Majority Supremes Uphold Wrongful Conviction and Capital Punishment
By Stephen Lendman | March 6, 2022
In April 2013, Dzhokkar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev were framed as patsies for what was called the Boston Marathon bombing.
Local police lethally shot brother Tamerlan near Watertown, MA.
Dzhokhar was arrested, falsely charged, convicted and sentenced to death.
Neither brother was involved with the incident, a state-sponsored false flag.
Like many times before in the US, innocent patsies were wrongfully punished, innocence not enough to save them.
At the time, Dzhokhar’s father, Anzor, said his sons had nothing to do with the bombings.
US “special services went after them because my sons are Muslims, and don’t have anyone in America to protect them.”
“I’m sure about my children, in their purity. I don’t know what happened or who did this… I fear for my son, for his life.”
Neither son was trained or had knowledge of explosives or firearms.
Their mother, Zubeidat, said both sons were set up.
FBI operatives followed them for years.
Her eldest son Tamerlan “was controlled by the FBI, like for three, five years,” she said.
“They knew what (he) was doing.”
“They knew what actions were and what sites on the Internet he was (accessing).”
“They used to come (to our) home.”
“They used to talk to me.”
‘They were telling me that (Tamerlan) was really an extremist leader and that they were afraid of him.”
“They told me whatever information he is getting, he gets from these extremist sites.”
“They were controlling him.”
“They were controlling his every step (and) now they say that this is a terrorist act.”
“Never ever is this true. My sons are innocent.”
Asked if they had secret aspirations and dark secrets, she said:
“That’s impossible. My sons would never keep a secret.”
In July 2020, US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit panel unanimously overturned Dzhokhar’s death sentence, saying:
The trial judge failed to adequately question jurors about their exposure to pretrial publicity about the incident.
Weeks later, Trump regime AG William Barr vowed to “do whatever’s necessary” to appeal the decision and “pursue the death penalty” against Dzhokhar.
In October 2020, the (In)justice Department filed a petition for writ of certiorari, seeking Supreme Court intervention in the case.
On Friday, the Supremes reinstated the death penalty against wrongfully convicted Dzhokhar by a 6 – 3 majority ruling.
He had nothing to do with placing one of two so-called “pressure cooker” bombs near the April 2013 Boston Marathon’s finish line — killing three, injuring around 260 others.
Writing for the Court’s majority, Clarence Thomas falsely said the following:
“Dzhokhar Tsarnaev committed heinous crimes (sic).”
“The Sixth Amendment nonetheless guaranteed him a fair trial before an impartial jury (sic).”
“He received one (sic).”
“The judgment of the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit is reversed.”
Justices Roberts, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett allied with Thomas to reverse the First Circuit’s ruling.
Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor dissented.
Dzhokhar is serving a life sentence at Colorado’s ADX Florence prison — the sole federal supermax facility.
According to the DOJ’s National Institute of Corrections, supermax confinement is in “special housing unit(s), maxi-maxi, maximum control facilit(ies), secured housing unit(s), intensive management unit(s), and administrative maximum penitentiar(ies.).”
They’re “highly restrictive, high-custody housing units within a secure facility.”
They “isolate inmates from the general prison population and from each other due to grievous crimes, repetitive assaultive or violent institutional behavior, the threat of escape or actual escape from high-custody facility(s), or inciting or threatening to incite disturbances in a correctional institution.”
In a 1999 report titled, “Supermax Prisons: Overview and General Considerations,” the DOJ said the following:
“Although “concentration, dispersal, and isolation are not new, the development of ‘supermax’ prisons is a relatively recent trend.”
“Prisons always had “prisons within the prison” for their worst inmates (usually called administrative segregation), and most states operate one or more facilities for their most threatening inmates.”
They’re for society’s “worst of the worst.”
Alcatraz was the prototype until closed in 1963.
Prison wardens aware of cruel and unusual punishment in supermax confinement call it a fate “worse than death.”
Prisoners are confined to windowless single cells about 7 by 12 feet for up to 23 hours a day, with a shower and concrete bed.
Inmates have few if any programs.
