NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, there was a previous thread about this, when the Israeli investigation began to reveal that the explosion on the Gaza beach may not have been the result of Israeli action, but rather the result of Palestinian terror. I promised to return and comment on this when the newsfeeds developed into a full story, and here it is. As the investigation has continued, and comes close to an end, it would appear that all signs point toward Palestinian terror. Keep in mind, no official and final conclusion has been drawn, but all media reports released as a result of the investigation reveal that the fault is of the Palestinians.

So far, the inquiry has revealed a few facts:

1. The family on the Gaza beach that was killed was not killed as a result of direct IDF ground, marine, or IAF shelling.

2. There is a gap between the time the IDF was shelling other areas and the explosion on the beach of 15-30 minutes (proving the above).

3. The area of shelling was hundreds of meters away from the beach, and a misfired shell will not land more than 30 meters off target.

4. Hamas forces were the first on the scene; they cleaned and destroyed virtually all of the evidence, including removing shrapnel from the actual bodies of victims to obfuscate ballistics.

5. Palestinian witnesses originally refused to cooperate with the investigation, but later complied. As a result, a large portion of the information gathered that implicates the Palestinians is from Palestinian sources.

6. The beach had been previously trapped with landmines and other IEDs by Palestinian terror groups to ward off raids in the Occupied Territories by sea, as well as being a common place to launch rocket attacks from.

7. Senior IDF officers claim to have seen what caused the blast; the collapse of a rocket tripod that set off other explosives in the area.

EDIT: More facts as of late

8. The crater at the blast site was not large enough for IDF artillery

9. The shrapnel found in the bodies did not match that of IDF artillery

Edit: More

10. Hamas removed other mines from the beach after the explosion.

Unfortunantly the Western, pro-Palestinian media hasn't covered much of this at all. In many cases, it jumped to the conclusion (with no evidence whatsoever) that the explosion was a result of Israeli shelling. As a result, major Western media sources such as the Guardian and Independent have been condemned by media watch groups, such as Honest Reporting:

Honest Reporting condemns unsubstantiated conclusions (http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/Tragedy_On_Gaza_Beach.asp)

EDIT: Second media watch group condemns Western news

A second media watch group has condemned the Western media as well, the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting (CAMERA):

Israel Should Not Be Presumed Guilty of Gaza Beach Deaths (http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=35&x_article=1129)

"The Western press, however, have misreported the story, presuming, based on zero evidence, it was an errant Israeli shell. For example:

BBC News reported on its Web site:

"Seven people, including three children, died on Friday when Israeli shells hit a beach in the Gaza Strip, Palestinian officials say."

The reporter qualifies the remark by adding "Palestinian officials say", but they include several more quotations from Palestinians blaming Israel who use words such as "massacre." The article has only one sentence from the Israelis saying they are "investigating," making it sound like Israel is investigating how it happened, not if it happened as a result of their actions. The article makes no mention that the Israelis were not even sure if the explosions were from Israel's weapons at all. No doubt at all is cast on the Palestinian claims that Israel is responsible.

Perhaps when the inquiry announces its conclusions officially, Western media sources will recant and run a new stories on the issue. In the meantime, here are the unofficial annoucnments from the inquiry:

Hams murders children in Palestine, blames Israel (http://www.israelnewsagency.com/hamasterrorgazaisrael48770611.html)

Hams murders children in Palestine, blames Israel
Joel Leyden
Israel News Agency

Jerusalem-----June 11.......An Israel Defense Forces intelligence officer has confirmed that the explosion that killed eight Palestinians on Friday, was caused by a stockpile of Hamas explosives.
"Shortly after we stopped defensive firing at Hamas rocket launch pads which were deployed behind Palestinian human shields, members of Hamas scrambled to fire more rockets at our positions," said Col. M. "We have eyes on every meter of Gaza, from the sky, from the ground and from the sea. One of their rocket tripods collapsed inadvertently setting off an explosion of a stockpile of Qassam rockets. The Palestinians killed their own children. And this was not the first time."

"Israel Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant said today that the Israel Defense Forces has additional evidence that it wasn't Israel artillery that hit the beach in Gaza. Galant, who commands Israel's southern command, said Israel stopped firing 15 minutes before the explosion. It's all on secure videotape from both sides of the conflict. Israel Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said he was sorry about the deaths, which included three children."

Palestinians may have caused beach deaths, Olmert says (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150035830524&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

Palestinians may have caused beach deaths, Olmert says
Jun. 11, 2006 22:54
Herb Keinon

Both Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Amir Peretz indicated Sunday that Friday's blast on a Gaza Strip beach that killed seven civilians may have been caused by the Palestinians, and not by the IDF.

Peretz said the panel's preliminary findings showed that the Ghalia family was not killed by a shell fired by the IDF ground forces or the IAF. Peretz said that one of six artillery shells fired by the IDF was unaccounted for, but that there was a gap between when the shells were fired and the time the Palestinians said the shells landed.

IDF: Gaza family’s deaths probably not our fault (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150035830729&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

IDF: Gaza family’s deaths probably not our fault
Jun. 11, 2006 23:46 | Updated Jun. 12, 2006 0:34
Yaakov Katz

An IDF committee set up to probe the cause of an explosion that killed seven Palestinian civilians on Friday in the Gaza Strip got to work on Sunday, with senior officers saying they had received new information indicating that the blast was caused by an "internal Palestinian incident" and was not related to Israeli artillery fire.

A Palestinian bomb planted on the beach or a Kassam rocket that went astray, senior officers said might have been the cause of the explosion. The officers said that Navy and IAF fire had been ruled out, and while the landing spot of one of six artillery shells fired close to the time of the incident had yet to be found, it was unlikely that the "missing shell" was the cause of the blast.

The IDF said the timeline of the incident and the artillery fire did not match. In addition, the closest any one of the six shells landed to the beach was 200-250 meters away, while a shell usually only strayed from its target a maximum of 30 meters.

Israel’s Rush to Apologize: Major Media Mistake (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=105186)

Israel’s Rush to Apologize: Major Media Mistake
22:14 Jun 11, '06 / 15 Sivan 5766
by Hillel Fendel and Hana Levi Julian

Israel's hasty apology for 7 killings in Gaza enabled civil rights organizations, left-wing MKs & foreign countries to condemn Israel. It now appears that Israel had nothing to do with it.

More than 24 hours after the deaths, the winds started to change. Peretz himself said last night that indications are that the fatal shells were fired by Arabs of the PA. Brig.-Gen. Aviv Kokhavi, Commander of the Gaza Formation, said that the Palestinians were not cooperating in the investigation of the incident, and that the data gathered at that point showed that it could well be that the seven were killed by Arab-fired mortar shells.

Some of the evidence shows that the incident on the beach occurred 15 minutes after Israel stopped firing shells. In addition, none of the shells fired at the northern Gaza Strip were directed at the area in which the people were killed.

Gissin: Don’t Blame Israel first (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150035829904&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

Gissin: Don’t Blame Israel first
Jun. 11, 2006 20:00 | Updated Jun. 11, 2006 22:03
Herb Keinon

"We jumped to conclusions before the evidence, and we immediately assumed that it was probably an Israeli shell," Gissin said. "But we don't know that for a fact. The Palestinians moved in and destroyed all the evidence. People should be asking themselves, 'why?' "

Just as Israel is conducting an investigation, Gissin said that the international community should also be demanding that the Palestinians conduct an investigation. But rather than doing that, he said, the Palestinians are removing evidence from the scene.

"We look at the area as a battle zone," Gissin said, "while the Palestinians view it as a crime scene, and are interested in making the evidence look like Israel carried out an atrocity," he said.

"But now we have a classic case where there is no real evidence, and all we have is a picture of a crying girl on the beach," Gissin said of Friday's incident in Gaza. "Nobody knows how the people there were killed. If it was an Israeli shell, why didn't the Palestinians invite the press to see the remnants of the shell, why have they been so quick to remove the evidence?"

Israel denies firing shell that killed Palestinians (http://www.cbc.ca/storyview/MSN/world/national/2006/06/11/israel-hamas.html)

Israel denies firing shell that killed Palestinians
Last Updated Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:48:14 EDT
CBC News

A top Israeli general says the country's armed forces didn't cause the explosion that killed eight Palestinians on Friday and ended the fragile ceasefire in the region.

Hamas, which leads the Palestinian Authority parliament, blamed the deaths on Tel Aviv as its military branch resumed attacks on Israel for the first time in 16 months.

But Israeli Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant said Sunday the military can prove it wasn't Israeli fire that hit the beach in Gaza, killing eight people.

Galant, who commands Israel's southern command, said Israel stopped firing 15 minutes before the explosion.

Palestinians cooperating with IDF investigation (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1149572658693&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

Palestinians cooperating with IDF investigation
Jun. 11, 2006 12:36
JPOST.COM STAFF

Palestinian sources provided the IDF with the time of the impact, which did not match the time of the IDF's sheling, and also provided shell remains for examination, Israel Radio reported.

Palestinians: Hamas cleared site of Gaza explosion (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1149572656052&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

Palestinians: Hamas cleared site of Gaza explosion
Jun. 11, 2006 7:40 | Updated Jun. 11, 2006 7:42
JPOST.COM STAFF

A Palestinian security source said Sunday that Hamas operatives had cleared the debris from the explosion which killed seven Palestinian civilians on Friday in order to frustrate the IDF's attempts to investigate the incident.

These are some of the most recent reports. As time has dragged on in the last 48 hours or so, more and more evidence has been amassed and released to the press that the Gaza explosion was the result of Palestinian terror, rather than Israeli shelling. Again, the official report has yet to come out, although Ehud Olmert promised to make it public. But from the mounting evidence, I think any reasonable person can figure out what really happened here.

EDIT: New Developments!

Report: Chances slim that IDF shell killed Gazans on beach (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150035838991&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull)

Report: Chances slim that IDF shell killed Gazans on beach
Jun. 13, 2006 0:30 | Updated Jun. 13, 2006 1:22

The IDF probe investigating the deaths of seven Palestinian civilians, caused by an explosion on a beach in Gaza on Friday evening, concluded that chances were slim that the accident was caused by IDF shelling.

According to Channel 2, the findings, expected to be formally released on Tuesday, showed an inconsistency between the shrapnel found in the body of one of the wounded babies and the metal used in IDF artillery.

Moreover, the investigation noted the absence of a large enough crater at the site of the explosion, as would be expected if an IDF shell had landed there.

The third observation casting doubt on the possibility of IDF shelling was the gap between the time when the army shot the artillery and when the commotion on the beach began. According to the probe's findings, several minutes past after the shelling, before the Palestinians on the beach reacted.

On Saturday evening Gaza Division Commander Brig.-Gen. Aviv Kochavi insisted that the sites that were shelled by the IDF were the places from where Kassam rockets were launched. He noted those places were frequently targeted by the IDF, and were known to be dangerous places.

Throughout the whole investigation, army officials complained about the lack of Palestinian cooperation. Unconfirmed reports further suggested attempts by Palestinians to remove shrapnel from the bodies of the wounded, treated in Israeli hospitals, thus impeding the investigation.

Official findings should be released on Tuesday.

Beach deaths 'not Israel's fault' (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/13/mideast.probe/index.html?section=cnn_topstories)

EDIT: Mainstream news begins to recant

Beach deaths 'not Israel's fault'
Nine killed in new Israeli air strikes on Gaza
Tuesday, June 13, 2006; Posted: 7:13 a.m. EDT (11:13 GMT)

JERUSALEM (CNN) -- An explosion on a Gaza beach that killed seven people last week was caused by explosives planted there by Palestinian militants, not artillery fire from an Israeli navy gunboat, Israeli military sources said.

Intelligence information gathered by Israeli investigators showed that Hamas quickly removed the remaining mines from the beach after the blast, the sources said

Probe: Deadly Gaza blast not caused by Israel (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13289081/)

Probe: Deadly Gaza blast not caused by Israel
Eight deaths on beach likely result of explosives planted by Hamas
Updated: 12:50 a.m. MT June 13, 2006

"The Palestinians had blamed an Israeli shell for the killing of the civilians in the northern Gaza Strip on Friday, and had recognized as a hero a Palestinian girl whose image was broadcast around the world crying over her father’s body at the scene."

"According to the findings, shrapnel taken from two wounded Palestinians who were evacuated to Israeli hospitals showed that the explosives were not made in Israel, the officials said. In addition, the last Israeli shell fired toward Palestinian rocket launchers who operate in the area was seven minutes before the blast and landed 250 yards from the scene, the officials said."

Interesting quotes. Any from the BBC? Non Israeli military, civilian or governmental sources (apart from cbc)? Independent investigations? No of course not.

Every government covers up. It´s a fact of life.

Is Israel guilty? I have no idea. Unlike yourself as a fanatical convert to Judaism, i´m keeping an open mind on this one and not blaming anyone.

Yet more casualties to bitter unreasoning hatred on both sides.

Interesting quotes. Any from the BBC? Non Israeli military, civilian or governmental sources (apart from cbc)? Independent investigations? No of course not.

Every government covers up. It´s a fact of life.

Is Israel guilty? I have no idea. Unlike yourself as a fanatical convert to Judaism, i´m keeping an open mind on this one and not blaming anyone.

Yet more casualties to bitter unreasoning hatred on both sides.

Your "open mind" is actually less open than you think. Here's why.

For one, "every government covers up" is a borderline conspiracy theory. Unless you can demonstrate a coverup here, there is no reason to assume that Israeli sources shouldn't investigate Israeli affairs.

The BBC gets its information about Israel from (gasp) the Israeli Press Office. Just like all of the Israeli newspapers. It isn't any less biased or independent than any Israeli paper. Not to mention the fact that the BBC, and many of these Western media sources, have already been condemned by media watch groups as I demonstrated in the very first link. If any source should be under scrutiny, it should be those that have already been demonstrated to report falsely by media watch groups.

In addition, rejecting the Israeli investigation because it is Israeli, or rejecting news sources because they are Israeli news sources is the fallacy of poisoning the well. Open-mindedness and logical fallacies don't go together.

I guess you could ask yourself, how often do you reject the findings of the police in a city because they are the police of that city? "Oh no, NY police can't investigate this murder in Brooklyn, they're from NY." Or how often do you reject local newspapers because they report on the town they are in? "Oh no, the Denver Post from Denver so its biased. It can't report on Denver. I'll wait for the BBC to give me information about Denver before I believe it."

Not to mention that if you read the articles, they state that PA Security has been involved as well. This isn't a sole investigation of Israel, but has been a joint venture between Israel and the PA. These conclusions are as much the result of the Palestinians as they are of the Israelis.

Interesting quotes. Any from the BBC? Non Israeli military, civilian or governmental sources (apart from cbc)? Independent investigations? No of course not.

Every government covers up. It´s a fact of life.

Is Israel guilty? I have no idea. Unlike yourself as a fanatical convert to Judaism, i´m keeping an open mind on this one and not blaming anyone.

Yet more casualties to bitter unreasoning hatred on both sides.


Most people on the forum knee-jerk accused Israel. The Palestinians have done this sort of thing many times before, so I'm tending to believe the story that they blew themselves up.

Most people on the forum knee-jerk accused Israel. The Palestinians have done this sort of thing many times before, so I'm tending to believe the story that they blew themselves up.

Exactly. Not just most people on the forum, but most major media news sources around the world, even ones that are suppossed to be biased towrad the Right, like Fox. In the beginning they virtually all reported, as fact, that Israel shelled the beach in one way or another.

In some of the links to those articles I posted it actually gives examples of how the Palestinians have done exactly this before, such as when they fabricated an entire massacre (at Jenin) to the media, and when Muhammad al-Dura was killed by Palestinian gunfire, yet they blamed it on Israelis, only to uncover years later via ballistics that it was the result of fire on the Palestinian side.

Kind of like the "Jenin Massacre", where the International Red Cross went in and found out there was no massacre of innocent civilians.

I´m extremely open minded on this particular subject, because as I said, I don´t KNOW who was responsible.

I´m not rejecting the Israeli news sources, I´m merely viewing them with the same level of skepticism you hold for information coming out of the occupied zone when it goes against the interests of Israel.

I´m not accusing Israel in this instance. I´m not accusing Palestinians. I´ll wait for the published report and view it on it´s own merits.

As for non biased reporting, you can hardly be considered neutral in this or other Israel/Palestine threads.

The more I read your threads the more i´m convinced you have a brilliant future in government.

Both sides are guilty of pig headed stupidity, but then, that could also apply equally to any other peoples involved in a power struggle for supremecy instead of equality.

I don't see any mention of this on CNN.

I´m extremely open minded on this particular subject, because as I said, I don´t KNOW who was responsible.

I´m not rejecting the Israeli news sources, I´m merely viewing them with the same level of skepticism you hold for information coming out of the occupied zone when it goes against the interests of Israel.

I´m not accusing Israel in this instance. I´m not accusing Palestinians. I´ll wait for the published report and view it on it´s own merits.

Alright, thats a fair stance.

I don't see any mention of this on CNN.

There are lots of things in the United States I don't see on the BBC, or Israeli news too.

The point is, it simply isn't seen as newsworthy enough to make international news headlines, or even be viewed as international news. Its much more newsworthy to report "Israel shelled sunbathers" than it is "We made a mistake: New Israeli investigation shows it was a Palestinian bomb (again)."

If you're really interested in international news, your best bet is to read the actual national news from the country you're trying to get information on. Or, better yet, stay posted from Government Press Offices, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs has already mentioned this in a few new press releases:

IMF, Communiques (http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Communiques/2006/)

There are lots of things in the United States I don't see on the BBC, or Israeli news too.

The point is, it simply isn't seen as newsworthy enough to make international news headlines, or even be viewed as international news. Its much more newsworthy to report "Israel shelled sunbathers" than it is "We made a mistake: New Israeli investigation shows it was a Palestinian bomb (again)."

If you're really interested in international news, your best bet is to read the actual national news from the country you're trying to get information on. Or, better yet, stay posted from Government Press Offices, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs has already mentioned this in a few new press releases:

IMF, Communiques (http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Communiques/2006/)

The last article about the explosion on CNN on the 11th still indicates that Israel was involved.

As for national news, not every nation has an independent media that is truly indepedent. I'd rather trust on CNN, MSNBC, BBC, or some other reasonably independent news source. I can usually compensate for thir bias in my mind and find the truth in them.

Reading the Guardian articles it does seem that they jumped the gun, but I don't think the IDF spokespeople helped matters, unless they've been completely misquoted. If you're not sure that it's your fault you don't say things like "We regret any harm caused to innocent civilians," or say it wasn't the Navy but might have been the Army, you say that it's not clear what happened and that you'll look into it.

The last article about the explosion on CNN on the 11th still indicates that Israel was involved.

As for national news, not every nation has an independent media that is truly indepedent. I'd rather trust on CNN, MSNBC, BBC, or some other reasonably independent news source. I can usually compensate for thir bias in my mind and find the truth in them.

Each of those sources gets their information about Israel from the Israeli Government Press Office.

Perhaps you can explain why they havn't run any new stories on the Israeli press releases regarding the investigation?

And are you implying that Israel has a less indepdent media than the USA? Can you support that implication at all?

Reading the Guardian articles it does seem that they jumped the gun, but I don't think the IDF spokespeople helped matters, unless they've been completely misquoted. If you're not sure that it's your fault you don't say things like "We regret any harm caused to innocent civilians," or say it wasn't the Navy but might have been the Army, you say that it's not clear what happened and that you'll look into it.

Yeah, the articles I posted actually cover that fact. Israel did make it sound as if it was their fault at first, and unfortunantly it mislead world opinion. Just like the Jenin massacre, which we later found out to be fabricated by Palestinians.

And its also a shame that the inquiry into the blast isn't getting as much world coverage as the original, unconfirmed reports. So much for fair and balanced reporting.

Each of those sources gets their information about Israel from the Israeli Government Press Office.

Perhaps you can explain why they havn't run any new stories on the Israeli press releases regarding the investigation?

And are you implying that Israel has a less indepdent media than the USA? Can you support that implication at all?

Is it possible that they haven't run any of the new stories because their veracity is in question? Are you implying that BBC is run by Americans?

Is it possible that they haven't run any of the new stories because their veracity is in question? Are you implying that BBC is run by Americans?

The BBC is the least independent of all the sources in question. While Israeli newspapers, MSNBC, and CNN are all private corporations, the BBC is a government-run organization. Its media is filtered by the government for content, must meet government-regulated standards, and is run under Royal Charter by government-appointed trustees. There is hardly anything independent about it.

The New York Post is also an independent news source. But I wouldn't wipe my ass with any news they report. I'm not knocking the source of these articles because(except for one) the source is the Jerusalem Post, I'm knocking it because it's: A)Not a news source I trust and B)It's the only source you're presenting.

Only one of those articles comes from a second source: CBC and that is not giving a definitive one way or the other.

On the other hand, Israel's quick apology is very interesting because in my experience, Israel almost never apologizes for military operations and rarely quickly. So I have to ask myself; Why would they apologize unless they were certain they were in the wrong? They never have before.

The New York Post is also an independent news source. But I wouldn't wipe my ass with any news they report. I'm not knocking the source of these articles because(except for one) the source is the Jerusalem Post, I'm knocking it because it's: A)Not a news source I trust and B)It's the only source you're presenting.

Israeli National News also covered it, which I linked to. As did the Government Press Office of Israel, which I also linked to. Selective reading you have there.

On the other hand, Israel's quick apology is very interesting because in my experience, Israel almost never apologizes for military operations and rarely quickly. So I have to ask myself; Why would they apologize unless they were certain they were in the wrong? They never have before.

They did during the Jenin massacre, which was later proven to be a Palestinian fabrication, and in the shooting of the young Arab boy that the article mentions, also later proven to be shot by a Palestinian rather than an Israeli.

Do you just make it up as you go?

Of course. The murderer reports the murder and says "Im not a murderer."

Well, I saw it coming.

Actually all you have to do is take a brief look through the online versions of Israeli newspapers. This investigation is in the Haaretz as well as Yedioth Ahrinoth:

Gaza beach blast: Possible scenarios (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3261513,00.html)

"But by Sunday, accumulating proof is suggesting – at least to the Israeli side – that the blast may not have been caused by an IDF shell."

But I guess all of the Israeli newspapers aren't trustworthy sources. For a reason that has yet to be explained or justified.

It must be part of that vast Jewish media conspiracy.

Of course. The murderer reports the murder and says "Im not a murderer."

You must be referring to the fact that Palestinians originally reported that it was a result of a gunboat firing on the beach, only to later report something different after it became evident that there was no gunboat at sea.

But, many will still continue to accuse Israel despite the fact that all of the evidence points toward a Palestinian bomb, including the testimony of Olmert, Peretz, as well as senior IDF officials who witnessed the explosion and saw, with their own eyes, that it was a Palestinian explosion due to terror.

Contrast this with the fact that there is no evidence to support the claim that it was an Israeli shell, and that media watch groups have condemned Western media for drawing the conclusion it was without any such evidence.

Israeli National News also covered it, which I linked to. As did the Government Press Office of Israel, which I also linked to. Selective reading you have there.



They did during the Jenin massacre, which was later proven to be a Palestinian fabrication, and in the shooting of the young Arab boy that the article mentions, also later proven to be shot by a Palestinian rather than an Israeli.

Do you just make it up as you go?

You're right. I missed that. And it's very substantial. I apologize.

As for the rest, a small handful of highly publicised incidents does not a trend make. Israel tend to be very unapologetic about the civilian deaths they cause while trying to kill militants. Please understand that I no way am I implying sympathy for Palestinians. When their militants START targeting Israeli military instead of houses, restaurants and malls, maybe I'll sympathise a bit more.

In fact, if it werent for the fact that these victims were trying to have a bit of fun on a beach, I wouldn't even care. As far as I'm concerned, the supporters of the status quo on both sides deserve what they get. But not on a beach, dammit! :(

But, many will still continue to accuse Israel despite the fact that all of the evidence points toward a Palestinian bomb, including the testimony of Olmert, Peretz, as well as senior IDF officials who witnessed the explosion and saw, with their own eyes, that it was a Palestinian explosion due to terror.

OF COURSE THE IDF AND OLMERT WOULD SAY THAT. Did you expect them to say anything different? It doesnt mean they are telling the truth.

OF COURSE THE IDF AND OLMERT WOULD SAY THAT. Did you expect them to say anything different? It doesnt mean they are telling the truth.

Not just Olmert and the IDF, the PA Security forces. You must not have read the articles, but this is a joint investigation between Israel and the PA. So, while you might attempt to poison the well by saying "OMG, its Israel! Jewzz liee!", it isn't going to cut it, since this is info from the Palestinian side as well.

The fact is, we have evidence it was a Palestinian attack, and there is no evidence (rather, we have proof against the claim) that it was an Israeli shell.

Is there any reason that you believe that Israelis did it, despite the evidence being amassed to the contrary by Israeli and Palestinian forces?

The BBC is the least independent of all the sources in question. While Israeli newspapers, MSNBC, and CNN are all private corporations, the BBC is a government-run organization. Its media is filtered by the government for content, must meet government-regulated standards, and is run under Royal Charter by government-appointed trustees. There is hardly anything independent about it.

What! The BBC is not government controled. It is government funded. There is a massive diffrence. Its media is most definitely not filtered by the government, unless you count the laws imposed on all media. Its independence from the government was demonstrated by the Hutton enquiry. That news under Gilliagans story wasnt filtered.

OF COURSE THE IDF AND OLMERT WOULD SAY THAT. Did you expect them to say anything different? It doesnt mean they are telling the truth.

Oh, like the "Jenin Massacre"

The International Red Cross determined that no massacre of innocent civilians took place in Jenin.

I guess you'll say, "did you expect the biased International Red Cross to say anything different?"

Not just Olmert and the IDF, the PA Security forces. You must not have read the articles, but this is a joint investigation between Israel and the PA. So, while you might attempt to poison the well by saying "OMG, its Israel! Jewzz liee!", it isn't going to cut it, since this is info from the Palestinian side as well.

The fact is, we have evidence it was a Palestinian attack, and there is no evidence (rather, we have proof against the claim) that it was an Israeli shell.

Is there any reason that you believe that Israelis did it, despite the evidence being amassed to the contrary by Israeli and Palestinian forces?

I see no record of the PA saying it was palestinian shells.

Oh, like the "Jenin Massacre"

This isnt Jenin.

What! The BBC is not government controled. It is government funded. There is a massive diffrence. Its media is most definitely not filtered by the government, unless you count the laws imposed on all media. Its independence from the government was demonstrated by the Hutton enquiry. That news under Gilliagans story wasnt filtered.

Its run by government appointed trustees. That is directly contrary to anything private or independent. Its just liberal enough and doesn't overtly focus on a pro-government agenda (what need is there to with the BBC?) that it avoids scrutiny on this issue.

Its regulated explictly by Royal Charter. Again, that alone excludes the possibility of it being "independent" in the free-media sense of the term that we use in Israel or the USA.

Actually, this report was on the US news, on NBC 4...They said basically the same thing: No Israeli units were firing at the time of the explosion.

Looks like everybody who said the Palestineans did it were right...Not that that's much of a surprise...

This isnt Jenin.
There have been numerous incidents claimed to be incidents by the Palestinians that have turned out to be completely false or completely orchestrated by the Palestinians.

Too many to count.

Jenin is just one of them. I have my suspicions that this is another. It's common for the mainstream press to condemn Israel out of hand on the first pass, and then NEVER revisit the story again, especially if it turns out they were spoofed by the Palestinians.

I see no record of the PA saying it was palestinian shells.

Go back and reread the articles titled, "Palestinians cooperating with IDF investigation" and "Palestinians: Hamas cleared site of Gaza explosion":

"A Palestinian security source said Sunday that Hamas operatives had cleared the debris from the explosion which killed seven Palestinian civilians on Friday in order to frustrate the IDF's attempts to investigate the incident."

What you have to keep in mind is the fact that this is information from Palestinians, not Israelis. Although you attempting to dismiss it because they are Israeli sources is illogical (poisoning the well fallacy), its also nonsensical because they aren't strictly Israeli sources - the information we're getting on the investigation is coming from Palestinians!

Actually, this report was on the US news, on NBC 4...They said basically the same thing: No Israeli units were firing at the time of the explosion.

Looks like everybody who said the Palestineans did it were right...Not that that's much of a surprise...

Well, it wont be long before someone claims that it is part of the vast Jewish media conspiracy in the USA too. Those Elders of Zion are behind everything these days...

There have been numerous incidents claimed to be incidents by the Palestinians that have turned out to be completely false or completely orchestrated by the Palestinians.

Too many to count.

There have also been numerous incidents which have turned out to be IDF killing innocent palestinians.

Too many to count.

I agree. Theres no evidence that Israel was involved and in fact, there is evidence they aren't. On the other hand, there is evidence that Hamas and/or other militant palestinians want to implicate Israel by eliminating proof.

I agree. Theres no evidence that Israel was involved and in fact, there is evidence they aren't. On the other hand, there is evidence that Hamas and/or other militant palestinians want to implicate Israel by eliminating proof.
Kazus says that Israel is guilty until proven innocent.

There have also been numerous incidents which have turned out to be IDF killing innocent palestinians.

Too many to count.

Of course. Both sides are drenched in blood.

But let's concentrate on this one incident. Since it took place on a beach. :(

There have also been numerous incidents which have turned out to be IDF killing innocent palestinians.

Too many to count.

A higher percentage of civilians have been killed by Palestinians than by Israelis. Almost 75% of Isaelis killed by Palestinians are innocent civilians, whereas less than 25% of Palestinians killed by Israelis are innocent civilians. In addition, Palestinians have killed about four times as many of their own people as Israelis have.

While its true more Palestinians have been killed, its also true most of them were terrorists killed in action.

Institute for Counter-Terrorism Statistics of the Arab-Israeli conflict (http://www.ict.org.il/casualties_project/stats_page.cfm)

Well, it wont be long before someone claims that it is part of the vast Jewish media conspiracy in the USA too. Those Elders of Zion are behind everything these days...
Yes...Radical socialists tend to have that strain of anti-semitism in them, don't they? But we're the real racists, are'nt we? :rolleyes:

Kazus says that Israel is guilty until proven innocent.

Even if it were palestinian militants, it sounds like it was most likely an accident and then evidence was removed in order to implicate Israelis.

On the other hand, Israel doesn't have to convince the world, just their citizens. Same with Hamas. They don't have to convince the world that Israel did it, just young angry palestinians. Whoever did it, all both sides have to do is spin it to maintain the status quo.

Its run by government appointed trustees. That is directly contrary to anything private or independent. Its just liberal enough and doesn't overtly focus on a pro-government agenda (what need is there to with the BBC?) that it avoids scrutiny on this issue.

Its regulated explictly by Royal Charter. Again, that alone excludes the possibility of it being "independent" in the free-media sense of the term that we use in Israel or the USA.

http://www.friends.ca/News/Friends_News/archives/articles02260403.asp

http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/news/news297.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3468005.stm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC#Historical_logos

http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/onguide/editorialvalues/editorialintegr.shtml

Read these and then tell me that the BBC is not independent.

Its run by government appointed trustees. That is directly contrary to anything private or independent. Its just liberal enough and doesn't overtly focus on a pro-government agenda (what need is there to with the BBC?) that it avoids scrutiny on this issue.

Its regulated explictly by Royal Charter. Again, that alone excludes the possibility of it being "independent" in the free-media sense of the term that we use in Israel or the USA.

That, sir, is Grade-A horse-hockey. The BBC, although funded and regulated in part by the government, is stil one of the more independent news organisations in the media. Or did you perhaps miss the Hutton Report, or the leaks on the Kelly investigation? The BBC is extremely independent. Government funding and regulation does not equal control or non-regulation.

On the other hand, Israel doesn't have to convince the world, just their citizens. Same with Hamas. They don't have to convince the world that Israel did it, just young angry palestinians. Whoever did it, all both sides have to do is spin it to maintain the status quo.

Unfortunantly in situations like this Israel is a world player, whereas Hamas isn't. Israel does have to maintain a good image and reputation, while the Palestinians aren't even a national political body and don't have to answer to human rights violations, the UN, etc.

When stuff like this happens, Israel gets demonized in the global political arena. Egypt, France, Syria, etc. all instantly condemned Israel, even when there was no evidence that Israel had done anything. Now, when Palestinians do this type of thing, they are mostly able to slip under the radar because they aren't a real political body that is subject to world scrutiny like the rest of the nations of the world.

That, sir, is Grade-A horse-hockey. The BBC, although funded and regulated in part by the government, is stil one of the more independent news organisations in the media. Or did you perhaps miss the Hutton Report, or the leaks on the Kelly investigation? The BBC is extremely independent. Government funding and regulation does not equal control or non-regulation.

Something can't be independent, by definition (and in this context independent was referring to freedom from government influence) and be run by government-appointed trustees and under a Royal Charter. The two are mutally exclusive.

Its true that the BBC has a good reputation for being fair, but this doesn't make it independent.

Kazus says that Israel is guilty until proven innocent.

Lt-Gen Dan Halutz, the Israeli chief of staff, ordered an end to the shelling from land and sea, which had continued throughout the day in retaliation for Palestinian rocket fire into the western Negev. The army apologised for the incident, saying it "regretted the attack on innocent people".

:Waits for silly explanation on why they apologized even though they didnt do it:

The best I will give them was "It was an accident" but even that will be highly unlikely for me to believe.

http://www.friends.ca/News/Friends_News/archives/articles02260403.asp

http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/news/news297.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3468005.stm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC#Historical_logos

http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/onguide/editorialvalues/editorialintegr.shtml

Read these and then tell me that the BBC is not independent.

Wikipedia: BBC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bbc)

The BBC is a quasi-autonomous Public Corporation operating as a public service broadcaster incorporated under a Royal Charter reviewed on a 10 yearly basis, currently run by a board of governors appointed by the government for a term of four years (formerly five years), though this is soon to be replaced with a BBC Trust. Management of the organisation is in the hands of a Director-General appointed by the governors.

Its not independent.

:Waits for silly explanation on why they apologized even though they didnt do it:

The best I will give them was "It was an accident" but even that will be highly unlikely for me to believe.

Actually, Palestinian witnesses were the first to report on it, and they claimed that there was a rain of shells from an Israeli gunboat. Thus, the Israeli government (which had no direct knowledge of IDF exercises at the time) believed the Palestinian witnesses.

Only after the investigation did the Palestinian witnesses begin to cooperate, we found out that wasn't the case, and that there was no Israeli gunboat at sea.

