Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.
Israelis who shot Reuters cameraman cleared
english.aljazeera.net — An Israeli tank crew which killed a Palestinian cameraman working for Reuters news agency in Gaza will not face legal action over his death, Israel's senior military lawyer has said.
deformation- 97 diggs
- digg it
- MarkEarhart, on 08/14/2008, -13/+26Of course not. We all know Israel's ***** doesn't stink. Why shouldn't they be able to commit any crime they want anywhere they want with total immunity?
- dkapuchino, on 08/15/2008, -1/+7Lets play a game... I start quoting cases of Israelis convicted in Israel's courts for mistreatment of Palestinians, you in return give me examples of Palestinians prosecuting other Palestinians for crimes against Israelis.
Or do you want to claim that the Palestinians ***** doesn't stink, and that only Israel is evil is this conflict, while the poor Palestinians are forced to murder, lynch and rape Israelis?
- dkapuchino, on 08/15/2008, -1/+7Lets play a game... I start quoting cases of Israelis convicted in Israel's courts for mistreatment of Palestinians, you in return give me examples of Palestinians prosecuting other Palestinians for crimes against Israelis.
- FrankHope, on 08/14/2008, -11/+24Rachel Corrie's murderer was also "cleared". It seems that no sin goes punished in Israel when the victim is a Gentile.
"Rachel Corrie was killed in the Gaza Strip in Palestine on March 16, 2003, trying to prevent the demolition of the home of a Palestinian family (a pharmacist, accountant, their wives, and five young children). The Rachel Corrie Foundation for Peace and Justice was established by members of Rachel’s family and community to continue the kind of work that she began and hoped to accomplish."
http://www.rachelcorriefoundation.org/- mustangmike53, on 08/14/2008, -5/+13http://rachelcorriefacts.org/Accident.aspx
- FrankHope, on 08/14/2008, -10/+6mustangmike53 - you're a troll. Go crawl back in your cave.
- mustangmike53, on 08/14/2008, -1/+13https://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm ...
As a Hamas activist said at Rachel’s funeral, “'Her death serves me more than it served her…Her death will bring more attention than the other 2,000 martyrs.'….” Corrie was the first American to be hailed as a Palestinian martyr. It is not surprising that these activists refuse to even entertain the possibility that her death was an accident. If it were, she would no longer be a useful symbol for indicting Israel’s self-defense measures and its very right to exist. - PolishLogic, on 08/14/2008, -0/+13Wait, so showing an opposing viewpoint is now trolling?
/facepalm - DreadPirate, on 08/15/2008, -1/+7Polish - it is if it disagrees with the liberal viewpoint. This is the group that is threatening people who dare to even *donate* to republican causes, after all.
- dkapuchino, on 08/15/2008, -1/+8Dread, these guys aren't liberal at all. Most of them are Ron Paul dead brains, and the few liberals aren't true liberals. What kind of liberal would completely ignore Israels first and foremost liberty - the freedom to live, without fear of your children being blown up by a suicide bomber?
- sn4ke666, on 08/16/2008, -0/+1I'm a libertarian and take issue with your characterization. Most of these "anti-Zionists" that I have met are anarcho-socialists. I don't remember Ron Paul making any anti-Zionist statements other than saying the US should stay out of the conflict. My friends in Israel say they would have no problem with the US stopping military aid - that they can take care of themselves. Anyway, don't turn this into a political alignment issue. I have many libertarian friends who are quite even-handed and even pro-Israeli when it comes to the conflict.
- mustangmike53, on 08/14/2008, -5/+13http://rachelcorriefacts.org/Accident.aspx
- MarkusGarvey, on 08/14/2008, -8/+15don't tank me bro!...
- dkapuchino, on 08/15/2008, -1/+5Don't Anti-Tank missle my women and children, don't Grad ballistic missile my women and children, Don't suicide bomb them, and I won't have to tank you.
- theShadow51, on 08/14/2008, -11/+11"The army said the soldiers had not seen the "press" signs."
That's the official IDF excuse for killing reporters/journalists (another example: John Miller).- dkapuchino, on 08/15/2008, -0/+6Because we all know how Israel just loves to kill reporters. Those awful Israels see the sign "press", they just reinterpret it as "Target practice", right?
