The International Solidarity Movement likes to present
itself as a champion of non-violence and peaceful resistance, but in fact it takes
pride in serving as a human shield for terrorists. It's a shame that even
Israel's media have fallen for this ruse – just like Rachel Corrie did.
The family of Rachel Corrie, who was crushed by an army
bulldozer during a pro-Palestinian demonstration in Gaza in 2003, filed a civil
suit against the State of Israel for their daughter's death. This week, the
Haifa District Court ruled that the state
was not to blame.
“Corrie could have moved away from the danger easily, but
she chose to endanger herself ... The purpose of the bulldozer’s work was saving
lives," wrote Judge Oded Gershon. "The incident occurred at the
height of an armed conflict between Israel and terrorist groups. The bulldozers
were being used to prevent explosives from being planted on the road; they did
not damage Palestinian homes in the area.”
Unlike the collaborators whose knee-jerk response was to
describe Corrie as a peace activist and mention only the innocent-sounding name
of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) without elaborating, here are some
facts of the case, most of which can be found on the NGO Monitor’s excellent
website.
The ISM portrays itself as advocating non-violence, human
rights, respect for international law and United Nations resolutions, and as
striving for a “just peace.” But study of its documents and the statements
made by its high-ranking officials shows that the organization’s ideology is in
fact anti-Israel and anti-Zionist, and has adopted the Palestinians’ most radical demands. Not only does
the ISM negate the policies of Israeli governments (which amounts to
“Israeli apartheid in Palestine” as it calls it), but also Israel’s very
existence as the Jewish homeland. Statements by ISM officials emphasize implementing the “right
of return” for Palestinian refugees to Israel, rejection of the
Oslo Accords, and never even mention the two-state solution. However, the ISM keeps its
positions vague so that it can appeal to the largest common denominator of
human rights and peace activists, including Jews – most of whom, surprisingly
enough, do not deny Israel’s right to exist, but merely oppose its policies.
In its internal documents, the ISM seemingly
justified the Palestinian armed struggle against Israel, even at the
height of the suicide terrorist attacks. Its activists gave refuge to a jihadi
operative who had been involved in suicide bombings, shooting attacks and planting
explosives.
They interfered with the Israel Defense Forces’
preventative operations (such as the incident in which Corrie was killed); at one point
obstructing the bombing of an explosives laboratory that produced bombs used in
suicide attacks.
The ISM’s activities include participation in Palestinian
demonstrations and acts of protest; stationing activists as human shields to protect wanted
terrorists; deploying its activists near IDF checkpoints and throughout
Judea and Samaria; providing financial, logistical and moral assistance to
Palestinians, including terrorists and their families; interfering with
the demolition or sealing of the homes of terrorists who have carried out
suicide attacks that have claimed many victims; and holding marches along the
security fence and from Jenin to Jerusalem.
As part of these tactics, the ISM took pride in
two particular acts on its website: stationing activists as human shields to protect the
terrorists who took over the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, and doing the same thing at
the Ramallah headquarters of then-Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat (in April 2002,
during Operation Defensive Shield).
Four high-ranking ISM officials are among the founders of
the international pro-Hamas coalition known as the Free Gaza Movement (FGM). It was FGM
that organized the flotillas, with the declared purpose of running the
blockade, strengthening Hamas and expanding the delegitimization of Israel.
Yes, the ISM was among those responsible for the Mavi Marmara flotilla, and even though
(or perhaps because) people were killed and wounded in the flotilla, they saw
the operation as a success.
As stated above, one of the ISM’s tactics is
direct confrontation with representatives of the government or the military, such as the provocation that brought down Col.
Shalom Eisner earlier this year and the incident involving Rachel Corrie. Corrie was
killed in a closed military zone while interfering with a vital military
operation against terror attacks coming out of Gaza. The ISM, then,
sent Corrie into a confrontation that put her life in danger. But rather than sue
the ISM for having lured their naïve child under false pretenses and enticing
her into solidarity with terrorists, her parents chose to sue Israel.
At the same time that they brought their suit and even
before the ruling was handed down, the Rachel Corrie Foundation worked to delegitimize the
Israeli legal system. A call to join the anti-Israel BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions)
movement has pride of place on its website.
That is the legacy of Rachel Corrie. Unfortunately
for all of us, Rachel Corrie was not a peace activist, nor was she simply a
left-wing activist. She was used as a pawn in the western jihad against the
Jewish state.
The ISM assigns great importance to media coverage of its
anti-Israel activity. Some elements of the Israeli media are won over by the false propaganda, while others fall into
the trap of ignorance. The day after the ruling was handed down, the newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth
ran an innocent-looking article about Rachel Corrie’s parents, who never questioned
their daughter’s membership in such a radical anti-Israel group. The ISM can tick off
Yedioth Ahronoth. As far as Haaretz is concerned, they hardly had to do a thing, since the ruling was “a sad day for
justice and human rights,” as a front-page headline read.
We have already discussed how among the radical Left, the
term “human rights” has been twisted and corrupted to mean “the rights of
anyone who is not a Jew.” Only Jews have no right to protect the lives of their
citizens, to say nothing of the right to having a state of their own in the
world.
The covenant of the written word
A debate is taking place in Germany over the legitimacy of the ancient
Jewish custom of circumcision. What historical, even macabre, irony. Tell the Christians
in Germany that their messiah, too, underwent a completely valid circumcision. The Jews caused
a fuss, and even Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger and President
Shimon Peres volunteered to
tell the Germans a thing or two about freedom of religion.
And I ask: What are Jews doing in Germany? In the name of
all the generations and the memories, why have the Jews lost
their memory and self-respect and chosen to put down roots in the country that
announced the “Final Solution to the Jewish Question?” Dear Jews, Germany
is not your home and never will be. Come home.
But here, too, a few militants have chosen to side with the
enlightened Germans. Writer Eyal Meged penned an article in Haaretz that called upon the president of Israel to
do as the Germans are doing and “ask us to reconsider the sacrifice of every
Jewish male on the altar of the mohalim [ritual circumcisers].” Oh, those
enlightened people. They’re so enlightened that they sit in the darkness of
self-importance, pouring scorn on the natives who hold to the tradition of
their ancestors and bring their sons into the covenant of our forefather
Abraham.
No, Meged, this is not some narrow-minded religious
custom. It is not some whim of the rabbis, nor is it something made up by a
Shas "commissar.” It is the first of our national traditions – the covenant
that constitutes entry into the Jewish people. The covenant of
the flesh, carried out precisely upon the reproductive organ. Responsibility
and commitment not only toward the continuity of the Jewish people, but
responsibility in sexual matters as well. And from the covenant
of the organ of procreation, we move to the covenant of the written and spoken
word. The fact that the Hebrew word for “circumcision,” milah, is identical to the Hebrew word for “word” makes us aware of
our responsibility toward words as the creators of worlds. After all, we are
the People of the Book, whose tradition connects flesh and spirit.
The words of a writer who does not understand the vital
importance of commitment to his people’s tradition, who shakes his head in
wonder at the extremely high rate of its observance among all parts of the
nation (about 98 percent!), a writer estranged from the covenant of
circumcision – the words in such a writer’s book will blow away like dust in
the wind, without leaving a trace on the cultural memory of his people.
No comments:
Post a Comment