American journalist killed by Israeli military

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Sixties Fan]

On May 22, the Twitter and Facebook accounts of “Al Jazeera Palestine” commemorated the anniversary of the alleged “Tantura Massacre” in 1948 with the following image:

(vide photo online)

The Arabic text states: “The martyrdom of about 300 Palestinians – today marks the 74th anniversary of the ‘horrific’ Tantura massacre which was carried out by the Zionist gangs against the residents of the town, located south of Haifa.”

In fact, the image in question is actually a 1955 photograph from Algeria:


(vide photo online)


Notably, Al Jazeera’s Palestinian staff, despite any proof, unequivocally accuses troops of having deliberately targeting their colleague Shireen Abu Aqleh. This photo fraud (as well as other relevant cases) should therefore be at the backdrop of any attempt to determine its credibility.

Al Jazeera Palestine's 'Tantura Massacre' Photo Fraud

Al Jazeera Palestine passes off a 1955 photograph from Algeria as documentation of an alleged Israeli massacre 1948 in Tantura, raising additional questions about

www.camera.org

 

[Sixties Fan]

Remember when the Palestinian coroner said that Shireen Abu Akleh was shot in the forehead?

The results of the initial forensic medicine report indicate that the direct cause of death was brain damage caused by a high-velocity bullet. The bullet penetrated the skull cavity causing an entry wound and then exited from the cavity causing another wound. Following that, the bullet hit the internal side of the protective helmet, ricocheted and lodged in the damaged tissues inside the skull.

The bullet hit her in front, exited the back, hit the helmet from inside and ricocheted back into her brain.

Al Jazeera even said she was shot in the face.

Apparently, the Palestinian prosecutor didn't like that story. Because the "investigation" has concluded something different:

Palestinian Attorney General Akram Al-Khatib said today that based on the Public Prosecution’s report on the killing of Shireen Abu Akleh, it was established that the veteran Al Jazeera journalist was killed by an armor-piercing projectile fired directly at her head by an Israeli sniper.

According Al-Khatib, an autopsy and forensic examination conducted in Nablus after Abu Akleh’s death showed she was shot from the back, indicating that she was attempting to flee as Israeli forces continued to fire towards the group of journalists.

Apparently the coroner didn't know what he was talking about. Or the Palestinian Authority decided that shooting her from the back makes Israel sound worse.

No wonder the Palestinian Authority doesn't want anyone to see her helmet, either.

Another indication that this report is filled with lies:

He added that the bullet had general and specific markings that match a Mini Ruger semi-automatic sniper weapon.

The IDF doesn't use Rugers.

One more thing that they claim:

Al-Khatib said the facts on the ground confirm the absence of any armed clashes at the time when the crime occurred, stressing that the investigation carried out by the Public Prosecution will be the cornerstone in the prosecution of the Israeli killers. “The only source of firing was by the occupation forces with the aim to kill,” he said.

(full article online)

Palestinian "investigation" contradicts coroner, and finds Israel killed Shireen Abu Akleh with a rifle they don't use

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Independent inquiry? LOL!

 

[Sixties Fan]

Middle East Eye released an entire seemingly unedited video of the scene in Jenin before and during Shireen Abu Akleh's death. (They mislabeled it as May 13, but it is clearly May 11.)

It provides additional evidence that the Jenin militants to the southeast shot and killed Abu Akleh, not IDF soldiers.

Here is a crucial 90 second excerpt that ends about three minutes before Shireen is shot:
----------------


I'm not as certain that the IDF had no angle - we don't know how far in the street Shireen was, although we know where the tree is, and of course bullets could go through foliage but I'm still convinced that the bullet hole at the top of the tree (see my previous post, update 1) would not look like that from that angle.

There is at least one other gunshot to be heard in the MEE video, whose source seems to be more than twice as far away as these, at 5:02 of the MEE video, with 800 ms between the shot and the muzzle blast. There may be an additional gunshot at 6:38, less than 30 seconds before the shots we've all seen.

