Human Rights Watch Calls This an ‘Apparent’ War Crime

Gee, thanks, Human Rights Watch. We never would have guessed. Despite the video evidence, and despite the report released yesterday by HRW, Israel continues to insist that live ammunition wasn’t fired.

Or in other words, “That’s our lie and we’re sticking to it.”

Here are a few choice excerpts from the report:

Video footage clearly shows Israeli soldiers firing in the direction of the boys, Nadim Nawareh and Mohammed Salameh, and the boys falling to the ground. Medical records indicate that the two boys, as well as 15-year-old, Mohammed Azza, whom Israeli forces also shot and seriously wounded, suffered wounds to the chest caused by live ammunition…

“The willful killing of civilians by Israeli security forces as part of the occupation is a war crime,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East and North Africa director. “Israel has a responsibility to prosecute the forces who targeted these teens, and also those responsible for assigning the use of live ammunition to police a demonstration.”

The Israeli military stated that it is investigating the killings but that its forces “did not use live fire,” only rubber bullets and teargas. However, rubber bullets are specifically designed not to penetrate bodies. It is highly unlikely that, at a range of at least 60 meters, rubber bullets would have caused the injuries that killed Nawareh and Salameh and wounded Azza. Nawareh’s family retrieved what may be the live bullet that killed him…

And here we get into the Israeli coverup:

The Israeli defense and foreign ministers both suggested, and an unnamed senior defense official claimed, that Palestinians falsified video evidence of the fatal shootings, Israeli media reports said. However the officials did not provide an alternative version of events. Witness statements, medical reports, security camera videos, news media videos and photographs by journalists, which Human Rights Watch viewed, indicate that Israeli forces fired live ammunition…

The military responded with statements that “the video in question was edited in a biased way” and “does not reflect the reality of the day in question, the violence [by Palestinian protesters].” An unnamed senior defense ministry official told Israel media that it was “likely doctored.”

Human Rights Watch obtained the unedited videos from three security cameras from the rights group and spoke to Fakher Zayed, 47, who owns the cameras. Two of the cameras were focused on the area in front of Zayed’s building, and the camera videos show the boys as they were shot, while the third camera was focused on the area between the building and the nearest group of Israeli forces. Zayed has a carpentry shop on the ground floor of the building and lives in an apartment on the first floor. He said he witnessed the shootings from his balcony. The unedited videos show no evidence that the boys posed a threat to the soldiers at any point while they appear in the videos, including the moments when they were shot…

On May 22, CNN published its own video footage showing one of the Israeli border police forces stationed about 60 meters from the Palestinian protesters firing toward the location where Nawareh was killed. Seconds later, the video shows a group of Palestinians carrying Nawareh away toward an ambulance…

You can go here to view the CNN footage. It’s quite illuminating, and as I commented previously, the report “leaves little doubt that it was a deliberate act of murder.” Back to the HRW report:

Some commentators and news reports have incorrectly stated that the CNN footage could not show Israeli forces shooting live ammunition because the assault rifles seen in the footage have attachments that are used to fire rubber bullets. However, the Israeli military has used at least one type of assault-rifle attachment, produced by Israel Military Industries, that allows forces to fire rubber bullets, but also to fire live ammunition without removing the attachment. A brochure states that the 22-centimeter-long “launcher” can be “attached to any rifle with NATO flash suppressor” and allows “immediate 5.56-mm lethal firing capability without removing adapter.”…

On May 28, Israeli media reported that after reviewing the CNN footage of the protest on May 15, an Israeli military police investigation determined that a soldier from the military spokesperson’s office had fired two rubber bullets at a wall near the Palestinian demonstrators in an attempt to disperse them. The soldier had asked a border police commander to use the latter’s assault rifle, fired the shots, and returned the weapon, the investigation found. The military suspended the soldier because he was not authorized to take an active part in the crowd-dispersal operation or to fire the rubber bullets. However the investigation reportedly cleared the soldier of suspicion of firing live ammunition.

