Bush's "man of peace" kills more innocents

May 19, 2004

Palestinians Say Blast at Protest Kills at Least 10
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 9:51 a.m. ET

RAFAH, Gaza Strip (AP) -- Israeli forces fired a missile and a tank shell Wednesday into a large crowd of Palestinians demonstrating against the invasion of a neighboring refugee camp, witnesses said. At least 10 Palestinians were killed, all of them children and teenagers, a Palestinian health official said.

At least 50 people were wounded, 36 of them critically, Palestinian hospital officials said.

Palestinian witnesses saw a missile land in the middle of the crowd of 3,000 demonstrators, and Associated Press Television Network footage showed smoke and debris flying as a large explosion rocked the area. The footage then showed Palestinians carrying the wounded, including children, from the smoky scene.

Military sources said on condition of anonymity that one helicopter missile and one tank shell had been fired. Defense sources said senior officers, including the chief of staff, were in an emergency meeting to investigate the incident.

"We are still checking the event. This is a combat zone filled with explosives devices and it is premature to know exactly what happened this afternoon in Rafah,'' army spokeswoman Maj. Sharon Feingold said.

Between 3,000 and 4,000 demonstrators were marching down the busy main street of Rafah town. When the crowd was less than a mile from the besieged refugee camp, the helicopter and tank began firing, witnesses said.

The wounded were evacuated to the Rafah hospital by ambulance, private cars and donkey carts, witnesses said. The hospital stairs and floors were drenched in blood as doctors shouted for help and blood donations. Hospital staff treated the wounded on the floors after quickly running out of beds.

Dr. Moawiya Hassanain, a senior Palestinian Health Ministry official, said at least 10 people were killed and 50 wounded. Of the wounded, 23 were critically hurt and 13 were in ``hopeless'' condition. Most of the wounded were children, he said.

"We cannot handle the situation, no hospital in the world can handle the situation,'' Hassanain said.

"I got instruction from President (Yasser) Arafat to mobilize all our teams to Rafah immediately and declare a state of emergency all over Gaza Strip hospitals.''

[groover]

Let's not jump to conclusions until we have more facts.
----------------------------------------------------------
Conflicting Reports in Israeli Attack on Palestinian Marchers

by KYW's Jay Bushinsky

The Israeli military command was uncharacteristically speechless about reports that at least 15 Palestinians were killed by air-to-ground missiles fired by its helicopter gunships.

Palestinian versions of the incident says the airborne attack was totally unwarranted, that there was a peaceful demonstration, a mass turnout of marchers -- men, women, and children -- heading for the Tel al-Sultan district of Rafah, the southern Gaza Strip city seized by an Israeli task force the day before.

Civilian Israeli observers contend that some of the marchers were armed, and one military source said the crowd was menacing.

The Palestinians say the demonstration was organized by Rafah residents and several unnamed Palestinian organizations.

One hour and 45 minutes later, Israel's military spokesperson finally came out with a statement saying it was too soon to draw conclusions about the cause of this disaster, or those responsible.

This is a combat zone filled with explosive devices. A communique said the Israeli army is checking the details of this incident.

[Gentle Giant]

Originally Posted by Chris A

Dr. Moawiya Hassanain, a senior Palestinian Health Ministry official, said at least 10 people were killed and 50 wounded. Of the wounded, 23 were critically hurt and 13 were in ``hopeless'' condition. Most of the wounded were children, he said.

"We cannot handle the situation, no hospital in the world can handle the situation,'' Hassanain said.

No hospital in the world can handle 50 wounded people? Not the point, I know, but this sounds more like dictation than reporting.

Also, speaking as a fellow liberal, I have to say that I am starting to get fatigued by the preponderence of article-based threads you start on every incident of outrage on the planet. Maybe you can collapse them all into a single "This world is going to hell" thread, rather than take up all the real estate in the Alley. Obviously, it's my choice whether or not to read and participate, and lately I've been exercising that choice by staying away, but you may find your views being considered more seriously by others if you yourself exercised a little more discretion. Just some friendly advice.

Let's not jump to conclusions until we have more facts.

Oh please!!

Chris A would simply shrivel up and die if he had to follow this mantra.

Maybe you can collapse them all into a single "This world is going to hell" thread, rather than take up all the real estate in the Alley.

Perhaps you have forgotten, GG, that this has been suggested to him , oh, about half a million times. And mostly by the liberals here.

