Congrats are due here to the Israeli governmnt who despite the lies told about them by ISM proved they are a democratic, publicly accountable administration by bringing this former soldier to justice.

What a pity the same respect for the basic human rights is not shown the the Palestinian Authority with its kangaroo courts, murder of "informers" and persecution of those seeking peace.

Well done Israel

Israel obstructed the enquiry al the way through - refused to give reports to the UK coroner - and the soldier certainly feels that he has been singled out because he is Bedouin.

So far the harshest sentence Israeli courts have handed out to an Israeli soldier for killing a Palestinian civilian is 20 months. I'd be surprised if Wahid Taysir got more than that for killing a civilian for no reason whatsoever.

Other internationals who have been killed or maimed have not had justice - Rachel Corries, Iain Hook and James Millar are dead with no one held responsible.

When it comes to Palestinian civilians, the conviction rate is almost non-existent.

And this cold blooded killing is supposedly 'manslaughter' - the idea of a Palestinian who shot an Israeli in the head getting a 'manslaughter' verdict is unimaginable - hell Israel routinely executes Palestinians without even the pretence of a trial - and imprisons many men, women and children without due process.

If Jonathon thinks that the Israeli judiciary is something to be proud of, that is HIS problem. Anyone with half a brain can see that it isn't.

ISRAELI SOLDIERS GETTING AWAY WITH MURDER: HRW
 http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=29188

I think Jonathon's just another bourgous dickhead troll.

Says it all really. The moral bankruptcy of Israel and its "supporters" [sic].

Jonathan - tell me - were you one of the people who got through to the Islam Channel fundraiser after the showing of "Jeremy Hardy v the Israeli Army" on Saturday night? If so, thanks mate! You helped ignite the phone lines for them. People don't usually ring in to pledge a monthly donation, but they did that night. £60k raised for InterPal.

Keep up the good work.



And for the rest of you (I suspect Jonathan is too far gone) here are some cool sites:

www.jewishfriendspalestine.com (gateway site linking to hundreds of organisations)
www.jfjfp.com (Jews for Justice for Palestinians)
www.btselem.org (Israeli Human Rights org)
www.icahd.org (Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions)
www.pcati.org (Public Committee Against Torture in Israel)
www.phr-israel.org (Physicians for Human Rights - Israel)

Fair comnment ftp, but it ain't fair to lay this at the door of the entire Israeli judiciary:

1. This is a military not a civilian court
2. Israel has been under Emergency Law (aka Martial Law) continously since 1948, so the Israeli Judiciary has no true power

I was with a group who once had an outside chance of setting a legal precedent in Israel, and was told by all the lawyers that it was pointless due to #2 above. No precedents can be set as the law is simply changed to circumvent them.

We fought on anyway, and created several Israeli legal precedents in the process, with maximal help from the judge who wrote the most scathing account of the Government's actions whilst explaining why she had no option but to rule against us. At one point in the trial she insinuated that she could not be living in the same country as the prosecutor if he thought he could flout the law by spouting nonsense ... she also called an unnecessary additional court date for the much delayed verdict in order to help us generate maximum media coverage.

Israelis in all walks of life are fighting this, with whatever means at their disposal - it ain't easy.

Israel - the only "democracy" which has been under continuous military rule from birth. A truly surreal State.

....... who act in a 'reasonable' way, but ultimately they legitimate and strengthen the very same system as the bad ones.

Heres how the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) Legal Director summed it up in a UN Special Committee hearing last Sunday:

"In his testimony, Iyad Alami focused on the absence of justice in the Israeli judicial system, emphasizing, through the use of concrete examples, that when a claim is related to Palestinian civilians living in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT), the Israeli judiciary, including the High Court, turns into a means to provide legal cover for Israeli military activity, even when such activity is in clear breach of international law. He further noted that grave breaches, including extra-judicial executions, house demolitions and torture of prisoners, are covered up by, and admitted to by the Israeli judiciary."
 http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2005/75-2005.htm

University of Haifa sociologists Arye Rattner and Gideon Fishman, who regard themselves as "ardent zionists" and liberals studied the way that the Israeli judicial system treats Israeli Palestinians and Israeli jews:

"The data gathered in this study supports the contention that the Israeli justice system discriminates, consistently and frequently, against Arabs. Using multivariate regression analysis, the authors demonstrate that Arabs have their criminal files remain open for a longer period than Jews; that an Arab defendant with no prior history of criminal activity is more likely to be convicted than a Jewish defendant with a similar record; and that Arabs are more likely to be convicted to a prison term than Jews. The results also indicated that in general, there is a higher probability of Arab defendants receiving a harsher sentencing across particular categories of criminal acts that range from violent crimes to property offenses.

To Rattner and Fishman, the higher conviction rate among Arabs in contrast to Jews, points to a disturbing disparity and raises serious questions in regards to the practice of fairness in the Israeli judiciary. The authors explain that Arabs have a greater sense of "legitimized illegalism" given that a larger number of Arabs justify with "legitimate" reasons their acts of disobedience (p. 110). The principle of due process is undermined because of endemic stigmatizing and stereotyping: "Being an Arab may lead to a presumption of guilt without facts and the rules of evidence" (p. 115)."
 http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3821/is_200004/ai_n8893710

Ewa Jasciewicz, who was subject to several hearings in Israeli Courts, makes some salient points:

"In August I spent three weeks in an Israeli detention centre after being declared a security threat on entry to the country at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion Airport. Using secret evidence, Israel’s domestic intelligence agency the Shin Bet said I had links with ‘terrorist’ organisations.

