Israel Uses a 13 Year Old Boy as a Human Shield

haven't checked this since yesterday, here is my response:

y u no apply for site admin?

p.s. I'm starting to notice the word "bro" really grinds some gears

It's been this way since 1948. Rocks rain down from one side, rocket attacks from the other. What ever reasoning is behind the pic, is cowardice at it's core. Some say they teach their kids to hate Israel early in life, they don't need to teach them anything, Israel instills the fear at an even earlier age......Which in time turns into an enormous hate. Irradicate is Israel's goal. Allways has been, probally allways will be. This "Nation" we call Israel is a freaking joke. They should change their name to " Whiners Corner" because all they do is whine about everything that don't go their way. Which these days, aint much.

This is wrong... why is it defended by some. Rocks or bullets this should not be the way to do things. Bias is rampant on here. Grow up

Originally posted by skalla
the nike shirt is most likely donated clothes aid, or a locally produced fake... it's unlikely that he went to to the nearest retail park and purchased expensive imported clothing for the kudos of the brand.

edit on 28-8-2012 by skalla because: clarity

There could be may possibilities. The shirt could be faked, could of got it on the black market, could of got it from a shop, the photo could be photoshopped and complete BS. Who knows.

This is wrong... why is it defended by some. Rocks or bullets this should not be the way to do things. Bias is rampant on here. Grow up

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I'm just wondering.....do we have anything but this kid's relatives and a very one sided newspaper article to back the circumstances being described for the photo? A photo can be worth a thousand words and a caption can contain a lie for every word it has.

We have witness testimony including but not limited to a Rabbi who claims he was attacked by police while trying to help the child. I'm not saying this witness testimony is absolute proof since anyone can lie if they feel like it. I believe this article to be truthful. Instead of tying the child to the front of the vehicle, they could have handcuffed him and placed him IN the vehicle. What kind of law enforcement officer would put a child in danger to "teach him a lesson"?

I believe the picture does all the explaining we need. Imagine if an American police officer were to tie a child who was throwing rocks to the front of his SUV while rocks were still being thrown while the officer hid behind the door of his armored vehicle, there would be outrage. But since this is a Palestinian child many members seem to find it more acceptable.

You may find the news article to be one sided, but some situations cannot be twisted. I already acknowledged the wrong doing of the rock throwers, but many people seem to troubles admitting the wrong doing of the officers in this incident.

reply to post by Corruption Exposed



You had me going for a second there, thought they had actually used an Israeli boy as a human shield.

"Yes, I acknowledge that the boy was throwing rocks and should have been dealt with accordingly."

He was.


Regards, Skellon.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Absolutely Zero evidence in the picture to support anything the article is claiming. A little proof beyond words....beyond the claims of parents who hate the Israelis so much it vibrates. That's all I ask...and in this case, it's what is entirely missing. My opinion.. Of course and as always.

So are you saying the picture is a lie, the child and his parents are liars, and the Rabbi was a liar?

I believe in one of your posts you said this thread is one sided, but I disagree about this. There are plenty of people from all sides who are discussing the information in the OP.

If you consider the OP one sided then so be it, I found it to be quite neutral.

Here is a more mainstream report that may interest you.

Israeli human rights activists have accused border police of using a 13-year-old Palestinian as a human shield.

Rabbis for Human Rights say that Mohammed Badwan was tied by police to a jeep during a recent demonstration in the West Bank village of Bidou.

The police apparently hoped this would stop Palestinians from throwing stones during a protest against Israel's West Bank barrier.

Israel's Supreme Court banned the use of human shields in 2002.

Rabbis for Human Rights also say that the boy was beaten by Israeli police before being arrested.

Israeli police spokesman Gil Kleiman said: "It's unclear what happened, we do not expose civilians to physical damage willingly."

The case is to be investigated by the Israeli Justice Ministry.

'Scared'

Mohammed later told the Reuters news agency: "I was scared when they got me at first, I thought they would put me in prison. I was scared a stone would hit me."
Mohammed's father, Saeed, said: "When I saw him on the hood of the jeep, my whole mind went crazy - he was shivering from fear."

Rabbis for Human Rights director Rabbi Arik Ascherman was detained by police when he tried to intervene to help Mohammed.

"It is very sad to see that we have come to this position. There is disbelief," Rabbi Ascherman said.

news.bbc.co.uk...

To answer your earlier question, yes, we do have more than just his parent's testimony and a "one sided article" to go by on this incident from 8 years ago.