The Israeli daily Haaretzreported that unnamed “Israeli military investigators said […] the shots may have been fired by the Palestinian side, rather than by Israeli troops.” Zayed, the store owner who witnessed the shootings, said that on May 23 he overheard military officials who came to his home speaking to one another in Hebrew and speculating that a Palestinian fired the shots.

However, the victims’ entry wounds, video footage, and witness statements all strongly indicate that the shots were fired from the direction where Israeli forces were positioned. It seems highly unlikely that a Palestinian repeatedly firing an assault rifle in that area would have gone unnoticed by Israeli forces, demonstrators, and journalists who were at the scene continuously for several hours before and after the shootings.

In addition to shooting the teenagers with live ammo, the Israeli soldiers, apparently for sport, also fired off a rubber bullet at an ambulance worker who arrived at the scene to provide medical assistance:

Nazzal took a rapid series of photographs that show a projectile flying toward the group evacuating Nawareh, and apparently striking the head of a man wearing a medic’s fluorescent vest. The man stumbles and holds his head in subsequent images. Nazzal said:

 “A bunch of boys rushed to help [Nawareh] and take him away, and while they were taking him to an ambulance that was about 50 meters away, the rubber bullets and teargas never stopped. One of the ambulance men rushed to meet the boys halfway, and while he was carrying Nadim to the car, he got shot with a rubber bullet in the back of his head. He held his head and fell to the ground.”

You have to remember that all this didn’t take place as a “rapid fire” sequence of events, as it were. It was a reality game of “shooting gallery” that went on for several hours over the course of an afternoon. The first boy was shot at 12:20 p.m.; the second at 1:45 p.m.; and the third at 2:58 p.m. Then the ambulance arrived at some point in all this, presumably  around 2 o’clock, at which point they shot the medic in the back of the head.

Meanwhile, keep in mind, the Israelis are claiming it was the Palestinians who shot themselves.

Since September of 2000 Israeli forces have killed more than 3,100 Palestinians “who were not taking part in hostilities,” the HRW report adds. And in that time, just six–count’em six–Israeli soldiers have been convicted for unlawful killing of Palestinians. And get this–of those six, the most severe sentence handed down was seven and a half months.

Clearly a culture of impunity exists in the Israeli military–perhaps in the population as a whole. Maybe that’s what they mean when they call it “the Jewish state.” Jews get to kill anybody they want as long as it’s not another Jew.

A couple of days ago I posted an article about the upcoming Presbyterian General Assembly, to be held June 14-21 in Detroit. One of the items up for consideration will be divestment from Israel, but as I mentioned, the measure is running up against stiff opposition from some within the church.

I profoundly hope that such people will take a close look at the HRW report and then do the decent, humane thing. Any delegate attending this convention who votes against the divestment measure is in effect saying, “Murder is okay when committed by Israeli soldiers.” There really aren’t many other interpretations you can give it.

This entry was posted in commentary, Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Human Rights Watch Calls This an ‘Apparent’ War Crime

  1. 0jr says:

    what do you expect from an org that was started and controlled by the bloody jew loving british who they themselves have been commiting genocide throughout the world when they weren’t preoccupied whit selling drugs and pirating ect

    • Pete says:

      Sir,i regard your sentiments as rather offensive and inaccurate, ethnic cleansing and racism is a european invention,going back to the grande inquistors of spain,there are whole races who dont exist,thanks to proto nazis,the conquistodores,’the jews a semitic race,related to arabs,’tho very much europeanized,’er blonde hair and blue eyes not a common genetic trait in the middle east,’my conclusion europeans are the progenitors,of racist attitudes that may persist in Israeli society,ie the British did view arabs as inferior,their common offensive term for them was w***g,’you should read mien kampf,Hitler learned much of ideas from the anglo world,he greatly admired the British Empire,it confermed is racial ideas,being that the British were of the Germanic race..

      • helvena says:

        Pete, your knowledge of history is extremely eurocentric. You might look into the life and brutal campaigns of Timur. And then check out the Han expansion in Asia which is not to be out done by the Mayans.

