Israel's Hebrew 'Palestinian' Daily: Ezra Schwartz deserved to die
Haaretz, Israel's
Hebrew 'Palestinian' daily, has published an article (accessible only behind a paywall, and I will not pay to access the full article) that implies that Ezra Schwartz, the
Massachusetts teenager who was
murdered last month in a terror attack,
deserved to die because his yeshiva sent him to volunteer at an 'illegal West Bank outpost.' They even call it an 'Exclusive.'
The reality is that most Israelis don't pay to read Haaretz - in print or online - and it is only read by the European and US elites for whom the online service exists. They are the target market for articles like this one - the BDS'ers and the elites who try to ban Israeli products from Europe's supermarkets.
The reality also is that if your child attends an identifiably Zionist year-in-Israel program, they will probably visit places across the green line in Judea and Samaria or 'east' Jerusalem at some point. Those places might include 'illegal outposts.' There is no difference where you are going to hand out charity. A Jew is a Jew wherever he or she may be.
And the reality also is that the terrorists who murdered Ezra and tried to murder his friends had no clue why Ezra and his friends were there, and really didn't care why they were there. The terrorists were just looking for Jews to murder as they have for the last 150 years in this country.
Shame on the lowlife scum at Haaretz for dancing on Ezra's grave.
Labels: Haaretz, illegal outpost, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, Judea and Samaria, Palestinian terrorism, terror victims
They forgot the Beeb
Tell me this tweet isn't the perfect description for the mainstream media's relationship with Israel.
Labels: al-Jazeera, anti-Israel media bias, BBC bias, CNN lies, Haaretz, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, MSNBC
Israeli Foreign Ministry says no deal on Iran nukes by end of March
A 'secret' report produced by the intelligence arm of Israel's Foreign Ministry and conveniently shared with Israel's Hebrew 'Palestinian' daily claims that
there will be no deal reached between Iran and the P 5+1 before the end of March. The main purpose of the report's release is apparently to contradict Prime Minister Netanyahu's claim that he must address Congress before Israel's elections to have any hope of stopping such a deal.
The report, a copy of which reached Haaretz, was written by Sarit
Young, a veteran researcher on Iran in the Foreign Ministry’s Center for
Political Research. It was distributed last week to a number of
Israel’s embassies worldwide following Khamenei’s speech to Iranian Air
Force commanders on February 8.
Khamenei told the officers that he opposed a
two-phase agreement with the world powers, the first at the end of March
including general principles only, and the second, a comprehensive
agreement by July 1. Khamenei said past experience showed that the
powers used the time between the two phases to raise new demands against
the Iranian nuclear program.
According to the report, this is the first time
Khamenei has come out against the outline of the agreement reached in
talks in Vienna in late November between the foreign ministers of Iran
and the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany.
“Khamenei’s position will make it difficult in our
view for the parties to reach an agreement. The remarks conform to the
hard and uncompromising line of Iran’s supreme leader,” the report
states.
The report also states that Khamenei’s opposition
to a framework agreement was, among other things, “a clear response” to
pressures on Iranian President Hassan Rouhani to reach a comprehensive
agreement as part of an extension of the talks.
According to the report, Khamenei’s speech contains
other indications that Iran was hardening its line toward proposals by
the six world powers. As opposed to past speeches, Khamenei did not use
terms like “heroic flexibility.” That phrase is one Khamenei coined more
than 40 years ago, when he was a young cleric, to describe the elements
that led the second Shi’ite imam, Hasan ibn Ali, to sign a peace treaty
with his enemies in 661 C.E.
Khamenei also made use of this term before the
signing of the interim agreement with the powers in Geneva in November
2013. According to the Foreign Ministry report, the fact that Khamenei
did not use the term last week, “is an indication of a lack of
willingness to be flexible or to wait for a better offer” from the
powers.
So if there's not going to be a deal, how do you explain this - which is apparently not part of the report?
According to a senior official in Jerusalem who is
intimately involved in the issue of negotiations between Iran and the
world powers: “At the moment the Iranian side is saying no to
everything.” The senior official, who asked to remain anonymous due to
the political sensitivity of the issue, said: “Our concern is that
precisely because of this, there will be some sort of compromise with
the powers as part of the desire to reach an agreement.”
If you
read the whole thing, you will find out that just about everyone outside of Israel disagrees with the foreign ministry's assessment. And for those of you wondering why Netanyahu's own foreign ministry would issue a report (and conveniently leak it to his political enemies) that contradicts Netanyahu's own assessment, the foreign ministry is still
inundated with Leftists.
Labels: Binyamin Netanyahu, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, Israel's Foreign Ministry, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, joint session of Congress, P 5+1
Two Hamas-loving Haaretz reporters arrested in Samaria
Two Hamas-loving Haaretz reporters - Gideon Levy and Alex Levac - were arrested on Monday at the entrance to Tulkarem, which is a 'Palestinian' city in Area A where
Israeli citizens are not permitted to enter (by the Israeli government - the 'Palestinians' would be happy to have lynching targets).
Haaretz itself has blamed the IDF for the incident.
"Their job is to help the vital work of journalists and not sabotage
it under false pretenses, and certainly not to arrest journalists
performing their duties," the newspaper stated Monday night.
Levy responded to the incident, saying that "should call a spade a
spade. It was a false arrest of journalists designed to thwart our work.
For 30 years I have surveyed the Occupation and I will continue even if
they arrest me every week."
The journalists openly rebelled against the IDF upon entering at a
checkpoint, police stated, and "provoked [against IDF officers], spat,
and cursed [at them]." It has now been revealed as well that one or both
of them attacked a high-ranking officer at the scene.
Here's hoping they get some jail time.
Labels: Haaretz, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily
Haaretz joins the 9/11 'truthers'
In an inflammatory cartoon in Thursday's editions, Israel's Hebrew 'Palestinian' daily is
blaming Prime Minister Netanyahu for 9/11.
The cartoon struck many as tone deaf, akin to depicting Netanyahu as Hitler.
Not surprisingly, it inflamed
those who already believe Haaretz is so left wing as to verge into
anti-Israel territory. But it also left even many diehard Bibi haters raising their eyebrows.
Haaretz is standing by the cartoonist, Amos Biderman, publishing another article article on Thursday in which Biderman claims - get this - that he didn't know that Americans were so sensitive about 9/11.
“It was certainly not my intention to insult or upset anyone,”
Biderman told Haaretz on Thursday. “I wasn’t sufficiently aware of the
great sensitivity that 9/11 holds for Americans.”
According to Biderman, his cartoon contained criticism of Netanyahu.
“I was mocking Bibi,” he said. “He’s been acting like a bull in a
china shop with the United States, which is Israel’s most important
strategic asset.”
Is that what it was? I thought cartoons were supposed to be funny. This one obviously is not.
Mike Doran came up with this response:
Hmmm.
Labels: 9/11, Binyamin Netanyahu, Haaretz, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, Jewish anti-Semitism
Chemi Shalev justifies 'Palestinian' terrorism
An amazing Twitter exchange between Northwestern University law professor Eugene Kontorovich and Haaretz US editor Chemi Shalev in which Shalev justifies Wednesday night's terror attack and the murder of three-month-old Chaya Zissel Braun HY"D (May God Avenge her blood).
Labels: Abu Mazen, East Jerusalem, Haaretz, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, occupation, Palestinian terrorism, Temple Mount
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! UPDATED
Haaretz reporter Amira Hass was barred from a conference at Bir Zeit University because - wait for it -
she's an Israeli Joooo. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! (Hat Tip:
Gershon D).
Hass attempted to attend the "Alternatives to Neo-Liberal
Development in the Occupied Palestinian Territories – Critical
Perspectives" conference at the university, which is located near
Ramallah where she lives.
But she was ejected from the hall by the organizers, Hass
claimed, after students at the admission desk noted she worked for the
Israeli publication and alerted security authorities to intervene.
...
Her colleagues and professors told her that she was being ejected on
the one hand "for her own protection" and also to give the students "a
safe space" free of Jews.
Meanwhile, the University has officially denied that there was a problem.
"The administration has no objection to the presence of the
journalist [Amira] Hass," it insisted, in an official statement. "The
University distinguishes between friends of the Palestinian people and
its enemies ... and works with every person and institution who opposes
the occupation."
But Hass - who is well-known in Arab and leftist circles for her aggressive anti-Zionism, and provoked outrage last year for justifying rock-throwing attacks against Jews - angrily noted that she was "not told" about the policy and that "Palestinian
citizens of Israel [i.e. Israeli Arabs - ed.] who teach at Israeli
universities are not subject to the same policy."
Gee, maybe Hass ought to rethink who is democratic and who is not....
UPDATED 6:09 PM
PS The event was funded by the
German government.
Labels: Amira Hass, Haaretz, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, Palestinian anti-Semitism, Ramallah
Off the deep end: Gideon Levy compares Netanyahu to Deif
This tweet is disgraceful. Only Israel's Hebrew 'Palestinian' daily and/or someone who writes for them would post such a thing from Israel.
Since when is Mohammed Deif a head of state? He's a terrorist with the blood of hundreds of innocent Israeli civilians
whom he targeted on his hands. Israel, on the other hand, does not target innocent civilians.
If any of you still subscribe to the rag known as 'Haaretz,' please consider canceling you subscriptions.
