Israeli Occupation Forces forces kill Gaza mother in front of her children

[ProgressiveMuslim]

Report, PCHR, 8 May 2008


Palestinian relatives of killed Hamas fighter Hisham Shomer, 25, cry during his funeral in the northern Gaza Strip town of Beit Lahiya, 6 May 2008. (Wissam Nassar/MaanImages)

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) strongly condemns the killing of a mother in front of her children yesterday, during an Israeli incursion into New Abasan town, east of Khan Younes.

PCHR investigations indicate that at approximately 14:30pm on Wednesday, 7 May, Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) troops raided the house of Majdi Abd al-Raziq al-Daghma during an incursion into New Abasan.

The troops opened the outside metal door, then blew up the wooden interior door. The force of the blast killed 33-year-old Wafa Shaker al-Daghma instantly. The IOF troops then stormed into the house and covered her body with a rug, having ascertained that she was dead. The troops then detained her three children, who had all witnessed the killing of their mother, in one of the rooms of the house. A soldier remained on guard at the entrance to the room. The children, who included a two-year-old, were confined inside the room for the next six and a half hours.

At approximately 11:00pm the children were finally able to leave the room after the IOF withdrew from the house. Twelve-year-old Samira ran to a neighboring house, and the neighors called an ambulance. Wafa Shaker al-Daghma's body was immediately transferred to Naser hospital in Khan Younes.

In addition to the killing of Wafa Shaker al-Daghma one Palestinian resistance member was also killed, and 23 others were injured. IOF also damaged 22 houses, destroying several in the process...

http://pchrgaza.ps/files/PressR/English/2008/46-2008.html

[Bobbieo]

1. Why would anyone in their right mind want to bring children into this world???

[msmcghee]

2. PCHR would do the Palestinain people a service . .

. . by attempting to put some balanced perspective into their claims.

In the first place why would any sane parent allow their children to remain in the presence of armed militants during an insurrection?

In the narrative they present, the one militant killed in this altercation and the 23 somehow wounded are depicted as "resistance members" - a euphemism at best, an ugly deception at worst. However, it does reveal that some kind of battle was underway in the neighborhood, if not in the house.

Simply reading the article one is left with bewilderment that there was no explanation at all for why at least 24 armed militants were in or near this house and what they were doing there - why the IOF were forced to use explosives to get into the house - nor does it explain what connection the militants had to this family, if any.

One-sided accounts like this feed into the strong emotions on both sides that ensure that the "cycle of violence" will only spiral higher. A clear depiction of the basic elements of what happened there with some minimal context would allow readers to assess if crimes were actually committed - and not be forced to accept PCHR's claims on it. One must ask why PCHR chose to publish this one-sided accusation when they could have filled in the most basic details of the encounter.

[subsuelo]

3. Suppose Palestinian militants invaded Israel

And shot a mother dead in front of her children.

Would you be complaining about the "one-sided accounts" that Israeli media might be writing in regards to the event?

Or would you be more upset about the militants running around Israel shooting people dead?

[msmcghee]

4. First of all, Palestinain militants have been . .

. . entering Israel and shooting civilians, knifing them, blowing them up, killing them in any number of ways - for sixty years. Thousands of Israelis have been killed by those attacks although since the WB fence has gone up that has greatly diminished.

Secondly, if Israel were lobbing rockets and mortars across the border of Gaza in an effort to kill Palestinian civilians - and if Palestinain militants entered Israel to attack the launch sites and military units firing them - and if those units killed an Israeli mother in front of her children* during that operation - and if a human rights organization accused the Palestinian unit of war crimes in that operation, but left out significant details of the event - then yes, I would complain about the objectivity of that claim. I would consider the claim to be propaganda unless it was amended to include the essential details of the event and the basis for the accusation.

* If the IDF unit was on the other side of a thick door that they had to use explosives to get through - how is it clear that the IDF force knew that the mother was on the other side of the door where she could be killed? How is it clear that the IDF knew that her children were there to witness the event when they blew the door down. How is it that the mother was killed but the children supposedly gathered nearby and watching were not injured according to the PCHR report? A serious claim of war crimes should at least provide answers to these basic questions.

