Palestinian car driver shot dead by Israeli soldiers

[Galactus]

You can't save the world all in one hit (wish we could)....but you've got to start somewhere. I believe Israel gets so much attention because it is savable. It's right on Europe's door step just half an hour away from the nearest EU country. And many of its Jewish citizens (clearly not all) share the common values of decency and what is right with the countries from which they emigrated.

It claims be a modern democratic country. I want it to ditch the hypocrisy and be one. We can then work on its neighbors, who may take note of the civilized country next door. At the moment some of them use Israel to point out US and global double standards.

Says the poster asserting that most Israeli Jews are racist, and therefore not proper material for peacemaking.

Many, if not most, Israelis were born in Israel, rather than "emigrated" from other countries. Even when considering the countries Israelis (or their ancestors) emigrated from - many do not represent the height of democratic tradition (Middle Eastern & North African countries, Russia & the former USSR, for example).

The eagerness in which some posters claim to uphold democratic and humanistic values somehow fails to be applied when discussing such issues relating to Palestinian society, and the future Palestinian state advocated.

Democracies are not all similar, and the degree of adherence exhibited to ideals differs. This is only denied by those repeatedly airing talking points.

>>Says the poster asserting that most Israeli Jews are racist,

..if any Israeli Jew believes in an exclusive Jewish State and exclusive Jewish only immigration, then they are racists.No other words for it.

>>, and therefore not proper material for peacemaking.

...That's an example of your usual spin, and not what I have said. Peace can still be made, and opinions turned around just as they have been in other troubled regions, when people come to realize the benefits of a peace agreement.

>>Many, if not most, Israelis were born in Israel, rather than "emigrated" from other countries.

...your "many Israelis" have been born since the ethnic cleansing of Partition and 49 years of illegal Occupation. Their parents and grandparents came from elsewhere to disposses the resident Palestinian population who were the majority at the time. Israel has a habit of creating facts on the grounds, then saying how can we possibly change this now? Yet despite all the waves of Jewish immgration and locally born Sabras, Palestinians still form the majority in Israeli controlled territory.

There is a danger that the younger Israeli generations have been brutalized and indoctrinated so much by Israel's constant belligerence that they may have lost some of their parents'and grandparents' more liberal views.

Hence the trigger happy, racist IDF in the OP.

As predicted in an earlier post, when nothing of substance to add, some can be trusted to turn any topic into a platform for airing their whole agenda.

One way or another, your rigid definitions and interpretations spell that in your eyes, most of the Israelis cannot be considered partners for peace. Apparently, this holds until the majority of Israelis will adopt your own views. No middle ground. And somehow, that the Palestinians exhibit similar trends, albeit more pronounced, does not bother you the least. But do go on about spins.....

You are the one who brought supposed Israeli roots as a basis for claiming that they are a better fit for suggested social engineering. Seems that even pointing out this is factually incorrect is auto rejected and used for another spin. When can't make a point, dodge to another issue.

What liberal views were "imported" by Jewish immigrants from Middle Eastern countries, North African countries, Russia (and the former USSR) ?

And as usual, the "hence" which does not follow. "Racist" how? "trigger happy" how? The car carried Israeli plates. A car heading his way at full speed will be considered a valid threat.

...One way or another, your rigid definitions and interpretations spell that in your eyes, most of the Israelis cannot be considered partners for peace...

Israel can be part of the peace very quickly and as i stated before as long as it is israel not returning the stolen occupied land to Palestinians, conflict is one sided and Israel do not need any partners for peace.

...The car carried Israeli plates. A car heading his way at full speed will be considered a valid threat...

yep, especially if the lady driver is wearing a head scarf! i am sure same IDF soldiers sure might kill an Israeli lady if accidentally she is sick and covering her head for keeping it warm!

Edited June 27, 2016 by Galactus

[dexterm]

Says the poster asserting that most Israeli Jews are racist, and therefore not proper material for peacemaking.

