At the core for his presentation Hassanat Ibrahim says that "we must make a clear distinction between sane people who wish to live in peace and quiet and the radical Marzel and his gang, whose only aim is to make headlines, provoke, and spark a dispute."
Well, I happen to disagree with this view, Ibrahim. The fact, the very basic and fundamental FACT is that in Israel we absolutely do not have to make this distinction in deciding who can go where and when. In Israel we allow people to enter our towns, to consume a glass of cold soft drink of his or her choice and then to leave the town unharmed, if and when he or she wishes, irrespective of the degree of his "sanity", whether or not the majority of the townspeople he might get in touch with consider his intentions "good" or “bad”. Even if he is a religious Jew, we must not think of harming him. Why? Because we are in Israel. Thinking and acting any differently from this standard is racist!
The people of Rahat and their supporters gave of themselves a terrible impression this morning by threatening the Jews wishing to enter the city with such violence that granted the mobilization of about a thousand police and security forces to protect them. This level of threat of violence does not protect peace and harmony but it effectively aims to create no-go zones for Jews in Israel and so we must make it absolutely clear where the hatred is coming from and where the hatred stands: it’s an anti-Jewish hatred coming from Arabs. The hatred we witnessed is NOT on the part of the visiting Jews as insinuated by Ibrahim and let me explain why.
The main objective of the Jew’s visit, and I refuse to call it a "march", was to draw attention to a worrisome phenomenon in Israel, that is to say to the selective application of the law by the Israeli government in general and by Mr. Barak in particular. A black uniformed mounted pogrom-police was used in recent years and months and even in recent weeks to remove Jews from their property, considered illegal, in the Judean hills. If and when a government or a single government minister decides to "apply the law", we have to make sure that the law is applied to each and every sector of society in competition with each-other. If one fails to do this, if one applies the law only to one party, in this case only to the so called illegal property owned by Jews, then we have a serious problem, one that we might want to call institutional anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism is racism.
Precisely to correct this situation the Jews went to Rahat this morning and precisely for this reason we should not have been and we should not be childishly called names like "radical Marzel and his gang".
I am not a gang member, Ibrahim. I am an Israeli citizen who refutes racism, all the more so when it is government sponsored and all the much more so if it is against Jews. As a religious Jew I reserve my G-d given right to enter every town and any village in my country and profess my opinion freely, without having to worry for my skin. You Ibrahim, have a right to dispute my opinion, within the means of the law. What you can not and must not do is threaten my biological existence with your violence. This kind of behavior belongs to other nations, not to Israel. I dare you not to limit my freedom of movement and my freedom to express my opinion.
I would appreciate if this piece could receive the same space and the same dignity from ynetnews.com as the shameful article it refers to.
- This is talkback # 17 on "Champions of racism"
NY Times Finally Shows Some Improvement in Anti-Israel Bias - by Ira Stoll - *...Against those six articles — more than one a day — the Times deemed fit to print only two on the other side of the issue. One was by Bret Stephens, and...
1 hour ago