His Name
Is Daniel Wultz. He is was an American Citizen. He is was 16 years old. He lives lived in Florida. He wants wanted to be a Rabbi. He went out to eat dinner at a restaurant in Israel.
And now he's dead. May God have mercy on his soul.
Explain to me the just cause of the Palestinian people that makes this okay.
Better yet. Explain it to his parents.
World news | Gaius Sunday, 14 May , 2006
By Juggler, Sunday, 14 May , 2006 @ 10:53 pm
Well, explain to Iraqi parents the just cause that makes the killing of their children okay. Or explain to Palestinian parents the just cause that makes killing their children okay.
It’s all a shame. It’s horrible that Daniel Wultz was killed.
My views on the situation are complex. I believe that the establishment of Israel wasn’t done in a good way–thousands of people were forced out of their homes.
I’m not sure that it could have happened in a good way in that part of the world. Some people have suggested that perhaps part of Germany should have been carved up for a Jewish state, which might have been a good idea then, but we’re 60 years down the road.
Given the situation that we have, Israel has a right to exist. Palestinians should be given their own country, with the proviso that attacks against Israel will cease, AND Israel will cede ALL control to the Palestinian government.
In my view, both sides have behaved very badly. Many, many Palestinians have been killed, I believe it’s 2-3 times the number of Israelis. That’s not to condone the killing of Israelis, just as acknowledging that Palestinians have killed many Israelis doesn’t condone the killing of Palestinians.
There is plenty of bigotry on both sides. It’s clear that many Palestinians are being taught to hate Jews. I have Jewish friends who have spent considerable time in Israel, and they tell me that there is widespread anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian bigotry among Israelis.
For a lasting peace to happen in the region, it will probably require some kind of Truth and Reconciliation Commission, with both sides willing to acknowledge their atrocities, and also for both sides willing to forgive the other side’s atrocities.
By Black Jack, Monday, 15 May , 2006 @ 11:17 am
Behold the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the Left. A 16 year old boy goes out to a restaurant with his dad for Passover and is blown to bits by Palestinian terrorism.
So, the Lefty above turns it into an opportunity to make propaganda for the Palestinians responsible for the mass murder. And, he cynically includes the obligatory fig leaf, “There is plenty of bigotry on both sides…” and similar expressions of the universal excuse for atrocity: They all do it.
No. They don’t. Palestinians are exclusively responsible for the terrorism they initiate, not their victims, and armed response to attack is self-defense. Attempts to equate the two only serve to prolong the conflict, aid the terrorists, and results in more slaughter of the innocent.
By Juggler, Monday, 15 May , 2006 @ 12:21 pm
No Black :Jack,
It’s terrible that the 16 year old boy was killed.
Were the Palestinians right to engage in armed self-defense when they were being evicted in 1948?
Perhaps you’d like to give up your house so a Native American family can take it over.
By Diva, Monday, 15 May , 2006 @ 4:32 pm
Stunned, absolutely stunned at the moral relativism embraced by Juggler. Terrorists kill innocent civilians - the Palestinians responsible for the bombing that killed Daniel are terrorists. The Israeli’s only use military force to defend themselves - they do not purposely target civilians.
As for this:
“My views on the situation are complex. I believe that the establishment of Israel wasn’t done in a good way–thousands of people were forced out of their homes.”
Go blame the U.N. it’s their baby and then blame the Palestinians because the problems they are now having is all their fault. Here’s some history:
“Britain’s inability to reconcile the conflicting demands of the Jewish and Arab communities led the British government to request that the ‘Question of Palestine’ be placed on the agenda of the United Nations General Assembly (April 1947). As a result, a special committee was constituted to draft proposals concerning the country’s future. On 29 November 1947, the Assembly voted to adopt the committee’s recommendation to partition the land into two states, one Jewish and one Arab. The Jewish community accepted the plan; the Arabs rejected it. (Diva Note: Sound familiar - it should think back to Clinton’s attempts to get Arafat to accept a VERY GENEROUS deal from Israel - and he too walked away from it because sharing and living peacefully with Israel is not what those in power (palestinians) want. )
Following the UN vote, local Arab militants, aided by irregular volunteers from Arab countries, launched violent attacks against the Jewish community in an effort to frustrate the partition resolution and prevent the establishment of a Jewish state. After a number of setbacks, the Jewish defense organizations routed most of the attacking forces, taking hold of the entire area which had been allocated for the Jewish state.”
I bolded the key phrase for emphasis. The Palestinians never wanted peace with Israel - they wanted Israel eliminated from the Middle East Map - which is exactly the same sentiments the palestinians embrace today. Read more here
By Gaius, Monday, 15 May , 2006 @ 4:37 pm
I agree. Juggler, Diva has it pretty well nailed here, but by all means also go check out AbbaGav’s blog on this issue. He’s got recent posts about the 1948 war.
By Juggler, Monday, 15 May , 2006 @ 5:49 pm
“The Israeli’s only use military force to defend themselves - they do not purposely target civilians.”
Tell that to the parents of Rachel Corrie. Or those who lost loved ones in the Sabra and Shatila massacres.
So the Arabs rejected a plan to give up some of their land in 1947. Wasn’t that their right?
And it’s not exactly correct to say they wanted Israel eliminated when the country didn’t exist.
By Juggler, Monday, 15 May , 2006 @ 5:55 pm
Actually, I’m the one who’s NOT engaging in moral relativism–I see all attacks against civilians as reprehensible. I’m not defending the attack that killed Daniel Wultz, but I can’t defend Israel’s attacks against civilians.
Remember, for years their response to terrorist attacks was to fire artillery into Palestinian areas. I’m not exactly sure how that’s not targeting civilians.
From a practical view, both sides’ strategies have been dismal failures. Israel is no less a target of terrrorism than it was 35 years ago, and the Palestinians have suffered enormously for the tactics employed by some amongst them.
It’s a sad day when acknowledging the deaths of all in a conflict is seen as diminishing the loss on one side.
By Juggler, Monday, 15 May , 2006 @ 11:28 pm
http://www.btselem.org/English/Press_Releases/20041124.asp
Iman al-Hams, a twelve year-old girl, was shot and killed on 5 October 2004 while walking to school in the Rafah refugee camp. The company commander who shot her claimed that he acted in accordance with regulations, and the IDF Chief of Staff accepted the commander’s version of events. Only after soldiers from the company told the press that the commander had “verified” her death (pumping her body with bullets from close range) did the Military Police initiate an investigation. The company commander has now been charged with illegal use of his weapon and obstruction of justice.
According to B’Tselem’s data, since the beginning of the intifada, IDF soldiers have killed at least 1,656 Palestinians who took no part in the fighting. Of those killed, 529 were children. Many of these deaths result from changes in the Rules of Engagement, which now allow soldiers to open fire on Palestinians in a variety of non-combat situations, even when the soldiers are not in danger. The most blatant example is the order to open fire whenever Palestinians enter so-called “danger zones,” including the perimeter fence around the Gaza Strip, and areas around military bases and settlements.
Tragedies are not limited to one side in this conflict. The family of Iman al-Hams likely grieved for her as much as Daniel Wultz’s family grieves for him.
By Juggler, Monday, 15 May , 2006 @ 11:29 pm
Oops, that last paragraph is supposed to be non-italic, as it’s my writing, not a quotation.