Jewish gunman wounds two Palestinians in Jerusalem

The only people threatening Arabs in Arabia, are other Arabs.

Tell you what, I'll have grandpa Abdul hold you down, he's only forty something, and let the thirteen year olds pound your brains out with a rock. I'm sure they'll consider it fair and it's not like you were using it. If he Didn't STOP they'd have been Shot AGAIN. See?

Don't bring your kids to the lynch mob Ali. You might think they are old enough to marry, but if you're planning to call them a child after the fact the bloody fingers kind of spoil the facade of innocence.

'...If you shoot to kill regardless of the gravity of the attack you will be prosecuted for manslaughter..." Regardless of whether one "shoots to kill" or not, there must be a death involved for a manslaughter charge to be filed. That's why they call it manslaughter. Those shot in this incident here were wounded in their legs. So far the evidence points to a clear case of self defense. And a suspect is considered innocent until proven guilty. Even in America.

YNET news reportes that the weapon used by the shooter was a rifle. I would think that fact alone destroys the excuses of the Israeli apologists. His weapon was not concealed nor concealable, and unarmed Palestinians would not make him reasonably fearful. Amazing how this fact is not published in this article or in the Jerusalem Post. Curious, isn't it? But the knee-jerk Israeli supporters have already made up their small minds that the shooting of unarmed Palestinians is somehow the Palestinians' fault.

" I carry a gun with me all the time and would shoot and kill any one let alone a group of several who are trying to hurt me." If you shoot to kill regardless of the gravity of the attack you will be prosecuted for manslaughter. Even in America.

"10,000 Jews thrown out of their homes, their communities destroyed. At the hands of their own government." The Gaza settlers were living on occupied territory just like the Sinai settlers before them. Just like the Sinai settlers they were aware that they were living there only as long as the government's permission was upheld. And if they lived either in self-delusion, or believed what irresponsible politicians told them, they have nobody to blame but themselves. Compassion? Why?

We here in the US call this self defense. I carry a gun with me all the time and would shoot and kill any one let alone a group of several who are trying to hurt me. Then the news report will say I was the victim and NOT the instigating attackers. After all the recent attacks on Jewish citizens by others,its time for Jews to arm and protect themselves against these street thugs no matter where in the world they live. PEACE THROUGH VICTORY

Is an italoamerican living here in Usa I agree 100% with you.. More and more american start to wake up of the unjust going on against Palestinian

When the people of the holy land will use their heads instead of their bullets to communicate ? when that place will be safe for everyone to walk safely with his children when are we going to stop hating each other? when are we going to live in peace.

He shot a 13yr old boy and a 40yr old father. People dont attack you for no reason. A father would never put his child in danger. 1st rule is to never shoot an unarmed civillian. Stones do not equal guns. This Israel/Palestine conflict is like David and the Goliath. The Palestinians are David and Zionist Israel the Goliath.

if an israel defence forces soldier wanted to kill and terrorise the pals of his neighbourhood he could kill em easily by shootin em in the head or body not legs! lets just for a moment think we didnt know these peoples religion ethnic group etc a man shoot 2 others from their legs and says its self defence! we dont know the testimony of the other side.. they didnt say we were walkin in the street and some crazy guy shoot us in leg= that can be an act of terror which failed miserably or a guy who lost his mind if they find out its the other party who attacked fist and he had no chance but his gun and shoot em in the leg than its no act of terror but still a crime to use ur army weapon against civilians there fore must be punished... so both party must be punished if the soldier says the truth...

The first is that they attacked and were armed, in which case shooting them in the legs to disable but not kill was probably the right thing to do. The second is that they attacked but did not use lethal weapons, in which case shooting them would be nothing short of an excessive use of force - especially if a thirteen year old was shot - but those cases are always found to be not guilty in the IDF anyway, so it doesn't matter. The third is that they didn't attack and the shooter is mentally ill, in which case he shouldn't have been given a gun in the first place. And then the fourth, which is that they didn't attack and the gunman is an extremist right winger - and that would just be another reminder of what Israel should have learned in 1994 and numerous times since - when you give an extremist right winger a gun, some poor Palestinian is going to pay the price.

There you go again.

