Uncategorized

1995 Terror Victim Dies

In 1995, Yona Malina – the son of survivors who fled from the Nazis – had barely been living in Israel for a year. The young Czechoslovakian immigrant was barely 28 years of age when while rediscovering his Jewish roots, he suddenly became paralyzed from the neck down, as a result of severe spinal injuries sustained from the explosion of a suicide bomber on the bus he was riding to the Hebrew University campus on Mt. Scopus. Maimed, scarred, and unable to breathe on his own, but living and suffering for ten years with his condition, Yona Malina has died at the ripe old age of 38, another victim of Arab Terror.
Not to be political, but his story of paralysis and respirator questions, are reminiscent of a few recent hot button topics in American media and politics.

24 thoughts on “1995 Terror Victim Dies

  1. “Arab Terror”?
    Maybe next time we’re morning the tragic loss of someone who has suffered a great deal we could avoid racist epithets. That would be swell.

  2. And I consinder myself a liberal.
    What would you call it? Palestinian Terror? Islamic Fundamentalist Terror? Crazy Dude on a Bus with a nail stuffed explosive belt hoping for seventy virgins while creating a bloodbath terror?

  3. -“Not to be political” is the thing to object to, unless it was meant to be terribly ironic, and then on nearly grammatical grounds. We’ll keep town crier’s “liberalism” in mind next time we hear someone talking about Jew Terror.
    =An explanation for a hypothetical TC interested in criticism: zn might mean “Arab terror” is unreasonable because it just happens to sound exactly like Zionist racism and because it paints an impossible isolated racially-linked terrorism “for no reason.” In other words, in American history you can’t talk about “Redskin barbarism” (although those live-flaying child-cooking rapists could be quite barbaric indeed, especially once they perceived settler children as nothing more than future murderous land-theives) because this imagines that it’s happening in a vacuum when any reasonable account would mention its causes. This man’s death is Ariel Sharon’s idea of peace.
    -OT: check out today’s Xymphora: Richard Perle is ratcheting up the Iran sell a bit (already, there’s this book out on Iranian nukes with a spooooky Ay-rub face dass got it some mushroom cloud smokingguns in its BEADY EVIL LITTLE Ay-rub eyes [which apparently double for Persian ones]). Is this good news for anybody but Perle’s little Washingtonian crowd of warmongers?

  4. I’m not at all comfortable with the term “Arab terror” either, but how would k&y and John Brown talk about the bombings against the British before 1948? Jewish terror? I’ve constantly heard “Jewish terror” before, and from people who you would not construe as anti-semitic.
    But, I think the article was an interesting piece. Terror doesn’t end when the debris is cleaned up. The injuries stay a long time, and in this case, over 10 years.

  5. Maybe we could call a moratorium on terms like “Arab terror” when we see a moratorium on the Arab establishment’s rejection of Zionism (and even on Western terms like “powerful Jewish lobby”).

  6. That is some PC bull.
    Arab Terror, Jewish Terror, Zionist Terror, Islamic Terror…. all acceptable terms. Assuming, of course, that the terror is linked to said terrorists nationalist and/or religious beliefs and that those beliefs correlate to one of the aforementioned nations and/or religions. Furthermore, it should be mentioned that terror is in-and-of-itself a bastardization and/or radicalization of most nationalist and/or relgious precepts. Clear?

  7. I stopper listening to the arguement for the use of less offensive language the moment it involved the words “Zionist Racism” and references to Native Peoples as “live-flaying child cooking rapists.”

  8. Its about time the arabs, who want Israel to cease, be expelled from our country.
    Only then will what happened to Yona Malina stop.

  9. Pedants, “Native peoples” most certainly were doing some awful things mentioned to settlers, for the reasons we have mentioned and not because they were “Native Peoples,” and that’s really the whole discussion. “Arab” has no political meaning and “Zionist” is nothing but political meaning. Keep burying people under their own homes and then discussing like good little academics why oh why anyone could possibly want to hurt God’s Own Children.

  10. “Arab” has no political meaning
    I suggest you learn some history …
    and “Zionist” is nothing but political meaning.
    … and pick up an Arabic newspaper or seven.
    Keep burying people under their own homes and then discussing like good little academics why oh why anyone could possibly want to hurt God’s Own Children. 
    Melodramatic, much?

  11. Yes, “Native Peoples.” It is a term frequently used in anthropology to describe indigenous peoples. The other prefered name is First Nations, which fits more precisely with the Native Peoples self-determination movement as a self-selected name, but is for the moment only widely used here in Canada.
    Here in the 21st century, in Canada at least, we frown upon refering to Native Peoples as Indians, Redskins and especially extremely racist and childish nicknames such as “live-flaying child-cooking rapists.”
    Second, I urge you to look a little closer at Native Peoples history in North America to realize that no, they did not all practice torture, ceremonial or otherwise. Many never had this tradition in their cultures, even against American settlers. Your sweeping generalization of the heterogenous nature of Native Peoples cultures would likely be construed by a Native Person as offensive, especially with the racist label you just gave them.
    Finally, yes I would rather discuss topical issues “like [a] good little academic” instead of descending to the level of goading, personal attacks, and the belittling of other people and/or their belief systems.

  12. Yes, “Native Peoples.” It is a term frequently used in anthropology to describe indigenous peoples. The other prefered name is First Nations, which fits more precisely with the Native Peoples self-determination movement as a self-selected name, but is for the moment only widely used here in Canada.
    Here in the 21st century, in Canada at least, we frown upon refering to Native Peoples as Indians, Redskins and especially extremely racist and childish nicknames such as “live-flaying child-cooking rapists.”
    Second, I urge you to look a little closer at Native Peoples history in North America to realize that no, they did not all practice torture, ceremonial or otherwise. Many never had this tradition in their cultures, even against American settlers. Your sweeping generalization of the heterogenous nature of Native Peoples cultures would likely be construed by a Native Person as offensive, especially with the racist label you just gave them.
    Finally, yes I would rather discuss topical issues “like [a] good little academic” instead of descending to the level of goading, personal attacks, and the belittling of other people and/or their belief systems.

