October 08, 2007
In Memory of Iman Al-Hams, On the Third Anniversary of Her Murder
The daily realities of living under an illegal military occupation are unimaginable to anyone who hasn’t lived under them. No matter how much one writes, it is impossible to convey the ghastliness, injustice, oppressiveness and inhumanity of being ruled over by a repressive military accountable to no one. The death of Iman Al-Hams, however, may provide an illustrative anecdote.
On the morning of the 5th of October, 2004, a morning as rudimentarily awful as any lived under a brutal occupation, 13-year-old Iman, wearing her blue and white school uniform and carrying her schoolbag, left her house in Rafah refugee camp to go to school. Iman wandered a few meters away from her usual route to school and ventured into the large security zone surrounding an Israeli military base, which is, as is common, located near Palestinian civilians’ houses and schools. What follows is a gruesome tale of sickeningly cold-blooded murder.
Iman was spotted by the Israeli military base’s watchtower. She was about 100 yards away from the military base when the following conversation took place between a soldier in the watchtower, an army operations room and a certain Captain R, who remains unnamed to this day:
**************
From the watchtower: "It's a little girl. She's running defensively eastward."
From the operations room: "Are we talking about a girl under the age of 10?"
Watchtower: "A girl about 10, she's behind the embankment, scared to death."
A few minutes later, Iman is shot from one of the army posts
Watchtower: "I think that one of the positions took her out."
Captain R: "I and another soldier ... are going in a little nearer, forward, to confirm the kill ... Receive a situation report. We fired and killed her ... I also confirmed the kill. Over."
Captain R—along with another soldier—walks towards Iman, and shoots two bullets at point-blank range into her head to “confirm the kill.” He starts to head back to his base, before turning around again and emptying all the bullets from his machine gun into the body of Iman.
Captain R then "clarifies" why he killed Iman: "This is commander. Anything that's mobile, that moves in the zone, even if it's a three-year-old, needs to be killed. Over."
**************
After she was taken to the hospital, doctors counted 17 bullet wounds in Iman’s body, and three in her head, though they were unsure of the exact number since her little body was shattered to the point where one couldn’t accurately count how many bullets had riddled it.
Anywhere in the world, you would expect such a murderer to be tried and to receive a very harsh sentence. Unfortunately, the laws that apply in most of the world do not apply to Palestinian children and their murderers. An Israeli military court, on October 15, 2004, cleared the soldier of any wrongdoing or unethical behavior, declaring that “confirming the kill” is standard procedure.
A few of the soldiers serving with Captian R seem to have not been satisfied. They were apparently motivated by racist animosity towards him (he is Druze, they are Jewish), and took the matter to a Military Police court. He was charged not with the murder of Iman, but with “illegal use of his weapon, conduct unbecoming an officer and perverting the course of justice.” He was cleared on all counts.
To add insult to fatal and gruesome injury, Captain R was then compensated with 80,000 Israeli Sheckels (around US$20,000) plus legal fees for the inconvenience of being taken to court over a triviality such as the life of a Palestinian child. The court also criticized the Military Police for investigating the case in the first place. Captain R was then promoted to the rank of Major, and continues to serve in the Israeli Army, where he may well have murdered other children in the past three years.
This is by no means an isolated incident or a freak failing of the “justice” system, but rather one example of many such stories that will shock anyone with an ounce of conscience or humanity in them. One could write whole books with the stories of children like Iman, killed in callous cold blood, whose murderers faced no repercussions whatsoever for their crimes. Since 2000, almost 1,000 Palestinian children have been murdered by the Israeli Army, and countless other thousands injured. Not a single Israeli soldier has faced any form of punishment, demotion, or even reprimand over any of these murders.
As The Guardian’s Chris McGreal put it back in June 2005:
B'Tselem argues that a lack of accountability and rules of engagement that "encourage a trigger-happy attitude among soldiers" have created a "culture of impunity" - a view backed by the New York-based Human Rights Watch, which last week described many army investigations of civilian killings as a "sham ... that encourages soldiers to think they can literally get away with murder".
In southern Gaza, the killings take place in a climate that amounts to a form of terror against the population. Random fire into Rafah and Khan Yunis has claimed hundreds of lives, including five children shot as they sat at their school desks. Many others have died when the snipers must have known who was in their sights - children playing football, sitting outside home, walking back from school. Almost always "investigations" amount to asking the soldier who pulled the trigger what happened - often they claim there was a gun battle when there was none - and presenting it as fact.
The tragedy of these stories is not just that these lives of innocent children have been lost, but that the Israeli Army, backed by the government, has made it entirely clear that all Palestinians are fair game to their soldiers. Had Iman’s murder been an isolated incident whose perpetrator was punished, one could argue that the Israeli army was not complicit in it. But by acquitting the proudly self-confessed murderer, along with hundreds of his likes, the army is sending a clear message to anyone who would listen that it is an institution that finds child-murder acceptable.
This is illustrative of the real injustice and tragedy of the occupation. Callow 18-year-olds, drunk on their power, sit behind some of the most sophisticated murder machinery in the world and unleash it on a civilian population. Their trigger-happy guns are the only judge, jury and executioner around. There are no moral imperatives, no accountability, and not even any incentive to attempt to minimize damage to civilians. The lives of those surrounding this murder machinery are dispensable.
This is why it is imperative that the occupation end. It is a fundamental right of the Palestinian people, like any other people, not to have their children murdered with impunity by an occupying army. Only when this happens can there be any prospect for peace. Ending the occupation is not conditioned on what the Palestinians do or how they behave, or whether they resist the occupation or not; it is a fundamental right for Palestinians, on a par with the right not to be enslaved.
Under occupation, every child, woman and man is collateral damage waiting to happen. Three years ago it was Iman’s turn. If the world lets the madness of this occupation continue, we will witness a new Iman Al-Hams every day, and our silence will make us complicit in her murder as well.
