Appreciate this article? +972 depends on your support -- click here to help us keep going

Analysis News

Palestinian teen killed by IDF near West Bank separation barrier

This is the fourth incident in the last week in which a Palestinian civilian was shot to death after trying to cross or coming close to an Israeli fence. 

A protester hanging a Palestinian flag on the separation barrier near Budrus, July 2011 (photo: Activestills.org)

Sixteen year-old Sameer Awwad from Budrus was killed Tuesday by IDF soldiers near the separation barrier at his village. Awwad, who was shot at least three times, is the fourth Palestinian civilian who has been shot to death this week while coming close or trying to cross an Israeli fence. According to reports, none of them posed any risk to Israeli soldiers or civilians.

According to eyewitnesses, Sameer was walking away from light clashes that had erupted by the barrier when he was shot from the back with three bullets from a distance of about 100 meters. One bullet hit his leg, another hit the back of his neck and exited near his eyebrow, and the third entered his rib cage and exited through his chest. Awwad was immediately transferred to Ramallah Hospital, where he was pronounce dead shortly after.

The village of Budrus received worldwide recognition for the non-violent struggle it conducted against the confiscation of its land for the construction of the separation barrier (later documented in the film Budrus).

Over the last few days, three other Palestinians have been killed in the vicinity of Israeli separation barriers. Anwar al-Mamlouk, 21, was killed last Friday in Gaza, near the barrier in Jabalya. On Saturday, Oudai Darwish from Dura near Hebron was killed in the South Hebron Hills, when trying to cross the barrier to find work in Israel. Darwish was shot at least four times, twice in his legs and twice in the upper part of his body.

Another Palestinian, Mustafa Abu Jarad, 21, was killed yesterday near the barrier in Beit Lahia.

The killing of Palestinian civilians near barriers was one of the main issues that led to the recent escalation in between Israel and Hamas in the south. Almost 20 percent of the area of the Gaza Strip is considered no man’s land by the IDF, forbidden for entry even by farmers who used to grow their crops on this land. Several incidents in which Palestinians were shot to death while traveling to this area resulted in rocket launchings into Israel.

Despite the high number of civilian casualties in those incidents, they received little attention in the media. Since the end of Operation Pillar of Defense, at least five Palestinians were killed near the Gaza border, but no rockets were launched in response.

The IDF has informed Hebrew media outlets that it will look into the shootings near Budrus and Dura.

For additional original analysis and breaking news, visit +972 Magazine's Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. Our newsletter features a comprehensive round-up of the week's events. Sign up here.

View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • COMMENTS

    1. aristeides

      Whenever Israel decides on another round of slaughtering Palestinians, all we hear from the apologists is, “What do you expect Israel to do?” in the light of, say, rockets that usually harm no one.

      But when Israel kills Palestinians, one after the other, what are they supposed to do? In Israeli eyes, nothing whatsoever. Palestinian deaths mean nothing, Palestinian lives are worth nothing, and nothing could possibly justify retaliation against Israel, which arrogates all vengeance unto itself, taking the place of the Lord.

      Reply to Comment
      • The Trespasser

        >what are they supposed to do?

        Stop coming near security fence and attack armed soldiers?

        >Palestinian deaths mean nothing, Palestinian lives are worth nothing.

        Well, “Palestinian” lives means nothing and worth nothing to “Palestinians” themselves first and foremost.

        As Golda Meir had said “Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us”

        >and nothing could possibly justify retaliation against Israel.

        Retaliation against Israel needs no justification, as retaliation against Arabs. What’s your problem?

        >which arrogates all vengeance unto itself, taking the place of the Lord.

        Did you came up with this nonsense yourself or picked it up on Mondoweiss?

        Reply to Comment
        • Joel

          And stop digging infiltration/kidnap tunnels and firing anti-tank missiles at school buses.

          Reply to Comment
        • Golda Meir’s canard is one of the most disgusting things ever to be said in the history of this conflict. A glib way of dehumanising Palestinians – they aren’t parents like we are parents, they don’t love their children how we love ours, they’re not like that. It gets easy to rationalise a few murders and the occasional massacre as soon as you start to think of people in this way.

          In another recent comment, Trespasser, you owned that Israel wields power over Palestinians and cited Philip Zimbardo’s prison study as proof that cruelty is an inevitable occurrence in this situation (but not a problem). So, if the senseless cruelty seen in the Stamford experiment is a natural result of domination, why are you now so keen to find some neat sensible reason for the army’s shooting a boy in the back?

          Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >they don’t love their children how we love ours

            You’ve just made it up. All Golda said is that Arabs hate Jews more than they love own children.

            Love to children is not what is measured here.

            >they’re not like that.
            Frankly, people who dress their children in suicide bomber’s suit for holidays are not like that and obviously love their children in some other way. Like young martyrs probably. Dunno really. IMO such people should be shot on sight – disregarding their race of faith.

            >So, if the senseless cruelty seen in the Stamford experiment is a natural result of domination

            It was not senseless. You really should read the book. I could email you my copy if you’d like.

            The cruelty is not result of domination but of disobedience.

            >why are you now so keen to find some neat sensible reason for the army’s shooting a boy in the back?

            Initial question was “what are they supposed to do [to not get shot]?”
            To which I’ve answered “Stop coming near security fence and attack armed soldiers?”

            Yeah, I should’ve written “attack or provoke”.

            This is a universal principle, applied anywhere: Don’t want to get hurt – don’t screw with armed people.

            That kid – and many others must’ve asked many times: Why is there armed people of foreign country on my land?

            Answer is simple and disappointing beyond acceptability – because your fathers and leaders had decided that you must suffer now for the future greatness of “Palestinian People”

            Reply to Comment
          • Philos

            “The cruelty is not result of domination but of disobedience.” – funny, that’s isn’t what the consensus view in the academic community (you know, people who are experts on this) with regards to the Zimbardo prison experiment. So, cruelty is the result of disobedience? Puts a whole new spin pogroms and the Holocaust doesn’t it? Or, as I’m sure you agree, these kinds of conclusions don’t apply to the goyim? You’re a goddamned bigot and it really says more about my home country (Israel) that we attract bigots like you to immigrate here like flies to shit.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >Puts a whole new spin pogroms and the Holocaust doesn’t it? Or, as I’m sure you agree, these kinds of conclusions don’t apply to the goyim?

            Unrelated analogies.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >funny, that’s isn’t what the consensus view in the academic community (you know, people who are experts on this) with regards to the Zimbardo prison experiment.

            Funny is that you don’t even have your own view regarding an issue you are discussing. Go, read the book and bring up your own conclusions.

            Reply to Comment
          • Oscar

            Philos philosophising:
            “says more about my home country (Israel) that we attract bigots”

            Stop whining already Philos. You are the bigot.

            Remember what you said about the Mizrahim, the Russian, the Ethiopian Jews and the Druse and the Beduin in the magav? You called them trigger happy brutes. And you made it a point to highlight their ethnicity as if to say that those people are more prone to be trigger happy brutes than anyone else.

            And what did you say about Americans?

            You know what I think Philos? You don’t sound to be Jewish to me. You seem to hate Jews and Israel too much.

            Have I worked out your number? Of course I have.

            Reply to Comment
          • Philos

            If this were a debate based offline, Oscar, I could sue you and win damages for libel and misrepresentation. Alas, this is an online debate and we must contend with the various trolls lurking under their bridges waiting to insult, libel, defame and misrepresent other people. You have latched onto something I have shared, something from my past when I was a soldier in the IDF, and it appears to have rattled you in some way beyond my comprehension. Perhaps, what I described just doesn’t jive with your view of “we’re all in this together” Israel. Perhaps, you don’t like the fact that the real dirty work of the occupation is delegated to non-Ashknasim, non-Sabras and non-Jews. I don’t know what it is but you need to make peace with it. Agree to disagree with me. You look at the bride (Israel) and don’t see any blemishes. I look at the bridge and see all the ugliness in her soul, yet, I can’t help but try to help her, to undo the trauma of the past and help her become a better human being.

            Reply to Comment
          • Oscar

            First of all, no way you would win a libel suit. You said what you said and it is a matter of public record. Be man enough to own up to it and correct your own prejudices.

            As for this:

            “… the ugliness in her soul, yet, I can’t help but try to help her, to undo the trauma of the past and help her become a better human”

            This is a prejudice too. All you do is focus on what is bad about Israel and amplify it. You put Israel on a pedestal and pretend that everything that it does is ten times worse than what any nation did or does in similar circumstances. That is not a way to fix Israel. That is the way to help Israel’s enemies who are not exactly angels themselves.

            You want to fix Israel? Then criticise but criticise constructively. Oh and yes, one more thing, be a bit more balanced. Someone else already said this about this whole site.

            Reply to Comment
          • Piotr Berman

            Philos, have some pride in your convictions! Border police = magav does have the culture of “trigger happy brutes” who celebrate their brutality, violent fantasies and achievements on Facebook pages. And because it is not an “elite unit”, it has a certain ethnic background.

            Judging from some situations in USA (Lynn England case), the problem may be not that soldiers of lower social status are more brutal but more prone to brag about it. A girl from a good family would never post photos of herself humiliating prisoners.

            Being called bigot, Jew hater etc. by rabid Zionist is hardly detrimental to someone’s good name.

            Reply to Comment
          • Vittorio

            “Being called bigot, Jew hater etc. by rabid Zionist is hardly detrimental to someone’s good name.”

            You mean to say Zionists cannot recognise bigots? Well guess what. You are wrong. You are one too you looney lefty.

            Reply to Comment
          • Kiwi

            How sad.

            Isn’t it always the case that those who criticise others cannot take criticism?

            Philos here goes around and calls everyone a bigot at a drop of a hat. But as soon as someone is critical of what he said, he blusters about law suites.

            And what about Piotr? He talks about girls from good families. And he implies that people from lower socio economic groups cannot be from good families? Some leftie hugh?

            He mutters about rabid Zionists. But he misrepresents the very word.

            What a sad, self important lot.

            Reply to Comment
          • Philos

            Piotr, I gave up trying to explain to Oscar that a statement of fact with regards to the ethnic and socio-economic make-up of the magav does not ipso facto make all members of an ethnic group brutes. Just those that are in the magav. It speaks eons to the racism of the state that they won’t send their good ashknasi sons and daughters to the magav. So I’m not going to bother trying to persuade him anymore and innure myself to his annoying habit of quoting me out of context. He didn’t serve in the IDF and he didn’t have the good fortune I did to get seconded to the magav during the second intifada. I will still stand by my prejudiced remark that Israel attracts all the racist assholes from the jewish diaspora like flies to shit. I am ever wary of speaking to American Jews lest they suddenly puff up their pigeon chests and rant about “their country” and “the haters” and “Arab terrorists” and the vast anti-Semitic conspiracy against Israel. Just like Oscar, The Trespasser and all the other trolls here from Yisrael Sheli

            Reply to Comment
          • Kiwi

            ” It speaks eons to the racism of the state that they won’t send their good ashknasi sons and daughters to the magav”

            “Good” Ashkenazi sons? You mean others are not good?

