Skip to main content

No motive




It was a clever plan. A 17-year-old carpentry-apprentice waited patiently until the target client purchased furniture from his employer, who in return tasked the young man in particular with delivering the furniture to the target’s rented apartment. Just when he made sure that no one was around, except for the landlord of course, the master-mind behind the plot charged and stabbed the victim with a screw-driver-turned-into-a-weapon. The victim quickly reached for his gun and fired a round of shots in the air that killed both the young attacker, and the innocent bystander (landlord). The failed attempt was politically motivated, as intelligently clarified by the law enforcement authorities of the screw driver victim’s country. Yes, the 17-year-old planned all of this to get out an important political message. No one shall be safe…furniture shops will serve as a breeding ground for young political criminal wannabes.  

The whole incident, sarcasm-free, occurred a week earlier when an Israeli embassy security guard shot dead a 17-year-old Jordanian man and the landlord who was at the wrong place at the wrong time. Allegedly, the young man was delivering furniture to the Israeli man, when they both quarrelled and the former attacked the latter with a screwdriver. To defend himself, the Israeli security guard reached out for his gun (like a sensible person would do), and with little regard to human life, killed both the young boy and the landlord who was standing there.

The tragedy of the entire episode, besides the unnecessary and unjustified death of two Jordanians, is the casual reaction of the Israeli government to the crime. To add insult to injury, Israeli officials have suggested that the incident was political (in response to the riots in Jerusalem following Tel Aviv’s wise decision to place metal detectors at Al Aqsa Mosque’s site).

By insisting on diplomatic immunity that protects the guard from questioning and prosecution, and by fabricating events and insisting on the ‘political motive’, Israel masked the regular excessive, brutal, unjustifiable, and non-discriminatory act with the typical self-defence rhetoric.

Any incident, any place and any time is meant to directly harm the innocent and defenceless (but gun bearing) Israeli civil servants – that is the common perception marketed by the masters of the victimisation theory. Had Tel Aviv had a little bit of tact, they would have at least given themselves some time to investigate the elements behind the incident and then blame it on political agendas.

It could have been a regular, old fashion argument between a client and an employee. It could have been an act of rage by a young young boy, which could have been handled more compassionately and wisely by an older and more sensible man. It could have been so many things, but death should not have been one of them.

God rest the souls of the two innocent victims.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Just as Orwell Said

         George Orwell said in his famous book 1984 that “first they steal the words, then they steal the meaning”, accurately foreseeing the political actions of world leaders and their manipulation of public opinion. His words are ever so precise once one examines the vocabulary applied by a number of world leaders when describing the policies and regimes of troubling countries: axis of evil, war on terror, terrorist killers, harbourers of fundamentalism etc. Ironic it is to see how those who were once described to have been allies with Satan himself seem to show good will in a matter of very few years. Iran is one very good example of this. The Persian nation has come out as a winner in the Geneva talks that were held in October, where not only did it get applauded for the concessions it offered, but it also ensured the west’s acceptance of its regional weight. Everyone seems to be more relaxed after the negotiations and a new round of talks has been set for November.  

Pan-Arabism vs. Middle Easternism?

             A rab Nationalism, a romantic concept that moved poets to write ballads, intellectuals to preach volumes, activists to passionately organize and the masses to cheer freedom. A concept introduced by students at the American University of Beirut in the last phases of the ageing Ottoman Empire and studied in secret societies. This concept developed and led, under western planning, to the Great Arab Revolt in 1916. The slogans of Arab revival and freedom from Ottoman tyranny swept the Arab nations, where hopes of independence and self-rule were promised by the restoration of Arab control over the area. Then problems arose. Who are Arabs? What is an Aran nation? How does it extend geographically? Is it an area that encompasses people who speak the same language and share the same history? If so, why did the Lebanese Maronites reject the concept of Arab nationalism and insist on a Lebanese identity? Why did the Egyptians hesitate before including themselves under th

Wishing You a New MENA

Journalist and author of A nd Then All Hell Broke Loose: Two Decades in the Middle East   said that “Everything changed with the First World War. The Middle East was reorganized, redefined, and the seeds were planted for a century of bloodshed.” He was not entirely right. Bloodshed lasted more than a century actually. Here we are in 2019, and the Middle East and North Africa region – the infamous MENA – is still a boisterous, rowdy zone of political recrimination, military coups, conspiracy theories, historic reminiscence, oil squabbles, and religiously-infused rhetoric. Blood shed of course as well. Well, here we are.  Algeria is set to head to the polls in April. President Abdelaziz Bouteflika will likely secure a fifth mandate. If not, Algeria’s powerbrokers, mainly the military and powerful business elites will enter into an expensive bargain of security versus social and economic stability. Having vested the long-enjoyed tranquillity on a political figure, rather than a