Article View: misc.headlines
Article #522Re: King David Hotel bombing
From: David Makowsky
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 05:44
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 05:44
44 lines
2849 bytes
2849 bytes
In article <167CBA3F2.MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com> MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com (Jim McMaster) writes: # In article <1992Apr14.175801.18171@ennews.eas.asu.edu> # makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes: # >In article <JIME.92Apr14103413@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes: # ># In article <1992Apr14.050948.24611@ennews.eas.asu.edu> makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes: # ># > In article <JIME.92Apr13011518@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes: # ># > # I guess your definition of terrorist act is different from most # ># > # people's. The bombing of the King David Hotel is considered one of # ># > # the top terrorist actions of the era. # ># > Very few people, even among those who mistakenly called the Irgun # ># > and Stern gangs terrorists, label that bombing as terrorist. You # ># > obviously do not know even the most elementary details of that # ># > incident. # ># Au contraire, Pierre. The King David Hotel bombing was clearly a # ># terrorist action. A military action wouldn't have been preceded by a # ># telephone call telling the people to get out. (In this case, some may # ># find it curious that a military action would have been more brutal, # ># but c'est la guerre.) # > You are being an imbecile here. Let us assume for the sake of # >argument that the King David hotel bombing was not a military action. # >That still does not make it a terrorist action. # The same old quandary.... If you disagree with the person's ends, he # is a "terrorist". If you agree, he is a "freedom fighter". This # applies equally to the Irgun as the PLO. You seem to have missed the point, irregardless of what you believe about the Irgun (actually, anyone who tries to compare the legitmate Irgun with the terrorist PLO as you have in your quandry is either ignorant or lying), this one action (the bombing of the King David hotel) cannot in any way be considered a "terrorist" attack by any reasonable definition. -- David Makowsky makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Apr17.054426.6015@ennews.eas.asu.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ennews!enuxha.eas.asu.edu!makowskyReferences:
<JIME.92Apr14103413@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> <1992Apr14.175801.18171@ennews.eas.asu.edu> <167CBA3F2.MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ennews!enuxha.eas.asu.edu!makowsky From: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) Newsgroups: misc.headlines,soc.misc,talk.politics.mideast,talk.politics.misc,alt.revisionism Subject: Re: King David Hotel bombing Message-ID: <1992Apr17.054426.6015@ennews.eas.asu.edu> Date: 17 Apr 92 05:44:26 GMT References: <JIME.92Apr14103413@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> <1992Apr14.175801.18171@ennews.eas.asu.edu> <167CBA3F2.MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com> Sender: news@ennews.eas.asu.edu (USENET News System) Reply-To: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ Lines: 44