Can you explain how tear gas is used differently by the Canadian or American police?
This is a complete non-issue.
Right, no Palestinians ever throw rocks at IDF. It's not like they're famous around the world for their rock throwing.
Hamas will NEVER accept peace (for flub)
- Thread starter basketcase
- Start date
This is a complete non-issue.
Easily.Can you explain how tear gas is used differently by the Canadian or American police?
Canadian and American police do not use CS tear gas commonly.
They do not fire tear gas directly at people.
They do not use the amounts reported at this protest.
And further, here is an article from the disreputed Al Jazeera, with backround on the family and the village.
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/01/20111513358119488.htmlBut what really makes the village stand out is the people that inhabit it - in particular, the Abu Rahmahs, whose misfortunes really began about three years ago.
All six Abu Rahmah siblings were non-violent activists - only four of them are left.
Their tale begins in July 2008, when one of them, Ashraf, was detained by Israeli soldiers in the nearby village of Ni'lin. The soldiers tied him up, blindfolded him and, as their commander watched, shot him in the foot at close range with a rubber-coated steel bullet.
The term "rubber-coated" can be misleading; this type of ammunition is consistently mislabelled as 'rubber' bullets by the army, leading people to think that it is relatively harmless. But the rubber coating is, in fact, paper-thin and encases a marble-sized steel ball that can break bones or even kill.
The whole incident was captured on video, making it impossible for the Israeli military to deny responsibility.
Ashraf's case went to the Israeli Supreme Court where a strong indictment against the commander was unanimously ordered. The soldier who committed the deed was put under investigation, but just two weeks later the charges against him were dropped and he resumed duty.
Bassem's story
On April 17, 2009, Bassem Abu Rahmah, another of the siblings, made his way to the front of the weekly protest as he did every Friday. Reaching the wall, he stood before dozens of Israeli soldiers, who have a reputation for regularly using violent means of "crowd dispersal" against non-violent protesters.
On this occasion, the Israeli military used a new type of high-velocity teargas canister - the sheer velocity of which, unlike the normal canisters, made it nearly impossible for the protesters to evade them.
Several Israeli activists had become trapped between two fences and, disorientated by the teargas, were unable to escape. Bassem shouted in Hebrew at the soldiers that they were shooting teargas at their own people and should stop for a minute to allow the Israeli activists to get out from between the fences.
One of the Israeli soldiers responded to Bassem's request by shooting a high-velocity teargas canister directly at his chest from a distance of about 40 metres.
By this point, many of the protesters and media had been driven away by the billowing teargas, but those still present heard a desperate call for an ambulance. There was no ambulance in the village that day and, after, a few drawn out minutes, a small, beat-up car sped down the road to the spot where Bassem lay. As it approached, the soldiers shot at it with teargas canisters. Bassem's limp body, his chest covered with blood, was carried to the car and driven the 30 minutes to the nearest hospital.
He died before reaching it.
It was the first time that somebody had been killed at one of Bil'in's weekly demonstrations and it soon became clear that Bassem had left a considerable mark not just on his family, but on the entire village.
Over coffee at her home, I told Bassem's mother in my broken Arabic that my own family in the US had heard about what had happened to Bassem on the news and that people all over the world knew of his story. It seemed to offer her little comfort.
I remembered how Bassem had been the first person in the village to introduce himself to me, how he seemed to know everyone and was always going from one place to another, helping people and spending time with his friends.
He worked with the Bil'in Popular Committee, which espouses non-violent and creative ways to attract attention to their cause, was deeply committed to non-violence and always spoke peacefully to the Israeli soldiers.
Who will look out for them?
I also recalled how on that fateful afternoon, Bassem had joined the other villagers and activists at the centre of Bil'in as they chanted slogans and began to walk towards the village's annexed land.
As always, Bassem was initially at the back of the crowd, trying to finish a conversation before the march began. But he had a long stride and, with his mobile phone blasting Arabic music, he had passed everyone by the time we reached the wall.
As he walked past me, told me, as he always did, to be careful and warned my friend to look out for me during the protest. But who was looking out for him?
Bassem's family were devastated by his death, so when I heard about the death of his sister, Jawaher, a few days ago, I immediately thought of them.
