you people are just nuts

That's not terrorism, but criminal activity. The legal definition of terrorism has to do with intent. Since he wasn't involved with any terror group, wasn't even politically active, apparently hasn't been to mosque in a while, and now he's dead, it's going to be a hard case to prove. The only points you can make for this being an act of terror is that he was Muslim and he yelled "Allah Akhbar!" (which is used by some Muslim terrorists, but, as far as we know, not exclusively by them).

I'm not saying that he wasn't a terrorist (I think he probably was), but if the state is going to take certain actions against him which depend on his being a terrorist, such as withholding money for burial costs, denying his family future National Insurance payments, preventing the family from erecting a mourning tent, and destroying his family's home, the state had better have an airtight case.

המוציא מחברו עליו הראיה

and his mother calling him a shahid yesterday on national tv.

That doesn't prove anything. Better to be the mother of a martyr than the mother of a murderer.

I just saw that according to Debka, the terrorist was a member of Galilee Liberation Brigades. The two previous terrorist attacks in Jerusalem were carried out by members of the same group. Although, according to Debka, Israel is trying to cover this up. So they'll need some other proof.

in a country like this, that pretty much proves terrorism. Otherwise every terrorist would get off like that saying he was just a murderer and not a terrorist.

According to your definition, Israel is a county that does not suffer from any terrorism (but lots of murder).

It's not "my definition". But the problem is that there is no definition (in Israeli Law, as far as I know). If there were, we could see if this guys fits the bill or not, and act accordingly.

It's important to have a definition for two reasons:

Firstly, the family of a Muslim who kills a Jew for a non-terrorism related reason (such as a business dispute) should not be punished like the family of a terrorist.

Secondly, If a Jew would shoot an Arab for a non-terrorism related reason, some leftist group could capitalize on the country's lack of specificity in its own laws, and file a suit that the Jew's house be destroyed, claiming the murder is terrorism.

One more thing - a "shahid" is a martyr, not a terrorist. While all dead terrorists would be considered martyr, not all martyrs are necessarily terrorists.

Rafi- just curious would you be in favor of destroying the homes of Jewish terrorists as well? For exmaple the home of Baruch Goldstein?

I am in favor of getting rid of all Arabs out of Jerusalem at least, if not all of Israel. They have proven time and again that they are not loyal to Israel. Of course, one can make exceptions and say some are good and can stay, but many have at least helped with terror if not committed terror themselves.

So the question of knocking down their house is moot to me. It is the best we can hope for right now so do it.

Jewish terrorists on the other hand are an anomaly. The fact that you can name one, and his terror act was committed something like 15 years ago, proves it is an anomaly. He is the exception not the rule. So no.

Baruch Goldstein was not a terrorist. He was a "mild-mannered highly educated" medical doctor and a major in the IDF. He treated Jew and Arab alike-a good man. There is great controversy on what exactly happened that Purim day, 1994. There is one version which says that he saw his friend die in his arms, and went berserk. There is another which says that the Arabs in the Ma'arat Hamachpela (or Ibrahimi Mosque as the Arabs called it)had been amassing weapons and planning a massacre of the Jews in Hevron. There are big questions on the veracity of the findings of the Shamgar Commission which was set up to investigate. Some sources seem to indicate that it wasn't thorough and did not explore all the evidence or testimony.
A kind man highly thought of does not turn into a rabid murderer; it is out of character and highly unlikely.
Here are some sources to help clarify the event. Actually, by asking more questions about the event and the investigation, the writers of these sources are putting the current 'accepted conclusions' into question; the truth has not yet been told about Dr. Baruch Goldstein's actions on Purim of 1994. It has also been implied that it was a shabak scape-goating and cover-up.
The pollice investigation of the incident concluded by December 1994 that Dr. Goldstein was himself murdered by the Arabs in the mosque in cold blood, after being disarmed. No Arab was brought to trial.
Information taken from the following articles:
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3182.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/25/newsid_4167000/4167929.stm

http://members.tripod.com/~VaAm/Aug2198.html

http://www.geocities.com/dr_b_goldstein/kever.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baruch_Goldstein

http://www.geocities.com/chaimsimons/baruchgoldstein