Did Israel Shell a UN School? The Truth Exposed

[bigjelmapro]

Did Israel Shell a UN School? The Truth Exposed

Followup investigation that didn't quite get the news press its deserved.

Link to Patrick Martin article at Globe and Mail:

Account of Israeli attack doesn't hold up to scrutiny

Physical evidence and interviews with several eyewitnesses, including a teacher who was in the schoolyard at the time of the shelling, make it clear: While a few people were injured from shrapnel landing inside the white-and-blue-walled UNRWA compound, no one in the compound was killed. The 43 people who died in the incident were all outside, on the street, where all three mortar shells landed.

Stories of one or more shells landing inside the schoolyard were inaccurate.

While the killing of 43 civilians on the street may itself be grounds for investigation, it falls short of the act of shooting into a schoolyard crowded with refuge-seekers.

Follow the first link to the full article.

Didn't see this on CNN, Sky, or Al Jazeera.

Perhaps I missed it, but curious as to why other Gaza-related stories get extensive coverage on all media outlets for days on end if Israel can be portrayed as the culprit wholeheartedly, while there isn't a modicum of coverage for actual followup investigations when they occur (where the alleged atrocities initially reported on ACTUALLY call for these investigations to take place).

So much for the 'Zionist controlled media' conspiracy.

Comments?

 

[Quad4_72]

Imagine that. Don't worry, I am sure parky will be here soon to condemn Israel for attempting to kill those that launch rockets into their border.

 

[gumboot]

Actually some posters, including me, were pointing this out almost immediately, because numerous news stories were making this point.

According to eye witnesses, insurgents set up a mortar team in the shadow of the UN school and fired at the IDF, and the IDF returned fire on the mortar position, outside the school.

Apparently the mortar team had called on people to come and help them with something, and most of the people killed were there helping the mortar team.

 

[Oliver]

It's strange, but I can't find more than 6* [*currently] reports about the OP:


UN retracts claim Israeli strike hit school
Melbourne Herald Sun, Australia - 6 hours ago
THE United Nations has retracted a claim that an Israeli strike which killed more than 40 people in northern Gaza city of Jabaliya last month hit a school ...

'Civilians killed outside, not inside, UNRWA school'
Jerusalem Post, Israel - Feb 1, 2009
The IDF initially confirmed that it had returned fire at gunmen inside the UNRWA school, but later retracted and claimed they were in the vicinity of the ...

UN disseminates lies and a willing media swallows them
The Australian, Australia - Feb 3, 2009
John Ging, UNRWA's operations director in Gaza, acknowledged in an interview this week that all three Israeli mortar shells landed outside the school and ...

Account of Israeli attack doesn't hold up to scrutiny
Globe and Mail, Canada - Jan 29, 2009
John Ging, UNRWA's operations director in Gaza, acknowledged in an interview this week that all three Israeli mortar shells landed outside the school and ...

UN Backtracks on School Shelling Claims
Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America - 17 hours ago
Maxwell Gaylord, the UN humanitarian coordinator in Jerusalem, said Monday that the IDF mortar shells fell in the street near the compound, and not on the ...

UN: Gazans killed in IDF strike on school were not inside building ...
Ha'aretz, Israel - Feb 3, 2009
"The initial examination conducted with forces operating in the area shows that mortar shells were fired from within the school at IDF forces. ...

 

[gumboot]

It's strange, but I can't find more than 6* [*currently] reports about the OP:

Are you serious?

 

[Darth Rotor]

Note for when enemy has mortars: cover is preferred to being in the open.

See OP for why.

DR

 

[Oliver]

Are you serious?

Yes, this should be all over the news by now, shouldn't it?

 

[gumboot]

Yes, this should be all over the news by now, shouldn't it?

Why on earth would the gun-jumping media want to call attention to the fact that they ran a false story? Haven't you learned anything about the media, Oliver?

 

[a_unique_person]

Did Israel Shell a UN School? The Truth Exposed

Followup investigation that didn't quite get the news press its deserved.

Link to Patrick Martin article at Globe and Mail:

Account of Israeli attack doesn't hold up to scrutiny


http://www.honestreporting.com/a/images/communiques/upload1/globe&mailunschool.jpg

Follow the first link to the full article.

Didn't see this on CNN, Sky, or Al Jazeera.

Perhaps I missed it, but curious as to why other Gaza-related stories get extensive coverage on all media outlets for days on end if Israel can be portrayed as the culprit wholeheartedly, while there isn't a modicum of coverage for actual followup investigations when they occur (where the alleged atrocities initially reported on ACTUALLY call for these investigations to take place).

So much for the 'Zionist controlled media' conspiracy.

Comments?

IIRC, from the thread I read, there were several accounts of what happened, and back then the consensus seemed to be that the people were killed outside, and there was no direct hit on the school, and the UN claimed that in the first place. The UN statement has already clarified their statement, that what they said in the first place was correct. The 'truth exposed' statement is a beat up.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25010544-5005961,00.html

It stressed that its initial report of the January 6 incident correctly stated that Israeli shells hit outside the school run by the UN agency for Palestinian refugees UNRWA, but that it later referred to "the shelling of the UNRWA school in Jabaliya".
The Israeli military initially said its forces had responded to hostile fire from within the UN school but later reportedly retracted that statement.

Clarifications all around.



Another update.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1061476.html

Dr. Ezzeldeen Abu al-Aish, who lost three daughters and a niece in an Israel Defense Forces strike in the Gaza Strip last month, responded Wednesday to an IDF statement confirming that it was Israeli fire that killed his daughters, thanking those responsible for investigating the incident and saying that "we all make mistakes, and we don't repeat them."

Abu al-Aish, a father of eight, became one of the symbols of the Gaza offensive for Israelis after he captivated TV viewers with a sobbing live report on the death of his three daughters and his niece in Israeli shelling. The 55-year-old gynecologist trained in Israeli hospitals and speaks Hebrew.

 

[Oliver]

Why on earth would the gun-jumping media want to call attention to the fact that they ran a false story? Haven't you learned anything about the media, Oliver?

I have, but I expect the serious Media to correct the story. But at least I would expect that Pro-Israel papers in the US, for example, would point out the error if the OP is correct. Yet, the story doesn't get any broad attention and I wonder why:

http://news.google.com/news?source=...-8&tab=wn&q=gaza+"un+school"+mortar&scoring=n

 

[gumboot]

IIRC, from the thread I read, there were several accounts of what happened, and back then the consensus seemed to be that the people were killed outside, and there was no direct hit on the school, and the UN claimed that in the first place. The UN statement has already clarified their statement, that what they said in the first place was correct. The 'truth exposed' statement is a beat up.

Did you get to read the Patrick Martin article before it was taken off their front page (you have to buy it now)? He first quotes John Ging of UNRWA claiming that the UN never said their compound was attacked, and claiming that it was Israel's fault for causing confusion.

Martin then neatly quotes the initial statements from Ging and the UN in which he quite clearly accuses Israel of attacking the compound directly, hitting the compound directly, and killing people inside the compound.

The UN played the anti-Israeli card, they've been caught out, and now they're backpedaling furiously. It would be funny, if it wasn't so utterly disgusting.

The UN have lost a tonne of credibility in this conflict. Not that they had any. I see the Jerusalem Post is reporting that the UN admits to hiring Hamas members. Go neutrality!

 

[gumboot]

I have, but I expect the serious Media to correct the story. But at least I would expect that Pro-Israel papers in the US, for example, would point out the error if the OP is correct. Yet, the story doesn't get any broad attention and I wonder why:

Perhaps these papers aren't as "pro-Israel" as you think they are. All of the major networks ran with the original story. Bringing attention to the fact that it was false would do nothing but tarnish their own reputation whilst giving free publicity to their competitors.

What do you mean "if the OP is correct"? Are you suggesting that the shells did land inside the school?

 

[Oliver]

Perhaps these papers aren't as "pro-Israel" as you think they are. All of the major networks ran with the original story. Bringing attention to the fact that it was false would do nothing but tarnish their own reputation whilst giving free publicity to their competitors.

What do you mean "if the OP is correct"? Are you suggesting that the shells did land inside the school?

No, I was suggesting that I didn't know what happened. Here's a more official source than the OP's articles:

FIELD UPDATE ON GAZA FROM THE HUMANITARIAN COORDINATOR


Clarification: While correctly reported on 6 January that Israeli shells landed outside an UNRWA school in Jabalia, resulting in an initial estimate of 30 fatalities, the Situation Report of 7 January referred to ‘the shelling of the UNRWA school in Jabalia.’ The Humanitarian Coordinator would like to clarify that the shelling, and all of the fatalities, took place outside rather than inside the school. According to UNRWA, the number of fatalities is over 40, many of them among the 1,368 people who had taken refuge in the school.