[subsuelo]

10. Both sides have been shooting innocent people dead

No excuse for either one of them doing it

[msmcghee]

12. But there is an excuse despite your protests otherwise.

If a state is engaged in defensive operations against an enemy that is attacking them and civilians are killed during the operation - as long as reasonable precautions are taken to avoid their death, it is not a crime.

But that's just according the UN and the Geneva Conventions. I realize you have your own take on it.

[subsuelo]

13. No, there is no excuse, sorry

Yes, I do see it differently.

No excuse for shooting down innocent people, as both sides continue to do

[msmcghee]

14. You have made no case . .

. . that both sides " . . shoot down innocent people" as a matter of policy, implying governmental intent. Only one side does that - and readily admits to it. But I'm still open to seeing this evidence.

[subsuelo]

15. "a matter of policy" (or lack of) is not a valid excuse

not to me, anyway

[msmcghee]

18. I realize you prefer not to notice the difference . .

. . between governments engaged in aggression against their neighbors that condone and celebrate attacks on innocent civilians - and governments engaged in defense against aggression that have strict rules of engagement in place to minimize the death and suffering of innocent civilians.

If you recognized such humanitarian practices common to civil societies - you'd also have to recognize Hamas and the other militants trying to kill Israeli civilians for the sick bastards that they are.

That's OK though. I am always amused by your relentless attempts at moral equivalence.

[subsuelo]

19. Nope, just tired of reading excuses for killing people

I'm sorry that's such a problem.

[parkia00]

5. Your statement...

"In the first place why would any sane parent allow their children to remain in the presence of armed militants during an insurrection?"


I find utterly pathetic. So you are saying it's the victims fault for being there? And you don't think as parents, they wouldn't want to be in a place safer where they can bring up their children in a loving atmosphere without having to worry about violence carried out by both sides? Just in case you haven't noticed, Palestinian enclaves are pretty much walled up ghettos. Where do you expect them to go? Into the sea? Move to Israel? Oh no you wouldn't like that! They can't go anywhere! They are stuck there. They are stuck between militants and the IDF. The citizens and militant are all mixed up together in the densely populated cities. Your statement is like saying a girl deserves to be raped just because she wears a short skirt!

[msmcghee]

6. I understand why the family lives in Gaza. My statement was . .

. . pointing our the incongruity and/or omissions of the PCHR report with respect to the presence of the mother and children in that particular location in the house at that time.

For example, there's no way to know from the report if the IDF decided to randomly blow the door on this house full of innocents - or if the family were trying to provide cover for the militants and hide their presence from the IDF who may have been chasing them - or if the family home was invaded by a squad of militants (although 24 is far more than a squad) on the run and forced the family to hide them - or any of many possible scenarios that could have led to the mother's death.

My statement was asking why, if the IDF was in the process of blowing the door, the mother was near the door, instead of hiding with her children in a safer part of the house, perhaps in a cellar. Typically, combat squads will call out for the door to be opened before using explosives. I have no idea what happened in this case. I have no basis to blame the mother for her death or the presence of her children nearby. We simply don't know from the report why she and they were where they were at the time. Since the charge of war crimes was the wanton killing of civilians by the IDF - that essential information showing why it was "purposeful killing off civilians" should have been included.

[Shaktimaan]

9. Woah.

I think she meant something more along the lines of, why did she remain in the direct presence of a bunch of armed militants knowing that the IDF has been actively targeting and attacking them. Where should she have gone? How about down the street, or to her mother's place, or anywhere that wasn't the same block as a platoon of Hamas terrorists.

Your statement is like saying a girl deserves to be raped just because she wears a short skirt!

It's more like saying that someone who stands next to soldiers during a firefight has a higher chance of being killed than someone who doesn't.

[Malikshah]

24. Yup-- cause running away during a fire fight with your infant children is always going to work

Looks like some folks need to get into some role playing here and see how it works.

sheesh.

