Bekijk Volledige Versie : Joden die 10-jarig meisje afknalden worden niet eens aangeklaagd
Coolassprov MC
01-08-07, 10:31
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/888394.html
Suspects in killing of 10-year-old Palestinian girl not to be tried
By Avi Issacharoff and Jonathan Lis, Haaretz Correspondents
The Jerusalem District Prosecutor's Office decided Tuesday not to indict Border Police officers suspected of being responsible for the January death of 10-year-old Abir Aramin from the West Bank village of Anata near Jerusalem.
The civil rights group "Yesh Din", which specializes in representing Palestinians whose rights have been violated by Israel's defense establishment or by Jewish settlers, announced that it will appeal the decision.
Aramin was seriously wounded in the head when she stepped out of school with her sister during recess and found herself in the midst of a confrontation between border police and young protestors.
Pathologists who conducted the autopsy on the girl's body found it difficult to determine what the cause of the girl's death had actually been. While the doctors dismissed the possibility that she was hit with a rubber bullet, they did not dismiss the possibility that she was killed by a stun grenade or rock.
Since the pathologists could not determine the cause of death, the Jerusalem prosecutors decided to close the investigation due to lack of evidence.
The investigation was conducted by the Judea and Samaria police department and not by the internal affairs division of the police department as the incident took place in the West Bank.
At the time of Aramin's death, military police would enter the village often and - according to village residents - instigate conflicts with the local residents.
Despite the death of his daughter, Basam Aramin, an activist with the non-profit organization "Combatants for Peace" decided to cooperate with the police.
In a deal struck two months after Aramin's death, it was agreed that Border Police would no longer enter the village without coordinating it first with the local residents - unless an internal emergency demanded police intervention.
Local parents and political figures agreed that if a violent confrontation with police should erupt, they would act to restore order immediately.
"Israelis are paranoid that we want to throw them into the sea with the fish but I think we need to stop focusing on the past and turn over a new leaf in our relationship," Aramin told Haaretz when the agreement was reached.
"The past is very painful for both sides. I have paid a heavy personal price - I lost my childhood in an Israeli prison and now I have lost my daughter. But from a personal and national standpoint, we mustn't remain in the past."
Geplaatst door Coolassprov MC
[url]Aramin was seriously wounded in the head when she stepped out of school with her sister during recess and found herself in the midst of a confrontation between border police and young protestors.
Pathologists who conducted the autopsy on the girl's body found it difficult to determine what the cause of the girl's death had actually been. While the doctors dismissed the possibility that she was hit with a rubber bullet, they did not dismiss the possibility that she was killed by a stun grenade or rock.
Moeilijk he, om een beetje goede titel te verzinnen???
Niet alleen is ze niet afgeknald, maar ook kan men niet bepalen of de doodsoorzaak een granaat (israelli) of Rots (palestijnse protestanten).
Coolassprov MC
01-08-07, 16:56
Geplaatst door Freesaf2
Moeilijk he, om een beetje goede titel te verzinnen???
Niet alleen is ze niet afgeknald, maar ook kan men niet bepalen of de doodsoorzaak een granaat (israelli) of Rots (palestijnse protestanten).
Geen scherp geschut op jonge kinderen= geen dode jonge kinderen.
Als je mijn titel werkelijk had gelezen, had je kunnen lezen dat er niemand aangeklaagd wordt voor een moord die voorkomen had kunnen worden.
Natuurlijk vindt een jood altijd wel een smoesje om een jood vrijuit te laten gaan; van zulke doofpot-affaires kan ik er miljoenen noemen.
Dankuwel!
Oh, Koelekont - je hebt je onderschrift veranderd! Deze is net zo grappig - ga zo door!
Coolassprov MC
01-08-07, 17:08
Geplaatst door David
Oh, Koelekont - je hebt je onderschrift veranderd! Deze is net zo grappig - ga zo door!
Deed jij dat ook maar eens, relnicht-van-niks.
Geplaatst door Coolassprov MC
Deed jij dat ook maar eens, relnicht-van-niks.
Je mist Miss V&D, hè?
Coolassprov MC
01-08-07, 17:10
Geplaatst door David
Je mist Miss V&D, hè?
Ken ik niet.
Geplaatst door Coolassprov MC
Ken ik niet.
Lieffie toch! Dat vindt 'ie niet leuk!
