Doc's Talk: Abbas calls for "war for Allah," and the West Bank erupts in violence

Monday, July 28, 2014

Abbas calls for "war for Allah," and the West Bank erupts in violence

Intifada-style violence follows Abbas' call

for religious "war for Allah,"

causing 9 Palestinians deaths

Senior Fatah official Tirawi:

"The big explosion is coming...

No one will say that weapons are forbidden

in the West Bank."

http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=12192

by Itamar Marcus

Palestinian Media Watch reported on Thursday that Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas had publicly declared the current conflict with Israel as a religious "war for Allah." On Friday, the Palestinian news service Ma'an printed an opinion piece that likewise interpreted the last lines of Abbas' speech as a call to West Bank Palestinians to initiate violence:

"He gave the sign to let the [Palestinian] street in the West Bank loose. Isn't the Quranic verse he quoted during his last speech, 'Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged. And indeed, Allah is competent to give them victory' [Surah 22:39, trans. Sahih International] a clear sign to loosen the reins of the street?"

Violence began immediately following Abba's speech and peaked on Saturday, as reported in the Jerusalem Post: "Nine Palestinians were killed during clashes with the IDF and Border Police over the weekend, in one of the deadliest days in the West Bank in the last 10 years." [July 27, 2014]

A cartoon published in the office PA daily today similarly indicated the PA seeks violence. The picture showed two masked men throwing Molotov cocktails and fire raging in the background. The Arabic text is a saying attributed to Mohammed regarding the end of the Ramadan fast: "The thirst has passed, and the throat is moist." In this context, the cartoon indicates that the period of quiet is over, and violence has returned.

[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, July 26, 2014]

The Ma'an journalist cited above explained that Abbas chose to encourage the West Bank to join in the violence for political reasons:

"Abbas realized that by staying outside the arena, he would be excluded from the political game. He also knows that the [Palestinian] street in the West Bank is ready for an explosion."

The op-ed also noted an explicit statement made by senior Fatah official Central Committee member Tawfiq Tirawi as another indication of Abbas' desire for violence:

"What is the meaning of Fatah Central Committee member Tawfiq Tirawi's statement regarding the West Bank's need to enter into an armed Intifada? It's been a long time since we heard a member of the Fatah leadership talk about weapons. The West Bank's entrance into the line of confrontation will reshuffle the cards, and the action is still just beginning."

Tirawi said in a TV interview that the violence we are witnessing now in the West Bank is just the beginning and will lead to a "big explosion":

Fatah Central Committee member Tawfiq Tirawi: "These are small explosions, which happen occasionally, but the big explosion is coming. The big explosion is coming. After the big explosion, no one will know where it will lead and what its results will be...It is legal to use all means - to shoot, throw stones, to hold a demonstration and a sit-down strike. All these means will be possible and permissible for our people, and let no one say that weapons are forbidden in the West Bank."

[Al-Mayadeen TV channel (Lebanon), July 24, 2014]

Click to view

Furthermore, Abbas issued two statements in support of continuing the West Bank unrest. In one, the PA leadership called on its "great nation to engage in continued popular action," and in the second it urged Palestinians "to continue peaceful popular resistance." As noted, the current "popular actions" are not "peaceful."

Yasser Abd Rabbo reads the PLO leadership statement: "The Palestinian leadership called on the masses of our great nation to engage in continued popular action of the broadest scope, to express its firm support for the heroic Gaza Strip and its brave resistance to the aggression army and its unceasing crimes."

[Official PA TV, July 23, 2014]

"A statement published at the conclusion of the [PA leadership] meeting stated that...'Even as the [PA] leadership emphasizes that it will continue to act to support the heroic Gaza Strip and to stem its flow of blood, it calls on all our people to continue peaceful popular resistance to support Gaza, its Martyrs (Shahids) and brave sons...'"

[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, July 27, 2014]

PMW has reported on the PA and Abbas' Fatah movement of policy glorifying violence and honoring terrorists who have murdered Israelis. Abbas and PA leaders have said many times that they do not reject violence but that violence needs proper timing. Ma'an understands that Abbas' decision to quote a Quran source justifying religious war, and the violence erupting in the West Bank subsequent to Abbas' speech, are indicators he considers this is an appropriate time for violence.

The following is a longer segment from the op-ed arguing that Mahmoud Abbas is behind the current West Bank violence:

Headline: "A single Quranic verse ignited the West Bank"

"Mahmoud Abbas read the situation well. In an implicit way, he fully supports the Egyptian initiative - for it is inconceivable that the West Bank could oppose Egypt. He acted slowly at first, convinced that Hamas would not endure Israeli fire for long. Yet it [Hamas] has withstood Israel's painful blows, and [even] embarrassed it by capturing the Israeli soldier.

Abbas realized that by staying outside the arena, he would be excluded from the political game. He also knows that the [Palestinian] street in the West Bank is ready for an explosion. Therefore, he gave the sign to let the [Palestinian] street in the West Bank loose. Isn't the Quranic verse he quoted during his last speech, "Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged. And indeed, Allah is competent to give them victory" [Surah 22:39, trans. Sahih International] a clear sign to loosen the reins on the street?

Furthermore, what is the meaning of Fatah Central Committee member Tawfiq Tirawi's statement regarding the West Bank's need to enter into an armed Intifada? It's been a long time since we heard a member of the Fatah leadership talk about weapons. The West Bank's entrance into the line of confrontation will reshuffle the cards, and the action is still just beginning. Israel will not agree to a third Intifada, and this is precisely what Abbas wants. He wants Israel to knock on his door in order to find a solution."

[Op-ed by Muhannad Ubeid, Ma'an (independent Palestinian news agency),

July 25, 2014]

Note: the captured Israeli soldier to which this article refers is Staff Sergeant Oron Shaul, who was declared MIA after his Armored Personnel Carrier was destroyed during combat in Gaza on July 17, 2014. Hamas claimed to have kidnapped him. On Friday, July 26, 2014, the IDF declared that Oron Shaul was 'a soldier killed in action whose burial site is unknown.'

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