197

U.S. teen fatally shot in West Bank by Israeli forces, Palestinian officials say (www.cbsnews.com)

submitted 9 months ago by Silverseren@kbin.social to c/world@lemmy.world

20 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The State Department confirmed that it has reached out to Israeli officials "for further information."

all 22 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world 71 points 9 months ago

Expect a firmly worded letter attached to the next shipment of arms and military aid as a response.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 20 points 9 months ago

The dots above the i's are no longer little hearts in this one.

[-] Doorbook@lemmy.world 58 points 9 months ago

They had killed Americans Christian Journalist. The media that was crying wolf about khasogi and international uproar became very silent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shireen_Abu_Akleh?wprov=sfla1

"A letter from 24 Senate Democrats pressed the Biden administration to probe the killing. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) lobbied against the letter. Previously, Senators Jon Ossoff and Mitt Romney issued a bipartisan demand for a full and transparent investigation. It followed an earlier letter in May signed by 57 House Democrats demanding an independent investigation into the killing."

Land of the free controlled by lobbiests..

[-] Transporter_Room_3@startrek.website 16 points 9 months ago

Call it what it is.

Bribery.

[-] PugJesus@kbin.social 10 points 9 months ago

The media that was crying wolf about khasogi

"crying wolf"?

[-] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 months ago

Yeah that’s a little bit of bias slipped in there to taint the rest of what seems like a reasonable comment

[-] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 9 points 9 months ago

What do you mean by "crying wolf"? The media was not crying wolf about Khasogi.

[-] Yearly@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

Land of the free controlled by lobbiests..

Always has been.

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

Did you mean to say "crying crocodile tears" instead of "crying wolf"?

[-] Silverseren@kbin.social 2 points 9 months ago

That would make a lot more sense if that's what they meant. Since the governments "investigating" very clearly didn't care about what happened to him.

[-] PugJesus@kbin.social 34 points 9 months ago

Not the first time, nor the last, Israeli forces have murdered a US citizen without reprecussion. NO other country would be allowed to get away with this without even a fucking diplomatic objection except for fucking Israel.

[-] Kalkaline@lemmy.zip 31 points 9 months ago

Oh, we care now that it was a US citizen? What about all those women and children? Literally thousands of them killed.

[-] PugJesus@kbin.social 19 points 9 months ago

The whole point of citizenship is that a government has exceptional obligations (and vice-versa) to those who hold citizenship. So yes, obviously a US citizen getting killed SHOULD be a bigger deal to the US than non-citizens, unless you want the US to literally be the world government.

[-] fastandcurious@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

Are you equating Palestinians with Americans?!

[-] autotldr 9 points 9 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

A Palestinian-American teenager was shot and killed Friday by Israeli troops in the West Bank, Palestinian officials told Reuters.

A State Department spokesperson would only confirm to CBS News that a U.S. citizen had died in the West Bank, adding that "we are working to understand the circumstances of the incident and have asked the government of Israel for further information."

The Israeli Police Spokesperson's Unit said in a statement that on Friday afternoon that "an incident report was received concerning firearm discharge, ostensibly involving an off-duty law enforcement officer, a soldier, and a civilian."

The "discharge was directed towards a perceived threat," described by the police statement as Palestinian individuals throwing rocks along a highway.

"Additional information indicated the potential fatality of a 17-year-old Palestinian due to gunfire," the police statement said, adding that an investigation has been launched.

Tensions in the West Bank have surged since Hamas launched its bloody Oct. 7 terrorist attack on southern Israel, sparking the Israel-Hamas war.

The original article contains 239 words, the summary contains 163 words. Saved 32%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[+] DdCno1@kbin.social -34 points 9 months ago

The "discharge was directed towards a perceived threat," described by the police statement as Palestinian individuals throwing rocks along a highway.

I have seen the aftermath of rocks being thrown on passing cars. If this 17-year-old did that, then he was not a civilian shot at random.

[-] Silverseren@kbin.social 30 points 9 months ago

So your response to teenagers throwing rocks is to gun them all down?

[-] fastandcurious@lemmy.world 19 points 9 months ago

That’s how a zionazi responds anyway, so you gotta be OK with it, you anti-semite

[-] MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago

You’re the kind of person to defend My Lai for resisting, if we were back in the 60’s.

this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2024

197 points (95.4% liked)

World News

38969 readers

2645 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.