Yeah, and they're all connected to Roswell, black helicopters, and the macaroni and cheese/toothpaste/spandex brainwashing conspiracy. Come on. Stop just spouting off conspiracy bullshit and cite some real sources.

I believe that this does hel to show some serious problems concerning torture exists within the IDF that should be investigated ...... and pressured ....... and for those found guilty, punished, so to set an example to all future IDF personnel who seek to use torture against humans, both of the adult and especially minors.



http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=994837

Last update - 05:12 22/06/2008

Report: Soldiers routinely abuse Palestinian prisoners
By Yuval Azoulay

A report by the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) to be released today claims that Israel Defense Force (IDF) soldiers routinely abuse Palestinian detainees and the army and law enforcement ignores the abuse.

The report contains 90 testimonies by Palestinians who were allegedly abused by IDF soldiers after being arrested during and after sweeps for wanted men between June 2006 and October 2007.

The report, compiled by attorneys Noam Hofstetter, Eliahu Abram and Dr. Yuval Ginbar, states that the alleged abuse occurs in vehicles transporting the detainees to various detention centers and at the centers.

"These acts of abuse do not exclude minor detainees, who are under special protection by Israeli and international law. The soldiers do not treat the minors with care and often, as various reports show, they take advantage of their weakness."

In addition to accusing the IDF of ignoring the alleged abuses, the report says law enforcement infrequently investigates or indicts those accused of abuse.

The report also accuses the Defense Ministry, the State Comptroller's Office and A report by the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) to be released today claims that Israel Defense Force (IDF) soldiers routinely abuse Palestinian detainees and the army and law enforcement ignores the abuse.

Yes, I posted a similar article way back at the beginning of this thread. I understand that there's a problem with IDF abusing Palestinian prisoners. Nobody's disputing that. And it's a real problem that we can rightly criticize.

My problem is when people take that real story and then post an inflammatory story that has no basis in fact.

In this case,

Truth: IDF soldiers sometimes abuse Palestinian prisoners.

Allegation with no basis in fact: IDF soldiers abused a particular 10 year old boy.

See the difference?

Until someone finds me the news story about the 10 year old boy in a valid, mainstream news source, I am inclined not to believe it.

In my opinion, there has been sufficient reports in which has been posted here in this thread that lends to the torture of children and also the focal point of the OP's article, Ezzat, the 10 year old child. I'll never expect this story to be covered by CBS, ABC or NBC or other filtered msms, because the election repeat spin machine and American Idols and the likes, are much more important to cover 24/7 than the horrific tragic human stories that needs to be exposed and followed up with justice. I'll not expect you to believe any of this, of which I respect and am fine with, but as long as the majority who reads this thread/report and many other reports like this, ones who knows and understands that this does happen, then it's worth it for me to bring it to other's attention that also offers ways for those others to contact officials and request that they pursue the correct course of action. You effort to discredit/reject this report is duly noted.

I'm not trying to discredit a potentially legitimate story. I'm trying to get to the bottom of whether it actually happened, because I know for a fact that pro-Palestinian media use distortions and lies on a regular basis to sow anti-Zionist hatred in the Arab world. For that matter, some pro-Zionist media use distortions and lies against the Palestinians. This Wikipedia article is a pretty good summary of media bias in the conflict. So yes, I am demanding that you find it for me in a neutral news source, because spreading specious stories like this without proof is damaging to the peace process. There's enough real crap being slung on both sides - we don't need to be making up more of it.

I also want to point out something else I noticed in that Wikipedia article. Toward the middle of the article is a section about Freedom House, which publishes an annual report about press freedom. According to Freedom House, Israel is rated as having a "free press," while the Palestinian territories are rated as "not free."

Again, I am not trying to discredit a potentially legitimate story. If this incident happened, then it's clearly an injustice that should be investigated. However, without a clearly neutral and valid source to verify it, we cannot be sure that it did happen, and thus we should be automatically suspicious of it, especially in such a heated political climate as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

I have been posting evidence of this for years on this message board, rather on the old RRMB. People who have been reading my posts a long time know that.

That's fine. Doesn't make any of it true, but right on.

In this thread, I have cited Raw Story, Harper's and Common Dreams. I believe they are legitimate sources.