[Shaktimaan]

7. An easy way to tell if you are reading an accurate, unbiased report

or merely anti-Israeli propaganda is to look for the phrase "Israeli Occupation Forces." This is an imaginary designation, there is no Israeli force with the official name of IOF. There's the IDF and the Shabak, (or Shin Bet.) But the term IOF is a made up name intended to influence the reader's perception of Israel and the occupation. Another good example would be calling IDF troops "Israeli Death Squads."

Of course we can do this to. How does the name, Hamas Shock Troops (HST) strike you? Or maybe, the Palestinian Gestapo Units (PGU)? Teenage Virgin Strike Force (TVSF)? Oh wait, I've got it, Hamas Presents The Super Sexually Frustrated Islamic Action Retard Squad (HPTSSFIARS)! Yeah! Gentlemen, I think we have a winner.

[msmcghee]

8. That's right. I even used the bogus "IOF" in my comment. n/t

[subsuelo]

11. Why? That's what they are - Occupation Forces

[Shaktimaan]

25. Well, what are the Israeli Occupation Forces, exactly?

Is it actually a specialized group of Israeli soldiers that exclusively deals with Occupied Territory, as the formal name and acronym suggests? Is there a difference between the IDF and the IOF? Or are they Shin Bet affiliated? Or is the term essentially meaningless, as the IOF doesn't really exists the name can be used to mean different things on different days?

The OP said that the IOF killed someone in Gaza. But Gaza isn't under occupation anymore... so what makes them IOF soldiers? I've read "news" reports of the IOF bombing Lebanon in 2006. Isn't that crazy? Not the IDF, which is a real army, but the IOF, which is a non-existent organization.

All I am saying is that real news outlets, like the NY Times, do not arbitrarily rename countries or armies in their reporting. This is because they are interested in relaying the news as objectively as possible. Fake news, propaganda outlets and single issue organizations are dedicated to affecting change by influencing people's opinions, so they're almost always far less credible than real news organizations (who aren't committed to pushing a specific agenda.) Terms like "IOF" are an attempt to reframe the discussion in a way that sways reader's opinion. The security barrier becomes an Apartheid Wall. Settlers become Colonizers. And Jewish becomes Pro-Occupation. (My favorite.)

There is a deliberate, organized attempt at gaining adherents at the expense of honesty and accuracy by pro-Palestinian groups. Here, Palestine Media Watch openly discusses it, even offering a list of common terms along with their recommended replacements.

http://www.pmwatch.org/pmw/language/

I'm not opposed to this practice at all actually. Their presence makes it very easy to identify a news clipping as untrustworthy propaganda. What's sad is when some people get their entire understanding of the conflict from reading these tracts, as they're ultimately left with a very warped version of current events and virtually no real knowledge at all.

[eyl]

26. So,

given their actions and the preachings of their affiliated imams, I take it you would have no objection if I started to refer to Hamas as ASDS (Anti-Semitic Death Squads)?

[Vegasaurus]

27. That's exactly what they are

So no one should have a problem with that acronym.

[subsuelo]

29. Fine, and instead of IOF we'll call Israel's forces "Anti-Moslem Death Squads"

Work for you?

[oberliner]

30. Or how about we just call Hamas Hamas and call the IDF the IDF?

That seems the most fair.

[breakaleg]

32. Wasn't one of the criticisms of the IDF in Lebanon recently was that they have become more

of an occupation army than a defense one. This came from an Israeli government official. So, it's not entirely off the mark.

And it's quite a stretch to call the IDF, IOF and Hamas the ASDS. Do you see the difference?

[eyl]

33. Why, because of the number of letters changed?

I don't see that affects the basic point.

[breakaleg]

36. You can count. Congratulations.

I was thinking more because a the IDF does indeed act as an occupation army and saying that does not imply they go on killing sprees on a regular basis. Whereas the comparison you are trying to make, does imply that.

But hey, if we were in kindergarten, your answer would probably trump mine.

[eyl]

40. *snort*

Try looking up, say, the frequency of suicide bombings back before the IDF clamped down on the West Bank. I'd say "killing spree" pretty much covers it.

[Vegasaurus]

16. 27 virgins await, or so they are told

No wonder sexually frustrated young men are in a hurry to blow themselves up.

The propaganda has worked beautifully.

[notfullofit]

17. Unfortunately

not for the sexually frustrated young men.

[azurnoir]

20. only 27?

what the number of suicide bombers is up so they had to "down size"?

[notfullofit]

21. In spite of myself

I had to smile at your comment (I did try hard not to, honest).

[azurnoir]

23. You were supposedf to really really n/t

[azurnoir]

22. Using the "Thank you for Smoking " rule again I see

There was a scene in the movie were Eric Haberman explains to his son that when in a debate you do not have to "prove" that your own point is correct, all you have to do is make the other guy appear somehow wrong. Amazing how often that principle is used by the ProIsrael set here.

So IOF is "bogus" to whom? It is not an "officially sanctioned designation of the IDF? I am sure for most Palestinians it is a correct term, but they and that and they does not count.
And thank you for proving the point that it is fine to use Nazi designations when talking about Palestinians.

[Shaktimaan]

28. Boy, did you ever miss the point.

You're right, the Palestinians' opinion does not count in this case. They are free to rename other countries' armies if they choose and pro-Palestinian organizations are free to use that term in their news reports if they so choose. But using that term marks the news report it's in as committed to a cause, instead of being committed to reporting accurate, unbiased, objective news.

Problem being that it is not an accurate term, it is not a term intended to be a description of the IDF operating in the territories, it is a fake name, complete with an acronym, intended to fool the audience into thinking that there actually is such a designation. Its use means that you are reading a report that will only give you the most pro-Palestinian view of the event, not the most accurate.

In fact, its use is part of a deliberate attempt by pro-Palestinian organizations to reframe the discussion as to elicit more sympathy for their cause and more animosity towards Israel. But don't take my word for it, Palestine Media Watch has a page outlining their reasons for altering their language along with a list of preferred words for everyday terms. For instance, a settler is now called a colonist. Pro-Israel or even Jewish are now referred to as Pro-Occupation. Now, would you disagree with my assessment that any news that uses the term Pro-Occupation to refer to everyone who is Pro-Israel or even just Jewish is probably not an objective source?

Interestingly, the PMW page I mentioned begins their argument with a quote by Noam Chomsky intended to criticize the distortion of language used by pro-Israel proponents. Ironically Noam's criticism just as strongly condemns PMW's campaign and any other attempt at influencing opinions by using deceptive language like "Israeli Occupation Forces."

"Distortion of language is a particularly insidious form of propaganda, insinuating beliefs by stealth that should be questioned and often rejected. The lexicon provides instructive illustrations, and highlights the need for careful attention to avoid these traps" -- Prof. Noam Chomsky

http://www.pmwatch.org/pmw/language/

And thank you for proving the point that it is fine to use Nazi designations when talking about Palestinians.

Is missing the point a hobby of yours or something? My fake acronyms were a parody of terms like IOF. The point was to illustrate the danger and absurdity of using language this way; hence the use of Nazi terminology. They weren't meant to be taken seriously.

[DogPoundPup]

31. Such a horror...seems Israel can't find peace WITH ANY NEIGHBOR n/t

[Shaktimaan]

34. what about egypt and jordan? np

[notfullofit]

37. Careful,

your bias is showing.

[Scurrilous]

35. UN asks Israel to probe raid which killed Gaza teacher last week

<snip>

"A United Nations agency called on Israel on Sunday to investigate the death of a Palestinian teacher employed by the agency who was killed in her home during an Israeli raid last week in the Gaza Strip.

"We're calling on the Israelis for an impartial investigation," said Christopher Gunness, spokesman for the U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), for which Wafa al-Daghma worked as a teacher at an elementary school for refugee children."

<snip>

"Palestinian medics and relatives at Abassan, a village east of Khan Younis, said Daghma, 32, was at home with three of her children when IDF troops with tanks approached.

Gunness said inquiries by UNRWA suggested Daghma was killed when troops blasted open the door of her home in order to take the building as an observation post.

