Culture, Global, Israel, Religion

Parents of Palestinian boy killed by IDF donate his organs to Israel

Forgiveness #2 by Carlos LatuffBBC News reports:

The parents of a Palestinian boy killed by Israeli soldiers in the West Bank have donated his organs for use in Israel, in the hope of promoting peace.
Twelve-year-old Ahmed Ismail Khatib was shot in the town of Jenin by troops who mistook his toy gun for a real one. His organs were transplanted into five Israeli children and a woman aged 58.
His father, Ismail, said saving lives was more important than religion, and added: “I feel that my son has entered the heart of every Israeli.”

full story

41 thoughts on “Parents of Palestinian boy killed by IDF donate his organs to Israel

  1. Thanks for posting this story. It teaches us how one can make the best of every situation, no matter how traumatic, no matter whether they be a Jew, no matter whether they be a Palestinian.

  2. It’s a good story. On the Israeli side, people have been donating organs from victims of terrorism to Palestinians in need of organ transplants.
    I think both stories should be told to the world. It’s interesting that Palestinians and Israelis seem to come together in death (with organ transplants). Let’s hope soon that they can come together in life.

  3. Nicole – the artist is named Carlos Latuff, he’s a Brazilian and his work has been featured on the website of Gush Shalom.
    If you click on the image in the post, it will take you to his page at where you can see many many images. Also he has a site on blogspot with “postal art” that people send him in the mail.
    I understand some people don’t like all of his cartoons, but I think his “Forgiveness” series is undoubtedly moving and I am surprised (well maybe not really) that people would intentionally get hung up on him and miss the point of this story. Perhaps some people can’t stand to think about what the act this family undertook means and have to search for something to be angry over.

  4. What a noble deed. Why is ‘shtriemel’ so convinced the cartoonist “is full of hate”? Shtriemel sounds like the only hater on this otherwise inspiring thread as far as I can tell.
    Of course I’m not a member of the chosen race so what do I know…

  5. What a gorgeous story! It demonstrates that the solution is going to be through our humanity, not our politics.

  6. I can hardly wait to see who spins the story as “Jews harvest organs from genocide!” first. Counterpunch or AmCon.

  7. ” and I am surprised (well maybe not really) that people would intentionally get hung up on him and miss the point of this story”
    You’re politics are so warped that you’re too willing to ignore bile to prove your point. Yes the story is moving. And yes Latuff’s art is anti-Semitic.

  8. John Brown:
    I think all the cartoons are creepy. The one that seems to gloat in dead US servicemen are creepy. The one that demonizes Israelis as big game hunters of Palestinians are creepy. The one that depicts Ariel Sharon as the Antichrist is creepy. This stuff isn’t edgy. It’s rather low, crude propaganda. NY Post crap. The “cute” stuff, understood in the context of this propagandist’s point of view is even creepier. This cartoonist strikes me as a rather unsophisiticated ideologue (as are many effective propagandists). Israelis are evil incarnate, Palestinians are blameless victims. Homologously, his cartoons seem to be either bloody, violent obscenities or disturbingly saccharine kitch (all the ‘hugging’ drawings strike me as sort of Christian and pedophilic. And “I guess” I’ve always thought that the “if you don’t like them, then you don’t have to look at them” argument to be the domain of retards. If you don’t like my opninions, you don’t have to comment on them.

  9. The little cartoon of the Arab man hugging the little Jewish boy was sweet but the other Latuff cartoons were horrible. The portrayal of bloodthirsty Israelis (not to mention Sharon with his dollar bills) killing Palestinians is identical to anti-Jewish Nazi cartoons. I am no fan of the Israeli right but falling back on anti-Jewish propaganda to counter Sharon is chilling.
    Those cartoons glorying in the killing of American soljdiers are also shocking. I thought one of the strengths of the anti-Iraqi war movement was its refusal to demonize the American soldiers
    as the anti-Vietnam War protesters often did. It’s not only hateful (those soldiers are our neighbors and family!) but the stupidest politics I’ve ever seen.