Many, if not most, Israelis were born in Israel, rather than "emigrated" from other countries. Even when considering the countries Israelis (or their ancestors) emigrated from - many do not represent the height of democratic tradition (Middle Eastern & North African countries, Russia & the former USSR, for example).

The eagerness in which some posters claim to uphold democratic and humanistic values somehow fails to be applied when discussing such issues relating to Palestinian society, and the future Palestinian state advocated.

Democracies are not all similar, and the degree of adherence exhibited to ideals differs. This is only denied by those repeatedly airing talking points.

>>Says the poster asserting that most Israeli Jews are racist,

..if any Israeli Jew believes in an exclusive Jewish State and exclusive Jewish only immigration, then they are racists.No other words for it.

>>, and therefore not proper material for peacemaking.

...That's an example of your usual spin, and not what I have said. Peace can still be made, and opinions turned around just as they have been in other troubled regions, when people come to realize the benefits of a peace agreement.

>>Many, if not most, Israelis were born in Israel, rather than "emigrated" from other countries.

...your "many Israelis" have been born since the ethnic cleansing of Partition and 49 years of illegal Occupation. Their parents and grandparents came from elsewhere to disposses the resident Palestinian population who were the majority at the time. Israel has a habit of creating facts on the grounds, then saying how can we possibly change this now?

There is a danger that the younger Israeli generations have been brutalized and indoctrinated so much by Israel's constant belligerence that they may have lost some of their parents'and grandparents' more liberal views.

Hence the trigger happy, racist IDF in the OP.

You are out of line.

There is NO trigger happy, racist IDF in the OP.

There was an incident in which the written word in the OP and subsequent video's clearly show why the actions of the car driver resulted in her death.

Unfortunately I am very much "in line" considering all the controversial extra judicial murders the IDF have been involved in during the last 9 months.

[SgtRock]

You are out of line.

There is NO trigger happy, racist IDF in the OP.

There was an incident in which the written word in the OP and subsequent video's clearly show why the actions of the car driver resulted in her death.

strange, you can see and some of us cannot.

to me it looks like a traffic accident and even if she was trying to ram into another car, it does not mean trigger happy fascist and rogue IDF soldiers can execute her without mercy.

Israelis look like taking traffic issues very seriously! even a fender bender can get you killed there:)) wow, what a country!

Perhaps you can state your Military and Anti Terrorism experience.

It would help us gain an insight to how you actually view the video.

sorry sergeant! i was not aware of the fact that we have some former - or current? - soldiers here.

were you an IDF soldier?

i have paid my way out to be exempt from military service. no way i could be part of any army! i always felt like being part of an army which they train you to kill and obey without questions asked is self disrespect for a human being.

and it is a brainless environment depending mostly on muscle and muscle memory. did not want to hold any gun too! hate guns.

regarding anti terrorism experience, i am coming from a country with a lot of terrorist acts, bombs, killings throughout history etc so yes, i have a bit experience for that.

usually, man is chosen for such attacks and rarely see a 19 years old lady with new born toddler doing such action.

and if terrorist attacks, they are mostly done by bombs, guns etc.

So no experience then.

Coming from a Country that has had lots of terrorist acts has got nothing to do with anti-terrorism.

Bombs yes. CAR BOMBS being a favourite.

As for female attackers.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/boko-haram-three-female-suicide-bombers-kill-at-least-27-people-on-lake-chad-island-where-refugees-a6761731.html

http://www.voanews.com/content/two-female-suicide-bombers-blow-themselves-up-in-cameroon-no-other-deaths/3121271.html

[Morch]

Had a child, hence this is was not an a deliberate attack. Perfect "logic". Palestinian media outlets routinely claim eyewitnesses. There's a clip, though. And this being the entrance to an illegal settlement, not that likely Palestinians would be loitering about, convenient as it may be for the story. Further, how would any eyewitness could "confirm" (they do not, by the way, just a weasel word) it was an accident? Were they in the car? Perhaps reading her mind?

