|Israel Resource Review
||19th June, 2006
An Examination: How Palestinian Media Professionals Can Bend TheTruth.
The Case of The Gaza Bearch Deaths on June 9th, 2006.
Sued Deutsche Daily
Reprinted with permission of the German Suedduetche Zeitung which ran the following article with a detailed examination of the evidence in the Gaza Bearch shooting on June 9th, 2006. It clarifies many aspects of the story, as it was disseminated by the Palestinian media
Source (in German) with photos:
The Middle East: The war of images Seven casualties in Gaza beach: Was it a shelling attack by Israel? Or an exploding Palestinian land mine?
Last Friday ten year old Huda Ghalia rose early, although she did not have
any school. She was excited. The last exams were written, and large summer
holidays had begun. Huda's father Ali had promised his children to organize a picnic at the beach in northern Gaza on that Friday last week .
Huda is, a cousin tells us, one of the class scholars and loves math,
biology and classics. Their favorite poem is by Mahmud Darwish: Calling Card is a sad poem about a homeless Palestinian and his hate for settlers.
The family from the 35,000 inhabitant town of Beit Lahia loaded up with plastic tables and chairs, cooked ears of corn and Pita bread on the short way to the beach. Beit Lahija is well-known for its strawberries, in addition, however, from here short-range missiles are fired on Israel.
For the father, one of his two wives and five of the sons and daughters the picnic had a deadly end. Before 5 p.m. a shell exploded g in the midst of the family. Seven humans lost their lives that Friday afternoon in the sand or in the ambulance.
The bloody picnic made Huda Ghalija famous within a few hours world-wide.
This was owing to the cameraman Zakarija Abu Harbed. Only few minutes after the explosion of shrapnel from a ball-filled shell the 36 year old cameraman from Gaza city with camera and full equipment was at the scene of the catastrophe.
A lucrative job
Harbed works for the Arab TV Ramattan News Agency. The agency has offices
in Ramallah in the West Bank and in Gaza city, the capital of the Gaza
The largest TV broadcasters in the world, CNN and ABC, news agencies such as Reuters and Associated press, and also German TV firms, work almost
exclusively with Palestinian camera men, if it concerns reports out of the
The pictures of the hopeless world in the Gaza Strip are filmed primarily by Palestinians. As a cameraman, working for Western media is considered one of the most lucrative jobs in the Palestinian areas. Some earn as much as 250 US dollar a day, as much as some Palestinian extended families earn in half a year.
Cameraman Harbed had occupational luck on past Friday: He was first at the
place of the misfortune. His agency, Ramattan news Agency sold the
heart-rending pictures of the hysterical and tear-flooded Huda Ghalia to
television stations around the entire world. In Australia as in India, in
Europe as in the USA, Harbed's photographs of Huda were shown: As she tears her hair and strikes her chest, as she sinks beside her dead father into the sand, as she runs completely alone dozens of meters in the sand.
In the Arab world and in the Palestinian areas the cause of the death of the Ghalia family members was already certain on Friday: Israeli shelling.
This verdict was also bolstered by archive photos of Israeli soldiers firing artillery shells, which some Arab television stations cut into the film of cameraman Harbed.
In opinion of the Hamas-led autonomy authority, and in the opinion of Fatah head and president of Palestinian Authority, Mahmud Abbas, the Ghalias were killed by Israeli bombardment. They both used the word "massacre".
In a rare consensus of opinion n Saturday, Hamas, the head of the government Ismail Hanija and Abbas symbolically adopted Huda and vowed they would be responsible for the remainder of their life for her living costs.
A Palestinian child, who lost its father, is considered as an orphan.
(Huda's physical birth mother Hamdia survived the detonation with an injury) Likewise the investigation of a team of the US human rights group, Human Rights Watch, concluded that Israel was responsible for the shell explosion.
The group formulates its conclusions, however, carefully and less
certainly: After interviews with victims, eye-witnesses, policemen and
physicians and visiting the scene of the disaster, one preserves "strong
assumptions" that Israeli artillery is responsible for the misfortune. The
report of the human rights groups does not mention however that their
investigator researched the incident for evidence only after a day had
elapsed - allowing enough time to remove important pieces of evidence.
The Israeli Ministry of Defense concluded, after first evaluations of radar and satellite photographs, that the projectile, which led to the death of the seven Palestinians did not originate with the army. Chief of Staff Dan Halutz said, that while Israel regrets the death of the seven Palestinians, this does not mean however "that we were responsible for it".
According to investigations of the Israeli army, based only on pictures and medical findings, not on on the scene searches, the Israeli army fired six shells in that Friday afternoon toward Gaza beach. According to data
supplied by Halutz, five of the six shells hit in the time between 16.31 and 16.48 - approximately 250 meters north of that place, in which the family picnic had taken place. The artillery bombardment was due to Palestinian rocket launchers.
An unmanned airplane of the Israeli army filmed the Gaza Strip at the time
of the bombardment from the air. On the films one sees on the one hand five impact holes of the shells in the beach, in addition, 250 meters to the south, humans. According to data of the army the explosion at the beach section, at which the Ghalias picnicked, must have taken place between 16.57 and 17.10. Before 16.57 normal beach activity is to be seen on the film of the army.
The fact that humans did not react to the five shell impacts at 250 meters
distance by rushing to escape is strange. The next scene on the army film
shows ambulances, arriving at the beach. That is at 17.15 o'clock. The
hospital, where the ambulances came, lies five minutes away from the site of the explosion.
Over the impact site the sixth shell, which caused the death of the seven
family members according to statements of human rights group and the
Palestinian government as a dud, The Israeli army cannot give any
information. It regards it however as "impossible" that the shell deviated a whole 250 meters from its target.
Meanwhile, Israel treated four of the beach casualties in hospitals in Tel Aviv and removed one of the wounded fragments, which could not have originated from weapons in the arsenal of the Israeli army.
The Israeli army does not exclude the possibility that the detonation was
due to a mine, which had been buried there by Palestinians, in order to
prevent the Israeli navy from landing commandos in the Gaza Strip.
In view of the contradictory statements, great importance is attached to
Harbed's television pictures. These however raise more questions than they
contribute to clarifying. The original photographs are in the meantime so
doubtful that CNN shows them only in abbreviated form at its Website.
To the Sueddeutche Zeitung, Harbed explains that he had been informed
afterwards about the explosion and driven to the scene by the rescue medics in the ambulance. In his pictures however, Harbed films the hysteria of the ten-year Huda, as if he were a witness of the detonation. Also he films the arrival of the medics, as though he was at the beach beforehand.
Additionally, some of the dead and wounded are covered with cloths - who did that?
Harbed claims that Huda escaped serious injury, since she was bathing in the sea. In his photos, however, Huda is running around in dry street clothes.
Harbed runs several minutes of the crying Huda and afterwards turns his
camera to the dead and injured.
Suddenly a man beside Huda's dead father can be discerned, until now covered and motionless, who appears with a machine gun in his hand. In the pictures of the cameraman one can recognize both medics in green OI clothes as well as dozens of men, most with typical Hamas full beards, apparently securing pieces of evidence.
However one must ask, why the medics do not worry about the injured people
and policemen do not secure the place. Have the Hamas men, as Israeli media quote Palestinian eye witnesses, removed pieces of evidence?
Evasive answers of the cameraman
It is also strange why in Harbed's pictures we cannot discern a crater. The more cameraman Harbed is asked by Sueddeutche Zeitung in the telephone
interview, the more he evades the issue. Was he at the scene of the incident before the outpatient clinic [personnel] arrived? Who are the civilians, who clean the beach? Who is the armed man in the ground, which suddenly rises? If it was an Israeli army shell that killed the Ghalia family members, why don't the Palestinians show its fragments?
And: Why didn't it occur to Harbed to calm the hysterical Huda down instead of pursuing her for several minutes with his camera? Harbed says: "She asked me to film her. She wanted to be shown to the world with her father and show the world what crimes Israel commits." The ten-year Huda, who lost seven family members, distraught in mourning, is supposed have given Harbed cinema direction instructions?
