Thursday, April 4, 2013

Amira Hass says throwing stones at Jews is a Palestinian-Arab "birthright"

Mike L.

The Elder of Ziyon has a piece today entitled, The inner syntax of Ha'aretz encouraging Arab terrorism, in which he points out that Ha'aretz columnist, the insidious Amira Hass, not only justifies Arabs throwing stones at Jews, but even thinks this kind of "resistance" should be taught in Palestinian-Arab schools.  She writes:
Throwing stones is the birthright and duty of anyone subject to foreign rule. Throwing stones is an action as well as a metaphor of resistance. ...

Often hurling stones is borne of boredom, excessive hormones, mimicry, boastfulness and competition. But in the inner syntax of the relationship between the occupier and the occupied, stone-throwing is the adjective attached to the subject of “We’ve had enough of you, occupiers.”

Even if it is a right and duty, various forms of steadfastness and resisting the foreign regime, as well as its rules and limitations, should be taught and developed. Limitations could include the distinction between civilians and those who carry arms, between children and those in uniform, as well as the failures and narrowness of using weapons.

It would make sense for Palestinian schools to introduce basic classes in resistance...So why are such classes absent from the Palestinian curriculum? Part of the explanation lies with the opposition of the donor states and Israel’s punitive measures. But it is also due to inertia, laziness, flawed reasoning, misunderstanding and the personal gains of some parts of society. In fact the rationale for the existence of the Palestinian Authority engendered one basic rule in the last two decades − adaptation to the existing situation. Thus, a contradiction and a clash have been created between the inner syntax of the Palestinian Authority and that of the Palestinian people.
This is two year old Adele Biton who is fighting for her life in the hospital because Palestinian-Arabs were exercising their "birthright."



The Elder notes something that I have been pointing out for a long time.  Throwing stones at Jews did not start in 1948 or 1967.  No.  Stoning Jews is a long-standing Arab hobby that has been ongoing for centuries.
In former times--and in remote places even today--it was common for Muslim schoolboys to stone Jews. When the Turks conquered Yemen in 1872, an envoy was sent from the Chief Rabbi of Istanbul to inquire what grievance the Yemenite Jews had against their neighbors. It is indicative that the first thing of which they complained was this molestation by the schoolboys. But when the Turkish Governor asked an assembly of notables to stop this nuisance,there arose an old doctor of Muslim law and explained that this stone-throwing at Jews was an age-old custom (in Arabic 'Ada) and therefore it was unlawful to forbid it.
An age-old Arab custom.

Ha'aretz needs to be boycotted and Hass needs to be fired.

I can't even believe it.  Here we have an (unfortunately) well-respected Israeli newspaper actually publishing an opinion piece in which the columnist, a Jew herself, claims that Arabs stoning Jews is something respectable and positive.

Tell me, how nauseating is that?

Talk about Jewish Stockholm Syndrome!

In truth, I could hardly be more disgusted and revolted and just plain pissed-off.

21 comments:

  1. "...an (unfortunately) well-respected Israeli newspaper..."

    Only outside Israel. Because it's an Israeli (if in location only) media outlet giving the worldwide media outlets—overwhelmingly anti-Zionist themselves—exactly what they want to hear. A case of clique members rubbing each other's backs.

    In Israel, Haaretz is read by the clueless yuppie-intelligentsia contingent (we call them "intellignatim" here, with the "g" pronounced; "intellignat" the disparaging word we use for "educated idiot"), but not by anyone else. Its circulation has dropped precipitously in the past years. Who knows, maybe it'll go bankrupt instead of having to be shut down for its provision of aid and comfort to the enemy.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's my birthright to firebomb Amira Hass' home.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What a sick tool she is. No wonder there is no peace when morons like her spur the freaks on.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ha'aretz is a friggin' disgrace.

    Hass needs to be canned... or caned... one or the other.

    ReplyDelete
  5. One disconnect is that Israelis tell me Haaretz is considered fringe-y in Israel and doesn't have much market share. But it's effect overseas is far greater. Similarly there's a great deal of Arab press in English that tells the west what it wants to hear and no one in the Arab world, in Arab has ever heard it or heard of the newspaper. It's a deficiency of Americans who rarely have more than English at their disposal. If they read Hebrew, French or Italian, they'd get a fuller picture of what's what.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Observers will also note that Amira Hass, who, although I'm pretty sure this is the furthest she's ever gone, is certainly no stranger to public and vocal anti-Israel extremism, is free to say and write whatever she pleases, even in an Israeli media outlet.

