I can't understand how someone was taking a video of the lady who gave birth and the husband while the doc was explaining to the Husband what to say in front of the camera. Isn't this a big deal and should be secret if it was true? what is the reason for the director who was creating the fake seen about the lady to allow the camera man to film their lie?!
How did the professor got the video and use it as proof?

excellent questions. i'll answer them in turn.
I can't understand how someone was taking a video of the lady who gave birth and the husband while the doc was explaining to the Husband what to say in front of the camera. Isn't this a big deal and should be secret if it was true?

Yes, this is a big deal. And it certainly should not be seen by outsiders.

what is the reason for the director who was creating the fake seen about the lady to allow the camera man to film their lie?!

the camera man who filmed the footage you saw was Pierre Rehov and he published it in a documentary called http://www.pierrerehov.com/jenin.htm. He told me he told his Palestinian handler that he was the son of a divorced couple and his father was Jewish and he hated him and Jews and wanted to make a movie against the Zionists. They took him in, and assuming that he was on their side, didn't pay close attention to him. On the other hand, in order to get the footage out, he had to sneak out in the middle of the night, because the PA checks all footage before it leaves the territories.

How did the professor get the video and use it as proof?
Rehov generously allowed me to use his film for Pallywood. He has many other movies, equally revealing. (In one, a Palestinian refugee is saying "We want to destroy Israel," and someone else tells him, "No, you can't say that on camera. The West needs to think we just want our own state..."

you also claim, falsely, that the doctor is the one who delivered the baby. No where in that video does the doctor or ANYONE say that. What we have is a scene in the car with the journalist on the phone with the doctor. We do not hear what the doctor is saying but only what the journalist is ASKING him. He asks him twice, did you deliver the baby? did you deliver the baby? -- we hear nothing on the other side. It could have been a yes, or it could have been a no. The next thing the journalist says is tell the doctor to not let them (the man and his wife) leave. Now, you talk about spin, and lies, etc... but don't you think that you are the one doing the spinning and lies here? I mean how did the fact that the journalist is asking the doctor if he is the one that delivered the baby become that the doctor did indeed deliver the baby.
Second, you show the scene with the doctor supposedly coaching the father on what to say. We saw the scene before hand about the father explaining the actual facts of what happened, but what the journalists seems to want to get out of the story was a little sympathy for the family, so he wanted more emotions...and the doctor took it upon himself to help explain that to the father, that was visibly shaken by the whole ordeal. This might not be the most spontaneous interview in the world, but that does not take away from the actual facts of the story. Many journalists will tell you that before they interview someone on camera, they always go through with them what they want to concentrate on...your fear, your anger, etc..., and that is exactly what the doctor was saying here. He was not telling the father to act like he was sad, or angry, he was saying to the father that the journalist wants to hear about how he felt, if he was scared, etc...
but ofcourse, there you go again twisting things to make them fit what you want...even if it is untrue.

Dear Ranya,

Play it back you will hear the guy said "2antye 2lwaladtyeha" are you the one who deliver the baby in form of he talking to a Women he said it 3 times talking to a Women, so how the Father who deliver the Baby.

Pallywood could be true Could be Lie ? and i wish it's a Lie