CNN reports: An American died in the West Bank on Saturday, the US State Department confirmed Monday, the second death in less than a month of a US citizen in the occupied Palestinian territory.

“We can confirm the death of a U.S. citizen civilian in the West Bank on February 10, 2024,” a State Department spokesperson told CNN, adding that department officials “are working to gather more information and have pressed the Government of Israel for further information.”

“We extend our deepest condolences to the family,” the spokesperson said. “Out of respect to the family, we have nothing further to share.”

Last month, another American, 17-year-old Tawfiq Hafiz Ajjaq, was fatally shot in the head, according to Palestinian news agency WAFA. Israel’s police have opened an investigation into the incident, the IDF and Israeli police told CNN last month.

Defense for Children International – Palestine adds: Mohammad Ahmed Mohammad Khdour, 17, was shot in the head by Israeli forces around 4:30 p.m. on February 10 west of the Palestinian town of Biddu, northwest of Jerusalem in the central occupied West Bank, according to documentation collected by Defense for Children International – Palestine.

read more: https://israelpalestinenews.org/israeli-forces-killed-2nd-american-citizen-west-bank-under-month-day-130/

  • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    So if they’re US citizens, they could’ve left? But their family chose to stay there with their children?

    But the State Department isn’t saying anything, and the propaganda sources aren’t going into those details.

    • hglman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Just because you have citizenship means you can leave nor that the west bank isn’t your home. People don’t just casually move their families.

          • pingveno@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Not just a complete nut job. Biden’s coalition includes many people sympathetic to Palestinians. That’s why we’re seeing at least some actions trying to pressure Israel into not being total shits towards Palestinians. As imperfect as Biden is, I’ve never seen Trump so much as utter a word in their defense. Reelecting Biden means having someone where there are levers to get them to do the right thing. Electing Trump means leaving Palestine to the mercy of Israel.

              • pingveno@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                This is also why I’m so critical of efforts to discourage voting in some illusory mission to pursue some fake chaste purity. In terms of domestic politics, Biden clearly has defenders of Palestinian rights in his coalition on his mind. At the same time, there are supporters of Israel in his coalition and people who want a balance. Trump just doesn’t have these sorts of people in his coalition. There are a hell of a lot of people in Trump’s coalition who just hate Muslims and would love to see all Muslims and Arabs ethnically cleansed from Israel-Palestine.

          • pivot_root@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            In a two-party first-past-the-post system, it’s not wrong.

            Having ideals is nice, but unless you manage to get the majority of the districts in your state to vote for a specific third party candidate, not voting for the minority lesser evil is indirectly supporting the greater evil.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              No, it is wrong. Most people don’t live in a swing state, so the third party vote won’t be anywhere close to spoiling the election. If that’s the case in your area (which, statistically it is), voting third party signals that neither of the two candidates are sufficient. There’s no harm to it, and it can only result in positive press for the third party.

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              13
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Biden isn’t a lesser evil! He’s a different evil, a more reasonable evil that follows norms and rules, but he’s still a génocidair that is responsible for a lifetime of evil and actually kept most of Trump’s worst policies on the border and around the world. You can argue Biden is better for Americans in particular, but I’m not interested in supporting genocide elsewhere to save myself.

              You’re just supporting polite fascism to stop vulgar fascism. America is a fascist country that must be stopped. No more evil.

              • 5C5C5C@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Except the kinds of genocide that will happen under Trump will, by any shred of evidence that anyone has ever seen, be far more frequent and more aggressive than the ones that happen under Biden. It’s not just about Biden being the less bad choice for Americans, he is also the less bad choice for the world.

                Trump has literally said that he will break treaties by not supporting from NATO allies who “haven’t paid” if Russia attacks them. He would certainly pull support from Ukraine if elected, which will effectively be a genocide of the Ukrainian people. When he was president he practically initiated a war with Iran, and it was only prevented because Iran uncharacteristically decided to be the adult in the room.

                Allowing Trump to get reelected only empowers everything you claim to oppose, and we can’t even pretend that there’s any uncertainty in that this round because we’ve actually seen it. Maybe you’re an accelerationist who would like to see Trump literally destroy America inside-out, but let me tell you there’s going to be a whole lot of genocide along that path before America actually collapses, so…

                • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  9
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  Except the kinds of genocide that will happen under Trump will, by any shred of evidence that anyone has ever seen, be far more frequent and more aggressive than the ones that happen under Biden.