Harper's is a pretty good source. I don't know a lot about the other two. However, unless I missed it, none of those sources actually referenced the actual story in question: that of the 10 year old boy allegedly attacked by IDF soldiers. Until I get a legitimate source that confirms that story, which is the subject of this entire thread, I'm still not going to let you off the hook.

I've already been down this road with Aboutbreath. He was never able to come up with independant verification for any of his claims, outside of the DCI-PAL sources he has been using.

This thread has been around for a while and still no one can come up with a reputable source for this story.

I guess we can file this under "disproven".

Yup.

It's my belief that there's only a very small handful here that wishes to ignore what the IDF does and in particular, this OP's report that's been posted. I feel confident that there are more of those, than not, who have read this report not only here in this forum but elsewhere, that supports such reporting and some who may have taken requests up with higher officials to push for what's right against such indecent violent and digusting acts against women and especially children.

You may wish to file this under disproven, of which I, myself, firmly file your opinion under 'somewhat delusional', only because you have chosen an ignorant path to quickly erase what's happening in the Middle East (and all around the world), because you obviously wish to protect Israel's image in your partiality here. I do respect your chosen attempt for such of an opinion, but I will not step away from posting such. I've explained my fair position previously in this thread and posted enough material that supports this report being more true than not. I'd hope that you may try to understand the position of this OP, although we disagree on the subject matter and it's validity.

No, you haven't posted a single story from a legitimate source that mentions the IDF assaulting this particular 10 year old boy. I've already granted you that the IDF has a problem with abusing Palestinians, and we can rightly criticize that. I don't know how much clearer I can be. Throwing out accusations without basis only exacerbates the conflict. If you find me a valid source for this particular story, then we can discuss it.

I've already covered this with you and see no since going down the same road with you over and over. The sources posted by myself along with many other supportive posts are valid enough for me as it has statisfied other posters as well. You wish to not recognize those sources, in which is fine with me. I have already stated this before. You are only one person out of many who wishes to ignore such sources provided. Again, that's fine with me. I've already stated that I highly doubt that any MSM will run this story, while many other stories falls through the MSM filtered cracks. That's simply how things are today. Many burried true stories not reaching MSM. Maybe 1 out of 500 true real life stories ever reaches MSM and probably only sometimes one makes it to broadcast because they've run low on their steady diet of everyday sillier stories surrounding Hollywood drama queen types.

By the by, how many times has MSM also been found to report false stories, while sometimes, having to correct an original report??? It happens often. How much propaganda is reported by MSM??? Lots!! I'll not put all my eggs in one basket concerning MSM reporting. You're quite welcome to do so.

The "Mainstream Media" as you call it has its flaws, yes, and one should always be careful about one's sources. However, the fact that that MSM has flaws doesn't automatically mean that you should dismiss them and put all of your faith in other, untested sources, like that Palestinian news source that was the subject of this thread, or Wayne Madsen's blog, or what have you. What makes those sources any better than, say, MSNBC? Just because it's a story not being reported by the MSM doesn't mean it's a true story being suppressed. It could just be bullshit.

I certainly don't put all of my eggs in one basket when it comes to news. I look at CNN, MSNBC, the BBC, the Guardian, I listen to NPR, I look at local news sites, I do Google searches for original sources. For the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, I read the Jerusalem Post and Haaretz for the Israeli perspective, along with the BBC and the Guardian, both of which are very pro-Palestinian. I also look at other sources.

I do not, however, look at some guy's blog and take him at his word that his stories are true. I wouldn't tell you to do that with my blog - I always want my readers to do their own research. I also don't listen to news sources that I know are so biased that their factual credibility is in question, and if I see a story from one of those sources, I demand a second, more credible source for verification.

My whole point throughout this thread is that you can't look at this story of a 10 year old boy being abused by IDF soldiers and take it at face value without verifying whether it's true. To do so shows not only an intellectual ignorance and willingness to fall prey to propaganda, it's also a dangerous way to ratchet up the level of anger in a conflict that already has more than enough anger to go around.

