The BBC are strangely promoting a lone gunman story of the attack in Sousse. In fact it was highly organised, including some gunmen who arrived by jetski. There were many grenades thrown, which is also missing from the BBC account.
Allowed HTML - you can use:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Yes, there seem to to be varying accounts in different places. Maybe this is just the confusion that attends the aftermath of such events. Dreadful events, very sad for the people and families. Almost inevitable that it would happen, though.
Suhayl
Yes but…
it’s almost 24 hours now and a great many available eyewitnesses. If the BBC with its massive resources is promoting a fundamentally wrong narrative, I am not inclined to think it an accident.
Err, every account I can find mentions a lone gunman.
http://news.sky.com/story/1509213/majority-of-38-tunisia-terror-dead-are-british
Have you a reliable source for this Craig?
There also seem to be accounts of men on a boat firing at the beach too, then speeding away. This guy seems to have followed security forces towards the beach, which seem slike a brave or else foolhardy thing to do, really.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/tunisia-terror-attack–120052946.html#ovlhk36
Kempe
Yes, I have an eyewitness.
Funny you should say this but the thought that struck me when I first saw the reports was that the numbers seemed quite disproportionate for a lone gunman.
“Petr said he was told by witnesses that a group of terrorists approached the shore on a boat and opened fire while still onboard.” [from above link]
Reuters:-
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/26/us-tunisia-security-idUSKBN0P61F020150626
Every other eyewitness seems to have seen just the one gunman with a rifle hidden inside a beach umbrella and a couple of grenades. In your rush to do a bit of BBC bashing you seem to have missed that every other news outlet is carrying the same version of events. I’ve no doubt your conspiracy minded supporters will see this as evidence of an extensive coverup, the usual suspects elsewhere are already convincing themselves it was yet another “false flag” event staged with actors.
In the real world there is bound to be some confusion and we may not know the full story for a few days yet.
What is murdoch saying? What does this mean. Odd and odder. Surely the autopsies and families will reveal “grenades” ???!
” Surely the autopsies and families will reveal “grenades” ???! ”
Yes, and if bullets were fired by the same gun or not.
Most news organisations are running with reports by both AP and Reuters that it was a lone gunman. Interestingly, NBC acknowledge this but are still reporting that it was multiple gunmen:
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/tunisia-attack-gunmen-kill-least-19-people-attack-sousse-beach-n382346
It seems to be a case of one Tunisian government official saying one thing, and another government official saying something different.
It used to be a principle of good journalism that an event needs to be confirmed by at least two independent sources before it would be reported on. Nowadays, it appears that there is just an “official narrative”. That is neither freedom nor democracy.
It is very strange. Scores of surviving witnesses in a highly accessible location. Yet very few eyewitness interviews being broadcast and the obvious questions – how many were there – not being asked or at least broadcast.
The media almost unanimous in running with an official source lone gunman story but very few incidents leaking out of eyewitness reports contradicting that. No eyewitness sources for the lone gunman story that I can see.
Craig, you seem to be immediately sceptical of this narrative. Does that mean you have changed your mind on other older narratives?
I am not sceptical. I have certain knowledge the official account is not true.
“The media almost unanimous in running with an official source lone gunman story but very few incidents leaking out of eyewitness reports contradicting that. No eyewitness sources for the lone gunman story that I can see.”
It is pretty standard practice when police are investigating a crime for them to ask witnesses not to publicise salient details while they are trying to track down those involved – if these become public then the offenders can take steps to disguise/cover up such details. This certainly happened to me here in the UK when I witnessed a crime a couple of years back.
RT reports Russian TASS as saying that Tunisian radio reported gunmen arrived on an inflatable and they report Tunisian ministry as saying three gunmen. One boat with three men is that so different at this stage to one man and even RT does not seem to be drawing suspicious inferences. I was puzzled listening to the man giving an early account on Radio 4 yesterday (from the hotel about 2 hours after attack), who said that he had not yet seen any police or army just one helicopter and he was wondering where they were? Lets not race to conclusions.
pls excuse spelling errors.
Telegraph, Mirror HuffPo all reported jet skis/inflatables on the beach many hours ago – so hardly a western conspiracy!
Where have we seen the lone gunman narrative before from the MSM, oh yes Dallas in November 1963…
“01:36 GMT:
There were three attackers in the Tunisian massacre, Interior Ministry spokesman Mohammed Ali Aroui told reporters. One of the men was was killed, one was arrested and another escaped.”
http://rt.com/news/269971-tunisia-hotels-tourists-attack/
Hmm Xinhua and Indy run with one gunman….I concede its odd.
1 shot; 1 arrested and 1 missing.
Craig
“I am not sceptical. I have certain knowledge the official account is not true.”
Go on then, we’re all ears…
@RobG
Yes, I heard on the news yesterday that a gunman was shot dead in Tunisia by the security forces/police there. There was photos of an apparent gunman also being arrested and taken away at or near the scene as well.
Craig:
“I am not sceptical. I have certain knowledge the official account is not true.”
So what’s holding you back?
Btw, we are still watching the space in the ‘Craig is meeting JUlian Assange’ thread, announced with much aplomb.
Anon1
You have been repeatedly warned for trying to provoke anti-Semitism. Your role appears to be to insinuate or attempt to provoke an anti-Semitic narrative. Yet again you posted a comment (now deleted) which pretended to be defending “the Jews” when nobody else had even mentioned them.
This is a final warning to you, ResDis and Habby. Any attempt to introduce the subject of Jewishness or anti-Semitism into a thread where no such intimation exists, will result in immediate banning that will be enforced by deleting any comment by anybody we even vaguely suspect might be you. Any suspicion of sock-puppeting anti-Semitic comments in order to initiate a false dialogue will have a similar result. This will be enforced absolutely arbitrarily, quite probably unfairly, and without discussion.
“This is a final warning to you, ResDis and Habby. Any attempt to introduce the subject of Jewishness or anti-Semitism into a thread where no such intimation exists,”
It would be nice to receive a first warning – as to the best of my knowledge I have only ever introduced the subject of Jewishness or anti-Semitism where there has been such an intimation on a thread already.
Res Dis
You missed the arbitrary and unfair bit!
The policy of US/UK in Libya where supposedly many terrorists are being trained is bizzare. To counteract the assassinations of over 600 Benghazi citizens the Libyan Army was created. The terrorists have largely been driven out of the city in spite of the US/UK refusal to arm the army. Instead the US/UK supports the Islamists in Tripoli who are associated and strongly support the terrorists.