Franchising "Apartheid": Why South Africans Push the Analogy Part III

3^rd part of 3

No Answer

On the one hand, the use of the apartheid metaphor is hardly unusual in the South African political context. Almost every political debate is framed in terms of apartheid. The ANC routinely accuses its opponents, often without justification, of having supported apartheid, and opposition parties retort by comparing the ANC to the National Party which designed the intricate apartheid system and ruled the country for five decades. The past is still present in South African political discourse, on Israel and on many other issues as well.

On the other hand, Israel is different. The ANC devotes more attention to Israel than to many domestic issues and conflicts closer to home. It denies that anti-Israel protest is often antisemitic, but on no other issue has the party been more willing to abandon its supposedly non-racial ideals. Party leaders have addressed openly antisemitic rallies; radical sectors of the party have made blatantly antisemitic statements; and ANC election posters have featured blood-drenched Israeli flags.[54]

In truth, the Israel-apartheid analogy is not entirely new. It was first used not by anti-apartheid activists, but the apartheid regime itself, protesting Israel's stance against South Africa at the UN in the 1950s and 1960s. Prime Minister Hendrik Verwoerd, the chief architect of apartheid, threatened South Africa's Jews with a tide of rising antisemitism should they fail to dissent from Israel's foreign policy.[55] The Afrikaans press supported Verwoerd, with many writers and correspondents comparing Zionism with apartheid and complaining that Israel's opposition to the latter was hypocritical.[56]

[T]he Israel-apartheid analogy...was first used not by anti-apartheid activists, but the apartheid regime itself, protesting Israel's stance against South Africa at the UN in the 1950s and 1960s

What the white nationalist right and the black post-colonial left share is distaste for opposition and difference combined with envy of Israel's success. Afrikaners viewed Israel, falsely, as a state of "whites" that had thrived in a sea of "non-white" nations, but which unlike South Africa had largely escaped global condemnation. Today's far-right remnant envies Israel's persistence when Afrikaners have had to give up their own national aspirations.

The ANC looked to Israel as an example of an oppressed people that had overcome racial persecution, enormous political obstacles and military weakness to build a successful, thriving nation. Israel's continued economic achievements, scientific innovation and vibrant culture in the face of terror stand in stark contrast to the ANC's mismanagement of the state and economy, which it still blames on the past.

Neither the far right nor the ANC's left can tolerate or even comprehend the economic success of South African Jews, which was largely achieved in spite of - not because of - both governments. Nor can they come to terms with a strong, successful, and democratic Israel. It goes against the dualism between strong oppressors and the weak oppressed according to which every political issue is framed in South Africa and every government failure is justified.

South Africa tells Israel that it only has a right to exist-if at all-as a victim of Nazi oppression, just as the ANC bases its claim to legitimacy, power and privilege on apartheid. But Israel has moved beyond its past, while South Africa has failed to use the memory of apartheid to motivate positive national unity and achievement. No false analogies and no re-writing of history can mask that.

[1] About half of South Africa's Muslim population is of Malay descent and the other half is of Indian descent. There has been a significant Muslim population in the region since the late 1600s.

2 Liphshiz, Canaan. "Anti-Israel Picket in South Africa: Protestors for Hire?" Haaretz, 9 June 2007.

3 "Pew Global Attitudes Project: Spring 2007 Survey of 47 Publics," Pew Global Attitudes Project, 2007.

4 Carter, Jimmy. Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, Simon and Schuster: 2006

5 "World Conference Against Racism NGO Forum Declaration." Durban, South Africa. 03 Sep 2001 .

6 Braun, Elihai. "The UN World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, Durban, South Africa."

7 "South Africa." CIA World Factbook.

8 McCarthy, Rory. "Israel Risks Apartheid-Like Struggle if Two-State Solution Fails, Says Olmert." The Guardian. 30 Nov 2007.

9 Pogrund, Benjamin. "Israel is a democracy in which Arabs vote." Focus 40 (2005).

10 Freedom House. Freedom in the World 2007.

11 Klinghoffer, Arthur Jay. Oiling the Wheels of Apartheid: Exposing South Africa's Secret Oil Trade (London: Lynne Rienner, 1989).

12 El-Fassed, Arjan. "The Mandela memo."

13Brandeis University. "Full coverage of the historic Jan. 23^rd visit by former President Jimmy Carter."

