Talk:Murders of Koby Mandell and Yosef Ishran/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Unbalanced

This article as it is now is completely unbalanced, as it does not mention the consequences for the Palestinian villages in the vicinity.

• As a direct consequence of the murder, the nearby village of Tuqu', a village of 8000 people, were in effect collectively punished, even if collective punishment of this kind is against the Geneva convention.
• There were also reports of stones thrown on the villagers by nearby settlers.
• 15 Palestinaians were arrested, all eventually released without being charged.
• And, most importantly: new land was stolen from the Palestinian village of Tuqu' during the "investigation" after the murder.

(Exactly the same thing happened to the villages nearby the Itamar-settlement 2 weeks ago, after the Itamar killings: a whole village was under house-arrest by the Israeli army, while settlers from Itamar simply stole another 20-25 dunum of privately owned Palestinian olive groves. There is a reason why Israelis call the occupied West Bank for the "Wild West Bank"!)

• Worst of all: nowhere in this article does it mention that the Israeli settlements are illegal under international law, and built on illegally confiscated (read: stolen) Palestinian land.

Quotes: "Settlers stoned Palestinians on the roads through Gush Etzion." Time Magazine, "settlers threw stones at Palestinian cars and the Israeli army sealed off the nearby Arab village of Tuqu," BBC Report, and this link. This article deserves a {{POV|date=March 2011}} tag. 82.205.34.232 (talk) 17:51, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Why don't you log in?--Mbz1 (talk) 17:54, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

On a substance of the comment: Are you really going to justify horrific murder because the murdered boys were settlers? Are you?

If we are to add what you said should be added then we need to add "On Tuesday, a body of another Israeli settler, who had been shot and stabbed, was found near the settlement of Itamar, south of Nablus." from the very same BBC source, and sadly so on, and so with no end in sight. --Mbz1 (talk) 18:14, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Whaw. This article has a section on "reactions", and a lot about the direct consequences of the murder. (including the Kobe Mandell act) When I try to say that this article is unbalances, as it did not at all mention at all those who bore the brunt of the consequences of the murder: namely the Palestinians in the vicinity....it gets labeled as "vandalism"!

Right. So it is "vandalism" on wikipedia to mention that as a direct result of these (undoubtedly gruesome) murders, some 8000 people got collective punished (btw: collective punishment of this kind is rated as a war crime). Also, as a direct consequences of the murder: that Palestinian villagers, who just happened to be unfortunate to live in their area, lost their land forever to illegal Israeli settlers. 82.205.34.232 (talk) 06:11, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

We'll get to a neutral presentation eventually, IP82+. This article started out as using the boys' terrible deaths to try to score points for political purposes, and was ridiculously biased in that sense, in my opinion. ( An effort I gather that Koby's mom would have deprecated, btw. ) It's becoming less so, and some of us, at least do want to bring it to a neutral presentation of all the relevant facts, including the context and consequences. But you really do need to create an account ( or appeal a block, if that's applicable ) in order to assist in that process. As you've discovered, any editor who dislikes your contributions can revert them without penalty if you're editing as an anon/IP. I'd be interested to know, in any case, whether any reliable sources reported this seizure of land that you're talking about. It's not that I disbelieve you, it's just that we can't include what you're saying in the article without a verifiable reliable source to support it.  – OhioStandard (talk) 06:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I said "vandalism" and vandalism it was.