            And in any case, what is wrong with the magav? I read a piece by Larry Derfner recently in which he was complaining that real Israelis idolise the magav.

            Reply to Comment
          • Kiwi

            From Larry’s article, Philos:

            “front-page headline on Thursday read: “Border Policewoman kills terrorist.” Her pixilated photo was tagged: “Heroine of the day.”

            Reply to Comment
          • Kiwi

            And Philos, this is what you said to Trespasser:

            ” … You’re a goddamned bigot”

            So Oscar called you a bigot and rightly so. Can’t you take the criticism that you so freely dish out to others?

            Reply to Comment
          • Vicky

            Oscar/Kiwi,

            Larry wrote that he agreed with everything Philos said about Magav. In his words: “Everything Philos is saying is true – I know it, anybody who’s lived in Israel for awhile and been in the army, or even has heard and read a good deal about the army, knows it.” You asked Larry why in that case he had written about the idolisation of Nofar Mizrahi, so I directed you to some interviews by women soldiers who described acting especially tough as one of the very few narrow ways in which they felt able to earn any sort of respect. The adulation and the disparagement are not mutually exclusive.

            The military may get romanticised in the diaspora as ‘Israel’s melting pot’ and ‘the great equaliser’ and all the rest of it, and I can see why you may be reluctant to let go of that image. But you have to acknowledge the fact that Philos has served in that army, while you have not; and he has had experiences that you don’t share. I don’t always like the language he’s used to describe magav, but that’s when I have to remind myself that I don’t have his experiences either. Neither of us knows precisely what they’ve been because he hasn’t gone into detail, but one thing should be clear: army wasn’t fun for him. It’s beyond crass to repeatedly accuse him of bigotry (and even to question his Jewishness) just because he can’t and won’t bolster your rosy vision of an institution that you weren’t part of, one that has negatively affected him. Let it go.

            Reply to Comment
          • Kiwi

            Vicki

            I will just speak for myself. I am not Israeli or even Jewish. But I have many Jewish friends and I am very familiar with the Middle East conflict.

            I can only go by what Philos said and yes I read what Larry too said, both in the original article and after he tried to back up Philos. But somehow Philos is not convincing me.

            I am glad he sounds convincing to you but we will just have to agree to disagree. Thanks for your comment though.

            Reply to Comment
          • Philos

            Kiwi, thanks for your interest in our intractable conflict with the Palestinians and your input on the cleavages in Israeli society. We all benefit from it. Much in the way that a Jewish Israeli would understand “good ashknasi” is a rather sarcastic, even embittered, way to describe the dominant ethnic group in Israel. I am Iraqi by the way, abdallak. From a lovely place near Lod. (Note, I am being sarcastic – most people refer to my family home town as a “hole” in Hebrew). In fact my home town made international news when our deputy mayor (of Shas) had a New Testament bible burning replete with chanting crowd.
            .
            But the magav girl is idolized, you ask? Actually, any time a female soldier squeezes the trigger (even in very dubious circumstances) she is idolized as a hero because ours is a very militarized and macho society where most girls serve as jobniks. So when a girl “acts like a man” and “kills a terrorist” (even if he is an unarmed 17 year old) she is idolized. Male magav soldiers who do this regularly get no press. Oh, and I won’t write down what is said about girl magav in other parts of the army but I will say it is insulting, sexists, specialized and demeaning. Think “Korean comfort women” and you’d be in the ballpark. Oh and to be a female magav soldier is terrible because their make counterparts hear what their buddies in other parts of the army say about them. It’s probably not for nothing that the majority of female confessions at “Breaking the Silence” come from ex magavnikot.

            Reply to Comment
          • Kiwi

            Philos

            Some of those Jewish friends that I mentioned, happen to have served in the IDF. And their story is not quite as exaggerated as your story seems to be.

            By the way, all armies have a male centric macho mentality.

            Be well.

            Reply to Comment
          • aristeides

            There is Oscar, the one-song bird. Everyone he disagrees with is a Jew-hater, and the Jews aren’t real hating Jews like him.

            Reply to Comment
          • David

            “This is a universal principle, applied anywhere: Don’t want to get hurt – don’t screw with armed people.”

            So if the IDF continues killing protesters who throw rocks, then your own “universal principle” gives those protesters the perfect justification to begin arming themselves with real weapons.

            Do you really want to see a militarized West Bank? Are you secretly working for Hamas?

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >So if the IDF continues killing protesters who throw rocks, then your own “universal principle” gives those protesters the perfect justification to begin arming themselves with real weapons.

            Of course, which it turn would give IDF justification to use more power.

            >Do you really want to see a militarized West Bank?

            Yes.

            Are you secretly working for Hamas?

            Yes.

            Reply to Comment
          • David

            At least you have a sense of humour.

            More seriously though, you really do appear to share some views with Hamas. Like Hamas, you seem to relish the idea of an all out fight for all of Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza, you also seem unconcerned about the ultimate cost in lives, and you are also very confident that your side would win.

            But consider the larger picture…

            Iraq is now a client state of Iran. Jordan is trouble, with the monarchy crumbling and the Muslim Brotherhood in position to take over. When that happens, the arms pipeline will then be open from Iran (and the Gulf Arab states) to the West Bank.

            Meanwhile, the arms pipeline is already open from Egypt to Hamas; and to the north, Hezbollah (or perhaps some less disciplined organization) may inherit some of Syria’s chemical weapons.

