Suddenly, this week the "T" word appears on Haaretz' front page
AH, Haaretz, the Palestinian newspaper printed in Hebrew, the daily whose idea of journalistic "pluralism" is based on Brezhnev's Pravda, the newspaper in which Israel (and America) are always wrong and the Islamofascists are always right, the newspaper of Post-Zionism and Post-Judaism, where Israeli survival is an archaic idea whose time has past.

 

Haaretz, or Al-Ard in Arabic, has for many years adopted the quaint custom of anti-Semitic newspapers elsewhere in referring to suicide bombers and mass murderers of Jews as "activists" and "militants."  You know, like the people who march to defend the self-esteem of dolphins.  Yet suddenly, this week the "T" word appears on Haaretz' front page. "T" as in terrorist.

 

How come? Well, the news story concerns Eden Natan-Zada, a mentally ill Israeli soldier (actually a deserter) who shot up Shfaram in October 2005 and killed several Druse and Arabs. Shfaram is about 40 minutes outside Haifa. He was then attacked by locals in the crowd who lynched him, killing him.

 

Ever since, the Israeli Attorney General's office has been mulling over whether to prosecute the members of the mob who killed the by-then-disarmed Natan-Zada. This week, the prosecution decided not to prosecute. Every second word referring to Natan-Zada in the Haaretz articles about the decision refers to him as a "terrorist." He of course was not, although he was a killer, and probably was not legally sane.

 

This is newsworthy because there have been cases in which Arab terrorists were apprehended live after they murdered Jews and who were then summarily executed by those who captured them. In every one of these cases, those who dispatched the terrorhoids were prosecuted. The most famous incident being the Bus 300 affair.

 

Now after the Natan-Zada incident, I called for the prosecution NOT to indict those who killed the perp. I also insisted that killing terrorists should never be considered a crime, even when Jews kill captured Arab terrorists, and that the decision not to prosecute Natan-Zada should be regarded as case precedent for ALL who kill terrorists, even when the lynchers are Jews. I thought that those who executed the terrorists in the Bus 300 affair should have been given medals. I am all in favor of lynching terrorists captured immediately after they commit mass murder.

 

Now Haaretz is also in favor of such lynching, but only when the perp is a Jew and the victims Arabs. Haaretz is NEVER in favor of punishing Arab terrorists who murder Jews, and of course opposes the death penalty for Arab terrorists.

 

Which brings us to the Haaretz editorial in the very same issue (June 16) in which it cheers the decision by the AG not to indict the killers of Natan-Zada.

 

In the very same issue, it runs an editorial demanding that a Jewish farmer in the Negev who shot Arab burglars who had broken into his small ranch be indicted! In January 2007 one Shai Dromi shot two Arabs who had broken into his homestead, trying to steal his sheep, and he killed one and injured the other.

 

The Attorney General prosecuted him. The Knesset decided to take an uncharacteristic stand against this case of prosecutorial politization and judicial tyranny by starting to pass (it already passed its "first reading") a special law, known in the media as the Shai Dromi Law, declaring that people who kill or injure burglars and intruders into their homes will not be prosecuted. The farm lobby took time off from lobbying for cheap water and subsidies to back the bill.

 

Haaretz of course is outraged! This law would be nothing less than a "license to kill." What about their Miranda rights?

 

I cite the editorial:

 

 

So when is it okay in Haaretz' opinion to kill intruders? When they are Jewish "intruders" in "Palestinian lands," of course!