Yesterday morning I was minding my own business and enjoying the Jerusalem market place (Machane Yehuda) I met up with a friend around 1pm who promptly asked me if I had heard about the bull dozer. I hadn't heard, but I had seen some commotion off in the distance from one end of the market.
According to this article in the Jerusalem Post there is a debate on whether the driver of a bulldozer, who ran through traffic and into a bus, killing three people and injuring many more is a terrorist or just a regular old murderer. The family of the man and their attorney are arguing that he had no ties with terrorist organizations and that in general he was just your average joe schmo with a criminal record.
Why would the family be so adamant as to their loved one's status? I don't think having a murderer for a son is any less shameful than a terrorist.
Ironically, it is the policy of Israel to bulldoze the homes of suicide bombers from the West Bank. The construction worker, who was an Arab resident of East Jerusalem (not the West Bank) falls into a grey zone. State officials want to crack down on Arab residents of Eastern Jerusalem (who currently have access to all parts of the city) due to this incident as well as the Yeshiva shooting back in March (also carried out by an Arab resident of East Jerusalem), which could make for even more tenuous relations between Arabs and Jews in Jerusalem.
So how do you decide if this 30 year old man is a murderer or a terrorist? Does it matter what his intentions were? He clearly provoked terror in the hearts of Jerusalem residents, not to mention my own mother who began her day frantically checking for messages from me. Was he simply a deranged resident who just happened to be Arab and just happened to crack one day while he was at work? Were his actions influenced or encouraged by past and more traditional terrorist attacks? Would he have suffocated his urge to kill if he had thought about the consequences for his family and the larger Arab community of Jerusalem?
An article from the New York Times seems to be the most comprehensive (many articles contradict each other on some of the details) but it doesn't address whether the man should be considered a murderer or a terrorist. What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I don't know, but I was checking your blog and Facebook all day yesterday for signs of activity..
G-d forbid, if anything like this happens again, can you do me a favour (because I'm a worrying Jewish mother) - can you post something ASAP giving the all clear sign?
Glad you're okay.
Post a Comment