Little constructive activity is offered.
Few visits are allowed, almost no direct contact ones.
There’s very little human contact overall.
Most inmates are incarcerated for life. For others, sentences are determinate.
Imagine being isolated in less than 100 square feet of windowless space with nearly no human contact for the rest of your life — especially if young, like Dzhokhar, when confined.
A fate worse than death indeed.
A Final Comment
Longterm isolated confinement crushes the mind and spirit, along with taking a horrendous physical toll — over time causing:
severe anxiety
panic attacks
lethargy
insomnia
nightmares
dizziness
irrational anger, at times uncontrollable
confusion
social withdrawal
memory loss
appetite loss
delusions and hallucinations
mutilations
profound despair and hopelessness
suicidal thoughts;
paranoia
For many, a totally dysfunctional state and inability ever to live normally outside of confinement.
Prisoner anecdotes describe the experience:
“People come in with a few problems and leave as sociopaths.
You’re like a “caged animal. I’ve seen people just crack and either scream for hours on end or cry.”
Isolation “creates monsters (who) want revenge on society.”
We “have a sense of hopelessness. Plus my anger (is) a silent rage…I am beginning to really hate people.”
“They…try to break a person down mentally (and) mental abuse leaves no evidence behind (like) physical abuse.”
Others say isolation is like being buried alive in a tomb.
When longterm, it often causes irreversible psychological trauma and harm, a condition no society should inflict on anyone, nor should lawmakers allow it.
Yet thousands in the US are irreversibly harmed this way, including wrongfully convicted victims of injustice like Dzhokkar.
The Ugly Face of Trudeau Regime Tyranny in Canada’s Capital
By Stephen Lendman | February 21, 2022
According to local media reports, Trudeau regime storm troopers arrested 191 nonviolent freedom-fighting truckers and supporters through Sunday.
Towing removed 57 vehicles.
The Ottawa police tweeted that operations continue “to remove all vehicles parked” near parliament Hill.
According to interim police chief Steve Bell:
“We will continue to work through the night, through the coming day and/or days until” streets are cleared.
As of Sunday, 103 peaceful protesters, threatening no one, face phony charges, including mischief and obstructing police.
According to Ottawa mayor Jim Watson, (illegally) seized vehicles may be sold instead of returning them to their rightful owners.
Defying the rule of law, Watson falsely claimed the right to “confiscate…vehicles and sell them (sic),” adding:
“I want to see them sold. I don’t want (them) return(ed).”
So-called investigations of police state violence against peaceful protesters assure coverup and denial whitewashing ahead.
Bell signaled what’s coming by claiming that police on horseback didn’t trample anyone.
Two protesters “collided” with horses, he said, falsely blaming the injured for police state violence.
Saying “no one (was) seriously injured (by) police actions. Safety is our priority” ignored trampling, beating, pepper-spraying and other violence against peaceful protesters by Trudeau regime goon squads.
Draconian actions flagrantly breached Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedom.
Trudeau regime tyranny abolished it.
The Ottawa Police Service (OPS) also tweeted:
“If you are involved in this protest, we will actively look to identify you and follow up with financial sanctions and criminal charges.”
A Freedom Convoy 2022 statement said:
“The use of more force will only be used to punish people, and not preserve or establish order.”
Commenting on Trudeau regime police state tactics, GOP Senator Rand Paul said the following:
“The Emergency edict that Trudeau has done in Canada allows him to do some horrendous things.”
“It allows him to stop travel, allows him to detain people without trial.”
Separately, Paul tweeted:
“Canada became Egypt…ruled by emergency edict that allows prohibition of public assembly, travel, and the commandeering of private companies without your day in court.”
Last week, Canadian Law Professor Ryan Alford condemned Trudeau’s “power grab.”
At a time when no national emergency exists, an invented one alone, Alford stressed that “not a single violent incident” justified Trudeau’s abuse of power.
He “failed to meet the requirements for invoking the Emergencies Act.”
“His doing so is clearly unconstitutional.”
Over the weekend, US Rep. Yvette Herrell said she’ll “introduc(e) legislation (to) temporarily grant asylum to innocent Canadian protesters who are being persecuted by their own government.”