- catcher6250, on 08/15/2008, -0/+6(If by John you mean James) then you should know that the Palestinians took Miller's death and claimed that he was a martyr for Palestine, then went on to have one of their martyr parades in his honor - even though the other journalists that worked with Miller objected. At the parade the Palestinians had already made thousands of posters with Miller's face framed by arabic writing of course used to paint Israel as evil. Not to mention the fact that the guy who shot Miller was a muslim and a captain in the IDF was prosecuted.
- mustangmike53, on 08/14/2008, -11/+9Like the Israeli soldiers seriously want to screw up their lives and their careers by killing journalists. They're in a tank in a war zone, trying not to get themselves killed. The reporter, on the other hand, was hanging around the front line of a war zone, in the same area as the tankers' potential attackers. Who knows what confusion or miscalculation resulted in the decision to fire the round, but deliberate targeting of civilians and journalists seems the least likely explanation.
- OpenRevolt, on 08/14/2008, -8/+2Oh that's right because all middle eastern men look the same.... Oh wait, how come they never shoot their own journalists?
- mustangmike53, on 08/15/2008, -0/+7WTF? Stoned much?
- dkapuchino, on 08/15/2008, -1/+4because if their own journalists were to even step foot on Palestinian terror-tory, they'd be lynched on the spot. Israel also doesn't use the civilian population as human shields, just so they can cry "See how the evil Israelis are killing civilians".
- OpenRevolt, on 08/14/2008, -8/+2Oh that's right because all middle eastern men look the same.... Oh wait, how come they never shoot their own journalists?
- Kizilbash, on 08/14/2008, -10/+10Well, there's a surprise.
Anyway it is the Israeli politicians who decided that it is okay to fire flechette grenades (the grenade explodes and little metal spiked darts come out, much like with a nail bomb) in heavily populated areas who should be punished for this.- yonoz, on 08/15/2008, -2/+6They were out of cotton candy "grenades".
- dkapuchino, on 08/15/2008, -1/+6Here's an Idea... If the palestinians stop using populated areas to launch missiles on Israeli towns, perhaps Israel won't have to fire back into those populated areas.
Flechette grenades are allow by international law. Firing rockets from schools and hospitals isn't.
- n0gnuz, on 08/14/2008, -6/+5Surprise!
- Fangsinmybeard, on 08/15/2008, -7/+4Of course. Madness and Chaos are the rule for this millennium. Those who lead now wish to end all life on the Earth.
- foopirata, on 08/15/2008, -4/+18Lesson of the day: do not stand an object on a tripod and point it at a tank in a combat zone.
On a related note, I fail to see any of the bleeding hearts above wailing about the reporters wounded by Russia in Georgia. Hm.- MarkusGarvey, on 08/15/2008, -13/+5way to condescend foo...fyi...sub is not about Georgia...so your advice is not to report news from war zones?....
- yonoz, on 08/15/2008, -2/+15I believe his advice is - soldier or journalist, you get into a war zone you'd better not point things at forces that shoot at people who point things at them - or at least, be ready to be shot.
- MarkusGarvey, on 08/15/2008, -11/+3but the reporter in Georgia, was just reporting...she was shot by a sniper..who knew who he was shooting at, just like the guy in the tank knew what he was shooting at was a journalist...
- yonoz, on 08/15/2008, -2/+12Why do you think "the guy in the tank" knew he was shooting at a journalist?
- foopirata, on 08/15/2008, -1/+13MarkusGarvey, you should stop getting your news exclusively from Digg. It shows a tremendous gullibility.
http://news.uk.msn.com/article.aspx?cp-documentid= ...
"Dutch TV journalist among 5 killed in Russian bombing of Georgian city of Gori "
http://globalvoicesonline.org/2008/08/11/south-oss ...
"Yesterday, the Russian radio station Echo Moscow reported that two Georgian journalists, Alexander Klimchuk and Grigol Chikhladze, were found dead in a street of Tskhinvali"
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1218446 ...
"Hurt Israeli reporter regains consciousness"
And the relevance to this story is that journalists in combat zones assume a risk, and they do not need to compound that risk by adopting what can be assumed to be an aggressive posture in the field. - MarkusGarvey, on 08/15/2008, -9/+2your intel is flawed foo...i don't get all my news from digg...and why after you make that assumption, why do you follow it up with an insult...cant you ever debate without a personal attack?...let me clarify my point, since you guys don't seem to get it....this is the incident i was referring to...
