VD is an idiot and has only posted this because he was shot in the @rse on the same subject in another thread (see link below). Anything can kill you,.... however that is not the point having no bearing on the subject and his lame attempt at justifying the Israeli's behaviour is completely dealt with here: http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/so-why-people-hate-israel-page167-t93540.html (Post 1661)
Where his attempted disinformation was shown to be no more than Zionist inspired lies, which when pointed out caused him to attempt to divert the subject to another previously disproved lie of his. You can read all about that attempt on the same page and note carefully, how VD tries to disinform and trivialise the data and recommendations provided by sources including the doctors in Israeli hospitals and a subsequent review of the matter by the internationally acclaimed British Medical Journal, "The Lancet".

He blathers on about this frame and that, from the video,... but I'd like to know how a fool with an obvious malicious motive to disprove the injury and no medical qualifications can make a credible medical diagnosis based on a few blurry frames from a movie showing only one view of the foot still with the shoe on. One only have to read the details of the injuries caused by these projectiles at far greater ranges than in this incident, to realise that VD's assertion that no harm was done, is at best wishful thinking, but more likely a deliberate lie based on his previous record in such matters. For a start, because you cannot see an injury, does not indicate that it does not exist, especially when you are looking at it from the wrong angle. VD states it is "clearly visible" in such and such a frame but will not post an image of this alleged frame.
About 15 years ago (my guess) a police officer died in the USA because after being involved in a shooting incident, although he complained of pains in the abdomen and showed visible signs of shock, no bullet wound could be found. He died before the surgeons could get him to the MRI scanner. The cause, a .38 FMJ round.

To paraphrase our idiot poster, "Yes, you can die from sunburn", but that has nothing to do with the lethality of Israeli steel "rubber bullets".

Both rubber and plastic-coated metal bullets are capable of entering the skull cavity and also breaking bones.
Israeli professor Michael Krausz and colleagues at the Rambam Medical Center in Haifa analysed the medical records of 595 casualties admitted to hospital during the October 2000 protests by Palestinians living inside Israel (typically described as “Israeli Arabs” by the media).
Of those, 152 were found to have been injured by rubber-coated metal bullets. Injuries were distributed randomly across their bodies but were most common on the patients’ arms and legs, and on their head, neck and face.
The doctors said their findings dismissed the theory that “rubber bullets” were safe.

Rubber-coated metal bullets with some of their rubber coating removed, revealing their hard steel core. Fired at speeds of what must be several hundred feet a second, these are munitions that cause enough damage that their manufacturers feel compelled to describe them as only “less lethal”.(than Ball ammunition)

Writing in the medical journal, The Lancet, they said firing the bullets at civilians made it “impossible to avoid severe injuries to vulnerable body regions such as the head, neck and upper torso, leading to substantial mortality, morbidity and disability.”
They added: “We reported a substantial number of severe injuries and fatalities inflicted by use of rubber bullets when vulnerable upper-body regions such as the head, neck and upper torso were struck.

For some odd reason, my 'puta will not "quote" posts nor allow me to use the "Advanced editor" so until I resolve it, my posts will often be in the format of this post below.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
Today is fast approaching 45 deg. C. outside (about 115deg. F.) , so I have a good reason to stay indoors to re evaluate some of VD's pathetic posts which I normally only give a cursory glance, having seen and disproved most of them before. And I must add, that in view of what I have found today, I should do it far more often, but alas I have a real life to lead, away from my computer.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~

Originally Posted by VD

This "video" needs some explanation: My bloody oath it does,....

I sugest you download it and view it frame by frame
(I have downloaded it, and viewed it frame by frame, (Thank you for the suggestion as up until now I had taken your answers at face value. I won't do that again) and your version shows frame numbers at least 100 lower than mine, so obviously you are viewing a poor quality video or using a poor editor)
shot is fired at frame 607 (00:24.280) Actually there is evidence of muzzle blast on the frame prior to that shown below but I won't argue over 0.031 of a second. Note the difference in frame numbers VD states 607 and mine is at 723

guy with white shirt scares up at frame 610 (00:24.440) Useless "padding" of no consequence to the video whatsoever.
"demonsrtator" lift his left foot at frame 613 (00:24.520)More useless padding.
video blurs at frame 615 (00:24.600)More useless padding.
video sharp again at frame 645 (00:24.960)More useless padding.
video blurs again and veers to the left at frame 627 (00:25.080)More useless padding.
last blurred frame at 631 (00:25.240)More useless padding.
next frame "demonstrator" on the ground at 632 (00:25.280)More useless padding.
the "demonstrator's" unharmed foot is seen in frame 633 (00:25.320) Is it?..... how do you arrive at that conclusion?

