Israeli Seriously Wounded in West Bank Stabbing Attack

[oberliner]

An Israeli man was seriously wounded after allegedly being stabbed by a Palestinian in an industrial park near Ramallah in the West Bank on Friday.

The suspected assailant fled the scene and a manhunt is currently underway.

In the attack, a 40-year-old was seriously wounded after being stabbed multiple times in his back and chest in the Sha'ar Binyamin Industrial Zone east of Ramallah, paramedics said. The suspected assailant fled the scene and army forces are currently conducting a manhunt.

Later, a Palestinian man identifying himself as Baraa Issa claimed responsibility for the stabbing in a video uploaded to Facebook, hours after the attack took place. 

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.684599

[Fred Sanders]

1. How many teens from across the apartheid-like borders were killed the same day?

Or will I get called the same names and get the same treatment as Kerry and Obama for daring to mention it is not only non-Arab Israelis getting killed and attacked in Apartheid Israel?

[6chars]

2. Wrong answer

Right answer. How horrible that this poor man was stabbed by a vicious attacker. I hope he recovers.

Really, that was your first first response to hearing that a man walking down the street is stabbed multiple times in the back and the chest? OK.

[Fred Sanders]

3. What is your response to dozens of teens lives ended early and forever for throwing stones?

Or the 500 children killed in Gaza Prison when Apartheid Israel bombed and straffed them? Any sympathy for them?

"Palestinian Teen Killed by Israeli Settler or Soldier"..is daily news some would rather not know, am I right?

[6chars]

4. Depends on what stones, how many and how they were being thrown at whom.

When they throw large stones with lethal force that could end their targets' lives early and forever, as appears to be the case sometimes (you have to see the size and shape of the stones, the strength of the throwers and the size and sophistication of slings they use), then I approve of treating them as the attempted murderers they are.

Your example is not "non-violent opposition" or "civil disobedience." It is not "kids will be kids." It is often attempted murder. So, nice try.

It's also not the same as a 40 year old man walking down the street and getting pounced on by a knife wielding attacker. To answer your question in a more direct analogy, if Jewish teens were throwing rocks in similar ways at Arab civilians or at Palestinian security forces, I would approve treating them as attempted murderers. And if a Jew walked up to a 40 year old Arab man and stabbed him repeatedly in the back and chest, I would think this was a horrible crime and would have little sympathy for what happened to the stabber.

[Fred Sanders]

5. In your scenario....a Jewish teen, tossed from his own land, throwing stones at Arab police

enforcing the occupation of massive amounts of his historical Jewish land...then the Arab police could kill the Jewish teen with a military assault rifle, depending on the size and quantity of stones?

Got it!

[6chars]

6. Your words not mine.

Nice try.

[oberliner]

8. I don't think there were any

Do you know of the killing of a Palestinian teen that took place that same day?

If so, I can't find any information about it - can you provide more details?

[Fred Sanders]

10. My mistake...maybe it was the day before or the day after, hard to tell with all the dead teens.

Why the tears for only one side, I cry for all the victims of Israeli decades-old occupation without end....used to be called "annexation" - is there only one side with a story to tell? What about the side with all the dead teens?

[oberliner]

12. What are you talking about?

I'm on Ma'an News right now and I am not seeing the incident you are referencing.

The Palestinian story is definitely being told (as it should be).

[Fred Sanders]

13. Do you have a link to the Palestininan story being told of the many teen deaths and injuries?

[oberliner]

17. Al Jazeera covers the Palestinian story fairly well

Also there are sites like Ma'an News out of Ramallah and some Israeli sites like 972mag and others.

[Crunchy Frog]

7. In terms of international law

are Israeli civilians even supposed to be present in the occupied West Bank?

If it's not occupied territory; if it has de facto been annexed into Israel, then shouldn't the responses to violent acts be treated equally, whether the victims are Jewish or Palestinian.

Yes, it's bad that somebody got stabbed, even if he did choose to be in an occupied war zone illegally. He's fortunate in having gotten immediate medical attention, and that he's got one of the most powerful military's in the world hunting down the perpetrator, who will probably be extrajudicially executed, and whose family home will probably be demolished.

If the perp wanted to get away with stabbing someone, he should have been Jewish, and done it to a Palestinian.

[oberliner]

9. Palestinian surrenders to PA after confessing on Facebook to Friday stabbing

A Palestinian man who used Facebook to confess to stabbing an Israeli outside a supermarket in the West Bank handed himself in to the Palestinian Authority on Saturday morning, a PA security source said.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/palestinian-surrenders-after-facebook-confession-to-stabbing/

[Crunchy Frog]

11. Glad to hear it. n/t

[6chars]

14. Need an international lawyer for this one

The territories in question were part of the Ottoman empire, then the British Mandate under the League of Nations, then part of a proposed UN partition plan which was never accepted by the Arabs, then on one side of an armistice lines (not recognized by Jordan as a border) and annexed by Jordan, then on the other side of armistice lines (captured by Israel after Jordanian attacks opened a front on these lines) and subsequently unannexed by Jordan but not annexed by Israel (other than Jerusalem, which has its own complicated story), and now with various administrative regions defined by the languishing Oslo agreement. As Israel and Jordan now have a peace treaty, and given the Oslo agreement, it is not a war zone.

