Independent

Indy fails to challenge Hanan Ashrawi’s claim she’s always rejected violence


An article today in the Independent focusing on the decision by US officials to deny Hanan Ashrawi’s request to visit the country noted the following response on Twitter by the veteran Palestinian official.

The Indy journalist didn’t challenge Ashrawi’s assertion that she’s “always been an ardent supporter of nonviolence resistance”, a claim which doesn’t withstand scrutiny.

  • In November of 2000, she endorsed the murder of Israeli soldiers and civilian settlers, stating that “the army of occupation and the settlers have become legitimate and select targets of Palestinian resistance.” (AP, November 15, 2000). 
  • During the same interview, she justified the savage lynching of two Israeli soldiers by Palestinians in Ramallah.
  • When asked in 2001 to comment on the latest deadly Palestinian terror attacks against Israelis, Ashrawi said (on the PA’s Voice of Palestine, Sept. 9, 2001) that “The only language Sharon understands is the language of violence.” 
  • In 2004, during an interview with PBS, Ashrawi was asked if she condemns all Palestinian violence, and she asserted that “You cannot tell the Palestinians, you mustn’t resort to any kind of violence, whatever including self-defense”.
  • In 2007, during a speech at Emory University in Atlanta, Ashrawi appeared to defend the terror group Hezbollah.

Let’s also remember also that Ashrawi was a minister under the government of terror mastermind Yasser Arafat.

Though, especially in recent years, Ashrawi has often expressed support for non-violence, at least during interviews with Western media outlets, her claim that she’s “always” supported only non-violence is clearly not accurate. 

Related Articles

11 replies »

  1. Typical Islamofascist – says one thing in English and the exact opposite in Arabic. Then knows that even if the truth gets out, the lamestream media will never cover the facts.

    • Only problem with that characterization, Maccabee, is the Ashrawi is a Christian. I; would underline that this is the only problem. Christian antisemitism and hypocrisy in the middle east is nothing new.

  2. The only statement that is somewhat ambiguous is the 2004 PBS interview reference to “self-defense,” but as it also must be scrutinized in context it’s hardly unfair to include it. She evidently did not continue to explicitly condemn unprovoked attacks, correct?

  3. Arab leaders make a practice of talking nice to western media, saying what leftist leaders want to hear, and something completely different to other Arabs i.e, “kill, kill, kill.” Arafat was adept at that.

  4. Arab leaders make a practice of talking nice to western media, saying what leftists want to hear, and something completely different to other Arabs i.e, “kill, kill, kill.” Arafat was adept at that.

  5. She’s awful, a double-talking propagandist and liar. It is a pleasure not to have her in the United States. No one needs to hear her faux humanitarian schtick one more time.