  10. By now it’s obvious that I should have let Shtreimel’s troll flop onto the floor and lie there but I guess it’s been proven time and time again that I’m a sucker for trolls and can’t resist responding..
    However I think you are misunderstanding Latuff. He does not “glory” in the death of American soldiers – he more often than not portrays them as being victims or pawns of the government or capitalist forces (example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) and he doesn’t portray all Israelis or Jews as being bloodthirsty (example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 6, 7 ) and he donates his art to Israeli peace groups. On the other hand I see no reason why he should portray people ordering or committing war crimes as anything other than bloodthirsty
    As far as soldiers being “our neighbors and family” if my family members or neighbors commit war crimes, that’s where my support for them ends. I’d rather support them in refusing to take part in an unjust war. However my cousin who is currently serving in Iraq in the US Army reserves is a medic so hopefully he isn’t committing any war crimes.
    If you look at the world through victimization-tinted lenses, perhaps you’ll see only what you want to see

  11. This is a beautifu; picture expressing a beautiful sentiment.
    Some of the other cartoons are disturbing, and that is unfortunate, but don’t let the bad erase the good.
    I looked through the entire forgiveness series and cried.
    My favorite is the two boys smiling and swinging together.
    If we can’t fix this, then maybe the children will.
    But it is wonderful to see that the Khatib family, and the other countless Jews and Palestinians who cross lines to come together, are stepping up to show the way.

  12. Call me a troll all you like Brown. Guess some of us are plain ‘ol victims who can’t see the love behind Latuffs cartoons. Alas…the majority of your posts speak for themselves.

  13. John Brown: What is a troll? If it’s someone who provokes for the sake of provoking then I don’t see what’s different from my comment and the general tenor of your posts. Although, I find your ad hominems to be consistently unsophisticated and joyless, and I never fail to crack myself up.
    Take a chill pill, scumbag!
    Dr. Freud’s patient troll

  14. John Brown: Does Latuff have any cartoons urging Palestinian youth to “REFUSE!” the lure of the jihadis and devote their energies to something more productive than blowing themselves up in order to kill civilians? This guy is not “anti-capitalist”. He is a fascist nihilist propagandist. I don’t think I am the one misunderstanding his cartoons. I think you are. And it’s quite sad.

  15. “And it’s quite sad.”
    Joey…its not sad. Sad is when you don’t have clue. Brown has a clue. It’s very well thought out.

  16. Shtriemel: i don’t think Brown is as self-aware as you think he is. For instance, he tries to slam me as someone who might benefit from psychoanalysis, yet he links to an artist’s website that romanticizes itself as “deviant” in both appellation and content. Brown similarly romanticizes his own self-proclaimed deviancy. Yet he seems to really like these cute little fluffy cartoons and over-the-top NY Post style caricatures. Pretty mainstrean stuff, if you’re a moronic fascist-sympathizing knucklehead. Although Brown’s pathology may be well thought out and internally coherent (as most delusions are) I doubt he possesses the self-awareness to understand the “root causes” that drive his need to shock people with graphic obscenities all the while hiding behind the smile of the angelic pacifist. It’s just so disgusting and hypocritical.

  17. Joey wrote: “What is a troll?
    A troll is someone who in the middle of a discussion of Bush’s myriad lies and screw-ups constantly tries to change the subject by yelling “but Bill Clinton got a blowjob!” or in this case wants to change the subject away from this story and onto cartoons that are entirely irrelevant, or endless personal attacks on myself
    It’s enough to make one wonder – what about this story threatens right wingers so much that they go batshit crazy, and insist on delving into personal attacks and random tangents ? Does it hit a raw nerve ? Does the story shame you ?

  18. Hi John,
    I am not a right-winger. I am a liberal democrat. I liked this story when I first read about it a week or so ago. I did not introduce a Latuff cartoon to this story.
    You introduced the cartoon. You seemed interested in discussing the artist. Your post facto indignation is ludicrous.
    And I’m certainly not ashamed of anything I believe in…who brought up shame? What do you think I’m ashamed of John? I’d REALLY love to hear what you think I should feel ashamed of.

  19. And it seems in this instance at least, you are the one trying to change the subject by shouting “Bill Clinton got a blowjob!” Nice try. (Troll?)

  20. Brown…if you weren’t such a “moronic fascist-sympathizing knucklehead” – I like that, thanks Joey – you would’ve read this comment from moi:
    “Yes the story is moving. And yes Latuff’s art is anti-Semitic.”
    See Brown? I’m able to apreciate that two contradictory ideas can exist within one blog posting. You’re unable to do that . Your posts reflect, time and time again, a compulsion to demonize Israel in favor of your victim of the week.
    I disagree with Joeys comment that you : “need to shock people with graphic obscenities”. I don’t believe you’re trying to shock anyone. It’s just how a “moronic fascist-sympathizing knucklehead” sees the world.