            Considering the increasing external dangers, do you really think now is the best time to be trying to provoke the Palestinians into launching a new Intifada?

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >At least you have a sense of humor.

            And few other senses as well, including a common sense.

            >More seriously though, you really do appear to share some views with Hamas.

            Sharing views? Hardly.
            But I’m taking them dead serious, that’s for sure.
            If Hamas proclaims that they are gonna fight till the last man there isn’t much I can do besides helping all their man to die in a timely fashion.

            >Like Hamas, you seem to relish the idea of an all out fight for all of Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza.

            Si vis pacem para bellum.

            >you also seem unconcerned about the ultimate cost in lives

            Like Hamas.

            Really, why should I be concerned regarding the loss of life among the enemy? They’ve chosen to fight, not us.

            >and you are also very confident that your side would win.

            You see, unlike Hamas and such, Israelis have nowhere to flee, so we either win or die fighting.

            Besides, all and every conflicts which Israel “lost” accordingly to Arabs claim were actually interrupted due to humanitarian issues – it seems that the world can’t stand more than 1000 Arabs killed by Jews at the time. Strangely, Arabs killed by Arabs have a much greater allowance.

            >Iraq is now a client state of Iran.

            No.

            >Jordan is trouble, with the monarchy crumbling and the Muslim Brotherhood in position to take over.

            So? They are not capable of running a state. None of Arab states is capable of ANY serious achievements simply because they too much rely on food imports.

            >When that happens, the arms pipeline will then be open from Iran (and the Gulf Arab states) to the West Bank.

            Which is why Israel has to retain control over the Dead Sea and Jordan River.

            >Meanwhile, the arms pipeline is already open from Egypt to Hamas; and to the north

            Yes. For many years now. So?

            >Hezbollah (or perhaps some less disciplined organization) may inherit some of Syria’s chemical weapons.

            Launching chem. weapons isn’t that easy. Besides, it would certainly give Israel good enough excuse to literally wipe Hezbullah off the map. Nasralla likes to eat too much to make a good mujahedeen.

            >Considering the increasing external dangers, do you really think now is the best time to be trying to provoke the Palestinians into launching a new Intifada?

            The new Intifada has already being officially launched.


            That is why the two men agreed that the best and only option facing the Palestinians these days is a “popular intifada” that would see Palestinian youths engage in daily confrontations with Israeli soldiers and settlers, especially in the West Bank.

            Abbas and Mashaal want an uprising similar to the first intifada, which erupted in 1987, when Palestinians mainly used stones and firebombs against soldiers and settlers, and refrained from launching terror attacks inside Israel.

            Yet Abbas and Mashaal seem to disagree on the ultimate goal of the “popular intifada.”

            While Abbas is hoping that daily clashes between Palestinian stone-throwers and Israeli soldiers will force Israel to withdraw to the pre-1967 lines, including east Jerusalem, Mashaal and his Hamas movement are hoping that the uprising would lead to the “liberation of all Palestine, from the Jordan river to the sea.”

            Abbas and Hamas have decided for now to lay their differences aside and work towards escalating tensions on the ground, particularly in the West Bank. Representatives of the two parties have been holding “reconciliation” talks in Cairo during the past few weeks in a bid to agree on a new strategy against Israel.

            Their goal is to drag Israel into a confrontation with Palestinian civilians — one that would embarrass the Israelis among the international community and force them to capitulate.

            http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3499/third-intifada

            They want war? They’ll get one. More than they think they could handle.

            Funny though, they can’t even decide what young Palestinian are dying for.

            Reply to Comment
          • David

            You state that Abbas’ goal is to “drag Israel into a confrontation with Palestinian civilians…” Assuming that’s true, then, by killing protestors who pose no real threat, isn’t Israel giving Abbas exactly what he wants?

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >You state that Abbas’ goal is to “drag Israel into a confrontation with Palestinian civilians…”

            Many people state that. Practically, everyone who is sufficiently informed and somewhat honest.

            >by killing protestors who pose no real threat, isn’t Israel giving Abbas exactly what he wants?

            Israel has not much choice. Suppressing is bad, allowing protests is much worse.

            It should be noticed that Palestinians en-masse are not seeking another conflict, lest want to be once again dragged into one.

            Should say 30% of ALL Arabs arise Israel would have really not easy time dealing with it.

            Reply to Comment
          • It’s not made up. If Palestinians prioritise hatred of Israelis over love for their own kids, giving their children second place, then the idea that their love for their kids is lacking in some way is a logical inference to make.

            Recently you objected to Piotr Berman’s question about whether you feel that Arabs are your enemies on the grounds that such a question is generalisation. Taking a handful of baby bomber pictures as proof positive of what Golda Meir claimed ‘the Arabs’ feel for their children is also a generalisation. Some parents abuse their kids in all manner of horrible ways. And some parents militarise their kids. It’s wrong to use cases like this to impugn an entire community of people. If we did that, where would that leave Israeli families? You must have seen the gun-worship that takes place on Yom ha’Atzmaut, with tanks and machine guns and whatever else put on display for kids to explore on family outings, as though a military base is really some giant adventure playground. You know that school kids get taken on field trips to bases. And statistically it’s a lot more likely for an Israeli child to end up toting a Tavor around than it is for a Palestinian child to grow up into a suicide bomber – or even to handle arms of any kind, ever. Does this mean we can reverse Meir’s toxic statement, apply it to Israeli parents? No, because while the militarisation of young people is always a terrible thing, it’s not always easy to recognise it, especially if you are deeply committed to a nationalist project of any kind. Your own group’s violence gets sanitised or excused in that situation (while other people’s is presented as uniquely savage) and your children’s expected future participation in it is packaged in language of duty, responsibility, and so on. Shooting parents who hold these ideas on sight is rather a paradoxical way of resolving the situation – and also a strange suggestion coming from you, given that you easily have one of the most militaristic worldviews of anyone here. Nor have you proven yourself to be a particular friend of child welfare in the past, so it’s surprising that you would feel this level of revulsion over the militarisation of babies.

