In a prior column, I introduced you to Ahlam Tamimi. Tamimi is a Palestinian terrorist, responsible for the 2001 suicide bombingat the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem that killed 15 people and injured another 132. Among the American victims of this terrorist act: Judith Greenbaum and Malka Roth, who were both killed; and David Danzig, Matthew Gordon, Joanne Nachenberg, and Sara Nachenberg, all of whom were injured. Malka Roth was only fifteen years old at the time of her death, and was one of eight children killed in the bombing. In late 2011, Tamimi was released by Israel as part of the trade of over one thousand Palestinian terrorists for Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who was being held by Hamas. Tamimi is now hosting her own television show for Hamas-affiliated Al-Quds TV station from her new home in Jordan. Tamimi was released even though she has admitted – on television – that she participated in the Sbarro terrorist bombing. In the interview, she even expressed her delight at the number of children among the dead.
On March 1, 2012, 52 U.S. Congressmen, acting on a bipartisan basis, sent a letter to the Attorney General, and the Department of Justice (DOJ), calling upon the DOJ to “(1) investigate those cases (in Israel or the Palestinian Territories) involving the murder of or infliction of serious bodily injury on American citizens ; (2) where evidence supports, indict those individuals complicit in the deaths of or infliction of serious bodily injury on Americans, (3) seek the extradition of, (4) try in American federal courts, and (5) punish these individuals.” (Full disclosure – the organization I work for, the Endowment for Middle East Truth, initiated this letter at the behest of many American victims, and their families.)
This letter referenced the 1991 Anti-Terror Act, which allows the United States to prosecute those who commit acts of terror overseas against Americans, and the large number of American victims of attacks in Israel and the Palestinian territories, which stands at (at least) 54 killed and 83 wounded. It also castigated the Department for its non-existent record of indictment and prosecution of these terrorists, in both successive Republican and Democratic administrations. The letter made note that this poor record “is particularly disappointing given that, in 2005, Congress specifically created a unit within the DOJ, called the Office of Justice for Victims of Overseas Terrorism (OJVOT), whose entire purpose “is to ensure that the investigation and prosecution of terrorist attacks against American citizens overseas remain a high priority within the Department of Justice.” Finally, the letter’s appendix listed several Palestinian terrorists who deserved prosecution, including Ahlam Tamimi.
On April 5, 2012, the DOJ sent its response. This letter, signed by Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich, claimed that “there are significant impediments to bringing prosecutions in the United States for attacks that occur overseas.” The main impediment mentioned was “(t)he crime scenes are located in places that are not under the United States’ control and, therefore, the United States is entirely dependent on the sovereign country where the attack occurred for assistance and cooperation in these investigations.” Therefore, the DOJ could not guarantee that everything would be done by the letter of U.S. criminal law, and that there would be no resulting problems with the chain of custody of the evidence and the admissibility of confessions.
This DOJ letter echoed a statement that was sent in an email last month to the Parents Forum for Justice, a group of American citizens and parents whose children were killed or wounded by Palestinian terrorists in Israel. It also echoed what the DOJ and OJVOT have been saying – both on and off the record – to the American victim’s families since 2005, when the OJVOT came into existence. And it even mirrored the complaints of the DOJ prior to the creation of the OJVOT. Since the DOJ letter never mentioned nor referenced any of the specific terrorist cases that the earlier letter had listed, we have to assume that the DOJ believes it is unable to prosecute all of the Palestinian terrorist cases, including Tamimi’s, for the reasons stated in their response letter.
Now, I don’t normally give out free legal advice on legal matters. After all, it isn’t considered proper to do so, and, besides which, I am not a practicing attorney. But this Justice Department argument, in reference to the Tamimi case, is patently ridiculous. It is certainly true that Tamimi’s terror attack occurred in Israel, and that the Israelis may not have been as careful with the crime scene, for evidentiary purposes, as the American police would have been. However, remember this video. Tamimi has actually admitted to her crime! And under U.S. law, this taped admission is not banned “hearsay” by Tamimi and may be used in court to convict her. This is because Tamimi, as the defendant in a U.S. criminal prosecution, would meet the definition of a “party opponent,” and thus, under the federal rules of evidence, anything she says would be admissible in court. See FRE 801(d)(2)(A):
-
Rule 801. Definitions That Apply to This Article; Exclusions from Hearsay …
(d) Statements That Are Not Hearsay. A statement that meets the following conditions is not hearsay: … (2) An Opposing Party’s Statement. The statement is offered against an opposing party and: (A) was made by the party in an individual or representative capacity.
