The media’s double standard on child victims of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Israel/Palestine
on 56 Comments
Musab al-Sarahneh (photo:Ma'an Images)

Musab al-Sarahneh (photo:Ma’an Images)

This post is about 2 children, each violently attacked recently and each victims of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict.

Above is a photo of 6-year-old Musab al-Sarahneh. He was shot in the eye by Israeli forces who opened fired in a refugee camp south of Hebron last week. He lost his right eye. It was reported by Ma’an News on Thursday and picked up by The Palestinian Chronicle and a site called USMessageBoard. According to the family the attack occurred while the boy was a passenger in the family’s car returning from a visit to his uncle’s house.

Noam Glick, 9, is taken to a Jerusalem hospital after being shot in Psagot, a Jewish settlement. (Emil Salman / Associated Press / October 5, 2013)

Noam Glick, 9, is taken to a Jerusalem hospital after being attacked in Psagot, a Jewish settlement. (Emil Salman / Associated Press / October 5, 2013)

Above is a photo of Noam Glick, a 9 year old Israeli girl who was attacked outside her home in the illegal West Bank settlement of Psagot, near Ramallah, yesterday evening. Glick was playing in her yard when she was attacked by a hooded assailant. While it is still unclear whether she was shot or stabbed with a knife police say the attack on the child was a “probable terrorist attack” but they are “not ruling out the possibility of other motives.”

The attack was reported throughout Israel as well as several US MSM sources including  Los Angeles Times, New York Times, AP via USAToday, Huffington Post and countless other news sources around the globe.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the attack on Glick heinous and hateful and pointed an “accusatory finger at the Palestinian Authority.”  The Jerusalem Post reported Palestinian incitement was responsible for Psagot incident as well as AFP who added “he held the Palestinian leadership responsible even though the attack took place in an area of the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control.” The Jerusalem Post:

“The events of the past month may lead to an escalation in the West Bank,” Shamni told Army Radio.

“It’s very difficult to determine if this is the start of an intifada,” he continued.

“However, we have here the evidence of three separate events. We need to look at them.

 

This attack came after two separate incidents in the last 2 weeks, of Israeli soldiers killed in the West Bank. Also there’s been an escalation of incursions by Israeli military forces into refugee camps in the West Bank resulting in the death of several Palestinians, including youths, which precipitated the soldier’s deaths. None of those incidents were included in what the Jerusalem Post characterizes as the “three separate incidences” that may have lead to an escalation of violence. However, Jodi Rudoren reporting for The New York Times included these attacks in her coverage of events today.

Israeli forces have killed several Palestinians in overnight raids in the Jenin and Qalandiya refugee camps in the West Bank in recent weeks, heightening tensions around the nascent talks.

Some initial and many followup reports on Glick’s attack included information about the recent ‘peace talks’. Rudoren mentioned several right-wing Israeli politicians who oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state “seized on the shooting to call for a halt” in negotiations.

“We’ve returned to a situation in which talks with the Palestinians equal murderous terrorist attacks,” Uri Ariel, Israel’s housing minister, said in a statement. “This situation cannot be allowed to continue.”

As an aside, none of the reports mentioned lots of Israeli politicians simply do not want 2 states. And as we mentioned earlier today, it was reported last week Israeli negotiators are refusing to even talk about the borders of a Palestinian state. From Haaretz weekend roundup prior to the child’s attack:

[A]n absolute majority of Likud MKs and ministers do not currently support an agreement with the Palestinians. If Netanyahu should decide to split from his party in the wake of a breakthrough in the talks, he will not have the backing of one-third of the faction, as Ariel Sharon did in November 2005, but two or three MKs at most. On a good day.

For some reason, the attack on 9 year old Glick offered an opportunity for the media, as well as Israeli politicians, to revisit the peace negotiations. And the assault that took 6 year old Musab al-Sarahneh’s right eye? Not worthy of even a mention in the western press. Why? Because they are all to common, and Palestinian life is not valued here like Jewish life.

Musab wondered: “Why did the Israeli soldier shoot me? I lost my eye, and I am still so young for that.”