14"Walter Sisulu: A giant of the liberation struggle." ANC Today 9 May 2003.

15 Tutu, Desomd. "Palestine and Apartheid." Speech at Friends of Sabeel Conference, Boston, 27 Oct 2007.

16 Kasrils, Ronnie. Armed and Dangerous: From Undercover Struggle to Freedom. Updated ed. Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball, 2004.

17 Baruch, Ilan. "SA Needs to Know Too," Cape Times, 3 July 2007.

18 Dugard, John. "Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights

in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967." 29 Jan 2007. http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/HRC/4/17&Lang=E

19 Ibid, p. 6.

20 International Herald Tribune, "UN Expert Calls Palestinian Terrorism `Inevitable Consequence' of Israeli Occupation," 26 Feb 2008.

21 BBC News. "West `pandering to Darfur rebels'." 4 Oct 2007.

22 Speech at the Kennedy School of Government, moderated by Prof. Duncan Kennedy, 25 Oct 2007.

23 "SA to Work with Zimbabwe's Spies," BBC News, 18 Nov 2005.

24 Mbeki, Thabo. "Aluta continua." ANC Today 26 Nov 2004 .

25 "Tutu: I'll pray for Mbeki." News24.com 29 Nov. 2004 .

26 BBC News. "ANC seeks to calm war of words." 30 Nov. 2004 .

27 "Declaration of Conscience Challenges Roots of Mistrust." ANC Today 7 Dec. 2001 .

28 Keinon, Herb and Associated Press. "South Africa Invites Haniyeh to Visit." Jerusalem Post 3 May 2007 .

29 Kasrils, Ronnie. "Bigotry on Israel." Business Day 15 May 2007 .

30 ANC 52^nd National Conference Resolution 52. Polokwane, 2007 < http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/history/conf/conference52/resolutions-f.html>.

31 "International Relations: A Just World and a Better Africa is a Possibility." ANC Discussion Document, Polokwane Conference 2007 ,

32 Moorcraft, Paul. "South Africa: `Allah's Bomb' and Other Nuclear Nightmares." Business Day, 14 January 2008.

33 Alon, Gideon. "Iran may get uranium from S. Africa following cooperation deal." Ha'aretz 18 Aug 2004.

34 PressTV. "S. Africa says Iran visit positive." 18 Apr 2007.

35"Harare Regime Scores `Universally Low' Approval Rating." The Star 8 Dec. 2004.

36 "SA Oil-for-Food Hearing to Start in May," Mail and Guardian, 21 April 2006

37 Hamlyn, Michael. "DA Presses Protector Over Oilgate." I-Net Bridge 24 Jan 2008 < http://iafrica.com/news/sa/821180.htm>.

38 Pollak, Joel. "South African Foreign Policy For Sale?" Guide to the Perplexed 15 Jul. 2007 < http://guidetotheperplexed.blogspot.com/2007/07/15-july-2007-south-african-foreign.html>,

39 "Diplomacy: Israel Closes SA Trade Office." African Business 1 Jul. 2004

40 Holiday, Anthony. "Has Mbeki changed line on Israel?" Cape Times 10 Jan. 2006.

41 "Call to mobilize against Israeli occupation." ANC Today 20 May 2007 < http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/anctoday/2007/at20.htm#art1>,

42 See "South Africa Annual Country Reports" 1997-2006, The Stephen Roth Institute for The Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism,

43 Ibid.

44 "South Africa 2002," The Stephen Roth Institute for The Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism,

45 Ibid.

46 "South Africa 2006," The Stephen Roth Institute for The Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism,

47 South Africa Press Association. "`Apartheid Israel' Worse Than Apartheid SA." 10 Ju. 2006 < http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx?area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__national/&articleid=276860>,

48 Krengel, Zev. "A letter from a South African Jewish community leader." Ha'aretz (27 Apr 2005).

49 "South Africa 2006." The Stephen Roth Institute for The Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism.

50 Tshwete, Steve. "Where was the Portuguese community when the majority of South Africans suffered the crimes of apartheid?"

51 Nathan, Laurie. "The Declaration of Commitment by White South Africans." Presentation to Harold Wolpe Forum, Cape Town, 20 Feb 2001.

