Israel kills two Palestinians in West Bank

[Violet_Crumble]

TULKARM, West Bank (Reuters) - Israeli soldiers shot and killed two Palestinians in the northern West Bank on Friday, Palestinian security officials said.
The shootings were the latest of a series of fatal incidents in the past week threatening to unravel an eight-month ceasefire and dash hopes that Israel's pullout from Gaza last month could lead to a resumption of peace talks.

Both sides gave conflicting accounts, and it was unclear whether the fatalities were a result of one or two separate incidents.

Palestinian witnesses said troops opened fire on unarmed protesters who threw stones at an army jeep, east of Tulkarm, a town in the northern West Bank, killing an 18-year-old youth.

Medics said the youth died immediately of his wounds

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2005-10-21T230147Z_01_FOR176181_RTRUKOC_0_US-MIDEAST-DEAD.xml&archived=False

[Missy M]

1. The hatred and killing will never end between the two. It goes on...

in each generation. This hatred is taught and until that stops there will never be peace.

[Behind the Aegis]

2. Or...

...until one side is willing to admit the other has a right to exist.

[Missy M]

3. I would think both sides should be willing to admit the other has...

a right to exist.

[Behind the Aegis]

4. One would think that...

...however that is not the case. Extremists from both sides deny the other the right to exist. The most obvious ones are the Hamas which will accept a 5 year silence until they can take all of Israel. BUt, all those dead Jews, best case scenario, just displaced, will matter little the world at large.

[Violet_Crumble]

5. They both have...

Despite claims to the contrary by a few folk here, both sides have admitted the right of the other to exist....

Violet...

[Behind the Aegis]

6. IDF soldiers kill two gunmen in exchange of fire near Tul Karm

By Haaretz Service, The Associated Press and Reuters

Israel Defense Forces troops shot dead Friday two armed Palestinians near the West Bank town of Tul karm, Israel Radio reported.

No IDF soldiers were wounded in the incident, which occurred close to the Anabta refugee camp.

The Palestinians had fired first at an army base, damaging a military vehicle, before being shot by IDF soldiers laying in an ambush nearby, An IDF source said.

IDF troops conducting a search found one of the gunmen dead nearby.

...

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/636897.html

[Englander]

7. Dupe.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x102714

[Behind the Aegis]

8. Guess they will lock or combine.

Although the stories are very different.

[Violet_Crumble]

9. The article I posted gave BOTH accounts...

Enough said...

[Behind the Aegis]

10. So I guess it's not a "real" dupe then.

Yr story has two accounts, the one I posted has one. I guess we will have to wait and see what pans out. Anyway, they can lock mine (since I posted after yrs) or they can combine.

[Violet_Crumble]

12. Yeah, it is a real dupe...

And I'd be hoping and expecting that the mods go with the article that actually gave both versions of events, and not the one that conveniently only gave one side of the story. Me, if I have something to add to an event covered by an already existing thread, I save the mods time and post any related articles in it, and don't start new threads...

btw, my habit of saying 'yr' is contageous, I see! :)

Violet...

[Behind the Aegis]

14. I don't care.

They can lock it or combine it. One is more in depth than the other.

[Violet_Crumble]

15. Thanks for saying the one I posted is more indepth...

Mine also was the one that provided BOTH versions of events and not a one-sided thing that would appeal to the IDF fanclub....

Violet...

[Behind the Aegis]

16. As you see it...

[Violet_Crumble]

19. Feel free to point out where yrs shows BOTH sides...

..because it didn't, and nothing that gives such a one-sided version of events can come close to being considered indepth. That's not just how *I* see it - it's how anyone who doesn't swallow one-sided versions of events would see it...

Violet...

[Behind the Aegis]

20. Didn't say mine did anything of the such...

...just more in depth.

[Violet_Crumble]

22. It's not more indepth...

Try reading my last reply about how it was lacking in depth...

Violet...

[Behind the Aegis]

24. Ah yes....you are the expert.

The fact yr article is lacking in many details and the one I provided had much more...yrs is more in-depth, two convoluted stories and one with what alleged happened. As I said, time will tell. Either it will be a combination, one story over another, or something completely different. The mods will combine or lock accordingly.

