1 thought on “Of anniversaries and Palestine”

  1. An interesting piece, as ever; a couple of thoughts:

    “killed by an IDF sniper” – probably not a sniper. The range was only ~250m, the grouping was not tight, and the rate of fire was faster than a sniper would use. The round has also been described as being 5.56mm NATO; the Israeli shooter was therefore probably carrying a standard M-16, not a sniper rifle.

    The Israelis identified the shooter almost immediately. That’s probably because of the number of rounds expended (which will be difficult to conceal, given batch numbers etc.) Had the US pushed hard at that point, Israel would probably have caved in – but Biden shamefully failed to discharge his duty to a US citizen.

    The rate of fire shows that this was a deliberate action, not a negligent discharge. What is as significant was the suppressive fire on the person who went to give Abu Akleh first aid, (but was prevented from doing so by further shooting.) Again, that clearly points to deliberate actions, rather than “an accident.”

    The IDF were keen to get hold of the round removed from Abu Akleh’s corpse. This was probably not to match it to the shooter’s rifle – which they already had – but rather to confirm whether it could still be matched ballistically to the shooter’s rifle.

    That the US Security Co-ordinator apparently did not make any comment on the above speaks volumes as to the integrity of the process.

    Biden is apparently upset that he does not have global support for operations against Russia (which has invaded parts of Ukraine on spurious historical grounds …); and more widely that democracy and the rule of law are not fairing well against autocracies such as PRC and Russia. Perhaps if POTUS were actually to uphold democracy and the rule of law without fear or favour – rather than just mouth platitudes – the US might find more people aligning with them globally. That’s not a new concept: “NO Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; nor will We not pass upon him, nor [X1condemn him,] but by lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right.”(https://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/Edw1cc1929/25/9/section/XXIX)

Leave a Comment

Scroll to Top

Access provided by the Bodleian Libraries of the University of Oxford

Copy link