The Palestinians also routinely claim denied medical care. Again, hardly likely that they would rush to a scene considering the location. Pictures and clips available show an Israeli medic unit on location. All of the above is claimed while disregarding previous posts alleging she was killed on the spot.

The original reports by Palestinian media did not mention medical care denied, nor eyewitnesses. These are later additions. And no real support is offered to substantiate them.

I do not know why you bother Morch.

The poster has no knowledge of terrorist MO's

S/He has no knowledge of Military MO's

Has no knowledge of R of E.

Is quite happy to believe unsubstantiated reports and is unwilling to believe what is seen in a video of the incident.

And to cap it all, the woman had a child so there is no way she could possibly have been a terrorist.

It is probably not allowed but I could provide a long list of female terrorists, and most of them had children.

I have no idea how posters are familiar with Palestinian society. The likelihood of a 18-19yo woman, and a young mom at that, driving around without being escorted is a bit of stretch, though. There would usually be a male companion (always family), or an older female chaperon.

EDIT - that's without getting into issues such as car ownership etc...

please no generalizations. i have been through many countries including many muslim one.

not all muslim countries are bigot Saudi Arabia with no respect for women and you know it.

Women cannot drive car only in Saudi Arabia as a muslim country legally and some very bigot reactionary muslim ones unofficially.

and they dont need to be escorted usually by a man apart from Saudi Arabia and some bigot muslim countries.

Typical generalization propaganda.

instead, you gave to ask yourself, why on earth a 19 years old women who has a toddler wants to do such action?

or is it fair for her toddler as she will never see her mom again or remember?

and what about women in Israel? Can they drive alone in occupied land??

Ah, so now it is alright to bring up other countries....thought you were adamant it was off-topic just a few posts ago (http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/927423-palestinian-car-driver-shot-dead-by-israeli-soldiers/?p=10902772). Troll will be trolls, I guess.

I did not refer to Muslim countries in general but to Palestinian society. There is no legal issues with Palestinian women driving, but young women are rarely venture about on their own. There is no law governing this, but that's the way things are, the Palestinian society still holding on to certain traditions.

A reference to possible motivations (by no means certain) relating to gender, age and society was posted earlier. Look it up.

Women in Israel are not the issue, but since you ask - if they come from traditional or religious families, pretty similar. This is more pronounced with regard to Orthodox Jews and Muslim communities.

[SgtRock]

You are out of line.

There is NO trigger happy, racist IDF in the OP.

There was an incident in which the written word in the OP and subsequent video's clearly show why the actions of the car driver resulted in her death.

Unfortunately I am very much "in line" considering all the controversial extra judicial murders the IDF have been involved in during the last 9 months.

The topic is the OP. Not the last 9 months.

So yes you are out of line.

[Galactus]

I do not know why you bother Morch.

The poster has no knowledge of terrorist MO's

S/He has no knowledge of Military MO's

Has no knowledge of R of E.

Is quite happy to believe unsubstantiated reports and is unwilling to believe what is seen in a video of the incident.

And to cap it all, the woman had a child so there is no way she could possibly have been a terrorist.

It is probably not allowed but I could provide a long list of female terrorists, and most of them had children.

I have no idea how posters are familiar with Palestinian society. The likelihood of a 18-19yo woman, and a young mom at that, driving around without being escorted is a bit of stretch, though. There would usually be a male companion (always family), or an older female chaperon.

EDIT - that's without getting into issues such as car ownership etc...

please no generalizations. i have been through many countries including many muslim one.

not all muslim countries are bigot Saudi Arabia with no respect for women and you know it.

Women cannot drive car only in Saudi Arabia as a muslim country legally and some very bigot reactionary muslim ones unofficially.

and they dont need to be escorted usually by a man apart from Saudi Arabia and some bigot muslim countries.

Typical generalization propaganda.

instead, you gave to ask yourself, why on earth a 19 years old women who has a toddler wants to do such action?

or is it fair for her toddler as she will never see her mom again or remember?

and what about women in Israel? Can they drive alone in occupied land??

