Weekend comment by Mike Adams.
None whatsoever. Despite this, Associate Editor Michael White in the British newspaper, The Guardian, made the following comment during a discussion on BBC Radio London’s Breakfast Show last Sunday concerning the physical vulnerability of political leaders:
«In Israel they murder each other a great deal. The Israeli Defence Forces murder people because they don’t like their political style and what they’ve got to say and it only means that people more extreme come in and take their place».
In a comment to the recent attack on Berlusconi White had said:
«We don’t want to encourage worse things that people sometimes do to political leaders – a great deal of anger… The awful truth is that you can’t guarantee to protect a leader in a free society – even if you had Soviet-style security or Hitlerite security».
He then referred to a breach in “Hitlerite security” when one of Hitler’s henchmen, Richard Heydrich, was assassinated in Prague. He was governor of Bohemia and Moravia, the de facto military dictator. This same Heydrich chaired the 1942 Wannsee Conference, which discussed plans for the deportation and extermination of all Jews in German-occupied territory. Heydrich was ordered by Hermann Göring to arrange the “Final Solution”.
«Hitler himself was, as everybody knows, nearly killed. That’s an extreme example. It’s an impossible thing…»
«He didn’t finish the sentence making you wonder why he chose Hitler and his SS Butcher of Prague» as examples of leaders that at one time needed protection and suffered as a result.
White talked about one of the good thing about The Troubles in Northern Ireland was that the leaders and their supporters «didn’t take to murdering each other in a serious way in knocking off their leaders» and that now they’re sitting in Government. White then proceeded to make the following statement:
«In Israel they murder each other a great deal. The Israeli Defence Forces murder people because they don’t like their political style and what they’ve got to say and it only means that people more extreme come in and take their place». The BBC presenter grunted to show her approval.
Why the non-related lunging out at Israel?
I’ve been grappling with that and I put forward the following suggestion: «product placement». This term is well known from the film industry; sponsored products are featured in films as mini-ads. I fear that Michael White is «sponsoring» an anti-Semite stance in stating that even the best of security systems cf. Hitler’s SS who presided «The Final Solution» could have its flaws. The «eye-opener» comes when The Guardian’s Political Editor accuses the Israeli Defence Forces of killing people simply because of political non-correctness. This is a gross injustice to the foremost protectors of the peace and eradicators of terrorism in Israel.