Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumIsrael investigates B'Tselem claims on shooting Palestinians
No one, no group, will Israel tolerate...they'll label them terrorist in one fashion or anotherwhen challenged.
Six months have passed since B'Tselem disseminated the video footage documenting the killing of two Palestinian youths Nadim Nawarah and Muhammad Salameh during the May 15 Nakba Day demonstrations in Bitunya, a small town near Ramallah. An inquiry by the organization raised suspicion that the youths had been deliberately killed.
On Nov. 12, it was authorized for publication that a border police soldier was arrested on suspicion of murdering the two youths, having used live bullets instead of rubber ones. In tandem, the soldiers commander was also questioned on suspicion of having known that live fire was used but having failed to report it.
The footage, filmed by a security camera located at the Bitunya intersection, stirred up a huge storm in Israel and around the world. The Israel Defense Forces emphatically argued that the riot-control force had not used live ammunition. The video footage has been tendentiously edited, failing to reflect the violent disturbance, was the response of the IDF spokesman. That response failed to address the allegations of the Palestinians that live ammo slugs had been removed from the bodies of the youths, who apparently posed no danger to the soldiers and were probably not involved in the violent demonstration that was taking place at the same time.
Defense Minister Moshe (Bogie) Yaalon also called the video into question, reinforcing the prevailing assumption in Israel that the Palestinians had, as usual, distributed a bogus and doctored video.
snip*The fact that the video was disseminated by BTselem an organization that Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman dubbed in the past as aiding terror caused many Israelis to be even more suspicious of the videos authenticity.
Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/11/btselem-ngo-hagai-el-ad-interview-israel-palestine-violence.html##ixzz3J5gyw48v
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 600 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Israel investigates B'Tselem claims on shooting Palestinians (Original Post)
Jefferson23
Nov 2014
OP
Israeli authorities have proven they cannot investigate suspected violations
Jefferson23
Nov 2014
#3
King_David
(14,851 posts)1. Took 2 reads to realize the 1st paragraph was your own commentary
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)2. At least you finally got it..that's what is important.n/t
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)3. Israeli authorities have proven they cannot investigate suspected violations
of international humanitarian law by Israel in the Gaza Strip
Published:
5 Sep 2014
Israel launched Operation Protective Edge in the Gaza Strip on 8 July 2014 and ended it, after a ceasefire was declared, on 26 August 2014. During the operation, Israel violated international humanitarian law in some cases, and many other cases are highly suspect. However, BTselem does not intend to demand that these suspicions be investigated by Israels current investigation mechanisms. This is due to the experience that BTselem gained following past military offensives in the Gaza Strip, which shows that there is currently no official body in Israel capable of conducting independent investigations of suspected violations of international humanitarian law. Israel's law enforcement system, in its present form, cannot adequately address suspicions regarding the militarys conduct during attacks on the Gaza Strip in three major areas:
Investigating senior political officials and military commanders: The overall policy guiding the military's actions is laid out by senior political officials, who are also involved in making and authorizing operational decisions. Other decisions are made by senior military commanders whose rank is either equivalent to that of the MAG or higher. In both cases, no mechanism exists for investigating the lawfulness of actions authorized on those levels.
The MAG's dual role: On one hand, the MAG gives legal counsel to the military before and during combat; on the other hand, he is responsible for deciding whether to open criminal investigations into soldiers' conduct. This dual role creates an inherent conflict of interests in cases where orders and commands given following the MAG's counsel raise suspicion that the law was breached. In these situations, the MAG who was responsible for legally authorizing measures suspected of being unlawful is charged with retrospectively deciding whether to initiate a criminal investigation into his own conduct and that of his subordinates.
Investigating incidents in which soldiers are suspected of having breached military orders: In the vast majority of such cases, investigations focus only on the conduct and responsibility of low-ranking soldiers and commanders in the field. First, an operational inquiry is usually carried out; then, the MAG decides whether to order an investigation by the Military Police Investigations Unit (MPIU) based on the inquiry's findings. In the rare instances in which an investigation is indeed opened, its findings are passed on to the MAG Corps, where the decision is made as to which measures if any are to be taken against the persons involved. Carrying out an operational inquiry in the unit prior to an MPIU investigation delays the criminal investigation sometimes by many months. Furthermore, it compromises the reliability of eyewitness accounts given by soldiers, who provide their versions during the operational inquiry. MPIU investigators often cannot reach the scene of the incident and have difficulty obtaining testimony from Palestinian victims or witnesses. These procedures are so lengthy that, in some cases, the MAG's decision whether or not to take steps against the perpetrators is made several years after the incident. B'Tselem encountered these issues in the last two military offensives Israel conducted in the Gaza Strip Operation Cast Lead (2009) and Operation Pillar of Defense (2012).
Operation Cast Lead, December 2008 January 2009
in full: http://www.btselem.org/accountability/20140905_failure_to_investigate
Published:
5 Sep 2014
Israel launched Operation Protective Edge in the Gaza Strip on 8 July 2014 and ended it, after a ceasefire was declared, on 26 August 2014. During the operation, Israel violated international humanitarian law in some cases, and many other cases are highly suspect. However, BTselem does not intend to demand that these suspicions be investigated by Israels current investigation mechanisms. This is due to the experience that BTselem gained following past military offensives in the Gaza Strip, which shows that there is currently no official body in Israel capable of conducting independent investigations of suspected violations of international humanitarian law. Israel's law enforcement system, in its present form, cannot adequately address suspicions regarding the militarys conduct during attacks on the Gaza Strip in three major areas:
Investigating senior political officials and military commanders: The overall policy guiding the military's actions is laid out by senior political officials, who are also involved in making and authorizing operational decisions. Other decisions are made by senior military commanders whose rank is either equivalent to that of the MAG or higher. In both cases, no mechanism exists for investigating the lawfulness of actions authorized on those levels.
The MAG's dual role: On one hand, the MAG gives legal counsel to the military before and during combat; on the other hand, he is responsible for deciding whether to open criminal investigations into soldiers' conduct. This dual role creates an inherent conflict of interests in cases where orders and commands given following the MAG's counsel raise suspicion that the law was breached. In these situations, the MAG who was responsible for legally authorizing measures suspected of being unlawful is charged with retrospectively deciding whether to initiate a criminal investigation into his own conduct and that of his subordinates.
Investigating incidents in which soldiers are suspected of having breached military orders: In the vast majority of such cases, investigations focus only on the conduct and responsibility of low-ranking soldiers and commanders in the field. First, an operational inquiry is usually carried out; then, the MAG decides whether to order an investigation by the Military Police Investigations Unit (MPIU) based on the inquiry's findings. In the rare instances in which an investigation is indeed opened, its findings are passed on to the MAG Corps, where the decision is made as to which measures if any are to be taken against the persons involved. Carrying out an operational inquiry in the unit prior to an MPIU investigation delays the criminal investigation sometimes by many months. Furthermore, it compromises the reliability of eyewitness accounts given by soldiers, who provide their versions during the operational inquiry. MPIU investigators often cannot reach the scene of the incident and have difficulty obtaining testimony from Palestinian victims or witnesses. These procedures are so lengthy that, in some cases, the MAG's decision whether or not to take steps against the perpetrators is made several years after the incident. B'Tselem encountered these issues in the last two military offensives Israel conducted in the Gaza Strip Operation Cast Lead (2009) and Operation Pillar of Defense (2012).
Operation Cast Lead, December 2008 January 2009
in full: http://www.btselem.org/accountability/20140905_failure_to_investigate