Autopsy Report of Turkish Activists contradict Israeli claims

[backscatter712]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/6/5/864207/-Autopsy-Report-on-Turkish-Activists-Contradicts-Israels-Claims

Yalcin Buyuk, vice-chairman of the Turkish council of forensic medicine carried out the autopsies on the 9 Turkish activists killed by the IDF.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6536MF20100604

(Reuters) - Nine Turkish activists killed in an Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound aid ship were shot a total of 30 times and five died of gunshot wounds to the head, Britain's Guardian newspaper reported on Friday.

Autopsy results showed the men were hit mostly with 9mm bullets, many fired at close range, the Guardian said, quoting Yalcin Buyuk, vice-chairman of the Turkish council of forensic medicine which carried out the autopsies on Friday.

The autopsy results showed that a 60-year-old man, Ibrahim Bilgen, was shot four times in the temple, chest, hip and back, the Guardian said.

A 19-year-old, named as Fulkan Dogan, who also has U.S. citizenship, was shot five times from less than 45 cm (18 inches) away, in the face, the back of the head, twice in the leg and once in the back, it said.

Two other men were shot four times. Five of those killed were shot either in the back of the head or in the back, the Guardian quoted Buyuk as saying.

The dead activists were not shot with paintballs, they were shot in the back, they were shot multiple times. Not consistent with claims the Israeli commandos were acting in self-defense...

[IndianaGreen]

1. Israel is as credible as BP

and as brutal as Imperial Japan's occupation of China.

[EFerrari]

2. I wonder if we'll hear more about that poor Indonesian doctor

who was shot tending to an IDF troop. He was shot multiple times in the stomach or that's what the report was.

[activa8tr]

4. That's exactly as I see it, too! n/t

[Igel]

3. I don't see the logic.

"The dead activists were not shot with paintballs, they were shot in the back, they were shot multiple times. Not consistent with claims the Israeli commandos were acting in self-defense..."

Nobody said they weren't shot with paintballs. Just that they were shot with lead. Don't assume that a contrary statement is necessarily contradictory. They really are different things in most cases.

Nobody said the Israelis didn't carry weapons that shot lead projectiles. In fact, we were told they carried pistols. Don't know what kind. You're again confusing a "contrary" with "contradictory."

Being shot multiple times isn't inconsistent with self defense. Again, depending on where the shots are, and the order they occurred, multiple shots might be strongly indicative of self defense. First you try to incapacitate with low risk to life; then you try to stop him but let him live; then you remove everything above the brain stem, stopping the attacker but necessarily killing him. Even multiple shots to one portion of the body might be compatible with self defense, depending on the weapon used, the emotional state of the shooter, etc.

Moreover, "self defense" is a funny kind of word. If I'm being attacked by somebody wielding a rabid ferret and I shot her, it's self defense. But if I'm a member of a Boy Scout pack and we're attacked by a mob of ferret-wielding polar bears, is it self defense if I shoot the polar bear attacking my buddy? Usually, because the "self" refers to a group defending itself, which means I might shoot somebody not attacking me.

Now, what are the odds that the guy attacking my buddy 10 feet away from me is going to have his chest and face pointing in my direction? Not good--and if he does, then it's likely my buddy is going to be in the line of fire. In other words, when talking about a group defending itself you'd quite probably expect that there'd be shots to the back. I'd also expect some to the side.

At least they didn't insist on its being a "fair fight." People don't like fair fights, except in movies *or* when the side they favor is weaker and ill-equipped (then they'd really rather have the fight be weighted in their favor, but they don't want to actually say that). They're not going to give up an advantage and risk their lives against somebody perceived as a foe or an aggressor unless there's something in it for them they value more than their lives or the lives of those they're trying to defend.

I see lots of things labeled "not consistent" that could very well be consistent, and sometimes "not consistent" means "nearly inevitably the case"; perhaps information's left out, perhaps possibilities are simply excluded out of convenience.

[activa8tr]

5. I can't quite figure out if you are trying to be funny, trying to write satire

or if you truly believe that trained marksmen commando's in Israel are so poorly trained that it takes THAT MANY shots in each body to stop, (by killing) the UNARMED ALREADY INJURED attackers.

To give you the benefit of the doubt, I guess you never were in the Israeli military, either that, or you need more training in writing satire.