icymi: Haaretz publisher calls for sanctions to end "second Nakba"
Posted by marknadim on November 3, 2024, 10:30 am
Haaretz publisher calls for Sanctions against Israeli leaders as used against S Africa to end apartheid there. UK-US 'mainstream' media and pollies bury this huge break in the narrative, effectively propping up war criminal Netanyahu. Inside Israel the Haaretz paper faces severe threats from the genocidal regime.
post below refers to repurcussions with new law against such whistle-blowing traitors.
'Hamas Are Not Freedom Fighters' | Haaretz Publisher Clarifies. Remarks, Netanyahu Government Threatens to Sanction Newspaper
At the Haaretz conference in London, Amos Schocken stated, among other things, that Israel is carrying out a second Nakba. In response, several ministers and government offices announced measures against Haaretz and expressed intentions to propose new restrictions on freedom of speech.
Israel's Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi has launched a renewed campaign urging a government boycott of Haaretz following remarks made by Haaretz publisher Amos Schocken at a conference in London on Sunday.
In his speech at the conference, co-organized by Haaretz, Schocken stated, "The Netanyahu government doesn't care about imposing a cruel apartheid regime on the Palestinian population. It dismisses the costs of both sides for defending the settlements while fighting the Palestinian freedom fighters, that Israel calls terrorists."
Following the publication of the speech, Minister Karhi sought to revive an initiative he had first pushed a year ago – to end government advertising in the newspaper and cancel all subscriptions for state employees, including those in the IDF, police, prison service, government ministries, and state-owned companies.
In his English-language speech, which was aired on Wednesday on Channel 14 and subsequently circulated in Israeli media, Schocken further remarked, "In a sense, what is taking place now in the occupied territories and in parts of Gaza is a second Nakba ... A Palestinian state must be established and the only way to achieve this, I think, is to apply sanctions against Israel, against the leaders who oppose it and against the settlers."
On Wednesday, Schocken clarified his remarks. "Given the reactions to my labeling Palestinians who commit acts of terror as freedom fighters, I have reconsidered my words. Many freedom fighters around the world and throughout history, possibly even those who fought for Israel's establishment, committed terrible acts of terrorism, harming innocent people to achieve their goals.
"I should have said: freedom fighters, who also resort to terror tactics - which must be combated. The use of terror is not legitimate."
"As for Hamas, they are not freedom fighters as their ideology essentially states, 'It's all ours, others should leave.' I have stated, though not in the conference speech but in an article, that the organizers and perpetrators of the October 7 attacks should be severely punished.
Schocken added, "There are Palestinian freedom fighters who do not use terrorism. Mahmoud Abbas, upon assuming his role as head of the Palestinian Authority, declared his decision to renounce terror and pursue only a diplomatic path. Perhaps for this reason, Netanyahu avoided establishing a relationship with him and chose Hamas instead.
"In my speech, I reiterated what I have written in several articles during the war: Israel's long-term victory will be achieved through the release of all hostages and the establishment of a Palestinian state, ending both apartheid and terrorism.
"My speech in London concluded with this: Zionism is still a justified idea for the Jewish people, but the conduct of successive Israeli governments have distorted its meaning beyond recognition. Israel needs to be put back on to the right path."
Channel 14's broadcast omitted the first part of Schocken's statement: "If we want to ensure Israel's survival and security, and also to help the normalization of the lives of the Palestinian, our neighbors, [a Palestinian state must be established]."
In a proposal Karhi's office submitted on Thursday, the minister requested that "the government shall not enter into new contracts with Haaretz, including individual subscriptions for state employees, nor renew any existing contracts; all current agreements with Haaretz, including personal subscriptions, will be canceled as legally feasible. The Government Advertising Bureau shall direct Haaretz to cease all advertisements, including statutory notices, regardless of payment status, and seek refunds for any existing payments. No further ads shall be placed in the publication."
Karhi's current proposal is identical to the one submitted to Cabinet Secretary Yossi Fuchs on November 23, 2023. At the time, Karhi accused Haaretz of "defeatist, false propaganda" during wartime.
The proposal also stipulates that "the government, its ministries, employees, and all state-funded entities, shall not be in contact in any way with Haaretz, including through subscriptions."
His proposal noted, "Since the beginning of the war, numerous complaints have accused Haaretz of adopting a harmful stance, undermining the war's objectives and weakening both our military efforts and social resilience. Some publications may even cross the criminal threshold defined in sections of the penal code, reserved exclusively for wartime. Although the criminality of its publications is being examined by the relevant authorities, it should be noted that Haaretz is generously funded by the Israeli public through government-purchased advertisements and subscriptions."
The proposal was submitted without a legal opinion from the attorney general, who is expected to oppose it.
On Thursday, Interior Ministry Director-General Ronen Peretz instructed his office's media and communications department to immediately halt all advertisements and collaborations with Haaretz, either directly or through the Government Advertising Bureau.
Peretz wrote, "These remarks provoke revulsion and reflect a severe detachment from core values, especially at a time when Israel is engaged in a just war following Hamas' deadly October 7 attack. Given the seriousness of these remarks ... we cannot and do not intend to remain silent in the face of harm to IDF soldiers and the state's efforts to protect its citizens."
Similarly, the mayor of Nesher, a city in northern Israel, wrote on X, "I have instructed the city spokesperson and treasurer to stop any advertisements in Haaretz or any publication associated with it. Only a consumer boycott, using public funds, will be effective."
Attorney Michael Sfard told Haaretz that the government-led actions are illegal. "Advertising budgets belong to the public; Karhi and [Interior Minister] Moshe Arbel cannot distribute them as they please. These are brazen attempts to deny budgets to Haaretz for ideological reasons, and they aren't even trying to hide the illegality. This is a blatant example of discrimination based on political views and the politicization of public resources to silence a political camp and delegitimize leftist discourse. Mr. Schocken's remarks are familiar in left-wing discourse."
Sfard, representing the organizations Zulat, the Movement for Fair Regulation, and the Democratic Bloc in their call for a criminal investigation into Channel 14 for incitement to genocide and war crimes against Palestinians, added, "For some reason, Channel 14 isn't on Israel's sanctions list, despite broadcasting criminal statements that Israel has pledged to investigate and address before the International Court of Justice in The Hague."
In response to Schocken's remarks, Justice Minister Yariv Levin sent a letter on Thursday to Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, requesting legislation to limit freedom of speech.
"I ask that you urgently provide me with a draft law stipulating that actions by Israeli citizens to promote or encourage international sanctions on Israel, its leaders, security forces, and citizens shall constitute a criminal offense punishable by ten years in prison," he wrote.
Levin added, "I further request that such an offense during wartime be considered an aggravating circumstance, allowing for the penalty to be doubled." Levin also wrote that "Calls for sanctions against Israel … constitute a severe breach of the fundamental duty of loyalty of a citizen toward their country. Such actions promote a course intended to deprive Israel of its right to self-defense."
The decades-long battle for Palestinian freedom is among the most just struggles in the world today. The means that some of them employ are among the most heinous.
The means that Israel employs against them are equaly and sometimes even more heinous, certainly in quantitative terms.
The Palestinians use abhorrent terrorism as a means to a just end and, in the case of Hezbollah and Hamas, also towards ends that are manifestly unjust; those of religious fundamentalism. Terrorism is a weapon of the weak and desperate, which does not necessarily give it legitimacy.
Israel uses its formidable military power to suppress their rights and their resistance. The fact that it does this by means of an army, not a terrorist organization, does not make its actions legitimate. Most of its actions in the past year were not legitimate.
Recent remarks by Haaretz's publisher, Amos Schocken, entered this picture – which in my view is clear and not at all complex – and set off a storm. His subsequent clarification, stating that Hamas does not belong to the category of freedom fighters, should have calmed the storm. But there are those who seek to heighten it.
There are those who seek to take revenge on Haaretz and want to see it shut down. The last established media outlet reporting the whole truth, especially over the past year, irritates many, and now they have an opportunity to retaliate.
But the criticism of Schocken's statement crossed ideological lines. Among the right, which would like to see a state with one TV channel and one newspaper under close supervision, there are also many in the opposing camp who were upset by the term "Palestinian freedom fighters." That's where the debate should be.
Ravit Hecht wrote that it is not only Benjamin Netanyahu's Israel that calls those who commit crimes against humanity terrorists. "We, the opponents of Kahanism and the government of Jewish supremacy, call them that. Because that is what they are."
But crimes against humanity are now being committed by both sides. In view of what is happening in Gaza and the West Bank, no one can deny this anymore. Is Israel a terrorist state? The measures that Israel takes do not abrogate its right to defend itself.
It has this right, but it has no right to utilize the means it is employing. Palestinians have a right to fight for their rights and their liberty, and they must not commit crimes against humanity. Hecht's definition of her camp as "the opponents of Kahanism and the government of Jewish supremacy" also blemishes the truth and beautifies Israel's center left. Israel has never had a government that is not a government of Jewish supremacy, because it has never had a government that is not Zionist.
Hecht and that camp which agrees with her err in their basic stance toward the occupation and Zionism. This is how Hecht describes the situation: "Yes, Israeli security forces have been harassing innocent Palestinians … includ[ing] minors ... as part of the tragic reality of controlling another people."
It is the security forces that are harassing, not the entire State of Israel; "often," instead of "always." This is the essence of the center left's cloying "how beautiful we are." It's the "security forces" who harass, as if they were a separate, independent entity rather than the heroes and the sacred cows of all Israelis, especially in the center left.
The truth is that we all, down to the very last leftist, are culpable, because it is not the security forces who are harassing but rather the State of Israel; and not "often" but always, by the very definition of occupation. Hecht and her ilk still believe in an enlightened occupation.
If only the security forces would harass a little less often, everything would be fine. But there is no occupation without harassment. Harassment is the essence of the occupation. An occupation of this kind provokes resistance. There has never been an occupation that did not provoke resistance. This resistance is called a struggle for freedom, and no struggle could be more just. It has no other name.
on November 3, 2024, 10:30 am