U.S. colonel has gone public with his personal conviction that the official findings about the 2022 murder of a Palestinian American reporter were soft-pedaled in order to appease Israel.
ed note–as always, lots of ‘must knows’ that every war-weary Gentile with a vested interest in his/her own future survival needs to understand about all of this.
Firsto, ladies and Gentile-men, a lil’ ‘notable quoatable’ in starting off this important discussion–
‘The thing that makes Judaism dangerous to everybody, to every race, to every nation, to every idea, is that we smash things that (we believe) aren’t true…We don’t believe in the boundaries of nation-states, we don’t believe in the idea of these individual ‘gods’ that protect individual groups of people. These are all artificial constructions, and Judaism really teaches us how to see that. In a sense, our detractors have us right in that we are a corrosive force, that we are breaking down the false gods of all nations and all people because (we believe) they’re not real…’–Douglas Rushkof in his book ‘Nothing Sacred…The Truth About Judaism’
And for those Gentiles with a vested interest in their own survival who would like to hear with his/her own ears this very ‘revealing’ statement on the part of the deranged Jewish author Rushkof–
VOILA’…
Now, the manner in which the above fits neatly and rationally into the particulars of the story below, nota bene the following–
The Jews, being adherents of the same Judah-ism described by the author Rushkof above, in addition to being murderers of Gentiles, are murderers of the truth. Like anaerobic bacteria that cannot exist within an oxygen-rich environment, the Jews, being after all–
‘Children of their father, the devil, who was a murderer from the beginning and the father of lies…’
(The words of Jesus Christ, not ours, so don’t blame us for quoting Him)
–cannot live in an environment where facts and truth steer human events and human activity.
This being the case, what that means is that an intrinsic part of the business of murdering the truth means murdering those who bring the truth, which obviously includes important historical events such as the one depicted below, to wit–
–as well as the murder of the Palestinian journalist holding US citizenship who features as the focus of the news story below.
Now, we could go on for hours, days, weeks, etc, discussing the murder and cover-up of Shireen Abu Akleh, the ‘forensics’ involved in all of it, how it is just one of hundreds (millions?) of similar state-sponsored acts of terrorism that Israel has committed and continues to commit on a minute-by-minute basis, but in the interest of not over-burdening further the already-overburdened Gentile mind, we’ll sum up the ‘bullet points’, no pun intended, of what appears below–
THE JEWS LIE, AS OBSESSIVELY AND AS COMPULSIVELY AS FISH SWIM AND BIRDS FLY.
NY Times
After Shireen Abu Akleh, a celebrated Palestinian journalist and American citizen, was shot and murdered by the IDF in the West Bank in 2022, the State Department delivered an equivocal assessment.
While shots fired from Israeli military positions were ‘likely responsible,’ it said, American officials ‘found no reason to believe that this was intentional.’
The shooting, it said, was ‘the result of tragic circumstances.’
That statement outraged Palestinians and many others, who saw it as the latest instance of the Israeli military dodging accountability for the deliberate murder of Palestinians.
The United States never again publicly weighed in on Ms. Abu Akleh’s killing.
But the U.S. officials who closely examined the shooting were deeply divided over the Biden administration’s public conclusions, with some officials convinced that the shooting was deliberate, according to five current and former U.S. officials who worked on the case.
Based on the circumstances of the shooting and the available evidence, these officials involved in the official investigation believed that the Israeli soldier must have been aware he was doing so.
One of those who opposed the Biden administration’s conclusion was Col. Steve Gabavics, a career military policeman with 30 years’ experience, including as the commandant of the U.S. military prison at Guantánamo Bay. At the time of the shooting, he was an official at the Office of the United States Security Coordinator.
That office, which facilitates cooperation between the Israeli and Palestinian security services, conducted the official U.S. government’s review of the shooting.
After Colonel Gabavics retired from the military in January, he went public — first in a documentary, and now in an interview with The New York Times — with his belief that the U.S. government had soft-pedaled the office’s findings in order to appease the Israeli government.
He aired his views in a documentary released in May by Zeteo News that publicly identified for the first time the Israeli soldier who shot Ms. Abu Akleh. But Colonel Gabavics was not named in the documentary; he is now speaking out openly for the first time.
Though the question of whether the shooting was intentional ignited disagreement within the office as a whole, the two officials who clashed most sharply over the shooting were Colonel Gabavics and his then-boss, Lt. Gen. Michael R. Fenzel, according to Colonel Gabavics and several other former officials involved in the examination.
That conflict culminated in Colonel Gabavics being sidelined from the official U.S. investigation and being threatened with dismissal by General Fenzel.
The four officials who spoke to The New York Times about the case — besides Colonel Gabavics — did so on the condition of anonymity because they remain employed by the US government and are not permitted to speak publicly.
Colonel Gabavics was chief of staff to General Fenzel, who led the U.S. Security Coordinator liaison office at the time and helped draft the July 4, 2022, State Department statement attributing the shooting to ‘tragic circumstances.’
Colonel Gabavics said in an interview that he and his colleagues ‘were just flabbergasted that this is what they put out.’