I'm sorry, but I can't just agree to disagree with you here. I have to insist that stories like this be vetted as being either truth or bullshit. This conflict is very personal to me as a Jew, and I will not have people making unsubstantiated allegations against Israel. If it happened, and you can verify that it happened, then we can talk about it. If you can't find any valid sources to verify whether it happened, then we cannot just assume that it did happen. This conflict is way too important, and we must insist on the highest standards of intellectual diligence in vetting allegations on either side.

Sinister Wrote:
The "Mainstream Media" as you call it has its flaws, yes, and one should always be careful about one's sources. However, the fact that that MSM has flaws doesn't automatically mean that you should dismiss them and put all of your faith in other, untested sources, like that Palestinian news source that was the subject of this thread, or Wayne Madsen's blog, or what have you. What makes those sources any better than, say, MSNBC? Just because it's a story not being reported by the MSM doesn't mean it's a true story being suppressed. It could just be bullshit.


Answer: Your bias is showing. Are you equally careful about the msm or do you give them the benefit of the doubt? And on what basis, do you make that assessment? It is subjective, is it not? Therefore, you cannot claim to be the final authority on what is legitimate journalism. Neither am I. The whole point of this message board is to share information and opinions with other members. In your world, it seems that we can only cite the sources you deem acceptable. For example, you call that Palestinian news source "untested" and you call Madsen's reports "blogs". In both cases, you disrespect those sources automatically and insist that we do so also.


Sinister wrote: I certainly don't put all of my eggs in one basket when it comes to news. I look at CNN, MSNBC, the BBC, the Guardian, I listen to NPR, I look at local news sites, I do Google searches for original sources. For the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, I read the Jerusalem Post and Haaretz for the Israeli perspective, along with the BBC and the Guardian, both of which are very pro-Palestinian. I also look at other sources.

Answer: Here your bias is showing again. You see the BBC and the Guardian as "very pro-Palestinian". I cannot agree. Perhaps their reporting is factual and you find it objectionable because it does not align with your opinions.


Sinister wrote: I do not, however, look at some guy's blog and take him at his word that his stories are true. I wouldn't tell you to do that with my blog - (snip)

Answer: I do not know your background. Are you claiming you are an investigative journalist? Madsen is. Did you work for the NSA and maintain sources in the intelligence community today? Do you live and work in Washington D.C. and have access to inside information throught your daily associations? My problem is that you belittle Madsen by calling him a blogger. I have seen this method used repeatedly lately, particularly by those who are staunch supporters of Israel who object to Madsen's reporting. Are you a blogger or a journalist? The only time I have heard Madsen referred to as a blogger is by those who are trying to attack him personally, in what appears to me to be an organized effort to undermine him, thereby casting doubt on his stories. I wonder if it is the content which is truly vexing you?


Sinister wrote: My whole point throughout this thread is that you can't look at this story of a 10 year old boy being abused by IDF soldiers and take it at face value without verifying whether it's true. To do so shows not only an intellectual ignorance and willingness to fall prey to propaganda, it's also a dangerous way to ratchet up the level of anger in a conflict that already has more than enough anger to go around.

Answer: Do you apply the same stringent standards toward mainstream media, which you know full well, or should know, does not cover important news stories seriously, if at all? In fact, they have shown in recent years that they frequently accept government sources at face value to their error and our detriment.

Sinister wrote: I'm sorry, but I can't just agree to disagree with you here. I have to insist that stories like this be vetted as being either truth or bullshit. This conflict is very personal to me as a Jew, and I will not have people making unsubstantiated allegations against Israel. (snip)

Answer: Wow. This is truly alarming! You "insist" and you "will not have" has a ring of authoritarianism to it. I do not mean this disrespectfually, but I must ask you: who do you think you are, to suppose you can decide what is acceptable as substantiated? Since you have shown your bias by citing the Guardian and the BBC as "very pro-Palestinian", what sort of source can we possibly expect to pass your test for "fairness"? Please realize that sometimes "agreeing to disagree" is the most civilized and respectable thing we can do, after we have exhausted all other means of finding common ground.
.

This whole thread (an the other one about the alleged "Russian Israeli mafia" or whatever) serves as a cautionary tale about not only the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but about the credibility of media sources in general. You (and AboutBreath) can't prove to me that your sources are credible, and I can't prove to you that they're not. You can claim that I'm biased because I refer to a news source as skewed one way, and I can call you biased for the same reason (wow, you really don't think the Guardian is pro-Palestinian? Have you read it at all? What would be pro-Palestinian for you, then, Hamas's TV network?)

It's not authoritarian to demand facts when presented with unsubstantiated allegations.

I'll leave the argument with this:

When presented with an inflammatory story like this, do some due diligence. Look it up for yourself. Don't just accept it at face value. That's all I'm asking.

I too am sorry that you wish to force your own judgement on me and others as to what rates as news sources and what doesn't per your choices. I also like those choices you have listed, but in this case, the information comes elsewhere. I understand how one, like yourself, wishes that every word that passes your lips is considered to be the absolute truth and rule of the day, but in reality, it is only an opinion, your opinion. I understand how the PAL Israel conflict is very personal to you, that I can appreciate, but I also feel very personally affected about how much AIPAC and other nations are able to highly influence our US politicians in order to drag us into affairs that we need not be involved, especially when we ourselves are hanging by our own last lifelines for survival and existance. Do not forget the US blood that has been shed for other nations. Do not forget US monies and aide sent to other nations. Do not forget many things that we do for other nations. That gives us the right (among other things) to present reports such as what was presented in the OP in defiance to cruel behaviour by others against children. That also gives us the right to stand up to other ethic groups or nationalities when disagreements forms. I personally will never exercise that right, just whenever I feel like it without good reason, but when conversation turns to the slant of 'we are the chosen ones' over others and or if one does share different opinions about such a conversation, because one/some will usually be considered or tagged as being anti-semtic, in an attempt to generally quiet and suppress opposing opinions and findings to yours and others who are pro Israel.

This OP isn't about which nationality is better over the other. It's simply a report that has teeth and it needed to be shared with others in which I have done. This thread has also provided sources to contact to have this incident investigated further. That gives me a strong sense of validity of this OP's report. These organizations wouldn't be putting out false alarms of such an incident if they too didn't feel that it wasn't true because it would discredit their image if the reports were false.

I call for peace in the Middle East but at the same time I call for justice on all sides also. Most importantly, I am more severe against my own nation's actions over others most of the time. This OP's report belongs in my honorable call for such justice and nobody will be able to change my views about that.

This is one of your best comments in which I find creditable. The only small glitch is, I feel that I have provided and proven my sources to be more so creditable to the OP than not, in which you're correct, you have't disproved it. Now if you can accept my appreciation for a more commendable comment made by you above, then I think we may have reached a very respectable range of disagreement on the subject of news/report sources.

Bzzzzt.

Groan.

Groan I shall as well. Mr Soros feels the same way.


http://www.washington-report.org/archives/...07/0707059.html

Writing in the April 12 New York Review of Books, George Soros, the billionaire philanthropist and political activist, argued that the U.S. is doing Israel a disservice by allowing it to boycott the Hamas-Fatah Palestinian unity government and to turn down the Saudi Arabian peace initiative. But, he pointed out, there is no meaningful debate of such policies.

“While other problem areas of the Middle East are freely discussed, criticism of our policies toward Israel is very muted indeed,” Soros wrote. Pro-Israel activists, he added, have been “remarkably successful in suppressing criticism.”

Singling out AIPAC as a key source of the problem, Soros accused the lobby of pushing a hawkish agenda on Israeli-Palestinian issues. “AIPAC under its current leadership has clearly exceeded its mission,” he maintained, “and far from guaranteeing Israel’s existence, has endangered it.”

Noting that “I have a great deal of sympathy for my fellow Jews and a deep concern for the survival of Israel,” Soros declared that he “cannot remain silent now when the pro-Israel lobby is one of the last unexposed redoubts of this dogmatic way of thinking...I believe that a much-needed self-examination of American policy in the Middle East has started in this country; but it can’t make much headway as long as AIPAC retains powerful influence in both the Democratic and Republican parties...I should like to emphasize that I do not subscribe to the myths propagated by enemies of Israel...Neither Israel’s policies nor the critics of those policies should be held responsible for anti-Semitism. At the same time, I do believe that attitudes toward Israel are influenced by Israel’s policies, and attitudes toward the Jewish community are influenced by the pro-Israel lobby’s success in suppressing divergent views.”

(snip)

Most American Jews are uncomfortable with AIPAC’s and the Israeli government’s warm embrace of the religious right. AIPAC delegates...enthusiastically cheered a speech by evangelical Pastor John Hagee, who railed against territorial concessions to the Palestinians as ‘appeasement’ and ‘crocodile food.’ Most American Jews are progressives and uncomfortable with the alliance with evangelicals like Hagee; and don’t share his hard-line views about peace with the Palestinians and have less to agree about on domestic policy.”

I'm not entirely comfortable with all of AIPAC's positions, but it's not the big bad boogeyman that the anti-Zionist intellectual crew would have you believe. I would align myself much more with JStreet, which was founded partly as a counterpoint to AIPAC.

So what?



For good reason.

AIPAC is a rightwing organization.

Rightwing organizations are full of shit.

QUOTE

To my knowledge, there is no consensus on what "most American Jews" feel about any particular thing.

I reject the idea of "control" or "influence" -- I'm sick of that kind of rhetoric, personally.

Yeah, AIPAC is full of shit afaic.

Also, to my knowledge, there is no consensus on what "Zionism" is, either.

Well they sure don't admit to torturing children, but when asked they do a lot of stammering!
LINK WITH VIDEO

Thanks for contrubuting that link. It supports what most of us (with good common sense) have been saying here in this thread. There's those who supports torture, denies torture and ignores torture. We know where most of the right wingers fits!!

As sad as these types of reports keeps surfacing, I am glad that in this incident, the Israeli Military Advocacy appears to be doing something about it. I applud that. I do fear that the final outcome of this soldier's hearing will result as a small incident not worth punishing the soldier over, but lets hope that's not the case this time and ti sends a strong message to the IDF and Military Police that beating children is off limits.


http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3565339,00.html

Ynetnews > News


Soldier suspected of punching Palestinian child in head

Military driver serving in Jenin area arrested on suspicion of attacking 12-year-old boy, Ynet learns. Military Advocacy plans to indict him in coming days; attorney says soldier suffering from personal difficulties, did not mean to hurt child

Hanan Greenberg
Published: 07.08.08, 08:29 / Israel News

The soldier, who serves as a military driver in the Jenin area, was travelling in the area several days ago when he encountered a number of Palestinian people. He allegedly got out of the car, grabbed one of the children and hit him. During the incident, the soldier allegedly punched the boy in the head, and only released him several minutes later.


The soldier's commanders, who found out about this grave incident, questioned him and reported the incident to the Investigating Military Police.


A military source said that "in such incidents, we carry out a full investigation and ask the court to extent the suspect's remand, as such offenses cause severe damage to the IDF's image."


The soldier was brought before the Jaffa Military Court, where the judge, Major Yifat Tomer, reviewed the evidence and a secret report submitted to her and decided to extend his remand.


The soldier's advocate, Captain Mark Kobel, said that this was not an act of abuse but rather an incident which only lasted a few seconds.


The attorney added that the incident was the result of the soldier's personal difficulties, noting that he did not intent on hurting the child.


The Military Advocacy will discuss the case in the coming days in order to determine the counts the soldier will be charged with.


This incident joins a series of incidents which have taken place in the West Bank recently, in which soldiers hurt Palestinians while deviating from the IDF's values.



"This incident has also been probed by commanders, and was handed over to the IDF's enforcement authorities for a proper investigation. Every incident is studied and probed in order to prevent such incidents from repeating themselves," the source concluded.

Noam Chomsky has a trenchant response to those who claim, along with Walt and Mearsheimer, that "AIPAC"/"Israel Lobby" (*) singlehandedly brought us to war with Iraq...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Israel_Lo...olicy#Criticism

Noam Chomsky, professor of linguistics at MIT, asserts that he did not find the thesis of the paper very convincing. He said that Stephen Zunes has rightly pointed out that "there are far more powerful interests that have a stake in what happens in the Persian Gulf region than does AIPAC [or the Lobby generally], such as the oil companies, the arms industry and other special interests whose lobbying influence and campaign contributions far surpass that of the much-vaunted Zionist lobby and its allied donors to congressional races." He finds that the authors "have a highly selective use of evidence (and much of the evidence is assertion)", ignores historical "world affairs", and blames the Lobby for issues that are not relevant.

