response 75 of 92:

Nov 20 18:08 UTC 2003

Bru may be technically correct... but if a law enforcement officer in the US
even fires his gun in the air, he's going to have to turn in his gun for
ballistics testing, file a report, and get through some legal procedures. 
If somebody is actually injured or killed there will likely be a civil lawsuit
along with wore serious internal investigations.

response 77 of 92:

Nov 20 23:53 UTC 2003

Fuck yourself happyboy.  It is probably what you know how to do best.

I know what I was trained to do, adn I have only been out of service a month.
And I knew this basic tenet long before I became a law officer.

response 79 of 92:

Nov 21 08:58 UTC 2003

Scott just can't help be a twit, with his attempt to mirror what I said.
The problem is that it doesn't fit; it's just another false-equivalence:

> He doesn't understand that by making unwarranted assumptions and
> presenting them as valid conclusions that he reveals his own prejudices.

What unwarranted assumptions masquerading as conclusions have I made?

Yours can be see in #61.

- - - - - - -

Rules of engagement are different in a war zone than for the police, and
when your enemy disguises himself as a civilian and then blows himself
up -- along with you -- that changes things further.

sj2, would you allow your children to lay bird traps (easily confused
for terrorists laying mines) in a closed military zone when alternatives
are available?  (Again, does anyone really believe that this small area
is better for catching birds than anywhere else?)

The cynic in me thinks that this is done intentionally. For there are
two obvious benefits.

1. If the bird hunters are shot, it opens Israel to criticism.
(Witness this item!)

2. This in turn makes it less likely that terrorists perpetrating
attacks will be shot before they can perform their murderous deed.

A "win-win" situation, especially if one doesn't mind sacrificing
for the cause or believes that the "martyr" will go to heaven and
be rewarded with virgins.

response 81 of 92:

Nov 21 18:24 UTC 2003

Re 79:  Wow.  Leeron really shows his attitude here.

So let me connect the dots.
1.  Leeron claims that he never portrays Palestinians as violent or
irrational.  
2.  Leeron's explanation for the incident in #0 is apparently that the
Palestinians involved sent their 10-year-old in to a "military area" in order
to get himself shot, so that Israel would end up looking bad.

response 83 of 92:

Nov 22 04:33 UTC 2003

Yawn.  Still can't address the topic, Scott?
Are you limited to talking about me?  What an odd obsession.
Can you explain the prejudice you exhibited in #61?

sj2, there is no information that this was the "only" place to hunt
birds. To the contrary, I think someone made the argument that it was
"better". That claim sounds curious to me (I don't hunt birds), but
it seems to indicate that there are alternatives.

Contrary to your impression, except during military operations in
pursuit of terrorists, there are no Israeli troops in the towns.

You may be right that this soldier was edgy, that he feared that he
would come under attack from a bomber. But this doesn't warrant the
conclusion that he did so intentionally or that Israeli soldiers,
ostensibly due to their hatred, murder Arab children (as Aaron charged).

Thus my comparison to the incident in the illegal Iraqi gun-market.
Someone was firing a gun near American soldiers who are under constant
threat of attack.

We would be wise to remember the words of former Israeli Foreign Minister
Shimon Peres: "In war, mistakes will happen. But the greatest mistake is
to go to war."

In fact, if Aaron's charge was true, what kind of parent would allow their
child to go anywhere near a military area? If the parent believes that the
child would be in imminent danger (whether this was true or not), either
he would forbid such hunting -- or prove my cynicism correct.

response 85 of 92:

Nov 22 08:42 UTC 2003

NABLUS, November 4 (IslamOnline.net) - Israeli occupation forces have 
adopted a new tactic in detaining what they call " Palestinian 
suspects", based on detaining their wives to get them to surrender in 
return for releasing their women, IslamOnline.net was told by 
Palestinian wives.

Tamam Abdel Wahid, wife of Anad Salah El-Refae, who is one of those 
wanted by the occupation forces, told IOL her detention story when 
Israeli soldiers broke into her house and arrested her on October 25.

 My 7-month-old baby kept crying but his tears failed to move any 
feelings inside the soldier who grabbed and threw him on the bed. 
Then, the Israeli soldiers arrested me,  she told IslamOnline.net 
Monday, November 3.

She added that she had nothing to do but to comply with instructions 
and accompany the soldiers to their military jeep, after blindfolding 
her and leaving her baby with her boy and two girls.

