As Chalan was closing the back door of ambulance 777, a missile most likely fired from an Israeli drone (not from an Israeli airplane or helicopter, as earlier reported) struck the rear of the roof of ambulance 777... .
...
The limited damage and the high precision of the strikes on the ambulances suggest that the weapon was a smaller type of missile fired from an Israeli drone or helicopter. Israel is in possession of an arsenal of highly precise missiles that can be fired from either helicopters or drones and are designed to limit the damage to their targets. The Israeli- designed and manufactured SPIKE anti-armor missile system and the still experimental DIME (dense inert metal explosive) missile are examples of smaller missiles designed to cause smaller explosions and limit collateral damage. Such missiles cause less powerful explosions than the previous generation of US-manufactured TOW and Hellfire missiles (often used by the IDF in assassination attempts against Palestinian militants in Gaza and the West Bank), which would have destroyed the ambulances completely. While the smaller missiles can be fired from either drones or helicopters, none of the witnesses reported hearing helicopters in the air before or during the attack, so it is most likely the missiles were fired from an Israeli drone.

HRW cannot conclusively state which missiles were used in the attack on the ambulances, because our researchers did not find diagnostic shrapnel or missile parts at the scene, and because of the experimental nature of some missiles used by the IDF. The DIME is a weapon with a casing designed to disintegrate in an effort to minimize collateral damage from its fragmentation. Regardless of the weapon used, the IDF certainly has the capability to attack vehicles with limited impact missiles designed to cause low collateral damage.
...
The missile traveled from the roof of ambulance 777 through the gurney on which Ahmed Fawaz was strapped, severing his leg, and then through the floor of the ambulance deep into the pavement of the road.
...
Israel has continuously advanced its drone-fired missiles, such as the STRIKE [sic: they mean "Spike," which was spelled correctly above. --ed.] missile and the still-experimental DIME missile, so that they are capable of limited damage to their targets.

The weapon, according to the military magazine "Defence Tech", is called DIME which means "Dense Inert Metal Explosive". It is a carbon shell that when it goes off breaks into small splinters. At the same time, there is the explosion of a charge which shoots a blade of tungsten dust charged with energy which burns and destroys everything in the radius of four meters with a really precise slant.

"With regard to allegations of the use of Dime weaponry, the IDF denies the possession or use of such weapons," the military said in a statement.

Human Rights Watch cannot conclusively state which missiles were used in the attack on the ambulances, because our researchers did not find diagnostic shrapnel or missile parts at the scene, and because of the experimental nature of some missiles used by the IDF.... Regardless of the weapon used, the IDF certainly has the capability to attack vehicles with limited impact missiles designed to cause low collateral damage....The missile traveled from the roof of ambulance 777 through the gurney on which Ahmed Fawaz was strapped, severing his leg, and then through the floor of the ambulance deep into the pavement of the road.

Are they seriously claiming those holes in the road come from a missile strike? It's ridiculous. When missiles hit the ground, they create a large crater, not a pristine little hole. Where did all the missing material go? The soil, asphalt, rocks etc that formerly occupied the empty space of that hole didn't just disappear. They couldn't have been ejected because the hole is too narrow. If something had actually pierced the ground like that, the ground matter would have been squeezed sidways in all directions, creating a raised area around the hole. The asphalt should have buckled. But its totally flat in the picture. Also, there's no evidence of heat or burning, which should be around the edges. If anything, that picture proves that it couldn't have been a missile.

I know a drilled hole when I see one. Someone took a cement drill with a dull blade and made those holes after the fact. Gimme a break.

There is no lifting or heaving of any sort at the site of the hole. Wouldn't an entering projectile, explosive or not, with enough force to puncture the tarmac expend enough energy underground to warp the pavement or at least raise the perimeter even slightly? (Drive a nail into plaster or drywall and see the surface raise up evenly around the nail). It's a road - that is, a road bed, with gravel and fill underneath, not empty air -not just a thin veneer of asphalt that can be punched through.

In the HRW report of December 2006, page 19, there are pictures of two men pointing to the missile craters in the road caused by the missiles that struck the ambulances. The distances of the craters from the kerb do not match the positions of the two ambulances as shown in the video replayed on the ITV News report.

While the gravest injuries the crew suffered were to their ear drums, they also sustained minor shrapnel injuries to the face, as verified by hospital records. Qasim Chalan, the ambulance driver pictured, suffered the most severe bleeding from his ears because he was standing right next to ambulance 777 when it was struck. The bandages were used to stem this internal bleeding (and a minor cut on his chin). The ear drum injuries were internal, and the minor cut of Chalan's chin could have healed within a week.

