What is known at the moment is that a Palestinian minister, Ziad Abu Ein, died today shortly after a confrontation with IDF soldiers during a protest north of Ramallah. Abu Ein – imprisoned in Israel for his role in a terrorist bombing that killed two Israeli teens, but later released during a prisoner swap – collapsed and was evacuated for medical care, but died before reaching the hospital.
What’s not known is the cause of death, and there is increasing evidence (which we’ll show later in the post) that Abu Ein, who suffered from health problems including diabetes and high blood pressure, may have died of a heart attack.
However, the Guardian’s Jerusalem correspondent Peter Beaumont naturally all but avoided evidence pointing to the strong possibility that Abu Ein died of natural causes, and instead primarily cited only those sources claiming he died as the result of trauma inflicted by an Israeli soldier.
Here are the relevant passages in Beaumont’s story, Palestinian minister dies after West Bank confrontation with Israeli soldiers:
A senior minister in the government of the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, has died following a violent confrontation with Israeli soldiers in a West Bank village near Ramallah.
Ziad Abu Ain, who deals with the issue of Israeli settlements and the separation wall, died as he was being rushed to hospital after reportedly being pushed and shoved by Israeli troops while planting olive trees in the village of Turmusiya near Ramallah.
A Reuters photographer covering the demonstration, who witnessed the incident, said that the minister died after being “shoved” by Israeli troops.
Chaim Levinson, a correspondent for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz who covers affairs in the occupied Palestinian territories, posted a picture of the minister on Twitter which he said had been taken “after Abu Ain was hit by an Israeli soldiers”.
A Palestinian witness at the protest told Haaretz that he saw an officer from the border police hit Abu Ein with the butt of his gun and kick him.
Beaumont ignores important evidence contradicting such claims.
These include:
1.An IDF statement – released hours before his Guardian story was published – that the minister’s death was a result of a heart attack, and that there was no significant physical confrontation between soldiers and the Palestinian minister.
2. Reporters on the scene undermine claims Abu Ein was hit by an Israeli rifle butt. BuzzFeed’s Sheera Frenkel quoted Roy Sharon, a journalist with Israel’s Channel Ten News, who was filming at the protest.
“I was standing there the whole protest,” Sharon told BuzzFeed News. “There were about 50 Palestinians and 20 foreign nationals taking part. The Israeli army let them go until a certain point, and then would not let them pass.”
Sharon said that several rounds of tear gas were fired at the crowd.
About 10 minutes later, after the tear gas, some people were standing near the IDF soldiers and were pushed back. They weren’t overly violent that I could see, they were pushing them back,” said Sharon. “Abu Ein was there among them, he was on the front line getting pushed back. Suddenly he was sitting on a rock, holding his chest.”
Sharon said that early reports that Abu Ein had been hit by a helmet or a tear gas canister were incorrect.
“I never saw that happen. There were lots of cameras there. They were pushing people back but I didn’t see anyone get hit by a helmet or with the canister,” said Sharon.
The Israeli journalist also tweeted: “If I’m not blind, then there was no rifle-butt strike, certainly not a significant or intentional one. I was standing next to him.”
3. Videos of the incident clearly seem to show that the PA minister was merely shoved, and there is no footage we’re aware of depicting a blow capable of killing him.
Here you can see Abu Ein after the incident clutching at his chest, consistent with claims that he may have died of a heart attack.
4. Nothing in these photos in the pro-Palestinian Arabic media indicate trauma.
Beaumont’s story should at least have noted that the Palestinian allegations that Abu Ein’ death – which Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has already characterized as a “barbaric assassination” – was the result of a blow by an Israeli soldier have been disputed by the IDF, Israeli witnesses, photos and videos of the confrontation.
Once again, it’s as if the Guardian journalist went out of his way to avoid reporting any evidence which would contradict the desired pro-Palestinian narrative.
Categories: Guardian
Your point 1 – Why do you continuously take IDF statements at face value? The military (the world over) always put out the facts that they want in the public arena as quickly as possible. How could they know so quickly what was the cause of death.
Your Point 2. – The Guardian does not say he was struck on the chest with a tear-gas canister. – The Israeli journalist says that there may have been a hit with a gun butt “If I’m not blind, then there was no rifle-butt strike, *certainly not a significant or intentional one*. I was standing next to him.” So he is admitting there may have been an unintentional strike.
Your point 3 – Maybe you’ve been inured but that 1st video shows a man being grabbed by the throat and pushed back. An arm comes up an blocks what a 2nd soldier does, but the man appears to go back even more.
