U.N. staff see boy shot in back - Israeli officer suspended

[eablair3]

well this sure confirms that article that Chris Hedges (NYT) wrote that was in Harper's Magazine a while back about some Israeli soldiers he saw in the Gaza Strip targeting innocent kids and "shooting them for sport," as he said.

____________

U.N. staff see boy shot in back
Israeli officer suspended after incident

MITCH POTTER
MIDDLE EAST BUREAU

GAZA CITY—An Israeli army officer has been suspended after an unarmed Palestinian youth was shot in the back at close range as he waved goodbye to a delegation of visiting United Nations aid workers, the Star has learned.

Yousef Bashir, 15, remains in serious condition at a hospital in Tel Aviv, where he was taken after the Feb. 18 incident at his family's home near the Jewish settlement of Kfar Darom in the southern Gaza Strip.

He is partially paralyzed beneath his shoulder blades, with shrapnel lodged against his spine, the boy's father said.

snip

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1077923412783&call_pageid=968332188854&col=968350060724

[packerssuck]

1. If the UN says it then it must be true.

:crazy:

[Trajan]

2. Do you have evidence this person is lying ? ..

Or just presuming so ? ...

[packerssuck]

3. No, but the UN is heavily skewed towards the Arabs seeing that

so many arabs and muslims make up the UN. After all wasn't it the UN who passed the resolution that Zionism=Racism?:P

The Palestinians are very good at the "victim" propoganda.

[RC]

4. It is easy to be the victim when

you are defending yourself with small arms or rocks against tanks, war planes, armor plated bulldozers.

[packerssuck]

7. You mean the kids and moms blown up on the bus by palestinian

suicide bombers are protected by armor and tanks?

[Resistance]

36. what are you talking about?

the discussion is on a Palestinian boy shot in the back. I don't think this is justified.

[eablair3]

5. this is why Israel is opposed to having UN Monitors

because more of this type of thing will be witnessed.

[packerssuck]

6. No, they're opposed to monitors because

they fear the palestinian leadership will send in suicide bombers and other murderers into Israel to kill innocent Jews and then hide behind the monitors. And God forbid if a monitor would get shot in the crossfire, the arab propoganda would have a field day.

[lefty_mcduff]

8. And God forbid

if a 15 year old unarmed kid get shot in the back by (at the very least) incompetent IDF forces.

Oh wait, *that's* what we're discussing. And *because* there's independant witnesses, this event is (at the very least) being investigated, by (while we're talking about bias) the IDF, while some folks (as is usally the case) blame the victim, who was *shot in the back*.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[number6]

105. well that make's sense, after they blow up

"they fear the palestinian leadership will send in suicide bombers and other murderers into Israel to kill innocent Jews and then hide behind the monitors"

....then they'll go hide behind U.N. monitors, yea,..ok

[mac2]

136. UN representatives as witnesses could be from a agreed upon country.

so there's no excuse to say no.

[Scurrilous]

9. If it isn't true...

...then why did the IDF suspend the officer involved?

[ET Awful]

11. It must have been that Arab media that made them do it. . . .

We all know that the IDF practice restraint and has never shot, attacked, maimed or killed an innocent person without cause. . . well other than the hundreds of them listed by such organizations as Amnesty International.

[packerssuck]

12. I have no sympathy for protestors who throw rocks at cops and defend

terrorists. It's really nice how you speak up against bulldozers etc. but you don't speak against the palestinian in that house who just blew up 20 Israelis. So, I can care less about those hypocritical protesters.

[lefty_mcduff]

13. So...

Was this *unarmed* 15 year old a protester? Was this kid, who was *shot in the back*, throwing rocks? Did this kid, who was *shot at close range*, just blow anyone up?

If not, what exactly is your point?

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

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

[lefty_mcduff]

22. Guess this about sums it up.

"I really don't care about the palestinians". This is the sentiment of many, but you at least have the fortitude to say it.

Not really condusive to peace in the long run.

[_Jumper_]

73. Are you a progressive?

The last time I checked progressives believed in equal rights and equal treatment for all.

[sushi]

79. This report is untrue

because you "don't believe most things that come out of the UN?"

I suspect a report is true to you if you like it, and a lie if you don't!


"But you and I weren't there so we don't know."

If we have to "be there" to "know" practically all of us, including you, better quit posting because we all mainly comment on reports by others.

[Violet_Crumble]

111. The problem with not caring...

...is that you leave yrself without a leg to stand on if someone were to say to you that they really don't care about Israelis, for example, or Americans. Because every retort you fling at them will just bounce back and hit you as well. Of course there's many folk around on the net who are quite open in their stance that they don't care about the Palestinians - all you have to do is go have a quick look at most comments at LGF, or visit the Yahoo message-boards. But in not giving a toss about civilians in this conflict, these sort of folk don't seem to grasp the glaringly obvious fact that their stance is every bit as repulsive as that of the anti-Arab racists and the anti-Semites...

Also, the footage of celebrating Palestinians was a reaction to Sept 11, not to a suicide-bombing in Israel. And seeing as how you don't really care about Palestinians, then my question is why do you appear to demand that people elsewhere in the world should care about Americans? Especially those folk who are suffering in part due to years of US foreign policy? Why is it that people elsewhere in the world are expected to personally identify with the victims of Sept 11 and not see it as a huge fuck-you to the US empire, while it's quite acceptable for Americans to just about throw a party when thousands of Iraqi civilians are killed or when Israel drops a bomb on an apartment building to kill one terrorist and ends up killing a bunch of civilians as well, including babies and small children? Why are we all expected to behave as though Americans and Israelis are just so much more special than any other people on earth?

The reality is that we should all care about any civilian caught up in this conflict, and some aren't less worthy than others just because of their ethnicity. While it must surely make things so much easier for folk who have to divvy up the world into GOOD and EVIL, and ensures that they'll never lose a moment's sleep over the worst of atrocities if they eventuate, I honestly think that those sort of folk have lost their way and it's up to the rest of us to make sure our voices are heard and that there eventually is a peaceful resolution to the conflict...

Violet...

[drdon326]

15. Considering....

the murderous palestinian terrorists are now recruiting
13 year olds , the IDF is damn right to be suspicious
of every kid now.

