Wednesday, November 04, 2009


While those on the left are besmirching Jewish settlers and communities because of one man, more and more information is coming out that indicates this guy is run-of-the-mill psychopathic serial killer, who we are now dubbing the J-unabomber (alternate spelling: Jewnabomber or Junabomber - help us decide).

Police now believe he murdered 2 traffic cops in the Jordan Valley 8 months ago.

This reminds of another Israeli (Secular) serial killer a few years back (1997).

Foreign hitchhikers were murdered and injured on the road down to Eilat.

The police found the (Secular) suspect. An IDF officer, Major Daniel Okev from Even Yehuda (near Netanya). At the time it was believed he was responsible for other missing tourists, but I never heard anything more about it.

Yet no one in the (Israeli) media was condemning the IDF or the (secular) community of Even Yehuda, or Netanya which it is near, or the center of the country where he lived. (The anti-Semites on the other hand had a field day).

I mean after all, we can't blame an entire secular community or secular society or secular educational system for a few wild weeds in their garden.

And don't get me started on all the (Secular) youth club stabbings happening in Tel Aviv - again products of their neighbors, neighborhoods, communities, and educational system.

You could say that one man's serial killer is another man's battering ram.

I think I've made my point clear.

Visiting Israel?
Learn to Shoot at
Caliber-3 with top Israeli Anti-Terror Experts!

Wherever I am, my blog turns towards Eretz Yisrael טובה הארץ מאד מאד


Commenter Abbi said...

Charedim also always whine about this when someone from their community does something horrendous. American Jews were also put off when Madoff was constantly identified as "Jewish" in the papers.

It's fairly obvious that when you have a community that stridently identifies as "religious/God fearing/holy(ier than thou)" and one member turns out to be a serial killer, yeah, it's going to make that community look particularly bad. Guilt by association is a pretty common human trait. So is pride by association- aren't you proud that Albert Einstein was Jewish? Or do you say "So what, he was just another smart human being who lived and died a long time ago, what does he have to do with me?

Secular people don't advertise themselves as answering to a higher moral/ethical code devised by God, so when one of them turns out to be a serial killer, it packs less of a punch. The guy committed a horrible crime, but he's not as much of a hypocrite and he didn't shame his entire God fearing community.

It's part of associating with a particular community. If you don't like it, leave the community.

JoeSettler said...

Secular people don't advertise themselves as answering to a higher moral/ethical code devised by God

So you're saying that makes secular people feel (or be) exempt from feeling/taking communal blame/responsibility when one of the neighborhood kids stabs another in a club or kills a taxi driver for fun, or gang rapes another neighbor's kid?

And therefore no one may point out the failures in their parenting, family, education, society, etc. because they as a group and as individuals don't aim for anything higher than self-serving hedonism?

Was that your point?

JoeSettler said...

Furthermore, pride in one's community's accomplishments arise when the community feels they are working towards that accomplishment as a community goal ideal, or these are shared values of the community.

When a member of a community does not act within/towards the communities goals the community members see that as a failure of the individual and a defection from the community.

It reflects back badly in terms of outsiders identifying the individual as part of the community, which now rejects him for not meeting their standards/goals/ideals.

But within the secular, you are either implying there are no communal goals or ideals for any of these criminals to have violated... or that by default secular Jews, forming the majority, don't need to defend themselves against claims that their society has failed, because any such claims can just be dismissed and ignored.

JoeSettler said...

Secular people don't advertise themselves as answering to a higher moral/ethical code devised by God

No. Peace Now, Anarchists for Peace, and all their friends advertise themselves as serving a higher moral/ethical code of their own devising.

Surprisingly though, that code does allow for tax fraud, weekly violence against soldiers and policemen, plagiarism, and other means to reach their ends. Yet secular society seems to accept it OK.

Commenter Abbi said...

I don't believe I said anywhere that no one may point out secular people's failures. You can feel free to whine about them as much as you like. They are exempt from communal identification because they don't identify themselves as as a community per se. Charedim identify themselves to separate from the secular majority. So do settlers and dati leumi. When you separate to identify yourself for other life purposes, yes, you will be identified when a community member reflects negatively on you.

But because secular people don't identify themselves as a cohesive community that represents higher moral ideals, it's kind of pointless to rail against them as a community . You're not really saying anything (but that seems to be your specialty).

"But within the secular, you are either implying there are no communal goals or ideals for any of these criminals to have violated.."

Yes exactly.

Peace Now and Anarachists for whatever are fringe groups.Being a secular Israeli doesn't mean you necessarily identify with Peace Now and if a member of these groups committed a crime, than i'm sure they would be identifed as "Peace Now activist Yosef Cohen killed 9 people yesterday". But being a Peace Now activist doesn't reflect badly on the secular public in general. A religious settler murderer reflects badly on the whole settler community and Torah-believing Jews in general.

