10 thoughts on “IDF Justice, Execution Style – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. Once again, your dishonesty is manifest. B’Tselem have raised suspicions that there was a confirmed killing – based on testimonies from palestinian witnesses (including the family of one of the terrorists, whose honesty can be questioned). You, on the other hand, post it like this:

    B’Tselem reports the shocking finding that they were killed while sitting in a car, execution styleAgain, this was not the finding, and you know it. Because if you don’t know it, then you are admitting you can’t read and understand a 4 paragraph report.

    Yeah, go ahead and delete the comment. It’s fine. I have a screenshot, and I’ll post on your dishonesty (again).

  2. Last year Richards wrote:

    Israel is entitled to defend itself & pursue wanted men as long as it has real evidence to prove their culpability & doesn’t kill or maim innocent civilians in the process.

    Today he says

    For the benefit of my opponents let me say that I’m not making a judgment on the alleged crimes of the victims. They may indeed have been guilty of terror actions against Israeli civilians. My point is that liquidating them was not the way to achieve justice.

    It’s not about justice, It’s about defence.

  3. What is shocking about that? It’s not the first time and wont be the last time. It’s just another extra-judicial killing, a targeted assassination, whatever one wants to call it instead of a “cold-blooded murder”. It’s certainly not justice, it’s a policy of lynching, with Israel as self-appointed prosecutor, judge and executioner. Nor is it about defense – certainly no such right is granted to those accused of alleged crimes. No proof for their guilt is ever provided – nor demanded by those who applaud or tolerate the practice.

    But I guess since the Israeli propaganda machine keeps telling us how Palestinians raise their kids to be terrorists and how they are all terrorists at heart, we are also asked to believe that the murder of any Palestinian can be justified as “self-defense” – or in the case of children, a “preemptive strike?”

    There is a war going on and both sides are killing innocent people, but there is such a blatant double standard as to how these actions are presented. That is what is shocking.

  4. As for Aussie Dave’s bile. Yes, B’Tselem uses the word “suspicion” because, unlike him, they’re careful when they make accusations. And isn’t it interesting that the man who claims he doesn’t hate Muslims or Palestinians (lies all) automatically mistrusts a Palestinian eyewitness account of the incident. He certainly would never mistrust an IDF or Israeli eyewitness account of such an incident.

    Here is what the B’Tselem press release says. I assure you that B’Tselem not only had eyewitness accounts, but they asked forensic specialists to go over the photographs & other evidence before making the following statement.

    B’Tselem’s investigation of the incident raises the suspicion that in violation of the High Court’s ruling, no attempt was made to arrest the suspects, and that the security forces operated as though on an assassination mission, shooting the suspects from behind with massive automatic gunfire although the latter did not try to escape or use their weapons.

    The investigation also raises a grave suspicion that the forces “confirmed the killing” of the suspects. Testimonies indicate that after three suspects, who were sitting in a parked car, were shot, a member of the security forces went over to the car and fired a single shot at each of them, from extremely close range. The same person also shot ‘Imad al-Kamal, the driver, who was lying wounded and unarmed on the road beside the car.

    That’s an assassination, execution whatever you want to call it. If it isn’t then provide evidence to dispute it. Provide actual statements from the soldiers involved saying what they did or did not do (Israel would never do that).

    Aussie Dave is one of the saddest, most pathetic of the hard-right Israel First bloggers. Would you quote that in yr blog when you write about me please, Dave L? There’s an interesting pathology going on here. Dave regularly when he posts here writes in disgust that he’s so offended that he’ll never return. Yet he always does like a moth to flame. And so he has once again. He takes it as his personal crusade to point out the “truth” about me to the thin niche of fellow Israel Firsters who read his swill. And when I ban him he always comes back using a new IP address to circumvent my banning. When you write more lies about me, Dave, do me the favor of including a link so your readers can visit and confirm their and your prejudices.

    @Amir: Killing militants in cold blood is not “defense.” It’s among the most OFFENSIVE behavior Israel could engage in. And I said Israel could “pursue” militants, not summarily execute them. Besdies, these individuals were not planning or executing terror attacks & had instead offered to turn away from their violent past which the IDF had rejected. You do remember the Jewish principle of teshuvah which says that anyone who sincerely offers to repent must be taken at their word & allowed to do so? Or have we Jews decided we no longer need to honor our own sacred religious principles?

    And btw you’re conveniently neglected the fact that when I first wrote about this incident you claimed the victims were killed in a firefight. Would you care to retract that statement now?

  5. According to the B’Tselem website there were three witnesses that they report: Ibrahim Abu Rashed, Muhammad Abu ‘Ahour, and Fadi al-Balbul. According to their own testimony, two of them were INDOORS when the gunfire began so they could not possibly see what preceded the gunfire or who opened fire first.
    Fadi al-Balbul:

    Around 6:10 P.M., I was giving a haircut to a customer and another was waiting. Suddenly, I heard the sound of gunfire outside. I went to the door to see what was happening.

