Full correspondence with BBC listed here.
11 June 2014
Dear Christina Roski
In addition to the points in my previous correspondence I add the following:
Mr Tregear invites me to supply evidence that the Demotix photographs were published before 26 August, the date of the alleged attack. I have already provided evidence that they were originally published dated 25 August; it is incumbent upon the BBC to provide proof this was not the date of their publication on Demotix. Clearly this matter can only be settled by accessing the metadata of Amer Alfaj’s original photographs. Demotix refuses to respond to me; a request from the BBC may be received differently.
Mr Pannell’s supposed inability to recognise the two victims in the Demotix images, with whom he had been in close proximity for several hours, is not plausible, especially considering the images’ subsequent use in the media to illustrate the “playground napalm bomb” incident. 
Timeline of events presented in ‘Saving Syria’s Children’
- Mr Tregear states:
The visit to the frontline clinic occurred on the morning of 26 August
The doctors’ movements from 05:47 to 15:53  are clearly presented as a chronological sequence, suggesting they made a round trip starting at the Hand in Hand hospital, discussing and then embarking upon what appears a lengthy and highly eventful trip to the frontline clinic, before returning the same day (26 August) to the Hand in Hand hospital, as seen later in the programme from 30:38, prior to the arrival of the “napalm bomb” “victims”. Is this what is claimed?
Only on close scrutiny is it evident the doctors are dressed differently across these scenes, and that the rooftop shown from 08:22 – 08:56 is not the same as that seen from 38:37 at the Hand in Hand hospital (the latter has no railings or red leaves). Where is the ‘first’ rooftop located? When was that footage made? Where and when were the scenes of the doctors setting off by car (09:29 – 10.10) shot? The location also does not appear to be the Hand in Hand hospital.
- At 15:56 Mr Pannell states:
Four days later we see the area being pounded by the Syrian air force; the clinic’s overrun with casualties, rebel fighters wounded on the frontline
The use of “we” scant seconds after Drs Ahsan and Hallam are seen speaking with clinic staff strongly suggests the doctors were also present “four days later” when the casualties arrive, even though they do not feature in this sequence.
- Mr Tregear writes:
When he said at 17.48 “The next morning, we moved to a village…” the footage showed children at the refugee camp and Mr Pannell was referring back to the previous sequence from the camp which was featured at the start of the programme (filmed on 23 August). The “next morning” was therefore 24 August.
This is incorrect. The section from 17:35 to 18:22 does not show “children at the refugee camp”, it plainly shows children at the village well . There is therefore no reference whatsoever to the “camp which was featured at the start of the programme”, either in the narration or the visuals, and therefore no indication that the “next morning” does not follow on from the immediately preceding footage of rebel casualties arriving at the frontline clinic. Indeed Mr Pannell describes the village (17:48) as being “a few miles west of the front line”, strongly suggesting proximity to the clinic.
- Judging by the varying levels of darkness, the scenes from 38:21 to 40:52, from the point where the “first two” ambulances set off for Bab al-Hawa to the shot of Dr Hallam against the setting sun, are out of sequence. In the first two scenes in this section (38:21 – 38:25 and 38:26 – 38:36) the ambulances are being loaded and Dr Hallam is crying, both in pitch darkness. In the next scene (38:37) Dr Hallam is on the rooftop in twilight, where she gives an interview. A shot from the rooftop at 40:07 also shows the ambulances below in twilight. This mixture of twilight and fully dark shots continues until 40:52.
How could Dr Hallam find time to give her twilight interview while ambulances were still being loaded below, a process which evidently went on until night completely fell?
Breaches of BBC Editorial Guidelines and Ofcom Broadcasting Code
Right of reply and fairness
The BBC has made the supremely serious allegation that the Syrian government has deliberately targeted schoolchildren with an incendiary device, yet has at no point requested or published a response from the Syrian government as required by section 6.4.25 of the BBC Editorial Guidelines and section 7.11 of the Ofcom Broadcasting Code.
‘Saving Syria’s Children’ breaches section 3.4.16 of the BBC Editorial Guidelines in the misleading chronology presented in its first half (see 1 – 4 above), the editing out of all chronology of the scenes of the “napalm bomb” “victims” from 30:38 onwards  and, above all, in the staging of an atrocity.
Women wearing identical black dress
Mr Tregear mistakenly believes my position has changed between 17 March and 7 May from claiming there was one woman in the black dress to two. In fact I had mentioned the second, younger woman, on 30 January (section 11). My point, which Mr Tregear professes not to understand, is not whether they are the same person – they are not – but why it should be that they are wearing not merely similar, but identical dresses and headscarves. My suggestion, which I had plainly stated, is that this was a costume recycled among the amateur actors used in the fabricated episode. 
This programme is the subject of worldwide scepticism as to its authenticity. The credibility of the BBC’s news service therefore depends on not merely a review of the ECU’s decision, but on an independent investigation, incorporating medical and munitions expertise, of the material presented in ‘Saving Syria’s Children’.
 On the matter of the date of the alleged incident, recall too the conflicting date (27 August) provided by Dr Ahsan – an astonishing error for a journalist to make, especially considering her statement “out of all the war zones I have ever been to, today has been by far the worst”.
- (05:47 – 08:21) Assessing facilities at the Hand in Hand hospital Dr Ahsan wearing plain dark scarf, Dr Hallam wearing green scarf
- (08:22 – 8:56) On a rooftop discussing the prospect of going further into Syria Dr Ahsan wearing gold scarf, Dr Hallam wearing multicoloured scarf
- (From 09:29, following a brief montage of combat scenes and explosions) Setting off by car to the frontline clinic where their convoy arrives at 13:54 Dr Ahsan wearing patterned dark scarf, Dr Hallam wearing green scarf
- (14:00 – 14:37) Supposedly sheltering from a fighter jet before entering the frontline clinic
- (14:37 – 15:53) Assessing medical supplies at the clinic, speaking with staff and listening to an eight year old boy recite from the Koran
 Including “11 year old Wahta” and her obviously coached personal denunciation of Assad.
At 34:08 Mr Pannell’s narration states “within minutes the hospital is overwhelmed” over footage of Lutfi Arsi’s third appearance in the programme (being carried into the hospital), having previously been seen at 32:26 and from 33:05 – 33:44.
Despite his having previously been seen being “treated” indoors from 34:36 – 34:55 Victim X is then shown arriving in the hospital yard at 35:35, heralded by Dr Ahsan with the words “I think there’s more coming; I think there’s more coming”.
The identical audio clip of someone exclaiming “yama yama yama” occurs at both 31:44 and 34:02. What justification can there be for this repetition other than to heighten drama in order to manipulate the Panorama audience?
 In addition, a Syrian observer has noted privately that the clothing of all the participants in the “playground napalm bomb” footage is not typical of the supposed local area.