Tuesday, August 30, 2005

Sorry, but it was terrorism 

The Ministry of Defense, perhaps understandably, is trying to wiggle out of calling the recent shooting of four Israeli Arabs terrorism. In this case, I find myself in the unusual position of agreeing with MK Mohammad Barakeh:

In response to the Ministry of Defense's declaration that four Israeli Arabs slain in a shooting rampage by a Jewish far-Right fanatic were not considered by law as terror victims, MK Mohammad Barakeh (Hadash-Ta'al) submitted a petition demanding an amendment to the current law.

Under the current law in Israel, an assailant must be a member of the 'enemy forces' against Israel for the action to be considered terrorism, said Mayan Malkin, a spokeswoman with the Defense Ministry.

But in this case the shooter, IDF deserter Eden Natan Zada, 19, was Jewish and his attack cannot be designated as terror, said Malkin.
The thing I don't get is why the shooter's being Jewish somehow makes him immune to the charge of being an enemy. Heck, the charge of enemy is thrown back and forth across the lines of disagreement between Jews all the time, not least on the subject of the disengagement. But a man who kills four Israelis on a bus to try to influence Israel's territorial policies sounds like an enemy to me.

Some can accuse me of weakening the party line here, and perhaps they'd be correct. But my goal isn't to strengthen the party line, but to strengthen the party. I believe in calling an apple an apple, regardless of who owns the tree.

If you really, really liked this -- or even really, really hated it -- there's lots more: