Hey Larry, it was a 91 year old farmer in his own field picking up a spent RPG and was slaughtered from a 3/4 of a mile away pea brain. Now go empty your bag and try not to spill it on yourself this time.
But wait. Deep down (you can almost hear the outside world ask), don't Israelis know that finding peace with the Palestinians is the only way to guarantee their happiness and prosperity? Well, not exactly.
The Israeli army has admitted that three Palestinian men it killed in Gaza on Sunday were civilians, and not terrorists, as previously claimed.
Brig Gen Ayal Eisenberg said one of the men had picked up a grenade launcher abandoned in a field, and Israeli troops mistakenly opened fire, thinking they were about to come under attack.
Among those killed were a 91-year-old farm worker and his grandson, aged 17.
Rocket fire from Gaza has increased in the past week. No casualties resulted.
Hours after the general's statement, at least two Palestinians were wounded in Israeli shelling east of Gaza City, a medic and another witness said.
The two were wounded when Israel fired four tank shells near the village of Juhr al-Dik, close to the heavily-guarded border, the witness said.
The Israeli army said it had returned fire after militants approached the border and fired a rocket propelled grenade at a patrol.
Mistaken identity Sunday's killings took place near the town of Beit Hanoun in Gaza after Israeli tanks fired across the border at the three victims, witnesses had said.
Continue reading the main story “ Start Quote
Our soldiers identified a civilian who was picking up a and, thinking he was going to fire at them, opened fire”
Brig Gen Ayal Eisenberg Israeli army's Gaza division head Two of those killed were named as Ibrahim Abu Saeed and his grandson Husam. The third victim, a 20-year-old man, has not been named.
At the time, Israeli army radio described the men as "terrorists", but Gen Ayal Eisenberg now says the soldiers made a mistake.
"The civilians killed by our soldiers' fire... were not involved in any terrorist operation," he told army radio.
"Our soldiers identified a civilian who was picking up an RPG [rocket propelled grenade] and, thinking he was going to fire at them, opened fire" in his direction, he added.
The incident occurred shortly after militants in Gaza fired several rockets and mortar rounds across the border into southern Israel. The attacks did not result in any injuries or damage.
'Trigger-happy attitude' Separately, a report published by an Israeli human rights group found that Israeli soldiers who kill Palestinians were rarely punished.
The B'Tselem report released on Tuesday said that the military investigated only 22 of 148 cases submitted by the group.
No criminal charges were brought in any of the cases, which involved the killing of 288 Palestinian civilians between 2006 and 2009, it said.
"This policy permits soldiers and officers to act in violation of the law, encourages a trigger-happy attitude and shows a flagrant disregard for human life," the report said.
One Thai farm worker in Israel has been killed by rocket fire from Gaza in the past 18 months, while scores of Palestinians in Gaza have been killed over the same period.
Now observing 2½ years without a single suicide bombing on their territory, with the economy robust and with souls a trifle weary of having to handle big elemental thoughts, the Israeli public prefers to explore such satisfactions as might be available from the private sphere, in a land first imagined as a utopia. "Listen to me," says Eli Bengozi, born in Soviet Georgia and for 40 years an Israeli. "Peace? Forget about it. They'll never have peace. Remember Clinton gave 99% to Arafat, and instead of them fighting for 1%, what? Intifadeh." (See TIME's photo-essay "Palestinian 'Day of Rage.' ")
But wait. Deep down (you can almost hear the outside world ask), don't Israelis know that finding peace with the Palestinians is the only way to guarantee their happiness and prosperity? Well, not exactly. Asked in a March poll to name the "most urgent problem" facing Israel, just 8% of Israeli Jews cited the conflict with Palestinians, putting it fifth behind education, crime, national security and poverty. Israeli Arabs placed peace first, but among Jews here, the issue that President Obama calls "critical for the world" just doesn't seem — critical.
Another whack for the desk. "The people," Heli says, "don't believe." Eli searches for a word. "People in Israel are indifferent," he decides. "They don't care if there's going to be war. They don't care if there's going to be peace. They don't care. They live in the day."
Heli and Eli sell condos on Exodus Street, a name that evokes a certain historical hardship in a neighborhood that suggests none at all, the ingathering of the Jews having entered a whole new realm here. The talk in the little office is of interest rates and panoramic sea views from handsomely appointed properties selling on the Ashdod waterfront for half what people are asked to pay in Tel Aviv, 18 miles (29 km) to the north. And sell they do, hand over fist — never mind the rockets that fly out of Gaza, 14 miles (22.5 km) to the south. "Even when the Qassams fell, we continued to sell!" says Heli Itach, slapping a palm on the office desk. The skull on her designer shirt is made of sequins spelling out "Love Kills Slowly." "What the people see on the TV there is not true here," she says. "I sold, this week, 12 apartments. You're not client, I tell you the truth."
The truth? In the week that three Presidents, a King and their own Prime Minister gather at the White House to begin a fresh round of talks on peace between Israel and the Palestinians, the truth is, Israelis are no longer preoccupied with the matter. They're otherwise engaged; they're making money; they're enjoying the rays of late summer. A watching world may still define their country by the blood feud with the Arabs whose families used to live on this land and whether that conflict can be negotiated away, but Israelis say they have moved on.
Only in your little fairy tale world Moe. 3.5 million people arn't going to be liquidated overnight no matter how much you wish for it. And as Janis said, "When you ain't got nothing you got nothing to lose" so , yes, shortstop, there are going to be dead bodies on BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE, get used to it.
