maandag 7 november 2011

Progressievelingen die 'Dood aan Israel' roepen

 

Mensen als Von der Dunk begrijpen altijd erg goed waarom mensen tegen Israel zijn en waarom 'vrijheidsstrijders' van Hamas en co het op Israelische burgers gemunt hebben. Moorden is fout maar.... en dan volgt een tirade tegen 'roofstaat Israel' een illegaal op andermans land gestichte entiteit die onze schuldgevoelens over de holocaust wat moet temperen en daarom kan doen wat het wil en wat de nazi's in WO II deden: het land etnisch zuiveren en een etnisch zuivere Joodse staat creëren. Dit soort onzin mogen mensen als Von der Dunk vertellen in de Volkskrant, op TV (de VPRO is favoriet) en natuurlijk op VARA's Joop. Waarom is deze visie zo populair en waarom willen mensen die blijkbaar zo graag horen, vooral zich progressief noemende mensen? Bradley Burston stelt voor dat progressievelingen hun ideologie eens kritisch bekijken als die het doden van burgers legitimeert. Een voorstel dat ik alleen maar van harte kan steunen.  

 

My daughter is an unarmed noncombatant. That should matter. It should matter, in particular, to progressives who believe, and justly so, that the inalienable rights of human beings, children in particular, take clear precedence over the strategic designs of nation-states and the appetites of nationalism.

It should matter, as well, when progressives turn a blind eye to war crimes committed against Israel - or, for that matter, to war crimes committed by Syria against Syrians. The assumption is that Israel's crimes are of such Third Reich magnitude, that anti-civilian violence committed by its enemies is either negligible or justified.

 

RP

---------- 

 

What does 'Death to Israel' mean to you?

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/a-special-place-in-hell/what-does-death-to-israel-mean-to-you-1.393497

If progressives cannot see Israelis as people, if they - we - cannot summon up the same compassion and concern for unarmed combatants on both sides of a battle front, it's time they checked their ideology for holes.

By Bradley Burston

My daughter went to school this morning worried about her civics exam. 
She came home worried about explosive warheads.

As of this week, she's in range.

Her school is now within reach of rockets that travel farther and with far more deadly payloads than the weapons we knew just a short time ago. With blasts strong enough to shatter apartment windows seven stories in the air.

My daughter is an unarmed noncombatant. That should matter. It should matter, in particular, to progressives who believe, and justly so, that the inalienable rights of human beings, children in particular, take clear precedence over the strategic designs of nation-states and the appetites of nationalism.

It should matter, as well, when progressives turn a blind eye to war crimes committed against Israel - or, for that matter, to war crimes committed by Syria against Syrians. The assumption is that Israel's crimes are of such Third Reich magnitude, that anti-civilian violence committed by its enemies is either negligible or justified.

I'll grant that it may be easier to see things this way from a distance. Say, the greater Akron, Ohio area, where last week Kent State history professor Julio Pino stormed out of a lecture given by Israeli diplomat Ishmail Khaldi - the first Bedouin Arab to serve in Israel's foreign service - shouting "Death to Israel."

Prof. Pino did not explain what he meant by death to Israel. Nor did Utah attorney Robert Breeze, when Salt Lake City granted him a municipal permit to stage a 14-hour "Death to Israel" rally in Salt Lake City in 2006.

Closer to home, though, where the Islamic Jihad's calls of "Death to Israel" come wrapped in Iranian steel and 40 pounds of explosives, the message is sharp as shrapnel: a call for genocide.

"Death to Israel" means death to Israelis. It means death to the members of my family. Like many in Israel, a family which has long worked hard and consistently and intensively for the rights of Palestinians, Muslims and Christians alike, to live in safety and sovereignty in a country of their own. What we want for ourselves is no less just. It is, in fact, the very same: freedom to live in safety and sovereignty.

I'll grant also that for some progressives, it may all come down to a question of numbers. I wonder how - or if - Pino relates to the death last weekend of Moshe Ami, the father and grandfather killed by an Islamic Jihad rocket, put to death on the streets of Ashkelon for the crime of Driving While Israeli.