I understand what you are saying, GG, but as long as the likes of Monte and Dolan continue to poo-poo the Bush and Sharon regimes' outrages, I feel it is important to bring it up. I mean, look at these pictures--should we ignore this because we might not be taken seriously?

Remember, Bush has not condemned this.

Ah, now you see GG? It's not Chris' fault that he posts such an obnoxious amount of Bush hating threads. How could you have been so blind?

And by the way, Chris "has me on his ignore list", so obviously he's doing a lot of guessing these days about what I poo poo.

[Gentle Giant]

I guess my point is that there are numerous conflicts and wars going on all over the world. The media only covers a few of them, and often from a single perspective. Is a stretcher with a bloody Palestinian more newsworthy or deserving of outrage and sympathy than a stretcher with a bloody Israeli? There are endless photos and articles of the atrocities that have been committed on both sides. At what point do you say "this whole thing is a friggin' mess" and be done with it? Between Bush, Sharon, and Arafat, there is not one single leader with the intelligence, courage, and integrity required to work for peace.

Until the conflicts end, there will be continuing revelations of senseless tragedy, whether it's 40 dead at a wedding party or a videotaped beheading. I take that as a given, but I'm getting numb by having each one thrown in my face. I'm not saying we shouldn't protest and work for regime change, but nothing seems to shock or sicken me anymore, and that's the most troubling thing to me right now.

Originally Posted by Gentle Giant

I guess my point is that there are numerous conflicts and wars going on all over the world. The media only covers a few of them, and often from a single perspective. Is a stretcher with a bloody Palestinian more newsworthy or deserving of outrage and sympathy than a stretcher with a bloody Israeli? There are endless photos and articles of the atrocities that have been committed on both sides. At what point do you say "this whole thing is a friggin' mess" and be done with it? Between Bush, Sharon, and Arafat, there is not one single leader with the intelligence, courage, and integrity required to work for peace.

Until the conflicts end, there will be continuing revelations of senseless tragedy, whether it's 40 dead at a wedding party or a videotaped beheading. I take that as a given, but I'm getting numb by having each one thrown in my face. I'm not saying we shouldn't protest and work for regime change, but nothing seems to shock or sicken me anymore, and that's the most troubling thing to me right now.

I think many of us agree with that, GG, but we must not become complacent or de-sensitized.

May 20, 2004

The Gaza Quagmire

While the world waits for Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to make his next political move, after the Likud Party rejected his plan to unilaterally withdraw Israeli troops and settlements from the Gaza Strip, the Israeli Army is engaged in what looks like a plan to unilaterally destroy the Palestinian territory.

In some of the heaviest fighting in years, 13 Israeli soldiers and dozens of Palestinians have been killed since the Likud Party referendum on May 2. Yesterday brought horrifying scenes of death as an Israeli tank and helicopter opened fire on a group of Palestinian demonstrators, including children, in the Rafah refugee camp. Also, despite widespread international condemnation, Israel persists with its policy of demolishing hundreds of Palestinian dwellings in what looks like a heavy-handed form of collective punishment.

Israel indisputably faces a threat from Hamas cells within Gaza, but it is hard to see how these sorts of attacks on Palestinians will do anything other than serve as a recruiting campaign for Hamas.

A political miscalculation is partly to blame for Mr. Sharon's obsession with appearing characteristically tough, lest his desire to withdraw be taken for a sign of weakness. He should never have entrusted his withdrawal plan to a narrow sliver of the electorate, the one most susceptible to pressure from the extremist settlers. If he had wanted to force the issue and deliver on his promise to President Bush, a better way would have been to call for a national referendum or merely a parliamentary vote. Polls consistently show that more than two-thirds of Israelis favor retreating from Gaza, a sentiment expressed at an impressive peace rally in Tel Aviv held last Saturday. Even Mr. Sharon's defense minister calls the Gaza occupation a "historical mistake."

Mr. Sharon's broader miscalculation was his belief that Israel alone can determine the terms of its withdrawal and the outlines of a long-term accommodation with the Palestinians. Unfortunately, President Bush helped enable this fantasy by telling the prime minister in Washington last month that if Israel withdrew its settlements from Gaza, it could decide in advance that it would keep some of its West Bank settlements and would deny Palestinian refugees the right to return to their old homes without even putting the issue on the table.