Posted on 11/01/2024 6:09:11 AM PDT by Words Matter
After several Israeli government ministries cut ties with the Haaretz newspaper due to comments made by its publisher, Amos Schocken referred to Hamas as freedom fighters, Schocken issued a weak apology. "I reconsidered what I said. Many freedom fighters in the works and in history, maybe even on the road to the establishment of the State of Israel, committed shocking and terrible acts of terror and harmed innocents to reach their goals. I should have said 'Freedom fighters, who use methods of terror and must be fought. The use of terrorism is not legitimate.'
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
Haaretzism means, sugarcoating or even justifying racist Arab Islamic terror while deeming sincere fear of it as “racist.”
Israel’s communist paper. Never to be trusted regardless of what its publisher said or meant today.
No wonder Islamo-Arab lobby on Wikipedia loves it.
Edmund: Ah, yes, will never walk again!
Harry: ...will conduct the thanksgiving service.
Edmund: Oh, Bath and Wells.
If you love them so much, go to Gaza and offer to help them, Amos. Let’s see how long your head stays attached to your body. But at least you can think about how much you admire them as they slit your throat.
Alls fair in love and war.
Hararetz is a sh*t paper run by communists.
No, he's considered it for the first time, or rather, realized the personal consequences. When he said it (and be certain, he still believes it) he was just regurgitating another left wing trope.
They are fighting for freedom? Since when? No one is oppressing them! They want OTHER PEOPLE’S LAND! Infact they insist on it! They aren’t fighting for freedom, they are fighting to annihilate a people that they can’t stand! Stop trying to legitimize their terrorism Amos!
A dog returns to its vomit.
YOU MUST FIGHT TERRORISM WITH TERRORISM.
THIS IS NOT A GAME OF :”CAPTAIN, MAY I?”
There have been lots of freedom movements in the last 100 or so years. To be fair it is rarely without some violence but some examples are Ghandi, Mandela, Walesa and many others. The Palestinians had the same chance with Arafat 25 years ago. When it came time to put down the guns and sign the papers he balked and went on to launch years of suicide bombs and other attacks. The Israeli people ended up turning from politically left to politically right ever since. And now Hamas is even worse than Arafat was. They have no desire to make peace and they don’t even declare themselves independent. Their stated goal is the destruction of Israel.
In all the scenarios over the century, the peace and independence movements had to first fight it out themselves. Even the Israeli militias pre-1948 had to fight each other (though it was resolved very quickly they did set upon each other) If the Palestinians want peace they can earn it but first they need to clean their own house. Otherwise, state or no state, they will be in a war and be occupied.
If they wanted peace, they could have it today by throwing down their weapons and vowing to get along. (It would take years to build trust though), but like,you said, they don’t want it- their hatred of the jews is too strong- it is so strong it is taught in schools,there.
In the end times, there will be a peace agreement, which will last only 3 1/2 years before the antichrist breaks the agreement. I however don’t think there will ever be a peeve agreement before that one- the acceptance of the agreement in end times will come as a shock to everyonez- something big will happen, and it will look like all out war is inevitable, but at the last minute an agreement will surprisingly be agreed to.
Amos Schocken’s lies, Bill Clinton’s truths.
The “Haaretz” publisher calls Palestinian terrorists “freedom fighters,” while the former U.S. president highlights their history of rejectionism.
By Ruthie Blum
(Nov. 3, 2024 / JNS)
Two speeches last week are worthy of note for the widespread surprise they elicited, causing each to go viral within minutes.
The first was delivered last Sunday by the publisher of the Haaretz newspaper, Israel’s equivalent to The New York Times in terms of its increasingly radical content—no longer even disguised as journalistically objective—and shrinking, self-anointed elitist readership.
At a Haaretz-organized conference in London featuring Israeli and British politicians, academics and media figures, Amos Schocken let his lies about the Jewish state rip. Given the bent of the periodical he proudly uses to promote a far-left agenda, the brouhaha his remarks sparked at home—with government ministries canceling their subscriptions to the periodical—was both a bit peculiar and long overdue.
Apparently, the fact that his professed “Zionism” wouldn’t extend to telling the truth about his country during an Iran-backed, multi-front war aimed at wiping it off the map constituted the crossing of a line.
Not that his pandering to antisemites gave him a pass with the protesters gathered outside the venue of the event, titled “Israel After October 7th: Allied or Alone?” On the contrary, Schocken’s being on their side made no difference. To them, he was just another Israeli Jew deserving of their hatred.
It’s the same tragic irony that befell assimilated Jews in Europe, who weren’t spared the gas chambers. Ditto for the members of the kibbutzim in southern Israel who sought and worked for peace with their neighbors. Their political support for and actual assistance to Gazans didn’t protect them from the enmity that was unleashed in full horrific force on that fateful Simchat Torah holiday.
Nevertheless, Schocken wasn’t deterred from spewing his vitriol...
“The only recourse with such a disastrous government is to ask other countries to bring pressure to bear, as they did in order to end apartheid in South Africa,” he continued. “In December 2016, the U.N. Security Council passed Resolution 2334, which states that territory cannot be acquired by force; opposes settlement-building, including co-called ‘natural growth’ of settlements; and stipulates the dismantling of all settlements built since March 2001, within the framework of the two democratic states living in peace, side by side, within recognized borders.”
He went on to assert, “Subsequent Israeli governments completely ignored this resolution and acted as though it didn’t exist. Not only did they continue building settlements, but the present government also supports the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from parts of the occupied territories. In a sense, what is taking place now in the occupied territories and in part of Gaza is a second Nakba.”
When all hell broke loose over Schocken’s mendacious depiction of an Israel that only exists in the minds of those who wish to see it disappear, he issued a clarification.
“I’ve reconsidered what I said,” he announced on Thursday. “There are many freedom fighters in the world and through history, perhaps also on the path to the establishment of the State of Israel, who carried out shocking and dreadful terrorist activities and harmed innocent people in order to achieve their goals. I should have said, ‘Freedom fighters who also use terrorist methods and need to be fought against.’ The use of terrorism is not legitimate.”
The implication was obvious: Jews also employed evil methods to achieve statehood. Whatever neat trick he thought he was pulling flopped at generating sympathy, let alone applause.
Which brings us to the second speech, that also had a jaw-dropping effect, but for the opposite reason. This one was delivered by former U.S. President Bill Clinton.
At a rally on Wednesday for Kamala Harris in the swing state of Michigan, Clinton appealed to the voters who’ve come out against the Democratic candidate for her administration’s ostensibly unforgiveable support for Israel. He did this by setting the record straight about the Palestinians’ attitude to the Jewish state.
Though opening with a call for a re-start of the “peace process,” he acknowledged the culprit behind its repeated failure.
“I understand why young Palestinian and Arab Americans in Michigan think too many people have died,” he began. “But if you lived in one of those kibbutzim in Israel, right next to Gaza, where the people there were the most pro-friendship with Palestine—the most pro-two-state-solution of any of the Israeli communities were the ones right next to Gaza, and Hamas butchered them.”
He continued: “The people who criticize [Israel’s response] are essentially saying, ‘Yeah, but look how many people you’ve killed in retaliation. How many is enough for you to kill to punish them for the terrible things they did?’ That all sounds nice until you realize what you would do if it was your family and you hadn’t done anything but support a homeland for the Palestinians, and one day they come for you and slaughter the people in your village. You would say, ‘You have to forgive me, but I’m not keeping score that way.’ It isn’t how many we’ve had to kill because Hamas makes sure that they’re shielded by civilians. They’ll force you to kill civilians if you want to defend yourself.”
Invoking the authority born of having hosted the 2000 Camp David Summit to forge a treaty that would result in the creation of an independent Palestinian state, Clinton admitted, “Look, I worked on this hard. And the only time [PLO chief] Yasser Arafat didn’t tell me the truth was when he promised me he was going to accept the peace deal that we had worked out, which would have given the Palestinians a state on 96% of the West Bank and 4% of Israel—and they got to choose where the 4% of Israel was. So they would have the effect of the same land of all the West Bank. They’d have a capital in east Jerusalem.”
Pausing to express sadness mixed with frustration, he interjected, “I can hardly talk about this.”
He proceeded to spell out the reality of the situation, emphasizing the details.
“They [the Palestinians] would have equal access, all day, every day, to the security towers that Israel maintained all through the West Bank up to the Golan Heights. All this was offered, including—I will say it again—a capital in east Jerusalem and two of the four quadrants of the Old City of Jerusalem, confirmed by the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Barak, and his Cabinet. And [the Palestinians] said no. I think part of it is that Hamas did not care about a homeland for the Palestinians. They wanted to kill Israelis and make Israel uninhabitable.”
Well, he declared, “I’ve got news for them. [The Jews] were there first. Before their faith [Islam] existed, [Jews] were there, in the time of King David, and the southernmost tribes had Judea and Samaria.”
He concluded by explaining why destroying Israel isn’t in the interest of either the Palestinians or of the Americans who support them. Whether his argument persuaded some undecideds remains to be seen. It’s hard to imagine the “From the River to the Sea” crowd accepting his historically accurate account.
Too bad he hasn’t been shouting it from the rooftops throughout the past two and a half decades. The same goes for Barak, who’s been too busy bashing and attempting to topple the Netanyahu government to engage in veracity or soul-searching.
Were he and his subversive bubble of Haaretz-reading followers to get their noses out of the air and hang their heads in humility, if not shame, they might understand why the Israeli peace camp has been evaporating over the years, until basically disappearing on Oct. 7, 2023.
https://www.jns.org/amos-schockens-lies-bill-clintons-truths/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.