On September 7, 2016, ABC News ran a story that suggested
Israel’s security forces may have committed murder against a ‘Palestinian’ (“Video
Raises Questions About Israeli Police Shooting”, abcnews, September 7,
2016). That suggestion was false. It maligned Israel's reputation.
Two days earlier, Israeli police had reported that two ‘Palestinian’
men in a car had tried to run over police in a ‘Palestinian refugee camp’ in
Jerusalem (“Palestinian Shot Dead Attempting Terror Car Ramming in Eastern
Jerusalem”, breitbart, September 5, 2016). As that attack unfolded, police
shot at the car. They killed one man in the car. The second man was injured.
When the initial report came out, it seemed that this
incident was no different from at least 45 other ‘Palestinian’ car ramming
incidents in the past year. But in this incident, ABC News reported, a video of
the shooting taken at the scene (no one asked why a videographer was present) appeared
to show police shooting after the vehicle had been stopped (ibid).
The headline posed an unasked question: why did police
continue to shoot after the car no longer appeared to be a threat? The headline
suggested that Israel’s behaviour in this incident was not right.
Israel has been accused many times of ‘disproportionate’
responses to ‘Palestinian’ attacks. Is that what this story suggested?
Israel has been accused of killing ‘Palestinians’ with a
crime called, ‘extrajudicial killings’. Is that was this film showed?
To understand why Israeli security forces could and would
legally be able to shoot at people inside a stopped vehicle, consider two
realities: (1) the threat that faces Israel; and (2) a recent terror incident
in Turkey.
Between 2010, the year I made aliyah to Israel, and
mid-January 2016, more than 1,000 Israelis have been killed and wounded in some
215 attacks by ‘Palestinians’ (Wm. Robert Johnston, “Summary of Terrorist
Attacks in Israel”, johnstonsarchive. net, January 8, 2016). That
averages out to 3 successful attacks per month for five-and-a-half years.
The Palestinian Authority responds to these attacks by glorifying
the murder of Jews (Itamar Marcus, “PA and Fatah continue to glorify murderer
of 3 on Jerusalem bus”, Palestinian Media Watch, September 1, 2016). That
glorification is part of a deliberate incitement campaign against the Jewish
state. It’s a continuing celebration of killing Jews.
This communal celebration of the killing of Jews means that
Israel must remain constantly vigilant.
An attack can come any hour of any day from any member of the
‘Palestinian’ community. An attack can be by knife, gun, rock, stone or car. It
can be committed by man, woman or child.
As these attacks increase Jewish vigilance, Jews in Israel
remember the second Intifada (late 2000-early 2005). During this 55-month period,
‘138 ‘Palestinian’ suicide bombers killed more than 1,000 Israelis (“The
al-Aqsa Intifada”, ynet, March 19, 2009). Thousands more were wounded.
Israel suffered an average of more than 2 successful suicide bombings
per month for more than four years. The toll and the damage were horrific.
To give you a sense of that toll, consider: if the same per
cent of America’s population were killed in similar bombings, more than
50,000 Americans would have been killed. The average Jewish population for 2000-2005
was app 5.25 million (it's 6.4 million today). The US population
today is 322 million (“US population”, worldometers.info, September,
2016). 1,000 Jews killed in Israel is the population equivalent of 50,000+ Americans killed in America.
The world saw how horrific a suicide bombing can be in June,
2016 (Chris Summers, “Incredible moment that hero policeman guns down Istanbul
airport suicide bomber then flees with SECONDS to spare after realising
terrorist is about to detonate explosive vest”, dailymail, June 29,
2016). This incident explains why Israeli security forces, in the incident reported by ABC News, continued to shoot after the ‘Palestinian’s’ car had been stopped—to make
sure no passenger would have the time to detonate a bomb which might be in that
car.
In Istanbul, a police officer shot and wounded a suicide
bomber. He did not then shoot again to kill him. Instead, he walked toward the
downed terrorist. Then, when he saw the terrorist move to detonate his bomb, he
turned and ran. The incident was captured on CCTV. At the time of the report,
no one knew if that police officer survived that blast.
Israeli security forces don’t want that to happen in Israel.
To prevent that, an Israeli security officer must not simply shoot and wound a
terrorist. He must neutralize him. That means, according to one report, an
attacking terrorist must either be killed or have both hands and feet
handcuffed in order to be considered ‘neutralized’.
When a car, capable of carrying hundreds of pounds of
explosives is involved in an attack against Jews, there is no time to remove an
attacker from that car to handcuff him. Wounded, he could detonate his bomb.
For him, ‘neutralizing’ means only one thing: he’ll be shot until he no longer
moves.
That’s not extrajudicial killing. It’s self-defense.
That’s why, in the incident videoed above, police continued
to shoot after the car had been stopped (the words of the story). The
car was not the threat, as the story suggested. The threat was the passengers,
either one of whom could have detonated a bomb.
Apparently, ABC News didn’t understand that. It just
reported what the video showed (“Video Raises Questions About Israeli Police
shooting”). But to one who understands the threat Israel must deal with, that
video doesn’t raise any questions; it simply verifies how Israel must act in
order to keep safe.
There’s an update to this story which escaped ABC News. The
update is, after the incident, Israel announced that the ‘Palestinian’ in the
car was not a terrorist. After investigation, Israeli police said that it
appeared both men (or, the driver; reports varied) had been drinking and were on
drugs. The incident was never intended to go this far.
Israel acknowledged its error. It announced it.
Killing by error in a high-stress situation that requires
security forces to make instantaneous decisions doesn’t make Israel evil. It simply
proves that Israel will be cautious when an incident unfolds. As a sovereign
state, Israel has the right to protect its security forces.
ABC News missed that—and put Israel into a bad light. ABC should
apologize for that error.
No comments:
Post a Comment