This is the ninth essay of a series of 17. Here are the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth ,seventh and eighth. These essays deal with 17 chapters of Ari Shavit’s “My Promised Land”. For a real understanding of these essays it is advisable to read the introductory essay titled “Can Ari Shavit be charged with High Treason?”.
Chapter nine of “My Promised Land” is titled “Gaza Beach – 1991″ and begins with an outright declaration of love for “the Palestinians” and their “intifada” a word that means “shaking off”. The Israelian yoke, that is, of course. Not the yoke of a corrupt and hate-mongering “elite” of Palmaffiosi that hold their own people hostage. I will start with a long quote from that chapter and highlight the words that make the so-called “First Intifada” (1987 – 1993) seem just and good and . . . . . . make the reaction of Israel seem unjust and evil.
“Twenty Years after occupation began and twelve years after Ofra was founded, the first intifada broke out. In December 1987 the Palestinians residing in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip revolted against Israel’s ongoing military rule. Tens of thousands took to the streets. Cities and villages and refugee camps were engulfed by protest. An unprecedented Palestinian rebellion challenged Israel and nearly brought down its reign over the occupied territories. But after the initial shock the Jewish state fought back. It mobilized its army and trained it to become an effective police force. It unleashed the Shin Bet, its efficient secret service, on the unarmed masses that rebelled against it.
Within a few months the Israeli military built several detention camps in which thousands of Palestinians were imprisoned after having been convicted by military tribunals. Within a few years, the intifada rebellion was in decline. The systematic and determined use of oppressive force worked. The Palestinian campaign lost momentum. Gone were the mass demonstrations. Gone was the notion that the popular uprising would force Israel to end occupation. Thousands of Palestinian civilians languished in the detention camps. In many ways their mass imprisonment tainted Israel’s democratic identity.”
So far Shavit’s Palmaffia-glorifying and Israel-demonizing. Below I wil quote the Virtual Jewish Library on the “First Intifada” and do some accentuating in that quote as well. These two quotations are of course something of a long-read, and it may take some effort to compare them and reach the inevitable conclusion, but a reader might find solace in the fact that it’s nothing in comparison with being engulfed for some 500 pages in Shavit’s brainwashing diarrhea. (Yes, the metaphor is peculiar, but you will remember it.) Now the Virtual Jewish Library on the same “intifada”:
“False charges of Israeli atrocities and instigation from the mosques played an important role in starting the intifada. On December 6, 1987, an Israeli was stabbed to death while shopping in Gaza. One day later, four residents of the Jabalya refugee camp in Gaza were killed in a traffic accident. Rumors that the four had been killed by Israelis as a deliberate act of revenge began to spread among the Palestinians. Mass rioting broke out in Jabalya on the morning of December 9, in which a 17-year-old youth was killed by an Israeli soldier after throwing a Molotov cocktail at an army patrol. This soon sparked a wave of unrest that engulfed the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem.
Over the next week, rock-throwing, blocked roads and tire burnings were reported throughout the territories. By December 12, six Palestinians had died and 30 had been injured in the violence. The following day, rioters threw a gasoline bomb at the U.S. consulate in East Jerusalem. No one was hurt in the bombing.
In Gaza, rumors circulated that Palestinian youths wounded by Israeli soldiers were being taken to an army hospital near Tel Aviv and “finished off.“ Another rumor, claimed Israeli troops poisoned a water reservoir in Khan Yunis. A UN official said these stories were untrue. Only the most seriously injured Palestinians were taken out of the Gaza Strip for treatment, and, in some cases, this probably saved their lives. The water was also tested and found to be uncontaminated.
The intifada was violent from the start. During the first four years of the uprising, more than 3,600 Molotov cocktail attacks, 100 hand grenade attacks and 600 assaults with guns or explosives were reported by the Israel Defense Forces. The violence was directed at soldiers and civilians alike. During this period, 16 Israeli civilians and 11 soldiers were killed by Palestinians in the territories; more than 1,400 Israeli civilians and 1,700 Israeli soldiers were injured. Approximately 1,100 Palestinians were killed in clashes with Israeli troops.
Throughout the intifada, the PLO played a lead role in orchestrating the insurrection. The PLO-dominated Unified Leadership of the Intifada (UNLI), for example, frequently issued leaflets dictating which days violence was to be escalated, and who was to be its target. The PLO’s leadership of the uprising was challenged by the fundamentalist Islamic organization Hamas, a violently anti-Semitic group that rejects any peace negotiations with Israel.”