Little Noam Glick is probably wondering why she was attacked too.

About Annie Robbins

Annie Robbins is Editor at Large for Mondoweiss, a mother, a human rights activist and a ceramic artist. She lives in the SF bay area. Follow her on Twitter @anniefofani

Other posts by .


Posted In:

56 Responses

  1. Mayhem
    October 6, 2013, 10:27 pm

    This article is more about Robbins’ double standards than anything else.
    Robbins can’t tell the difference between a deliberate attack on a child and an incident in which a child is inadvertently injured. And of course she offers no explanation for why soldiers shot at the car in which the Palestinian boy was travelling. There had been some trouble for reasons unclear and it seems that this unfortunate boy was caught up in the fray.

    • Annie Robbins
      October 7, 2013, 3:31 am

      inadvertently injured? open firing in a refugee camp does not inadvertently injure people, the intent is to injure.

      • seafoid
        October 7, 2013, 5:56 am

        It’s systematic but always accidental. I can’t really understand it but I don’t speak Hebrew.

    • Cliff
      October 7, 2013, 3:34 am

      To Jewish supremacists like mayhem, all Palestinians are ‘inadvertently injured’ or killed.

      Maybe Palestinian militants should mimic mayhem and Zionism’s Holocaust Denial style intellectualism when they target civilians.

      • miriam6
        October 7, 2013, 12:46 pm

        Maybe Palestinian militants should mimic mayhem and Zionism’s Holocaust Denial style intellectualism when they target civilians.

        So Cliffy – what exactly is ‘ Zionism’s Holocaust Denial style intellectualism’ ?

        It sounds thoroughly pretentious drivel and ultimately devoid of meaning but according to you what does it mean?

        What CAN it possibly mean?!

      • Cliff
        October 7, 2013, 2:29 pm

        666 said:

        It sounds thoroughly pretentious drivel and ultimately devoid of meaning but according to you what does it mean?

        What CAN it possibly mean?!

        I think overusing the word ‘pretentious’ is pretentious.

        ‘Holocaust denial intellectualism’ is when a Zionist makes a rant about some Jewish settler who stubs their toe (most often) to the exception (Jewish settler killed) as if it’s the END OF THE WORLD.

        Meanwhile, these same Zionists do not care about the daily abuses and human rights violations they commit against the Palestinians.

        They either:
        1. justify abuse or murder of Palestinians
        2. deny their existence by simply factoring their occurrence out of any and all analysis (see Tokyobk/Wondering Jew/Hophmi)
        3. making excuses for their occurrence (human shields, don’t bring kids to a political demonstration that’s in their village [LOL], etc.)

        It is like that Rabbi (who you probably admire) who said a Jewish fingernail is worth more than 10,000 Arabs.

        Got it, Zionist?

      • Annie Robbins
        October 7, 2013, 3:08 pm

        ‘ Zionism’s Holocaust Denial style intellectualism’

        hmm, i’ve never heard the phrase before but it reminded me of a video i just saw. check out some of the charaters on this stage and then listen to their responses to the reporters at the end.

        link to mondoweiss.net

        “You should have your mouth duct taped!”

        [edit: not intended to divert the topic to rwanda]

    • yrn
      October 7, 2013, 3:56 am

      Typical Robbins’ double standards

      • yrn
        October 7, 2013, 4:00 am

        PA kidnaps another Islamic Jihad figure in raid on Jenin refugee camp
        a large number of troops from the PA security agencies stormed the camp at 10 o’clock in the evening while wildly firing shots in the air, which caused panic among the citizens, especially the children and women.

        link to islamicinvitationturkey.com

        Send over Allison Deger I am sure the PA will give her free permission to explore…

      • Shingo
        October 7, 2013, 9:33 am

        PA kidnaps another Islamic Jihad figure in raid on Jenin refugee camp
        a large number of troops from the PA security agencies stormed the camp at 10 o’clock in the evening while wildly firing shots in the air, which caused panic among the citizens, especially the children and women.

        Everyone knows the PA are nothing more than the outsourced security apparatus for Israel. Half the PA jobs are security related.

