The part i have trouble believing is that anyone who was heading to photograph something like that, and was well equipped enough to have a helicopter, would produce such low res images.
As for the images themselves, I would mostly draw suspicion upon the points in this one:
[img:871zwxlm]http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,6066134,00.jpg[/img:871zwxlm]
A:The bows. One black, one a light, yellowish wood. Presuming for the moment that those are the natural colors of the timber they're made from (I guess the black one could have been pigmented with charcoal/ash, or such), it seems strange that such a small group of people would have experimented enough to find more than one good/preferred tree for their bow construction.
Both archers in that image are also displaying an atrociously bad firing stance, and the one on the right doesn't even appear to be aiming at the helicopter.
B:The upturned basket at the right. Somehow, it looks like a mass produced cane basket from anyone's local store, even at this detail. Almost too...precise looking compared to the roofs of those huts, which I daresay look like they have hardly been maintained, in some of the pictures (or built to look that way).
C:The belt worn by the person observing. It looks VERY white for cloth made in a society that hasn't yet developed bleach, not to keep it clean, but to remove the "natural" colour in the first place. I would highlight the pile of something next to the basket on the same grounds, if I could determine what is was.
More generally, I see no evidence of an area used for fire in the village, which would seem an obvious feature of somewhere meat is prepared for consumption. Assuming they made all those bows for hunting, rather than in case they ever had helicopters to shoot at

The huts look rather flammable for fires to be built indoors too.
I'm obviously no expert, it could all be on the level, but those are my doubts anyway.
Edit: Now that's what I call rambling
