June 20, 2014
Chessler on the 7th Day of Captivity For Three Israeli Teens
It bothers my that my friend Phyllis believes people in the US think, "From their point of view, Israel’s very existence is, allegedly, a colonialist crime..."
For this I am often cursed as a Zionist or a Jew by those online who hate the Jews and support their kidnapping and murder. As a not very good Baptist, its an honor to be cursed by such folks, its reassuring to know that Jewish scripture confirms I'll be on the right side of history.
I feel that all Christians are blessed through the Jews, its through them that we know the word of God and through them that Jesus came to this Earth, so that not only they but all of us could be saved, could come to know the Lord.
So today this blog belongs to Phyllis and Israel, we pray that the missing boys Eyal Yifrach, Gilad Shaar and Naftali Fraenkel are released safely and without condition.
Phyllis Chesler: This is the seventh day of captivity for the three kidnapped Israeli teenagers. Some well-meaning Jews have already compared them to the mainly Christian girls in Nigeria who were also captured by Islamist terrorists. The girls were taken on April 15th and have, so far, been in captivity for sixty-six days.My apologies to our greatest ally in the Middle East for not giving this issue a top place on our blog earlier. And may God, "bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee". And may we never forgot that it is through Israel that we are all blessed.
No one is condemning the smirking epidemic of three fingered salutes by Palestinian children. Each finger stands for one of the kidnapped boys and they are mocking the Jews and celebrating the kidnapping. An entire next generation of Palestinian children are being spoiled, destroyed, taught to glorify hate, cruelty, violence, and death.
As to the media: On June 18, 2014, the New York Times had the strangest, spookiest placement for their coverage of the Prayer Vigils held in New York City for Eyal, Gilad and Naftali. It appeared on page A24—opposite the Obituaries of a novelist, a children’s book editor, and a copy-writer. I was quite taken aback. This coverage might have appeared in the City section or perhaps as news, earlier on. It was a fairly sympathetic piece; is this the reason that editors placed it among the Obituaries? Is it entirely coincidental, accidental, or is someone assuming, even actually wishing that these boys are dead? What other rational explanation can there be for such a bizarre placement?