Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Haaretz Denounces Financial Malfeasance at Tel Aviv University
1. The Return of the "T" Word to Haaretz
Comrades, it is not every day that Haaretz, the Palestinian daily
published in Hebrew, uses the term "terrorist". Instead, it has followed
for years the lead of the BBC, CNN, and others in referring to
Palestinian mass murderers of Jewish children and other civilians as
"activists" or occasionally militants. That way, the paper is signally
its implicit judtifying (no that was not a spelling mistake)of the
After all, if the terrorists are
driven by a sense of desperation due to Israel's racist cussedness, then
why disrespect the killers by calling them inappropriate names like
"terrorists"? Suicide bombers would always be included in the body count
For years, the term "terrorist" did not appear anywhere in Haaretz,
neither in reference to Palestinian terror nor to anti-American terror in
But today, a minor miracle occurred. The word appears in Haaretz, not
once but half a dozen times. Why?
It is being used with regard to a "Jewish terrorist", one Eden
Natan-Zada, an apparently mentally-deranged soldier who shot
to death four people on a bus in the town of Shefaram 10 months ago. Why
do I say he seems to have been deranged? Haaretz reports that his own
parents had tipped off the army and police that they suspected their son
was unstable and about to do something insane. If he was insane, then in
fact he was neither a terrorist nor a murderer. No one is suggesting he
had any help or collaborators. And no Jew, as far as I know, justified
the soldier's killing of Arabs in Shfaram.
So was he insane? We will never know for sure. After being disarmed
and apprehended, a mob beat him to death. The issue is in the news
because the police traced those who killed the soldier and have arrested
them. The Caring Crowd is outraged that the killers of the soldier have
Haaretz today has three separate headlines trumpeting the arrest of
those Arabs who merely bludgeoned to death this "terrorist" and the "T"
word is used throughout, for the Jew! See for yourself in English at
Haaretz has actually used the "T" word elsewhere in recent months, but of
course in reference to gunfire by unknowns aimed at Palestinians.
Meanwhile, the article about the killers of the "terrorist" is
accompanied by a little piece of Haaretz yellow journalism, a "news story"
declaring that no evidence has been found that any Rabbi gave the killer
Natan-Zada a rabbinic go-ahead to murder Arabs before he did so. Huh?
Clearly Haaretz wants to repeat for godzillionth time the blood libel
and outright lie that Rabbis give "go-aheads" to murder people, a Der
Sturmer style fabrication repeated endlessly with respect to the
assassination of Yitzhak Rabin by Yigal Amir. (By the way Amir,
evidently, was NOT insane.) Not a shred of evidence has ever emerged that
any Rabbi has ever given any "go-ahead" to murder anyone. It is only a
small jump from such ludicrous lying to claiming that Jews drink gentile
blood on Passover.
2. On another matter, Haaretz economics writer Haim Be'er writes in the
business section on June 13 the following (my translation - it is not in
"Tel Aviv University Exploits Manpower Agency Workers while the Cost of
the Salary of University President Itamar Rabinovh is 57,492 NIS per
"While 600 adjunct instructors at Tel Aviv University are struggling to
get basic social benefits (like pension -- SP), and while there is a
danger that the university Medical School might be shut down, while
manpower agency employees are emplyed at the university without become
regularstaff members in the name of cost savings - the "salary
festivity" at Tel Aviv University proceeds!
"... The monthly salary of university president Prof. Itamar Rabinovich is
57,492 NIS per month." Article then goes on to denounce other
astronomical salaries for other senior campus officials.
3. CHORUS OF HYPOCRITES [reaction to Gaza Beach incident]
(Article by Editor Amnon Dankner, Ma'ariv, 12.6.06
[Translation provided by Israel Government Press Office]
It is still not at all clear what caused the deaths of seven members of
Palestinian family on the Gazan beach. They may have touched an old shell;
they may have also stepped on a mine prepared by the Palestinians
against a seaborne infiltration of Israeli forces.
Yet, already, even before the matter has been fully clarified, that
well-known international chorus is bewailing that moral image of Israel is
in decline by these very acts that it has yet to be proven to have
committed. This joy for self-flagellation and simultaneous dragging of the
IDF through the mud alongside the hypocritical choir of condemnation by
Arabs' and their automatic supporters is daunting and reprehensible.
Even if it is eventually proven that that which killed and maimed on the
Gazan beach was an Israeli shell, that was fired - of course - without the
intention of attacking innocents, there is still no place for the moral
indignation that represents - in actuality - a very faulty position,
precisely from a moral point-of-view. The State of Israel has every right
in the world to aggressively defend its citizens from Kassam rocket fire.
This right must permit it that which the IDF is doing - to shell open
from which the Palestinian cells are launching the Kassam rockets. The
Palestinians in Gaza can only make claims on themselves: We withdrew from
the Gaza Strip, down to the last centimeter, in a painful, wrenching step;
we shattered communities and families and we are entitled to demand
quiet from the Palestinian side in Gaza. We are also entitled to respond
with force when the lives of Israeli residents are put at risk and to try
remove the harrowing nightmare that is hanging over our heads day and
It is very easy to claim, as [Israeli author] David Grossman did here
yesterday, that all of these military efforts are in vain because the
Palestinian fighting continues. But if we do not take the steps that we
taking in the face of this aggression, would it be better? Will the
Palestinians not be encouraged to continue with greater impetus and
claim many victims? The call to declare a ceasefire and sit down to
unconditional negotiations without preconditions no longer sounds as good
since the experience of those blood-soaked years after the Oslo accords.
has an anachronistic and irrelevant taste, certainly after the
crowned themselves with an extremist and uncompromising Hamas
administration. To think that this would lead to quiet and bring a halt to
the killing of Israelis is surprising in both its naivet? and its
non-learning from experience. Once, my lot was with those who thought that
if we would only be nicer, show more goodwill, be more humane and offer
concessions - everything would be just fine. But the lesson that we
learned, and which cost us so much blood, is that this
1960's-flower-children-who-have-not-really-matured approach which thinks
that if we just give peace a chance, it will crown us with garlands and we
will be borne by white Hamas doves; if only we do not respond with force
do not stand for our lives, a warm sun of marvelous tranquility will shine
upon us - is so stupid in the perspective of what we have gone through,
the brain bubbles with astonishment at hearing such things.
We are living on our swords in the face of a tangible threat that is being
heard loud and clear from Gaza, Ramallah, Damascus and Tehran. We are
fighting against those seeking our souls, who are killing and maiming us.
is the way of war, the defending sword, as it is being swung, does not
always strike those who are actually guilty. But if we exaggeratedly
flagellate ourselves due to a shocking television photo and if our hearts
soften due to a pointed article in The Guardian or the moral condemnation
the Quay D'Orsai, we will also undercut both the will and the ability to
There are no magic military solutions; this is true. But the conclusion
that David Grossman drew here yesterday that in place of a non-existent
military solution, there is a magic diplomatic solution, is also
There is the hard work of assertive self-defense replete with the military
measures without which even David Grossman would not feel safe in his
The perspective of time requires forbearance, restraint, determination and
patience. And it is also not worthwhile to hastily cast guilt upon
ourselves because we dare to stand up for what is ours and for our lives.