An ax-wielding Palestinian militant went on a rampage Thursday in a Jewish settlement in the West Bank, killing an Israeli 13-year-old and wounding a 7-year-old boy before fleeing the area.
The attack posed an important test for Israel's new prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who has promised a firm hand against militants and expressed skepticism about prospects for peace. Government spokesman Mark Regev called it a "senseless act of brutality against innocents."
The murdered boy has been identified as Shlomo Nativ.
This AP report refers to the attacker as a 'militant'; it is not till later in the article that we are told that the identity of the killer is not known and that a terrorist group took responsibility. Yet, despite the lack of confirmed information, the Muslim who killed a Jew is nothing more than a militant--"engaged in warfare; fighting; combating; serving as a soldier".
Does any Muslim who murders a Jew in Israel automatically get a pass from the media?
Apparently so:
Muslims who kill Israelis are militants--unless the deed is done by a piece of machinery that mysteriously gets possessed:
Bulldozer Goes on Rampage in Israel, Driver KilledIt is not until afterwards that a Muslim was behind the wheel--and we all know what that makes him:
A Palestinian driver rammed a construction vehicle into a bus and police car on a highway Thursday, wounding two officers before he was shot dead, police said, the latest in a string of attacks by militants using heavy machinery against Israeli targets [emphasis added]
A Muslim murderer is a militant; Israelis are merely targets--from the description, you wouldn't even know if the objective was a living being or an object.
And it goes without saying, as Elder of Ziyon points out, that the murderer of Shlomo Nativ in Bat Ayin will become a hero to the Palestinian Arabs.
And the media, that automatically dismisses the severity of the slaying of Shlomo Nativ as a militant act, is a party to the acceptance of such a heinous act as something noble.
It is worth noting that Roget's Thesaurus apparently has not yet caught up to the nuances in the word militant, equating the word with 'activist, belligerent, combatant, demonstrator, fighter, objector, partisan, protester, rioter, warrior'--but not terrorist. (Though it does equate murder with terrorism)
For those who may be interested in facts, Soccer Dad notes a piece of history unlikely to be picked up by eitherthe media or other apologists:
What's important to remember as part of Gush Etzion, (the Etzion bloc) Bat Ayin was occupied territory, from 1948 to 1967. It was purchased by Shmuel Yosef Holtzman in 1930 and acquired by force by Jordanian forces during Israel's War for Independence.
When it comes to Palestinian terrorism, the facts--like the acts themselves--are twisted.
See also: Jameel, Israelly Cool, Treppenwitz and Israel Matzav
UPDATE: Jonathan Tobin provides some more history of the area where the terrorist attack took place:
But though I don’t doubt the murdered child, whose name was Shlomo Nativ, will be simply called a “settler” in most accounts, it isn’t likely that we will hear much about the history of the area where he lived.
You see, Bat Ayin is part of the Gush Etzion bloc of settlements. Far from being built after the 1967 war and thus, wrongly considered a violation of international law, Gush Etzion was settled by Jews prior to 1948. In 1948, the Gush Etzion bloc was attacked by Arab gangs and after a long siege, overwhelmed by the attackers who were aided by Jordan’s Arab Legion. Most of the Jewish inhabitants were massacred. After this territory was retaken by Israel in June 1967, some of the survivors of the 1948 attack returned to the area and began the work of restoring Jewish life to this part of historic Biblical Judea.
Technorati Tag: Bat Ayin and Terrorism and Shlomo Nativ.
No comments:
Post a Comment