            Thanks for the book offer, but I’m already very familiar with the Stanford experiment. I read the book as part of my initial training as a therapist, and revisited it when I looked at the possibility of expanding my practice to ex-soldiers.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >If Palestinians prioritise hatred of Israelis over love for their own kids, giving their children second place, then the idea that their love for their kids is lacking in some way is a logical inference to make.

            Could you imagine a Jewish mother blessing her son for suicidal mission to kill Arab civilians? I could not.

            >Taking a handful of baby bomber pictures as proof positive of what Golda Meir claimed ‘the Arabs’ feel for their children is also a generalisation.

            You are right of course. But than there is a problem.
            At one hand generalization isn’t acceptable and each one should be judged by one’s deeds, while at other hand we have entities such as states or political parties, which are generalized by the definition.

            >And statistically it’s a lot more likely for an Israeli child to end up toting a Tavor around than it is for a Palestinian child to grow up into a suicide bomber.

            Jewish child has a near-zero chance of growing into suicide bomber, that’s for sure.
            AFAIK there is no known examples in history, while list of Arab suicide bombers (or assassins) is anything but short and is started nearly 1000 years ago.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassins#Assassination

            >or even to handle arms of any kind, ever.

            Can’t agree with that one either. Firearms (and knives of course) are integral part of Arab culture.

            >Your own group’s violence gets sanitised or excused … and your children’s expected future participation in it is packaged in language of duty, responsibility, and so on.

            My own group is sick an tired of sending children to participate in duty and such. Not much choice though.

            Israeli children are indoctrinated to defend Israel, while Palestinian children are indoctrinated to hate Zionist occupants – you won’t argue with this claim, would you? But than it means that Golda is right after all – to some extent.

            Reply to Comment
          • joe

            Hmm, lets imagine: a mother having a son who is groomed as a soldier from an early age and eventually becomes dies in a suicide attack.

            Let me see, is there anything in Jewish thought or mythology that promotes that idea?

            Samson. Crazy fool: Abrahamic religions are full of suicide bombers.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >a mother having a son who is groomed as a soldier from an early age and eventually becomes dies in a suicide attack.

            Not even remotely similar to a mother blessing her child to successfully explode among civilians. Besides, that accident took place more than 3000 years ago. Got any newer examples?

            >Abrahamic religions are full of suicide bombers.
            Name 5 (five).

            Reply to Comment
          • joe

            I said before that just because you claim it is not similar does not make it so. You said it was impossible to imagine a Jewish mother doing that, I have just showed you how a Jewish hero does exactly that. Funny how that isn’t good enough for you all of a sudden.

            There is also Eleazar Avaran who is on a suicide mission in the books of the Maccabees.

            I could go on, but I can’t be bothered. Suicide as an act of war is part of Judaism. Deal.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >I said before that just because you claim it is not similar does not make it so.

            No. I claim that it is not similar because it is not similar, not because I said so.

            >You said it was impossible to imagine a Jewish mother doing that, I have just showed you how a Jewish hero does exactly that.

            1 – A Jewish hero is not equal to a mother of Jewish hero.

            2 – Prisoner bringing down the pillars to kill nation leaders is not equal to indoctrinated kid pushing the button to kill other children in hopes for paradise and 70 virgins.

            >There is also Eleazar Avaran who is on a suicide mission in the books of the Maccabees.

            I could go on, but I can’t be bothered. Suicide as an act of war is part of Judaism. Deal.

            You’ve named only 1 (one) so far. Samson does not really count – his life was already ended when Philistines apprehended him.

            Strangely you haven’t produced any modern examples. Can’t be bothered, or have none?

            Maybe because you are not aware that suicide is forbidden in modern Judaism?

            Suicide is generally forbidden by Jewish law. It may be an acceptable alternative if the alternative is the commission of certain cardinal sins for which one must give up one’s life rather than sin.[1] Most authorities hold that it is not permissible to hasten death to avoid pain if one is dying in any event, but the Talmud is somewhat unclear on the matter.[2]
            Suicides are frowned upon and buried in a separate part of a Jewish cemetery and not to receive certain mourning rights. In actual practice every means is used to excuse suicide—usually by determining either that the suicide itself proves that the perpetrator was not in his or her right mind, or that the suicide must have repented after performing the deadly act but before death took place.

            Reply to Comment
          • joe

            You know why there is no point in discussing things with you – it is because you arbritrarily decide from other people’s comments what is relevant, what is irrelevant, what is right and what is not right.

            I don’t care what you think about *anything*. You are not an authority here on *anything*.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >You know why there is no point in discussing things with you?

            I know. Because I won’t buy your hypocratic fallacies.

            >I don’t care what you think about *anything*. You are not an authority here on *anything*.

            And now you are lying.

            You wouldn’t bother to answer if what you is saying was truth.

            Besides, dude, you are nothing but a few black letters on an off-white background. Why would someone be bothered by what these or that letters care about?

            The best you can do is refrain from answering to save some internet traffic.

            Reply to Comment
          • joe

            Why would I bother posting? Maybe because I can’t stand to see you unchallenged.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >Why would I bother posting? Maybe because I can’t stand to see you unchallenged.