Jawaher died on New Year's Eve as a result of inhaling teargas at the village's weekly protest.
There has been some speculation over the type of teargas used on that day, with other activists emphasising the large quantity and unusually strong effect it had on them.
The Abu Rahmah family has been left to deal with yet more injustice, grief and loss.
Waiting for justice
Israel began building settlements on the village's land during the 1980s. Gradually more and more land was confiscated, until, in late 2004, the Israeli army ordered the construction of the "separation" wall, which would annex almost 60 per cent of Bil'in's land. The land, which was mostly agricultural, was essential to the economy of the village.
Soon after the decision to build the wall was announced, the Bil'in Committee of Popular Resistance Against the Wall and Settlements (Bil'in Popular Committee) was formed and in February 2005, the weekly non-violent demonstrations against the wall began. The have continued ever since, despite the harsh reactions of the Israeli military, which has, among other things, raided the homes of and arrested protest organisers in the middle of the night.
The village has had some success in its legal battle to get its land back. At one point, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that construction on the nearby settlement of Matityahu had to be stopped and ordered the path of the wall to be moved back - returning almost half of its land to the village.
But, like many court orders impacting the occupied territories, this was never carried out. Construction continued on the nearby settlements and the Supreme Court reached a new decision, whereby only about 10 per cent of the land would be returned to the people of Bil'in.
Even this ruling, however, has not been carried out and for the people of Bil'in the struggle continues in the hope that the deaths of Bassem and Jawaher Abu Rahmah will not have been in vain.
Of course you know how much these Canadian and American police forces used in order to say that they don't use it commonly. Considering the NA police don't in or next to a war zone it's not surprising they don't use tear gas a lot on protestors.Easily.
Canadian and American police do not use CS tear gas commonly.
They do not fire tear gas directly at people.
They do not use the amounts reported at this protest.
I was under the impression that CS was less toxic than other forms and therefore used more often by police. I could be wrong but I don't think so.
A quick google comes up with this;
p://www.safetyenforcement.com/tegasin.html
CN Tear Gas:
CN has been used in personal defense products since the 1920's. Among the first such products were tear gas pens and pistols that used a ballistic device, generally a blank pistol cartridge, to propel solid CN particles at an attacker. Not surprisingly, numerous mechanical and chemical injuries to the eye resulted from the use of these products.
Unfortunately, reports on the toxic ocular effects of CN from this type of exposure were usually confounded by traumatic injuries from the blast effect of the delivery device, and this makes it difficult to determine with certainty the exact extent of ocular damage resulting from CN exposure. In addition, the blast effect can drive CN into the deeper layers of the cornea or even into the globe. Such injuries would not be expected with exposures produced by personal defense sprays.
CN was marketed as a personal defense spray in 1965 by General Ordinance and Equipment Company under the brand name Mace. This product gained wide-spread popularity in the 1960's, and the term Mace is still incorrectly used as a generic term for all aerosol defense sprays.
A possible problem associated with the use of CN for personal defense is that it has been reported to have limited effectiveness against some individuals, notably those under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or those with certain mental disturbances. Additionally, it can take several seconds for CN to achieve its full effect, and the person using the spray would be vulnerable to attack during this time.
Exposure to CN at concentrations that might be produced by a defense spray usually results in extreme irritation of the eyes, burning pain, conjunctival hyperemia, lacrimation, and possibly blepharospasm. Concentrations of CN above those usually provided by defense sprays can cause more severe ocular complications including sloughing of the conjunctiva, corneal edema, and keratitis with subsequent risk of scarring. CN has also been reported to be capable of causing neuroparalytic keratopathy.
High concentrations of CN can also cause significant non-ocular effects including respiratory tract irritation, a burning sensation and erythema of exposed skin, irritation and burning of the oral and nasal mucosa, nasal congestion, and cough. Some individuals can experience nausea, vomiting, and headache following CN exposure, and primary contact dermatitis, allergic dermatitis and blepharitis have also been reported.
Selection from: "Pacific University College of Optometry"
CS Tear Gas:
In the 1950s, the Chemical Defense Experimental Establishment (Porton, England), developed CS. O-Chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile is a white crystalline substance that is usually mixed with a pyrotechnic compound in a grenade or canister for use. It's useful form is intended to be a smoke or fog of suspended particles. Effectiveness in crowd control derives from its properties as an extremely severe skin and mucous membrane irritant and lacrimator, even at minute doses. Instantaneous conjunctivitis with concomitant blepharospasm, burning and pain are characteristic. These symptoms are exacerbated in hot or humid weather.
Since its introduction, CS has virtually replaced CN as the riot control agent of choice in England and the United States. During the Vietnam War, the United States developed an array of delivery vehicles for CS, including small pocket grenades, the "Mighty Mite" (a continuous spray device used in caves and tunnel systems) and 58-kg cluster bombs dropped from helicopters and planes.
Toxicology of CS:
Military studies among volunteers have noted that, in most cases, removal from exposure to CS results in fairly rapid recovery with cessation of all symptoms within minutes. Proponents of the use of CS believe that, when used properly, high or prolonged exposure to the substance would be precluded by an individual's natural aversion to remaining in an area where the substance is present (United Kingdom patent specification 967 66; 1960). Its popularity among military and police authorities stems partly from comparisons with the other tear gas agents, which suggests that CS is a more potent lacrimator and seems to cause less long-term injury, particularly with respect to the eye.
......... but they could be wrong also.
In this matter, I have to admit, I could be wrong.
At present the reports are all pretty unofficial with the clearest being that protesters took empty tear gas cannisters to the US embassy.
They identified the American firm that made them, but didn't confirm the contents.
They did seem to confirm, as the Al Jazeera article does, the use of high velocity tear gas.
But which gas they used, I don't have very clear info.
I should have looked into it more, but have only done a bit tonight.
Frankly, I'd rather talk about the 68 year old killed sleeping in his bed.
At present the reports are all pretty unofficial with the clearest being that protesters took empty tear gas cannisters to the US embassy.
They identified the American firm that made them, but didn't confirm the contents.
They did seem to confirm, as the Al Jazeera article does, the use of high velocity tear gas.
But which gas they used, I don't have very clear info.
I should have looked into it more, but have only done a bit tonight.
Frankly, I'd rather talk about the 68 year old killed sleeping in his bed.
Could be?In this matter, I have to admit, I could be wrong.
At present the reports are all pretty unofficial with the clearest being that protesters took empty tear gas cannisters to the US embassy.
They identified the American firm that made them, but didn't confirm the contents.
They did seem to confirm, as the Al Jazeera article does, the use of high velocity tear gas.
But which gas they used, I don't have very clear info.
I should have looked into it more, but have only done a bit tonight.
Frankly, I'd rather talk about the 68 year old killed sleeping in his bed.
Even when you shown to be dead wrong, you can't admit and try to blame it on vague incomplete reports by others.
Yet she was away from the protest so they were not fired directly at her and the distance would make the amount irrelevant.Easily.
Canadian and American police do not use CS tear gas commonly.
They do not fire tear gas directly at people.
They do not use the amounts reported at this protest.
Keep on with your pathetic attempts at spin.
p.s. every report has it as CS
The Israelis were not responsible for her death - plain and simple.
p.p.s. Here is an AP photo from the 'peaceful' protest on the 31st.
http://apimages.ap.org/OneUp.aspx?s...aaac31c50ff1d53b&dbm=PThirtyDay&page=1&xslt=1
(I'm sure it is a 'non-lethal' slingshot of the type that has been used as 'non-lethal' by armies in the area for thousands of years)
Now you are just making up shit. The Americans routinely use CS tear gas. The Greeks also just used it a week or two ago to disperse the protests there. It's commonly used all around the world.Easily.
Canadian and American police do not use CS tear gas commonly.
They do not fire tear gas directly at people.
They do not use the amounts reported at this protest.
Moreover US soldiers are exposed to CS gas during their training, to condition them, and I haven't heard of any of them dying from it.
Take a look at the first two photos to the left on the page; more peaceful protestorsYet she was away from the protest so they were not fired directly at her and the distance would make the amount irrelevant.