Did the 6 assailants have the right to attack the defender in a public place? If the guy with the gun was the only assailant, you can be sure he would have shot their bodies or heads. If he was a terrorist, he wouldn't have stopped until he killed them, most often not even then. Ever seen a human body torn apart by a group of assailants with no weapons? How you know they didn't stone him first? Do you know stones also kill more than a few here? "Used to Post Here" is right on all counts. The desperate Jew-haters scream "Jewish terrorist" in some twisted try at "moral equivalence". The shooter's assailants are lucky they were shot only in the legs. But lots here say the Jew is guilty until proven innocent. Nothing new there, but as disgusting as ever.

nothing strange about it

Armed off duty soldier in an Arab neighbourhood shoots a 13 year old CHILD and isn't torn to pieces. p.s the monitor must love you!

Jews never became the enemy in Palestine until the Zionist mission was to conquer a land inhabited by majority native, indegenious, Arabs. After all, I don't recall seeing Jews complain living in Arabville during the European persecutions.

Does this assailant have the right to discharge his weapon, with intent, in a public place, and at his own discretion? If so, why? If not, you have legal precedent (and a history of 'popular demand') to find the appropriate penalty

Evident self defense when it comes to israeli shooting at palestinians. he will probably sleep in his bed tonight and the court is another playground to tell the world that we are a democratic country that have rules. things never change in those people mentality.

This is a clever tactic. Go into a Palestinian neighborhood with a gun, shoot people and then claim you were attacked first. Who will the Israeli police believe, the Palestinian neighbors? Are you kidding? He will get off with nothing. They dropped the charges of a settler Hevronista who shot three Palestinians at close range (and didn't deny it!) that was captured on a video!

After saying that, I expect you will put your body where your mouth is. When a lynch mobs comes for you, you better not be protected.

Terrorists do not stop after wounding our legs. We had a couple of Jewish Terrorists once, there is the one who was torn to pieces in a Mosque and then there is the one who was arrested, handcuffed and then torn to pieces on a bus. Our prisons are filled with healthy Arabs who murdered Jews. Your many lands are filled with our often desecrated graves, alongside the graves of all other Infidels who had the audacity to live freely of your bloody rule.

I am sure nothing in the world is more terrifying to you, than a Jew who protects himself.

It would not be the other way around, because the Koran says "Smite them above the necks and on all of their fingertips", not "Shoot them in the legs so they can not chase you and then stop".

He stopped after wounding their legs, so thank "Allah" that he did not want to kill them. I am sure you will be unarmed and readily lay your neck upon the alter, when a Lynch Mob comes for You; for you have just forfeit your right to be protected.

He was a soldier, he had military training and he stopped after wounding their legs when he could have finished them off with head shots. This shows restraint and supports the very likely probability that he acted in self defense. In Texas he could have shot them both in the heads after they were down, and he could have done so legally. Fire until the threat is neutralized. They could have "crawled after him". ;^)

If he had been Palestinian, there would have been thirty of him and they would not have stopped at just wounding a few legs. You will learn of this, when your country has its own Palestine and a wrong turn results in a lynch mob coming for you. Of course, you will be unarmed at that time and will have no way, to wound their many chasing legs.

Wounding a Lynch Mob in the Legs is hardly Terrifying.

Israeli prisons are filled with healthy, well fed Arabs who Murdered Israelis. Why does Israel bother to protect people who do nothing but cower and beg the Mighty Islamic Empires to Enslave them? Why don't we just ship you all to Abu Dhabi since you hate Israel so much?

When the Jihad comes to your door, I hope you are unarmed and unprotected.

If he wanted them dead, he'd have shot them in the head. Clear Cut Case of Self Defense.

Buries head in sand to deny the reality of Israeli brutality.

"YO FOLKS - he claimed self defense - or are Jews who defend themselves automaticaly guilty. " That's the due process served on the Palestinians, many who are children. Jews can be terrorists too you know.

"What's good for the goose is good for the gander".

10,000 Jews thrown out of their homes, their communities destroyed. At the hands of their own government. You all stood by and applauded- and then proceeded to pretend it never happened, while continuing to call Israel "apartheid". Then two Arabs thrown out of their homes- in which they were illegally squatting-- and furor. One Jewish gunman wounds two Palestinians- LIGHTLY IN THE LEG- and you call that terrorism? How many Arab terrorists do you know that run around shooting people 'lightly in the leg'? Reading the unabashedly racist comments by a bunch of supposedly open-minded, compassionate leftists gives me my daily comedic fix.

The shooter claimed he opened fire in self-defence after being attacked by a group of six. Were the two wound persons attacking this sole individual? The religion of the gunman is relevant as to why he used his gun or why he was allegedly attacked?

he would have been killed, so what self defense are you talking about he is a terrorist and needs to be treated like one.