“We cannot be silent as our neighbors to the north are treated so badly.”
At this time, constitutional law in Canada is null and void.
Trudeau regime tyranny replaced it.
A Final Comment
On February 23, US truckers comprising the People’s Convoy will depart from Adelanto Stadium in southern California for Washington, DC.
They’ll be joined by “frontline doctors, lawyers, first-responders, former military servicemen and women, students, retirees, mothers, fathers and children – on this peaceful and law-abiding transcontinental journey toward the east coast.”
Their mission is all about “freedom and unity…restor(ing) accountability…lifting (draconian) mandates and ending a state of emergency when none exists.
Organizations involved in the freedom-fighting mission include:
The Unity Project
The America Project
Advocates for Citizens’ Rights
US Freedom Flyers
The American Foundation for Civil Liberties & Freedom
Faith groups from every spectrum
Independent journalists are accompanying the truckers to report accurately on their peaceful, law-abiding mission.
It’s being assisted by retired military personnel and security experts.
At this time, arrival in Washington is expected on March 5.
ThePeople’sConvoy.org is the official website of the mission for accurate information.
The Truckers’ Declaration states the following:
“We the People of the United States, in Order to restore our once perfect Union, re-establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense of all, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty, do ordain and establish the restoration movement of The People’s Convoy for the United States of America.”
“WE DEMAND THE DECLARATION OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY CONCERNING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC BE LIFTED IMMEDIATELY AND OUR CHERISHED CONSTITUTION REIGN SUPREME.”
“WE ARE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND WE STAND TOGETHER UNDER THE BANNER OF FREEDOM – FREEDOM IS THE ONE THING THAT UNITES US ALL.”
“LIBERTY FLOWS THROUGH ALL OF OUR VEINS.”
Trudeau regime tyranny suggests what likely awaits the People’s Convoy in Washington on arrival or in the days that follow.
The choice of freedom-loving people everywhere is unambiguous.
Eliminate draconian health and freedom-destroying mandates or they’ll eliminate us.
Were directed-energy weapons used on Australian civilians?
By Jessica Rose | Unacceptable Jessica | February 17, 2022
What is a directed-energy weapon?
A directed-energy weapon (DEW) is a ranged weapon that damages its target with highly focused energy, including lasers, microwaves, particle beams, and sound beams. Potential applications of this technology include weapons that target personnel, missiles, vehicles, and optical devices.
These weapons are currently being developed/used by the U.S., Russia, China, India, the U.K., Iran and Turkey. The claim is that they are awesome because they are ‘discreet’ since “radiation does not generate sound and is invisible if outside the visible spectrum”. They can also be used in space and are cheap! Yay! Cheap weapons! In the above definition, I don’t see anything about using this vicious dangerous technology on civilians who are peacefully protesting. Funny that. This is what they may look like.
Photo courtesy of Australian Free Independent Press Network
Recently, due to the flame lit inside the global community by amazing Canadian Truckers, a very large crowd gathered at the Canberra Parliament to protest government-imposed mandates.
It appears as though in order to control these rowdy, unpatriotic, flag flying rabble-rousers, DEWs were used by the Australian Federal Police on these very people.
I thought this might be one of those many ‘stories’ that circulate the inter-world that isn’t really rooted in evidence. But then I found video that, to me, is clear evidence of the truth. You may disagree with me, but not telling the truth is lying to me. Avoiding providing an answer to a simple, direct question is lying to me. And this man, AFP Commissioner Kershaw, is clearly not telling the truth by refusing to answer the question posed by the Senator that, in my opinion, he also very clearly knows the answer to. Maybe he is ‘just following orders’.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/b0qQtGdFDKAP/
I am not aware if these types of weapons have ever been used in my proximity so I cannot attest to their effects but there are also some photos circulating the interweb (the people are ok with it) of the effects of the ‘burns’ on some of the people who were there and claim to have been affected by these directed energy weapons. There are many reports from people who were at the protest of strange ‘symptoms’.
Some of the effects of being exposed to DEWs include headaches, earaches and burns to the face. Most Aussies know the dangers of exposure to excessive amounts of U.V. light from the sun and thus wear physical protection such as hats and zinc creams. The person in this photo was wearing a hat. So the burns are not explained, in my opinion, by excessive U.V. exposure alone.
I find this highly disturbing considering that trudo is currently trying really hard to impose tyrannical actions against good, hard-working, law-abiding Canadian citizens from his hidey-hole. Maybe he had to go this route because he used all his money to buy injections instead of his own stash of energy weapons. I don’t know. But rest assured people, our free nations are under assault. This is VERY clear. It seems there are no measures that are off limits to them. They DO NOT care about the people. The civilians. The bread and butter of every single community, city, town, state, province and country.
I find myself constantly asking myself if this could possibly be happening. All of this. It has before, but this is now, after all. But, all you have to do is LOOK at Canada and Australia from 2 year old eyes and compare. No one could have imagined the shit state of things. It’s been so easy to quickly bring down entire nations with fear mongering, lies and government-imposed mandates and sanctions. Injected with improperly-tested gene therapies that have proven not to work and to be effectively dangerous, exposed to government-imposed microwaves for saying ‘I don’t like what you are doing to me and my country’… I mean WHEN DOES IT STOP?
IT STOPS WHEN WE SAY IT DOES. Tell your friends.
They are making an example of Novak Djokovic. Here’s why.
By Kit Knightly | OffGuardian | January 17, 2022
Tennis star Novak Djokovic is being deported from Australia, after losing his final appeal the WTA’s top-ranked player will not be allowed to defend his Australian Open title.
It was reported this morning that an Australian court had refused Djokovic’s appeal against the cancellation of his visa, and as such he’s being put on a plane and flown out of the country.
To be clear: This is all because he’s not “vaccinated” against Covid19, and vocally speaks out against the practice. The government have clearly and publicly admitted as much…but we’ll get to that.
The rejection of Djokovic’s medical exemption and subsequent deportation has been accompanied by a wave of vitriol in the press the likes of which we have rarely seen.
One Australian sports presenter was “accidentally” recorded calling him a “lying, sneaky arsehole” in a video that was later “leaked” to the press.
The Spectator has one piece which is nothing more than a slew of ad hominem and mockery, against not just Djokovic but all “anti-vaxxers” and “conspiracy theorists”, calling the Serbian a “conspiracy super-spreader”. They have another blaming his “arrogance for his downfall”.
The Daily Mail ran a story headlined: “Welcome to the Wacky World of Novak Djokovic… and meet his equally wacky wife!”, and two more opinion pieces claiming his arrogance has “trashed his reputation” and calling him “a loser”.
The Guardian‘s Australian Political Correspondent Sarah Martin defends the decision and jokingly refers to it as a “no dickheads” immigration policy, attacking Djokovic’s “anti-science god complex” and calling him an “all-round jerk”.
The childish name-calling just doesn’t end. Even his fellow players are sticking the boot in.
Stefanos Tsitsipas attacked Djokovic for attempting to “play by his own rules”, adding “A very small minority chose to follow their own way. It makes the majority look like they are all fools”, which is at least true, but not in the way he means it.
Spanish star Rafael Nadal said Djokovic should just follow the rules like everyone else, perhaps flashing the kind of attitude which allowed a fascist dictator to stay in power in his country for 40 years.
Some players, at least, have come to Djokovic’s defense, including Australia’s own Nick Kyrgios, who has said he is “ashamed” of the way Australia has handled the situation and chastised other players for not showing solidarity with Djokovic.
But why is this happening? Why are they trying to punish such a public figure, and why now?
Well, firstly, I’m not sure it is about punishing Djokovic, and not just because getting to leave Australia is an odd thing to be considered any kind of punishment these days.
Rather, it’s about the performance of punishing him. It’s about making an example of him. Not so much preventing him from playing, as much as denying him a platform.
The Australian government basically admits that in their legal justification for cancelling the visa.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison said Djokovic had been barred from entry for “breaching the rules…it’s as simple as that.” But he is either mistaken or lying, as he directly contradicts the case presented to the appeal court by the government.