The claim that the damage to the ambulances must have occurred long before July 23 because of the appearance of rust on the ambulance in photographs taken a week after the attack is baseless. Coastal Lebanon is not a "dry climate...in the summer," as alleged, but is extremely humid -- as anyone present in Lebanon during the war can recount. The saline humidity of Lebanon's coast causes rapid rusting, especially on damaged metals such as shrapnel-torn roofs.

Non-explosive missiles

A few commenters on blogs have asserted that Israel sometimes removes all explosives from small missiles, relying on the kinetic energy of the projectile's impact to do the damage to whatever vehicle is being targeted. The reason for this is to minimize "collateral damage" and not injure bystanders by making a precision strike no larger than it needs to be. If this is true, then it is theoretically possible that Israel did use a non-explosive missile to attack this ambulance, and fired it so precisely that it passed through the ventilation cover in the center of the roof and then continued right through the leg of a patient, the floor of the ambulance, and into the ground underneath without exploding. This would account for a few of the incongruities of this case. But not for most of them. The non-exploding missile theory still does not explain the rust on the roof, the reports of explosions and fires, the undamaged flanges of the siren hole, the shrapnel holes coming from the outside, the apparently undamaged floor, etc., and most importantly: If Israel really did target a random ambulance with no military value, apparently for the sole purpose of killing rescue workers and civilians, then why would it go to the trouble of using a humane hyper-precise attack designed to minimize injuries? It makes no sense.

Unfortunately, the current HRW document does nothing to dispel the doubts about the incident and HRW's initial reports. Instead, HRW has produced 25 pages of non-evidence and foggy speculation. ... In fact, the report is so rife with inconsistencies that it gives rise to more questions than originally existed. It is a pity that the HRW team in Lebanon went through so much trouble, only to produce such an incomplete report.

No aircraft, helicopter, or drone fires a missile from directly above a target. All targets for missiles are acquired and the missiles launched when the launching platform is in basically level flight. Therefore, the missiles strike the target from the side, not the top down. Only bombs have a trajectory that would cause a stike on the top rather than side of the vehicle. The HRW report fails a "smell test" on so many levels as to be ludicrous on its face. Basically it boils down to physical evidence that doesn't support the conclusions, and statements that don't match the capabilities and methods of employment of any known weapons systems.

Unless the attacking aircraft was stationary overhead, the missile would still have a forward trajectory. A dropped object would have the same forward velocity of the aircraft when it began its downward descent. If the aircraft or drone was moving at 150 miles per hour and was relatively close to the ground, the object would be traveling forward at about the same speed when it hit the ambulance and the ground.

The object would also be angled in its trajectory since it would be fired or dropped well before the moving aircraft was directly over the target. The hole in the ground also should reflect the impact of an object moving horizontally as well as vertically. Shouldn't the asphalt be pried up on the leading edge of the impact and compressed on the trailing edge (assuming there was no explosion to destroy the pristine impact hole)? And shouldn't the hole be angled?

If the aircraft were flying very high the missile could lose some of its forward motion due to frictional air resistance. But dropping objects from an extreme altitude would not be accurate enough to perfectly hit an ambulance, let alone two ambulances. Thus the dropping theory is out and a guided missile would be required.

A propelled missile would certainly have an angled entry and forward motion. It would seem the only option to angled entry and forward motion of the object is dropping or firing it from a stationary aircraft directly overhead. This requires a hovering helicopter, not a drone as HRW says, as drones can't stop mid-flight. However, helicopters can not fire weapons directly downward, and must be fired at somewhat of an angle.

I have provided some sketches to clarify my point as it may be somewhat hard to visualize from just descriptions.

"We (IDF) certainly do not target ambulances but in a combat zone, we cannot always co-ordinate their safety," Captain Benjamin Rutland said. "It (the ambulance) could have been struck by our mortar or artillery.

"There was (Israeli army) shelling in the vicinity of the ambulance, but we do not have UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle) footage and we don't have access to the ambulance so we cannot tell for sure."

He made the comments during an Israeli army-hosted inspection of the South Lebanon border given to a group of Australian reporters earlier this month.

While admitting the possibility of a tragic mistake, Captain Rutland cited several incidents during the recent Lebanon conflict in which Hezbollah fighters had stage-managed or misrepresented evidence of civilian casualties.

"Human Rights Watch trusts that, now that the truth has been demonstrated, these armchair deniers will devote their energy to pressing Israel to determine why this attack occurred, who was responsible, whether disciplinary or punitive measures are in order, and what steps can be taken to ensure that similar attacks are not repeated in the future."

