Families: No justice in Israeli inquiry on Gaza beach deaths

[Seastallion]

.........

You start off with a false premise, Israel has been convicted of no war crime here, their internal investigation concludes the same, which I agree with.

I can't be sure of anything else. The children, one or all four may have been killed,by Israeli munitions. I state maybe because press conclusions are not always correct, as was the case with a whole family wiped out during operation cast lead which was originally blamed on Israel turned out to be due to a stray Hamas rocket.

When this thread was first introduced I had no reason to suspect the deaths of the boys were due to anything but Israeli fire. I posted the links which made me question this. There are several inconsistencies in press accounts and eye witness statements, so different as to be irreconcilable. Only one journalist claims the children were playing football, there is no film anywhere to support this claim, yet it passed as reality, just as did the yard of the children being the sons of poor fishermen and not a well connected Fatah member. Plus some of the video footage supplied by the Palestinians was so obviously a composite that a layman could spot it. Why supply dodgy images?

The Al Dura incident was only mentioned tangentially to demonstrate there is a precedent to the theory I put forward. This is the last I will say on the matter unless some fresh evidence emerges.

(previous stuff omitted for clarity)

You start off by saying that you agree with Israel's self-assessment of no war crime and that you can't be sure of anything else. Yet, you can't be sure if the children were even killed by Israeli munitions....despite Israel's admission that they did kill them!

So you agree with Israel's report only so far as that they committed no war crime, but you don't necessarily agree with their self-confessed killing of the kids.

Sort of contradictory.

As a matter of interest, how much of the evidence that the report writer used to reach the conclusion that he did, have you viewed to have reached your consensus of no war crime? Or was his word good enough for you?

And what parts of all that evidence make you still unsure and doubtful of the IDF's own conclusion that they did indeed kill the boys? Or was the report writer's word not good enough this time?

I wasn't going to reply, but just for you here's another question to consider. Do journalists run towards explosions, unless they are told it's safe to do so? Journalists in Gaza go nowhere without Hamas minders watching and authorizing their presence.

http://www.thomaswictor.com/journalist-confirms-gaza-beach-deception-operation/

It's a pity you don't want to answer those very reasonable questions. The answers would have been telling.

The "proof" that your link claims is not a proof at all...it's speculation. And as Thorgal has pointed out, the gun boats had retreated.

Your source claims that the reporters ran towards the explosions....there is no reference to the time lapse between the explosions and the reporters arriving on the scene....in fact one narration I read was from a reporter (or several) on his balcony...your source makes out that the reporters were waiting for it to happen.

Essentially, your conspiracy theory contradicts the IDF.....yet you still take the IDF report at face value...while offering this conspiracy theory as evidence? You can't have it both ways.

Your source also makes out that a handful of reporters from several networks all conspired to dummy this footage and report a hoax. Quite preposterous.

What WAS interesting from your link is that Israel is known to "double tap", and the explanation of that, "“When I’m embedded with military units,” the journalist said, “I never go anywhere unless they tell me it’s safe. They don’t allow me to wander off by myself if there’s an attack. People think it’s because they have secrets to hide, but the real reason is called a ‘double tap.’ Terrorists and some military forces set off one bomb or fire a weapon, and then when people arrive, they light them up. It can easily be two or three more bombs or rockets or whatever.”

"

(Sorry about the pasted text...I don't seem to be able to adjust it to a friendlier format)

Edited June 17, 2015 by Seastallion

[Steely Dan]

.........

You start off with a false premise, Israel has been convicted of no war crime here, their internal investigation concludes the same, which I agree with.

I can't be sure of anything else. The children, one or all four may have been killed,by Israeli munitions. I state maybe because press conclusions are not always correct, as was the case with a whole family wiped out during operation cast lead which was originally blamed on Israel turned out to be due to a stray Hamas rocket.

When this thread was first introduced I had no reason to suspect the deaths of the boys were due to anything but Israeli fire. I posted the links which made me question this. There are several inconsistencies in press accounts and eye witness statements, so different as to be irreconcilable. Only one journalist claims the children were playing football, there is no film anywhere to support this claim, yet it passed as reality, just as did the yard of the children being the sons of poor fishermen and not a well connected Fatah member. Plus some of the video footage supplied by the Palestinians was so obviously a composite that a layman could spot it. Why supply dodgy images?

The Al Dura incident was only mentioned tangentially to demonstrate there is a precedent to the theory I put forward. This is the last I will say on the matter unless some fresh evidence emerges.

(previous stuff omitted for clarity)

You start off by saying that you agree with Israel's self-assessment of no war crime and that you can't be sure of anything else. Yet, you can't be sure if the children were even killed by Israeli munitions....despite Israel's admission that they did kill them!