    Muhammad Abu ‘Ahour:

    We went into the store. I told Darar about the problem, and he took my phone and began to check it. While he was checking it, I heard the sound of gunfire outside. I immediately went outside to see what was happening

    Ibrahim Abu Rashed claims he saw the whole thing but his testimony contradicts that of Muhammad Abu ‘Ahour. They both claim that someone called out the name Imad but Muhammad Abu ‘Ahour claims that the man who called out the name “was standing on the street next to an orange minibus with Palestinian plates” AFTER Imad was shot Muhammed saw six soldiers approach the Daihatsu and open fire. Muhammed also testified that there was gunfire BEFORE Imad’s name was called out. Ibrahim doesn’t testify about any gunfire BEFORE Imad’s name was called out (contradicting Muhammed) and testified that the soldiers came out before Imad’s name was called out, and that the soldier’s were the ones who called out his name (again contradicting Muhammed).
    Muhammed confirmed that there were weapons in the Daihatsu, so the men were, according to him, armed. According to Fadi, his uncle Ahmad HAD been given amnesty and so was supposed to lay down his weapons. His presence in the car with these terrorists and weapons clearly shows that he violated the terms of the amnesty.
    So even if these witnesses aren’t purposely lying, and it certainly is possible that they are, their testimony is very unreliable. I have not seen any reason to doubt the IDF’s claim that they were on a mission to arrest these men, certainly not this unreliable B’Tselem report.

  6. Amir, really this is beyond pathetic. Being an apologist for the intelligence apparatus is one thing. But what they did is criminal. I’ve read all 3 sets of testimony. Nothing any of the 3 said contradict ea. other. And they agree in most of the essentials. This was cold blooded murder. Murder most foul. The perpetrators are fiendish, evil men. I could only say this after reading the eyewitness testimony. Normally, I would never say this about another human being. But this is different.

    I would like you to present a single instance in which a report or claim of B’Tselem’s has been proven to be wrong. They are one of the most reliable human rights groups I’ve ever seen. And I’ll tell you, I trust B’Tselem’s judgment far more than yours & even far more than the IDF. Further, if the report was wrong or a lie the IDF would be all over this story denying it at the top of their lungs. The fact that they have not, so far, said a word is very telling.

    You judgement about the unreliability of the witnesses is questionable as usual. While some of them may not have seen the beginning of the incident, they all say that they ran to see what transpired so they certainly saw some of the incident & enough to make a judgment of what happened. Not to mention, as I wrote, that the forensic evidence would clearly show where the bullets came from and whether the victims had taken any offensive action.

    And are you saying that because a man’s request for amnesty had been accepted by the Israelis (not a fact verified in any other story I’ve read about this incident btw) and he was in a car that contained weapons that this justified his liquidation???

    You are pathetic to justify this brutal killing.

  7. While some of them may not have seen the beginning of the incident

    The beginning is the most important part. If they were given a chance to turn themselves in and decided not to, it really doesn’t matter to me what angle the bullets came from.

    the forensic evidence would clearly show where the bullets came from and whether the victims had taken any offensive action

    So present the forensic evidence or the coroner’s report.
    The IDF obviously had good intelligence here, why not just strike the car with a missile from a helicopter? I can think of only two reasons. Either they wanted to minimise the risk of civilian casualties or they wanted the men arrested, Either way you should be proud of the IDF.

    And are you saying that because a man’s request for amnesty had been accepted by the Israelis (not a fact verified in any other story I’ve read about this incident btw) and he was in a car that contained weapons that this justified his liquidation???

    Obviously, yes. Especially if he was given a chance to turn himself, and even if he hadn’t he could have turned himself in whenever he wanted to.

    We obviously differ on what constitutes legitimate defensive measures. When the suicide bomber is at the entrance of a shopping mall and some poor immigrant earning a minimun wage is blown up as he tries to stop him, then it’s too late.

  8. You’re case is falling apart fast. You said:”When you add to this the fact that several of the victims had applied for amnesty–under a joint PA-Israeli program under which a militant agrees to renounce violence and involvement in militant activities–and been refused”
    I already pointed out that one of them was apparently granted amnesty and was in violation of the terms of amnesty. Another, Shehade, the most dangerous of the terrorists rejected amnesty:

    Finally, asked why he rejected amnesty in favor of continuing with armed struggle, he said, “It is the revolutionaries who have the right to give amnesty to the occupation, and not the opposite.”

    from the maan news agency (12/03/08)

  9. The beginning is the most important part.

    Go back & read the testimony. EVERY SINGLE WITNESS says the assassins were shooting from behind the car. How could the victims have realized they were being attacked, turned around & fired back at their assailants? No one says that the victims used a weapon. EVERY SINGLE WITNESS saw only IDF assassins firing. EVERY SINGLE WITNESS viewed the bodies in the car & noted they were still seated next to each other, one with his head resting on his friend’s body. Does that sound like 3 men who were resisting their attackers? Or like three men ambushed before they had a chance to do a thing to defend themselves. In other words, pls. find a single shred of evidence FROM THE TESTIMONY that justifies a supposition that they resisted in any way.

    Either way you should be proud of the IDF.

    That does it. You’re banned. I can’t stand your ugly amoral smugness. PROUD??? I’m disgusted & how dare you tell me I should be proud of butchery. You’ve really gone beyond the pale this time, Amir. If you wanted to get a rise out of me you did. You’re no longer welcome here. You can keep finding new IP addresses to get access but I’ll delete yr comments as quickly as you post them.

    As far as the reason the assassins attacked and did not use a missile, the demolition of the family home of one of the victims the previous week points to revenge as being the motive–plain cold revenge. Not a desire to protect civilians & certainly no desire to arrest them since they were ambushed from behind & not a single witness notes any effort to attempt to arrest them.

  10. The Israeli press gives less attention to what happens in the West Bank and in Gaza since Israelis don’t care about what’s going on there.
    Many Israeli hardly care about what’s happening in the nearby city. We are less involved. Less people have faith that they have any influence about what’s happening outside their houses. This is sad indeed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link