Netanyahu Decries Massacre at Tel Aviv Gay Center
In a Western society, when someone commits a barbaric act, emergency services rush to the scene of the crime to try to save as many people as possible while the police and other investigative organizations start to seek out clues and sift through evidence in order to to determine the cause of the crime and to apprehend and prosecute the perpetrator.
In the wake of the attack Saturday on a gay and lesbian center in Tel Aviv, that is exactly what Israeli organizations and authorities have been doing. Even officials at the highest levels of Israeli government have responded, with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu considering it during his weekly cabinet meeting and the Israeli Knesset committing to address the issue “when the legislature convenes [today] for an already-scheduled special recess session.”
Sending “condolences to the families of the two people killed in the attack and wish[ing] the wounded a speedy recovery,” Netanyahu decried the massacre:
I unequivocally condemn the shocking murder. . . . I have spoken with Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch and stand by the police in searching for and finding the killer. We will bring him to justice and will prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law. . . .
I say to the Israeli people: We are a democratic country, we are a country of tolerance, a country of laws, and we must respect every person, whoever and wherever he is.
It is good to see the leader of a nation speak out so swiftly and unequivocally about these murders. Let us hope his blunt talk leads to the quick apprehension of the killer and his speedy prosecution.
So should all leaders react, publicly showing respect for the dignity of each individual, regardless his background, regardless what aspects of his (or her) character cause him to differ from the social norm.
Also to note is the number of Israeli officials who called this a terror attack–which it was.
37 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
In a Western society, when someone commits a barbaric act, emergency services rush to the scene of the crime to try to save as many people as possible while the police and other investigative organizations start to seek out clues and sift through evidence in order to to determine the cause of the crime and to apprehend and prosecute the perpetrator.
And liberals start coming up with wacky conspiracy theories on how it’s all Republicans fault and immediately start chumming the water with demands for erosion of our freedom. Of course they go ape when an infanticide “doctor” is shot, but could care less when a soldier is killed by a radical Muslim. If they can’t play political games and lie to the American people, they’re not interested.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — August 3, 2009 @ 5:28 am - August 3, 2009
Has Obama made ANY comment about this yet? Did a search and couldn’t find anything.
Near as I can figure, he can shoot his mouth off about “stupid” cops in a college town, but he can’t offer any words (outrage, condolences, etc) about this shooting. Maybe condemning the shooting would damage his “improved” relations with all his Arab/Muslim buddies.
Comment by JohnJ — August 3, 2009 @ 7:35 am - August 3, 2009
I am assuming (always a danger) that the gunman was most certainly NOT a conservative Christian who wanted to kill gays.
Of course, I could be wrong. I doubt it.
Comment by Bruce (GayPatriot) — August 3, 2009 @ 9:21 am - August 3, 2009
I don’t support the death penalty. If we kill the people who kill us, then we simply become like them. This horrible tragedy offers the gay community to show the world our capacity to respond to violence with forgiveness and hope. We have the right to lock up murderers who are a danger to society, but death in response to death solves nothing.
Comment by Ashpenaz — August 3, 2009 @ 10:47 am - August 3, 2009
Ash, the death penalty isn’t for every killing. It is for cold blooded murder. There are degrees of killing and degrees of punishment.
Anyway, how did the left come up with that convenient trope – if we kill we become that which we hate.
Oh yeah, their stupid moral relativism.
Comment by Leah — August 3, 2009 @ 11:44 am - August 3, 2009
#2 – JohnJ is right; where is Dear Teleprompter’s response?
And since his Chief of Staff is a Jew by birth himself, what is HIS response?
The silence is deafening. HRC and other GayLeftLib groups, are you listening?
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — August 3, 2009 @ 11:51 am - August 3, 2009
If we kill the people who kill us, then we simply become like them.
I’m reminded of a case a few years ago where a guy shot and killed a Polk County Sheriff deputy and his K9 deputy. He was found the next day and shot down by a few deputies. I myself slept better knowing that a POS with no problem shooting cops had assumed room temperature.
The bullets were a hell of a lot cheaper than housing this bastard for who knows how many years and paying for his endless appeals. The only drawback, I’m sure, were the CYA reports that had to be filled out on each bullet fired (thanks libs).
Comment by ThatGayConservative — August 3, 2009 @ 12:28 pm - August 3, 2009
Uh–that idea that when we kill we become just as bad as the killer comes from Jesus. “He who lives by the sword dies by the sword.” “Do not repay evil for evil.” “Love your enemies.” “Turn the other cheek.” That sort of thing.
Comment by Ashpenaz — August 3, 2009 @ 1:12 pm - August 3, 2009
And yet, Ash, Jesus allowed Himself to be killed by the authorities.
The lesson there is that all things work for God’s will. God is able to bring goodness out of what might seem the greatest evil.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — August 3, 2009 @ 1:33 pm - August 3, 2009
Ash & Leah, why the discussion about capital punishment in this case? Israel has no capital punishment.
I’m glad for the rapid government response. TA has improved in its gay relations since I first began visiting more than 25 years ago. It’s common to see men walking hand-in-hand on Dizengoff and Ben Yehuda. I’m hoping this atrocity will awaken Israelis even more to reach out and embrace their gay citizens.
Comment by Man — August 3, 2009 @ 2:32 pm - August 3, 2009
No, you just expect society – which means, *other people* – to endlessly support and care for the most heniouis criminals. Because, after all, it won’t be you doing it.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 3, 2009 @ 3:00 pm - August 3, 2009
(sorry, I was going for “heinous”)
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 3, 2009 @ 3:00 pm - August 3, 2009
May these killers be found!
Comment by karl anglin — August 3, 2009 @ 3:11 pm - August 3, 2009
Ash, since you like to quote the Bible so much, it might interest you to know that one of the only commandments God repeated in all five books of the Torah is that any man who commits murder is to receive the death penalty. Jesus and his disciples never repudiated this law, and in fact, after Jesus was murdered by an unjust court and received the worst form of capital punishment imaginable (crucifixion), none of the Apostles ever stood on a Jerusalem street corner with a sign that said, Stop Capital Punishment Now! So please admit that your moral view on this issue is your own opinion, not the teaching of the Old or New Testament.
Comment by Elephant in the Room — August 3, 2009 @ 3:12 pm - August 3, 2009
Again, I defer to the Pope and his remarks on the death penalty. Or the Archbishop of Canterbury. Or the social statements of the ELCA. Or UCC. Or UMC. If we can protect society without killing someone, by locking them away forever, then we should do that. The only time we can justly impose the death penalty is when there is no other way to protect society. It is difficult to see a situation where locking someone away wouldn’t be just as effective in protecting society as killing someone. I don’t believe that killing someone out of revenge is moral for either the state or individuals.
This tragedy offers the gay community a chance to treat their enemies as compassionately as we want to be treated. If we ask for the death penalty for those who murder us, how can we ask those in Iran not to use the death penalty on gays? If we call for these people’s executions, we are supporting the death penalty in principle, and therefore, we are supporting the death penalty for gays in Iran.
Comment by Ashpenaz — August 3, 2009 @ 3:56 pm - August 3, 2009
Hi, I am back in Australia after a really great trip. Did not see much of LA after all – too tired ROFL.
When people murder others it is always a bad thing, even though there are times when the murders are justified and in reality are actions that are due to self-defence. For example I have heard of crimes where a daughter has killed her father or step-father because he had been brutally raping her and she could not take it any longer. However, the crime described in Tel Aviv is not in that category.
It should not matter to anyone that the community using the night club was a gay community. The perpetrators are nothing more than cold blooded murderers. Since Israel does not have a death penalty for murder then perhaps when these people are caught (if it was not a suicide bombing) then they should be shipped to the front line in order to sweep for landmines.
Jews should be following the laws of the Torah and according to the Torah a murderer should be punished with death except in certain circumstances where the person can seek refuge from the revenge of the relatives.
However, only within Christianity are those particular laws now repudiated since the laws of the Torah were nailed on the cross, but God’s Laws i.e. the Ten Commandments remain.
Comment by thestraightaussie — August 3, 2009 @ 5:26 pm - August 3, 2009
I.e.: to Authority. Rather than mounting a logical defense of your position. Sorry, I’m unimpressed.
Ah, so you do support the death penalty, you just want to make it sound like you don’t. I mean, who among us would seriously argue that the death penalty should be used when it is *not* necessary? I surely don’t.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 3, 2009 @ 5:50 pm - August 3, 2009
As I earlier mentioned, Israel has no death penalty.
However, even in states which do, capital punishment should always be attended with solemn and respectful reverence. One must balance the severety of the punishment with the act. God gives life; if we as a society take life, it must be with a dreadful understanding of and reverence for what we are doing.
Comment by Man — August 3, 2009 @ 5:51 pm - August 3, 2009
If we ask for the death penalty for those who murder us, how can we ask those in Iran not to use the death penalty on gays?
Easy. You can point out the difference between being gay and murdering someone.
If you don’t know the difference between the two, Ash, there’s very little left to say.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — August 3, 2009 @ 6:59 pm - August 3, 2009
Gays are executed in Iran because they are seen as murderers–spreaders of disease, etc. Once you allow the death penalty, you allow for broad interpretations of justifications for using it.
It is difficult to think of a situation where incarceration would not work just as well to protect society as killing someone.
When I say I defer to the Pope, I am not talking about human authority. I am talking about someone who helps people understand the moral absolutes upon which the universe runs. The authority is the universal moral law, not any human being.
Comment by Ashpenaz — August 3, 2009 @ 7:16 pm - August 3, 2009
“Jews should be following the laws of the Torah”
What? NO they should follow their constitution and laws. otherwise they are no better than the Taliban…
Comment by gillie — August 3, 2009 @ 8:15 pm - August 3, 2009
Oh, yes you are. The Pope is a human being and has no more a direct line to God than you do. If you cite him as authority, then you are talking about human authority.
