Thread by @talhagin

During any conflict, controlling the narrative is crucial for garnering support.
Any Groups vying for this control will produce two types of videos: Narrative Pieces and Evidence Showcases.
What’s the difference, and how can it help you understand what you're seeing?
🧵

This analysis will focus on al-Qassam and the photos/videos they've shared. Previously, I have analyzed the flaws in evidence showcases, using the IDF as an example, but I plan to create a similar thread discussing this topic using the IDF as an example.

Narrative Pieces: These types of photos and videos require from the viewer one of two things:
1. Ignorance - You won't ask critical questions regarding the photo/video because you don't know what to ask.
2. Trust - You believe in the overall narrative, and won't see a reason to question the legitimacy of what's showcased.

Example of a Narrative Piece:
This video, released by al-Qassam on December 10th, 2023 is trying to push the following narrative:
"Occupation [IDF] helicopters transport wounded soldiers after the bombing of the "Sofa" military site and the outbreak of a fire inside it".
But?

Example:
As a trusting/ignorant viewer, you've just witnessed the IDF evacuate its wounded - but you didn't.
Objectively: Rocket fire did occur, at exactly 13:59 - But the crux of the claim is injured soldiers were evacuated. The problem?
That's not a transport helicopter.

Example:
The helicopter showcased as proof the IDF evacuated wounded troops is not a transport helicopter, but an attack helicopter (AH-64 Apache).
The IDF has two transport helicopters it uses in Gaza: The UH-60 Blackhawk and the CH-53K King Stallion

Evidence Showcases: The photos and videos offer ample material for viewers to review, resulting in:
1. 3rd-Party Verification: Claims made can be independently verified by OSINT analysts
2. Consistency of Claims: The evidence presented is consistent with external reports.

Example of an Evidence Showcase:
This video, released by al-Qassam on June 5th, 2023 is trying to push the following narrative:
"Targeting a special zionist force with a TBG shell and sniping enemy soldiers on the axis of advance in the center of Jabalia camp in the northern Gaza Strip"

Example: This video clearly showcases to the viewer an explosive (RPG), and a sniper rifle being used against IDF forces - Important to note that thy aren't claiming any of these soldiers were killed in this video, just that they were targeted.
Consistent and verifiable.

Where is the line drawn between the two? Not always clear!
For example, the recent evidence showcased by al-Qassam regarding an ambush it allegedly conducted on May 25th, 2024 is a mixture of both.
Let's review all the evidence:

An Analysis: May 25th, 2024 ambush of SF soldiers by al-Qassam.

I've already written 1 thread where I analyzed the initial showcase of evidence, and then presented the additional evidence shown later on. This thread will build on all of this:

First - Precedent:
Hamas, and other Palestinian militant groups (Al-Aqsa Martyrs', etc) have released dozens of "Evidence Showcases" - with varying consistencies.
In confirmed evidence showcases, they've shown clear images of easily identifiable/consistent markings:

Second - A review of each piece of evidence independently:
The body - 2 images (One image has been digitally enhanced)
1. They are using a red stretcher for the body, commonly used by the Red Crescent in Gaza. IDF uses green stretchers.
2. Same body is shown in both videos (Face and outfit match)

Verified Info: Only one body has been shown.

The guns and magazines: A total of 3 guns have been presented.
However, after a thorough review of the weapons showcased - There is a striking inconsistency: The Ejection Port

1. I reviewed dozens of images/videos of Scorpions being used - None of them had Ejection Ports on their left side, ALL were on the right. (It also appears as if one doesn't have an ejection port at all).
2. The only gun with a visible ejection port was 2#: A. On the right side B. The serial number is consistent (1 letter, 6 numbers)
3. The gun showcased in the video and the 4 images below appear to be the same gun - If so, they can't be a real weapon due to a missing ejection port.

The vest - Only 1 vest is shown in each image and the video.
Based on a review of all 5: They are the same vest.
Green - a pertruding green pouch.
Red - Blood stain
Yellow - Magazine pouch color scheme
Based on my analysis, nothing indicates they are different - Nor do they match the types of vests used currently by the IDF in Gaza.

The Helmets - In the first video they showcase 2, but then add 3rd in the second video.

Military Radios - Despite a lengthy search, I was unable to find images of these radios being currently used by the IDF, nor did I find these radios in equipment seizures by Palestinian militants in past videos.
If you have more info - Please add it in the comments!

The photo of the KIA individual:
This is the same individual both shown in the close up image and in the video with the stretcher - beyond that, no additional information is known.
(There has been a lot of misinformation about the photo - be wary!)

Step 3 - Review of evidence collectively:
1. The radios do appear to be property of the IDF - Currently unclear if they are actively used.
2. Only 1 of the 3 weapons showcased is verified to be real
3. Only 1 kia individual has been shown, despite claims of more than 1.
4. No record of the IDF using Scorpion Evo 3s currently exists (The Israeli security forces are reported to use CZ weapons, based on a 2015 article - but which weapons used isn't said).

The IDFs initial reaction and probable hypotheses:
The IDF has only made one public comment on the claims - They specify no soldier was kidnapped very strongly, leaving no room for error if they were proven wrong.
Most likely hypotheses as a result of all this:

Hypotheses:
1. The individual/s killed were foreign mercenaries, paid by Israel.
2. Hamas fabricated the event.

Issues with both.
Mercs:
1. If the IDF wanted to distance the possibility of being implicated, why would its mercenaries carry radios with clearly IDF markings?
Fabricated: Hamas is clearly trying to prove its allegations, and isn't backing down. If it was a lie, why add on so much evidence that can be independently reviewed?

These questions are important, and they are precisely why I am unsure what the truth is about this incident at the current stage.
I'll leave this analysis here for external review, and then update it accordingly to feedback and/or new evidence provided by al-Qassam.

Thank you for taking the time to read through the entire analysis.