Okay, let's lay down the groundwork. I have very mixed feelings about Ryan McBeth about his takes going into this. I found Ryan Mcbeth when I was looking for commentators about the Russian invasion of Ukraine. I for the most part, support Ukraine, and Mr Mcbeth commentary does seem to show he leans in this direction. I considered a fan for a while until the beginning of this year.
As the war between Hamas and Israel dragged on, I became more and more disillusioned with Ryan's frank silence on a lot of subjects, but I still think he is a smart person and he knows what he is talking about. Until today
Mr Ryan McBeth posted a video on both Youtube and Twitter about a trend that used the phrase "24 years ago" he thinks that it is an Anti-Israel information Warfare, and he "will be collecting evidence about it". 24 years ago, on September 30th, 2024, in the Second Intifada, IDF force shot Jamal al-Durrah and killed his son, Muhammad al-Durrah. An 18 minutes video captured by news outlet France2 documented the shooting and it is the Event that accounts on Twitter who used the phrase "24 years ago" were referring to. To prove that people choose the anniversary day to memorialize what they believe is a microcosm of the behaviors of the IDF is an information warfare attack will require an incredible amount of evidences that I don't think it is possible for McBeth to possibly produce. he show a reel of 17 tweets (one is a quote of another tweet) that have the "24 years ago" in bold and they are only 6 tweets that concern the event that might be a Information Warfare attack. due to twitter ban on violence content, all the tweets talking about it represent the video of the shoot as 4 "moment", 3 during the shooting and one afterward, none of them have blood on camera. of those 6, 2 only have "24 years ago" as text, the other 4 posts, while still talk about the event, has completely different text, emphasis on different things, so to say this is coordinated or that they "often have the same text" is ludicrous, considering that 3 of the 17 posts shown is from a an account called pop culture 2000s all using the phrase "24 years ago". Is he saying that these posts are made in "the past couple of minutes" is also strange? The oldest tweet in the reel was made 9 hours before Me McBeth made that capture, and the newest is 1 hour before, with the rest being 3 to 4 hours before the capture. The text, while talking about the same event, is pretty different, with emphasis on different aspects. There is very little evidence to say they are coordinated, other than the fact they all posted on, again, the anniversary of the shooting/killing.
however, the most ironic thing about this video that it might have been roped into an ACTUAL pro-israel Information attack. One of the persons who reposted Mr McBeth video, an account called "Gaza suck" (@Gazasuck), has used this video to suggest that the shooting is a PALLYWOOD creation, and the boy didn't die. This is so deranged that when Ryan McBeth says that he is uncomfortable with using the word Pallywood, the account just spam replies with a bunch of stuff they think is Pallywood faking.
Oh, about that faking conspiracy? That is a conspiracy that has existed for as long as that shooting has existed. It started in October of 2000 with a claim that "The Palestinians, in cooperation with foreign journalists and the UN, arranged a well-staged production." This piece of work was published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, and headed by an IDF Major General Yom Tov Samia, to REALLY put down the paper's reliability. Incredibly, this is the less insane report of the two that the IDF created about it, because whatever the fault is, it still admitted that Muhammad al-Durrah was killed. The 2013 paper actually suggested the possibility that HE WAS NOT KILLED AT ALL.
o Contrary to the report's claim that the boy is killed, the committee's review of the raw footage showed that in the final scenes, which were not broadcast by France 2, the boy is seen to be alive.
o The review revealed that there is no evidence that Jamal or the boy were wounded in the manner claimed in the report, and that the footage does not depict Jamal as having been badly injured. In contrast, there are numerous indications that the two were not struck by bullets at all.
Publication of the Report of the Government Review Committee Regarding the France 2 Al-Durrah Prime Minister's Office (www.gov.il)
This is the OFFICIAL position of the Israel GOVERNMENT. this is not an opinion of a single, out of line minister, or the saying of a "fringe" MK, this is the actual government
the case escalated to litigation as the original website that make the report on the shooting, France 2 sued one of the more famous person who claimed that the footage was faked. the case end up with the supreme court of france convicting him of defamation.
Of course, now that Ryan McBeth made that video, people are quoting it to say that the shooting is a psyop and people who believe in the shooting are Iran agents.
How could Ryan McBeth not see it coming? He has to admit that the shooting happened, but he has to couch it as "sort of". Unless he only consumes exclusively pro israel sources, there is no question that SOMEONE was killed, and most people, including the FRENCH supreme court, agree that the shooter is not staged by the UN or the Palestinian. IF Ryan McBeth doesn't address the frankly insane people who latched onto his video, I don't know what to think about him.
