Over 200 Palestinian children arrested in two months

[idontwantaname]

i have been told that it is "legal" for Israel to arrest and detain palestinians for 6-8 months without charge or due process and this time can be renewed multiple times taking away many years of a young mans life.

---------------------------

http://www.dci-pal.org/english/display.cfm?DocId=464&CategoryId=1

Israeli occupation forces are arresting scores of Palestinian children each week, bringing the number of juveniles currently held in appalling conditions in Israeli detention centres and prisons to new record levels.

Information gathered by the DCI/PS Research & Information and Legal Units shows that since the start of 2006 over 230 Palestinian children have been arrested, with the Israeli army appearing to target in particular youths from the Bethlehem Nablus and Jenin areas of the West Bank. The scale of arrests over the past two months brings the number of Palestinian children in Israeli custody to almost 400. This represents a significant increase on the already-inexcusably high numbers of recent years and marks a further indication of the scant regard Israeli pays to Palestinian children's rights and to international legal instruments.

<snip>

DCI/PS deplores the systematic abuse of the basic human rights of these detainees, first as children and secondly as prisoners. We call on Israel to cease at once its policy of targeting, arresting, abusing and imprisoning Palestinian children and to release immediately all Palestinian children held illegally in Israeli prisons and detention centres.

We urge you, members of the international community, to take a stand on this urgent humanitarian issue. We call on you and your governments to intervene immediately and demand Israel's compliance with international human rights and humanitarian law and to ensure these violations of Palestinian children's rights cease at once.

Please address letters of protest to the following individuals:

UN Human Rights Committee
and UN Committee on the Rights of the Child
Fax : + 41 22 917 9022
E-mail: [e-mail]


Acting Israeli Prime Minister
Ehud Olmert
Office of the Prime Minister
Fax: ++972 2 670 5475
Email: [e-mail]; [e-mail]

Israeli Minister of Justice (Ms) Tzipi Livni
Fax: + 972 2 646 6357
E-mail: [e-mail]

Menahem Mazuz,
Attorney-General/Legal Advisor to the Israeli Government
Fax: + 972 2 628 5438

Avichi Mendelblit
Military Attorney General
Israel Defence Forces
Fax: + 972 3 5694370
[e-mail]

[Colorado Blue]

1. Can you confirm your assertions?

What are you defining as "children"? Teenagers? Are you asserting that people are simply snatched off the street for existing while young?

Or what?

Is it possible there are strong suspicions that these people are involved with terrorist threats? There have been increasing intelligence reports in the past few months, dozens of them - many linked to credible threats which have been interdicted in time to prevent tragic violence. Others have been stopped at the cost of soldiers' lives. There have been people killed in shooting incidents on the West Bank.

Please provide some credible documentation.

[idontwantaname]

2. credible documentation...

should really come from the IDF or BP or whoever it is that is doing these arrests.. dont you think?

however... i thnk the age is 13-18 and they get "snatched" up for a number of reasons...

but what you seem to not realize is this has been going on decades... not the "past few months" which you choose to justify as being ok through "increasing intelligence reports" of which the word "intelligence" is subject to question.

please refrain from overheating you spin machine. it has become quite out of control the past couple weeks... "Others have been stopped at the cost of soldiers' lives. There have been people killed in shooting incidents on the West Bank."

[Wordie]

4. Actually, it appears the organization in the OP is associated with the UN.

Regarding the age issue, and reading between the lines just a little bit...

About DCI/PS

Defence for Children International/Palestine Section (DCI/PS), established in 1992, is affiliated with the Geneva-based Defence for Children International, a non-governmental organization established in 1979, with consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council, UNICEF, UNESCO, and the Council of Europe. Though affiliated with an international network, DCI/PS is an independent, Palestinian non-governmental organization, which develops its programs and acts according to Palestinian children's needs and Palestinian priorities.

Mission

DCI/PS is dedicated to promoting and protecting the rights of Palestinian children in the West Bank and Gaza Strip - as articulated in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child as well as in other international human rights instruments - and to facilitating the creation of an environment which is aware of and respects children's rights.

So, I can't say with absolute certainty, but it wouldn't surprise me if they confirm to whatever the UN's definition of the age of a child is.

[Violet_Crumble]

5. Reality check: Teenagers ARE children!

And here's some credible documentation....

About DCI International


Defence for Children International was established in Geneva, Switzerland in 1979, the International Year of the Child, in response to a UN plea calling to remedy the lack of international bodies that advocate for the rights of children. The organization was founded by Mr. Nigel Cantwell and the Reverend Moerman, along with eight other persons from Latin America, Asia, and Europe.

DCI’s first important mission was to collaborate in the drafting of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. In 1985, DCI began to expand a worldwide network by establishing National Sections of the Movement. DCI/Palestine Section is one of over 35 DCI Sections around the world.

http://www.dci-pal.org/english/display.cfm?docid=434&categoryid=16

But, wait! There's more:

Convention on the Rights of the Child
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by
General Assembly resolution 44/25
of 20 November 1989
entry into force 2 September 1990, in accordance with article 49

Article 1
For the purposes of the present Convention, a child means every human being below the age of eighteen years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier.

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/k2crc.htm

Now for what the Israeli military defines as a child:

From the outset, the very definition of a child is subject to scrutiny, with Military Order 132 defining a child as anyone aged 11 or under, adolescents are aged 12-13 and children aged 14-16 as teenagers. Later military orders expanded the category of teenager to include children aged 16-17, but in reality, children this age continue to be treated as adults. The same military order stipulates that children under the age of 12 should not be held in detention and that ‘adolescents' should not be detained for more than 6 months. But while it also specifies that ‘teenagers' must not be imprisoned for more than a year, this limit is contradicted by the second half of the article which adds “unless the crime for which the teenager is charged carries a maximum sentence of more than five years”.

http://www.dci-pal.org/english/display.cfm?DocId=459&CategoryId=10

This is backed up by Human Rights Watch:

The Israeli military reinstituted Military Order No. 132 in 1999, permitting its forces to arrest Palestinian children as young as twelve. Originally issued during the Intifada, the order had been suspended in 1993. Following the renewed implementation of the order, groups of Palestinian children reported that they were beaten or threatened with physical abuse during interrogation.

http://www.hrw.org/wr2k1/children/child4.html

Sorry I couldn't find anything from such credible sources as Camera or Christian World News, but strangely enough they don't seem to think there's such a thing as Palestinian children...

Violet...

[Tom Joad]

6. Time to hold Israel accountable.

Not trying to wish the crimes away. It won't help the human rights situation. It really won't help Israel if you just hope these things aren't true.

[cali]

7. There's no excuse for this.

It's just plain wrong. But from what I gather from your postings, your idea of holding Israel accountable is dismantling it. If that's an inaccurate assessment of your beliefs, what actions do you think should be taken to hold Israel responsible?

[Violet_Crumble]

8. Here we go again...

How on earth do you gather something like that from Tom's posts??????

Violet...

[cali]

10. Well, the one that was deleted earlier

today, and several others. And no, I'm not going to go dig them up. That's the impression I've gotten.
and what's with the remark, "here we go again"?

[Violet_Crumble]

15. i read the deleted post...

and i've read tom's site and only incredibly appalling comprehension could read to the conclusion you somehow got to..

As for here we go again, this happened yesterday towards another poster, and yr aware already what i think of those particular tactics, especially when so selectively applied....

violet...

[cali]

18. Might I suggest, yet again, that

one's perspective depends largely upon the lens one is viewing events through? We all have the motes and beams of our individual experiences and different intelligences, firmly embedded in our respective eyes. I trust you understand that applies not only to me but to thee.

A statement such as: "and i've read tom's site and only incredibly appalling comprehension could read to the conclusion you somehow got to.." really doesn't say much. You would have been far better served had you said "I've been to Tom's site and I disagree with your conclusion, etc", instead of displaying disbelief (couched in a lame insult about my comprehension, reading or otherwise) that anyone could disagree with your interpretation.

Finally, I'm not using any tactics. I'm asking questions as I see fit. You're certainly free to do the same, and I've noticed that you often do so. Selectively, at that.

[Violet_Crumble]

20. So which lens are you viewing events through?

Saying: 'But from what I gather from your postings, your idea of holding Israel accountable is dismantling it.' isn't asking a question. It's making an accusation. You say I do the same, but yr going to have to give me links to where I make accusations rather than ask questions coz I don't recall doing that, much as it would give me a few seconds of self-righteous glee to do so on occassion...

I stand by what I said, and I'll expand on it. Only poor comprehension or a wilful desire to misrepresent Tom's stance could lead to anyone coming away from anything Tom has said with the conclusion that Tom wants to destroy Israel. It's along the same lines as my experience where a few rather strange souls have come away from reading what I have to say on the conflict with the conclusion that I'm anti-Semitic and a terrorist. And because those conclusions aren't based on anything but a mixture of creative reading and cherry-picking snippets of what I say out of context, I don't pay any heed to them, which is the advice I'd give to Wordie and Tom when that sort of thing happens to them :)

I'd feel more reassured about an assurance of not using any tactics if any of my questions had gained an answer. They haven't, so I'm on a safe bet...

And now for my suggestion - It's always much more constructive to stick to discussing the issues (in this case the arrest of Palestinian children) rather than concentrating on discussing what you decide fellow posters may or may not believe in general about the conflict. Once I climbed out of that trap a few years back, I find that my posts are less likely to be peppered with the word 'you', which is usually a dead giveaway that things are being personalised...

