Indeed, to be precise in the data.
The tension between the detractors of the legal revolution and its supporters, and the extensive preoccupation with the issue, bring to the air large amounts of various historical distortions, most of which relate to comparisons between the current crisis and previous crises.
Last Saturday, Shalom Kitel interviewed Brigadier General Harel Knafo, a member of the Security Movement, which supports the annexation of the West Bank to Israel, in Network B's "Yoman HaShavu" newspaper. Knafo compared the conflict, which is taking place against the background of the legislative tsunami, to a withdrawal The one-sidedness of Ariel Sharon from the Gaza Strip, with the aim of convincing that when the left makes controversial decisions, the right behaves nicely and reconciles with them.
Kittel sought to defend the historical truth and said that it was precisely the right that decided on the full withdrawal from Gaza.
Kanafo, who during his military career also served as the commander of the Inter-Services Command and Staff College, and therefore could be expected to know the modern history of Israel, immediately announced that Sharon was not the head of the Likud when the IDF withdrew from the Gaza Strip, but the head of the party he founded after abandoning the Likud - "Go ahead." Kittel, who is not a Kenyan Katla, tried to stand his ground, but the interviewer reprimanded him, and even added a military-something rebuke: "You have to be accurate with the data." Kittel decided not to continue the confrontation.
Well, Mr. Knafo, here are the figures:
• Prime Minister Sharon announced his intention to unilaterally withdraw from the Gaza Strip on December 18, 2003 (in April 2004 he explained, in an interview with the "New York Times", that he did so when he saw the public support for the Geneva initiative, in which a group proposed of dozens of senior Israelis and Palestinians a detailed permanent arrangement. Sharon opposed the Geneva initiative, and decided to propose his own plan).
• On May 2, 2004, the withdrawal plan from Gaza was put to a referendum among Likud members.
59.5 percent of Likud members opposed the withdrawal, and only 39.7 percent supported it.
• Sharon decided to ignore the non-binding results.
• The "World Headquarters for the Salvation of the People and the Land" led a fierce struggle against the withdrawal, which included a call to refuse the order, and organized demonstrations with many participants against it.
The headquarters also demanded that the Attorney General prosecute Sharon, using the "law for prosecuting Nazis and their aides", and after the evacuation began a campaign called "We will not forget and we will not forgive".
• The process of disengagement, which included the complete evacuation of the IDF from the Strip and the destruction of all settlements in it, lasted from August 15, 2005 to September 11 of the same year.
• On November 21, 2005, Sharon retired from Likud and founded Kadima.
To the knowledge of the one who was the former commander of the IDF College: 1. The behavior of the right in the case of the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza was really not an example of contentment with sticking to the rules of the game. 2. Fortunately it was the Likud, led by Sharon, who led the decision. 3. It was expected of you to know that.
the wonder drug.
Supporters of the death penalty for terrorists have always waved it as a response to the erosion of security.
Filled with Jewish morality (remember the "deadly Sanhedrin", if it orders the death penalty once every 70 years?), filled with the continuous opposition of all security forces, out of the estimation that in the period of time between the decision on the punishment and the execution, efforts will be made to kidnap Israeli hostages ( Remember the kidnapping of the British sergeants, in 1947, by the IDF in order to obtain amnesty for three condemned to death?) But the promise to the voter must come true!
The fact that irresponsible candidates throw out, before the elections, in the heat of the competition between the parties, promises whose fulfillment will cost the Israeli economy huge sums that were not considered at the time they were promised, and security risks that were not considered, is more important than any other consideration.
The human right to life may be trampled as part of the crazy wave of legislation to distance us from the democratic countries in the West, and from the Israeli uniqueness in the Middle East.
were we wrong
We will fix it!
If you found an error in the article, we would appreciate it if you shared it with us