July 2nd, 2007. At approximately 2 pm a water tanker was on its way to refill the water tanks of the Palestinian Abu Heikel family, living in Tel Rumeida, Hebron. Since their house is on the opposite side of the illegal Israeli settlement of Tel Rumeida, the truck had to take the road passing this settlement.
When the truck tried to reach its destination, a group of approximately fifteen settlers went out of their homes, blocked the street and prevented the driver of going further. The truck spent about one hour in this miserable situation. During this time settlers were shouting at the truck driver and using a CD to reflect the sun into his eyes. A couple of children made several attempts to enter the truck by stepping on the trucks stairs, while other settlers were throwing eggs at the trucks windshield.
Several soldiers joined the scene and surrounded the drivers cab. Whether their purpose was to protect the driver or to join the settler’s harassments couldn’t be surely known. They did not do anything to prevent the settlers from blocking the road, therefore the truck had to go back down the hill and stopped at the nearby crossroads.
When the house owner arrived he started negotiating with the police, which had already been there, because of another incident happening at the same time. After another hour the house owner went up the hill, with the police following him. At approximately 4.30 pm the truck was finally allowed to make another attempt to deliver his load. Without any further incidents he was able to reach the Abu Heikel family house and refill their water tanks.
At approximately 2.30 pm two human rights workers (HRW) were sitting at the crossroad near the illegal, according to international law, Israeli settlement of Tel Rumeida, inside the Palestinian neighbourhood of Tel Rumeida, Hebron. A Palestinian boy, Samir Abu Rmeleh, approximate age 17, arrived carrying a little puppy and took a seat next to the human rights workers (HRWs) and several other Palestinian children.
After a few minutes he continued walking down the hill, pulling his dog in an obviously harmful way. Two soldiers standing nearby immediately started shouting at him in Hebrew, probably asking him to stop mistreating his dog. Samir ignored the soldiers and tried to provoke them by pulling the dogs leash and lifting the dog into the air. One of the two soldiers took the dog away from the Palestinian boy and brought him into his outpost. The boy immediately started discussing the situation with the soldiers, asking them to give him his dog back. The soldiers, who were not able to understand Arabic, ignored Samir’s attempts and refused giving the dog back.
When the two HRWs joined the scene and asked the soldiers to inform them about the proceedings, they explained that their only purpose was to protect the dog and to prevent the boy from continuous mistreatment of the dog. The HRWs repeatedly replied that they agree with the aim of protecting animals, but that this situation isn’t any of the soldiers business. Meanwhile Samir made several attempts to get his dog back by trying to negotiate with the soldiers, as well as by calling his dog or luring him with chicken pieces. Eventually the soldiers interrupted Samir’s attempts by ordering him to stand on the other site of the street, enforcing their orders by grabbing the boy’s shirt.
After some minutes a group of off-duty female soldiers arrived and showed a huge interest in the dog’s well being. The female soldiers informed the HRWs about their intention to take the dog with them. Since this was neither in the best interest of the HRWs, nor of the Palestinian boy, the HRWs suggested that they take the dog to their house. One of the HRWs informed Samir about their suggesting and he agreed to do so. The soldiers were discussing the HRWs suggestion as well, but finally decided not to give them the dog, since, how they said, they can’t be sure, that they won’t give him the dog back. Several times the female soldiers tried to carry the dog to the nearby settlement, but stopped proceeding after continuous interventions of the HRW.
Because of the long duration of the incident the proceedings started to draw more attention. So a couple of Palestinian children, three more soldiers, the TIPH and three more HRW joined the scene. The soldiers called the police, proposing to charge Samir of animal abuse. During the next hour another two Palestinian boys, Ahmad Rmeleh and Abed Fakhoury joined the discussions with the soldiers, trying to help their friend. After several attempts of negotiating with the soldiers as well as with Samir, one of the boys was handcuffed. The soldiers refused to justify their behaviour. For everyone’s enjoyment he was able to get rid of his plastic handcuffs twice.
The police arrived at 3.30 pm and entered into negotiations with Samir’s mother, several other Palestinians and the HRW, unfortunately without any success. Ahmad and Abed were handcuffed again for “interrupting the soldiers work” and were forced to sit on the ground behind the soldiers outpost.
At about 4.15 Samir was taken into the police car. Several soldiers, policemen and HRW surrounded the car while one soldier stepped into the car. The soldier was obviously trying to cover up his abuse of Samir while he hit Samir in the face. Meanwhile the soldiers tried to prevent the HRWs outside from watching the proceedings by pushing and shoving two of them. After another two minutes Ahmad and Abed were taken to another military outpost inside the illegal settlement of Tel Rumeida.
