Today, Palestinian spokesman Nabil Abu Rudineh denounced Israel for “executing” a Palestinian boy, and compared this incident to the murder of Muhammad al Durah in 2000. The mashup got tweeted almost simultaneously.
#NEW_MUHAMMAD_ALDURAH
The discourse is powerful on multiple levels. Associating this picture with Al Durah attempts to give it the power was the icon of hatred that gave the “Al Aqsa Intifada” so much of its intensity, it was literally a banner of violence.
It fed an entire industry of indoctrinating hatred and a desire for martyrdom among Palestinian youth. As one fresh faced 12 year old girl assured her approving interviewer, “everyone want to be a martyr.” By which she meant, everyone wants to blow themselves up amidst a bunch of Israelis to kill and maim as many of them as possible.
The product of that hatred is this second lad, born just at the time the Al Durah icon of hatred hit the world. This time Hassan was actually shot and killed by an Israeli. But he was not an innocent bystander like Muhammad al Durah (who wasn’t shot), but he and his cousin had just stabbed and nearly killed three Israelis including a 13-year old boy.
Someone who can see this latter case as the equivalent of Muhammad al Durah, even if they were not aware of the false information about his death, makes no distinction between innocence and guilt, none between illegitimate violence and self-protection. And the reason they do not see these differences is because, in their eyes, the enemy – in this case Israelis – deserve no consideration as people. They have no right to resist attacks, no claim on justice to fight back against murderers; they must stand down before the violence that stalks them.
On a cultural level, this is among the most extreme positions of the tribal ethos – my side right or wrong. “We” are always right. The “other” always wrong, and must be destroyed. If you do violence to me, you’re guilty; if I do violence to you, I’m innocent and you deserve it.
On a religious level, this is among the most extreme positions of triumphalism. Our religion is superior to all, therefore anyone “blameworthy” enough to reject it, has no right to resist our dominion.
Whichever way one places the emphasis (cultural/religious), this attitude is deeply ominous and should set off alarm bells among anyone committed to an egalitarian, empathic, prosperous and non-coercive world.
And whoever understands the staggering role of the current mainstream media – BBC and NYT and NGOs in the lead – in reinforcing this deeply distorted moral vision of Muslim victimization, should feel dismayed for the prospects of a free and responsible press in a democratic society.
UPDATE: The 2015 “Al Durah” turns up alive at Israeli hospital.
Here’s the footage of the incident itself, where it’s clear the boy is neither dead nor particularly badly hurt.
and here he is in Israel’s Hadassah Ein Karem.
Israel can never win the war of propaganda as shows this film with the serene voice of the story teller.
I think the Ramallah lynching is relevant in this context.
you mean, when they tore the soldiers’ bodies apart with their bare hands, shouting “revenge for Muhammad al Durah”?
Yes, it happened on Oct. 12.
The beastly bloodthirsty wild nature of the Arab crowd is quite contrasted with the Israeli one.
Well said as always.
Just one note, the expression “Allah Ackbar” is explicitly triumphalism. So is the expression “Arab Lands” or “Muslim Lands” or what should at most be shared holy sites turned into exclusively “the 3rd Holiest Site” in the entire world for Islam.
I feel bad for the kid. He’s as much a victim of this craziness as anybody else. It’s the culture from which he comes that’s at fault. If they REALLY cared they’d look inwards. But they don’t.
The human sacrifice continues.
Which one of them do you feel bad about? The Israeli victim or the Arab assailant, both aged 13, treated in an Israeli hospital or the 15 yrs old dead beast?
I feel badly for both of them. No innocent person should ever be killed, and certainly not a child. And no child’s childhood should be stolen from him by inculcating him with so much hate that he literally becomes an instrument of evil and is shot dead (out of necessity)by by the age of 13 in the midst of committing murder.
Both these kids lose.
The kids are just tools.
Palestinianism is what’s responsible.
It’s been killing both us and it’s own children for near 100 years.
Disgusting moral equivalence.
The use of passive tense is too telling. The Arab assailants were very active with their knives.
Another human sacrifice. A child.
And another swatch of fabric added to the quilt of the lethal narrative. Another swatch of red.
What the Ramallah thugs do is simply project their intentions on al-Yahud. It may sound nice and fluffy to journey whose concept of responsibility means delivering their stance on matters they don’t even try to understand, but the moral equivalence here is a perversion.
Israeli children are not born and educated to commit Jihad. There’s no such thing in Judaism.
Pingback: A gyűlölet újabb ikonja | Periszkóp