Here we see the frame that VD claims shows the unharmed foot. I fail to see how VD claims can see through the foot to see an injury sustained from above whilst the victim was standing, by looking at a very blurry image of the sole of his shoe which is in shadow (There's more about this later), perhaps this is a special skill only available to Israeli shills, because to me, it is nothing short of miraculous. And there's even more about this later,.... (Stay tuned folks, there's exciting times ahead)

Originally Posted by VD

the way the soldier holds the weapon when fired he can impossible hit the "demonstrator's" foot which B’Tselem said was a rubber coated metal bullet. Under the Israeli forces’ rules of engagement, rubber bullets are to be used only from a distance of 50 metres or more, to avoid piercing the skin. This was from 1 meter and his foot did not show any signs of injury. Like always with such videos (and photos) it is shot in close up style and important pieces are missing. You do not see the "demonstrator" fall.
Pallywood again?
They propably fired to scare him without hitting the "victim".

Impossible to hit the demonstrators foot, eh? (More about this later too. ) So,... if what you suggest is true how do you explain the fact that the IDF charged those two lumps of sh!t involved and found both of them guilty? Yes, I know that it was only investigated after a public uproar as always, but it seems that even the IDF could not credibly dispute the available evidence.

This also makes your attempted lie about only being used at ranges of 50 metres or more look even more stupid than usual. No,... certainly not Pallywood , more like a "VDs Lies Production" I'd say.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~

Now! having given you a short while to reflect upon the fact that you have again been caught lying, with all the guile and lack of skill of a 5 year old, I would ask you to examine the enlarged clip taken only seconds after your miraculous view of an "unharmed foot", starting at 0.28sec, as the victims foot slowly falls to his left exposing the sole of his shoe to the direct sunlight, and perhaps explain the exit hole on the sole of the victim's shoe. It is very clearly visible from 27.561secs. to 33.099secs., with the exception of about 7 frames where the camera moves it out of frame. (nearly 80 frames)

In view of the fact that you claim to have spent the time and effort to view the video "frame by frame" quoting a lot of old lies about how you could allegedly see and diagnose all manner of miraculous things, I fail to see how you could have missed THIS,..... I certainly didn't.


I really MUST look at VD's posts more far closely and far more often,... he is obviously far less skilful at his trade as an Israeli shill than we have been giving him credit for. I guess that's one of the major downfalls of taking him at face value instead of realising that he is in fact, no more than a blatant and unabashed liar.

Rubber bullets can be lethal as do plastic ones, but so does a kitchen knive or a fist. It all depends on how it is used. Police and the military use rubber and/or plastic bullets mostly during demonstrations that (can) get violent. No matter what they say about it they are nowhere as lethal as live amo.

I know this part of my post has not much to do with this tread, but I do feel to have the right to defend myself against accusations.

First of, the video I used has a frame size of 480x360 at 25 fps (TV PAL quality as in Europe), if his video is of better quality he should have given the link. So, the quality is not poor and the editor I used is the same as his. VirtualDub 1.10.4. You can find it here.

I cant post a picture that is as easy to read as his, because I work with a resolution of 1680x1050 and then a "printscreen" looks like this:

I said the shot is fired at frame 607 (00:24.280). if you devide the amount of frames (607) by the time (00:24.280 sec) you'll get 25 fps (PAL). His video is frame (723) and time (24.124) which results in 29,97 fps (NTSC). But that's not inportant. I also did some more research about the event.

guy with white shirt scares up at frame 610 (00:24.440) Useless "padding" of no consequence to the video whatsoever.

he's a witness and that is very important.

video blurs at frame 615 (00:24.600)More useless padding.
video sharp again at frame 645 (00:24.960)More useless padding.
video blurs again and veers to the left at frame 627 (00:25.080)More useless padding.
last blurred frame at 631 (00:25.240)More useless padding.

The blurring, filming of a wall or the ground are tipical for such videos and almost always the most crucial part is missing. This is not padding.

next frame "demonstrator" on the ground at 632 (00:25.280)More useless padding.