At approximately 4:20 in the afternoon, the soldiers took Samir to a police vehicle that had just arrived. They dragged the boy to the police car that was surrounded by approximately 5 soldiers and one border police. A female HRW was filming during this time and the soldiers attempted to block her view of the boy. During this time they turned the Palestinian to face the police vehicle, pulled his hands behind his back and bound them with a plastic wrist tie. They forcibly pulled the wrist tie exceptionally tight and the boy’s face showed his obvious pain and discomfort at the wrist ties being so tight. He was then pushed into the back of the police van with a soldier trying to get in behind him. The soldier was half in the police vehicle and appeared to be talking with the boy when he was seen by the HRW hitting the boy in the face. The HRW continued to attempt to film the soldier hitting the boy however there were at least another five soldiers and border police around her. In doing this, both soldiers and a policeman forcibly pushed her and grabbed her, trying to drag her away from the area. Following this, the police vehicle drove away.
The soldiers turned their attention on the two remaining Palestinian teenagers who had been detained, placed wrist ties on both of them and started to pull them towards the soldiers base by the illegal settlement of Tel Rumeida. The soldiers would not give any reason or justification for why they needed to do this despite repeated attempts by the HRWs to find out. Eventually they were informed that they would be held at the base until the police would come to bring them to the police station.
The HRWs maintained their presence in the area and at approximately 4:50 in the afternoon, the same police vehicle that had taken away the teenage boy returned. The police stopped by the female HRW and asked what she had seen. When she expressed concern over the soldier hitting the Palestinian, they recommended that she came down to the station to give a statement. They repeated that it was necessary to go to the police station to complete the investigation and that if she had seen the soldier hit the boy it was necessary for a formal complaint to be made. The police advised they would go to the army barracks for a moment and on their way back collect the HRW to take her to make a statement. The HRW complied and when stepped into the van, there was one of the soldiers present from when the incident took place already in there.
Once at the police station, she was made to wait with three soldiers; two male and one female, and the Palestinian who had been detained. She found the wrist ties still on the boy and him in obvious pain with his hands swelling from restricted blood flow as a consequence. She requested his hands be released, and despite protests from the soldiers, the police complied and the ties were undone. The boys wrists were examined by the HRW and there were severe marks on his wrist where they had been tied.
After a further ten minutes the police informed her that in reality she was actually being arrested by the police for obstructing the police and army work. She was really surprised at this, as there had been no suggestion that this would happen and the police had reassured her that she was being taken to the station to give a statement regarding the soldiers behavior. The police had openly lied to her regarding their intentions and had essentially tricked her into coming to the station with the intention of detaining her. The police eventually rephrased what they said and admitted that she hadn’t been arrested however she had been detained. She was advised that she would have to wait for the investigator to speak with her after speaking with the other soldiers and the boy. During this time the Palestinian boy was silent and waited patiently for his turn with the investigator. When his opportunity did arise, the investigator questioned him aggressively and there were many places where he shouted at the boy.
After nearly three hours of waiting the police finally allowed the HRW to offer her version of events. She relayed what happened to the investigator and explained how there were a number of soldiers between her and the police vehicle and that the claims that she had been obstructing the police were false accusations. She was advised by the investigator that she needed to write, in English, that she wouldn’t intefere with police or army work and that if she did then she would be deported. The HRW refused to do this as she hadnّt done anything wrong and essentially, as the police had already falsely accused her of interfering on this occasion, it was more than possible that they would repeat this and get her deported without just cause. The police threatened her with being arrested and when the HRW refused to state in writing that she would no longer intefere with the army or otherwise be deported the police advised her that she was being arrested. Eventually after a period of time the HRW was taken to the exit gate of the police station and released without charge. The HRW understood that the Palestinian boy was still in the station and was not able to find out what would then happen to him.
This initial incident lasted for about two hours. The HRW was detained for a total of four hours at the police station before being released. About ten Israeli soldiers and two policemen engaged in this case, repeatedly using physical violence against Palestinians and an international HRW and eventually arresting and detaining three Palestinians because they were mistreating a little dog. It’s doubtful that if a settler lifted a Palestinian into the air that this would draw the same attention as this case of a Palestinian boy and his dog.
After the dog spent a few hours with the soldiers he was finally given to another Palestinian boy.
It is not known the eventual fate of the Palestinian boys.