Posted by Saifedean Ammous at 12:01 AM | Permalink
Comments
I remember, when this incident was in the headlines in Israel (sadly, I live there), I once overheard a brief conversation about it between two israeli students at my university,one of them said: "... well, I don't know about the whole "confirming a kill" thing, but she really had no business being there." So, at any rate, and this was the dominant sentiment among most israelis, she had it coming.
It's this nonchalant disregard of the value of Palestinian lives, even children, within the military as in the civilian population, which allows this behaviour by the IDF to continue. No one was outraged that they killed her! No one was outraged that a young schoolgirl can be machined gunned in her home town for straying a few meters off her her school route. It's the part where that one soldier emptied a magazine into her already riddled body that they found shocking, THAT was unacceptable to the moral standards of the people of Israel, they're humane killers.
Posted by: Nikolai Nkola | Oct 8, 2007 3:29:14 AM
I find it reeks of irony that the same people who supposedly elevate the sanctity of Palestinian life killed by Israelis is silent about the wholesale glorification of martyrdom in large segments of the Palestinian community. A whole book can be written on this but here are quick examples:
1. Compensation to families of martyrs
2. Posters glorifying martyrs throughout the area
3. Interviews with parents encouraging martyrdom
4. Guerilla groups embedding themselves in civilian areas so that there will be martyrs
5. Acts of nihilistic rage such as the random shooting of Kassam rockets that will inevitably lead to retaliation.
and maybe most importantly maximalist geopolitical positions that lead to inevitable martyrdom , i.e. "Return the refugees and dismantle Israel otherwise we will kill you" style of negotiating ( Pragmatism is mainly a Western construct).
Taking all this into account and much much more one reaches the clear conclusion that Israel cares for Palestinian life more than the Palestinians themselves do...
And know better proof for that is available than the statistics that show the many Palestinians killed in Fatah-Hamas warfare between themselves.
If that is not persuasive enough than nothing will be.
Posted by: davidfriedlander | Oct 9, 2007 12:30:53 AM
David,
Your analysis, to put it mildly, is completely erroneous.
How on earth could you possibly conclude that Israel cares about Palestinian life when not a single soldier can be punished for the murder of a Palestinian child?
But more importantly, you continue to peddle the mistaken line that is quite common amongst Zionist propagandists, that the reason there is violence is that Palestinians incite their kids to violence.
When the Israeli army kills your sister like they did to Iman, murders your father, arrests your brothers and tortures them, THAT is the best incitement to violence. All the stuff you mention is completely irrelevant.
Palestinians, like any other humans, do not take repression, persecution and murder very well. When the Israeli army carries out these acts, they are just preparing generations of Palestinians to grow up with the hatred that drives them to legitimate resistance, as well as illegitimate means of violence.
Liek anywhere in the world, only when this occupation and oppression stops will the Palestinian violence stop.
It is quite disingenuous of you to blame it all on Palestians inciting themselves to violence and absolve Israel of the decades of murder, oppression, racism, persecution and incitement to hatred.
Posted by: Saifedean | Oct 9, 2007 9:37:48 AM
1. Mr. Saifedean, Israel basher par excellenr should thank his lucky stars that the Palestinians are not going up against the late and unlamented Hafaz Assad. Mr. Assad, when faced with the type of terrorism used by the Palestinians, which was emanating from the City of Hama, had the city encircled with hundreds of artillery pieces and subjected it to a 2 day bombardment which killed 20,000 people. Imagine how Mr. Saifedean would be whining if Hama rules were imposed on the Palestinians.
2. For the readers of this thread, it should be noted that Mr. Saifedean considers all of Palestine to be occupied territory so it is devious of him to demand an end to the occupation. What he means by ending the occupation is that the State of Israel agree to go out of business.
Posted by: SLC | Oct 9, 2007 12:02:48 PM
"Liek anywhere in the world, only when this occupation and oppression stops will the Palestinian violence stop."
No. It is this type of outlook that is every bit as contemptible as any occupation. We have seen time and time again that violence is not a successful means for Palestinians to achieve a redress of their grievances.
It is possible to end oppression peacefully, and what is happening there is not "like anywhere in the world." For instance, The Carnation Revolution in Portugal and the Civil Rights movement in America are just a couple of instances from the past half century where a non-violent path was successful, and there are countless other examples like these two.
The whole world is watching, so maybe it's time for a different approach.
Posted by: Kyle | Oct 9, 2007 12:06:47 PM
Kyle,
My point is not to support violent Palestinian resistance. My point is that the occupation HAS to end regardless of what resistance modes are applied by Palestinians.
It is just not possible to continue justifying the occupation based on the REACTION of the Palestinians to the occupation. Just like you can not justify continuing slavery based on the fact that the slaves are rebelling a lot against slavery, and just like you can NOT justify apartheid based on the reaction of blacks to apartheid.
If you want Palestinian violence to end, the best, most effective and guaranteed way to do it is to end Palestinian oppression.
By shifting the onus of the blame on what the Palestinians do in terms of resistance, you are normalizing the occupation as something accceptable; and placing the blame of its continuation on the Palestinians themselves. Which is just wrong.
Incidentally, the real problem of the occupation is the illegal Israeli settlements built on stolen land. These are NOT the result of Palestinian resistance. These are pure colonial racist land-theft. It is NOT a response to anything the Palestinians do. Israel started this colonization in 1968, and clearly wanted to maintain this territory and resources. Just how could you possibly justify this land theft, or even ignore it and shift the blame to the Palestinians.
This is the root of the problem, if the Palestinians didn't commit one violent act, Israel would've still built these settlements. So it is really disengenuous for you to continue blaming the Palestinians for the occupation and its continuation.
The real problem is the occupation, racism, repression and land theft. All of these things are borne out of pure Zionist racist land-theft that has nothing to do with the Palestinian reaction.
It is time we call a spade a spade, an illegal occupation an illegal occupation, and to stop blaming the victim for not taking their repression with more magnanimity.
