for not doing their job. You are allowed to open fire on an attacker with a knife. How many times must they repeat that in the courses security guards have to take?

without shooting him, why would they need to shot him? I understand that he was trying to kill/hurt someone but if they thought that they needed to shoot him wouldn't they have done it? For all we know the guards were both huge men and he was a smaller guy... just because you are "allowed" to shoot someone doesn't mean you HAVE to shoot them.. right?

huge guy or cut an artery. Suppose he stabbed the woman before they stopped him? Just because you can legally shoot a terrorist means that you do it.

"if they thought that they needed to shoot him wouldn't they have done it?" You were not there and do not know any details.. your automatic response to shoot someone is a bit concerning as it is in your other post.

Any of you ever take a course or two in psychology? A 50 year old Arab man attacks a young (presumably pretty) Jewish woman with a knife. Has nothing to do with "proving" he is not a collaborator. Has nothing to do with necessarily wanting to kill a Jew. Hmm. Care to take a guess as to what this gentleman is trying to do? Hmm. Let's examine the circumstances a bit. A 50-year old Arab. A young, presumably attractive, Jewish girl. A knife. A stabbing motion. Duh. A little case of ED, nothing some Viagra cannot alleviate. Or throw his crummy ass in jail, where it belongs, for threatening this innocent young woman and making her fear for her life. I'm nice. I'm not stupid.

Well, if they would have shot him it would have proven to this guys friends that he wasn't a collaborator and it would have solved a problem. The womans problems were solved by the security guards (thank goodness) but society still has the problem of feeding and housing this guy and wondering if and when he will actually kill someone. One shot would have been a quick cheap solution to this problem and no great loss to society.

was also mentally disturbed, not a terrorist, at least in the traditional sense. At any rate, the job of the security guards was, first of all, to protect the target of violence, which they did, and, second, to stop the culprit using the least violent method and capture him, if possible, which they did. It's the Court's job to decide what to do with him. The problem here in Israel is that we reckon that the Court is always too lenient with Arabs who aggress against Jews but not Jews who aggress against Arabs.

You can be good sometimes. You made me smile +1 :)

Well, thank you. People do not always like what I have to say, but that doesn't bother me much. I rarely like what other people have to say, especially the Jew-haters. In any event, thank you again for your kind words. I love to make people smile!

You made me smile also! :)

The obvious lack of security evident in Israel today is of being PC to the point of being stupid. Israel in its quest to be the model ghetto Jew is a far cry of the Israel that fought for Independence in 1948.

dont for a second concern yourself with others' ignorance, hypocrisy, and malelolence. You are what you are and that is a freaging x-women superjew. Very proud of you! Kudose.

When a perpetrator is down, and rendered harmless, it is illegal to kill them. Moreover, important to know who his friends are, round them up and their friends as well, and bring them all to trial.

Thank you very much, Jae, for your kind words. SuperJew? Thank you SO much. I'm going to order a leotard with an "SJ" logo! A cape, too! Seriously, though -- the sun has not yet risen on the day where the ignorance of others bothers me. Kind of fun to watch them sputter and squeak and resort to name-calling. They cannot counter on the history, the geopolitical reality and the facts, I guess. I don't take them seriously. I never have; I never will. Thank you again, Jae.

My pure pleasure, Jeremy!