another shot fired

Israeli Headshots in the West Bank
Shooting Tristan Anderson

By SCOTT HANDLEMAN

I had the honor to get to know Tristan Anderson last year as his lawyer in a nonviolent protest case.

Last Friday, at a rally against the ongoing construction of Israel's "separation wall," Tristan was shot in the head by a high-velocity tear-gas cannister. He was taking photographs at a weekly demonstration in the West Bank village of Ni'lin, which stands to lose 25% of its remaining land to the wall. (The wall was ruled illegal by the International Court of Justice in 2004. Undertaken in the name of state security, it effects a further massive land theft by the Israeli government on behalf of Jewish settlers in the West Bank.)

Tristan's skull and face were shattered. Surgeons removed part of the frontal lobe of his brain, and he may lose an eye.

Because the Israeli army does not allow Palestinian ambulances into Israel, Tristan's ambulance was detained for 15 minutes at a military checkpoint, while he lay bleeding from his brain. He was ultimately transferred to an Israeli ambulance.

Israeli government spokespersons said the soldiers followed proper policy, as the protest took place in a closed military zone. This stance is hardly surprising. Since July 2008, Israeli soldiers have killed four unarmed residents of Ni'lin, ages ranging from 10 to 22, at demonstrations against the wall. Three of these four Palestinian youths were shot in the head, and one in the back; three by live ammo, and one by "rubber-coated steel bullets" that lodged in his brain. (Details about each of those shootings is at http://palsolidarity.org/2009/03/5324.)

The question is whether the Israeli soldiers were indiscriminately rocketing high-velocity cannisters straight at the crowd, or whether from 50 meters a soldier mistook Tristan for Palestinian, and aimed a tear gas cannon directly at his head. Tristan was standing still when he got hit.

There will be a demonstration at the Israeli consulate in San Francisco this afternoon at 4pm.

Scott Handleman is a defense lawyer in the Bay Area. He can be reached at: shandleman@gmail.com

and so another american citizen is brutalized by the israeli military. remember how we supposedly went to war with grenada to defend a handful of american medical students, and how we were "furious" with panama when an american couple was attacked? well, for reasons that had nothing to do with these americans, we ended up killing thousands in these two nations. meanwhile, in israel, we fund, to the tune of billions of dollars a year, the israeli military, which then uses that money to kill anyone who stands in their path of brutalizing the palestinian people. we are near the six year anniversary of the murder of rachel corrie. it seems israel wants to celebrate it in style.

with our tax dollars.


this article is good, but i take issue with one of the points. it says the question is whether israel was firing indiscriminately, or whether they aimed directly at this young man's head. is one better than the other? is it justifiable for israeli soldiers to fire indiscriminately? would it help those who were murdered to know that they were not fired at directly? and is it worse for israel to kill americans than it is to kill palestinians? of course it isn't. the fact is, once a state has gotten used to murdering anyone who stands in its way, it begins to spread the murder around. and when no one, including the u.s., calls them on their brutality, then it just gets worse. and of course, we don't care about young americans being killed by brutal militaries. our own brutal military is sending young americans off to kill and be killed each and every day, so why should we expect them to become concerned now? they are interested in their own power, in controlling resources, and in extending their political and economic influence. if documenting the mistreatment of americans helps to further these goals, then it will be front page news. if not, no one will know, and the babble about israel being a democracy that has a right to exist will go on and on, as if nothing has happened.