From: K. and S. Jaffar

There are many discrepancies in the HRW report, amongst which:

1. How did the missile enter the ambulance, shear off a man's leg, go through the floor of the ambulance into the road (into a beautiful round hole) without exploding, and then dematerialise? No shrapnel or bits of missile left to examine.
2. Why would Israel develop such a weapon? What would be the point?
3. If Israel truly developed a weapon designed to do such a thing, minimising collateral damage to such an extent, surely Israel should be congratulated, not condemned.

From: Mike B.

HRW tasked itself with ending speculation regarding what happened and wants the armchair detectives to press Israel for victims compensation based on their 24 page report. I think a lot of people would be happy to do so if they were convinced by this "end all" report. A couple of observations regarding the HRW report which leave me wanting in a report designed to erase all doubt:

1) Not a single picture of the "missile exit" on ambulance 782 was provided showing the path through the vehicle, damage to the floor, substantiating the claim that it penetrated into the ground.

2) Not a single picture of the stretcher on 777 that was pierced cutting off the mans leg.

3) A picture of a gurney mattress, patient side up, which is supposed to show evidence of a missile going through it after severing a mans leg. Then this man laid there for 1.5 hours according to his own account with no medical attention while his stump and his leg apparently did not soak the fibrous material with any amount of blood which would leave any discernable red stain? (cauterization is fine but 100% cauterization with no blood loss at all is laughable) Perhaps we would expect to find a stain like this one.

4) Speaking of that above link: This person is not mentioned in the HRW report but the caption here states that he was a rescuer in "both the 1996 and 2006 massacres." The odds of two ambulance attacks in the same city 10 years apart in front of the national memorial for the previous attack, AND the same Lebanese red cross employee? Man this is just amazing coincidence!

5) Two holes in the pavement which under the HRW theory could only be made by an object that is still stuck in the ground, yet nothing has ever been recovered? I mean if we are talking about Israel deliberately attacking wounded civilians lets dig up that evidence! Nope. Nothing.

6) I sure would have liked some measurements on those holes, how about how deep they go? At what angle?

7) HRW states that the all ambulance personnel were in their vehicles except the driver of 777, who was "closing the back door" of ambulance 777 when the right rear of 777 was hit. In effect putting him within 3 feet of this missile. The 782 ambulance which was behind him and to the right sustained enough force to blow the windshield inside the vehicle but this man who was standing in effect between that missile and that windshield had no injuries to his face?

8) The researchers did not find diagnostic shrapnel at the scene? Since there was apparently no explosion inside the vehicles causing massive fire damage there and with all the personal accounts of "so much shrapnel" there would be shrapnel embedded in every soft surface inside both vehicles. The seats, headliner, etc should all be full of this stuff. Yet there is no pictures of this provided or anything that could even be pointed to as a "fragment"?

9) HRW goes to great lengths to provide numerous examples of other incidents in which Israeli missiles "struck" vehicles but did not destroy them. Providing one such picture in which three people were killed but showing no damage to anything except the roof of the vehicle. I certainly would have liked to see more pictures of this vehicle and the other cited examples. If Israeli missiles hitting cars and leaving them virtually untouched is so common then I would love to have seen those examples in clear, high resolution pictures at many angles. When I look for pictures of cars hit by missiles I seem unable to find examples such as these. All the cars look like the examples cited in this zombietime report in which the car is severely charred throughout the inside.

10) The HRW report states that two workers and three patients were inside 777 when the first missile came through it. The Strike missile or the DIME missile would clearly have killed not only the man who lost his leg, but also his son laying inches away from his as well as likely all people who were inside the vehicle, including the red cross worker who by process of elimination must have been seated in the back of the van when the missile hit the van.

11) Directly targeting Red Cross ambulances would certainly be a war crime. But someone tell me if I am incorrect, impersonating a Red Cross vehicle while in a war zone is also a war crime? Isn't that what on several occasions muslim extremists have been caught doing? I am not suggesting Israel directly targeted this vehicle, but even if they did who took the gloves off and put the red cross people at risk by using their vehicles and also posing as civilians only to attack army targets? Not Israel. That honor is reserved for muslim extremists and the blood of civilians is on their hands for doing so.

12) In the middle of a war zone, created by muslim extremists who attacked Israel across a relatively peaceful border, and who hide among civilians, the loss of civilian life is unfortunate but it is a forgone conclusion in this scenario.

13) The idea that this region (religion) has an endless supply of people who are willing to strap on bombs and kill innocent women and children but the same region does not have people who would tell a lie regarding what happened is simply ludicrous. Personal accounts are nice, but please note that all interviewees "knew" the story had been challenged ahead of time and could easily have been supporting the story knowing that it hurts their archenemy, Israel. I prefer forensic evidence as there is no way this can lie.

