Doc's Talk: How the Media, the UN and the Diplomats Saved Hamas 18 Years Ago

Monday, July 19, 2010

How the Media, the UN and the Diplomats Saved Hamas 18 Years Ago

Daniel Greenfield

"18 years ago in the winter of 1992, there was another Gilad Shalit, and his name was Nissim Toledano, a border police sergeant was kidnapped by terrorists on the way to work. After an extended search, Nissim Toledano was found dead in a roadside ditch. In response to that attack and numerous other atrocities committed by Hamas, including a planned massive car bombing, Israel made the decision to deport 400 Hamas terrorists. Among them the past and present day leaders of Hamas. And you might assume the story ends there. And you would be wrong." For the past two months the media has been consumed with talk of Hamas ruled Gaza and the flotillas meant to break the Israeli blockade. But how one might ask did Gaza come to be overrun with Hamas terrorists. The answer is that the world forced Israel to let them in.

18 years ago in the winter of 1992, there was another Gilad Shalit, and his name was Nissim Toledano, a border police sergeant was kidnapped by terrorists on the way to work. After an extended search, Nissim Toledano was found dead in a roadside ditch. In response to that attack and numerous other atrocities committed by Hamas, including a planned massive car bombing, Israel made the decision to deport 400 Hamas terrorists. Among them the past and present day leaders of Hamas. And you might assume the story ends there. And you would be wrong.

The United Nations issued a unanimous resolution condemning Israel's deportation of "civilians" and demanding that Israel immediately bring them back, or face sanctions. The United States voted for that resolution, along with three others condemning Israel. Thomas R. Pickering, the American delegate warned that the deportations of Hamas terrorists "do not contribute to current efforts for peace." Of course we now know, just how much the Hamas terrorists that the Bush and Clinton Administrations forced Israel to accept "contributed to peace".

Lebanon refused to officially accept the terrorists. The Red Cross brought them tents and blankets and the media swarmed to take photos of them "shivering from the cold" while drinking coffee outside their tents. Newsweek accused Israel of "Deporting the Hope for Peace". The LA Times ran a tearful interview with the wife of Mohammed Taamari, a future member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, who was terribly lonely without her husband. Much as after the flotilla raid, the Israeli media condemned the clumsy mishandling of the deportations.

Finally after enough browbeating by James Baker and Warren Christopher, Rabin agreed to take the Hamas terrorists back. In a bizarre charade that would serve as a tragic foretelling of events to come, Rabin agreed to return 100 terrorists immediately, and to take the remainder back in a year. 18 years later, the Hamas terrorists that Israel took back control all of Gaza, and have been responsible for an untold number of murders.

The terrorists that Israel was forced to accept included current Hamas leader Ismael Haniyeh and Hamas' religious figurehead, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. They included Mahmoud al-Zahar, a co-founder of Hamas, who last year proclaimed; "They have legitimised the killing of their people all over the world by killing our people". They included Mohammed Taha, another co-founder of Hamas. They also included Abdel-Aziz Rantisi, another Hamas co-founder, who was responsible for numerous murders of Israelis, who would proclaim, "By Allah, we will not leave one Jew in Palestine". They included his son Ayman Taha, who commanded the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, which carried out numerous attacks on Israel, including the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit.

And that is how a failure to drive out those responsible for the kidnapping and murder of one Israeli sergeant in 1992, led to the capture of an Israeli corporal in 2006. It is also the story of why Gaza was turned over to Hamas in the name of "peace." It is the story of how the United Nations, the UK and two US administrations pressured Israel into accepting the leaders of Hamas in the name of peace. It is also the story of how the media conducted a propaganda war on behalf of an Islamist terrorist organization, not just today when it publishes false stories about starvation in Gaza, but 18 years ago, when the only people supposedly starving were adult male Hamas terrorists.

The world insisted that Israel take back the Hamas leadership, and Israel did. The world insisted that Israel had no business being in Gaza, and Israel withdrew from there, which allowed the very same Hamas terrorists that the world insisted Israel take back, take over. Now the world is insisting that Israel has no right to blockade those same Hamas terrorists in Gaza. People who are shocked by this development in 2010 shouldn't be, since 18 years ago Israel wasn't even allowed to throw the same terrorists out of the country.