Pino may see disproportionality and injustice in the fact that only one Israeli died in the rocket attacks, while army air strikes in Gaza killed at least 10 members of the Islamic Jihad and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, several of them while in the act of firing rockets at southern and now central Israel.

It should matter that Israel took pains to spare Palestinian civilians in these raids. It should matter, just as the wrongheaded, ultimately self-destructive excess and civilian casualties of past operations have mattered to those who justly condemned them.

It should matter that the Islamic Jihad, Iran's direct foothold in Palestine, knows precisely what Death to Israel means. As does Iran.

What is this country that Julio Pino and Robert Breeze believe deserves to die? They may think they know Israel. They may think this is one huge, Arab-loathing, mass-murdering, land-thieving plague of an illegitimate entity.

It is certainly easier on the political conscience to see us this way.

But if progressives cannot see Israelis as people, if they - we - cannot summon up the same compassion and concern for unarmed combatants on both sides of a battle front, it's time they checked their ideology for holes.

The country that Pino and Breeze want to see eradicated is far more complex and worthwhile than they want to consider. It is a country in which a clear majority of the population, battered by wars and terrorism and heartbreak and frustration, still wants to see negotiations leading to a Palestinian state alongside Israel, and an end to occupation.

My daughter's civics teacher, who teaches her class about the natural rights of all peoples to liberty and security, gives extra credit to students for going to demonstrations and protests.

You can be sure that each one of those pupils, left, right or center, knows exactly what "Death to Israel" means. Not one of them, left, right or center, will stand for it. Not one of them should. 

 

zondag 6 november 2011

Wapenhandel en smokkel bloeit in de Sinaï woestijn

 
Een van de tastbare gevolgen tot nu toe van de zogenaamde Arabische lente, is dat de Sinaï woestijn een stuk gevaarlijker is geworden. De Egyptische regering heeft nauwelijks nog vat op de wapensmokkel vanuit Libië, Jemen en niet te vergeten Soedan, en duizenden moslimfanaten zijn vrijgekomen uit Egyptische gevangenissen tijdens de opstand.
 
 
Wouter
____________
 
 

Collapses in Libya, Yemen Transform Sinai into Major Arms Market

http://www.geostrategy-direct.com/geostrategy-direct/secure/2011/11_02/2.asp

Collapse in Libya, Yemen transforms Sinai into major arms market

TEL AVIV — Egypt's Sinai Peninsula has turned into a huge weapons market.

Israeli and Western officials agreed that Al Qaida and Bedouins have smuggled numerous missiles and other weapons into Sinai. They said a range of weapons, including anti-aircraft missiles, could be acquired cheaply.

"If you want to buy today a mortar or a machine gun or even a MANPAD [man-portable, air defense system] all you need is a few dollars and you get it," Israeli government counter-insurgency adviser Nitzan Nuriel said.

Nuriel said weapons have flooded Sinai from neighboring Libya as well as Yemen. He said the arms have been used to establish an Al Qaida presence meant to attack Israeli and Western interests in the region.

"The level of the threat is much more dramatic than it was a year ago," Nuriel, an adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, said.

Western officials agreed. They said Al Qaida has been bolstered by both Bedouins as well as hundreds of Islamist insurgents who escaped prison during the revolt against the regime of President Hosni Mubarak in February.

"The common wisdom is that Al Qaida has been weakened by the Arab Spring when you make a global assessment, on an ideological basis," Lorenzo Vidino, a researcher at Switzerland's Center for Security Studies, said. "But I would have to concur that on a tactical level they have benefited in places like the Sinai."

The officials, who attended a conference by Israel's Institute for Counter-Terrorism in September, said their assessment was shared by new military regime in Egypt. They said the Egyptian military was concerned over the power vacuum in Sinai amid the collapse of Mubarak's security forces.

"They left spaces where there is no government authority and it is pretty hard for us to know what is going on," Dutch Foreign Ministry counter-insurgency director Frank Van Beuningen said.

Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon asserted that Iran was helping the insurgency network in Sinai. Ya'alon said Teheran was preparing for the fall of the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad and wanted to bolster other proxies in the region.

"Realizing that Assad's regime might not last for a long time they are already busy developing alternative channels to deliver arms to their allies," Ya'alon said. "They consider these surrogates not only as a tool for threatening Israel on a daily basis but also an integral component in their effort to deter Israel and the free world from taking harsher measures to make sure that they don't have the capability to develop nuclear weapons."

Israel has already approved an Egyptian plan to deploy thousands of soldiers, special forces as well as hundreds of main battle tanks in Sinai. But officials said Egypt has not shown the determination to eliminate Al Qaida and other insurgents.

"International cooperation can reduce the threat a little bit," Nuriel said. "At the end of the day you need strong response forces along the borders."

 

Anti-Joodse Jood Gilad Atzmon geprezen door John Mearsheimer en Richard Falk

 

Gilad Atzmon, ik ben de link weleens tegen gekomen op antizionistische sites, maakt weer eens duidelijk dat antzionisme en antisemitisme meer met elkaar gemeen hebben dan de officiële politiek correcte leer ons voorhoudt. Hij vindt dat het na 65 jaar weleens tijd wordt vragen te stellen over de holocaust, hij beschuldigt Joden ervan uit te zijn op wereldmacht en hij heeft zich verontschuldigd voor zijn vergelijking van Israel met het Derde Rijk. Dat was onfair tegenover de nazi's.

"Many of us including me tend to equate Israel to Nazi Germany. Rather often I myself join others and argue that Israelis are the Nazis of our time. I want to take this opportunity to amend my statement. Israelis are not the Nazis of our time and the Nazis were not the Israelis of their time. Israel, is in fact far worse than Nazi Germany and the above equation is simply meaningless and misleading."

Okay, er bestaan meer gekken denk je dan misschien, maar Atzmon wordt verdedigd door diverse Amerikaanse academici, waaronder professor Mearsheimer (van het boek over de Israellobby, die we toch vooral gèèn antisemiet mochten noemen, dat doet de pro-Israel scene immers altijd om 'gerechtvaardigde kritiek' kalt zu stellen), en, jawel, Richard Falk, speciale VN rapporteur voor de mensenrechten in de Palestijnse gebieden. Wanneer Falk weer eens met wat heftige aantijgingen tegen Israel komt nemen ANP en alle kranten dat klakkeloos over, zonder iets te vermelden over de extreme ideeën van deze man. Maar nu staat het zwart op wit, om precies te zijn op de kaft van Atzmons nieuwe boek 'the wandering who?'.

Dus zolang de beide heren zich niet distantiëren van deze antisemiet, hoeven we hun 'kritiek' op Israel niet meer serieus te nemen. 

 

RP

----------

 

Why are John Mearsheimer and Richard Falk Endorsing a Blatantly Anti-Semitic Book?

Alan Dershowitz

·      November 4, 2011 | 12:00 am

MORE FROM THIS AUTHOR

Dershowitz: How the Palestinian Leadership Is Ignoring History

The TNR Primary: Part Fourteen: Our distinguished panel of eggheads and eminences announces its votes.

As the discourse about Israel on university campuses continues to degenerate, there is growing concern that some of Israel's most vocal detractors are crossing a red line between acceptable criticism of Israel and legitimizing anti-Semitism. The recent endorsements by several internationally prominent academics—including John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Richard Falk of Princeton—of an overtly anti-Semitic book written by a notorious Jew-hater illustrate this dangerous trend. 

The book in question is entitled The Wandering Who? and was written by Gilad Atzmon, a British jazz musician. Lest there be any doubt about Atzmon's anti-Semitic credentials, listen to his self-description in the book itself. He boasts about "drawing many of my insights from a man who … was an anti-Semite as well as a radical misogynist" and a hater of "almost everything that fails to be Aryan masculinity" (89-90). He declares himself a "proud, self-hating Jew" (54), writes with "contempt" of "the Jew in me" (94), and describes himself as "a strong opponent of … Jewish-ness" (186). His writings, both online and in his new book, brim with classic anti-Semitic motifs that are borrowed from Nazi publications:

Throughout his writings, Atzmon argues that Jews seek to control the world:

·     "[W]e must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people are trying to control the world very seriously."