Posted by: saifedean | Oct 9, 2007 1:02:44 PM
One more thing,
I am in fact a supporter of non-violent resistance. However, I am really disappointed when people start lecturing Palestinians about non-violence. Palestinians have tried non-violence for decades, and have been met with crushing violent murder by the Israeli army.
The American government in the south and the apartheid regime in South Africa were actually malleable to non-violent pressure, and the world had the decency to support this struggle.
With Palestinians, Israel could not care less about non-violent struggle, and has confronted it with force, and the world was hypocritical enough to not care.
The best illustration of that is that someone like you actually has the audacity to assume that their ignorance of the long distinguished tradition of non-violence in Palestine means that this tradition doesn't exist.
Non-violent does exist, unfortunately, the world is not interested in it, and is more comfortable thinking of Palestinians as purely criminals and murderers.
Posted by: saifedean | Oct 9, 2007 1:07:08 PM
First of all I never said that the problem is exclusively the fact that Palestinian parents incite their children to become shahidim (martyrs). I gave numerous examples of a general atmosphere that glorifies martyrdom.
For Westerners, there is a failure to understand the premium put on honor/shame in Arab culture. Therefore many Westerners have a tendency to look at the conflict through a prism of compromise/pragmatism.
The "occupation" is a nice rhetorical tactic that you seem to lavishly insert into your posts. On the other hand in your other columns you endorse a maximalist approach, namely, that Israel must absorb the Palestinian refugees. Are you implying now that merely ending the occupation would be sufficient even though in your other posts you reject compromise on the refugee issue (its either one or the other).
Maybe you should go read the Hamas charter and ask yourself why any Israeli would remotely think of negotiating with such a party (unless you believe that Israelis should proactively destroy their own country so that another progressive/liberal Hamastan should arise).
Posted by: david friedlander | Oct 9, 2007 1:16:54 PM
David: "The "occupation" is a nice rhetorical tactic that you seem to lavishly insert into your posts."
Indeed, forty years of oppression, murder, land and resource theft, no self-determination all forms of persecution are nothing but a "nice rhetorical tactic" on my part.
I rest my case.
Posted by: saifedean | Oct 9, 2007 1:25:19 PM
I'll be blunt: Israeli foreign policy assumes Palestinian misery. That is not to say that Israel wants Palestinian misery, but it nonetheless bases its policies on the perpetual suffering of the Palestinians.
I'm not sure the key date is 1968. It might actually be 1977, when Likud began promoting settlement expansions. In either case, for decades now, Israel has shown no interest whatsoever in accomodating the Palestinians. From ever-expanding settlements and "forbidden roads" to a callous disregard for Palestinian lives, Israel does not care. It is perfectly happy to see millions of people under its control live without human dignity, and furthermore, to exercise collective punishment on a refugee population.
I agree that Palestinians are largely taking a nonproductive approach to this conflict. But so is Israel, and Israel holds power. It has greater control than Palestinians over how this conflict ends.
So, in light of the recent declaration of Gaza as an "enemy entity", the question we all need to ask ourselves is, Where is the line? How far will we go with communal punishment? Obviously, Gazans will be more unhappy with Israel if it causes a state failure. That will only fuel more rocket attacks. But what then? A ground assault? Carpet-bombings? Genocide? Where does it end?
Posted by: Shlomo | Oct 9, 2007 2:00:01 PM
Shlomo,
So far many of the casualties recently have been a result of Fatah-Hamas infighting (which pales in comparison to the Shia-Sunni sectarian violence in Iraq). In addition the economic situation in the Palestinian territories, especially Gaza, is terrible. Instead of focusing on how to alleviate these problems Palestinian thinkers such as Mr. Ammous are happier plaing the blame Israel for everything game..... and more importantly..... the Arab honor/shame game of maximalist narratives/diversion ( such as claiming that even after 60 years Israel has no right to exist).
Who are you supposed to feel sorry for when instead of improving their economic condition Palestinians are building home made Kassam rockets out of gatorade bottles.
Posted by: david friedlander | Oct 9, 2007 2:47:00 PM
This is a real bad situation. Im an Israeli, I support what the army does and I care more about the children of Sderot, where Qassam rockets from Gaza have been falling regularly for 7 years, than about the children in Gaza. I agree with most of what Freidlander has said , but I still feel shitty about this.
Posted by: aguy109 | Oct 9, 2007 2:47:18 PM
David,
What you HAVE to understand is that it is impossible to improve the economic, political or social situation in Palestine in any significant way as long as there is occupation.
With occupation, no Palestinian government has any monopoly of power, or any meaningful authority to be able to do anything meaningful, whether it is from a political, economic or social aspect. Israel controls the roads, Israel invades and assassinates, and Israel prevents Palestinian families from even meeting each other with its racist walls and roads. No government, no matter how well intentioned and competent, could govern effectively under such condition.
That is why I talk about the occupation. In order for all the things you talk about to happen, the occupation needs to end.
You, unfortunately, seem to have chosen the curious position of calling on all of these things to happen, without even acknowledging that the occupation may even be a little hindrance. It is, after all, nothing but a "rhetorical tactic" I'm employing.
I really wish from the bottom of my heart that you would live for a week, just one week, under the occupation. I would like to see you then come lecture me about me not being interested in economic development in Palestine.
Posted by: saifedean | Oct 9, 2007 3:13:28 PM
Aguy,
Thank you being honest and saying this incredible statement you just made differentiating between the value of a child's life because of where they are from.
I firmly believe there can never be peace as long as people like you care about the lives of Israeli children more than the lives of Palestinian children.
I genuinely, from the bottom of my heart, wish that one day you will wake up to realize that Iman and all the innocent girls in Sderot are just that: innocent girls; beautiful young human beings that had no choice over where they were born, and equally do not deserve to be killed, injured, repressed or persecuted because of where they were born.
Once you and people like you have the courage, honesty, humanism and integrity to recognize that children are indeed children, this conflict will be over in five minutes.
