This article,
written by Tal Gilad, first appeared in Hebrew on February 2, 2017, at the end
of the trial of Elor Azaria. It was published in “Makor Rishon.” It was
translated into English by Bat-Zion Susskind-Sacks.
It is
difficult to write about Elor Azaria. The entire affair is an absurd dance, so hallucinatory,
frustrating, and depressing, in a way that one does not know where to commence.
The point that continues to echo in my head, though, is one that seems to be
taken out of a horror show in hell, was to hear the judges say that Elor
attacked the “Sanctity of Life” principle. Throttled Mother Theresa during
helping the poor. The Sanctity of the Life of a terrorist?
As far as
we, Yisraelis, are concerned - and no, we do not have the privilege of seeing
it from a different point of view - it is irrational and unethical for us to practice
any sensitivity to the “sanctity” of life of people for whom we are the object of
desire for obliteration, who hold a declared ideology on the subject and even arrived
with the goal of putting that ideology
to practice.
Perhaps, it is necessary to explain that which is self-explanatory. A terrorist is not a criminal, not even a POW or a bomber of the common kind. Even a law offender acts within the boundaries of the society of which he is a part. He committed a crime and for that specific issue, he must be punished within his community, when the goal of the punishment is, mostly, to correct or deter. It is meant to bring matters back to the course of law and order.
In the more sever circle, one can find treason, espionage etc., despite the fact that they do not always involve death directly, these are acts which are aimed, intentionally and maliciously, against an entire entity, an attack on security interests and endangering an entire state and its citizens. The punishments, in such cases, are severe in most countries, generally a long sentence or even the death penalty. Still, vaguely, there is a framework of abiding by the rules of the game, a dirty crime, where there is, nonetheless, room for a legal debate and both sides are equal in the eyes of the law.
A bit further in the vague realms, dwell the “classic” terrorists, such as the Irish underground, or the anarchists who used to blow up coffee shops. If we analyze their horrific deeds, we would still discover that they stem from some kind of a twisted ideology of “destroying in order to build a new society” or in order to banish the British, where the civilians that were hurt were not the target itself, or as means of spreading fear. The Irish underground did not have a set doctrine according to which one has to kill all of England and annihilate its citizens.
A terrorist who attacks Yisrael does not belong to any of these circles. He is from a different world. His sole goal is to destroy the whole organism, anyone and anything that is in it, including the lawmakers, the laws and the entire body of voters, for or against, including those who are fighting for his rights and his sanctity of life or defend him in court, including his children and their babies. He is coming to murder us all because in his eyes, it is the right and educational step to take. There are no rules and no fair play, one should only kill, and we are not the means, we are the target. Morally, as far as we are concerned, he is not supposed to have any rights, there is nothing to fix, deter or understand.
Perhaps, it is necessary to explain that which is self-explanatory. A terrorist is not a criminal, not even a POW or a bomber of the common kind. Even a law offender acts within the boundaries of the society of which he is a part. He committed a crime and for that specific issue, he must be punished within his community, when the goal of the punishment is, mostly, to correct or deter. It is meant to bring matters back to the course of law and order.
In the more sever circle, one can find treason, espionage etc., despite the fact that they do not always involve death directly, these are acts which are aimed, intentionally and maliciously, against an entire entity, an attack on security interests and endangering an entire state and its citizens. The punishments, in such cases, are severe in most countries, generally a long sentence or even the death penalty. Still, vaguely, there is a framework of abiding by the rules of the game, a dirty crime, where there is, nonetheless, room for a legal debate and both sides are equal in the eyes of the law.
A bit further in the vague realms, dwell the “classic” terrorists, such as the Irish underground, or the anarchists who used to blow up coffee shops. If we analyze their horrific deeds, we would still discover that they stem from some kind of a twisted ideology of “destroying in order to build a new society” or in order to banish the British, where the civilians that were hurt were not the target itself, or as means of spreading fear. The Irish underground did not have a set doctrine according to which one has to kill all of England and annihilate its citizens.
A terrorist who attacks Yisrael does not belong to any of these circles. He is from a different world. His sole goal is to destroy the whole organism, anyone and anything that is in it, including the lawmakers, the laws and the entire body of voters, for or against, including those who are fighting for his rights and his sanctity of life or defend him in court, including his children and their babies. He is coming to murder us all because in his eyes, it is the right and educational step to take. There are no rules and no fair play, one should only kill, and we are not the means, we are the target. Morally, as far as we are concerned, he is not supposed to have any rights, there is nothing to fix, deter or understand.
Intra-galactic
values
This is analogous to extra-terrestrials that come to annihilate humanity to make frozen food out of it or just because they dislike Earth. They do not try to scare; they are not trying to harm the national interests or to free anyone from “the Occupation.” They come to kill, and for the purpose of killing, the more, the better and we do not interest them beyond that. We are not obliged by any intra-galactic values. There is not much that we can do other than defend ourselves and kill them in return. There is no Geneva Convention for devouring extra-terrestrials, they will gobble and package for takeaway including Geneva.
This is analogous to extra-terrestrials that come to annihilate humanity to make frozen food out of it or just because they dislike Earth. They do not try to scare; they are not trying to harm the national interests or to free anyone from “the Occupation.” They come to kill, and for the purpose of killing, the more, the better and we do not interest them beyond that. We are not obliged by any intra-galactic values. There is not much that we can do other than defend ourselves and kill them in return. There is no Geneva Convention for devouring extra-terrestrials, they will gobble and package for takeaway including Geneva.
Clearly the
Palestinians see it differently. We have no problem with the Palestinians admiring
the terrorist and naming city squares after him, in the same manner that the
extra-terrestrials will gurgle songs of praise for the one brave member who
traveled lightyears merely to bring them back fresh humans from
earth. It is not my business, nor my role to educate either the Palestinians or
the extra-terrestrials. It is a situation of a total clash of interests and
irrelevant on who is right. It does not belong here. In such a situation, I am
entirely duty bound to my interest. As a Jew in Yisrael, I have no right to
view it from any other angle, it would be irresponsible of me towards my
children. And, please, be wise enough to distinguish between the readiness of a
large portion of the public to principally understand that which they see as
national aspirations of the Palestinians and the twisted recognition of the willingness of
terror organizations to murder us all and the sense of their ”Sanctity of Life”
concept. The first is a legitimate discussion, the second, never.
Somehow, the
feeling that whoever is sensitive to the sanctity of life of the one who comes
to slaughter him and his family, is a super moral kind, has taken roots. A
heavenly creature with a halo of light and a soprano church choir accompany his
appearance at our gate. He is not, he is an irresponsible idiot and the last
thing one can say about him is that he is righteous because his fake morality
endangers others. It is not morality, it is an infantile narcissism of the kind
of “wow, I am so good.” These are two entirely different creatures. One has practical
and educational values, the other is a monster in a sheep’s skin.
Elor killed
a terrorist. He merely helped a dying terrorist reach the seventy-two virgins,
fifteen minutes earlier. He broke the law, true, and if someone breaks the law,
he should be punished. So keep him confined to his base over the weekend and
warn him that next time he should conduct and legal verification of death
procedure and not wait eleven minutes. But stop pumping yourselves with the “sanctity
of life,” of a terrorist. You have entirely gone mad; you lost your compass.
No comments:
Post a Comment