·     "American Jewry makes any debate on whether the 'Protocols of the elder of Zion' [sic] are an authentic document or rather a forgery irrelevant. American Jews do try to control the world, by proxy." 

Atzmon expands on this theme in The Wandering Who?, repeatedly conflating "the Jews" and "the Zionist":

·     He calls the recent credit crunch "the Zio-punch" (22) and says it was not "a Jewish conspiracy" because "it was all in the open" (30).

·     Paul Wolfowitz, Rahm Emmanuel, and other members of "the Jewish elite" remain abroad instead of moving to "Zion" because they "have proved far more effective for the Zionist cause by staying where they are" (19).

·     The American media "failed to warn the American people of the enemy within" because of money (27). 

Atzmon has written that Jews are evil and a menace to humanity:

·     "With Fagin and Shylock in mind Israeli barbarism and organ trafficking seem to be just other events in an endless hellish continuum."

·     "The Homo Zionicus quickly became a mass murderer, detached from any recognised form of ethical thinking and engaged in a colossal crime against humanity." 

Atzmon rehearses many of these ideas in The Wandering Who?:

·     "[T]o be a Jew is a deep commitment that goes far beyond any legal or moral order" (20) and this commitment "pulls more and more Jews into an obscure, dangerous and unethical fellowship" (21).

·     If Iran and Israel fight a nuclear war that kills tens of millions of people, "some may be bold enough to argue that 'Hitler might have been right after all'" (179). 

Atzmon regularly urges his readers to doubt the Holocaust and to reject Jewish history:

·     "It took me years to accept that the Holocaust narrative, in its current form, doesn't make any historical sense. … If, for instance, the Nazis wanted the Jews out of their Reich (Judenrein—free of Jews), or even dead, as the Zionist narrative insists, how come they marched hundreds of thousands of them back into the Reich at the end of the war?"

·     "[E]ven if we accept the Holocaust as the new Anglo-American liberal-democratic religion, we must allow people to be atheists." 

Atzmon reprises some of this language in The Wandering Who?:

·     Children should be allowed to question, as he did, "how the teacher could know that these accusations of Jews making Matza out of young Goyim's blood were indeed empty or groundless" (185).

·      "The Holocaust religion is probably as old as the Jews themselves" (153).

·       The history of Jewish persecution is a myth, and if there was any persecution the Jews brought it on themselves (175, 182). 

Atzmon argues that Jews are corrupt and responsible for "why" they are "hated":

·     "[I]n order to promote Zionist interests, Israel must generate significant anti-Jewish sentiment. Cruelty against Palestinian civilians is a favourite Israeli means of achieving this aim."

·      "Jews may have managed to drop their God, but they have maintained goy-hating and racist ideologies at the heart of their newly emerging secular political identity. This explains why some Talmudic goy-hating elements have been transformed within the Zionist discourse into genocidal practices." 

Atzmon returns to this theme repeatedly in The Wandering Who?:

·     The "Judaic God" described in Deuteronomy 6:10-12 "is an evil deity, who leads his people to plunder, robbery and theft" (120). Atzmon explains that "Israel and Zionism … have instituted the plunder promised by the Hebrew God in the Judaic holy scriptures" (121).

·     The moral of the Book of Esther is that Jews "had better infiltrate the corridors of power" if they wish to survive (158). 

Finally, Atzmon repeatedly declares that Israel is worse than the Nazis and has actually "apologized" to the Nazis for having earlier compared them to Israel:

·     "Many of us including me tend to equate Israel to Nazi Germany. Rather often I myself join others and argue that Israelis are the Nazis of our time. I want to take this opportunity to amend my statement. Israelis are not the Nazis of our time and the Nazis were not the Israelis of their time. Israel, is in fact far worse than Nazi Germany and the above equation is simply meaningless and misleading."

