972mag, and the made up drama of Ami Kaufman and Mairav Zonszein, a critical analysis of the rational of demented fantasies

Earlier this July the internet was abuzz with a new story of an Israeli atrocity in the West Bank. A 5 years old child was arrested by the IDF for throwing stones. That was the image been pierced into people’s mind, the actual story was less dramatic.

A first sign of manipulation been made, was the gap between the headlines. In Ami Kaufman’s commentary the key word was ‘detention’ (originally it was the more incriminating word ‘arrest,’ as indicated in the web link and the correction at the end of his column). But the Hebrew title of the youtube clip was ‘icuv,’ a word in Hebrew that can be translated in two different ways. The first option is ‘detention.’ This word raises the association of an arrest because some forms of detention are acts of an arrest, but not all of them. Another possible translation is ‘delay’ as in, “He was delayed for a few minutes.” These are two different situations and two different images rising from the same title. In the first a child faces the powerful might of military system, which raises the concern for his rights as well as the frightening possibility of an abuse. In the second it is just a brief encounter, uncomfortable but brief, and therefore without the concerns that come out of the first possible translation.

Which is true?

None of them!

Because all the soldiers did, with the help of local civilians, was to take the child to his mother.

But since the main block of Ami’s and Mairav’s readership does not read Hebrew, this double gap, (between the two headlines, and between them and the reality of what actually happened), is irrelevant. They have all that they dim necessary in order to launch a scathing righteous rebuke, of Israel, the IDF, the occupation, and the soldiers themselves. As well as individuals engage in Israeli advocacy, Hasbarah, people such as myself for example. People Ami Kaufman does not know, never met, and never talked with about this incident. But that does not stop him from condemning and insulting all of us as racists. And that is before anyone of us had said a single word about this incident.

Now, why do that? Why open a new front before you finished your business with the first front? Which I suppose is the occupation, or isn’t it Mr. Kaufman? And why attack those that are not even involved, yet? Don't you have a case to prove first?

If we choose to protect whatever it is you are criticizing Mr. Kaufman, then by all means, fire away. Since we have actually said nothing before you printed those nasty accusations, it is this nothing that you are accusing of racism. Now, Mr. Kaufman, what kind of person accuses nothing for being racist? Did nothing also steal the jellybeans when we weren’t looking?

Superficial righteousness surpasses logic, and surpasses wisdom. Because Ami Kaufman throws his insults while engaging in a dialogue with imaginary Hasbarah persons, created by his own imagination. And since he opened the door to personal insults I can only step in and merely ponder the possibility that Ami Kaufman is a mentally unstable individual that talks to imaginary persons. After all, he only invented this imaginary Hasbarah folks just so he could tell them to shut up. (Surprise, surprise, 972mag Ami Kaufman is intolerant to other people’s views, even the ones he invented.)

But that is not the case. This fantasy dialogue is a literary device. Its purpose is to fill the gap between the reality on the ground and the severity of the accusations. In fact all of Ami Kaufman’s commentary is a collection of similar devices, with the same purpose. It begins with a heads up warning designed to create an expectation for something serious; thus planting in people’s minds the idea that something bad had happened. Followed by a battery of heavy accusations such as sickness, racists, and smug. Apparently for Ami Kaufman these insults are a substitute for making a case. And of course there is the famous “what if these were my children” line, aimed to create sympathy in any parent heart. Indeed what if it was your child? What if your child got into trouble with the law? (God forbid!) What would you rather have the police do? Arrest him? Lock him up? Or bring him home back to you? Because this is what the Israeli soldiers in the video actually did. They brought the stones-throwing child to HIS MOTHER.

You see, this is what real Hasbarah folks do, check the facts. And the facts are simple, this was not arbitrary, the child was throwing stones, even B’eteselm does not dispute that. And he was not arrested, since the soldiers TOOK THE STONES-THROWING CHILD TO HIS MATHER.

Checking the facts is one of the reasons it takes a long time for the truth to put on its pants before the lie travels across the world, but at least it is now out there. And the truth is that taking a child TO HIS MOTHER is not a violation of the child’s rights, it is not an abuse, and this is not an even arrest. It is most certainly has nothing to do with racism.  IT IS TAKING A CHILD TO HIS MOTHER, where he belongs. It is as simple as that. Otherwise is to suggest that there is something fundamentally wrong with the family unit all over the world. That is the logical outcome of Ami Kaufman’s, and Mairav Zonszein’s assertion.

But it is too complicated for Ami Kaufman, Mairav Zonszein, and their ideological clones to understand. Reading their account it is as if they are in two different universes at the same time. On one hand they give the actual run down of the events, soldiers, and civilians, taking a stones-throwing child to his parents’ house. On the other hand, their rebuke of this act by describing an act of an arrest, something that did not happen, since according to their own account the soldiers TOOK THE CHILD TO HIS MOTHER!

