Sometimes this seems to be a really hard word to define. At least for some. Another popular saying goes “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”. It seems today that especially left oriented ideologists tend to mince this, and thus making excuses for Arab Islamist extremists. However, real freedom fighters usually don’t make a habit of achieving fame and claiming honor by deliberately executing civilian unarmed defenseless mothers and their children at point blank range, execution style to the head, for the sole reason that they happen to belong to the “wrong” ethnic group. Jew-hating terrorists do however, and have time and time again acted accordingly, and have done so a lot lately.

Nations and states have been struggling with this word; “terror”. Some even point their fingers at the UN and (rightfully) claim that even they have problems defining what terror really is. Well, except from when the UN office headquarters in Iraq was hit on August 19, 2003, by a bomb blast. Then the UN press statement by UN Chairman Kofi Annan himself, read that the UN had been targeted by, and I quote: “unprovoked and murderous violence”. Which is another and pretty good summary of what terror is really all about.

A Swedish journalist, occasionally employed by AB, and author by the name of Björn Kumm has written the book “History of Terrorism” (reprinted and updated in 2003) where certain misapprehensions are put into printed words. His readers are informed in the chapter “The first terrorists” that in the world history the first terrorists were the Jews. And the author of crime novels, Liza Marklund, believed him: “The first terrorists. They were Jews” – more or less like a parrot she repeated this without a flinch, and without questioning.

The author does not explain, or give any really good explanation, anywhere in his book, the definition of what the term “terror” means in itself, except perhaps in “The poor mans choice”. According to the online Merriam-Webster encyclopedia however, the definition is: “violence: (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands.” Then one might continue to read the American (as in USA) definitions and what the CIA, the US government intelligence department writes:
“The Intelligence Community is guided by the definition of terrorism contained in Title 22 of the US Code, Section 2656f(d):
— The term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.
— The term “international terrorism” means terrorism involving the territory or the citizens of more than one country.
— The term “terrorist group” means any group that practices, or has significant subgroups that practice, international terrorism.”
The US Navy has concluded this definition with:
“The U.S. Government has employed this definition of terrorism for statistical and analytical purposes since 1983.”
Some other quotes:
“Terrorism is the unlawful use or threat of violence against persons or property to further political or social objectives. It is usually intended to intimidate or coerce a government, individuals or groups, or to modify their behavior or politics”.
— Vice-President’s Task Force, 1986

“ Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”— FBI Definition
American governmental authorities already have their definitions as well as a clear understanding of this word. What is commonly accepted practice nowadays is that this kind of terrorist violence is foremost aimed at an unprotected and unarmed civilian population, as a primary and main target. Therefore, violence (or threats of violence) because of political (or religious) intentions (primarily) against non-combatants – is equal to terror, as means for illegal political-religious blackmail and extortion. According to the author Kumm the Jewish zealots, who protested and fought against the Roman invading legions, were terrorists. The author gives an example with references to religious aspects and the Bible, which was conducted around 2000 years ago when the author describes what happens to a Jewish heretic. The fact that the Romans certainly used severe methods to subdue the invaded Jewish population is, or at least, should be common knowledge as historical fact. For those to whom it isn’t, a reading tip is the book by Josephus Flavius, The Jewish Wars.

Naturally and especially the rebels fighting against the Romans, including the Jewish zealots, suffered as they were killed and maimed in the most gruesome ways. After the final rebellion in 132-135, known as the Bar-Kochba uprising, named after its leader with the same name, when hundreds of thousands of Jews were killed, with an estimated half a million slaughterd Jews, and further tens of thousands sent away to the Orient as slaves separating them from their homes – and thus the Jewish Diaspora begun.