Tamam's tragedy was not a first or a last among Palestinian wives of 
Palestinian resistance fighters, as internal Israeli intelligence 
adopted such a policy against the wives of senior leaders of Islamic 
Resistance movements in the West Bank.

Occupation forces arrested the wife of Sheikh Gamal Abu El-Heiga, a 
Hamas leader, in the northern West Bank to force him to surrender. A 
surgery for removing a brain tumor was due to be carried out on her 
before detention.

Even after arresting her handicapped husband, occupation intelligence 
did not release her but she remained in a prison for Palestinian women 
so far.

Another Victim

The family of Amgad Ebeidy, 25, who comes on top of the list of the 
wanted and who is accused of being the head of Al-Quds Brigades, 
military wing of the Islamic Jihad movement, was also a victim of this 
tactic, as his wife kamilia was arrested after destroying their home 
on October 27.

 A large force came to us in the middle of the night and forced us to 
get out of our house and told us they would destroy it,  Ebeidy s 
mother told IslamOnline.net.

 They refused to let us take anything with us. We begged them to allow 
us to take out the furniture and they paid no attention,  she 
maintained, adding that the occupation soldiers brought down the two-
storey building that housed 12 persons.

 Since I was arrested, they insulted me and threatened to leave me in 
detention for a long time and to be exposed to horrible torture,  
Kamilia, released by the Israeli forces after a day in prison, said.

 The soldiers gathered around me and asked me about Amgad and I said 
that I don t know his whereabouts but they accused me of being a liar 
and an accomplice and threatened me of life imprisonment,  Kamilia 
said.

 Officers started to practice psychological pressures on me and asked 
me to persuade my husband to surrender,  she added.

 If they think that such measures will humiliate our people, they are 
mistaken. Yet, where are human right defenders? Where is the Arab 
conscience? Where is the justice they demand day and night?  she 
wondered.

It is worth mentioning that the Ministry of POW and the Released 
Affairs has declared in August 2003 that the occupation authorities 
were still detaining 73 Palestinian women, including 11 girls.

response 87 of 92:

Nov 22 16:34 UTC 2003

I do not know if that is true.  Certainly he is the best spokesman for that
position here on GREX, but that doesn't mean he is the only one holding any
specific position.

I have refrained from commenting on the people hunting birds, but shall do
so now.  It seems to me that the parents of the boy were stupid and careless.
remember, he was not the only one out there hunting birds, he had relatives
with him.  While he may not have known better than to go into the area and
hunt, they should have, and they should have kept him out if it was possibly
dangerous.

The palestinians have had no problem using kids to provoke the Isrealis in
the past, adn I am sure they will have no problem doing so in the future.

The isrealis could have ended this 40 year ago by pushing all palestinians
out of the Country.

They didn't.

They could have done it 30 years ago by pushing all palestinians out of the
country.

They didn't.

They had the military might to do this any time in the past 20 years.

They didn't.

This should tell the palestinian supporters something.  It should tell them
the isrealis WANT to work with them.  They WANT peace.  They Want to have an
integrated nation.

The palestinians DON'T!

response 89 of 92:

Nov 25 22:25 UTC 2003

Good points, Bruce. The converse is also true. The Arabs could have made
peace in 1937, 1947, 1949, 1956, 1967, 1977, 1994, 2000.... but with the
exception of a few countries (Egypt in the late 1970s, Jordan in 1994)
chose not to.

Once again Scott allows his imagination to run away with fiction.
While the situation has gone from good to worse due to Arab terrorism
(in Gaza, a 64x increase in the number of people being fed by UNRWA)
there is no starvation that would make sending children into a closed
military area an "acceptable risk".

> there are going to be lots of people hunting birds for FOOD.
> there are going to [be] people already claiming other, safer areas

Really? Have there been turf wars over bird hunting areas?
I mean, wouldn't you rather squabble with your neighbor than be shot at
by the Israeli army?  (If things were as alleged, if hate-filled Israeli
troops were just waiting to shoot Arab children, one would expect the
exact opposite behavior.)

Of course, this is all hogwash.
The birds aren't even being hunted for food!
THEY WERE HUNTING FOR *SONG* BIRDS!!!

Will someone please help Scott wipe the egg off his face?

response 91 of 92:

Nov 26 01:07 UTC 2003

Ah, what the heck. Nicely done, Leeron, I'd missed that detail.