So you agree with Israel's report only so far as that they committed no war crime, but you don't necessarily agree with their self-confessed killing of the kids.

Sort of contradictory.

As a matter of interest, how much of the evidence that the report writer used to reach the conclusion that he did, have you viewed to have reached your consensus of no war crime? Or was his word good enough for you?

And what parts of all that evidence make you still unsure and doubtful of the IDF's own conclusion that they did indeed kill the boys? Or was the report writer's word not good enough this time?

I wasn't going to reply, but just for you here's another question to consider. Do journalists run towards explosions, unless they are told it's safe to do so? Journalists in Gaza go nowhere without Hamas minders watching and authorizing their presence.

http://www.thomaswictor.com/journalist-confirms-gaza-beach-deception-operation/

It's a pity you don't want to answer those very reasonable questions. The answers would have been telling.

The "proof" that your link claims is not a proof at all...it's speculation. And as Thorgal has pointed out, the gun boats had retreated.

Your source claims that the reporters ran towards the explosions....there is no reference to the time lapse between the explosions and the reporters arriving on the scene....in fact one narration I read was from a reporter (or several) on his balcony...your source makes out that the reporters were waiting for it to happen.

Essentially, your conspiracy theory contradicts the IDF.....yet you still take the IDF report at face value...while offering this conspiracy theory as evidence? You can't have it both ways.

Your source also makes out that a handful of reporters from several networks all conspired to dummy this footage and report a hoax. Quite preposterous.

What WAS interesting from your link is that Israel is known to "double tap", and the explanation of that, "“When I’m embedded with military units,” the journalist said, “I never go anywhere unless they tell me it’s safe. They don’t allow me to wander off by myself if there’s an attack. People think it’s because they have secrets to hide, but the real reason is called a ‘double tap.’ Terrorists and some military forces set off one bomb or fire a weapon, and then when people arrive, they light them up. It can easily be two or three more bombs or rockets or whatever.”

"

(Sorry about the pasted text...I don't seem to be able to adjust it to a friendlier format)

You claim I want to have things both ways, this is exactly what you and other esteemed members are doing when accepting the Israeli admission as to causing the deaths yet refusing to accept their findings that there was no criminal action on their part.

P.s the close up shot of the explosion sight looking out to sea was filmed from the deck of a ship, were the reporters there just coincidentally there getting in a bit of sunbathing?

Then there's the Fishermans hut (sic) which has a gaping hole in its side before the filmed smoke from the explosion yet had three corrugated iron sheets sealing it when the apparent explosion was filmed, who put these there, when and why?

Edit: Just to say all the press didn't have to be in cahoots with a conspiracy, all that would be needed is for them to be fooled, just as it was with the Israelis. You see what you want to see.

Edited June 17, 2015 by Steely Dan

[slerickson]

Something to ponder. Given that Israel controls the news coming out of Palestine and for the most part they and their U.S. Jew allies control the U.S. Propaganda machine; do you suppose every once in a while the reporting you read is entirely one sided fabricated, distorted bullshit?

[geriatrickid]

Something to ponder. Given that Israel controls the news coming out of Palestine and for the most part they and their U.S. Jew allies control the U.S. Propaganda machine; do you suppose every once in a while the reporting you read is entirely one sided fabricated, distorted bullshit?

Are you able to substantiate your racist and hate filled claim?

Israel has no control over the news coming out of Gaza or the PLA territory.

What exactly is a U.S. Jew ally and how do they control the U.S. Propaganda machine?

When did Israel take control of the BBC, or Russia Today, or Al Jazeera, or Reuters or Agence Presse France, or Fox?

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies removed.

[Linky]

Something to ponder. Given that Israel controls the news coming out of Palestine and for the most part they and their U.S. Jew allies control the U.S. Propaganda machine; do you suppose every once in a while the reporting you read is entirely one sided fabricated, distorted bullshit?

Are you able to substantiate your racist and hate filled claim?

Israel has no control over the news coming out of Gaza or the PLA territory.

What exactly is a U.S. Jew ally and how do they control the U.S. Propaganda machine?

When did Israel take control of the BBC, or Russia Today, or Al Jazeera, or Reuters or Agence Presse France, or Fox?

What is racist and hate filled about his post?

He calls the propaganda for what it is. Nothing racist or hate filled about it.

Any excuse for the enablers to use hyperbole.

[Seastallion]

(previous stuff omitted for clarity)

You start off by saying that you agree with Israel's self-assessment of no war crime and that you can't be sure of anything else. Yet, you can't be sure if the children were even killed by Israeli munitions....despite Israel's admission that they did kill them!

So you agree with Israel's report only so far as that they committed no war crime, but you don't necessarily agree with their self-confessed killing of the kids.

Sort of contradictory.