In light of this Der Stürmer-like bigotry against Jews, it should come as no surprise that even some of the most hard-core anti-Israel activists have shunned Atzmon out of fear that his anti-Semitism will discredit their cause. Tony Greenstein, a self-styled "anti-Zionist" who recently participated in the Palestine Solidarity Campaign's unprecedented disruption of an Israel Philharmonic Orchestra concert in London (which Greenstein compared to protesting the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra in the 1930s), denounced The Wandering Who? as "a poisonous anti-Semitic tome." Sue Blackwell, who co-wrote the Association of University Teachers' motion to boycott Israeli universities in 2005, removed all links to Atzmon from her website and placed Atzmon on her list of "nasties" along with David Irving and Israel Shamir. Socialist Worker, a website that frequently refers to Israeli "apartheid" and publishes articles with titles such as "Israel's murderous violence," removed an interview with Atzmon and called the evidence of Atzmon's anti-Semitism "damning." At least ten authors associated with the Leftist publisher that published The Wandering Who? have called on the publisher to distance itself from Atzmon's views, explaining that the "thrust of Atzmon's work is to normalise and legitimise anti-Semitism."

Hard-core neo-Nazis, racists, anti-Semites and Holocaust deniers, on the other hand, have happily counted Atzmon as one of their own. David Duke, America's premier white supremacist, has posted more than a dozen of Atzmon's articles on his website over the past five years and recently praised Atzmon for "writ[ing] such fine articles exposing the evil of Zionism and Jewish supremacism." Kevin MacDonald, a professor at Cal State Long Beach whose colleagues formally disassociated themselves from his "anti-Semitic and white ethnocentric views," called Atzmon's book "an invaluable account by someone who clearly understands the main symptoms of Jewish pathology." Israel Shamir, a Holocaust denier ("We must deny the concept of Holocaust without doubt and hesitation") who argues that Jews ritually murdered Christian children for their blood and that "The rule of the Elders of Zion is already upon us," refers to Atzmon as a "good friend" and calls Atzmon one of "the shining stars of the battle" against "the Jewish alliance."

But neither Atzmon's well-established reputation for anti-Semitism nor the copious anti-Semitic filth that fills The Wandering Who? has deterred Professors John Mearsheimer and Richard Falk from actively endorsing Atzmon's work. Mearsheimer, the Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, calls The Wandering Who? a "fascinating" book that "should be read widely by Jews and non-Jews alike." Falk, Milibank Professor of International Law Emeritus at Princeton University and United Nations Special Rapporteur on "human rights in the Palestinian territories," calls The Wandering Who? an "absorbing and moving" book that everyone who "care[s] about real peace" should "not only read, but reflect upon and discuss widely." Falk's endorsement appears prominently on the cover of Atzmon's book. Mearsheimer's endorsement is featured on its first page. These professors are not merely defending Atzmon's right to publish such a book; they are endorsing its content and urging their colleagues, students, and others to read and "reflect upon" the views expressed by Atzmon. One wonders which portions of this bigoted screed Professors Mearsheimer and Falk believe their students and others "should" read and "discuss widely."

Mearsheimer has defended his endorsement (on Stephen Walt's blog) by questioning whether his critics have even read Atzmon's book. Well, I've read every word of it, as well as many of Atzmon's blogs. No one who has read this material could escape the conclusion—which Atzmon freely admits—that many of his "insights" are borrowed directly from classic anti-Semitic writings. Mearsheimer claims, however, that he has endorsed only Atzmon's book and not his other writings. But the book itself is filled with crass neo-Nazi rants against the "Jew," "World Jewry," and "Jewish bankers." He claims that "robbery and hatred is imbued in Jewish modern political ideology on both the left and the right" (123). And like other anti-Semites, Atzmon is obsessed in the book with Jewish names. It was Jews, such as Wolfowitz and Libby, who pushed the United States into war against Iraq in the "interests" of "their beloved Jewish state" (26). "How is it that America failed to restrain its Wolfowitzes?" Atzmon asks (27).