52 Ibid.

53 Kasrils, Ronnie. Debates of the National Assembly: 6852.

54 Barrell, Howard. "Rasool's brothers linked to anti-Semitic poster." Mail & Guardian 24 Nov 2000 .

55 Shimoni, Gideon. Jews and Zionism: The South African Experience 1910-1967. Cape Town: Oxford UP, 1980. 310-1.

56 Shimoni, Gideon. Jews and Zionism: The South African Experience 1910-1967. Cape Town: Oxford UP, 1980. 312-13.

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

 

Fatah Leader, School Books Supports Terrorism against US in Iraq

by Ezra HaLevi

A leader of Mahmoud Abbas's US-backed Fatah party has come out in support of the terrorist war being fought against US and British forces in Iraq. PA text books for school children also push attacks on American and British forces

Mahmoud Ismail, a member of the PLO Executive Committee, expressed his support for the war on the US during an interview on official Palestinian Authority (PA) TV, which is under the control of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. The clip was recorded and translated by Palestinian Media Watch, which monitors incitement on PA television.

Ismail further defined the US -Britain alliance fighting in Iraq as the Arab Nation's "enemies, the imperialists," and justified the "right to struggle and to resistance [euphemism for terror -PMW] in all possible ways in all the occupied lands." Those occupied lands, he said, include "Palestine" and Iraq.

PMW translated Ismail's complete statements, made on PA television on February 26, 2008:

"I want to cite the actions and future actions of President [Abbas], from the starting point that the Palestine cause is the essential and central cause of the Arab Nation. It's not surprising that [to] certain journalists of the current despicable American era, our [Arab nationalist] language of the 50s and 60s is outdated, when we talk about the nature of the struggle between the Arab Nation and its enemies: the Imperialists and Zionists, who attack and occupy our territories inside Palestine and outside, in Iraq, in the remains of South Lebanon and the Golan.
 
"We [however,] take pride in this [Arab nationalist] language because we are the authentic Arabs who believe in our Arabism, our faith, our cause, our Nation, in our right to struggle and to resistance [euphemism for terror] in all possible ways in all the occupied lands, in Palestine, Lebanon the Golan and Iraq..."

PA Text Books Call For Fighting Americans and British in Iraq
"Palestinian support for those fighting American and British soldiers in Iraq is mainstream Palestinian ideology," Palestinian Media Watch Director Itamar Marcus says. One example given is a recently published PA textbook for schoolchildren, Contemporary Problems (grade 12, p. 92),  in which fighting between the Islamic-Arab world and the West is described as a "Clash of Civilizations." The book frequently expains that the clash is led by the United States and Iraq, PMW reports.

Fighting against American and British soldiers in Iraq is "brave resistance to liberate Iraq" from "occupation" according to the Grade 12 textboom "History of the Arabs and the World in the 20th Century." (p. 147)

 
"Islam is said to promote Human Rights (Contemporary Problems, pp. 95-96), while the US and the West are described as 'the colonialist states, [who] are taking advantage of it [human rights]' and 'interfering in the matters of other states, as is happening in Afghanistan, Iraq, Darfur...' (ibid, p. 101) America is guilty of 'violations of international humanitarian law in Iraq and Afghanistan...' (ibid, p. 108) 

According to PMW, the PA schoolbooks were published with foreign money, primarily from Belgium.
 
The following is a translated passage from the new 12th grade Palestinian history book:
 
"The President of the United States, George Bush Jr [sic], gave the Iraqi president in 2003 an ultimatum of 48 hours to leave Iraq, or face a war to disarm him. The Arab League rejected this ultimatum. The U.S. and Britain [forces]... stormed Iraqi cities with the participation of military forces from different countries and Baghdad fell. The Iraqis did not surrender to this occupation but succeeded in organizing themselves, and a brave resistance to liberate Iraq began." [History of the Arabs and the World in the 20th Century, grade 12, p. 147, published 2006]

Ezra HaLevi

 

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

 

Depravity

 

by Dr Mike 

 

Last week's terror attack against students at the Mercaz HaRav yeshiva in Jerusalem shows that really, the "peace process" has changed nothing on the Palestinian side, whether it be in their own leaders or their supporters around the world. Their goal in 2008 remains the same as it was in 2000, in 1972, and in 1948: the elimination of Jewish self-determination in our homeland. Their methods remain the same: the random slaughter of as many Jews as possible, especially those going about their daily lives in schools, in restaurants or on buses, to spread terror among the civilian population. Their reaction to these atrocities remains the same: the Palestinian street's celebration of mass murder and the near-deification of the murderers as "martyrs", and their apologists around the world blaming the victims and excusing the perpetrators.