  21. JohnBrown: We’ve been called brownshirts and we posted this story eight days ago on Jewlicious. We were all touched by the parents’ gesture and saddenned by the stupid loss of life.
    You could have avoided all the tangential talk by chosing a less controversial graphic to illustrate your post. Given your past statements however, it is not such a stretch to imagine that this was you taking the opportunity again to bait those you disagree with. So why so shocked when people react? You knew exactly what you were doing, don’t be coy.

  22. ck – There’s nothing inherently controversial about *this* graphic. That’s why shtreimel went on a tangent about *other* irrelevant cartoons, and virtually none of the discussion from shreimel or Joey has been about either this graphic or this article
    To the contrary – there’s probably nothing I can do to avoid some people from immediately resorting to ad hominems other than not expressing an opinion, but I’m not about to stop

  23. “If you are trying to suggest that Al Jazeera ignored it, you’re wrong”
    I wasn’t trying to suggest anything, I was trying to prove something and stated baldly that mine was an imperfect experiment. Thanks for taking the time to prove the point to be incorrect. This is how rational people endevour to find out if a premise is true or false.
    Now, I would still be interested to know why you assumed me to be “right-wing” (a false premise!) and what exactly made you think that this particular week-old story “shamed me.” Unlike ck, I don’t think you are aware that you bait people incessently. I don’t think you are playing coy. I think you are a brainwashed moron wearing a vapid shit-eating grin. And that’s not a “personal attack”. it’s a subjective description of the type of character that I think produces the kinds of stupid opinions that you willingly offer to the public.

  24. Yes John Brown, the graphic in question is inoffensive. But for those of us familiar with Latuff’s work, well … you know, it kind of stands out.

  25. What is the big deal? Some of our biblical laws proclaim the merits of a ‘social order’ that would not be out of place in a horror film today. I don’t see anyone saying the ‘author’ should not be quoted when appropriate.
    Creepy – the spamblock reads ‘dissects’… :-0

  26. Michael,
    To what are you referring to in the Torah which would be appropriate for a ‘Horror’ film? I have studied Torah for many years and not found anything which is horrific. What is it about Judaism which horrifies you?
    Michael U.

  27. Hey Michael, no offence mate. I was trying to make a point, not argue that the bible IS a script for a horror film.
    But since you have asked:
    If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother … all the men of the city shall stone him with stones, that he die …. (Dt. 21:18, 21)
    This is obviously an extreme, and (sadly) I don’t have the knowledge off hand, or the time at the moment to look through, but I am sure you will agree that some of the scenes and the ideas in the bible are of a day and age when the sanctity of life was less respected then nowadays (at least in one owns people – but let’s not get into that one).
    Notwithstanding Judaism’s relative grace and orderly consideration for that which is heartfelt, some of it was pretty gory. I don’t know about you, but personally watching someone getting stoned, or otherwise killed in a graphically creative way, is not a favourite pastime.

