This week saw permission finally given for the media to publicise the identity of Jacob Teitel, a Jewish terrorist arrested about a month ago for his involvement in a series of attacks and attempted attacks against Arabs, left-wing Jews, messianic Jews, and possibly also homosexuals.
Responses have been more or less predictable. Many settlers and their supporters have focussed their responses less on the deeds allegedly carried out by Teitel than on countering the supposed left-wing tarnishing of all settlers with Teitel's brush. Some have made the absurd comparison to Assaf Goldring, a depressed, mentally unstable father who murdered his own child. It makes no more sense, they say, to talk about the 'settlers' and their values in discussing Teitel, than it does to talk about the 'secular' and their principles in relation to Goldring. Of course, the comparison is nonsensical. Goldring's disgusting actions stemmed from a combination of mental instability and personal strife; his motivations were not political. There is indeed no association between 'secular values' and his actions.
Responses have been more or less predictable. Many settlers and their supporters have focussed their responses less on the deeds allegedly carried out by Teitel than on countering the supposed left-wing tarnishing of all settlers with Teitel's brush. Some have made the absurd comparison to Assaf Goldring, a depressed, mentally unstable father who murdered his own child. It makes no more sense, they say, to talk about the 'settlers' and their values in discussing Teitel, than it does to talk about the 'secular' and their principles in relation to Goldring. Of course, the comparison is nonsensical. Goldring's disgusting actions stemmed from a combination of mental instability and personal strife; his motivations were not political. There is indeed no association between 'secular values' and his actions.
Teitel's activities, on the other hand, were motivated by a set of values held passionately by many within his community and those like it. One need only walk into any shul in Israel, and peruse one of the many pamphlets on the weekly Torah portion, in order to get an idea of the kind of vitriol that is seen as acceptable within many/most religious-Zionist communities. These same values, this same hatred, motivated Teitel. True, most people who share his worldview do not express their views through violence. But there is an ideological climate that cannot be ignored.
Some of the leaders of the so-called Israeli left and centre, for their part, have proven once again their hypocrisy—and possibly their racism—when it comes to dealing with terrorists. Where are the calls to destroy the terrorist's family's home? Just last year, when a Palestinian terrorist from Jabel Mukaber massacred students in the Merkaz Harav yeshiva, then- (and now-) defence minister, Ehud Barak, not only called for the terrorist's family's home to be destroyed; he called for the legal processes involved to be adjusted so that the house could be destroyed more quickly (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1009167.html). Where are those calls now? Is the defence minister unable to arrange for the destruction of a house of the family of a terrorist who is Jewish? Does his family have rights that the Merkaz Harav terrorist's family does not?
Of course, I don't think the houses of Teitel's family should be destroyed. If they were involved in his activities, then they should stand trial just as he will, and face the consequences of their actions as mandated by the law. If they weren't involved, then to destroy their homes as a 'deterrent' to potential future terrorists, whether effective or not, would be a gross violation of their human rights. Just as it would be a gross violation of their rights to destroy their homes if they, and Teitel himself, were Arabs. This is known as the rule of law; it's held in quite high esteem in some places.
Of course, I don't think the houses of Teitel's family should be destroyed. If they were involved in his activities, then they should stand trial just as he will, and face the consequences of their actions as mandated by the law. If they weren't involved, then to destroy their homes as a 'deterrent' to potential future terrorists, whether effective or not, would be a gross violation of their human rights. Just as it would be a gross violation of their rights to destroy their homes if they, and Teitel himself, were Arabs. This is known as the rule of law; it's held in quite high esteem in some places.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment