Palestinian ambassador in Prague dies after injuries from blast

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Wrabbit, the way the police spokesperson's statements are worded makes it almost impossible to figure out what they really think, and I believe they've done that on purpose. This incident has rather serious implications and so it's better (from a Czech govt standpoint, at least) to keep the waters as muddied as possible.

The way I see it, though, there are six scenarios. Well, there may be more, but here's the ones I have so far:
1) The safe was fitted with a security device/system to effectively destroy any contents if the door was opened, perhaps with a proviso that there was some kind of timer mechanism that limited its safe opening (no pun intended) to certain periods. Open at the wrong time, the thing explodes. I see this as less likely as I'd expect an Ambassador would need to be able to access his safe at any time and with minimal delay.

2) Similar to 1) in regards to the safe being fited with an explosive, security device/system, but possibly some kind of device (eg a keypad or fingerprint reader) inside the safe had to be activated or encoded within a set time of opening the door, or the device would detonate. In this scenario, possibly the Ambassador opened the door but then made an error and failed to render the explosive device/system inactive.

3) Similar to 1) and 2) re the fitted security device, but in spite of the Ambassador following correct procedures, the device went off anyway due to some kind of hardware or software failure.

4) Again similar re the device/system, but the Ambassador had opened the safe and followed procedures but then perhaps did something in error in the process of closing it again. It could be (for example) that there were sensors in the door and/or hinges and there had to be a further code input in the keypad inside the safe so it would ignore the door's movement and allow it to close without setting off the explosives.

5) Similar to 2), but much more specific about a possible error by the Ambassador. Today's the first of January. So I am wondering if there was some issue with the new yeardate. Perhaps part of disarming the explosive device/system involved entering the correct date, plus a code word for that day? You know, the password of the day? What if the Ambassador had made the very simple error of entering 1/1/13 instead of 1/1/14? The code word for 1/1/13 would not match with today's (or it simply did not exist in the system memory; same difference) and that might have been enough to trigger it.

It was around midday, he'd probably had a late night and was a bit tired (NOT hung over, as I very much doubt he would drink alcohol), so even if it asked him to re-enter as it read his first try as an error, he'd maybe done the same again and pretty hurriedly. I wouldn't feel too calm with a bomb two feet in front of my face and I have to disarm it with a code and the clock's running down. So he enters it again: Codeword, and date: 1/1/13. Human nature, after using "13" for a whole year.

But the software reads it and it doesn't match. You are not the Ambassador, says the System. Bomb explodes.

Frankly I suspect it really could be that simple.

6) This is the one I really hope is not correct. Safe is secured by a device, perhaps. But also, perhaps the Ambassador opened the safe, disabled the explosive system by whatever method, but then placed another explosive device inside and for some reason, that one triggered. In that scenario, we'd have a badly damaged safe but with what seems to be some kind of explosive security system, which officials can't be sure detonated or not. Hence the muddled reports, maybe.


All of the above are based on the assumption that the safe was fitted with security to destroy its contents in the event of unauthorized access. Barring scenario 6) something went wrong with that system. Either human error or a system failure. I tend to the former as more likely, especially given the date and the likely late night the Ambassador had had.


Some may puzzle how the police seemed so sure that the explosion happened after the door was opened, and not while it was being opened. There is a big difference there, because several scenarios I've mentioned above rely on the door being fully opened before the thing went boom.

It's actually pretty simple. If the explosive in the safe went off before the door was fully opened (and safe doors typically open right back out of the way), then there would be scorch marks and other blast evidence and material on the inside of the door. But if the door was already fully opened, then the inside of the door would be virtually unscathed. The inside of the safe itself would be toast, but not the door.

I detailed the exact Czech words the police used in an earlier post here, but I believe that's why they said "after" opening and not "during" opening. The police experts know their stuff and were obviously pretty sure on that point. They didn't even use any word to indicate it "probably" exploded after being opened. Just plain, straight-out "after".

reply to post by ketsuko

No worries. As I said, it's no biggie. :thumbs up:

As for the posting: yes. Prague's one of the nice little postings for Embassy staff to get. It's bang in the middle of Europe, so it's only a quick flight to some key cities like Vienna and Berlin, and even London's only two hours away. The city's Old Town is just beautiful and it's generally pretty peaceful here as well.

So, it's a good place to post an Ambassador if you want them to have a quiet time and not risk them creating too much strife, even if they do something rather undiplomatic.

Within limits, that is.

However, in perspective, if an event like this happened in London or DC or one of the other plum diplomatic postings, we'd likely be seeing a lot more about it in the international MSM -- and hence on the boards here. But Prague is just a nice little backwater on the diplomatic scene, so most of John and Joan Public won't pay much heed to this.

That doesn't affect the way various nations may be reacting to it, though. Taking the analogy of the swan gliding across the water, we won't even see the near-frenzied damage control that's probably going on behind the scenes right now.

Damage control? Near-frenzied? JustMike's gone nuts, right?

Maybe I have, but look at it this way: if a safe in a Palestinian diplomat's private residence in sleepy old Prague had an explosive device in it, what may we surmise about safes in various other diplomats' homes in far, far more important places?

Are we seriously expected to believe that they don't have something similar elsewhere, and nor does anyone else?

In my first post in this thread I stated:

But while from a security standpoint I can see the sense in having a self-destruct device for a safe that might contain highly sensitive information, I have to wonder about how this all happened.

In other words, having an Ambassador's safe security protected did not surprise me. Not one bit. It makes sense to me. That doesn't mean I like the idea, especially the rather extreme way this was possibly done. But not liking something and admitting its likelihood are quite different things.

Some might protest that it's incredibly risky to rig a bomb in a safe, it's James Bond 007 movie stuff, it's illegal to "mantrap" and so on. Those arguments, while perfectly reasonable, just don't matter -- not to the people who make decisions about such things. I very much doubt the late Ambassador simply decided to set up some explosives in his safe. Almost certainly, that decision came from higher up.

Sad but true, secrets can be much more valuable to certain PTB than people's lives or mere local laws.

We might like to think, "My nation would never do such a thing!" but I feel we'd be sadly mistaken. Virtually every nation will do whatever it takes to protect sensitive information.

Okay, so I'm surmising, but I don't think it's entirely beyond the realms of possibility that some other nations use similar measures to "protect" secrets. So, my feeling is there may have been some very urgent comms going on today, and not only between various Palestinian missions or embassies and their ministry, but possibly other nations' as well.

The AP version is reporting that this safe was recently moved and had not been opened for something like 20 years. So this makes things even more interesting.

Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad Malki said no foul play was suspected, noting that the safe had been left untouched for more than 20 years.

...

The safe was recently moved from the old embassy building, but it had come from a building that used to house the Palestinian Liberation Organization's offices in the 1980s, Malki said.

They do use the word booby-trap in this account where you did not in your translation quoting the same person. I'll defer to your translation.

So for some reason, this guy had an old PLO safe he was opening?

It was not immediately clear how Malki knew the safe had been untouched for more than 20 years or why and when the safe would have been booby-trapped.

And I guess according to the story, the ambassador decided this would be as good a time as any to just find out what was in there ...

"The ambassador wanted to know what is in the safe," Malki said. "He opened it and asked his wife to bring a paper and a pen to write down the contents of the safe. She left him to bring (the) pen and paper. During that time, she heard the sound of an explosion."

Something else occurred to me for why the Czech Government would be very careful and possibly confusing on things at the moment.

Palestine is a nation in word, not any real sense yet. That matters a lot for things like National Airlines, Military Transports or Diplomatic Transports.

Even if it did fly in on a commercial airliner, almost any other country could argue it didn't, in theory, and prove otherwise?

If this explosive was there by design, someone flew it in to Prague or it was bought locally with explosive integrated ..and diplomatic immunity or diplomatic pouches is all fine and well, but a bomb on an airliner is still a bomb on an airliner or commercial cargo flight, eh? Questions...more so, as time to think about it adds up. How did it get there in the most literal sense, eh?

JustMike
reply to post by ketsuko

 

No worries. As I said, it's no biggie. :thumbs up:

As for the posting: yes. Prague's one of the nice little postings for Embassy staff to get. It's bang in the middle of Europe, so it's only a quick flight to some key cities like Vienna and Berlin, and even London's only two hours away. The city's Old Town is just beautiful and it's generally pretty peaceful here as well.

So, it's a good place to post an Ambassador if you want them to have a quiet time and not risk them creating too much strife, even if they do something rather undiplomatic.

Within limits, that is.