  28. MichaelMe,
    Let me start my reply by stating a fact of Torah. There are several levels of meaning in each portion. The one you are looking at is the literal interpretation of the statement. The literal translation is usually the most incorrect, and as a result many people usually think the wrong thing about what Torah really means.
    Your understanding of Judaisms ‘value of life’ is completely incorrect. Life is extremely valuable, and it always has been. One, often used example is that even though we are prohibited from doing certain things on Shabbot, we are commanded to violate Shabbot in order to save a life. If life was not very important, why not let somebody die instead of violating a law from G-d himself? The reason is that every life is sacred. We also feel that killing one Jew is equal to killing all Jews. Because each soul is equally important in the ‘eyes’ of G-d.
    Back to your misinterpretation of ‘Stoning the Rebel Son’. Personally, this applies to me because I was quite a rebel when I was younger. I was not killed, but spiritually I died when I was kicked out of my mothers house for doing reprehensible things. I was sliding down the sliperry slope, having to learn the hard way what was right and wrong. I mean I was very, very low… I got into drugs, I was stealing, I got involved with shady characters, etc. I moved to California to live with my father. There I got into more trouble, and more trouble.
    When the Torah talks about the death penalty, it is not saying that killing is right. The purpose of Torah is to point Jews in the right direction, to return to the ways of G-dliness. The L-rd G-d wants us to perfect ourselves. The child reads this and sees that he will surely die if he rebels against his parents. This instills a fear, a good kind of fear. G-d wants us to fear him, because in many individuals fear is the prime motivator. To a G-d fearing jew, the fear is a fear which brings joy. Fear is also considered the Awe of G-d, and as a result the days between Rosh Hashanna and Yom Kippur are called the “days of awe”.
    The ten commandments make it clear that we are to honor our parents. The purpose of this commandment is to establish the order of things. Your parents created you, you should respect them. G-d created the universe, he is the parent of the universe. We should honor him too. A rebel son violates this commandment. If an individual places himself above the others, lets his arrogance take control, he violates the will of G-d himself. Who does this Rebel Son think he is? He shakes his fists at his parents, and to G-d too.
    Very seldom has the death penalty been employed by the Bet Din. I have been told that even the term “An Eye for an Eye” has been misunderstood. The purpose of the “EyeForAnEye” law is to provide for equal compensation for lost articles, limbs included. I don’t think this law was ever meant to mean that if you take out someones eye, your eye should be taken out. That is what those who only read a sentence without understanding the meaning behind it.
    Your mention of slavery also is a misunderstanding. Look at the laws concerning Jews ownership of slaves. Jews idea of slavery is very different from other societies. We believe that slaves should be treated as well as the masters. We believe that slaves should not be forced to work on Shabbat. We believe that slaves can be redeemed. Slavery was not something which people were born into and had to stay for the rest of their lives. Slavery was something people fell into when they were unable to take care of themselves. Slavery is a state which is a metaphor for people in low positions, the servant… Jews were slaves in Egypt and we are commanded to remember that. We remember that in all our relationships with others. We treat our servents with care and compassion because we know how it feels to be servants.
    Another issue which riles my goat is when people point at the story of Abraham and Isaac. They say that the story is a story of ‘child’ abuse. The thing those people don’t realize is that Isaac was no child. Isaac was 39 when he was to be sacraficed. Isaac knew the situation, and let Abraham {who was in his 100’s at the time} bind him on the altar. This story demonstrates the GREAT, AWESOME, and IMPRESSIVE faith both Abraham and Isaac had in the promise of Hashem. This is why Abraham is so beloved in Judaism, his faith was impervious to destruction {which is why he survived the furnace episode}.
    If I were you, and you seriously have issues with Torah, I would contact a friendly neighborhood Rabbi who could easily explain these issues to you…
    Shalom Brothers,
    Michael U

  29. Dear Michael U
    It is this kind of dialogue at the Jewschool court that keeps me coming back, so thanks for your generous and sincere answer.
    I don’t have ‘issues’ with the Torah. I have reservations of people seeing the world in black and white. And it seems to me that some people would take the Torah, and wield it as a heavy object in their effort to stifle any ideas that oppose their world-views. The case in point here was ridiculing a hopeful and positive side note to the conflict, which reminds us indeed that ‘every life is sacred ‘ because the drawing accompanying it was penned by someone who holds a worldview which does not favour military brutes – Israeli or otherwise. Bible thumping righteousness, it seems, is not the exclusive domain of frothing evangelists…
    Rest assured that I have immense respect to all that is spiritually driven and upholds the sanctity of life – any life. I regret to say that I don’t see much of it in many of the opinions expressed here: the gist of most of the arguments I encounter profess that the fact other people don’t hold Jewish life sacred, means we should feel fine when we act as thugs – be it soldiers shooting at children going to school, settlers bashing Palestinians farmers, Israeli police shooting teargas and rubber bullets (or worse) at separation-wall demonstrators or Israeli Arabs facing bureaucratic hassles meant to dissuade them from claiming their rightful position as citizens. Maybe your understanding of an eye for an eye is deep and multi-facetted, but most of our brothers and sisters take it as an excuse to thuggery. I think that is inexcusable, and that if one is really a man or a woman of G-d, they would abhore violence of any kind.
    We probably don’t see eye to eye on many a subject (but hey, let’s keep both of them, hehehe) – I would vouch that fear and G-d are actually the opposites, and I do think that most religious people take the written word much too literally (even if they see the hidden meanings). In my search, I have encountered some Rabbis who were noble and illuminating, and some more that have a very simplistic and dual perception of consciousness. If any will happen to wander through to this neck of the woods (I live somewhere in Asia), I promise you that I will be delighted to share a conversation and am open to learn what they might have to offer. Meanwhile, I send you warm regards and, if I may, suggest you might consider taking life more lightly. Attitude begets experience…
    What is the meaning of the journey?
    Seeking the truth and practising compassion
    That is the meaning of the journey
    (From the Tibetan book of the dead)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.