Peace activist’s home vandalized with death threats: Harriet Sherwood blames Bibi


The following is a perfect illustration of the endemic anti-Israel journalistic bias which can frame any anti-social behavior by Israelis as an indication of systemic oppression.

Harriet Sherwood’s latest post, “Israeli peace activist’s home vandalised with death threats and swastikas“, Guardian, Nov. 8, reports on threatening graffiti on the home of an Israeli peace activist.

The phrases “price tag” and “Rabin is waiting for you” were spray-painted on Tuesday near the residence of Peace Now official Hagit Ofran.

Tuesday evening marks the Jewish anniversary of prime minister Rabin’s assassination.

The vandals wrote “Hagit Ofran – zal (of blessed memory)” and “Givat Assaf” – an illegal outpost in the West Bank slated for evacuation by the State. The Israeli right have been protesting against the planned razing of a number of illegal outposts.

While such behavior is, of course, morally reprehensible, Sherwood’s characterization of the event is hysterical, and simply classic Guardian. 

First, there’s this gratuitous photo of an angry PM Netanyahu brought back into service after previously being used in an August post.

Then, after describing the events, which Israeli police are investigating, Sherwood pivots to her desired narrative. 

Sherwood quotes a representative from Peace Now directly blaming Netanyahu for the attacks, and then adds:

“The attack came as Netanyahu announced he was supporting two parliamentary bills to curtail the foreign funding of Israeli human rights organisations. Groups targeted by the bills have said the legislative move is an attempt to silence them and restrict their work.”

As I noted the last time Sherwood tried desperately to connect unrelated phenomena, in a report on anti-BDS legislation, the bills in question don’t curtail funding, but merely require that foreign funds to NGOs be reported - similar to such requirements in the U.S. – and certainly don’t, in any manner, “silence” them or “restrict” their work in the least.

Sherwood concludes:

“A human rights worker who asked not to be named said: “There is a public atmosphere of trying to stop human rights activity.” 

I suppose we’re to take from this that the human rights worker was afraid for his or her life.

More likely, the activist knew that such an allegation flies in the face of an Israeli society where human rights work is ubiquitous and robust; where their message is amplified by a free press; and where such activists can engage in their work without fear.  Indeed, suggestions to the contrary can not be taken seriousy by anyone who actually lives in the state.  

Further, it’s diffiuclt not to contextualize Sherwood’s shoddy causation with her dearth of similar narratives relating to the cause of Palestinian terrorism.

Sherwood, for some reason, didn’t note that a day before the Fogel family massacre - in which five Israeli civilians, including 3 children, were murdered in their home – the Palestinian Authority honored Ahlam Tamimi, the accomplice who led the suicide terrorist to the Jerusalem Sbarro’s in August, 2001.  Fifteen people were murdered in the attack, 7 of them children. 

Of course, the glorification of terrorists by Palestinian society is nothing new, nor is the obvious connection between such honor bestowed upon those who murder innocent Israelis and continuing acts of such terrorism.

The deadly effects of routine Palestinian incitement is not surprising or new unless, of course, your view of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict is shaped by the reports of Harriet Sherwood.   

22 comments on “Peace activist’s home vandalized with death threats: Harriet Sherwood blames Bibi

  1. This is even more twisted that usual. The photo caption states that “Peace group Peace Now blames the policies of prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu for the attacks carried out by extremist settlers in revenge for moves to demolish unauthorised West bank outposts.”

    So the logic is this:
    – The “peace activists” endlessly campaign against the “settlements”.
    – The Israeli Prime Minister declares the intention to dismantle some of these settlements
    – “Extremist settlers” carry out a reprehensible attack on a “peace activist’s” home
    – Said peace activiest” blame Netanyahu for having a policy that they have campaigned for!

    You couldn’t make it up…

    … but Harriett could!

  2. the bills in question don’t curtail funding, but merely require that foreign funds to NGOs be reported

    Why the new legislation now? Surely it’s not a move against NGOs that are critical of Israeli policy?

    • pretzelberg, I was about to post this as fitting for Harriet Hen’s falseness. Now I have to wonder about you.

