17 thoughts on “Two Dubai Killers Entered U.S.; Mossad Used Australian Passports for Spying in Syria, Iran, Lebanon – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. These countries should require people to give up their citizenship when they make aliyah to Israel or move to any other country for that matter. Why doesn’t Avigdor Leiberman include this condition in his ‘loyalty oath’ demands – all Israelis should renounce every other citizenship to get their Israeli citizenship.

  2. Whoever did it and by whatever means, kudos to them. The targets both used and flaunted International Law to wreak murder and mayhem. Let us stop bemoaning the exacters of justice and instead celebrate those who do the “dirty work” so that we may sleep peacefully in our homes at night.

    1. This is an odious post, but one that makes Mossad and assassins everywhere quite pleased. But what about when Hamas or Hezbollah use the exact same argument to kill an Israeli target? Then you’ll somehow find a distinction bet. the acts of callous murder.

      1. No sane person would ever sleep peacefully at night knowing that any country’s government can send out hit squads against persons it believes are criminals. This would be a homicidal free-for-all which no civilized country should ever engage in. We did not develop a system of criminal justice only to send thugs out into the night to murder people we believe are guilty of crimes or may commit them in the future.

        Just because Israel says someone is a terrorist does not make it so. Just because Israel claims someone is a killer does not give them the right to disregard laws that have been put into place to protect the rights of all persons. A squad of people barging into a hotel room to murder another human being is no different than a suicide bomber detonating himself inside a pizzeria, when you get right down to it. Both are forms of vigilantism and are unconscionable.

  3. Fawn Rainforest flaunts his/her own ignorance. It is the killers of Mahmoud al-Mabouh who flouted international law by assassinating him.

    1. Mary, please be so kind as to send your email address to Richard, and I will kindly ask him to pass it on to me. Thanks.

  4. Hi Mary:

    I don’t expect you to agree with me because we effectively live in different moral dimensions with completely different ethical guidelines. I understand you; in your world all killing is evil, thus the person who murders innocents while they enjoy a slice of pizza is the moral equivalent of the person who kills the planners and facilitators of the pizzeria attack.

    In my moral universe the killer of innocents is not the same as the killer of murderers. Those with my worldview deplore the murder of innocents and celebrate the removal from this earth of those who commit those murders.

    Oftentimes clarity is better than agreement.

    Best wishes,


    1. You completely miss the point, Fawn. Read Mary Hughes-Thompson’s short and succinct comment and perhaps you will get the drift.

      At the risk of repeating myself (endlessly, I think), Israel (and in fact, no nation) has the right to act unilaterally and extrajudicially against any human being for the purpose of killing them. You are completely wrong in thinking there is any justification for this kind of activity, both morally and legally.

      To applaud and condone murder is despicable. We have courts of law to determine the fate of accused criminals. You absolutely fail to see the difference between what Israel does and what terrorists do – that there is no difference at all. What an appalling blind spot to have, really.

      And of course, Israel is always right, it murders “terrorists,” but the Palestinians have no right to fight back. When they do, they’re called “murderers,” “thugs,” and “terrorists.”

    2. Those with my worldview deplore the murder of innocents and celebrate the removal from this earth of those who commit those murders.

      Yours is not a ‘moral dimension’ nor a set of ‘ethical guidelines.’ Your philosophy will reap the nihilist amoral whirlwind. You’re in favor of murdering your enemies & allowing your own to get off scot free. While Israeli civilians are “innocent” Israel is not.

      1. And not a word of concern from Fawn about the many innocent Palestinians who have been killed while Israel so morally dispatches its “enemies.” There is nothing ethical in her philosophy; it is entirely narcissistic and self-serving.

  5. Not all extrajudicial killings are unlawful. Every soldier who kills an enemy combatant engages in an extrajudicial killing, as does every policeman who shoots a fleeing felon. There are several complex legal questions involved in assessing these situations.

    First, was the person who was killed a combatant, in relation to those killed him? If Israel killed Mabhouh, there can be absolutely no doubt that he was a combatant. He was actively participating in an ongoing war by Hamas against Israeli civilians. Indeed, it is likely that he was killed while on a military mission to Iran in order to secure unlawful, anti-personnel rockets that target Israeli civilians. Moreover, Hamas combatants deliberately remove their uniforms while engaged in combat.

    The Goldstone report suggests that Israel cannot lawfully fight Hamas rockets by wholesale air attacks. Richard Goldstone, in his interviews, has suggested that Israel should protect itself from these unlawful attacks by more proportionate retail measures, such as commando raids and targeted killing of terrorists engaged in the firing of rockets. Well, there could be no better example of a proportionate, retail and focused attack on a combatant who was deeply involved in the rocket attacks on Israel, than the killing of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh. Not only was Mabhouh the commander in charge of Hamas’ unlawful military actions at the time of his death, he was also personally responsible for the kidnapping and coldblooded murder of untold numbers of civilians through his Salah al-Din Brigades.

    Obviously it would have been better if he could have been captured and subjected to judicial justice. But it was impossible to capture him, especially when he was in Dubai. If Israel was responsible for the killing, it had only two options: to let him go on his way and continue to endanger Israeli civilian lives by transferring unlawful anti-personnel weapons from Iran to Gaza, or to kill him. There was no third alternative. Given those two options, killing seems like the least tragic choice available.

    Best wishes,


    1. Gimme a break, please. What nonsense, to compare a soldier in war to a murder committed by a state-sponsored terror group on foreign soil.

      I also make it my policy not to debate Goldstone with hasbarists; besides, it is not the subject of this thread.

      You are also being willfully dense by claiming Israel had the right to protect its civilians by killing a man in another country. You, like Israel, obviously think that violating international law is OK when you believe it suits your purposes.

  6. Mary:

    If Israel did this, it would not have been a violation of International Law (wishing it to be so does not make it so), it would however be a violation of Dubai law. Thus Dubai could request the extradition of the involved parties should they ever be identified. Hpwever Dubai’s options are limited should the responsible party be Israel, since Dubai has no extradition agreement with Israel.

    I await the day when there is equal anguish, indignation and wringing of hands on this website when Israel’s enemies commit their atrocities. As I said before, we live in different moral dimensions. In any case thanks for engaging.

    Have a great rest of your day,


    1. A government agency committing extrajudicial assassination on foreign soil is indeed a violation of international law. Your Mossad chief, and Netanyahu himself, can conceivably be brought to the Hague and charged.

      You don’t give a damn about equal anguish, and please spare me the hasbara nonsense about “Israels enemies” and their “atrocities.” Israel’s atrocities against Palestinians vastly outnumber anything any Palestinian has ever done in fighting the occupation. As I have said many times before on this website, the Zionist victim card has been played so many times that it’s beyond dog-eared.

      And as for the rest of my day, I will enjoy it much more when the murderers of Mahmoud Mabhouh are brought to justice.

      1. What it comes down to is that with all the shortcomings that are pointed out on this blog as well, I’m glad to be on the Israeli side that glorifies life and has rules of engagement that make efforts to prevent collateral damage as opposed to the other side that couldn’t really give a care who dies in its ‘campaigns’ against the Zionist enemy.

        1. Israel “glorifies life”? Explain that to me…no, explain it to the 1,400 dead Gazans Israel killed last year. While you’re at it, you can explain how they “made efforts to prevent collateral damage.”

          Hasbara is falling on this website like dirty rain.

  7. You see Mary, clarity IS better than agreement, and you could not be any more clear. Fascinating.

Leave a Reply

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

Share via
Copy link