      • yrn
        October 7, 2013, 3:17 pm

        Shingo
        Who elected the PA ?
        Or did they coup like in Egypt or was Hamas elected in the west bank and the PA took over by force, or is it what you want it to be ?

      • Annie Robbins
        October 7, 2013, 3:46 pm

        Who elected the PA ?

        the US and Israel?

        yes, at the last election hamas was elected by the palestinian people in both the WB and gaza.

        or was Hamas elected in the west bank and the PA took over by force

        the gov of israel began the siege after the election/inauguration of hamas w/an economic embargo, then blockaded gaza, then imprisoned hamas legislators. so it was by israeli force.

        or is it what you want it to be?

      • Shingo
        October 7, 2013, 4:35 pm

        Who elected the PA ?

        The PA was created by Israel. Remember that Lieberman has repeatedly threatened to dismantle the PA, so the Israelis clearly regard it as their own puppy.

        Or did they coup like in Egypt or was Hamas elected in the west bank and the PA took over by force, or is it what you want it to be ?

        You sound very muddles and a bit confused.
        1. Hamas was elected.
        2. Yes, the PA took the WB by force.

    • talknic
      October 7, 2013, 5:26 am

      @Mayhem Successive Israeli Governments deliberately encouraged the young girl’s parents to illegally settle where they might be subjected to the violence expected when on occupies another people, dispossessing them and stealing their territory while blabbering about wanting peace. That’s a double standard 101.

      Annie Robbins is the bearer of news, you of course, unable to tell the truth from fiction and refusing to differentiate, attack the messenger, when the message is clear. The child’s parents are as stupid as their Government (and you) to have endangered their child by her being in non-Israeli territory under the occupation of the Jewish state.

      You will of course drag out the bulksh*t notion that there is no occupation. However, you have been shown overwhelming evidence that there is indeed occupation.

    • Justpassingby
      October 7, 2013, 5:38 am

      I think its important to look at Mayhem comments here on Mondoweiss to get a deeper sense of how radical zionists argue.

      • seafoid
        October 7, 2013, 12:45 pm

        Was Mayhem eee before the change ?

        They seem to have a class based split of work . Hoph is for the thinkers and Mayhem is for the uneducated.

    • Woody Tanaka
      October 7, 2013, 6:48 am

      zio, you missed the biggest difference — the boy has a right to live in Palestine. The girl didn’t. And the authorities should arrest those responsible for the attack on the girl. Starting with her parents for bringing her i. a war zone as the steal Palestinian. land, and the politicians who support that theft. They are ultimately the ones most responsible.

    • eljay
      October 7, 2013, 7:47 am

      >> This article is more about Robbins’ double standards than anything else.

      Says the guy who fails to condemn both attacks, and who glosses over the fact that:
      - the Israeli soldier was operating deep inside the West Bank – far outside of Israel’s borders; and
      - the Israeli colony in which the girl lives is deep inside the West Bank – far outside of Israel’s borders.

      For the record, I condemn both attacks.

    • Shingo
      October 7, 2013, 9:04 am

      Stop acting like such a repugnant hypocrite Mayhem.

      If the girl had been Palestinian, you’d be accusing her parents of using her as a human shield or child abuse for exposing her to a hostile area. There is a reason why the Geneva Conventions forbid building settlements on someone else’s land. They don’t take kindly to it.

    • The Hasbara Buster
      October 7, 2013, 12:32 pm

      This article is more about Robbins’ double standards than anything else.
      Robbins can’t tell the difference between a deliberate attack on a child and an incident in which a child is inadvertently injured.

      The attack on the Jewish girl was the act of a private citizen representing no one but themselves. That on the Palestinian boy was carried out by a soldier representing the State of Israel.

      But was the Palestinian boy “inadvertently injured”? Evidence shows that Israeli soldiers shoot completely innocent Palestinians carelessly. This was highlighted in November 2011, when Dan Mertzbach, a West Bank rabbi, was mistaken for a Palestinian while driving his car through a checkpoint and shot dead by an Israeli soldier. Instead of shooting at the vehicle wheels, as the rules require, the soldier shot Mertzbach in the neck and head; a subsequent investigation revealed that “the road block was set up in a faulty way that made it difficult for oncoming cars to see it in time.”