In short, this video shows that:
* There were other audible gunshots in the minutes before Abu Akleh was killed, not as wass reported.
* At least one was recognized by the reporters as being shot near them, and it came from around 220 meters away.
* There were no IDF soldiers anywhere near the reporters, which means that it is entirely possible that the militants saw figures moving, perhaps some with helmets, and took a shot directly towards them.
* The reporter referred to the "shebab" and pointed towards the southeast, seeming to point where the shots came from. (And any reporter and witnesses who know this will never, ever admit it to CNN.)

The idea that Shireen was shot by trigger-happy terrorists to the southeast is not only plausible - it is likely.

(full article online)

There was gunfire before Abu Akleh was killed - including one towards reporters, seemingly from the southeast

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Sixties Fan]

That changes EVERYTHING. Suddenly, when we KNOW there was another group, a whole new range of ideas that were not considered make MUCH more sense than the IDF acting like a spoiled teen or despot who wants to get rid of critics.

What do we know about these gunmen?

1) They WERE walking within the range of the audio estimate of distance to Shireen.
2) They AREN'T professionals. They love to shoot guns. They don't learn military discipline.
3) They can EASILY make mistakes in shooting at people from a distance.
Also, the firing patterns of the shots that killed Shireen did not sound like the IDF's way of doing things, but they sounded - undisciplined.

Did the militants shoot Shireen?

If I am seeing this video accurately, showing reporters dodging a bullet minutes before Shireen was killed, and then pointing to a building while saying that there were Palestinian militants there, it sure seems possible or likely.

And if they could see a gunman in a building from where they point, that indicates a line of sight from the gunman to Shireen.

This brings up the possibility of gunmen on upper floors in buildings, which definitely solves the line of sight problem. This building would be ideal:



It would have a straight shot west if the IDF convoy went one block north, it is camouflaged with trees, - and it happens to be the exact distance that the bullet traveled to kill Shireen Abu Akleh.

It also fits the bullet patterns of the tree perfectly.
It's just a theory. There might be sections of the wall on the ground that provide line of sight. This is something CNN could have checked and it wasn't interested.
A militant could have hopped on top of a wall, too.
The IDF wasn't in the southeast so any bullet that came from there was from a militant. And we have evidence of at least one that reporters seemed to think did, in fact, come from the southeast.

Does everything add up perfectly yet? No, of course not. But they didn't add up perfectly to indict the IDF, either. We need the bullet. We need Shireen's helmet. We need the bullet that hit the other reporter. But there is enough evidence that there was another group, who were undisciplined, and who were not at all excluded as suspects by the evidence we have.

Perhaps Bellingcat will have the intellectual honesty to look at these other possibilities - they fit in better with the tree bullet holes, they fit better with the reporters in the video, and they fit better with basic logic if you know anything about the IDF beyond BDS lies

And you KNOW CNN will never admit they are wrong unless the evidence becomes overwhelming. They care more about reputation and ratings than the truth.

That's where we are at. There is a compelling alternate theory that was NEVER considered. When you compare the chances of an IDF mistake (or assassination, in the middle of a street battlem turning their backs on the terrorist to their south in order to kill a reporter that would backfire spectacularly) with the chances of a Jenin terrorist making a mistake, there is really no comparison - unless you think the IDF is a bloodthirsty, vindictive army before you start looking at the evidence.

Not considering alternate theories, and thinking that the open source media gives a complete picture of the facts, is a recipe for failure.

(full article online)

Summing up Abu Akleh and the mistakes of the investigators

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What's the only thing more useless than Tinny?

Assertions from Palestinians.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

Not troubled enough to pull your thumb out of your ass and do something.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Not troubled enough to pull your thumb out of your ass and do something.

Dignified?
Is that what you call it when terrorists steal the coffin from the family?

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Assassination of Shireen Abu Akleh: Who Gave the Order?

Israel: It is highly unlikely that the killing of journalist Shireen Abu Akleh was the decision of a lone soldier or a commander.

www.mintpressnews.com

There had to have been an order or, at the minimum, approval given by the highest levels of the Israeli defense apparatus, as high as the minister of defense or even the prime minister, before the sniper could execute this assassination.