Yesterday, I saw several blogs noting, with derision, that Arab (i.e., Muslim) media had not deigned to report on the murder of Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg in Mumbai. An Orthodox Jew who went to India to serve the needs of both Jewish foreigners doing business in Mumbai and the indigenous Jewish population, Holtzberg was from the very conservative Lubavicher or ‘Chabad’ movement.
This article from Saudi Gazette does not go into the scope of Holtzberg’s life or work, but does single his death out for attention among the reports of the murders of others in Mumbai. But yes, at least one Arab paper has reported on the Rabbi’s death, and a Saudi paper at that.
MUMBAI – Indian security forces’ war against terrorists in Mumbai narrowed down early Saturday morning to at least “two or three” militants who were still roaming the charred corridors of the Taj Mahal Hotel.
By Friday evening, the security forces routed the terrorists in the Trident-Oberoi, freeing hostages held inside, and from a Jewish community center, ending the conflicts there.
More than 150 people have been killed since gunmen attacked 10 sites across India’s financial capital starting Wednesday night, including 22 foreigners – two of them Americans, officials said.
A rabbi from Brooklyn, New York, Gavriel Holtzberg, and his wife, Rivka, were among five hostages killed by the terrorists at the Jewish community center, Nariman House as Indian commando units stormed the building, the military said. Commandos slid down ropes from a hovering Army helicopter on Friday morning as they closed in for the final assault, killing two terrorists inside.
Also among the dead were two Americans, a 58-year-old man and his 13-year-old daughter, members of a spiritual community visiting from Virginia, who died in the Oberoi hotel. Two more Americans and two Canadians, traveling as part of the same retreat, were injured.
…
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
The deaths of the Rabbi and his wife are terrible crimes and tragedies, but there are bloggers who want to make this all about Islam’s ‘war’ on Jews. There were scores of deaths that no doubt included other Jews and many more non-Jews. There is little doubt that the extremists involved harbor great antipathy toward Israel, but these attacks appear to be fundamentally related to disputed tribal areas. There is something very crass and deeply disrespectful about hijacking the narrative and force-fitting it conform with a Neocon political explanation. This was not, first and foremost, about Israel or Jews. It was about India, Pakistan and long-running regional tribal disputes.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
I agree with the point you’re making. The fact is, though, that many–and not just ‘Neo-cons’, however you define that–think that Muslim antipathy toward Israel as well as frank anti-Semitism is a considerable black mark against Muslims.
I’m not aware of anything suggesting the Mumbai attacks were related to tribal lands. Could you provide more information on that?
Thanks.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
My analysis of the Mumbai attacks is here. As for why Jews were targeted, in my opinion that’s simply because these murderers wanted to gain sympathy from those who approve of Jews getting killed, and are willing to turn a blind eye to other evil deeds in return. Although they killed in cold blood, these terrorists were not suicidal, and probably counted on negotiating a safe exit; they figured that by holing up in the Chabad House and murdering a few Jews they could earn their welcome in another country and end their mission by flying there, with some liberated prisoners as fellow passengers. Other terrorists in India have followed that route in the past.
Who knew that India would respond to the Mumbai Massacre not by negotiation but by an all-out assault on the terrorists? It may be quite a while before something like this happens again.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
I think your analysis in this comment is probably right. I don’t now that I’d put this at the door of the ISI, though it’s possible, as you note on your blog.
I do hope the Indian reaction serves as a lesson, not only for the terrorists, but for other governments that have to deal with similar events.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
I would be curious what the Arabic-language press is saying. I’ve heard some chatter of people regarding the Israeli forces in Mumbai — as if “it only goes to show” just how much the Jews run the world, or whatever.
Arab News reported yesterday that the US sent the FBI to “direct” Indian security forces — so there does seem to be this sentiment that Western powers are hemming in and ordering the Indians around. This idea of Western hegemony in the Middle East and Central Asia (for the benefit of Israel, in view of many in the region) reverberates with the perception that the US is hemming in on Pakistan by using it as a launching pad for targeted strikes on the border region from one side — while at the same time also engaging in cross-border incursions from the Afghan side. I wish more editorials from the Arabic press were translated into English, as I’m sure there are some humorous theories therein.