Starting on June 27th, 2007. Following the Israeli Occupation Forces’ (IOF) invasion of Nablus, from late Wednesday evening until early Friday morning, in which hundreds of Israeli troops in dozens of armored vehicles and bulldozers invaded the city and the Balata refugee camp, taking over numerous buildings and homes, blocking entrances to hospitals and schools, taking over radio stations, and eventually demolishing three homes in the old city, Human Rights Workers (HRWs) inspected the old city, visiting sites of IOF-demolished homes.
Several houses in the old city were demolished using explosives. The residents of the homes were not given warning of the impending demolition, and in some cases were prevented from leaving the home. One resident, a Palestinian Red Crescent (PRC) medic described climbing out the 2nd story window and hanging onto the ledge in order to escape the collapse of the floor resulting from the demolition of the adjoining house.
The father of a family whose home was demolished by explosives described how the IOF invaded the home around 5:30 pm on Thursday, collecting family members in one room and interrogating the sons on two occasions. The 2nd interrogation session took place in a bathroom, where the sons were badly beaten. Two young men of the family, ages 20 and 24, were arrested. The house was demolished shortly before midnight.
The neighboring house, sharing a wall with the demolished home, also lost a 1st story ceiling-2nd story-floor due to Israeli explosives. Additionally, the weight-bearing wall was badly damaged, further endangering inhabitants sharing this wall. The mother of the family explained they had only just finished re-building after the last invasion. She further explained that had her sons been standing a few meters further away, they would have been killed in the collapse of the floor.
In the Safadi home, 3 sons were arrested. The house was thoroughly trashed: Israeli soldiers burrowed into the kitchen floors in search of tunnels and weapons, and additionally ransacked the rooms of the home. While occupying the house, snipers were installed in windows strategically overlooking the alleys outside. The family was used as human shields while the IOF occupied the house.
The Asali household suffered similar injustices. IOF soldiers also dug into the floor, opening a well and exploding a shared-family storage room on the ground level. Soldiers occupied the home from 8 am Thursday until the IOF left Friday morning, again placing snipers in the windows. Upstairs rooms were completely ransacked. Six Palestinians were kept captive in the house, as human shields, during the entire time of occupying the home.
At 3 of Nablus’ hospitals —Al Watani, Rafidia, and Nablus Specialty Hospital—at least 2 Israeli military vehicles blocked entrances from Wednesday night until Friday morning, with soldiers preventing doctors, hospital staff and patients alike from entering, despite the urgency of doing so.
According to Al Watani hospital staff, the army shot at the hospital with machine guns on 5 different occasions. IOF additionally delayed delivery of critical supply trucks like those bringing oxygen, as well as those with supplies for dialysis machines—most patients cannot survive long periods without dialysis, and further prevented delivery of food.
The day after the army pulled out, HRWs visited the home of one Nablus old city resident who was held captive in one room of her home, along with approximately 40 other family members and neighbors, from Wednesday evening until Friday morning. In another room upstairs, approximately 50 neighbors were held, and a further 15 were kept in yet another room of the house. All were held under similar conditions. During their captivity, residents were neither given food or water, nor were they permitted to use the toilet, instead having to hold themselves or urinate in the room in which they were kept captive. Numerous elderly, children, and one pregnant woman suffered greatly under these circumstances. One elderly man was unable to take his vital medicine for nearly two days as it needed to be taken with food. Both the elderly woman and man developed severely swollen legs from remaining seated for nearly two days, needing to be carried out of the room when finally released from captivity.
While occupying the home, soldiers urinated in the rooms as well as ransacked the house. Upon eventually leaving the home, one soldier tossed a hand grenade into the 2nd story window of the house still occupied by about 100 unarmed civilians, fortunately not resulting in any deaths but nonetheless adding to the damage done by the soldiers.
This house-occupation was not an isolated instance. Numerous homes in the old city were appropriated and occupied, residents crammed into small rooms together and held without food, water, or visits to the toilet.
The army was allegedly looking for “wanted men” (resistance fighters). The action of occupying homes and holding residents captive equates to using the civilians as human shields during the military invasion, a practice which is internationally recognized as illegal.
In one instance on Thursday evening, soldiers took captive a Palestinian Medical Relief (PRM) volunteer who had been part of a group escorting civilians to their old city homes. Initially detaining the medic by asking for his ID, the soldiers further detained him by keeping the ID. Soldiers took the medic into the home they were occupying, holding him inside for over 30 minutes before he reappeared blindfolded and handcuffed at the door of the building. He was then made to squat in front of the building for approximately another 20 to 30 minutes while soldiers changed shifts. During this time, international HRW attempted to secure the medics release, citing the soldiers’ violations of international law in arresting and using the volunteer medic as a human shield. The HRWs inquiries and requests were met with refusals to release the medic and by the soldiers’ statements that they were not obligated to disclose the reasons for the medic’s detention. After numerous attempts to negotiate the medic’s release, HRWs had to leave the scene. It is unknown whether the PRM volunteer was harmed during his initial or later detention, though there is a high probability he was interrogated and beaten, as in other instances.