Daghma's 13-year-old daughter Samira told reporters last week that her mother had ordered her and a sister and brother aged under 5, into another room. The children then heard an explosion, she said. Soldiers then entered the house.

Only some hours later, when the soldiers left, were the children able to leave the room where they had been held and neighbours and relatives were able to retrieve Daghma's body.

Human rights groups have called on Israel to mount independent investigations into several civilian deaths in the Gaza Strip recently. Among these was the killing of a mother and four of her children on April 28 and the killing of a Reuters television cameraman and several other civilians on April 16."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/982342.html

[msmcghee]

38. So the brother and sister were . .

. . in another room - meaning that as I suspected, the mother was not killed "in front of her children" as the PCHR states. Imagine my surprise.

[notfullofit]

39. Some truths are

more inconvenient than others.

[Scurrilous]

41. Testimony: Soldiers blow up door of family home, killing the mother

Full title: Testimony: Soldiers blow up door of family home, killing the mother, and leave body with her children, Gaza, May 2008

<snip>

"I am 13 years old. I live with my father, Majdi a-Daghameh and brothers and sisters: Muhammad, 12, Roah, 10, Manal, 9, Ruba, 4, and Qusai, 2. My mother, Wafa a-Daghameh, lived with us until she was killed. Our house is on Abu Latifah Street, about 700 meters from the Gaza Strip`s eastern border with Israel.

Last Wednesday <7 May>, around 2 A.M., I woke up from the sound of heavy gunfire. My father and mother were sitting in the living room, watching television, and I went to sit with them. A few minutes later, I went back to my room, where my brothers and sisters were sleeping. I lay in bed until I fell asleep.

Around 6 A.M., I heard my mother wake up Muhammad, Roah, and Manal, to get them ready to go to school. They go to the UNRWA school, where my mother teaches, and they all leave for school together. Ruba goes to kindergarten. When they were about to leave the house, my mother heard gunfire outside and decided not to leave. Around 7:30, the school principal called her and said she had to go to the school. My mother left the house with my brother and sisters, and I remained at home with my father, Ruba, and my baby brother Qusai.

I tidied up the house and then went out onto the roof to see what was happening in the area. I saw three tanks standing side by side about 500 meters from our house. When I saw the tanks, I immediately went back into the house because I was afraid I`d get hurt.

Around 8:30, my father went next door to his friend`s house. I stayed at home with Ruba and Qusai. We sat in the living room and watched cartoons on television. About half an hour later, the electricity was cut off. At around 12:00, I heard somebody call my name. I went to the window and saw my mother. She asked me to open the door. `How did you get home?` I asked her. She said somebody had brought her home through the fields. She came quickly into the house and went to the kitchen to prepare lunch for us. I went into the kitchen too and fried potatoes. When we finished eating, she sat down to study. She was studying at the al-Quds Open University. I played with my brother and sister. We heard the sound of gunfire outside. I looked out the window and saw a bulldozer about 30 meters from our house. A few minutes later, the gunfire stopped.

Around 4:15 P.M., I prayed. There still wasn`t any electricity. After I finished praying, I sat with my mother in my room and read the Quran. Suddenly, we heard a door crash to the ground. We looked out the window and saw an army bulldozer shoveling the ground and knocking down the fence in the yard of our neighbor, Ibrahim Abu Latifah. The bulldozer destroyed his house.

We all sat on the floor in the room and heard the tanks coming toward our house. I also heard voices of soldiers talking in Hebrew next to the window. My mother told me she was going to put her outer garment so she could answer the door quickly in case the soldiers came knocking. She put it on and stood by the door on the eastern side of the house. I stood by the window on that side of the house, from where I heard the soldiers` voices. Suddenly, I heard a huge explosion inside the house and saw a red ray of light. Smoke filled the house and there were pieces of glass and wood all over the floor. I couldn`t see my mother because the smoke was so thick.

I went to where my mother had been standing and found two soldiers inside the house. One of them looked at my mother, who was lying on the floor, and said in Arabic, `great`. I went back to the room right away because I was afraid of them. One of the soldiers stood at the door of the room. Ruba and Qusai were screaming and crying. It was 4:30 P.M."

more