Also I’m not sure that just because these attackers did not blow themselves that we can assume they weren’t betting on a one-way entry into Mumbai. Well, in any case, I’m not sure there are taking hostages. People might have been “held hostage” in the hotels, but those guys appeared to be executing the “hostages” from the get-go. The folks in the hotels might have simply been “held hostage” to the fact that if they left their rooms they would be murdered in cold blood.
I want to go back to the Saudi press for a moment on an unrelated topic. I’ve been read some of the columns and comment thread-excerpts on the Saudi girl rock band. The Saudi press, if you can call it “press”, would make Fox News and MSNBC look like professional, objective organizations that never ever expound commentary! Even “hard news” stories tend to be reporters expounding on the magnanimous gestures of “officials” — they tend not to use many quotes (lots of paraphrasing and providing “context”). In the case of the rock band, false charges, led by the Saudi press, have been circulated that the gals play decadent parties in Dubai and in Western compounds. There’s a claim that they’re being investigated and some have called for them to be hauled in front of Shariah court. The girls have said they regret speaking to the New York Times, because they were upset at how the paper portrayed them as some kind of enigma, which has fueled the backlash. (Well, what did they expect?!) I guess if the band’s Facebook profile is removed we could suspect that the pressure that has been exerted on them was real; the band already claims to have disbanded for the time being.
So it would not surprise me if the Saudi press is also filled with innuendo and conspiracy theories about the “Mossad in Mumbai” and the Western hegemony in the region. I wish I could read Arabic!
November:29:2008 - 08:57
Arab News actually said ‘guided’ rather than ‘directed’.
That could be an objective use of the word as the FBI, sadly, does have significant experience in dealing with the aftermath of terrorist attacks around the world. If an American is killed abroad in a terrorist attack (and sometimes in a criminal act), the FBI will come in to do its own investigation. It has learned, slowly, to work with the local law enforcement officials and not be all knees and elbows in asserting its self-perceived ‘dominance’.
The reality, however, is challenged by both the past and by fiction. The FBI attempted to use strong-arm tactics in Yemen following the USS Cole bombing and in the 1990s in Saudi Arabia, particularly following the Khobar bombing. In one case, they ended up being constrained by the US Ambassador; in the other, the Saudi security forces were not very cooperative at all. So much for the past.
We still see the example of a headstrong, kick-ass FBI in films like “Kingdom”, though, where an FBI unit goes around even its own leadership to deal with terrorists in Saudi Arabia. The film mixed contemporary with past to tell a dramatic story, but did not convey contemporary reality as a result.
On the topics of paranoia and rumor in the Arab media… where to begin, where to stop, whose toes to step on?
There are some basic realities, though. It never pays to bother those in power. It never hurts to praise them. Hiding inconvenient facts has a longer history than exposing them.
This isn’t restricted to the Arab media, of course. When I worked in India in 2001, there was a sensation when a local news web channel, Tehelka.com, went after high level officials accused of bribery. By getting officials on tape accepting bribes, the scandal helped turn the public away from the Bharatiya Janata Party.
But annoying those with power is sometimes a dangerous thing. Tehelka.com and its founder Tarun Tejpal went through a period of prosecution/persecution. They were often slammed in other Indian media for being in the service of some foreign power or other.
Finding the ‘hidden hand’ behind any untoward event has long been a norm in Arab culture. I don’t pretend to know why. Finding some way to identify Israel with that hidden hand is nearly as long a custom. As long as there is Arab-Israeli friction–and probably long after–there will be some who find it easy, convenient, and popular to blame Israel. And, like a broken clock, they might get it right sometimes.
Objective journalism is hard. I don’t think American media is nearly as objective as it used to be. But the goals of objective journalism are critical to society and its important to keep pushing for them and trying to protect those who take part in it.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
Finding the ‘hidden hand’ behind any untoward event has long been a norm in Arab culture. I don’t pretend to know why. Finding some way to identify Israel with that hidden hand is nearly as long a custom.
