PA Arab Mob Attacks IDF Soldiers at Beit Ummar

[vminfla]

A mob of some 200 PA Arabs attacked IDF soldiers in a rock attack Thursday near the Judean Arab village of Beit Ummar.

Rioters hurled the fist-sized, irregular-shaped stones with razor-sharp edges that are indigenous to the region, often used in larger sizes for peaceful purposes as decorative landscaping pieces.

When aimed at people and traveling vehicles, however, the hard, limestone and quartz missiles can be deadly.

The attack occurred during what appeared to be a spontaneous riot, but what may actually have been a pre-organized demonstration by local Islamist groups.


http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/150300

[oberliner]

1. Could there be a better illustration of the RW slant of Arutz Sheva than these four paragraphs?

I don't think there could.

[Violet_Crumble]

2. Probably not...

And you know I share yr objection to such an extremist RW source being posted here, but I'm wondering if us reacting to it is just encouraging them to post more and more from there. I'm still gobsmacked that the person who posted this OP believes that Peace Now and DKos are radical leftist groups and Arutz Sheva is merely slightly centre-right :hi:

[eyl]

9. I dunno

I found it kind of poetic :)

[oberliner]

10. Very deliberately chosen language

In just these four short paragraphs we have stones that are "fist-sized" with "razor-sharp" edges.

When these stones are larger they are used for "peaceful purposes" but apparently the fist-sized ones are too small to be used as "decorative landscaping pieces".

Instead these rocks that are, incidentally, "indigenous to the region" (why this detail needed to be pointed out I am not certain) are turned into "hard, limestone and quartz missiles" that "can be deadly" (one wonders if the IDF soldiers under this missile attack were armed with anything nearly as deadly as the fist-sized rocks).

Also managed to sneak in the words "mob", "rioters", and "Islamist groups" (with one more "riot" thrown in for good measure).

Was this just a "spontaneous riot" or was it a "pre-organized demonstration by local Islamist groups"? Hard to know which of the two possibilities is more alarming.

And to think it all took place in a Judean Arab village.

No year given, perhaps somewhere around 50 BC based on the nomenclature?

[bemildred]

12. +1.

You have learned well, Grasshopper, I approve. The words change, the sources change, the technique is always the same.
:thumbsup:

[oberliner]

17. No need to get patronizing!

There is no learning necessary to understand that Arutz Sheva is a far RW biased source.

[bemildred]

19. But such a fine exegesis is not to be found every day.

You had already made clear your understanding of the subject matter.

[oberliner]

20. Great vocab word

One doesn't come across the word "exegesis" every day.

Thanks for what appears to be not a back-handed compliment.

I'll take it.

[bemildred]

23. Indeed.

Nothing back-handed about it, perhaps a bit of exaggeration, inflation, as to the importance of it. I am quite aware I am not really your mentor or whatever, despite the "Grasshopper".

"Hermeneutics" is handy too, sends them to the dictionary every time.

[Violet_Crumble]

14. Heh heh. I'm all over the danger of those Arab fist-sized stones now!

Excellent post!

:thumbsup:

[oberliner]

16. Also note the use of the phrase "PA Arab"

This is so they don't have to actually call them Palestinians, I'm guessing.

[vminfla]

26. Maybe because they are on the PA payroll

It would not be the first time that the PA funded the lifestyle of terrorists. It has a rich history of fomenting and funding terror. Why even Arafat and Barghouti planned an intifada in advance, coming up with the funds to pay for it all and everything.

[Violet_Crumble]

28. A mob of civil servants throwing fist-sized, irregular shaped stones?

Civil servants don't tend to take risks when they take industrial action, which is why the ones here build toilet paper towers to protest rather than importing some of those special Arab stones and lobbing them at our bosses.

As for the outbreak of the second intifada, I don't know whether that one-man forum is yrs, but I'd tend to place a bit more weight in the Mitchell Report than a lone internet warrior on a strange mission. Interestingly enough, the report's no longer available on the State Department site, though maybe it's so well hidden that I can no longer find it. Anyway, here's what it said:

'In their submissions, the parties traded allegations about the motivation and degree of
control exercised by the other. However, we were provided with no persuasive evidence
that the Sharon visit was anything other than an internal political act; neither were we
provided with persuasive evidence that the PA planned the uprising. Accordingly, we have no basis on which to conclude that there was a deliberate plan by
the PA to initiate a campaign of violence at the first opportunity; or to conclude that there
was a deliberate plan by the GOI to respond with lethal force.'

http://eeas.europa.eu/mepp/docs/mitchell_report_2001_en.pdf

[bemildred]

11. Well, imaginative, allusive; I don't know that I would go quite as far as "poetic".

:thumbsup:

[eyl]

27. On reflection

maybe I should have gone with "evocative"

[bemildred]

3. +1. Razor sharp rocks eh? nt

[CJvR]

4. Is there something odd...

...about that?

Ever tested the edge of shard of flint?

[azurnoir]

5. yep and nothing keeps an edge quite like limestone huh? n/t

[bemildred]

6. I'm pretty sure they don't hold up well in combat with modern arms.

Otherwise the IDF would be armed with rocks too.

[oberliner]

7. Limestone and quartz missiles

I don't think I've ever heard rocks described that way before.

That's some pretty purple prose for a supposed news article.

Granted, sites that are less than friendly towards Israel do the same sort of thing themselves.

I guess it's all part of the game.

[bemildred]

8. Yep.

It's the purple prose. It's not like throwing rocks at people with guns is likely to be good for your health. And yes it is a game, but a fairly high-stakes sort of game.

[vminfla]

25. I guess the practice of stoning is doomed to failure

despite being part of the legal code of some mideast countries.

Then again, we already know that rocks, as these individuals have meant them to be used can kill.

[LeftishBrit]

13. Indeed!

[vminfla]

15. 199, 201...how did they really know?

maybe they had one of those clickers, and each of the rioters walked through a turnstile one at a time..click...click....click.

Excellent point. You sure called them out

[oberliner]

18. The estimate on the numbers isn't really the problem

See my other witty remarks about this article for further insights.

[vminfla]

21. Witty? no. A logical fallacy of Argumentum Absurdum? Yes.

We all know that Rocks can kill, downplaying rocks as harmless is disingenous.

[oberliner]

22. Not a logical fallacy because I am not challenging any of the information contained in the article

My assertion is not that the information in the article is false.

My claim is that these paragraphs are an illustration of the RW slant of the source.

I do believe that I have provided evidence to support that claim, such as the manner in which this incident was described and the specific word choices used.

I am trying to prove that the source is slanted so the only way to do that is to point to examples of how this source presented the information and how it would differ from other sources presenting the same information.

With that premise in mind, the argument I am presenting is pretty sound logically.

If you could show me another source or two that covered this incident in a similar fashion to this one (similar terminology used, etc) then that would be a fair rebuttal to my assertion.

[bemildred]

24. FWIW, it did not appear to me that you were making a logical argument at all.

That would require that you state some premises and then claim that your conclusion follows from them by inference, by deduction in other words.

You were making an assertion and providing some exemplary evidence to support it, by induction in other words. The proper critique would be evidence to contradict it, exemplary or otherwise, i.e. some piece in Arutz Sheva which tramples on taboos or violates the current party line.