But the scale of Ami’s and Mairav’s fantasy is even bigger than that. Supposed their dream fantasy was true, and the child was been arrested by the IDF soldiers. Even this would not justify their vitriol. For the simple reason that the underline premise of article 40 of the UN Convention on the Rights of theChild acknowledges the right of authorities to arrest children when they break the law. And throwing stones is breaking the law. There are restrictions attached, of course, but the right/duty exists. If any of those restrictions were violated then they would have a case. But the mere act of an arrest is not considered a violation of the child's rights, therefore it is not an abuse, and has nothing to do with racism. And since no arrest was made in the first place, THEY TOOK THE CHILD TO HIS MOTHER, no restrictions were violated. True, IDF’s orders forbid the arrest of children under the age of 12, but that only show that the IDF is stricter and more vigil in protecting children’s rights than the UNICEF. Surprise, surprise!

Like I said, this is what real flesh and blood Hasbarah folks do, CHECK THE FACTS!

The fact is that fantasy is the underline thread of their entire commentary. As the video shows, the soldiers weren’t smug. They were thorough. They had their orders, and the orders were in conflict with one another. On one hand, keep order, on the other hand, do not arrest children under the age of 12. Solution: TAKE THE STONES-THROWING CHILD TO HIS MOTHER. 

And the local civilians were not indifferent. Indifference suggests passivity. But these civilians, mostly kids by the way, were very much active. They are engaging the soldiers, and at some point (around minute 2:03) are the ones that are actually taking the child TO HIS MOTHER.

And why wouldn’t they?

He is a Palestinian, they are Palestinians, and his parents are Palestinians. It is their obvious collective interest to keep him on the Palestinian side. And what better way to do this than taking him back to HIS PALESTINIAN MOTHER.

Yes occupation is bad; everything that has to with war is bad.

Yes in a state of occupation soldiers and civilians are at odds most of the time. But sometime mutual interests meet. Call it a rarity, call it surreal, call it a limited meeting of interests, call it whatever you like. Sometimes there can be a solution that serves both sides, in the narrowest sense of the word most likely. But it can happen and it does. It is evident at the climax of the story. There, after minute 3:20, one of the soldiers asks “Eifo hu gar?” “Where does he live?” and receives answers from the surrounding teenagers, each pointing to the direction of the child’s resident. And later those teenagers are the ones who actually take the child into the army jeep.

Yes, the child was screaming his lounges out, and our heart goes out to any child who cries that way, whatever the reason. But if this is to serve as an indicator of an abuse, then any sibling rivalry would constitute a Breaking News item for all the global news corporations. What constitute an abuse are the circumstances, not just the reaction. And putting a child in a jeep in order to TAKE HIM TO HIS MOTHER is not an abuse, even if it is against his will. There is no question he was afraid of that jeep that is perfectly understandable. But what were the soldiers supposed to do? Once they made the decision to TAKE THE CHILD TO HIS MOTHER, wasn’t their elementary responsibility to provide a vehicle for that purpose?  What would the critics have them do, force him to walk in a hot summer day? If the soldiers had a Segway with a parasol attached the child would have undoubtedly reacted completely differently. But armed forces are using jeeps. This may sound too cynical but it is the sober reality.

Since the perpetrators of this article are insinuating a gross child abuse, we should ask ourselves what is more likely to be considered a child abuse?

A child who is sitting in a jeep that has air-condition; or, a child walking in a hot summer day?

He might be crying in the first example, and cheerful in the second one, but his health will be compromise in the second example, but not in the first one.

Shocking! Isn’t it?

Not only do these Israeli soldiers keep the rights of this stones-throwing child, they also take care of his health.

So why is he afraid? Probably because he did something wrong such as throwing stones, for example.

Even if we, (again), go towards the gang at the 972magazine, and accept their demented fantasy that every crying child is an indication of an abuse. What of all the non-crying children around him? The two boys at the beginning of the clip, patting a dog before, and after the soldiers came, completely unmoved by their arrival.