In addition, in the video, we can see that Tamimi spends a lot of time smiling when the terrorist attack is brought up, and especially when she learns the true death toll of children from it. In court, these smiles are not considered “statements,” which may be hearsay, but are instead considered “physical manifestations.” For this reason, they are admissibleeven without a hearsay rule exemption or exception. In a U.S. legal case, all the prosecution would need to do to get all this evidence before the jury is to prove the authenticity of the videotape so that there’s a reasonable basis for the jury to believe that it is, in fact, Tamimi who is making the statement. The defense will complain about this, but it is not like the tape shows any evidence that Tamimi was forced – by coercion or physical beatings – to admit to her terrorist actions. Indeed, she was clearly proud of them.
Contrary to the DOJ’s argument in their response letter, there is no credible legal reason that I can see that would bar them from prosecuting Ahlam Tamimi for her 2001 terrorist crime against six American citizens. And in fact, another American law – 18 USC Chapter 113b Section 2332 – actually demands that they prosecute her:
-
Sec. 2332. Criminal penalties
-STATUTE-
(a) Homicide. – Whoever kills a national of the United States, while such national is outside the United States, shall – (1) if the killing is murder (as defined in section 1111(a)), be fined under this title, punished by death or imprisonment for any term of years or for life, or both;…
(b) Attempt or Conspiracy With Respect to Homicide. – Whoever outside the United States attempts to kill, or engages in a conspiracy to kill, a national of the United States shall –
(1) in the case of an attempt to commit a killing that is a murder as defined in this chapter, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both; and (2) in the case of a conspiracy by two or more persons to commit a killing that is a murder as defined in section 1111(a) of this title, if one or more of such persons do any overt act to effect the object of the conspiracy, be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both so fined and so imprisoned.
The time for excuses is past. The Justice Department needs to bring Ahlam Tamimi to justice for her terrorism against Americans.
Adam Turner serves as staff counsel to the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET). He is a former counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee where he focused on national security law.
@ yamit82:
Yes, granted. And that is precisely my point.
Worldwide, most Jews today are not fighters.
Because on some level, they don’t know the presence of Jews in the Land to BE lawful.
But they’re going to have to discover that, if they’re to be equipped for the struggle that’s coming
— because it’s not clear to me that the existing Jewish population of the State is — alone — going to be sufficient to weather that struggle.
Again you miss my point. To say that they “believe in” that need would suggest that this is something conscious & intentional, Yamit. I don’t know that it IS conscious.
I think we have this need generally quite in spite of ourselves; as I said earlier, it appears to be in our hardwiring, our programming — perhaps straight from the Manufacturer.
Can’t help that. I sincerely wish that it — the Jew’s need to know himself to be lawful — could be clearer at this point. But one cannot give himself clarity, and I know my limitations.
I suggest, however, with all due respect, that your quarrel in this particular matter is not with YoursTruly, but with the aforesaid Manufacturer.
And I would NOT take that bet. I agree with you 100 percent.
However, the overwhelming majority of Jewish supporters of Israel — while they may well be AWARE of the scriptural promises of God to the Jews — are not inwardly ruled by that awareness. They do, however, OTOH — and for better or for worse — relate thus to the Law of the Land. Again, I don’t say that OUGHT to be the case — rather, merely that it IS the case.
Given that overriding reality, then, the rational thing to do is to educate the ignorant among the Jewish People in re San Remo, etc.
Yes, they do. However, that they “feel something emotional” won’t cut it. (It’s necessary, I grant you — but insufficient.)
Emotion — of itself — is unreliable. It often arrives unbidden, and departs just as autonomously.
Most divorced persons still feel something emotional about their “ex” — on occasion — but they could never bring themselves to renew their erstwhile commitment, even if the circumstances were felicitous.
This is laughable, ESPECIALLY coming from PresentCompany.
— Li’l Old Winemaker here is not the one who relies on what he reads. . . .
@ dweller:
Duh! Did I say otherwise?
Sorry dweller I thought you understood that the only real Jews left in the world are Israeli. You used the word Jew and fight in the same context. That would pretty much exclude all or most Jews except Israelis. Fighting is an American Jewish pejorative. That’s why you have courts and all those Jewish Lawyers so you can sue the heck out of them for fun and profit.
Psychologically if Jews believe in the “need to know that he is lawful” (an imprecise expression, meaning is ambiguous), they are more apt to sue in court than fight and if the option is fighting they may join the enemy camp rather than fight. American Jews have lost their toughness and any survival instincts that were once synonymous with being Jewish.
I disagree. Ask any Jewish supporter of Israel if he relates to San Remo, the Balfour declaration or any other of the international agreements relating to Israel in the past century or G-d gave the Land to the Jews? I am willing to bet anything that the vast majority never heard of those agreements and treaties nor understands them if they have. I am willing to bet that an even higher % of Jews know the biblical story of Abraham his sons and grandsons. I am willing to Bet that most Jews wouldn’t recognize the name San Remo and even where it is but all know Jerualem. none venerate San Remo but most Jews still do feel something emotional about Jerusalem.
I am not speaking about Halacha, I am referring to the essence of what it is to be Jewish and even the most atheistic Jews still have some emotional ties to our biblical and historical narrative and historical memory.
I really don’t believe you have a clue about Jews other than what you may read.
@ yamit82:
Where this case is concerned, the only judge AND jury resides in the heart of the individual Jew.
He and he alone is the target audience and the final trier of fact.
Everybody else is essentially an observer
— welcome to watch, but ultimately not a direct part of the action.
No, that is NOT what “dweller claims.”
Not even close, Yamit.
For one thing, I was speaking of Jews generally, not merely about existing Israeli troops specifically.
ALL soldiers in the field — on ANY side of ANY conflict — invariably fight, most directly, for their buddies, their families, their country.
That may be more apparent in the case of Israeli troops, but the phenomenon itself is in no way unique to them.
But that’s not what I’m talking about.
If you check my previous postings, I’ve said — again & again
— that, consciously or otherwise, the Jew (probably more so than anybody else, and whether secular or observant) needs to know that he is lawful.
For better or for worse, and on some level that seems to come with his interior hardwiring, the Law is his “home turf.”
The vast majority of Jews, however, are — for better or for worse — secular rather than observant.
Hence, wherever they find themselves, they are less likely to relate to law as bound up in Scripture or Halakha
— than to the accepted Law of the Land.
And inasmuch as Israel is a nation state, that means that as to Israel’s existence
— the ordinances & statutes of international jurisprudence are paramount.
I think Wallace gets that particular concept better than you do, yahnkeleh.
OBAMA’S OWN WORDS TRAP HIM:
2008: “Navy Seal Team 6 is Cheney’s private assassination team.”
2011: “I put together Seal Team 6 to take out Bin Laden.”
2008: “Bin Laden is innocent until proven guilty, and must be captured alive and given a fair trial.”
2011: “I authorized Seal Team 6 to kill Bin Laden.”
2008: ” Guantanamo is entirely unnecessary, and the detainees should not be interrogated.”
2011: “Vital intelligence was obtained from Guantanamo detainees that led to our locating Bin Laden.”
really!!!
what a pos….
while i definitely think that joe biden is a bumbling idiot, i kinda’ warm up to the thought that he might suddenly become the potus….
@ Viiit:
@ Viiit: I don’t know. The instructions say “Your email address will not be published. So I can’t send you mine in this reply. Perhaps you can do it by writing to Ted Belman and ask him, if it will not be an imposition, to send me your email address.
@ Wallace Brand:
Don’t misunderstand me I know the arguments and thinks academically you and others make a good legal case. That said as you know the best legal cases in secular courts of law don;t always win and I’m sure the Arabs could also present a good legal case, maybe not as solid but still?
In any event as another Lawyer BILL NARVEY has said several times in our discussions over the years “rights not asserted are not rights”
The governments of Israel have not only refrained from asserting our legal rights they have accepted the Arab narrative entered into binding agreements that have ceded our rights to the Arabs. The principles have been established that we are an occupying power whose primary concern and demand is security and recognition 2nd. Land for Peace ( a euphemism for security)doctrine was enshrined by Begin and extended by all Israeli governments since.
To raise issues long since archived while intellectually stimulating is a distraction and a dead issue in our real politic arena.