[snip]

(*) My biggest problem BTW with this term is, as always, what it is a referent to. Is the "Israel lobby" all pro-Israel organizations, including say Americans for Peace Now, J Street, and Meretz USA? Is it only AIPAC? The problem with equating "Israel Lobby" and "AIPAC" is it makes it seem like the only pro-Israel point of view is AIPAC's ... when it isn't.

AIPAC has played a major role with both Iraq and Iran. I'd say AIPAC is/was more interested for war with Iran more so than war with Iraq, but in order to get to Iran, the path to Iran was through Iraq in which the Bush Administration and the PNAC first had it's sights on. Since 2005, spies connected with AIPAC and Israel have been involved with trials (and one still being delayed) (AIPAC vs Bush Administration) while our State Dept tries to snuff quite this event and while our politicians still snuggles closely with AIPAC.



http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story..._next_war/print

FBI agents watched as Larry Franklin, an Iran expert and career employee of the Defense Intelligence Agency, drove up to the Ritz-Carlton hotel across the Potomac from Washington. A trim man of fifty-six, with a tangle of blond hair speckled gray, Franklin had left his modest home in Kearneysville, West Virginia, shortly before dawn that morning to make the eighty-mile commute to his job at the Pentagon. Since 2002, he had been working in the Office of Special Plans, a crowded warren of blue cubicles on the building's fifth floor. A secretive unit responsible for long-term planning and propaganda for the invasion of Iraq, the office's staffers referred to themselves as "the cabal." They reported to Douglas Feith, the third-most-powerful official in the Defense Department, helping to concoct the fraudulent intelligence reports that were driving America to war in Iraq.

>
>

Franklin was taking the extraordinary—and illegal—step of passing on highly classified information to lobbyists for a foreign state. Unable to win the internal battle over Iran being waged within the administration, a member of Feith's secret unit in the Pentagon was effectively resorting to treason, recruiting AIPAC to use its enormous influence to pressure the president into adopting the draft directive and wage war against Iran.

>
>

It was a role that AIPAC was eager to play.

>
>


But as the Pentagon moved the country closer to war with Iran, the FBI was expanding its investigation of AIPAC and its role in the plot. David Szady, then the bureau's top spy-catcher, had become convinced that at least one American citizen working inside the U.S. government was spying for Israel.


>
>


The FBI also had its sights on Larry Franklin, who continued to hold clandestine meetings with Rosen at AIPAC. Apparently nervous that the FBI might be on to them, the two men started taking precautions. On March 10th, 2003, barely a week before the invasion of Iraq, Rosen met Franklin in Washington's cavernous Union Station. The pair met at one restaurant, then they hustled to another, and finally they ended up in a third—this one totally empty. As an added precaution, ]Franklin also began sending faxes to Rosen's home instead of to his AIPAC offices.

>
>

Larry Franklin, it turns out, wasn't the only person involved in the Pentagon's covert operation who was exchanging state secrets with other governments. As the FBI monitored Franklin and his clandestine dealings with AIPAC, it was also investigating another explosive case of espionage linked to Feith's office and Iran. This one focused on Ahmed Chalabi, the head of the Iraqi National Congress, the militant anti-Saddam opposition group that had worked for more than a decade to pressure the U.S. into invading Iraq.

>
>

Agents quietly confronted Franklin with the taped phone call and pressured him to cooperate in a sting operation directed at AIPAC and members of Feith's team in the Pentagon. Franklin, facing a long prison sentence, agreed. On August 4th, 2005, Rosen and Weissman were indicted, and on January 20th, 2006, Franklin, who had earlier pleaded guilty, was sentenced to twelve years and seven months in prison. In an attempt to reduce his sentence, he agreed to testify against the former AIPAC officials. The case is set to go to trial this fall.


>
>

Franklin is the only member of Feith's team to face charges. The continuing lack of indictments demonstrates how frighteningly easy it is for a small group of government officials to join forces with agents of foreign powers—whether it is AIPAC or the MEK or the INC—to sell the country on a disastrous war.