[Violet_Crumble]

27. Not an expert, just using common-sense...

When one article conveniently omits any mention of the other side of the story and presents what it's saying as the only account, I'd say there's a hell of a lot of detail missing. Can I ask why you posted one with only one version of events AFTER an article clearly giving both versions of events was given? If you think both versions of events were convoluted, feel free to post in the other thread explaining why you think so...

Violet...
(spreading 'yr'-vian virus since 2002)...

Violet...

[Behind the Aegis]

29. Honestly,,,

I didn't see the "continue" at the bottom of the page. I thought the article was done. Therefore, I was posting the "other" version. However, one version is more detailed, the other more nebulous.

[Violet_Crumble]

32. Huh??

What 'continue'? What 'bottom of the page'?

Instead of just saying over and over and over again that the article you posted is more detailed despite the fact that it omitted any mention of the other version of events, yr welcome to explain *why* you feel it was more detailed even though it missed out a whole bunch of detail in that there was another version of events...

Violet...

[Behind the Aegis]

34. Go to your post

if you click on it...at the bottom, it says page 2 or continue. I missed it the first time.

[Violet_Crumble]

36. Oh, that page 2...

n/t

[Behind the Aegis]

38. Yep!

The one I admitted I didn't see. Funny that. I can admit when I am wrong, doesn't seem to be a trait often seen here.

[Violet_Crumble]

39. The second page had very little on it...

As I recall it was three short paragraphs that didn't add or take away from the bulk of the story on the first page, so I'm not entirely sure what yr admitting yr wrong about...

btw, just to add to the 'I can admit when I'm wrong!' atmosphere - I can admit when I'm wrong too :)


Violet...

[Behind the Aegis]

40. Nope...

...it had the 2nd scenario.

On edit: You know...the story I posted. It wasn't in the first page of your 'complete' version. So, it was a "boo-boo" on my part.

[Violet_Crumble]

45. No, the first page had both versions of events...

The second page only had this about a separate incident:

"In a separate incident on Friday, a Palestinian policeman was critically wounded in Tulkarm as officers tried to break up a brawl between two Palestinian men on a city street outside a cafe.

Neither Palestinian involved in the brawl was believed to belong to militant groups fighting Israel.

Israel withdrew from Gaza last month but still occupies the West Bank."

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=uri:2005-10-21T230147Z_01_FOR176181_RTRUKOC_0_US-MIDEAST-DEAD.xml&pageNumber=1&summit=



Violet....

[Behind the Aegis]

48. Nope...not quite.

from the article here: "The gunmen fired on police who were called to deal with an argument in a coffee shop, witnesses said. The gunmen attacked and fired at the police officers when they entered the cafe, the witnesses said. One police officer was in critical condition after being shot in the stomach, hospital officials said." No cafe was mentioned in your "first" page, only the second.

So, no...both versions were not presented in your article on page 1. This is why I said I didn't see the second page, which does say an incident occurred at a cafe. Which means that your article did mention two scenarios, but mine was more detailed.

[Violet_Crumble]

51. Read both articles carefully...

That is a separate incident. It is NOT another version of the same event...

Violet....

[Jim Sagle]

56. I missed that part.

[Jim Sagle]

55. Yeah, that thread wuzn't nuthin' but a dupe. Congrats.

[Englander]

11. Yeah, it's deja vu all over again.

Another dose of 'malicious propaganda' from the idf, most likely.

[Behind the Aegis]

13. Sure is....

...'malicious propaganda' could only come from the IDF and no where else.

[Violet_Crumble]

17. Where did he say that??

The IDF isn't the only place malicious propaganda springs from, and he didn't say it was...

Violet...

[Behind the Aegis]

18. Implication...

you know...nuance.

[Violet_Crumble]

21. More like creative reading...

you know...conjuring up what one wants to see...

There was NO implication at all of that in what he posted...

Violet...

[Englander]

25. Well, obviously, Violet.

But fabrication, 'creative reading', and the like, where stuff that
that doesn't actually appear in anyone's posts, is explained as
what they were really saying, is what i/p is all about.