    Haaretz's offices weren't firebombed or raided by the Israeli government, nobody was lynched and / or raped, no bloody palms were proudly waved out of windows, no cities were set on fire, etc etc...

    And such tolerance in a country whose existence regularly is actually threatened, at that.

    This strikes me as yet another clear case of the strength of Israel's values on display, for anyone who dares question them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That observation having been made, let me also note that I certainly do not oppose any legal actions / potential judgments against her for her incitement and hate speech.

      That's part of living in a strong liberal democracy, as well. She should not be able to make a living off of justifying and excusing terrorism, either. Sort of along kinda similar lines of the Son of Sam laws (of course I realize it's not an exact parallel, and I am not an attorney, but it's the first thing that came to mind - profiting off crime) we have here in the US, the victims of such crimes, and their loved ones, should be able to hit right back at her.

      Delete
    2. "This law requires that victims of crimes be notified whenever a person convicted of a crime receives $10,000 (US) or more—from virtually any source.

      The law then attaches a springing statute of limitations, giving victims an extended period of time to sue the perpetrator of the crime in civil court for their crimes.

      This law also authorizes a state agency, the Crime Victims' Board, to act on the victims' behalf in some limited circumstances. Thus far, the current New York law has survived constitutional scrutiny."

      What a great law! Thanks Jay.

      In Australia there is the Proceeds of Crime Act which allows the state to seize royalties or other income of notorious criminals who seek to profit from their notoriety. The law doesn't have the constitutional issues of the NY law but has other problems.

      The Son of Sam law is a much more elegant solution.

      Delete
    3. You know, I reckon I can see a role for a "Son of Sam" type law here. Let Hass earn from her pro-murder incitement of grievance mongering retards. But then have a law that always Adele's mum to sue her and Ha aretz back into the Stone Age where by their own admission they belong.

      Delete
  7. The Psychology of Populations under Chronic Siege, by Kenneth Levin

    "On the level of individual psychology, the paradigm is the psychology of chronically abused children. This most typically means children subjected to parental abuse. Almost invariably, such children blame themselves for their predicament. They tell themselves, 'I am treated this way because I am bad, and if I become good I will be treated better.'

    "This phenomenon is widely recognized by psychiatrists, psychologists, and social workers and is most often ascribed to children's naïveté. According to this interpretation, the abusers tell their young victims that the abuse is punishment for their being 'bad,' and the children, in their naïveté, accept this at face value.

    "But children are not that naive. The victimized child of an alcoholic father or a chronically depressed, withdrawn, and irritable mother knows that he or she is being treated badly. Nevertheless, such children almost invariably choose to repress that knowledge and to believe that changes in their own behavior - behaving in a more exemplary fashion, being more attentive to the parents' needs and wishes - can change their parents' ways and win them a better life.

    "To comprehend the motivation for this self-delusion, consider the existential predicament of such children. They can, on the one hand, acknowledge their essential helplessness and the hopelessness of their situation. On the other, they can delude themselves, blame themselves for their victimization, and endure the guilt of that self-indictment, of perceiving themselves as 'bad,' but also preserve the hope that by their own action, by becoming 'good,' they can win relief. Children almost invariably choose to avoid hopelessness at all costs, and adults do the same."

    http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-046-levin.htm

    Auto-Genocide, Jewish Style, by Kenneth Levin
    http://frontpagemag.com/2009/kenneth-levin/auto-genocide-jewish-style-by-kenneth-levin/

    The Paradox of the Jewish Mind, by David Solway
    http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-paradox-of-the-jewish-mind/?singlepage=true

    ----

    On Theobald of Cambridge: a Medieval English Jewish convert to Christianity; the inventor of "the Blood Libel":

    The Blood libel legend: a casebook in anti-Semitic folklore
    http://books.google.com/books?id=jk0yLW7YOWwC&q=theobald+cambridge

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Western Culture, the Holocaust, and the Persistence Of Antisemitism, by Catherine Chatterley

      "...In Western culture, the beliefs many people still hold about 'the Jews' are not seen to be antisemitic (read genocidal) but are simply felt to be reflective of day-to-day reality. In other words, what some of us identify as antisemitic ways of thinking most people see as simply reflective of a reality in which Jews are in fact wealthy, in fact powerful, in fact connected to one another, and in fact work together (or conspire) to protect their own communal and individual interests, which today include the fate of the State of Israel. Again, this is not new but fully consistent with classical forms of European antisemitism, in which antisemites point to 'reality' to illustrate Jewish power, conspiracy, materialism, criminality, or whatever negative association they want to affix to 'the Jews.' And the 'reality' they find then reconfirms their pre-existing antisemitism, as it does today. After almost 2000 years of indoctrination, which has worked very hard to fix the Western imagination—and our individual attention—upon this abstract collective called 'the Jews,' we should not be surprised to discover that Western culture is riddled with antisemitic perceptions and habits of thought about the Jewish People. And this complex invisible reality has not been exorcised by the Holocaust. Negative beliefs and attitudes about Jews are so normal and so ingrained in Western perceptions and attitudes that people—both gentiles and Jews—are simply unable to recognize them for what they are...."

      "...In the Western world, 'the Jews' have for millennia been demonized collectively and conceptualized as nihilistic operatives working against the goals of humanity, whether defined as Christian, Enlightened, Proletarian, or even Aryan. 'The Jews' have been associated in the most concrete and abstract ways with every conceivable form of evil known to Western culture: killing God in the form of Jesus; kidnapping, torturing, and killing children; poisoning, cheating, and conspiring against their neighbours; cannibalism, blood-drinking, devil-worship, human sacrifice; every form of disloyalty to the state; extortion, blackmail, and all types of financial crime one can only imagine. This is precisely the context that invented and maintained the lie of the 'Worldwide Jewish Conspiracy,' which in turn produced the Hitlerian solution, and both have been exported around the world. What is so extremely disturbing about Ahmadinejad’s rhetoric, and many others who echo him, is its classic antisemitic depiction of 'the Jews,' here in the contemporary form of 'Zionists,' as operating outside the values and interests of common humanity and all that is good. Worse still is the fact that this seems to go unnoticed by the vast majority of people in Western nations, including otherwise progressive academics and members of government. Few seem to notice that the West is being courted by Ahmadinejad to be recruited into his global antisemitic strategy under the banner of humanistic inclusion and spiritual redemption..."

      Text: http://web.archive.org/web/20090422150719/http://www.yale.edu/yiisa/chatterleypaper3509.pdf

      Video (RealMedia format): http://streaming.yale.edu:8080/ramgen/cmibroadcast/yiisa/chatterley_030509.rm

      RealPlayer - RealMedia player
      http://www.real.com/

      Delete
    2. The Antisemitic Imagination, by Catherine Chatterley

      "Dr. Chatterley's new book argues that antisemitism is one of humanity’s most enduring and destructive inventions due to its core-location at the center of the Western religious imagination. The book is composed of six chronological chapters, which explain the nature of the Antisemitic Imagination by examining its historical and cultural evolution over the last two millennia.

      "Antisemitism is the product of the rancorous separation between Judaism and the Jesus Movement, which evolves during the first century into a gentile church and later into the imperial religion of Christianity. The four gospels, and other books of the New Testament, inform the intellectual, emotional, and legal foundations of European civilization in all its diverse manifestations. It is these texts that are implicitly anti-Judaic, and pregnant with the basic components of antisemitism, which evolves into a popular mass phenomenon during the High Middle Ages.

      "During these centuries (1000-1300 CE) a fictitious character comes to life out of the stories and liturgies of the Church. That character is 'the Jew,' a figment of the Christian imagination, who is both the product and generator of antisemitism. The character is defined by its anti-ethical essence and criminal behavior, which is contrasted to that of the Christian in a bilateral exercise of demonization and edification. 'The Jew' becomes utterly indispensable to the Church, its people, and its message. At once, the character is used to define Jewish vice and to demonstrate Christian virtue, illustrating both the forsaken nature of Judaism and its people and the truth of the Christian message. Chatterley argues that this dialectical relationship between Christians and Jews, rooted in theology and characterized by a Manichean splitting between good and evil, is one of the pivots of Western history.

      "'The Jew' becomes an idée fixe in the theology of the Church for his rejection, torture, and killing of Christ. This conception of 'the Jew' as traitor and Christ-killer defines his essential nature and criminal motivation in the European imagination. Remarkably consistent across time and space, regardless of European region, religious denomination, language, or nationality, the negative value and behavioral characteristics attached to 'the Jew' are static and monotonous. As Steven Katz and Sander Gilman have observed, 'we see shifts in the articulation of perception over time in different contexts, but not in the basic perception itself.'

      "Through an analysis of words and images the book demonstrates that despite the dramatic changes in European societies from the Middle Ages through the Enlightenment into the twenty-first century, the antisemite fixates upon the same negative qualities and motivations he sees in 'the Jew' and continues to make the same basic accusations about his character and behavior. Even the annihilation of over six million Jews in the European heartland during the middle of the last century did not destroy the ideological fixation on 'the Jew.'

