It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


WORLD: UN fabricates story of Israel shelling UNRWA school in Gaza (Confirmed)

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 03:30 PM
Glad to see the UN caught with its pants down.
it's obvious they are trying to turn the world against anything Judeo-Christian.

I wonder what GamerGal will have to say about this.
Btw, where is that little purple haired spunky girl?

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 03:51 PM
reply to post by deccal

problem is, i don't see this as something israel would do to itself. so who would do such a thing? this is a real odd scenario. you ever read the ezekiel 38 prophecy? not only does it appear that israel is under a nearly world wide invasion in the text, but the people who are in the process of attacking it, are ....well it sounds like they get nuked, to be honest. seeing as how the guy who had the vision wasn't around during the nuclear age (i guess?), the chances of it being some conspiracy to nuke their enemies is unlikely. i'd like to chalk it up to a past event (especially since it mentions horses (but this may be a misinterpretation) but erm, i don't know what past event that would be!

furthermore, when i did research on the names of the nations involved, turned out they were all descendants of noah, as described in genesis 10. ? wtfreak?

[edit on 2-2-2009 by undo]

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 04:00 PM
So...lets tidy this up.

The Israel's didn't target the school. Those UN people got the location wrong.

Instead, they targetted the area just outside the school and killed 43 people based on intelligence that was 12 months old without any fresh fire coming from the area - right?

Of course that makes it all better then.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 04:06 PM

I am more inclined to believe the UNRWA over the IDF simply because the UNRWA has a good reputation with gazan's the IDF...

Not surprising that the UNRWA has a good reputation with Gazan's. If your paycheck depended on it, you would too.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 05:41 PM
reply to post by neformore

Well, Hamas doesn't exactly like to brag about their members getting killed. No one is going to lob 3 mortar rounds into the same location without some intel that indicates a target. I have no problems with acknowledging that civilians and innocents were killed. Still I'm not naive enough to believe that it was just a lovely day at the market when 3 random rounds came in for no reason what-so-ever.

Like I said earlier, that's not the issue. 43 people were killed. Why didn't the U.N. state that 43 were killed for no reason? Why the need to elevate the situation into a story of how a school was attacked? Pure propaganda.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 05:45 PM

Originally posted by dbates
reply to post by neformore

Pure propaganda.

Propaganda by whom, for what purpose, against who?
or you mean this yeah i am that old to listen such groups

all edits to trz to embedd link

[edit on 2-2-2009 by deccal]

[edit on 2-2-2009 by deccal]

[edit on 2-2-2009 by deccal]

[edit on 2-2-2009 by deccal]

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 07:33 PM
reply to post by dbates

I don't think it is any great mystery that some want the stories, no matter how exaggerated or inaccurate to be true due to their own agenda.

Hatred makes usually normal people willing participants in lies and distortions and seems to plague the news whenever the Jews or Palestinians are involved.

I would think the News coming out of Israel is suspect also but likely not to the point of what we get from a Terrorist group like Hamas. The Civilians, the victims of both sides lunacy, only know what they are allowed to know.

Both sides seem so far gone in their frenzy of hatred that it is hard to imagine them ever having the sense to compromise as they should. If people here can not remain civil about it even thought they are not even involved, how will the real participants ever come to a peaceful agreement? Lots of history shows they probably can not.

It was nice reading an unbiased post. Thanks so much.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 07:39 PM
In thinking about this after reading it over again, the real question is why are we in the UN and why does it exist? It seems to be just another roadblock in the way of direct communications between countries. A hole in the ground to shovel money into its leaders peers pockets. They lost me when I looked at who was on the Human Rights Council. Its just another organized crime mob operating in the light of day.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 09:05 PM
I thought I would give it a rest and see to what conclusions fellow ATS'ers come.

The article states;

The 43 people who died in the incident were all outside, on the street, where all three mortar shells landed.

That's right, 43 people got killed by the Israelis. The UN says that these people were in the compound and the article says otherwise, so how about have a court deciding who is telling the truth?

Of course you can of the mind the death of 43 Palestinians is insignificant and the transgression of UN sanctity is the only relevant matter.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 10:36 PM
This research does not change anything at all. While the school was not hit directly the school was still aimed towards by the IDF. I simply cannot understand that logic that actually not hitting the school makes it all good.

For Christs sake 43 people were killed in a matter of seconds. Now it is impossible for us to know if those 43 people were Hamas soldiers. But from what i understand the war was a scam with an extremly low resistance from the Hamas. Which tells me they probobly were not Hamas soldiers. I cannot for the life of me understand how you can say that throwing away 43 peoples lives just like that somehow is justified or understandable, and in some mysterious way UN's "wrong doing", just because the school was not directly hit.

anyway my 0.02$

Now come on everybody, lets wait for the next slaughter from the all-mighty IDF

[edit on 2-2-2009 by bastupungen]

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:03 PM
I may suggest that since Israel is serously blamed for that Gaza operation. UN is somehow a threat for Israel.