So, the U.S. is reportedly trying to press the Palestinian leader into what the New York Times called a "creative solution... that would allow the Palestinians to accept less than a full extension of the moratorium or that would enable Mr. Netanyahu to sell an extension to his domestic audience." For Abbas, of course, that sounds a lot like negotiating a new compromise on the old compromise he had rejected in the first place. And to make matters worse, the Israeli municipal authority in Jerusalem will in October begin debating plans for more than 1,300 new housing units in the occupied part of the city.
For Clinton, however, Abbas' obsession with the settlement-freeze issue is a distraction from the main event of a peace agreement to deliver a Palestinian state. But for the Palestinian leader, it's a reminder of the imbalance in leverage between the two sides, and of the fact that the U.S. is not about to use its own weight to balance the scales. After all, the Palestinians argue, the settlement freeze is not a concession any more than the PA Security Forces arresting the suspected gunmen in the attack on settlers two weeks ago is a concession; both are longstanding obligations under the Bush Administration's 2002 Roadmap. Seeing Netanyahu scale back the settlement moratorium another few notches is simply another indication, for Abbas, that he has no leverage and that he's locked into a process on Netanyahu's terms, which Washington says is the only route to Palestinian statehood. Abbas deeply doubts that he'll get what he needs out of the process, but he'll stay at the table because he has nowhere else to go.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Tuesday inadvertently revealed just why the Palestinians and most of their Arab neighbors are so gloomy about her Administration's Middle East peace efforts. Speaking in the Egyptian resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh after the latest round of direct talks between Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas — which U.S. officials characterized as positive — Clinton recalled that she had been "summarily criticized, roundly and consistently by everyone in the region" late last year when she described as "unprecedented" Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's declaration of a partial moratorium on settlement construction on occupied land. That moratorium is set to expire on September 26, and Netanyahu says he doesn't plan to extend it. That has Abbas threatening to walk away from the table. But Clinton said the Palestinians are setting too much store by the moratorium, somewhat disingenuously suggesting that if it had been so derided previously, it can't be that important.
Clinton's purpose, of course, was to warn the Palestinians against a walkout. "For me," the Secretary of State said Monday, "this is a simple choice: no negotiations, no security, no state." She may have said "for me," but she meant "for the Palestinians." After all, the Israelis already have a state, and Abbas is doing nothing to threaten their security. But Clinton ought not to be surprised by the fuss Abbas is making over the moratorium issue: She herself had insisted just last spring that Israel freeze all construction on occupied land: "Not some settlements, not outposts, not natural growth exceptions." (See photos of Mahmoud Abbas pressing for peace.)
Yet, the arrangement she hailed as "unprecedented" six months later included plenty of exceptions, such as ongoing Israeli construction in occupied East Jerusalem and of public buildings in West Bank settlements. Netanyahu had defied Washington and prevailed; Abbas was left isolated, holding out for the Obama Administration's original demand as a precondition for talks. Eventually, financial pressure on his aid-dependent administration from the U.S. and its allies forced the Palestinian leader into a humiliating retreat — he's at the talks because he has been left no option, not because he believes Netanyahu intends to offer terms acceptable to any Palestinian leader. So, the expiration of Netanyahu's limited moratorium was viewed by Abbas and his entourage as an opportunity to press for more concessions, but Clinton was clearly warning him that the only game in town is a peace process on terms comfortable for Netanyahu. And the Israeli leader is warning that his coalition with parties of the far right will not survive a continuation of the moratorium. (There are more than enough alternative coalition partners in the center of the spectrum to create a viable government, of course, but the Obama Administration is not in the game of pressing for regime-change in Israel.)
Well it seems the Israelis are looking at the big picture. I suppose that is far too much for you to fathom. It's called a lasting peace, not just one that suits the here and now but something to build a future with.
As long as Israel gets to keep all the illegal occupied lands and probably Gaza as well. And all the water rights and forget about the rights of return or just compensation. And forget about East Jeruselem. So,.....whats "just and honorable" about that?
Sounds like its "my way or the highway" to me.
Sounds like more dead Israelis and more dead Palestinians too.
Oh, ok, now its a joke. My vertically challenged adversary, could you do us all a favor and keep what little comedic episodes you convulse to the blatant side just so they are easier to digest.
So, back to the Peace talks, it seems they are going to come to a head real quick. Language that Netanyahu chose today implies there may be no way to postpone the resumption of building. He's already prompted his puppet George Mitchell to lay a ground-work for the same by having him say to Abbas that "the Palestinians should look beyond the dead line to the big picture of final borders." Looks like the dance is starting early.
Israel has to gain if this "last ditch peace initiative works.
First of all cessation of violence. All sides and international sentiment would welcome this.
Secondly if a "fair and equitable" settlement of issues were to come out of this, Israel would be given credability.
And RESPECT.
And thirdly if the deeds match the retoric this peace could prove to be the dawn of a new era of understanding between Nations and all faiths
And with regards to the first thing I mentioned above, the cessation of violence would also afford the people one tiny, wittle, itsy, bitsy teeney little perk,...
If its too confusing for you when view in this perspective then look at it this way. If Israel continues with the building, the rockets will continue and when things start to heat up there will be more "Cast Lead" initiatives and more international condemnation etc. There may be some more silly suicide bombings etc and heavens know what else. But from a PR perspective its not going to make the cost of diamonds go up, right? So,, you get more flys with Dung than you do with vinigar right! Jazz it up a bit!!!
SilverBirch Forum Posts (3,158)
United Nations Peace Keepers in Gaza
What part of MORE DEAD BODIES ON BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE don't you understand Larry?