Labels: Binyamin Netanyahu, civilian casualties, human shields, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, Mohammed Deif, targeted killings
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
In Tel Aviv today, Haaretz held a '
peace conference.' The picture above is of the yefei ha'nefesh (beautiful people - but it loses something in translation) attending the conference fleeing for their lives upon the announcement that Hamas has just shot a rocket at Tel Aviv (Hat Tip:
Dan F).
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Labels: Haaretz, Hamas rockets, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, Middle East peace process, Tel Aviv, yefei ha'nefesh
Shimon Peres' legacy
The saddest part about this Caroline Glick column is that most of the world still sees Slimy Shimon Peres as an angel in disguise and not as the sleaze bag he really is. Shimon Peres' legacy is a
nuclear-armed Iran.
Peres’s legacy will be Iran’s nuclear arsenal.
For years, many Israelis as well as Israel’s supporters in the US, the
Sunni Arab states in the Persian Gulf and even the French have been
scratching their heads wondering why Israel hasn’t struck Iran’s nuclear
installations yet. Over the past few months, we received our answer.
The ongoing police investigation into allegedly illegal conduct by
then-IDF Chief of Staff Lt.- Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi has revealed the source
of Israel’s paralysis.
Apparently led by Peres, the triumvirate of security chiefs serving
between 2008 and 2011 – Ashkenazi, then-Mossad director Meir Dagan and
then-Shin Bet director Avi Dichter – colluded to undermine Prime
Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s and then-defense minister Ehud Barak’s
legal authority to order Israel’s security forces to take action against
Iran.
According to a Haaretz report on Wednesday, between 2008 and 2011, the
four men leaked plans and discussions of possible Israeli strikes on
Iran to the media in order to prevent them from being carried out. The
four men opposed an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear installations and
stridently rejected any Israeli operation not coordinated with the US.
Ashkenazi and his associates are being investigated by the police for
crimes associated with criminal insubordination to Israel’s elected
leadership. Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein ordered the police probe
in January after information unearthed by the media and by the State
Comptroller’s Office raised strong suspicions of a conspiracy led by
Ashkenazi to usurp the powers of the government.
According to media reports of the investigation, the police have
discovered tape recordings of numerous telephone conversations between
Ashkenazi and Peres. According to Channel 1 and Haaretz, Peres’s
attorney requested that Weinstein prohibit the publication of the
details of phone conversations.
Haaretz’s report didn’t specifically state that the conversations in
question related to actions by Peres and the security chiefs to prevent
military operations against Iran’s nuclear weapons program. But the same
day the report appeared, Amir Oren, Haaretz’s senior commentator,
published an article praising Peres for preventing Israel from attacking
Iran.
Oren wrote, “Peres’s involvement in blocking the Iranian adventure
[i.e., a military attack against Iran’s nuclear installations] is… the
most important action he took as president.”
As Amnon Lord wrote last December in Makor Rishon, Peres’s role in the
security chiefs’ conspiracy to prevent Netanyahu and Barak from ordering
a strike against Iran’s nuclear installations was to provide
“pseudo-constitutional and pseudo- moral support” for their unlawful
subversion.
The four men were very likely not acting by themselves. Lord argued
that the Obama administration was a fifth partner in this criminal
conspiracy.
The US was represented in its efforts by the then-chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Michael Mullen. Mullen visited Israel almost every
month during this period and constantly praised Ashkenazi’s leadership
publicly.
As Lord noted, these trips were reciprocated by Ashkenazi and
then-Military Intelligence commander Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin who flew
regularly to Washington.
For the Americans, Lord wrote, the point of cultivating these ties was
“to influence the IDF’s high command and cut it off from the political
leadership of Israel.”
In the case of Iran’s nuclear weapons program, as in the case of the
phony peace process, Peres’s motivation, like that of Ashkenazi, Dichter
and Dagan, was clear and crass. He wanted power.
The facts already established by the Ashkenazi et. al. conspiracy
probe reveal that from his earliest days as chief of staff, Ashkenazi
was preparing the ground for a post-IDF run for prime minister. His will
to rule distorted his perception of his place in the chain of command.
Instead of viewing Netanyahu and Barak as his commanders, as the law
stipulates, he saw them as his political rivals, and behaved
accordingly.
As for Peres, he had been searching for a leftist politician who
could defeat Netanyahu. Ashkenazi was his knight in shining armor.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Amos Yadlin, Gabi Ashkenazi, Haaretz, Iranian nuclear threat, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, Meir Dagan, Middle East peace process, Oslo accords, Shimon Peres
Haaretz's newest blood libel
Some
bald and unsubstantiated allegations from Haaretz, arising out of the alleged killings of two 'Palestinians' in Beitunia ten days ago.
Even the Palestinian Authority, despite its declarations, is not hastening to assist in finding out the truth. After two weeks, the Palestinian security forces have yet to hand over to the IDF the bullets removed from the bodies of the two young men during the autopsy in the Ramallah hospital.