Ah, so now it is alright to bring up other countries....thought you were adamant it was off-topic just a few posts ago (http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/927423-palestinian-car-driver-shot-dead-by-israeli-soldiers/?p=10902772). Troll will be trolls, I guess.

I did not refer to Muslim countries in general but to Palestinian society. There is no legal issues with Palestinian women driving, but young women are rarely venture about on their own. There is no law governing this, but that's the way things are, the Palestinian society still holding on to certain traditions.

A reference to possible motivations (by no means certain) relating to gender, age and society was posted earlier. Look it up.

Women in Israel are not the issue, but since you ask - if they come from traditional or religious families, pretty similar. This is more pronounced with regard to Orthodox Jews and Muslim communities.

morch, you started with generalization and i disproved it. and what you know about Palestinian society you dont like much?

and thanks for proving the fact that some devout Judaist are as bigot and reactionary as devout Muslim.

and i am sure for security reasons, Israeli women prefer not to drive around occupied land alone.

and many days passed and any developments on legal inquiry on this murder yet?

[dexterm]

@Sgt Rock

It's the culture of impunity among the IDF that has been encouraged by the Netanyahu government with its recent changes to its rules of engagement which has led to a spate of extra judicial murders. This is simply another instance symptomatic of that incitement.

The IDF need now only have to say they "thought" they or someone else was in fatal danger to get off scot free, when they shoot to kill. Naturally they usually apologize afterwards when they are mistaken.

Edited June 27, 2016 by dexterm

[Galactus]

strange, you can see and some of us cannot.

to me it looks like a traffic accident and even if she was trying to ram into another car, it does not mean trigger happy fascist and rogue IDF soldiers can execute her without mercy.

Israelis look like taking traffic issues very seriously! even a fender bender can get you killed there:)) wow, what a country!

Perhaps you can state your Military and Anti Terrorism experience.

It would help us gain an insight to how you actually view the video.

sorry sergeant! i was not aware of the fact that we have some former - or current? - soldiers here.

were you an IDF soldier?

i have paid my way out to be exempt from military service. no way i could be part of any army! i always felt like being part of an army which they train you to kill and obey without questions asked is self disrespect for a human being.

and it is a brainless environment depending mostly on muscle and muscle memory. did not want to hold any gun too! hate guns.

regarding anti terrorism experience, i am coming from a country with a lot of terrorist acts, bombs, killings throughout history etc so yes, i have a bit experience for that.

usually, man is chosen for such attacks and rarely see a 19 years old lady with new born toddler doing such action.

and if terrorist attacks, they are mostly done by bombs, guns etc.

So no experience then.

Coming from a Country that has had lots of terrorist acts has got nothing to do with anti-terrorism.

Bombs yes. CAR BOMBS being a favourite.

As for female attackers.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/boko-haram-three-female-suicide-bombers-kill-at-least-27-people-on-lake-chad-island-where-refugees-a6761731.html

http://www.voanews.com/content/two-female-suicide-bombers-blow-themselves-up-in-cameroon-no-other-deaths/3121271.html

of course there are female suicide bomber palestinians same as there are female soldiers at fascist Israel army murdering palestinians. dont respect them both.

but i hardly see a 19 women terrorist with a new born toddler ramming her car around as a terror act!

Edited June 27, 2016 by Galactus

[Scott]

An off-topic, baiting post has been removed. Continued inflammatory trolling will result in suspensions.

[SgtRock]

@Sgt Rock

It's the culture of impunity among the IDF that has been encouraged by the Netanyahu government with its recent changes to its rules of engagement which has led to a spate of extra judicial murders. This is simply another instance symptomatic of that incitement.

The IDF need now only have to say they "thought" they or someone else was in fatal danger to get off scot free, when they shoot to kill. Naturally they usually apologize afterwards when they are mistaken.