[Violet_Crumble]

28. Makes me wonder why we bother posting...

That sort of thing is part of the reason I took a hiatus from this forum. Sometimes I think we should just let others post for us seeing as how they insist on reading something completely different from what we post :)

Violet..

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Englander]

23. The phrase has a history -

it relates to the rocket/stretcher-in-UN-ambulance nonsense
from last year, I think.

[Behind the Aegis]

26. lost me there.

I have no idea what you are referring to.

[Violet_Crumble]

30. It was big news last year...

The IDF accused the UN of allowing terrorists to use ambulances to transport weapons and showed a video it alleged proved it. The video was actually of someone loading a stretcher into an ambulance...

Violet...

[Behind the Aegis]

31. Must have missed it...

...guess I don't have Israel on the brain as often accused.

[Violet_Crumble]

33. Doesn't surprise me that you 'missed it'...

It wasn't one of the IDF's finest moments, and I'd be sticking it down the memory hole too if I was a fan of the IDF...

Violet...

[Englander]

35. It was this -

From October last year, the idf claimed that film of a UNRWA
ambulance showed a rocket being placed in the back, when the shown
object was actually a stretcher. The Unrwa chief, Peter Hansen,
used the phrase, & that's what it refers to.

UN hits back over Israeli charges

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3719432.stm

________________________________


' Rows

In October 2004, Israel released a video tape it alleged showed militants transporting a rocket in an Unrwa ambulance. This proved to be false, and the Israeli army was forced to withdraw the allegation.

Mr Hansen accused the Israeli government of disseminating "deliberately inciteful, false and malicious propaganda".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4191313.stm

________________________________


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNRWA#October_1.2C_2004_Incident

[Behind the Aegis]

37. Didn't see it.

Therefore, I admitted I didn't know what you were talking about, nor did I dispute it.

[Englander]

41. I know, I believe you.

I like to use the phrase sometimes, I haven't used it for
a while, & I remembered this morning. If one doesn't know the
context, or the Unrwa aspect of the phrase, then you're just left
thinking, ~uh~? It's short-hand for providing an example of the
fabrications that the idf sometimes take part in.

[Behind the Aegis]

42. Is there a similar phrase for PA propaganda? n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

47. Probably. Why?

n/t

[Behind the Aegis]

50. why not?

If there is one, shouldn't there be an opposite? Propaganda is never one-sided.

[Violet_Crumble]

52. You tell me...

n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

43. Thanks for putting those links together, Englander...

For those of us who missed it when it happened last October, it gets us up to speed :)


Violet...

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Violet_Crumble]

46. It's not about being obsessed....

This is the I/P forum. There's an assumption made that people who post here not only want to learn about the conflict, but will participate in sharing what they know with others if they don't have the same level of knowledge....

Not at all sure why yr thinking that someone taking the time to get information about an event that you said you didn't know about is being labelled as obsession with Israel and her misdeeds, because if I were given information to fill in gaps in my knowledge, I'd be thanking the person instead of posting about obsession...

Violet....

[Behind the Aegis]

49. Just curious...

It is the I/P forum. Many post here with out having a single iota of knowledge, others post nothing but propaganda. Some are willing to share and accept that their information may not be correct, while some will always say they are right and never admit a mistake, no matter how small; almost like Shrub (Bush...the US president).

I did thank the person who filled in the gaps, I commented on the person who made the non-sequiter comment.

[Violet_Crumble]

53. Curious about what?

I'm quite aware that many post here without having a single iota of knowledge, etc, etc. I've been in the sitation where I've provided facts not only from the Israeli govt website, but another official Israeli international representative, only to find that it was being ignored and the mistake made in the thread wasn't being admitted. Live and learn, I guess...

Who made a non-sequiter comment, and what was it?

Violet....

[Coastie for Truth]

54. M'lords

Move to strike the append as frivolous and not properly based.

OPs are differnt articles - Reuters and Haaretz.

[Jim Sagle]

58. Stupe thread. Locking.

;-)