The smaller boy with a similar shirt at the middle of the clip, bewildered at the hysteric behavior of the stones-throwing child. And what of all the elder teens around them, non-of them fearing for their own lives, non-of them fearing for the lives of the stones-throwing child. It seems that the majority of children view the Israeli soldiers as human beings to be reason with. There is not a lot of love in that relationship, but also absent is the fear sick racist smug soldiers supposed to generate. Shouldn’t the majority overrule the minority? Not really since the circumstances are also important. But the folks at 972magazine do not touch the circumstances, aka the facts, they’ve written them out. They are the ones who created the arbitrary criterion that every crying child is an evident of an abuse. They are the ones that must accept the logical outcome of their own criterion, that a child that does not cry is an evident for the lack of an abuse. And when we face one crying child and half a dozen that don’t, then majority overrides the minority. That is the logical outcome of their criterion. And surprise, surprise, they do not accept it. Worse than that, they’ve written out those kids completely. Instead Mairav Zonszein replaced them with non-existing indifferent adults. In doing so she expanded the fantasy into a complete fiction. The reality behind her fiction is the opposite; the Israeli army respects and observes the rights and well-being of Palestinian children. At least according this evidence provided by Be’tselem and 972magazine.

In the video below Israeli soldiers take a stones-throwing child to his parents' home using an air-conditioned jeep, while aided by local civilians. Later it was the father who actually got arrested. The whole affair was resolved at the offices of the Palestinian Authority.

For some this undisputable conclusion is a heresy so unacceptable every bone in their body shakes at 10 on the Richter scale. But these are the facts. This is what real flesh and blood Hasbara folks do, check the facts. And the fact is that the perception of reality shared by the pack of writers in the 972magazine is a complete fantasy; a strange and demented one to be precise.

Now why would otherwise rational human beings adopt such an irrational fantasy?

The reason is very simple and very rational, rational from a very ago-centric point of view. This fantasy serves them in one of the most selfish ways there is.

When it comes to liberal and progressive causes, (as with any kind of popular causes), there are various types of champions and advocates that fight for these causes. The pioneers of the cause and their successors are people who serve their declared causes. They fight against human rights abuses in order to end them. Or they fight against the occupation in order to bring peace between Israelis and Palestinians. However the people behind the 972magazine belong to a sector of pseudo ideologists where the opposite is taking place. For them the occupation exists in order to serve them, to help portray them as champions of human rights and other Liberal causes. Some people wear fancy close as a status symbol, even if they cannot afford it. Others adopt social causes in order to wear them as lucrative ornaments. And the more devilish is the abuse they claim to fight against the more shining their ornaments become.

For the first group, the existence of situations were Israel and Israeli soldiers are not child eating monsters patrolling the West Bank, is not a problem. They have no problem in acknowledging the existence of human rights abuses made by the Palestinian Authority. They fully acknowledge the existence of incitement in the PA official activity, such as education, television, and diplomacy. Accordingly they recognize its destructive effects on the peace process. They also know that anti-Semitism exits among the loud voices of Israel's critics, and they confront it.

But for the later group such realities are a major inconvenience. If Israel is respecting the rights of children, as this story clearly reveals, then it is not racist, child abusing monster. That means that the folks at 972magazine cannot dwell in the splendor that comes with the position of protectors of abused Palestinian children. This keeps away the most sought of title that of glorious fighters against apartheid, which is one of the most ravishing and desired jewels on the shelf today. If, for example, they are to acknowledge the existence of anti-Semitism among Israel's critic, then this will taint the image of the integrity of Israel's critics, and with it their shining new clothes. They can always turn their attention to places where such atrocities do happen, but that will deny them the prestigious title of self-criticism. Therefore it is not surprising that they have turned to fantasy. But is it the only option, or just the lazy option?

The fact that even their collective fantasy is insufficient to justify their accusations, only demonstrates the pathetic state of their dandy liberalism. This condition however is not a unique one, whenever and wherever dandyism takes itself seriously, it comes out pathetic. And it does not matter in what field of life this takes place.

The main difference between real Liberals and dandy Liberals is in the fury factor. Real liberals will be upset when the authorities of the state do abuse the rights and well being of the people under their control, especially children. Dandy Liberals are upset when these authorities do the opposite, and take care and safeguard the rights and well being of the people under their control. Because this denies them the glamorous jewels, luxurious clothes, and smashing stylish hairdos that comes with the cause they claim to fight for. In their eyes they fight for all the suffering people on Earth, them being mostly and only the Palestinians. And like a spoiled rich girl that cannot take her tiara diamond everywhere she wants, they are furious. The reason they lashed out at the soldiers is not because they did the wrong thing, but because they did the right thing, TOOK THE STONES-THREWING CHILD TO HIS MOTHER!

For these folks the occupation will never end. Even when every Palestinian, every Arab, and every Muslim on Earth declare the conflict over and all grievances resolved. The Folks at 972magazine, and others like them, will continue to cry ‘occupation, occupation, occupation.’ Without it they are like Carrie Bradshaw in a world without shopping for the basic non-necessities.

