Film on Tom Hurndall recalls fatal shooting in Gaza, and the fallout
Britain's Channel 4 has produced a new film about Tom Hurndall, the 21-year-old British activist who was shot in Gaza by an Israeli sniper in 2003. The film documents the efforts by Hurndall's parents to have Tom's death investigated and the soldier who shot him brought to justice.
In a preview by Kate Kellaway of the U.K. Guardian, father Anthony Hurndall talks about the pain of observing his own government's silence about the death, and its lack of pressure on Israel for an investigation. Kellaway writes of Anthony Hurndall:
There is barely suppressed outrage in his voice as he remembers the British government's failure to protest when Tom was shot: 'The government viewed Israel as a close ally who they did not want to put out in any way.'
It was only when a Tel Aviv bar was bombed by two British Muslims three weeks after the shooting of Tom in 2003 that Anthony became aware of how skewed the British government's attitude could be. 'Jack Straw expressed deep sympathy to the Israelis and promised to put all the resources of the British government at their disposal. This was our government taking responsibility for two people who were not employees of the British government, merely two citizens of Britain who happened to be in Israel.'
But when their own British citizens (Tom, along with Iain Hook, a UN worker shot by an Israeli sniper in November 2002, and James Miller, a documentary-maker shot by an IDF patrol in May 2003) were attacked by Israeli soldiers, there was no outcry (no ministerial interest at all, beyond a standard request, from a junior level, for a proper inquiry). 'They were shot not by people for whom the Israeli government had no responsibility but by their own soldiers. That, for me, was outrageous.'
Share
Facebook
5 Comments
Gaza,
International,
Israel
Comments RSS Feed Reader Comments
One would never know from reading this write-up that a Bedouin soldier in the Israel Defense Forces was convicted by an Israeli court of manslaughter and sentenced to 8 years imprisonment, despite the fact that Hurndall was actively engaged in shielding Palestinian terrorists as a member of the International Solidarity Movement. The Hurndalls in their anti-Semitic rage, which undoubtedly fed their son’s hatred of Israel in the first place, have been trying for years to falsely implicate the Israeli military and government in the slaying, which is preposterous. Jewish soldiers, Jewish governments and the Jewish military do not murder civilians, even those shielding terrorists. Rather than continue to libel Jews and Israel, the Hurndalls should clean their own house first.
Excellent point. And as Mr. Grossman notes, someone like me, who does not know the facts as well as him, would read this commentary by Uriel Heilman and come away never knowing that Israelis did their part to bring about justice by trying and convicting the perpetrator.
Hurndall was NOT engaged in shielding Palestinian terrorists, unless you are referring to the eight-year-old children (the ones he was saving from being shot) as terrorists?
Secondly, the Hurndalls have absolutely NO ‘anti-Semitic rage’ - Tom’s mother spent a period of her youth there, passing on only fond memories of the country to her son. Likewise I love Israel as a nation and a people, yet loath the actions of its military in the occupied territories.
Rather than pulling the same old, tired, anti-semitic argument every time someone dares to question the IDF’s actions, how about looking at why children are being shot at, and unarmed peace activists are being shot dead?
Just to point out to the above post by Herbert Grossman, he needs to open his eyes on whats happening in Palestine (i.e. there is another holocaust happening and this time by the jews/israelis.
Your statement that israeli soldiers dont kill civilians is obsered, what about the thousands of childern, women and men killed during the occupation of israel ,,, i am sure they were civilians .....
furthermore,,, dont forget Herbert that israel dint exist prior to 1948,,, and they are the occupation,,, so do the maths yourself
Leave a Comment
To leave a comment, you must first be logged in to JTA. If you are not registered, please click here.
Already a JTA member?
Need to know? Get JTA's free e-newsletters!
Recent Comments
- Claude S. on Connecting the dots: Susan G. Komen, J Street and Bill Clinton
- Yaakov Cohn on Connecting the dots: Susan G. Komen, J Street and Bill Clinton
- Herbert Kaine on Times travel writer on Israel: ‘A politically iffy burden’
- Lloyd Trufelman on Netanyahu doth protest too much?
- ASC on Times travel writer on Israel: ‘A politically iffy burden’
Seraph
10/13/08 08:01 PM
I see. So his point is that there really is no difference between sitting in a cafe and being blown up and being shot in a military zone after purposefully heading there to aid and abet Israel’s sworn enemies.
Now that sounds a tad bit unreasonable to me.