Palestinian Terrorists Shoot At and Hit Child

Specifically, they were shooting at a group of children, but only hit one child. Maybe because their aim is so lousy.

But what children? Those evil little zionist non-humans the Palestinians are taught to collectively hate? No, t'was those poor victims of the terrible Israelis, the Palestinians!

Yes, Palestinian terrorists fired at Palestinian children. Why? To enforce a teacher's strike in Palestine. Apparently those kids were getting to close to the school for the terrorist's liking.

Linky: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060903/...tinians_strike

(Note: it says 'fired into the air' but usually you don't hit kids in front of you in the gut when you shoot up)

The irony here, of course, is that had Israel done this and not even hit a kid, we would be hearing cries from round the world on how very evil Israel is, how their response was because they are sub-human homicidal animals. It would be international front page news. But when the Palestinians do it, we hear nothing.

Of course, there's no media bias - or bias in what people will allow the Palestinians to get away with.

EDIT: Also funny how people support the 'Palestinian Cause' when this is what the terrorists try to do all the time to Israel; kill as many innocents as possible.

Crazed Rabbit

I agree with you that this is deplorable, perhaps the more so because the child's parents appear to be so locked into the cycle of violence and its justification, they won't condemn the men who shot their child.

This is the root of the whole problem - both sides have easy recourse to unthinking violence, and populations/supporters that accept this as justifiable.

However, I believe dilute your point with your last edit: those of us who support the 'Palestinian cause' are not automatically supporters of terrorism nor adopt blind spots when idiots murder innocents. I for one, have always maintained that a viable Palestinian state will be much more likely if the militants abandoned the armed struggle and took up non-violent protest.

It is possible to support the establishment of a Palestinian state without endorsing terror, just as it is possible to support Israel's right to exist without endorsing indiscriminate violence against non-combatants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

I agree with you that this is deplorable, perhaps the more so because the child's parents appear to be so locked into the cycle of violence and its justification, they won't condemn the men who shot their child.

This is the root of the whole problem - both sides have easy recourse to unthinking violence, and populations/supporters that accept this as justifiable.

However, I believe dilute your point with your last edit: those of us who support the 'Palestinian cause' are not automatically supporters of terrorism nor adopt blind spots when idiots murder innocents. I for one, have always maintained that a viable Palestinian state will be much more likely if the militants abandoned the armed struggle and took up non-violent protest.

It is possible to support the establishment of a Palestinian state without endorsing terror, just as it is possible to support Israel's right to exist without endorsing indiscriminate violence against non-combatants.

---

I agree entirely,

and i also dont think palestinians are taught to collectively hate, it would just be natural in such a turbulant enviroment...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

I agree with you that this is deplorable, perhaps the more so because the child's parents appear to be so locked into the cycle of violence and its justification, they won't condemn the men who shot their child.

This is the root of the whole problem - both sides have easy recourse to unthinking violence, and populations/supporters that accept this as justifiable.

However, I believe dilute your point with your last edit: those of us who support the 'Palestinian cause' are not automatically supporters of terrorism nor adopt blind spots when idiots murder innocents. I for one, have always maintained that a viable Palestinian state will be much more likely if the militants abandoned the armed struggle and took up non-violent protest.

It is possible to support the establishment of a Palestinian state without endorsing terror, just as it is possible to support Israel's right to exist without endorsing indiscriminate violence against non-combatants.

---

Wisdom, once again.

Ultimately the answer is that both groups are exactly the same. In fact I bet the Palastiniancs are just the Isrealis that never left and got converted to Islam or Christianity.

If they were just two people I'd bang their heads together. I really don't see an actual solution that will work, though.

(Note: it says 'fired into the air' but usually you don't hit kids in front of you in the gut when you shoot up)

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: and usually when you shoot someone in front of you in the gut they get more than a slight wound, but as you are a resident expert on guns rabbit , you should know that what goes up must come down .

Seriously though , your post is just so funny it is almost unbelievable .

EDIT: Also funny how people support the 'Palestinian Cause' when this is what the terrorists try to do all the time to Israel; kill as many innocents as possible.

Damn , you will have to remind me as I must have slept through it , when was the last Israeli kid hit by a stray bullet fired by a Palestinian terrorist over an industrial dispute .
Anyhow I thought Fatah weren't the evil terrorists now , they are the acceptable face of the Palestinian authority that Israel could really do business with now that they don't run the government , it is the other crowd that run the government that are the evil terrorists and who you can't do business with . Well until the next elections anyway when whoever wins becomes the evil terrorists that you can't do business with :juggle2:
Did you mention a cycle there Banquo .~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tribesy

and usually when you shoot someone in front of you in the gut they get more than a slight wound, but as you are a resident expert on guns rabbit , you should know that what goes up must come down .

---

What article were you reading?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the article

Stray fire hit a 12-year-old boy, Issam Ghannam, in the abdomen, witnesses said.

He was in stable condition after undergoing surgery, doctors said.

"He has passed the danger zone and is now resting in intensive care," said Dr. Khaled Qadiri, a doctor at Rafidya Hospital in Nablus.

---

He needed surgery and was, according to the Doctor, in the 'danger zone' for a while. How is that a slight wound? WTF are you talking about?

Quote:

---

Damn , you will have to remind me as I must have slept through it , when was the last Israeli kid hit by a stray bullet fired by a Palestinian terrorist over an industrial dispute .

---

Where did I say the terrorists tried to shoot Israeli kids? You're making stuff up to fit your absurd claims.

The terrorists use belts of explosives, in case you just arrived from mars. :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Anyhow I thought Fatah weren't the evil terrorists now , they are the acceptable face of the Palestinian authority that Israel could really do business with now that they don't run the government , it is the other crowd that run the government that are the evil terrorists and who you can't do business with . Well until the next elections anyway when whoever wins becomes the evil terrorists that you can't do business with

---

Again, you're throwing in a bunch of distorted stuff to try and make yourself look clever. And are you confusing Fatah with Abbas?

Quote:

---

However, I believe dilute your point with your last edit: those of us who support the 'Palestinian cause' are not automatically supporters of terrorism nor adopt blind spots when idiots murder innocents. I for one, have always maintained that a viable Palestinian state will be much more likely if the militants abandoned the armed struggle and took up non-violent protest.

---

You're right, I probably did dilute my point. But why would the Palestinians need to protest anything? They've got land and a sort of governmental system. It's not Israel holding them back from becoming a state. It's themselves.

Quote:

---

It is possible to support the establishment of a Palestinian state without endorsing terror, just as it is possible to support Israel's right to exist without endorsing indiscriminate violence against non-combatants.

---

Yes, but the Palestinian cause, as espoused by the Palestinians, is the destruction of Israel.

Crazed Rabbit

Meh if it was old Winnie Churchhill he would have used the army and machine guns on women and children to break a strike or to enforce it depending on which way his political fortunes blew on the day.

Yes I am being a tad hyperbolic and yes that was an understatement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Meh if it was old Winnie Churchhill he would have used the army and machine guns on women and children to break a strike or to enforce it depending on which way his political fortunes blew on the day.

---

Only if it was in Britain. He wouldn't have risked soldiers to break up strikes if it were in a foreign country, he'd have called in the air force instead, dropping gas munitions for greater effect.

Quote:

---

Yes I am being a tad hyperbolic and yes that was an understatement.

---

People outside Britain often don't understand why the British were wary of having Churchill as a peacetime PM. He had probably the lowest regard for British lives of any PM in the last 200 years, and that includes Wellington of Peterloo fame.

What article were you reading?

Well two Israeli ones , two palestinian ones , a Lebanese one , an arabian one and two British ones .:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
He needed surgery and was, according to the Doctor, in the 'danger zone' for a while. How is that a slight wound? WTF are you talking about?

See above .

Where did I say the terrorists tried to shoot Israeli kids? You're making stuff up to fit your absurd claims.

The terrorists use belts of explosives, in case you just arrived from mars.
Like I said rabbit .........Seriously though , your post is just so funny it is almost unbelievable .
........but hey if you want to rant about unrelated crap go ahead ....oh you already have .:juggle2:

Again, you're throwing in a bunch of distorted stuff to try and make yourself look clever. And are you confusing Fatah with Abbas?