The whole concept of Jewish return is biblical. Jewish nationhood is biblical, Most of Jewish history is either biblical or tied to Judaism in some way. The Balfour Declaration was based on Jewish biblical narratives and claims. Even non religious gentiles are familiar with the Jewish biblical narrative so at least the argument is not an alien or strange idea or concept for most and that includes Muslims Sikhs and others.
I would love to hear the Muslim and Christian arguments against the bible. Once you discount the veracity of the bible than all societal norms based on the bible including Legal concepts would or could be questioned. I don’t think they would have the guts, it would be as if they would be shooting themselves in the foot even possibly higher up the human torso.
A- I believe you are mistaken and are projecting your own views on this issue and while that may apply to many or most Americans not so in Israel. Not so for Jews in France and some other countries. I think most Jews would embrace the Biblical rights argument because it goes directly to Jewish identity and emotion. Nobody but a few understands legal arguments even most lawyers who are divided and far from unanimous in their understanding. I am speaking of those who have studied the issue, as for the rest? Might as well be Greek. The average citizen will never be swayed by issues, arguments and language he can’t understand nor wants to be forced to defend issues and arguments he neither understands and is unable to articulate.
B- You are dead wrong about Israelis Every Israeli only fighting for secular reasons or beliefs as dweller claims in our legal justifications. Horse shit. An Israeli fights for his family his friends and his country. Even in a very unpopular war like first Labanon war, most reservists showed up and few recruits opted for deferments. The last general call-ups produced over 120% response even many came from out of the country to be included and not miss the action
In Israel you normally serve with the same guys throughout the term of reserve at least 20 years. We know each other as well or better than our own immediate families, if one guy doesn’t show up it puts a heavier and riskier burden on the rest. We may complain but we are friends and take our responsibilities and national duty seriously. The anger over the 2nd Lebanese war was not over the entrance into the war but how the war was prosecuted. Don’t anyone try to BS you when we fought in Gas Cast Led we shot at anything that moved and laid so much fire and the diaper heads that we had next to no casualties from the enemy. Most of our casualties were from Friendly Fire.
Why I Serve
@ Wallace Brand:
Excellent point.
Is there some way that I can send you a private message?
@ yamit82: Yamit, as a lawyer, or I should say ex lawyer — I retired many years ago — if I have four good arguments based on International law and domestic law of the US and the UK, why should I unnecessarily limit myself to the argument based on canon law? There are three good arguments based on International Law, one based on San Remo. The details of the San Remo agreement are also on line in a two part op ed that can be seen at:
Part 1: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/11408 Part 2: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/11412
Debunking the Palestine Lie” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7ByJb7QQ9U
One aargument is based on the aggressive war of Jordan against Israel in 1948 and Israel’s defensive war in 1967, Danny Ayalon, Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, Calls West Bank ‘Disputed’ Territory (VIDEO) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/25/danny-ayalon-israel-video-west-bank-_n_909216.html One argument is based on Israel’s assertion of sovereignty over some of Palestine West of the Jordan River as assigned to it in the Partition Resolution, with its own blood and treasure, as permitted by the UN Charter (as it was not, in 1948, land subject to the sovereignty of others). The Ottomans had ceded it to England as trustee for Israel. When England abandoned its trust, a Court sitting in equity would likely give it to the Israelis, particularly if they held a majority population at the time of the decision. In 1924 the UK and the US entered into a treaty approving and adopting the Balfour Declaration as the basis for disposition of captured Ottoman lands. Under the US Constitution this is just as binding domestic law as a law enacted by the Congress.
Your canon law argument will only appeal to the very religious. But the secular troops Israel is relying on for survival will go with the International Law and Domestic law arguments as well as the canon law argument.. My conclusion, rely on all 5 arguments.
@ Wallace Brand:
Of course it was liberated, and we are not finished and won’t be until the liberation is complete.
In the world today you probably won’t find more than several hundred people who recall “San Remo” yet literally billions know that G-d gave the Land exclusively to the Children of Jacob (the Jews). You don’t have to be a believer to use the argument.
I still say my argument is the better, try it you may even come to like it. 😉
Jewish Links To The Holy Land
@ yamit82: Right. It’s “liberation” not occupation. World Jewry held exclusive political rights to the land since April 25, 1920. Even if it were an occupation, a look at the facts, as shown in Efraim Karsh’s article in Commentary, “What Occupation” shows that it was a “Mitzvah”, not a “Nabka”.
Correction
I wrote:
We agree on an important point that if it is necessary to protect our people by applying our “justice” to our Arab enemies, then it should be done.
I meant
We agree on an important point that if it is necessary to protect our people by applying the Arab “justice” to our Arab enemies, then it should be done.
@ BlandOatmeal:
ok oatmeal, your comment to joe kinda’ gets on my nerves.
first, you owe profuse apologies to all ‘beasts’ for insulting them in comparing them to this filth. i would propose a variation to joe’s nomenclature… as far as i am concerned, these are “s.h.p.o.s”… subhuman p.o.s. there! much more accurate, much more descriptive!
but now, back to you, oatmeal.
you state that these shposes (you DO understand what ah’m talkin’ ’bout…dontcha’?) “are more righteous than the Jews,”
i really don’t know what you’ve been smoking but this has to be the cherry on the sundae!
truly, how DARE you make this comparison?
you should reread very carefully viiit’s reply to you (@27)and INTERNALIZE it!
it is totally irrelevant as viiit said, what is written in ANY ancient text, for, that and 50 cents today will definitely NOT get you a cup of coffee let alone, a piece of land and a life in peace…
NO!
the only thing that will get you that, is a fully loaded uzi or galil pointed at the shpos, and THE WILLINGNESS TO PULL THE TRIGGER!
if israel has ‘painted itself into a corner’ as you say, it is because of the insistance to do EVERYTHING possible and impossible just not to (gasp!) pull the trigger…
what is needed is a leadership that does not give s**t what the rest of the world says,and what ever actions they choose to take (or not) is only after they have answered ‘yes’ to the question “is this good for the jews?”.
PERIOD!
@ Joe Hamilton:
No Arabs No Terrorists!!!
See#30
Most of the Jewish problems in antiquity as today is because we refused to obey the commandment to drive out or kill the inhabitants of the Land.
@ BlandOatmeal:
Torah and Freewill!
Joshua bin Nun allegedly sent three letters to the Canaanite nations before the invasion: Whoever wants to leave, leave; whoever wants to make a treaty of tribute and servitude, make the treaty; whoever wants to fight, fight.
G-d gave the natives the relatively easy choice of moving out, but it was up to them to accept or reject it. Just as in 1948, the natives had to vacate their villages in good order so that Jews could take them over. They couldn’t even take their idols with them, as Jews are commanded to destroy those traces of foreign worship. “Only from the towns of the nations which Lord your G-d gives you for inheritance, you shall leave none alive. But you shall cease, cease them” (Deut20:16-17).
Jewish law distinguishes between two kinds of war: obligatory and voluntary. The obligatory war is fought to conquer the Promised Land and defend it from any enemy, even one who offers a land-for-peace deal (like the Amonites in book of Judges 11) or merely demands straw and hay.
The voluntary war is fought for expansion of the boundaries of the Promised Land. The Torah spells out the consequences of the enemy’s freedom of choice clearly. He can accept the Jewish offer of peace or fight. The peace deal that normal Jews offered to our enemies would have sent American liberal Temple rabbis running for the Criminal Court in Hague: the surrendering inhabitants had to accept “tribute and servitude.” They could, however, continue pagan worship because these things happened away from the Promised Land; contrary to the liberal tikkun olam nonsense, Jews did not intend to serve as a beacon to nations who could persist in their pagan filth. Exodus 20:24 commandment to extirpate foreign worship only applies to the Promised Land, not to the entire territory conquered by Jews.
Once they have refused the divine command to flee before the Jews, they lose the benefit of the divine offer which allowed them to stay alive. G-d is merciful to his creatures: the natives are killed so that they don’t compound their sin of opposing G-d and his people.
The Torah commands us to return from Exile and take over this land (Deut30:5). Jews must take the towns in the Promised Land from whatever nations happen to have settled them at the time. And when we take the towns, the exterminatory commandment of Deut20:16 kicks in.
Exterminating the natives is the only way for a conqueror to establish himself in the land. If he does not follow the cruel logic of conquest, the natives would become “thorns in his side,” which the Palestinian population has indeed become to Israel.
The Palestinians exercised their freedom of choice in 1948 when they fought the Jewish state. There is no room, accordingly, for the peace process.
@ BlandOatmeal:
Yes, my mother’s word is much more valid than the Bible, especially when my mother relates to me her own personal experience.
The example of “losing a fight with your wife” is frankly irrelevant to our conversation unless your wife is not a genocidal antisemite. We are talking about life and death of our people. This is a war which prefer to win, and if killing the mother of a monster is helpful for that purpose, then so be it. As I explained, I don’t see her as being innocent.
As for the wisdom you don’t find it in the Bible unless you already have it in your heart. If you are wise, you will be able to find wisdom even in the Bible.
However this whole discussion about Bible is irrelevant. We agree on an important point that if it is necessary to protect our people by applying our “justice” to our Arab enemies, then it should be done.
I don’t really care if you came to this conclusion by studying the Bible, and I came to it by rational thought. We still agree. And as we need to change the culture so that such acts will become possible.
There is a lot more we can learn from our Arab enemies: For example Arabs are killing their fellow Arabs if they sale land to Jews. Perhaps Jews should consider doing the same thing to their fellow Jews who sale land to the Arabs. One may hope that the very “fatwa” would be sufficient an no Jew would then ever sale land to Arabs.
Likewise Jews should not employ Arabs, and certainly Jews should not support the fast breeding Arab mothers with their tax money.
@ Viiit:
…what Viiit says?
If you don’t accept the validity of the Bible, the Quran nor any other book, what DO you accept? Your mother’s word?
I wasn’t discussing the relative merits of winning and losing (and I don’t agree with you — when fighting with my wife, I prefer to lose. It turns out nicer that way). I was discussing the more difficult issue Joe Hamilton mentioned — whether or not Israel should punish the families of terrorists. The Arabs, whether they get this from the Quran or elsewhere, say,
“Definitely, YES! and their children’s children, through all generations!”
That is why the Palestinian national anthem speaks of a continuing “vendetta” until the complete annihilation of the Jewish people, whereas the Israeli national anthem speaks of a longing of the heart to return to Jerusalem and the land of Zion. The matter Joe spoke of requires wisdom — not from your mother, wise as she may be; but the deepest wisdom available. I referred to that wisdom (the Bible) in my reply.
You are advocating applying Arab justice to Arabs. I disagree. In that case, deep wisdom is also required. A favorite TV show is on… gottarun.
@ BlandOatmeal:
It is not really relevant what the Bible, Quran, or any other book says.
What matters is that it is a war, and wars are either lost or won.
I prefer to win then to lose. If the choice is between killing the mothers of the murderers and having more Jews killed, I’d prefer to kill the mother of the murderer.
At the same time I have very little sympathy for the mothers of the murderers. She raised him to hate Jews, so she is responsible.
At the same time, I don’t look down at them, I know that if I was born in their family and in their environment, I’d be thinking and feeling the same way as they do. Still, I advocate applying Arab justice when dealing with Arabs.
Some years ago a young Jewish man was tortured to death while being kept for one month in a house of a Muslim suburb of Paris. Everyone in that house knew that a Jew was tortured there and many people came to look. I would also love to see that house burned down and as many people in it as possible killed.
Some of the criminals are now in jail in France. I’d love to see them dead, too. And that certainly is a doable deal. I believe that killing the Arab murderers and their families will make them think twice before killing the next Jew. Yes, it is a war, and we must win it.
@ Joe Hamilton:
First of all, Joe, these are not “subhuman beasts”. In fact, they are more righteous than the Jews, who have been commanded to kill all the inhabitants of the land (including women and children) but have chosen to disobey God.
As to punishing the families of “Palestinian” enemies of Israel, I believe the Bible commands that this be done — punishment with death. However, this does not apply to those who have signed an agreement of peace with Israel (as the “Pals” have). Israel has painted itself into a corner here.
Viiit Said:
I always thought punishing the families of the subhuman beasts who carry out terrorism against Jews such as the scum who murdered the children at Sbarro, would be a more effective way of reducing the incentive for the Muslims beasts to murder women and children. Anyone who thinks the Muslim supremacist Nazis will decide to accept what they call the “Zionist entity” by any means other than fear of Israeli Jews is delusional.
@ MikeP:
And by the way, Europeans can afford to be “civilized” now that they are not at war.
During WWII the Western allies did not hesitate to burn alive tens of thousands of people in Dresden and Hamburg, or carpet bomb Stettin. The Europeans can be quite barbarous too.
@ MikeP:
dear mike,
i think we’re getting somewhere….
while you agree, with paul, you DO understand that “The only reason to do that is if we want them to STOP acts of terrorism”….