Yes, the visa was first cancelled on a technicality about incorrect information but, a judge overruled that decision, allowing Djokovic to enter the country.
That’s when Immigration Minister Alex Hawke stepped in to personally revoke the visa under section 133 of the Immigration Act 1958.
Under this (worryingly vague) legislation, the Immigration Minister is granted the power to cancel any visa at all, if:
the Minister is satisfied that it would be in the public interest to cancel the visa.
This was the argument put to the appeals court, that the minister can expel anyone, for anything, if he believes it to be in the best interests of the public.
That’s public interest, NOT public health.
Hawke admits in his written statement that Djokovic presents a “negligible risk of Covid19 infection” to those around him. So it’s nothing to do with protecting people from infection or stopping the spread of the virus.
Public statements from officials suggest that they consider any “anti-vaxxer” to be a threat to the public interest by undermining the vaccination programme. Thus they can justify barring entry to Djokovic (or, it should be said, any other “anti-vaxxer”) under the guise of “public interest”.
It’s about control, it almost always is.
In short, the government are scared that Djokovic’s very presence in the country is a threat to their neo-fascist lockdown.
If you look closely at the media messaging, there’s more than a little fear behind the wall of abuse and mockery.
Article after article is at pains to point out that “the majority of normal Australians want the Joker gone”, or some variation on that sentiment. Somewhat desperately selling the line that nobody agrees with, or supports, Djokovic’s position.
A statement which is given the lie by the regular huge protests taking place all across Australia’s major cities (like this one, just this weekend, in Sydney).
The Australian government are worried they’ve turned their country into a powder keg of public resentment, and that the slightest social spark could set it off. Increasing the size of the (already huge) protests against the lockdowns and vaccine mandates, maybe even tipping the country into full-blown chaos.
One of the Spectator articles mentions that Australians have been living in a “police state” for two years, and then vaguely references the subsequent public anger, even whilst attempting to downplay it, misrepresent its cause, and turn it against the unvaccinated.
Australia has fallen. Peace, prosperity and freedom have been sacrificed on the altar of “safety”, and Covid “vaccination” has become a quasi-religious rite in their country, even more so than the rest of the world.
As such, the unvaccinated are slandered, punished, threatened and othered at every turn. Locked down, locked up and locked out.
Can you only imagine what could happen if people found out it was all for nothing? Or that the heaven-sent vaccines aren’t the magical solution to all that ails us?
In this kind of political climate they simply can’t afford to have an “anti-vaxxer” on national television, healthy and athletic and winning championships against a field of vaccinated rivals.
Especially when three vaccinated players have already dropped out with “breathing difficulties”
Before anyone accuses me of a surfeit of cynicism, let’s review the actual words of Alex Hawke from the appeal procedure [our emphasis]:
I consider that Mr Djokovic’s ongoing presence in Australia may lead to an increase in anti-vaccination sentiment generated in the Australian community, potentially leading to an increase in civil unrest of the kind previously experienced in Australia
Elsewhere Djokovic is described as a “talisman of a community of anti-vaccine sentiment”.
This kind of brutal treatment of publicly unvaccinated famous faces will likely only intensify. It’s already spreading from country to country, with France announcing Djokovic will not be allowed to defend his French Open title unless he gets vaccinated.
It seems pretty clear that the public shaming of Djokovic is a power-play to secure what they perceive as their own tenuous grip on the narrative, one that could have far-reaching consequences moving forward.
Consider, Djokovic is not barred from entry just for being unvaccinated, but also because he has publicly spoken out against vaccination.
Australia is now not only requiring you be “fully vaccinated” to enter the country, but has barred someone for even expressing anti-vaccine sentiment.
It’s no longer enough to conform by action, you must now conform by speech.
Next is thought, but even they would never try to legislate against that… right?
Israel arrests 75 Palestinians from Gaza in 2021
MEMO | January 4, 2022
The Israeli occupation forces have arrested 75 Palestinians in total last year at the Erez Crossing between Gaza and Israel, according to the Palestinian Prisoners Centre for Studies.
The Israeli army bans Palestinians in the Gaza Strip from entering the 300-meter area adjacent to its border with the enclave and shoots or arrests anyone who breaches it.
The Palestinian Prisoners Centre for Studies observed that the number of arrests last year was the same as the year 2020, during which 76 Palestinians were arrested, despite the enclave not being under direct occupation like the occupied West Bank.
Researcher, Riad Al-Ashqar, Director of the Centre, stated that the Israeli occupation forces use the Erez Crossing as a means for collective punishment.
He added that the Israeli forces blackmail Palestinians to work with the occupation by providing information in exchange for allowing them to cross, especially patients and merchants.
Al-Ashqar noted the arrest of 35-year-old Walaa Muhammad Mustafa Al-Rifai, from Maghazi in the Gaza Strip, while accompanying his wife, who is ill with cancer.
They had attempted to reach the Makassed Hospital in occupied Jerusalem, where his wife had previously obtained a medical referral for treatment there and had obtained Israeli permits that allow them to pass through the checkpoint to reach the hospital for treatment.
However, the Israeli forces arrested Walaa and transferred him to Ashkelon Prison for investigation.
Al-Ashqar also expressed concern for Israel’s heavy naval presence, restricting any traffic in and out of the enclave as well as the distance Gaza’s fishermen can travel to fish, severely affecting the livelihoods of some 4,000 fishermen and at least 1,500 more people involved in the fishing industry.
Palestinian fishermen often suffer from multiple Israeli violations, including attempting to sink Palestinian boats in the sea, firing at them, as well as narrowing the fishing area for long periods.
Gaza has been under a strict Israeli siege for 14 years and has been subject to repeated Israeli onslaughts during that period which have led to wide scale damage, high rates of unemployment and poverty.
Dutch Police Sick Attack Dogs On Anti-Lockdown Protesters
Is this what a ‘free’ country is supposed to look like?
By Steve Watson | Summit News | January 3, 2022
Shocking video emerged Sunday of police in Holland beating anti-lockdown protesters with batons and sending in dogs to maul the dissenters.
Massive amounts of people turned out to protest hard lockdown restrictions which were put back into place by the Dutch government before Christmas.
Everything except essential stores has been shut down in the country until at least Jan. 14.
The restrictions dictate that gatherings of more than two people are illegal, so the government sent in the riot police.
Watch:
Why is Israel Amending Its Open-Fire Policy: Three Possible Answers
By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | December 28, 2021
At the outset, the Israeli military decision to revise its open-fire policies in the occupied West Bank seems puzzling. What would be the logic of giving Israeli soldiers the space to shoot more Palestinians when existing army manuals had already granted them near-total immunity and little legal accountability?
The military’s new rules now allow Israeli soldiers to shoot, even kill, fleeing Palestinian youngsters with live ammunition for allegedly throwing rocks at Israeli ‘civilian’ cars. This also applies to situations where the alleged Palestinian ‘attackers’ are not holding rocks at the time of the shooting.
The reference to ‘civilians’ in the revised army manual applies to armed Israeli Jewish settlers who have colonised the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem in defiance of international law and Palestinian sovereignty. These settlers, who often operate as paramilitary forces in direct coordination with the Israeli army, endanger the lives of their own families by residing on occupied Palestinian land. Per Israel’s twisted standards, these violent Israelis, who have killed and wounded numerous Palestinians throughout the years, are ‘civilians’ in need of protection from rock-throwing Palestinian ‘assailants.’
In Israel, throwing rocks is a “serious crime” and Palestinians who throw rocks are “criminals”, according to Liron Libman, Israel’s former chief military prosecutor, commenting on the new rules. For Israelis, there is little disagreement on these assertions, even by those who are questioning the legality of the new rules. The point of contention, according to Libman and others, is that “a person who is fleeing does not present a threat,” though, according to Libman himself, “the new policy could potentially be justified,” The Times of Israel reported.