Here's to my indomitable hope that this will one day happen.
Posted by: saifedean | Oct 9, 2007 3:20:21 PM
Yessir, the Palestinians are real liberal peaceful people.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3458147,00.html
Posted by: SLC | Oct 9, 2007 3:23:50 PM
"What you HAVE to understand is that it is impossible to improve the economic, political or social situation in Palestine in any significant way as long as there is occupation"
Hmm... thats interesting. Poverty and development are in a severe crisis throughout the Arab World. Go read the Arab Human Development Report. Do you think that Yemen and Syria are so much more developed than Palestine? Let me guess you are next going to tell me that Syria and Yemen are occupied also. This refutes your assertion that "occupation" is solely responsible for Palestinian/Arab poverty.
You said that the occupation is the only obstacle yet in another column you are adamantly opposed to compromising over the refugee issue.
There will be a wall also with a two state solution (which you seem to be against since your refugee position suggests you support a two state solution of Palestine one and Palestine two). Does Canada implement border control in order to create apartheid and imply that Americans are inferior, etc....? And this is the case even though Canada and America don't confront anything near what Israel confronts with Hamas.
So please I come back to my first point. Since you reject the cultural explanation of Arab poverty I want you to explain to me why unoccupied failed states such as Syria and Yemen are dysfunctional?
Posted by: david friedlander | Oct 9, 2007 3:26:43 PM
David,
Unfortunately, I am not racist, stupid or ignorant enough to engage in a discussion about a "cultural explanation" of Arab poverty. This isn't because I don't know anything about this stuff, I am in fact doing a PhD in Economic Development and do know a thing or two about it, but it's because this stuff is too absurd for me to attempt to discuss, and more importantly, because if you are someone comfortable enough with writing such garbage, then it is pointless to argue with you.
As for your point on the right of return. After a few of your comments, I can now better understand why someone like you would find it so impossible to understand that someone like me would not want an illegal occupation AND would not want to be discriminated against in land ownership.
It's a pretty revolutionary and controversial idea, I'm sure. What audacity do I have to think that I was born into this planet with an inherent right to NOT be governed by a military occupation AND not have my grandfather's land taken away from me because of the religion to which I was born?
Seriously, what the hell do I think I am? A human being? Obviously, I can't be, as I'm Palestinian, and we obviously don't get to have any of the rights that normal humans have.
Again, I repeat my wishes to Aguy to you: may you one day wake up to realize that we all are, indeed, human beings.
And Again, my hope that this will happen is indomitable.
Posted by: saifedean | Oct 9, 2007 3:38:46 PM
Actually you are racist. I never claimed that the Arabs are not allowed to have a state regardless of real or perceived injustices they were involved in. Yet you claim that the Jews cannot have a state even after 60 years.
Also how is a debate on the cultural aspects of Arab development racist? Since when was there an equation of race=culture?
You also engage in outright lies. You said that "giving up the occupation" is enough yet state in another column that no cessation of violence is possible without the return of the refugees.
You are the racist, not me.
I hope that a Native American comes to your place of residence and throws you out.
Posted by: david friedlander | Oct 9, 2007 9:27:22 PM
David Friedlander, You are seriously deluded and just embarrass yourself with your ignorant and laughable comments. You are the racist and Safidean is in fact one of the most honest writers I have ever come across. He has more integrity in an eyelash that you evidence in your entire set of meanspirited, myopic and mangled responses. I'm glad you resort to levelling these ridiculous charges as it serves as a barometer for how effective his writing is.
Posted by: Concordia | Oct 10, 2007 12:14:51 PM
Saifedean, here is the most powerful article supporting your proposition that Palestinian lives are deemed disposable by many:
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9032.shtml
Posted by: david friedlander | Oct 10, 2007 12:32:18 PM
I just wanted to mention that while Saif has sometimes let his rhetoric get the best of him (though he has handled himself with honor in this depressing thread) his essential point is so fundamentally correct and unassailable that everyone is always forced to argue side issues.
The occupation is wrong and that is the fundamental thing and it is crazy that that should be a point of debate.
It is wrong to keep a people under military occupation and to deprive them of the basic rights that any of us would demand simply by virtue of being human beings.
The question of whether Palestinians have done enough to 'deserve' their basic rights is a piece of outright racism and we would have no compunction calling it such under analogous situations.
That doesn't condone Hamas or Islamic Jihad who can both kiss my ass.
But until Israel ends its occupation there is nothing to talk about.
Indeed, the occupation is so destructive of Israel's own vibrancy as a democratic or even decent state that sheer self interest ought to drive the decision.
Unfortunately, that's not happening and the unwillingness of many in this country to call Israel the apartheid state that it has become doesn't help either.
This blaming the victim bullshit has gone on too long and we should all be ashamed of ourselves for allowing it to.
Morgan Meis
Posted by: morgan meis | Oct 10, 2007 12:58:08 PM
Morgan and Concordia,
Thanks a lot for your very kind words.
I think writing such an article has starkly illustrated to me something very important.
Many people are simply impervious to logic, understanding, empathy or any sense of humanism.
Even when faced with a case such this cold-blooded murder, they can not get themselves to even say that it isn't a good thing that a child is murdered. They have to resort to their tired racist arguments of blaming the victim.
It really is amazing how racist, criminal and coldblooded seemingly normal people can become.
But I don't let this disappoint me. There have always been racists like this in South Africa, the American south and countless other places.
All of these racists now belong in a special section of history's dustbin specifically designated for racist garbage. I have no doubt this section will soon be expanded significantly to host many more of the callous racists who view the murder of this child as nothing important.
However, what really does disappoint me is the cowardly silence of the many who should know better.
As Martin Luther King said: "We will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."
Posted by: saifedean | Oct 10, 2007 3:10:49 PM
David Friedlander to Saifedean, whose family has been forcibly evicted from their lands: "I hope that a Native American comes to your place of residence and throws you out." This is like a German telling the child of a holocaust survivor "I hope someone throws you into a concentration camp." The cruelty of Friedlander's statement would be unbelievable, if it weren't so commonly directed at Palestinians.
