James sent me this: "Have
you noticed that the killing of Mohammed Abu Khdeir is always “in retaliation
for” the killing of Naftali Frenkel, Gilad Shaer, and Eyal Yifrah, but the
killing of the last three is never “in retaliation for” the killing of
Nadeem Nouwarah and Muhammad Mahmoud Salameh, and the wounding of Mohammad Mahmoud
Odeh Salameh?
Zionists still think they get to say when history begins and ends.
It’s
the same way Usama and Mustafa Muamar remain completely unknown to Americans,
though they were civilians kidnapped from Palestine the day before Tank Sgt.
Gilad Shalit was captured in retaliation. To his credit, Noam Chomsky said “The
steady drumbeat of accusations about the capture of Shalit is, again, blatant
hypocrisy, even putting aside Israel's long history of kidnapping. In this
case, the hypocrisy could not be more glaring. One day before Hamas captured
Shalit, Israeli soldiers entered Gaza City and kidnapped two civilians, the
Muamar brothers, bringing them to Israel to join the thousands of other
prisoners held there, hundreds reportedly without charge. Kidnapping civilians
is a far more serious crime than capturing a soldier of an attacking army, but
as is the norm, it was barely reported in contrast to the furor over Shalit” ("Exterminate all the
Brutes": Gaza 2009 ").
And of
course, when any mainstream USA newspaper ever says “Palestinian military
action X was in retaliation for
the illegal Israeli occupation and ethnic cleansing of Palestine,” I promise to
drop dead on the spot."