Coolassprov MC
01-08-07, 17:15
Geplaatst door David
Lieffie toch! Dat vindt 'ie niet leuk!
Heb geen zin in nichterige raadspelletjes; jouw galgenhumor laat me verder koud.
Geplaatst door Coolassprov MC
Heb geen zin in nichterige raadspelletjes; jouw galgenhumor laat me verder koud.
Weet ik. Ga maar door met je Hamas flauwekul. Past bij je. Net als je kromme onderschriftjes. Lieffie.
Coolassprov MC
01-08-07, 17:17
Geplaatst door David
Weet ik. Ga maar door met je Hams flauwekul. Past bij je. Net als je kromme onderschriftjes. Lieffie.
Je mag me pm'en als je de behoefte voelt.
:zwaai:
Geplaatst door Coolassprov MC
Je mag me pm'en als je de behoefte voelt.
:zwaai:
Done!
Coolassprov MC
01-08-07, 17:23
Geplaatst door David
Done!
Als ik tijd heb, zal ik erop reageren.
Geplaatst door Coolassprov MC
Als ik tijd heb, zal ik erop reageren.
Ik wacht met smart! :roker:
Coolassprov MC
01-08-07, 17:29
Geplaatst door David
Ik wacht met smart! :roker:
Hoop dat je geduldig bent, mijn tijd is kostbaar en ik plaats nichten ook nog eens achteraan de rij; overigens niet om ze te plezieren omdat ze al iets hebben met ''achter''.
Geplaatst door David
Geplaatst door Coolassprov MC
Je mag me pm'en als je de behoefte voelt.
:zwaai:
Done!
Gay scene innuendo?
Wel safe, jongens. Denk erom.
Coolassprov MC
01-08-07, 19:21
Geplaatst door Charlus
Done!
Gay scene innuendo?
Wel safe, jongens. Denk erom. [/QUOTE]
Ga je beklagen bij David; dat is de rugtoerist of degene die de rugtoerist rondleid.
Geplaatst door Coolassprov MC
Despite the death of his daughter, Basam Aramin, an activist with the non-profit organization "Combatants for Peace" decided to cooperate with the police.
In a deal struck two months after Aramin's death, it was agreed that Border Police would no longer enter the village without coordinating it first with the local residents - unless an internal emergency demanded police intervention.
Local parents and political figures agreed that if a violent confrontation with police should erupt, they would act to restore order immediately.
"Israelis are paranoid that we want to throw them into the sea with the fish but I think we need to stop focusing on the past and turn over a new leaf in our relationship," Aramin told Haaretz when the agreement was reached.
"The past is very painful for both sides. I have paid a heavy personal price - I lost my childhood in an Israeli prison and now I have lost my daughter. But from a personal and national standpoint, we mustn't remain in the past."
Goeie persoonlijkheid, zeg. :fpetaf:
Geplaatst door Coolassprov MC
Geen scherp geschut op jonge kinderen= geen dode jonge kinderen.
the doctors dismissed the possibility that she was hit with a rubber bullet.
Dus niet met scherp geschoten.
Geplaatst door Coolassprov MC
Als je mijn titel werkelijk had gelezen, had je kunnen lezen dat er niemand aangeklaagd wordt voor een moord die voorkomen had kunnen worden.
In jouw titel stel je niet dat er niemand wordt aangeklaagd, Je stelt dat er geen Joden worden aangeklaagd. Verder stel je zonder enig bewijs dat het meisje door Joodse troepen is neergeschoten terwijl daar 0 bewijs voor is.
Geplaatst door Coolassprov MC
Natuurlijk vindt een jood altijd wel een smoesje om een jood vrijuit te laten gaan; van zulke doofpot-affaires kan ik er miljoenen noemen.
Dankuwel!
Heerlijk zon zwart\wit wereld waarin jij leeft. Alles wat niet gaat zoals jij wilt is een doofpot
Coolassprov MC
03-08-07, 11:33
Geplaatst door Freesaf2
the doctors dismissed the possibility that she was hit with a rubber bullet.
Dus niet met scherp geschoten.
Dat staat er niet; je leest wat je wilt lezen.
Wat er wel staat is niet meer dan suggestief.
Bovendien; heb je weleens een rubber kogel zien wegstuiteren van een kinderlichaam?
