Friday, August 5, 2005
I got an email alert yesterday from the Jewish Telegraphic Agency to the effect that "An AWOL Israeli soldier killed at least three people in a terror attack on a bus in an Israeli Arab town." I thought, well, they're kind of jumping the gun a bit, aren't they? Isn't this really a murder -- vicious and brutal, no doubt, but surely not terror? We wouldn't want to assign that word to every act of violence or it loses its meaning. Perhaps they're playing a game of "more condemnatory than thou." Indeed, they are, and I'm not sure it's necessarily a bad thing -- it's certainly politic, if not completely accurate. So far the murderer, who's name I won't bother repeating, has not been shown to be acting out the wishes of any group -- something that would make this more clearly a terror attack.
Nevertheless, every sector of Israeli society, from top to bottom, has taken the opportunity to condemn without equivocation what this trash has done. Ariel Sharon said the incident was "a criminal act of a bloodthirsty terrorist targeting innocent Israeli civilians," and the perpetrator will not be buried in a military cemetery (he was an AWOL soldier) as both authorities and families of others buried there won't have it. Sharon is also calling for the act to be considered a terrorist one so that the victims get insurance payments from the national victim fund.
I won't bother providing links to the Palestinian Arab reaction when one of their's murders Jews -- the occassional off-hand condemnation, usually addressing the tactic rather than the act, the lauding in official media, the celebratory posters and namings...the contrast couldn't be and won't be more stark.
How bizarre, then, to receive this email from the Free Muslim Coalition, "Free Muslims calls on American Jews to Condemn Israeli Terrorist." One moment I think the FMC is an interesting organization that "gets it," the next they send out something silly like this. Do they actually believe there are going to be any American Jewish organizations who support this act of clear murder? Really? And here's the weird part:
Why call out those two guys? Is there any indication that they would support such an act as this, or is this more simple projection, albeit from an unexpected source, as we all know that Muslim group after Muslim group has refused to unequivocally condemn terror acts against Israelis? How about giving it a day to see what the groups and individuals say? Or are they (the FMC) just getting this out as fast as possible to give the impression that Pipes and Emerson and others had to be dragged into it? That's what I'd suspect. And is Daniel Pipes really a Jewish leader? Eh, I guess so. Is Emerson even Jewish?
Update: Omri hits all the notes with appropriate links here.
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: A Jewish Terrorist?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.solomonia.com/cgi-bin/mt4/mt-renamedtb.cgi/4551
Yes, Steven Emerson is Jewish.
It's a little scary how anxious so many of us seem to be to get on board the "Jewish terrorist" train. It's a phenomenon I've witnessed before when Jews behave horribly in a public way.
But I'm at a loss to figure out what makes this an act of terrorism. What was the message? Who was the political target? What change in policy was he advocating? If he was striking out against Sharon's government, why murder Arabs on a bus? If he was striking out against palestinian terrorists, why kill presumably peaceful Israeli Arabs? If he was just out to kill Arabs because he doesn't like Arabs, then wasn't this a hate crime rather than terrorism?
When Jewish extremists try to blow up a school or a mosque to send a message that Arabs aren't safe in Eretz Yisrael and should leave, or in some kind of sick quid pro quo for an attack on Jews, that's terrorism. Is that what was going on here? Maybe, but maybe this was just a demented kid who went postal. Shouldn't we find out before we start acquiesing in the use of the 'T' word?
A final note: I remember how quickly Israel and the international Jewish community jumped to take responsibility for the murder of Mohammed Al-Dura. We now know better, but the damage has been done.
Great points.
If he was striking out against Sharon's government, why murder Arabs on a bus?
I can think of at least one plausible tactical reason: to spark a repeat of the October 2000 riots and pin down the police so they won't be able to evacuate Gaza. This was one of the scenarios the Shin Bet anticipated, although they were looking more for an attack in the Palestinian territories than inside Israel. And there are some indications that this was the shooter's object.
At any rate, the guy was a Kahanist who was known to the Shin Bet and who was apparently questioned in connection with one of the periodic Temple Mount plots. Three of his friends were arrested this morning on charges that they knew of the planned attack, which suggests that it was premeditated. According to at least some of the reports, he stated that he was carrying out the attack to stop the withdrawal. He may not have been a member of an organized group and his attack certainly wasn't a model of sophisticated planning, but I'd say that "terrorist" is the right word.
Jonathan,
Yeah, his "friends" were, what? 15-17 years old? Big time terrorists, I'm sure. From what I've read, he was a Kahanist wannabe that no one wanted around because he was nuts. So I'd say: severely disturbed teenager, of the Columbine variety (and credit that analogy to Meryl Yourish if it fits, BTW -- if not, blame me) is probably more accurate.
But we'll see. The ZOA has acquiesed in the "terrorist" designation. Far be it from me to go right of Morton Klein.
And there have been 15 to 17 year old suicide bombers, haven't there? It's possible to be a "severely disturbed teenager" and a terrorist. The guy's dead now, so we'll never know his motivations for certain, but it seems like he at least thought he was carrying out a political attack.