Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Shrapnel from deadly Gaza beach explosion was Israeli: TV

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 03:28 PM
Original message
Shrapnel from deadly Gaza beach explosion was Israeli: TV
<snip>

"Shrapnel from an Israeli artillery shell was extracted from a young Palestinian wounded in a deadly Gaza beachfront explosion earlier this month, an Israeli television report said Monday.

The privately-owned Channel 10 report cited medical sources whose findings contradicted Israel's official version of events that the explosion which killed eight Palestinian civilians was not caused by Israeli artillery.

The shrapnel was removed from a 12-year-old boy who was wounded on the beach on June 9 and then transported to a hospital in southern Israel for medical treatment, it said.

The sources told the channel the shrapnel came from a 155-millimeter shell used by Israeli army artillery gunners, a tactic it uses in a bid to halt rocket fire toward southern Israel by Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip."

http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=129309
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
gaspee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. Anyone surprised?
I was hoping the evidence would lead to the conclusion that it was a tragic accident; unexploded old ordinance, who in their right minds would want this to be other than an accident?

Unfortuantely, I am not one bit surprised it's turned out this way. My governement has trained me very well over the past 5 years. I've always been suspicious of people investigating themselves, but now, I believe nothing I'm told.


Now, I'm questioning this source. I think I'm going crazy. Bushworld: we're all just along for the nightmare ride.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
2. Here is the question I have...
Was it a fired round, or an old round buried in the sand from earlier firing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Give it a rest.
The IDF has been shelling gaza every damn day. How about we take the obvious simple explanation first: they missed and hit the beach, rather than keep looking for other ways to explain this away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Please, I am trying to be fair here.
I know that in other places where shells were fired, as long ago as WW-1, they still sometimes go off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Fair is not looking desperately away from the obvious. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. although I think there's virtually no
doubt that the deaths resulted from Israeli shells, your characterization of the poster as "looking desperately away from the obvious", isn't only patently UNFAIR, it's downright rude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. I considered that it might be interpreted as rude.
So I tried a kinder approach in another post.

However, I really am sick and tired of our own willingness right here to consider total bullshit as equivalent to the obvious explanation.

We ought to 'fairly consider' if perhaps, while the IDF was indeed SHELLING GAZA AT THE TIME, it might just as likely be that some left over shell from a previous beach shelling was the actual cause.

A previous beach shelling? What? So the IDF routinely shells this beach? Just not this time?

I know, how rude of me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. I'll try another approach.
How do we know that the sneaky palestinians didn't steal an IDF shell, hide it in the sand, and then blow up a bunch of their own kids to make the IDF look bad?

Do you see my point?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. I see the point that you cannot accept even the chance of accident.
Because it obviously threatens some deeply held belief of yours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Oh no I think it was an accident.
An accidental freaking shelling of the Gaza beach while they were shelling other sections of Gaza. Shit happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #12
19. Actually, ALL 6 shells were aimed along a 250-meter stretch of that beach.
Furthermore, the kill zone for each 155mm shell is 50 meters, casualty zone up to 100+ meters.

The area covered by the shelling is a 250-meter stretch. Six shells were fired, each with a kill zone of 50 meters in diameter. They only needed 5 shells to run a kill zone along that entire stretch. The first shell is the one that killed the beach-goers, IIRC. It's likely that the time between the first and subsequent shells allowed others along the stretch to evacuate.

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakeme2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Israel was shelling that day.. they admitted that
So on the day Israel was shelling a shell from WWII blows up on the beach... Give me a break...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. No, that wasn't what I said.
If they have been shelling that area, and the area is deep sand, a live round might land and not explode. They could have fired that round days before or years before, doesn't matter.

I'm not a "fan" of the IDF, and want to see a sovereign and CONTIGUOUS Palestinian State, but I also do not want to exclude the chance of accident given the number of rounds no doubt expended in the area.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BayCityProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. the UN partition
didn't give Israel a contigous nation....and they still accepted it without blowing themselves up on buses and in disco's....just sayin...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Tough.
Because the bombings will never end until it happens.

That's not a threat, that is just the reality I see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Vogt Donating Member (61 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #13
23. Maybe not, but
while the Israelis were not "blowing themselves up on buses and in discos" they were not under a cruel and violent military occupation by a foreign power - with the exception of the British occupation, to which the Israelis responded - in part - by blowing up the King David hotel. Those unto whom evil is done do evil in return. Nationalities, ethnicities and religions have nothing to do with this simple fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wellst0nev0ter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 03:01 AM
Response to Reply #13
25. Even Though Jews Were 33 Percent of the Population
They got 55 percent of the land, and yet the partition is still presented as equitable or even a little biased against the early Zionists. Maybe I'm missing something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 04:34 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. of that 55%
over half was desert
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prole_for_peace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #2
14. the injuries were to the top part of the body
consistant with a fired shell. if it had been buried the injuries would have been to the legs and lower torso.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Good point! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
17. IDF: Channel 10 report on Gaza beach blast a lie
<snip>

"Channel 10 News claimed Monday night that a piece of shrapnel removed from a Palestinian injured in last week's explosion on Lahia Beach in Gaza almost certainly came from an Israeli weapon.

