Palestinian child shot dead by Israeli soldiers

wes

Sand wrote: »

This is true.

Assuming a kid was actually killed here [ still no confirmation of a body or autopsy....] and its not just blatant propaganda....

Any evidence of this propoganda coming from western news sources? Of course there is no evidence of this at all. The IDF were the only people firing. Care to provide any evidence to support your propoganda theory? Perhaps building a wall to steal other people land is bound to make you look bad. Maybe Israel should consider that.

Sand wrote: »

If you were involved in a violent protest facing off against armed IDF soldiers who you view as monsters quite capable of murdering Palestinian kids and you see Palestinian kids involved in the protest do you

A) Give them the thumbs up, great to see them become politically active so young....

Send them the **** home out of harms way? Dont they know how bloody dangerous the situation is?

C) Call your friendly Palestinian media to let them know they might have a money shot shortly?

Think hard....

Hardly a representation of reality now is it. Also, the media was already there. There have been protests in Nilin for a while now.

Also, the intent of the organizers is for the protests to be peaceful and not violent, you can read it more here:

'We have no alternative than peaceful protest'

Sadly the protests turned violent with stone throwing, but your scenario hardly make sense considering the organizers are trying to hold a peaceful protest.

Sand wrote: »

Also Wes, a couple of questions:

You say

You base this on the report. Thats weird because the report says....

The article later goes into more detail and thats what I quoted. Stones were thrown and the IDF responded with plastic bullets and tear gas. The crowd dispersed and went back to the village and the boy was shot.

This was the account from the people who were there. The brief summary is pretty vague, but the detail later tell the whole story.

Now a question to you, why are the IDF there at all in Nilin? There wall would work just as well in Israel. Why do things like this and make themselves look bad in the media? Taking more land in a conflict about land and claiming to want peace and security seems a bit odd doesn't it?

Sand wrote: »

I.E. the soldiers were not firing on a peaceful, dispersing crowd - they were firing on violent crowd that was stoning them. Either the boy was involved in the stone throwing, or was caught by a stray bullet. Seeing as the soldiers were under attack, its hardly likely even the worst mother****er of the lot took time out to deliberately target and unarmed child minding his own business.

They had dispersed. It says so later in the article, where they give more detail on what happened. The stone throwing happened first and then after the crowd dispersed, they fired live ammo at them. Pretty clear case of murder.

Also, the crowd was not peaceful, they were throwing stone, but when live ammo was used they were dispersing.

Sand wrote: »

Youve quoted this alot....seeing as you mustve have been there to speak with such authority on exactly how it went down can you tell me how far exactly the village is from the IDF positions? Would a stones throw summarise the distance? As according to the report you quote the boy was shot in the village, whilst the crowd of protestors were stoning the IDF?

I am quoting from the article and would assume the people there would know more than you and me. I would trust the person who was there. The crowd was dispersing when the boy was shot as per the people who were there.

Sand wrote: »

Man, Team Israel is totally whupping Team Palestine...theyre going to need a hell of a half time talk to turn this around.

The numbers show that Israel maybe aren't entirely truthful about there claims, when it comes to there purity of arms and all that nonsense.

Regardless, its sad to see so many people on all sides lose there lives in the continuing conflict.

Of course if you want to be "rah, rah" go team Israel about it, then have fun. I am sure they will do something fun very soon!

wes

Sand wrote: »

Stop with the bollocks. You posted this in Politics. You didnt post it as a call for a moment of meditation on the tragic loss of a young life. You posted it for political propaganda.

So again, enough with the ****e.

What propoganda? Linking to an article that shows what Israel is doing? Stealing land and engaging in a conflict as they have always done.

wes

El Stuntman wrote: »

anyone care to offer any solutions or even to move somewhat out of their entrenched pro-Palestinian (seems to be more of them for some reason) or pro-Israeli positions?

The potential solution is already well known. That of the 2 state solution. The problem is getting there.

Now the 1 state solution is another less likely one, but at the rate Israel is taking up Palestinian land, it may not always be the least likely solution.

FTA69

Bubs101 wrote: »

It doesn't say that they targeted him anywhere. I'm pretty sure that no matter how evil the Israeli's are portrayed in the media one of them isn't going to shoot a kid in the chest for no reason whatsoever on purpose.

Why not? Young, scared soldiers do horrific things in time of war; from rape, to theft, to mutilation to out and out murder. One only has to look at My Lai or Bloody Sunday for an example of that.

Playboy

Look no matter what anyone says Israel is an occupying and aggresively expansionist force in someone elses land. Every death including the deaths of Israeli civilians is blood on the hands of numerous Israeli governments and the US who back them.

Israeli's are murdering people, stealing their land and haven been doing so for decades but yet you still find people on this forum who defend them. How can anyone who has any sense of morality or ethics defend what is going on and what has gone on in that region since the turn of the century. (this is not an attack on certain posters but an actual question that I will hope they will try and answer). I just cannot see how anyone can justify the actions of successive Israeli regimes and their policies .. and the damage said policies have caused to peoples lives (all in the name of a Greater Israel and a homeland for the Jewish people)

dlofnep

Sand wrote: »

Oh yeah and Dlofnep....



Stop with the bollocks. You posted this in Politics. You didnt post it as a call for a moment of meditation on the tragic loss of a young life. You posted it for political propaganda.

So again, enough with the ****e.

You appear upset? I posted it in politics because it is a political conflict. If I had of posted it in another forum, it would of been moved here. Don't try dictate to me on the reasoning of posting it here. I posted it because I wanted to address the issue at hand. Not that I even have to validate any of this to you.

oscarBravo

I know it's an emotive topic, but less of the personal squabbling, please.

Sand

Any evidence of this propoganda coming from western news sources?

Any evidence of anyone actually dying? If you look closely at the report youll notice its hinged around one quote from a Palestinian political activist.

Salah Al Khawaja, a member of Nilin’s Committee Against the Wall, said Israeli troops fired live rounds at a group of protesters who ran into Nilin after security forces dispersed demonstrators using rubber-coated bullets.

“Protesters arrived at the wall’s construction site outside the village and the soldiers started to open fire with rubber bullets and tear gas. This pushed the protesters back into the village where the boy was hit by a live bullet in his chest,” he said.

So a political activist said, but no objective evidence provided. No pictures, no video, no autopsy report. No mention of a shooting in the apparent IDF comment. Nothing. I asked in my first post for any such evidence, and no one has supplied any objective evidence that anyone even died in that village. Not even a photo of an ambulance taking the body away, or a funeral.

You know, by the standards of evidence you demand of Iranian nuclear weapons programme, youre very much willing to accept whatever you read in the papers. A paper that cant even confirm what age the boy was - do a google on his name for news reports and take your pick...was he 9? Was he 11? Was he 12? Everyone has an opinion, but no one so far can show even a photo of the gravestone.

It may well be the kid was killed, but its also possible the kid never existed in the first place. Especially when its well known that the Palestinian terrorist groups have a huge sideline of manufacturing news to be relayed by "Palestinian sources" to the Western media which rarely checks the news it reports. Pallywood.

Sadly the protests turned violent with stone throwing, but your scenario hardly make sense considering the organizers are trying to hold a peaceful protest.

Again, from the report....

The demonstrations are led by local Palestinian villagers whose communities are cut off by the 436-mile long barrier and supported by foreign sympathisers from the International Solidarity Movement. Palestinian youths often throw rocks during the protests and Israeli troops fire tear gas and rubber bullets.

From the report it is clear that there is often violence at these protests and that with the amount of rocks, tear gas and rubber bullets flying around they are not safe for children and any responsible adult and any responsible protest organisation would have sent them back home. Why didnt they? These are children, adults - even apart from their parents - are supposed to take some responsibility for ensuring their protection.

Saint posted the "scores" in the child killing conflict between Israel and Palestine, the reason the "scores" might be so heavily tilted against the Palestinians is probably down the Palestinians sending their children to pick fights against front line combat troops whilst the Israelis send their kids to school and keep them safe as possible.