The end of UN by removing any credibility whatsoever, and furthermore in a case of a ''behond mesure'' new attack promissed by M. Olmert.

abolishing the UN, would clear the way, and let big countries free to conquer, invade, and attack others.

Without credibility UN is nothing, they were almost powerless, now they will become a bunch of liards. Then a bunch of antisemites.

Without UN.

This would be most convenient if someone wants to attack Iran over a military nuke programm not proven.

In 2002, It was not an easy game to attack iraq with UN consent on false pretentions. It was not an easy play to defend the gaza attack by Israel in UN last month. It was a pain in the neck for Israel's allies at the UN assembly.

Is the UN an obstacle to be removed for some actions in the future ?

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:09 PM
reply to post by dbates

dbates, I'm a bit confused.

I read the material, and one time it says three mortar rounds exploded, and later says three artillery shells exploded.

Having called in and adjusted fire from both artillery and mortar rounds, this doesn't make a lot of sense.

The locations of the round explosions are all three in the street.

This is like the best indirect fire shooting in the history of the world.

Mortars don't have much of a range when compared to artillery. Keep in mind the 120mm mortar has a range of 166 meters to 7,000 meters, but that is maximum range, using all external charges which makes the rounds not very accurate.

Normally, you get a marking round, an observer sees where it hits, and you adjust fire. Only after you have a round more or less on target do you fire for effect.

It's hard enough in more or less open terrain, but damned near impossible in a city with structures.

You see where I'm going with this?

How did they happen to drop three quick rounds on a street, with some 40-odd "civilians" present?

Artillery is the same way, except a bit more accurate and of course has a longer range. The longer the range, the lower the trajectory, thus harder to hit something in a street without hitting the buildings on the street first.

Mortars or artillery?

I would guess mortars from the limited damage.

Now, since the Israelis would have to have a forward observer, or real-time observation point (UAV), you still have to register the initial rounds and then "walk" the rounds in.

My question is this:

Exactly whose mortar rounds went off?

You don't just load up three mortars, or even one with three quick drops and hit a target. It doesn't work that way.

I question whether Israeli gunners even made this happen.

Because if they did, then they can do things with indirect fire that no one else on earth can do.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:53 PM

Originally posted by bastupungen
This research does not change anything at all. While the school was not hit directly the school was still aimed towards by the IDF. I simply cannot understand that logic that actually not hitting the school makes it all good.
[edit on 2-2-2009 by bastupungen]

And I can't understand why you are pretending that anyone is making that claim.

NO ONE is saying that the attacks were justified. That is NOT the topic of this thread. Why on earth is that so difficult to understand? The civilian deaths are not being dismissed, minimized or marginalized.

The discussion introduced by the OP was why is the UN attempting to skew the news.

I understand that this is a touchy subject for people, but it is annoying in the extreme to see people build up strawmen so they can knock them down.


posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:55 PM
reply to post by undo

Star...and ding ding ringading thoughts exactly about the whole situation..

like there is an agenda...and a well thought out
being played out right in front of our eyes...only time will tell...

and if you snoop around the religion board you will see many fundamentalists and extremists spouting how prophecy is following course as we speak...starting in 49'...

cecil e rhodes anybody?...ahem...its always the british fault...seriously

posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:48 AM

Originally posted by dbates
Why didn't the U.N. state that 43 were killed for no reason? Why the need to elevate the situation into a story of how a school was attacked? Pure propaganda.

Its a good question.

See, as much as you are struggling to understand why they did what you beleive, I'm struggling to understand why they would feel any need to put out such propaganda in the first place.

A little bit of politics perhaps?

Heres a thought..... maybe the diplomatic arm of the UN is sick to death of the Security Council veto process... and took matters into their own hands with a slight turn of the pen?

You're right. There is more to this.

posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 02:05 AM
load of propaganda rubbish, even the red cross have condemned the israelis, i never believe the media, its all about who does'nt want to look bad, but the children are still dying

posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 03:18 AM
reply to post by dooper

Excellent point, having been experienced in fire direction, my thoughts were the same. It is very odd that they would fire three rounds on the first try. I thought it was a rocket attack, or a bomb dropped from a plane or a drone. Mortar rounds make no sense, unless they were not from the IDF.