That the U.S. government avoided calling it intentional, he said, ‘continued to be on my conscience nonstop.’
‘The favoritism is always towards the Israelis and very little goes to the Palestinians,’ he said of his experience working in the office.
The four officials said they believed Colonel Gabavics was acting out of concern for what he saw as the truth.
For General Fenzel’s part, some officials said one factor that may have played into his thinking was his desire to preserve his office’s working relationship with the Israeli military, which had previously stopped cooperating when displeased.
Examining the Shooting
The office where both General Fenzel and Colonel Gabavics worked, now known as the Office of the Security Coordinator, found itself examining the shooting after Israeli and Palestinian officials, who carried out their own independent investigations and refused to cooperate on a joint inquiry.
The F.B.I. initially declined to investigate because, according to Colonel Gabavics, it said it had not been requested to do so by Israel.
With the Biden administration under pressure from U.S. lawmakers, the F.B.I. eventually opened its own investigation in November 2022.
Nearly three years later, however, it has not released any findings, nor has it said when it might do so.
In the immediate aftermath of the shooting, the Biden administration assigned General Fenzel’s team to assess the case and write a report on the evidence.
To analyze the trajectory of the bullets, Colonel Gabavics and other colleagues were sent to examine the scene on the day Ms. Abu Akleh was shot and murdered, the colonel and other officials who worked on the review said.
A key part that the U.S. office played in the investigations was to take custody of the bullet that murdered Ms. Abu Akleh and hand it to Israeli government ballistics experts for testing in the presence of the American officials, including General Fenzel. The Israeli experts also examined an Israeli Army rifle that the Israelis said a soldier had used to fire in Ms. Abu Akleh’s direction.
The 2022 State Department statement said that extensive damage to the bullet made it hard to draw a definitive conclusion about which gun it was fired from.
The U.S. team also reviewed the separate Israeli and Palestinian investigations into the killing, but it did not conduct interviews with witnesses or perform its own tests.
Colonel Gabavics described himself as the lead U.S. investigator on the case, but it was his boss, General Fenzel, who was tasked with the responsibility of arriving at the final verdict.
Colonel Gabavics said he and others on the team agreed that the Israeli soldier who shot Ms. Abu Akleh must have known that he was shooting at a journalist.
Colonel Gabavics said he concluded that the shooting was deliberate based on several factors:
1. Records of Israeli military radio traffic on the morning before the shooting showed that soldiers were aware of journalists in the area, and there had been no gunfire coming from the journalists’ direction that might make the Israeli soldiers likely to shoot toward them in self-defense, he said.
2. There was an Israeli military vehicle down the road from Ms. Abu Akleh that morning and a sniper watching the road from inside the vehicle would have been able to see the journalists clearly, Colonel Gabavics said.
3. When he visited the scene of the shooting hours after it occurred, he said, his colleagues, wearing blue vests similar to Ms. Abu Akleh’s navy-blue protective vest marked ‘Press,’ positioned themselves where she had fallen and they were clearly visible to him from where the shooter’s vehicle had been, he said.
4. Colonel Gabavics said that the precision of the shots, hitting Ms. Abu Akleh’s head and a carob tree right next to her, did not suggest an uncontrolled spray of gunfire. That, together with the fact that the shooter fired first at Ms. Abu Akleh’s producer, then at her, then at a passerby who tried to help, indicated to him that the shooting was definitely deliberate, he said.
An investigation into the shooting by The New York Times in 2022 found that 16 shots were fired from the approximate location of the Israeli military convoy, most likely by a soldier from an elite unit.
For the shooting to be accidental, he said, ‘the most absurd thing in the world’ would had to have taken place…The individual popped out of the truck, just was randomly shooting, and happened to have really well-aimed shots and never looked down the scope, which wouldn’t have happened,’ he said.
His assessment matched that of Palestinian officials.
Israel, for its part, said that Ms. Abu Akleh was hit by either an Israeli soldier or a Palestinian gunman firing indiscriminately during clashes with Israeli soldiers, and insisted ‘its soldiers would never intentionally hurt a journalist’.
Evidence reviewed by The Times for its investigation however showed that there were no armed Palestinians near Ms. Abu Akleh when she and her colleagues came under fire.
Colonel Gabavics said he shared his findings orally with General Fenzel and also wrote them into a draft of the office’s report on the shooting.
But General Fenzel disagreed, and shared his assessment with the State Department, which publicly deemed the shooting ‘unintentional’.
The office still had to finish its report on the shooting, however, and that became the focus of the internal tug of war.
Colonel Gabavics and three of the former officials at the office said he repeatedly inserted stronger language into the draft, which General Fenzel repeatedly deleted.
Eventually, the general ordered his chief of staff off the case, the colonel said.
Colonel Gabavics continues to believe there had been a miscarriage of justice.
‘This was the one that probably bothered me the most’ of any case in his career, he said. ‘Because we had everything there.’
Intent is what separates “Murder” from Homicide.
Gosh! Jews lie and governments (particularly Israel worshipping ones) lie. Is water wet?