Dexterm

I am not interested in your continual game of naked twister .

Please provide a copy of the IDF's R of E. They will most likely contain these words '' To preserve life and prevent further danger '' or words to that effect.

Please provide a copy of ANY Countries '' Shoot to kill '' Policy. While you are hunting for it, Find ANY Countries '' Shoot to not kill '' Policy.

I will save you time, they do NOT exist.

The written OP, combined with the subsequent video's, based on my knowledge and experience says that it is understandable why the shooting took place.

You do comprehend this. I did not say right or wrong, I said understandable.

You obviously know different. So I await with baited breath for you to also state your vast knowledge and experience that enables you to draw your conclusion based on the OP and subsequent video's. Not based on the 50's or 20 years ago. just the OP and subsequent video's.

Edited June 27, 2016 by SgtRock

[dexterm]

@Sgt Rock

It's the culture of impunity among the IDF that has been encouraged by the Netanyahu government with its recent changes to its rules of engagement which has led to a spate of extra judicial murders. This is simply another instance symptomatic of that incitement.

The IDF need now only have to say they "thought" they or someone else was in fatal danger to get off scot free, when they shoot to kill. Naturally they usually apologize afterwards when they are mistaken.

Dexterm

I am not interested in your continual game of naked twister .

Please provide a copy of the IDF's R of E. They will most likely contain these words '' To preserve life and prevent further danger '' or words to that effect.

Please provide a copy of ANY Countries '' Shoot to kill '' Policy. While you are hunting for it, Find ANY Countries '' Shoot to not kill '' Policy.

I will save you time, they do NOT exist.

The written OP, combined with the subsequent video's, based on my knowledge and experience says that it is understandable why the shooting took place.

You do comprehend this. I did not say right or wrong, I said understandable.

You obviously know different. So I await with baited breath for you to also state your vast knowledge and experience that enables you to draw your conclusion based on the OP and subsequent video's. Not based on the 50's or 20 years ago. just the OP and subsequent video's.

There's a very interesting article on the IDF rules of engagement by Prof. Amichai Cohen, , a research fellow at the Israel Institute for Democracy and dean of the Faculty of Law at Ono Academic College. He says the problem, as we are debating here, with the rules of engagement are that they are not black and white. He talks of the difference between a war situation and a law enforcement one. He mentions the problems of policing the West bank. He says that the rule is to use the minimum force required

In a law enforcement situation, you are allowed to shoot only when there is a threat and, even then, only in order to stop them, Cohen said. You might call this the war on terror, but legally speaking, this is law enforcement.

Under those protocols, it is illegal for officers to shoot suspects as a form of retaliation or as a deterrence to others. You only shoot at someone that poses a threat, he said.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/as-knife-wielders-are-subdued-questions-on-shoot-first-ask-later/

The way I see it is the maximum not the minimum force required that is now commonly being used, and Human Rights Watch, the US, the UN, and Amnesty International agree.

"Trigger-happy: Israel's use of excessive force in the West Bank"

http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/reports/trigger-happy-israel-s-use-of-excessive-force-in-the-west-bank

And the culture of impunity has arisen out of the lack of prosecutions for the use of excessive force. The IDF know that they need only say "I thought I was in danger" and they get off scot free.

Edited June 27, 2016 by dexterm

[SgtRock]

@Sgt Rock

It's the culture of impunity among the IDF that has been encouraged by the Netanyahu government with its recent changes to its rules of engagement which has led to a spate of extra judicial murders. This is simply another instance symptomatic of that incitement.

The IDF need now only have to say they "thought" they or someone else was in fatal danger to get off scot free, when they shoot to kill. Naturally they usually apologize afterwards when they are mistaken.

Dexterm

I am not interested in your continual game of naked twister .

Please provide a copy of the IDF's R of E. They will most likely contain these words '' To preserve life and prevent further danger '' or words to that effect.

Please provide a copy of ANY Countries '' Shoot to kill '' Policy. While you are hunting for it, Find ANY Countries '' Shoot to not kill '' Policy.