      The car where the Palestinian boy was travelling was fired at under a Draconian policy of shooting anything that moves just in case and without taking any care to ensure that live fire is necessary–a policy illustrated by the case of rabbi Mertzbach’s car. This is a long way from being “inadvertently injured.”

  2. Sycamores
    October 6, 2013, 11:51 pm

    in Al-Khalīl/hebron Palestinian man, Abed Sider and his 3-year-old niece assaulted and hospitalized by Israeli soldiers last Tuesday 2nd of October. link to palsolidarity.org

    hardly gets a mention on the web let alone mainstream media.

    yet this girl Noam Glick is everywhere.

    was she shot or stab?

    the LA Times says she was wounded in the shoulder

    while

    the NYT says she was shot in the chest

    the Jerusalem Post says she was lightly wounded

    while both the Huff. Post and USA Today says she was seriously injured

    something stinks to high heavens here.

    • Bumblebye
      October 7, 2013, 9:05 am

      From the moment I read Earwig (ludwig) comment about this, in which s/he it stated the child was dead, something smelt fishy – apart from the fact that it was easy to ascertain she was certainly not dead. The amount of variation in the story suggests to me that this was a domestic accident of some kind which has been leapt upon in order to deliberately blame Palestinians – pr, pr, pr. The Israeli party line is being rejected? We know how to get ‘em back on side again, boss! Just let them believe one of our kiddies was deliberately hurt by an Ayrab! Just the description of the ‘lurking’ ‘hooded’ person rings all the wrong bells. The truth will probably never be revealed. Little Noam has provided a propaganda coup.

      • Sycamores
        October 7, 2013, 12:15 pm

        i was going to write earlier it has all the hallmarks of a neighbourhood dispute that got a bit nasty. the suspect was able to come and go without anyone seeing him/her in what one would have to presumed is a well gaurded illegal settlement near East Jerusalem albeit ‘a hole in the fence’ was seemingly enough to bypass all these security checks, yeah right.
        as others have said already who’s calling for a third Intifada or better still who have the most to gain at this moment from a Palestinian/israeli flare up.

        and can anyone clarified did the young girl get shot or was she stab. i can’t believe, in a violent place like the illegal settlements they can’t distinguish between a knife wound from a gun shot wound.

        i doubt we ever heard the truth but i hope Noam Glick recovers swiftly.

    • Abierno
      October 7, 2013, 11:52 am

      While any injury of a child is horrific, the reporting on Noam Glick changes hourly,
      with the most current stating that she saw a masked arab attempting to enter her house. As for Musab, a bullet to the eye will pass through the orbit into the frontal and subcortical areas of the brain depending on the trajectory, so he can be expected to have lifelong cognitive problems as well as loss of vision in one eye.

      • Woody Tanaka
        October 7, 2013, 12:29 pm

        ” the reporting on Noam Glick changes hourly, with the most current stating that she saw a masked arab attempting to enter her house. ”

        If he was masked, how, exactly, does she know he was an Arab??

      • Annie Robbins
        October 7, 2013, 1:20 pm

        she doesn’t. the state doesn’t either. presumably, this is why the state says

        the attack on the child was a “probable terrorist attack” but they are “not ruling out the possibility of other motives.

        they do not know who carried out the attack. but the timing, w/israel MK’s meeting w/abbas in ramallah today, and netanyahu giving his speech emphasizing “security” could not have been more advantageous to israel’s positioning in the ‘peace process’.

      • Shingo
        October 7, 2013, 4:12 pm

        Thanks Annie,

        So Ludwig and Mayhem’d claim that this was an attack by a Palestiniam sniper is baseless.

        How typical!

      • Annie Robbins
        October 7, 2013, 5:51 pm

        shingo, they’ve been raiding palesinian homes since it happened. kind of like what they were doing before it happened, however now it has ‘context’. here’s an RT report:

        link to presstv.ir

        i think they mention the man who has been arrested is mentally unstable.

