How Utterly Predictable

Do you remember this atrocity?

Footage of Fadel Shana, 23, being killed by a tank shell in the Gaza Strip has been released by the news agency, which said that the cameraman was hit despite clear markings that showed him to be a journalist.

After medical examinations of Shana's body, Reuters said that Israel had used a controversial type of tank shell which scatters metal darts, or flechettes, around the surrounding area after exploding, risking civilian casualties. Israel refused to comment on the report, but stated that the weapons were not illegal.

I wrote about it here.
Not that I’m surprised, but it still bears pointing out because I’m sick and tired of people shrugging off all sorts of barbaric behavior. Where’s the outrage? Where’s the accountability? This has been going on for a long time, so what good is a measured demand for a ’swift, honest and impartial investigation’? Has anything like that ever been forthcoming in all these years? No. The IDF will blow this off just like they surely blow off any complaints about people getting killed in the occupied territories. They don’t care. These soldiers have been given carte blanche to do whatever they want. Maybe the guy in the tank woke up on the wrong side of bed, so he decided to kill some people yesterday. He knows there will be no negative consequences for him, so what’s to stop him? Apparently nothing.
Sure enough, Israel cleared the troops involved.

LONDON (Reuters) - An Israeli tank crew who killed a Reuters cameraman and eight young bystanders in the Gaza Strip four months ago acted properly and will not face legal action, Israel's senior military lawyer has concluded.

The military advocate-general told the international news agency in a letter sent on Tuesday that troops could not see whether Fadel Shana was operating a camera or a weapon but were nonetheless justified in firing a shell packed with darts that killed him and eight other Palestinians aged between 12 and 20.

...Reuters wrote to Mendelblit on Wednesday with a number of questions, including asking precisely why the soldiers ruled out the possibility that Shana was a cameraman, why the fact he stood in full view of the tanks for some minutes did not suggest he had no hostile intent and why the tank crew, if concerned but unsure, did not simply reverse a few meters out of sight.

The Foreign Press Association in Israel said the army had a "long line of cases clearing its soldiers of deadly negligence".

It added: "The army is obligated to clearly identify its targets before firing, especially in areas where civilians and journalists are present. The mere suspicion of possible hostilities should not be enough to justify overwhelming deadly force.

"We hope that the army's conclusion does not appear to give soldiers free license to fire without being sure of the target, greatly hindering the media's ability to cover the conflict."

Obviously, the IDF soldiers know full well that they have free license to kill whoever they please, for whatever reason they choose or no reason at all, and with complete impunity. That is the only conclusion one can draw. What is the point of diplomatic niceties under these circumstances, aside from enabling more atrocities?

No comments:

legal mumbo jumbo

Disclaimer: The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.