And still, the shooting of rubber bullets, for which the soldier was suspended, reveals a few things about the conduct of the army during violent clashes with demonstrators. The soldier was suspended from his job, and a Military Police investigation was opened against him, because the firing of rubber bullets was not part of his assignment during the demonstration. Although he was trained as a combat soldier, his job (the precise nature of which cannot be disclosed due to a military court gag order,) is connected primarily to communications.
The Border Policeman and the other soldiers who fired rubber bullets during the demonstration were authorized to do so; the communications soldier was not. His suspension, which under ordinary circumstances would not have aroused any interest, attracted media attention because it took place in the wake of an incident that was to a great extent documented by security cameras and television cameras. Had it been a matter of soldiers who killed unarmed Palestinians in undocumented incidents — which take place almost on a monthly basis on the West Bank — there probably would have been no news coverage.
But the soldier is not so exceptional. A fact that is not widely discussed is that for quite a few soldiers who participate in dispersing demonstrations it’s a chance to take part in the “action” - firing shots, albeit it with non-lethal ammunition, in the midst of the chaos, and the adrenaline rush of a confrontation. We can reasonably assume that the soldier was seeking an exciting experience, or an escape from boredom, and that the Border Police acceded to his request to allow him to fire rubber bullets at the demonstration.
In recent years, most of the clashes between the IDF and the Border Police on one hand, and Palestinian demonstrators on the other, take place at times and in locations that the two sides have chosen in advance — what the army dubs “focus points of friction.” Although the encounter takes place repeatedly, sometimes on a weekly basis, the commanders do not have total control over the soldiers. There is always a possibility that a soldier will violate the rules of engagement, without his commanders knowing exactly what he is up to during the demonstration.
The potential for damage is exacerbated when the shooter is a soldier attached to a force and is not part of an organic unit. In the IDF there are many such job-holders — drivers, dog handlers, intelligence operatives and others — who wander among the units and join them for a few hours or a few days. This is potentially dangerous because the soldier is not part of the regular chain of command. The operational commander in the field didn’t know him before they were teamed up for the assignment, whereas his commanders are at the base and are unable to supervise him and to make sure that he is following orders.
During the years of the second intifada there were several incidents in which non-combat soldiers who found themselves in the line of fire caused problems for the unit to which they were attached, whether by firing irresponsibly on civilians or by operational mistakes (and even firing inadvertently at other soldiers). This is a weak point which almost invites mishaps, although judging by what the investigation has found until now, the soldier from the communications unit is not connected to the killing of the demonstrators.
The items I highlighted in bold reflect unsubstantiated allegations by Haaretz. The first paragraph (that I quoted - there were a couple of others before it) and the last half sentence reflect reality. And with good reason: There is no proof thus far that the IDF is responsible for the alleged killings.
Labels: blood libel, Haaretz, IDF, IDF rules of engagement, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, Naqba day, open fire rules, Pallywood
Ode to a terrorist
It's the kind of 'reporting' we've come to expect from Israel's Hebrew 'Palestinian' daily.
On Saturday, the IDF killed Hamza Abu al-Haija, whom it described as a
ticking time bomb, who was being directed to carry out a mass terror attack against Israelis in Judea and Samaria. Abu al-Haija was the son of Sheikh Jamal Abu al-Haija, the Hamas Sheikh in Jenin, who has been held in an Israeli jail since Operation Defensive for 12 years. Jamal was sentenced to nine life sentences for his role in sending a suicide
attacker to the Meron junction in August 2002 to carry out an attack
that killed nine Israelis. The IDF came to arrest the son, Hamza, but Hamza
came out firing from his hiding place and was killed. Haaretz's Gideon Levy turns Abu al-Haija into a
martyr.
Hamzi didn’t act like a wanted man. He was spending the day in his
family home, acting normally; he wasn’t armed nor did he betray any
signs of the nervousness typical of men on the run that I’ve met over
the years. Wearing sweats, he was playing with his little niece and
joined the conversation we were having with his mother. He smiled a lot
and said he was not afraid.
He
told us that on the evening of December 18 soldiers had come to his
home to arrest him while he was celebrating the birth of a nephew with
friends. They heard suspicious noises from the street and at first
thought it was a force from the Palestinian Authority, which has also
been trying to arrest Hamas men in the camp. Only when he and his three
friends ran to the roof and looked down did they realize it was the
Israel Defense Forces.
Hamzi
managed to escape by fleeing over the roofs and through the alleys, but
his friend, Nafaa Saidi, was shot and killed by the soldiers. In the
three ensuing months, no one tried to arrest him and Hamzi continued
with his routine; during the day he would stay in his family’s home, but
at night he would sleep elsewhere.
Of course, he didn't act like a wanted man. He just happened to be on the run all the time. But don't let that stop Levy from trying to humanize him.
I first met Hamzi in June 2003. He was 11, with both parents and his
oldest brother in jail, and the five remaining children, all of then
young, were forced to fend for themselves. I described Hamzi then as a
scared and quiet boy. His mother, Asmaa, was placed in administrative
detention (arrest without trial). She spent nine months in prison, all
the while suffering from a brain tumor. The family home was destroyed in
2002 by a missile fired by an Apache helicopter, but was rebuilt and is
now roomy, pleasant and well-tended, with pictures of the father and
his sons on a large poster in the living room. Two of Hamzi’s brothers,
Abed and Amad, are also imprisoned in Israel.
Ater
hearing that her son had been killed Saturday, Asmaa was hospitalized.
When we parted from him two weeks ago and told him to take care of
himself, he told us, “There’s nothing to worry about.”
I'm sure there was no reason - no reason at all - for that home to be destroyed or for Israel to try to arrest the son. /sarc But in fact, there were
many reasons.
According to the IDF, Israeli security forces surrounded Abu
al-Hija’s house, where he barricaded himself. After refusing to come
out, soldiers stormed the hideout where a shootout took place. Abu
al-Hija was the only person in the building after everyone else
evacuated.
When he attempted to escape, Abu al-Hija opened fire first on
an army dog sent inside the building and then on troops. The IDF
returned fire and shot Abu al-Hija dead.
Abu al-Hija was “wanted for numerous shooting and bombing attacks as
well as planning future acts of terrorism.” The Palestinian Ma’an News
agency reported that an IDF bulldozer was used to demolish part of the
house where Abu al-Hija was hiding.
IDF Spokesman Lt. Col. Peter Lerner confirmed that Abu al-Hija opened
fire on security forces while attempting to escape. Lerner said that
Abu al-Hija was a “ticking time bomb,” waiting to carry out numerous
terrorist attacks against Israel.
Abu al-Hija’s father, Jamal Abu al-Hija, is a famous Hamas leader who
was arrested in 2002 by Israel. Sentenced to nine life sentences, Jamal
Abu al-Hija took part in at least six known terrorist attacks,
including the Jerusalem Sbarro pizza shop bombing in 2001 that killed 15
people.
In a statement from prison, Jamal Abu al-Hija extolled his son’s
“heroism” and “blessed his confrontation with occupation forces until
his last bullet.” He added that he had been praying for his son’s
martyrdom from prison.
What nice people. Just give them a mistake, and I am sure that they will stop trying to murder everyone around them. /sarc.
Labels: Haaretz, Hamas, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, Jenin, Palestinian terrorists
#BDS_Fail Haaretz loses it
Yes, Haaretz, Israel's Hebrew 'Palestinian' daily, really did tweet this:
For the record, the 'Palestinians' in the picture are NOT caged in. They are in line at a checkpoint to cross the green line into pre-1967 Israel - probably to work.
And yes, I downloaded the picture in case they try to deny it.
Labels: BDS, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, Scarlet Johansson, SodaStream, Super Bowl XLVIII
It was neither Open nor Zionist, and now it's dead
Let's get in the mood for this first.
Let's go to the videotape.
Peter Beinart is leaving the Daily Beast, and his blog - which I systematically refuse(d) to link - is shutting down. Beinart's Open Zionist blog - which was
neither open nor Zionist - is no more.
Peter Beinart, the liberal Jewish blogger, is leaving The Daily Beast
for The Atlantic Media Company, sources familiar with the move tell
POLITICO. He will serve as Contributing Editor for both The Atlantic and
National Journal.
Beinart, a former New Republic editor, joined the Daily Beast in
November 2008 and in 2012 launched "Zion Square" -- later changed to
"Open Zion" -- a blog dedicated to "an open and unafraid conversation
about Israel, Palestine, and the Jewish future." Formerly a fixture on the AIPAC speaking circuit, he has in recent years become a hero on the Israeli left -- and a pariah on the right -- for advocating against Israeli settlements and in support of a two-state solution.
His departure from Daily Beast, which was first reported by Mondoweiss, comes
almost two months after founding editor Tina Brown announced she would
be leaving the company. Open Zion, which was funded by New America
Foundation, will cease to exist.
UPDATE (3:26 p.m.): Atlantic spokesperson Emily Lenzner forwards the press release, which will be going out shortly (after the jump).
Washington, D.C. (November 4, 2013)—Political columnist, journalist,
and author Peter Beinart will join Atlantic Media as a contributing
editor, reporting for both National Journal and The Atlantic. Tim
Grieve, editor-in-chief of National Journal, and James Bennet,
editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, jointly announced the addition of
Beinart to their editorial teams, starting in January, 2014.
