Or, welcome to my low-maintenance heck.
GatewayPundit is on top of the story, as usual:
He must have shaved before he passed out because this is definitely not the brother in the ribbed shirt...
Herein lies the problem of sending photographers to the staged mega-funerals preferred by terror groups throughout the middle east. In some cases, the photographer is sympathetic to the group participating in the rally, and therefore would be reluctant to report on anything which presents the terror group in a negative light. In other cases, it may just be impossible to verify who the people participating in the rally are, and therefore either the off-the-cuff remarks of some of the participants is repeted verbatim, or the photographer/editor are left to guess as to who the people in the picture are.
It's the same thing with death reports--the news services readily accept claims of "civilian" casualties when presented to them by local doctors, even if the "civilians" killed are of "military" age. Yet, on the other hand, no information presented by Western militaries--be they Israeli, British, or American--is accepted without qualification. "According to Israeli sources," or "According to an American military spokseman."
My hat's off to Jim for breaking this story. Excellent work, as usual, sir!