Mahmoud Abbas gave his usual condemnation of the attack. However, expecting him to actually take any steps against Hamas in the West Bank, or even to stop official PA incitement of terrorism, is clearly out of the question. After all, the official PA daily Al Hayat Al Jadida gave the murderer front page coverage and declared him a "shahid". And Abbas himself got a little careless when speaking in Arabic to the Jordanian newspaper Al-Dustur, boasting about his pride in having "fired the first shot" for Fatah against Israel in 1965 (2 years before Israel took the West Bank from Jordan in the Six Day War) and having taught other terror groups how to conduct "resistance". He did reiterate his position against armed conflict with Israel--"because we are unable. In the future stages, things may be different."

Of course, in Hamas-stan, there's no need for any type of pretense. The scenes of joy caught on camera would suggest something benign and cheerful like a victory in a World Cup soccer match. Despite the supposed dire humanitarian condition in Gaza, there's always candy to hand out and weapons to fire into the air when Jews are killed, and always enough material to make more rockets to launch at Sderot and Ashkelon. It's impossible to watch these without wondering how this raw hatred and addiction to violence will ever be overcome. None of these people are under the illusion that acts of terrorism like this will lead to a Palestinian state alongside Israel, because these are not people who are interested in living alongside a Jewish state. If anyone doubts that, read the Hamas Charter. And to anyone who wishes to claim that this is all just part of a "cycle of violence", try to find a film of Israelis celebrating deaths of Palestinian civilians, or articles in the Israeli press cheering Palestinian civilian deaths (I mean REAL civilians, not the apparent BBC definition of a civilian as an armed fighter in a ski mask who doesn't happen to have an official militia card in his pocket) .

The apologists for Palestinian terror of course had to try to explain this atrocity away as being the fault of the Israelis; I suspect the same people who are so dedicated to "peace and justice" would react in utter horror to a rapist blaming his crime on the victim. Some will undoubtedly claim a similarity to Baruch Goldstein, who was correctly and widely condemned by all but a fringe element of Israeli society (and the worldwide Jewish community), as opposed to being officially lauded as a hero and his murderous acts publicly taught to schoolchildren as an example of heroism. The bleating voices at "Jewish Peace News" managed to talk out of both sides of their mouths at once, condemning the violence and admitting that "Hamas' praise for the operation is both contemptible and chilling" yet then going on to say that "terrorist violence like this is almost always a symptom of Israel's expansionist policies and is unlikely to end until the occupation is over." It makes me wonder; what part of Article 11 of the Hamas Charter don't they believe? "The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up."

Palestinian terror existed before the state of Israel was established , it existed before the West Bank and Gaza were under Israeli control (as Abbas himself proudly pointed out), it existed before the Oslo Accords, and it exists now. The goal now is the same as it was then: "itbach el-Yahud" (slaughter the Jews). Those who think that this appetite for blood will stop when Israel withdraws from the West Bank, as it has already withdrawn from Gaza, are naive at best and fraudulent at worst.

If Israel reacted the way other countries around the world would respond, then Gaza City would look like Grozny after the Russians were through with it, or the Old City of  Hama, Syria which Hafez Assad paved with asphalt after eliminating the Muslim Brotherhood (as well as thousands of other citizens) there. The fact that Israel is still willing to conduct talks with Mahmoud Abbas, and that Israel has shown incredible restraint not only after terror attacks like this but also during the daily shelling from Gaza, stands in stark contrast to the bloodlust shared by too many Palestinians and excused by too many of their supporters around the world.

 

Dr Mike 

 

Original content is Copyright by the author 2008. Posted at

Palestinian funding.

 

By Joel Mowbray

 
A showdown could be looming between Congress and the Bush administration over a $150 million emergency aid package for the Palestinian Authority government led by President Mahmoud Abbas.