Beinart will also be writing for Haaretz, Israel's Hebrew 'Palestinian' daily.
Oh joy....
Labels: Atlantic Wire, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, Peter Beinart
Artists4Israel responds to Haaretz hatchet job
I suppose it was just a question of time until Israel's Hebrew 'Palestinian' daily noticed
Artists4Israel. In the weekend edition,
Haaretz attacked the group that has done so much for so many people here, because they paint in Judea and Samaria. While I cannot get to the article, because like everything else at Haaretz it's behind a paywall (the only things I can get to there are Barak Ravid's reports if I click on them from Twitter), you can get a flavor for it by reading
Craig Dershowitz's response. Full disclosure: Craig and his artists have been guests in our home a couple of times, and when one of our kids saw that I had their blog open, he immediately asked when the artists are coming back again.
At your own words (words you use twice in one sentence - high school
writing 101 mistake), Artists 4 Israel is a "small organization", yet,
you spend a whole half a page above the fold decrying our work. Must
have been a slow news day or, perhaps, there is something more here.
After all, if you are going to give us so much press (PS, thanks for
that), you should at least really make your accusations sting and not
just ridicule our size. Yet, the best you do is describe us as
"right-wing" (again, using that phrase twice - seriously, can we buy you
a thesaurus - maybe the JNF will pay for it) yet your only proof of
this political orientation is that we paint "Pro-Israel" messages. Your
equation then is that "Pro-Israel" is synonymous with "right-wing". We
do not ascribe to a notion of right and left wing as such divisive
politics is an invention of bigots like yourself who choose to separate
and alienate. We choose to unite. We believe that beauty of art is
pan-wing. However we do see your bias through this false equivalency.
Yours is a sad belief which paints (pun intended) everything life
affirming with the gloomy sepia of politrix (typo very much intended).
Spray-paint (I want to write "sic" here but I think it is more relevant
to point out that you don't even copy edit your own work. It is spray
paint - two words, no hyphen) is a form of creation. It is creation,
like the Third Temple might be. It is creation like our paintings in
Judea, Samaria, Tel Aviv, Ariel, Shiloh, Arab villages across Israel,
mixed schools and community centers. We have created art in child
daycare centers, in refuges for battered women and homes for at-risk
children. It is creation like the JNF's planting of trees, building of
parks, growing of flowers, green grass and a hopeful earth-driven
future. It is the opposite of your attempts to destruct and to destroy.
Grab a can of spray paint (hyphenate if you must) or a handful of seeds
and earth and create something other than the fictions in your
reporting. No one can hate life that much so, maybe there is something
else going on here.
Your story's lies go from the wishful (saying we come to Israel to paint
every few months (if only!) to the mundane (there are no videos on our
website) to the slanderous (painting on a "Palestinian's" home never
happened). The only truth in your fable comes from your uncredited
appropriation of a JPR video.
The JPR, unlike you, are serious, investigative journalists. Their
story was timely (aka the "new" part of "news"), their reporters were on
the ground, their sources were primary, their reporting comprehensive
and multi-sided. You couldn't even post the video that matched your
description of it! That is not me speaking on the video. That is SKI, a
member of the UR New York art collective, a New Yorker of Dominican
descent and Catholic beliefs. Yet, you hinted at some sort of racist,
evil religious Jewish plot in our painting of the Temple. That makes no
sense. Maybe there is something more going on here.
SKI's words are precious. He informs everyone (well, except for your
editorial staff it seems) that he is there "spreading the word of peace
through art". Peace. Art. Creation. How dare you respond to such unbridled life affirming actions with destructive lies and hate?
SKI's words are also prescient. Being in Israel to "see the reality - it
is not what you read about." According to your words, Haaretz is "the
world's leading English-language Website for real-time news and analysis
of Israel and the Middle East" As such, it is the monolith of your
bastardized reporting that is creating the misrepresentation of Israel
that SKI had to venture into Hebron to expose.
And, SKI learned the truth well. While bricks and giant rocks were being
hurled at him in an attempt to maim and kill an artist of the world by
"Palestinians", SKI was being treated to watermelon and lemonade by his
new Israeli friends. When a group of stick weilding "Palestinian" youth
tried to ambush SKI, he was saved by an IDF soldier. When SKI asked the
soldier why he wore his helmet in the sweltering heat he was told
because it was too unsafe for him to take it off. SKI learned, even in
the heart of Hebron, a site of so much ridicule from your paper, that he
loves Israel. "this place is amazing. It is this little gem." And, he
hadn't even seen the Tel Aviv beach.
Read the whole thing.
I believe that the second picture in this post comes from the incident involving SKI in Hebron. It's described
here.