14) Extremists have proven time and time again that to kill other muslims, even women and children, is OK just as long as it serves the larger purpose. Why is it not possible that certain extremists attacked that convoy in order to "serve the larger purpose"? The RPG theory seems to match the physical evidence closer than any other put forth thus far.

If you read zombietime it reads similar to a court room exhibit trying to prove why something did not happen one way, full of details and with a plausible explanation for all seemingly incriminating details. If the HRW report were presented in that same courtroom as the opposing viewpoint their side would be demolished because they leave more questions unanswered than they answer. Maybe this is explainable for a reporter who is under a time deadline but any attorney who with time and resources came up with this to prove their point would be chastised by the judge and their client would lose. This report is just a terrible effort, either intentionally or because of incompetence.

From: R. Maynard

One thought I had is that when, say, a bullet, impacts something it does two things. 1, slows down and 2, deforms. So if I shot three objects lined up, the first and third would look very different, due to the changing size of the projectile, and speed, which prolongs the the "penetration" stage. Round about way of saying, that it if this ambulance thing really did happen, it looks like it was from a missile shot out of the ground, because the bottom hole is smaller than the top hole! (Except for how the metal is bent downward on the roof, which makes the whole thing nonsensical.)

From: Richard V.

Regarding the "exaggerated bullet holes" hypothesis. Even if these ambulances were hit by an aircraft strafing them, how do the people making the claim explain that some of the bullets were powerful enough to rip holes through the roof and amputate legs, etc, but others apparently just dented and then bounced off the roof? And NOT ONE of the munitions seems to have been powerful enough to pierce both top and bottom of the vehicle (which would've set the fuel tank ablaze).

C'mon!

From: S. Jones

I don't see why zombietime should question that Israeli projectiles should punch clean cylindrical holes in the pavement without a surrounding bulge. Everyone knows that when Wile E. Coyote falls from a great height in his various attempts to catch the roadrunner, he punches a clean coyote-shaped hole in the ground. The material that was once in the hole always disappears completely. Wile E. then climbs out of the hole to go to a new roadrunner capturing scheme. It has always been that way. The doubters need only watch more cartoons.

From: JW

You might want to pick up a copy of "Introduction to Impact Engineering" by M.A. Macaulay (published by Chapman and Hall). It explains the mechanics of different impact scenarios and helps show the reality of what the physical evidence implies.

Case in point: The holes in the pavement. Estimating the diameter of these holes at approximately 65mm, with evidence of spalling around the perimeter, it would be entirely likely that a similar scabbing pattern is evident on the underside of the slab. This would indicate penetration at ballistic speed by a projectile of lesser diameter. If the penetration was made sub-ballistically, there would not be spalling and the underside scabbing would flow out at approximately a 45 degree angle through the balance of the slab. This would leave a considerable undermining of area around the hole. The van roof perforation was undoubtedly sub-ballistic, due to the discernible progression of deformation (bend, buckle, stretch, tear) of the metal.

Thus, an object would have had to enter the ambulance slowly (in relative terms) and speed up to penetrate the roadway -- which is impossible.

This shows that the holes in the road are unrelated to the ambulances.

From: david m.

there is one one possibility that may be responsible for the damage:

Is it possible that a rocky meteor broke up just above the ambulance? I know there should be a raised rim on the impacts to the ground, but if the subsurface is soft enough, the projectile would punch a clean hole through the hard pavement, I think.

Wasn't there a meteor shower going on at that time?

Photos of meteors going through people's roofs, couches, beds, are usually lacking in burn damage.

From: G.T.

By chance, I ran into one of the engineers involved in the Strike project. He said that the plasma ejected from a hollow charge could theoretically travel through the empty interior of the ambulance intact, exit, and make a small impact crater in the road. The problem is that the entry hole would be a small, neat circle of 7 cm. In other words, not the large square found on ambulance #777. Additionally, there would be missile junk lying around - empty parts of the casing, fins, electronics, etc.

From: Jason F.

As I was reading your very well written response about the HRW article, I came upon a point about whether a drone could fire a missile.

In this ynet news article, a video shows the IAF attacking a Hamas mortar position. In the article it explicitly states that the IAF has not confirmed that a drone was used. However from this video it looks to me that a drone is the most likely case, because why else would the terrorists keep shooting and not notice the noise? However considering Gaza's small size it could have been a drone targeting the area while a helicopter, jet, or even an MLRS position could have fired upon the area.

But let's just assume for the sake of argument that this was a drone that launched the missile at Hamas. It becomes fairly obvious that the drone pretty much wipes out everything, had created a large fireball, and created quite a large tower of smoke. So again claiming a drone doesn't help HRW's argument.

