PMWATCH  - April 5, 2002 -- In his April 4th edition of "Alan  Keyes is making 
sense", Alan Keyes focused on the question  of "calling a terrorist a terrorist" -- i.e., 
in Keyes parlance, the need not to mince words about Arafat and the necessity for 
Gerge W. Bush to "stop pandering to terrorists". When confronted by a caller (Susan 
from Illinois) about Israeli terrorist actions, Alan Keyes said that he would have no problem 
accusing Israel of terrorism if he were given evidence that they attacked civilians willfully  
and systematically.  But given that no such evidence exists, Keyes explained, it stands to 
reason that Israeli actions 
are not terrorist actions

Well, if you have been with PMWatch for any period of time, you know that the 
smoking gun on that issue exists in the form reams of published reports by dozens 
of human rights organizations.  But given that the language and concerns of human 
rights organizations are rarely taken seriously by the US media and government 
(unless the human rights criticism is against an adversary), we need to 
turn to reports on such atrocities from the very media itself: And the rawest 
and most reliable evidence was published by New York Times reporter Chris Hedges 
in his October 2001, Harper's Magazine story, "A Gaza Diary".

Chris Hedges was also interviewed by NPR's Fresh Air on October 30, 2001. He 
had the following exchange with Barbara Bogaev (who was filling in for Terry 
Gross that day):

  BOGAEV: You describe daily encounters between Israeli soldiers and 
  Palestinians there. And most of those killed are young Palestinian boys. 
  What did you see of this fighting while you were there? How did this 
  shooting go down? 
  
  Mr. HEDGES: Well, every afternoon--you know, you could almost time 
  it--around 3 or 4, the Palestinian kids, who have nowhere to play, 
  would play--would go out on the dunes and they'd have kites or rag 
  balls and this kind of stuff. And I remember--I heard it the first 
  day. And I speak Arabic, so I'm listening over the loudspeaker to 
  the worst curse words in Arabic, and phrases like, you know, 'All 
  the Palestinians who live in Khan Yunis are dogs,' which is calling 
  an Arab a dog is particularly insulting. And I couldn't--I just couldn't 
  believe what I heard. 
 
  And I walked out towards the dunes and they were--the--over the 
  loudspeaker from an Israeli army Jeep on the other side of the 
  electric fence they were taunting these kids. And these kids 
  started to throw rocks. And most of these kids were 10, 11, 12 
  years old. And, first of all, the rocks were the size of a fist. 
  They were being hurled towards a Jeep that was armor-plated. I doubt 
  they could even hit the Jeep. And then I watched the soldiers open fire. 
  And it was--I mean, I've seen kids shot in Sarajevo. I mean, snipers would 
  shoot kids in Sarajevo. I've seen death squads kill families in Algeria or 
  El Salvador. But I'd never seen soldiers bait or taunt kids like this and 
  then shoot them for sport. It was--I just--even now, I find it almost 
  inconceivable. And I went back every day, and every day it was the same. 
  http://64.226.129.19/pmw/manager/features/display_message.asp?mid=487

Of course, Mr. Keyes will respond to this accusation by saying that it is
an aberration and that the IDF punishes soldiers who engage in such conduct
when it knows about them.

But this argument can be demolished by pointing to the story below, published 
in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz.  In it author Gideon Levy writes:

  When this is the reaction of the IDF spokesman to the killing of children
  and when the IDF's juridical system doesn't lift a finger to investigate the
  incidents, the message that trickles down to every soldier is perfectly
  clear - killing children does not result in any sort of investigation, so no
  harm will come to a soldier the next time he shoots a child in the head,
  whether the child is throwing stones or running for his life.

So, ask Mr. Keyes if he is willing now to go on the air and declare that Israel 
does engage in terrorist actions.

Fill your contact info and your letter and click send.  It will be sent to:

    alankeyes@msnbc.com

Palestine Media Watch
http://www.pmwatch.org

http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=127894&contrassID=
2&subContrassID=4&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y&itemNo=127894

Sunday, February 10, 2002

The message from the high command

By Gideon Levy

An 11-year-old boy was shot in the head from short range while fleeing after
he threw stones at Israeli soldiers who were posted at the roadblock next to
the refugee camp where he lives. That is the version given by eye-witnesses.
It took the boy a week to die, and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) spokesman
stated: "In the course of disturbances, use was made of means to disperse
demonstrations against a youth who was identified as the chief inciter- The
soldier who fired acted properly."