            I see. So you now are not able to produce any viable arguments to back your position which means that my argumentation is flawless and unchallenged I reign again.

            Good.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >Nor have you proven yourself to be a particular friend of child welfare in the past, so it’s surprising that you would feel this level of revulsion over the militarisation of babies.

            I’m full of surprises ;) At times I even manage to surprise myself.

            Now seriously. My views are realistic. I do realize that military power is necessary to achieve certain goals now or in nearest future, however I also do realize that if humanity is to survive much longer some behavioral
            patterns have to change.

            The problem is that while some of world’s countries seem to have “pacified” for the lack of a better word, population others, on the contrary, are more than eager to use their new and shiny (or old and rusty) AK-74.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            Did you happen to read “Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere” by Lev Gumilev?

            Very interesting theory on how and why nations raise and fall.

            I should’ve figured that you are familiar with Zimbardo’s works due to your occupation.
            Damn trolls.

            p.s. had to answer in three parts. 972mag managed to get worst discussion engine ever.

            Reply to Comment
          • Piotr Berman

            Madre de Dios! Someone remembers Lev Nikolaevich! I read only “History of ancient Turks” where he does discuss ethnogenesis, a fascinating and quite irrelevant subject (except for the fact that ethnogenesis produces a-historical mythos, as in the case of Zionist myths and legends).

            Reply to Comment
          • Piotr Berman

            On the second thought, the socio-economic background of different units is probably irrelevant, conscripts are indoctrinated and behave as instructed. When the government ministers incite more to kill the enemies, there are more killings.

            Israel has a somewhat strange concept of “elite” and “non-elite” units, for example, biographical entries or reports on politicians often note “served in elite unit XXX” and Magav is never mentioned as such.

            Once there was a story in Ha’aretz about a reserve officer who had a command in some area of West Bank and was instructing soldiers to be polite on checkpoint, avoid situations leading to conflicts and violence etc. I got impression that it was like a story on a calf born with two heads — very rare and thus newsworthy.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >a fascinating and quite irrelevant subject

            Hardly irrelevant. Ex. analyzing the fall of Arab civilization via the prism of ethnogenesis theory yields surprising results.

            >Israel has a somewhat strange concept of “elite” and “non-elite” units … and Magav is never mentioned as such.

            That is because Magav is a subdivision of Police, not IDF.

            >I got impression that it was like a story on a calf born with two heads — very rare and thus newsworthy.

            A perfect example of an opinion formed by media.

            The fact that some events are not reported makes people believe that there is no such events or that occurrence of events is rare.

            Reply to Comment
          • sh

            “Israel has a somewhat strange concept of “elite” and “non-elite” units … and Magav is never mentioned as such.

            That is because Magav is a subdivision of Police, not IDF.”

            And the Police doesn’t have elite units? Magav doesn’t have Yamas?

            Separating what’s considered important from what’s dross is a feature that runs through every aspect of life. Merkaz, elite units, periferia, mi’utim, it’s all part of the fingerpointin’ fun.

            Reply to Comment
          • Piotr Berman

            In USA, bio entries of politicians with military service would mention “Air Force”, “Navy”, “Army”, “Marines”, decorations if any and that’s it. No “elite units”

            I understood that Magav is “police” but it uses conscripts.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            Conscripts can serve in the “blue uniform” police units as well.
            Patrol, office jobs, etc.

            Quite a lot of Israeli Arabs join police, by the way, especially in Haifa. Probably even more that ranger and tracking units.

            >And the Police doesn’t have elite units? Magav doesn’t have Yamas?

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamam
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamas_%28Israel_Border_Police_unit%29
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasam

            For obvious reasons serving in police is not even remotely as prestigious as serving in military, in any country.

            Yamas hardly does any heroic job unless of course you consider particularly heroic chasing down Palestinian teenagers.

            >Separating what’s considered important from what’s dross is a feature that runs through every aspect of life.

            Like in pretty much any other country.

            Reply to Comment
          • Piotr Berman

            I tried to illustrate the evil in conceptualizing the other humans as “enemies” by the firestorms created by Allies in Japan and Germany. One can discuss if targets were “legitimate” or not, but one has to stop and understand the horror of incinerating hundreds of thousands of people, and it is not that babies could run for their lives through walls of fire more effectively than “less innocent” adults.

            War strips people of humanity. When the war stops, people may regain sanity, but if the war never stops? Then only one”moral” question remains: what we can get away with? This is where Israel is today. Israel is not unique BUT why should USA import that insanity?

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >Then only one”moral” question remains: what we can get away with?

            You really should travel to a couple of war zones, talk with people there.

            Reply to Comment
    2. aristeides

      Stop being on their own land, in other words. I see nothing in this account about “attacking armed soldiers” or in most of the recent accounts of Palestinians killed.

      But this bullshit is just the sort of thing I would expect from the tresspasser who considers himself above retaliation.

      What would the tresspasser do if Jews were being shot near the border fence by armed Palestinians?

      Reply to Comment
      • The Trespasser

        Ariesteidieis,
        >Stop being on their own land, in other words.

        You said that.

        >I see nothing in this account about “attacking armed soldiers” or in most of the recent accounts of Palestinians killed.

        You are lying.

        >What would the tresspasser do if Jews were being shot near the border fence by armed Palestinians?

        Build another fence, higher and not penetrable.

        Reply to Comment
        • aristeides

          “According to reports, none of them posed any risk to Israeli soldiers or civilians.”

          Who is lying?

          Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            You are.