I just wanted to point out this article so that someone doesn't try to 'pull the rabbit out of the hat' and say they have found the end all to be all. The reason is that the best way to beat someone's argument is to pre-empt it.

From: Jörg

If there are two entry holes in the vehicles and two holes in the pavement there have to be two exit holes in the vehicles as well!

From: Y.T.

1. Who were the HRW team members, and what were their military and forensic qualifications?
2. Were the interviews conducted in English or in Arabic? Were there any interpreters or intermediaries present? If there were intermediaries, they are suspect. If the researchers were Arabic-speaking, they could also be biased.
3. What kind of known missile will leave an impact crater like that when it explodes in the tarmac? There must surely be some ordnance expert who can answer this question, for the craters are VERY unique. I've never seen anything like it. To me it looks as if they were drilled or dug.

From: H.

The "blast" damage on the "fake ambulance missile strike" is exactly reminiscent of "bored redneck kids shooting guns at roadsigns" including shotgun pellet patterns, and small caliber arms.

Some of the ambulance damage is old and rusted while the "missile strike" is fresh and new, perfectly cut and sanded.

"Fresh" bullet holes and shotgun blast on a road sign.

Small arms bullet holes on sign, rusted.

Shotgun pellet damage likely here.

Look familiar ?

As noted, this image of one of the ambulances shows that the damage in the lower 1/3 is fresh bent inward and composed of bullet holes (likely AK-47) and some kind of "frag damage" lower right, again bent inward possibly shotgun pellet damage.

Note the upper 2/3 is the same kind of damage, only rusted, which means this former ambulance has been used as junkyard target practice for some time.

Missile hole is too fresh too large and too perfect, and it looks like the interior furnishings were brought in fresh or "rehabbed" since it doesn't show the damage from the aged bullet holes.

As you noted of the interior, no "burn" damage from the blast -- dang the sheet looks nice and white on the gurney doesn't it?

The top of the ambulance shows that rednecks with guns in Lebanon shoot abandoned vehicles for fun too.

The inside of the ambulance says "Thanks for the free propaganda SUCKAS" all over it. As a friend noted: "Clearly this damage is from the new Israeli supersecret Rust Inducing/Double-Aught/Redneck Bomb (RIDAR), which they have been illegally testing on Palestinian ambulances." Correction, that should be "Hezbo Ambulances" or "Hezbo-ulance" for short.

From: Phil S.

Here's a potential discrepancy you may wish to address. This excerpt is from the HRW report: "but one of the Tyre ambulance crew, Muhammad Hasan, was hit with so much shrapnel to his helmet that he momentarily lost consciousness." And "Muhammad had received additional shrapnel wounds to his chest and head from the first attack on the ambulance." Shrapnel? What shrapnel? HRW also said this: "Human Rights Watch cannot conclusively state which missiles were used in the attack on the ambulances, because our researchers did not find diagnostic shrapnel or missile parts at the scene."

From: Justin B.

Subject: Hospital notes

The next step is that they will produce some paper documents (if they want it to look official they will of course produce them electronically) that show the hospital records. I work in an American Emergency Room that is fully computerized, and yet the records of an admission including diagrams of injuries are still largely written by hand, and by date and content are only as good as when they are actually received by someone outside the hospital. This deception is not something that I have ever witnessed here, but could very easily be accomplished with sympathetic hospital staff. My suspicion is that the hospitals in Tyre are nowhere near computerized, and producing documents that say nearly anything will take roughly 30 minutes. The only thing in this entire report that would be difficult to forge would be phone records, and those don't say what the content of the calls were.

The forensic evidence is beyond flimsy, as you have pointed out. Just know that faked hospital records will likely be the next step.

From: Mark B.

Just wanted to offer a few comments (not specifically on *your* analysis -- but on some info some others have postulated and that appear on your site and in your rebuttal to the HRW assessment).

- "Commonly used weapons would never strike the vehicle from a perfectly vertical trajectory."

It's a safe generalization to say that MOST weapons would not strike with a vertical trajectory, it is not safe to assume this is an impossibility. There are a good number of guided munitions designed specifically to strike on a dead-vertical trajectory. There are weapons that can be launched from helicopters, fast-attack fixed wing aircraft and drones that hit the target from directly overhead. Drones routinely operate and attack from altitudes between 25,000 and 35,000 MSL (to remain out of audible range while patrolling). A vertical attack profile is preferred in most instances because vehicle armor is typically most-vulnerable from that aspect. If I were using a strictly kinetic weapon (perhaps a conventional weapon with the HE components removed?) that is exactly how I would want to strike the target. Of course, I'm not even suggesting that's what actually occurred -- but I wouldn't give much credence to the "too vertical to be real" argument.

- "The rust on the vehicle is obviously more than a few days old. The shown damage could not have taken place in the alleged time-frame."

I agree that there is a lot of rust on the top of the vehicle that is, inarguably, too old to have formed in the period between the alleged attack and the time the photographs were taken. I've done a heck of a lot of automotive sheet metal work (restoring cars as a hobby). The rust is absolutely old damage that has been exposed to the elements for a long time.

That said, when looking at the 1.4Mb image that you've made available... I can't help but notice that most of the patches of old rust also have spots of clean, bare metal where it looks like the old rust was knocked off by spall or shrapnel. These spots of clean metal all appear to radiate out from a central point (as does the powdery-looking light blue discoloration on the roof, which also seems concentric to the spots of bare metal). I wonder what could have caused this damage and discoloration radiating out from a central point.

Honestly, to me it looks like the vehicle has been damaged by at least two events. The old, rusty damage all looks like the vehicle was hit by spall or shrapnel from a distant source (with a low angle-of-incidence) and a later impact that knocked chunks of the old rust away, with a much clearer point-of-origin.

I haven't read any speculation to date as to why these patches of old rust show more recent damage within them.

There is clearly rust of different ages on this vehicle. Take a look at the "clean" ring of sheet metal around the bottom of the missing roof vent (with "old" rust around the screw holes where, presumably, water incursion had caused corrosion over time).

- "There is no blood on the gurney. A patient who lost a leg should have bled-out all over the place."

This one is a tough call. I worked several years as volunteer EMT and I've seen several, relatively "bloodless" amputations before. When a limb is severed (cleanly), the blood vessels can initially retract into the limb and pinch themselves off -- with remarkably little blood loss. Over time, the vessels DO dilate again and bleed profusely though. I agree that this is still suspicious though -- I wouldn't expect a kinetic strike from above to cleanly sever a limb. I'd expect it to produce a pretty nasty crushing injury that would bleed like a stuck pig.

Overall, I agree that the bulk of the evidence points to this alleged missile attack being BS. Hell, the HRW folks manage to hang themselves with their own petard when they state that there was no recoverable evidence of even a shred of the supposed munition. Even an idiot could surmise that some portion of the weapon could be dug out of the hole in the pavement. Where did that go? Was the ambulance attacked with an air-dropped icicle? Did the entire weapon evaporate on impact? Feh.

In short, bravo for your detailed analysis of this ham-fisted propaganda. I still think there are a few, odd, as-yet explained things seen in the photos -- but these hardly support the claims of the "victims" of this alleged attack.

From: Steven D.

Looking at the evidence, I have another theory. I do not know if it is right or wrong, but I wanted to share it with you.

The ambulances might have been showered by the debris of a defective missile that exploded in mid-air. That missile would most likely be from Hezbollah. Their missiles were smaller and more primitive. They were more likely to go off course or explode before they hit their mark.

Nothing exploded in the ambulances because it had already exploded above the ambulances.

What went through the vehicles were shrapnel.

The small holes and dents in the roof were created by the shower of shrapnel.

If a missile were launched nearby and went straight up in the air its pieces would come down almost vertically. Also, the irregularly shaped pieces would have more air resistance. Even if the missile had a forward trajectory, the shrapnel would be slowed down and come down at a much sharper angle.

As I said, it is just a theory, but I thought you might be interested.

From: W. Sullivan

The new images of the ambulance damage and holes in the pavement do seem to defy explanation as to their cause. But there might be one munition that may fit nicely.

To summarize --

Ambulance roof:

- Hole in dead center, appears to have "discernible progression of deformation (bend, buckle, stretch, tear) of the metal"; appears roughly head-sized.
- Shrapnel damage surrounding center hole which, due to the angle and radial nature, appears to come from an explosion above the hole.
- Downward denting of the roof.
- Smoke/burn marks caused by an explosive or propellant, again showing a radial distribution similar to shrapnel damage.

Interior of ambulance:

- Interior roof shredded by shrapnel.
- Evidence of increased temperatures/pressures in ambulance shows that they were present but not extreme (some charring but no fires; doors not blown open).
- Evidence of a fist-sized penetration through gurney and floor of ambulance.
- Path of damage appears roughly (within 10-15 degrees?) vertical.
- Gurney pad shows evidence of a fist-size penetration traveling at great speed (evident in star-shaped tear and loss of material from exit area).
- Shrapnel and heat/gas from the explosion was not severe enough to kill the occupants of the ambulance.

