Doc's Talk: Our Lady of Blockade Busting

Friday, July 23, 2010

Our Lady of Blockade Busting

Theoptimisticconservative's Blog

In the dearth of US reporting on flotilla activity aimed at Gaza, one item is getting a small amount of attention – if not, in my view, enough. News reports from the Levant today suggest that the Lebanese flotilla that was delayed indefinitely in June expects to get underway in the next few days. The two confirmed ships in the flotilla will stop in a third-country port (probably in Turkish Cyprus) before trying to reach Gaza; the ship that is to leave from Beirut has been given the name Maryam, for Mary the mother of Jesus Christ, and will reportedly carry only women as passengers (presumably the crew is male). At least half of the 50-some women in the group are Christians, and an unspecified number are nuns.

The make-up of Maryam’s passenger list has no doubt changed a bit since the original reports about it in mid-June, when Maryam was first scheduled to depart. Some reports from June suggested “several dozen” nuns were among the passengers, but with the total number being between 50 and 60 and half of the women being Muslims, this would have to be an overstatement. Nevertheless, there continue to be reports of a substantial contingent of Lebanese Maronite Catholic nuns (who are Roman Catholic), and a handful of American Catholic nuns, among the Christians.

I wrote a month ago about the troubling fact that the Patriarch of Antioch, head of the Melkite Greek Catholic church in the Levantine region, was issuing blessings for the Lebanese flotilla. The Maryam activists are moving ahead full-throttle in this vein, referring to their “weapons” as their “faith in the Virgin” and renaming themselves all “Maryam plus a number” for the duration of the voyage. It is one thing for people to act in their capacity as concerned (if misguided) citizens; another again for them to act in their capacity as ambassadors of Christ – as the nuns are doing – and invoke blessings in the name of Jesus on what they do.

It’s not clear whether the American nuns on Maryam – there are reportedly as many as five – are members of a recognized canonical order. This report suggests five nuns from Oregon were to participate; another report from a US activist (cited in my 3 July flotilla update) mentions a nun from Wisconsin. I haven’t been able to find any information on the order(s) they come from. They may or may not respond to pointed guidance from the Vatican.

But the Lebanese nuns are Maronites, a denomination of Roman Catholic Christianity. The indications would suggest that they have the approval of their spiritual authorities – see, for example, the photo in this Haaretz article from June showing the Maronite Archbishop of Sidon in a warm greeting with Samar al-Hajj, the Lebanese activist spearheading the Maryam effort. (Ms. Al-Hajj, a Maronite Christian, is the wife of General Ali al-Hajj, one-time director-general of Lebanese Internal Security and a longtime suspect – released in 2009 – in the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri.) There is enough of an implication that the Church endorses the Maryam initiative for the Vatican to intervene – as Israel’s diplomats have asked it to – particularly given the risks involved in trying to run the maritime blockade.

It has become absurdly clear that there is no humanitarian need to break the maritime blockade of Gaza. Not only does Israel herself provide goods to Gaza as well as allowing all third-party humanitarian aid to enter Gaza via land: in June and early July, the Netanyahu government lifted the remaining prohibitions on non-military goods. From an equally practical standpoint, there is no value for cost or efficiency in delivering goods to Gaza by sea. There is no infrastructure in Gaza’s port, and hence no possibility of delivering bulk cargo efficiently. As this academic study from 2004 concluded, the cost-effectiveness of delivering cargo to Ashdod and convoying it over land will make it uneconomic to even build up a commercial port infrastructure in Gaza; the only reason to do it would be political. That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done, but it does mean that under any state political conditions, Gazans would pay more for the same goods, for the foreseeable future, if they were delivered to Gaza by sea than if they were convoyed from the port in Ashdod.

The purpose of the flotillas is to break the blockade – imposed to prevent the importation of weapons – not to deliver humanitarian goods. It is a political objective, not a spiritual one. In this regard, it’s worth noting what two of the American nuns reportedly did earlier this month, as their days lengthened in Beirut and Maryam waited for the go-ahead to depart. According to this account by Franklin Lamb, the nuns paid their respects – as part of an “American delegation” – to the deceased Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah, spiritual leader of Hezbollah and the cleric who blessed the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1982. Says Lamb:

They [the American delegation of which the nuns were a part] felt they were the true representatives of their country, not their Embassy, thought by some to be in Lebanon to promote Israel’s agenda, not American interests.

Individuals have a certain right to be ignorant, prejudiced, and foolish, but it is not at all out of line to suggest that the Vatican has a special responsibility to offer better guidance to its faithful. The “civil disobedience” the Maryam activists have in view has no application for either Christian compassion or social justice; it cannot be justified as an act of Christian love. It’s about breaking a blockade – one imposed lawfully, by the way, in accordance with the applicable international conventions – so that a terrorist group (Hamas) can more readily import weapons with which to terrorize both Israelis and Gazan Arabs.

The most likely fate of Maryam – and her sister ship, M/V Nagi al-Ali, last reported in Tripoli – is being turned aside and heading for an Egyptian port rather than courting a serious armed response from the IDF. That’s what went down with the most recent blockade-runner wannabe, Libyan ship M/V Amalthea. I don’t think there’s real potential for an armed showdown again until the next Turkish flotilla sets out, assuming there is one. (See my previous posts linked above for information on that.)

Nevertheless, the likelihood of a non-dramatic outcome for Maryam doesn’t excuse the Church’s leadership for its apparent hands-off, de facto endorsement of a project that qualifies as not just ill-advised but “a-Christian.” Like Melkite priest Hilarion Capucci’s gun-running for Fatah in the 1970s, joining a flotilla that proposes to “deliver humanitarian aid” by the least effective method possible, in order to weaken a lawfully-imposed blockade that keeps viciously homicidal weapons out of the hands of terrorists, is quite obviously not what Jesus would do.

Cross-posted at Hot Air.

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