However, in perspective, if an event like this happened in London or DC or one of the other plum diplomatic postings, we'd likely be seeing a lot more about it in the international MSM -- and hence on the boards here. But Prague is just a nice little backwater on the diplomatic scene, so most of John and Joan Public won't pay much heed to this.

That doesn't affect the way various nations may be reacting to it, though. Taking the analogy of the swan gliding across the water, we won't even see the near-frenzied damage control that's probably going on behind the scenes right now.

Damage control? Near-frenzied? JustMike's gone nuts, right?

Maybe I have, but look at it this way: if a safe in a Palestinian diplomat's private residence in sleepy old Prague had an explosive device in it, what may we surmise about safes in various other diplomats' homes in far, far more important places?

Are we seriously expected to believe that they don't have something similar elsewhere, and nor does anyone else?

In my first post in this thread I stated:

But while from a security standpoint I can see the sense in having a self-destruct device for a safe that might contain highly sensitive information, I have to wonder about how this all happened.

In other words, having an Ambassador's safe security protected did not surprise me. Not one bit. It makes sense to me. That doesn't mean I like the idea, especially the rather extreme way this was possibly done. But not liking something and admitting its likelihood are quite different things.

Some might protest that it's incredibly risky to rig a bomb in a safe, it's James Bond 007 movie stuff, it's illegal to "mantrap" and so on. Those arguments, while perfectly reasonable, just don't matter -- not to the people who make decisions about such things. I very much doubt the late Ambassador simply decided to set up some explosives in his safe. Almost certainly, that decision came from higher up.

Sad but true, secrets can be much more valuable to certain PTB than people's lives or mere local laws.

We might like to think, "My nation would never do such a thing!" but I feel we'd be sadly mistaken. Virtually every nation will do whatever it takes to protect sensitive information.

Okay, so I'm surmising, but I don't think it's entirely beyond the realms of possibility that some other nations use similar measures to "protect" secrets. So, my feeling is there may have been some very urgent comms going on today, and not only between various Palestinian missions or embassies and their ministry, but possibly other nations' as well.

See my problem with that is it doesnt take much to destroy documents using explosives. So i dont think this is what this was i mean you could put a small amount flash paper inside the safe id say two inches on the bottom of a safe guarantees documents would be destroyed also wouldnt want to open that door talk about getting burned. See it sounds to me this wasnt a device attached to the safe but it was explosives stored in the safe. He was removing them or placing them in depending on if it was smuggled in or out of say gaza.

Oh and your right they have made exploding safes but they would kill anyone heres one for the James Bond fans from Q branch of MI6.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

reply to post by ketsuko

Interesting, isn't it? So they had a safe in another building that hadn't been opened for 20 years but rather than checking it out first, they just moved it to another building and installed it. And then the Ambassador, with nothing much to do on New Year's day decides to open the safe so he can make a list of what's in it.

Well, I guess it's possible. Stupider things have happened. But the ideas of leaving explosives locked away in a safe for two decades -- and no-one knew they were there -- creeps me out even more than some of the scenarios I've listed above. I mean, the PLO at that time were known to use diverse means in their cause, so to not check a safe that's been shut for 20 years before moving it just strikes me as far from bright.

Re the "booby trap" phrase. That's perfectly okay to use. As I explained in a post on the previous page, to translate "nástražný výbušný systém" I used "protective explosive system" simply because of our international readership, who might not understand a term like "booby trap". The term I used still gives the same concept, because ultimately a safe booby trapped with a bomb is designed to protect whatever secrets are in it by the rather messy expedient of blowing them up.

The term could also be translated as "explosive booby trap system", but the "booby trap" idiom was one I preferred to avoid in the intial translation.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Well, Semtex is made here in the Czech Republic by a company aptly named Explosia, and has been in production since the late 1950s. So they wouldn't really need to import anything. (If it's semtex its residue can be identified by experts. Doesn't mean they'll let us know, but they will know if it was or wasn't.)

But export via a diplomatic bag? Yes, that's possible. Totally illegal under normal laws, especially for unauthorized commercial aircraft transport, but diplomatic bags are what they are.

Understandably, neither the Palestinians nor anyone else would want the good ol' public to know too much about what sort of things can be carted around the world in diplomatic bags.

reply to post by JustMike


All i know is one phrase comes to mind live by the sword die by the sword. Or i guess more aptly live by the bomb die by the bomb.

reply to post by dragonridr

Sadly, yes. You speak a truism.