      The louder [s]he talked of [her],,, honor, the faster we counted our spoons

      Emerson
      American Civilization

        • Try a wikileak:

          http://www.cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=10TELAVIV439

          And perhaps consider this post from a CiF thread you contributed to:

          RumRiver
          7 November 2011 12:21PM

          Opposition to the existence of an Israeli state is based on the belief that the “Palestinians” are a worthy race, and the Jews are not. It would be a matter of one nationalism versus another nationalism, except that Jewish nationalism exists and has concrete achievements. “The Palestinian nation” remains theoretical, unable to define its own population, territory, or political and social values, and unable to form a constructive consensus around matters of national urgency. The only points upon which “Palestinians” have demonstrated agreement and agency, are in committing acts of violence against Jews. (Jews, not Israelis.)

          In the Guardian narrative, Jewish achievement is denied and “Palestinians” are suffused with sentimental claptrap. It’s difficult to see, how this is not antisemitism, or something very like it.

          Now, if you wish to support Israel, why not try to see “things as they are”?

          Israel doesn’t legislate out of vindictiveness and in my opinion legislates against enemies far less than it should. See:

          http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/08/belgium-taxpayer-funds-used-to-finance-anti-israel-ngos.html

          …including comments.

          • Spell it out, Ariadne.

            You replied to my post – but without answering my question.

            Why a new law that is obviously aimed at NGOs who criticise Israeli policy?

            • You made up that last sentence, pretzelberg. Not just put some truth into words. Why jump to a conclusion? Do the reading.

              Here’s zamalek from the same CiF thread. He states facts beautifully:

              zamalek
              7 November 2011
              10:00AM

              Stopping references to Jewish chosen-ness, money or power – that’s the easy bit.
              What I object to is the Guardian’s reporting on Israel through bias by omission, decontextualisation or by reporting outright lies as truth.

              The Palestinian cause is built on antisemitism – either you have the outright genocidal bigotry of Hamas, as expressed in its charter, or you have the duplicitous bigotry of the Palestinian Authority, which has the same objective – the end of Israel – but internationally presents a ‘moderate’ face. Yet it has no intention of recognising Israel as a Jewish state and incites its own people to murder Jews and names public stadia and squares after terrorists. This incitement woefully under-reported, leading to distorted perceptions among observers of the conflict.

              The Guardian does readers no favours by encouraging the appeasement of Hamas, downplaying the antisemitism of the Palestinian Authority, and completely ignoring the Arab antisemitsm that caused a greater refugee problem than the Palestinian.

              It also feeds in to the trope that Jews are European colonialists by ignoring the fact that half of Israel’s Jews descend from refugees from Arab and Muslim lands. We never hear their voices or their ‘narrative’ .

              http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/06/averting-accusations-of-antisemitism-guardian?commentpage=2#start-of-comments

              • You made up that last sentence, pretzelberg.

                How so?

                And why repost that particular CiF comment?

                It concludes with “the trope that Jews are European colonialists”.

                You know that I abhor such tropes.

  3. Peace Now….Now needs Harriet Sherwood to protect them.Peace Now an organization that is financed and cheered by groups and governments who are hostile to Israel,is now having the racist rag the Guardian and Harriet Sherwood coming to their rescue………..

    • Steven Plaut is very funny on Peace Now. There was another lot who forged documents to take land from Israel and give it to Arabs but I forget which. There are so many.

  4. It would be nice if frontpage were to include Harriet Sherwood in its gallery of Monsters and Gargoyles –

    Voices of Palestine

    Here is Haj Amin al-Husseini:

    http://frontpagemag.com/2011/11/08/voices-of-palestine-haj-amin-al-husseini/

    Open quote: Appointed Mufti of Jerusalem by the British High Commissioner in May 1921, Haj Amin al-Husseini was the founder of the Palestinian Arab movement. He relied upon virulent anti-Jewish incitement to garner popular support. endquote.

  5. Tuesday evening marks the Jewish anniversary of prime minister Rabin’s assassination.

    A “Jewish anniversary”?

    • Yes, Pretz. The “secular” anniversary was on 4 November. Tonight is the “Jewish” anniversary, the day in the Jewish calendar (yahrtzeit) that corresponds with the day he was assassinated.

      So “Jewish anniversary” is accurate in this case.

  6. Pingback: Harriet Sherwood, and the Guardian’s strange fixation on the survival of one Jerusalem bookshop | My Blog

Comments are closed.