This is crucial because the video does not show how the victim got to the ground. Did the shot scared him and had to sit down or was he pushed down? Again this is tipical for such movies because now they can tell whatever they want and it is always negative for the IDF and almost always not truthful. B'Tselem gives cameras to "Palestinians" ans surely will give them "advice" on how to make the movie most damaging and not the most truthful.

the "demonstrator's" unharmed foot is seen in frame 633 (00:25.320) Is it?..... how do you arrive at that conclusion?

Because he said so himself.

Abu Rahmeh, 27, took off his shoe and showed a large blister on his toe, with bruising underneath. He said for several days after the shooting, the toe was swollen.

This completely contradicts Seno's statement and the picture:

Impossible to hit the demonstrators foot, eh? (More about this later too. ) So,... if what you suggest is true how do you explain the fact that the IDF charged those two lumps of sh!t involved and found both of them guilty? Yes, I know that it was only investigated after a public uproar as always, but it seems that even the IDF could not credibly dispute the available evidence.

This also makes your attempted lie about only being used at ranges of 50 metres or more look even more stupid than usual. No,... certainly not Pallywood , more like a "VDs Lies Production" I'd say.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~

Now! having given you a short while to reflect upon the fact that you have again been caught lying, with all the guile and lack of skill of a 5 year old, I would ask you to examine the enlarged clip taken only seconds after your miraculous view of an "unharmed foot", starting at 0.28sec, as the victims foot slowly falls to his left exposing the sole of his shoe to the direct sunlight, and perhaps explain the exit hole on the sole of the victim's shoe. It is very clearly visible from 27.561secs. to 33.099secs., with the exception of about 7 frames where the camera moves it out of frame. (nearly 80 frames)

In view of the fact that you claim to have spent the time and effort to view the video "frame by frame" quoting a lot of old lies about how you could allegedly see and diagnose all manner of miraculous things, I fail to see how you could have missed THIS,..... I certainly didn't.

You see things that you want to see. That "hole", wich is not clearly shown on every frame, does not come from a bullet wound. As a former military man you should have known how a shot wound through the foot looks like.

Shot from 1.5 meters with a "deadly" rubber coated steel bullet through his foot and all he had was a blister on his toe!!!

That guy was not "a Palestinian protester" but Ashraf Abu-Rahma. The "Palestinians" call him Bil’in’s Che Guevara (because of his communist ideas and who knows what else) but also "The hyena".

I noticed that you never answered this on the day you read it, but went away for a day to make up your story. You never thought that I would actually do as you suggested and look at it frame by frame did you? It's an amazing coincidence that the hole that can be clearly seen, is about the correct size to have been caused by a low velocity (relative to ball ammo) 1.5cm projectile. It's definitely too big for ants or wood borers, and certainly far too small for rabbits or Wombats.

I tell you what,...
How would you like the chance to show that you are just not making this all up as you go along? All you have to do is post a copy of the frame that you claim shows that the foot inside the victim's shoe is "uninjured" and give a credible explanation as to how you've arrived at this miraculous conclusion from the frame shown. If you can do this I will post a written apology. Now, you couldn't ask for me to be fairer than that.
Remember,.... when you made this ludicrous claim, you stated that the frame showed "an uninjured foot". (yes, we know it does,... but that is his other foot)


You are without doubt a certifiable idiot. Nothing you have said disproves a single thing that I said nor does it explain how you so conveniently missed seeing a large exit hole in the sole of the victim's shoe. Here is another view clipped from Second 25 of the video and it's nowhere near his toes. See,... that's the problem when you lie and just make stuff up as you go along, it never agrees with the visible evidence.

Abu Rahmeh, 27, took off his shoe and showed a large blister on his toe, with bruising underneath. He said for several days after the shooting, the toe was swollen. This completely contradicts Seno's statement and the picture:

It does nothing of the sort. Please show video evidence of this momentous event, it's really odd that after all the fuss, no visual evidence of this claim exists, not even a still photo of this truly newsworthy event. Knowing the injuries and deaths caused by these projectiles at far greater ranges this answer is obviously a fabrication of the Israeli Hasbara department. We all know the lengths they go to to lie their way out of being caught.

You see things that you want to see. That "hole", wich is not clearly shown on every frame, does not come from a bullet wound. As a former military man you should have known how a shot wound through the foot looks like.

"I see things I want to see",.... . absolutely Priceless,.... of course it's not clearly shown on every frame because in the majority of them the sole of the shoe is in shadow, however it Is clearly visible in 96 frames where sunlight allows clearer images. At the 52nd frame the sun reflects off of something shiny starting to appear and running down from the hole. Perspiration perhaps,... maybe the "blister" on his toe broke?

