BBC: Israeli Troops Fire on Reporters/Peace Demonstrators

As far as the Israelis are concerned, anyone not dressed in an IDF BDU is a potential militant. Their enemies don't usually wear uniforms, you know...

How do they know who's a combatant and who is not?

Now, I am not condoning intentionally firing at reporters, but I can certainly understand being nervous when seeing approaching crowds in a warzone. Historically speaking, in the occupied territories approaching crowds are hostile, and many an IDF soldier has fallen to them. It sounds like in this case the crowd surprised the soldiers. They're lucky that they even got warning shots.

And they really should not be there. You don't stage a peace rally in a warzone and expect all of the bullets to miss you.

 

This is a transcript of a segment that appeared on a CBC evening news show.
http://tv.cbc.ca/national/trans/T020318.html

Title: Israeli television broadcast damning tape of Israeli soldiers

PETER MANSBRIDGE: Meanwhile, an Israeli television network has broadcast something the army didn't want anyone to see, tape of Israeli soldiers raiding a Palestinian home. Neil MacDonald now on the raid and the reaction.

NEIL MACDONALD (Reporter): Outside Bethlehem's hospital earlier this month, Ismail Hawajah sat sick with grief. The Israelis had killed his wife Huda, he told CBC, with an explosion at their home. As is often the case, his story of abuse by soldiers couldn't be verified. The army had nothing to say, and what was happening inside the refugee Camp was off limits to foreign reporters. But not to the Israeli media. An Israeli camera went right along with the soldiers right into the briefings and right into the Hawajah home. The army blew off the door and inside found Huda Hawajah mortally wounded, on the floor. Ismail Hawajah clearly thought at that point his wife would live. He begged the army to let an ambulance through. There were delays. The camera captured the terror of the woman's young daughter and her brother's attempt to stop her from showing the soldiers her fear. After the mother was finally taken out, one of the soldiers spoke to the news crew. "I don't know what we're doing here," he said. "Purification maybe. It's dirty here. I don't know why a good Hebrew boy should be here so far from his home." Another soldier said he approved of the operation, and that it really wasn't so bad. The soldiers then tore the house apart, evidently looking for weapons. In another scene, a girl begged soldiers not to demolish her home's wall, but in vain. Soldiers commonly smash walls to get into adjacent houses. This tape was actually not supposed to be aired. The arrangement is this. All three networks here agree that if the army doesn't like what's filmed, the footage is never broadcast. In this case, the army decided this tape was too embarrassing, too damaging, so it ordered it shelved. But this past weekend, Israel's Channel 2 decided to break the embargo, and the army and the government and a lot of viewers did not like what they saw. This Israeli official, who strongly condemns Palestinian censorship, had this to say.

RANAAN GISSIN (Israeli Spokesperson): I would have expected, you know, a little bit more, I would call it self-censorship on the part of the Israeli media.

MACDONALD: Israel's second biggest newspaper splashed it all over page one today under the headline "gaffe." The army, after trying to suppress distribution of the pictures, expressed contrition for its soldiers' actions.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Our action is so difficult to be done, that it is to the extremities of acceptance.

MACDONALD: And regarding the delay in evacuating Huda Hawajah, the army said this.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: It's a mistake.

MACDONALD: Neil MacDonald, CBC News, Jerusalem.
------
Perhaps one of the reasons the Israelis don't like the foreign media because they aren't quite as accommodating as the Israeli media are. I'm not suggesting this is why they fired on them, of course. Just adding this to the mix.

 

This was a big clue that they were peaceful, and not militants.

 

Pued,

You are joking right? So, anyone in a war zone that wears a sign that says "I am peaceful" should be allowed to go on their way?

Come on now.....

DaDakota

 

Well gee, I figured when there are a bunch of people, walking quietly down the street with a big sign that says, "Peace not War", my first thought probably wouldn't be to open fire on them . . . . Maybe I'd politely ask them their reason for being here, or maybe I'd ask them nicely to leave.

Its certainly seems to be a better idea than the "Shoot em all and let God sort it out" crowd control the Israelis practiced.

 

Yes, and today foreign media tried to smuggle militants out of Arafat's hole. Maybe they don't like the foreign media because the foreign media is actually helping Arafat by trying to legitemize his actions? Hell, today they tried to help hime more concretely.

I am aware of the incident reported here. It is a tragedy when things like this happen, and is certainly preventable - the wife should have been allowed to get medical attention. Personally, I'd court-martial the officer in charge... But I will point out again (it seems for the thousandth time) that had the Palestinians accepted the Barak deal, not started the intifada, and not started throwing suicide bombers at Israel on a daily basis, then the Israelis wouldn't be there in the first place.

Things like this happen in wartime - it seems to be unavoidable (although the individual incidents are usually avoidable in hindsight). It is regrettable, to say the least. But if the Palestinians wouldn't have effectively declared war on the Israelis by turning down the peace deal and starting the intifada, then none of this ever would have happened.

Censorship in warzones is pretty common, BTW. If actual combat footage of the warzone would have been showed during February, 1991, then millions of people would have been screaming at us to stop, too. War is an ugly business.

 

Since when has Israel formally been at war?

Plus Israel doesn't legally control these areas. If they impose their sanctions...that should be cause enough for the International Community to step in especially the United States. The Oslo accords give this land to the PLO...hence making Israeli law not apply.

Is that hard to fathom?

 

Treeman,

Exactly, we learned our lessons about having supposed unbiased Journalist in the war zones in Vietnam.

War is not pretty, and if it gets into our living rooms on TV, people lose the stomach for it real fast.

They should not let any reporters in the warzone, period.

Now, that being said, I don't condone the actions of the tank crew, but at least they fired at the ground and not INTO the crowd.