Violet...

[cali]

22. I have answered your questions.

It hasn't been to your satisfaction, and that's too bad. You ask and I answer as I see fit. As far as your claim that all you do is ask questions, this thread in and of itself dispels that assertion. In fact, the post I'm responding to dispels that. You state: "Only poor comprehension or a wilful desire to misrepresent Tom's stance could lead to anyone coming away from anything Tom has said with the conclusion that Tom wants to destroy Israel." that's an accusation and an inaccurate one at that.

Sorry, I'm not going to crawl through the I/P threads to provide you with more examples of your making accusations. This thread should suffice. If it doesn't, well, what's the point.

Let's clear up something: I'm not here to reassure you about anything at all. Why should I? Again, I've responded to your questions. You haven't liked my responses. That's different from not answering. It's a shame you can't discern the difference.

Thanks for your suggestion about sticking to the topic posted. It is a good one, but please note I was responding directly to another poster's remarks. Clearly, I'm not the only one who wanders off topic.

[Violet_Crumble]

23. No, you haven't...

Let's see. My posts where I asked you some pertinent questions are sitting there with zero replies to them, so not sure how you consider not even posting a reply to be answering, but not to my satisfaction. And I think yr not able to tell the difference between questions, accusations, and stating an opinion. Yr comment about Tom wanting to see Israel destroyed was an accusation, my comment about poor comprehension is my very educated opinion and not aimed at anyone specifically, as was yr accusation about Tom. Yet you claim yr not making accusations, but then turn around and accuse me of making accusations. Go figure. And I knew you'd refuse to go find any examples of me making accusations the way you did to Tom seeing as how they don't exist...

Uh, I didn't say anything about *you* sitting there and reassuring me, so I don't know what that's all about...

I don't give a toss who you were responding directly to as it's got zero to do with the suggestion I made. And from seeing some later posts from you in other threads, I can see that my suggestion was totally ignored. Oh, well. Can't blame a girl for trying. Sorry for getting you angry. That wasn't my intention :)

Violet...

[cali]

24. I gave you a clear example.

You deny it's an example. We could continue in this vein ad nauseum. I'm not sure what it proves except that you think your take is correct and I think mine is. Different perspectives, different conclusions. I wasn't aware that I hadn't responded to one or more of your posts to me.

"my comment about poor comprehension is my very educated opinion and not aimed at anyone specifically, as was yr accusation about Tom."

LOL. Now that's truly amusing. Of course it was directed at me. No, I'm not particularly angry. Slightly irritated, but I keep in mind what EM Forester wrote: "Only hypocrites cannot forgive hypocrisy." I'd like to add that touting one's educational prowess unnecessarily doesn't bolster one's argument. Particularly as an anonymous poster on the internet. Not to mention that you have no idea what my educational background is.

I used the word dismantle, not the word destroy. I think there is a difference, and I"m hardly the only person that believes that an unlimited right of return for Palestinians would essentially dismantle the Israeli state. Tom's website supports such a right of return.

As far as anger goes, I see your latest post to me as merely one of several very hostile posts. You know, the old beam and all. Combined with your gratuitous denial of intent regarding said hostile posts, to my eye, beams, motes, splinters and all, you appear lacking in basic self awareness. Opinion? Accusation? Take it as you will.

[Violet_Crumble]

25. Read my post you just replied to...

Take extra careful notice of what I said about the difference between questions, accusations, and opinions...

Do you always take every word said so literally? For the record, I'm not particularly educated and didn't realise that'd be taken literally....

No, I'm not angry nor being hostile, nor am I lacking in basic self awareness. Believe me, you'd know if I got pissed off....

Given yr stance on the I/P conflict which apart from a few small things here and there seems pretty close to my own, I'd be much more interested in discussing the conflict with you than getting into 'yes you did!' 'no you didn't!' type exchanges, as I consider it all a bit of a waste of space and energy in the long run. So I'll try this with another question and see how we go:

You've mentioned the Right of Return. You clearly don't support an unlimited Right of Return in the physical sense, so what do you think would be a fair and just resolution? Me, I think one of the most important aspects to any solution will be Israel acknowledging the wrong that was done. After that I think compensation and at least some of the refugees being allowed to return to what is now Israel would go a long way towards putting things right. Oh, and a concerted effort from the PA to get the refugees used to the fact that the homes of their parents and grandparents for the most part aren't there, and Israel in 2006 is not the Palestine from the late 1940's. And repatriation to countries of their choice for the refugees that can't move to Israel....

Violet...

[cali]

13. Having visited Tom's website

how could I gather anything else?

[Tom Joad]

16. I listen to Israel's dissenters, and have little in common with the

Israeli establishment. So isn't it clear?

