Doc's Talk: Blaming Israel Won't Help

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Blaming Israel Won't Help

Phyllis Chesler
Israel National News
September 18, 2011

http://www.phyllis-chesler.com/1034/blaming-israel

Excerpt:

On September 16, 2011, the New York Times actually used the word "Islamist" in a front page story—not as often or as prominently as the word "militant" but still, there it was—and in an article titled "At White House, Weighing Limits of Terror Fight."

For all those who are invested in the Lie that the infidels (i.e. Western civilization} are not under attack, allow me to point out that the anti-Israel and anti-American Paper of Record had, altogether, three articles on the front page about Afghanistan, Bahrain, and about "Islamist militants in Yemen and Somalia" as well as about "Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, based in Yemen, and the Somalia-based Shabab;" "Al Qaeda operating in Afghanistan…and in the tribal regions of Pakistan."

In this same issue, the Times also has articles which focus on or mention Jordan, "Palestine," Turkey, Afghanistan, Libya, Bahrain, Lebanon, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, and the Arabian Peninsula.In this same issue, the Times also has articles which focus on or mention Jordan, “Palestine,” Turkey, Afghanistan, Libya, Bahrain, Lebanon, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, and the Arabian Peninsula.

Even the Times knows that something is up, something has gone wrong, very wrong in terms of the Muslim world, that it is far bigger than Israel, and that it won’t get better merely by blaming Israel or America.

In my opinion, were Israel to be attacked she would be on her own—and she would blamed for daring to defend herself. This has already happened many times. While the war against the Jews is very hot, it is almost invisible in the western media.

As we know, (but allow me to remind us), in August of 2011, Israel endured 178 Hamas/“Palestinian” terror attacks which included 145 rockets and 46 heavy mortar shells fired into the south of Israel.

That same month, Israel also endured a heavy “surge” of hostile, apparently civilian Arabs crossing Israel’s borders from Syria and attempting to do so from Lebanon, which included the Lebanese Army opening fire on a group of Israeli soldiers.

Also in August, terrorists (Hamas? Al Qaeda? PLO?) crossed into Israel from Egypt, wearing Egyptian military uniforms, and killed seven Israeli civilians, including young children; they wounded at least thirty Israelis. The attacks against Israel in August alone were three times greater than all the attacks against Israel this year.

During this same time, the Turkish Prime Minister demanded that Israel “apologize” for defending herself from a Turkish-launched terrorist attack (the Marvi Marmara incident) and threatened to send Turkish warships into the Mediterranean to accompany a new flotilla to break the Israeli siege of Gaza.

And right around 9/11, Egyptian police forces allowed angry and hate-filled “demonstrators” to overrun the Israeli Embassy in Cairo; Prime Minister Netanyahu made no progress for the safe release of the Israeli security guards trapped in the building; only a phone call, eight to ten hours later, from President Obama presumably persuaded the Egyptians to help the besieged Israelis escape.

Finally, on September 13, 2011, the Turkish Prime Minister blew more smoke, this time in Cairo when he got the crowd to roar its hatred for Israel. He is in a dead heat competition with Iran for leadership of the Caliphate.

During this time, no one really came to Israel’s aid on the ground or in the world’s media. During this time, the various world-wide demonstrations against Israel, calls for a “Palestinian” state at the UN, and calls for the boycotting of Israel continued unabated. (I have no way of knowing what went on behind the scenes in terms of help offered or refused).

True, Israel may turn out to have some unexpected allies (Cyprus, the Kurds, India, Greece—maybe even Saudi Arabia) and yet, Israel is surrounded by “surging” human forces of hate as well and she is really, truly on her own.

Yesterday, I spoke with Mayor Ron Nachman of the mainly secular city of Ariel in the Shomron (Samaria). He agreed with my assessment—an assessment shared by others-- that Israel is essentially on her own. Let me quote him at length.

Israel can’t trust anyone, including America. American policy has been mistaken for six decades. America refused to move its Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. That tells us what we need to know.

Now, the Arab “Palestinians” saw they could not get Israel to agree to commit suicide and so they turned to the United Nations. The solution is really between Israel and Jordan. Jordan is the real ‘Palestinian’ state. And by the way, when Jordan annexed the West Bank and Samaria from 1948-1967, no journalist called it an “occupation.” It is only “occupied” when it is in Jewish hands.”

What is this phrase: The ‘West Bank?’ The West Bank of the moon? The sun? The West Bank of America? We need to use the right language. Is California the “West Bank” of America? And by the way, would Americans agree to allow Mexicans and Canadians to carve out a corridor from San Diego to Vancouver so that both non-American groups can come and go without American oversight? This is what Israel is being asked to do.

And what is the meaning of the ’67 lines?’ Do people really understand that Israel is only nine miles wide, just as wide as the distance from the south to the north of the borough of Manhattan? Giving up any more land means that Israel is non-defensible.

Words and how they are used and misused continues to create problems.

The Wall.’ What is that? Think of it as a gated community. There are walls all over the world that are never singled out. Only Israel’s security fence is.

The Arabs simply refuse to accept a Jewish state. A two state solution will not lead to peace. It will lead to more attacks on Israel. They gave Yasser Arafat a Nobel Peace Prize but he brought bloodshed, not peace. Everyone shouted ‘Land for Peace'. It only led to Arab attacks on Israel again and again.”

“Mayor Nachman,” said I, “Nu, what is your solution to this intractable dilemma?”

Solution? At this rate, we need a five state solution. Jordan is one, Israel is the second, Judea and Samaria are a third, Gaza is a fourth—and the Israeli Arabs want autonomy as well.

My friend and colleague Israeli Arabist, Dr. Mordechai Kedar, believes in a confederation of cantons, with local governmental autonomy on many issues and a federal government for security and other issues, based on Dr. Kedar’s understanding of tribal loyalties and conflicts and the Arab inability to create both large and stable modern nation states.

I ask Mayor Nachman if he believes that Israel can defeat Iran. He says, cryptically:

It is not good to push someone whose back is already against the wall..

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