So, in short, Israel apologized because it believed the initial reports from Palestinians, who were later changed their stories and were proven to be lying.

It should also be noted that Israel never took responsibility for the action.

An apology is not equal to "We did it."

There have also been numerous incidents which have turned out to be IDF killing innocent palestinians.

Too many to count.
I wonder how many of those were caused by Palestinians, like the four kids with toy guns that they dropped off within sight of an Israeli military outpost recently in hopes that the Israelis would shoot them and create bad press.

Unfortunantly in situations like this Israel is a world player, whereas Hamas isn't. Israel does have to maintain a good image and reputation, while the Palestinians aren't even a national political body and don't have to answer to human rights violations, the UN, etc.

When stuff like this happens, Israel gets demonized in the global political arena. Egypt, France, Syria, etc. all instantly condemned Israel, even when there was no evidence that Israel had done anything. Now, when Palestinians do this type of thing, they are mostly able to slip under the radar because they aren't a real political body that is subject to world scrutiny like the rest of the nations of the world.

Well, I don't see it like that. If Israel is trying to maintain a good international image, they suck at it. And if the Palestinians think that they don't need a good international image, then they're fooling themselves.

But when it comes to the cycle of violence and the political power that is wielded by those who exploit it, the real targets for propaganda are the Israelis and the Palestinians themselves. Both sides NEED the anger of their citizens to keep them in power.

I wonder how many of those were caused by Palestinians, like the four kids with toy guns that they dropped off within sight of an Israeli military outpost recently in hopes that the Israelis would shoot them and create bad press.

Around 450 Palestinians civilians between 2000 and present have been murdered by other Palestinians as a result of the Arab-Israeli conflict. This number is about a third of how many Israelis they have killed. Palestinians kill a dispreportionate amount of their own people for fighting with Israelis.

But when it comes to the cycle of violence and the political power that is wielded by those who exploit it, the real targets for propaganda are the Israelis and the Palestinians themselves. Both sides NEED the anger of their citizens to keep them in power.

These elections Israelis picked doves like Olmert and Peretz. I would think that if Israelis picked their leaders based on anger, they would have stuck with Bibi or other hawks further to the right.

These elections Israelis picked doves like Olmert and Peretz. I would think that if Israelis picked their leaders based on anger, they would have stuck with Bibi or other hawks further to the right.

Actually, I bet itwas a redirection of anger for not showing progress. That's probably the political card that Olmert and Perez(Peretz?) played. I'm no expert in Israeli politics, but I suspect that the palestinian conflict plays a major role in election campaigns. :p

Actually, I bet itwas a redirection of anger for not showing progress. That's probably the political card that Olmert and Perez(Peretz?) played. I'm no expert in Israeli politics, but I suspect that the palestinian conflict plays a major role in election campaigns. :p

You're right, it does play a large role in it. Although only to certain groups. Israel has a very diverse political arena, much more so than what we see in many democracies. Some political parties win their Knesset seats by appealing to a very narrow, specific group. For example, the Pensioners Party appeals directly to senior citizens (and it won 7 seats) and Israel Bietinu appeals directly to Russian immigrants. Thus sometimes demographics and other issues weigh out over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Other parties, like Likud, seem to revolve around the conflict.

A higher percentage of civilians have been killed by Palestinians than by Israelis. Almost 75% of Isaelis killed by Palestinians are innocent civilians, whereas less than 25% of Palestinians killed by Israelis are innocent civilians.
Breakdown of Fatalities: 27 September 2000 through 1 January 2005

Israelis: 1010
Non-Combatants killed by Opposite Side: 764

Palestinians: 3179
Non-Combatants killed by Opposite Side: 1099
Your math is wrong. 34,6% of the palestinians killed were non-combatants according to your link, not less then 25%.

You were right about the Israeli numbes, though. 75,6% is a large number indeed.

In addition, Palestinians have killed about four times as many of their own people as Israelis have.
People killed by actions of own side: 406
Actually, they've killed about 12,8% of the total number of palestinian casualties.

Compared to Israel, who have killed about 2,2% of the total number of Israeli casualties.

While its true more Palestinians have been killed, its also true most of them were terrorists killed in action.

Institute for Counter-Terrorism Statistics of the Arab-Israeli conflict (http://www.ict.org.il/casualties_project/stats_page.cfm)
I'd like to see another overview of the statistics in this conflict. Not because I think they are wrong or misrepresented here, but because they don't quite add up.

(Non-Combatants killed by Opposite Side + Combatants killed by Opposite Side + People killed by actions of own side = 3047 palestinians and 1001 israelis, not 3179 and 1010 respectively.)

I'd like to see another overview of the statistics in this conflict. Not because I think they are wrong or misrepresented here, but because they don't quite add up.

(Non-Combatants killed by Opposite Side + Combatants killed by Opposite Side + People killed by actions of own side = 3047 palestinians and 1001 israelis, not 3179 and 1010 respectively.)

That was a summary of statistics from the three in depth studies done that are linked to on the summary page. If you read them, you'll find that a large portion of the Palestinian non-combatant deaths are uncertain; that is, we aren't totally sure that they were not involved in terror activities, but that we know they weren't killed in combat. Low confidence statistics from these studies were excluded from the summary page.

From the in depth studies combined, the statistics are 16.7% of Palestinians killed by the other side are non-combatants, while 69.1% of Israelis killed by the other side are non-combatants.

That was a summary of statistics from the three in depth studies done that are linked to on the summary page. If you read them, you'll find that a large portion of the Palestinian non-combatant deaths are uncertain; that is, we aren't totally sure that they were not involved in terror activities, but that we know they weren't killed in combat. Low confidence statistics from these studies were excluded from the summary page.

From the in depth studies combined, the statistics are 16.7% of Palestinians killed by the other side are non-combatants, while 69.1% of Israelis killed by the other side are non-combatants.
I still don't get why the numbers in the summary page don't add up.

Damn it, I saw another page of statistics on this subject just a few days ago, but it wasn't what I was looking for at the time so I just browsed it and discarded the link. *grumble*

I still don't get why the numbers in the summary page don't add up.

Damn it, I saw another page of statistics on this subject just a few days ago, but it wasn't what I was looking for at the time so I just browsed it and discarded the link. *grumble*

It might be because both sides get credit for killing civilians in a crossfire.

It might be because both sides get credit for killing civilians in a crossfire.
Wouldn't it then be more than the total when adding up, not less? :confused:

Wouldn't it then be more than the total when adding up, not less? :confused:

I think it is because they deliberately omitted deaths that they couldn't account for in any way, or they omitted deaths that had a 'low confidence' rating on their scale. Thus, the total of deaths is higher than those that fit into any one category.

I think it is because they deliberately omitted deaths that they couldn't account for in any way, or they omitted deaths that had a 'low confidence' rating on their scale. Thus, the total of deaths is higher than those that fit into any one category.
I suppose that could be an explanation. Strange that they didn't include an "unconfirmed" category or "other" or "low confidence" or something, however.

These are some of the most recent reports. As time has dragged on in the last 48 hours or so, more and more evidence has been amassed and released to the press that the Gaza explosion was the result of Palestinian terror, rather than Israeli shelling. Again, the official report has yet to come out, although Ehud Olmert promised to make it public. But from the mounting evidence, I think any reasonable person can figure out what really happened here.

Yes, you've grabbed your little flag and are waving it till you get all sweaty.

Why is none of your crap on the front of Haaretz or in the 2000 plus mideast articles via Google News?

Yes, you've grabbed your little flag and are waving it till you get all sweaty.

Why is none of your crap on the front of Haaretz or in the 2000 plus mideast articles via Google News?

Why would it be? The Haaretz is a far left Israeli paper. Its the only Israeli paper that doesn't have it. I've cited virtually every other one so far; YNet, Arutz Sheva, JPost, Israeli National, as well as the Israeli Government Press Office, in addition to foregin news like that Canadian paper.

The Haaretz will most likely only run it when the official statement is released. Of course, the fact that Peretz and Olmert, as well as the IDF general leading the investigation and the senior IDF members who witnessed it all said that it was the result of Palestinian internal terrorism makes it pretty clear.

Compare that to the fact that there is no evidence whatsoever that Israel did it, and its a pretty convincing case.

Someone also mentioned in this thread that they saw it on MSNBC news earlier as well. But I guess you ignored that.

Someone also mentioned in this thread that they saw it on MSNBC news earlier as well. But I guess you ignored that.
So-called "revolutionary" socialists love to ignore real evidence in favor of their own, made-up evidence that supports their own warped worldview.

Funny how these people would rather support a backwards, terror-supporting regime than a modern, freedom-loving democracy...I find it highly amusing, yet disgusting at the same time...Guess i'm torn.

So-called "revolutionary" socialists love to ignore real evidence in favor of their own, made-up evidence that supports their own warped worldview.

Funny how these people would rather support a backwards, terror-supporting regime than a modern, freedom-loving democracy...I find it highly amusing, yet disgusting at the same time...Guess i'm torn.

Maybe that's why modern Western governments are going to become terror-supporting regimes because the revolutionary socialists will finally see them as "good".

yet another example of truth and fact finding taking a back seat to sensationalism and 'Getting the news out first'.

it's things like this that make me doubt any "fast breaking stories" from any and all media sources.

yet another example of truth and fact finding taking a back seat to sensationalism and 'Getting the news out first'.

it's things like this that make me doubt any "fast breaking stories" from any and all media sources.
As well you should.

A dose of healthy sceptisism is good for you. *nods*

As well you should.

A dose of healthy sceptisism is good for you. *nods*
i've always been Sceptical of News Media. but this is now becoming more the National Inquirer. I mean Entertainment Tonight seems to have more facts and impartial coverages in their program than News outlets including CNN, MSNBC, FOX and all affiliates.

Time will tell, it appears.

i've always been Sceptical of News Media. but this is now becoming more the National Inquirer. I mean Entertainment Tonight seems to have more facts and impartial coverages in their program than News outlets including CNN, MSNBC, FOX and all affiliates.
You just have to stay critical, and be ready to change your mind as new information is obtained.

On another note, I'm looking forward to knowing what the IDF inquiry committee will conclude with when it presents its findings to Peretz on Tuesday night. There is still too few facts, too much speculation, and some unaswered questions - not to mention that the investigation is still ongoing.

Just keeping everyone posted on new developments in the Gaza Beach Incident:

Report: Chances slim that IDF shell killed Gazans on beach (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150035838991&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull)

Report: Chances slim that IDF shell killed Gazans on beach
Jun. 13, 2006 0:30 | Updated Jun. 13, 2006 1:22

The IDF probe investigating the deaths of seven Palestinian civilians, caused by an explosion on a beach in Gaza on Friday evening, concluded that chances were slim that the accident was caused by IDF shelling.

According to Channel 2, the findings, expected to be formally released on Tuesday, showed an inconsistency between the shrapnel found in the body of one of the wounded babies and the metal used in IDF artillery.

Moreover, the investigation noted the absence of a large enough crater at the site of the explosion, as would be expected if an IDF shell had landed there.

The third observation casting doubt on the possibility of IDF shelling was the gap between the time when the army shot the artillery and when the commotion on the beach began. According to the probe's findings, several minutes past after the shelling, before the Palestinians on the beach reacted.

On Saturday evening Gaza Division Commander Brig.-Gen. Aviv Kochavi insisted that the sites that were shelled by the IDF were the places from where Kassam rockets were launched. He noted those places were frequently targeted by the IDF, and were known to be dangerous places.

Throughout the whole investigation, army officials complained about the lack of Palestinian cooperation. Unconfirmed reports further suggested attempts by Palestinians to remove shrapnel from the bodies of the wounded, treated in Israeli hospitals, thus impeding the investigation.

So it looks as if the official findings will be released on Tuesday. But from all the information the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has released so far, it may be easy to tell what the official report is going to say.

And in other news, another media watch group has condemned Western media sources for their inaccurate, knee-jerk coverage of the Gaza Beach Incident. If everyone remembers from the OP, Honest Reporting issued a statement regarding this already. Now, its the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting (CAMERA):

Israel Should Not Be Presumed Guilty of Gaza Beach Deaths (http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=35&x_article=1129)

"The Western press, however, have misreported the story, presuming, based on zero evidence, it was an errant Israeli shell. For example:

BBC News reported on its Web site:

"Seven people, including three children, died on Friday when Israeli shells hit a beach in the Gaza Strip, Palestinian officials say."

The reporter qualifies the remark by adding "Palestinian officials say", but they include several more quotations from Palestinians blaming Israel who use words such as "massacre." The article has only one sentence from the Israelis saying they are "investigating," making it sound like Israel is investigating how it happened, not if it happened as a result of their actions. The article makes no mention that the Israelis were not even sure if the explosions were from Israel's weapons at all. No doubt at all is cast on the Palestinian claims that Israel is responsible.

So much for independent, fair, and accurate reporting from the Beeb.

I'll be sure to include all of the new developments in the OP as well, for folks new to this thread.

You just have to stay critical, and be ready to change your mind as new information is obtained.

On another note, I'm looking forward to knowing what the IDF inquiry committee will conclude with when it presents its findings to Peretz on Tuesday night. There is still too few facts, too much speculation, and some unaswered questions - not to mention that the investigation is still ongoing.
and I wonder how many news groups that did report this as IDF at fault will actually apologize or even print a retraction.

and I wonder how many news groups that did report this as IDF at fault will actually apologize or even print a retraction.

I was thinking the same. Probably none, for two reasons.

They don't want to admit they were wrong and discredit themselves.

It doesn't get the same ratings as"OMG, bloodthirsty Jews kill defensless Arabs on beach and make matzah out of their flesh!"

Genuine question:

Why was their such an uncharacteristic rush from IDF/Israeli Govt spokespeople saying "Whoops" about this?

Normally the IDF just ignore it or disregard it. This time they were quick (too quick it seems) to say it might have been them?

That sticks in my mind....

Whenever crap like this happens, it just shows that the Palestinians need some proper leaders for a change. Jenin was the same thing, thousands of casualties become dozens became a few.

I suppose kudos are due to the IDF for doing an investigation, and for not having killed as many civilians this month as was believed.

Still, they need to reconsider their tactics. Targeted assassinations are one thing, but targeted assassinations with missiles in an area with some of the highest population density on the planet? Did you hear about a recent airstrike in Gaza on some militant's car? Didn't get him, but badly hurt three people who happened to be close-by...

Genuine question:

Why was their such an uncharacteristic rush from IDF/Israeli Govt spokespeople saying "Whoops" about this?

Normally the IDF just ignore it or disregard it. This time they were quick (too quick it seems) to say it might have been them?

That sticks in my mind....

The IDF always takes responsibility for innocent civilian casualties. When it comes to collateral damage, its often ignored. Originally, the first sources on the beach were Palestinian and they made it out to be that it was an Israeli shell. Then they refused to cooperate. Only after Palestinian sources began to cooperate and tell the IDF what really went on did it become clear that this wasn't an Israeli act.

If you read the various interviews with the little girl, she actually gives contradictory accounts as well. At one point, she says that gunboats shelled the beach. At another point, she says that a bomb was thrown at her by Jews. Likewise, other Palestinian sources contradicted themselves when they claimed that gunships and aircraft bombed them, or that Israelis rained down a fire of shells onto the beach.

But I didn't really want to get into all of the mistakes on the Palestinian side. There is some hard evidence at this point that demonstrates a Palestinian cause, and exonerates the Israelis.

But on that note, can you give any examples of a case like the Gaza Beach Incident where the IDF just ignored it? Any times that the IDF hasn't given its sympathy or apology for accidents of this nature?

I was thinking the same. Probably none, for two reasons.

They don't want to admit they were wrong and discredit themselves.

It doesn't get the same ratings as"OMG, bloodthirsty Jews kill defensless Arabs on beach and make matzah out of their flesh!"
more and more proof that the news media is getting extremely sloppy.

Still, they need to reconsider their tactics. Targeted assassinations are one thing, but targeted assassinations with missiles in an area with some of the highest population density on the planet? Did you hear about a recent airstrike in Gaza on some militant's car? Didn't get him, but badly hurt three people who happened to be close-by...

Yeah, in fact I think one of the ones that was hurt was an Israeli citizen too.

Some of Israel's tactics are questionable, and certainly risky. However, Israel actually has a more strict 'rules of engagement' than the US does. If you note the non-combatant casualty rate as a result of Israeli-Arab conflicts in comparison to things like the Iraqi occupation, or the numerous conflicts in Asia, they are extremely low as well. Something like 3,000 non-combatant Palestinians over the last 5 years in comparison to 30,000-40,000 in the Iraqi occupation. War is awful, and the tactics are questionable, but nations have to be evaluated within their context, and that includes evaluating them against other nations. In this context, the IDF is actually lightyears ahead of other nations in regards to safety and preserving human life.

And while it is questionable if war can ever be right or moral, there is a bit of truth to what Olmert said when he said it was the "most moral Army in the world." No other Army, when faced with what Israeli has been faced with, has acted in a more ethical manner.

more and more proof that the news media is getting extremely sloppy.

Its all about ratings and entertainment. This is why we get stories on US national news like "fluffy cat runs up a tree! Bear gets stuck in mailbox!"

The IDF always takes responsibility for innocent civilian casualties. When it comes to collateral damage, its often ignored. Originally, the first sources on the beach were Palestinian and they made it out to be that it was an Israeli shell. Then they refused to cooperate. Only after Palestinian sources began to cooperate and tell the IDF what really went on did it become clear that this wasn't an Israeli act.

If you read the various interviews with the little girl, she actually gives contradictory accounts as well. At one point, she says that gunboats shelled the beach. At another point, she says that a bomb was thrown at her by Jews. Likewise, other Palestinian sources contradicted themselves when they claimed that gunships and aircraft bombed them, or that Israelis rained down a fire of shells onto the beach.

But I didn't really want to get into all of the mistakes on the Palestinian side. There is some hard evidence at this point that demonstrates a Palestinian cause, and exonerates the Israelis.

...all of which just confuses me more as to why the rush to say "yeah, we probably did do that" originally. Meh.


But on that note, can you give any examples of a case like the Gaza Beach Incident where the IDF just ignored it? Any times that the IDF hasn't given its sympathy or apology for accidents of this nature?

Such incidents likeTom Hurndall (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Hurndall) and the initial findings into the death of James Miller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Miller_%28filmmaker%29) leave a strong distaste in my mouth when dealing with the IDF.

Thats just my own opinion.

Its all about ratings and entertainment. This is why we get stories on US national news like "fluffy cat runs up a tree! Bear gets stuck in mailbox!"
truth be told, I would rather those type of stories than ones that end up being lies or false.

I liked the story about the bear being run up a tree by a housecat. :D

...all of which just confuses me more as to why the rush to say "yeah, we probably did do that" originally. Meh.

I don't think they ever actually said that. Peretz apologized and offered sympathy, so did Olmert. Halutz offered sympathy as well, but stated that no one in the government was taking responsibility for it because they didn't know what happened.

But when it came out in the media, the Isreali govt didn't know what was going on at all. The media got their story from the Palestinians, and then the Israeli govt essentially found out that way. It took a while to find out the exact times of shell firings, to gather all the red tape, etc.

Such incidents likeTom Hurndall (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Hurndall) and the initial findings into the death of James Miller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Miller_%28filmmaker%29) leave a strong distaste in my mouth when dealing with the IDF.

Thats just my own opinion.

Hurndall's killer was actually sentenced. Miller is still an ongoing thing. If anything, the fact that Israel is willing to try and sentence its own IDF members should say something about the credibility of the IDF. Not to mention that if the IDF were following the Rules of Engagement from the United States or other nations, then Hayb may have never been convicted. It was only against the IDF's rigid code that he was found guilty of a violation.

truth be told, I would rather those type of stories than ones that end up being lies or false.

I liked the story about the bear being run up a tree by a housecat. :D

Yeah, if i had to pick, I'd rather watch stuff about cats and bears than lies and cries for ratings and attention.

I actually forgot there was a real story with a cat and bear in it when I wrote that though, hehe.

The Palestinian leadership has to be the most lame-brained group of bumblers on the planet. They fight the most technologically advanced military in the Middle East with their stones and suicide bombers, when all they have to do to achieve victory is surrender.

Yes, surrender.

Give up.

Join the Israeli democracy as loyal Palestinian-Israeli citizens and continue to do what they are already doing, which is produce large Palestinian families. Within a generation or two they will vastly outnumber the Israeli-Jewish citizens and voila! they can vote themselves a separate state or remain part of a multicultural Israel.

Either way they will be better off than they are blowing up their children in the name of some boneheaded jihad.

Hurndall's killer was actually sentenced. Miller is still an ongoing thing. If anything, the fact that Israel is willing to try and sentence its own IDF members should say something about the credibility of the IDF. Not to mention that if the IDF were following the Rules of Engagement from the United States or other nations, then Hayb may have never been convicted. It was only against the IDF's rigid code that he was found guilty of a violation.

This is what smacks of "ignoring it" or "disregarding it" in the case of Miller The Israeli Judge Advocate General recommended that he be disciplined but his commanding officer, Brigadier General Guy Tzur, overturned the decision

Not a problem with the legal system: just the IDF.

As for Hurndall, it was the initial "Ah well, he was in the wrong place/It was his own fault/Crossfire/Human shields" excuses as well as the initial refusal to do a proper inquiry (even though there was a large amount of evidence supporting his parents claims) that anger me.

Again, my beef is with the IDF itself, not any other part of the Israeli system- either political or legal.

The Palestinian leadership has to be the most lame-brained group of bumblers on the planet. They fight the most technologically advanced military in the Middle East with their stones and suicide bombers, when all they have to do to achieve victory is surrender.

Yes, surrender.

Give up.

Join the Israeli democracy as loyal Palestinian-Israeli citizens and continue to do what they are already doing, which is produce large Palestinian families. Within a generation or two they will vastly outnumber the Israeli-Jewish citizens and voila! they can vote themselves a separate state or remain part of a multicultural Israel.

Either way they will be better off than they are blowing up their children in the name of some boneheaded jihad.funny, that was my suggestion in getting America out of Iraq.

Yeah, if i had to pick, I'd rather watch stuff about cats and bears than lies and cries for ratings and attention.

I actually forgot there was a real story with a cat and bear in it when I wrote that though, hehe.
and a swan that fell in love with a swan shaped boat.

a love sick moose that attacked joggers.

a Love sick deer that fell inlove (and mated with) a stone deer lawn ornament...

and alot of other stories that were so much better than other crap that they report on.

Again, my beef is with the IDF itself, not any other part of the Israeli system- either political or legal.

Well, every military has its bad apples. I think there may be a general groupthink or mob mentality that does that to people. I just don't think that the IDF is any worse than other armed forces, and that it is far better in many cases. But I'm not going to pretend its perfect, or that its policies are perfect. No group on Earth has that claim.

Looks like some major news sources that reported incorrectly are recanting now:

Beach deaths 'not Israel's fault' (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/13/mideast.probe/index.html?section=cnn_topstories)

Beach deaths 'not Israel's fault'
Nine killed in new Israeli air strikes on Gaza
Tuesday, June 13, 2006; Posted: 7:13 a.m. EDT (11:13 GMT)

JERUSALEM (CNN) -- An explosion on a Gaza beach that killed seven people last week was caused by explosives planted there by Palestinian militants, not artillery fire from an Israeli navy gunboat, Israeli military sources said.

And we've got another one from MSNBC:

Probe: Deadly Gaza blast not caused by Israel (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13289081/)

Probe: Deadly Gaza blast not caused by Israel
Eight deaths on beach likely result of explosives planted by Hamas
Updated: 12:50 a.m. MT June 13, 2006

"The Palestinians had blamed an Israeli shell for the killing of the civilians in the northern Gaza Strip on Friday, and had recognized as a hero a Palestinian girl whose image was broadcast around the world crying over her father’s body at the scene."

"According to the findings, shrapnel taken from two wounded Palestinians who were evacuated to Israeli hospitals showed that the explosives were not made in Israel, the officials said. In addition, the last Israeli shell fired toward Palestinian rocket launchers who operate in the area was seven minutes before the blast and landed 250 yards from the scene, the officials said."

Hurndall's killer was actually sentenced. Miller is still an ongoing thing. If anything, the fact that Israel is willing to try and sentence its own IDF members should say something about the credibility of the IDF. Not to mention that if the IDF were following the Rules of Engagement from the United States or other nations, then Hayb may have never been convicted. It was only against the IDF's rigid code that he was found guilty of a violation.

13 UN workers..no convictions...What happened that Captain who killed the 13 year old, btw? What sentence did he get?

13 UN workers..no convictions...What happened that Captain who killed the 13 year old, btw? What sentence did he get?

What makes you think that a dead UN worker means that there should be automatic convictions? Thats not how the Rule of Law works.

Take Iain Hook, for example. He was killed in a Jenin raid by IDF troops because he appeared to be holding a pistol. And not surprising, since many UN workers carry sidearms. The IDF investigated it, expressed sympathy for the death, but didn't bring charges against the soldiers - because they were innocent. People killed accidentally in the course of duty, not as a result of negligence or a violation of the IDF's strict code, are not legally equivalent to people killed as a result of negligence or violation of the code. Anyone with any respect for the Rule of Law should know that much.

But alas, Israel is being singled out again. The fact is, more UN workers have been killed in the Congo than in Israel, some the result of deliberate and obvious murder, yet the Congolese governments have rarely carried out investigations, much less brought charges against anyone. The same can be said of virtually all war-torn African states, like the Sudan.

Yet, you single out the IDF, and expect the IDF to take the fault or blame for something that the individual solders are not legally guilty of. While you ignore the fact that the real war crimes are being committed against UN workers in African states, that the governments don't investigate them following the Rule of Law, and that the UN doesn't even follow through with the investigations. This is a perfect example of the double standards of the anti-Israeli crew.

Its also a perfect example of how the IDF is, like Olmert stated, the most moral Army in the world. You simply can't find one that has acted in a more ethical way when put in the situations that the IDF has.

Well once again I miss out on all the debate...I gotta stop sleeping in so late...anways I didn't have time to read all the posts but I did get a chance to see someone say that the story wasnt on CNN...well if this has already been posted I'm sorry, but here are the links to the CNN story, Fox News story, and the CBS story...

CNN:http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/13/mideast.probe/index.html

FOX: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199232,00.html

CBS: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/13/ap/world/mainD8I7C1K82.shtml

and I wonder how many news groups that did report this as IDF at fault will actually apologize or even print a retraction.
None, most likely. And they will say that they were never wrong.

If you could find an article you think qualifies as "wrong", you could link it and I'll see if I can spot'n'post what arguments the news group would use to say that they were not wrong at all...

None, most likely. And they will say that they were never wrong.

If you could find an article you think qualifies as "wrong", you could link it and I'll see if I can spot'n'post what arguments the news group would use to say that they were not wrong at all...

CNN was probably the most brazen I've seen, aside from the Middle Eastern papers. Here is an article from the 9th from CNN:

Beach strike shakes Hamas cease-fire (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/09/mideast/index.html)

"JERUSALEM (CNN) -- An Israeli navy gunboat fired shells onto a northern Gaza beach Friday, killing at least seven people and prompting the military wing of Hamas to call off a 16-month-old cease-fire with Israel."

It jumped right to the conclusion that an Israeli navy gunboat did it. It didn't even add the qualifiers "according to Palestinian sources" like a lot of the others did.

CNN was probably the most brazen I've seen, aside from the Middle Eastern papers. Here is an article from the 9th from CNN:

Beach strike shakes Hamas cease-fire (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/09/mideast/index.html)

"JERUSALEM (CNN) -- An Israeli navy gunboat fired shells onto a northern Gaza beach Friday, killing at least seven people and prompting the military wing of Hamas to call off a 16-month-old cease-fire with Israel."

It jumped right to the conclusion that an Israeli navy gunboat did it. It didn't even add the qualifiers "according to Palestinian sources" like a lot of the others did.
Hmm... If that's not over the line it's very close to it...

There, they'll probably go with "The ingress doesn't mean much on its own, and we got all our facts from palestinian sources, like it says further down in the article...
Palestinians were picnicking when the Israeli shells slammed into the beach, Palestinian medical sources said. About 20 people were injured in the attack, Palestinian security sources said.
See? So we did nothing wrong."

:)

CNN was probably the most brazen I've seen, aside from the Middle Eastern papers.

Which is why I personally stay away from American news networks.

i must say im very impressed TS.

you have managed to pull together a story thats the polar opposite to every major news organ in print, tv, radio and internet, both in Israel and internationally, the Israeli government and military's positions and all from the anonomity of your bedroom.

you are, quite literally, a better researcher and journalist than all the so callled middle east correspondents in the world and experts on these matters, even those who try reaaaaally hard to paint israel well. you are also more clued in to what the IDF are up to than they are themselves.

hats off to TS. you will go far.

unless he is a lying bastard trying in vain to help cover up an appaling crime by the IDF with all sorts of smoke and mirrors out of some form of extreme zionist pride. but surely that couldnt be true.

i must say im very impressed TS.

you have managed to pull together a story thats the polar opposite to every major news organ in print, tv, radio and internet, both in Israel and internationally, the Israeli government and military's positions and all from the anonomity of your bedroom.

you are, quite literally, a better researcher and journalist than all the so callled middle east correspondents in the world and experts on these matters, even those who try reaaaaally hard to paint israel well. you are also more clued in to what the IDF are up to than they are themselves.

hats off to TS. you will go far.

unless he is a lying bastard trying in vain to help cover up an appaling crime by the IDF with all sorts of smoke and mirrors out of some form of extreme zionist pride. but surely that couldnt be true.

Well thank you. :D

But actually most of the major news organs in print are starting to concur with the Israeli papers. Its been on the BBC, Fox, CNN, MSNBC, etc. I think someone posted links to the new articles recently.

i must say im very impressed TS.

you have managed to pull together a story thats the polar opposite to every major news organ in print, tv, radio and internet, both in Israel and internationally, the Israeli government and military's positions and all from the anonomity of your bedroom.

you are, quite literally, a better researcher and journalist than all the so callled middle east correspondents in the world and experts on these matters, even those who try reaaaaally hard to paint israel well. you are also more clued in to what the IDF are up to than they are themselves.

hats off to TS. you will go far.

unless he is a lying bastard trying in vain to help cover up an appaling crime by the IDF with all sorts of smoke and mirrors out of some form of extreme zionist pride. but surely that couldnt be true.


1. Journalists are rarely really aware of what's going on in any situation. Most of them are not objective, and most of them can't help but pick a side. Even then, their editors have already picked a side.

2. Journalists covering military situation who are not military are the most easily deceived. Do you remember the 1991 Gulf War? Not one single correspondent realized that the US was going to do an end sweep instead of a frontal assault - every news organization printed horror stories about the expected debacle - they were waiting for US soldiers to die horrible flaming death. Even the reporters who were standing there for 18 hours watching the 1st Infantry Division unload and then reload their armor onto transporters couldn't figure out what every private knew without being told.

Well thank you. :D

But actually most of the major news organs in print are starting to concur with the Israeli papers. Its been on the BBC, Fox, CNN, MSNBC, etc. I think someone posted links to the new articles recently.

actually they all reported that the IDF changed their story and are denying their initial admission of guilt. they are most certainly not reporting this as a Palestinaian act as your mischevious posts, and worse, titles of threads dictate.

Its worrying orgnised the amount of spontanious threads that the zionist boys have put up on this flimsy premise

DK, an opinion peice on the possible tactics in a future war is fundamentally different to the entire worlds media reporting an incident the israelilis admitted to before some anomomous internet activists try and muddy the waters with extremely dubious sources.

actually they all reported that the IDF changed their story and are denying their initial admission of guilt. they are most certainly not reporting this as a Palestinaian act as your mischevious posts, and worse, titles of threads dictate.

I wonder if you even read them. Here is a new one from CNN:

Israel: Palestinian explosives caused by beach deaths (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/13/mideast.probe/index.html)

"JERUSALEM (CNN) -- The explosion on a Gaza beach that killed seven people last Friday was caused by explosives planted there by Palestinian militants, not artillery fire from an Israeli navy gunboat, Israeli military sources said Tuesday.

Intelligence information gathered by Israeli investigators showed that Hamas quickly removed the remaining mines from the beach after the blast, the sources said.

Adding to the conclusion that it was not an Israeli shell that killed the family was an examination of photographs of the crater on the beach. The sources said experts found it was the type of crater caused by a planted explosive, not by an artillery shell landing from above.

Finally, shrapnel removed from three of the injured by doctors at Israeli hospitals was not from an artillery shell, the sources said."

The fact is, we have solid evidence that Israel didn't do it, and that it was from Hamas planting mines on the beach. In addition, there was never any actual evidence that Israel did it. All the Israeli leadership did was apologize and express sympathy over dead Palestinians - far more than the Palestinian leadership does when Israelis are killed.

actually they all reported that the IDF changed their story and are denying their initial admission of guilt. they are most certainly not reporting this as a Palestinaian act as your mischevious posts, and worse, titles of threads dictate.

Its worrying orgnised the amount of spontanious threads that the zionist boys have put up on this flimsy premise

DK, an opinion peice on the possible tactics in a future war is fundamentally different to the entire worlds media reporting an incident the israelilis admitted to before some anomomous internet activists try and muddy the waters with extremely dubious sources.


The IDF never admitted guilt. While it was a bad PR move on their part to even comment on the event before conducting an investigation, they were kind enough to openly say that if it was collateral damage, that the loss of civilian life was regrettable.

I NEVER see any Palestinians or Arabs in the Middle East condeming the innocent killing of Jews in the streets of Tel Aviv and other Israeli cities.

And as for your zionist conspiracy theory...the facts go against all claims made by the Pals that the explosion was the fault of the Israelis, PERIOD.

Quote:
"JERUSALEM (CNN) -- The explosion on a Gaza beach that killed seven people last Friday was caused by explosives planted there by Palestinian militants, not artillery fire from an Israeli navy gunboat, Israeli military sources said Tuesday.

Intelligence information gathered by Israeli investigators showed that Hamas quickly removed the remaining mines from the beach after the blast, the sources said.

Adding to the conclusion that it was not an Israeli shell that killed the family was an examination of photographs of the crater on the beach. The sources said experts found it was the type of crater caused by a planted explosive, not by an artillery shell landing from above.

Finally, shrapnel removed from three of the injured by doctors at Israeli hospitals was not from an artillery shell, the sources said."

the israelil army press office and anonomous sources are not enough to counter the initial admission of guilt and the imapartial press on the issue. and the fact they killed more kids today.

the israelil army press office and anonomous sources are not enough to counter the initial admission of guilt and the imapartial press on the issue. and the fact they killed more kids today.

There was no intial admission of guilt. In fact, Olmert, Peretz, and Halutz explictly stated that the IDF was not guilty, but that they expressed sympathy.

Nor is the impartial press that impartial, it would seem. It has already been condemned by media watch groups over this issue, such as CAMERA and Honest Reporting.

But again, an investigation has been underway, and the evidence says it was the Palestinians. That much is a fact.

Quote:
"JERUSALEM (CNN) -- The explosion on a Gaza beach that killed seven people last Friday was caused by explosives planted there by Palestinian militants, not artillery fire from an Israeli navy gunboat, Israeli military sources said Tuesday.

Intelligence information gathered by Israeli investigators showed that Hamas quickly removed the remaining mines from the beach after the blast, the sources said.

Adding to the conclusion that it was not an Israeli shell that killed the family was an examination of photographs of the crater on the beach. The sources said experts found it was the type of crater caused by a planted explosive, not by an artillery shell landing from above.

Finally, shrapnel removed from three of the injured by doctors at Israeli hospitals was not from an artillery shell, the sources said."

the israelil army press office and anonomous sources are not enough to counter the initial admission of guilt and the imapartial press on the issue. and the fact they killed more kids today.
Because all Israelis are liars. The doctors, the press, all of them, right?

Also those palestinians killed today died because Islamic Jihad was driving katusha rockets through a populated area. The secondary explosion from the palestinian rockets killed most of the civilians. Israel won't and shouldn't allow those rockets to be fired at their nation. It's perfectly fine for them to use air to surface missiles to destroy the rockets before they're used.

Quote:
"JERUSALEM (CNN) -- The explosion on a Gaza beach that killed seven people last Friday was caused by explosives planted there by Palestinian militants, not artillery fire from an Israeli navy gunboat, Israeli military sources said Tuesday.

Intelligence information gathered by Israeli investigators showed that Hamas quickly removed the remaining mines from the beach after the blast, the sources said.

Adding to the conclusion that it was not an Israeli shell that killed the family was an examination of photographs of the crater on the beach. The sources said experts found it was the type of crater caused by a planted explosive, not by an artillery shell landing from above.

Finally, shrapnel removed from three of the injured by doctors at Israeli hospitals was not from an artillery shell, the sources said."

the israelil army press office and anonomous sources are not enough to counter the initial admission of guilt and the imapartial press on the issue. and the fact they killed more kids today.


So the Palestinians are reliable sources but the Israeli's are not? Can you show me this "initial admission of guilt"?

How about the explosion is Gaza that was blamed on them? Do you still believe Hamas?

Also those palestinians killed today died because Islamic Jihad was driving katusha rockets through a populated area. The secondary explosion from the palestinian rockets killed most of the civilians. Israel won't and shouldn't allow those rockets to be fired at their nation. It's perfectly fine for them to use air to surface missiles to destroy the rockets before they're used.

SR, just like the Palestinians, ignored that fact and attempted to shift the blame onto Israel. But you're correct, it was the Palestinian explosives being transported that ended up killing the other 11 Palestinians today, not the Israeli attack itself.

But hey, lets blame the Jews instead of the Palestinian terrorists who are smuggling bombs.

There was no intial admission of guilt. In fact, Olmert, Peretz, and Halutz explictly stated that the IDF was not guilty, but that they expressed sympathy.

Nor is the impartial press that impartial, it would seem. It has already been condemned by media watch groups over this issue, such as CAMERA and Honest Reporting.

But again, an investigation has been underway, and the evidence says it was the Palestinians. That much is a fact.

the IDF says it wasnt the IDF (shock horror), human rights watch say it was. matbe it was maybe it wasnt, but it is far from as clear cut as you are presenting. in fact you are more biased than the press you are deriding because of leaks from anonomous sources. its pathetic.

the IDF says it wasnt the IDF (shock horror), human rights watch say it was. matbe it was maybe it wasnt, but it is far from as clear cut as you are presenting. in fact you are more biased than the press you are deriding because of leaks from anonomous sources. its pathetic.

You just claimed there was an "admission of guilt". Where is it? You blatantly condemnd the IDF based soley on Palestinian information and rehashed by news sources. Now that alternative information has come out, you are still condemning the IDF. Pot meet Kettle.

the IDF says it wasnt the IDF (shock horror), human rights watch say it was. matbe it was maybe it wasnt, but it is far from as clear cut as you are presenting. in fact you are more biased than the press you are deriding because of leaks from anonomous sources. its pathetic.

HRW in Gaza is on the list of groups that support terror in the United States. Its been condemned repeatedly, and isn't exactly considered a real source. Not to mention that the IDF investigation was done in junction with Palestinian Security, if you've been reading the reports. When the IDF AND Palestinian Security forces, working together, have drawn these conclusions, I think I'll believe that over a group that is on a terror watch list.

So the Palestinians are reliable sources but the Israeli's are not? Can you show me this "initial admission of guilt"?

How about the explosion is Gaza that was blamed on them? Do you still believe Hamas?

im not saying that, but there is clearly agenda based 'truth finding' at play, and its very easy to find PA stories that no-one else can and throw up a banner headline or two that dont reflect the tone of the story and claim conspiracy. you cant give out about sloppy journalists and carry on like TS



But hey, lets blame the Jews instead of the Palestinian terrorists

and his pathetic attempts to hide behind anti-semitism when he doenst get it his own way.

im not saying that, but there is clearly agenda based 'truth finding' at play, and its very easy to find PA stories that no-one else can and throw up a banner headline or two that dont reflect the tone of the story and claim conspiracy. you cant give out about sloppy journalists and carry on like TS

Actually, all of the stories reflect the tone so far. You're the only one that seems to be questioning it. I wonder why that is.

The IDF was responsible for doing the investigation, and part of that investigation included a joint effort from the Palestinian security. The numerous stories posted have documented that. As much as you'd like to try and poison the well by saying its an IDF investigation so its findings are invalid, which is illogical in itself (see above, poisoning the well), it isn't even true because it was a joint effort with Palestinian security forces.

Want to blame the fact that Palestinians burned down their Parliament yesterday on Israel, too?

im not saying that, but there is clearly agenda based 'truth finding' at play, and its very easy to find PA stories that no-one else can and throw up a banner headline or two that dont reflect the tone of the story and claim conspiracy. you cant give out about sloppy journalists and carry on like TS



and his pathetic attempts to hide behind anti-semitism when he doenst get it his own way.

Now lets read excerpts from the other sources that have been cited and linked to :

the crater formed by the blast _ which the military viewed afterward on TV footage and through its surveillance equipment _ appeared to be from something in the sand, not from a shelling, the officials said.

The army has accounted for five of six of the shells that it fired in the area Friday evening before the blast, the officials said. The one shell that is not accounted for was fired before the five others _ more than ten minutes before the blast that killed the Palestinians _ and apparently landed further away than the shells that were fired later, the officials said.


So everyone's hiding something escept the Palestinians.

Colin King, an explosives expert with Jane's Defense Weekly, said that, even without access to the beach, Israel could probably tell what caused the blast if it had some photographs of the area and pieces of shrapnel.

Colin King, an explosives expert with Jane's Defense Weekly, said that, even without access to the beach, Israel could probably tell what caused the blast if it had some photographs of the area and pieces of shrapnel.

Exactly, and Israel obtained the shrapnel. That lets us do ballistics, etc. Thats the type of stuff that gets people convicted in court.

The rest of it was mostly circumstantial. The times, places, the fact that Hamas removed land mines from the beach, etc. Its all strong evidence to point toward the fact that Palestinians did it, but the hardest part of evidence is the shrapnel. Thats how we know, without a doubt, that it wasn't an Israeli shell.

and his pathetic attempts to hide behind anti-semitism when he doenst get it his own way.

I'm pretty sure the hatred towards Israel from the Palestinians is strongly founded on anti-Semetism.

Here is a passage taken directly from the Hamas covenant (remember, Hamas won an overwhelming majority of the vote):

Moreover, if the links have been distant from each other and if obstacles, placed by those who are the lackeys of Zionism in the way of the fighters obstructed the continuation of the struggle, the Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to the realisation of Allah's promise, no matter how long that should take. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said:

"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).

and another:

The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised. To do this requires the diffusion of Islamic consciousness among the masses, both on the regional, Arab and Islamic levels. It is necessary to instill the spirit of Jihad in the heart of the nation so that they would confront the enemies and join the ranks of the fighters.

and another:

We should not forget to remind every Moslem that when the Jews conquered the Holy City in 1967, they stood on the threshold of the Aqsa Mosque and proclaimed that "Mohammed is dead, and his descendants are all women."

Israel, Judaism and Jews challenge Islam and the Moslem people. "May the cowards never sleep."

and another:

The Islamic Resistance Movement consider itself to be the spearhead of the circle of struggle with world Zionism and a step on the road. The Movement adds its efforts to the efforts of all those who are active in the Palestinian arena. Arab and Islamic Peoples should augment by further steps on their part; Islamic groupings all over the Arab world should also do the same, since all of these are the best-equipped for the future role in the fight with the warmongering Jews.

"..and we have put enmity and hatred between them, until the day of resurrection. So often as they shall kindle a fire of war, Allah shall extinguish it; and they shall set their minds to act corruptly in the earth, but Allah loveth not the corrupt doers." (The Table - verse 64).

and another:

This Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS), clarifies its picture, reveals its identity, outlines its stand, explains its aims, speaks about its hopes, and calls for its support, adoption and joining its ranks. Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious. It needs all sincere efforts. It is a step that inevitably should be followed by other steps. The Movement is but one squadron that should be supported by more and more squadrons from this vast Arab and Islamic world, until the enemy is vanquished and Allah's victory is realised.


and when it comes to peaceful solutions:

Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement. Abusing any part of Palestine is abuse directed against part of religion. Nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its religion. Its members have been fed on that. For the sake of hoisting the banner of Allah over their homeland they fight. "Allah will be prominent, but most people do not know."

Now lets read excerpts from the other sources that have been cited and linked to :

the crater formed by the blast _ which the military viewed afterward on TV footage and through its surveillance equipment _ appeared to be from something in the sand, not from a shelling, the officials said.

The army has accounted for five of six of the shells that it fired in the area Friday evening before the blast, the officials said. The one shell that is not accounted for was fired before the five others _ more than ten minutes before the blast that killed the Palestinians _ and apparently landed further away than the shells that were fired later, the officials said.


So everyone's hiding something escept the Palestinians.

Colin King, an explosives expert with Jane's Defense Weekly, said that, even without access to the beach, Israel could probably tell what caused the blast if it had some photographs of the area and pieces of shrapnel.


all based on the say so of the idf by the way. all of it.

I'm pretty sure the hatred towards Israel from the Palestinians is strongly founded on anti-Semetism.

Here is a passage taken directly from the Hamas covenant (remember, Hamas won an overwhelming majority of the vote):


and another:


and another:



and another:



and another:




and when it comes to peaceful solutions:


you accused ME, not hamas, of 'blaming the jews' and id like it withdrawn

all based on the say so of the idf by the way. all of it.

So you admit that you consider the IDF to be a less reliable source than the PA?

Do you know if HRW had access to the Israeli doctors? Did it have access to the shrapnel?

Can you show me the "initial admission of guilt" by the IDF you said was retracted?

Has the PA blamed other actions on the IDF that turned out not to be true?

Im not understanding why the palestinians would do this to their own people to end a VOLUNTARY cease fire. If they wanted to end the cease fire, they could have just done it.

Palestine ordered the cease fire and held their word with no counter offer from Israel. This would highlight any aggression from Israel, which is what Palestine wanted. They wanted the world to see Israel for what they are. Using this to end the cease fire just doesnt make sense.