Labels: Artists4Israel, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily
Haaretz: A case study in the collapse of modern journalism
The Tower has a devastating feature on Haaretz, Israel's Hebrew 'Palestinian' daily. It's calling it, '
a case study in the collapse of modern journalism.'
In a Sunday interview with journalist Kalman Libskind of the radio
station Galei Yisrael, Haaretz publisher Amos Schocken set out to defend
Hass’s article. Growing flustered, however, Schocken ended up saying
that moving to a settlement was a form of deliberately endangering the
welfare of one’s children, something that in another context would
trigger the intervention of social services. As for Hass’s sympathy for
rock-throwers, Schocken refused to distance himself. “Sometimes,” he
concluded, “you have to fight violence with violence.”
The method Amos Schocken chose to defend Hass’s article, and his
defense of editor-in-chief Aluf Benn’s decision to publish the piece in
full, sheds some light on the recent changes at the once-venerable
Israeli daily. In a series of interviews conducted with current and
former Haaretz employees, some of whom held high-level positions at the
paper and most of whom still hold it close to their hearts, a consensus
emerged to the effect that the paper is undergoing a process of major
change that has led to a dramatic reduction in staff, a precipitous
decline in journalistic standards, and a willful radicalization of its
politics in pursuit of Internet traffic.
As Israel’s longstanding newspaper of record, these developments have
raised important questions about the future of print journalism,
especially in a country where a free and dynamic press has always been
at the center of Israel’s democratic discourse.
...
according to the employees interviewed for this article, all of whom
refused to be identified out of fear of the impact on their careers in
Israel’s small and insular media environment, the Amira Hass affair was a
red flag not only for the Israeli public, but also for many on the
Haaretz staff. As one former editor at the news desk put it:
Amira Hass’s article must be seen as the result of a conscious
decision to radicalize the paper, to make it something shallow,
sensationalist, and shocking, and to give it the image of a
paper—really, a website—that is courageous and groundbreaking. At the
end of the day, there is only one goal: To generate traffic. It doesn’t
matter if the piece is good or bad, what matters is that it leads to
website traffic.
Like most of the people we spoke with, the editor does not identify
with the political Right in Israel. Yet he felt a need to add the
following: “Amira Hass’s article fits Aluf Benn and Amos Schocken like a
glove. She wrote shocking things. Any editor with a minimum of
discretion would have said that it wasn’t suitable for publication. But
here? The more provocative you are—to the Left, of course—the better the
editorial staff thinks it is.”
...
An even more pointed criticism of the editors’ objectivity came from
another staffer familiar with the news desk. “There is almost no one who
is not on the radical Left, or more precisely, who hasn’t accommodated
themselves to it and suddenly become a Leftist. Except for Amos Harel
and Haim Levinson, there are almost no journalists I would allow myself
to call trustworthy. The rest are sycophants who suddenly joined the
extreme Left. Israel Harel is the token Rightist in the opinion section,
but if you look at the section in its entirety, it’s obviously getting
systematically worse.” The same staff member also took issue with Benn’s
decision to dedicate time to giving public lectures and writing opinion
pieces for the paper.
...
Though the newspaper has always taken a progressive political line, even
its ideological detractors once recognized the benefit that a newspaper
rooted in quality journalism and rigorous about its standards provided
Israeli society. As Hanoch Marmari, who served as the paper’s
editor-in-chief for close to 50 years after being appointed by Amos
Schocken’s father, Gershom, put it:
“Today Haaretz is not in the playing field. Rather, it is morphed from a
player to a spectator in the bleachers. When you are a distant observer
you do not necessarily see the complicated dynamics of the game—and you
definitely exert less influence.”
Sounds just like the New York Times, doesn't it?
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Aluf Benn, Amira Hass, Haaretz, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, Israeli media bias, liberal media bias
Yesha Council complains to police about Haaretz
The Yesha (revenants') Council has sent a letter to the police, accusing Haaretz's Amira Hass of inciting violence against the revenants by writing a column that claims that the 'Palestinians' have a
'right' to throw stones at the revenants.
In a column published Wednesday, Ha'aretz writer Amira Hass,
who lives in the PA city of Ramallah, wrote, “Throwing stones is the
right and the duty of anyone living under foreign rule.” Later in the
column she termed rock-throwing “a metaphor for resistance.” Hass is the
official Ha'aretz correspondent for what the newspaper labels the "occupied territories".
Hass, who also lived in Gaza for three years in contravention
of Israeli law, wrote that arrests of rock throwers "is part of the role
of the foreign occupation, no less than gunfire, torture during
investigations, land theft... and discrimination in distribution of
water."
Several recent rock attacks by Arabs targeting Israelis living in
Judea and Samaria have caused serious injury. In the most serious case, a
terrorist wounded a mother and three of her children, including a
3-year-old who was critically injured. All were rushed to the hospital, including the toddler who has since undergone numerous surgeries.