At issue is whether or not Mr. Abbas has either the capacity or desire to bring Palestinians closer to a peace deal with Israel, and it was his own words that triggered congressional wrath.

In an interview with Jordanian newspaper Al-Dastur last week, Mr. Abbas spoke with pride of violence he had waged in his past, suggested that terrorism could start anew in the future, and essentially backed away from repeated statements that he "recognizes" Israel's right to exist. A top congressional appropriator, Foreign Operations Chairman Nita Lowey, said flatly, "President Abbas' recent statements cast doubt on his willingness to take the steps necessary for peace with Israel."

But Mr. Abbas' comments alone likely would not have sparked this fracas. Just one day after news of the interview shocked key legislators and staffers, who learned of it last Thursday when it was translated into English by watchdog group Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), the administration sent over its plan for $150 million in direct cash assistance to Abbas' PA.

"What were they [administration officials] thinking sending over the request the day after Abbas announces he's open to re-starting terrorism and doesn't really recognize Israel's right to exist?" asked one miffed Hill staffer.

Appearing much less careful than when speaking in English, Mr. Abbas last week told the Arabic-language Al-Dastur, "I was honored to be the one to shoot the first bullet in 1965," the year his organization, Fatah, initiated terrorism against Israel. (Transcript provided by PMW.) The renowned "moderate" Palestinian leader then explained his pride in "having taught resistance to many in this area and around the world ... including Hezbollah, who were trained in [PLO] camps."

At least Mr. Abbas stated an opposition to terrorism, noting, "Now we are against armed conflict." His reasoning, though, is what troubles Congress: "because we are unable." Possibly hinting at a shift in strategies, he immediately added, "In the future stages, things may be different."

Most concerning to Congress, however, was a statement that at first blush might seem relatively innocuous. Discussing the question of whether or not Hamas must "recognize" Israel, Mr. Abbas explained, "I don't demand that the Hamas movement recognize Israel. I only demanded of the [Palestinian] national unity government that would work opposite Israel in recognition of it."

This comment raised eyebrows because it shifted the common understanding of what it means to "recognize" the Jewish state. Most understand "recognition" to be fairly straightforward: The acknowledgement of the right of Israel to exist peacefully as a Jewish state neighboring a Palestinian one. Mr. Abbas, however, now defines "recognition" as acknowledging in a literal sense that an entity named "Israel" is the party at the other end of the negotiating table.

Mr. Abbas does not deserve the benefit of the doubt on this count. Defending his "recognition" of Israel on TV network Al-Arabiya in October 2006, he explained that it was more a practical reality than a meaningful political position. He cited as an example the need for the PA to get $500 million from Israel: "The Palestinian finance minister has to come to an agreement with the Israeli finance minister about the transfer of the money. So how can he make an agreement with him if [the PA finance minister] does not recognize him? So I do not demand of Hamas nor any other to recognize Israel. But from the government that works with Israelis in day to day life, yes."

In other words, Mr. Abbas only recognizes Israel when money is on the line, but not in the way the U.S. and Israel think he does.

The contents of that interview only came to public attention because of the tireless work of Palestinian Media Watch, which monitors a wide array of Palestinian media on a shoestring budget. And in the next week, PMW will be releasing a report titled "Since Annapolis," which will detail how in the few months since this most recent round of peace talks, "the PA Abbas-controlled media has continued to send clear messages to its people that deny Israel's right to exist and anticipate its destruction," according to PMW director and founder Itamar Marcus.

Even if Rep. Lowey gets strong bipartisan support to withhold the $150 million from the PA, odds are Mr. Abbas will get the money he needs in the short run, whether from the U.S. or not. But in the future, he might finally be more careful before speaking - even in Arabic.

 

Joel Mowbray

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

 

Al-Qaeda has infiltrated Gaza with help of Hamas, says Abbas

By James Hider

Al-Qaeda militants have infiltrated the Palestinian territories with help from Hamas, according to Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian President.

The charges are the most serious yet in the war of words between Mr Abbas, who controls the West Bank, and Hamas, whose Islamist guerrillas expelled his Fatah-dominated security force from the Gaza Strip last summer.

"Al-Qaeda is present in Gaza and I'm convinced that they [Hamas] are their allies," said Mr Abbas in an interview with al-Hayat, a London-based Arabic newspaper. "I can say without doubt that al-Qaeda is present in the Palestinian territories and that this presence, especially in Gaza, is facilitated by Hamas."