Road damage:

- Fist-sized hole in the pavement.
- Spalling around edges of hole.
- No evidence of explosion underneath roadway/no upheaval of road surface.
- The hole appears even all the way around, which would suggest that the cause of the hole traveled through the pavement roughly (within 10-15 degrees?) vertically.

Adding all of these up, and assuming that none of it was faked or tampered with, we can say of the event that caused the damage:

1. An explosive projectile was fired at the ambulance.
2. The projectile was relatively small, due to the fact that the ambulance was not destroyed.
3. The projectile was traveling nearly perpendicular to the ground when it impacted the ambulance.
4. The projectile exploded above the ambulance.
5. Something emerged from the explosion that was dense, solid and at a speed analogous with that of a bullet.
6. This something penetrated the ambulance from roof to ground, severing a leg and puncturing a gurney on its way through.
7. The explosion scalded the roof, dented it in and resulted in smaller shrapnel damage.
8. The explosive force acted upon damage caused by the penetrator, bending and tearing at the entrance hole and causing the metal at the edges to tear and bend in, enlarging it.
9. Gas from the explosion entered the body of the ambulance, but not enough to set it on fire or to destroy it or kill its occupants.

From this series of events, I would suggest that the weapon used was a high explosive anti-tank RPG (rocket-propelled grenade) round. The HEAT RPG round is designed to explode outside of the intended target, using the force of the explosion not to create shrapnel but to create a molten metal "penetrator" designed to slice through armor. Once fired, the warhead travels until the fuse contained in its nose comes in contact with the target. Upon striking the target, the shaped charge of the warhead detonates, which deforms a metal (copper, steel or other) "cone" into the aforementioned penetrator. The body of the RPG round is fragmented, but it is not designed specifically to cause damage this way. I believe that this picture shows a spent RPG round penetrator (in hand -- roughly fist-sized and flattened out) after being defeated by a countermeasure. The countermeasure is designed to cause the RPG to detonate further away from the vehicle, thus making the round ineffective. More interestingly, check out this page and view the damage to an Abrams tank caused by a RPG round. The penetrator has been successful in this instance. Note that the gasses that entered the tank were not enough to kill or severely hurt the crew. Also note the radial shrapnel damage and the smoke/burn marks caused by the warhead detonating. The Abrams fared better, of course, because of its armored nature. But you can compare the fingerprint of the explosion on the exterior of the tank to that on the roof of the ambulance. They appear very similar. I haven't been able to find any pics of non-armored vehicles hit by RPG rounds; perhaps you might have better luck.

Assuming my theory is correct, we can derive a few corollaries. First, because of the nature of RPG platforms, we can safely assume the attackers of the ambulance (possibly both, if the damage to both is the same) were not drones or other aircraft but individuals on foot stationed above the vehicles. These individuals would have had to have been on buildings or some other structure very close to the location where the vehicles were damaged. This therefore indicates that the attackers were Lebanese. Also, due to the difficulty in striking a moving vehicle with an unguided round from a position perpendicular to the line of travel, it would suggest that the vehicles were in fact not moving at the time they were struck. These two facts would indicate that it was a setup; that ambulances were selected for destruction, placed in a location of symbolic relevance, struck with RPG rounds, and then stories appropriate to the resulting damage were constructed for use in propaganda.

The events would have had to have transpired like this:

1. Two ambulances are selected to be destroyed for propaganda purposes.
2. They are placed outside of the Qana Memorial for increased propaganda value.
3. One or more men with RPG launchers armed with HEAT warheads head to the roof of nearby buildings, to simulate an air attack against the ambulances.
4. The men fire one round into each ambulance.
5. Stories are concocted that roughly match the damage to the ambulances.
6. Additional damage may be caused to the ambulances to sweeten the pot.
7. Willing participants in the fraud are used as supposed occupants; their real injuries caused in other areas of the Lebanese conflict.
8. Gullible western media outlets are brought in to spread the propaganda.

This seems the most likely scenario. There are, of course, alternatives. The ambulances may have been ambushed, their occupants truly suffering their injuries in the attacks. Alternatively, the ambulances may have been struck accidentally by ordanance fired in the air at some other location; this seems the most unlikely alternative.

Anyhow, that's my musings on the whole mess.

From: Trevor C.