Food for thought.

The stone throwing happened first and then after the crowd dispersed, they fired live ammo at them. Pretty clear case of murder.

No, the report on which youre basing your entire view clearly stated the boy was shot as protestors threw rocks. Not after, not before. As and when the rocks were being thrown.

The greater detail you mention is just a 2 sentence quote from a political activist who doesnt even mention the stone throwing at all.

Either you believe the report is trustworthy in which case trust all of it, or you believe is a confused contradictory tale which cannot be trusted in which case dont trust any of it.

I would trust the person who was there.

Hes part of the protests FFS. Bias? His evidence is hearsay at best, and wouldnt stand in a courtroom.

Of course if you want to be "rah, rah" go team Israel about it, then have fun.

Sorry, Im not the one keeping scores like it was a football game. Nor am I the one sending kids to pick fights with heavily armed soldiers and then using their inevitable deaths for propaganda purposes.

You appear upset? I posted it in politics because it is a political conflict. If I had of posted it in another forum, it would of been moved here. Don't try dictate to me on the reasoning of posting it here. I posted it because I wanted to address the issue at hand. Not that I even have to validate any of this to you.

Bored, and a bit of amusement at the "Guys, this isnt about Israel and Palestine, this is about a young boy cut down before his time...." spiel when you ran into some political discussion you didnt like. Quick, to the moral high ground!!!!

What did you expect posting it in the Politics board? You posted it for political discussion, for political propaganda purposes. "Hai, guise, Lookit dem ebil Israelis!!!!" Delude yourself if you want I guess.

Sand

Ah here we go. I found a report with a picture of the dead boy.

One small issue though.

Every report says the boy was shot through the chest. That was the mortal wound.

Why in the photos is it the boys head that is bandaged/bleeding whilst his chest has no bandaging or blood?

Heres a photo with another angle of the chest. Still no blood or bandaging anywhere except for the head.

Looks like someone missed a detail when setting up the photo shoot.

Ive got to say I am curious now. Will look more into this to see if I can find a photo of the boys injuries that matches with the events described....

dlofnep

I'd just like to point out that another youth has been shot and killed. Apparently in his front lawn.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3576101,00.html

That's 2 youths in the same day, shot by over-aggressive Israeli troops.

Sand

Did they get the wounds right this time for the photo shoot?

GuanYin

As an aside, I've seen my fair share of gun shot wounds (GSW) in the ER and there is nothing in that photo to suggest that the boy was not shot in the chest. Assuming the wound is perforating the majority of blood and wound evidence will be from the exit wound. In both penetrating and perforating GSWs you usually don't see large amounds of bleeding at the entrance wound.

In the pictures shown, the wound could easily be obscured by the blanket and may not be any large than an inch or so.

In otherwords, that picture tells you absolutely nothing about whether the boy was shot in the chest and it Sand's point is based on conjecture (and inaccurate conjecture).

Sand

Heres another version of events of the boys shooting....if there was a boy shot at all.

Mussa's uncle, Hosni Yusuf Mussa, told Ynet that he fails to understand why a Border Guard police officer would shoot at a child.

"He was a young boy playing with his friends. How could he threaten the soldiers?" he said. "They're just kids who saw a march against the fence and joined in. To come back dead and without a head shows the cruelty of the soldiers."

Uh sorry, without a head? His head is still clearly attached and intact.

But you see, now hes 11 years old and has been shot in the head. Not the chest as originally claimed by Wes' eyewitness and the media.

And lets look at the details ----

Mussa's 10-year-old friends said they were trying to remove barbed wire placed by the army when a jeep arrived and forces started to fire.

"Suddenly, we saw the martyr falling and one bullet in his head," said Mussa's friend Ahmed Saadat. He admitted that the children then started hurling stones at the forces, with one of them hitting a police officer in the head.

Okay, this is another discrepancy in the many versions of this tale - first the boy was down in the village, with the crowd having dispersed, and was shot in the chest.

But wait, actually he was up at the fence trying to remove barbed wire when he was shot in the head.

This story is laughable. The Palestinian sources involved cant get a single version of the story straight and the photos of the dead boy provided show no evidence he was shot in the chest, and his uncle [ who would have seen the body you would think, or would have at least has a first hand account] claims the body was without a head which the photos again do not support.

The "story" stinks of a con job perpetrated on the western media which doesnt even do basic investigation of the press releases it publishes for Palestinian terrorist groups.

In otherwords, that picture tells you absolutely nothing about whether the boy was shot in the chest

No evidence the boy was shot in the chest. No blood, whatsoever either in the sheets, on the chest or on the gurney. Nothing.

No evidence the boys head was severely traumatised by the bullet as the uncle claims - head is still firmly attached and seem pretty much intact - no huge gaping cavity.

The photos demonstrate, much as the changing versions of the events, what a crock of invented nonsense this is. Youre being conned.

dlofnep

"Without a head" - This could mean anything, especially after being translated. The fact that you are trying to deny this child's death is disgusting.

Sand

"Without a head" - This could mean anything, especially after being translated. The fact that you are trying to deny this child's death is disgusting.

It means at the very least serious head trauma.

And there was no kid killed here so save me the drama. The entire story was invented for consumption by the gullible. Christ, it doesnt even stand up to some half arsed googling.

Its just hilarious how some of the supposed cynical, jaded, fight the power, cant trust the corporate media types swallow this **** wholesale when they want to.

dlofnep

Wow. Just wow. At first I thought you were trolling, but at this point I don't know what to say. Tell the parents of this child that he's not dead. I'm sure they would love to know!

Playboy

Sand are you having a laugh or something?

What are you trying to deny .. that the kid was killed by the Israeli's? So who killed him .. his parents or the Palestinian propoganda machine (lol!). Are you trying to deny the amount of people displaced and murdered because of the illegal Israeli occupation? Are you now some kind of authority and detective extradonaire on all things Israeli/Palestinian that we should trust over international news agencies and Human rights organizations.

Of course in an incident like this there is going to be major discrepincies in eye-witness accounts .. Its not like people are standing still while the IDF fire rubber bullets, tear gas and then live rounds at you.

To hear you whine about Palestinian propoganda, with the amount of control the US & Israel exert on the International media especially in the US, is laughable and hypocritical beyond belief. Chomsky tackles this very issue in many of his books .. if you havent read them you should .. and if you have read them then what the hell are you on about?

GuanYin

Sand, enough of this nonsense. You've conjectured that there was no shooting, there is news media reporting that there is. Unless you find some article debating the veracity of those claims you're dragging the thread off topic with your opinions that have no basis bar you're prejudice for the topic.

In otherwords (in case I'm not clear) your opinions are not facts so stop treating them like them, stay on topic.

Everyone else, accusations of trolling will not be tolerated.

Sand

What are you trying to deny .. that the kid was killed by the Israeli's? So who killed him ..

I seriously doubt the kid was killed at all. There are multiple, highly contradictory stories floating around that place the boy in various locations, carrying out various activities, and being killed by by wounds that are sometimes in his chest, sometimes in his head, sometimes removing his head.

Oh and his age is described as being anywhere between 9 and 12.

The photos of the body look staged and contradict claims that his head was missing or that he was shot in the chest.

I see a made up tale, with various parties giving conflicting accounts because they didnt see anyone get shot and are simply making it up as they go along.

Sand, enough of this nonsense. You've conjectured that there was no shooting, there is news media reporting that there is. Unless you find some article debating the veracity of those claims you're dragging the thread off topic with your opinions that have no basis bar you're prejudice for the topic.

Let me get this clear. If its written in a paper, it must be true. In fact, I am not even allowed to disbelieve the paper, unless and only if I can find another media source that prints something different?

So a person must blindly accept whatever they read in the paper, because the paper never prints anything wrong does it? Thats your defence of the contradictions in the accounts? And that noting these is dragging the thread off topic. What is the topic then, if not the death of this boy? Assuming this boy died at all of course.

Tell me, which version of events do you believe?

What age was the boy? 9, 11 or 12
Where was the boy shot? In the chest or in the head? Was the head wound traumatic enough that the uncle could describe the head as "missing"?
Where was the boy when he was shot? In the village? Or at the fence?
Was the crowd throwing stones at the time or dispersing?
Was the boy throwing stones, dispersing with the crowd or cutting barbed wire at the fence?

These have all been printed by the papers - which version do you believe?

GuanYin

Sand wrote: »

Let me get this clear. If its written in a paper, it must be true. In fact, I am not even allowed to disbelieve the paper, unless and only if I can find another media source that prints something different?

So a person must blindly accept whatever they read in the paper, because the paper never prints anything wrong does it? Thats your defence of the contradictions in the accounts? And that noting these is dragging the thread off topic. What is the topic then, if not the death of this boy? Assuming this boy died at all of course.

Tell me, which version of events do you believe?

What age was the boy? 9, 11 or 12
Where was the boy shot? In the chest or in the head? Was the head wound traumatic enough that the uncle could describe the head as "missing"?
Where was the boy when he was shot? In the village? Or at the fence?
Was the crowd throwing stones at the time or dispersing?
Was the boy throwing stones, dispersing with the crowd or cutting barbed wire at the fence?

These have all been printed by the papers - which version do you believe?

I know you know better than to question moderating in a thread.

Journalistic standards is not the topic of the thread. You've stated that something is awry because the accounts conflict, we get that.

However, you're trying to use that information as proof of something and mildly trolling the users of this thread (and that "judgement" is a mod judgement). So stop it (that is the only bit you need to get clear).

Obviously the reporting and propaganda by both sides is an issue of discussion and that is fine. Claiming, as you are doing, that the incident didn't happen is a leap too far. If you keep it up, I'll ban you.

Hope that clears everything up. The PM button or rules discussion thread is the only place I want to see this post followed up.

Back on topic.

dlofnep

The ages vary because most of the papers stated "believed to be around nine years old".

Keywords being "believed to be". Meaning, the papers weren't sure at the time of print. Since then, they have confirmed his age.

Manic Moran

Without going quite to the same extreme as Sands, he does make a valid point in that many people on here will take the Palestinian word for things at face value. If the Israelis said anything like "There was Palestinian shooting at the same time and may have been who really shot the kid" (Which, you will note in the original article, the Israelis do say they're also investigating the possibility of it being a Palestinian bullet, although nobody seems to have commented on this) it would be automatically dismissed as Israeli attempts at deflecting attention away from themselves.

I see nothing wrong with treating the story with a little skepticism as a story. (Not as to whether or not the kid is dead).

If he was running away from the storm of rubber bullets and tear gas, how did he get shot in the chest?

NTM

the_syco

Manic Moran wrote: »

If he was running away from the storm of rubber bullets and tear gas, how did he get shot in the chest?

Ah, we all know that they run backwards. Only suicide bombers run forwards...

Manic Moran wrote: »

So who in their right mind decides to bring along their 9-year-old kid when going to go stone soldiers?

Sounds like a mindset who'd use human shields...

GuanYin

Manic Moran wrote: »

Without going quite to the same extreme as Sands, he does make a valid point in that many people on here will take the Palestinian word for things at face value. If the Israelis said anything like "There was Palestinian shooting at the same time and may have been who really shot the kid" (Which, you will note in the original article, the Israelis do say they're also investigating the possibility of it being a Palestinian bullet, although nobody seems to have commented on this) it would be automatically dismissed as Israeli attempts at deflecting attention away from themselves.

I agree, when you're in a situation where things are happening fast and there is turmoil all around, I would not put much faith in eyewitness acounts, especially when the eyewitnesses have a bias.

I imagine they may do a ballistics report on the bullet (or maybe they don't care, who knows). If so, it would be relatively easy to say where the bullet came from.

Manic Moran

If so, it would be relatively easy to say where the bullet came from.

And if the Israelis released a press release saying "It was not an Israeli bullet", how many poster on here would believe them?

This is probably a photoshop, but adding some levity to this thread.


NTM

GuanYin

Manic Moran wrote: »

And if the Israelis released a press release saying "It was not an Israeli bullet", how many poster on here would believe them?img]

NTM

You're only just realizing this now?

Welcome to the world of tribal psychology.

wes

Manic Moran wrote: »

And if the Israelis released a press release saying "It was not an Israeli bullet", how many poster on here would believe them?

Well I think looking at this report from Human Rights watch from a couple of years ago make for interesting reading regarding Israel's investigations into its military:

Promoting Impunity
The Israeli Military’s Failure to Investigate Wrongdoing

You can read the summary here as its a long report:
Summary

I am pretty sure that Human Rights Watch are not any part of the Palestinian propaganda machine. Of course I am sure many people will consider them as such regardless.

Also, the context of the violence should be noted btw in this case. The IDF were actively breaking international law, when the child was killed. Anyway you look at it, Israel looks very bad, not due to any propaganda effort on the part of the media, but due to there own actions.

Manic Moran

No, I'm willing to stipulate that HRW are well-intentioned and fairly neutral, if occasionally a little mis-guided. At least, they'll occasionally lash out at the Palestinians as well, as I found browsing around their site today looking for various reports.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/11/16/isrlpa17357.htm

The Hamas-run government in Gaza must establish an independent and nonpartisan commission of inquiry to hold security forces accountable for their use of excessive and indiscriminate force against pro-Fatah demonstrators in Gaza City on Monday, Human Rights Watch said today. More than 90 demonstrators were wounded and seven lost their lives when Hamas security forces opened fire.

Maybe getting shot while protesting is a bit of a national passtime in Palestine? Doubtless had the Israelis shot almost a hundred Palestinians, there would be a thread or two on the issue here. So, I looked back at the Politics threads for the appropriate time period and see.... nothing.

Obviously killing demonstrating Palestinians is fine with many posters here... Unless it's the Israelis doing the killing.

NTM

humberklog

Manic Moran wrote: »

And if the Israelis released a press release saying "It was not an Israeli bullet", how many poster on here would believe them?

This is probably a photoshop, but adding some levity to this thread.


NTM

Very good. Looks a serious bit of kit for such a little shield. Steel v. Pathos? Murdered or Martyred.

wes

Manic Moran wrote: »

No, I'm willing to stipulate that HRW are well-intentioned and fairly neutral, if occasionally a little mis-guided. At least, they'll occasionally lash out at the Palestinians as well, as I found browsing around their site today looking for various reports.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/11/16/isrlpa17357.htm

Maybe getting shot while protesting is a bit of a national passtime in Palestine? Doubtless had the Israelis shot almost a hundred Palestinians, there would be a thread or two on the issue here. So, I looked back at the Politics threads for the appropriate time period and see.... nothing.

So? I don't see thread on any number of subjects concerning the Palestinian/Israeli conflict and any number of other topics. This include violence by both sides. Do we have to start a thread on every single act of violence for both sides? If we did that, this board would be flooded with such threads and become unreadable.

Also, perhaps the topic was discussed in the context of another thread.

Manic Moran wrote: »

Obviously killing demonstrating Palestinians is fine with many posters here... Unless it's the Israelis doing the killing.

So if there is not a thread on it people must not care about it then. What about all the other acts of violence from both sides, do people not care about those since they didn't start a thread about them?

That assuming it wasn't discussed in a thread you didn't find of course.

Also, I am sure most here would condemn Hamas and what they do (there utter scum, and so are Fatah and the Israeli leadership). I know many have done so ion this board, but I find it odd that people must condemn Hamas etc in this thread, but we never see the same sort of thing asked of other posters to condemn the IDF in the context of a thread about Palestinian violence. Of course I could have very possibly missed that thread (or overlooked the post that done), so maybe I am wrong in that regard, as I can't possibly read every thread and post for the last few years.

Does not condemning the IDF and Israel colonial project and violation of international law and UN resolutions in every topic mean some agree with it? I would say no, of course not. We can't possibly know what there thinking.