Israeli troops kill 4 Palestinians, wound 160 in protests over Jerusalem

[rooster59]

Israeli troops kill 4 Palestinians, wound 160 in protests over Jerusalem

By Nidal al-Mughrabi

 

A Palestinian demonstrator uses a slingshot to hurl stones towards Israeli troops during clashes at a protest against U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, near the border with Israel in the east of Gaza City December 15, 2017. REUTERS/Mohammed Salem

 

GAZA (Reuters) - Israeli troops shot dead four Palestinians and wounded 150 others with live fire on Friday, medical officials said, as protests over U.S. President Donald Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital entered a second week.

 

Most of the casualties were on the Gaza Strip border, where thousands of Palestinians gathered to hurl rocks at Israeli soldiers beyond the fortified fence. Medics said two protesters, one of them wheelchair-bound, were killed and 150 wounded.

 

In the occupied West Bank, another area where Palestinians are seeking statehood along with adjacent East Jerusalem, medics said two protesters were killed and 10 wounded by Israeli gunfire.

 

One of the dead was a man who Israeli police troopers said was shot after he stabbed a member of their unit. Reuters witnesses said the Palestinian held a knife and wore what looked like a bomb belt. A Palestinian medic who helped evacuate the man for treatment said the belt was fake.

 

Palestinians -- and the wider Arab and Muslim world -- were incensed at Trump's Dec. 6 announcement, which reversed decades of U.S. policy reticence on Jerusalem, a city where both Israel and the Palestinians want sovereignty.

 

Washington's European allies and Russia have also voiced worries about Trump's decision.

 

Gaza's dominant Hamas Islamists, which reject coexistence with Israel, called last week for a new Palestinian uprising, but any such mass-mobilisation has yet to be seen in the West Bank or East Jerusalem.

 

There have been almost nightly Gazan rocket launches into Israel, so far without casualties. Israel has responded with air strikes on Hamas facilities, one of which killed two gunmen.

 

The Israeli military said that, on Friday, about 3,500 Palestinians demonstrated near the Gaza border fence.

 

"During the violent riots IDF (Israel Defence Force) soldiers fired selectively towards main instigators," the military said in a statement.

 

A military spokeswoman had no immediate comment on the wheelchair-bound protestor, Ibrahim Abu Thuraya. Abu Thuraya, 29, was a regular at such demonstrations. In media interviews, he said he had lost both his legs in a 2008 Israeli missile strike in Gaza.

 

In the West Bank, the Israeli military said that about 2,500 Palestinians took part in riots, rolling flaming tyres and throwing fire bombs and rocks at soldiers and border police.

 

Israel captured East Jerusalem, an area laden with Jewish, Muslim and Christian shrines, from Jordan in the 1967 war and later annexed it in a move not recognised internationally.

 

Palestinians hope that part of the city will be the capital of a future independent state and Palestinian leaders say Trump's move is a serious blow to a moribund peace process.

 

Israel has welcomed Trump's announcement as recognising political reality and biblical Jewish roots in Jerusalem. U.S. Vice President Mike Pence is scheduled to visit Israel, as well as Egypt, next week.

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-12-16

[bogozy]

As usual, lügenpresse information. Israeli troops kill 4 palestinians..................   Palestinians started to hurl stones, firebombs, and after the Israeli troops shot them, in self defence. It is the fact.

[JulesMad]

Sure, the Israeli's are as innocent as americans, are they not?!?

 

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, JulesMad said:

Sure, the Israeli's are as innocent as americans, are they not?!?

 

Is there a contest?

It's pretty clear that wasn't a serious question.

Maybe you could rephrase it to post something that actually means something. 

 

Anyway, as an American I strongly feels trump's recent announcement about Jerusalem is bad for the USA, bad for Israel, and obviously bad for the Palestinians as well.

Edited December 16, 2017 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

14 hours ago, bogozy said:

As usual, lügenpresse information. Israeli troops kill 4 palestinians..................   Palestinians started to hurl stones, firebombs, and after the Israeli troops shot them, in self defence. It is the fact.

I suggest the use of that German word lügenpresse is quite bizarre and offensive in this context. It's a Nazi word now resurrected by neo-Nazis. 

 

The 'Worst' German Word of the Year

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/01/the-worst-german-word-of-the-year/384493/

[dexterm]

One of the 4 killed was an unarmed wheelchair bound man, Ibrahim Abu Thurayeh, carrying a Palestinian flag protesting Trump's decision shot by a cowardly Israeli sniper from behind a steel reinforced fence.

More disgusting handiwork of the most moral army in the world. And it disgusts me even more that my cowardly government lends support to these animals.

 

Shame on Israel. A country that has to murder a paraplegic because it fears so much the defiant spirit of a man who crawls along the ground to wave a protest flag is going nowhere morally and ultimately politically.

Palestinian double amputee killed by Israeli sniper

"Ashraf al-Qidra, the spokesman for Gaza's health ministry, said in a statement on Saturday that the Israeli army has been using snipers armed with explosive bullets and indiscriminately firing tear gas canisters.

 

"The army also uses gas bombs of unknown quality, which has led to the injury of dozens in the form of convulsions, vomiting, coughing and rapid heartbeat," he said.

 

Qidra also noted that Israeli forces have been using excessive violence against civilians and deliberately targeting paramedics, ambulances and news crews."

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/12/palestinian-double-amputee-killed-israeli-sniper-171216113544411.html

[Stargeezr]

I doubt that Israel will ever  be at peace with Palestine in our lifetimes.

Too much hatred!

Geezer

[Morch]

Obviously, the usual suspects will milk this to the last drop. As a prolific poster opined, helps focusing on the agenda.

 

There will be no direct answers or even coherent replies when certain questions are raised regarding the responsibility or a leadership calling and encouraging clashes and demonstrations. There will be nothing negative said about a leadership seeing such death as fuel for the "cause". Guess some on here see things similarly.

 

One of the standing criticisms leveled against Trump's announcement was that it was taken knowing despite being aware of how it will be received and violent reactions being expected. Not holding my breath that the same reasoning would be applied with regard to the Palestinian leadership's calls for "days of rage" etc., despite being aware of how things might turn out. Apparently, the argument of don't-do-x-because-you-know-it-will-make-them-do-y applies only in some situations. Some groups/parties/sides are either given greater leeway or are exempt, others held to higher standards.

 

And to address expected nonsense replies, this is not about defending or justifying anything - but about pointing out the double standard of narratives used. The above is not aimed to absolve anyone of anything, but to highlight that accountability is not a strong suit of any side involved. Trump did not have to make his announcement, Palestinian leadership did not have to call for clashes and demonstrations, the Israeli army did not have to kill demonstrators, poster do not have to milk such topics.

 

[Kiwiken]

Leaders on both sides call for Protest. Youth takes it too far and they die. This is always the result. As long as debate can be blocked by veto .peace can never have a Chance.

As a Kiwi my observation is that trump is a school yard Bully I have seen his type all my life. He is focused on protection of his own people (the rich and powerful).

As long as he achieves self gratification he will continue. He cares nothing of Palestinian or ordinary Israeli just the rich and powerful.

After all it is always the poor who are sacrificed first

[simple1]

22 minutes ago, Morch said:

the Israeli army did not have to kill demonstrators

One assumes Israeli soldiers using live ammunition against demonstrators are acting under orders. 

Other than one well known incident, I do not recall UK soldiers using live ammunition against demonstrators using sling shots, fire bombs etc in N.I. Why is live ammunition seemingly permitted by the IDF, apparently even against demonstrators who are at a distance? 

[Morch]

13 minutes ago, Kiwiken said:

Leaders on both sides call for Protest. Youth takes it too far and they die. This is always the result. As long as debate can be blocked by veto .peace can never have a Chance.

As a Kiwi my observation is that trump is a school yard Bully I have seen his type all my life. He is focused on protection of his own people (the rich and powerful).

As long as he achieves self gratification he will continue. He cares nothing of Palestinian or ordinary Israeli just the rich and powerful.

After all it is always the poor who are sacrificed first

 

Not sure what you're on about.

 

Leaders on both sides calling for protests ending up in youths deaths? Not really. That's more of a Palestinian thing. One could probably find other, more accurate examples of how Israeli leaders contribute to the sorry state of things. What this got to do with debate being blocked by veto, I've no idea.

 

Schoolyard bullies exist everywhere, being a Kiwi does not offer any special insight into this.

 

Trump being "focused" on anything but himself is a novel notion. While some of his actions may be construed as exhibiting "protection of his own people", I doubt he actually got "his own people" as such, or more to the point - that the Jerusalem announcement meaningfully relates to that. By the way, similar views are prevalent with regard to many Israeli and Palestinian  leaders as well, never mind regional and others.

 

 

[Morch]

16 minutes ago, simple1 said:

One assumes Israeli soldiers using live ammunition against demonstrators are acting under orders. 

Other than one well known incident, I do not recall UK soldiers using live ammunition against demonstrators using sling shots, fire bombs etc in N.I. Why is live ammunition seemingly permitted by the IDF, apparently even against demonstrators who are at a distance? 

 

Use of live ammo is governed by the assessment of a given situation being life-threatening or not. With the former, the restrictions are lighter and there is no limitations on who may open fire. With regard to the latter, those firing will do so under orders and at specified targets, shooters would ideally be officers or trained snipers. That's the theory, at least, application often falling short of specified rules.

 

I think that with regard to the OP, and similar situations, one consideration of using live ammo and/or hitting main agitators, would be a means to stop things from getting further out of hand. One view I recall hearing was along the lines of better to stop one demonstrator, rather than letting the situation develop in a way that may result in mass casualties. For example, if the crowd tries to storm a fence or a post.

 

I don't know that one can directly import and compare situations in the way suggested. Other than differences in ROE and legalities, there could be other factors, such as relevant units make up (the IDF is for the most conscript based), and the numbers ratios between demonstrators and soldiers.

[JingerBen]

7 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Use of live ammo is governed by the assessment of a given situation being life-threatening or not. With the former, the restrictions are lighter and there is no limitations on who may open fire. With regard to the latter, those firing will do so under orders and at specified targets, shooters would ideally be officers or trained snipers. That's the theory, at least, application often falling short of specified rules.

 

I think that with regard to the OP, and similar situations, one consideration of using live ammo and/or hitting main agitators, would be a means to stop things from getting further out of hand. One view I recall hearing was along the lines of better to stop one demonstrator, rather than letting the situation develop in a way that may result in mass casualties. For example, if the crowd tries to storm a fence or a post.

 

I don't know that one can directly import and compare situations in the way suggested. Other than differences in ROE and legalities, there could be other factors, such as relevant units make up (the IDF is for the most conscript based), and the numbers ratios between demonstrators and soldiers.

Go tell that to the family of the Palestinian who was shot to death in his wheelchair.

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, JingerBen said:

Go tell that to the family of the Palestinian who was shot to death in his wheelchair.

 

Milk it for all its worth.

 

[dexterm]

2 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Use of live ammo is governed by the assessment of a given situation being life-threatening or not. With the former, the restrictions are lighter and there is no limitations on who may open fire. With regard to the latter, those firing will do so under orders and at specified targets, shooters would ideally be officers or trained snipers. That's the theory, at least, application often falling short of specified rules.

 

I think that with regard to the OP, and similar situations, one consideration of using live ammo and/or hitting main agitators, would be a means to stop things from getting further out of hand. One view I recall hearing was along the lines of better to stop one demonstrator, rather than letting the situation develop in a way that may result in mass casualties. For example, if the crowd tries to storm a fence or a post.

 

I don't know that one can directly import and compare situations in the way suggested. Other than differences in ROE and legalities, there could be other factors, such as relevant units make up (the IDF is for the most conscript based), and the numbers ratios between demonstrators and soldiers.

You are defending the indefensible as usual, whitewashing Israeli atrocities with verbose pseudo objectivity.

 

With all manner of crowd control at their disposal....water cannon, skunk spray, rubber bullets, tear gas, pepper spray, tasers...Israel should know..they've actually made an export industry out of it!