• If you claim that "new land was stolen from the Palestinian village" without providing any source whatsoever,
• If you are complaining about "collective punishment of 8000 people" without providing any source whatsoever,
• If you are complaining that "15 Palestinaians were arrested, all eventually released without being charged" with no noticing that the info is in the article already.
• If you came here to justify something that cannot be justified by saying "Worst of all: nowhere in this article does it mention that the Israeli settlements are illegal under international law, and built on illegally confiscated (read: stolen) Palestinian land."
• And if according to all those bogus claims you tag the article that is at the Main page at the moment, it is vandalism

Now Roscelese, who clearly has not a slightest idea what she was doing, reinstalled your tag, but you know what I am not even going to remove it, because I do believe that there are lots of POV in the article installed by another side, for example I believe that the information that the murders "dipped their hands into the boys' blood" is supported by a few RS and should have been represented in the article.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

I wish you hadn't raised that last rather gruesome issue, but since you have, I've seen no support in reliable sources for this claim, it seems to have been made only by a relative of one of the deceased who can hardly be described as a disinterested party. Some other sources state that "blood was smeared on the walls", but that's not the same thing. Gatoclass (talk) 03:42, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

@Gatoclass: I saw a two or three sources that reported it, but my perception from trying to follow it was that the report started with a guest editorial Koby's dad wrote, that local TV news repeated it, and that a couple of other sources then picked it up based on that television report, or perhaps on the father's editorial. It's frustrating to try to figure out what's actually original reporting in this case, versus what's just one source parroting another. They all made so many mistakes in rushing to get the story out, mostly by quoting from or "borrowing" each others reporting, I think, that the issue becomes very confused. We either have to report everything they all said, or try to use our judgment as to what's credible and what isn't.

@Mbz1: Accusing someone of vandalism because you don't like their edit has earned others a block before now. Likewise with your derogatory comment about Roscelese, that she "clearly has not a slightest idea what she was doing." That's just asking for trouble, as well. Stop addressing your fellow editors that way. You may not like or respect them, but you have no right to address them that way. I repeat, don't do that again. I'm going to copy this message to your talk page, to make sure you see it.  – OhioStandard (talk) 04:33, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Per WP:REDFLAG, exceptional claims require exceptional sources. Gatoclass (talk) 12:23, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

That's why I linked it to CNN source. Of course it was not a "relative, who made such claim". It was reported on Israeli TV. It is what police said, and that's why I now put this information that should not have been removed in the first place back to the article.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:48, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Six months after the tragedy, Koby's mom and dad reiterated the gruesome claim in an editorial they originally wrote for the Jerusalem Post. This certainly is an "exceptional" claim, and it wasn't widely reported that I'm aware of; CNN only says that a TV news channel reported it, so they're not giving it the weight of their own organization by saying so. One would expect that if it were a fact, that so striking a claim would have been made in all or almost all the reports of the crime.

It's interesting to note, btw, that while Mbz1 is more than happy to quote Israeli sources that assume Palestinians were guilty and that they intentionally targeted the boys out of a terrorist motive, she entirely ignores (for example) the sentences from this same CNN report that say, "Palestinians said there was no proof of who was responsible for the boys' killings", and "Police spokesman Rafi Yaffe said it appeared the boys were killed in a chance encounter. He said it was not clear whether the killings were linked to the theft overnight of dozens of goats from Tekoa."  – OhioStandard (talk) 20:41, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure how cruel or stupid one could be to say that I am "more than happy" to write anything at all about this murder.The only thing that would have made me happy would have been that horror never happen.

"Israel TV said police believed there were at least three assailants, who dipped their hands in the boys' blood after the killing and smeared it on the cave wall." by Phil Reeves in Tekoa Irish Independent

"Police said the boys had been beaten by at least three killers who used large rocks. They said the killers dipped their hands in their victims' blood and smeared it on the walls of the cave" Washington Post

Israeli detectives at the scene said they believed the murderers dipped their hands in their victims' blood and smeared the walls of the cavern" by Charles M. Sennott, Boston Globe

Actually here are few more sources with strangely enough even NPR reporting that.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:31, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Below is the copy of the initial post made by IP 82.205.34.232 (talk) at 17:51, 31 March 2011 (UTC) after which he tagged the article. I've added my comments in green after each comment by the IP comment. I will appreciate, if somebody could point me out to anything that merited tagging (and re-tagging for that matter) of the article that was at the main page at the moment:

This article as it is now is completely unbalanced, as it does not mention the consequences for the Palestinian villages in the vicinity.

• As a direct consequence of the murder, the nearby village of Tuqu', a village of 8000 people, were in effect collectively punished, even if collective punishment of this kind is against the Geneva convention. No source--Mbz1
• There were also reports of stones thrown on the villagers by nearby settlers. No source--Mbz1
• 15 Palestinaians were arrested, all eventually released without being charged. No source--Mbz1
• And, most importantly: new land was stolen from the Palestinian village of Tuqu' during the "investigation" after the murder. No source--Mbz1

(Exactly the same thing happened to the villages nearby the Itamar-settlement 2 weeks ago, after the Itamar killings: a whole village was under house-arrest by the Israeli army, while settlers from Itamar simply stole another 20-25 dunum of privately owned Palestinian olive groves. There is a reason why Israelis call the occupied West Bank for the "Wild West Bank"!) No source, unrelated--Mbz1

• Worst of all: nowhere in this article does it mention that the Israeli settlements are illegal under international law, and built on illegally confiscated (read: stolen) Palestinian land. soapboxing--Mbz1

Quotes: "Settlers stoned Palestinians on the roads through Gush Etzion." Time Magazine, "settlers threw stones at Palestinian cars and the Israeli army sealed off the nearby Arab village of Tuqu," BBC Report, and this link. This article deserves a {{POV|date=March 2011}} tag.

The exact quote from Time magazine is "Two Romanian immigrant workers mending a security fence at the Gaza border were blown up by Palestinians. Settlers stoned Palestinians on the roads through Gush Etzion." How this info is related to the murder of two boys, and why it should be in the article? In regards to BBC quote, the info was represented in the article before IP added the tag. Here's a quote from the article "They arrested 20 Palestinians from nearby villages and imposed curfews and roadblocks in response to the attack"--Mbz1 (talk) 15:20, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Rrrright: here is a quote from the third link I added (http://www.annadwa.org/resources/articles/prophet_amos.htm) at 7:51, 31 March 2011 (see above):

On the morning of May 9th the bodies of two Israeli settlers were found in a cave nearby the settlement of Teqoa’, a settlement that was built on the expropriated land of Teqoa’ village. Fingers were quick to point at the residents of the Palestinian Teqoa’ as being responsible for the killings. [Village Mayor]Sulieman has been trying to solve this mystery that has negatively impacted the every day life of his constituency. …According to Sulieman, the Israelis arrested fifteen people from the village then released them without pressing charges. He said that the killing of the two Israelis was announced on Israeli radio at 7:30 AM. By 8:00 o'clock of that same morning a number of caravans were placed on top of an opposite hill which belongs to Palestinian families from Teqoa', ‘announcing the birth’ of a new Jewish settlement. “The Israeli forces did not exert any effort to bring these caravans from anywhere else. They were already there waiting for a suitable excuse and a perfect timing.” He added. Following the incident, the Israeli authorities adopted a number of military measures against the Palestinian residents of Teqoa’. To begin with, the Israelis have sealed off the town, preventing some 1200 Palestinian workers to get to their jobs in Israel. Isolating the village from the outside world also meant denying the villagers access to their traditional shepherding areas, which extends in a 5km width down to the Dead Sea. Every night since the incident, Israeli bulldozers have been piling up dirt on all the roads leading to the village to block vehicles traveling to and from the village. Each morning, Palestinian kids can be seen trying to open one of these roads to maintain a lifeline to the village. Any Palestinian caught driving on one of these roads may be stopped by the Israeli soldiers the whole day until sunset, thus loosing a day’s wage before allowed to go back home.

This is published by the International Center of Bethlehem, a "a Lutheran-based, ecumenically-oriented institution" (obviously just a front for the some Palestinian jihad terrorists :P) (The number 8000 was about the total number of people in the village. Not everyone works outside the village.)

If you want more information, go to: http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/opt_arij_profile_tuqu.pdf That is published by United Nations, Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), (scroll down to p. 17, and you find what land was taken (read: stolen) when.)

I strongly object to labelling as "soapboxing" when one wants to add the information that the settlement is illegal under international law. The opposite is true: this is essential information. Same about the fact the the settlements are built on land which has been "confiscated" (which in this case is just a prettier word that "stolen") from local Palestinians.

Lastly, to OhioStandard: No, I have never been banned or blocked from editing wikipedia: I simply do not care enough about the make-belief-world of wikipedia. Btw: I am writing this from the Wild, Wild, West Bank; where settlers commonly just fence inn a part of Palestinian land…and declare it theirs! And the soldiers protect them! If you don´t believe me: PLEASE come here and see it for yourself. (As an old Christian nun told me in the old city of Hebron the other day: you will get the picture within 5 minutes.) I got interested in this article as we have been seeing a wave of violence (from settlers, against Palestinians) and land-grabbing (by settlers, of Palestinian land) following the recent (horrific as they were) Itamar killings. And the Israeli, or international media hardly ever report it. (So it will not get into wikipedia). There is a reason why old anti-apartheid people from South Africa who come to the West Bank say that this is worse than Apartheid South-Africa. The rights of the Palestinians here are ....zero. 82.205.53.148 (talk) 18:05, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

In the last source you provided, I was not able to find anything about "stolen Palestinian land" in relation to the murder. Please provide a direct quote what you are talking about. I do not believe the other sources are reliable.The link to their home page is broken. I will remove the tag now. Please discuss before adding it back.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:18, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Sigh. Why do you not click the links I provide? The link I provided is NOT broken: http://www.annadwa.org/about/about.htm. You have falsely removed the label of unbalanced from the article, and given me a false and misleading "warning". And, as I said above, for "taken land", read: "stolen land". There is absolutely NO difference. You are welcome to the Wild West Bank and see for yourself. Until then, I really find no further use in participating here. 82.205.53.148 (talk) 20:03, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I only asked you to give me the exact quote to look for in your last source because I was not able to find there anything related to the murder. maybe I am missing something. If you give me the text to find, then we could talk about this. I did click on all the sources you provided. The link to "home" is broken for this one. Your talking about "apartheid" is soapboxing --Mbz1 (talk) 20:17, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Mbz1, you may think whatever you like about my notes to OhioStandard, but if my point about the Israeli settlements being illegal under international law is "soapboxing", then I guess every fact you do not like can be labelled the same way.

As for landgrabbing after the Itamar killings (which I never thought should go into this article; I just mentioned it in passing, as it fits the pattern), there already are reports out on the net by NGOs if you care to look, but what fits "reliable sources" standard of this place (eg UN) will not be published before a few months.

That you find 1 out of 6 links broken in the www.annadwa.org-web-site...and it is not a reliable source! Whaw! Have you heard about the web.archive.org? http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20080217044854/http://www.annadwa.org/about/about.htm

Sorry, but this wikipedia is such a waste of time, and I am tired of being called "a vandal". Mbz1: Words will never convince you, please, please come to the West Bank and talk to some of the Palestinians here (That is if you, unlike the local settlers, think that non-jews are human beings worth talking to.) Good-bye. 82.205.26.206 (talk) 09:51, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

What's a waste of time is complain about bias to the other volunteers here and not to be willing to do anything about it yourself. Wikipedia has a large contingent of editors in this area who try to fan the flames of hatred by writing "Hurrah for my side!" articles, and editing in a corresponding pattern. You care enough to have come here to complain about it, and you encountered some of the aggression that goes with that, I'm sorry to say. But you don't care enough about it to do anything but that, anything but complain? I already told you that you can't make any difference in this area if you won't create an account and log in. It's up to you whether you're willing to do so.  – OhioStandard (talk) 14:24, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Wow, in re-reading that, I see it comes across as rather harsh. Sorry; I didn't mean it to. Anyway, I do hope you'll create an account and do your best to contribute relevant information from reliable sources in a neutral way. I certainly understand why living with violence and injustice splits people into very angry factions, but anyone who's willing to undertake the admittedly very difficult task of putting those feelings aside to improve the encyclopedia is more than welcome here.  – OhioStandard (talk) 17:48, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Palestinian condemnation of the murder

Yesterday I asked a question about sources that confirm somebody from Palestinian officials condemned the murder. Nobody responded, so here's a new section. I know BBC call the statement by the spokesman "a condemnation", but it is just a reporter's interpretation of what was said. In reality here's what was said: "Palestinian Cabinet member and peace negotiator Saeb Erakat said Palestinians regret any civilian deaths, regardless of what side they are on." So, there's no "condemnation" of this particular murder in that statement, and I believe the lead should be re-written like this:The Israeli government condemned the killings. A spokesman for the Palestinian Authority said "he regrets any civilian deaths, regardless of what side they are on." Yasser Arafat, President of the Palestinian National Authority,when asked about the murder of Jewish boys, responded by citing recent examples of Palestinian children killed or injured by Israeli actions."--Mbz1 (talk) 16:21, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

We don't have a source saying Israeli officials condemned the murder, now, do we? Isn't it just your interpretation of what was said? (By the way, there's another source which uses "condemned" for the response of Palestinian officials, the Boston Globe of May 10, 2001, but I suppose that's also the reporter's personal interpretation.)

Really, though, how often do people actually include the words "I condemn" in their statements? It's used almost exclusively by secondary sources. We can take that as the reporter's personal opinion, or we can follow the WP:RS guidelines we use on every other article and report what the sources say, even if it doesn't make Palestinians look bad (shock and horror!) Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:26, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Sure we have a source that using this very language "condemned" in regard to Israelis and US "The United States condemned the murder as particularly vicious; Israeli Education Minister Limor Livnat called it "a moral stain on the Palestinian people that will never be erased."";"Sharon condemned the murders and held the Palestinian Authority directly responsible." I saw some more, but I am tires tonight. Maybe tomorrow I'll find another one.

Boston Globe says that Palestinian officials condemned the killing of innocent civilians on both sides. It is exactly what I am saying. No Palestinian condemned this particular murder.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:08, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Er, your first source doesn't say Israeli officials "condemned" the killing. But anyway, aren't these statements of condemnation just "a reporter's interpretation"? Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 05:30, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I would not like to use the word "trolling" in regards to your post, but honestly do you have any doubt that Israeli officials condemned this particular murder while Palestinian officials never condemned this particular murder ?--Mbz1 (talk) 05:35, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sure you don't want to call my post "trolling." Your desire not to call it "trolling" was so strong that it just burst out of you, such that you had to tell me about it! Anyway, we have an RS which says Palestinian officials condemned the murder, without caveats, so your own personal interpretation has no place here. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 05:49, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Roscelese is correct. Boston Globe reporter Charles Sennott wrote on 10 May, 2001, in a page A.1 story entitled, "Boys' Deaths Renew Focus on Old Mideast Hatreds",

• "Responding to news of the attack, Palestinian leaders condemned the killing of civilians, both Israeli and Palestinian."

Likewise, Matthew Kalman wrote on 1 June, 2001, in a second USA Today article,

• "Israeli police do not know who killed the teens. The slayings drew a rare condemnation from the Palestinian Authority, which has called on Palestinians to battle Israel for an independent state."