  13. Axl, while reading your elaboration of pedantic details we discovered, through means we cannot reveal, that you were not sitting down when you wrote it! This is not acceptable! It is as inconceivable and unprofessional to discuss things within a frame of reference as it is to type things while standing! This kind of chaos [simultaneous tear-wiping] comes from Galut living, or, even more pernicious, from suffering the horrors of the virtual Galut. We are presently working on a study which will enable a panel which will partner with a think tank which will actualize a course which will eventually be able to treat you. Until then, there is nothing we see that needs to be retracted: you walked into a discussion on the very topic of what makes a term offensive and how it can be contextually grounded, and your every criticism is this baby talk about elementary precautions that have nothing to do with the fact that there was violence, and the violence came from somewhere, and where the violence comes from (either racial Ay-rub/Redskin savagery or a previous provocation) has an ideological value.
    But fuck it. Which you catalog butterflies a century and a half from now things will be where they are now, for the same reasons, with just as good prospects for change.

  14. sort of OT: Sudanese government arrests volunteers for Doctors without Borders following increased rape report, here

  15. axl-
    thank you for your articulate post about native / indiginous peoples and the significance of language both in our evaluation of history and in the present while discussing contemporary political issues as well.
    i was (and still am) irate that the people on this posting board felt that it was ok to describe american indians in that manner. i will not repeat what they said because it truly sickens me. american history reveals that **columbus committed mass genocide ** and looking at the power dynamic and during that time period it is hard to believe that the situation could possibly be any different. and the statistics about american indian reservations in this country (prison, alcohol, poverty rates, etc) reveal that we all still have a lot of learning and growing to do.
    i am hesitant to make any further comparisons (besides language/terminology) between this situation and that in the middle east because there are a lot of differences in history and context that make that comparison much too long of a post to delve into without a serious analysis.
    thank you.

  16. In what manner, you sick thank-you-note writer? What we said (it hasn’t been Memory Holed yet) was that in talking about anticolonialist violence, the real racism is in not mentioning the cause. No amount of apropo-of-nothing wolfdancing on the part of the righteous, who are sickened (SICKENED!) by our completely symbionese use of historical comparisons, will change the fact that:
    -violence was committed by the “real Americans” (our favorite term for them).
    -this violence could be quite brutal, and fed in real and imagined accounts into a cycle of violence with the settlers.
    -this violence (here is the unimaginable part they are trying to obscure with their laughable outrage) came from somewhere.
    Now,
    -If you’re a settler, you’re problably more than satisfied with the response, “yeah, no kidding, it came from the savages.” [«k&y, how dare you call them savages. And trying to use apostrophe marks to put words into the mouth of a hypothetical settler! Oh, Jesus, the infamy!»]
    -If you actually want the cycle of violence to stop, and you’re going with the racial explanation, then you’re left with extermination. Of course, if you can’t do that, you can try banishing them. But they’re there until they’re not. Ultimately the problem with the racial explanation is not that your middle-school teacher would be horrified by it, it’s that even granting every racist precept, it doesn’t work. It’s like the economic argument against discrimination. So you could back up and look at real causes, which is unthinkable. So you won’t.

  17. completely inappropriate and of course absolutely unrelated ramble:
    one of Kurt Vonnegut’s narrators works at a university and is bullshitting with a friend about his wise old grandfather (uncle?), who would spit out such witticisms as “Never masturbate, it makes you lazy and crazy.” He gets to the part where the old guy once said he felt sorry for the Jews because they’re trying to get through life with half a Bible and realizes that a preppie airhead, daughter of his enemies in the faculty, is standing around nearby for no apparent reason.
    Turns out she’s tape-recording him and later tries to get him law-screwed for corrupting the youth with anti-Semitic propaganda.
    Nothing to do with the present thread, of course.

  18. sam: “i was (and still am) irate that the people on this posting board felt that it was ok to describe american indians in that manner.”
    Who thought it was OK? It was offensive. It’s all offensive. I thought that was the point. If we have to sit down and catalogue all the offenses, we’ll die here. For chrissakes!

  19. What really makes me irrate is what the Maori did to the Maoriori. That is truly the forgotten genocide.
    Maori out of “New Zealand”!

  20. Humans are sufficiently filthy that anyone familiar with history, and its abuses, should know the “forgotten genocides” are most likely truly forgotten, unless you’re talking about the final conflagration we’ll all die in.
    …gotta stop reading Ellison right before bed…

  21. I miss JohnBrown and AsafST. Really.
    I didn’t come here to be with ‘like’ people, I want ‘the exchange of ideas’.
    Could anyone please blog about how the leftist state prosecutor is performing political discrimination and/or something about settlers getting 2 million shekels a piece to voluntarily leave their homes and become unemployed?
    We haven’t has a decent exchange between/about leftists, settlers, seperation, the fence, Jews and others in a long, long time.

  22. I agree Josh, these verbose rants regarding something so obvious are quite a bore. He was murdered by arab-terror thugs! Who killed him for simply being a JEW! And if given half the chance would do the same to everyone one of u! THeir goal is to push us back into the sea.. Period! ZN, you do his memory a great injustice by denying who is responsible for his murder….

  23. haha spamisha thats hella funny, the poor jews only have half a bible… no wonder theyre all going to hell

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.