I will save you time, they do NOT exist.

The written OP, combined with the subsequent video's, based on my knowledge and experience says that it is understandable why the shooting took place.

You do comprehend this. I did not say right or wrong, I said understandable.

You obviously know different. So I await with baited breath for you to also state your vast knowledge and experience that enables you to draw your conclusion based on the OP and subsequent video's. Not based on the 50's or 20 years ago. just the OP and subsequent video's.

There's a very interesting article on the IDF rules of engagement by Prof. Amichai Cohen, , a research fellow at the Israel Institute for Democracy and dean of the Faculty of Law at Ono Academic College. He says the problem, as we are debating here, with the rules of engagement are that they are not black and white. He talks of the difference between a war situation and a law enforcement one. He mentions the problems of policing the West bank. He says that the rule is to use the minimum force required

In a law enforcement situation, you are allowed to shoot only when there is a threat and, even then, only in order to stop them, Cohen said. You might call this the war on terror, but legally speaking, this is law enforcement.

Under those protocols, it is illegal for officers to shoot suspects as a form of retaliation or as a deterrence to others. You only shoot at someone that poses a threat, he said.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/as-knife-wielders-are-subdued-questions-on-shoot-first-ask-later/

I asked for a copy of the R of E not some guys interpretation of them.

But using the interpretation of the legal eagle and the line that I highlight.

Retaliation or deterrence is not in play here.

You only shoot at someone that poses a threat. This does come into play.

A vehicle accelerating into a Military checkpoint is a direct threat. The reasons why it is accelerating into the Military checkpoint are of NO relevance.

An accelerating 2 tonne vehicle on its own is a danger to life and limb without even taking into consideration the threat posed by the vehicle possibly being an IED or even the possibility of the vehicle been laden with armed terrorists.

Now, within the confines of the OP and in conjunction with the related video's can you now understand why this shooting occurred ?

It may well be that in the fullness of time, other evidence is forthcoming that might indeed show that this was nothing more than a tragic incident and there was no evil intent on behalf of the driver.

Put yourself in that 10 second timeframe it took for the vehicle to accelerate into the checkpoint and ask yourself what you would have done.

[SgtRock]

The way I see it is the maximum not the minimum force required that is now commonly being used, and Human Rights Watch, the US, the UN, and Amnesty International agree.

"Trigger-happy: Israel's use of excessive force in the West Bank"

http://www.amnestyus...n-the-west-bank

And the culture of impunity has arisen out of the lack of prosecutions for the use of excessive force. The IDF know that they need only say "I thought I was in danger" and they get off scot free.

The white noise you added to your post ha nothing to do with the OP

[Morch]

I have no idea how posters are familiar with Palestinian society. The likelihood of a 18-19yo woman, and a young mom at that, driving around without being escorted is a bit of stretch, though. There would usually be a male companion (always family), or an older female chaperon.

EDIT - that's without getting into issues such as car ownership etc...

please no generalizations. i have been through many countries including many muslim one.

not all muslim countries are bigot Saudi Arabia with no respect for women and you know it.

Women cannot drive car only in Saudi Arabia as a muslim country legally and some very bigot reactionary muslim ones unofficially.

and they dont need to be escorted usually by a man apart from Saudi Arabia and some bigot muslim countries.

Typical generalization propaganda.

instead, you gave to ask yourself, why on earth a 19 years old women who has a toddler wants to do such action?

or is it fair for her toddler as she will never see her mom again or remember?

and what about women in Israel? Can they drive alone in occupied land??

Ah, so now it is alright to bring up other countries....thought you were adamant it was off-topic just a few posts ago (http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/927423-palestinian-car-driver-shot-dead-by-israeli-soldiers/?p=10902772). Troll will be trolls, I guess.

I did not refer to Muslim countries in general but to Palestinian society. There is no legal issues with Palestinian women driving, but young women are rarely venture about on their own. There is no law governing this, but that's the way things are, the Palestinian society still holding on to certain traditions.