The perpetrator is not going to be executed. The Palestinian perpetrators who have lost their lives have been shot during the incidents. It is safe to assume that security force will try to apprehend this person. I suppose if he tries to stab them he will probably get shot. Otherwise, tried and if convicted probably jailed.

Hope this helps.

[Crunchy Frog]

15. This is what I've been able to find on international law.

Occupation and international humanitarian law: questions and answers

In your honest opinion, what is the West Bank, and what is it in relation to Israel? Is it a part of Israel? Is it a territory under military occupation? Is it something else?

[6chars]

16. That'll only take you so far.

International law is ambiguous and incomplete, with indeterminate authority. What there is does not really apply to this situation in any clear way; it was developed with other situations in mind.

People spend a lot of time looking backward and trying to prove that their side is right and the true victim - I guess with the idea that once that is done some outside force will come in and impose the justice they deserve. This is really a situation which has been bad for both sides. I would rather look forward and figure out how people can live in peace, and figure out what should be done now in order to bring this about.

To do this, I would say we need a term like "Sensitive Territory." I don't expect Israel in any final peace accord to leave its large settlements or to leave Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem - a lot of proposals since the 1990s conceive about the same borders. Outside of those likely borders, I think Israel should treat it as "sensitive territory" and try to minimize its presence and avoid doing anything that would have to be reversed or otherwise make it harder to implement a peace accord.

In understanding this region, it helps to have a sense of the scale involved. There are a lot of dense areas with a lot of empty space in between them, all in a very small region. The entire area is about 10,000 square miles. About half of that is the sparsely populated and aptly named Negev Desert (part of Israel under 1949 armistice lines). The remainder is 3000 square miles on the west side of the 1949 armistice lines and 2000 square miles on the east side. So this is like San Diego County is the Negev, Los Angeles County and Orange County are the populated regions, and that is it - all the other counties are other countries. With a population of 10 million people (12 if you count Gaza), it is packed like the LA area. Population is densest in the few miles by the ocean, where it is continuously settled from the southern to the northern tip (further south including Gaza). The cities are close to each other - if Tel Aviv is LA, Ramallah is Pasadena, Jerusalem is Riverside, Gaza is Irvine. The population has grown almost 10 fold since 1948, with all sorts of new building in what was previously low quality farmland and scrub. All the smaller cities too are like large developments like or suburbs or towns or neighborhoods.

[Crunchy Frog]

18. Thank you for not answering my question.

I don't have a "side" in this situation. It's just that I can't help noticing that one side is occupier, and one side is occupied, subjugated, and dispossessed.

Once again, I'm curious. What do you think the West Bank is? Is it a part of Israel with a bunch of stateless people living in it? Is it a perpetual or permanent occupation of land that isn't part of Israel? Is it a temporary occupation until a peace deal can be negotiated? Is it something else?

Everything that I've read (other than Israeli propaganda) suggests that it is an occupation, and that international law concerning occupation should be followed, with legal obligations to protect the welfare of the occupied population. I myself think that there has been a de facto annexation, and that it should be recognized, and all persons residing in the region should be granted citizenship and equal rights under the law. I think it's an obscenity when the law is applied so unequally to two groups of people living in the same region, and under the same ultimate sovereignty.

That's just my opinion. I was just curious to know what yours was. I don't expect that you'll tell me, though.

[6chars]

19. Not sure why you didn't consider that an answer

I called it "sensitive territory." I do not think it is part of Israel, I do not think it is part of Jordan, and I do not think it is a country with distinct borders. I guess stateless is close to what it is. Israel has in theory a temporary military presence in the whole territory until a peace deal can be negotiated. I see it as a very difficult situation for everyone because there is so much distrust and worse that just jumping into a "one state solution" would lead to a bloody civil war with millions of deaths - there are examples in history, and a poor peace agreement would lead to a takeover by Hamas followed by bloody interstate war (with outside supporters) with millions of deaths. Neither of these is good for either side. I think it would help if extremists on both sides, advocates of violence and terrorism, advocates of poke-in-the-eye settlements, etc. would be marginalized. If not, I guess what I see is a region that is going to be turned into a base for attack and that is going to end poorly. Real statesmanship is needed on both sides. But there are lots of times when what is needed is not what happens. We'll see. Not trying to be evasive, it is just not a simple question at all and simple answers are bad answers in this case.

[Crunchy Frog]

20. Thank you.

You actually did a considerably better job in this post.