[packerssuck]

16. It's ok to recruit 13 year old kids to murder civilians but it's

horrible for Israel to put up a fence to protect themselves. Arab propoganda.:-(

[lefty_mcduff]

19. If you could point out

where I said it's 'ok to recruit 13 year old kids to murder civilians' I'd be forever in your debt.

And if this is 'Arab Propaganda' why is the IDF investigating the event? The IDF is generally not swayed by 'Arab Propaganada'.

[packerssuck]

26. I was saying it in general not specifically you.

[_Jumper_]

74. Who is saying that?

The problem people have is that it is a land grab. If it were built on the Green Line no one but hardcore pro-Palestinian people would object.

[lefty_mcduff]

17. Suspicous is 1 thing.

Shooting unarmed kids in the back is quite another, don't you agree?

[packerssuck]

27. I guess you were there and saw the whole thing.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

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

[Violet_Crumble]

113. If you read the article, you'd know there were eyewitnesses...

And unless someone who tries to call them liars tries to come up with something to back up their nonsensical claims, the credibility of those witnesses aren't in any doubt. After all, it's not the first time IDF troops have done this sort of thing and AI has some of these incidents documented. I dunno, maybe now it's time for the little dance to start when AI is accused of being anti-Israel and anti-Semitic and under the evil influence of those accursed Ayrabs ;)

Violet...

[drdon326]

32. Surprisinly...I do.

welcome to intafada II.....

where the palestinians have broken every international norm and rule of war by using men...then WOMEN.....AND NOW KIDS !!!....to murder innocent people.

Perhaps , since you might have a better understanding of hamas,IJ,
al aqsa and pflp, you might tell them to stop using women and kids
to do their atrocities....then the IDF wouldnt have to worry about them.

[Violet_Crumble]

114. International norms and rules of war apply to Israel as well...

...y'know, the same intifada where the israelis* have broken every international norm and rule of war by building settlements on occupied territory, allowing the murder of innocent people, and using the worn-out excuse of The War Against Terror to try to justify everything, even shooting kids in the back. As far as I'm concerned it's totally hypocritical to demand that one side stick to international norms and rules of war and strenously oppose the other side having to do the same. International law isn't something that should be applied selectively when it suits someone's purpose...

Violet...

[sushi]

81. Even a teenager

waving goodbye to aid workers?

[Violet_Crumble]

112. Suspicious = shooting them?

Because it's the shooting of this boy that was being talked about. There was absolutely no indication that there was a suspicion that he was a potential suicide-bomber, and even if there had been, that's no justification for shooting him in the back...

Violet...

[Gimel]

18. Proof

Where is the forensic proof on that? I read that it is still under investigation, and haven't found a report on this in any other news source yet.

[lefty_mcduff]

20. Know what you mean.

The Toronto Star - the last bastion of biased, pro-Arab reporting.

[Scurrilous]

21. Well I'm sure....

...the IDF will do a complete and thourough investigation of this incident. All necessary forensics will be done in a fair and impartial manner. CSI: The OT is probably hard at work as we speak.

Any IDF soldier found to have acted improperly can expect a hearty handslapping and perhaps a vigorous scolding.

Fear not, justice will be served in this matter.:thumbsup:

[packerssuck]

29. I'm sure that Israel could learn a lot from the Palestinian justice system

[Scurrilous]

31. Nah...

...the justice system employed by Israel in the OT works perfectly and hardly needs input from anyone, much less the Palestinians whom benefit mightily from it's munificence.

[packerssuck]

34. Let's see:

Israel: Liberal Democracy

Palestinians: Repressed dictatorship (mafia). I would like to see how long a palestinian would live in the terrirtories if he openly dissented against Arafat. lmao.:D

[Darranar]

35. Quite long, actually...

At this point, Arafat is pretty much powerless. Israeli destruction of PA infrastructure combined with a number of terrorist organizations (many of which are not allies of the PA) roaming through the West Bank and Gaza have resulted in a highly weakened PA with little popular support.

[packerssuck]

Wrong! Arafat holds the purse strings. Still in control of forces.

[brainshrub]

47. What does Israel being a Liberal Democracy have to do with shooting kids?

The U.S. was one of the first Democracies on the planet, but that didn't justify slavery.

[packerssuck]

54. Scurrilous had brought up legal and judicial systems and I

responded to it. Come on, keep up with the conversation.

[Darranar]

23. It is totally unjustified...

to use live fire against rock-throwers.

But I don't see what that has to do with the topic at hand, though, because this person wasn't throwing rocks.

[lefty_mcduff]

24. Some people could also learn from the Father

from the article....

"We make a mistake if we let our wounded memory guide our future. Punishment doesn't pay. What pays is a change of mentality," an emotional Bashir told the Star.

"It is time for tolerance and forgiveness. I want the Israelis to know that we, both sides, have no other option. Let us devote ourselves to melting the ice and find a solution to give our children a chance to live."

He's certainly a lot more tolerant and understanding than many who are commenting on this incident.

Word.

[packerssuck]

25. You seem to forget....

that Arafat walked away from Clinton and Barak peace table and started the second intifada.

[Darranar]

28. No, you're wrong...

Barak left, to ready himself for the Israeli elections.

[packerssuck]

30. What???? Nice revisionist history.

[Resistance]

38. the fact that Barak walked

isn't even a matter of dispute - it's the truth.

[packerssuck]

51. Wrong!

[Resistance]

57. ok man

whatever ya say

:party:

[tinnypriv]

72. Or, in the real world

It's the truth, as resistance said. He knows this because this topic has been discussed numerous times in this forum. You may not be aware of it, but hey, that's your dime. For the facts:

Prime Minister Ehud Barak has decided today (Sunday), Jan 28, 2001, not to continue the diplomatic contacts with Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat and his people until after the elections in Israel.

I'll try and give the least anti-semitic source possible:

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0j8c0

Barak walked. Fact.

[Gimel]

88. In truth

that Barak walked but that was in a post-rejectionist era when Arafat had already rejected Camp David and the second Intifada was already in process. A big difference as a new era had started. Arafat wanted to use force to compel Israel to sign on his conditions.