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-2353278 ...
that sniper knew he was shooting at a reporter...the guy in the tank, with the most advanced electronics and optics in the world, not to mention access to satellite imagery , cant discern reporters with a camera, from a guy with a weapon?...BOTH INCIDENTS WERE DELIBERATE, if you guys still don't get it...yeah...shoot first, as questions later... - foopirata, on 08/15/2008, -0/+9"your intel is flawed foo...i don't get all my news from digg" - and yet, the only case you bring up was the one on Digg's front page.
"why do you follow it up with an insult" -
gullible
adjective
1. naive and easily deceived or tricked; "at that early age she had been gullible and in love" [syn: fleeceable]
2. easily tricked because of being too trusting; "gullible tourists taken in by the shell game"
WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
I fail to see how that's any insult.
"that sniper knew he was shooting at a reporter" - FTA:"Most likely it was a sniper." - and from there you already draw your conclusions? game, set and match? what do we call that, in a very non-insulting manner? gullible, I think it is. From the person who's always going "ask the though questions, mon", no less.
"the guy in the tank, with the most advanced electronics and optics in the world, not to mention access to satellite imagery , cant discern reporters with a camera, from a guy with a weapon?" - again, you really should stop getting your information from , I don't know, "24" or something. Do you think that every tank in the IDF has access to satellite imagery? Do you think that satellites are tasked and pointed at a moment's notice? Do you think that the optics on a tank, optimized for IR view, with a big-pixel white-on-black or black-on-white view can really zoom and discern between a camera and a shoulder fired missile? Really.
"BOTH INCIDENTS WERE DELIBERATE" - in one case, a reporter is standing and gets shot, by a sniper or other. It is debatable, why would a sniper go thru the motions just to zing her in the arm. Terrible, and possibly deliberate, who knows. On the other case, a reporter, in the middle of a combat zone, sets up a tripod, puts something on top of it and points it at a tank, 1.5km away. The tank crew has but seconds to understand if it is under possible fire or not. What would you do in this circumstance? Let me ask you a different question - would you point a toy gun at a policeman in the middle of a stand-off situation and hope his reflexes, training and cool demeanor would keep you safe?
If you fail to recognize the difference, then may I humbly suggest a check on your underlying motives. - yonoz, on 08/16/2008, -0/+8LOL@ satellite imagery!
Seriously though, these tanks aren't designed to distinguish a camera from an anti-tank weapon, and you can't really afford to second guess in these situations. - MarkusGarvey, on 08/17/2008, -7/+2yeah foo...it's pretty hard to argue with someone who has all the answers..//s...you say you didn't call me "gullible" as an insult?...YOU, don't even believe that...
...and i saw quite a few reports that it was a sniper, and my point was, that if it WAS a sniper, he would have known who he was shooting at....
...i have no doubt the command center has satellite imagery. and i will bet they had been watching them for a while before they fired, apparently they were sure that it wasn't IOF troops or Israeli civilians , they probably did it for fun because they knew they could get away with it...
"Let me ask you a different question - would you point a toy gun at a policeman in the middle of a stand-off situation and hope his reflexes, training and cool demeanor would keep you safe?"...
...that's called suicide by cop...why would i do that?...analogy fail for you foo...
- foopirata, on 08/17/2008, -0/+9"it's pretty hard to argue with someone who has all the answers" - can you retort to anything I said as being false, or inaccurate? Being right doesn't mean "having all the answers".
'you say you didn't call me "gullible" as an insult?' - and yet here I am, providing you with the exact definition of the word, and attesting to the fact it wasn't meant as an insult. You, on the other hand, not only try to tell me in what sense _I_ used the word, you even go as far as telling me what _I_ believe or do not believe. What was that about "having all the answers" ?
"that if it WAS a sniper" - what's the point of capitalizing the "was" ? shouldn't the right thing to do be capitalizing the "if", since the question if it was a sniper or not is still open?