Israel has long accused al-Qaeda of infiltrating the Palestinian territories. The Israeli army's intelligence chief said this week that more al-Qaeda members had entered the Gaza Strip after Hamas blew up the wall on the Egyptian border in January.

Mr Abbas's comments were the first time that such a senior Palestinian statesman has added his weight to the charges.

The accusation came as Hamas fired rockets into a southern Israeli college campus yesterday, killing an Israeli man. Israeli forces carried out a series of strikes in the Gaza Strip and West Bank, killing at least seven suspected militants, including several Hamas senior commanders. Last night Israeli jets struck the offices of Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas Prime Minister, and the nearby premises of his interior ministry. He was not there at the time.

Hamas, a nationalist Islamist organisation whose charter calls for the destruction of Israel, has been at pains to distance itself publicly from the fanatical al-Qaeda. "There is no truth in these allegations," said Sami Abu Zuhri, a spokesman, in turn accusing Mr Abbas - regarded as an Israeli stooge for his faltering peace negotiations with Jerusalem - of "seeking to mobilise international opinion against Hamas".

Last year a group calling itself the Army of Islam kidnapped Alan Johnston, a BBC reporter, in Gaza and held him for more than three months while claiming to have links to Osama bin Laden's organisation. The kidnapping took place before Hamas seized control in June, and the Islamist organisation - which had previously conducted anti-Israeli operations with the Army of Islam - forced it to release Johnston.

Hamas said that the Army of Islam had been financed by Muhammad Dahlan, the hated Fatah security chief in Gaza, who is close to Mr Abbas.

In January, another group calling itself the Army of Believers, Al-Qaeda in Palestine Organisation, ransacked the private American International School. A Christian bookseller was also recently murdered in Gaza, while a gunman shot up a YMCA centre. Western journalists have been alerted to possible kidnap threats.

Some independent analysts believe that al-Qaeda - losing ground in Iraq as local Sunni insurgents reject its ultra-violent tactics - may be seeking to establish itself in new areas. Osama bin Laden said that he was focusing on the protracted Israel-Palestinian conflict in comments disseminated on a jihadist website in December. "We will not recognise a state for the Jews, not even one inch of the land of Palestine. Blood calls for more blood and demolishing calls for further demolishing," bin Laden said.

The man believed to be the head of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, this month described Israel as an "evil germ that has infected the body of the Umma [Islamic motherland] and must be extracted".

James Hider

 

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

---------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Disproportionate in Gaza

By Denis MacEoin

It has started all over again. Israel fights back against Hamas aggression, and everybody cries 'disproportionate'. There's a body count, and it turns out that the Israelis have killed far more Palestinians than the Palestinians have killed Israelis. Apparently this means Israel has been disproportionate.

But war isn't about exact body counts. Most of the dead Palestinians have been Hamas fighters. If more soldiers on one side die than on the other, isn't that what is supposed to happen in war? As for the genuinely unfortunate Palestinian civilians who have been killed, won't anyone own up to the fact that their lives were put at risk by Hamas fighters hiding within the civilian population? That's illegal under international law, so let's be brutally honest and say that Hamas, not Israel, is guilty of war crimes here. Not so many Israelis get killed, because IDF troops are based away from civilian centres. And don't pretend Hamas are mere 'militants': when they fire rockets or send in suicide bombers, they target the civilian population. Another war crime.

Some sort of madness seems to grip people at a time like this. Israel pulls out of Gaza, apparently something the people of Gaza wanted. What does Hamas do? It takes control of Gaza by brute force, then it uses proxies to fire barrage after barrage of rockets into southern Israel. The pro-Palestinian brigade sneer that these 'home-made' rockets are of little consequence. I notice that none of these people have ever volunteered to live in Sderot (or Ashkelon) in order to drive that point home. If the Scots were firing similar rockets into Berwick, do you honestly believe the UK government would sit back for years and do almost nothing, as the Israeli government has done?

The real disproportion here lies with Hamas, Fatah, and their allies, in their complete refusal to abide by any of the norms of modern international law or the principles of the United Nations. Here's an early passage from the 1988 Hamas Charter:

'The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that. Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Moslem generations until Judgement Day. This being so, who could claim to have the right to represent Moslem generations till Judgement Day?