It is well known that terrorists hide among the population, not only attacking civilians, but also making civilians targets by firing from among them. All of these people who died in this military action died as a result of the actions of Hamas. Hamas is responsible for all the civilian deaths in this event.

posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 03:26 AM
reply to post by dbates

Here's video of the UN School being shelled:

Source: January 19, 2009 PBS News Hour

Was the video faked? What about the shell the reporter holds up afterward? How did a artillery shaped hole end up at the school balcony?

What about these people who cry because their loved ones died in the school bombing?

Warning Graphic Video

Were those bodies faked? Are all of these people lying to make a PR stunt?

[edit on Tue Feb 3rd 2009 by DJMessiah]

posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 03:33 AM

so thats all fake as well then huh

and `in responce to mortar fire within the school`

they attacked it based upon a video shot over a year ago! we had all the paid for bloggers come steaming in with the relabled video (the palestinian one) causing mayhem , but a total SILENCE when i PROVED israel wrong!

they attacked a school based on a video from over a year ago


for every article ,dbates ,that says israel didn`t shell the school , they are pages of prose proving they did.


watch the video - it shows the school toilet building after being hit and other damage INSIDE the UN compund.

edit 2:

this is the video Israel used to justify the attack on the school, 2 rather glaring problems - first the date is october 2007 and second the location - the Beit Hanoun Elementary School - is NOT the one Israel attacked.

israel attacked a girls school in jabayla - the video showed a different school , in a different city from 2007.

second israel stated

it was deliberately attacked, “according to procedures,”

using evidence from a different school , in a different city in a different year.

then israel retracted saying

"The Israeli army is briefing diplomats privately that the militant fire from Jablia yesterday did not come from inside the UNRWA school compound, but from the outside," said Chris Gunness, a spokesman for the UN Relief Works Agency, which aids Palestinian refugees

in the first i linked that israel admitted to targetting the school - then retracted that and said near the chool and finally silence.

[edit on 3/2/09 by Harlequin]

posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 03:49 AM

Originally posted by dbates
Hold on to your socks because this is going to shock them right off of your feet. Israel did not shell the school in Gaza as we were led to believe. Desipite article after article on how Israel had stooped to shelling school yards, it turns out that this really isn't the case at all. The school was never attacked.

Most people remember the headlines: Massacre Of Innocents As UN School Is Shelled; Israeli Strike Kills Dozens At UN School. There was just one problem: The story, as etched in people's minds, was not quite accurate.

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.

So 43 people were killed in the street. This is serious enough and would no doubt require an investigation of some sort. But why exclaim or lead everyone to believe that a school was shelled? Why, because sensationalist in the media or Hamas wanted a bigger story. This seems to be the case with most of the stories or tragedy that came out of this last battle with Hamas. They take an actual event, blow it out of proportion, and then sell it to the world as the truth.

I know some here will want to focus on the 43 deaths. An investigation into this would merely be a fact check. Turning standard war fatalities into criminal war crimes through twisting of the facts is however, a conspiracy to hide the truth. Why isn't the truth good enough? It would seem that someone in the U.N. has an agenda. Their efforts to keep the world focused on Israel's retaliation to Hamas' random rocket attacks on civilians is showing.

The UN's Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs got the location right, for a short while. Its daily bulletin cited "early reports" that "three artillery shells landed outside the UNRWA Jabalia Prep. C Girls School ..." However, its more comprehensive weekly report, published three days later, stated that "Israeli shelling directly hit two UNRWA schools ..." including the one at issue.

This story has it all. A cover-up from the U.N. and teachers and citizens being told not to tell the truth to the press. When you continue to see a pattern of lies and cover-up you have to start asking questions. Remember the hospital that was a smoldering ruin of ashes? This is yet another case of the UN sensationalizing the news to stir up anger against Israel.

On Friday, health workers went through the smoldering wreckage of the five-story Al Quds hospital run by the Palestinian Red Crescent Society, which was hit by three Israeli shells the day before.

There was nothing left to salvage inside the blackened hulk.
(Jan. 16, 2009, UN says Gaza hospitals in crisis)

But again, no surprise to see that the hospital wasn't hit, it was a warehouse near the hospital that was reduced to cinder. The only damage to the hospital was that it lost it's water supply. Israel was not targeting the hospital.

Water pipes supplying the facility were badly damaged by the shelling. Hospital services are expected to be back to normal in three to five days.

I'd continue with several more stories with the same result but I think you get the picture now. This is a clear conspiracy to cover up the truth. The U.N. seems to be part of that conspiracy.

[edit on 2-2-2009 by dbates]

This was always the case from day one - sorry to burst your fascist bubble. Israel is being charged with war crimes for shelling civilian targets NOT because they were actually hit but because the bast radius destroyed everything within a 300 meter radius -

Maybe you might want to think about that.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in