The fact that Palestinians in the Middle East war fabricate based on
pictures or bring incorrect pictures into circulation is not new. In the
media parlance following the US TV Magazine 60 Minutes one speaks of
"Pallywood" - following Hollywoods film industry. In the [60 minutes] report for example one can see Palestinians of the latest Intifada, who carry a dead person on a stretcher. Someone trips, the alleged dead man falls on the soil - and jumps swiftly again back on the stretcher, lies down and acts like a dead man.
A recent example of an attempt of Palestinians to lead the world public by
the nose is the Israeli Air Force attack on last Tuesday on three members of the "Islamic Jihad", in which eight civilians, among them two children, were killed. After the attack on the car, in which the members of the terror group sat, one sees three men briefly, as they remove a short-range missile in a hurry from the car.
For two days the Ramattan TV news Agency Internet site blinked with an
"urgent flash: Message for our customers . As if the company is anxious to
further spread the Huda pictures, whose authenticity is doubted by many
people, pointing out hereby that that it possesses exclusive rights to the
pictures. Nobody has the right to disseminate the pictures further without
consent of Ramattan news Agency.
Translation copyright 2006 by Ami Isseroff and ZioNation.
friendly version of this article
Return to Contents
Arming the Enemy: Unforeseen Consequences of Olmert Handing Over US Weapons to an Organizations Placed on the US government List of Terrorist Organizations
Israel's government last week provided American-made weapons, including hundreds of M-16 automatic machine guns, to the Fatah organization in Gaza. It did so despite the fact that the military wing of Fatah, the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade, has been on the U.S. State Department's list of terrorist organizations since March of 2002.
Yet Israeli officials were quick to defend the move. An Israeli government official justified the transfer of arms to an anti-Israel terrorist group on the grounds that the Israeli government wants to strengthen the head of Fatah (and thereby the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades), Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, in the rivalry between Abbas's factions and Hamas. Similarly, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert explained that the arms shipment was meant to "bolster security forces loyal to Abbas amid an increasingly violent power struggle between the PA chairman's Fatah party and Hamas."
There is an important flaw in the Israeli government's reasoning. Al Aksa Brigade members give no sign that they will cease their continuing terror attacks against Israel. Nor is there any indication that they will halt the missile attacks against Israeli civilian targets, which emanate from Gaza and for which they have long taken credit. It is also unlikely that the brigades will suspend their alliance with the Islamic Jihad terrorist organization, the most recent product of which was the April 19th bombing of a Tel Aviv restaurant in which 11 people were murdered, including 16-year-old American Daniel Wultz.
On the contrary, in an interview with World Net Daily, one of Al Aksa's leaders, Abu Yousuf, hinted that the weapons supplied by Israel have already been used in two shooting attacks in the past few days. One attack killed a 35-year-old Israeli Arab citizen on a major West Bank highway on the outskirts of Jerusalem this past Sunday. "These weapons will not be used in an internal war but against Israelis," bragged Yousuf. Yousuf further explained that Israel transferred the weapons to his Force 17 unit "for its own political purposes. We are not concerned with the reasons. The weapons will not be used against our brothers, only [against] Israelis."
In another embarassing blow to Israel this week, Abbas named Mahmoud Damra to head his armed forces. Damra is on Israel's most wanted list of terrorists, wanted in the murder of nine Israeli civilians in the fall and winter of 2000. On close terms with the late Palestinian terrorist leader, Damra was offered shelter in Arafat's compound in Ramallah in 2002 after Israel accused him of masterminding a string of terrorist attacks. Numerous queries to the office of the Israeli Prime Minister to comment on the Damra appointment have gone unanswered.
It remains unclear whether the U.S. government had approved the transfer of American-made weaponry to a terrorist organization. A source at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security said that any such action would be viewed as a serious felony. There has not yet been a formal response from the State Department, but the consequences could be serious. Supplying weapons to a terrorist organization could result in U.S. sanctions against Israel, for instance, something that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert may not have considered.
friendly version of this article
Return to Contents
the Israel Resource
The Israel Resource Review is brought to you by
the Israel Resource, a media firm based at the Bet Agron Press Center in
Jerusalem, and the Gaza Media Center under the juristdiction of the Palestine
You can contact us on firstname.lastname@example.org.