Nope I am throwing in a bunch of stuff to make your post look even sillier than it already is .

You're right, I probably did dilute my point. But why would the Palestinians need to protest anything? :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:


Yes, but the Palestinian cause, as espoused by the Palestinians, is the destruction of Israel.

Would you care to rephrase that , or should I just write " but the Israeli cause as espoused by the Israelis is the siezure of all land from the Nile to the Euphrates and the expusion of all non Jewish inhabitants" to give you a clue on where you are going wrong with your statement .

This will relly hurt the Palenstinian's Cause.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

EDIT: Also funny how people support the 'Palestinian Cause' when this is what the terrorists try to do all the time to Israel; kill as many innocents as possible.

Crazed Rabbit

---

Your statement implies that all Palestinians are terrorists, which would include the child hit by the bullet since he was Palestinian as well. So why would one terrorist shooting another terrorist bother you?

Quote:

---

Your statement implies that all Palestinians are terrorists, which would include the child hit by the bullet since he was Palestinian as well. So why would one terrorist shooting another terrorist bother you?

---

:inquisitive:
I said that Palestinians support the destruction of Israel, not they all are strapping on bomb packs right now and planning to jump the fence.

Quote:

---

Well two Israeli ones , two palestinian ones , a Lebanese one , an arabian one and two British ones .

---

Eight different articles, eh? You have waaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyy too much time on your hands. But in which of these did the doctor say that the wound was 'slight'?

Quote:

---

Would you care to rephrase that , or should I just write " but the Israeli cause as espoused by the Israelis is the siezure of all land from the Nile to the Euphrates and the expusion of all non Jewish inhabitants" to give you a clue on where you are going wrong with your statement .

---

Really? A majority of Israelis believe that? They'd have to, if your statement was analogous to mine.

Quote:

---

Where did I say the terrorists tried to shoot Israeli kids? You're making stuff up to fit your absurd claims.

The terrorists use belts of explosives, in case you just arrived from mars.
Like I said rabbit .........Seriously though , your post is just so funny it is almost unbelievable .
........but hey if you want to rant about unrelated crap go ahead ....oh you already have .

---

Unrelated? You brought it up:

Quote:

---

Damn , you will have to remind me as I must have slept through it , when was the last Israeli kid hit by a stray bullet fired by a Palestinian terrorist over an industrial dispute .

---

Quote:

---

Nope I am throwing in a bunch of stuff to make your post look even sillier than it already is .

---

What does talking about Israel supposedly saying they can deal with Fatah have to do with anything?

Crazed Rabbit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

:inquisitive:
I said that Palestinians support the destruction of Israel, not they all are strapping on bomb packs right now and planning to jump the fence.
Crazed Rabbit

---

Ok. So the kid, a Palestinian, who got shot supported the destruction of Israel. I still don't see why this upsets you if you support Israel yourself?

He was as child, and also was not personally trying to blow Israelis up.
:inquisitive:

Crazed Rabbit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

He was as child, and also was not personally trying to blow Israelis up.
:inquisitive:

Crazed Rabbit

---

"Not personally". So you are still implying that he at least supports the destruction of Israel even though he is too small to carry a bomb.

At what age does he stop being a child and become a shootable "I support the destruction of Israel because I'm a Palestinians" adult?

When did I say you could shoot everyone who supported the destruction of Israel?

And I would speculate that the environment Palestinians now grow up in, being fed hate daily, might lead this kid to not be infatuated with Israel.

Crazed Rabbit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

(Note: it says 'fired into the air' but usually you don't hit kids in front of you in the gut when you shoot up)

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: and usually when you shoot someone in front of you in the gut they get more than a slight wound, but as you are a resident expert on guns rabbit , you should know that what goes up must come down .

---

Gravity can't make a bullet fall fast enough to penetrate the skin.

Why, what's the terminal velocity of a bullet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

When did I say you could shoot everyone who supported the destruction of Israel?

---

You didn't. But am I right to assume you think terrorists should be shot? And when this kid grows up, and being Palestinian he would support the destruction of Israel, wouldn't that make him a terrorist?

What's all the fuss? Logically.....

The ruling government of the polity in question used force to enforce a government edict. How is this historically rare? In what way is it unexpected? Until changes were made in the legal code, a child from the London rookeries could get to see John Ketch for stealing a loaf of bread. Stealing was against the law and law-breakers were punished.

It is absolutely vital to any political entity seeking to act as the governing authority for the Palestinian people to ensure that the populace adheres to the government's mandates -- or else they undermine their own authority.

I personally prefer a society wherein I have an institutionalized voice in the making of those laws and regulations and thereby feel compelled to obey through the explicit force of that social contract as opposed to the overt use of force -- but force always underlies the actions of government.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

He had probably the lowest regard for British lives of any PM in the last 200 years, and that includes Wellington of Peterloo fame.

---

Wasn't Wellington Irish though. Why would the English make him PM? Did they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Why, what's the terminal velocity of a bullet?

---

Not too much, seeing as mice can fall from tall buildings and live with nay but a scrape, but a bullet is about 5-10 g heaveyer, rite? Not much, I think the bullet was shot at the poor kid. This really makes the terrorists look bad in front of their own people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

What's all the fuss? Logically.....

The ruling government of the polity in question used force to enforce a government edict. How is this historically rare? In what way is it unexpected? Until changes were made in the legal code, a child from the London rookeries could get to see John Ketch for stealing a loaf of bread. Stealing was against the law and law-breakers were punished.

It is absolutely vital to any political entity seeking to act as the governing authority for the Palestinian people to ensure that the populace adheres to the government's mandates -- or else they undermine their own authority.

I personally prefer a society wherein I have an institutionalized voice in the making of those laws and regulations and thereby feel compelled to obey through the explicit force of that social contract as opposed to the overt use of force -- but force always underlies the actions of government.

---

It was a child that they shot. I dont know where you live, but where I live they wouldnt of used A FREKIN GUN to keep a child away from a certain area. Most men can pick up a small child and carry him/her with ease.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Why, what's the terminal velocity of a bullet?

---

Mythbusters did a show on it where, using a verticle wind tunnel, determined it to be about 150fps and that it's most stable position is it's side- that is to say it's likely to fall sideways. Using that speed, they fired bullets into a pig carcass with an air gun at that speed and it either bounced right off altogether or just barely broke the skin while bouncing off.

They did find incidents where people were killed by upward fired bullets- but they surmised that the bullets were actually fired at an angle instead of straight up considering that the bullets had travelled a great distance (mile?)before hitting their victim. A bullet fired at an angle wouldn't lose its velocity to gravity the same way one fired straight up would- so when gravity brings it to the ground it could still be moving at a lethal speed...

Since you asked though, I did some Googling where various eggheads worked out the terminal velocity of bullets using mathematics and calculated them to be 240-300fps. That's still about the same speed that paintball pellets are fired at and many times slower than the almost 3000fps that rifle bullets travel when fired. At that speed(if accurate), I'd say it can definately break the skin- but it wouldnt penetrate deeply enough to be serious.

Bottom line on shooting upwards- it's not a good idea. :sweatdrop:

More relevant to the topic- Consider that the child was hit in the abdomen. A falling bullet would almost definitely hit in the head/shoulders area- not the stomach and the children would've been far too close for an 'not quite' straight up shot to hit them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IrishArmenian

Wasn't Wellington Irish though. Why would the English make him PM? Did they?

---

Being born in a stable doesn't make one a horse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IrishArmenian
Wasn't Wellington Irish though. Why would the English make him PM? Did they?

---

Ireland (not just the six counties) was a part of the UK at that time. One only has to look at the union flag to see this, The cross of St. George superimposed over the saltire of St. Andrew, which in turn is superimposed over the cross of St. Patrick. The poor Welsh lose out as they are 'only' a principality, not a Kingdom.

Wellington was PM but a pathetic one.

Typical. Probably all zionist lies. As always. Ah well, the place ain't boring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Typical. Probably all zionist lies. As always. Ah well, the place ain't boring.

---

How could it be a zionist lie?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by holybandit

How could it be a zionist lie?

---

Beats me, I was being sarcastic by the way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Beats me, I was being sarcastic by the way.

---

You did a bad job.