Posted by: Abbas Raza | Oct 10, 2007 6:07:58 PM
"It really is amazing how racist, criminal and coldblooded seemingly normal people can become."
Not to excuse it, but when the example is so blatant, the defense mechanisms have to crank up to overdrive.
Not that "we can be excused for not respecting Those People's lives, because Those People have no respect for human life" has ever been a good excuse.
"I hope that a Native American comes to your place of residence and throws you out."
I am 1/16 Lakota (supposedly) and I would settle for a felafel dinner and better housing, education, and health care on the rez.
Posted by: Vicki Baker | Oct 10, 2007 6:35:16 PM
Actually the posters here are the ones displaying racism. Millions of refugees, even as recent as World War, 2 have been absorbed into their respective areas. To say that there is no statute of limitations and that the destruction of Israel after 60 years is still a legitimate cause is racism.
If the palestinians have a right to return to their places instead of the people who live there than supposedly Jews have a right to uproot Polish resident in their former homes, Native Americans have a right to uproot European Americans and many Europeans have a right to go back to Mongolia and resettle there since there is no statute of limitations and the Mongolian migration brought many people to Europe. The destruction of Israel no matter how benign it's represented (such as Saif's indirect suggestion that there should be a two state solution namely Palestine Junior and Palestine Senior) is a denial of self determination and a manifestation of racism.
Posted by: david friedlander | Oct 10, 2007 9:17:56 PM
To David, SLC, Aguy and all the rest of the Zionists who have commented here;
I used to think that the best way to show the world the racism of Zionism is for me to call it out on its racism and keep repeating how racist Zionists are. Thanks to you, I know realize I was wrong; all I have to do is to watch genuine Zionists like yourselves express your heartfelt opinions about the point-blank-range murder of a Palestinian girl with 20 bullets, and that is more effective than anything I could ever say about Zionism. Please keep coming back and telling us what you all think so that everyone in the world can see it.
Thank you. With enemies like you, who needs friends.
Posted by: saifedean | Oct 10, 2007 10:57:47 PM
Hitler was right. If only we let him finish the job.
Posted by: Odin | Oct 11, 2007 12:06:32 AM
To David Friedlander:
Is there some internationally recognized statute of limitations on the right of return? Not that I know of. It varies from country to country. In Ireland, it goes back 2 generations, with some flexibility. I know that in the 1980's, West Germany was accepting as citizens ethnic Germans who had settled in Eastern Europe centuries ago. Spain accepts descendants of Sephardic Jews expelled in 1492. Israel also has a right of return for ethnic Jews with no statute of limitations that I know of.
Are there international statutes against the forced relocation of whole populations?
Yes.
Posted by: Vicki Baker | Oct 11, 2007 12:14:07 AM
Morgan, you said it best -- this thread is depressing.
Why? Because it cannot and was perhaps not meant to bring out the best in anyone. By which I mean, to stimulate real discourse rather than to incite people to ventilate and take cheap shots.
That children should be killed because adults can't manage to create a solution perfect for almost no one but acceptable to nearly all is a truly horrible thing -- what could be less controversial? Without hearing it, I know that when rockets from Gaza kill Israeli children, Palestinians feel that it is a grave matter, one of the awful costs of effecting their liberation. The conflict-related death of a child is sickening -- but maybe not sickening enough? For the people with the power to do so on either side of the conflict have not come forward, in the name of the rising generation, to stop the conflict and with it the slaughter of their children. This is a failure big enough to go around, isn't it?
Instead, it backs everyone further into his own corner. There have been on this thread expressions of ill will, sarcasm and incomprehension. It looks to me like even trying to get on the same wavelength must just not be interesting to many, though not all, people here -- the same effort to work things out and understand one another that makes following and participating in other threads on 3QD very fruitful. There are other polarizing topics than what should happen in the Middle East, yet this is the one that makes everyone look and feel worse at the end of the thread. No one understands anything better than he did before reading and writing, and many people have found reason to lower their opinions -- further still -- of those who disagree with them.
Being neither a Palestinian nor an Israeli nor an American Jew, I have no dog in this fight. I am "for" only people on both sides who will work to create a new paradigm, one that is sparing of human life and respectful of human rights, including the rights of children to see their parents strive for peace as if it were something worth having.
It's not really possible for me to tell what some people who have written here want -- peace, after and contingent upon the destruction of Israel? Or, peace, once the Palestinians are finally subdued for good? I hope that's not the big idea or two, but with the adjectives that are flying here, who can say? Over and over in my life and certainly tonight, I have been reminded of some lines of Tacitus: "They have created a desert, and called it peace." I hope all of us may be moved to do better another time.
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Oct 11, 2007 1:09:45 AM
While I was writing the above, I see that "Odin" wrote in to invoke Hitler, and of course we'll never know who Odin is. I'm really sorry he thought he came to the right place.
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Oct 11, 2007 1:19:17 AM
Having been critical of Saif's rhetoric and his positions on earlier threads, let me applaud his decency and restraint on this one. As an American Jew and decedent of holocaust victims (my paternal grandfather's entire family to be exact), let me also state how depressing I find the manipulative intransigence of writers like Mr. Friedlander, who seem to equate any critique of the state of Israel with an argument for its destruction and any moral outrage over the treatment of Palestinians as somehow a capitulation to Jihadists and suicide bombers. There is no difficulty in seeing where the lion's share of the region's misery lies and who is to blame, and to say so does not mean that one believes that Israelis ought to be cast into the sea.