52nd frame showing the hole

59th frame showing the hole

I must admit that until now I have never seen the exit hole in a shoe made by a 15mm steel bullet lightly coated with Rubber and obviously neither have you, as you missed the one clearly shown in the video. To be honest I really doubt that you've seen a great number of actual wounds of any sort. So what do you think it is,... that witchetty grubs suddenly took a liking to the sole of his shoe where he was just shot, it must be one of those amazing coincidences of nature that only occur in Palestine, eh?

Whats this crap about the bloke in the white shirt being "an important witness",... WTF are you talking about,... all of those present including the camera operator were witnesses you clot, what makes him so special? It was just padding.

That guy was not "a Palestinian protester" So, who was the green shirted protestor clearly seen in centre frame at the beginning of the movie? Lying again

Originally Posted by Haaretz

Burberg arrested Ashraf Abu Rahme on July 7, 2008 for his "involvement in disrupting the peace." The prisoner was taken to the entry of the village, where he was bound and his eyes were covered.
Burberg, who had known Abu Rahme because of his role in previous demonstrations, allegedly said: "Now you will stop demonstrating against the IDF."

Originally Posted by The Guardian

The shooting took place on July 7 this year during PROTESTS against the continued construction of Israel's West Bank barrier. A bystander's video was released by the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem.

You've been caught telling another lie

Just admit it, you've been caught out lying again and again, or more correctly,... still.

Seno, you are making a fool of yourself. You made a mistake but are to stubborn to admit it. That hole, which is not always seen on the video, can not come from a steel bullet that penetrated his foot. There's no blood to be seen. If he was shot like you said he was he would be crippled for the rest of his life. You see things that you want to see, not what is actually there.

Originally Posted by senojekips

Originally Posted by The Guardian
The shooting took place on July 7 this year during PROTESTS against the continued construction of Israel's West Bank barrier. A bystander's video was released by the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem.

The article you quote from the Guardian can be read here: Israeli soldiers charged over shooting of Palestinian prisoner. I doubt if you read it, because this comes from the same article:

Rahmeh, one of several dozen Palestinians who had been throwing stones at soldiers, suffered a bruised toe.

This incident clearly shows that the "steel" bullets the IDF uses cannot even penetrate a toe from a distance of 1.5 meters.

Originally Posted by VDKMS

Seno, you are making a fool of yourself. You made a mistake but are to stubborn to admit it. That hole, which is not always seen on the video, can not come from a steel bullet that penetrated his foot. There's no blood to be seen. If he was shot like you said he was he would be crippled for the rest of his life. You see things that you want to see, not what is actually there.

Well,... In that case it must make you feel like an absolute idiot to be made such a fool of and shown to be a deliberate liar by someone whom you regard as a fool?
I have not only posted what is actually able to be seen, I have also posted clips to verify my statements. I notice that you are not willing to do the same,.... or explain your earlier "miracle diagnosis". Which was clearly another lie.

So, I repeat my very fair and honest offer.
Here is a chance to everyone that you are just not making this all up as you go along? All you have to do is post a copy of the frame that you claim shows that the foot inside the victim's shoe is "uninjured" and give a credible explanation as to how you've arrived at this miraculous conclusion from the frame shown. If you can do this, I will gladly post a written apology. Now, you couldn't ask for me to be fairer than that.

Originally Posted by VDKMS

This incident clearly shows that the "steel" bullets the IDF uses cannot even penetrate a toe from a distance of 1.5 meters.

Ahhhh, so you are making things up again? Please explain how you come to this conclusion in the face of earlier reports by Israeli doctors clearly stating that these steel projectiles can easily penetrate the skull and break bones at ranges over 40 metres. Not to mention the video evidence clearly showing the exit hole for at least 96 frames and also a growing stain in the sole of the victim's shoe? If this matter were not so serious, your pathetic answers would have me ROFL.