Jews were not the only victims of the violence. In fact, as the intifada waned around the time of the Gulf War in 1991, the number of Arabs killed for political and other reasons by Palestinian death squads exceeded the number killed in clashes with Israeli troops.
PLO Chairman Yasir Arafat defended the killing of Arabs deemed to be “collaborating with Israel.” He delegated the authority to carry out executions to the intifada leadership. After the murders, the local PLO death squad sent the file on the case to the PLO. “We have studied the files of those who were executed, and found that only two of the 118 who were executed were innocent,” Arafat said. The innocent victims were declared “martyrs of the Palestinian revolution” by the PLO (AlMussawar, January 19, 1990).
Palestinians were stabbed, hacked with axes, shot, clubbed and burned with acid. The justifications offered for the killings varied. In some instances, being employed by Israel’s Civil Administration in the West Bank and Gaza was reason enough; in others, contact with Jews warranted a death sentence. Accusations of “collaboration” with Israel were sometimes used as a pretext for acts of personal vengeance. Women deemed to have behaved “immorally” were also among the victims.
Eventually, the reign of terror became so serious that some Palestinians expressed public concern about the disorder. The PLO began to call for an end to the violence, but murders by its members and rivals continued. From 1989-1992, this intrafada claimed the lives of nearly 1,000 Palestinians.”
As Howard Sachar says about the “First Intifada”:
“The [Jewish] Israeli public was stunned — and terrified. It was humiliated, too, in its public image. Indeed, the uprising may have achieved its greatest success in the realm of world opinion. In their stone‑throwing, barricade‑erecting, and tire‑burning, the demonstrators very swiftly learned to alert foreign newsmen in advance, to ensure broad television and other journalistic coverage of Israeli repression. Less thoroughly reported were Palestinian killings and sexual mutilations of suspected local Arab informers. By the end of 1989, however, fully a third of the 2,700 attacks carried out by Palestinian activists were perpetrated against fellow Arabs.”
Part of this chapter nine “Gaza Beach – 1991″ consists of an article by the then 34-year old Shavit that appeared in 1991 in Haaretz and in the New York Review of Books. In it he relates the story of his twelve days on a military reserve-tour-of-duty acting as a guard in a detention camp where “Palestinian” rioters were held prisoner. Shavit does his best in several passages to suggest widespread cruelty on the side of the Israeli personnel in this Gaza-camp.
“The prison commanders and the prisoners’ leadership negotiate daily. They allow life here to proceed calmly. It is two years now since an officer shot to death a prisoner who tried to attack him—and kept shooting while the young man rolled over on the ground in his blood. Nowadays, unlike in the past, families and lawyers are given the right to visit every Friday. The Red Cross drops in regularly.”
Note the casual remark that “in the past” no external supervision was possible to contain the violence of the guards. And consequently there is also no way of knowing whether Shavit speaks the truth. But let’s assume the incident took place exactly this way. I’m capable to imagine what can have happened psychologically to this shooting officer. I can do that while I’m not an Israeli soldier stressed to the limit by the psychological warfare of the Palmaffia’s and the hatred that emanates on a daily basis from the whole islamic world that surrounds Israel.
I’m writing this as a Dutchman of 70 years old with quite some street-experience in Amsterdam with a kind of Moroccan-islamic youth that has exactly the same appearance and appeal as the “Intifada”-stone-throwers. They are not insolent in a “normal” everyday manner, they are capable of dehumanizing you just with their attitude. They really get to you. Or maybe I should say “they get to your marrow”, like a leading social-democratic liberal in the Netherlands has put it after having spent some months as a “street-coach” dealing with these youths. These “boys” have something in their attitude, the way they move, the way they look at you, that makes every Christian aware of the fact that these “boys” are something quite different from an average insolent Dutch boy. I for one had in the past 30 years once in a while a fantasy in which I machine-gunned a whole bunch of them. Yes, I’m a bad person. I know.