 

You justify the psychopathic IDF actions with: 

 >>one consideration of using live ammo and/or hitting main agitators, would be a means to stop things from getting further out of hand. One view I recall hearing was along the lines of better to stop [note the euphemism] one demonstrator, rather than letting the situation develop in a way that may result in mass casualties.

 

You're saying It's better to murder a human being, a paraplegic waving a Palestinian flag, as a form of crowd control, presumably as a lesson to others, and this all the while perpetrated by heavily armed and protected Israeli thugs from behind a steel reinforced fence, watchtowers and armored vehicles.

That's disgusting.

 

The world is finally waking up to Israel's war crimes and the barbarity of its illegal occupation.
 

[Morch]

25 minutes ago, dexterm said:

You are defending the indefensible as usual, whitewashing Israeli atrocities with verbose pseudo objectivity.

 

With all manner of crowd control at their disposal....water cannon, skunk spray, rubber bullets, tear gas, pepper spray, tasers...Israel should know..they've actually made an export industry out of it!

 

You justify the psychopathic IDF actions with: 

 >>one consideration of using live ammo and/or hitting main agitators, would be a means to stop things from getting further out of hand. One view I recall hearing was along the lines of better to stop [note the euphemism] one demonstrator, rather than letting the situation develop in a way that may result in mass casualties.

 

You're saying It's better to murder a human being, a paraplegic waving a Palestinian flag, as a form of crowd control, presumably as a lesson to others, and this all the while perpetrated by heavily armed and protected Israeli thugs from behind a steel reinforced fence, watchtowers and armored vehicles.

That's disgusting.

 

The world is finally waking up to Israel's war crimes and the barbarity of its illegal occupation.
 

 

Kindly stop with your lies and the faux moralizing (fat chance). Not everyone needs to adopt your vehemence in order to address and issue or make a point.

 

I was not "defending" anything. I did no "justify" anything but relayed some of the reasoning. And, of course, I did not opine that "it is better", that's just you putting words in my words.

 

What's disgusting in how low you'd go twisting posts and milking such topics.

 

 

[dexterm]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Kindly stop with your lies and the faux moralizing (fat chance). Not everyone needs to adopt your vehemence in order to address and issue or make a point.

 

I was not "defending" anything. I did no "justify" anything but relayed some of the reasoning. And, of course, I did not opine that "it is better", that's just you putting words in my words.

 

What's disgusting in how low you'd go twisting posts and milking such topics.

 

 

A paraplegic protesting by waving a flag Palestinian is shot in the head by an IDF sniper from dozens of yards away; no sympathy...all you can think of in your preamble is Israeli PR damage control by muddying the waters calling any further criticism "milking",

>>Obviously, the usual suspects will milk this to the last drop.

 when there had been only one post critical of Israel at that point.

So don't lecture me about one sidedness. You have revealed your true colors.

 

More than anything else the IDF's form of crowd control by murder is counterproductive. How much more anger, bitternesss and revenge (which will translate into more resistance fighters) will this war crime cause? 

 

How much adverse PR will this generate for Israel through a wider global awareness on social media of their brutal repression. 

 

Besides being a cold blooded war crime, it's a plain dumb way to react. 

Edited December 17, 2017 by dexterm

[JingerBen]

4 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Use of live ammo is governed by the assessment of a given situation being life-threatening or not. With the former, the restrictions are lighter and there is no limitations on who may open fire. With regard to the latter, those firing will do so under orders and at specified targets, shooters would ideally be officers or trained snipers. That's the theory, at least, application often falling short of specified rules.

 

I think that with regard to the OP, and similar situations, one consideration of using live ammo and/or hitting main agitators, would be a means to stop things from getting further out of hand. One view I recall hearing was along the lines of better to stop one demonstrator, rather than letting the situation develop in a way that may result in mass casualties. For example, if the crowd tries to storm a fence or a post.

 

I don't know that one can directly import and compare situations in the way suggested. Other than differences in ROE and legalities, there could be other factors, such as relevant units make up (the IDF is for the most conscript based), and the numbers ratios between demonstrators and soldiers.

