In every major terrorist attack in the past few years there has been a Jewish component. The Charlie Hebdo attack had some jihadis murder Jews in a deli. This was met with the contemptible lie by president Barack Obama that it was “some random folks in a deli” that were murdered.
Then there was the attack more recently in Paris. This had a few components. A popular sporting event, a soccer game, and a Jewish owned venue for dance music and drink. (They probably also had ham on the menu) So a very strong target for Muslims.
There was the attack in Copenhagen where a free speech meeting was shot up and then a man killed outside a Synagogue.
In pretty much every attack, the jihadis make sure that there is at least a component of attacks on Jews. So what about today in Belgium?
Starbucks shuts all Belgium stores after bombings
New York (AFP) – Starbucks shut all of its coffee shops in Belgium on Tuesday, after a Brussels airport outlet was apparently the location of one of the bombs that killed about 35 people.
“Amidst reports of attacks targeting Brussels Airport and a metro station, initial indications are that an explosion took place outside our store within the airport,” the US coffee chain said in a statement.
“This store and all other Starbucks stores in Belgium will remain closed until further notice.”
So what does Starbucks have to do with Jews?
Starbucks in particular has gained a reputation in the local community for notoriously being a pro-Zionist company, yet a lot of that appears to be based on misinformation.In fact, within the last year, any strings that had connected Starbucks to Israel appear to have been cut. The company closed down all six of its locations in that country earlier this year, dissolving its joint partnership with Shalom Coffee Co., which helped operate the Starbucks locations in Israel.
The Arab American piece is quite fair and rational. But the BDS and Islamic groups are not. And this may mean that the choice of location to detonate the explosives constitutes and answer to the question: Where is the anti-Jewish component of this attack?
It would be good to know more about the tactical aspects. Was the Starbucks the best place anyway irrespective of all this? Or like other attacks such as Bombay and Paris, did they actually suffer a tactical loss in order to make a strategic point? In other words, would they have created more terror by choosing a location other than Starbucks which had more potential to do structural damage and create loss of life, and so Starbucks was chosen in order to specifically be anti-Jewish? Or was Starbucks where they wanted to detonate anyway.
This answer may have to wait for an architect to weigh in or better yet, a decent confession by a captive. If indeed we are permitted to know the truth and as Maj. Nidal Hassan has still not been allowed to fully disclose his thinking, we may never know it.
Xanthippa sent in the following addition. The recent attack in Turkey had the bomber following a group of Jewish men before detonation.