Revenge, Havat Gilad style

Last week, a shock occurred in the coalition, as well as in the media and among its propagandists: quite coincidentally, the British 'Telegraph' (identified with the right) chose to headline an article about Yair Golan with a statement of his from May 2025 ('A sane country does not kill babies as a hobby'), which was distorted from the start as if it were an official image of the Prime Minister and his wife. The condemnations flowed like water, describing an event ranging from 'terrible damage' to an 'international terror attack.' Well, it sounds like the way Israelis contribute to the country's image in the British media is an important topic. If so, one must address the article that made waves over the weekend: Yehuda Shimon, a resident of Havat Gilad, was interviewed by BBC correspondent Lucy Williamson, justified acts of revenge against Palestinians, and told her in general terms what should be done in response to the death of an Israeli: 'We need to kill all the people in the (villages of) Tal and Al-Sara, even Jit and Far'ata.' Assuming that 'all the people' is not a figure of speech, we have before us a proposal to kill babies not as a 'hobby' but as a worldview. When Williamson asked Shimon to clarify if he expects a death ratio of thousands of Palestinians for every Jew, he determined that her calculation was fundamentally wrong: 'One Jewish life — that is ten million (Palestinians).' Now one can understand why over the weekend even a nine-year-old boy (!) from the village of Al-Mughayyir was allegedly wounded by gunfire from a soldier on leave, who arrived along with settlers in the area: after all, ten million is a fairly high bar, and no one is spared along the way. Since the BBC is not a local newspaper, Shimon's racist remarks (only a few of which were brought here) caused havoc in the media and on networks, and this is despite the fact that the reporter actually took the trouble to clarify that many Israelis reject them. It can be argued, and rightly so, that Shimon's public weight is not as important as that of Golan, a party leader and former Deputy Chief of Staff. However, he is also not an esoteric factor on the delusional fringes of the discourse: just last week, for example, Shimon was visited by a 'dear friend, an old friend,' as he defined MK Matan Kahana from the opposition. Kahana arrived at Havat Gilad following the severe fire that occurred there, which also consumed Shimon's house. By the way, it is interesting if Kahana, from Gadi Eizenkot's party, is bothered by an incident from five years ago, in which it was claimed that Shimon attacked the then-commander of the Golani reconnaissance unit, Lieutenant Colonel Ayoub Kayouf. Matan Kahana, like Naftali Bennett, mobilized in favor of Havat Gilad not only for reasons of human solidarity with a community that underwent a shock, but to prove to the deep right that he is still flesh of their flesh despite sitting in a coalition with Ra'am. This, of course, will not bring even a quarter of a vote from there or even slightly calm the aggressive campaign against the 'left-wing government' (which will be composed mostly of right-wingers, even if not by the definition of the 'Admorim' from Channel 14), but at least it serves to clarify to anyone pinning hopes on the upcoming elections, whether from within Israel or abroad: an alternative government will be able to make positive changes in a variety of areas, but it is doubtful whether it will really be able to deal courageously and without compromise with the powder keg of the West Bank and the rapid deterioration of the region into apartheid. In fact, a real 'upheaval' will only be able to occur when the Israeli public decides that public calls for genocide are not just a problem in 'hasbara' (public diplomacy).