[Marek_Tucan]

What facts are being refused? The videos are totally inconclusive, not facts, the only thing you may tell for sure is that Abrams is being hit by RPG-29 (and even then that is sure only in the first video, the other might be well by popular method of filming a guy "aiming" a RPG somewhere safe and then cutting and pasting the hit sequence). Unless you manage to link the incident on tape with US casaulties, it's inconclusive re. destruction or not.
I can recall for example one much-touted video of Stryker being blown up spectacularily, in a massive bang and cloud of smoke and dirt... And then finding out the vehicle in question in fact suffered only superficial burns and was able to ride on (which of course was not seen on the insurgent vide claiming "destruction") and lots of similar cases (let's for example have look at how many times was Cajone Eh - the Abams that remained in Baghdad after the first Thunder Run - filmed and reported as "yet another destroyed US tank"). Besides take a look at statistics from Lebanon, 2006 - only IIRC 10% of penetrating hits on Merkavas produced a casaulty, large casaulties among tankers were mostly commanders and loaders being hit by splinters when fighting out of hatches. So the mere fact there is a hit on the video means nothing more than that there is a hit - unless clear signs of damage can be shown. Think of it as of WWII rules for acknowledging kills for fighter pilots.