The matter can be set out with a question: what is terrorism? Yes, it seems a silly question, everyone knows the meaning of terrorism, don’t we? However, there are some odd difficulties to define certain actions as terrorism or not.
In this post, “8 questions about the ‘oops’ justification”, the author argue against the common justification for the murder of hundreds of innocent Palestinians by Israel Defence Forces:
We are told: There is a fundamental difference between the Israeli regime and the Hamas regime. It is named as “intent.” Hamas intends to kill many (and actually kills few). Israel intends to kill few (and actually kills many). Isn’t it clear which side is the side of moral decency?
His answer is “no”, and explains it in his post, it’s worth to read it.
But I wanted to stay in one of the questions, as I said, what is terrorism? Strangely, there isn’t a legal definition of terrorism in any institution of the international community, as UN. It has been said that the reason for that lack of definition is that any reasonable one would convert in terrorists all U.S. presidents since World War II; obviously including the current president and his drone strikes.
A common definition of terrorism is something like this: those violent acts that are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political, or ideological goal, and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (Wikipedia: Terrorism).
But that poses some problems. If someone explodes a handcrafted bomb in a building trying to kill an enemy general, and doesn’t care if the bomb also kills other 15 people -family, neighbours and bystanders-, is that terrorism? Everyone will answer “yes”. If a fighter jet or a drone launches a missile on a building trying to kill an enemy combatant, and doesn’t care if the missile also kills other 15 people -family, neighbours and bystanders-, is that terrorism? Now we can understand why there isn’t a legal definition of terrorism.
Ok, come back to Gaza, where Israel started a massive bombardment and invasion on 8 July. Since that day, Israel Defence (!) Forces have killed 820 people, 85% of them (700) civilians; in the other side, Hamas has killed 32 Israeli soldiers and 2 civilians. It’s meaningful that 85% of deaths by Israeli army are civilians, and the percentage is a 5,8% of dead civilians by Hamas. If Israeli army is trying to kill terrorists and Hamas is trying to kill civilians, both are extremely clumsy. The same happened when Israel attacked Lebanon some years ago: Israel killed a huge number of civilians, while Hizbulla (other alleged terrorist group) attacked Israeli soldiers.
I know, it can be argued that Israel is always the invader (although Zionists and their supporters don’t like this word, but is the word used when an army occupies a territory outside of the borders of their country). But when Hamas militants come into Israeli territory, do they go to a kibutz, a village, maybe a road to attack a bus? No, each time a Hamas command come into Israel, they search for a military detachment, despite of the evidence that it would be much easier to attack civilians; in one of these attacks, a few days ago, Hamas militants killed two Israeli soldiers.
So, these days we are listening or reading that bombarding a hospital or a group of children playing football at a beach are “legitimate war actions”. In the other side, shooting against enemy soldiers is a “terrorist attack”. The meaning of “terrorism” begins to be complex.
I’ve mentioned that cases, the bombardment of a hospital (four times in different days) and the murder of the children at a beach from a ship, because these cases aren’t mistakes nor collateral damages, with no doubt, they were conscious and deliberate attacks; the goal was to destroy a hospital and to kill medical personnel, patients and children. There are many more cases of deliberate murders of helpless civilians. In the next video, a volunteer looking for wounded people is shot by a sniper and finished off when is lying on the ground, wounded; nobody can pretend that the volunteer was mislead with a combatant.
Let’s come back to the definition of terrorism: those violent acts that are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political, or ideological goal, and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants. It’s obvious Israel army disregard the safety of non-combatants, since most of their victims are helpless non-combatants; but also, Israel army is deliberately targeting non-combatants as well, as we have seen. It’s totally impossible to deny that Israel Defence (!) Forces are doing terrorist attacks in Palestine.
Then, Zionists and their supporters must reject that definition, and look for a definition that let Israel having the most moral army in the world, as they like to claim. Here it is: whatever Israel Defence Forces do is legitimate self-defence, whatever Hamas does, and by extension any Palestinian, is terrorism.
If someone can think that is a plausible definition, then can continue supporting the murder of hundreds or thousands of civilians. Or even enjoying the show, as some Israeli people do comfortably seated on a hilltop, eating popcorn and drinking beer, cheering as bombs tear apart non-Jewish people. As another sample of brutal barbarism, we have seen these days in Israel a parliament member claiming that mothers of enemy combatants should be killed, and an academic saying Hamas militants’ mothers and sisters should be raped; before or after killing them?
Hug a terrorist
Once determined that every Palestinian are terrorists for Israel regime and its supporters… hug a terrorist. This video, made in Canada, will be good to finish this post with a better taste in the mouth.
Produced by Like for Syria https://www.youtube.com/likeforsyria