 

4 hours ago, JingerBen said:

Go tell that to the family of the Palestinian who was shot to death in his wheelchair.

 

4 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Milk it for all its worth.

 

No need to do that. The plain facts speak for themselves. A long spiel is only necessary when you're pushing propaganda points to indirectly defend an atrocity.

The current Zionist leadership are their own worst enemies. The sooner they're gone, the better. Moderate Israelis are the only hope for the future.

Live within your 1967 borders or continue to be a pariah state.

The whole world is against you.

 

[Morch]

 

@dexterm

 

Milk it.

Helps focus on the agenda.

Not buying into your faux rage, your fake emotive nonsense.

Doubt you truly give two figs about the guy. The only value is a propaganda one.

And yes, your posts are one-sided, and yes, you are milking it for all its worth.

Disgusting.

 

[Morch]

7 minutes ago, JingerBen said:

 

 

No need to do that. The plain facts speak for themselves. A long spiel is only necessary when you're pushing propaganda points to indirectly defend an atrocity.

The current Zionist leadership are their own worst enemies. The sooner they're gone, the better. Moderate Israelis are the only hope for the future.

Live within your 1967 borders or continue to be a pariah state.

The whole world is against you.

 

 

Yes, I get it some of you prefer short repetitive slogans. But do talk about propaganda.

Once more, there was no "defense" offered, kindly stop with this lie.

 

As for your other nonsense, not all Zionist Israelis are extremists and not all moderate Israelis are anti-Zionists.

Obviously no such critical view offered with regard to the Palestinians.

 

Israel limited to the 1967 lines does not represent the extant of Palestinians aims, at least not with regard to the Hamas. And Israel, despite wishful thinking from the usual suspects is not a "pariah state", nor is "all the world" against it.

 

[dexterm]

44 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

@dexterm

 

Milk it.

Helps focus on the agenda.

Not buying into your faux rage, your fake emotive nonsense.

Doubt you truly give two figs about the guy. The only value is a propaganda one.

And yes, your posts are one-sided, and yes, you are milking it for all its worth.

Disgusting.

 

What a strange coincidence whenever I make a post critical of Israel, you happen always to be here too!
But mine is called an agenda, though somehow yours is not.
Pot kettle black springs to mind.

 

For crying out loud, this is a public forum for the general exchange of opinions, strong or otherwise.

What do you want? That the topic setters and mods only allow posts where people share your opinions?

 

Mine is not faux rage...genuine rage I can assure you: 4 Palestinians killed and hundreds injured, all as a result again of Israel's disproportionate use of force..or "mowing the lawn" as they call it.

 

Not even faux sympathy from you. Protesting paraplegics shot dead for resisting by waving a Palestinian flag..par for the course in illegally occupied Palestine.

Edited December 17, 2017 by dexterm

[Morch]

10 minutes ago, dexterm said:

What a strange coincidence whenever I make a post critical of Israel, you happen always to be here too!
But mine is called an agenda, though somehow yours is not.
Pot kettle black springs to mind.

 

For crying out loud, this is a public forum for the general exchange of opinions, strong or otherwise.

What do you want? That the topic setters and mods only allow posts where people share your opinions?

 

Mine is not faux rage...genuine rage I can assure you.

Not even faux sympathy from you. Protesting paraplegics shot dead for resisting by waving a Palestinian flag..par for the course in illegally occupied Palestine.

 

Commenting on your posts is "sinister" as well, now? Pathetic.

I'm am not the one pushing an extreme, one-sided view and doing so with bile filled vehemence, you are. I'm not the one shying away from criticism of one side to this conflict, no matter what - you are. Maybe not offering anything similar counts for an agenda in your book. Or perhaps anything that counters your rants and tirades does. Twist it as much as you like, our contribution to these topics differs

 

In a similar vein it would seem that you cannot abide with any criticism or disagreement, yet try to turn the tables whenever these are aired. Considering you expressed your intentions of disseminating these views as a major reason for joining these discussions, if not the forum - agenda would be an apt word, whether you like it or not.