[tinnypriv]

95. So you agree that Barak walked

Thanks for giving us the Israeli perspective.

Maybe one day the facts long admitted in Israel will seep through to the American "supporters" of Israel.

Maybe. :thumbsdown:

[GabysPoppy]

98. What did Arafat offer at Camp David?

Maybe I missed it somewhere. Oh I remember, let's have another Intefada and toss the Jews into the sea.

[tinnypriv]

101. Hey, I'm just a simple guy

And happen to think the official U.S. reports on the topic are quite informative. You might try consulting them. Say, the Mitchell Report:

"(We were not) provided with persuasive evidence that the PA planned the uprising."

It continues:

"We have no basis on which to conclude that there was a deliberate plan by the PA to initiate a campaign of violence at the first opportunity"

It continues:

"...or to conclude that there was a deliberate plan by the GOI to respond with lethal force."

Next paragraph:

"However, there is also no evidence on which to conclude that the PA made a consistent effort to contain the demonstrations and control the violence once it began; or that the GOI made a consistent effort to use non-lethal means to control demonstrations of unarmed Palestinians. Amid rising anger, fear, and mistrust, each side assumed the worst about the other and acted accordingly." ¹

Incidentially, the report also makes clear the same point I've made repeatedly in this forum (obvious even if the report wasn't available, simplicity since it is): namely that the visit of Sharon did not cause the outbreak of the Intifada, nor was it the "spark". That happened the next day, when Israel used lethal force against Palestinian demonstrators in an orgy of wanton and criminal violence.

Also, we can talk about Camp David if you like, but I suspect you actually have no inclination to do so, given your comments. Needless to say, he wasn't trying to "toss the Jews into the sea".

I should note in this context that the current leaders of Israel not only want to toss the Palestinians into the desert (or just destroy Palestinian nationalism) - they're also acting to implement those desires with concrete policies, in accord with consistent practice.

Seems to me anybody interested in peace, justice and self-determination should be primarily concerned with that manifestation of destruction of a national grouping, though of course that doesn't preclude also being concerned with Jewish and Israeli security.

But hey, tactics are your dime, not mine.

-----

1. Text of 'SHARM EL-SHEIKH FACT-FINDING COMMITTEE'. Online: http://usembassy-israel.org.il/publish/peace/archives/2001/may/mitchell.html

[GabysPoppy]

103. The terrorism began in a vacuum?

All the cut and paste in the world doesn't negate the facts on the ground.

[tinnypriv]

107. If you want an answer to how the 2nd intifada started

That's something different. Serious people have studied the question, and you can be directed to their work if you like. Or not.

As for "terrorism", there was no firing, even much rock-throwing from the Palestinian side at the beginning of the 2nd Intifada.

Israel responded to that with vicious terrorism, firing hundreds of thousands of bullets at unarmed demonstrators, using helicopter gunships against civilian targets, collective punishment etc. All in the first few weeks. Then it "escalated".¹

As for "facts on the ground", Israel is the one with the guns, so it gets to change them. I happen to think destroying any meaningful chance of Palestinian self-determination is actually pretty idiotic (what the GOI is doing right now), but you're free to differ.

-----

1. Note that the use of "escalted" in itself an interesting term - when Palestinians are killed in their dozens and deliberately maimed (shot in the eyes and knees deliberately) in escalting numbers, nobody refers to that as an "escalation". When Jews also become victims, the conflict "escalates". The same principle can be seen in the use of the terms "quiet" or "relative" when describing time periods when Palestinians are killed, but others are spared.

[Gimel]

130. I consider myself serious

even if you do not. I know that what you say is false. You are lumping together claims without verification. No live ammunition was used on Sept 29.

Sept 27, 2000 - Sgt. David Biri, 19, of Jerusalem, was fatally wounded in a bombing near Netzarim in the Gaza Strip.

Sept 29, 2000 - Border Police Supt. Yosef Tabeja, 27, of Ramle was shot to death by his Palestinian counterpart on a joint patrol near Kalkilya.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0ia50

Do you think that these murders were carried out without weapons?

The Palestinian police were given weapons by Israel, and they turned them on the Israelis who were participating in a joint patrol. Joint patrols were set up in the Oslo agreements.

Nov 23, 2000 - Lt. Edward Matchnik, 21, of Beersheba, was killed in an explosion at the District Coordination Office near Gush Katif in the Gaza Strip. (The joint DCOs were established at the borders of Palestinian-ruled areas under the interim peace accords and were responsible for coordinating security and humanitarian cooperation.)

Nov 23, 2000 - Sgt. Samar Hussein, 19, of Hurfeish, was killed when Palestinian snipers opened fire at soldiers patrolling the border fence near the Erez crossing.

Nov 24, 2000 - Maj. Sharon Arameh, 25, of Ashkelon was killed by Palestinian sniper fire in fighting near Neve Dekalim in the Gaza Strip.

Nov 24, 2000 - Ariel Jeraffi, 40, of Petah Tikva, a civilian employed by the IDF, was killed by Palestinian fire as he travelled near Otzarin in the West Bank.

Dec 8, 2000 - Rina Didovsky, 39, a Beit Hagai school teacher on her way to work, and Eliyahu Ben-Ami, 41, of Otniel, the driver of the van, were killed when a car full of gunmen opened fire on the van near Kiryat Arba.

Dec 8, 2000 - Sgt. Tal Gordon, 19, was killed when gunmen in a passing car opened fire on an Egged bus traveling south from Tiberias to Jerusalem on the Jericho bypass road.

Dec 21, 2000 - Eliahu Cohen, 29, of Modi'in was shot and killed tonight by Palestinian terrorists waiting in ambush on the road between Givat Ze'ev and Beit Horon.

Dec 28, 2000 - Capt. Gad Marasha, 30, of Kiryat Arba and...

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0ia50


and on and on.

That's right. No Camp David agreement. Arafat rejected the offer Barak made. He rejected additional sacrifices on Israel's part. He himself called the Intifada even before Sept 28, 2000.

The Mitchell Accords and the Tenet plan were never implemented due to continuous Palestinian violence.

