Larry Derfner, days after innocent Israeli civilians were murdered by terrorists near Eilat, wrote, on his personal blog, that such attacks on Israelis are a justifiable weapon for Palestinians to employ in order to overcome the “occupation.” Derfner wrote:
“Whoever the Palestinians were who killed the eight Israelis near Eilat last week, however vile the ideology was, they were justified to attack.”
“Terrorism in the face of a rejectionist Israeli government is justified.”
Derfner was soon fired by the Jerusalem Post, and I began wondering how long it would take before the Guardian found a way to express their support for the terrorist supporting Israeli.
While there hasn’t yet been a pro-Derfner piece at CiF or the Guardian, in today’s edition the Guardian’s veteran journalist (and currently CiF editor) Brian Whitaker featured a column by Derfner recently published in the Lebanese Daily Star, under Whitaker’s “Best Blogs and Analysis from the Middle East”. (Lower right corner of this page)
Here’s the Daily Star essay by Derfner highlighted by Whitaker, which predictably blames Israel, and the Israel lobby in the U.S., for the absence of peace between Israel and the Palestinians, but, by Derfner’s standards of “rattling the cage”, isn’t especially controversial.
Also, of note. Derfner is also now a contributor to the far left site, +972.
You’ll recall our Twitter exchange with another +972 contributor, Yossi Gurvitz, which revealed the radical left Israeli to share the views of many prolific anti-Zionists. As I wrote at the time:
Gurvitz does not conceive of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. He believes the creation of Israel was mistake and denies the existence of the Jewish people, a view shaped by theories made popular in anti-Zionist circles by the notorious Shlomo Sand (author of “The Invention of the Jewish People“)…He also views Judaism as a “primitive religion” that’s incompatible with democracy.
Indeed, in the Arab media and the radical Israeli post-Zionist left, Derfner has seemed to have finally found his true ideological home.
Could his ‘Comment is Free’ commentary be too far off?