Doc's Talk: The Genocidal Threat to Israel

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

The Genocidal Threat to Israel

P. David Hornik
FrontPageMagazine.com
3/11/2008

The real nature of the “Arab-Israeli conflict”—a genocidal assault by Arabs and other Muslims on a peace-loving democracy—was on horrific display Thursday evening when a Palestinian entered a Jerusalem yeshiva and shot to death eight young men while wounding nine others before being shot to death himself. The nature of Gazan society was also on horrific display; that same evening Gaza’s streets filled with joyous crowds of thousands…. In mosques in Gaza City and northern Gaza, many residents went to perform the prayers of thanksgiving. Armed men fired in the air in celebration and others passed out sweets to passersby.

Hamas stated that it “blesses the operation. It will not be the last.” Islamic Jihad, also Gaza-based, came out with “We welcome this heroic act and strengthen the hands of those who carried it out.”

Meanwhile on the West Bank, Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas was strangely credited for “condemning” the attack when he seems only to have released a statement that he “condemns all attacks that target civilians, whether they are Palestinians or Israelis.” Abbas’s Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades was more forthcoming in a statement released Sunday in Ramallah that expressed full support for what it too called a “heroic” attack.

Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, official newspaper of the PA, was similarly forthcoming: it featured a front-page photo of the dead terrorist over a caption calling him a shahid (martyr).

But if Abbas, favorite of Condi Rice and the Bush administration and “peace partner” of the Olmert government, felt the need to release a relatively abstract, toned-down statement, no such restraint was shown by Gazan leaders and certainly not by the populace. But the fact that Gaza or “Hamastan” is an ignorant society deeply inculcated with hatred did not stop New York Times reporter Steven Erlanger from going there last week to find some anti-Israeli scoops.

In a report filed also on Thursday before the Jerusalem attack, Erlanger referred to the “48-hour Israeli military incursion” days earlier, “which killed nearly 100 Palestinians,” and said “residents here were horrified by the numbers of civilians they believed had died….”

Though he must have known about previous Gazan celebrations after deliberate massacres of Israelis, Erlanger didn’t bother to ask these residents if this was an across-the-board “horror” about civilian death or a rather selective one. Instead the best he could manage was this sop to “even-handedness”: “Arguments persist over how many of the dead were truly uninvolved civilians, with Palestinian officials saying half or more than half, and Israel saying far less than half.”

It went without saying that for Erlanger, the word of Palestinian—meaning Hamas—officials had equal weight with Israel’s; the Times and other liberal media never giving Israel even a slight nod as a parliamentary democracy compared to the terrorist organizations that attack it.

But Erlanger’s aims went beyond putting Israel on the same moral plane as Hamas and the society it has helped mold. He quotes one Mirvat Abu Shbak, wife of a Fatah general who fled Gaza after Hamas assassination attempts: “We were sleeping at midnight when there was a lot of shooting.... An Israeli sniper took a position in the house next door, and he could see me, and me him.”

The Israeli sniper, according to Mirvat Abu Shbak, goes on to kill two of her teenage children in cold blood—rather like the Israeli soldiers who, in Gaza back in 2000, were almost universally believed to have killed the child Muhammad al-Dura just for the hell of it, in what was eventually exposed as a fraud and a libel.

But Erlanger has no tough questions for his interviewee because he’s found something too valuable: an Abu Ghraib, “proof” that it’s the Western—i.e., American or Israeli—forces who are brutal and cruel and that, as in the worldview of liberal Times readers, one shouldn’t defend oneself against terror because it just kills people, makes them angry, and makes you a criminal.

Indeed, Erlanger quotes Gazans supporting “resistance” to Israel without asking what the term could mean now that Israel has left Gaza and what it is that the rockets raining on civilians in sovereign Israeli territory are “resisting.”

But that would take Erlanger too far afield from liberal pieties about “occupation”; anyone asking why Gazans’ lust for Israeli blood remains so strong even post-“occupation” would have to pay attention to the genocidal, anti-Semitic indoctrination that Gazans (and West Bankers) continue to receive nonstop from mosques, schools, and media.