A reference to possible motivations (by no means certain) relating to gender, age and society was posted earlier. Look it up.

Women in Israel are not the issue, but since you ask - if they come from traditional or religious families, pretty similar. This is more pronounced with regard to Orthodox Jews and Muslim communities.

morch, you started with generalization and i disproved it. and what you know about Palestinian society you dont like much?

and thanks for proving the fact that some devout Judaist are as bigot and reactionary as devout Muslim.

and i am sure for security reasons, Israeli women prefer not to drive around occupied land alone.

and many days passed and any developments on legal inquiry on this murder yet?

You did not "disprove" anything, and doubtful that you comprehend what the word actually means.

What I know about Palestinian society is a lot more than most posters will ever know, and the proof (look up the meaning) can be found in my many posts discussing these issues over the years. It is grudgingly accepted even by some of the usual posters I spar with on these topics. As a presumably new member, you may want to do some back reading before posting nonsense. My post, by the way, had nothing to do with liking or not liking Palestinian society, it was simply a description of how things are.

I did not "prove" (again...) anything with regard to Orthodox Jews, the facts are not hidden, and they were discussed on quite a few topics in the past. There was never an attempt, by myself, to present Orthodox Jews or other Jewish zealots in a favorable light.

Many days passed? More like 3. Don't let facts confuse you. As posted earlier, both attention span and patience are in low supply on TVF. Referring again to earlier post regarding media coverage and emerging details relating to such incidents - http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/927423-palestinian-car-driver-shot-dead-by-israeli-soldiers/?p=10897802

[Morch]

There's a very interesting article on the IDF rules of engagement by Prof. Amichai Cohen, , a research fellow at the Israel Institute for Democracy and dean of the Faculty of Law at Ono Academic College. He says the problem, as we are debating here, with the rules of engagement are that they are not black and white. He talks of the difference between a war situation and a law enforcement one. He mentions the problems of policing the West bank. He says that the rule is to use the minimum force required

In a law enforcement situation, you are allowed to shoot only when there is a threat and, even then, only in order to stop them, Cohen said. You might call this the war on terror, but legally speaking, this is law enforcement.

Under those protocols, it is illegal for officers to shoot suspects as a form of retaliation or as a deterrence to others. You only shoot at someone that poses a threat, he said.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/as-knife-wielders-are-subdued-questions-on-shoot-first-ask-later/

The way I see it is the maximum not the minimum force required that is now commonly being used, and Human Rights Watch, the US, the UN, and Amnesty International agree.

"Trigger-happy: Israel's use of excessive force in the West Bank"

http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/reports/trigger-happy-israel-s-use-of-excessive-force-in-the-west-bank

And the culture of impunity has arisen out of the lack of prosecutions for the use of excessive force. The IDF know that they need only say "I thought I was in danger" and they get off scot free.

Interestingly, the first quote of the interview linked says:

“But you have to be very careful about coming to legal conclusions based on one specific video, filmed from one specific viewpoint,” an actual legal expert, Prof. Amichai Cohen, told The Times of Israel.

And here's another:

“There’s no order that I am aware of that says shoot them in order to kill them,” Cohen said.

Applying what is said in the interview to the OP actually lends support to the IDF response in this case.

As for the linked Amnesty report, which is as biased as can be expected and also covers 2011-2014 (before the current so-called Knife Intifada) - allow me to reply by quoting AI's secretary general, Salil Shetty: "We are not experts on military matters...We do not want to pontificate on issues we don't really understand"

(http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/talktojazeera/2014/02/salil-shetty-speaking-truth-power-201427102725815233.html - ~9:30 min.). Granted, he was referring to Syria, but considering the AI report is peppered with sage opinions (such as petrol bombs posing no threat to soldiers, among others) of military issues, it does seem....odd.

[Scott]

An off-topic, baiting post and reply have been removed.