Posted by: Jonathan | Oct 11, 2007 11:00:01 AM
A question to David Friedlander, if he or anyone else is still following this thread. You keep clinging to your tired talking points blaming the palestinians and the generally degenerate arab culture for their misery, and criticizing saifedean for supporting the refugees' right to return and a perceived support of Israel's destruction. No one is denying that too much of what the palestinians do ends up being to their detriment, especially the recent mess in Gaza. And I agree that in the present state of things, it is practically inconceivable that the refugees return. The right to return, though, must be acknowledged, the crime of 1948 must be acknowledged by the state of Israel. However, practically speaking, they cannot return, the original refugees are mostly dead, their former homes are destroyed (or will be soon demolished, as is happening to many of the arab buildings in my town of Haifa), and this shit-hole of a country is too crowded as it is. And as for the obliteration of Israel, though it may have been a valid stance 40-60 years ago (not including a potential mass genocide), the fact is that it's here to stay, or more specifically the jews are here to stay; the state of israel, on the other hand, must and will change in the future, if there is to be any hope of lasting peace.
Now, given all this, and even assuming your arguments to be correct, does that justify the actions of the state of israel and its army? Does it exonerate israel? Is Iman's murder acceptable to you? Do the palestinians deserve to live under military rule, without rights, subject to the whims of teenage soldiers and foreign overlords, their lives expendable, their aspirations and ambitions confined to what exists between their home and the next checkpoint, refugees under the oppressive rule of the same enemy who exiled them?
In short, is anything you said here relevant? Or are you actually saying that it's all the palestinians' fault?
Posted by: Nikolai Nikola | Oct 11, 2007 2:35:49 PM
You know, when Mahmoud Ahmeddinijad came up to Columbia a few weeks ago, he was asked about his denial ("research") of the Holocaust. He responded by invoking Palestinian suffering. Same response when asked about his anti-Zionism.
I mention this because everyone else I know who so closely connect Palestinian suffering to antisemitism work for AIPAC. So that's one thing that both sides share in common. They both associate acknowledgement of Palestinian suffering with antisemitism. Another thing they share in common: both are working to destroy all I hold dear about the State of Israel.
Posted by: Shlomo | Oct 11, 2007 3:08:36 PM
Great work Saifeddin
Posted by: Osaid | Oct 12, 2007 7:19:22 AM
It is quite amazing : how most Israeli millitary men pay NO respect to Palestinian Lives.
This is ( I think ) mostly not related to racism or religious or cultural differences as much as it is a mere human greed. We simply tend to cause harm to others if accountability is not present, and this is the case in Occupied Palesine.
Posted by: Osaid | Oct 12, 2007 7:33:31 AM
Explain to me something simple. Out of all the countries in the Middle East which are more "democratic" and progressive as Israel. If the answer is "none" than what moral authority do Arabs have to come and preach to Israel about "democracy". If you want even a kernel of credibility I suggest that you create one democratic Arab country among the existing 22 as a template.
Posted by: david friedlander | Oct 13, 2007 12:45:53 AM
David,
That is a classic non-sequitur and one that defenders of Israel's treatment of Palestinians and Israel's continued occupation of the West Bank use all the time. Electoral democracy for the citizens of Israel does nothing to justify the bulldozing of Palestinian homes (etc.), nothing, not a thing.
Posted by: Jonathan | Oct 13, 2007 9:19:56 AM
It seems obvious that David has no intention of addressing the main issue here, and is simply diverting the discussion towards increasingly irrelevant critiques of arab countries and people. No use in pursuing the matter any further with him.
Posted by: Nikolai Nikola | Oct 13, 2007 11:12:38 AM
Sadly, when Bronze Age Fiction gives people divine right to this portion of the Mediterranean, only violence and ignorance will be the continual result.
Until these ignorant camp fire stories are no longer guiding thes people lives on a path to extinction, I'm afraid this will continue.
"If Atheism is a religion, then health is a disease!"
Clark Adams
Posted by: Dave Ranning | Oct 14, 2007 12:40:22 PM
Mr. Ammous,
First of all, I am pleased to see that you are capable of stating your views without resorting to curses to describe people you dislike or disagree with.
However, I find your post to be just another study in demonization and propaganda, only this time, you exploit the terrible death of a child to make your point.
The point being, of course, that Israelis (as such) are murderers, who need "incentives" not to kill children, and when these are lacking, shoot them without giving it a second thought. To what purpose Israelis indulge in shooting innocent children we are left in the dark. Probably just for the fun of it.
This is a grave accusation, Sir, and coming from a Palestinian, hypocritical and false in the extreme.
Of course the poor child's death is horrible and unwarranted. Nothing can justify killing children. To my mind, and to many Israelis like me, the soldier should have been shamefully discharged from the army, possibly tried for murder or manslaughter. There is absolutely no moral excuse for cases like these and I find Aguy109's comment that he cares more about Israeli children than Palestinian children to be cruel and misguided.
Having said that, I wondered, at first, if I should start my comment by naming Israeli children brutally murdered by Palestinians during this 40 year blood-letting. Including names, ages, quotes from parents and detailed descriptions of their gruesome murder (as appear in your graphic piece). I even thought about quoting the killers' families showering ecstatic praise on their murderous children's "courageous" exploits. However, there is something so devastating about these comparisons that I've decided to try a different approach.
In your post, you state the following:
"Not a single Israeli soldier has faced any form of punishment, demotion, or even reprimand over any of these murders."
I refer you here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1292398,00.html.
Here is an excerpt:
"A soldier is currently on trial for manslaughter over the April 2003 killing of pro-Palestinian British activist Tom Hurndall and, in a separate case, an officer has been convicted of causing Palestinian deaths by negligence".
Later, you state:
"Callow 18-year-olds, drunk on their power, sit behind some of the most sophisticated murder machinery in the world and unleash it on a civilian population. Their trigger-happy guns are the only judge, jury and executioner around. There are no moral imperatives, no accountability, and not even any incentive to attempt to minimize damage to civilians. The lives of those surrounding this murder machinery are dispensable."
This preposterous statement serves only to demonize Israelis, as a people, and make them seem like blood thirsty animals, keen on killing. Osaid picks up on your line of thought and comes to the informed conclusion that "most Israeli millitary men pay NO respect to Palestinian Lives."