I would take the word of a Rabbi over the word of an Israeli police officer any day. But that is just my opinion right?

reply to post by Corruption Exposed


The kid actually just looks annoyed in the picture. Not exactly scared but i'm no people person :/

I imagine the meat shield must TOTALLY be more effective than the pathetic armored vehicle

Originally posted by votan
This is wrong... why is it defended by some. Rocks or bullets this should not be the way to do things. Bias is rampant on here. Grow up

Some people have to learn the hardway, theyre blessed with being meatheads. If i threw a rock at someone and hit them when i was a kid, my dad would throw a rock and hit me with it showing me how it feels. The lesson i would take away would be "man that hurt, i don't want to do that again, that musta been what it felt like to them".

Being lenient with certain people (especially kids) shows them you are a weak minded individual and they will walk all over you until you nut up. Kids only understand one thing. Pain.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


Nah, they understand fear, too.

reply to post by CynicalDrivel


Explanation: Yes very true ... but fear is birthed from pain.

Pain is a method ... Fear is the result!

Personal Disclosure: However ... Pain, as an instruction method, is pretty poor primary instruction method and RULES from lack of OVERSIGHT because the parents obscure their own vison of what the child is occupied with doing at any moment in time.

Parenting is a 24/7/365 prison sentence Full Time Job for 25 to Life, where there is no longer just a sense of self to worry about!

It is called FAMILY FEUD!

Where as ... Education, which shows not only the logic of what works and why but also the reasons and rewards of following such logic [and conversly the pitfalls off not following that set of logic], is a very good primary instruction method and LEADS from FULL DISCLOSURE and TRANSPARENCY! Because this method quikly free's one from the need of to have constant oversight of the child, since trust, in a shown working map of actions to take, has been shown to them and they have no excuses except to grow with it or die.

It is called LIVING TO BE FREE!

What have this boys parents been teaching him and how have they taught that?

What did the policemens parents teach them and how did they teach that?

Where were the boys parents and what where they doing while this child was engaged in rock throwing and being used as a human shield?

Will the policemens parents think and feel their children acted honourably or dishonourably?

Personal Disclosure: @ All Parents! ... What are you?

RULERS or LEADERS!?

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Originally posted by votan
This is wrong... why is it defended by some. Rocks or bullets this should not be the way to do things. Bias is rampant on here. Grow up

Some people have to learn the hardway, theyre blessed with being meatheads. If i threw a rock at someone and hit them when i was a kid, my dad would throw a rock and hit me with it showing me how it feels. The lesson i would take away would be "man that hurt, i don't want to do that again, that musta been what it felt like to them".

Being lenient with certain people (especially kids) shows them you are a weak minded individual and they will walk all over you until you nut up. Kids only understand one thing. Pain.

It is called parenting. verbal, passive punishement, then spanking. If it is an offender who does not respond to the first two you just skip to the last one right off the bat. that is how you work with boneheaded kids.


The difference in the methods is the perception it gives.

In this scenario I do not know what you are trying to get at.... did that boy tie some kid to a car??? since he tied someone to a car is that why they tied him to a car??? Oh it was rock throwing soo why didn't they just chuck a rock back at him???

Because that was not the intention of this action. It was to deter rock throwing from his buddies by putting him in harms way... aka a Shield.

How is this right??? No one seems to be able to answer this question.


what did this kid learn?? if i don't want my enemy to attack me I put one of their friends in between them and I.

At least the kid came out ok and not basdly hurt..Look at middle east countries who Stone people alive, like c'mon that is horrible and also. if someone rapes a girl, the girl has to marry them by law or she gets what killed or stonned..Now that's pretty messed up. You think putting a kid on a car is that bad, kid doesn't look hurt or beaten up in anyway as people are claiming..I'd rather be on a car, than get stonned to death..

reply to post by votan

How is this right??? No one seems to be able to answer this question.

It's not right, but it is understandable given the circumstances.

I'm not sure how informed you are of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but rock throwing is a very serious matter. Many Israeli citizens have been killed because of it; many soldiers seriously injured i.e a rock thrown at their face, which isn't protected.

People seem to treat this matter as if it weren't a big deal: the irony is, when Palestinian youth throw rocks, it's excused as "just rocks"; when IDF troops take one of the rock throwers and tie him to the front of their vehicle to deter the rock throwing - it's using someone as a "human shield";

That is misleading. When thinks of human shield, what should come to mind is what the Palestinian terrorists do: they hide behind non-combatants in situations of live fire in order to induce the IDF to kill civilians. Thus, the intention behind 'the human shield' in this situation is to create a situation in which civilians will be killed.

Here, the IDF probably understood that these kids wouldn't throw rocks if they knew that one of their rocks would harm their friend. It was a risk - yes - but it was a somewhat reasonable risk in that they weren't dealing with bullets, grenades or fire bombs, but little hoodlum punks who don't realize the danger that throwing rocks can cause to people, to vehicles etc.

