Israeli bus killer lynched by mob

[Merlov01]

Quote by: shrike I agree with Sharon on this one. We bring our terrorists to justice contrary to Palestinians do nothing to stop them or to bring them to justice. The Palestinians glorifying their terrorists and make them heroes in the eyes of the children so that next generation of suicide bomber will grow up. The terrorists don't need any justification to commit their terror acts. They will do every time when they have possibility .For example in the middle of cease fire the Islam Jihad committed suicide bombing in Netaniya killing 4 civilians. Btw This soldiers was a deserter so his weapon should have been taken by his commanders. I hope they going to pay for that mistake

Killing a soldier isn't an act of terrorism. Interesting how you agree with Sharon that it was an 'attack', look at the story.

[shrike]

Quote by: Merlov01 Killing a soldier isn't an act of terrorism. Interesting how you agree with Sharon that it was an 'attack', look at the story.

Where did I say it is?

[rorystokes]

Israeli bus killer lynched by mob!
There was me thinking this HUGE Israeli had killed a bus!

[righthand]

Quote by: Merlov01 Killing a soldier isn't an act of terrorism.

It would not be an act of heroism, would it???

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon called the incident a reprehensible act by a "bloodthirsty terrorist". So Sharon said that he was a terrorist. He should know. It takes one to know one, right? [Qibya]The question is then, when did Natan-Zada become a terrorist?

• If and when he left the army, but AWOL doesn't usually equal terrorist. And the IDF buried him.
• When he made the decision to do what he did. But if at the last moment he changed his mind, then surely he would be only a potential terrorist. And that would apply to most of the IDF, who aim to kill.
• When he fired his gun, killing the driver. If he had not subsequently died, I question if he would he still be labelled a terrorist.
• When he died. This would be my best bet as he then he had no value to the State and was only an embarrassment. (When the Prime Minister was assassinated, I do not remember the assassin being treated as a terrorist. Was it because he survived?)
• Was it from when Sharon, the expert, pronounced that he was a terrorist? Or was Noha Maqadmeh and her ten children terrorists, too
• Unknown.

But...Sharon was WRONG.

Mia Amazing that Sharon would be honest and call the man a terrorist. Despite what Shrike would have us believe, this is not the norm. Neither the US or Israel ever call it's own terrorists, only the other 'side'. I'm I'm wrong, Shrike, please post the evidence of Israel calling it's own terrorists, or doing anything really other than saying 'we have a right to defend ourselves'.

Yes, you were wrong and right. There are Israeli terrorists but not Jewish Israeli terrorists. You cannot even have the odd nut case who is a terrorist, especially if he's a Zionist. "A reprehensible act by a bloodthirsty Jewish terrorist who sought to attack innocent Israeli citizens" but Sharon flip flops. Or he did back then, supposedly. I wonder when he is due to grab the headlines again?

Under Israeli law, only attacks by "enemies of Israel" are considered terrorists, and so Natan-Zada has not been legally recognised as a terrorist nor the people he killed as victims of terrorism. From its terrorist/freedom fighter origins, it had to be so.