      (continued)

      Delete
    3. (from continued)

      "The radically immoral characteristics of this fabrication created by Christianity remain consistent despite their secularization and racialization during the 18th and 19th centuries, their Islamization from the middle of the 20th century, and their globalization via the Internet and satellite television since 2001. For the antisemite, 'the Jew' remains inherently unethical, enormously powerful, conspiratorial by nature, intent on world domination, corrosive in effect, and an existential threat to humanity however that shifting concept is defined (be it Christian, proletarian, 'Aryan', or Islamic). The book demonstrates that this has been the case historically regardless of whether or not the context was religious or secular, Western or Islamic, left or right.

      "The Antisemitic Imagination seeks to clarify our understanding of the nature of antisemitism by assessing how the phenomenon operates inside Western culture and its religious imagination. It will also explain how and why antisemitism is flourishing today--for the first time in history outside a Christian cultural context. The book concludes by arguing that 'the Jew', a libelous fictitious abstraction first generated and then propagated by Christian Europe, must be uprooted from our imagination in the interests of truth, morality, and justice."

      http://can-isa.netfirms.com/publishing.html

      ----

      Jewish Foundation of Manitoba - 2012 Women's Endowment Fund Luncheon - Guest Speaker: Dr. Catherine Chatterley

      vimeo.com/45200603

      Delete
    4. Anti-Semitism 2.0, by Mudar Zahran

      "The concept of the 'evil Jew' has made a well-disguised comeback: Criticizing Israel and Zionists, is now deemed a legitimate option to cursing Jews and Judaism. Not only is it open, socially acceptable and legal, but it can actually bring prosperity and popularity. This new form of anti-Semitism 2.0 is well-covered-up, harder to trace and poses a much deeper danger to the modern way of life of the civilized world than the earlier crude form of it, as it slowly and gradually works on delegitimizing Jews to the point where it eventually becomes acceptable to target Jews, first verbally, then physically -- all done in a cosmopolitan style where the anti-Semites are well-groomed speakers and headline writers in jackets and ties; and not just Arab, but American and European, from 'sanitized' news coverage of the most bloodthirsty radicals, to charges against Israel in which facts are distorted, selectively omitted or simply untrue, as in former President Jimmy Carter's book on Israel.

      "Why would a Palestinian* be writing this? The answer is simple: The Palestinians have been used as fuel for the new form of anti-Semitism; this has hurt the Palestinians and exposed them to unprecedented and purposely media-ignored abuse by Arab governments, including some of those who claim love for the Palestinians, yet in fact only bear hatred to Jews. This has resulted in Palestinian cries for justice, equality, freedom and even basic human rights being ignored while the world getting consumed with delegitimizing Israel from either ignorance or malice.

      "Worse, just as the old form of anti-Semitism has proven itself a threat as poisonous to its supporters, as it was to the Jews, the new form of anti-Semitism 2.0 could prove itself the same -- all the more likely as we see the world tolerating Iran's nuclear ambitions not necessarily out of love for the Mullah's regime, but instead because of mental fixation against Israel.

      "Such bias against Israel cannot be 'accidental' or merely 'unfortunate.' No other nation has received the amount of scrutinizing, criticism, coverage, demonization and delegitimization. In fact the question to be asked is not whether there is bias against Israel; but rather why there is bias against Israel? ..."

      http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/1979/anti-semitism-20

      Note: * "Palestinian": 'Palestinian' Arab

      Delete
    5. Jihad and Jew-Hatred: An Interview with Matthias Küntzel

      "The main achievement of Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, was to combine the Jew-hatred of ancient Islam with modern anti-Semitism into a new and persuasive rhetoric. I discovered a speech he gave in 1937 with the title, ‘Jewry and Islam.’ Here, he intermingled modern anti-Semitism the stories of very early Islam, going back and forth from the 7th and the 20th centuries, and connecting both kinds of Jew-hatred. This was something new."

      http://207.97.238.133/democratiya/article.php?article=249

      Delete
  8. Just when you think Ha aretz couldn't get more vile.

    Here's a response from Adele Biton's mother

    http://www.algemeiner.com/2013/04/04/mother-of-girl-injured-by-stone-throwing-responds-to-haaretz-come-to-the-intensive-care-unit-and-see-my-adele/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “I believe in the value of life,” [Adva Biton, mother of Adele] continues, adding,”the paramedic who first reached our car, who saw us crushed under the truck, is a young Arab man. He came and started his sacred work. He didn’t utter lofty, hollow words like yours, words that kill. He simply saved lives.”

      “I agree with you, Amira, that everyone is entitled to his or her freedom. Arab and Jew. I agree with you that we must all strive for liberty, but there is no one in the world who will achieve freedom and liberty by deadly weapons.”


      ~~~

      What a twisted world we live in, where the woman who is capable of speaking such beautiful words, despite suffering such unspeakable and ongoing tragedy, is the one who is generally portrayed to the larger world as a villain; while the person who makes excuses and justifications for vile savagery is gainfully employed by a generally respected media outlet.

      Here's a clear-cut case for those who consider themselves liberals to make an outright stand. At least Ms. Hass provided that.

      Who are you with?

      I know where I stand, as a proud liberal. And it's with the Biton family.

      Delete
    2. Again, we're not fighting people per se, we're fighting a concept, a cult, a belief system. Those are much harder to confront because we here in the west are reared on a world view on a history that assumes we're fundamentally rational. That things can divided into things that make sense and are basically good or useful, and things that are senseless and are bad, corrupt and not useful. We don't entertain the mythical ideological world because to 'us' it doesn't make any sense so we assume it serves no purpose.

      We here attempt a draw a line. They don't. To them there's no clear reason to even make that distinction so they don't make the distinction. There's no useful difference between insanity and morality, between fanaticism and piety between life and death. It's not that they simply evaluated their options and decided to be evil. They just don't think in those terms. It's not that right and wrong don't exist, it's that they don't matter. If you took a bunch of 19th century nihilism and mixed it up with sociopathy, Islamic fervor, Jew hate and added a modicum of media savvy you'd build the world's greatest useful idiot modern western supporter of the 'Palestinians'. This is a large of their appeal, the pure anarchy of it. It's like that line from the Joker "Do I really look like a guy with a plan?"

      Well to use a term from my other favorite philosopher, Kosh Naranek: "the avalanche has started, it's too late for the pebbles to vote."

      Delete
    3. I agree with that, Trudy.

      I've noted before, how I see with my own eyes, every day right here where I live in North Philadelphia, which is probably the most heavily concentrated Muslim-populated area anywhere in North America, that the line can be drawn, and even the most fanatical of any given cult can be kept in check as long as authorities and citizenry insist our laws must be maintained.

      There are no honor-killings in Philadelphia, there aren't any "no-go zones" for me (someone who is quite obviously not a Muslim) anywhere around here, even along certain blocks of Germantown Avenue where non-Muslims are generally outnumbered at least 29-1, there are no politicians calling for Sharia to be implemented here, etc etc...

      And yet, there is also a lively Muslim community presence here (mostly African-American; but also large numbers of Arab-Americans, too), which doesn't seem to be 'oppressed' in any way.

      We all get along and go along, and it works.

      I think more attention should be paid to what we get right here in places like Philadelphia, in terms of integration, as opposed to what they apparently get very wrong in places like certain neighborhoods of London or Paris, as I read these days...

      Delete
    4. Jay, that's a very interesting comment.

      So, what do you think that Philadelphia is doing right that Paris is not? Or probably more to the point, what is the United States doing right that France is not?

      Y'know, where I live we pretty much have everyone from all over the planet and the racial tension is virtually nil. Laurie and I lived in the Richmond District of SF for years and I love that neighborhood. It's Irish pubs and Chinese restaurants and markets and Russian delicatessens and bakeries. Absolutely terrific place which, btw, also holds a sizable number of ultra-orthodox Jews.

      And, yeah, it works.

      The United States often lambasted as a terribly racist country, but the fact of the matter is that today the United States is absolutely one of the least racist countries on the planet.

      In fact, given the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe, I would argue that the US is less racist than is Norway.

      {Is that hard to imagine?}


      Delete
  9. Part of the issue is a willingness to confront it at all. Philadelphia is willing to have that discussion. Whereas in East London, the government has given up. They've created an Islamic autonomous region and they hope that they can contain the size of it. Essentially their liberal minded multiculturalism has created a ghetto.

    The Muslim community is like any other. There are reasonable people and glint eyed lunatics. But the lunatics win because they threaten and scare the community. Ordinary people try to keep their head down but they know that eventually by ones and twos young men will join them. But unless the wider city and the Muslim community itself is willing to take them on, they're only going to get bigger and stronger.

    ReplyDelete