It wasn't the "first act of terrorism by a Middle Eastern country" on about 3 counts:
1. Its debatable whether or not this was a terrorist act.
2. There is no evidence that it was an act by a Middle Eastern country. It was carried out by a Middle Eastern PERSON, but he didn't necessarily act on behalf of any country.
3. Even IF we count it as an act of terrorism, it certainly wasn't the first. Apart from the Old Testament, there were terrorist acts associated with the end of colonialism, e.g. the King David Hotel bombing in 1946. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing )
2007-06-25 14:32:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by Tim N 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
But was it an act of terrorism? I think it was an odd thing that happened, but I am old anough to have seen the assasination as it happened. The Keenedy's had their hands in a lot of pockets. I think if you can blame anyone it would have to be the teanster's and their mob connections. Bobby was the chief consel for the committee on organized crime. He was Attorney general in the kennedy Administration. He had plenty of time to make a lot of enemies. Also his brother jack liked to live on the dangerous side and knew some of the gansters in las Vegas, and if that does not convience you, his father Joseph Patrick made a lot of deals with the mob; then Bobby turned around and investigated them, and many of them did hard time. Bobby was not exactly Mr. Popularity with the mob of the 1960s.
2007-06-25 14:20:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by datalj12 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Actually, the earliest acts of terrorism by any Middle Eastern country probably happened in the Old Testament. Amazing how bloody that history is, and how frequently the Judeo-Christian Diety ordered the Jews to kill all their neighbors, women and kids along with them, steal their livestock, and level their homes.
Which isn't to say earlier Middle Eastern terrorism didn't exist. It almost certainly did. That just happens to be some of the earliest that comes to mind as a part of the widely published history.
2007-06-25 13:33:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by Jack P 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Sirhan was a hit man for the American Mafia. Kennedy was causing them a great deal of trouble.
2007-06-25 17:32:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by brainstorm 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
do you be attentive to seventy 3% of all information are thoroughly made up!! Apollo hit it on the top; no longer many IRA, ETA, Chechen Liberation, Shining course, Columbian rebellion military, Cambodian and Nepalese Communist social gathering or Tamil Tiger supporters (to call some properly-loved circumstances), could take kindly to being called center eastern! u . s . a . of america is in simple terms the maximum modern in a lengthy line of international places to discover the painful and indiscriminate results of terrorist acts, the two living house-grown and foreign places. in spite of the undeniable fact that, there have been many acts of terrorism over various many years (commencing around WW a million) that don't extra healthful into your "Profiling for Dummies one hundred and one" view of the international. shame on you.
2016-10-18 21:26:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by hilderbran 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I wouldn't consider a lone deranged gunman a middle eastern country ,so no final answer T4
2007-06-26 03:17:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it was just something agains't the Kennedys. I will never understand about the Kennedy assinations.
2007-06-25 13:35:22
·
answer #7
·
answered by JBWPLGCSE 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
They have thousand years of history, and there were many more incidences before that. But it's not like Americans cares about it.
2007-06-25 13:31:57
·
answer #8
·
answered by Astrid Nannerl 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
It was most probably an insane act by an insane individual.
2007-06-25 15:03:39
·
answer #9
·
answered by 34th B.G. - USAAF 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, it was by ultra-Conservatives, the Mafia and rogue agents, we are our worst enemies.
2007-06-25 13:35:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