This is not a stretch of the cynicism employed in this column. It is an accusation proven by none other than one of the leaders of the pack, his royal-highness Larry Derfner. Larry Derfner opposes John Kerry's peace initiative. That in itself is not unusual, due to past experiences and past tragedies, many people are skeptic, and I, myself, am no different. For those who want peace, skepticism, and past experience is insufficient to oppose the John Kerry initiative. There are heavy issues involved. Such as trust, the integrity of the process, the ability of each side to deliver, overcoming misunderstandings and different interpretations, etc. However Larry Derfner’s reason has nothing to do with the peace process.  He fears this initiative will terminate the European boycott of Israelis. His rational is a folly no less than that of his two compatriots, if not bigger. “Israelis need to be scared out of the occupation” he says. It is a good thing that he acknowledges that this boycott is about persecuting Israelis. The settlements are just the excuse. What Larry's logic has however is amnesia. Israelis do compare the grim economic prospect of a boycott with their current economic situation. But they also compare it with the reign of terror they were under during the greater part of the second intifada. As unattractive as dire economic conditions are, the fear of living under the constant presence of death, where in each day there is one or two mass murder attacks on Israeli civilians, is far worse. Like most people Israelis are not looking forwards to live under stressed economic conditions. But like most people it is preferable to horrific death. And the last time Israel was under a massive delegitimation attack, it coincided, not coincidently, with the wave of mass murder attacks on Israeli civilians known as the Second Intifada.

Larry lives in a separate universe where terrorism never happened. Likewise the boycott he supports will not end the occupation and is not meant to bring peace. It is evident by the hypocrisy that characterizes every aspect of this boycott.  For one thing there is no need to put Israel through a financial squeeze in order to get it to make concessions on settlements and on land it conquered in 1967. Israel proved that in 1982 when it delivered the Sinai to Egypt and evicted all settlements there. This was proven again in 2006 with the unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, of soldiers and civilians, and with the settlements freeze of 2010.  History has shown that if Israel’s concerns are attended to it will make painful concession for peace, or for even less. Any peace process must address these concerns, just as it must address the Palestinians concerns. A boycott washes them aside; hence the boycott is against the peace process. The second level of hypocrisy is the selectivity of this measure. We do not see any boycott of Morocco for its settlements policy in Western Sahara, nor of Turkey and its settlements policy in Northern Cyprus. And let's not forget the Chinese massive settlements policy in Tibet and Turkestan. This is not a universal principal; it is a selective one, aimed at targeting Israel. Why punish the one country that has cooperated on this issue?  Because that cooperation is not something the EU is interested in. This is a simple act of assault, and Peace Negotiators do not assault the negotiating parties. They work hard to build trust. And violence, and this is violence, does not built trust. Nor does it meant to be.

From the point of view of international law the boycott bases itself on one interpretation of the international law regarding the legal position of the settlements. One of the issues peace negotiations are expected to reach is an agreed interpretation of the international law, and not just over one issue. So, why does the EU do the opposite if they want peace? Clearly they do not want peace. For the purpose of peace one does not built machinery aimed at the economical persecution of each and every Israeli, no matter how trivial their connection to the settlements might be. For peace to succeed economic opportunities are to be increased not vanquished. But Larry Drefner would rather have the slightest chances for peace extinguishes, and the misery of both Israelis and Palestinians continues so this anti peace measure can be implemented. Totally irrational from the point of view of peace advocacy, completely rational from the point of view of someone who treats liberal values the way a fashionista treats cloth and jewelry. The EU is an important body in the international arena; therefore it can be treated as some kind of a judge. If it says Israel is a rough state then automatically it is. End of discussion before it begins. As demonstrated above, there is plenty to discuss but for Larry Drefner and his like this is an unnecessary distraction. With the EU as a seal of approval they can look oh so gorgeous fighters against this rough state whenever they look in the mirror. The mirror being the fantasies produced by their keyboard and displayed in their magazine. Someone like that, who wants to look high and mighty at the expanse of peace, at the expanse of those suffering from the lack of it, has a well known equivalency in the fashion world: Those that buy huge numbers of luxury goods and other status symbols that were made by child labor. This is a moral depravity, pure and simple.

For people who wish to rid their societies from liberal values, Dandy Liberals are a god sent. They ridicule liberal values more effectively than any right wing incitement. And alienate the majority of the public, including those inclined to support liberal causes. They put under a cloud every worthy liberal cause there is, as if the clouds are not thick enough already. And they make the two-state solution looks like the property of those insensitive to the concerns of every day Israelis, if not worse. For those of us wishing to understand and resolve the problems that incase our global society, among them the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, dandy liberals should be recognized and distinguished from real liberals.

At the same time we must also know the differences between dandy liberals and fake liberals. Fake liberals are those that are advancing certain causes that have nothing to do with liberal and progressive values but nevertheless modern society places them under the wider banner of liberalism. These are causes such as Marxism, Anarchism, plain old anti-Semitism, and in some places even Islamic Jihadism. The values of these causes are a sharp contrast to liberal values. Some of their advocates are true believers committed to these causes; others are more like the dandy liberals. For fake liberals the dandy liberals are also a god sent, because they are willing to buy everything the fake liberals have to say. Kind of like before the issuing of a new smartphone, but less useful. But they are not one and the same. Dandy liberals do not seek to destroy liberal society, fake liberals most certainly do. However, Just like the peace process liberal society will benefit from non-of them. They represent lack of integrity and abundance of ignores. Before human rights were a popular cause, these were the very thing the human rights movement sought to eradicate. Instead this strange and demented off spring of our culture of affluence threatens to reintroduce them into the main stream of liberal society. If we desire to protect the precious achievements of the progressive movement, dandy liberals, and fake liberals, should be recognized and marginalized. Starting all over again is a frightening prospect.

Palestinian propaganda: When honesty slips out

Palestinian propaganda long ago reached impressive levels of sophistication and fabrication. Arguing for the delegitimation of one nation, an act that contradicts the core values of liberal progressive societies, while pretending to be a national liberation movement with social liberal progressive values, is quite a feat. And when we see the automatic trust their propagandists enjoy from the mainstream media and left-leaning intelligentsia including Jews, this success is very impressive. But sometimes their true intentions and their supremacist view of the world make their way to the surface as a result of their own words and actions. This is the case with their set of maps below, which appears in many of their demonstrations and websites, but only recently caught the attention of the pro-Israel blogosphere.

The four maps below are supposed to represent Zionist lust for Arab lands. As usual with Palestinian propaganda, it has its omissions.  For example, the map showing Israel giving up the oil-rich Sinai Peninsula in exchange for peace in 1979 is missing. While it does have its falsehoods, as pointed out by Jeffrey Goldberg, Adam Holland, and at Zionism-Israel, when they debunked misguided convictions held by pro-Palestinian activists; this set of maps does portray a genuine feeling of loss, one that comes from losing actual property that was in the possession of the Arab world prior to the formation of the state of Israel. However this property was not land, land was just the means by which this property was lost:

The first map, on the left, that of 1946, represents the ultimate sin, Jews aspiring for life of liberty, already taking significant steps toward that goal on land bought and paid for with hard currency and earned by blood and sweat.

The second map is the ultimate outrage; the world acknowledges that Jews are their own property, free to have a land, a country and a will of their own, like all nations on earth. Today the Palestinian propagandists say they couldn’t have accepted the partition offer of 1947 because the Jews got 55%. However, when the Peel proposal of 1937 offered only 17% to the Jews, the Arabs violently rejected it. Why? Because it was not about land, it was about the use of that land. To the Palestinian propagandist, a free Jewish society on any portion of the land of Israel, even with zero Arab population, is something to be totally rejected.

The third map is the ultimate crime: A free Jewish state and free Jewish people as a fact of life, of everyday reality. The fact that in that alleged abomination Arabs do own land, privately and through organizations such as the Islamic Waqf and the Greek Orthodox Church, is not surprisingly omitted, along with the fact that in the Arab world, then and now, Jews are not allowed to own land. And prior to 1967 those lands were not Palestinian; they were Jordanian and Egyptian.

The fourth map, which is vaguely based on the phases of the Oslo peace process, has its own set of omissions, and quite a list of them:

• It omits the fact that it was Israel, the enemy of the Palestinians who gave them land to rule on, and not Egypt or Jordan, who ruled the Gaza Strip and the West Bank prior to 1967.
• It omits the facts that more land was offered by Israel in exchange for peace in 2000 and the Palestinian leadership rejected it completely.
• It omits the murderous violence launched against Israeli citizens after that rejection.
• It omits the disengagement from Gaza and the subsequent rise of Hamas.
• It omits the Qassam rockets attacks on Israeli population centers in the south of Israel, Olmert’s offer to Abu Mazen in 2008 of more land, and Abu Mazen rejection of that offer.
• It omits the attacks on Israeli citizens by Palestinian terror organization in 1994 and 1996.

It omits so much one has to wonder what the little green enclaves in the last map really represent, after all their connection to reality is more tenuous than any of the other maps?

Is it possible that their size is a metaphor for the propagandists’ own lack of confidence in their own beliefs and arguments, and that in spite of their successful deception they fear reality and morality will close in on them, exposing their lies and delusions?

Know this, even the most successfully sold fabrication has a major flaw, it is a fraud based on a lie. And as such it will always fear exposure, and that fear will be its downfall. And it is up to us, the ‘stolen’ property that gained its liberty by owning land legally and becoming a sovereign nation like most of the nations on this earth, to catch it.