It wasn't intelligent, ultimately, because of the PR effect it would have. But given the circumstances, it is hardly as offensive as you and others are making it out to be. These were kids. They wouldn't have thrown rocks if they knew their friend could get hurt. If they did throw rocks - that only shows how inhuman they are.

So, understand that. The IDF and it's soldiers are trying very hard to control this situation they are in. Day in and day out they deal with this abuse - and they have to tolerate this distortion in the worlds media against them. They throw rocks, they shoot rockets, they commit terrorist attacks - and when they respond, it's they - the IDF, and Israel - who is demonized for "inordinate response" - when the enemy - this wily, astoundingly immoral pack of Islamists - create situations designed to maximize civilian casualties: locating their military and governmental facilities in residential neighborhoods (unlike the IDF or most militaries) so that when the IAF responds to terror attacks, there will be collateral damage. When they go into Gaza or the territories - as in operation cast lead - IDF troops complained that hamas terrorists shot from crowded areas - with the intention that the IDF response would kill civilians.

This is amazing. Just look at this chain of events:

They shoot rockets at Israeli towns, killing civilians, or commit terrorist attacks ---> Israeli public clamors for retribution, to bring a stop to these attacks on their lives ----> IDF plans air raids, or in the odd situation, land raids ---> Hamas locates their facilities in precarious areas, in order to induce civilian casualties ---> during the air strike, or offensive, civilians are inadvertently killed because of the situations in which they find themselves ---> Hamas, and the Palestinians win a political victory against Israel: even though they initiate the violence, and incite hatred against Jews, Judaism in their media, and even though they have strategic designs for the IDF to kill more civilians then they kill in terror attacks, it is the Israeli's held responsible. This is what one diplomat called Hamas' "cruel calculus of numbers"; more people dead on their side means a political win. And to beat Israel requires political support. And they get it because reasonable human beings aren't seeing whats being done against the Israelis.

Yes, this was a stupid, mostly innocuous stunt. But you can definitely understand their frustration in dealing with this predicament day in and day out. You can imagine that they just resolved to try something like this to force a cessation to their rock throwing.

It looks like the kid was wearing an arm band and just sitting on the hood of a car.

Again, a bunch of over emotional hyperbolic nonsense designed to inflate tempers against the Jews.

reply to post by votan

In this scenario I do not know what you are trying to get at.... did that boy tie some kid to a car??? since he tied someone to a car is that why they tied him to a car??? Oh it was rock throwing soo why didn't they just chuck a rock back at him???

They put him on the hood so that if his friends threw rocks they would hit him, thus teaching him the lesson not to throw rocks by showing him, rocks do hurt when theyre thrown. It was also done to publicly shame and embarass him, which works well enough on it's own. Either way, that kid won't be throwing rocks at anyone anytime soon. Hopefully it would also teach his parents not to leave their child unattended and running amok in the streets. The kid got off fairly easy, in Thailand they would have whipped him with a split cane rod till his legs bled. The kid was being an ass and he got some public embarassment out of it, maybe next time it will teach him to mind his own business. If it was my kid, he woulda got a double dose of it when he got home, except i'd whip his tail till he could see God with his eyes closed.

reply to post by dontreally


The thing is that if you are able to use such a tactic in such a small scale which is not a big deal, what are you willing to do when the stakes are higher?? YOu will more easily be able to move to a bigger scale.. You say it is no big deal but when does it become a big deal??

There were different ways to handle this. Just like at work I can ignore many of the mundane safety procedures that quickly leads to ignoring other more serious ones here or there till one day i get comfortable and i disregard all of them and get hurt/killed.

THings just do not happen they build up to it.

I am not bleeding heart and I will paint a kids back porch red if he/she deserves it but this is just very very poor judgment. If you cannot handle little kids with out doing this bs then....

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


Actually the caning is more acceptable than this garbage. The exercise of putting a kid in front of you to stop the rock throwing and disciplining the kid can lead up to doing the same thing under real fire.

Did it do the job?? yes was it the best way of doing it... No it was not.

I have many ways to get the job done in many areas of my life.. there is the right way and the wrong way.

Poor way to discipline. Is it effective?? there are probably kids still throwing rocks today and one kid who has a chip on his shoulder now due to the embarrassment plus he got a tip on how to get a cease fire from enemies.. use a live shield.

Had they done something different it problably wouldn't stop kids from throwing rocks but it also wouldn't teach a kid to use a human shield.

i saw this on RT news thats bad...