What you are attempting to do is to portray Israelis as a people of killers and murderers, without any morality or humanity. You use a terrible story to make false generalizations and accuse an entire people of murder. You seem to think that be demonizing us, you become righteous. Your claim that the Palestinians come from a long tradition of non-violent resistance is laugh-out-loud ridiculous (and your condescending tone does not, as usual, make you right). The PLO and Hamas are of course noted for their non violent agenda, Hamas winning the last elections by a landslide with an ultra violent, anti Jewish charter, avowing to wage eternal holy war on the infidel Zionists as long as they continue to occupy "their" land.
Here is an astonishingly non-violent excerpt from the charter:
"The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said:
"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).
Here's another non-violent one:
"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad".
http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm
Islamic Jihad, Hizbollah and the Muslim brotherhood are also widely renowned for their non violence. True, there are some non violent activists and groups working in the area, but they are absolutely marginal, even by their own admittance.
Here is one interesting reference:
http://www.palestinecenter.org/cpap/pubs/20020329ib.html
The truth is that both sides have chosen violence as their tactic, and both sides are paying the price.
Of course, many Israelis view Palestinians in just the same way - murderous, callous terrorists who would kill children going to a dance or riding the bus without batting a eye.
They claim that Palestinian society has become one in which such murderers are celebrities, their faces plastered on walls and buses. They claim it is a culture that celebrates indiscriminate murder as patriotic, religious heroism. They claim it is a society that rears it's children on hatred and fanaticism.
I say that such demonizing does nothing but create more hatred. The Palestinians have murdered and butchered and bombed and shot Israeli citizens by the thousands. How can Mr Ammous possibly feel he is on higher moral ground after such brutal violence and terror?
Mr. Ammous cannot feel any compassion towards Israelis since he deliberately uses propaganda to de-humanise them. Some Israelis de-humanise Palestinians in much the same way. The truth is that, morally, we have both reached rock bottom, and the only way to start climbing out of the pit is to stop this insanity and hatred. None of us occupy the moral high ground and we are all stuck together in this interminable quagmire of death.
Israel should reach a negotiated agreement with the Palestinians which should include the creation of a viable Palestinian state, the partition of Jerusalem and some sort of solution to the refugee problem. I wonder, what does Mr. Ammous think the Palestinians should do?
Vicki,
"Spain accepts descendants of Sephardic Jews expelled in 1492." Actually, and quite frankly, sadly, this is untrue.
Posted by: dkmy | Oct 14, 2007 8:08:48 PM
DKMY,
Thanks for your comments. Please allow me to show you why everything you wrote is either flat-out false, or, at least, misleading and deceptive.
You said: “you exploit the terrible death of a child to make your point.” It’s amusing you’d say that. If you’re accusing me of exploiting the death of a child to make a point that children shouldn’t die, then you’re absolutely right; I plead guilty. I don’t think children should die like Iman, and that’s why I wrote this. You, on the other hand, find that talking about her death amounts to “propaganda”. You, of course, also refuse to condemn the occupation whose perpetuation is the root cause of the death of these thousands of children. What courage and honesty.
You said: “The point being, of course, that Israelis (as such) are murderers”. I NEVER said such things. Please, if you can not answer the points that I make, it’s ok, you don’t have to reply. You also don’t have to make stuff up and say that I said it in order to discredit me. For the record, I’m nowhere near as stupid, racist or ignorant to ever make such a generalization about anyone. As a Zionist, I’m sure you find this impossible to fathom, but I don’t judge entire peoples by the actions of individuals.
You said: “This is a grave accusation, Sir, and coming from a Palestinian, hypocritical and false in the extreme.” First of all, I never made this accusation. You should learn to read. Secondly, you’re the one who is obviously making false generalizations about peoples. This accusation that I did NOT make is indeed a grave one. But it speaks volumes about your own racism when you say that making this accusation becomes even more grave if it comes from a Palestinian.
You said: “Of course the poor child's death is horrible and unwarranted.” This is frankly just disgusting, and, I’m sorry to say, typical disingenuous Zionist garbage. Whenever there is a discussion of a crime committed by Israel, Israel’s supporters will begin a paragraph by such false sympathy, before then proceeding to skirt the issue, place the blame back on Palestinians (by overgeneralizing the actions of individuals) and fail in the whole process to say one bad word about the occupation, the Israeli Army, or any of the root causes of this child’s death. You Zionists are so predictable, it’s getting boring.
If you really think the death of this child is horrible and unwarranted, you should be calling for the immediate end of the occupation that has killed her and thousands of others. If not, then you’ve clearly shown how much this child’s death matters to you.
You said: “To my mind, and to many Israelis like me, the soldier should have been shamefully discharged from the army, possibly tried for murder or manslaughter.” Words are incredibly cheap. If that really were the case, I wonder why you do not talk about this. Why you do not campaign about it. Why you do not go around calling for the IDF to have strict laws on child-murder, or why you don’t demand an end to the occupation. Please stop this disgusting tactic of feigning sadness over a child’s death while working deligiently to protect the criminal army that murders her.
As for the deaths of Israeli children. I have said this before (see my reply to Aguy109) and I will say it again: the death of all children is wrong, reprehensible and needs to stop. The difference between you and me, and the reason you are a hypocrite and I am not, is that I DO NOT belong to any organization that has murdered any children; and I DO NOT take a stance in defending any of these organizations. You on the other hand, may have served in the Israeli army, and even if you didn’t, you continue to defend them and refuse to say a single bad word about them. Once you stop defending this criminal army, then you can come to preach to me about your morals, as long as you support this army, you really ought to stop making such a hypocrite of yourself.