Likewise, according to Atzmon's book, it was "Jewish bankers," financiers, economists, writers, and politicians such as Greenspan, Levy, Aaronovitch, Saban, Friedman, Schiff, and Rothschild who have caused the economic and political problems of the world, ranging from the Bolshevik revolution to the wars of the 20th century to the current economic troubles (27,194). And like other classic anti-Semites, Atzmon doesn't simply fault the individual Jews he names; he concocts a worldwide Jewish conspiracy motivated by a "ruthless Zio-driven" (27) "Jewish ideology" (69) that finds its source in "the lethal spirit" (122) of the Hebrew Bible. This sort of conspiratorial drivel is borrowed almost word for word from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion—the Czarist forgery that became a staple of Nazi propaganda.  

A number of other prominent academics have defended Atzmon and his endorsers. Brian Leiter, the Llewellyn Professor of Jurisprudence at the University of Chicago Law School, dismissed the reaction to the book and to Mearsheimer's "straightforward" endorsement as "hysterical" and not "advanc[ing] honest intellectual discourse," though he acknowledges not having read Atzmon's book. On the basis of having perused one brief interview with Atzmon, Leiter is nonetheless prepared to defend him against charges that he is an anti-Semite or a Holocaust denier: "His positions [do not mark him] as an anti-Semite [but rather as] cosmopolitan. … He does not deny the Holocaust or the gas chambers… ." Leiter should read the book, especially pages 175-176, before leaping to Atzmon's defense. There Atzmon reflects "that 65 years after the liberation of Auschwitz, we must be entitled to start asking questions. We should ask for historical evidence and arguments rather than follow a religious narrative that is sustained by political pressure and laws." 

James Petras, Bartle Professor of Sociology Emeritus at Binghamton University, called  The Wandering Who? "a series of brilliant illuminations" and praised Atzmon's "courage." The list of academics who have endorsed Atzmon also includes William A. Cook, a professor of English at the University of La Verne in southern California; Makram Khoury-Machool, a lecturer at the University of Cambridge; and Oren Ben-Dor of the University of Southampton School of Law.

These endorsements represent a dangerous step toward legitimizing anti-Semitic rhetoric on university campuses. If respected professors endorse the views contained in Atzmon's book as "brilliant," "fascinating," "absorbing," and "moving," these views—which include Jewish domination of the world, doubting the Holocaust, blaming "the Jews" for being so hated, and attributing the current economic troubles to a "Zio-punch"—risk becoming acceptable among their students. These endorsements of Atzmon's book are the best evidence yet that academic discourse is beginning to cross a red line, and that the crossing of this line must be exposed, rebutted, and rejected in the marketplace of ideas and in the academy. (Another evidence of this academic trend in Europe appeared recently on Atzmon's website, where he brags that he has been invited to "give a talk on ethics at the Trondheim University" in Norway. This is the same university whose faculty refused to invite me to speak about the Arab-Israel conflict.)

Accordingly, I hereby challenge Professors Mearsheimer and Falk to a public debate about why they have endorsed and said such positive things about so hateful and anti-Semitic a book by so bigoted and dishonest a writer.

Alan Dershowitz is a professor at Harvard Law School. 

 

vrijdag 4 november 2011

Palestijnse held vermoordde kleine oude Joodse dames

 

Nog meer verheerlijking van terroristen door de Palestijnse Autoriteit. En nee, we brengen dit soort nieuws niet steeds omdat we de Palestijnen graag zwart maken, maar omdat we hierin een (zwaar onderschat) kernprobleem van het conflict zien. In de woorden van Elder of Ziyon:

 

Out of millions of Palestinian Arabs in the territories, can we find 30 people - one for each victim - who are willing to publicly proclaim that  al Sayid is a monster?
Everyone, from right to left, knows the answer. It would be very difficult to find those thirty people.
And that difficulty is a core issue in the entire conflict.

 

RP

-----------

 

A manly Palestinian Arab hero who murdered little old Jewish ladies

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2011/11/manly-palestinian-arab-hero-who.html

 

From Palestinian Media Watch:


Transcript:

PA TV host: "We are outside the home of the patient, heroic fighter who is resolute, overcoming his chains, desiring freedom - Abbas Al-Sayid, the lion of the prison cells."
PA TV host interviews released prisoner in the house of Al-Sayid:
Host: "[What is] your feeling now in the home of Abbas Al-Sayid - the leader, hero, defeater of the enemies, defeater of the dungeons, and lion under interrogation?"
Released female terrorist, Du'a Al-Jayousi: "He was an example and role model for us, we wanted very much to meet him."
Released male terrorist, Muayyad Al-Jallad: "I do not forget our neighbor and brother, Abbas Al-Sayid. He is the crown on our heads. Allah willing, we will soon rejoice for him over his release... He is honor to the nation, and there is no doubt that he makes us proud. Allah willing, he has enough patience and will... We are all familiar with his manly qualities of heroism and strength."
[PA TV (Fatah), Oct. 25, 2011]


Ah yes, those manly qualities of heroism and strength were powerful enough to manage to murder the mighty and strong Chanah Rogen, a 90 year old woman from Netanya, who had dedicated a couple of rooms at the Laniada Hospital in Netanya.

 

Even more impressive, this macho hero of Palestinian Arabs everywhere massacred a spry 86-year old, Frieda Britvich:

 

 

 

In fact, the Netanya Passover Massacre claimed 30 victims, whose average age was 68, and of whom 20 were over 70 years old. The victims, from the MFA site:

Shula Abramovitch, 63, of Holon- David Anichovitch, 70, of Netanya- Sgt.-Maj. Avraham Beckerman, 25, of Ashdod- Shimon Ben-Aroya, 42, of Netanya- Alter Britvich, 88, of Netanya- Frieda Britvich, 86, of Netanya- Andre Fried, 47, of Netanya- Idit Fried, 47, of Netanya- Miriam Gutenzgan, 82, Ramat Gan- Amiram Hamami, 44, of Netanya- Perla Hermele, 79, of Sweden- Dvora Karim, 73, of Netanya- Michael Karim, 78, of Netanya- Eliezer Korman, 74, of Ramat Hasharon- Yehudit Korman, 70, of Ramat Hasharon- Marianne Myriam Lehmann Zaoui, 77, of Netanya- Lola Levkovitch, 70, of Jerusalem- Sarah Levy-Hoffman, 89, of Tel-Aviv- Furuk Na'imi, 62, of Netanya- Eliahu Nakash, 85, of Tel-Aviv- Chanah Rogan, 90, of Netanya- Irit Rashel, 45, of Moshav Herev La'et- Clara Rosenberger, 77, of Jerusalem- Yulia Talmi, 87, of Tel-Aviv- St.-Sgt. Sivan Vider, 20, of Bekaot- Zee'v Vider, 50, of Moshav Bekaot- Ernest Weiss, 80, of Petah Tikva- Eva Weiss, 75, of Petah Tikva- Anna Yakobovitch, 78, of Holon- George Yakobovitch, 76, of Holon. 

 


S.Abramovitch


D.Anichovitch


A.Beckerman


S.Ben-Aroya


A.Britvich


F.Britvich


Andre Fried


Idit Fried


M.Gutenzgan


A.Hamami


P.Hermele


M.Lehmann


Dvora Karim


M.Karim


E.Korman


Y.Korman


L.Levkovitch


S.Levy-Hoff.


Furuk Na'imi


E.Nakash


Irit Rashel


C.Rogan


C.Rosenberger


Y.Talmi


Sivan Vider


Z.Vider


Ernest Weiss


Eva Weiss


G.Yakobovitch


A.Yakobovitch



Out of millions of Palestinian Arabs in the territories, can we find 30 people - one for each victim - who are willing to publicly proclaim that  al Sayid is a monster?

Everyone, from right to left, knows the answer. It would be very difficult to find those thirty people.

And that difficulty is a core issue in the entire conflict.