 

As said not buying into your emotive nonsense, regardless of any "assurances". Interestingly enough, this is also one sided, in line with the posts. I'm not the one given to displays of virtual emotions as support for my posts - you are, why would I change my ways in order to accommodate faux complaints?

 

Now, if you're quite finished making this topic about me, go back to milking the poor guy's worth for all the propaganda value that's in it. While at it, may want to read my first post again, and reflect or even reply to the points raised rather than derail the topic further.

[stevenl]

7 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Commenting on your posts is "sinister" as well, now? Pathetic.

I'm am not the one pushing an extreme, one-sided view and doing so with bile filled vehemence, you are. I'm not the one shying away from criticism of one side to this conflict, no matter what - you are. Maybe not offering anything similar counts for an agenda in your book. Or perhaps anything that counters your rants and tirades does. Twist it as much as you like, our contribution to these topics differs

 

In a similar vein it would seem that you cannot abide with any criticism or disagreement, yet try to turn the tables whenever these are aired. Considering you expressed your intentions of disseminating these views as a major reason for joining these discussions, if not the forum - agenda would be an apt word, whether you like it or not.

 

As said not buying into your emotive nonsense, regardless of any "assurances". Interestingly enough, this is also one sided, in line with the posts. I'm not the one given to displays of virtual emotions as support for my posts - you are, why would I change my ways in order to accommodate faux complaints?

 

Now, if you're quite finished making this topic about me, go back to milking the poor guy's worth for all the propaganda value that's in it. While at it, may want to read my first post again, and reflect or even reply to the points raised rather than derail the topic further.

Yes, you are pushing an extreme, one-sided view.

[Morch]

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

Yes, you are pushing an extreme, one-sided view.

 

Do tell. Not that it is much on topic, of course.

Edited December 17, 2017 by Morch

[JingerBen]

2 hours ago, JingerBen said:

 

 

No need to do that. The plain facts speak for themselves. A long spiel is only necessary when you're pushing propaganda points to indirectly defend an atrocity.

The current Zionist leadership are their own worst enemies. The sooner they're gone, the better. Moderate Israelis are the only hope for the future.

Live within your 1967 borders or continue to be a pariah state.

The whole world is against you.

 

 

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Yes, I get it some of you prefer short repetitive slogans. But do talk about propaganda.

Once more, there was no "defense" offered, kindly stop with this lie.

 

As for your other nonsense, not all Zionist Israelis are extremists and not all moderate Israelis are anti-Zionists.

Obviously no such critical view offered with regard to the Palestinians.

 

Israel limited to the 1967 lines does not represent the extant of Palestinians aims, at least not with regard to the Hamas. And Israel, despite wishful thinking from the usual suspects is not a "pariah state", nor is "all the world" against it.

 

I stand by my statement that Israel is a pariah state.

An overwhelming number of countries condemn the occupation of Palestinian land and the ongoing building of illegal settlements.

It would be interesting to see a list of nations that support Israeli colonization of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

I refrain from personal attacks on you and your motives for posting.

Please extend me the same courtesy. Thanks.

[Scott]

Post reported and removed. 

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, JingerBen said:

 

I stand by my statement that Israel is a pariah state.

An overwhelming number of countries condemn the occupation of Palestinian land and the ongoing building of illegal settlements.

It would be interesting to see a list of nations that support Israeli colonization of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

I refrain from personal attacks on you and your motives for posting.

Please extend me the same courtesy. Thanks.

 

Standing for something doesn't make it so. At least no in any practical sense. Many countries do disagree and even condemn Israeli policies - and in many cases, these are well deserved. That does not, however, make these countries shun Israel, or avoid relations on multiple levels. Israel is not an outcast as far as international community goes.

[bogozy]

On 2017. 12. 16. at 8:33 PM, Jingthing said:

I suggest the use of that German word lügenpresse is quite bizarre and offensive in this context. It's a Nazi word now resurrected by neo-Nazis. 

 

The 'Worst' German Word of the Year

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/01/the-worst-german-word-of-the-year/384493/