As a matter of interest, how much of the evidence that the report writer used to reach the conclusion that he did, have you viewed to have reached your consensus of no war crime? Or was his word good enough for you?

And what parts of all that evidence make you still unsure and doubtful of the IDF's own conclusion that they did indeed kill the boys? Or was the report writer's word not good enough this time?

I wasn't going to reply, but just for you here's another question to consider. Do journalists run towards explosions, unless they are told it's safe to do so? Journalists in Gaza go nowhere without Hamas minders watching and authorizing their presence.

http://www.thomaswictor.com/journalist-confirms-gaza-beach-deception-operation/

It's a pity you don't want to answer those very reasonable questions. The answers would have been telling.

The "proof" that your link claims is not a proof at all...it's speculation. And as Thorgal has pointed out, the gun boats had retreated.

Your source claims that the reporters ran towards the explosions....there is no reference to the time lapse between the explosions and the reporters arriving on the scene....in fact one narration I read was from a reporter (or several) on his balcony...your source makes out that the reporters were waiting for it to happen.

Essentially, your conspiracy theory contradicts the IDF.....yet you still take the IDF report at face value...while offering this conspiracy theory as evidence? You can't have it both ways.

Your source also makes out that a handful of reporters from several networks all conspired to dummy this footage and report a hoax. Quite preposterous.

What WAS interesting from your link is that Israel is known to "double tap", and the explanation of that, "“When I’m embedded with military units,” the journalist said, “I never go anywhere unless they tell me it’s safe. They don’t allow me to wander off by myself if there’s an attack. People think it’s because they have secrets to hide, but the real reason is called a ‘double tap.’ Terrorists and some military forces set off one bomb or fire a weapon, and then when people arrive, they light them up. It can easily be two or three more bombs or rockets or whatever.”

"

(Sorry about the pasted text...I don't seem to be able to adjust it to a friendlier format)

You claim I want to have things both ways, this is exactly what you and other esteemed members are doing when accepting the Israeli admission as to causing the deaths yet refusing to accept their findings that there was no criminal action on their part.

P.s the close up shot of the explosion sight looking out to sea was filmed from the deck of a ship, were the reporters there just coincidentally there getting in a bit of sunbathing?

Then there's the Fishermans hut (sic) which has a gaping hole in its side before the filmed smoke from the explosion yet had three corrugated iron sheets sealing it when the apparent explosion was filmed, who put these there, when and why?

Edit: Just to say all the press didn't have to be in cahoots with a conspiracy, all that would be needed is for them to be fooled, just as it was with the Israelis. You see what you want to see.

No, not both ways because the IDF admission corroborates the journalists. Nothing else does though,

If you read the report, the hut was bombed the day before....quite feasible that someone repaired it over night.

Any journalist not in cahoots and fooled would not report witnessing things, but would report what they heard.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed.

[Steely Dan]

(previous stuff omitted for clarity)
You start off by saying that you agree with Israel's self-assessment of no war crime and that you can't be sure of anything else. Yet, you can't be sure if the children were even killed by Israeli munitions....despite Israel's admission that they did kill them!
So you agree with Israel's report only so far as that they committed no war crime, but you don't necessarily agree with their self-confessed killing of the kids.

Sort of contradictory.

As a matter of interest, how much of the evidence that the report writer used to reach the conclusion that he did, have you viewed to have reached your consensus of no war crime? Or was his word good enough for you?
And what parts of all that evidence make you still unsure and doubtful of the IDF's own conclusion that they did indeed kill the boys? Or was the report writer's word not good enough this time?

I wasn't going to reply, but just for you here's another question to consider. Do journalists run towards explosions, unless they are told it's safe to do so? Journalists in Gaza go nowhere without Hamas minders watching and authorizing their presence.

http://www.thomaswictor.com/journalist-confirms-gaza-beach-deception-operation/

It's a pity you don't want to answer those very reasonable questions. The answers would have been telling.

The "proof" that your link claims is not a proof at all...it's speculation. And as Thorgal has pointed out, the gun boats had retreated.
Your source claims that the reporters ran towards the explosions....there is no reference to the time lapse between the explosions and the reporters arriving on the scene....in fact one narration I read was from a reporter (or several) on his balcony...your source makes out that the reporters were waiting for it to happen.

Essentially, your conspiracy theory contradicts the IDF.....yet you still take the IDF report at face value...while offering this conspiracy theory as evidence? You can't have it both ways.
Your source also makes out that a handful of reporters from several networks all conspired to dummy this footage and report a hoax. Quite preposterous.