The Israel Defense Forces Spokesman's Office rejected the report. "Unfortunately, Channel 10 persists in publicizing falsehoods despite having been given the true facts," said the IDF Spokesman.

The military inquiry committee headed by Major General Meir Klifi based its conclusions largely on a fragment extracted from a girl wounded in the incident who was hospitalized in Israel. Laboratory examinations by the IDF and then by an Israeli academic institution, the army said, proved conclusively that the shrapnel was not from a 155 mm shell of the type used by the IDF and resembled explosives used by Palestinian organizations.

Channel 10's Shlomo Eldar reported Monday that last week another fragment, removed from a different Palestinian, is of Israeli origin."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/728817.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 04:41 AM
Response to Reply #17
20. One of the annoying tendencies
of Haaretz's website is that their translated versions tend to be abridged.

According to the Hebrew version, the IDF is currently checking the new fragment.

Also of interest, and omitted from the translated article, is a meeting HRW's Garlasco had with Kalifi:

Also, the Human Rights Watch representative investigating the circumstances of the incident in Beit Lahia, Mark Garlasco, met with Kalifi last night.

After the meeting Garlasco said, that Kalifi explained that "the investigation is still open. We are examining the possibility that it was a 155mm shell which had been fired earlier and exploded during the incident, or that it was a bomb set there".

According to Garlasco, Kalifi told him that the Palestinian authority had cooperated with the investigation of the incident. A day after the incident, the PA transferred to Israel three bags of evidence:

The first sack contained fragments of 155mm shells, which had been gathered in the area of shelling. According to Garlasco, Kalifi explained that the fragments were not thoroughly examined because they had been gathered from a wide area, not just where the family had been hit.

The second bag contained fragments the Palestinians claimed were gathered from the crater of the shell which killed the Ralia family. According to Garlasco, Kalifi explained that the bag contained both old and new fragments and thus no conclusions could be drawn from it.

According to Garlasco, the third sack contained dirt which had been gathered from the same crates, but Kalifi explained that no residue of standard TNT had been found in it. This would seem to rule out the possibility that a shell caused the crater, and supports the claim the explosion was caused by a homemade bomb. However, Garlasco said, even the Qassam rockets the Palestinians fire contain a certain amount of TNT, so it is unlikely to be a bomb.

Garlasco also said that Kalifi told him that the fragment removed from the wounded Palestinian was not from a 155mm shell, but the IDF was unable to conclusively determine its source.

According to Garlasco, there is a likelihood that an IDF shell, which landed on the morning of the incident and didn't explode because it hit the sand, exploded in the afternoon because of the new shelling which "woke up" the detonator.

The committee headed by Kalifi continues in its work and is supposed to report to the Minister of Security and the IDF CoS at the conclusion of the investigation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Violet_Crumble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 05:15 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. A slightly OT question about Ha'aretz translations.....
Are many articles translated into English abridged versions? I think I'm safe in making the assumption based on the credibility of Ha'aretz that the translations are as accurate as you can get from Hebrew to English, so it's the abridged thing that I'm curious about. I actually wish they wouldn't do it, as that bit you posted that was omitted from the original article is describing the same meeting that JPost reported on, and not surprisingly, what JPost reported and Ha'aretz reported seem to be two different things. Anyway, kind of makes me want to pick up my neglected attempts to learn Hebrew, just so I can read the non-abridged versions of articles...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 06:43 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. As far as I've seen
the articles which are abridged tend to be the longer ones. However, there have been quite a few cases where I had the impression (but didn't bother to check) that an article was abridged because its ending felt truncated.

Regarding the quality of the translations themselves, they're usually OK (certainly better than YNet, which is the only other news source I know of with both Hebrew and English versions of its articles, and which I've caught in some rather stupid errors, though they seem to be improving lately), though they have the occasional gaffe*.

As for the report itself, the two reports seem to me to be in agreement in their essentials (except the JPost headline), though the JPost version has more detail; you can attribute that either to JPost editorializing or (more likely, IMO) the fact that the Haaretz article was less focused on the meeting.

*A humorous example from several years ago - an IAF squadron, violating regulations, caused a sonic boom over Jerusalem. Haaretz's Hebrew headline read "Squadron causes sonic boom over Jerusalem". However, the translator picked the wrong meaning of the word tayeset, and the English version read "Female pilot causes sonic boom over Jerusalem". :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
24. Israeli TV links dud army shell to Gaza beach blast
<snip>

"The blast that killed seven Palestinians on a Gaza beach may have been the delayed explosion of a dud Israeli shell, Israeli television said on Tuesday, in a challenge to the army's assertion it was not responsible.

Channel Two quoted sources in an Israeli hospital which treated survivors of the June 9 blast as saying some of the shrapnel removed by surgeons was from a 155 mm artillery shell, ordnance used by Israel but absent from Palestinian arsenals.

Israel has fired hundreds of shells at the northern Gaza Strip, which it quit last year after 38 years of occupation, in a bid to stop Palestinian rocket salvoes across the border.

But the Israeli army denied responsibility for the beach blast, which drew international censure and prompted the Palestinian Hamas government to call off a 16-month-old truce."

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L2051991.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 15th 2024, 04:39 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC