http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5065982.stm

it was only a matter of time with Israel shelling Palestinian lands almost daily.

I would have hoped to see some figures on how many Palestinians were killed since February 2005... and how many Israelis.

pfffrt. sad news, yet entirely comprehensible.

Reading through some of the news related to this story, I come away with the thought that the Hamas and the Fatah Military factions have found some common ground. I am not sure how this will play out. With the communication skills of these two groups I am sure it will now become a blame game between the two of them.

Its too bad that neither of the two groups have the sense enough too save their bullets for their enemy, instead they shoot their guns in to the sky to show their anger.

That's the way the media plays it. This weekend, every paper and website: "OMG teh Izraylees shot tha girls family on the beach!!!1! Jews are evil babykillers! She's an orphan now!"

Now: http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/13/...robe/index.html

hmm, craters are not left by bullets. IED. it's all they know of war. I personally knew something stunk to high hell about 5 shells killing seven people.


no doubt HAMAS will apologize for assuming it was Israeli smallboat fire, and restore their truce, yeah? I mean being that they are so noble and all,..

Yea...Not suprised. Kill your own, blame the enemy.

Hamas is showing their diplomacy skills. Lets attack government buildings. And people expect them to be nice to the rest of the world?


I'm just waiting for someone to say that Hamas is justified in planting the mines to kill their own. Because Israel bullied them into it.

are you such fools?

you believe "Israeli Military Sources" over Human Rights Watch?

Are you so open to propaganda? Because frankly what you said there raum is plain incredible.

I bet you guys are convinced TV shopping channels talk directly to you as well, hmm?!

Lets, for arguments sake...just assume that it was the shells.

What do they expect. Rockets are fired, and no one is gonna do anything?

And I'm very happy that Abbas and the Israeli PM are talking and negotiating. Hamas is showing to be a horrible thing for the palestinians.

And Brains, you're going to say something like "Israel should stop attacking, and the rockets will stop"

These are terrorists. When USA killed Zarqawi, no one paid attention to the other 5 people who were killed.

Why? Because they killed a terrorist. And everyone, including the people in the country, wanted him dead.

The Hamas makes it a point to use the media to demonize Israel

Brains, be emotional. It's easier with no experience.

or maybe you have some?

What experience do you have with ballistics?

I have alot, having actually fired high calibur self-propelled weapons, including a 78mm like the one Israeli IDF craft were firing at the time. i ahve also fired the "little bit" 50 calibur that was at one time planted on the side of a MARK-109, and "repozzed" to my own 3"50 gun tub on the ship I was the assistant armorer on for two years of my four navy years.

I do not expect many people at Human Rights Watch actually have a iota of ballistics experience, and can EASILY flub a investigation, which is why they call upon Israel to offer a outside transparent investigation. They know they have no idea of what they are talking about, or seeing. I believe their heart is in the right place, but would you take an investigation from the Human Rights Organization as a definitive ballistic analysis? not me. so, i scoped my own.

I was at first furious about this. I hate defending the military use of force, especially when the occasional act of idiocy, hatred, and the FUBAR of any mode of operations (miltary or otherwise) inevitably shows its head. Then, I felt compelled to do some legwork on it, because it just didn't add up when the inconsistencies came forward.

I saw the informal and hardly qualified report by HRW on this. I challenge its summary of findings and assertions, as so far.

Where was the impact? Not on the footage I saw. I have fired large weapons, including a anti-tank weapon. They leave CRATERS. big ones. Of a howitzer like the M-109 (the weapon fired) it is said "It digs the grave for you." The only rounds consistent with any shrapnel damage from a howitzer are from flechette rounds, and they will SHRED not just pierce.

Typical ballistics on a 155mm round leave a 4+ foot crater. Did you see one? or maybe the elite IDF ninjas filled up the hole while the cameras were on the girl. You know, the cameras that just happened to be on the beach?

The blast pattern in the sand is indicative of a mine, not a artillery weapon. It is an "out and wide" pattern, not a "down and deep" pattern. the impact of the blast is well centered, not angeled. it would have been a better accusation to say the bomb was dropped from the sky, right over the site.

There is no velocity to the blast pattern. That indicates a static discharge of force at the delivery point. I.E. a nonmoving explosion. no missile, no round. a bomb or a mine.

The muzzle velocity of a howitzer round can not be lessened. you can not slow a round down. The muzzle velocity is inconsistent with the timing of the attacks.

The rate of fire is inconsistent with the timing of the attacks. This is a single shot self-propelled weapon. A team of eight men can not load and prep the weapon for the timing of the attacks.

Basically, Lee Harvey Oswald couldn't have fired all these shots in the time he had to make the kill.
-----------

The sole assertations of the Human Rights watch is that "they found evidence of shells marked 155 mm" on a beach peppered with over 5,000 rounds of howitzer fire.

They also found other craters marked with 155mm debris. Lots of them. More than any rate of fire could be supporting.

But many of these are from previous shellings, which litter the area.

Their major flaw is that they are using testimony and expert advice from the Palestinian EOD (explosive oridinance disposal). I worked with the EOD, and I know the USN EOD knows their stuff. The Palestinians don't have the equipment to have legitimate ballistics knowledge of a M-109.

Now, the BIG deal. 155mm Mark109 shells were investigated. BUT the IDF were at that time firing 78mm rounds from their naval vessel.

of all of these, one was unaccounted for.

IF Israeli gunfire was responsible, it was a 155mm dud that was already laying on the beach. The blast MIGHT be consistent with a 155mm round exploding with no velocity.

PALESTINIAN FAMILY CASUALTIES FROM ISRAELI DUD ON BEACH

is much different than

ISRAEL LAUNCHES ATTACK ON PALESITIAN FAMILY PICNIC.

they also say most of the damage is head and torso, and so it can't come from below. I guess they don't realize most people injured by land mines suffer major head and torso damage. only the person who trips it by foot recieves significant foot damage... and that varies with different kinds of mines. In fact, MHT (massive head trauma) is the major cause of death in children who discover landmines, worldwide.

many mines (bounding types) have a sensitive area around them and jump up. Israel and Palestine have both used these.

I, however, will not say who planted the mine, if in fact it were a landmine, which I strongly suspect over a magic bullet from a magic howitzer. or when it was planted. Both Israel and Palestine have set mines on these beaches. in fact, children in palestine still die from mines planted in 1967, and as of late there has been a resurgence in reports of casualties.

That is why I unilaterally oppose landmines and IED's. It has no target, and there is no safety, and no one calls the shot. There is no honor in leaving a bomb with a hari trigger you can not disarm a few inches under the dirt.

---------

For me, this is as simple as the JFK issue. The rounds can not be cycled and fired fast enough for the ballistics. The muzzle velocity of the weapon can't generate the force needed for the "magic" bullet shots. There was more than one shooter.

and I am far from a fool.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5079464.stm

Brains,

what did you hope to accopmplish by posting something that essentially confirms my reply? In effect, the only people who think this was a howitzer round are the inexperienced independent investigators at Human Rights Watch, who admittedly are not qualified to make a truly competent investigation of their own, or they would not insist that israel do so. They are the only investigative party that believes this is the result of oncoming fire from a howitzer round that was not even on the ship that witnesses say was firing down the beach, which is where presumptive conclusions that the IDF fired on the family came from.

I aready said, it could be a mine or a dud. and most likely was.

--------

If your point was to confirm my assumptions with BBC coverage, great. If you had a different point, state it.

I dont like BBC coverage of this turmoil becuase its very 'palestinian based'.

They barely touch on the fact that dozens of rockets have been fired into Israel, injuring people.

But they make it a point that when Israel attacks a militant vehicle on its way to LAUNCH MORE ROCKETS, they focus on the regretable innocent victims.

It's clearly bias. And especially more so because they don't list the By-Line. It could be a report straight out of Al-jazeera or Hamas.

dk. apparently you indeed do not read BBC News, because they very consequently mention Palestinians launching Qassam's as well. stories like this or this regularly feature on their front page (or at least on the Middle East front page). so biased they certainly are not. if they were, they would not be winning awards, would they?

@raum: the guy speaking for HRW is Marc Garlasco, a former Pentagon adviser who is now a military analyst with the group. I think he knows as well as you do, he is independent AND he has been on-site.

Awards? They won a Webby



Thats not a journalism award. But, Online Journalism Awards are awards. And they did in fact give BBC a nomination for General Excellence in Online Journalism award in 2005. As did they give one to CNN, ESPN, and the New York Times.

They did win in 2004 for General Excellence in Online Journalism.

But then again Bill O Reilly of Fox News won some journalism awards.

err... yeah. true.

i also posted reactions to your comment about biasedness. did you look at them? do you see that they also show the other side of the story?

Ok...
The first article was nothing more than a quick little lesson on the different rockets that are fired. Hardly the sensationalized story about the 8 people killed in PA.

The second story didn't do much different other than show the terrorists making their weapons. And how they fear for their children.

An example of sensationalism to win the sympathy plea


Makes it sound like these scum never blow a teenage club, or a bus full of children, and senior citizens. They make it sound like their rockets know how to dodge children, and only hit adults.

Brains..All you did was show me how the news is brainwashing you. They use good wording to give the image of victims to the terrorists.

Oh, did you noticed that they called the last set of 8 innocent victms martyrs? Since when are innocent people martyrs?

that is not brainwashing. that IS how they feel. that is THEIR words! it is THEIR opinion. THEIR view on this. if they would not feel like that they would not make rockets now would they? that is not the opinion of the BBC, that is an exact wording of how THEY speak - the other side of the story. things YOU never read!

you said that the BBC never reports about PA using Qassams, that is just wrong. They even have black on white proof they do. They have picture of guys making them!

No, i didnt say the BBC never reports about PA using Qassams.

I said they dont focus on the people hurt or killed from them. Or the children killed in suicide bombings. They sensationalize the deaths of palestinian children, but just give a body count, if they evne mention the death of israelis in terroristic attacks

I agree, body counts are the most neutral way to show what is going on. So here you have it:

http://www.btselem.org/English/Statistics/Casualties.asp

(Since start of the second intifada)

Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces : 3.471 (of which 695 minors)
Israeli's killed by Palestinians : 1.005 (of which 119 minors)

More neutral then naked figures you can't get, can you?

again. it shows you do not read the site. they do mention israeli deaths. they do not focus on it, that is true and they certainly not sensationalize. on neither side.

front page today: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5082820.stm

You misunderstand me brains.

Take this last article.
They don't mention any details of the injured. If this happened in the PA, they would say something like:
Article
or


It's called sensationalism. You add a face, a name, something to the victim to make it seem more tragic.


"20 people killed on a bus by a suicide bomber" doesn't have the same ring as "an 8 year old boy playing was killed along with 8 people on the beach." Then you add the picture of a young victim or similiar.

For the suicide bomber, you add a picture of bus debris, or israeli tanks to show retaliation

you are correct. that would be sensationalism and it would be biased if the BBC would portray news that way, but it does not.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2347155.stm

(with a picture of the burning bus behind civilians carrying a dead or wounded person)

or

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2348159.stm

if ^^ that is not showing the Israelis suffering I do not know what is.

or

an article on Israeli's living with bombers

or

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4498862.stm

(including a link to pictures from the scene - maybe not as close up as some similar ones at the PA side, but that might as well have to do because of police barriers, no?)

or (one more)


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3699224.stm

as much detail as the "family picknick", no?

and so on.

but... as K2 pointed out: PA civilian deaths ARE more frequent. their death toll just is higher. there ARE very very objectively seen MORE news stories to be posted.

Is this a reply to you? Did I understand you well now?

Brains, I didn't mean any offense.

The first 2 articles are from 2002, and thats fine. I am mostly referring to recent news. Your point is made. I still feel that they're downplaying the rocket attacks on israel as of recent.

And yes, K2 did make a point that there have been more civillian deaths of the Palestinians than of the Israelis.

The one thing neglected is to mention how many of those are terrorists.

And maybe people should recognize that they are risking their lives and their families lives when they engaged in terroristic activities, OR associate with terrorists.

We're getting into a back and forth again of which came first, and who is the bigger evil.





On the bright side:

Hamas Government Wants Ceasefire

well, according to different but consistent the PA, more that 70%-80% of the kids in palestine want to be shahid. so how many of the kids are terrorists?

ask www.al-fateh.net

they are not. as far as I have understood the BBC reports, the palestinians launch them almost daily, but they mostly miss target. no casualties "as of recent". If I am mistaking - i.e. if there are Israele casualties - I am sure you can find them on BBC as well.

is my BBC-induced view on Palestinian aggression incorrect concering rocket attacks?



yes. that IS good and I like a lot you like it as well. now. why doesn't Israel follow suit and give peace a chance?

I'm just curious..I'm not trying to antagonize...

If the world (USA, Israel, EU) views Hamas as a terrorist organization, to the level of Al-Quiada, is it the issue of hunting the terrorists, or the innocent civilians?

Isn't association with a criminal or terrorist a crime?

i am not sure what you mean dk. please rephrase.

He means that all Palestinians civilians are terrorists and thus legitimate targets (because they have voted or at least support hamas morally).

Oh well, dk, I'm not blaming you or anybody else, it seems like discussing this topic can't be done without emotions taking over... And I admit I also can't look at this conflict in a "neutral" way.

Just this: if everybody would think like you (once a terrorist always a terrorist), Nortern Ireland would still be a warzone, because several ex-IRA members are now part of the process of bringing peace. And Ariel Sharon would have never been allowed to become prime minister because of the massacre at Sabra and Shatila. And former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin can be labelled terrorist as well, since he was involved in the attempt to kill then-West German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/726013.html).

And I must say, I find it simply stunning that we are actually slipping further and further on the slope, since nobody is even questioning the fact that we don't mind a country we call Western and democratic with a proper justice system in place to perform extra legal executions.

What is the entire world blaming the USA for? They are detaining people without a proper trial, and everybody is screaming. Israel simply executes them without bringing them to court and nobody seems bothered.

WOAH! I absolutely DID NOT mean that! Nor do I, under any circumstances EVER believe that all Palestinians civilians are terrorists! I am not that shallow or racist.

I am asking...is your anger with Israel because it is attacking terrorists (meaning, taking any action at all), or are you upset becuase innocent civillians get caught up in the attack?


EDIT:

On the bright side:
EU endorses Palestinian aid plan

And full circle...

Palestinian militants reject truce offer to Israel
Palestinians fire rockets into Israel
(No BBC report of this at the time I checked)

Both, actually... The civilian casualties are of course a total atrocity, certainly if they are the result of actions done by the official Israeli army.

But my problem remains: it should not be tolerated in a democracy that the army (even with political backing) can kill possible terrorists without allowing them to have a proper trial. And if I'm correct, Israel has abolished the death-penalty, which makes these extra-legal executions even more sour.

We do agree that in a democracy, the justice system is a corner stone? That is the reason even Saddam is brought to trial... It's not a matter of being guilty or not (and I guess most of the people Israel executes are truely criminals) it's the fact that everybody is entitled to a trial. If Israel can't bring these guys to trial, then, whatever the consequences, they should leave them alone.

A couple things...

Israel abolished the death penalty for normal crimes.(1954). They allow it for terrorists and extremes, such as Adolf Eichmann. (The primary architecht of the Holocaust).


I do agree that innocent deaths are horrible. I don't like it either. I do raise the point though... The general law is that being associated, or being involved with a terrorist, makes yo ua co-conspirator on certain levels. An accomplice as it were.

An person, by UN standards set in the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, commits an offense if they participate as an accomplice. They hide or work with the terrorist, conceal them, etc.

I'm not saying all citizens of Palestine are terrorists, but you have to assume some risk to life when you hang out with them, or frequent the spots they fire rockts from.

Also...were you outraged by the death of Zarqawi?

it was not directly addressed to me, but here's my take: i was not outraged. I did think: another marketing opportunity which leads to what exactly? more stability? ... keep on dreaming!

about your comment on that news item not being on bbc news. it was mentioned in another article. now, you could easily interpret the story's title - in which it is mentioned - as being "negative to Israel", but that too happens the other way around. for example when Israel shells the PA almost daily (which has happened already during some weeks). Not all of these shellings make headlines.

The Israeli army confirmed it targeted a vehicle near Gaza City, which it said was carrying militants.

Israel has carried out a spate of air strikes against militants recently in an effort to stem Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel.

Five such rockets were fired into Israel on Friday, but no-one was hurt.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5089324.stm

Well, I did say AT THE TIME, it wasn't mentioned. I didn't say they didn't mention stuff ever.

But with Zarqawi... there were 6 other people killed. Including a woman and a child. So why no outrage?

okok. fair enough. I just posted it, since you have described the bbc as biased before. I thought you saw the lack of that sotry as proof that indeed the BBC was. hope you understand.

I was and am not outraged by the family picknick story, nor by the civilians which have died together with Zarqawi, nor by when a suicide bomber explodes a bus. I find them truely, truely sad, but since I am not surprised by them, there is no outrage.

I am outraged by injustice. The injustice which the most powerful nation on earth has used to wage a war because of economic intrests. The injustice with which Israel decides to build barriers on PA territory. The injustice shown in its extra-judicial killings. The injustice with which PA funding has ceased etc. THAT is what outrages me.

Well, I too am outraged by the USA and the war in Iraq. I think GWB is a horrible president, and this war is the most aweful thing that could have happened in the last 25 years.

I also feel that Israel and the PA have NOTHING to do with that. So to cite either one of those events as fuel for the fire for the other event is ineffective.

Moving on to building borders...
This is a debate of time, and where you want to start looking. Going to biblical days, this land was all called "Eretz Yisrael" and "Land of the Hebrews"

Fast forward alot...many different regions and owners. In 1947, the UNGA passed the partition plan which divided the area into Jewish and Arab areas. The Jewish people accepted the plan. The Arabs did not. A few small fights ensued.

Finally, the british released the land to the Jewish people, who declared their independence. And then the Arabs attacked.

1949..Armistice agreements divided the land between Israel, Eygpt, Jordan, and Syria. Jordan got east jerusalem, Eygpt got the Gaza strip.. (The green line)

Come forward to the 1980s. The PLO decides the state of Palestine has borders, and it includes Israel.

Anyway..long story short....its a history game of how far back in history you want to look.

As for your comment about the funds being cut.
1) No nation is EVER obligated to give money to any other nation. No person is ever obligated to give money another person. Just because a nation can't support itself, doesnt mean other nations HAVE to help it. They choose to freely.

2) Hamas took power of the government. Hamas is a violent terroristic organization, bound to the destruction of Israel. So why should countries give money to Palestine, when that money is going to be used to buy guns. Arms. weapons.
But the people will suffer. So the nations choose to find a way to pass money along to the people, bypassing the government. This means Hamas has to find money from other arab nations. Who, at this point, would be supporting terrorism. But thats nothing new.

Round and Round we go.

You the People of Palestine, You have free choice to vote in the government you want to represent you.

The Hamas: Considered a terrorist group by the rest of the world. This choice may have some serious consequences.

The Fatah: Not considered a terrorist group by the rest of world, and seems to want to get along with its neighbors and have kept good enough relations to keep the support coming in.

What message did they send us by picking the Hamas?

Although I understand the point you make, I think its a bit simplistic.

The people weren't happy, are hoping for change. But it why Hamas fears a referandum. The people WANT the 2 state idea. peace.

Hamas would loose any power it had with the referendum.

dk. indeed. you ARE free to give money or don't.

the problem here is that you have a country which has evolved into relying on outside funding for years. if you take that away from one day to the other, it looses all form of income it has and it is bound to fall into chaos. very extremely put you are commiting economic genocide; you are not targeting the government anymore, you are targeting its complete population which relied on the funding.

don't forget either that Israel gets quite a lot of funding as well. while it certainly would not fall into chaos as quickly as Palestine, it would also very much feel that reduction.

I am aware that MANY countries, get funding from lots of groups. And all the countires are supporting the people. They are bypassing the 'government'.

I still completely fail to see your "association" idea.

Israel fires rockets into busy streets to hit people in their cars. So a Palestinian walking in a street is assiciating himself with terrorists? Driving behind or in front of a vehicle that has a terrorist inside is also associating yourself with terrorists?

Having a neighbour that happens to be involved with groups like hamas/Al Aqsa is also associating yourself with terrorists?

This thing that happened on the beach: the "defense" of Israel is that the last shell was fired a couple of minutes before the actual blast happened that killed that family, so it wasn't theirs (although Peretz, minister of defense isn't sure anymore)... And nobody is wondering: ok, so why did you even launch grenades onto a beach where civilians were present?

You know what outrages me? The fact that we seem to have a ranking in how much value a life has. The number of deaths is much higher amongst Palestinians then Israeli's (like the statistic showed), yet all Palestinians are terrorists because so many innocent Israeli citizens die (meaning, an innocent Palestinian doesn't exist).

K2..you really have the wrong impression of what I am saying, and I'm a bit offended that you seem to think that I think all Palestinians are terrorists.

I have NEVER said that, and I will NEVER think that. I don't for even a second believe all muslims or arabs are terrorists.
Those are individual people making choices.

I'm not defending this beach incident. The information about it is sketchy.

But.
In the past, there have been people in the same house as terrorists. In the same car. Etc. They are associating with terrorists.

I feel bad for the people and the families of the innocent victims of any attack, israeli or palestinian.

But I think people also have to be smart enough not to hang out near an area that terrorists are firing rockets from (ie, the beach)

Also, Israel is not randomly shooting wherever it pleases. It attacks warehouses/factories/houses where rockets are made. They attack spots that terrorists shoot rockets from.

I'm not saying that I condone the killing of innocents.

I also feel that the people have put themselves in a tough spot by electing a terrorist organization to their government.

to them it is NOT a terrorist organisation! hamas has schools and hospitals as well! it even is one of the only (the only?) groups that have observed a cease-fire for one-and-a-half years!

Is that like honor among theives?

Aside from being personally insulted, I think I'm going to bow out of this topic.

i do not know what you mean with "honor among thieves".

I am sorry if I have, but I do not understand why you feel personally insulted either dk.

I'm sorry dk, but you made it sound like most civilian casualties from Palestinians happen with people that are in the car with targets or live in the same house.

But that is simply not true. The civilians that get killed have no links with terrorists, but were simply walking on the street or staying in their own houses: that happens when you fire missiles into cities. And again, the easyness with which the world treats these casualties is unseen... (yesterday, Israel again fired missiles at a car, missing the 3 targets but killing 3 children in the process.)

It's like if you would fire a rocket into 42nd street in New York to hit a maffia guy, and take a couple of American civilians in the process. (Even typing this, it seems too ridiculous for words). And yet this happens in Palestinia. Because I don't care for whom they voted or whether they hate Israeli's or not: if you haven't done anything wrong, and you get killed because the Israeli army tries to kill a terrorist, that is simply unforgivable.

As far as hamas is concerned: I'm not going to try and convince you, but believe me: you can push people that far that they will vote for extremists, and in that respect the policy of Israel rolled out the red carpet for hamas. Like brains said, hamas got popular for creating schooling systems and hospitals, but the million dollar question is of course why Palestinians didn't have these things in the first place. And that is because Israel has managed for decades to suffocate the Palestinian economy. And if you say "and corruption?", true as well, but corruption only flourishes in economies that are underdeveloped.

And if you don't believe the above, then let me try to convince you by giving the example of Northern Ireland, where peace was reached the moment London allowed the IRA to participate in elections (through Sinn Fein). From that moment on, many catholics discovered that you could reach your goals in a non-violent, political way as well. In that respect the hamas participation is rather a step in the right direction.

And finally, I really don't understand that in the 21st century you still have political leaders that are convinced you can invoke internal regime changes by completely isolating a country, by cutting away all funding, and by letting the regular people suffer. That never worked, and it never will. It just helps prolong the situation because you suffocate the political process in such nations: the opposition shrinks because everybody unites versus "the rest of the world", or (like in this case): most people are simply to busy trying to stay alive, politics is the last thing on their mind.

UPDATE:

Gaza beach victim woke up. No shrapnel in her body, except one piece that was unreachable. it was surface damage, indicative of no velocity.

if anything from Israel, it was a misfired round, but most of the invasive shrapnel is not indicative of israeli armaments.

even the Human Rights Watch are retracting the "proof" that it was an intentional israeli attack. the question is, though, where did the proof come from? the large crater marc garlasco (the laughable specialist from HRW) said was indicative of 105 mm howitzer fire was dug by a shovel, btw.

There were looking for more evidence. none was found, the round does not disappear, nor get vaporized.
-----------------

still no story about the victim waking up but on the Jerusalem Post buddy - so maybe she did, maybe she did not. Unconfirmed as of now.

here's another update:
"If the Israeli allegations of tampered evidence are to be believed, many Palestinians would have to have engaged in a massive and immediate conspiracy to falsify the data," said Mr Garlasco - a former Pentagon intelligence analyst.

"The conspirators - witnesses, victims, medical personnel and bomb disposal staff - would have had to falsify their testimony, amend digital and hand-written records, and dip shrapnel into a victim's blood," he said in a Human Rights Watch statement

"It beggars belief that such a huge conspiracy could be orchestrated so quickly."

The army has not responded to HRW's statement.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5104010.stm



quite a different story from yours. as far as I am concerned it is from a far more reliable source too.