Two court appearances later, it was declared that I wasn’t a security threat, only that my naivety could be manipulated to serve terrorist agendas. I was to be allowed into Israel, but not the occupied territories.

But accepting that decision would have set a legal precedent and empowered the Israeli state even further in its agenda to exclude journalists and human rights activists from witnessing and reporting on the reality of Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine. And I do not recognise the authority of a judiciary that condones war crimes, collective punishment, the theft of land, colonisation and the criminalisation and killing of a people who have every right to resist, militarily or otherwise, that occupation."
 http://www.redpepper.org.uk/Oct2004/x-Oct2004-Jasiewicz.html

A judiciary that is prone to racism, and which rubber stamps war crimes in not, at the end of the day, something to crow about...............

Heh heh.

I don't disagree with you. But it ain't the full story, is it?

I do agree about the pointlessness and counter-productivity of deciding to try and change things from within - unless you absolutely refuse to compromise. Otherwise, you will be assimilated, and if you refuse to be assimilated, you will be discredited and marginalised (cf Scott Ritter, David Kelly, etc) Now, working to Israeli “law” is compromise, so it's a non-starter.

But then again ... do we really want all the "good" legal-types in Israel on the other side of the bench, representing people but with no power to judge them? It ain't just the verdicts that matter in court, its the language of the accompanying judgement. Future Israeli law students will have to study these, and future cases will quote them in support.

Even if they're only reduced to media tarts, surely we want some judges hawling prosecutors over the coals sometimes? Look at this article in Ha'Aretz:  http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=176264&contrassID=2&subContrassID=5&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y That case hit Palestinian TV sets – and things like that mean a lot to Palestinians, just to know people are coming, even if they never see an International themselves. They feel like they have a voice when for so long they have felt voiceless, and that in itself is empowering the non-violence movement. And it got through to the Israeli mainstream, and that ain't no bad thing.

Here's a parallel ... I don't blame any of those serving Israeli soldiers who simply couldn't face the consequences of refusal (not just jail, no free education, healthcare, restricted jobs, social alienation etc). They don't all have the support networks to be able to refuse - a lot of the refuseniks are middle-class types with jobs or family secure enough to allow them to risk prison for a month or so each year. But many that are – or feel - forced to compromise do their best to improve things from within. Since Tom - and I fully credit the Hurndalls with this change - there have been several high profile cases where soldiers have grassed up their colleagues and officers for murder - refusing to lie for them. The culture is already changing, due to the good guys doing their best in impossible circumstances. It might not be perfect in an ideologically rigid world, but every little helps in the real one.

And there are two other, quite separate, issues here:

1. Capitalising on our Israeli friend's interest in the thread. We're not trying to convince him and his ilk - they're way too far gone - but they help others work out whose side they'd rather be on. I can't stand it when people resort to insults in response - it makes us look just as bad as they are and leaves uninformed readers indifferent between the two sides. We don't need "friends" like that - it's like admitting you don't have a rational response, when we do - unlike our uber-Zionist friends. (Not referring to you here, BTW. I like your posts :).

2. I do consider it important to make sure that people less involved than we are realise that Israelis are not one amorphous blob of cowardly inhumanity. That is an outrageous nonsensical libel - and an impression doesn't help anyone. It vastly weakens any rabidly Zionist "argument" when this is made clear. They do not speak for Israelis any more than they speak for Jews. This is an important media-myth to tackle, and I think it's worth doing, even if it sticks in your purist throat.

Screw ideology - not what we're here for - think strategy.

The moron who said that Israel's Judges have no power - stop talking twaddle and get your facts straight.


It is to Israel's credit that this trial took place.

Of course, it is to her further credit that a fair trial took place in the face of the immense pressure to convict without any due process which was called for by the ISM.

No other Middle East State would have put one of their soldiers on trial if a Jew was killed whilst protesting about Jewish homes which were seized when their inhabitants were exiled.

J&P

Happens it was a military tribunal .........

And Tom Hurndall was fetching terrified kids from behind a road block - he wasn't protesting about "ruined houses" ........

And the chances of you producing evidence that ISM called for conviction without a trial are doodly squat - because it didn't happen..........

If anyone deserves a "well done", it is the Hurndall family who gathered the evidence that totally undermined the 'official' story/lies put out by the IDF.

ymu

"Screw ideology - not what we're here for - think strategy."

However much you reform a pile of horse dung, its still just a pile of horse dung........

Fact one: most of the 1948 700,000 so called Palestinian refugees left of their own accord after being requested to leave by arab countries. 700,000 also stayed behind and became Israeli citizens.

Fact two: Arab countries expelled 700,000 Jews from their countries during the 1948 war.

Fact three: In the year 2,000 the Israel government offered the Palestinian leadership their own state consisting of 95 per cent of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip. This offer was flatly refused by Yasser Arafat.

Fact four: If the Palestinians laid down their arms there would be peace. If Israel laid down its arms there would be no Israel!
 http://www.israelsolidarity.co.uk