The targeted arrest and detention of medics is common and is a form of collective punishment for these volunteers providing essential emergency services to wounded Palestinians. Volunteer medics typically are young Palestinian men, who the IOF routinely accuse of having involvement with militant groups. When not arrested, medics and ambulances are still routinely denied access to emergency areas, denying the wounded emergency attention, a tactic which can result in the deaths of the injured. On Friday morning, one paramedic, age 23, was shot in the shoulder while on duty.
During this latest invasion of Nablus, at least 60 reported cases occurred as a direct result of the IOF army presence and actions. A further 15 routine but serious medical cases required the attention of the PRC whose movement was greatly restricted by the presence of the IOF. Injuries resulting from rubber bullet wounds numbered 48 in the span of 16 hours—these were only the injuries which were reported to and attended by the PRC. Among these cases, one 23 year old man was shot 4 times in the back and once in the chest with rubber bullets. There were also two reported cases of injury by live bullets. It is worth mentioning that these were all cases which the PRC was alerted to and do not include the injuries unreported to the PRC.
Following a brief absence during the day on Friday, the occupying army re-entered the old city Friday evening and again Saturday evening, as happens on a regular basis in the Israeli military-surrounded city of Nablus.
June 29th, 2007. At approximately 11.00 am a group of about 40 Palestinians, Israelis and internationals gathered in the fields of the Palestinian village of Artas to protest against the construction of the, according to international law, illegal Israeli Apartheid-Wall and to support a local farmer in entering his land.
His fields are going to be ruined by the construction of a sewage-system for the nearby illegal Israeli settlement of Efrat, as well by the construction of the Apartheid-Wall. Approximately one month ago, Israeli military and bulldozers, uprooted about 40 apricot trees and forbid the owner to enter his area.
When the demonstrators were about to proceed to the uprooted area, where a part of the sewage-system has already been constructed, the way was immediately blocked by about 15 soldiers, preventing the demonstration of going further. After a couple of minutes and several attempts to negotiate with the soldiers, the Israeli military surprisingly allowed the Palestinian farmer and his supporters to enter his land.
The next 30 minutes were spent, by an impassioned and moving speech. The land owner and some other Palestinians explained their miserable situation to the present media, as well as to the international activists, and asked them not to stay silent in the face of the injustice and oppression they have seen, but to spread their messages all over the world.
Despite one incident of unprovoked violence against a Palestinian, the demonstration in Artas was a successful and enjoyable time for all of the demonstrators present. Since it was the first time in 40 days, that the farmer has been allowed to enter his field, the demonstrators reached their aim in a peaceful way, without any people being arrested or injured. The demonstration concluded by the farmers offering to all the activists, to get fruit from his trees, which everybody was happy to do.
Help save the Palestinian inhabitants of Susya from eviction!
On June 6, 2007, a final Israeli Supreme Court hearing was held on the appeal of the Palestinian residents of Susya, in the southern edge of the West Bank. The deliberations – carried out since 2001 (appeal # 7530/01) – was against the destruction of the Palestinians’ homes.
The Court has basically accepted the state’s argument, that the residents are squatters, even though they are the legal owners of the land. This is because they have built their homes (after being evicted once before) without permit, and therefore the homes must be destroyed. Since Palestinian Susya is in “area C”, the authority to issue permits rests with the settler-run Civil Administration bureau, situated in a settlement in the northern part of the West Bank.
There is no end to the cynicism of the settlers, the IDF, the Civil Administration, and even the Court towards Susya Palestinians. It is well known, that the above-mentioned bureau does not give permits to Palestinians. Some residents have submitted permits in the past – only to be turned down repeatedly.
At bottom line, even though the State admits the land is private Palestinian land, it prevents Palestinians from living on it. At the same time, settlement outposts in the same region are expanding, many of them also built on private Palestinian land.
Will the Minister of Security and the Israeli government now approve the eviction of 13 Palestinian families attempting to continue to live on their land and tilling their fields – or will it cater to the settlers’ expansionism and explicit wishes to “clear” the area of its original residents?
It is also up to you. Please act.