 

[gumboot]

No, I was suggesting that I didn't know what happened. Here's a more official source than the OP's articles:

So you accept the journalist's report that the UN and the media deceived us about the facts of the case?

What do you think of that?

 

[Oliver]

So you accept the journalist's report that the UN and the media deceived us about the facts of the case?

What do you think of that?

I cannot claim that the media and the UN deliberately deceived us since part of the Medias Problem was that Israel denied them to enter Gaza, which would have brought a clear picture early on [AKA: Blowback]. So I assume it's either a matter of misunderstanding or the Arab Media that was in Gaza at the time spread the misinformation deliberately and the western Media aired the story without strong evidence.

But what I seriously wonder about is the fact that the clarification doesn't get more attention. That's really strange.

 

[bigjelmapro]

This clarification is not news-worthy to most media outlets, hence the lack of coverage.

Serge Schmemann, former deputy foreign editor of the New York Times, once wrote:
“There is nothing a journalist fears more than having a correction printed about his story.”

Both Chris Gunness (UNRWA Spokesperson) and John Ging (UNRWA Director of Operations in Gaza) initially stated that the IDF shelling was aimed intentionally at the UN school/compound. These statements occurred on Jan. 8th and 7th, respectively which all media outlets picked up on, where only a 'clarification' or rather, detraction, of these allegations without any supporting evidence, was made on Jan. 30th. The damage had already done and this is what the international media and community itself cling on to.

Lastly, this clarification which was linked in the pdf file linked above doesn't state any real clarification or real admission that the UN and the UNRWA agreed with Israel's position. The official statement where this clarification is based off of goes as follows:

http://www.un.org/unrwa/news/statements/gaza_crisis/chris_gaza_crisis.html

Over 40 Palestinians were killed and over 50 injured following shelling near an UNRWA school in Jebalya Camp on the afternoon of Tuesday 6th January 2009. Israel maintains that it was responding to rocket fire from Palestinian militants who were hiding inside the school compound.

Chris Gunness, UNRWA Spokesperson

8th Jan 2009

"I have been authorised to say that in private briefings with diplomats, the Israeli army has admitted that the rockets from Jabalya (two days ago) came from outside the UNRWA school compound, not from inside it. Therefore the allegations against a neutral UN human development organization were entirely baseless. This increases pressure for an independent investigation. "

This is quite different than what's quoted in the pdf file provided.

This contradicts the statement of John Ging:

http://www.un.org/unrwa/news/statements/gaza_crisis/fakhura_school_jan09.html

John Ging, UNRWA Director of Operations in Gaza, speaking on a visit to the UNRWA-run Al-Fakhura school in Jabaliya, where an Israeli strike killed over 40 people on Tuesday

Gaza, 7 January 2009

"There's nowhere safe in Gaza. Everyone here is terrorized and traumatized. These men, women and children are all seeking safety and there is no safety in Gaza at the moment, even in an UNRWA school. This is unacceptable.

I sincerely hope that for the sake of those who have died that it will not have been in vain, that it will spur everybody into more immediate action to get this cease-fire agreed and just stop horrific violence.

Today is better than yesterday but we have only three hours. That means we have 21 hours of terror. I want 24 hours of ceasefire, we want a full ceasefire."

On the allegation that Israeli troops came under fire from inside the school, Ging added:

"I have been reassured by my own staff that there were no militants in the schools. If anybody has evidence to the contrary, then let's bring it forward

The school was clearly marked as a U.N. building and GPS coordinates for the site had been provided to Israeli forces.

Today I have talked to the witnesses and I was humbled by their dignity. They were so stoic in the face of such a stressful circumstance, and they still believe in the U.N."

The same can be said about the Mohammed al-Dura affair, which is still being hammered out in court. However, in this case, the monuments, streets and stadiums named after al-Dura were already made. No retraction or investigation would ever 'clarify' this situation.

The political motivations behind this wholehearted and false allegation against the Israel are readily apparent.

 

[a_unique_person]

Did you get to read the Patrick Martin article before it was taken off their front page (you have to buy it now)? He first quotes John Ging of UNRWA claiming that the UN never said their compound was attacked, and claiming that it was Israel's fault for causing confusion.

Martin then neatly quotes the initial statements from Ging and the UN in which he quite clearly accuses Israel of attacking the compound directly, hitting the compound directly, and killing people inside the compound.

The UN played the anti-Israeli card, they've been caught out, and now they're backpedaling furiously. It would be funny, if it wasn't so utterly disgusting.

The UN have lost a tonne of credibility in this conflict. Not that they had any. I see the Jerusalem Post is reporting that the UN admits to hiring Hamas members. Go neutrality!

Beat up, again. The UN has a bombed out site, attacked with phosphorous, with live video of the event.

You have no idea if the "The UN played the anti-Israeli card". What evidence do you have? It looks to me like a correct report was made, they stand by it, and in the confusion someone misinterpreted the event.

Clarification: While correctly reported on 6 January that Israeli shells landed outside an UNRWA school
in Jabalia, resulting in an initial estimate of 30 fatalities, the Situation Report of 7 January referred to ‘the
shelling of the UNRWA school in Jabalia.’ The Humanitarian Coordinator would like to clarify that the
shelling, and all of the fatalities, took place outside rather than inside the school. According to UNRWA,
the number of fatalities is over 40, many of them among the 1,368 people who had taken refuge in the
school.

Look for "Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon delivers remarks during a press conference in front of a damaged warehouse belonging to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for the Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) Headquarters. (20 January 2009)"

http://un.org/apps/news/photostories_detail.asp?PsID=36

 

[a_unique_person]

The same can be said about the Mohammed al-Dura affair, which is still being hammered out in court. However, in this case, the monuments, streets and stadiums named after al-Dura were already made. No retraction or investigation would ever 'clarify' this situation.

The political motivations behind this wholehearted and false allegation against the Israel are readily apparent.

The al-Dura affair reminds me of 911, to the extent that people are claiming it is all a conspiracy to smear Israel, with the Palestinians deliberately shooting the boy for propaganda purposes.

Is the case of Iman Al-Hams another setup?

An Israeli army officer who repeatedly shot a 13-year-old Palestinian girl in Gaza dismissed a warning from another soldier that she was a child by saying he would have killed her even if she was three years old.
The officer, identified by the army only as Captain R, was charged this week with illegal use of his weapon, conduct unbecoming an officer and other relatively minor infractions after emptying all 10 bullets from his gun’s magazine into Iman al-Hams when she walked into a “security area” on the edge of Rafah refugee camp last month.
A tape recording of radio exchanges between soldiers involved in the incident, played on Israeli television, contradicts the army’s account of the events and appears to show that the captain shot the girl in cold blood.
The official account claimed that Iman was shot as she walked towards an army post with her schoolbag because soldiers feared she was carrying a bomb.
But the tape recording of the radio conversation between soldiers at the scene reveals that, from the beginning, she was identified as a child and at no point was a bomb spoken about nor was she described as a threat. Iman was also at least 100 yards from any soldier.
Instead, the tape shows that the soldiers swiftly identified her as a “girl of about 10” who was “scared to death”.
The tape also reveals that the soldiers said Iman was headed eastwards, away from the army post and back into the refugee camp, when she was shot.

​

At that point, Captain R took the unusual decision to leave the post in pursuit of the girl. He shot her dead and then “confirmed the kill” by emptying his magazine into her body.

 

[gumboot]

Beat up, again. The UN has a bombed out site, attacked with phosphorous, with live video of the event.

You have no idea if the "The UN played the anti-Israeli card". What evidence do you have? It looks to me like a correct report was made, they stand by it, and in the confusion someone misinterpreted the event.

See bigjelmapro's post above yours. The UN were directly responsible for the confusion about this incident, and their statements made it absolutely clear they were accusing Israel of deliberately targetting and hitting the school.

 

[a_unique_person]

See bigjelmapro's post above yours. The UN were directly responsible for the confusion about this incident, and their statements made it absolutely clear they were accusing Israel of deliberately targetting and hitting the school.

They deliberately said what they deliberately said, but you don't know that "they" deliberately said the wrong thing, when "They" also said the right thing. When a confusing story comes from the one place, it's possible it comes down to individuals getting it wrong. I would also add the IDF appears to have been in on this anti-semitic libel, since they also agreed at first that their weapons did hit the school. Was that also 'deliberate'?