ARIKAT: So here’s unqualified support for the Ukrainians to resist this Russian invasion and so on, and to – and for any occupied people to resist their occupier. Does that extend to other places, like for the Palestinians, and maybe the Iraqis, and other places? Do they have the right to resist a military occupation?MR PRICE: Said, self-defense is a principle that belongs to all countries.ARIKAT: Right, and so it does belong to people who are under military occupation, including –MR PRICE: It belongs to –ARIKAT: — including the Palestinians, right?MR PRICE: — all countries. All countries have the right to self-defense.
Q Can I ask you one other question? In parts of southern Ukraine, it seems that Russia has shifted from a military takeover to, essentially, occupation.MS. PSAKI: Yeah.Q That it is now occupying parts — occupying towns. Does the White House support the Ukrainian people’s right to resist the occupation and, essentially, through any means necessary?MS. PSAKI: Well, we certainly support the rights of the Ukrainian people to fight back. I would note that we have seen many Ukrainians; many, many members of the Ukrainian military; and certainly President Zelenskyy in leadership fight bravely, courageously over the course of the last 12 days.I think it’s also true that the world needs to be prepared for a very long, difficult road ahead. While they are fighting bravely and we are standing with them and supporting them, the Russians are still intending to grind out military advances in the short term just by sheer manpower and firepower.So, yes, we support their right to push back and to fight back against that.
Palestinians and their supporters are playing a game, mightily trying to compare Ukrainians defending their homes to "Palestinian resistance."
But "Palestinian resistance" has a completely different meaning. To Palestinians and their Israel-hating supporters, "resistance" means the right to murder Jewish civilians.
In Arabic, Palestinian terrorist groups like Islamic Jihad and Hamas are called "resistance factions." The Arabic "Palestinian resistance" page lists over 40 terror attacks against Israeli civilians as examples of "resistance" dating back to 1954. Gaza rockets aimed at Jewish population centers are called "resistance rockets." The word "resistance" is a dog-whistle for Israel haters to justify terrorism.
Asma Khalid's question used another dog-whistle that is crystal clear to Israel haters, by adding "through any means necessary" - a reformulation of how the modern antisemites describe murdering Jews as resistance "by all means and methods" or, in Hamas' formulation, "with all means possible." She was trying to get Psaki to say that Palestinian terrorism is admirable.
Sure enough, even though Psaki didn't fall completely into that trap, Mondoweiss trumpeted her answer as if Psaki herself used the words "by any means necessary," pretending that she agreed that terrorism is legitimate.
Similarly, MSNBC's Ayman Mohyeldin chose to interpret Psaki as saying that Ukrainians have the "right" of "resisting occupation," and he is knowingly adopting that language to give the impression to the reader that Palestinians have the right to kill Jews.
No one says that Ukrainians have the right to shoot rockets into Russian population centers. No one says Ukrainians have the right to send suicide bombers to kill Russian civilians drinking tea in restaurants. Terrorism is illegal under international law. But these reporters are trying to get US officials to adopt their terminology to imply that murdering Jews is a right, and purposefully misinterpreting the answers as if they agree that Ukrainians can defend themselves.
Which means that the White House and State Department allow people who support and justify murdering Jews into their briefing rooms.
(h/t YMedad)
