MK Bahloul defends remark that Hebron stabber is not a terrorist
Ahiya Raved
Published: 09.04.16, 19:16
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
5 Talkbacks for this article
1. If he wasnt a terrorist, he was legally killed. End of story
Jake   (04.10.16)
If you consider this stabber a soldier doing his job of killing the occupier soldier, then he was killed in action on the battlefield. A soldier out of uniform is considered a spy, which makes him a legal target for field execution.
2. Because we've got idiots like Livni&Barak it doesn't mean
that anything goes. Yes, he is right: it is a WAR for territory between two opposing races, Jews and Arabs. No "Palestinians", thank you. Baloul is regarded as one of "us". But surprise (to some): he IS NOT!!!!
3. Bahloul is right. Is attacking Hamas gunman terror?
Andi ,   Israel   (04.10.16)
Attacking soldiers or armed combatants is not terror any more than we attacking Hamas armed combatants is terror. Terror is deliberately attacking innocent civilians.
4. There is a significant difference
Moshe ,   Israel   (04.10.16)
The Jewish undergrounds who have fought the Brits wanted a homeland for the Jews. Britain has not negotiated with them over their aspiration. Therefore, they were freedom fighters. Israel, on the other hand, negotiated several times with the Pals willing to grant them a state, but realized that this was not their goal. All they want is Israel's destruction. Thus, the Palestinian assassin in Hebron was a sheer terrorist.
5. the stabber was an enemy illegal combatant
c   (04.10.16)
he is not a member of a uniformed army. hee was laying in wait to murder israelis. he murdered a memebr of the idf in territory under israel's authority.
Back to article