It does not seem likely that the Arabs were innocent victims since they did not welcome the police arrest of the man who fired at them. Instead they threw stones at the police who were protecting them! Probably the incident began when a group of Arabs attacked an innocent Jew who was lucky to be armed for self-defence. That would explain why the crowd threw stones at the police and also targeted the homes of local Jews who were not involved in the incident.

If this "shooter" had been an Arab, he'd be dead. Shoot first, ask questions later is how it usually goes.

its only fair, since the other two shooters in j'lam had the same faith.. oh right, its not going to happen, he is not an arab... he is god's chosen race.. and he can do no wrong..

Gunman? I wonder what happened to 'terrorist'?

There is insufficient information in the article to draw any conclusion. We do not no the actual circumstances, the mental state of the shooter, or why he was such a bad shot. What WAS the weapon? Why was he such a bad shot? I don't see how anyone can use the information presented by Haaretz to justify an accusation of 'terrorism' or a justification of 'self defense.' The initial report certainly doesn't sound like either.

Isn't that what Israel does when Palestinian "Terrorists" commit crimes? I think it is time for some equal treatment. Jewish "Terrorists" deserve the same fate as the Palestinians. Even if it means kicking destroying the home that the rest of the family lives in.

Jewish gunman vs Palestinian terrorist.

Why on earth would Israel do this to itself? If it is true what the man claims then his shooting is entirely within the range of permissible self-defense acts. If not, wait until his story turns out to be false in court and then attack him. This article really does sound like it was written for an anti-Israel audience.

YO FOLKS - he claimed self defense - or are Jews who defend themselves automaticaly guilty.

Without a doubt this was self defense.

If he was acting in self-defence why Haaretz is calling him a gunman? What this Jew was suppose to do? Give the other cheek?

In the west bank and east Jerusalem where the Palestinians are constantly being messed with and the daily humiliation of occupation - when they fight back (as you put it) they are called terrorist and are splashed all over the media outlets. By your standard, the Palestinian natives are just fighting back.

Silwan, a "mostly Palestinian" neighborhood... what does that mean? It is a Palestinian neighborhood that has been infiltrated and colonized by Jewish settlers, protected by the Government and supported by a tourist industry of the Occupation...

The shooter was a trained IDF soldier - he aimed at their legs - doesn't that tell you something? With his training he could easily have killed them, if that's what he wanted to do. But he aimed at their legs inflicting non-lethal injuries intended to stop them. If he was off-duty, out of uniform, the group may have thought he was an unarmed easy target. As always, arabs gamble, and when the lose, they cry unfair.

Everyone is lucky that there were no serious injuries. Here is a chance for a fair investigation and punishment if a crime was committed. An Arab under the same circumstances would be dead--the shooter is lucky on that account.

Is this is going to be about the individuals right to defend themselves from harassment and attack, I think that the Pals in Hebron ought to start packin'

I imagine that if I were to move into the projects in South Central LA, I might run into a problems at some point. If I were to move there and get my ass kicked, no one would be surprised. They'd urge me to move back to an area where I was more welcome. If I were to just start packin' and shooting folks who started trouble with me, I'd be in jail, where this idiot should be.

What did you expect? When the israeli government will not do anything to protect the Jews, the people will take the law into their own hands.

you mean "terrorist"? Hello?

You both claim there is a double standard but you are comparing apples and organges. Rampant terrorism that chronically targets Jews by delusional, hateful persons that can only be deterred, sometimes, by consequences to their families, cannot be compared to isolated violence by an individual for whom standard deterrence techniques, as in imprisonment, work. That is why perpetration of criminal rather than terror acts by Pals in Israel is never responded to by destruction of homes. Once the delusion and hate and the reward of the next world is off the table, ordinary techniques work and when that is the case, whether the perpetrator is Jewish or Pal, ordinary techniques are utilized.

Such a hillul hashem!

What if it was the other way round: the headline would be so diffrent, I'm sure! Blow up the Familyhome of the Israeli and put him for 10 years into jail!!! That's exactly what would happen if it was the other way round. I guess the gunman will not even go to court, like so many before him.

And I'm waiting to hear when this terrorist's home is going to be demolished.

In the past few months there have been an alarming number of assaults by Arabs against Jews in Jerusalem - particularly in the Old City area - including one recently where a young man required hospital treatment for quite serious injuries. For some reason, Ha'aretz chooses only to report on this incident, where the Jewish victim fought back and his attackers were the ones injured. How typical.