Geplaatst door Freesaf2
In jouw titel stel je niet dat er niemand wordt aangeklaagd, Je stelt dat er geen Joden worden aangeklaagd. Verder stel je zonder enig bewijs dat het meisje door Joodse troepen is neergeschoten terwijl daar 0 bewijs voor is.
Lekker onderzoek als het geleid wordt door de daders zelf!
(The investigation was conducted by the Judea and Samaria police department and not by the internal affairs division of the police department as the incident took place in the West Bank.)
De enige verdachten zijn Joden; diegenen die met hun dienstwapens op kinderen schoten en hierbij een 10-jarig meisjes doden.
Het feit dat er een burgerrechten-organisatie
(The civil rights group "Yesh Din", which specializes in representing Palestinians whose rights have been violated by Israel's defense establishment or by Jewish settlers, announced that it will appeal the decision.)
bestaat die tegen dit soort doofpot-affaires ingaat bewijst dat dit meer routine dan incident is.
Geplaatst door Freesaf2
Heerlijk zon zwart\wit wereld waarin jij leeft. Alles wat niet gaat zoals jij wilt is een doofpot
Kom maar 'terug met je ''waardevolle mening'' als je volwassen genoeg bent voor dit soort zaken.
Coolassprov MC
03-08-07, 11:41
Geplaatst door Coolassprov MC
Natuurlijk vindt een jood altijd wel een smoesje om een jood vrijuit te laten gaan; van zulke doofpot-affaires kan ik er miljoenen noemen.
Bron: http://www.btselem.org/Shared/Images/Technical/English/about_us/aa_r1_c1.jpg
http://www.btselem.org/english/Firearms/Jag_Investigations.asp
Military Police investigations during the al-Aqsa intifada
At the beginning of the al-Aqsa intifada, the Judge Advocate General's office changed its policy regarding the opening of Military Police investigations for cases in which IDF soldiers kill Palestinian civilians.
In the first intifada, the IDF investigated every case in which a Palestinian was killed except for those in which the person killed was involved in the fighting. When the current intifada began, the JAG's office decided that Military Police investigations would only be opened for those cases in which soldiers "severely violate the open-fire regulations and cause bodily injury or loss of life." Under the new procedure, the army unit investigates every incident in which a soldier from that unit kills a Palestinian civilian. The findings are forwarded to the JAG's office which then decides whether the findings warrant a Military Police investigation.
This change in policy has led to a drastic fall in the number of Military Police investigations. From the beginning of the current intifada (29 September 2000) to 14 February 2007, the Military Police investigated only 239 cases involving shooting by soldiers. Only 30 of these investigations resulted in the filing of indictments. During this period, 3,963 Palestinians were killed, among them 814 minors (under the age of 18). Some of those killed were indeed killed while fighting against Israeli soldiers or civilians, however hundreds of others were not involved in the fighting.
In justifying the change in policy, the JAG's office contends that since the beginning of the al-Aqsa intifada, an "armed conflict" has been taking place in the territories, and that the IDF, therefore, is not automatically required to investigate every attack on civilians. However, it is not correct to define the situation in the Occupied Territories as armed conflict. Some of the actions taking place in the Occupied Territories are indeed combat actions, but a significant number of IDF actions - at checkpoints, in dispersing demonstrations in which the Palestinian side does not open fire, in arresting Palestinians - are normal police actions of the kind that were carried out by soldiers in the first intifada. Furthermore, even if the situation is one of armed conflict, the army is still required to investigate attacks on civilians. Armed conflict, too, has rules, and intentional attacks on the civilian population are forbidden. To ensure that soldiers comply with these rules, such incidents must be investigated.
The JAG's office also contends that the current situation in the territories does not enable the investigation of every case in which a Palestinian civilian is killed. Military Police investigators will undoubtedly face difficulties in conducting their investigations, but these difficulties cannot justify the failure to open an investigation. They can only justify the subsequent closing of the file.
The new procedure is not a suitable alternative to the procedure that was implemented in the previous intifada. First, the new procedure's declaration that only cases of "severe violation" warrant the opening of an investigation is vague and susceptible to various interpretations. The JAG's office did not establish clear criteria for determining when it will request a Military Police investigation. It is no surprise, therefore, that no clear distinction is made between cases in which an investigation is opened and the dozens of similar cases in which the JAG's office decided that an investigation is not warranted. Many investigations were opened only after human rights organizations, diplomats, or journalists put pressure on the JAG's office to do so. The handling by the JAG's office of the death of Khalil al-Mughrabi raises doubts about the manner in which the JAG's office decides whether to open a Military Police investigation.