        And Pete, you can’t rant about the evils of racism and then accuse Europeans of being uniquely evil, that my dear man is racist.

        Hitler acknowledged the jews as a separate race from the Germans. As any realist realizes two races cannot live peacefully in the same geography for very long without one subjugating the other. The jews had subjugated the Germans and Hitler tried to change that. Hitler underestimated jewish power in England. Don’t forget there were many Britons, as there were Americans, who believed Hitler’s fight was a noble one. Nationalism vs internationalism.

  2. helvena says:

    and just a bit of FYI: Partly as a consequence of the marriage between Charles II of England and Catherine of Braganza (1662), and especially after William and Mary became joint sovereigns of England (1689), London, too, became a center of Sephardi banking, leading figures being Anthony (Moses) da Costa, Solomon de *Medina, and Isaac Pereira. In the reign of Queen Anne (1702–14), Manasseh *Lopes was a leading banker; during the 18th century Samson *Gideon, Francis and Joseph *Salvador, and the *Goldsmid brothers, leading members of the Ashkenazi community, were outstanding. In the middle of the 18th century Jacob Henriques claimed that his father had planned the establishment of the Bank of England (1694).

    http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0003_0_01978.html

    Banking is the thin edge of the jewish wedge.

  3. Pete says:

    Just a thought,jews have never been persecuted for 5thousand yrs,this is a myth,the old testament is evidence of Israels imperial past during the early bronze age,the bible has many stories,of rape and genocide,the difference between the ancient Greeks and Romans,is they never had a book commanding them to do it,’a good reason to be a athiest, agnostic or Deist…

    • ariadnatheo says:

      it is inconsistent to use the bible as a historical document attesting what you call ‘israel’s imperial past’–two demonstrable errors of fact right there — yet claim it is a reason to an atheist

  4. Pete says:

    My knowledge of history,may be eurocentric but check your history,modern racism,is rooted in the reconquista,when spain ethnically cleansed herself of jews and arabs,’the ancient Greeks believed the dark skin people of africa were blessed by the god appollo,due their darker skin,modern biological racism,has its roots at the end of the midieval period,’you only have to read shakespear’s othello,which conveys the attitudes of the period,racism replaced the ideas of christian supremacy over islam,that period is when the occidental world divided its self from the oriental,’these attitudes gained pace during the renaissance and humanity has been battling ideas of racial chauvinism ever since….

  5. Pete says:

    FYI,there is racism in all parts of the world,the war in Dafur proves this and the attitudes of many arab countries to non arabs also proves,racism is a human problem,as we struggle to over come cave man tribalism..

  6. Pete says:

    Last post,im aware of the ruthless first Emperor of China…

  7. Pete says:

    One last post,there are no mono cultures,’even there were,’there still would be conflict’,just look at Ukraine,’all slavic people and there is hate,the Roman Empire,’the most successful culture in history,’being that their Empire lasted a thousand yrs,,’they had three non european,Emperors,Septimius Severa ,’the most well known,’the Roman knew they could not be ethnically exsclusive like the Athenians,if they were gonna last,’Alexander the Great,probably invented,multiculturalism,’of cors,if he was assasinated it was probably for that reason…

    • ariadnatheo says:

      not exactly so
      the roman empire did not last 1,000 years; the one that did and was the longest lasting was the byzantine empire
      alexander the great was not assassinated for ‘multiculturalism’ but that’s another long story
      of course there are ethnically ‘mono’ cultures; the japanese for one, etc
      being ‘all slavic people’ is not a sufficient basis for the development of a common national consciousness — look at the serbs and croats; for that matter, the french, italian, spanish, portuguese and romanians are ‘all latin people’ but diverse nations and cultures.
      people’s national consciousness is not based on their –mostly inexistent — awareness of their indo-european origin.

  8. Pete says:

    Still waiting moderation?? Er nothing libelous or offensensive,i appreciate mr Helvenas opinions,he is right that racism is not uniquely a european thing,ive researched,his offerings in debate..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s