".i have no doubt the command center has satellite imagery" - I am sorry, but you are clearly out of your depth. You seem to think that satellites are some magic thing as in tv, that can read the paper over your shoulder whenever you want. That's not how it works. More so, even if it were, the "command center" doesn't watch over the shoulder of every thank out there. In fact, tank crews are given "area boundaries" they are responsible for, and they in turn report to their command, not the other way round. I'd suggest less "Enemy Of The State" and "24" and a bit more of real world if you really want to insist in talking about this kind of stuff.
Also, "i bet", "they probably" and "i have no doubt" makes for poor arguments. It just shows you're acting out of belief and agenda, and hardly out of fact. Which, you know, is what real people take into account when considering life. Not that you seem to have any problem in building your little fantasies and running with them.
"analogy fail for you foo" - understanding fail for you, MarkusGarvey. If you are in the middle of a situation where your behavior can be interpreted as aggressive, the simplest rules of survival dictate you do not engage in that behavior, never mind how you call it. That's as simple as it gets: you don't point a toy gun at a policeman in pursuit, and you don't point an object at a tank in a combat zone. - MarkusGarvey, on 08/17/2008, -7/+1understanding is fine here foo-foo...you seem very irritated..you should relax some bubala...its' bad for your health to have so much anger inside you...go ahead.... pick apart every word i say...i will help you work through your denial too!... talk about synchronicity!...HumanCattle just shouted this to me as i was writing this!...
http://digg.com/educational/Teachings_On_The_True_ ...
...i cant wait to hear your response.... - foopirata, on 08/17/2008, -0/+9"understanding is fine here foo-foo" - what was that about being offensive? Can't you address a person by their proper moniker, does it make you feel good using your playground-speak? So, what is it, do what I say don't do what I do?
"you seem very irritated" - don't flatter yourself. Amused, if at all, at having to school you time and again.
"pick apart every word i say...i will help you work through your denial too!" - so, I guess that means you cannot really answer what I tell you, and are now embarking into the "uh uh uh uh but but but" phase of your "argument".
".i cant wait to hear your response" - my response to what, you babble and say nothing worth (or even requiring) one?
In light of your acting, and in a very non-offensive way, simply and observation: grow up. - MarkusGarvey, on 08/17/2008, -7/+1that was just like a pet name kind of thing....jeeze...take a Mydol...you do seem very tense...and i did retort to you and yonoz...que es su problema?..you are the one who needs to grow up...not even i have have all the answers, so why do you think you do?...you think you are better than me?...ehhh....i give you your props if i think you are right....so?...
- foopirata, on 08/17/2008, -0/+9so, you can feel all offended when you're called "gullible", but it is ok for you to call people any way you decide and demand respect. I see how it works. From now on you'll get what you give, ganja-mon.
"que es su problema?" -Mi 'problema' son tipos como tu que piensan que entienden lo que dicen, pero no tienem la mas puta idea. En las palabras del Rey de Espana, por que no te callas? - MarkusGarvey, on 08/18/2008, -6/+1ya know...your main problem is that think you have infallible logic...you are so full of ***** that you are trying to come off like you are not meaning to insult me by calling me gullible...you get all bent out of shape because i call you "foo-foo", but you started it, and i had, had a few beers..."Mi 'problema' son tipos como tu que piensan que entienden lo que dicen, pero no tienem la mas puta idea"...i understand what is being said..just like i said before, you think you have all the answers..who made you the the judge of the truth?...you will never agree with me just because of who i am...same as your buddies...so in the words of Bob Marley, "if you are a big tree, we have a small ax...
- foopirata, on 08/18/2008, -0/+6"your main problem is that think you have infallible logic" - logic is either correct or incorrect, that's the beauty of it. If you can prove mine wrong, do it. Whining doesn't help you or whatever "cause" you seem to spouse.
"you are trying to come off like you are not meaning to insult me by calling me gullible" - point me in the definition of the word "gullible" what may be so insulting.
'you get all bent out of shape because i call you "foo-foo"' - merely pointing out that you demand respect, but you fail to give it.
'i understand what is being said' - didn't you say you were Mexican? I'd expect your Spanish to be better. I clearly said "people like you who think they understand what [they] say". Case in point, your "knowledge" of capabilities and procedures in the use of tank platforms in combat. Lots of authoritative talk, zero knowledge. Expand that to lots more "stuff" you put out, every day. Think about that.