I think the best explanation is the one Michael Totten winkled out a few years back in Lebanon:
So it’s safe for Arabs to blame others. It is not safe to blame those in your community, or yourself if that also impugns your community, or whoever has the means and desire to do you harm because of what you say. Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms have few Arab roots in the Middle East.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
plz dont forget that many indian muslims as well as foreign muslims were victimized in da attack
BTW, not all indigenous militant organizations r muslims—there r some sikh and militant hindu separatist groups in assam area as well as ultra hindu militant groups.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
Yes, my bad. I should have side “guided.” But I’m not sure the FBI coming in to guide investigations (if that’s why they were doing) is quite the same as guiding the security operations, as the report implied. And certainly there’s room for praising officials, if there is also room to criticize them as well. It’s a delicate game, especially in the KSA, but the Arab-language media does not criticize authority, and it fuels the flames of xenophobia and an extreme sense of defensiveness in the face of legitimate criticism. I’m not sure the “opening up” we read in the English-language press matches that of the local-language press. It’s almost as if the English-language press is used as an example of the “opening of the press” — something that can be pointed to, while the local-language press (the press read or watch by most citizens) is still up to the same old gig of propaganda, innuendo, demonization and preachy-ness — far more overtly that what is seen in countries with more open media. It’s always frustrating to see the media playing this role, in the USA or the KSA.
Put it this way: when we celebrate that an English-language newspaper bothered to mention a rabbi’s death in Mumbai it shows just how far the media has to go.
Also to the last commenter: I agree completely that India’s murderous extremism is not relegated to Muslims alone. From my view, calling these men “Muslims” is a contradiction — since killing random people is actually a mortal sin for which you go to hell (from the perspective of faith), right? We should just stick to the moniker “cold blooded mass murderers” and leave it at that. On the other hand, this action in particular crosses international borders, unlike the extremism inside India. These men were Pakistanis who engaged in a highly-orchestrated Marine-style assault — there is a profound difference when a group from a separate country comes in and murders citizens in a a neighboring country, because this could be construed as an act of war, not an act of “sectarian strife.”
November:29:2008 - 08:57
More ugly details: the dead at Chabad house had this distinction:
The Rabbi and his wife are what we Jews call our martyrs – victims of violence simply because they peacefully served G-d as Jews.
There are reports that the terrorists had intimate knowledge of the Chabad House because the terrorists had roomed there posing as Malaysian students. So they returned to torture and murder their host. The next time Muslims accuse others of “Islamophobia” – an unreasonable fear of Islam – they would do well to consider this incident, for if the Holtzbergs had feared Muslims more and refused the “students” lodging, they would have suffered less or not at all.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
@Solomon: What a nightmare. I want to know how these men got to this point. These men probably weren’t born as psychopathic killers. And I don’t buy the argument that “suffering in Palestine” or “suffering in Kashmir” or “the occupation of Iraq by the infidel,” or whatever, adequately explins the path from angry young man to psychopathic killer of non-combatants.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
“I want to know how these men got to this point.”
Simplified, the Telegraph reports it goes like this:
I note that while Prince Khaled Al-Faisal, Emir of Makkah Region, acknowledged that terrorists are the problem, his only prescription is that it is “essential to introduce the correct teachings of Islam to non-Muslims and Muslims living in non-Muslim countries.”
The Prince does not explain how doing so would reduce terrorism.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
Solomon2: Pr. Khaled is not a stupid man. I think you’ve selectively quoted him.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
Arrgh! It wasn’t Pr. Khaled who said that terrorists are the problem and prescribed introducing “Islam in its true shape and spirit” as the solution, but Grand Mufti Abdul Aziz. My bad! The Gazette article cited contains no quotes by Pr. Khaled denouncing Muslim terrorists.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
Well, that might be because Khaled Al-Faisal is Governor of Mecca, while his brother is the Foreign Minister, with responsibility for international affairs.
The Saudi gov’t did say this, however:
November:29:2008 - 08:57
Chucho, A good source of translations of Arabic-language media appears regularly at http://www.memri.org.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
Norman: That’s true to some extent. As long as you keep in mind that MEMRI is a pro-Israel organization with a very definite agenda, it serves a useful purpose. The translations are not always accurate, however. There’s also very selective use of quotations.