A 15-year-old boy threw stones at a tank that was besieging the headquarters
of a national leader. A soldier shot him in the head from short range,
killing him. The IDF Spokesman: "There was a large throng, which included
stone throwing. The force that reached the site reacted with means to
disperse demonstrations but did not identify any casualties. Nor were any
complaints made to the coordination and liaison authorities."

A soldier in an undercover unit gave hot pursuit to a boy of about nine who
had been throwing stones, shot him from behind and killed him. The IDF
Spokesman: "A group of Palestinians this morning attacked soldiers with
stones- In the riots a Palestinian youth aged 14 was killed."

These are the stories of three of the 80 Palestinian children younger than
15 and the 197 below the age of 18 (according to data of the Palestinian
Human Rights Monitoring Group) who have been killed in the intifada. The
first two children were brothers and their story was told in Ha'aretz
Magazine. The testimony on the third boy was reported by the Tel Aviv weekly
Ha'ir, citing a reserve soldier who was an eye-witness to the event.

The IDF has totally shaken off any and all moral responsibility for the
killing of these children. According to the army spokesman, one boy was a
"chief inciter" (and therefore deserved to die?). No "complaints" were
received about another (and therefore there are doubts about whether he was
killed?). The third took part in "riots" (and therefore the verdict against
him, death by shooting, was valid?).

In not one of these cases did the IDF spokesman take the trouble to do the
minimum human necessary thing - to express sorrow at the death of the
children. The only conclusion is that the IDF is not sorry about their
killing. That is the message to those who did the killing and to the
families of those who were killed. No less grave, the IDF did not even
contemplate investigating the circumstances of the deaths.

When this is the reaction of the IDF spokesman to the killing of children
and when the IDF's juridical system doesn't lift a finger to investigate the
incidents, the message that trickles down to every soldier is perfectly
clear - killing children does not result in any sort of investigation, so no
harm will come to a soldier the next time he shoots a child in the head,
whether the child is throwing stones or running for his life.

The wave of harsh testimonies by reserve soldiers who refuse to serve in the
territories, which has inundated almost every media outlet recently - and is
the most important achievement of this group so far - has again brought to
public attention atrocities that are being perpetrated in the occupied
territories. The fact that these testimonies come from Israeli soldiers -
and not from "dubious" Palestinian testimonies, reports of "extreme" human
rights groups or articles by a handful of "one-sided" journalists - has
given them greater credibility.

More important, the testimonies indicate that these are no longer
exceptional events but policy with a clear, if twisted, goal - to embitter
the lives of the residents so that they will put pressure on their leaders
to fight terrorism. That is what Israel did in Lebanon and it is displaying
the same behavior in the territories. The women in labor who are not allowed
to go through the roadblocks, the terminally ill patients in ambulances who
howl in vain in traffic jams at roadblocks, and the children who are shot -
if the IDF senior command truly wanted to, it could put a stop to events
such as these.

The soldier who a few weeks ago told Rada Zakin from the village of Yamoun,
whose wife was in labor and bleeding in the car, that he had the right to
kill them but no right to let them through the roadblock, expressed well the
terrible reality that the IDF high command has brought into being. The days
of seminar that various units occasionally hold on the subject of "human
dignity" become effectively meaningless if the spirit underlying the orders
is that now, since we are at "war," everything is permitted.

The fact is that not everything is permitted. When the IDF wanted to prevent
immoral and illegal actions, it was able to do so. There are two offenses
that IDF soldiers have rarely committed during the years of the occupation -
sexual harassment and looting. The main reason for this is that the IDF
fought with determination against both types of deplorable behavior.
Soldiers knew that they faced severe punishment if they engaged in looting
or rape. This is not the case with soldiers who open fire with such
intolerable ease at children, prevent the ill from passing through
roadblocks or abuse residents of the territories.

These offenses are no less grave than rape or looting, but they are
considered less grave by the IDF. If in the perception of IDF senior
officers the killing of unarmed children - an act that former Shin Bet
security service chief Ami Ayalon has called "flagrantly illegal" - does not
merit investigation, denunciation or contrition, it is no wonder that a
soldier who was manning the Kalanya roadblock a week ago Saturday opened
fire, in the midst of a conversation with his buddies, at a group of
children who were throwing stones from a distance at which the soldiers were
out of range. This time no children were killed.