The ‘debate’ on the new open-fire policy in Israeli media, gives one the false impression that something fundamental has changed in the Israeli army’s relationship with occupied Palestinians. This is not the case at all. There are numerous, daily examples in which Palestinians, including children, are shot and killed with impunity, whether throwing rocks or not, going to school or merely protesting the illegal confiscation of their land by the Israeli military or armed settlers.
In the Palestinian village of Beita, in the northern occupied West Bank, eight unarmed Palestinians have been killed since May. This small village has been the scene of regular demonstrations against Jewish settlement expansion and against the illegal settlement outpost of Eviatar, in the Palestinian rural area of Mount Sabih. The victims include Muhammad Ali Khabisa, the 28-year-old father of an eight-month-old child, who was shot dead last September.
Though the new rules have placed much emphasis on the status of the supposed Israeli victims, labelling them ‘civilians’, in practice, the Israeli military has used the exact same standard to shoot, maim and kill Palestinian alleged rock-throwers, even when armed settlers are not present.
A famous case, in 2015, involved the killing of a 17-year-old Palestinian teenager, Mohammad Kosba, at the hands of an Israeli army colonel, Yisrael Shomer. The latter alleged that Kosba had thrown a rock at his car. Subsequently, Shomer chased down the Palestinian teenager and shot him in the back, killing him.
The Israeli officer was “censored” for his conduct, not for killing the boy, but for not stopping “in order to aim properly,” according to The Times of Israel. The Israeli military chief prosecutor at the time concluded that “Shomer’s use of deadly force under the framework of the arrest protocol was justified from the circumstances of the incident.”
Israel’s disregard of international law in its targeting of Palestinians is not a secret. Israeli and international human rights groups have repeatedly condemned the Israeli army’s inhumane and barbaric behaviour in the occupied territories.
In an extensive report as early as 2014, Amnesty International condemned Israel’s “callous disregard for human life by killing dozens of Palestinian civilians, including children, in the occupied West Bank” over the years. AI said that such killings had taken place “with near total impunity.”
“The frequency and persistence of arbitrary and abusive force against peaceful protesters in the West Bank by Israeli soldiers and police officers – and the impunity enjoyed by perpetrators – suggests that it is carried out as a matter of policy,” the Amnesty report read.
Even Israel’s own rights group, B’tselem, concurs. The organisation decried the Israeli army’s “shoot-to-kill policy”, which is also applied to “people who have already been ‘neutralized'”. Indeed, in the case of Abdel Fattah al-Sharif, a Palestinian man who was shot point-blank in Al-Khalil (Hebron), by an Israeli military medic, Elor Azaria, in 2016, was not only ‘neutralized’ but also unconscious.
According to B’tselem, Israeli “soldiers and police officers have become judge, jury and executioner”. With this tragic and sinister trajectory in mind, one is left to wonder why the Israeli army would amend its open-fire policy at this particular moment. There are three possible answers:
One, the Israeli government and army are anticipating a surge in Palestinian popular resistance in the coming months, possibly as a result of the massive expansion of illegal settlements and forced evictions in occupied East Jerusalem.
Two, by perfectly aligning the existing open-fire policy with the aggressive shoot-to-kill military practice already in place, Israeli courts would no longer have to contend with any legal repercussions for killing Palestinians, including children, regardless of the circumstances of their murders.
Finally, the revised rules would allow Israel to make a case for itself in response to the open investigation by the International Criminal Court (ICC), concerning human rights violations and war crimes in occupied Palestine. Israel’s Attorney General will now argue that no war crimes are taking place in Palestine since the killing of Palestinians is consistent with Israel’s own military conduct and judicial system. Since the ICC is investigating alleged war criminals, not the government itself, Israel hopes that it can spare its own murderers from having to contend with the legal expectations of the Court.
Though the timing of the Israeli military decision to amend its open-fire policy may appear sudden and without much context, the decision is still ominous, nonetheless. When a country’s military decides that shooting a child in the back without any proof that the alleged ‘criminal’ posed any danger whatsoever is a legal act, the international community must take notice.
It is true that Israel operates outside the minimum standards of international and humanitarian laws, but it is the responsibility of the international community to protect Palestinians, whose lives remain precious even if Israel disagrees.



