Then they can say they are looking into it. They didn'.
No one is asking them to prove it. If it didn't happen, they can deny it. They didn't deny it, and that was in response to a specific inquiry. What does that tell you?
Actually, it matches her story perfectly. She says that they told her they had "expolded her laptop" yet the laptop was actually shot through. Then, in response to the media inquiry, they say they "expolded" a suspicious package.
Why is it that rather than reaching the logical conclusion that when the Israeli's say the had "explode" a suspicious package it might mean that they actually shot it at it as part of their protocol to "explode" it you instead reach the conclusion that she must be lying to make Israel look bad?
I will ask the security people tomorrow if their definition of "exploding" a suspisions package might include shooting at it. I will ask if they know anything about what supposedly happened. I will ask after I get my "1" sticker and will report back. And anyone who wants to post that asking such a question will get m in trouble can go suck a lemon-- I don't care and neither will they.
We have Israel saying the exploded something. We have her presenting a shot-up laptop as supposed evidence.
1) Bullets aren't explosives.
2) Most of that laptop was untouched. Even if a bullet passed through explosives it generally won't set them off. Thus what was done to that laptop is basically useless from a security standpoint.
3) How was the laptop positioned to get bullets through it? If it was lying flat that means the shooter was standing above it. Would you shoot into a bomb at your feet??? If it was propped up against something, why, and why didn't it fall down when the first round hit?
Why in the world should I believe Israel did it? It simply doesn't make sense. One thing the IDF certainly isn't is morons.