[Gimel]

109. This report

I have linked to this before, and easily you see that according to the State Department, the sides were not meeting each other half way, that there was no trust or understanding.

The Camp David talks had broken down and Arafat had called for an Intifada. That was already known by Israel.

It was not Barak who left the negotiations at Camp David. The later negotiations were meant to reach an agreement on principles to avoid a further escalation. It was obviously, too late.

[tinnypriv]

110. "called for an Intifada"

I quoted the report which says the opposite.

Did you read the same one?

When you say "known by Israel", op-eds denouncing Arafat as ultra-scum don't count as evidence of pre-planning.

[Gimel]

116. You quoted the PLO position

that was included in the report. Anyone who takes this at face value is in for a rude awakening. Many other documents prove the on-going violence. Even in this State department report it is noted:

Security, however, is the key GOI concern. The GOI maintains that the PLO has breached its solemn commitments by continuing the use of violence in the pursuit of political objectives. "Israel's principal concern in the peace process has been security. This issue is of overriding importance... (S)ecurity is not something on which Israel will bargain or compromise. The failure of the Palestinian side to comply with both the letter and spirit of the security provisions in the various agreements has long been a source of disturbance in Israel."21

With increasing violence in the territories, the settler population was strengthened. Israel will not give in to violence nor negotiate under fire and terror.

Arafat called for an Intifada as surly as the first rock hit an Israeli policeman on the Temple Mount. There are many more studies on this, and the State Department report does not deny that. The report tries to be objective rather than focusing blame. It sees problems in the position of each side and addresses them. However, it is NOT saying that Israel walked away from negotiations or that Israel started the Intifada.

The anti-Israel incitement, the orchestrated attacks throughout the country following Sept 28, 2001, the failure to control terrorist organizations, along with the smuggling of illicit weapons, leaves little doubt that Arafat is complicit with the terror and his very words called terrorists to action.

According to the GOI, the Palestinian failure takes several forms: institutionalized anti-Israel, anti-Jewish incitement; the release from detention of terrorists; the failure to control illegal weapons; and the actual conduct of violent operations, ranging from the insertion of riflemen into demonstrations to terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians. The GOI maintains that the PLO has explicitly violated its renunciation of terrorism and other acts of violence,22 thereby significantly eroding trust between the parties. The GOI perceives "a thread, implied but nonetheless clear, that runs throughout the Palestinian submissions. It is that Palestinian violence against Israel and Israelis is somehow explicable, understandable, legitimate."23
http://usembassy-israel.org.il/publish/peace/archives/2001/may/mitchell.html

[tinnypriv]

125. No, I quoted the Mitchell conclusions

Summing up and evaluating the PLO and GOI claims.

The GOI claims that Arafat started the Intifada were found to be virtually baseless. No surprise, given that is just the truth.

Oh and for sheer hyprocrisy your argument must rank pretty high. You condemn me for quoting the PLO position (lets put aside the fact that allegation is a lie), and then you yourself decide to verbatim quote the GOI position - note: "the GOI maintains".

Now, you also say that there are "many more studies" on this topic. Sure. I've read all of them, and none seriously challenge anything I said. So unless you're prepared to cite these (unnamed) "studies", you'll accept the accuracy of that comment and the preceding ones and withdraw your insinuations to the contrary (with laughable evidence as supporting documentation).

Finally, the fact that Arafat is in some ways "complicit" in terror is something that I've already condemned and acknowledged many times.

So what? Sharon is a worse terrorist, has terrorists in his cabinet, and governs in a coalition with an (evolved) terrorist faction (National Union).

I acknowledge and condemn both. When the latter point is repeatedly brought to your attention, your response is evasion.

[Gimel]

131. Even Egyptian

investigative reports say Sharon was not responsible for beginning the Intifada, and since you say Arafat wasn't either, I will remind you that when the IDF re-entered Jenin the people were non-violent until Arafat, isolated in his Mukata HQ, called on them to resist and fighting broke out. Sorry. But evidence shows that Arafat's word is followed by the majority and has been for years.

See my post 130.

[Gimel]

108. Read again

Barak walked on a later meeting. Camp David conference was held prior to the Intifada opening. The meetings at Taba were an attempt to obtain some accomplishment from the shattered peace talks. time ran out.

You may not be aware of the true complexity that it involved. This process is not a simple resolution of one issue terrorism and borders. It involves many aspects that govern the daily lives of Israelis and Palestinians. This is the Process set up in Washington, 1993.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00sk0


Many meetings are required on many different aspects of the relationship to be developed between the two peoples. The failure of Camp David, and the offer to Arafat, which he rejected, was a chance to resolve major issues, The meetings with Barak after the Intifada began, was an attempt to avoid total collapse of understandings. There were accomplishments made at those meetings.

[Gimel]

117. That says nothing

Another page on the same site:

On July 11, the Camp David 2000 Summit convened. The summit ended on July 25, without an agreement being reached. At its conclusion, a Trilateral Statement was issued defining the agreed principles to guide future negotiations.

Under the shadow of violence and terrorism, President Clinton hosted talks with Israeli and Palestinian teams in Washington from December 19-23, 2000, at the conclusion of which Clinton presented a bridging proposal to the parties.

Following a meeting in Cairo between Foreign Minister Ben-Ami and Chairman Arafat, marathon talks between Israeli and Palestinian delegations were held in Taba from January 21-27, 2001, ending in a joint statement.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00rv0#implementation

If you continue reading on the link you provided you will see that security related contacts continued after that point. To say the Barak "walked" is totally incongruent with reality.

The security contacts regarding a relaxation on the ground, the cessation of violence and counter-terrorism - will continue.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0j8c0

[LibInternationalist]

94. wow, you're wrong

Arafat left, without proposing an alternative solution (which is what is generally done when a settlement is unacceptable to one side) -- I'm generally not a big fan of Israeli government policy, but there certainly isn't an easy solution to this whole mess

[tinnypriv]

96. Barak walked

See the link in this thread to the official Israeli government statement.

This isn't even a disputable fact.

[Resistance]

100. Amazing isn't it

on edit: No I am actually not very amazed. Western elite media is flooded with distortions, misrepresentations, and flat-out lies in regards to Palestine.