The USA Today article title is: "Blood, despair flow from cave: Settler family mourns son killed in West Bank", and it appeared on page A.09. Kalman is hardly pro-Arab, btw. In the same article he wrote that Hamas approved of the deaths of "two more settlers", but I've not seen that claim reported by any other source. Nor have I been able to find a non-paywall source for either article.  – OhioStandard (talk) 06:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The Boston Globe went on to say,

Ghassan Khatib, a Palestinian commentator and director of the Jerusalem Media and Communication Center, condemned the killing as "horrific." ( He said ) "The Palestinians look barbaric as a result of this killing. But at the end of the day, is it any different than when civilians are killed by Israeli tanks or attack helicopters? Two teenage boys are killed today who are Israeli, and we have had two killed every day who are Palestinian for the last seven months. . . . What happened today is two more civilians were killed, that is what we should all be upset about," Khatib added.

When asked about the significance of the boys' killings, Meron Benvenisti, an Israeli author and former deputy mayor of Jerusalem, replied angrily: "It teaches us nothing. It only reflects reality. We have sunk to a primordial level. We should all wonder where are we? What century are we in? Are we back to thousands of years ago to Isaac and Ishmael? Is this what we have become? The answer, tragically, is absolutely."

When you read quotations like this, Mbz1, I wonder if you ever get a glimpse of the futility of trying to convince the world about the "theme of stupid/murderous Muslims" as betsythedevine put it? I know you're aware that roughly six times more Palestinian kids were killed than Jewish ones in the round of violence that Koby and Yosef appear to have been caught up in. I wonder if you've really convinced yourself that the Israeli government has no innocent blood on its hands? That it was fine, for example, for Sharon to fire missiles at Arafat's headquarters in response to the boys' murders, injuring 20 people who hadn't committed them? But if you think it'll do the world any good to continue your mission, and you don't have access to the USA Today or Boston Globe articles I cited above, let me know and I can e-mail them to you. They both contain plenty of material that can be used to fan the flames of hatred.  – OhioStandard (talk) 06:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

OK, I withdraw that post. Not Palestinian officials condemned this particular murder, but a Palestinian commentator did.--Mbz1 (talk) 06:33, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

We have a source that says Palestinian officials condemned the murder. Your personal opinion of how specific they should have been is irrelevant. If you want to point out in the article text that Palestinian officials "didn't condemn this particular murder," please find a) a source that says they did not and b) a source that says other people condemned "this particular murder." Otherwise, give it a rest. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:50, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

For cry out loud, didn't you notice that I have already "given it a rest" in my prior post just above yours?--Mbz1 (talk) 06:55, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

You're still claiming that the officials did not condemn the murder, so I'd say I can be forgiven for thinking that you're still on about that. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:58, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I hope you are not going to deny me a freedom of speech and/or a freedom of thought, don't you? I said I withdraw my question about this part of the lead, and this all that should matter for the article and you.--Mbz1 (talk) 07:03, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Unwatched

This is to inform everybody, that I am taking the article from my watch list. It is all yours now. Please do as you wish. I am way too tired to go on like this,--Mbz1 (talk) 07:06, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps you won't believe it, but I'm sorry this has been troubling for you. I invited you once before to try to come to an understanding on my talk page, and I'll reiterate that you're still welcome there. Please accept that I'm not being critical now, but I just can't understand how you feel it helps anyone to use Wikipedia to publicize old outrages committed by one side, and to try to get exposure for that on the main page. It's my opinion that such actions only perpetuate the cycle of suffering by keeping hatred alive and fueling ethnically-directed revenge. I'd like to understand, if I can. Post to my talk page if you're willing to help me do that.  – OhioStandard (talk) 08:01, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Unreliable sources ?

Since when The Jerusalem Post and The Independent became unreliable sources?

"An anonymous caller claiming to represent the group told foreign news agencies it would continue to attack Israelis until they are forced off Palestinian land. An anonymous phone caller claimed the murders were in revenge for the death of a four-month-old Palestinian baby hit by shrapnel during bombardment of Gaza An anonymous caller to Reuters claimed responsibility for the boys killings in the name of an Islamic militant group, saying they were to avenge the death of the four-month baby and an Islamic Jihad militant on Saturday

Please revert yourself. Broccolo (talk) 20:20, 27 April 2011 (UTC)