      • Woody Tanaka
        October 8, 2013, 7:02 am

        “i think they mention the man who has been arrested is mentally unstable.”

        So it looks like the israeli terrorists have found someone who won’t be able to defend himself so they will be able to torture a confession out of him.

  3. Walid
    October 7, 2013, 4:32 am

    Israel, is desperate to start something or anything that it can term the “start of the intifada” that would give rise to bringing the current talks to a halt. Maybe the Palestinians could stop being so charitable with those robbing them and give them a real intifada since Israel appears to be close to declaring it. Either way, Israel won’t be giving them anything from the talks. The smell hasn’t abated from the alleged killing of the 2 Israeli soldiers.

    • Annie Robbins
      October 7, 2013, 11:19 am

      walid and bumblebye, the intifada angle definitely jumped out at me. especially after reading the statement (completely buried/ignored by western press) of the western officialsaying israel wouldn’t talk about border issues at negotiations, only security. within days there is a big security threat. a threat that justifies, in part, the very same actions the military was doing in august, the raids on refugees. very provocative. then you have netanyahu claiming the attack was the fault of palestinian (leaders) incitement.

      strange.

      plus, in the very same region, very near,
      i noticed on saturday in haaretz: link to haaretz.com

      This week, the ultra-Orthodox members of the Knesset’s Finance Committee refused to support the finance minister’s request to transfer NIS 28 million to the settlement of Beit El. Their reason: the decision by Education Minister Shay Piron, from the finance minister’s party, to slash the support for foreign students attending yeshivas in Israel. If implemented, the decision will most affect Mir Yeshiva, in Jerusalem, the apple of the eye of United Torah Judaism.

      so, the state screws w/the settlements and there’s a price tag a security breach/attack leads to a crackdown on palestinians and who says intifada first? israeli politicians. something fishy indeed.

  4. seafoid
    October 7, 2013, 4:42 am

    Palestinian child deaths are accidents, deeply regretted, won’t happen again, Israel most moral army etc

    Any attack on a Jew is of course laden with ancient hatred and anti-Semitic by its very nature, systematic etc

    Palestinians are pawns. Jews are high value media fodder.

    • Woody Tanaka
      October 7, 2013, 6:50 am

      Yeah, Mayhen started out the comments with that racist two-step…

      • seafoid
        October 7, 2013, 11:19 am

        They all do.

        Israel is deeply sorry . Israel does not target civilians
        link to youtube.com

        Of course they sing a different song in Tel Aviv

  5. quercus
    October 7, 2013, 7:26 am

    @Mayhem. We all know that the IDF often shoots at Palestinians for no real reason, only to be a-holes, and then say afterward it was because of ‘security reasons’ or some such other excuse. We’ve heard it all before, Mayhem.

    My enlightenment came after listening to International Public Radio some years back, and during broadcasts of Israel Public Radio, hearing Ariel Sharon (who is not amongst the living or amongst the dead) say Israel had the “most moral army in the world bar none”. Well, I don’t know about you, but as soon as someone wants to claim morality for themselves or some group to which they belong “I would put my hand on my wallet” and the other on my gun.

    What we see is that Jews are no different from anyone else, no more moral, no kinder, not more honest, or decent, just people, and not chosen, and some are first class jerks, to be nice about it, and you Mayhem seem to be in the last group.

  6. Citizen
    October 7, 2013, 7:27 am

    The context for subject maiming is whether or not it is systematic, institutional, administrative. Was the example done “under cover of law.” or not? How deeply was the controlling state involved, complicit? Is the police power of the state involved in attempted justification, or is justification via posse, vigilant, or is it purely personal? Which model best fits the incident in its context, a Hitler state, an apartheid state a la former S Africa, the Jim Crow south? Or the US circa this current “hate crime” era a la Zimmerman? What, and how often is the persistence of a pattern? How contrasting are the facts surrounding respective statistics? Do they suggest incidental, coincidental, or purposeful maiming?

