The Sri Lankan Government questioned the authenticity of the Video No Fire Zone as dismissed it as Fake.
I posted a blog validating the authenticity of the Video No Fire Zone.
What about the Photograph of Balachandran Prabhakarn, son of the slain LTTE Supremo Prabhakaran?
I cam across information that the Photo of Balachandran whose Photo is doing the rounds could be a Fake.
Balachandran Prabhakar Killed 1
Balachandran Prabhakaran Killed 2
Balachandran Prabhakaran Killed.3
These allegations have been rejected by the Lankan government. To what extent are the claims valid? Since these are serious allegations, it is important to examine the veracity of the `evidence’ presented by the Independent which collaborates closely with Channel-4 and British Tamil Advocacy groups.
What raises suspicions is the surfacing of this picture after one year, with the claim that it is part of a successive footage from the same camera. Are there any other photos? Figure 2 clearly shows that the light comes to this under-ground bunker from the area numbered 1, and radiates towards 2, 3 etc. Nevertheless, the there are hardly any shadows consistent with the light source
around the boy’s body or the head area.
A blow-up of the region around the left shoulder of the child shows that, far from there being any type of shadow, a shoddy job of colour filing has been done along the edge of the shoulder. The shadow seen in the sand bags just left of number 9 indicates what to expect. Furthermore, the shadow of the edge of blanket near no. 7, on the arm, is completely in the wrong direction.
Furthermore, the end of the bench to the left off no. 6 does not show the planks, but appears to have been worked over on the initial canvas using graphic tools, totally obliterating the type of texture of the wood planks seen to the right of the boy.
It is also important to compare very carefully the trouser
worn by the boy lying dead on the ground, shown below.
First, we notice a person wearing slippers. We also se an ordinary civilian shoe.
This shows that the people around the dead boy are NOT SOLDIERS. Perhaps a group of
LTTE people found the dead boy much earlier. The camera belonged to an LTTE person who
had other pictures of bunkers
, or of the boy and used them for creating graphic art with photoshop or any other tool.
The narrow black flap on the pocket cover is 16-18 cm long and narrow, with a width of 4cm. On the other hand, the trouser worn by the boy seated on the wooden plank has a pocket flap which is much wider. The artist, in positioning the boy seems to have drawn the flap in a way different from that on the trouser of the boy dead, and laying on the ground. Two pictures of the boy sitting in the bunker have been published. If the pictures in the bunker are authentic, then the picture of the dead boy wearing a similar but different trouser is inconsistent with the claims of these British reports. Hence the new picture raises troubling questions about the way photos are being used as `evidence’ in an age where sophisticated graphic tools are readily available even to a child. Of course, the Tigers are well known to be past masters of publishing fake photos. Many pictures of Prabhakaran posing in groups with black tigers
, or blown up bodies attributed to the army were published in the Tamil Net from as early as 10 years before the demise of the Tigers.
Can some one clarify,I am unable to find information technically?
What about the Images?
Tamilian Killed By Sri Lanka