Doc's Talk: Crowds of Gazans streamed into Egypt after the border fence was breached.

Friday, January 25, 2008

Crowds of Gazans streamed into Egypt after the border fence was breached.

It was part of a Hamas pressure campaign to open the Rafah Crossing in contravention of agreements Egypt is a party to. The open border enables the terrorist organizations to smuggle operatives and weapons into the Gaza Strip.

Crowds crossing the border into Egyptian territory through one of the
breaches in the fence (Suhib Salem for Reuters, January 23).

Overview

1. The escalation in the fighting between Hamas and Israel and the lack of fuel and supplies resulting from the closing of the crossings into the Gaza Strip were exploited by Hamas to exert pressure on Egypt . In our assessment, Hamas's goal is to cause the Rafah Crossing to be opened and to force the Egyptians to renege on its participation in the Crossings Agreement of August 2005.

2. To achieve its aim Hamas, as usual, has brought the Gaza Strip population into play to protest and demonstrate against Egypt at the Rafah Crossing. At the same time, the terrorist organizations created a fait accompli by tearing down the border fence between the Gaza Strip and Egypt in a number of places, which let an uncontrolled mass of hundreds of thousands of Gazans stream into Egyptian territory.

3. The Egyptian regime sent police reinforcements to the area to no avail, and could not find an effective response to Hamas's tactics. The uncontrolled movement of crowds of Gazans in and out of Egypt means that Hamas can now smuggle terrorist operatives and weapons into the Gaza Strip with almost no interference .

Crowds of Gazans breaking through the Rafah Crossing
(Palestine-info Website, January 23).

Background

4. Israel 's closing of the crossings into the Gaza Strip after a massive rocket attack and the lack of fuel and supplies that followed were exploited by Hamas and other terrorist organizations to exert pressure on Egypt . In our assessment, their goals are the unilateral opening of the Rafah Crossing and the creation of new regime at the Gaza-Egypt border to replace those Egypt is committed to by the Crossings Agreement . 1 Some of the terrorist organizations even threatened that if Egypt did not accede to their request they would use force to open the crossing (Radio Sawt al-Quds, January 20). Even Israel's January 22 decision to renew the supply of fuel and humanitarian aid did not change Hamas's position, claiming that the aid reaching the Gaza Strip was not enough and calling for continued pressure to be exerted on Egypt (Al-Aqsa TV, January 22).

5. Hamas government prime minister Ismail Haniya suggested that a formal delegation be sent to Egypt to discuss arrangements for bringing aid into the Gaza Strip through the Rafah Crossing (Palestine-info Website, January 21). Khaled Mashal , chairman of Hamas's political bureau in Damascus , said that he was putting pressure on Egypt to bring about the opening of the crossing. He said that he had appealed to Omar Suleiman, head of Egyptian intelligence, and Ahmed Abu al-Ghait, Egyptian foreign minister, to give a message from him to Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak (Al-Jazeera TV, January 21). 2

6. Concurrently with its public appeals, Hamas organized protest marches near the Rafah Crossing attended by many civilians:

1) On January 22 about 200 women belonging to a Hamas women's organization led a demonstration of thousands of Gazans to demand that Egypt open the crossing and allow Palestinians to leave the Gaza Strip. They shouted slogans defaming President Mubarak. In the heat of the demonstration the Palestinians broke through to the Egyptian terminal where a confrontation developed between them and the Egyptian security forces stationed at the crossing. The Egyptian forces used force to disperse the demonstrators, employing water cannons, night sticks and dogs, and according to reports, live ammunition as well (Al-Jazeera TV, January 22). 3 During the confrontation a number of demonstrators were detained. At least 20 Palestinian demonstrators were slightly injured, as were a number of Egyptian soldiers.

2) On January 21 there was a demonstration attended by hundreds of Palestinians near the Rafah Crossing. Among the demonstrators were doctors, patients and wounded Palestinians as well as Hamas members of the Legislative Council. They held a press conference and called for the immediate opening of the crossing (Al-Aqsa TV, January 22).

7. Alongside the demonstrations, a fait accompli was achieved on the ground when on the night of January 22 armed Palestinians detonated charges at a number of points along the concrete fence running through Rafah (Al-Arabiya TV, January 23). As a result, the fence was breached in eight locations and thousands of Gazans broke through the crossing to the Egyptian side. That forced the Egyptian regime, which could not withstand the pressure, to open the border crossing (January 23). The Palestinian and Israeli media reported that since the breaching of the fence, thousands of Palestinians have streamed into Egyptian territory (according to media estimations, between 150,000 and 300,000 so far). 4 Many of them have bought supplies or asked for medical treatment and have returned to their homes. In addition, hundreds of Gazans who had been stuck at the terminal used the opportunity to return home.

One of the sites where the fence between the Gaza Strip and Egypt was torn down by armed Palestinians. Crowds of Gazans can be seen passing back and forth. (Ma'an News Agency, January 23).

8. At the same time as the protests in Gaza , there was a Muslim Brotherhood protest march in Cairo . It left from the People's Assembly and made it way to the headquarters of the Arab League (Muslim Brotherhood Website, January 21).

Reactions

9. Israel security sources regard the events as a security threat. In their assessment, a free passage of Palestinians into and out of Egypt poses a security threat by enabling them to smuggle weapons and terrorist operatives into the Gaza Strip with almost no interference (Ynet, January 23). The Israeli foreign ministry has officially announced that Egyptians are deployed along the border between the Egypt and the Gaza Strip and that it expects Egypt to solve the problem. According to the announcement, Egypt is responsible to ensure a properly-operating border crossing in accordance with the agreements signed between the two countries .

10. A spokesman for the Egyptian foreign ministry expressed regret at the events at the Rafah Crossing and said that Egypt was investing maximum efforts in finding a solution for the grave situation in the Gaza Strip. He said that the Egyptians had sent 40 trucks with supplies into the Gaza Strip through the Kerem Shalom Crossing. 5 He appealed to “those in control of the Gaza Strip” (by implication, the Hamas government) to prevent a recurrence of such events (Middle East News Agency, January 22).

11. “ Palestinian sources” condemned the Egyptian security force dispersal of the demonstrations. In a television interview, Musheir al-Masri, a Hamas member of the Legislative Council, called upon the Egyptian leadership to open the Rafah Crossing to lift the burden from the shoulders of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip (Ramattan News Agency, January 22).

12. Palestinian presidential spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeina said that what happened at the Rafah Crossing was the result of the “unacceptable blockade” of the Gaza Strip. He said that Abu Mazen had demanded a number of times that the blockade be lifted and the crossings be placed under PA control (Wafa News Agency, January 23).

1 The Rafah Crossing is operated as part of the Crossings Agreement signed after the disengagement in August 2005. The agreement mandates coordination between Israel , representatives of the Palestinian Authority and the Europeans relating to the movement of Gazans through the Crossing.

2 To soften the appeal to Egypt , Hamas said that this time they were requesting that the crossings be opened for humanitarian reasons and not to bring weapons or money into the Gaza Strip (Palestine-info Website, January 20).

3 Following the events of the past week the Egyptians reinforced the forces at the crossing with 300 additional policemen specializing in riot control.

4 In our assessment, the figures were exaggerated and tens of thousands, not hundreds of thousands of Gazans crossed into Egypt .

5 According to reports from an Israeli security source, on January 20 and 21 the Kerem Shalom Crossing was closed. On January 22, 13 trucks passed through.

Thanks to Center on Intelligence and Terrorism

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk