As incitement to hatred and violence, this is relatively good and probably effective:
Throwing stones is the birthright and duty of anyone subject to foreign rule. Throwing stones is an action as well as a metaphor of resistance. Persecution of stone-throwers, including 8-year-old children, is an inseparable part − though it’s not always spelled out − of the job requirements of the foreign ruler, no less than shooting, torture, land theft, restrictions on movement, and the unequal distribution of water sources. …
Even if it is a right and duty, various forms of steadfastness and resisting the foreign regime, as well as its rules and limitations, should be taught and developed. Limitations could include the distinction between civilians and those who carry arms, between children and those in uniform, as well as the failures and narrowness of using weapons. …
So why are such classes [in 'resistance'] absent from the Palestinian curriculum? Part of the explanation lies with the opposition of the donor states and Israel’s punitive measures. But it is also due to inertia, laziness, flawed reasoning, misunderstanding and the personal gains of some parts of society. In fact the rationale for the existence of the Palestinian Authority engendered one basic rule in the last two decades − adaptation to the existing situation. Thus, a contradiction and a clash have been created between the inner syntax of the Palestinian Authority and that of the Palestinian people.
So someone is criticizing the PA, the Oslo-created ‘government’ of the Palestinian Arabs, for not doing a good enough job of encouraging them to throw stones at Jews.
Throwing stones — which are sometimes cement blocks or rocks as big as a person’s head — can have and has had deadly results. But the writer of the piece above, knowing this, believes that it is a “right and a duty.”
The implication is that murder is also a right and duty in these circumstances.
Stone-throwing is a perfect form of ‘resistance’ for ‘Palestinians’ since it is actually a traditional Muslim response to the presence of Jews, ‘occupiers’ or not. Daled Amos writes,
Keep in mind the long history of Arabs throwing rocks at Jews. In Jews and Arabs: Their Contacts Through the Ages, S. D. Goitein wrote in 1955:
In former times–and in remote places even today–it was common for Muslim schoolboys to stone Jews. When the Turks conquered Yemen in 1872, an envoy was sent from the Chief Rabbi of Istanbul to inquire what grievance the Yemenite Jews had against their neighbors. It is indicative that the first thing of which they complained was this molestation by the schoolboys. But when the Turkish Governor asked an assembly of notables to stop this nuisance,there arose an old doctor of Muslim law and explained that this stone-throwing at Jews was an age-old custom (in Arabic ‘Ada) and therefore it was unlawful to forbid it. [p. 76]
You might think that the person who wrote the original text, which is critical of the PA and which appeals to the Seventh Century sensibilities of radical Muslims, is a member of Hamas.
Nope. As you probably know already, the person calling for more rocks to be thrown through the windshields of Jewish vehicles as the “birthright and duty” of Palestinian Arabs, is Amira Hass, a Jewish employee of the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz.
Along with the ideological bent of editorialists like Hass, Ha’aretz manipulates straight news as well. Although its Hebrew print edition has a very small circulation in Israel, it has a large and popular English website, which is fine-tuned to mislead its worldwide audience of diplomats and media people:
Close reading of both print editions over the course of years has revealed an ongoing pattern. In preparation for the English edition, the Hebrew articles (most Ha’aretz stories are written first in Hebrew) are not merely translated – they’re often also whitewashed. In sometimes dramatic and sometimes subtle cases, time and again, information appearing in the Hebrew original concerning Palestinian militancy, violence and other Arab wrongdoing is downplayed or omitted entirely. In some instances, the English account is completely at odds with the original Hebrew. — CAMERA
This time they have gone too far. By publishing this straightforward piece of incitement, Ha’aretz and Hass have crossed over from ordinary propaganda to incitement to murder. Some Israelis agree, and have filed a complaint with the police.
Ha’aretz does a huge amount of damage, and should be closed down.