News
MK Bahloul talks up a storm saying Palestinian stabber not a terrorist
Moran Azulay, Itamar Eichner
Published: 08.04.16, 22:17
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
10 Talkbacks for this article
1. MK Bahloul..??!!
BJ ,   Isael/US   (04.08.16)
How should we relate to this crazy old and new and dangerous predicament ??!! MK Bahloul...??!! What the "hell" is going on..?? Haven't Are We,The Jewish People, lost our minds and memories of 68 years old terrorism ??!! The deliberate and most savage murders of our innocent children, women and of course our IDF ???!!! Where is the rage and revenge...??!!
2. in THEORY he has a point....
Bluegrass Picker ,   Afula   (04.09.16)
....but he should be careful of what he asks for. His logic would allow Hebrews to shoot-on-sight, anyone displaying a Palestinian flag.
3. Duped by violence preaching politicians?
e-ducate   (04.09.16)
How can an intelligent person advocate violence? MK Bahloul needs some elementary school afternoon education.
4. MK Mr. Bahloul, when u enter a room...
Jew-C ,   JewLandia (Israel)   (04.09.16)
I as a citizen of the State of Israel will stand. However, Sir, with full respect for your position...WTF, Whisky Tango Foxtrot, were you thinking when you made your comments?
5. He's right. Terrorism is...
JVC ,   LA, USA   (04.09.16)
military levels of force used against civilian populations to obtain a desired political objective. Military levels of force used against military populations to obtain a desired political objective is warfare. It's what soldiers train for and do. Big difference. I expect a civilian to be terrorized. I expect a soldier to fight back. Learn it. Applies everywhere, every time. This is probably the only thing I will ever agree with an Arab MK about.
6. Let us call it total war
A. R. ,   Ashkelon   (04.09.16)
Let us assume that Mr. Z. B. is right, and the Palestinians are busy in attacking civilians and soldiers alike. Therefore, no matter how he is defining it, the reality is a TOTAL war. In such situation Israel has the right to retaliate with a total war, and Mr. Z. B. and his like, should not complain about the autcome of it.
7. Terrorist is a terrorist. What a definition lol
(04.09.16)
8. The farce on wheels that is our Knesset, is true treasure-
(04.09.16)
trove of insane behavior by people that shouldn't be allowed membership in the first place. So who's surprised.
9. The Maquis
Mark ben Josef ,   USA   (04.09.16)
The Maquis in France resisted the German Wehrmacht in WWII. Germany classified the Maquis as terrorists. The rest of the world disagreed. An IDF soldier beyond the Green Line is a soldier making war on the non-Israeli population beyond the Green Line. There has been no peace agreement. The IDF soldier is occupying the Palestinians by military force. Resistance against a military occupier may be futile, but it cannot be terrorism anymore than the Maquis, or the Polish underground, or Mordechai Anielewicz were terrorists.
10. The MK was Technically Correct
Daniel ,   Tel Aviv   (04.09.16)
In this case the MK is technically correct according to Prof. Boaz Ganor of the ICT. "The definition proposed here states that terrorism is the intentional use of, or threat to use, violence against civilians or against civilian targets, in order to attain political aims. This definition is based on three important elements:... 3. The targets of terrorism are civilians. Terrorism is thus distinguished from other types of political violence (guerrilla warfare, civil insurrection, etc.). Terrorism exploits the relative vulnerability of the civilian “underbelly”—the tremendous anxiety, and the intense media reaction evoked by attacks against civilian targets. directed against civilians." In this case the target was a soldier. It does not make the crime less reprehensible. It does however call to question the term "Terrorist"
Back to article