  7. just
    October 7, 2013, 7:47 am

    Terrible and cruel acts toward children. Our media’s craven attention wrt the sad Fogel family and Noam Glick coupled with their frank disregard of the victims of the IOF and the illegal settlers is beyond belief.

    When will they finally acknowledge the ongoing Nakba? Or even speak of the barbaric Occupation?

    When?

    • Egbert
      October 7, 2013, 8:17 am

      Contrast the handling of the Fogel case with that of the Oshrenko family. In both cases, a Jewish family, including children and infants, was murdered. The first case was treated as an act of terrorism, resulted in international publicity and outrage, with armed night raids against all Palestinians in the vicinity. The second case was treated as a normal murder with little international publicity. The reason for the difference? The perpetrators in the first case were Palestinians ( has a trial taken place yet?) and in the second they were Jewish tried in normal courts of law. Identical crimes, different treatments.

  8. pabelmont
    October 7, 2013, 8:24 am

    Annie:

    Thanks for a well described analysis of the USA’s MSM’s slanting of the news on I/P.

    You are exactly right that [1] the USA’s MSM newspapers rushed into print before they knew what happened to the Israeli settler girl, because of a USA MSM compulsion to play up to Israeli (and perhaps Jewish) fears and demands, and that they failed to provide possibly explanatory background material; and [2] that they failed to give much story or background material about the Palestinian camp child (such as — why were the soldiers there at all? Hasn’t the occupation lasted long enough? and such as why was the child or anyone else living in a refugee camp in the first place),

    If faulting the USA’s MSM for their treatment of I/P, I would start with a complaint that MSM fails to give historical and legal context — and a suggestion that they do so not because they always hate context and history but because THIS context and THIS history put the USA (which supports Israel) an Israel itself in a bad light, and MSM are determined to SLANT the emotional response of Americans by MISLEADING them.

    But we all know all this,

    As to grammar, you might, and various newspapers should, wish to consider the difference between two sound-alike words, each of which appeared in this posting, “incidents” and “incidence” discussed at easily_confused/incidence_incidents. “Incident” means an event, a happening, and is almost always the right word for newspapers and bloggers. “Incidence” means a tendency or frequency, like “the incidence of measles among refugee children” and has another, scientific, meaning which is almost never the right meaning in newspaper and blogging usage.

  9. pabelmont
    October 7, 2013, 9:30 am

    In trying to make sense of the awful settlement aspect of the occupation, I have decided to issue my own interpretation of one aspect of the Fourth Geneva Convention’s (G4) prohibition on the occupier transferring its own citizens into occupied territory (this is the rule which makes the settlers presence illegal; the settlements (buildings) themselves are probably illegal as impermissible takings of land for other than necessary military purposes of occupation).

    Here goes:

    Since it is impermissible for the occupier to transfer any of its own population into occupied territory, it follows that all members of the occupier’s population within the occupied territories may be regarded as soldiers. This means that the children among them are child-soldiers (something frowned on by many commentators when it occurs in Africa and South America) deliberately placed in a dangerous war-zone (called by some “in harm’s way”) by their government. This also means that all settlers, being soldiers, are proper targets for non-terrorist militants (freedom fighters). This also means that the settlers, because they are (in fact) not in uniform and not subject to military discipline and chain-of-command are ipso facto not protected by the Geneva Conventions (GC) which relate to the treatment of soldiers (just as the USA does not accord GC treatment to Al Qaida and other irregular militants.

    Now, if this interpretation doesn’t sound quite right, is it because there is something wrong with the laws of war, or is it because there is something wrong with trying to integrate Israel’s settlement project with the laws of war and with humanitarian law?

    • Woody Tanaka
      October 7, 2013, 9:59 am

      I think there is a lot to be said for this opinion. In the whole I believe it is correct. I disagree with regard to minors who were brought by their parents. If they choose to fight, bear arms, etc. they are soldiers, but if not they are human shields of the settlers and their presence constitutes a war crime and crime against humanity on behalf of the settlers.

