict shall put an end to it and shall repress it with the least possible delay.

The answer seems to be NO! The operative words are ‘alleged to have’.

Furthermore, it is an indisputable fact that Israel confined the entire population of Gaza, preventing them from fleeing a war zone, by having all crossings closed under the 2005 agreement, including those between Gaza & Egypt. Escape was not possible, ironically, not even into the sea.

Create a free website or blog at