Happy Passover.

Palestinians call Jews “Our dogs” – From ElderofZion YouTube Channel

Found on  Elder of Zion YouTube Channel






Short and to the point; credit is due were credit is most certainly due, and this one deserves a lot of credit.

Peace movement Pantheon of oblivion

What all the following people have in common?
Angelo Frammartino,
Ziva Goldovsky,
Mavis pat,
And Dr. Levi Billig,
A young Italian, an Israeli teenager, a 46 years old American nurse, and a British burn Israeli Orientalist? They all lived in different periods but their lives ended the same way, they were murdered by Palestinians; by people they tried to reach and help.
24 years old Angelo Frammartino was a human rights activist working with Palestinian children in East Jerusalem; a Palestinian named Ashraf Hanaisha stabbed him to death on August 10^th 2006; apparently he mistook him for a Jew.
Ziva Goldovsky was an 18 years Old Russian burn Israeli peace activist who was murdered by a Palestinian terrorist, a friend of her Palestinian boyfriend, On August 10^th 1988.
Mavis Pat was a 46 years old American nurse working in Gaza Baptist Hospital. She was murdered on the 15^th of January 1972 by a grenade thrown into a car driven by her employer, hospital manager Reverend Edward Nicolas, who was wounded from submachine gun fire during that attack, along with one of his three kids that were in the car with them (All Americans).
Dr. Levi Billig, 39, was murdered in his home apartment in the neighborhood of Talpiot in Jerusalem by a Palestinian sniper on August 21^st 1936. He was one of the leading names in the ‘Brit Shalom’ peace association, and his death is considered to be the point in time when this group ceased to be a factor of any importance in Zionist politics.
Their tragic death is more of an indicator of the shortcoming of the peace movement then it is of Palestinian brutality, which has plenty of indicators from other chapters of the protracted Israeli Palestinian conflict; because in the history of the peace movement they are all in a special pantheon, The Pantheon of oblivion.





Angelo Frammartino is still remembered somewhere on the web, because his death was relatively recent, but as Calev Ben David had pointed out it is very little, faintly little, when compared to all the effort been made to sanctify Rachel Corrie.
Ziva Goldovsky was forgotten almost immediately after her murder. During the first days after her murder, and the investigation that followed, left wing newspapers in Israel, Haaretz, Davar, and Al Hamishmar, dealt heavily with the story, but as the shock subsided, she vanished from memory, only to be mention occasionally by far right Jews who drooled over her death the way Max Blumenthal does in his frame jobs.
On the Mavis Pat story I run by accident, while going through old newspaper looking for something completely different, and I’m probably misspelling her name. All I know is this, had she lived she could have been by now someone’s grandma and great grandma.

Tragic though their stories are, in the greater story of the Israeli Palestinian conflict they were barely a footnote, partially because no one made an effort to remember them, (only recently the family of Ziva Goldovsky opened a web site commemorating 20 years to her death), and partially because they did not affect the course of history. But when it comes to the story Dr. Levi Billig, it is not about sidelining a personal tragedy but about editing out nearly an entire chapter of history, the chapter of ‘Brit Shalom’ and its era.

‘Brit Shalom’ was a political association founded in 1926 in Jerusalem by leading Jewish thinkers, scholars and political activists, see here; its declared purpose was “To pave a road and an understanding between Hebrews and Arabs towards common forms of life in the land of Israel. By way of complete equality of the political rights of both nations with wide autonomy.” In 1930 they advocated a bi national state. And some of its members were even willing to limit Jewish immigration.

The concession they offered were difficult to a lot of Jews to accept because they were regarded as a deep cut in the core Zionist beliefs and aspirations, and in the Arabs side there was no response, just a few second level personalities willing to listen. But what devastated this movement the most was Arab terrorism. The riots of 1936 claimed the lives of dozens of Jews mostly civilians, and one political casualty - ‘Brit Shalom’.