I do cite it here often, though, and usually favorably.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
I agree that MEMRI is a good source, especially its wonderful videos of what self-proclaimed “sheikhs” (who often rise to power through nepotism and “wasta”) blather about on state television. One of my favorites is a “scholar” talking about how US astronauts secretly converted to Islam after realizing that the Kabaa was indeed the center of the universe, based on studies of magnetic radiation (or some such nonsense). On the other hand, I do think MEMRI selects what it chooses to translate and post on YouTube. I call it the “Michael Moore” version of reality: find the easiest and most overtly stupid targets and prop them up as examples for the rest of us to laugh at. I would love to see somebody translate opinion pieces from the Saudi press, including not just the conspiracy minded pan-Islamist hardcore Salafist wing nuts, but also the more metered columns. I’d also love to see somebody translate simple news stories out of the Saudi press to underscore the way reporters cover local news. I think that would highlight how much “brainwashing” and subjective “analysis” takes place in the day-to-day press. One good example is that whenever a criminal suspect is arrested, say for smuggling drugs, the media assumes the guilt of the arrested suspect. And nobody in the Saudi media is willing to ask why so many criminal suspects confess to their crimes. (I think I know the answer: they force suspects to fingerprint confessions, sometimes BLANK SHEETS OF PAPER.) In a broader context, I think the media is just an more developed extension of the stuff published in Saudi textbooks. And it’s related to this post because we’re thrilled when the media (in this case the English-language media) mentions the death of a rabbi, but, geez, if that’s a “tiny victory” for the press, it shows how far the press has to go toward addressing not just problems with extremism, but also and more importantly problems that adversely affect Saudi citizens every day. (Fortunately I think the media there is doing the best it can on the domestic abuse front, I guess, though they tend to drop stories without following up unless the story has garnered international or regional attention. In that sense it’s great that “we” put pressure on “them” to address these issues. In exchange, Saudi Arabia can join the WTO and make tons of money giving up its “economic sovereignty” by opening its markets. They can’t both ways: they either engage the world and address these problems while also engaging the world economically, or they shut themselves up and sell oil, camels and clink.) I think the media is doing a horrible job addressing medical malpractice, too, which affect Saudis. I doubt we’ll see a truly open and critical media in Saudi Arabia in our lifetime.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
Like he’s a special victim. Needs to be recognised differently from the other victims. Like all the non-American or Muslim victims who were given extraordinary coverage by the American press during 9/11. What a laugh.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
Memri isn’t just selective with information, it sometimes just gives false/weak translations. It hardly ever publishes moderate discussion, if only to make moderate discussion seem marginal or non-normative. MEMRI is about as good a source as FOX or Haaretz.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
Actually, MEMRI has changed it tone. About five years ago, it started recognizing moderate and reform-minded Arabs and congratulated their efforts. This is good, if you think moderation and reform are good, of course.
It does continue to pick out those who hold archaic, intolerant ideas about society and who do things that make Islam look silly or dangerous. There’s no question that these people do exist and that they do harm the image of Arabs and Islam.
The question is: How representative are they? By focusing on them, does MEMRI dishonestly reflect the reality of the Arab and Islamic world?
And it always must be kept in mind that MEMRI is a pro-Israel organization with the agenda of promoting at least some Israeli points of view. Those points of view tend to be conservative and similar to those of the Likud Party, not of the more liberal parties.
You’re right that some of its translations are weak or questionable. That seems to have improved over the years, but it’s always best to check the original. That assumes one speaks or reads Arabic, however. That is not the norm in the US–MEMRI’s audience–so there is room for intentional ‘accidents’ of translation.
Nevertheless, it does provide a service in translating materials that would otherwise go unseen. A does of skepticism as to the completeness and accuracy is required, though.
November:29:2008 - 08:57
Singling out particular victims of terrorist acts is not a laughing matter.
Had the victims of this attack been solely Indians, I doubt it would have made for lasting commentary. Fires, earthquakes, droughts, and all tend not to get much news coverage unless there is some particularization available. National media tend to pick up on stories that affect their own nationals, after all, no matter what country we’re talking about. That’s a simple news decision with no underlying agenda.
The case of Rabbi Holtzberg is a special one and does deserve special coverage. For one, it’s clear that the reason for his death was solely his religion. Like it or not, the perception that a Jew will be killed almost automatically by a radical Muslim is held by many–and not just non-Muslims.
Second, the reports that he and his wife were tortured, something not done to the other victims, distinguishes his death from the ‘ordinary’ victims’ deaths.
Then there’s the fact that he was seen as a gentle person who extended his charity to all who came–without accompanying proselytizing efforts–made him a ’special’ victim as well. He could not even be considered an element of ‘cultural invasion’ that bothers many Indians because he and his group had always been socially conservative.
So yes, he got special coverage.
The intent of my post was to point out that even Saudi media found it suitable to single out his death. That both distinguishes him and his death and demonstrates that Saudi Arabia is becoming aware that extremism in the name of Islam, which kills people solely for not being Muslim, is wrong and worthy of public condemnation. That is both new and creditable.