Admit it, You are a pathological liar. You just can't help yourself, can you,... it's second nature to you.
Your complete lack of any moral compass whatsoever and obvious sociopathic behaviour are certainly not what I would expect from someone who claims to have attended Belgium's premier officer training establishment. Every day I am becoming more and more convinced that you are actually no more than an Israeli shill. Someone of your low standards would never pass the acceptance interviews to the Australian Defence Forces Academy let alone gain entry.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Israeli High Court of Justice ordered on Wednesday the Israeli military to press stronger charges against a an officer after shooting a bound and blindfolded Palestinian civilian in the West Bank. I can't imagine the Israeli High Court doing this just for a "Blistered Toe" (My comment)
The court decision came based on a petition by Israeli human rights organizations B’Tselem, ACRI, PCATI and Yesh Din on behalf of the victim Ashraf Abu Rahmeh, 27.
The incident was documented by a young teen that was in her home close by, and was published on Youtube.
The petitioners demanded that the indictments filed against the soldier who fired the shot, Staff Sergeant L. Koria, and the platoon commander, Lieutenant Col. Omri Borberg, be changed so as to reflect the severity of the offenses.
Using a weapon to intimidate, and shooting a handcuffed detainee may amount to abuse of detainee under aggravated circumstances, an offense that carries a penalty of seven years in prison. In the petition, attorneys Limor Yehuda and Dan Yakir from ACRI stated that the decision of the Military Prosecutor to charge the soldier and commander with “unbecoming conduct”, an offense which does not appear on criminal records, is highly unreasonable and conveys an alarming message of disrespect for human lives, laying the foundation for future incidents of abuse.

Last September Abu Rahmeh , from the village of Bil’in, scene of weekly protests against the Israeli wall, sustained critical wounds in his leg and was left to bleed for some time until the soldiers allowed an ambulance to take to a nearby hospital in the central West Bank city of Ramallah. That does not sound like a "Blistered toe" to me. (my comment).

The victim was in a solidarity peaceful protest* in the nearby Nil’ in village, he recalled that day. “I was blindfolded, they took me near the army vehicles then I heard shoots, I fleet pain in my leg, like someone have cut it off, I fall-down on the ground, I was so scared, the soldiers said they will kill me if they see me again” Abu Rahmeh told IMEMC over the phone.

* More proof of your lie about Rameh not being a protester.

Originally Posted by senojekips

Well,... In that case it must make you feel like an absolute idiot to be made such a fool of and shown to be a deliberate liar by someone whom you regard as a fool?
I have not only posted what is actually able to be seen, I have also posted clips to verify my statements. I notice that you are not willing to do the same,.... or explain your earlier "miracle diagnosis". Which was clearly another lie.

So, I repeat my very fair and honest offer.
Here is a chance to everyone that you are just not making this all up as you go along? All you have to do is post a copy of the frame that you claim shows that the foot inside the victim's shoe is "uninjured" and give a credible explanation as to how you've arrived at this miraculous conclusion from the frame shown. If you can do this, I will gladly post a written apology. Now, you couldn't ask for me to be fairer than that.
Ahhhh, so you are making things up again? Please explain how you come to this conclusion in the face of earlier reports by Israeli doctors clearly stating that these steel projectiles can easily penetrate the skull and break bones at ranges over 40 metres. Not to mention the video evidence clearly showing the exit hole for at least 96 frames and also a growing stain in the sole of the victim's shoe? If this matter were not so serious, your pathetic answers would have me ROFL.

Admit it, You are a pathological liar. You just can't help yourself, can you,... it's second nature to you.
Your complete lack of any moral compass whatsoever and obvious sociopathic behaviour are certainly not what I would expect from someone who claims to have attended Belgium's premier officer training establishment. Every day I am becoming more and more convinced that you are actually no more than an Israeli shill. Someone of your low standards would never pass the acceptance interviews to the Australian Defence Forces Academy let alone gain entry.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* More proof of your lie about Rameh not being a protester.

This is from B'Tselem itself. Sorry to post the full article because you do not follow the links I give.

Press release

B'Tselem: Prosecute soldier who fired 'rubber' bullet at Palestinian detainee, Investigate the involvement of an officer in the event and suspected cover-up

Published: 20 Jul 2008
Today, B'Tselem is publishing a video clip documenting a soldier firing a rubber coated steel bullet, from extremely close range, at a cuffed and blindfolded Palestinian detainee. The shooting took place in the presence of a lieutenant colonel, who was holing the Palestinian's arm when the shot was fired.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=4qY92YOlvS4"][ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=4qY92YOlvS4"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=4qY92YOlvS4[/ame][/URL]

The incident took place on 7 July, in Nil'in, a village in the West Bank. A Palestinian demonstrator, Ashraf Abu Rahma, 27, was stopped by soldiers, who cuffed and blindfolded him for about thirty minutes, during which time, according to Abu-Rahma, they beat him. Afterwards, a group of soldiers and border policemen led him to an army jeep. The video clip shows a soldier aim his weapon at the demonstrator's legs, from about 1.5 meters away, and fire a rubber coated steel bullet at him. Abu-Rahma stated that the bullet hit his left toe, received treatment from an army medic, and released by the soldiers.