None of this makes sense.

Im not understanding why the palestinians would do this to their own people to end a VOLUNTARY cease fire. If they wanted to end the cease fire, they could have just done it.

Palestine ordered the cease fire and held their word with no counter offer from Israel. This would highlight any aggression from Israel, which is what Palestine wanted. They wanted the world to see Israel for what they are. Using this to end the cease fire just doesnt make sense.

None of this makes sense.
It might be an accident... If it was a mine, I mean, and the family tripped it unknowingly.

I'm still waiting for the official report, and won't speculate any further...

So you admit that you consider the IDF to be a less reliable source than the PA?


id put them on a par, both capable of spin/lies when needs be. and in this case the IDF have most to gain from lying. imagine a neglgent shot or irate individual on a navy ship/artillary position ended the hamas ceasefire? ouch

im questioning the ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY of certain people here that the press shot their load to early here and it was the nasty arabs killing their own to blacken the IDF when the evidence is still up in the air. the IDF, understadably, now deny it was them, while HRW appear to quesion this.

people in these threads are clearly not trying to find the truth on the issue, but the truth that suits their own viewpoint while professing to be doing great investigitive work and hinting at an anti-semetic streak in the western press. not on, not on at all

Im not understanding why the palestinians would do this to their own people to end a VOLUNTARY cease fire. If they wanted to end the cease fire, they could have just done it.

Palestine ordered the cease fire and held their word with no counter offer from Israel. This would highlight any aggression from Israel, which is what Palestine wanted. They wanted the world to see Israel for what they are. Using this to end the cease fire just doesnt make sense.

None of this makes sense.

Plausible deniability.

"Look, the Israeli's attacked first."

you accused ME, not hamas, of 'blaming the jews' and id like it withdrawn


I accused you of nothing of the sort. I simply was showing that Pal hatred towards Israel has to do with anti-Semetism.

I believe you mean Tropical Sands, who I think was making a generalized statement, not a personal attack. You jumped the gun

the IDF says it wasnt the IDF (shock horror), human rights watch say it was. matbe it was maybe it wasnt, but it is far from as clear cut as you are presenting. in fact you are more biased than the press you are deriding because of leaks from anonomous sources. its pathetic.
Didn't the fake Human Rights Watch from Gaza say 155 mm shells were used? From what I could find on the internet no Israeli ship uses 155 mm guns. 76 mm seems to be the biggest. Did I miss some class of Israeli warship? Or is your fake human rights group full of shit?

I accused you of nothing of the sort. I simply was showing that Pal hatred towards Israel has to do with anti-Semetism.

I believe you mean Tropical Sands,


wasnt directed at you

id put them on a par, both capable of spin/lies when needs be.

im questioning the ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY of certain people here that the press shot their load to early here and it was the nasty arabs killing their own to blacken the IDF when the evidence is still up in the air. the IDF, understadably, now deny it was them, while HRW appear to quesion this.

And yet you didn't question the "ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY" when all the news was reporting it was the IDF that did it.


people in these threads are clearly not trying to find the truth on the issue, but the truth that suits their own viewpoint while professing to be doing great investigitive work and hinting at an anti-semetic streak in the western press. not on, not on at all

And yet you've presented quite a bit of anti-Israeli stances.

Care to answer the rest of my questions?

Hell, HRW says it was a 155mm shell. I can't find any IDF ships that carry such armament. The PA has changed its story several times.

Im not understanding why the palestinians would do this to their own people to end a VOLUNTARY cease fire. If they wanted to end the cease fire, they could have just done it

Hamas didn't intend to do it to Palestinians for an excuse to end the cease fire. Hamas had been setting mines on the beach to attempt to thwart the IDF, which had been doing raids on terrorist bases from the sea recently. That was a left over mine that the Palestinian family tripped. Then Hamas was the first on the scene and attempted to remove the evidence, including other mines.

It was only after this happened that Hamas used it as an excuse to end the cease fire. It has actually been in the news for about two weeks that Hamas had been planning to end it. This was just a bit of lucky timing, so they could have an excuse to blame it on Israel. It seems to have backfired, though.

Palestine ordered the cease fire and held their word with no counter offer from Israel. This would highlight any aggression from Israel, which is what Palestine wanted. They wanted the world to see Israel for what they are. Using this to end the cease fire just doesnt make sense.

Not exactly. Hamas ordered a cease fire. This means that only the armed wing of Hamas had to stop. Hamas still endorsed and supported attacks from other groups that are not officially connected to Hamas. In fact, Hamas didn't even follow its own cease fire, it was behind the Sinai bombings.

And yet you didn't question the "ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY" when all the news was reporting it was the IDF that did it.


i did you know



And yet you've presented quite a bit of anti-Israeli stances.

Care to answer the rest of my questions?

Hell, HRW says it was a 155mm shell. I can't find any IDF ships that carry such armament. The PA has changed its story several times.

the HRW quote is from an article whose headline (only) was put up here to 'prove' the IDF are the victims here. i just posted the whole article to prove that TS was being economic with the truth. so ask him, he opened that can of worms.

and dont the IDF refuse to publish details of their capability?

and dont the IDF refuse to publish details of their capability?

Only nuclear capability.

But its interesting someone would point out that the size shell the fake HRW group is too large to actually be fired from a warship. Can we say internal contradiction?

i did you know

the HRW quote is from an article whose headline (only) was put up here to 'prove' the IDF are the victims here. i just posted the whole article to prove that TS was being economic with the truth. so ask him, he opened that can of worms.

and dont the IDF refuse to publish details of their capability?


1. You accept as fact that the shell was a 155mm shell, as stated by HRW.

2. Too bad the Israeli Navy doesn't field any ships with any guns larger than 75mm, and that one was retired years ago. All of the Israeli ships have 20 and 30mm automated air defense cannon - not used for shooting at ground targets.

On that note, terrorists are notorious for using old shells and explosives for their IED's. It could be virtually any type of shell, but it wouldn't demonstrate that it was the fault of the Israelis.

If you remember from the reports, there was a gap in between the time Israeli shelling occured and the explosion. That was confirmed by Palestinian sources.

i did you know

Really? Where?




the HRW quote is from an article whose headline (only) was put up here to 'prove' the IDF are the victims here. i just posted the whole article to prove that TS was being economic with the truth. so ask him, he opened that can of worms.

The IDF as victims? You mean against the international papers that assumed their guilt just by statements made by the PA?

and dont the IDF refuse to publish details of their capability?

No. I regularly read articels on the IDF Navy in NI proceedings as well as updated IDF armour through the Aberdeen Museum Foundation publications.

The IDF as victims? You mean against the international papers that assumed their guilt just by statements made by the PA?

I don't even think that the statements were originally made by the PA. I think they were made by one or two Palestinian witnesses and the injured little girl. We had conflicting statements like "Israeli gunships shelled us" and, quoting the little girl, "The Jews threw a bomb at us."

Even the Palestinian statements were inconsistent.

1. You accept as fact that the shell was a 155mm shell, as stated by HRW.

2. Too bad the Israeli Navy doesn't field any ships with any guns larger than 75mm, and that one was retired years ago. All of the Israeli ships have 20 and 30mm automated air defense cannon - not used for shooting at ground targets.

are you following me around?

where did i saw i accept HRW's assesment of the situation?

I don't even think that the statements were originally made by the PA. I think they were made by one or two Palestinian witnesses and the injured little girl. We had conflicting statements like "Israeli gunships shelled us" and, quoting the little girl, "The Jews threw a bomb at us."

Even the Palestinian statements were inconsistent.

I'll retract that then and say " individual Palestinians".

where did i saw i accept HRW's assesment of the situation?

Do we even know if something occured from a group calling themselves "Human Rights Watch" that can be called an assessment? Only CNN made a spurious mention of this, in contrast to the dozens of papers already listed that cite directly from the Israeli press releases.

Keep in mind, these Western media news sources have already been condemned for their biased and inaccurate coverage of this event by Honest Reporting and the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting. Its probably best to go to the source at this point for information. If I want Jamaican news, I don't go to CNN or the BBC, I go to the Gleaner. And if I want British news, I don't go to the Gleaner, I go to the BBC. In the same respect, if you want Israeli news, you should probably go to Israeli newspapers first.

And note the double standard here. If someone goes to a Jamaican newspaper for Jamaican news, no one cries "OMG, the Gleaner, thats biased because its Jamaican!" Yet, when people go to Israeli newspapers for Israeli news, people instantly jump to the conclusion that Israeli news sources are biased simply because they are Israel. Its wrong because its a double standard, and its wrong because its a fallacy called poisoning the well.

Do we even know if something occured from a group calling themselves "Human Rights Watch" that can be called an assessment? Only CNN made a spurious mention of this, in contrast to the dozens of papers already listed that cite directly from the Israeli press releases.

Keep in mind, these Western media news sources have already been condemned for their biased and inaccurate coverage of this event by Honest Reporting and the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting. Its probably best to go to the source at this point for information. If I want Jamaican news, I don't go to CNN or the BBC, I go to the Gleaner. And if I want British news, I don't go to the Gleaner, I go to the BBC. In the same respect, if you want Israeli news, you should probably go to Israeli newspapers first.

And note the double standard here. If someone goes to a Jamaican newspaper for Jamaican news, no one cries "OMG, the Gleaner, thats biased because its Jamaican!" Yet, when people go to Israeli newspapers for Israeli news, people instantly jump to the conclusion that Israeli news sources are biased simply because they are Israel. Its wrong because its a double standard, and its wrong because its a fallacy called poisoning the well.


ts, you were the one who decided to introduce the specific CNN article that quotes HRW. now you are trying to call it lies? wont wash.

if the jamaican military are involved in an incident like the weekends, i wouldnt rely on them 100% for information, no. especially if we knew that the JDF insisted on reading the articles first.

ts, you were the one who decided to introduce the specific CNN article that quotes HRW. now you are trying to call it lies? wont wash.

if the jamaican military are involved in an incident like the weekends, i wouldnt rely on them 100% for information, no. especially if we knew that the JDF insisted on reading the articles first.

And if you would actually look, PD was the first one to post the CNN article in another thread along w/ the numerous other articles from other sources in this and the other 2-3 threads.

if the jamaican military are involved in an incident like the weekends, i wouldnt rely on them 100% for information, no. especially if we knew that the JDF insisted on reading the articles first.

The IDF doesn't insist on reading the articles first. I'm sure you've heard that before, its a common myth regarding Israel. There is no media censorship in that respect.

And the IDF wasn't involved in an incident this weekend. Using the argument that they were, when there is no evidence, to demonstrate why they can't be used as evidence that they weren't is a fallacy of cause and effect.

Again, you've yet to address your other fallacy, poisoning the well, or your usage of the double standard when it comes to Israel.

It appears that this may be the US based HRW, and not the Gaza based on as CNN implied. This is from Reuters

Israel denies role in deadly Gaza beach blast (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-06-13T173624Z_01_L139968_RTRUKOC_0_US-MIDEAST-SHELLING.xml&src=rss)

An investigator from international rights group Human Rights Watch told reporters in Gaza earlier that evidence pointed to Israel having fired the shell, but he had to leave the door open to the possibility that the explosion was caused by something else.

This isn't really any different from what the IDF originally claimed. Earlier, according to the IDF as well, it was believed Israel fired the shell. Although now we know better. It seems as HRW isn't willing to make a a conclusive statement that it was the IDF either.

And if you would actually look, PD was the first one to post the CNN article in another thread along w/ the numerous other articles from other sources in this and the other 2-3 threads.

PD makes me think of Police Department.

LAPD
NYPD
SFPD