After having read your fascinating article, I would like to point out that the Spike missile has a tandem warhead. The Eurospike web site notes in this pdf file that "The tandem warhead system ensures penetration of the most highly developed armour." This would suggest, even though it doesn't say specifically, that it can defeat targets equipped with reactive armour. The image on your site clearly shows that the second warhead is a shaped charge type. The damage to the roof and floor of the ambulance would seem to be consistent with the precursor warhead detonating, causing the large hole, then the second warhead, which may have been a shaped charge or explosively formed penetrator (EFP) detonating, releasing a narrow stream of superheated liquid metal or a "slug" (in the case of a EFP) which punched a hole through the floor of the ambulance and subsequently into the pavement below. It is conceivable that a "slug" would not have caused a significant fire, hence the intact carpet.

From: Cpl Alexander J.

1. In my experience, Kinetic Energy Projectiles (KEP's) create enormous heat. Designed to MINIMIZE collateral damage is not saying that they do not create damage at all. Consider: The APFSDS-T (Armor Penetrating Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot-Tracer) Round that is fired from the 120mm smooth-bore cannon on an M1A1 (or A2) Abrams Main Battle Tank (round pictured above by zombie) devastates its target by penetrating one side, creating massive overpressure, heat, and fragmentation inside the object, then penetrates the opposite side with the effect of brutally forcing everything that was once inside the object out of it through a hole the diameter of a large man's thumb. Believe me, this is invariably lethal and quite ugly.

2. Such a proposed weapon (KEP, concrete warhead, etc.) still has fuel inside of it. I can assure you that such a substance burns even after the weapon's arrival at it's "terminal destination". It does so at temperatures that liquefy common metals and alloys. If the "victims" heard the drone, the range was at a minimum. It would still have fuel, and plenty of it. Again, a strong assurance of lethality.

3. ALL guided munitions (and most unguided as well) have minimum safe distances designed to protect the actuator and, more importantly, to allow the device to ARM and ORIENT itself. This does not disprove the assertion that they heard anything, but it invites further doubt.

4. Why, oh why, would any military waste what must be at least a US$250,000 (very conservative estimate, as the shoulder-fired Javelin costs US$500,000) missile on an ambulance? No one reported to be inside it was of any political or strategic importance, and Israel has a long standing policy of announcing successful hits on High Value Targets if the hoax was a cover up. If suspected of harboring terrorists, they would use a much more reliable and "collateral-friendly" burst of fire from a machine gun. Even more realistically, they would follow them to their destination, and arrest them for questioning, or simply observe them for further intelligence.

You can research for yourself Israel's full line of tactical capabilities on www.globalsecurities.org Click military, countries, then Israel.

I've seen smaller munitions up close and personal that do substantially more damage than displayed in this obvious ruse.

I was quite disappointed with the new HRW report. They took no samples from the inside of the two holes they discovered where the missiles supposedly entered the pavement beneath the 2 ambulances. These are holes that were not presented as evidence before for some reason - leaving the distinct possibility they were created recently.

They showed no shrapnel from the insides of the 2 ambulances that they had access to whereas the roofs of both ambulances show hundreds of holes where shrapnel (or some sharp instrument) apparently entered the vehicle roofs.

It defies belief that a missile could cut off a man's leg just below the crotch and leave no blood on the gurney - or that he would not die of shock within a short time from the injury. Yet he claims he was in and out of sleep / unconsciousness and/or awake for app. 1.5 hours waiting for another ambulance to come after the attack. There are just too many bizarre unexplained events here that HRW made no attempt to explain.

The point you made is good. This is not HRW's first article as Zuckerman carelessly implies. Their first article condemned the IDF a few days of the attack. IMO this is their clumsy attempt to reclaim some of the donors they must have lost for supporting such an obvious hoax last July. They don't even identify their investigator(s) or describe that person's forensic credentials.

The provide a few new photos to support their view but even those are confusing and ambiguous in many cases. Their photo of the hole the missile supposedly made in the roof of ambulance #777 has been cropped to hide a much larger hole next to it that appears on a more distant view of the two ambulances in the lot. Both holes are much larger than the app. 4 3 holes in the pavement and the gurney.

Their diagram shows the two ambulances virtually touching (left-front of #777 touching right-rear of #782) yet contemporaneous photos and a home video taken shortly after the event all show the two vehicles separated by about 6-8 feet. (HRW claims that closeness explains the inblown windshield on #777.)

Nor do they explain how a missile exploding inside #782 could blow in the windshield of #777 without doing serious damage to the interior of #782 - which shows no burn marks of any kind.

Re: DIME - These are missiles with carbon fiber housings that disintegrate on detonation to create no shrapnel and therefore no collateral damage - only a high pressure blast wave to kill within a short radius. Why then are the roofs of both vehicles full of shrapnel holes?

I'm afraid this will tarnish their reputation even more than it has been already. Any reluctance by the public to revisit the event will accrue to HRW's benefit as any close examination of their report will reveal that it is far from a believable rebunking of the episode.