What WAS interesting from your link is that Israel is known to "double tap", and the explanation of that, "“When I’m embedded with military units,” the journalist said, “I never go anywhere unless they tell me it’s safe. They don’t allow me to wander off by myself if there’s an attack. People think it’s because they have secrets to hide, but the real reason is called a ‘double tap.’ Terrorists and some military forces set off one bomb or fire a weapon, and then when people arrive, they light them up. It can easily be two or three more bombs or rockets or whatever.”
"
(Sorry about the pasted text...I don't seem to be able to adjust it to a friendlier format)

You claim I want to have things both ways, this is exactly what you and other esteemed members are doing when accepting the Israeli admission as to causing the deaths yet refusing to accept their findings that there was no criminal action on their part.

P.s the close up shot of the explosion sight looking out to sea was filmed from the deck of a ship, were the reporters there just coincidentally there getting in a bit of sunbathing?

Then there's the Fishermans hut (sic) which has a gaping hole in its side before the filmed smoke from the explosion yet had three corrugated iron sheets sealing it when the apparent explosion was filmed, who put these there, when and why?

Edit: Just to say all the press didn't have to be in cahoots with a conspiracy, all that would be needed is for them to be fooled, just as it was with the Israelis. You see what you want to see.

No, not both ways because the IDF admission corroborates the journalists. Nothing else does though,

If you read the report, the hut was bombed the day before....quite feasible that someone repaired it over night.
Any journalist not in cahoots and fooled would not report witnessing things, but would report what they heard.

The Israeli investigators had the sole remit of establishing criminal culpability or otherwise. The information they considered in arriving at this conclusion is not the same as that of the forensic analyst who by his own admission suspected Hamas were responsible. There is so much more evidence to consider, but as I stated he is putting together a film summarizing his findings, best to watch that when released instead of trying to cherry pick from a very complicated body of evidence. I am also aware that fascinating though this is the topic is about the findings of the Israeli inquiry. Edited June 19, 2015 by Scott

[up-country_sinclair]

their findings that there was no criminal action on their part.

So, Israel found that there was no criminal action on Israel's part. Well, that's mighty convenient.

I can only assume that ISIS is contemplating the deployment of this tactic soon. "Yeah, we killed them, but we held an internal review, and we found that we didn't commit any crimes". Case closed.

[ggold]

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/197710

US Expert: Hamas, not Israel, Killed Boys on Beach in Gaza War

One of the incidents most widely disseminated as "proof" of Israeli war crimes during its defensive Operation Protective Edge in Gaza last year was the deaths of four Arab youths on a Gaza beachfront used exclusively by Hamas terrorists.

it now appears that Israel need not take any approach to defend its actions - as the children on the beach were apparently killed not by its forces, but by Hamas itself.

The evidence for such has been gathered by a US-based weapons expert named Thomas Wictor. After conducting a forensic analysis of what happened on the day, pieced together using Hamas propaganda footage, film from various international TV networks, and photographs, Wictor has concluded that the boys killed on the beach were murdered by Hamas in a “Pallywood-style” propaganda stunt.

[up-country_sinclair]

The evidence for such has been gathered by a US-based weapons expert named Thomas Wictor.

Thomas Wictor? LOL.

the New York Times and Reuters published a series of photographs showing two Palestinian men at a hospital in Gaza, crying over the death of their father in an Israeli artillery barrage. The unconditionally pro-Israel Frum wasn't buying it, thanks to the helpful sleuthing of some "friend" of his, a random guy on the internet named Thomas Wictor

Seasoned Mideast journalist Ali Gharib—who previously worked alongside Frum at The Daily Beast—went a step further and interviewed Frum's source for the paranoid piffle, blogger Thomas Wictor, who professed his belief in ghost cats and admitted of his doctored-photos thesis: "Oh yeah, it's possible that I'm completely wrong about everything. This is just opinion."

http://gawker.com/david-frums-apology-for-his-nutty-theory-links-to-more-1613454088

Worth repeating:

Thomas Wictor? LOL.

[Thorgal]

Thomas Wictor ? The non academical and subjective judeophile blogger ?

'A US based weapon expert' ...Oh no, giving me a break...

Quote from link :

'...has worked as a stevedore, library archivist, conversational English teacher, editor of the world’s first online newspaper, voice-over actor, delivery driver, process server, field representative for a document-retrieval service, scale-model builder, and music journalist.'

...they took advantage of his post-traumatic stress disorder with secondary psychotic features, as well as the “brain fog” caused by Meniere’s disease. Both of these conditions create memory lapses and dissociation.'

http://www.thomaswictor.com/about/

You will need a lot of more Wictors to justify OP...

Edited July 5, 2015 by Thorgal

[Jay Sata]

Can I suggest there is little point trying to discuss this here when the free world can make up its own mind.

I for one will not waste my time on threads such as this with the same old rhetoric trotted out every time.

Waste of time and keyboard strokes.

[Scott]

Off-topic post removed.