Whether or not the secular media is interested in Peace Now's tax issues has nothing to do with a Jewish man claiming to be religious who murder people.

Didn't you learn anything when your teacher said "Behave nicely on the bus when you wear a kippa because you're representing the whole Jewish people"?

Olah Chadasha said...

Jameel, are you actually saying you have a problem with political activists using one random person as a poster boy and rallying cry for their cause?

I for one don't see the problem. Obviously, a person's address is directly correlated to the crimes they commit. Yup. Extensive studies about this. Nothing to blame but geography.

Jameel @ The Muqata said...

OC: btw -- I didn't write this post, JoeSettler did!


Orange and Black said...

This man is a seriel killer. What does religion even have to do with it? Because he wears a kipa and lives in a religious community. So we might as well paint the entire secular community the same way because they don't wear a kipa and commit awful crimes too and more often. His religion is irrelevant. If he wasn't wearing a kipa he would have killed poeple anyway too. Last week they caught some mother abusing her children, the only thing we know about her is that she wasn't religous and from a religious community, because they didn't mention her community and religous beliefes at all.

JoeSettler said...

So far no one has weighed in on the most important issue.

Is it:

a) J-unabomber
b) Junabomber
c) Jewnabomber

Yochanan said...

Let's go the super antisemitic route and go with the "Joooabomber"

Yochanan said...

Sorry, that should be "Joonabomber"

MAOZ said...

Needs a few more o's.


Ethan said...

Lets be completely honest here as we demand from the other side, lest we lose the moral authority to see the difference between right and wrong.

Baruch Goldstein's grave today is a shrine. Noam Federman apparently feels an appropriate use of his time is spent guarding this "precious" shrine, lest any group visit it and besmirch "Dr. Baruch Goldstein's name." This same man guarding Baruch Goldstein's shrine, (complete with tens of stones from "pilgrims") is featured on Arutz "Day in the life of Noam Federman." David Wilder, head of the Jewish Community of Hebron, describes this guardian of Goldstein's shrine and bullyer of any group critical of Goldstein as "The foundation of his opinions rest upon the pillars of Am Yisrael, Eretz Yisrael and Torat Yisrael" I even have arutz sheva and women in green giving me updates on his hunger strike to protest the violation of his "civil rights!"

The same wonderful "Arutz Sheva" runs articles defending terrorists who target perfectly innocent women and children on the basis of nothing more than their race, giving these terrorists "the benefit of the doubt." Is that the same arutz sheva that features interviews and positive coverage of Baruch Marzel, who called for a "holy war" against homosexuals or the same A7 whose only mention of Yigal Amir is when arguing that he was the victim of a conspiracy or arguing for his clemency?

In the other post when I took Joe Settler to task for his double standards, AYNYRAND complained about the Moral Relativism of the Left. Moral absolutism is not the same as tribalism. Harping on the primitiveness of Arab society and their excuses for violence and backwardness while complaining about the lack of nuance and perspective when I point out the above isnt moral courage or moral absolutism or speaking uncomfortable truths to power. Its not even moral relativism - its simply tribalism. Speaking "uncomfortable truths" dosent only work when its uncomfortable to someone else. Be a proud tribalist if youd like - but call it what it is. Unlike Joe the settler, I can make fun of the mayor of London for his call for "cultural sensitivity" because I won't then whine about the lack of "nuance" or "anti-settler prejudice" when I say that Baruch Marzel is a primitive violent thug when he calls for a "holy war against homosexuals." Or is that one subject on which you agree with "primitive backwards Arab culture?" I can say that anyone who rationalizes Hamas terrorism is sick and evil because in the same breath I'll say that there is not one iota of a difference between Hamas sympathizers and anyone who blesses the memory of Baruch Goldstein and maintains his grave as a shrine. Is that "unnuanced" of me? Is that engaging in hateful stereotypes to point out that apparently not many from your community has the courage to say the same about Noam Federman or that they support organizations and news services sympathetic to him? So apparently everyone engages in "unfair" scapegoating when they say that maybe Baruch Marzel and Noam Federman and the veneration of "Baruch HaGever" Goldstein and his shrine perhaps contributed to the mindset of Teitel? You can be a moral relativist or a moral absolutist - not both at the same time.

Zionist Jew said...

To Ethan on Baruch Goldstein:
Havin discussed this with my brother who is secular,also knowing the way these people who made a shrine..his outraged reply was:If Baruch Goldstein were around to see this phenomenon
he'd horrified.
And as my brother is a wise fellow I can believe his opinon on this a 100%.
I for one would not make a shrine as though he was A HERO.
He did much for the community and as my Bro' says:HE JUST FOR ONE MINUTE HE LOST IT.
If some of disagree fine by me.No problem.I am only paraphrasing.

Search the Muqata



Related Posts with Thumbnails