            Lie #1 – “posing any risk to Israeli soldiers or civilians”
            is not the same as “attacking (or provoking for that matter) armed soldiers”

            Lie #2 – “I see nothing in this account about “attacking armed soldiers” or in most of the recent accounts of Palestinians killed.”

            In those events which were videotaped we can clearly see that EACH time Palestinians were attacking soldiers in one way or another.

            Reply to Comment
          • joe

            He was an unarmed civilian walking away from a confrontation. Obviously posing some serious kind of risk.

            Reply to Comment
          • aristeides

            Joel – since the murdered men were doing none of those things, it just shows that stopping them will do the Palestinians no good. Israel will keep killing.

            Reply to Comment
          • aristeides

            What dishonesty! Tresspasser will say anything, no matter how false, to discredit the truth.

            And here is yet another case of Israeli false equivalence. Israeli apologists argue that killing Palestinians is totally justified if they are attacking or provoking soldiers in any way – even when they’re not, as they were not in the case under discussion, despite T’s lies.

            Yet when Israelis attack and provoke Palestinians, as they regularly do, striking back is terrorism and totally unjustified.

            The entire system is built on asymmetry of force. Israelis feel so free to kill, not because they are threatened, but because they know there is so little threat to them.

            If an Israeli Jew were killed for every Palestinian shot by the IDF, the trigger fingers would become a lot less happy.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >Israeli apologists argue that killing Palestinians is totally justified if they are attacking or provoking soldiers in any way

            Can’t you refrain from lies for just few sentences? We were not discussing whether or not IDF soldier are allowed to shoot Palestinians at their own concern. You asked question – What is the way for Palestinians to not get shot. I’ve answered.

            >even when they’re not, as they were not in the case under discussion

            Since in EACH AND EVERY documented incident Palestinian attack or provoke soldiers prior to be shot at, it is safe to conclude that in undocumented incidents Palestinians behave accordingly.

            You are not expecting me to believe the same people who’ve claimed that Muhammad al-Salaymeh attacked Magav officer with a birthday cake, are you?

            Reply to Comment
          • aristeides

            Lie, T. Unless, as the IDF seems to do, you regard any Palestinian existing as a “provocation.”

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            Only those who believe that Jews have no right to have their own state on their historic land.

            Reply to Comment
          • aristeides

            Let’s see how that works. The IDF issues mindreading equipment to all its troops. Whenever they spot a Palestinian thinking the provocative thought that Jews don’t have the right to disposess Palestinians from their land, tear down their homes and bulldoze their fields to make room for more Jews, they open fire.

            Perfectly justified.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            How many times did you had your nose surgically shortened?
            Must be costly…

            Let me guess – Suha Arafat’s fund is paying for surgeries, right?

            Reply to Comment
          • Shmuel

            “If an Israeli Jew were killed for every Palestinian shot by the IDF, the trigger fingers would become a lot less happy.”

            Stop your crap, Aristocrat. In the entire conflict in ALL Arab Israeli wars, since 1950, slightly over 50,000 people were killed on all sides. And mostly in wars and violence instigated by Arabs in which Israel ended up having the upper hand.

            Compare this to what happens when Arabs fight wars against each other. In two years in Syria, the death toll already exceeds 60,000 people.

            Why am I bringing that up? I am bringing that up because if thats what they do to each other, then imagine what they would do to Jews if they would have the upper hand militarily against Israel. Personally, I would rather not imagine it. But YOU probably have wet dreams about it.

            Reply to Comment
          • aristeides

            I know why you bring it up, Shmutz. It’s what all the Israeli apologists do, trying to demonize Arabs and make Israelis look good in contrast. No originality.

            Reply to Comment
          • Shmuel

            “I know why you bring it up, Shmutz. It’s what all the Israeli apologists do, trying to demonize Arabs”

            Yea. In the same way that you and your buddies demonize Israelis. Only what I brought up happens to be true. Want me to provide a link to the site that verifies what I say?

            Reply to Comment
          • andrew r

            “I am bringing that up because if thats what they do to each other, then imagine what they would do to Jews if they would have the upper hand militarily against Israel.”

            Many governments have shown an aptitude for killing fellow citizens who are perceived as threatening their authority. The US to its credit has the children of Branch Davidian members, the son of Anwar al-Awlaki, members of the Black Panthers, many strikers throughout the 20th century[1], to say nothing of the US civil war which the federal govt. owes its authority today.

            And of course the Zionist movement killed its fair share of noncombatants to make Palestine a Jewish state, and the Israeli govt. killed fellow Zionists when it felt the need to (Altalena).

            In the event of US govt. authority breaking down for whatever reason, we’d be likely to see Syria magnified 10x – both govt. forces and armed idiots would be killing indiscriminately. The lack of such killing is not due to the US being more civilized than Syria, but due to most Americans according legitimacy to the system and the ability of the US to export violence and diffuse it at home.

            [1] http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/militia-slaughters-strikers-at-ludlow-colorado

            Reply to Comment
    3. By this report, this boy–boy–was shot three times in the back. At no point is there mention of the boy as a serious threat. On the IDF’s own terms, one shot would have been sufficient. There were three. This tells me that there is little control coordination of firings. And that tells me that the IDF is not concerned with loss of life; nor are they concerned with the back anger, pent up, which these killlings instill.

      I have yet to see convincing evidence over events of the past month where deadly force was necessary. In a war it doesn’t matter. But the IDF is now engaged in a policing action, without oversight beyond the agency of force. That is a prescription for abuse; which is what you have. When true violence flares, recall these senseless killings which show most strongly that the IDF is unconcerned with the damage to locals. This level of irresponsibility would be intolerable if the occupied and occupier shift roles; that test should be the standard.

      If ever there is a chance of removing this polarization it is in Bank/Israeli interaction. The IDF does its State a disservice, for it seeds the next round of brutality on both sides, which, as usual, will be born by those whose lives have just begun.

      The tent village action in E1 stands out yet more brightly–brilliantly–after this 4th shooting in a week. The State has no idea of what it faces, so reacts with brutal abuse of life in these marginal events. What if faces are people who will not give in, nor will give the State an excuse to kill in greater events. That resolve is hard to conceive–I know it is for me–but I think it is there.

      Reply to Comment
    4. Haifawi

      Something that should be noted here is that RZs and Settlers now make up a much larger percentage of the Combat Forces than previously. So I would expect to see a lot more “itchy trigger finger” since the goal of these people is to increase friction to the point when it becomes politically popular to “Expel the Fakestinians to Jordan” for “Greater Israel.”

      Reply to Comment
      • It is easy for most of us to put on racial or other category glasses and see things in black and white. Raised in such a purity setting, exactly what a live fire provocation is will shift to the fast trigger. The IDF treats its soldiers as sacred, as do most modern armies, and will be loathe to put their boys “at risk” by announced rules of fire. When it happens, just make sure the soldier is sent elsewhere and protected.

        All this does is create more stories among Palestinians, giving more reason to hate and distrust. Each killing also impacts the standing of the Palestinian police, as these often cooperate with Israeli security, so are seen as tainted. With each effective soldier immunity Israel signals it has no interest in any accomodation in the Bank.

        Young soldiers should not be given such power. It is just not true that they need it for their personal protection. All that results is damaged young–dead young Palestinians, mourning friends and relatives, and a growing ugly video game response by young soldiers to “the enemy.”

        Reply to Comment
    5. Jan

      Many Israelis view Palestinians as less than human. Their school books portray them as terrorists and shiftless. The school books do not call them Palestinians but Arabs as if they have no other identity.

      When the IDF kills a Palestinian there is no uproar. If there is an “investigation,” the shooter will usually get off with not even a slap on the wrist.

      But if an Israeli is killed it is a different situation. The house of the killer is destroyed, his family may be arrested and imprisoned and if the killing came from Gaza the bombs would fly.

      The Palestinians, like the Jews of of mid-20th century Europe, have no recourse but to just take it. Maybe soon they won’t stand by and watch their people picked off one by one.

      Is there any wonder that the world is looking at Israel and seeing it as the pariah state that it is. Only the US, Canada and a few lesser states give Israel their full support. One day that will go away too and Israel will be on its own thanks to its actions.

      Reply to Comment
      • I believe there are many young Israeli soldiers that would never pull the trigger as in this case. But policing is about everyone, and there are clearly some who will. When there is no effective consequence, this demoralizes those who refuse the trigger. Israeli command and control is demoralizing their force by allowing these events to continue; the standard of morality within the IDF is diminished. A good general would abhore this.

        The destruction of family housing of a designated terrorist is unjust and repugnant. It is a blotting out which Jews themselves faced in some form for centuries. It attaches guilt to a class, something the Prophets forbade. We all get drunk on power. But this is no videogame.

        Reply to Comment
    6. directrob

      The violent death of a person is very sad. In events like these it means something went terribly wrong.

      How can the various Israeli forces fail so badly more than five times in one week? The kindest explaination is probably that the Israeli forces are incompetent and lack basic training and leadership.

      Reply to Comment
      • The Trespasser

        You probably missed the beginning of the 3rd Intifada.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lmox2VOlcjQ

        More here: http://www.3rdintifada.com/

        How does that allow Israel to shoot “unarmed civilians” you’d ask.

        Well, by it self it does not.

        However as real life had proven more than once that NOT shooting “unarmed civilians” is perceived as weakness (not humanism) and leads to more disturbance and eventual casualties on both sides.

        Reply to Comment
        • directrob

          Is this irony or are you just joking?

          Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            I’m dead serious.

            Reply to Comment
          • directrob

            I could point out to you why what you advocate is a crime against humanity, but I think you already know.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            Palestinian rioters are calling for a dismantling of state of Israel and further violations of Jewish human rights.

            There is no reason why such rights should be applied to those who deny others of having mentioned rights.

            Reply to Comment
        • sh

          How do you know the 3rd intifada you think they’re talking about is violent? Come to think of it, they could just as well have been announcing a permanent cease-fire.
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znmHsb-QZPE

          Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >How do you know the 3rd intifada you think they’re talking about is violent?

            Violence is not an issue: 3rd Intifada has no legitimate goal – as two previous.

            >Come to think of it, they could just as well have been announcing a permanent cease-fire.

            Yet ah! why should they know their fate,
            Since sorrow never comes too late,
            And happiness too swiftly flies?
            Thought would destroy their paradise.
            No more; where ignorance is bliss,
            ‘Tis folly to be wise.

            Reply to Comment
    7. “as real life had proven more than once that NOT shooting “unarmed civilians” is perceived as weakness (not humanism) and leads to more disturbance” : Thanks you, Big T, for showing us what you are.

      Reply to Comment
    8. Click here to load previous comments

    LEAVE A COMMENT

    Name (Required)
    Mail (Required)
    Website
    Free text

© 2010 - 2014 +972 Magazine
Follow Us
Credits

+972 is an independent, blog-based web magazine. It was launched in August 2010, resulting from a merger of a number of popular English-language blogs dealing with life and politics in Israel and Palestine.

Website empowered by RSVP

Illustrations: Eran Mendel