CNN Uses Faked Palestinian ‘Casualty’ Video in Coverage

In its pro-Palestinian coverage of the escalated violence in the Middle East, CNN used faked video footage showing Palestinian “victims” of Israel’s rockets being dragged off the streets.

On his November 15 report, Anderson Cooper hosted a report by CNN correspondent Sara Sidner and during the wind up to her report Cooper played a few video snippets of “victims” being dragged off the streets of the Palestinian held areas.

But one of those “victims” wasn’t a victim at all but was instead a man merely acting injured all for the benefit of western cameras.

Worse, this particular faux victim video is a well-known fake. Breitbart already posted about this “Pallywood” theatrical extravaganza and if we knew about it, how could CNN not have known?

CNN isn’t the only Old Media outlet that falls for fake Palestinian videos. There is, for example, a famous video that caused a contentious court case in France back in 2008. It was a fake video supposedly showing a young Palestinian boy named Muhammad al-Dura being shot at by Israel’s Defense Forces. At first, the video caused international outrage, but in time it was proven to be just Palestinian street theater. No Muhammad al-Dura was ever shot at.

The BBC also has a long history of anti-Israel bias.

How do these fake videos continue to end up in western news coverage? It’s because few western news organizations actually have any news crews on the ground in these affected areas. As it happens, throughout the Mid East western news outlets rely on “stringers” to get video of events. In this case, a stringer is a Palestinian who takes his own video and then sells it to western news agencies. This leaves western news agencies naturally open to faked, Palestinian propaganda. But, the thing is, all these western news agencies know this is happening and they just don’t care.

These faked, “Pallywood” videos will continue to be used by western news organizations because it satisfies their anti-Israel bias.

Shortlink:

Posted by on November 17, 2012.
Filed under corruption, Culture Of Corruption, Foreign Affairs, Global Politics, Islam, Islamic Fascism, Israel, Media.
Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago-based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart's BigGovernment.com and BigJournalism.com, RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, RightPundits.com, StoptheACLU.com, Human Events Magazine, among many, many others. Additionally, he has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs to discuss his opinion editorials and current events. He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the new book "Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture" which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of PubliusForum.com. Feel free to contact him with any comments or questions, EMAIL Warner Todd Huston: igcolonel .at. hotmail.com "The only end of writing is to enable the reader better to enjoy life, or better to endure it." --Samuel Johnson

You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
  • 914

    These video’s are every bit as fake as the Occutard movement or this presidency for that matter. All fake and all mentally deranged.

    • SteveCrickmore075

      914, of course there is a lot of fraud in the world, practiced by most parties-. only you, like most conservatives, don’t seem to recognize it when it happens to someone you support to the hilt. For example, you must be the only one in the world who adamantly maintains that Lance Armstrong “won fair and square” as you commented last month, even in the wake of of an avalanche of revelations. Your ideas on cheating or who is a fraud is willfully selective and deranged yourself..

      • jim_m

        The question of Lance Armstrong is simply one where any honest person would acknowledge that he was competing on the same level with everyone else in cycling. In other words: They all cheat in that sport. You wouldn’t have a world cycling champion for the last 20 years if you disqualified all the cyclists who have been doping.

      • jim_m

        I would be especially interested in your evidence that the other side in this conflict is perpetrating fraud. We have seen many instances of fraud from the palis, from the Associated with Terrorists Press, from al-Reuters, from AFP and others. I haven’t seen any from the Israeli press or the Israeli government. You claim to have this evidence. Time to pony up.

        • SteveCrickmore075

          The evidence is the total bombardment of Gaza. The last time in the 26 day war in Gaza, in December 2008- January 2009, half of 1,200 Palestinian casualties were civilians, many women and children (the Israelis had thirteen in the entire conflct). You see! We’re just defending ourselves. But as the Interior Minister of Israel, Eli Yishal admits, the real reason for Israel’s operation in Gaza…”The goal of the operation is to send Gaza back to the Middle Ages (and acquire more land). Only then will Israel be calm for forty years.” an operation with the encouragement, wink, nod and heavy military & financial support of the winner of the Nobel Peace prize of 2009. There is your cynicism for you, jim. Obama is even better than Lance Armstrong. Yes, he has urged Prime Minister Netanyahu to make every effort to avoid civilian casualties.”…. Well, every effort, except firing a ton of missiles into crowded cities and refugee camps.

          • jim_m

            I am speaking of disseminating propaganda. You are complaining about casualties created by terrorists hiding among civilians. You complain that civilians die because terrorists deliberately put them at risk. There is no condition that Israel could defend herself that you would find acceptable.

          • donwalk

            Maybe Israel can purchase some of those rockets the Palestinians are using? You know, the ones that land in the center of populated areas in Israel, but amazingly do not kill or maim any Jewish civilians, children or innocents. How in the heck do they do that?

          • http://www.shockandblog.com/ Jay McHue

            What are you babbling about? 3 Israelis have been killed and 70 injured so far. The reason there aren’t more is that Israel has wisely built strong bomb shelters and made sure citizens know to stay close to them during times like this. The Palestinians? Not so much: http://www.inquisitr.com/403078/hamas-proud-to-use-human-shields-in-gaza-video/

          • donwalk

            That shows that Isael is “Winning”, which is what you are supposed to do when involved in war!

            Subject: [wizbang] Re: CNN Uses Faked Palestinian ‘ Casualty’ Video in Coverage

      • 914

        I don’ support anyone to the hilt accept family and friends. And what does Lance Armstrong have to do with lying terrorists videos? Do try to stay on topic in the future.

  • jim_m

    It doesn’t matter that this was a fraud. As in everything else, the media are only interested in the information that promotes their agenda. The media will ignore the facts because the facts do not promote their agenda.

    Reuters, AP and CNN have all a history of presenting phony information about Israel in order to advance a pro islamic and pro pali narrative.

  • Commander_Chico

    Israelis are still killing Arabs about ten to their one.

    • herddog505

      In war, I believe that is called “winning”.

      • Commander_Chico

        Is the USA winning in that war? Au contraire.

        • 914

          The U.S. is not in that war.

          • jim_m

            Chico wants us to be in it against Israel.

          • Commander_Chico

            The rest of the world sees the USA in that war. Petraeus said so much when he was CENTCOM.

        • herddog505

          Ditto 914: how are we even fighting that war?

      • Brucehenry

        No, if one side is killing ten times as many combatants as the other side, that’s called “winning.” If one side is killing ten times as many NONcombatants as the other side, that’s called a “tragedy.”

        It’s also called “a disproportionate response,” at least by many people.

        • jim_m

          I struggle to find what is disproportionate in responding to a group, Hamas, which is supported by the palestinian people and whose charter states

          “The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews [and kill them]; until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: Oh Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!”

          A group that holds renouncing any part of what they consider to be palestine to be equivalent to renouncing the islamic faith, where such apostacy is met with death.

          And it is impossible to negotiate with a culture that holds to the concept of Taqiyya, which justifies lying in negotiations with an adversary for the purpose of breaking any deals made when the advantage can be seized to destroy the enemy.

          You complain about a disproportionate response but you make no complaints about the cowards who hide amongst the civilians. You make no complaint about their bad faith in negotiations. I can think of only two reasons why you overlook these things: you’re a tool or you’re prejudiced.

          When your adversary has committed itself to your genocide, I find it really difficult to understand what exactly could ever be considered disproportionate.

          • 914

            Amen

          • Brucehenry

            I do not understand why you think the whole of my thinking about this issue can or should be contained in one blog comment, Jim.

            My comment was in response to what I consider to be a rather flippant observation by Herddog. I was pointing out that “winning” is not what some would call one side killing ten times as many noncombatants as the other side.

            Your POV, that Palestinian civilians should be punished by death for the crime of supporting their elected government, is no different than the argument Hamas uses to support its rocket attacks against Israeli innocents. They are Israelis, says Hamas — why differentiate between combatants and noncombatants? Isn’t that the same argument YOU are using when you say you can’t find what is disproportionate about responding to a group “supported by the Palestinian people”?

          • jim_m

            On the contrary. While Hamas (and you) view all Jews as the enemy, I have made a point of saying that civilian deaths are the fault of hamas for hiding themselves in civilian neighborhoods and using civilians as shields. I have called this cowardly.

            My point is that Israel has the right to defend itself from attack and if the perpetraors of this attack are going to hide among innocents then the deaths of those innocents are on the heads of Hamas.

            On the other hand, you seem to believe that if Hamas will hide among civilians then the Israelis must be compelled to do nothing to address the violence against their own citizens

            What I find really repulsive is your comparing attacks against an armed militia hiding behind civilians to attacks directly upon civilians themselves. Shame on you.

          • Brucehenry

            Well, your point about Hamas hiding amongst civilians is valid. But, again, I wasn’t writing an essay here. I was responding to Herddog’s flippant remark with one of my own.

            BTW, fuck you and your anti-semitism charges against me. I was making a limited point and again, fuck you.

          • jim_m

            Sorry Bruce. I’m just tired of the left drawing these false equivalencies and acting as though despicable cowards who target innocents and hide behind civilians are the same as the legitimate armed forces of a nation trying to defend those innocents and taking pains to not kill the civilians the cowards are hiding behind.

            I fail to see why it is that so many on the left are so willing to make this error. I ascribe the answer you see above. I suppose I could simply say that the left is in favor of terrorism and the fascist dictatorship that the terrorists seek to establish, but that would offend you as well, while being equally true.

          • Brucehenry

            If I called you a racist every time you wrote something that could possibly be construed as racist, no matter how outlandishly, unfairly, or uncharitably, I’d never say anything else, Jim.That’s what you do with your antisemitism charges.

            For instance, above you call Israeli noncombatants “innocents.” But the brown-skinned Palestinian noncombatants are merely “civilians,” not “innocents.” Is that racist on your part? Some would say so, but I’m sure you didn’t mean it that way. If I was like you, I’d jump all over that remark and snidely imply “racism” and “Islamophobia.”

            Matter of fact, that pretty much sums up your style. You’re not interested in a discussion. You’re interested in “winning” a rhetorical fencing match.

          • jim_m

            Whatever. From the leftist point of view the very fact that I disagree with you makes me a racist. The incessant branding of dissent as racism has made the epithet meaningless and consequentially given cover to real racists.

            However, the treatment of Israel and the palestinian conflict is intertwined with antisemitism and has been from the start. While you personally may not harbor these feelings the narrative started decades ago with a decision that the Israelis were at fault for being Jewish and desiring a homeland.

            I will simply note that rarely do you ever hear complaints against the British who had control of the territory and made this all happen. It is only ever the fault of the Jooos.

          • Brucehenry

            Whatever indeed, Jim. My point is that it’s rude as hell to call somebody a racist or an antisemite with no more provocation than I have given you — or that you routinely give me, and I let it pass.

            Secondly, this is the third time this week you’ve said something historically false. First it was “Hitler left the Communist Party,” then yesterday it was “child labor laws pre-dated unionism.” When called on it, you fled (left) the thread.

            Now you say it’s rare to hear complaints about the British re: Palestine. Have you never read anything about the history of the area? Why do you think so many Arabs hate the US so much? Because we are seen as the inheritors of British hegemony! Why did bin Laden refer to 1920 as the year of disaster? Because it was that year the Sikes-Picot agreement was implemented and the League of Nations mandate handed Britain “legal” control of Palestine. The compaints go on and on. Don’t blame others because you haven’t read widely.

          • jim_m

            Contrary to public opinion I have a life. I actually do go other places than at my computer to look at Wizbang. Hitler was attracted to communism. I did not say that he was ever a member of the party. If so I misspoke. As for the child labor laws I stand by my claim that they were not driven by unionism. There was a far broader social concern that drove that issue.

          • Brucehenry

            You said Hitler “left the communist party.” Then you said “child labor laws pre-dated unionism.” Now you say that nobody ever complains about Britain’s role in the origins of the Middle East conflicts.

            You, sir, have said three historically ignorant things in the past week, two in the last 24 hours. Congratulations.

            EDIT: What makes you say that “Hitler was attracted to communism”?

          • retired.military

            But bruce we get called racist enough even when it has nothing to do with race. Look at what the left is doing with McCain and Rice.

        • herddog505

          Tell that to Gens. Arnold, Spaatz, Eaker, Doolittle, and Lemay, as well as AIr Marshall Harris.

          Then, ask yourself how you’d feel about it if you lived in Israel and had to send your family down into a shelter, perhaps several times each day, because some prick on the other side was indiscriminately lobbing rockets into your town. Maybe you wonder if one of those rockets might hit your kids’ school or bus, or land in the street while they’re outside. Or a direct hit on your shelter that it can’t withstand.

          What OUGHT the Israelis to do? Aside from agree to walk west until their feet stop touching bottom, that is?

          • Brucehenry

            I am not saying that Israel’s response is unjustified, simply that, one, any time noncombatants are being killed it’s tragic, and two that MANY PEOPLE, not necessarily just me, consider a response disproportionate that kills ten noncombatants on one side for every one noncombatant death on the other.

            My main reason for responding at all was because I considered your “winning” comment rather flippant.

          • Oysteria

            What would be “proportionate”? Should Israel lob unguided missles into Gaza so that people are killed only indiscriminately and make sure that they stop at only a few? This whole “disproportionate response” rhetoric just rubs me the wrong way.

            I’m going to bed. I’ll read more sometime tomorrow.

          • 914

            “and two that MANY PEOPLE, not necessarily just me, consider a response disproportionate that kills ten noncombatants on one side for every one noncombatant death on the other.”

            Then tell them to get out from behind the Women and children and fight like Men or live in Peace and inherit a new Country.

          • herddog505

            Flippant or not, there is IMO a good bit of truth in it.

            1. People don’t fight wars with the idea that the number of casualties on both sides is equal or even “equivalent”. They fight wars with the idea of inflicting enough pain on the other side to make him give up. This means, basically, killing more of them than they kill of us;

            2. Sorry that non-combatants get killed in war. Civilized countries do what they can to minimize this, but the fact of the matter is that civilians, because their labor provides the “sinews of war”, are effectively fair game;

            3. The terrorists, through both accident and design, hide amongst civilians. Until somebody comes up with a weapon that will ONLY harm the combatant that it’s aimed at and do absolutely no collateral damage, civilians are going to be hurt no matter how hard one side or the other tries to limit collateral damage;

            4. Unless and until one side understands – usually through lots of painful experience – that continuing the struggle will result in crippling damage to him and that his best course of action is to make terms, the war will continue, causing more and more casualties. Better to gain a quick though bloody victory rather than fight a prolonged and, hence, bloodier conflict.

            Unless the Palis can either induce the other Arab states to try – again – to gang up on Israel and beat them in war or get their hands on decisive weapons (nukes) that would do them as much harm as the Israelis, I don’t see that they can force Israel to come to terms. Israel, for political reasons, will not employ the force necessary to force the Palis to come to terms. Result: bloody, prolonged deadlock and increasingly hardened attitudes. I mean, think of it: both sides are fighting to the death over a miserable, worthless little piece of land. Why keep doing it, other than that they now have so many scores to settle that they can’t stop?

          • Brucehenry

            And your points one, two, and four can be just as logically used by Hamas terrorists as by Israeli military authorities.

            And your concluding paragraph just underscores how tragic the situation is, undeserving of the response: “Dead civilians? Too bad! Winning!”

          • herddog505

            Yes, I’m sure that Hamas feels totally justified in what they do. So what? I’m not aware that many – if any – people have ever fought a war while thinking themselves the villains.

            We did some pretty nasty things during World War II. In our methods, we were not much different from the nazis or Japanese: we bombed cities, conducted unrestricted submarine warfare, were prepared to use poison gas, did use the Bomb, etc. I don’t lose a great deal of sleep over it, however: the world is a better place without Schikelgruber and Tojo even if that meant sending clean-cut American boys out to bomb German and Japanese women and children by the tens of thousands.

            Color me old-fashioned, but the world is divided into, if not always good guys and bad guys, then at least bad guys and worse guys. My sympathies lie with the Israelis as being better than the Palis, and thus I’m not very critical of the steps they’ve taken to (as I see it) defend themselves. I’m certainly not going to sign on to a lot of hogwash about “proportionate response”, which I frankly see as nothing more than a lot of anti-Israeli propaganda, an effort to turn them into villains for defending themselves and hobble their defense.

            So, yes: Dead civilians? Too bad! Winning!

            Sucks, but that is how the world works.

    • 914

      So the Arabs are pro choice then. Not surprising.

    • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

      Good on them!

  • Carl

    RE: The guy in the video walking around unharmed “after” shots are shown of him being carried away “injusred”… How do we know that the video of the man walking around wasn’t shot before he was injured?

    If that’s the case – if the shot of the guy walking around is just out of sequence than it’s easily explained as an editing error.

    Has the BBC responded to criticisms?

    • http://www.shockandblog.com/ Jay McHue

      You’re not the brightest bulb in the pack, are you? It’s amazing how pristine this “injured” man looks — no blood, clothes that are spotless and whole, etc.

      But you are right about one thing. It was an editing error. The editors forgot to leave out the footage of him walking around after playing dead.

  • herddog505

    Timely:

    As Israeli airstrikes and naval shells bombarded Gaza this weekend, the world asked the question that perennially frustrates, confuses and enrages so many people across the planet: Why aren’t the Americans hating on Israel more?

    America is a big country with a lot of things going on, but the real force driving American support for Israeli actions in Gaza isn’t Islamophobia, Jewish conspiracies or foam-flecked religious nuts. It’s something much simpler: many though not all Americans look at war through a distinctive cultural lens. Readers of Special Providence know that I’ve written about four schools of American thinking about world affairs; from the perspective of the most widespread of them, the Jacksonians, what Israel is doing in Gaza makes perfect sense. Not only are many Jacksonians completely untroubled by Israel’s response to the rocket attacks in Gaza, many genuinely don’t understand why the rest of the world is so steamed about Israel—and so angry with the United States.

    http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/11/18/america-israel-gaza-the-world/

    Essentially, the idea of “proportionate war” is alien to the American experience. We have no feudal history in which war is fought by relatively small armies until one king or duke gets tired of it and gives up. Instead, our history is one of total war, whether it be exterminating Indian tribes to get their land, burning and looting entire swathes of the South to get the Confederacy to yield, or using A-bombs on Japan to get them to give up. Even in our popular culture, the American hero endures only so much before he gets angry enough to end the fight decisively, i.e. by wiping out his opponents.

    I suggest that our limited experience with proportionate war has been entirely negative. While I make no doubt that the Vietnamese would disagree, I think that most Americans believe that we fought our long war there with one hand tied behind our backs and, had we but REALLY turned the military loose on North Vietnam, we would have won the war in short order, saving tens of thousands of American lives (and I suggest that, to most Americans, they are the only ones that really count) and billions in treasure. We are getting more experience with this sort of war in A-stan, and got a lot in Iraq. Result: lots of dead and wounded Americans and an enemy who clearly never “had enough”.

  • http://www.shockandblog.com/ Jay McHue

    I’m just going to leave this here:

    http://mediamythbusters.com/index.php?title=Fauxtography

    (Bummer about the number of outdated links, though.)

  • http://www.shockandblog.com/ Jay McHue

    If you want a lot of laughs, check out former fauxtography exposer and now full-time kool-aid-drinking lefty Chuckles Johnson’s take on this: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/41210_About_That_So-Called_Pallywood_Video

  • Pingback: CNN Uses Faked Palestinian 'Casualty' Video in Coverage | Peace for Bid