  10. mondonut
    October 7, 2013, 9:54 am

    pabelmont says: …it follows that all members of the occupier’s population within the occupied territories may be regarded as soldiers.
    ================================================
    No, it does not follow. Nor does your entire post that declares that Israeli children are proper and legal targets of anyone who declares themselves to be a “freedom” fighter.

    • Woody Tanaka
      October 7, 2013, 10:36 am

      Sure it does. But more to the point. if these are ‘israeli’ children, then get them the hell out of Palestine and back to israel. And those who are fighting for the lberation of Palestine from the evil of zionism and the zionists are, indeed, freedom fighters.

    • Cliff
      October 7, 2013, 12:08 pm

      nut

      why are you supporting putting Israeli Jews among an enemy population whose land is being colonized?

      go behind the green line and stay there

  11. Eva Smagacz
    October 7, 2013, 2:56 pm

    I read she is out of the hospital.
    What are these parents doing, taking kids on a project to colonize Occupied Palestinian Territories? Especially in a place full of Jewish militia, armed to the teeth. It’s like taking a toddler to an armed robbery with you.

  12. yrn
    October 7, 2013, 3:03 pm

    Typical Eva Smagacz blaming the Parents and not a word about the Terrorist Killer.
    Reading some of her comments, it’s not surprising.

    • Annie Robbins
      October 7, 2013, 3:11 pm

      hmm, doesn’t a killer require a corpse?

      doctors characterized her injuries as light. …

      Israel Glick, Noam’s father, recounted what her daughter told her took place on Saturday. He said his daughter saw a person in a black hoody come draw near and “like Noam tells us ‘Dad, he aimed the pistol at me and then three boom boom boom,’” he said.

      IDF forces discovered what they thought was a makeshift weapon, which they believed was used to shoot Glick but was later found to be a cigarette lighter. It was sent together with a knife found nearby to a crime lab. It isn’t clear if the knife has anything to do with the attack. Israeli security agencies still do not know what weapon the assailant used.

      link to haaretz.com

      sooo military forces (“Givati Regiment battalion”) discovered what they thought was a makeshift weapon, which they believed was used to shoot Glick, and then discovered it to be a cigarette lighter. this is really getting interesting.

      i’d love to see a photo of the lighter the givati forces confused for a gun. maybe it confused the little girl too. maybe she didn’t actually see a gun.

      • yrn
        October 7, 2013, 3:27 pm

        Dear Annie Robbins

        And I thought the terrorist wanted to give flowers to the girl……
        Or bring up an argument that he shot her in self defense, this will fit your argument.
        Your answers a more and more predictable, as you too would blame the parents want you .

      • Cliff
        October 7, 2013, 3:57 pm

        yarny

        you seem confused

        who are you referring to? the terrorist killer? or the killer terrorist?

        who did he kill, yarny?

      • Woody Tanaka
        October 7, 2013, 4:29 pm

        “And I thought the terrorist wanted to give flowers to the girl……”

        Typical zio: convict a person as a “terrorist” even before the investigation is started. No doubt, your shin bet Gestapo will torture a “voluntary” confession out of some random person.

        “Or bring up an argument that he shot her in self defense, this will fit your argument.”

        No, shooting her parents or any adult in this occupation camp would be in self-defense and in liberation of Palestine from the vile occupation forces.

        “as you too would blame the parents”

        Yes, they’re bad parents who clearly did not love their child enough not to force her to participate in a crime against humanity.

      • Woody Tanaka
        October 7, 2013, 3:41 pm

        LMAO. yarny is getting his lies mixed up…

    • seafoid
      October 7, 2013, 3:16 pm

      YRN has a new shtick. Typical X.
      But same old same old otherwise.

    • Cliff
      October 7, 2013, 3:26 pm

      terrorist killer? so a killer of terrorists?

      who died, yrn? who killed?

    • Woody Tanaka
      October 7, 2013, 3:44 pm

      “blaming the Parents”

      Of course she is; the parents are blameworthy. Taking children to occupy someone else’s land demonstrates that these parents are unfit, as they love their ideology more than their children.

Leave a Reply