“Following almost three months of Palestinian riots, violence and deadly terror attacks against Israelis, 2/3 (67%) of Palestinians are in favor of stabbing attacks against Israelis and almost the same amount are in favor of ‘an armed intifada’. Although most Palestinians support ‘the use of knives’, almost half (47%) of Palestinians believe the PA’s libel that Israel fabricates the stabbing attacks and that ‘those who were shot have not stabbed or were not attempting to stab Israelis’. However, 51% do believe that ‘most… have in fact stabbed or were attempting to stab Israelis’.” [link added]
This is frightening, not only for the hatred it reveals, but also because of the insane and typical “islamic logic” in those surveyed, a “logic” that almost equals the insanity in Ari Shavit’s own “dialectics”. The stabbers did stab and did not stab. The stabbers did stab and were therefore hero’s. The stabbers did not stab and were therefore innocent victims.
So I think I understand why something snapped in that officer’s head and why he just continued to shoot. And I think I also understand what has happened to the camp doctor that is described by Shavit:
“Or maybe the camp doctor is to blame for the analogy haunting me. He is no Mengele, of course, but when I wake him in the dead of night to treat one of the nocturnal detainees who has just been brought in—barefoot, bruised, looking as if he is having an epileptic fit—the doctor shouts at him. And although the detainee is barely seventeen and complains that he was just beaten on his back and on his stomach and over his heart, and although there are indeed ugly red marks all over his body, the doctor shouts loudly at him, “I wish you were dead.” And then, turning to me, he laughs and says, “I wish they were all dead.”
The “analogy” that “haunts” Shavit is clearly between Auschwitz and the detention camp. No less. Oh yes, he is really crazy, that Shavit. And it seems he became progressively more crazy while writing his book. The Stockholmdualistic demonization of his own country takes bizarre forms. He devotes a few pages to the idiotic Auschwitz-comparison:
“Yet an evil stench is in the air that even the Mediterranean breeze cannot carry away. Although unjust and unfounded, the haunting analogy is pervasive.”
Unjust and unfounded, but pervasive. Did I mention that Shavit has a penchant for amazing dialectics? What about the evil stench? Well, it is not really there:
“Most obvious, there are no crematoria here.”
That might be a difference indeed: during the rule of the Jews until 2005 (and after 2005 for that matter) there was an explosive population growth in Gaza.
“And I, too, who have always abhorred the analogy, who have always argued bitterly with anyone who so much as hinted at it, can no longer stop myself. The associations are too strong.”
The Auschwitz-equation is idiotic and Shavit admits as much, but the net-result is that the equation is planted in the minds of the less suspicious and critical reader who bcomes more susceptible to the Palmaffia-propaganda that routinely invokes the nazi-equation and that of the South African “Apartheid”. In short: Shavit’s ambiguous crap is bringing again the message: die Juden sind Schuld!
Shavist asserts and suggests a lot that is not easy to verify. That is especially true of his allegations concerning the torture he claims to have indirectly witnessed during his twelve days in the detention camp. His prose is very expressive on this point:
“Or maybe the screams are to blame for my inability to rid my mind of the comparison [of Auschwitz]. At the end of my watch, as I walk from the reservists’ tent to the showers, I suddenly hear horrific screams. ( . . .) I am stunned by the literally hair-raising screams coming from the other side of the galvanized tin fence of the interrogation ward. From the various human rights reports I have read, I know what might be going on beyond the fence. Are they using the “banana-tie” method of torture or the other, more brutal methods? Or are they simply applying a crude, old-fashioned beating? ( . . .) fifty yards from the showers where I try to rinse off the day’s dust and sweat, people scream. ( . . .) They scream because my Jewish state makes them scream. In a methodical, orderly, and absolutely legal fashion, my beloved democratic Israel makes them scream. ( . . .) thousands upon thousands are being held. Many of them are being tortured. In our case the issue is not a dozen deadly enemy agents, and the issue is not a limited and precise operation of counterespionage. The thing here is cracking down on a popular uprising, a forceful occupation of another nation. ( . . .) This is a phenomenon without parallel in the West. This is systematic brutality no democracy can endure. And I am a part of it all. I comply.”
This sounds all very, very terrible. But I have one remark and one question. My remark: it would not be necessary to hold “thousands upon thousands” if the “Palestinian leadership” would not marinate their own population in Jew hatred and not organise the terror. All this suffering is of their own making. My question: how many of these detainees were killed or maimed in these camps? My guess is: none, because the “international press” already creates a cosmic fuzz about one sick Arab terrorist who dies in custody and allegedly did not receive sufficient treatment from the Israeli prison-authorities.