But I have to say that I truly feel sorry for the Ambassador's family, especially his wife, who saw what happened to him. That's an awful thing to see and I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

Okay, it's near midnight here so I'm off for the night. Thank you to the OP for starting this thread: this is where I first heard about this news as I had my TV off and I've been on ATS for much of the day! And although it's not my thread I'd like to say thank you to everyone who has contributed their thoughts and opinions. Multiple points of view in a case like this are always better than just relying on one's own. Especially because I live in the city where this happened, your views from outside looking in are incredibly helpful in try to keep some balance.

Seems to me a Palistinian ambassador blew himself up with explosives he shouldn't have had.Yes I can't wait to hear what a diplomat was doing with explosives.

Hey JustMike, any news on this story from the local outlets? Right now I'm reading there was a large cache of weapons found. All sources but the one below say they cannot confirm what weapons were discovered.

respekt.ihned.cz...

Swills
Hey JustMike, any news on this story from the local outlets? Right now I'm reading there was a large cache of weapons found. All sources but the one below say they cannot confirm what weapons were discovered.

respekt.ihned.cz...

edit on 2-1-2014 by Swills because: (no reason given)

Oh im sure they just brought them over from the old embassy too. You know go to the old offices get 2o year old safe install it then go in the back room with the office supplies and grab the AK47s.

reply to post by Swills


UK, newspaper said he was trying to open a safe that had not been touched for past 20 years, some safe. Some weird excuse.

20yrs is enough time for certain explosives to get unstable.

i'm sorry he lost his life.

reply to post by Swills


Ummm...I was wondering if it might have been an internal affair.....I.E.,inter-Palestinian. Does anyone know if he was affiliated with, Fatah or Hamas...perhaps part of a power struggle between them?

Just pondering

YouSir

Suchdol mayor: Palestinians not welcome

Prague, Jan 3 (ČTK) —Palestine's embassy should move away from Prague-Suchdol because diplomats illegally kept arms and explosives in the embassy's future seat, violating both Czech and international law, Prague-Suchdol Mayor Petr Hejl said today.

The Prague-Suchdol Town Hall has called on the Czech Foreign Ministry to move the Palestinian Embassy away from its territory.



Czech Police discovered unregistered weapons in the embassy building in connection with an explosion that caused the death of Palestinian Ambassador Jamal Al Jamal on Wednesday.

First Deputy Foreign Minister Jiří Schneider told Hejl today that he shares the fears of the city neighborhood.

"Deputy minister Schneider spoke to Mr Hejl today and told him that the Foreign Ministry shares the fears and is ready to discuss the situation," ministry spokeswoman Johana Grohová told ČTK.

I'd love to know more about these weapons they found but no one is talking save for one unnamed police source to one Czech news outlet, other than that no one is talking.

Are these weapons from the cold war era? What kind of weapons are we talking about here and how many? Why are the weapons there?

reply to post by YouSir


Here's his Wikipedia, if he was affiliated with Hamas I think it would have been mentioned. He's apart of the PLO, and the PLO and Hamas don't get along because the PLO in the early 90's recognized Israel's right to exist and is no longer considered a terrorist organization by the US/Israel.

en.wikipedia.org...

Swills
reply to post by YouSir

 

Here's his Wikipedia, if he was affiliated with Hamas I think it would have been mentioned. He's apart of the PLO, and the PLO and Hamas don't get along because the PLO in the early 90's recognized Israel's right to exist and is no longer considered a terrorist organization by the US/Israel.

en.wikipedia.org...

You have not been keeping up the PLO and Hamas formed one government they work together now for peace. Boy that last part was hard to say without laughing.

The Doha deal, signed by Mahmoud Abbas and Khaled Mashal in February 2012, was described as a step forward in the stalled implementation of the Palestinian reconciliation agreement, signed in Cairo in April 2011.
In March 2012, Mahmoud Abbas stated that there were no political differences between Hamas and Fatah as they had reached agreement on a joint political platform and on a truce with Israel. Commenting on relations with Hamas, Abbas revealed in an interview with Al-Jazeera that "We agreed that the period of calm would be not only in the Gaza Strip, but also in the West Bank," adding that "We also agreed on a peaceful popular resistance [against Israel], the establishment of a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders and that the peace talks would continue if Israel halted settlement construction and accepted our conditions."