[tinnypriv]

102. Sort of

The fact that the Palestinians are lied about is not wholly surprising. The North lies about the south so often and so massively you can hardly document it.

However this specific case is actually "supporters" of Israel lying despite explicit Israeli government admissions to the contrary (which refute their positions).

That is probably historically unique. I can't think of any other case of that. Certainly Stalinists defended the USSR, but never beyond what the USSR admitted.

[Aidoneus]

33. it started from beneath him

actually..

[lefty_mcduff]

40. And that has exactly what to do

with the comment from the father. Or the subject of this thread in general. I haven't forgot the situation you refer to.

It's just not specific to what is being discussed in this thread.

[Resistance]

41. it seems

really really difficult for some to condemn the cold-blooded shooting in the back of a young boy by Israeli soldiers.

Very sad.

[lefty_mcduff]

43. Agreed.

Seems folks are willing to discuss anything but.

[packerssuck]

55. I don't condemn it cause I wasn't there and I don't know if the

soldier felt threatened. Nor do you.

[sushi]

83. You're so right

We weren't there, so how can we know if the soldier felt threatened or not by a teenager waving goodbye to UN aid workers. Besides, the story can't be true because UN people don't tell the truth.

Thank you for opening our eyes.

[Gimel]

89. It should be condemned

However, a trial should first be conducted after an investigation. that is in a system of justice, not knee-jerk reaction. I have not seen irrefutable evidence that an IDF soldier was responsible. If so, he should be punished. If not, the culprit should be found and punished. The father of the injured child does have a commendable attitude which is rare.

[sushi]

92. I also like the attitude

of the injured child's father. If only there were plenty of people like him on both(!) sides.

[Gimel]

93. Reasonable doubt

However, as there is reasonable doubt that this incident ever occurred, and that it is all fiction. The attitude of the father is another part of that fiction.

[_Jumper_]

75. What does that have to do with the father's comments?

You admitted to hating the Palestinians but can't you give that person credit?

[Muddleoftheroad]

39. I guess you've never had rocks thrown at you

With the intent to kill.

If I felt my life was in danger, I wouldn't hesitate.

[lefty_mcduff]

42. No doubt you would...

... and that's why military personel are supposed to have training allowing them to deal with rock-throwing teenagers with non-lethal response. Sometimes the IDF cut those classes.

However, the case we're dicsussing did not involve rock throwing. It involved the IDF shooting an unarmed kid in the back.

It would appear that the pro IDF folks want to discuss everything *but* that.

[Muddleoftheroad]

44. I only know what we did as kids

Throwing rocks and kids got hurt.

I also know what I've seen in sports. Baseballs, footballs, basketballs, softballs -- all injuring people and knocking them down with ONE ball.

Multiple attacks put soldiers in jeopardy. They are trained to defend themselves. If you try to hurt somebody with a mob, then you can kill them.

Actually, the case we're discussing involves an allegation. Nothing more. Nothing less. It is, however, an allegation from highly suspect "witnesses."

If it turns out to be true, the soldier should be tried. If not, the UN should be banned from the area.

[lefty_mcduff]

46. Why are they 'highly suspect'.

Simply because they're not proffering the desired 'testimony' or do you have other insider info that I'm not privy to.

[Aidoneus]

49. because it makes the army look bad

and that CANNOT possibly be true! "tohar ha'neshek" et al..

[Muddleoftheroad]

52. Because they are UN

That automatically makes them suspect.

[lefty_mcduff]

60. Oh. The UN.

The origanization that folks trot out as the arbitrator of world law to be obeyed when it suits (the formation of Israel and Bush's recent invasion of Iraq are two examples that come to mind) and then condem as biased whenever the body disagrees, voices opinions opposed, passes resolutions against, or (as in this case) talk to reporters about an event that, even on the surface, is suspect.

Gotcha.

Well, I guess we can then resort to unbiased sources like The Jerusalem Post and Al-Jazzera for our news. That will keep us all honest.

[_Jumper_]

76. They consider the UN anti-Semitic

Because even countries that hate Arabs more than Jews vote against Israel in the UN.

[Darranar]

68. So...

are the testimonies of all federal workers now suspect, because Bush is a liar?

[sushi]

86. But of course!

We all know which country is always right. Why doesn't it just leave the UN. It's much better to live separately than be a member of a club of liars!

[Aidoneus]

48. the soldiers should be put in jeopardy

by their mere presence (to say nothing of routine activities), they are committing criminal acts and should be opposed.

[Muddleoftheroad]

53. If they are opposed by violence

They should respond that way.

And people here should not complain when those who attack troops get shot.

[lefty_mcduff]

61. One more time.

This kid did not attack troops. He was shot in the back.

[Muddleoftheroad]

62. One more time

We only have an allegation. Nothing more.

[lefty_mcduff]

65. Fair enough

So let's use *allegations* as a baramoter when Palestinians are *supsected* of terrorism and being involved with terrorism (negating many assasinations that many support).

And if the facts hold out, I'll expect your outrage. Not 'shit happens'. Not 'collateral damage'. Not 'occupational hazzards'.

But unconditional, unbiased outrage.

Fair enough for you?

[Muddleoftheroad]

71. Nope

We have highly suspect and politically motivated witnesses making a claim. It may be correct, but their credibility is wildly at issue.

If the "facts" hold out, he should be prosecuted.

[Violet_Crumble]

115. Wrong...

There is nothing wrong with the credibility of the eye-witnesses, and if anyone has any information proving otherwise, they're free to share it...

It would be nice to see some condemnation of a kid being shot in the back rather than empty accusations against all who were present when he was shot. And his father could teach a few people a lesson in conciliation as far as I'm concerned. He more than anyone has a reason to hate, but he's the one talking about conciliation and peace...

Violet...

[sushi]

80. Good question!

And why did the IDF officers apologize, twice?

[Resistance]

45. Another report of the crime is here

Weekly Report: On Israeli Human Rights Violations in the OPT

Palestinian Centre for Human Rights

No. 06 /2004

12 - 18 February2004

In the afternoon, Israeli soldiers fired at a Palestinian child, who had been speaking with a UN delegation at his family’s land in Deir al-Balah, wounding him with a live bullet in the back.