A Palestinian girl from Nil'in filmed the incident from her house in the village, and B'Tselem received it this morning.

B'Tselem does not know if any proceedings were opened against those involved. However, residents of Ni'lin told B'Tselem that they saw the soldier the following day, still serving in his unit.

B'Tselem immediately forwarded a copy to the Military Police Investigation Unit commander, with demand that an immediate Military Police investigation be opened, if it hasn't already, and that the soldier be brought to justice. Additionally, B'Tselem demanded that the involvement of the lieutenant colonel who was holding the detainee is investigated. B'Tselem stressed that members of the security forces are obligated to report unlawful acts. It is even more serious is a high-ranking officer participates in such a whitewash.

Who's lying?

Now back to this tread:
fac: Israeli rubber bullet fired from a distance of 1.5 meter to someone's foot.
result : blister on his toe.
conclusion : harmless

Originally Posted by VDKMS

Who's lying?

In view of the facts given and the amount of trouble you have gone to to both divert the original subject despite video evidence to the contrary it looks very much like you are,.... as video evidence clearly shows you to be wrong, the same video evidence that you claim shows that the foot inside the shoe was miraculously unharmed. I notice that you have never posted the image that allows you to make this miraculous diagnosis nor have you explained how you arrived at it.

Originally Posted by VDKMS

Now back to this tread:
fac: Israeli rubber bullet fired from a distance of 1.5 meter to someone's foot.
result : blister on his toe.
conclusion : harmless

Still no photos of this miracle happening? and we all know that this is not really feasible according to evidence given by Israeli doctors on the injuries and deaths sustained from these steel projectiles. Able to penetrate the skull and break bones at ranges of 40 metres, yet somehow merely blisters a toe when fired at a range of one metre.

I notice that in the subsequent court hearing that both those sh!tbags involved disputed the evidence given by the other in an attempt to distance themselves from any blame. That old Israeli trait of lying at the drop of a hat comes to the surface again.

The fact that the Israelis have a department overseen by a politician dedicated to spreading lies and giving disinformation makes any reports highly suspect. However video evidence is much harder to dispute.

Originally Posted by senojekips

In view of the facts given and the amount of trouble you have gone to to both divert the original subject despite video evidence to the contrary it looks very much like you are,.... as video evidence clearly shows you to be wrong, the same video evidence that you claim shows that the foot inside the shoe was miraculously unharmed. I notice that you have never posted the image that allows you to make this miraculous diagnosis nor have you explained how you arrived at it.

Still no photos of this miracle happening? and we all know that this is not really feasible according to evidence given by Israeli doctors on the injuries and deaths sustained from these steel projectiles. Able to penetrate the skull and break bones at ranges of 40 metres, yet somehow merely blisters a toe when fired at a range of one metre.

I notice that in the subsequent court hearing that both those sh!tbags involved disputed the evidence given by the other in an attempt to distance themselves from any blame. That old Israeli trait of lying at the drop of a hat comes to the surface again.

The fact that the Israelis have a department overseen by a politician dedicated to spreading lies and giving disinformation makes any reports highly suspect. However video evidence is much harder to dispute.

Now you mention the court. Here's the full text of the High Court decision.
Ashraf Abu Rahma testified before court that he was injured in his right side of his left toe

You claim to know it better than Ashraf Abu Rahma himself????

Originally Posted by VDKMS

Now you mention the court. Here's the full text of the High Court decision.
Ashraf Abu Rahma testified before court that he was injured in his right side of his left toe

You claim to know it better than Ashraf Abu Rahma himself????

Why can I not claim to know better that the Hasbara published under threat of death, after all you claim to know better than the Israeli doctors who investigated the deaths and injuries caused by Israeli steel projectiles? One good turn deserves another.

Any person under the threat of death by IDF will say whatever he is told to say,.... wake the fcuk up. Unfortunately the Hasbara department didn't realise that the video clearly shows them to be liars. (Something we've always known anyway)

Speaking of lies, I notice that you still have not posted this "Frame 633" that shows the uninjured foot.

Nor have you posted this miracle image that shows the edges of the exit hole, "Going inwards"

We all know why don't we? Because they were creations of your vivid imagination, lies you made up as you went along. like 99% of everything you say.