For the liberal mind, though, that would be full of unpleasant implications: that Israel and the Palestinian Authority/Hamastan are not on the same moral plane; that Israel is justified in fighting terror; that the Palestinians might want to do to Jews pretty much what the Nazis did to them and by constantly giving the Palestinians credence and “understanding” one is actually abetting their aims. A can of worms that even Steven Erlanger, bold explorer of Gaza, wouldn’t want to look into.

But if it’s bad enough for liberals to display such attitudes, it’s even worse when a purportedly conservative U.S. administration that claims to be fighting a War on Terror relates to Israel and its attackers with the same moral equivalency and shows the same obsession with “the Palestinians” and desire that their diseased culture gain full political independence.

Secretary of State Rice, in Israel last week, went all-out to get Israel talking with Abbas again and reiterated her belief that Israel and the Palestinians could reach a final peace settlement by the end of 2008. Her belief in this peace has indeed never flagged—not after Hamas won the January 2006 Palestinian elections after she urged that it participate, not when arms, explosives, and trained terrorists poured across the Gaza-Sinai border after she bullied Israel into abandoning it.

The secretary’s belief in this “peace” between a democratic ally and the terrorist entity that attacks it sailed through the escalating rocket attacks and was intact last week as Iranian-made Grads pounded Ashkelon while Abbas was telling a Jordanian paper that he had never given up the path of violence, totally negated Israel as a Jewish state, and sought another unity government with Hamas.

To “honor” her presence Israel stopped its drastically overdue offensive against Gaza terror, and Hamas, which Rice has helped bring to power and consistently protects against the possibility of serious Israeli military action, once again had a chance to recuperate and rebuild for the next ever-more-lethal round.

So it does not really help that on the night of the massacre in the yeshiva Bush called Olmert to say that “This barbaric and vicious attack on innocent civilians deserves the condemnation of every nation.” Much more helpful would be if Bush were to condemn—or even address—not just the specific act but the genocidal depravity of Palestinian culture as a whole that allows people to pass out sweets after a massacre, name streets and schools after suicide bombers, and instill murderous passions even in small children.

If Bush were once to show the candor and integrity to look straight at that reality—a reality of fifteen years of massive Israeli and Western aid and solicitude engendering nothing but ever-worsening corruption, fanaticism, violence, and hatred—he might then have to ask if it’s moral or wise to keep tying Israel’s hands against terror and pushing it to “negotiate” its future viability with sworn enemies.

He might not only have to call Olmert on Thursday night to convey his condolences but also Abbas on Friday to demand to know why his Authority’s official organ is glorifying the mass murderer on its front page as a religious hero.

He might have to ask why a U.S. president who claims to admire and care about the Jewish people should prod them again along the deadly path of appeasement and what U.S. interest is served by allowing Hamas terror to flourish and grow while pretending that Fatah terror does not exist and those who stand at its head are honorable statesmen.

But for that level of candor Bush, Rice, and their administration would have to look beyond whatever factors of currying favor with Arabs and Europeans, or liberal-like blindness, drive their destructive policy toward Israel and consider the real implications of the Palestinian culture of genocide and whether America should be aiding and whitewashing such a society and promoting its political aims.

A good place to start would be the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s campaign against genocide, which confronts the reality of the jihadists’ cataclysmic aims and the fact that, as Robert Spencer notes, “The most prominent non-Muslim society in the jihadists’ sights is, of course, Israel.”

With Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hezbollah’s Hassan Nasrallah, Hamas leaders Khalid Mashal and Mahmoud al-Zahar, and Abbas’s official Palestinian Authority media making genocidal declarations against the Jewish state and the Jewish people, the least America could do is encourage the strongest and most realistic rather than the weakest and most delusional trends among Israelis, drop the outrageous charade of moderate, peace-seeking Fatah, and do what it can to help Israel survive instead of constantly goading it into lethally dangerous passivity and concessions.
P. David Hornik is a freelance writer and translator living in Tel Aviv. He blogs at http://pdavidhornik.typepad.com/. He can be reached at pdavidh2001@yahoo.com.

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