I am pretty sure all those people that were killed by the suicide bombers would have liked a few warning shots...don't yall?

Boy,

Has Israel recongized the Oslo accords? Or is this just some other countries getting together and making BS decisions for the rest of the world?

DaDakota

 

Puedlfor:

They walked around a corner and ran into a tank. It doesn't sound as if the Israelis saw them coming, saw the peace sign, and then decided "OK, let's kill some peaceniks". It sounds as if they surprised an IDF position that was looking in another direction.

At any rate, just the mere fact that the Israelis fired warning shots should tell you that they were trying not to shoot at the crowd at first. Someone else probably heard the shots, turned around and saw the crowd, and fired before it registered what was going on. Battle is confusing.

I am not sure if this is what happened, but this is what it sounds like.

And again, they should *not* have been there in the first place. The surest way for a civilian to die is to wander into a combat zone - no matter what their intentions are. Soldiers are jittery.

 

The Camp David proposal was a farce and the whole damn world called Israel on it. Go to Gush-Shalom for God sakes.

Also the Palestinians didn't start the Infifada II. Sharon went into Masjid ul Aqsa like a jackass with troops on Friday. If some Anti-Catholic biggot who has a history of KILLING Catholics even in UN camps goes into the Vatican with troops insulting people at Sunday mass...what do you think would happen?

 

Hey crowd, are you armed?

No sir!

Ooh okay, thanks...

 

DD the Oslo peace-agreement...the one that gave PLO the West Bank and Gaza in 93...it gave these occupied territories PLO control.

 

boy:

Since 1948. With everyone except for Jordan and Egypt.

They have effectively been at war since the intifada started.

No one legally controls these areas. The Oslo accords did *not* give the land to the PLO, they simply created the PNA - and gave it the mandate of stopping terrorism in the West Bank and Gaza Strip - and set the conditions for a future final resolution. The Barak deal *would have* given the land to them, but the Oslo accords most certainly did not.

And the US is not going to intervene. We are not going to a) slap sanctions on anybody, or b) send in peacekeepers. Don't get your hopes up.

 

A farce? The Israelis offered 96% of the occupied territories, and then offered to give up *Israeli* land to make up for the other 4%. They offered Palestinian statehood. In fact, they offered every single thing that Arafat asked for, until at the end of the conference Arafat asked for "right of return". That is always a dealbreaker for the Israelis, and when they refused it, Arafat scuttled the entire deal.

Yes, that is the popular interpretation. What is never mentioned, though, is that the intifada would have taken weeks or even months to actually plan - you don't just start an organized uprising on the spur of the moment. Arafat had it all planned out already; Sharon just gave him a convenient spark to light the fire with.

And incidentally, why is it that the any muslim can visit any holy site they want, but when an Israeli tries to visit the holiest site in Judaism, every muslim in a hundred miles goes ape? The Temple Mount is the holiest site in their religion. Jews attempting to worship at the wailing wall are regularly chased off. I thought Islam was supposed to be a tolerant religion?

What in the hell are you talking about? This is absolutely false.

First, there is no such thing as an "Oslo peace agreement". An accord was signed which created the PNA, and which set conditions for a *future* land for peace deal. No land - not a single inch of land - was ever formally exchanged under Oslo.

And incidentally, the PNA's primary role under Oslo was to crack down on terrorists in the territories. They certainly didn't lift a finger to do that, not at any point in the past 9 years. So the whole deal is kind of voided anyway, since one side didn't live up to its agreements...

 

For all those saying that the troops shooting at peace protesters was justified because of paranoia. I just saw the footage and I guess I'd $#it bricks to if I were in an ARMORED TANK.

I don't take either side, but I don't buy the fear theory so easily after seeing it was a tank.

Carry on.

 

Treeman: I think what alarms me about that piece is that the army has final say on what the Israeli media report. War is ugly, but I don't think we should be sheltered from that, and I don't think the army should be allowed to do whatever they want to without scrutiny either. Is it a bad thing that we lose stomach for war? Won't this keep us from fighting wars we shouldn't be fighting, like Vietnam? If there are wars that we must fight, and certainly most would say Afghanistan falls into that category, then we understand and take responsibility for the gravity of what are doing. You may call this naive, but I'd rather we stood up and faced the truth of what we do rather than the sugar coated version. This is a much longer discussion than we likely have time for now though. We can continue it when you get back.

I wish you well on your upcoming tour, Treeman. When you get back you'll have some great info to add to these discussions. I'll say a prayer for you soldier.

 

Grizzled,

Why do you think Desert Storm had all the reporters doing their job from the rear areas?

Because the Army learned you can not trust the press.

DaDakota

 

boy:

Just in case you're interested, here is the actual text of Oslo:

http://www.iap.org/oslo.htm

No where - no where - does it even mention handing over any land at all. It was just an agreement to give the Palestinians autonomy, which they have terribly abused.

Wakko67:

I'm not saying that it was justified - targeting civilians is never justified - I am saying that it is understandable. The battle zone truly is a confusing place.

And being in a tank doesn't mean you're invulnerable. The Israelis have found hundreds of antitank rockets in hidden PNA caches in the past few days. How do they know someone in that crowd doesn't have one?

In a battlezone, you shoot first and ask questions later. You are likely to die if you try to do it the other way around (one reason why soldiers don't make very good policemen, unless they are actually trained as such). As I said, the surest way for a civilian to die is to wander into a battlezone. If they had any brains at all, then they'd do the sensible thing and stage the protest *outside* of the combat zone...

 

I'm not sure what you mean by that. In Vietnam, ugly things were reported, but that was an ugly war that should perhaps have never happened. Maybe that's what the public needed to see.

 

Tree you're probably right about that...

So disregard what I said about the Oslo Accords...

However to say that Arafat got everything that he asked for is purely a work of fiction. Here