In the same way, if you were to say that Bush is an aggressive warmonger, and were to quote people like Noam Chomsky or Cindy Sheehan, or Human Rights Watch to back that up (and NEVER gave Bush credit for anything!), we would know that you hate America and Americans, and that were obsessed with dismantling the united states.

That doesn't make sense to you?

:sarcasm:

Edited for spelling.

[cali]

17. Nope. It doesn't make sense.

Over half of the American populace is against the war and doesn't support the admin. Is that true of Israel? Does a majority of the population support an unlimited right of return? Or is it a miniscule minority? No, numbers don't count for much when it comes to right or wrong, but I don't see it as being nearly as simple as you do.; You see Israel, as it's currently constituted, as an entity that has no redeeming qualities whatsoever except for a tiny group of dissenters. I disagree.

Unlike Sheehan, you're not calling an individual an agressive warmonger, you're condemning an entire country for its culture. It's pretty clear that your comparison is a tad weak, so no, it doesn't make any sense to me.

You can ignore the other side of the coin to your heart's content. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And I'm not talking about any particular wrongdoing on the part of the Palestinians or the fact that Hamas and others have inculcated a culture of hate as surely as any Israeli culture of hate. I'm talking about the right of Israel to exist as a culturally Jewish State. There's no reason to believe that a state of say, 5 to 7 million Palestinians and 6 million Jews would be a success.


Finally, I'm always amused by the infatuation of Duers with the dripping sarcasm thingy.

[cali]

19. Forgot to add:

You listen to a few fringe dissenters. The buld of Israeli dissenters do not share their POV.

[Tom Joad]

9. Cali, I believe in international law.

I believe that all aid to Israel from the United States should be halted until it is willing to comply with international law. I do not believe in removing people from their land. I do not believe in holding children in detention and torturing them. I do not believe villages should be destroyed (as in Bil'lin, where the wall is being built in such a way as to prevent farmers from reaching their crops).

For a general outline of what a better future might hold, you can look here on my website:
http://tomjoad.org/OlgaAppeal.htm

FOR TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION, FOR EQUALITY AND PARTNERSHIP

The State of Israel was supposed to grant security to Jews; it has created a death-trap whose inhabitants live in constant danger, the likes of which is not experienced by any other Jewish community;

The State of Israel was supposed to tear down the walls of the ghetto; it is now constructing the biggest ghetto in the entire history of the Jews;

The State of Israel was supposed to be a democracy; it has set up a colonial structure, combining unmistakable elements of apartheid with the arbitrariness of brutal military occupation.
more....
http://tomjoad.org/OlgaAppeal.htm

[cali]

12. I believe that the US shouldn't be giving

aid to Israel, but the right of full and unlimited return is the effective end of Israel. It's also as unrealistic as anything I can imagine. I believe that Israel is indeed a democracy. Your pov seems irrevocably one sided to me. Calling Israel a ghetto seems willfully obtuse.

[Tom Joad]

14. Statement was put out by Israelis.

I will always believe that refugees forced out by military force have a right to return to their homeland.

It what ways will that be the "effective end of Israel"?

Realistically, Israel will have to deal with making peace not only with its Palestinian neighbors, but also with the Palestinians in their midst. It cannot remain a state for Jewish people and a democracy, it must become a state for all its inhabitants.

The statement i quoted did not say that call all of Israel a ghetto, but saying that it has created ghettos. If you don't believe that, i urge you to see the ghettos for yourself. They sit alongside rich, wealthy subarban-like developments for Jews only.

[Violet_Crumble]

21. A two-state resolution is now unrealistic...

What you describe as 'the effective end of Israel' is actually support for a binational state. While unrealistic, it's no more unrealistic than two viable and independent states emerging. Thanks to Sharon's great settlement building adventure, all that can emerge is an expanded Israeli state and a weak and territorially disjointed Palestinian 'state'. So when two things are unrealistic, I prefer to go for the unrealistic one that's the fairer one out of the two...

Violet...

[Igel]

3. Average age and standard deviation, please.

Some of it might be word games.

Words games are deception for the simple.

[Tom Joad]

11. Children of a lesser god?

Tom Hurndall, as many remember, died while trying to save Gaza children in what amounts to a free-fire zone.

Jocelyn Hurndall, Tom's mother, asked if Prime Minister Blair, who supports Israeli policies, if he considered Palestinian "children of a lesser god?"

So I have questions to ask of Tony Blair. Does he regard the children of Palestine as children of a lesser god? Does he accept that such inaction is tantamount to complicity in the process of destroying any peace initiative in the Middle East? Mr Blair, you know now that an Israeli soldier has confessed to shooting in cold blood an unarmed British citizen who was trying to shepherd children away to safety. When will you be ready to openly condemn these actions?

[Lithos]

26. Locking per I/P guidelines

Not based on a recent news or op-ed article.

Lithos
I/P Forum Moderator