It is probably not the most scientific procedure to refer to the Bible when conducting a crime scene investigation thesis regarding committed terrorist crimes. But if one still wishes to use the Bible as reference point, it is also written that the Judean hills is the eternal homeland of the Jews (given to the Jews by God, and not to the Romans or anyone else), and therefore the most natural and logical conclusion would be that some of the Jews in fact acted in self-defense against what was clearly a foreign invasion. But if one still wishes to use the Bible as reference point, like Kumm did in his blame-game, it also says at an even earlier stage, in the Old Testament, Exodus, chapter 1:
16: "When you serve as midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the birth stool, if it is a son, you shall kill him; but if it is a daughter, she shall live."
This alone, if anything, could and should be classified as pure terror against a civilian unarmed population. If one is still of the opinion that all Arabs are the same people as, or at least closely related, to the ancient people of Egypt, something many Arabs of today like to cultivate myths about, then there shouldn’t be any questions left for those journalists and authors who are trying to classify who the first terrorists in history were by staring at the Old Testament for answers. But the author Kumm manages, be it intentionally or not, to blame the Jews for the plague that swept and still sweeps over the world to this day. “The first terrorists were Jews” he claims. He then devotes a complete chapter to “The Jewish Terrorists” where he claims that it was the Jews who also introduced the modern terror of today in the Middle East, at first against the British colonial rulers during the mandate period. He goes on, taking great care to dig up every tiny piece he can find, trustworthy or not, about Jews who might have conducted terror in his very selective and narrow story telling:
“During the first half of the 20th century terrorism spread to the Middle East. The first to use terrorist methods were the Jewish groups who like their predecessors 2000 years earlier went in close quarter combats with the occupational force – because of, as they perceived it, the same nationalistic goal, the rebirth of an independent Israel.”
On February 22, 1948, three car bombs go off in Ben Yehuda Street, Jerusalem, leveling four buildings, injuring about 130 persons and leaving more than 50 dead. The victims were Jews; many of them were at the time of the blasts asleep in their beds. Deserted British soldiers delivered the trucks filled with explosives. The British government’s official position had until this point been restricting Jewish immigration heavily with the White Book (1939), in order to appease Arab Muslim political extortion claims, and used secured camps surrounded by barbed wire and guarded with machine guns in Cyprus for the remaining civilian Jewish survivors of the European Holocaust. British foreign minister Bevin later declared that their officers trained and lead the Transjordanian Arab Legion – which later tried to annihilate the Jews. The car bomb at Ben Yehuda was merely the straw that broke the camel’s back for Irgun and Lehi, who then declared British soldiers fair game, as retaliation.

Other sources in Kumm’s book are the Swedish Jewish author, Göran Rosenberg, and the Israeli writer Benny Morris, the latter described as being “the most critical Israeli researcher”. Morris has already been exposed in Professor Efraim Karsh’s Fabricating Israeli History. But the Swedish audience mainly knows of the journalist Rosenberg, a Jewish intellectual with outspoken left oriented sympathies. He has written a self-explaining book “The Lost Land” (1996) where he describes himself as not being content by what he found in Israel, when he, as a teenager, tried to make aliyah. He lived there for two and a half years from 1962, when he left and went back to Sweden – to work for the Palestine Groups translating Hebrew in the beginning of the 1970’s together with people like Jan Guillou. Or, as he himself puts it, “the Anti-Zionist left to which I belonged myself at the end of the 1960’s”. Rosenberg seems mainly disappointed and disgruntled in his book, that the state of Israel didn’t fulfill all his teenage expectations.

Morris himself has changed his tune a bit lately, clearly blaming the Muslim Arabs for the current war. In the British paper The Guardian one could read a longer chronicle beginning like this:
“Peace? No chance

The rumor that I have undergone a brain transplant is (as far as I can remember) unfounded – or at least premature. But my thinking about the current Middle East crisis and its protagonists has in fact radically changed during the past two years. I imagine that I feel a bit like one of those western fellow travelers rudely awakened by the trundle of Russian tanks crashing through Budapest in 1956.”…
Perhaps a conclusion in the Israel Insider best describes another Israeli view regarding Jews like Morris:
…”But the genre of historical writing that has done the most damage to Israel's image has not been the hatred-filled screeds coming out of the dubious academic institutions of Cairo and Damascus. It has been the work of Jews who have come to doubt the justice of Israel’s cause that has emboldened its enemies the most. In the last 20 years, the rise of a new group of Israeli historians, known as “revisionists”, has engendered a bitter debate about Israel’s origins and policies.”…
Kumm, in a chapter later named “We have called from our tents” claims that Arabs only resorted to terrorist violence a quarter of a century after the Israel’s declaration of independence as a response, as a perfect school example of reversal of guilt and selectivity regarding historical facts. Kumm not only fails to mention, but totally omits such previous Arab and Muslim terror, amongst plenty of easy to find examples (as for instance the role of the Muslim Brotherhood (formed 1928), that today has “modernized” into the terror group of Hamas) for his reading audience in his book. Like for instance the previous leader of the Arabs in the British controlled mandate, the grand mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammad Amin al-Husseini, who later became a Nazi war criminal after organizing the Muslim Waffen SS extermination divisions in the Balkans during the Second World War, and who was personally involved in Hitler’s extermination plans regarding which key player it might have been that brought terrorist violence into those parts of the Middle East that is Israel today.