P.R.E.C.I.S.E.L.Y.!!!
the rest is semantics and fluff. once again, “if i am not for myself who will be for me?”…hilel obviously knew what he was talking about…
the fate of jews and the jewish state of israel must NEVER be decided by ANY nonjew. PERIOD!
have we not learned anything from the sho’ah???
i am not sooooo enamoured with niceties, towards my enemies, because, you know, we might, god forbid, eliminate a few ‘innocent ones’ in the process….
to that i would say : 1. kaparah! 2. there is no such thing as an innocent musloid… read hai raising reports how jews who lived for many years in peace, side by side with musloid neighbours (aaaww..isn’t that nice? and they were exchanging gifts etc etc) until for no apparent reason, ‘after friday prayers’ they (the musloids) turned on them and were hunting them like animals….
incidentally, similar such reports are coming out of egypts copts killed by their musloid neighbours in what media whitewashes as “secterian violence”…..
so you see, mike, i applaud, paul’s noble soul, but i wish for me, my family and people to be alive and prosper.
and this is the time when we MUST go for the jugular with no apologies.
@ paul a:
I agree completely with Paul that Vilit’s suggestion makes us no better than the Arabs. The only reason to do that is if we want them to STOP acts of terrorism. A member of a Jerusalem family that has been been in the area for 5 generations told me that the European mentality of Israeli politicians is not strong enough to convince Arabs that they must cease terrorism because our threats are seen as weak and toothless. He citied several examples where peace prevailed between his relatives and various Arab clans after the clan leaders became painfully convinced that threats of tit-for-tat retributions were far more than idle. Peace between Arab Palestinians and Israelis will only occur when the Arabs believe no act of terrorism will go unpunished. It’s the Arabs from an Arab culture that need convincing by their own standards and rules and not Europe or the US populations with less brutal rules of justice. Play nice and we lose!
@ the phoenix:
Indeed the mother and the other members of the family the boys who murdered the Fogel family were proud of their heroes. So they are not exactly innocent. The mother and the family brought up those boys with dehumanizing hatred where in their mind “Jews are not human”.
In the deeper sense they all are innocent, and probably if you, and I were born and raised there, we too would have similar ideas. However such philosophical niceties are, while perhaps true, are not practical solutions on short term.
Perhaps, if we could expel the UNRWA and other UNITED nation criminals, and take responsibility for re-educating the pals, then after one generation we would have results.
@ david frankel:
That’s exactly the problem.
Egoistic Jews want to be “better”.
I don’t have any need to be better than Arabs. I have a need for our people not being exterminated and for our neighbors to respect this tiny sliver of land as ours.
Ultimately cruel meens may even save Arab lives as they will discourage Arab crimes and wars against the Jews.
Moreover, they appeal to Arab honor. It is considered honorable by Arabs to submit to strong and cruel power, but dishonorable to submit to unmanly, sissy-acting Israel.
Example: In the rare cases when a Bedouin boy rapes a Bedouin girl the relatives of the girl murder the father, and other members of the family of the boy. (The boy may escape, hide and not be easily found.) The Bedouin boys know that, and therefore very rarely rape Bedouin girls.
What they instead rape Jewish Israeli girls. It is a much better gamble: First of all, they may never be found, secondly if they are found they get maximum of 8 years in jail and will be let out after 5 for good behavior. Israeli jails are quite comfortable. Because we are “better than them”, we are much more “humane”. Unfortunately being humane to the rapist is being inhumane to the Israeli girls.
So here is the paradox, by being “as bad as the Arabs” we will actually save the girls from being raped, Jews being murdered and Arabs living in jails. Everyone wins.
The DOJ should, can, but won’t prosecute. Its all political in the sense of what fall out might impact against Obama’s re-election campaign. The DOJ for instance after securing a conviction against Black Panthers showed up in court presumably for sentencing, but instead, withdrew the charges, even after a conviction. How they managed that is beyond me.
@ Laura:
dear laura,
“Why should Israel even be remotely concerned about world opinion when the lives of its citizens are considered cheap by the international community?”
could not agree with you more. the list of ‘grievances, if you could indeed call it that, against the so called international community is a mile long. the world seeing the mighty lion of judea, turning into a miserable scarreddy cat living in the shaddows of the shtettl of yesteryear, is losing, whatever little respect/awe they had towards the ‘NEW JEW’ of ’67…
almost 45 years have past since and an almost complete reversal to the old image has taken place.
i regret that ‘paul a ‘ does not accept vilit’s solution. the ‘eureka’ moment of realization has not occured yet, but occur it will…
it is a zero sum game paul, where only ONE of the sides is walking out of the ring, and as such, it better be us
once you realize paul, that there is no such thing as ‘innocent women and children’ (do you need to be shown the smoking gun videos of these ‘inocents’ dancing in the streets and giving out candies after 9-11, after the fogel massacrre???
is it really only when a knife is held to your throat while the other musloids in garb are film your soon to be executed, beheading, that you and others with noble souls and enlightened minds will understand whom we are dealing with?????
Speaking of which, the Olympic committee refuses to pay tribute to those murdered Israeli athletes. As I said, the international community does not consider the murder of Jews to be a crime against humanity. Why should Israel even be remotely concerned about world opinion when the lives of its citizens are considered cheap by the international community?
Blowing up kids in a pizza parlor because they are Jewish is called genocide. That you would defend it means you are a nazi.
killing the terrorists does not mean we are like them we we fight we fight to kill and elemnate the enemy they will not give up till they defeat the jewish people and thatsd thier goal
If we accept Vilit’s solution, we become no better than the terrorists who murder women and children.
I cannot accept such a solution.
@ Viiit:
Agree 100%!
In any negotiation, it is imperative to speak the same language.
Now, THIS, is a language that ALL musloids can understand….from the garden variety to the more ‘exotic’ ones….
The garbage must be thrown to the curbside and until it will be picked, it will just lay there for all to see.
It is NOT occupation. Israel does have a moral claim to the land.
Convicted terrorists should never be released alive
— unless they are first (while asleep) implanted with a tracking device
so as to facilitate keeping tabs on them.
(No reason they should have to be informed about their new electronic status
— except if there’s a point to be made thereby.)
The solution is to exercise Arab justice when dealing with Arabs.
Arabs take revenge on the nearest relatives when they cannot get hold of the criminal. So in this case, Jews should kill the mother, sister, brother, father, and/or other near family and relatives of the murderers.
This is particularly important with the newer cases like with the two boys who murdered the Fogel family: Kill the boys mother, father, and a few brothers, that will be good Arab justice. Something that Arabs will understand, it will appeal to their logic and they will start respecting Jews, and think twice, trice, or more times before they go out and murder more Jews.
Ultimately it may even save Arab lives, and this respect may prevent the need for larger actions by IDF later on.
the title says it all.
hussein’s lackeys at work.
@ Sally:
Hmmm… The Arabs are occupying Jewish Land, so we should act as you say, at least it wold be moral.
You know what you can do with your legal argument?
@ Sally:
Actually it’s called a crock.
Odd how the Israelis didn’t get enmeshed in legal niceties after the Munich Olympics massacre…
@ Laura:
That’s Ironic, Laura. Nevertheless, I think the bereaved families should be suing for Tamimi’s extradition in every forum available; and those survivors who are US citizens should be pursuing “wrongful death” civil litigation against her. As Mao Tse Tung said, “If you don’t hit it, it won’t fall”.
@ BlandOatmeal:
Because the ICC doesn’t consider the murder of Jews to be a war crime.
Why has Tamimi not been put on trial for genocide in the Hague?
Jews have a strange sense of justice. Where did they get their ideas from? Talmud? I certainly don’t see any foundation for this sort of thing in the (Christian) Bible. Let me compare two situations:
1. The recent release of Zionist terrorist, accomplice in the assasination of traitor Rabin, after serving 16 years in prison.
2. The release of not only Tamimi, but of hundreds of other admitted murdering terrorists, after serving lighter sentences.
Putting aside irrelevant arguments about whether or not murderers should be killed (both cases involve murder accomplices), the disparity between the two cases is, conservatively, about 1000:1 in favor of Israel’s enemies.
As I said, this is a strange sense of “justice”. I read somewhere in the Bible, that the Jewish people were to be a “light” to the world. This doesn’t seem like light at all, but deep darkness. What’s more, I would understand the matter if some radical party such as Meretz, in collusion with the Arab parties, had somehow contrived the release of Tamimi; but it was the right-wing Likud-led government, so I can safely say that ALL ISRAEL was fairly well represented in this “justice”.