Yechimovich Badmouths Bibi, Ignores Terror
I guess it must be unavoidable for a Prime Minister to be “damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t”. Shelly Yechimovich plays this to the hilt and she never misses a chance to badmouth Netanyahu.
On the Friday night news (23 October), as terror still stalks us, Yechimovich chose to speak about the stalled talks with our neighbours to the west. She clearly stated that if Netanyahu is serious about negotiations and peace he should join the meeting in Jordan even if he was not invited. She repeated this several times: that Netanyahu should invite himself to the party in Jordan regardless of how US Secretary of State John Kerry, King Hussein and Mahmoud Abbas would feel about the intrusion. Even though Kerry had already met with Netanyahu in Jerusalem, his trip to Amman would be a way, in her opinion, to show serious intent to solve the problem between Israel and the Arabs who came to call themselves Palestinians, a problem whose resolution is vital to Israel’s future.
This is the same Shelly Yechimovich who, among others, blasted Netanyahu for speaking to Congress about Iran even though he WAS invited. The problem for those opposed to that trip was that it was an invitation by House Speaker John Boehner ONLY, and not a bi-partisan invitation. They went on and on about the insult to President Obama and did not concern themselves with the issue at hand and how serious Netanyahu’s intent was to influence THAT problem, one that is probably no less vital to Israel’s future than the conflict with the Arabs in Judea and Samaria.
In a blog post I wrote at the beginning of the latest wave of terror, for the Times of Israel, about the initial public statements on the social media uploaded by a selection of MKs. Yechimovich was apparently more concerned with criticizing Netanyahu than confronting the painful subject at hand.
This essentially translates as: Netanyahu has lost control over Israel’s security.. . . The Government has no plan for fighting terror. . . . The vile terrorists must be punished to the full extent of the law, but at the same time there has to be a policy and actions, not just words, statements and pithy sayings.. . . Our forces need to be adequately distributed tomorrow during the holiday . . .
She is more active on twitter than on Facebook and in both media, when reviewing her posts between the start of the wave of terror and the present day, when she does relate to the terror, what she does, in fact, is criticize Bibi for something or other.
Here are two Tweets (the only ones on the topic, I think)
שיא העליבות ראש ממשלה במצוקה בוחר לשאת נאום נגד חנין זועבי אחרונת חברות הכנסת. פשוט פאתטי ומדאיג
— שלי יחימוביץ (@Syechimovich) October 11, 2015
The utmost sleaziness is a Prime Minister in stress who chooses to make a speech against Hanin Zoabi the last of the female MKs; this is simply pathetic and worrying.
and these two together:
אנחנו מגבים את כוחות הבטחון וגאים בהם בלי קשר למצבי הרוח שלו. לצהל יש תוכנית רב שנתית, לביבי יש תמיד תוכנית
מפורטת לשעה הקרובה.
— שלי יחימוביץ (@Syechimovich) October 8, 2015
You are calling for a unity government? Why? So you can create the false impression that the opposition is part of Netanyahu’s absolute failure at what he is most proud of, security?
We stand behind our security forces and are proud of them regardless of his moods. The IDF has a long-term plan; Bibi always has a detailed plan for the coming hour.
There was only one post on Facebook related to a specific terror incident:
Hi. This is Shelly (she always starts her posts on her own FB page like this as if someone would think her post was not hers), sharing a post written by Naama Henkin’s (z”l) brother, Yishai Armoni. From deep sorrow, mourning and common sense and a lot of wisdom, simplicity and nobility.
Armoni writes: “‘If you go out for revenge dig two graves, one for yourself.’ I don’t want revenge, I want my sister back. And if that is not possible then don’t take anyone else’s sister, ever. Thank-you.”
That was an important post, in my opinion, but it is remarkable in being the only one related in any way to the victims of Arab terror.
We cannot judge an MK solely by what he or she posts to the social media because they do a lot more than what we see on their Facebook and Twitter accounts. However, this is the face they present to the world because most people do not watch the Knesset Channel on TV, nor do they follow what bills the MKs table nor how they vote on all but the most sensational ones. Most people do not follow the committee and other behind the scenes activities in the MK’s busy day. MKs can reflect what they do and what they consider important when they choose the material they put up for all of us to read. And Yechimovich chooses to ignore the terror attacks, the victims, the perpetrators and when she does relate to it, she does so in order to criticize the Prime Minister.
She favours going back to negotiations, bemoaning the fact that Oslo is already 22 years old and there has not yet been substantial movement forward. I suppose she blames Bibi and the right-wingers for that, however, she ignores the fact that Labour held the speaker’s staff for about 4 or 5 of those 22 years and formed part of the government for about 10 of those years.
We learn something about people, not only by what they say, but by what they choose not to say. Yechimovich, you show yourself to be a shallow thinker who apparently cannot deal with the complexities of the situation. I’m glad you are not in the driver’s seat. And you’re not so great as a back-seat driver either.
Sometimes it is far better to not join a meeting that is rigged against you, because then you have no commitment to following the decisions of others. To attend would give the meeting a legitimacy.
Wouldn’t it be nice if the criticism actually fit the particular issue rather than her just finding fault regardless of what he does?
Netanyahu can’t win with this person. So if he had pushed his way into the meeting, she would then have said what a bully he was, and ignorant of culture, blah, blah, and blah. PM Netanyahu is a good man, who loves his country, and is doing his best for it. Columnists like this woman make his job even more difficult, in that no matter what he does, she criticizes it.
I agree with you, Nancy. Funny you should refer to her as a columnist – she used to be a journalist but went into politics several years ago.