Monday, 29 March 2010
Because by Jerusalem we mean all of Jerusalem. Pesach must be such a hard time for anti-Zionist Jews, having to celebrate G-d's saving us from slavery in Egypt, and eventually taking us to Israel.
I am determined that when I say "leshana haba" this year at the Seder, next year it will be true.
Wednesday, 24 March 2010
Tuesday, 23 March 2010
The IDF, acting in self-defence killed two Palestinians on Sunday, who had attacked them with a pitchfork, and were also armed with a syringe and glass bottle filled with stones. The Times says that "the unrest was prompted by Palestinian anger at restrictions on access to farmland which is close to an Israeli settlement", as though the only natural reaction to settlements is to try to stab an Israeli with a pitchfork.
Hider uses EoZ's favourite phrase "protests erupted" (the media uses passive phrasing when referring to Palestinian violence); and quotes Ghassan Khatib, an aide to Salam Fayyad the Palestinian Prime Minister, as saying: “We look at this as part of the Israeli escalation. It could have been treated in a completely different way. But the Israelis have been escalating..."
So Hider quotes a Palestinian on Israel's behaviour, but chooses not to mention Hamas' threats of a new intifada.
He talks about the Palestinians that Israel killed, but doens't mention all the injuries and damage caused by the rockets and boulders that Palestinians have been attacking with. Injuries and damage caused to Israelis, even if the intention is to kill, is just not newsworthy compared to some houses being controversially built in Jerusalem.
Here's what Hider and the Times missed:
Today (because it's safe to say it won't be in the Times tommorrow), two Israelis were wounded when Arabs threw rocks at them in their car. One was treated on the spot, the other had to be evacuated to hospital. This incident occured near where a checkpoint was removed in June, under pressure from the US. There has been a rise in rock and fire-bomb attacks in the area, since the checkpoint was removed.
Also today, a rocket fired from Gaza landed on Israeli farmland.
Yesterday, two rockets launched by Palestinians landed in an open area in Sderot, and one mistakenly in Gaza.
On Sunday, several Israeli vehicles were damaged in separate rock-attacks. Also on Sunday, a rocket launched landed south of Ashkelon, no damage.
On Saturday, at least four rockets were launched from Gaza, one landing close to a kibbutz in the South, and sirens going off in several areas from Sderot to Ashkelon.
On Friday, five rockets had been fired in the last 24 hours, with one landing in the Western Negev, and another in the Gaza strip. A man also had his windshield smashed and 18-month old daughter injured in a rock attack in the Old City in Jerusalem.
On Thursday, several Israeli vehicles were damaged in separate rock-attacks at different locations, and a woman and man were injured in two other attacks. A Thai worker on a kibbutz was killed by a rocket in one of five rockets launched into Israel in two days.
On Wednesday a bus was stoned and a rocket was fired landing near Sderot and causing two people to go into shock, one of them a girl.
On Tuesday three buses were stoned, an Israeli woman was injured in a rock-attack and had to be treated in hospital, and two mortar shells missed their target and landed in Palestinian territory.
And on the Saturday before that, Palestinians attacked IDF soldiers with a firebomb and rocks, and in a separate incident that day, a Palestinian was caught at a checkpoint in possession of three knives.
Those incidents are not "resistance"; there was no provocation: the building of houses does not merit an innocent civilian to be injured or killed by rockets or boulders. But perhaps that is the case to James Hider of the Times.
Sunday, 21 March 2010
According to the Times' history lesson, after the 1979 Camp David accords between Israel and Egypt, the Egyptian prime minister was assassinated, and two years later, out of nowhere "Israel launched a massive invasion of Lebanon".
If the Times is going to give some context, maybe it would be better if they didn't portray Israel as the war-mongers everyone believes it to be, and instead give the whole picture, such as the assassination attempt on the Israeli ambassador to London. The war was not a success, but it wasn't without purpose: "The operation was meant to destroy militant infrastructure on the Lebanese-Israeli border, which had been used by terrorists to attack IDF forces, as well as the Israeli communities abject to the border." The story of Israel's life.
After the 1993 Oslo Accords, and Yitzchak Rabin's assassination, the Times says "the two sides plunged into fresh violence with the 'al-Aqsa intifada' in 2000". But fails to mention that in five years after Oslo, but before that intifada, 279 Israeli civilians had been murdered in 92 Palestinian terror attacks. Or that the "trigger" for the intifada was Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount, with the Palestinian Authority issuing a call
Thursday, 11 March 2010
It might be a surprise that I, Proud Zionist, am reporting this breach of the IDF rule against using human shields, but the reason's in this very sentence. The IDF has a strict code of morality and if soldiers break these rules they will be punished accordingly. I am supportive of Israel and the IDF, and I will state with confidence that in general, the IDF is the most moral army in the world.
That's why when a one-off incident like this occurs, it should be acknowledged - as just that, a one-off incident, where the soldiers involved will be dealt with accordingly - in this case tried and possibly serving a jail sentence of up to three years.
Cast Lead was justified, and I believe that the IDF in general conducted itself in a manner superior to how any other army would have under those circumstances. The IDF went out of its way to protect Palestinian civilians, but in an army of thousands there are bound to be isolated incidents of rule-breaking and inappropriate conduct. The fact that the IDF does not hide these incidents reflects on how seriously it takes it's own morality.
My problem is that the media worldwide will undoubtedly pounce on this incident and twist it to indicate that "Goldstone is right" and that "Israel committed war crimes in Gaza". But it wasn't Israel or the IDF, it was just two idiot soldiers.
And whilst the media gets busy reporting that, they most likely won't be reporting this - that a rocket launched today struck a storage facility on a kibbutz, just a short distance from residential buildings. Or this - that an Israeli woman was injured when Palestinians threw "stones" at her car. Palestinians throw "stones" every day at Israelis in their cars, and sometimes out of them. I want to be clear: these are not "stones"; they're boulders.
Ahmadinejad's latest psychotic ranting and threats to Israel and the Jewish people probably also won't be reported in the mainstream media.
Because anti-Israel bias dictates that Israel only ever be portrayed as the aggressor, never the victim.
Saturday, 6 March 2010
“As for the ‘separation walls’ and checkpoints that one sees in Israel, the 99 per cent drop in the number of suicide bombings since their erection justifies the policy. There is simply no parallel between apartheid South Africa – where the white minority wielded power over the black majority – and the occupied territories, taken by Israel only after it was invaded by its neighbours… If Arab Israelis were deprived of civil and franchise rights, that would justify such hyperbole, but of course they have the same rights as every Jewish Israeli.”
And on Gardner’s point, Roberts observes that the Dubai assassination is no different from the targeted killings of Taliban leaders carried out by Nato, or by the assassinations that have taken place in many countries including Britain, France and Russia “without the legitimacy of those states being called into question, or their being described as ‘rogue’”.