The handling of the story by the Guardian looks to me to be even handed. It never presents the evidence as facts – always quoting sources (eg Chaim Levinson) and sticking to the known facts: that Ziad Abu Ein died shortly after a confrontation with the IDF.
An investigation may well find that he did die of a heart attack brought about by the stress of the confrontation, but that the soldiers in question did not behave illegally in trying to manage the situation. There is nothing in the Guardian report that precludes that development.
Your point 1: Media doesn’t have to take anything at face value, but should give both sides. Your point 2: My post never claimed that “The Guardian says he was struck on the chest with a tear-gas canister”. Your Point 3: There is a myriad of evidence contradicting the claims made in the report, including by journalists at the scene. A fair journalist would at least cite some of the more credible counter-claims. Do you disagree? Further, at the very least, the videos cast great doubt on Palestinian witness claims. It’s interesting that even Sheera Frenkel at BuzzFeed (not known as a pro-Israel journalist to put it mildly) had more balancd in her report, and cited Israeli journalist at the scene as denying that the PA minister was ever struck by a soldier.
One more thing: Times of London at least noted:
“Roy Sharon, a correspondent for Israel’s Channel 10, tweeted however: “If I’m not blind, then there was no rifle-butt strike, certainly not a significant or intentional one. I was standing next to him.”
If Beaumont wanted to inject some balance in the report, he could have quoted an Israeli journalist who was on the scene, right next to the minister, and contradicted Palestinian claims.
Adam: stop defending the IDF. Why not investigate them? Are they really helping your cause? Really?
They say all publicity is good, but that’s bollocks. The world is watching, and Israel ‘looks’ terrible.
Why not get them to sort out their behavior ? I mean, seriously, there are too many ‘coincidences’ when it comes to the IDF and their ‘factual statements’ vs what NGO’s and video footage shows….
Institutionalised violence and overtly aggressive behavior wrapped up in a culture of impunity: the IDF.
They’ll be your undoing.
All of the above ignores that the death of Abu Ein is amply justified even if deliberate:
1. The PA has abrogated Oslo and maintains a state of war against Israel. Its ministers should be “fair game”.
2. Abu Ein himself murdered Israeli civilians.
Walton, you prove the point perfectly. Naturally, you assume that the IDF is guilty of “institutionalised violence and overtly aggressive behaviour” – and, by implication, that that is what happened in this instance, when there is only one person’s word that this man – or anyone at this demonstration – was subjected to any force greater than being stopped from passing by a firm arm.
The world is indeed watching. The thing is – they only see what they want to see.
“Naturally, you assume that the IDF is guilty…”
It’s not natural. It’s a learned behavior.
A conditioned behavior.
Walton – please tell us what any police force in the world is entitled to do when confronted with a group of people who are determined to pass to a place where the police – presumably for some valid reason of security or crowd control or keeping the peace – have made it clear they are not permitted to go?
How much force is permitted before said police force is said to “look” terrible? How much should said police force put their possible image in World media above, say, the stated goals of security or keeping the peace?
In other words, who gives a toss what you think of the IDF. If, by standing their ground, they prevented a clash between Palestinian protesters and Jewish residents (which could have quickly deteriorated into extremely violent scenes), then I say – job well done.
I suppose you think the IDF should allow any Palestinian free access to Jews to do whatever they will, just in case one of them may have a weak heart or a respiratory disease.
Thanks for the reply Adam.
I have re read the Guardian’s report and no-where are they trying to position the story as blaming and/or attributing the direct cause of death to the IDF. If they were they would need a lot more evidence from both sides of the argument to back up their assertion.
But they are not.
They are saying (rather blandly) that Ziad Abu Ain died shortly after a confrontation with the IDF. “…died as he was being rushed to hospital after becoming involved in clashes with Israeli troops”. Then they say “The Israeli military said it was looking into reports that Abu Ain, a senior figure on Fatah’s revolutionary council, collapsed and died after being struck in the chest at an event where he also inhaled teargas fired by Israeli security forces.”
Then quite rightly they try to flesh out what happened. So first they quote (and properly attribute) two of Abu Ain’s colleagues. It is true thyat they might be embellishing the facts. But by way of (partial) balance they quote two ‘neutrals’; Chaim Levinson, a correspondent for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz and a Reuters photographer. So far all 4 are agreeing (broadly) that an altercation took place and that Abu Ain was struck or grabbed by the IDF.