Second, an internal investigation conducted by a unit cannot properly form the basis for the decision of the JAG's office to open or not open an investigation. At the unit level, the persons directly involved in the incident, and who will bear the consequences of the investigation, are the ones who conduct the investigation. Clearly, this conflict of interest will affect the conduct, as well as the results, of the investigation. Furthermore, the commanding officers conducting the internal investigation do not have the investigative skills of Military Police investigators. Soldiers' testimonies to B'Tselem indicate that the investigations conducted by the units in which they served were carried out negligently, and that in many cases no investigation was conducted at all. The initial decision made by the JAG's office in the matter of the death of Ahmad al-Qureini is a perfect example of the problem of using a unit's investigation to determine whether to open a Military Police investigation.
In addition to the fundamental problems inherent in the new procedure, implementation of the procedure is problematic as well. In most cases, many months (at times more than a year) pass from the time of the incident to the time that the JAG's office decides to open a Military Police investigation. When the investigation is finally opened, the investigators have difficulty in finding the victims and eyewitnesses. Finding evidence at the scene is almost impossible at such a late stage. The problem is aggravated by the fact that the Military Police investigation unit has very few Arabic speakers, and Arabic speakers are needed to take testimonies from witnesses.
The JAG's office relies on these difficulties to explain the small number of investigations and indictments. In some of these cases, though, it has only itself and others in the IDF to blame. The ultimate reason for this failure lies in the improper implementation of the procedure and the flawed manner in which the Military Police investigations are conducted.
The sweeping directive not to open investigations, the flawed handling of the internal investigations by the units, and the negligent handling of the investigations that do occur transmit a message to the commanding officers and soldiers: Even if you breach the rules and harm innocent people, there is little, if any, chance that measures will be taken against you. This message leads to a trigger-happy attitude and to widespread injury and death among civilians in the Occupied Territories.
On 27 October 2003, The Association for Civil Rights in Israel and B'Tselem submitted a petition to the High Court of Justice against the Military Judge Advocate General (JAG). The organizations called on the JAG to open military investigations into all cases in which IDF soldiers kill Palestinian civilians who were not involved in combat. The petition details the circumstances surrounding the death of eight Palestinians who were killed by IDF soldiers between May 2002 and May 2003.
IDF Chief-of-Staff Dan Halutz recently announced a change in the procedure for internal investigations. In a statement to the High Court, the State Attorney's Office called this change a "significant improvement" in the existing situation, an improvement which justifies the rejection of the petition filed by B'Tselem and ACRI.
According to the new procedure, the Judge Advocate General's Office will be provided a detailed report, within 48 hours, of each incident in which a civilian not taking part in hostilities is killed. Based on the information contained in the report, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) will decide whether to open an investigation.
Despite the improvement, the new procedure does not rectify the principal flaws in the process of deciding whether to open an investigation. The responsibility for collecting the information provided to the JAG, which forms the basis for determining whether to open a Military Police investigation, is left in the hands of the military forces that were involved in causing the death. This situation creates a clear conflict of interest in that the persons charged with reporting the primary facts in the case may bear criminal liability for the acts described in the report. Furthermore, the new procedure does not solve the currently existing problem in which the decision to open a Military Police investigation is made long after the incident occurred and the evidence at the scene has disappeared. The request made by B'Tselem and ACRI that the Military Police immediately document the scene of an incident in which a Palestinian civilian is killed so that a future investigation, if ordered, would be effective, was rejected by the State Attorney's Office.
Most importantly, the new procedure leaves intact the general practice of not investigating cases in which civilians who were not taking part in hostilities are killed. This situation transmits a grave message to the soldiers of contempt for the most basic human right, the right to life.
The petitioners have submitted their opinion regarding the new procedure, and the petition is still pending.
Geplaatst door Coolassprov MC
Natuurlijk vindt een jood altijd wel een smoesje om een jood vrijuit te laten gaan; van zulke doofpot-affaires kan ik er miljoenen noemen.
Miljoenen maar liefst. Wel, zolang er nog maar geen sprake van miljarden is.
Elke Jood is bereid om met een smoesje een andere Jood die over de schreef is gegaan, vrijuit te laten gaan of begrijp ik je verkeerd?