According to investigations conducted by PCHR, at approximately15 :00, an international delegation, including two staff members of UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and one staff member of United Nations Association International Service, visited Khalil Suleiman Bashir’s house, adjacent to “Kfar Darom” settlement, east of Deir al-Balah. Israeli soldiers positioned in the area gave permission for the delegates to visit and speak with the family, provided that the delegation did not enter the house and left after 30 minutes. The delegates agreed and did not enter the house. The delegation proceeded to speak with Mr. Bashir in the area of his garden as indicated by the Israeli soldiers. After 30 minutes, Israeli soldiers gestured for the delegation to leave the area. Immediately, the delegation moved towards the clearly marked UN vehicle to leave. Yousef Khalil Suleiman Bashir,15 , stood in his garden with his father watching the delegation get into the vehicle. When the delegation had got into the vehicle and was about to move away, an Israeli soldier fired a single live bullet, hitting Yousef Bashir in the back near the spine. The soldier fired at Yousef from a distance of approximately 20 meters. Immediately, the delegation evacuated the child to a hospital in Deir al-Balah. The child was then transported to Shifa Hospital in Gaza city where he remains in a serious condition.

At approximately15 :30, Israeli soldiers positioned along the Egyptian border, south of Rafah, opened fire at al-Brazil neighborhood, adjacent to the border. A Palestinian child, Mo’ath Talal Abu Sha’ar,11 , was wounded by a live bullet in the right foot.

[packerssuck]

50. Speaking of the UN:

The UN is responsible for that housing in the Palestinian territories. According to the UN bylaws, it is illegal to use civilian areas as a base for military operations. Arafat and the rest of his terrorist factions and friends have been using the palestinian population as shields for more than 50 years.

I'm surprised that the UN hasn't done anything about this. I mean it's been going on 50 years now. But, I guess that you see nothing wrong with the palestinian terrorists using palestinian population as shields.

[lefty_mcduff]

64. Uh-huh.

That's a kettle of fish. You may also want to brush up on the Geneva Conventions about 'occupying armies'. and 'civilian populations'. While you;re at it "collective punishment" as well. Wouldn't worry about the UN though - Israel's corporate enablers and weapon suppliers are always on the standby with vetoes should the UN get *too* uppity.

And I guess you see nothing wrong with the IDF blasting their way through civilians to get at *suspected* terrorists. Not indicted terrorists. Not convicted terrorists. *Suspected Terrorists*. Using tanks, Apaches, Bulldozers, Mavericks, Sidewinder and Hell-storm missles. Rumors of flachette rounds as well. Against *suspected* terrorists armed with Soviet Era Kalashnikovs and home made bombs.

Well, I guess not. You've already stated (in post #14) that you "don't really care about the Palestinians" have you not? And let's not forget that we're discussing a 15 year old kid who was shot in the back by an IDF soldier. A soldier who is now suspended (one would assume with probable cause) while the incident is under investigation.

Wow - even the IDF is showing more compassion.

[packerssuck]

66. Yes, Israel should show more compassion towards people who

are killing them. lol. Again, It's illegal to have a military base of operation amongst the civilian population. Therefore, Israel has every right to go in there and get 'em. It's Arafat and Hamas who have endangered their population. If Arafat had wanted peace, he could've had it a long time ago. Many Israeli prime ministers tried different initiatives. But it always came down to Arafat not wanting to police his own people. He and Hamas have said many times that they want to push Israel into the sea.

[lefty_mcduff]

67. Well, if you want to only discuss

international law that the Pals break (which I do not deny), while ignoring the multitude of laws and conventions that Israel defies (which you are insistant on ignoring) we can't really solve anything now, can we?

I actually said that the IDF, whom I am no big fan of, is showing more compassion than many who are merely commenting on this incident of this thread. An incident which involves a 15 year old boy (a few years older than my kid which really brings it home to me).

If you actually believe that Hamas could 'push Israel into the sea' perhaps you should investigate the lop-sided military situation as it has stood for years.

While you mention Arafat, I suppose Sharon is not mentioned as you view him a man of 'peace'. Perhaps you should investigate his ahm, colorful past, and his ahm, earlier expressions of compassion.

And if you're going to quote Hamas hyperbole, perhaps you should read some of the more colorful hyperbole coming out of Sharon, the Likudnists, and others.

A more colorful comment floating around a few days ago theorized that the Pals were gentically predisposed to terrorism. So, you'll excuse me if I don't place all the blame at the feet of Arafat.

[_Jumper_]

77. A 15 year-old waving to people is trying to kill?????

Or do you blame all Palestinians for terrorism?

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

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

[tinnypriv]

70. And the Zionist organisations did the same thing

With UNRRA.

They recruited, trained, smuggled arms etc in the UNRRA camps, despite that being a violation of their committments.

Some of the people trained, and some of the arms smuggled there were used for terrorist attacks in Palestine.

Of course, that is just a glorious moment of Jewish nationalism, a moment to savior in the founding of Israel. When the Palestinians do the same thing (on a much smaller scale), they're disgusting parasites, to be eliminated, right?

As for shields, the Israeli army does the same thing right now. They use innocent Palestinians as human shields in military operations.

The army even threatens them with death in some circumstances.

I'd be interested in your comment on that.

[packerssuck]

56. I'm sure it happened just like they said. I'm sure that no palestinians

were throwing rocks or planning an ambush. I mean, palestinians never target Israeli soldiers.

[Aidoneus]

hm.. machine hiccup'd

double post..

[Aidoneus]

58. actually, they do

and may they continue to do so.

How strange it is that the occupation soldiers are hanging out in enemy territory in order to be available for having rocks thrown at them.. which, according to the Hebrew-language Israeli press (Maariv or Yediot, I forget which), is something the IDF does just to provoke a reaction. Their very presence constitutes criminal activity. Within the context of the situation, they have two rights:--to leave and never return, or, barring that, to bleed. And that happens, somewhat regularly; it's still called "terrorism".

That doesn't apply here, however. Shooting a kid in the back at close range is difficult to justify, but I commend people here for trying.

[packerssuck]

59. You have a short memory........

The IDF moved into terrirtories after many suicide bombings committed against Israelis. It costs Israel a lot of money to stay in the territories and this is why Arafat and the gang want to keep Israel stuck in the territories. It kills the Israeli economy.

I don't know why the kid got shot in the back. I'm sure the palestinian and the palestinian terrorist enablers were up to something. They go to cause trouble, why else would you mess with soldiers every day.

[Aidoneus]

63. a lot of things could be said about me..

a short memory is not one of them.. I'm well aware of the greater context at work here.

[sushi]

84. You don't know

why the kid got shot in the back? I thought you didn't believe stories coming from the UN. This is a UN story. What happened for you to change your mind?

Since when is waving to aid workers "messing with soldiers?"

[tinnypriv]

69. Ma'ariv, 3 Dec 2003

Front page article:

Headline:
How IDF sends out soldiers to attract Palestinian fire

Text:
Soldiers complain: We must dress up as settlers, travel on Judea and Samaria roads, with goal of attracting fire from terrorist ambushes. IDF says: Goal is to catch stone-throwers.

[Aidoneus]

82. that's the one

thanks..

[Gimel]

90. It's the same report

The Canadian report was obviously lifted from this one.

[number6]

78. what a piece of shit Army officer

shooting an unarmed Palestinian youth.

BTW I support the U.N. and I believe the story !!

[Muddleoftheroad]

85. Yes, of course witnesses never lie

and the UN has never acted unfairly against Israel...

[lefty_mcduff]

87. Following the logic of your earlier posts...

...there are not even *allegations* that the witnesses are lying. What we're left with is *biased* scenarios of witness mistruths, created to offer cover and yet another excuse for the disgraceful antics of some members of the IDF.

Given the fact that the IDF have at least as much reason to 'distort' what happened, why should you, or anyone else, automatically doubt the witness accounts any more than those of the IDF?

[number6]

104. I never said witnesses never lie or

UN has never acted unfairly against Israel,

the flawed U.N. is the best we got for now
and I beleive this story ...

[sushi]

91. I support the UN too

It makes mistakes but it also does great work. The world needs the UN. Whether this story is true or not, let's wait for an investigation, but I can believe it.

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

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

[tinnypriv]

99. What the fuck is this racist bullshit?

Quote: "civilized rules don't apply to palestinians" ? :puke:

Putting that aside, and back to the world of fact, Palestinian courts usually aren't allowed to hear crimes against Israelis, according to the wishes of Israel. Try looking it up.

Back to "civilised": Palestinian courts aren't even allowed to try Israelis for admitted crimes against Palestinians - say, assault, murder, terror etc - examples of which are too numerous to document here.

In fact, the current defense minister of Israel (Shaul Mofaz) has himself previously admitted to shockingly racist actions against Palestinians, one minor example of which was forcing them to write numbers on their arms to remember Jews killed in the Holocaust (on the 27 of Nissan no less).

He wasn't tried in an Arab court, he was tried and acquitted (on ridiculous grounds) in an Israeli military tribunal.

Is that "civilised"?

How about the Lebanese slaughtered in the Israeli invasion of their country? Ever heard of an Israeli tried in their courts?

[packerssuck]

118. Hmmm, let me refresh your memory

Arafat was using Lebanon as a base of operations for terror attacks against Israel. Arafat had killed thousands of Lebanese and was trying to take over power in Lebanon. Lebanon wanted Arafat out of there and that's why Israel was cheered when they first entered Lebanon before the prolonged war swayed public opinion.

Palestinian courts are a joke. Arafat commits extra judicial killings against his own people. The court system is corrupt and controlled by Arafat. Israel would have to be nuts to allow Israelis to be tried by Palestinian courts, lol.

Didn't 300 people in Arafat's cabinet resign recently because Arafat was so corrupt and against peace with Israel? yes.

[drewb]

119. This is how you justify racist bullshit???

:wtf:

:loveya:

[packerssuck]

120. No, I would be much more ruthless.

How would you feel if suicide bombers were infiltrating your community?

[Resistance]

121. what would you do

if an entire army was invading your towns and murdering your civilians so that they could steal more of your land?

[Name removed]

124. Deleted message

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

[drewb]

126. Hardy har har and Yuckity yuck yuck....

:nopity:
:party:
:silly:
:loveya:

[mac2]

133. drewb...your posts are weird and useless. What is that?

[Forkboy]

138. drews post are excellent

and add more than asking what they add adds...or something like that :silly:

Hardy har har and yukkity yuk!

on edit-if you stick around long enough (and I hope you do) you too will be reduced to laughing or crying at the insanity of it all.

[Lithos]

122. Doesn't play

Two wrongs don't make a right in this case. The fact remains that Palestinian courts do not try Israeli's.

[tinnypriv]

127. Though this is hardly worth the time

Here is a response:

<< "Arafat was using Lebanon as a base of operations for terror attacks against Israel." >>

I doubt you're aware of this, but Arafat was respecting a cross-border cease-fire brokered by America despite Israeli terrorist bombings and provocations at the time of the Lebanon invasion (the Habib ceasefire).

Also, "base of operations" is an interesting term. Why do you think the Palestinians were in Lebanon? Did they like the scenery?

They were driven there by terror, massacre, rape, destruction etc. All long ago documented in Israel.

<< "Arafat had killed thousands of Lebanese and was trying to take over power in Lebanon" >>

Lebanon is such a complex picture I doubt anybody could reduce the civil war to one sentence. Doubly so in your case, since you grabbed this talking point direct from Israeli hasbara. If you really want it refuted with Israeli documentation, ask.

<< "Lebanon wanted Arafat out of there and that's why Israel was cheered when they first entered Lebanon before the prolonged war swayed public opinion." >>

Yes, Lebanon wanted the Palestinians back in Palestine. What an outrageous demand. As for being "cheered", I'll do something outrageous and quote some Lebanese. First the (note: Christian) Ambassador of Lebanon to the United States at the time:

"I request the Security Council to stop the aggression against Israel .. to stop the wanton bombardment of positions in Lebanon by Israel"

Another statement (addressing a disarmament conference in New York):

"The atomic holocaust of tomorrow becomes a problomatic danger, remote and almost unreal, to those who are living an actual holocaust: the holocaust of their mother earth, of men, women and children physically destroyed along with the cities they built and loved"

He sounds positively thrilled.