The Israeli museum Tel Hai in northern Galilee tells the story of the one-armed Joseph Trumpeldor who was mortally wounded on March 1, 1920, when helping Jews to defend their homes against attacking Arabs.
As early as in April 1920 Arabs had, and which was later documented in the Haycraft commission, staged riots against the Jewish civilian population in Jerusalem in what became known as the “Bloody Passover” with deadly outcome. And again in Jaffa, a year later along with other Jewish areas, which resulted in 88 dead and another 238 wounded ). The Haycraft commission later summed it up thus:
“The racial strife was begun by the Arabs, and rapidly developed into a conflict of great violence between Arabs and Jews, in which the Arab majority, who were generally the aggressors, inflicted most of the casualties.”
And this was only a foretaste of what was to come as a result of the appointment of the British high commissioner (and of Jewish origin) Sir Samuel, and from the hate agitating Mufti, with follow ups in the form of Arab riots against Jews in 1929, and again during 1936-39. Looting, plundering and raping went on as well as killings of unarmed civilian Jews, and there was certainly no Israeli occupation then, since the re-establishment of the modern state of Israel was yet to come. As an initial response to the first Arab Muslim attacks and pogroms aimed directly at the Jews, they did the most logical thing to do as the British colonial rulers seemed either not to be able to, or be interested in protecting the Jews and so planted the first seed that was to be the Haganah – the defense organization, on June 5, 1920. Vladimir Jabotinsky (“the right-wing so called revisionist” according to Kumm) took part in creating the Jewish Defense Forces in 1920, for which the British first sentenced him to 15 years of hard labor, where after he later, after a public outcry, was granted amnesty and pardoned.

Between 1920 and 1948, during the time of the British mandatary colonial rule, there is a plethora of examples of gruesome terrorist attacks and ethnic cleansing, conducted by Arabs against Jews. But of those well-known historical facts Kumm mentions absolutely nothing to his readers in this particular chapter, or anywhere else in the book for that matter. And how is the mufti’s successor, the Egyptian born Arafat portrayed the few times he is mentioned in Kumm’s book?

…“lastly got control of a small part of his occupied homeland”… p. 26
…“the revolutionary as their commanding officer”… p. 92
…“Arafat’s umbrella organization PLO, the Palestinian liberation organization”… p. 93

The state of Israel on the other hand, became internationally famous for combating terrorism, both in theory and in practice, both foreign and domestic, because of what they are and have been subjected to by force. Israel’s former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has written several internationally praised books on the subject, before the catastrophe struck the USA with the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks, and Netanyahu is himself a former officer in one of Israel’s top elite military branches: the Sayeret Matkal (The Elite). Netanyahu’s brother was killed during the rescue raid at Entebbe in 1976 when the state of Israel showed to the whole world how one should never give in to terrorist threats. Netanyahu founded an Israeli institute is his brothers name: The Jonathan Institute, and in 1979 he funded and organized an international conference on terrorism.

Should anyone be interested in the proven modern day terrorism in the Middle East, it was Arabs, especially those who later came to call themselves Palestinians, who invented the modern terrorist industry of hijackings of civilian airliners, like when the PLFP hijacked the El-Al passenger plane in Rome on July 23, 1968, which later was followed by a series of airline hijackings. The Israeli airplane company El-Al has since been regarded as world leading with regards to the safety of civilian airplanes, and other democracies started taking classes in order to learn from the Israeli experience of measures to take in order to protect the passengers. For those who are interested in the ongoing phenomenon of “walking bombs”, there are several sources, free of charge available on the Internet, where one for instance can read the paper the Atlantic Monthly , a think tank where experts interview Israeli officers about the industry of Arab Muslim homicide bombers that debunks most of the myths of the “poor”, “uneducated”, “desperate” and “last resort” excuses made which some left oriented pro-Palestinians try to cultivate. It takes organization, money, education, bomb builders, handlers, drivers, lookouts, scouts, and lots of hard planning just to produce one homicide bomber.
Kumm, on the other hand, seems to have had a little career boost while teaching his findings at the Olof Palme Center. A mere two weeks after USA was hit on 9/11, when the victims corpses were still laying crushed under the debris, and when there was still chaos and shock still ruled the world, Kumm was conducting and leading a seminar, and moved the discussion in order to speak about “state terrorism” instead, bringing up Israel as an example to illustrate that, which was soon followed by Jonas Gardell claiming that US actions ”against its own population” and “in Tripoli in 1996” also were perfect examples of state terror.

On another personal note; what terrorism needs in the lowest form to function, can be divided into two main categories: Economic supply and an ideology (which can include extreme secteristic religious interpretations) to keep up the terrorist business. One cannot work without the other. It’s a symbiosis. And parts of the Swedish establishment have contributed in both areas, with pleasing and appeasing the former PLO, and lately the PA with both billions of aid money and worse, moral support to the organization under the wishful-thinking pretext of future peace.

What terrorism mainly produces, and needs to be able to continue to produce in order to work and operate, besides the maimed and dead bodies, is fear. Fear of more terror from the terrorists, aimed at their proclaimed enemies. Those who preach that terror is the result of Islamic fundamentalism, and that it can never happen in Europe are (obviously) wrong, since it already has, and within the EU. The large Madrid train bombing, and the brutal murders of political leader Pim Fortuyn (although Swedish media covered up the factual assassination motive , and instead claimed it was a animal activist who went crazy) as well as the murder of the artist Van Gogh prove otherwise. And then the spectacular London bombings. These acts of pure savagery in the heart of Europe have produced fear among the western population, who with artistic culture, their openness and democratic values as well as political freedom oppose extreme Islamism.

Continue to chapter, conclusions

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?