Perhaps they should have included the Roy Sharon, tweet. But even that would have largely confirmed that possibly an unintentional strike with a rifle butt took place.
Still there is no assertion of blame nor does the report try to place blame. It tries to get to the bottom of the actual events and I think it does that even handedly.
Bullshit of our obviously lying Dunkelmann
I have re read the Guardian’s report and no-where are they trying to position the story as blaming and/or attributing the direct cause of death to the IDF.
Al Guardian
The Israeli military said it was looking into reports that Abu Ain, a senior figure on Fatah’s revolutionary council, collapsed and died after being struck in the chest at an event where he also inhaled teargas fired by Israeli security forces.
Mohammed Mohesin, an assistant from Abu Ain’s office who witnessed the incident and travelled in the ambulance to hospital, claimed that over the course of a few minutes one policeman grabbed Abu Ain by the throat, a second struck him in the throat, and a third headbutted him in the chest.
Abbas described the attack as “a barbaric act, which we cannot be silent about or accept”. He announced three days of national mourning and said he would take “necessary steps” after an investigation.
The death was also condemned by the Palestinian foreign minister, Riyad al-Maliki, who said that “Israel will pay” for the “murder” of Abu Ein.
The subtile antisemite Dinkle was obviously sent here to spin around and defend Al Guardian, but now he failed being caught lying.
“Abbas described the attack as “a barbaric act, which we cannot be silent about or accept”. He announced three days of national mourning and said he would take “necessary steps” after an investigation” – This is an undisputed fact: he did describe the act thus and he did announce 3 days of mourning.
“The death was also condemned by the Palestinian foreign minister, Riyad al-Maliki, who said that “Israel will pay” for the “murder” of Abu Ein.” – This is an undisputed fact; *he did make these condemnations*
Have you a problem with reporting facts? Your bigotry has undermined any credibility you ever had.
Credibility is to report all significant Palestinian officials’ statements, including those calling for the killing of Jews. Not just the ones that fit the Guardian narrative.
Bullshit of lying Dinkle
I have re read the Guardian’s report and no-where are they trying to position the story as blaming and/or attributing the direct cause of death to the IDF.
Well, how do you call the reporting of your ‘facts’, but omitting other facts which contradict the claims of your Palestinians?
Thanks again for the confirmation of your antisemitism.
But all I had to do was read the sub-heading-
“Ziad Abu Ain was reportedly shoved by Israeli troops while planting olive trees”
So we are to picture a man peacefully planting olive trees, then violently shoved by Israeli troops.
Bullshit. HE was the one confronting the “troops”, who were not troops but policemen. They use the word “troops” because it fits the narrative of the evil IDF. It was border police, a part of Israeli police. When you violently disobey policemen it might end badly. I’m not saying it’s right but unfortunately it happens around the world, daily, including in Britain. And when the man is in his fifties with heart problems, you see the result.
P.S. Besides the point, but a convicted murderer. Good riddance.
My faith in Karma has been reinstated…
Dinkle:
“But even that would have largely confirmed that possibly an unintentional strike with a rifle butt took place.”
Maybe you should discuss this with the PA which minutes after already stated that it was murder.
Judge, Jury and Executioner…
dinkle, you are splitting hairs.
Al Guardian as usual spins the words for maximum effect and damage. Everything Al Guardian writes here is innuendo and is meant to convey something more than just the facts.
If you do not see that then you need to go back to school.
Reblogged this on Oyia Brown.
Watch the Left spin this……..
Israel is the most left leaning state in the Middle East.
The respect the environment. They respect gays. They respect all cultures. They have multiple newspapers and political parties. They are a democracy, with nationalized healthcare. I bet they also believe in affordable education.
So the Left spin is (ready) that the citizens of Right Wing police states such as Saudi Arabia and Syria and Jordan and, yes, even Egypt pretty much wish they were really like Israel (minus all those Jews, of course).
Well I have met Zionist hating Leftist Scots who had close friends in Syria and often went there to visit. Their narrative was the official Syrian one. When I told them I’d be going to Tel Aviv she nearly fainted.
The Left practices perceptional narrowing just as the Right does. For decades Arab regimes have been creating a steady stream of dissidents who live in Europe and North America. These were the non violent political activists who dared to stand up to the secular dictators. But a guy in a tweed suit talking about what a butcher Assad is, is not as sexy as a dead baby, or a girl in a bombed out class room in Aza.