In an article called “Palestinian prisoners of Israel” Wikipedia says:
“In 2000, an official Israeli report acknowledged torture of detainees during the First Intifada. The report said that the leadership of Shin Bet knew about the torture but did nothing to stop it. Human rights organisations claim some detainees died or were left paralysed.”
Torture is admitted. Or maybe it was “torture”. Who knows? And we all know about the bias of the “human rights organisations” especially when they “claim” some misdeed on the part of Israel.
“Between 1988 and 1992, intra-Palestinian violence claimed the lives of nearly 1,000. By June 1990, according to Benny Morris, ‘[T]he Intifada seemed to have lost direction. A symptom of the PLO’s frustration was the great increase in the killing of suspected collaborators.’”
I think we can safely assume that Shavit’s stories are greatly exaggerated.
“And anyone standing at the gate, like myself, can see the paratroopers’ jeep leave the detention camp after midnight and drive into the occupied, darkened city, which is under curfew, to arrest those who are said to endanger the security of the state. I will still stand at the gate when the paratroopers return in their military vehicles with boys of fifteen or sixteen, who grit their teeth, their eyes bulging from their sockets. In some cases they have already been beaten. The soldiers gather around to watch them undress, to watch them shiver in their underwear. As they tremble with fear, even S., who owns a plastics factory in the occupied territories, cannot believe his eyes. ‘How have we come to this?’ he asks. ‘How have we come to chasing such kids?’ “
Shavit writes this text in 1991 but he incorporates it in a book published in 2013. So he knows about the rise in the meantime of murderous and terroristic Hamas in Gaza. So why “are said to endanger the security of the state”? Has it not become obvious in the meantime that these “boys”, marinated in Jew-hatred, were and are a danger indeed? And what kind of gay pedophile sadists are these IDF soldiers, so tempted by shivering boys in their underwear? Is it possible that the boys are so frightened because they learned from the Palmaffia-propaganda that Jews are monsters that will immediately proceed to kill them? And why have these boys been beaten already? This must be because IDF-soldiers are sadists. It cannot be because of the way “such kids” have a knack for brutalizing in a manner that goes straight to your marrow.
Shavit’s need for narcissistic self-manifestation takes usually the form of better-than-thou-ism: I’m not like those evil right-wing Israelis! But in this chapter we find a kind of exculpation of the Israeli state. He explains that it’s all because of those nasty mechanisms of bureaucracy, allowing people who are not bad in themselves to produce collectively a malicious result. That is strange, because part of being Jewish is always talked about as being aware and conscientious. It is not only strange but also self-incriminating in an alarming and superstitious way, almost like antisemites believe in a Jewish guilt. Are they after all not only a chosen but also a cursed people, the Jews, that carry evil within them without knowing it?
“Yet in some mysterious way, all these nonevil people manage together to produce a result that is evil indeed. And evil is always greater than the sum of its parts, greater than all who contribute to it and carry it out. Despite our unkempt exteriors, our clumsiness, our pathetic petit-bourgeois ways, we are evil in Gaza. But this evil of ours is a cunning evil. For it is an evil that happens, as it were, of its own accord, an evil for which the responsibility is no one’s. Evil without evildoers.”
This is a recurring theme in Shavit’s book: describing the Jews as a species that for all their positive intentions produce evil. As I said already in my dicussion of chapter one:
“See? No evil in those desperate Jews who are not aware of their own imperialism but who are going tot drive out the Palestinian people, “bury” Palestinian villages and replace one people by another. These are naive and innocent criminals. Shavit constantly produces this kind of unresolved contradictions, this kind of complicated and harmful rubbish.”
Depicting the Jews, the Israelis, as the evil in Gaza, is of course nonsense. In the entire Middle East evil – murderous violence and insane oppression – is solely created by Islam.
Maybe Shavit’s 1991-Haaretz-New-York-Review-of-Books-article that is incorporated in this chapter has helped in the 2005 decision of Ariel Sharon to give up Gaza. Because Shavit wrote very convincing prose in 1991:
“From watchtower number 6I can see the sea, the camp, the city of Gaza. Gaza is a city with no hope, no cure. It is the city of the people whose houses and villages we took in 1948 and whose place of refuge we conquered in 1967. It is the city of those whom we exploited during the long decades of occupation, denying them human rights and civil rights and national rights. So in Gaza there are no excuses. Gaza is not even needed for our defense like some strategic heights in the West Bank; it is not even a historically charged terrain like some parts of Judea and Samaria. Gaza is clear and simple. It is the epitome of the absurdity of occupation. It is futile occupation. It is brutal occupation. It corrodes our very existence and it erodes the legitimacy of our existence.”
Except for the arguments that in fact have led to the evacuation of Gaza in 2005 – (Gaza is indeed not historically important terrain and indeed not absolutely necessary for Israel’s safety) – Shavit is lying in the above paragraph about everything. He defines the occupation of Gaza as an arbitrary act of aggression followed by exploitation and cruelty. But that is not so. Gaza was taken in self-defense in 1967 after a refusal on the part of the Arab world to even negotiate peace terms. After 1967 Jewish settlers built thriving villages in Gaza with their own hands. After 1967 Israel did everything to make the economy of Gaza boom and to fight poverty among Gazans. After 1967 . . . . . . . terrorism was also resumed after having been suspended between 1948 and 1967, suspended because it was the fellow-Arabs of Egypt who were doing the oppression.
From 1948 to 1967, during Egyptian rule, Palestinian Arabs deliberately were disenfranchised, left in their misery and cruelly treated (in Gaza and in Samaria-Judea) so these “victims”/victims could serve as a propaganda weapon against Israel. Read: “When Egypt was in Gaza” by Eliezer Whartman. The terror in the period 1948 – 1967 was in straight continuing line with the terror – (against Jews ánd benevolent Arabs!) – that had been organized and sustained since 1920 by the Mufti of Jerusalem.
Note especially the last sentences of the above quoted paragraph: futile occupation erodes legitimacy of Israel’s very existence. This is deeply, deeply insane. Every word is a blatant lie and a perversion of the truth.
The truth being he following:
The Jews had and have a Moral Right to settle in Judea-Samaria because they have lived there for thousands of years and because the land of Palestine remained a Central Myth of the Jews in the Diaspora for many centuries. Because Jewish immigration from 1890 on put an end to a brutal colonial occupation by Arabs and Turks that began in 638 AD and lasted fo 1300 years. Because the Jews brought from 1890 to Palestine a social order that was superior in every respect to the brutal and irrationalistic Islamic feudalism that prevailed in this empty and desolate land full of wild lands. Because this Moral Right has been formalized in the Treaty of San Remo in 1922 into an International Legal Right. Because during the whole period from 1922 to date, that Moral Right and that International Right have both been strengthened by the Laws of War.
This strengthening of the Law of War happened because from 1921 onward the Arabs, instigated by the Mufti of Jerusalem Amin al-Husseini, practiced terror based on Islamic principles. Because from 1936 onward the Mufti carried out this terror with the help of Hitler and the rest of the Nazi leaders. Because the ultimate aim of this terror was to commit genocide on the Jews. Because twice, in 1948 and in 1967, Samaria-Judea (“the Westbank”) was used as a springboard in a war of aggression by the Arabs that on both occasions had the intention to commit genocide on the Jews. Because Jordan from 1948 to 1967 had occupied Samaria-Judea illegally after a war of aggression and made Judenrein. Because it was just a coincidence – (the king of Jordan was too afraid of his own “Palestinians”) – that in the third war of aggression by the Arabs in 1973 Judea-Samaria was not used as a springboard.
Because from Khartoum 1967 the Arabs have refused to negotiate seriously about peace and therefore forced Israel to start governing Samaria-Judea. Because the “Palestinians” led by Arafat have sabotaged the Oslo Peace Treaty in 1993 from the beginning. Because the “Palestinians” afterwards have rejected every even more generous new peace offer. Because both Arafat and Abbas and Hamas openly placed themselves in the tradition of the Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin al-Husseini, which means in the Nazi tradition.
So far the truth.
This chapter also contains a hypocritical and sanctimonious pipe-dream. The 98% of the reeaders of Shavit’s book that are not aware of the fact that Shavit wrote this passage alreadyin the 1991(!) essay “On Gaza Beach” in the New York Review of Books might wonder why Shavit does not inform these unaware readers whether or not he still cherishes this dream after Israel left Gaza in 2005 and after Hamas turned it into a rocket-lunching platform.
“One day, when Free Palestine is established, its government will surely lease this piece of land to some international entrepreneur who will build the Gaza Beach Club Med. One day, when there is peace, Israelis will come out here for a short holiday break abroad. By these blue-green waters, they will drink white wine and dance the samba. On their way home they will buy embroidered black Palestinian dresses in the air-conditioned duty-free shop of the international terminal separating prosperous Israel from peaceful Palestine.”
Before 2005, there existed indeed this idyll à la Gaza Beach Club Med. In the chapter “Plowshares beaten into swords in Gaza” (!) of his book “The Late Great State of Israel” Aaron Klein describes some scenes from the forced evacuation of Gaza in 2005, in particular how distressing the breaking up of whole lifes has been for the Jews of the village of Gush Katif in Gaza. Aaron Klein saw Gush Katif just before the eviction:
“I was struck by the natural beauty of the place. It looked like Orange County, California, transplanted.
Jewish settlers, says Klein, had single-handedly built their houses. I do not think the Palmaffia-leaders are willing or able to do the same. Klein describes how even before the Israelis had left, these leaders had already begun converting Gaza into a missile base and were busy firing rockets into Israel.
When governed by the Israeli’s during the period 1967 -2005, Gazans were much better off than under the Egyptians from 1948 till 1967. It is the terrorism and hate-preaching of their own Palmaffia-leadership that deprives Gazans of a possibility to the good life. Maybe not the whole of Gaza could have been like Gush Katif, but even the overcrowded city of Gaza could have been a much better place to live than it is now. The Gaza Beach Club Med that Shavit dreamed of in 1991 could have become true under Israeli supervision, if only the “Palestinians” had abstained from terrorism.
But as it is now, only the Palmafiosi of Hamas are living in luxury in Gaza. Ast the same time, despite the so-called “blockade” by Israel, no one is starving there, like it was the case under Egyptian rule from 1948 to 1967. And what about that denial of a right to their own nation? Or as Shavit pathetically puts it “denying them human rights and civil rights and national rights”. In 1991 Shavit could not know how from 1993 on the Oslo-accords, that gave the Palestininian a fair chance to statehood, would be systematicalle and deliberately torpedoed by Arafat and only for one reason: because Arafat cum suis had never any intention to make real peace and to recognize Israel.
Yes, it is tiring and irritating to be obliged to list the same iron facts again and again, to denounce the lying, perversion and concealment of types like Shavit. But there seems no way around it. The unwillingness to face truth regarding Israel and Islam is too pervasive in all of the West and especially in Israel’s Haaretz-idiots. These morons, like Shavit himself, are stuck in Gutmenschliche slogans like this one:
“So the question now is not land for peace. The question is land for our decency. Land for our humanity. Land for our very soul.”
This is insane. Already in 1991 Shavit could have known that the wars of 1948 and 1967 were genocidal entreprises by the Arabs who refused subsequently to even talk about peace and that in 1967 Israel was forced to occupy Samaria and Judea, regions that were since San Remo 1922 legal places of settlement for Jews to begin with. And in 2013, after the open betrayal of the Oslo-accords by Arafat, after the evacuation of Gaza and the terror that followed, Shavit publishes a book in which he preserves the unaltered passages of the 1991-essay while these passages were already naive in 1991.
Could this mentality be interpreted as a Stockholm-syndrome? Adults should be able to recognize evil in themselves, but this sick self-incrimination and refusal to acknowledge the proven cruelty and mercilessness in an enemy is spiritual cowardice.
Take for instance this paragraph in this chapter nine that was written in 2013 by a seemingly incurable demented Shavit:
“Perhaps this is the reason that even today, the sights I saw and the sounds I heard in the Gaza Beach facility still haunt me. I am haunted by the notion that we hold them by the balls and they hold us by the throat. We squeeze and they squeeze back. We are trapped by them and they are trapped by us. And every few years the conflict takes on a new form, ever more gruesome. Every few years, the mode of violence changes. The tragedy ends one chapter and begins another, but the tragedy never ends.”
No, great writer, deep thinker and impeccable moralist Shavit. “We”, Israel is not the one who starts the pinching. Nowhere and never. They, the Palmaffia’s and the Arabs and the Islamists, are the ones who start the pinching. Always and everywhere. Therefore it is not a tragedy. Because the hallmark of a tragedy is the presence of foredooming forces which no man can control. But the Palmaffia’s and the Arabs and the Islamists just want this terror, this misery and this hatred very consciously. There is only one way to explain this as a tragedy,that is when you say that Arabs and muslims are foredoomed to terrorize and not capable of producing anything else than oppression and cruelty. But that would be racist, would it not?