Also, the statement I made about not a single Israeli soldier facing any punishment for Palestinian children’s death remains true. You could only come up with ONE case of punishment, that of the murder of Tom Hurndall, who is a British adult, and NOT a Palestinian child. The only reason Tom Hurndall’s murderer faced any punishment (and it was very light punishment given the starkness of the murder) is that the British government threatened to ask for his extradition if Israel didn’t do anything. Hardly a strong case of the army setting a standard for ethical conduct for its soldier.
You said: “This preposterous statement serves only to demonize Israelis, as a people, and make them seem like blood thirsty animals, keen on killing.” No it doesn’t. Stop accusing me of saying stuff I didn’t say. What this statement says is that when you set an army loose amongst civilians, and you impose absolutely no conduct codes on them, and give them full authorization to do whatever they want, you are bringing about death and injury to thousands of civilians.
You continue at full length to accuse me of making generalizations about Israelis. I never did say such things, and you really make yourself out to be even more ridiculous than your pathetic viewpoints when you continue beating this dead horse.
Then, as I mentioned previously, you follow the all-too-predictable path of citing some propaganda about how some Palestinians are crazy murderers, as if that is supposed to make Iman’s murder ok. No one here is defending Hamas, so your harping on about them is just plain ridiculous.
You then move on from misinterpretation to outright lying when you say: “Mr. Ammous cannot feel any compassion towards Israelis since he deliberately uses propaganda to de-humanise them.” This is absolutely false. Not wanting a Palestinian child to be murdered does NOT mean that I want Israelis to die. I can not believe I need to spell this out, but arguing with you really means I need to spell everything out in the simplest terms, as you are certain to twist it around.
I half-agree with you on one thing though: “truth is that, morally, we have both reached rock bottom,” I think you are absolutely right when you speak for yourself on this, but please do not speak for me. I have never been part of any organization that has murdered anyone. I have never defended the murder of anyone. I have never condoned any murder whatsoever. And it would be extremely disingenuous, even by your standards, if you would equate the moral depravity of what the Israeli government and army have done to the Palestinians with what the Palestinians have tried to do in response. Ethnically cleansing a million Palestinians, leaving them all stateless, occupying another 3 million for 40 years, murdering thousands of children, demolishing thousands of homes, and destroying the livelihoods of 10 million Palestinians has been an ongoing project of oppression amongst the most barbaric and disgusting of the 20th or 21st century. The Palestinians have certainly not always been angels when attempting to fight back. But there is absolutely no way whatsoever that even someone as disingenuous as you could equate the perversity of the criminal with the victim.
Dkmy, I will not respond to you again if you continue putting words in my mouth that I didn’t say. You are sounding almost as ridiculous as david Friedlander, and, dare I say it, SLC.
Posted by: Saifedean | Oct 14, 2007 9:00:14 PM
Saif,
I want to add my voice to those who have commended you in this space for refraining from name-calling. It's a step in the right direction, and I appreciate it for many reasons. A big benefit to you is that it makes it much easier for a reader to follow your arguments than at past times, and I trust you are writing to be understood by as many readers as possible, not just to give your point of view another airing.
I'd like to ask you to try something -- to give commenters, even those who particularly don't agree with you, credit for writing to be understood, too, rather than for being mere mouthpieces of an opposing rhetoric. To read and think, "What does this person really think? How can I find -- or create -- common ground with him/her?" Sometimes it seems what you're interested in is the narrowest possible reading of what is before you, so that you appear not to see the forest for the trees. I'll give you an example or two of what I mean, in case this is worth something to you.
Way up above, Aguy109, an Israeli, wrote in to say he felt terrible about this (the death of Iman Al-Hams), adding that "I care more about the children of Sderot, where Qassam rockets from Gaza have been falling regularly for 7 years, than about the children in Gaza." You and many readers see the remark as hugely callous, when it was to my reading only a truism, along the lines of saying you care more about your own children than about someone else's. No one has suggested it's non-humanitarian of you to write about the death of a Palestinian child when you could have picked an Israeli child whose innocent life was also a forfeit to ceaseless hostilities. I understand that the death of this little girl was most bitter to you because she was one of yours who died in a particularly awful needless and unavenged way. To say that the deaths of Israeli children are several circles out from the death of Iman Al-Hams is not to say that you don't care about them, only that they matter less viscerally to you. If you had extended to Aguy109 the right to feelings similar to your own, you might have understood him differently and replied to him differently, but seeking that understanding would have meant accepting that he was a person more like you than unlike you in at least this one way.
With dkmy, Saif, you almost have a friend. I know, that sounds absurd to you, and certainly you and he disagree plenty. But what you have in him is an Israeli who would seek a political solution which you yourself might find just about good enough. Here's what he thinks should happen:"Israel should reach a negotiated agreement with the Palestinians which should include the creation of a viable Palestinian state, the partition of Jerusalem and some sort of solution to the refugee problem." He also calls for an end to the dehumanizing rhetoric on both sides, and feels that things are at an all time low, at rock-bottom. The treatment received by the soldier who killed Iman Al-Hams was not the treatment dkmy would have found just, either. Not by a long shot. What did he get for this? Scorn for having interpreted your words differently than you felt was right, a lecture on how his words were cheap, and finally he got bundled into the same bundle as some of your least-favorites when you called him "almost as ridiculous" as you find them.
I could go on, but I won't. Either you feel, by now, that I may be offering you something you can use, or you never will. What I see here, Saif, is a lot of missed opportunity -- in which you're hardly alone, be it said. But you are the essayist, everyone else but a commenter, and this confers on you some responsibility to be the deeper reader. For now, it seems to me you are listening mainly for those voices which confirm your present thinking, not for the ones which lead to new and crucially different thinking, and you are concentrating more on your outrage at being possibly misunderstood in matters that are open to inference than on the perils of missing other people's major points.
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Oct 14, 2007 11:44:50 PM
For those in this forum who try to mitigate this monstrous act against an innocent child, please replace this 13-year old girl, Iman, with an Israeli child or any child and you might grasp the chilling injustice of this incident.
Posted by: delphi | Oct 15, 2007 2:50:26 AM
Post a comment