The old school middle class Arab dissident who wrote books and essays, made speeches and talked to the press is no more. Never was really. Those that went to torture jails for their views only. Those that left all behind and ended up driving taxi’s in Berlin or Paris. Nobody ever cared for them on the Left.
The creepy thing is that the Left after the Ayatollah coup is again backing non-kosher Arabs and other Islamists who are certified bat-shit-crazy. Glenn Greenwald from his gay mango paradise pontificates about the Wests made up threat of Islam as Iran hangs gays from building cranes. Palestinian gays find exile in Europe or Tel Aviv. The 11 million Syrian refugees seem to be a side show, but the 700.000 dead Palestinian ‘refugees’ are important.
Kouf…
“The respect the environment.”
Although I agree that most do you might want to pay close attention to the company behind the oil spill last week in the Arava.
I know about the oil spill. One reason why oil is a terrible energy resource. I was referring more to the fact that Israel is the only country in the world with more trees now than 60 years ago.
Speaking of IDF. The officer touching the man is a Border Patrol man. Not IDF. Minor detail.
The man was a convicted terrorist who had murdered. he was also in a US jail. he was violent scum.
Hey Peter Beuamont-
I know you read this blog every once in a while to affirm your beliefs that Zionists are cold, heartless creatures. And I know that you’re willing to buy each stinking conspiracy drivel that crawls between your ears. The reality is that anti-Israel Palestinians tend to lie through their teeth and, at the very least, exaggerate till they get your sorry ass to report about some Massacre (Jenin) or Lynching (Arab bus driver) that really wasn’t. By the way, Pete, do you know what genuinely happens AFTER these lies get spread? Take a guess, Champ….. Suicide missions taking out unarmed pizza noshers and observant Jewish preachers.
Kindly, Sir, I suggest you go fuck yourself where the sun don’t shine. And with a chainsaw. You and your paper are the very worst on this planet for very good reasons: You’re completely off the hook in terms of your hate monger bullshit.
One can hope you feel the made-up wrath of folks who can’t seem to work themselves way from the chains their own forebears placed on them. Their stupidity and your stupidity deserve each other.
“I suggest you go fuck yourself where the sun don’t shine”
Do you mean in the basement of “The Guardian” building?
“Do you mean in the basement of “The Guardian” building?”
More likely the editor’s office.
Jeff as you should know the sun always shines in “The Guardian” Editor’s office.
It shines out of the Editor’s arse!
That is what all the apologists for “The Guardian” believe.
😉
I imagine there’s a gargoyle on their building.
OT Rusbridger leaving Guardian editorial post next summer – announced today.
Rusbridger takes over the chairmanship of Scott Trust, leaves Al Guardian after converting The Guardian into a vile platform for antisemites.
http://www.theguardian.com/gnm-press-office/2014/dec/10/alan-rusbridger-appointed-chair-of-the-scott-trust
Mission accomplished.
Why are they upset that Ziad ibn-kelb is now Holy Shahid for the lie of “Palestine”? Pro-Hamas ‘tards LOVE death, no?
Has anyone handed out candy yet?
http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/12/10/british-reporter-palestinians-blocked-israeli-medic-from-aiding-pa-official-and-convicted-terrorist-ziad-abu-ein/
Adam,
You know very well where I stand on the media bias.
I also do not regret the death of this man even one iota. I do, however, regret the way he died. The following is from the israeli coroner, Dr. Hen Kugel, who attended the autopsy:
“We know what happended (sic) there – he died from a heart attack. He had significant blockage of the arteries and his heart was in bad shape. When they grabbed his neck it caused massive stress which led to bleeding and then full blockage which is what killed him.”
source – http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4602214,00.html
Yes, he died from a heart attack but it was not an isolated incident. There is a chain of cause and effect here.
The soldier that grabbed his throat couldn’t know about this man’s health condition and I do not believe should be charged with Abu Ein’s death. However, this could have ended differently.
Yaron. I am not a doctor, but I would imagine that if you have an 80% blockage of your arteries and your heart is in bad shape, any event that causes your heart to beat faster hence your blood pressure to rise is likely to trigger a massive heart attack.
This could have been the event that triggered it, true, but it was bound to happen at some point, and who is to say that the enhanced adrenaline and excitement of his attendance at a “protest” would not have brought it on without ANY direct contact with Israelis anyway?
I’m not doubting that for one second. I just wish that it _would have_ happened without any direct contact.
Who cares?! Just ONE MORE TERRORIST dead!