                  And Democrats will oppose Trump’s genocide, rather than lining up behind the genocide like they have under Biden. That matters and that’s why I’m voting for Democrats down ticket. I want them to obstruct the genocide instead of be complicit like they are under Biden.

                  Also, there’s no basis for assuming that Biden’s second term won’t be even more genocidal. Right now he has to worry about the election, how bad is he going to get without that hanging over his head? You’re just assuming Trump will be worse because he’s more vulgar.

                  They’re just bad in different ways.

                  He would certainly pull support from Ukraine if elected, which will effectively be a genocide of the Ukrainian people.

                  Biden and his NATO allies are keeping the war going by stopping negotiations. Biden made the war worse.

                  Again, he’s just bad in different ways. (Also, if there was any risk of genocide in Ukraine then why hasn’t anyone brought a case to the ICJ?)

                  When he was president he practically initiated a war with Iran, and it was only prevented because Iran uncharacteristically decided to be the adult in the room.

                  Biden is putting us on the brink of war with Iran! And Yemen! And Lebanon! We’re on the verge of fucking WWIII under Biden. That’s what you’re voting for!

                  Again, he’s just bad in different ways. (Also, revolutionary defeatism is not accelerationism. Different political tendencies.)

    • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      So which candidate do you plan to vote for who will NOT be supporting Israel? Obviously not Trump, since he’s already shown that not only will he support anyone who throws money or favors at him, but he has also been willing to stand behind terrorist countries and defend them. I guess that means you’ll be voting third-party then? Not that you’ll find any of those candidates able to stand against Israel either…

        • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          But would their candidates be allowed to push back if by some miracle they were to be elected? Even with a full presidential order sanctioning support of a foreign nation, there are still two other branches of government deeply in their pocket who would try to prevent this.

          • pivot_root@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            It’s about a zero percent chance. If, by some miracle, they managed to win even a single state, they wouldn’t have enough power to influence anything. If they hypothetically won the presidency and vetoed any bills offering support to Israel, the Democrats and Republicans in the senate and house could work together to override the veto with a two thirds vote.

      • pingveno@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Don’t vote, then politicians will ignore you as a non-factor and you will deserve it.

        Vote for an irrelevant third party, then politicians that matter will ignore you as a non-factor and you will deserve it.

        Vote for politician that has a chance of winning, do it consistently, then politicians will pay attention to you and you will deserve it.

        Don’t just vote, but show up at town halls and contact your politicians, politicians will pay more attention to you and you will deserve it.

        This is how old conservative people have been controlling this country far past their welcome. They show up. It’s no secret. Gen Z has been pretty good about turnout compared to previous young generations, so that’s encouraging.

        • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          It would be nice if more older people would simply look at the facts. Don’t vote for the same party just because that’s what you’ve always done. The beliefs of the Republican party from 50 years ago are pretty in line with the beliefs of today’s Democratic party because things have shifted so much. My area is very heavily Democratic so my individual vote doesn’t really matter that much, but I still show up for every election because the overall number of voters still matter to the political algorithms. I find it rather telling that the GOP party (and especially Trump) is having an absolute conniption over Taylor Swift encouraging people to get out and vote, one might think they have realized that the only way they can win an election is by actively preventing people from voting and through educational deform to keep them stupid.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Third party for me. The total third party vote is less than a quarter of the spread between the major party candidates (usually like 65/30), so there’s no chance my third party vote will impact anything. However, if my third party candidate gets an interesting precent of the vote, maybe they’ll get a platform for 10 min or something on the news, and that sounds a lot more effective than picking one of the two awful candidates.

        • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Or if we manage to get a politician’s worst nightmare – ranked-choice voting! They tried voting it in here in Colorado and oh boy the misinformation bots were out in full force for that one, making a lot of idiots think that somehow this meant their individual vote would no longer matter.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Eh, I’m not a fan of RCV, but I’ll take it if that’s all that’s offered. There are much better voting systems.

            But my general rule of thumb is if there’s a lot of pushback on something, it’s probably a good idea.

        • survivalmachine@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Magically, either of those choices is the same. “I am perfectly and equally happy with either of the two serious candidates”. We’ll thank you for your support when our candidate wins.