And you don’t seem clear on what it is. In this thread alone, you have taken 2 different positions on the death penalty. (One that we should never do it; another that we should do it when necessary to protect society, which is the position of all death penalty supporters.)
Operative word: SEEN. Question that should arise: By whom? And are they right to see it that way? Suggested answers: By Islamist kooks, and they are very much in the wrong. To paraphrase NDT, if they don’t know the difference between being a murderer and being gay – and they don’t – then they are very, very much in the wrong and in violation of what you called ‘universal’ (but I would call ‘objective’) moral law.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 3, 2009 @ 8:16 pm - August 3, 2009
The Office of the Pope is a special office set up by God to continue to reveal His truth to the world. No, the specific human being in that office does not have any more access to God than I do. But when one is given that office, God reveals Himself to the one holding that office in a way God does not reveal Himself to me. The office of the Pope is a way for God to speak to the whole church through the person using that office. In the same way God lifts up ordinary bread and wine to be vehicles of His real presence, God lifts up an ordinary human to the office of the Pope.
The point being, you don’t know shit about Catholicism.
Comment by Ashpenaz — August 3, 2009 @ 9:52 pm - August 3, 2009
Since few of the citizens of Israel are Catholic, would you really have them follow the dictates of the Pope?
In fact, what in the world does the Pope have to do with U.S. law? We may or may not be a Christian nation, but we certainly are not a Catholic nation. You really need to argue something other than “’cause the Pope sez so.”
IMO, when a person purposely and with malice takes the life of another, he forfeits his right to be considered human.
Comment by Polly — August 3, 2009 @ 11:40 pm - August 3, 2009
Do you defer to the Pope on homosexuality?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — August 4, 2009 @ 12:15 am - August 4, 2009
No, for homosexuality I defer to Archbishop Katherine Jefferts-Schori. I never said I was consistent. I don’t think anyone has ever accused me of being consistent, either.
Comment by Ashpenaz — August 4, 2009 @ 7:40 am - August 4, 2009
That’s all right, Ashpenaz. You’re not the first person who defers to a pope when one is in agreement with him, and defer to someone else when not in agreement with him.
Comment by Pat — August 4, 2009 @ 1:11 pm - August 4, 2009
Heck Pat,
I’m just entertained when the Pope agrees with me
Comment by The Livewire — August 4, 2009 @ 1:31 pm - August 4, 2009
Ash may be unique, however, in being a self-proclaimed Lutheran who boasts of his deference to the Pope.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 4, 2009 @ 2:06 pm - August 4, 2009
By fax or telephone?
Actually, Ash, it’s likely that I know rather more about it than you do. If I may paraphrase you, “you don’t know shit about my biography”, LOL
And it appears I *may* also know more about Lutheranism.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 4, 2009 @ 2:13 pm - August 4, 2009
But consistency is a choice, Ash. *Try*. It makes discussions easier. For example, you’ll be less likely to run into trouble from espousing both sides of an issue (as with the death penalty, here). It will also make you more convincing, when you speak in the voice of the Pope (asserting his claims to special Divine guidance and authority as real) or in the voice of ‘universal moral law’.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 4, 2009 @ 2:50 pm - August 4, 2009
The Catholics and Lutherans have signed an agreement on justification by faith. This ends the primary reason for the division. The ELCA also has bishops in apostolic succession now. The point is, being a Lutheran or any kind of Christian does not mean rejecting the Pope. I believe that the Pope has an important teaching office for the whole church.
I believe, like Aquinas, that human law should mirror divine law to the extent that’s possible. It will never mirror divine law perfectly, but where it can, it should.
Comment by Ashpenaz — August 4, 2009 @ 5:28 pm - August 4, 2009
And yet, they remain divided. (One possible cause: Lutherans reject the Roman church’s teaching or claims as regards the Pope’s authority.)
Courtesy of the Anglican church. Not the Roman church. (Excepting that the Anglicans were once Romans, pre-schism.)
Countless Christians have died for the right to reject the Pope, Ash. But more to the point: does being a Christian necessarily mean *accepting* the Pope’s inflated claims of importance? Please consider Martin Luther’s views and life experience, before answering.
Well, I truly don’t. And, by the it’s-true-if-the-other-guy-really-believes-in-it type of epistemology that you had offered earlier in discussing Iran’s treatment of gays, you must now concede the validity of my belief. Oops, sorry, I forgot, that would be expecting basic consistency from you – and you’ve announced your choice to be radically inconsistent.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 4, 2009 @ 6:31 pm - August 4, 2009
(P.S. by “the Anglicans”, above, I meant the U.S. version – PECUSA)
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 4, 2009 @ 6:34 pm - August 4, 2009
(which then traces back to the Anglican church proper)
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 4, 2009 @ 6:37 pm - August 4, 2009
And my sister wonders why I’m a heritic.
Like I said earlier. I’m always tickled pink when the Pope agrees with me.
Comment by The_Livewire — August 4, 2009 @ 8:40 pm - August 4, 2009
Who, except maybe a militant atheist, could argue with that? I expect that Christian death penalty supporters would be first to agree.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 4, 2009 @ 9:20 pm - August 4, 2009