Wednesday, 18 February 2015

Three Missing Israeli’s Found Dead – Tim Veater

 Three Missing Israeli’s Found Dead – Tim Veater
It is reported that the three young Israeli males – Eyal Yifrach, 19, Gilad
Shaar, 16, and Naftali Fraenkel, a 16-year-old with dual Israeli-American
citizenship – have been found close to the West Bank town of Hebron from which
they set off before they disappeared.
In the CBS report headed up “Bodies of three Israeli teenagers found in a field
near Hebron.” (see: newyork.cbslocal.com) describes how “The Shin Bet said the
bodies had been buried in a field near the village of Halhul, just north of
Hebron.” In support of the location it adds a statement by Binyamin Proper, who
was among the civilian volunteers that found the bodies. “He told an Israeli TV
channel that a member of the search party “saw something suspicious on the
ground, plants that looked out of place, moved them and moved some rocks and
then found the bodies. We realized it was them and we called the army.””
Compare and contrast this with the statement only a couple of paragraphs before
as follows: “An overwhelming Israeli security force had swept through the West
Bank in a desperate search for the three boys before their bodies were found in
a cave.” This is puzzling to say the least.
I am sure I do not need to point out the fact that a field is definitely not a
cave, nor could it be confused with it. Plants do not usually grow in
Palestinian caves, nor is it very easy to bury in a cave in my experience. If
they were found in a cave, would a newspaper describe the place prominently as
“a field”? Unlikely I would have thought, particularly as it relates to such a
prominent story with all its serious ramifications. Journalists are taught to
confirm and corroborate.
Of course we could just put this rather fundamental difference down to sloppy
reporting. Somehow, given the story and the news outlet I doubt it. More likely
it accurately reflects what the reporters were told, possibly from slightly
different sources. Such differences can mean very little or they can mean a lot.
Past experience teaches it would be foolish to ignore it. It may be just a
reporting error. On the other hand such conflicting reportage can flag up more
fundamental problems and it is always interesting to see how the problem is
handled once the basic evidential contradiction (for that is what it is) is
spotted. We shall have to wait and see.
Another somewhat worrying element – and anyone who has followed some of my other
articles on high-profile cases where state governments are involved will
appreciate how it keeps recurring in such a way as to raise suspicions about
what is actually going on – is the way in which, prior to any forensic evidence
becomes available, people distant to the actual discovery or investigation (in
this case the Israeli Prime Minister) make pronouncements that appear to
indicate they are not only sure how the victims met their deaths, but who
carried it out. He also of course cannot resist making political capital out of
what is essentially a personal tragedy. This always raises a red flag.
In this case CBS reports Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as saying in a
statement “Hamas is responsible, and Hamas will pay.” He adds the teenagers
“were kidnapped and murdered in cold blood by wild beasts.”
A little later the report adds, rather conveniently some might think, “Last
week, Israel identified two well-known Hamas operatives as the chief suspects.
The two men remained on the run late Monday.” So not only is the organisation
and method of the killings pretty much sorted, two individuals are already in
the frame. Naming the perpetrator prior to the investigation has been a feature
of suspect incidents from Kennedy through Boston bombing we would do well to
remember.
It then adds a source called “B’nai B’rith International” which blamed
Palestinian militants for the boys’ deaths. Notice the subtle change of emphasis
here from “Hamas”, a political organisation labelled “terrorist” by western
governments, to the more general term “Palestinians”. I repeat these differences
should not be treated lightly. They always indicate deeper trains of thought.
To quote: “The kidnapping and subsequent murders are the direct product of the
constant and relentless incitement taught by the Palestinians,” B’nai B’rith
International said in a statement. “For many decades, generations of
Palestinians have been raised on a diet of hate, which feeds the terror
targeting Israel. The twin evils of incitement and terrorism have once again
shown that Israel does not have a credible partner for peace.” Of course it goes
without saying that this statement is not balanced in any way by explanation why
there should be hatred arising from historical or continuing injustice and
violence on the part of the State of Israel. That would be too much to expect.
I am not suggesting for a moment that the young men were not killed in the way
described – how could I possibly know? But what I am saying is that multiple
cases prove that governments have, and do, create extreme circumstances for
political purposes, to stir up emotions and to provide moral justification for
actions that would otherwise be ruled out by the condemnation they would elicit.
Israel has proved it is quite prepared to assassinate individuals in cold blood
by wild beasts (to adopt the PM’s colourful turn of phrase) and had its agents
jumping for joy at the collapse of the Twin Towers, so by any rational
assessment it is not beyond the realm of possibility. I say no more than that.
The treatment of the story by CBS is understandably emotive. Whichever way you
look at it, the unnecessary premature and violent death of three young men has
to be in any situation, in any language. It is clear that CBS is very aware of
its Jewish New York audience and turns to them for a reaction which is fairly
predictable. Fairly stated, it is an article that uses the three victims to
represent a wider victim state. It reinforces the impression Netanyahu only
recently wanted to give that Israel “was under attack from all sides” whether
the reverse of the truth or not.
So we feel for the families of the dead. For them it is a huge tragedy and loss.
But so too it was for the families of the two young Palestinians shot dead by
Israeli snipers in Bethlehem on Friday 6th December 2013.
The IDF uses live ammunition against civilian children as it did in 2009 when it
killed a 13 year old teenager in Hebron and a protester in Nil’in in June. The
former incident occurred after Clashes had taken place almost every day in
Bethlehem’s Aida Refugee Camp since three Palestinian militants were killed in
Yatta by Israeli soldiers. At the same time, two further Palestinians in Aida
Camp were shot with live ammunition.
Apropos the December killings http://972mag.com/photos-palestinians-shot-by-israeli-sniper-using-silenced-rifle/83164/
reported, “This week saw several more incidents of live ammunition used against
Palestinians in Bethlehem before Friday’s shootings which wounded two. In the
second shooting Friday, a bullet passed through both legs (above the knees) of
the young Palestinian man.”
Then on 15 May this year Nadim Siam Nuwara, 17, and Muhammad Mahmoud Odeh Abu
al-Thahir, 16, were killed at a Nakba Day protest near the Ofer military prison
in the occupied West Bank village of Beitunia. As luck (?) would have it, CNN
actually captured video footage of the IDF soldier doing the shooting which
rather destroyed the web of lies put out by the Israeli military. (see
http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/cnn-camera-catches-israeli-soldier-who-fired-killed-palestinian-teen)
“Israel has continued to deny its occupation forces used live bullets, intimated
that Palestinians might have shot the boys, and even suggested that the security
camera footage capturing the boys deaths had been faked.”
So you see Israel’s military, intentionally and pre meditatively, as a matter
of government policy, shoots Palestinian children with live ammunition for the
purpose of killing them. In fact agents of the state have a track record of
killing at home and abroad yet Israel’s Prime Minister claims to be the innocent
victim and uses events such as the recent tragic deaths as confirmation and
excuse for greater disproportionate violence. It is worth noting that since just
the year 2000 no less than 1,400 CHILDREN have been killed by Israeli forces!
Whether it has in fact engineered the present situation has no foundation. But
that it is capable of doing so is plainly not beyond the realms of possibility.
Significantly and perhaps predictably, when I searched for Nadim Siam Nuwara,
17, and Muhammad Mahmoud Odeh Abu al-Thahir, 16, on the same CBS web site that
carried the very one-sided report of the killing of the three “Israli teens”, I
found … nothing. END.

No comments:

Post a Comment