To clarify, these were heinous atrocities. In the first two days of the riots, April 19 & 20, more then 20 Jews where murdered by Arab mob, mostly in Tel Aviv and its vicinity but also in Jerusalem and Haifa. They were stoned, knifed, beaten or shot to death; any means available was used. This was followed by a wave of refugees, as hundreds of Jews fled from Jaffa to Tel Aviv and from mixed neighborhoods in Jerusalem and Haifa into those with dominate Jewish population. Afterwards, nearly everyday at least one Jew was murdered, often several. The attacks were all over the land, the victims were men, women, children and the elderly, Ultra Orthodox Jews who then were strong anti Zionists, and secular Jews, European Jews and non European Jews, some were born in the land, some have been there for many years and others only recently arrived.
During the days leading to Billig’s murder evil was very concentrated, but not much different then what had happened before and after. On the 27^th of July two Palestinians above the age of twenty, throw a bomb at a crowd of Yemenite children as they left for home from their Talmud Torah, religious school, in Tel Aviv.
Six children were hurt: Shimon Ashkenazi age 9, Amram Yitzhak age 11, Cohen Yekhiel aged 9, Shmuel Barkhiel age 11, David Shubri age 8, and Immanuel Cohen.
The perpetrators escaped a police chase with the help of a mob from the Arab village of Menashia that violently kept the police from arresting them. Even though no one was killed the horror from such monstrosity sent shock waves throughout the Jewish community in the land of Israel.
On August the 13^th most members of the Aunger family from Safed were killed when a bomb was thrown into their home, the father, Alther was 36, his son Avraham 6, the daughters Hava and Yafa were 7 and 9. Two days later several workers were killed in an ambush in the Carmel Forest. The next day 8 years old David Albalah was killed by a bomb thrown from a train passing through Hertzl Street in Tel Aviv. And on the 17 that month the nurses Martha Fink and Nehama Tzedek were gunned down in front of the Government Hospital in Jaffa were they worked, taking care of Arab patients.
In face of such constant atrocities ‘Brit Shalom’ deep cut concession looked more and more unattainable, unrealistic and unappealing. It also affected its membership eroding it more and more. The final blow came on the 21^st of August, when the Palestinian murder campaign hit home and hit hard. Dr. Levi Billig was not just a gifted man and a committed Orientalist, he was also a very liked individual with Jewish, Arabs and British friends as indicated by the eulogies given by his friends Dr. Shlomo Dov Goitein and Dr. Yehuda Magnes at his funeral, two men who shared his dreams and visions.







This murder turned ‘Brit Shalom’ from a marginal group to whatever definition there is for something that is less then that. But the eulogy for the movement and its ideas came two month earlier by one of its founders and former member Arthur Rupin, who said on May 16: “The peace will not be established in this land by an ‘agreement’ with the Arabs, rather it will come in due time, when we are strong enough so the Arabs will not be so certain in the results of the struggle and be forced to accept us as an existing fact.”

Now, how much different is that from what Zeev Jabotinsky had said 13 years earlier in his famous “About The Iron Wall” essay?
Not much different at all, and that is the whole point.
Because what the peace movement had edited out here, was not just a chapter in history, nor the conclusion that the other side was right, a frightening one to any hard line dogmatic ideologue, but one that he can still dispute if he insists (or she). But the mere possibility that the other side was right; dogmatism in its worse form is about certainties, absolute and total, everything has been written in advance and the possibility of error is non existence, worse then that, it is incomprehensible. From there picking and choosing from history what is ideologically convenient is not very far, it is almost unavoidable. But whatever the motives are, picking and choosing from history will always be dishonest, just as when one victim of violence, Rachel Corry, is more cherished then the others, only this time it has a moral price tag. And that price tag includes the morality and credibility of people that are not just peace activists but also peace monopolists.





Correction: in my first post about ‘Brit Tzedeck v’Shalom’ I had mention Dr. Yehuda Magnes as one of the founders of ‘Brit Shalom’, that was a mistake on my part. Dr. Magnes was associated with this group through the Hebrew University, which he headed and many of the founders of ‘Brit Shalom’ worked at, and by the similarity of their views. But he was never a member; as far as he was concerned they were not moderate enough.
I thank those who had corrected me.

Max Blumenthal drooling for hate in Tel Aviv

So Maxi B, your frame job from Jerusalem got canned so you went to Tel Aviv for a sequel.
How did you do Maxi?
Out of the hundreds of people celebrating the ‘White Nights’ festivities, the Tel Aviv centennial celebrations, this is what you have found? Two kids less then half your age saying stupid things, that's it? But Maxi B, stupid kids exist everywhere, hardly ‘feeling the hate’ as you’ve promised your followers. And the way you were drooling over these two, oh may, oh may…

And you knew that Maxi B, so you went to the Tel Aviv University to fish for more hate. And what did you find? No anti Obama talk to suck your fingers with, or anything else that could counter the video the Jerusalem Post made to balance your old frame job.
Do you know what you did get there, Maxi B?
Because what you did find are glimpses of the serious business of peacemaking, the different narratives, the mutual mistrust, the fear and grievances two warrior nations have towards each other, and more and more.