Hass’ column constitutes praise for violent rock attacks and gives
such attacks legitimacy, Ro'eh and Shachner said in their complaint,
adding that it ignores the dangers posed by such attacks.
I do not understand why successive Israeli governments have allowed this woman to live in and report from the 'Palestinian' side. This is not the first time she and Israel's Hebrew 'Palestinian' daily have incited violence against Jews, nor is it likely to the last. Ironically, very few Israelis read Haaretz - it is one of the least read newspapers in the country. It's the international media that give Haaretz its power.
Labels: Amira Hass, anti-Israeli Israelis, Haaretz, incitement, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, Jewish anti-Semitism, Judea and Samaria, revenants, stone throwers
2012's Dishonest Reporter of the Year is an Israeli
In an unusual move, HonestReporting.com has given its 2012 Dishonest Reporter of the Year award to an Israeli.
And the winner is....
Haaretz's Gideon Levy.
It’s no secret that some of the most critical stories concerning
Israel in the international press are lifted straight from the pages of
Israel’s very own Haaretz newspaper, and all the more so thanks to its
English language website.
While Haaretz is entitled to fulfill its role as a critical domestic
judge of Israel and its government’s policies, what happened when it
published a story that was — quite simply — dishonest?
Gideon Levy’s front page article ”Most Israelis support an apartheid regime in Israel,” backed by a survey, made headlines around the world:
Israelis approve discrimination if West Bank annexed: poll (AFP)
Levy regularly demonizes the Jewish state to foreign audiences and in
his own newspaper columns. He regularly goes beyond legitimate
criticism of Israel, crossing red lines and allying himself with those
who refer to Israel as a racist “apartheid state”, promote boycott,
divestment and sanctions (BDS) and wish to see the very destruction of
Israel.
On the basis that Levy promotes the canard of Israeli “apartheid”, he
is the last journalist who could give an objective analysis of this
polls results.
His article opened with the following premise:
Most of the Jewish public in
Israel supports the establishment of an apartheid regime in Israel if it
formally annexes the West Bank.
Levy’s entire premise was based, however, on a hypothetical situation
where Israel annexes the West Bank – a policy that the majority of
Israelis are opposed to according to the very same poll.
Other statistics were casually tossed into the mix by Levy in an
attempt to fit the figures to his framing of Israel as an apartheid
state. Minority opinions were highlighted and illustrative graphs that
appeared in the Haaretz Hebrew edition were noticeably absent from the
English article.
Levy stated that the survey was commissioned by the New Israel Fund’s
Yisraela Goldblum Fund. It was perhaps an indicator of just how
politicized and toxic this poll was that the New Israel Fund publicly disassociated itself (Hebrew) from it.
After an outcry over the article, Haaretz was forced to issue a clarification
stating that the original headline did not accurately reflect the
findings of the poll and amended the headline.
While it did not
represent a correction or apology, Haaretz did publish an opinion piece
by Dr. Yehuda Ben Meir, who shredded Levy, concluding:
There’s a lot of room for improvement in
Israeli society, but this article does an injustice to the State of
Israel, the Jewish people and the truth. an injustice to the State of
Israel, the Jewish people and the truth.
Toronto’s Globe & Mail (to its credit) was the only non-Israeli
paper to report the clarification – an indication of just how much
damage the original story had caused to Israel internationally.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Haaretz, Honest Reporting, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily, Israeli apartheid
BWAHAHAHAHAH! Haaretz going on open-ended strike
Here's a great piece of news. Just when President Obama most needs a Leftist newspaper to convince Israelis that we can live with a nuclear Iran,
Haaretz, Israel's Hebrew 'Palestinian' daily, is going on an open-ended strike.
“Tomorrow, all of us, employees of all sections of the paper and the
online edition, are going on strike,” the announcement said, adding “no
employee will take pictures, no worker will write articles, no one will
edit, design, produce, or interview until the end of the strike.
Remember: there is no paper without journalists.”
The workers, who face wide-scale layoffs in the near future, said
that at 4 p.m. Wednesday they will hold a meeting inside the paper’s
headquarters on Shocken Street in south Tel Aviv, after which they will
launch the open-ended strike.
The workers said that management continues to ignore their protest efforts, creating the need for more drastic measures.
Last Sunday night, Haaretz
employees held a partial work stoppage, shutting down the paper for
around two hours in what was the first such action by the paper’s
employees.
Shouting “no newspaper without journalists”, the employees of Haaretz and
the Marker blocked Shocken Street outside the paper’s headquarters in
south Tel Aviv, and demanded answers about the size and scope of the
impending layoffs.
BWAHAHAHAHA!
Labels: Haaretz, Israel's Hebrew Palestinian daily