One of the more cynical left wing talking points is that Israel was responsible for Hamas. Looking back to 1992, when the current Hamas leadership were sitting outside their Red Cross tents in Lebanon and the left was pounding on Israel's door, demanding that they be let back in-- it is all too clear who was and is responsible for Hamas. The people who saved Hamas 18 years ago, are responsible for it today. The media and the diplomats who 18 years ago were claiming that deporting Hamas would somehow "radicalize" the Palestinian Arabs insured that the Hamas leaders would return to radicalize all of Gaza and the West Bank.

After the deportation of the Hamas terrorists, Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin delivered a speech in the Knesset in which he said;

"I have no pity in my heart, nor do I shed tears (for the Hamas terrorists). I see the media whining their hypocritical speeches - and I think instead of Nissim Toledano's orphaned children, the widow of Shmuel Biran, and the bereaved parents of Shmuel Geresh."

Rabbi Shmuel Biran was a schoolteacher in Kfar Darom, an Israeli village in Gaza. He was murdered by Hamas terrorists while crossing a two lane highway. The UN did not condemn the murder of Rabbi Biran. Newsweek did not write any piteous pieces about how much his widow missed him. Instead they called Kfar Darom a settlement, even though it was part of a history going back over 2000 years, and the land it was on had been bought and paid for, fair and square. But the same diplomats and reporters who wailed for the lonely Hamas terrorists in Lebanon, pitied not the family of Rabbi Biran. Instead they demanded his family and all the Jews of Kfar Darom be expelled from their homes.

Kfar Darom being burned by its new occupants
Eventually they got their wish. The families of Kfar Darom were dragged out of their homes. Today Kfar Darom is used by Hamas terrorists to launch rockets deeper into Israel, at other towns and villages. And the murderers have inherited the land of their victims. And yet there is no peace. Never any peace.

Now the vultures keep on circling. Once they said there would be peace if only Israel let the Hamas terrorists back in. Then they said, there would be peace if only Israel ethnically cleansed Jewish communities in land claimed by the terrorists. Now if only Israel will lift the blockade and give Hamas access to unlimited weapons-- perhaps then there will be peace. No, there will be no peace. Only more murder. When you bring a snake into your pocket, you will be poisoned. The closer you bring him and the less you restrain him, the worse he will bite you. As with snakes, so it is with terrorists.

After his death, it has become fashionable to selectively quote some of Rabin's speeches. But this speech is rarely quoted. And you don't have to work too hard to understand why.

Our struggle against murderous Islamic terror is also meant to awaken the world which is lying in slumber. We call on all nations and all people to devote their attention to the great danger inherent in Islamic fundamentalism. That is the real and serious danger which threatens the peace of the world in the forthcoming years.

But why quote such a speech? In 1992, America and Europe were not terribly worried about Islamic fundamentalism. It was after 1992, not 1692. And Islamic terrorism was one of those things that would surely go away if Israel would just compromise with the terrorists.

Two weeks after Rabin agreed to take back the Hamas terrorists-- the World Trade Center was bombed by a group led by the nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, under Omar Abdel Rahman, the "Blind Sheikh" who led al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, which like both Al Queda and Hamas, emerged out of the Muslim Brotherhood. Rahman's message to Muslims was very simple; "cut the transportation of their countries, tear it apart, destroy their economy, burn their companies, eliminate their interests, sink their ships, shoot down their planes, kill them on the sea, air, or land." And that was exactly what they went on to do. The World Trade Center bombing in 1993, set the stage for the more successful attacks of 2001. Just as the Hamas atrocities of 1992 set the stage for the bigger and more horrifying attacks to come.

Meanwhile in Afghanistan UN aid convoys were being ambushed and massacred. Tourists were being murdered in Egypt. Hamas killed two traffic cops in Tel Aviv. But no one worried. Peace just was just on the horizon. And so Israel was forced to submit to Islamic terrorism. Hamas' path to victory was paved by two US administrations and a press corp always eager to turn terrorists into victims, but never interested in hearing from the victims of the terrorists.Islamic terrorism had won not on its own terms, but with the unified support of the United Nations standing behind it.

That is how Islamic terrorism always wins. That is the template behind its victory. And Rabin's speech of that winter of 1992, which warned the West of what was to come, was ignored. Today Rabin is remembered as the man who compromised with terrorism. It is the only thing he is remembered for anymore .But compromising with terrorism did not bring peace. Not in Somalia, where US troops were brutally murdered next year. Not in Afghanistan, where the Taliban slaughtered aid convoys. Not in Indonesia or New York or Paris or Egypt. And certainly not in Gaza. The Islamic Fundamentalists had won a battle with the backing of the US and the UN. They have won many more since then. Now they are trying to win the war.

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