Yes Maxi we do security checks on Arabs, that is because we don’t want to be blown up by Arabs, as we had been just a few years ago. But you have select out that fact, just as you have selected out the Israeli narrative:
Should we apologize to you and the Arab world for celebrating our independence day because we like the idea of been free, or for surviving the ethnic cleansing they had declared on us?
You have mentioned Arab suffering in that war, but what about Jewish suffering, such as the 100,000 Jewish residents of west Jerusalem, who were prevented food and medicine by an Arab siege, or the sniper at the top of Hasan Beck mosque shooting at pedestrians walking the streets of Tel Aviv, the same streets where you were desperately scavenging for expressions of hate, or whatever you can twist as such.

Why is it Maxi B that Israeli suffering doesn’t exist in your videos, could it be because you know nothing about suffering just as you nothing about peacemaking? Could it be Maxi B that you just don’t care, cause you’re not in it for the caring!


The Hasan Beck mosque




Related link Max Blumental anti-Semitic hit.

Obama and the Israeli public, So say Haaretz

Haaretz says that in a meeting with Jewish leaders president Barack Obama told them that us Israelis must do some reflections. What a nasty thing to say about us, after all the reflections we did during the Oslo years, and what we got for it, waves after waves of mass murder attacks. But then, that is what Haaretz says he said; no other Israeli newspaper says so.
Haaretz is a good newspaper, on society, law and government, science, environment, etc. until someone or something touch its occupation button, then it becomes the newspaper that advanced Amos Harel’s unfounded war crimes charges, the last major newspaper to realize that anti Semitism plays a major role in the ‘criticism’ of Israel, and the newspaper whose editor had asked then Secretary of State Condoliza Rice to rape Israel into concessions.
This is a newspaper where a dogma resides in it. A dogma so strict it denies the existence of reality, or treat reality as a major annoyance.
But they need reality to confirm their fantasies, they need to rape it into been something else, and since they cannot do it, they ask the American Secretary of State to do it for them; and since they cannot reflect on their own ideological mistakes, as other known Israeli left winger did such as Ari Shavit, Gadi Taub, A. B. Yehoshua and others, the want the Israeli society to reflect on why it cannot agree with them. And since none of this is likely to happen, they need an international authority such as the president of the USA to confirm their dogma. And if they can imagine war crimes where they weren’t, they can imagine words and sentences into the mouth of a US president.

Elucidating the Elucidation, Alex Stein’s guest post at Harry’s Place.

Today Harry’s Place hosted a member of the opposition, Alex Stein from falsedichotomies.com. I call him opposition and not enemy because he does acknowledge that throwing rocks can be lethal, and Israel is justified in its need for a security barrier, (though he wants it as close as possible to the green line, where it is very close to our main communities).
Alex claims he knows the IDF murdered Bassem Abu Rahmeh during the Saturday’s demonstration in Bil’in because he held a tear gas canister in his hand, similar to the one that killed Bassem, and therefore he knows how heavy it is. But what about the firing mechanism Alex, did you check that, do you know if it is easy to handle, especially with “recently introduced canisters’? Does it take a bizarre set of circumstances for a projectile to be fired at a lower height then intended? Or is it just very easy for your dogmatic thought process to find Israeli soldiers guilty of murder?
A “bizarre set of circumstances” Alex, is a stray bullet that went through corners before hitting someone, debris that misses everybody, a rain of fish.

Alex you hold every Israeli soldier guilty of murder due to actions you attribute to few. I don’t recall regular Wehrmacht soldiers been held to such a high standard, no wonder you’ve backed down from this statement in talkbacks. But if you still hold to that sweeping generalization, what that makes you Alex, You and your movement? For your failure in condemning terrorism and incitement, for not offering an alternative to the security barrier, you and your people weren’t even able to think of the idea of getting a single Palestinian from those living along the barrier route, just one, to call to those terrorists and say “not through my land”. By your own logic Alex you are just as guilty as Hamas and the other Palestinian mass murder organizations. You Alex are a butcher and a torturer of hundreds and thousands of Israelis, a slayer of families.

Gerald Kaufman is a good Jew.

A good obedient Court Jew of a Jew. There are no more courts to house Court Jews so GK inhabits the improvised court of ‘Israel critique’ unable to distinguish between criticism and slander.
The claim that Israel uses charges of anti-Semitism to silence critiques of Israel is Palestinian propaganda accepted by some elements in the left because it was labeled ‘criticism of Israel’.
The fact is that Israel never done it – it is simply bad diplomacy. Only the blatant holocaust denial of the Iranian president forced our state officials to start addressing the issue.
The IDF replay, which GK claims the Nazis used, is a false claim. When the Nazis thought they are going to win, they did not try to hide their intentions, when they started to lose, they did try to hide their crimes.
[If only the Jews of Warsaw had at the time the amount of weapons Hamas has now in Gaza. ]
GK is a good person, but not a very smart one, he really cares, but he needs to be told/programmed how to care. GK spoke to a lot of empty seats, how many empty houses will listen to him now in the Jewish world?