To quote some more Lebanese who are "cheering" - we could go to the press. Say, Monday Morning, a quality Beirut journal:

"With the exception of the rightist Lebanese front, officials, politicians, and party leaders unreservedly condemned Israel's invasion of Lebanon and vowed to resist it, accusing the United States of responsibility for savage aggression and denouncing the Arab's failure to throw their full weight behind Lebanon and the Palestinians."

Note that the Prime Minister, the (Christian) Foreign Minister, the House speaker, the head of the Shiite milita, the largest muslim groupings, the leader of the Druze and many maronites and others in Lebanon were all verociously opposed to the Israeli invasion.

Still, lets grant that some were "cheering". Ok, who?

Students at the Lebanese University which was ransacked "with wanton destruction and looting of scientific laboratories and classrooms by Israeli soldiers"? Were they cheering?

The Lebanese who had to rebuild their private homes and hospitals and institutions which were destroyed and damaged in over $100m in devastation?

The doctors at the Berbir hospital which was ransacked by Israeli soldiers who also defecated all over the place?

The hundreds of orphans wandering the streets of Tyre?

You'll have to be more specific about who was "cheering". I suspect you don't know any, because your statement is based on idiotic and ridiculous Israeli government claims, ridiculed by serious Israeli commentators (all the above is mostly from Israeli or Jewish sources which can be supplied to you if you so require).

<< "Israel would have to be nuts to allow Israelis to be tried by Palestinian courts, lol" >>

Glad to see that you think forcing Palestinians to write numbers on their arms on Holocaust Memorial day is a laughing matter. Strangely enough, Mofaz claimed the same defence - he ordered the humiliation "in jest".

Also, lets get the principles straight - Israel can try Israelis, and can also try Palestinians. But not the other way round, right?

Why not?

Before you use the "Israel is a democracy" defense, remember that Palestinians charged with crimes in their own land are not tried in Israeli courts, but IDF military courts. If you want some of the sentences handed out by the Samaria military court quoted (from the Israeli prison service Hebrew site), just ask. Whether you ask or not, here is a couple of examples:

1. The military courts give a 20 month sentence to Palestinians for throwing stones, yet Israeli civilian courts often give a zero jail term to religious Jews who do the same.

2. Those same military courts which give out 20 month sentences for throwing stones (in occupied territory remember) also give suspended sentences to IDF soldiers who deliberately murder helpless, unarmed and non-demonstrating Palestinians.

In essense, in the eyes of these courts --which you think are so fantastic-- if you throw a stone and you're an Arab, you're more of a criminal than a Jewish murderer.

Note that the suspended sentence I mentioned is one of only 4 cases where an IDF soldier was convicted for serious crimes against a Palestinian, despite overwhelming evidence of massive human-rights abuses (that evidence often from Israeli human rights organisations).

Before you decide to fall back on the "Israel investigates each case" canard, note that senior military correspondents in the Hebrew Israeli press report that (essentially) the Israeli military investigations of actions against Palestinians are a joke.

You can be provided with the full article (in English) from Yediot Aharonot if you like. It is entitled:

"Poorly Investigated, Forgotten and Buried"

<<" Didn't 300 people in Arafat's cabinet resign recently because Arafat was so corrupt and against peace with Israel? yes" >>

Some resigned because he is a corrupt thug, yes. His being "against peace with Israel" was not given as a reason, so in that regard you know zero about the topic.

In any case, the number of resignations was later alleged to be fabrication.

[drewb]

129. Let's see you refute that Mr. Packerssuck...

Sound of crickets...

:loveya:



To Tinnypriv... Bravo!

[mac2]

137. Don't understand.

[Aidoneus]

123. suspended? hell, just a phony PR slap on the wrist

Perhaps his house should be bulldozed.

That would be the penalty if the offending army man had the misfortune of being born with the wrong last name.

[mac2]

134. It was arrogant murder because he knew he could get away

with it. It also intimidated the UN workers and others in the community. It is a Mafia like action.

[Gimel]

128. A better account

This report from Ha'aretz has a detailed report, includes the same incident. The Child has hit by a piece of shrapnel, apparently flung from the wheel of a vehicle that was hit directly.

The IDF Spokesman's Office has responded that "on February 18 an IDF officer carried out a shooting in the direction of the wheel of a vehicle that looked suspicious to him, in the area adjacent to Kfar Darom. Apparently from the shooting a youth who was in the area was injured. The officer has been suspended from his position until the investigation is completed. The IDF is continuing to investigate the circumstances of the incident." http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=398835

The "Star" account says:

an unarmed Palestinian youth was shot in the back at close range as he waved goodbye to a delegation of visiting United Nations aid workers. http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1077923412783&call_pageid=968332188854&col=968350060724

The Ha'aretz report:

According to Halil Bashir, two pieces of shrapnel are embedded in his son's spine. The doctors at the Israeli hospital do not yet know whether they will perform surgery to remove them. If the pain persists, it is a sign that the shrapnel are pressing on the spine and they must be removed, even if the spine is liable to be injured during the operation itself. http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=398835

The Star: "The boy was no more than five metres from us, waving goodbye after our visit, with his back to the Israeli observation post," said one of the U.N. field staff. "It was absolutely quiet. But then a single shot was fired. The boy fell to his knees and then he collapsed on the ground. It was like slow-motion video. "There is absolutely no doubt in my mind the bullet came from the Israeli army position. They were only about 20 metres away. There was nothing else going on. There is no other explanation." http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1077923412783&call_pageid=968332188854&col=968350060724

The inaccuracies in the Star report are glaring. The child was hit by shrapnel, not the bullet. It was the unintentional result of a bullet fired elsewhere. None-the-less, the soldier who fired the shot has been suspended. This was an accidental shooting.

[mac2]

135. bull crap

[mac2]

132. You have to be naive to think the Israelis are always the victims.

UN sides with Arabs? Could they not even be angry about this without being accussed of being one-sided? Why lie? The killing is on both sides.