It sadly appears that nothing much has been done to deter IDF soldiers from killing children. How can anyone put a bullet in the head of this little boy in the picture?? Apparently some IDF soldiers has no problem doing it.




http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9728.shtml


Ahmed Mousa (facing camera) photographed four hours before he was shot and killed by Israeli forces. (palestinesolidarityproject.org)

Transcript: Israeli military kills 10-year-old in Nilin

Transcript, Flashpoints, 30 July 2008

A member of the Israeli occupation military's border police shot and killed a 10-year-old Palestinian boy yesterday evening in the West Bank village of Nilin. Ahmed Mousa was shot in the head by live ammunition, according to eyewitnesses, as he turned and left an area that was being targeted with rubber-coated steel bullets by the Israeli military during a demonstration against the annexation wall built on the village land. Several soldiers were ordered to remove themselves from the demonstration by commanding officers, according to a report by the Palestine Solidarity Project, for their violent and "undisciplined" behavior.

At least in this incident, the child was only 17..... unlike the usual 10-12 year olds.



http://www.imemc.org/article/56285




17 year old Nil'in boy pronounced clinically dead according to
medical sources


Thursday July 31, 2008 11:11author by Ghassan Bannoura - IMEMC News Report

17 year old Yousif Amira, who was shot in the nearby Nil'in village on Wednesday evening, has been pronounced clinically dead, Palestinian medical sources in the central West Bank city of Ramallah told IMEMC on Thursday morning.

Witnesses said that Israeli soldiers stormed the village and took positions there, and as soon as the funeral was finished on Wednesday afternoon local youth clashed with the Israeli soldiers. Three were injured, among them Amira.


Younis, the cousin of Amira, told IMEMC during a phone interview that Amira was going to visit him at his house; Israeli soldiers chasing local youth opened fire at him and injured him. Younis assured IMEMC that Amira was not taking part in the stone throwing.

I guess you didn't read the snippet you posted, which indicated "Several soldiers were ordered to remove themselves from the demonstration by commanding officers, according to a report by the Palestine Solidarity Project, for their violent and "undisciplined" behavior." Further news reports indicate Israeli authorities have arrested border policemen involved.

Anyway, the PSM nor electronic intifada are hardly reliable sources. Id' suggest you look beyond those, if you're really interested in the A-I conflict.

Good God - this thread's back? Give it up, AboutBreath. I'm wishing you were about out of breath.

There are other sources who have covered this same story. In one, the commander was suspended for 10 days of duty. I'm sure he'll never kill another innocent child again with such harsh punishment. Thank you for bringing to our attention that there needs to be more news sources to cover such dispictable acts of violence and cowardice by some IDF soldiers.



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle4425395.ece

July 29, 2008

Palestinian child shot dead by Israeli soldiers


Israeli soldiers shot dead a young Palestinian boy today during heated protests in a West Bank village close to Israel’s huge separation barrier.

Hammad Hossam Mussa, believed to be around nine years old, was mortally wounded by an Israeli bullet as protestors threw rocks near the West Bank close to the village of Nilin.

The boy was killed on the same day that the Israeli army suspended a lieutenant-colonel who had allowed one of his men to shoot a bound and blindfolded Palestinian youth in the leg with a rubber-coated bullet during a recent protest in the village, where frequent demonstrations against the fence take place. A Palestinian observer filmed the soldier shooting the detained Palestinian at point-blank range, inflicting minor injuries.

The battalion commander was relieved of his duties for 10 days and condemned by a military investigation for his “moral and authoritative failure”.



http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3574986,00.html

Committee member Ibrahim Khawaja told Ynet that the children who were with Moussa said that they were sitting near the site where the fence is being constructed when a military vehicle suddenly arrived, apparently belonging to the Border Police. They said a trooper exited the jeep, aimed his rifle towards the group and hit Moussa in the head. Khawaja said the boy was killed and later evacuated to the Ramallah Hospital.

As long as kids are being killed like this, I'll never run out of breath. Such ignorance is completely unacceptable. It's obvious from which of those who come here that are insensitive to brutality against Palestinian children.

Oh, give it a rest. Don't be so sanctimonious.

People actually approve of children being slaughtered like animals? Where is the liberal humanity in such actions?

Excuse me. Are you one in a position who owns and operates this message board to give such commands to those who post current events such as what's being posted in this thread?

Hard to believe isn't it? That shows us just how cruel some of these people are. Here I thought radical Repigs were really bad. No wonder they keep getting back into office when there's these kinds of people roaming this planet.

I know this may be graphic but sometimes, we need to see these things like this to better understand what's going on with such actions by thugs who don't care about children's lives.



http://www.palsolidarity.org/main/2008/07/...-dead-at-nilin/

10-Year old shot dead at Nil’in
July 29th, 2008 | Posted in Press Releases, Reports, Ramallah Region

A 10 year old boy called Ahmed Ussam Yusef Mousa was shot dead at approximately 6pm near the Palestinian village of Nil’in. He was shot once in the head at close range with live ammunition.



According to eye witnesses a group of youths attempted to remove coils of razor wire from land belonging to the village. Without warning, they were fired upon and Ahmed was killed. Israeli newspaper Maariv reported in March that the Israeli authorities have given a new order to border police operating along the apartheid wall surrounding Jerusalem. They can now open fire directly on Palestinians who try to demonstrate near the barrier. But sniping is forbidden if there are Israeli or foreign citizens amongst demonstrators.




At least 11 other Palestinians have died protesting against Israeli’s apartheid wall. Their names are:

Mohammad Fadel Hashem Rayan, age 25.

Zakaria MaHmud Salem, age 28.

Abdal Rahman Abu Eid, age 62.

Mohammad Daud Badwan, age 21.

Diaa Abdel Karim Abu Eid, age 24.

Hussain mahmud Awwad Aliyan, age 17.

Islam Hashem Rizik Zhahran, age 14.

Alaa Mohammad Abdel Rahman Khalil, age 14.

Jamal Jaber Ibrahim Assi, age 15.

Odai Mofeed Mahmud Assi, age 14.

Mahayub Nimer Assi, age 15.

To date, none of the soldiers who killed demonstrators has been prosecuted.

----------------------------------------

(comment pulled - wrong thread. Sowwy )

Did you mean to use the word "singlehadedly" or did you err on the side of hyperbole?

I know of no one who believes AIPAC "singlehandedly" brought us to war with Iraq.

Don't pay any attentiont to the people who don't care or want to know about the abuses and murder of children. They incriminate themselves with their attitudes.

Most people of conscience do want to know about these horrible crimes. It hurts to know but we must know.

Thanks for posting these stories.

I care. I just wonder about why people never bring up the Israeli children murdered by Palestinians.

I mean, if we're going to look at bloody and horrible pictures, there's also these, too. Children in infancy killed in Palestinian terror attacks.



Until this conflict ends, and unless both sides refuse to make children targets, there will be more pictures like these.

BTW, just so I'm clear, I don't care whether the pictures are of Palestinian or Israeli children -- seeing either killed and injured in this conflict makes me sick.

Let's keep waving the flag, it should be a white one. I am sick of this shit.

So I guess that means no such people exist.

On this board, at least...

Speaking for myself, I've never come across many steady articles of deliberate killing, torture and abuse of children of Israel. I'm fairly sure it happens, but it doesn't appear to happen at the level that it does against Palestinian children. Regardless, any and all children used for pleasures of torture, abuse and death is entirely unacceptable.

I wonder why you haven't started such a thread. I know I would comment in the same way as I do in this thread about the senseless killings and abuse of children. In fact, I would not be one to spend more time complaining about the journalistic sources from which one gets their information of such. That's what has amazed me more than anything about this thread. There have been those who were more concerned about the sources and how it reflected the IDF to be more than the incredibly terrible incidents itself.

QUOTE

Until this conflict ends, and unless both sides refuse to make children targets, there will be more pictures like these.

BTW, just so I'm clear, I don't care whether the pictures are of Palestinian or Israeli children -- seeing either killed and injured in this conflict makes me sick.

[b]We are in total agreement here. Once again, I have viewed your words to being more sincere than most others who make it obvious of their oposition to what's shared here in this thread.

That's extremely obvious. I find them hypocritical and disgusting. It doesn't leave much room for self worth does it?






You're welcome. I feel that as shocking and disturbing as the posts sometimes are, these reports has a place in our everyday discussions.

So long as people with agendas post from questionable sources, people are bound to ask questions about them.

I don't see what's wrong with that.