"just like i said before, you think you have all the answers..who made you the the judge of the truth?" - I'm still waiting for you to refute any of the facts I base myself upon. Until you do that, you're only wrangling your hands in the air and using cheap appeals to emotion. Use logic and facts to refute me, and I'll gladly say I am wrong.
"you will never agree with me just because of who i am" - I don't know who you are, I don't care who you are, you are not important, I'm not important. But when you use half-truths and support outright lies to smear my country and people that are dear to me - you'll get me on your case.
I really don't care about the size of your axe (even though it seems you do), but in the words of Bob Marley, "Zion train is coming our way,Two thousand years of history,Could not be wiped away so easily." - MarkusGarvey, on 08/19/2008, -3/+1I'm not smearing Israel, I'm smearing Zionism...and i gave retorts to your questions, they just weren't what you wanted to hear...also i haven't spoke Spanish since i was 7, but i got the gist of what you were saying...and Bob Marley wasn't speaking about Israel in ""Zion Train"...he's talking about Ethiopia..Zion" stands for a Utopian place of unity, peace and freedom, as opposed to "Babylon," the oppressing and exploiting system of the western world and a place of evil...Ethiopia is Mount Zion ... :)
- foopirata, on 08/19/2008, -0/+3"I'm not smearing Israel, I'm smearing Zionism" - good to know you admit you're in for the smear job. I believe we are making progress - admiting it is a good first step. Keep on it.
Upwards in the thread (just to stay in the confines of it, there are other examples), we have you saying "they probably did it for fun because they knew they could get away with it..." - 'they' being Israeli soldiers. Not "Zionists". Israeli soldiers, which include Druze, Christian and even some Moslem Israelis. Some of them hardly what one would call "zionists" with the leer you use. Therefore you were smearing (vilifying, defaming,maligning) Israelis and the country they represent.
"and i gave retorts to your questions, they just weren't what you wanted to hear" - really? I didn't ask for answers, I asked you to retort to my logic and facts and prove them wrong or stop whining about my "infallible logic". Which you failed, or didn't try to, do. It seems your "getting the gist of it" is failing you in two separate languages. Your lack of understanding of the toy gun analogy hardly counts as an "answer" except in the realm of "reply to a question".
'and Bob Marley wasn't speaking about Israel in ""Zion Train"' - oh, so NOW details are important to you? see how it works when the subject strikes close to home? (regardless, the fact that he uses Jewish history to build his analogy should be enough for understanding the idea).
The fact is, you fling baseless accusations, you climb on the wagon of your fellow travellers and when the discussion gets serious, you try to get all cutesy and fluffy and annoyed and outraged and childish (it's midol, not mydol, btw). Doesn't work that way. Perhaps it does in some playground you frequent, but not between adults. Man up to what you say and do and you'll see that you get more respect from people. - MarkusGarvey, on 08/20/2008, -0/+1of course i will smear any ideology that oppresses anyone...where have i led you to believe anything different?...
..until the philosophy, that holds one race superior and another another...inferior..... is finally....and permanently....discredited...and abandoned......
you and your friends strategy is to say that if your are against Zionism, that you are antisemitic a racist and a bigot and hate Israel...fortunately, people don't buy it anymore...i have admitted i was wrong to you a few times, you never have...i guess that means that your always right..//s..
...baseless accusations?....the basis for my comment "they probably did it for fun"....is seeing the brutality inflicted on innocent Arabs...I'm sure Hamas , Hezbollah, and Fatah do the same..that doesn't make it right..Israeli-Zionists should be setting the example...
- Kizilbash, on 08/15/2008, -8/+3That just shows how much attention you pay. I posted a story here about reporters killed in South Ossetia.
- dkapuchino, on 08/15/2008, -2/+8And I'm sured you blames only the Georgians.
What is it about you people that you just enjoy siding with the bad guys (Hamas, Russia)?
I wonder what that makes you... - dkapuchino, on 08/15/2008, -2/+7sure, blame
- dkapuchino, on 08/15/2008, -2/+8And I'm sured you blames only the Georgians.
- MarkusGarvey, on 08/15/2008, -13/+5way to condescend foo...fyi...sub is not about Georgia...so your advice is not to report news from war zones?....
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is