Keep on with your pathetic attempts at spin.
p.s. every report has it as CS
The Israelis were not responsible for her death - plain and simple.
p.p.s. Here is an AP photo from the 'peaceful' protest on the 31st.
http://apimages.ap.org/OneUp.aspx?s...aaac31c50ff1d53b&dbm=PThirtyDay&page=1&xslt=1
Figure I'd do flub the favour and post this story about Israel shooting a Palestinian at a checkpoint. Somehow flub forgot to post it.
Now why would flub forget to post this tragic event?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12143060Israeli troops kill Palestinian at West Bank checkpoint
Israeli troops in the West Bank have shot and killed a Palestinian man who tried to attack a checkpoint, the Israeli army says.
The man leapt from a taxi and ran towards the checkpoint east of Nablus carrying a pipe bomb, ignoring orders to stop, a spokesman said.
Troops later found a second explosive device on his body.
Now why would flub forget to post this tragic event?
Selective memory?Figure I'd do flub the favour and post this story about Israel shooting a Palestinian at a checkpoint. Somehow flub forgot to post it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12143060
Now why would flub forget to post this tragic event?
Wow, didn't know I was responsible for posting every report of a death there.Selective memory?
That is as tragic as the death of the woman killed by tear gas, the 68 year old man killed sleeping in his bed by shots at close range, the man killed at a checkpoint for holding a bottle and all the other deaths on both sides.
Its fricking tradgedy, that country, and I find all your partisan shots and justifications for war crimes and killings quite sick.
And all I hear from you is how its not really that bad in Gaza, despite the reports from the UN, WHO and ICRC and the countless other organizations making reports. No wonder there looks to be no end to the this tragedy.
What you are responsible for is the accuracy and legitimacy of your comments and your references which time and time again are utterly wrong or seriously flawed.Wow, didn't know I was responsible for posting every report of a death there.
That is as tragic as the death of the woman killed by tear gas, the 68 year old man killed sleeping in his bed by shots at close range, the man killed at a checkpoint for holding a bottle and all the other deaths on both sides.
Its fricking tradgedy, that country, and I find all your partisan shots and justifications for war crimes and killings quite sick.
And all I hear from you is how its not really that bad in Gaza, despite the reports from the UN, WHO and ICRC and the countless other organizations making reports. No wonder there looks to be no end to the this tragedy.
There is a difference from what I say as personal opinion: It is unofficial policy in Israel to not lease land to Palestinians, vs what I quote.What you are responsible for is the accuracy and legitimacy of your comments and your references which time and time again are utterly wrong or seriously flawed.
In this thread I have admitted that I should research tear gas use more, and my comment may not have been correct.
But my references have not been proven wrong, time and time again.
In fact, I'm still waiting for anyone here to prove that my personal opinion is wrong.
Nobody has found anything to dissuade me, all I've heard are personal insults.
We don't have enough band width to list the number of errors you've posted in just recent times, nor do many members have the desire to spend the time required. You're a total joke and as mentioned a couple of times, the few time you make a semblance of a minor point or get a reference right is greatly overshadow by the plethora of crap you post.There is a difference from what I say as personal opinion: It is unofficial policy in Israel to not lease land to Palestinians, vs what I quote.
In this thread I have admitted that I should research tear gas use more, and my comment may not have been correct.
But my references have not been proven wrong, time and time again.
In fact, I'm still waiting for anyone here to prove that my personal opinion is wrong.
Nobody has found anything to dissuade me, all I've heard are personal insults.
This coming from the guy who said settlers could be considered valid military targets....and I find all your partisan shots and justifications for war crimes and killings quite sick.
...
As long as you admit that all of your posts are based soley on personal opinion and not fact.There is a difference from what I say as personal opinion: ..
Prove me wrong, please.What you are responsible for is the accuracy and legitimacy of your comments and your references which time and time again are utterly wrong or seriously flawed.
Go ahead, that's what I've been waiting for.
Instead, all you do is insult.
So unless you can come up with an argument soon, I'm going to put you on ignore.
Your haven't put up a legitimate argument to rebuff; just vacuous crap. You have done the same for such a long time that it's really tiresome.Wow three return posts, no arguments only insults.
What a surprise.