'This is the law governing the land of Palestine in the Islamic Sharia (law) and the same goes for any land the Moslems have conquered by force, because during the times of (Islamic) conquests, the Moslems consecrated these lands to Moslem generations till the Day of Judgement.'

The Day of Judgement? How on earth does that fit into the concept of the Westphalian state and the rule of international law? In 1948, when Israel was established by a majority vote of the UN, the Arabs simply defied that vote and sent armies against the new country with the intent of obliterating it. These countries wanted all the advantages that came from membership in the UN, but the moment that body voted democratically to create Israel, they turned their backs and have continued to turn their backs to the present day. Proportionate? Far from it.

The consequence for the Palestinians has been horrific. Instead of enjoying the state they were given in 1948, instead of cooperating with Israel to create mutual prosperity, they and their allies fought yet more wars, while they launched wave after wave of terrorism against the Jewish state. Some people call them resistance fighters, but that's an unforgivable response to such actions. There's nothing to resist, in that Israel is always willing to make peace the moment the violence against it stops. It has been saying so for 60 years and, to be honest, it's bloody obvious. Why would anyone prefer war. Some people don't believe that; but the Palestinians haven't once put it to the test. Why not? Because they think religious motives ('the Day of Judgement') are a valid excuse for killing innocent civilians in the 21st century?

When Israeli children are killed by rockets or suicide bombers, the people of Gaza and the West Bank hand out sweets to passers by and rejoice. When Palestinian children die in the course of an attack, no-one in Israel celebrates. When Palestinian children are wounded, they are taken to Israel and treated in Israeli hospitals. While rockets have been raining on Sderot, Israel has been providing Gaza with 90% of its electricity, with food, medicine, fuel and other necessities. What other country has shown so much compassion to an enemy plotting to destroy it? There is no proportion in any of these things, yet they build a very different picture to that given in the media, of Israel as a marauding tyrant, taking disproportionate revenge.

We all want peace. But that will not come so long as Hamas struggle for the unrealizable and for the coming of Judgement Day.

Denis MacEoin

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

 

Lies That Kill

by Carlos

There are lies, there are damn lies, and there are lies that kill.
 
And sometimes the deadliest lies gain power by exploiting little bits of truth.
 
Saree Makdisi is a professor of English literature at the University of California, Los Angeles, and a frequent writer on Palestinian issues. In a PBS NewsHour television interview he said that the Palestinian rocket strikes on cities in southern Israel are "illegal and immoral." That gives him some credibility. But then he went on to say:

It's important to be able to understand what they're coming from and what they're in response to.

The important thing is to understand where the rocket attacks are coming from and what needs to be done to stop them, which is to stop a 41-year-old illegal occupation.

The rocket attacks are in response to an ongoing situation. The situation is determined by the occupation. If the occupation stops, everything else will stop, as well.

In other words, the rocket attacks are immoral, but there is good reason for them. This is a clear contradiction. If there were a good and justifiable reason for the attacks, they would not be immoral. Makdisi wants to have it both ways.
 
Let us examine Makdisi's good reason for the rocket attacks against Israel. He says it's the "occupation." That is the Palestinian mantra used to excuse every Palestinian atrocity, and it has worked. But there's a problem: Gaza is no longer occupied. There are no more Israeli settlements in Gaza, and no Israelis live there anymore. This has been true for almost three years. Yet Makdisi insists that Gaza is "occupied."
 
Here is his reasoning:

[Hamas] is not actually in full control of Gaza. Gaza, according to international law, is still under Israeli occupation, because Israel controls the borders, the air space, territorial waters, and all access to Gaza, essentially.

These days "international law" seems to be whatever anyone says it is. "Occupation" still means to occupy, to have your people on the ground where others don't think they belong. As to the borders and territorial waters, it is not just Israel who has a say in what goes on there. The Egyptians also exercise quite a measure of control. In fact, when Palestinians in Gaza destroyed sections of the border with Egypt and many Palestinian civilians crossed over, Egyptian security forces came at them with clubs, tear gas, water cannons, and attack dogs. Then Egypt resealed the border.
 
So is Egypt occupying Gaza?
 
Makdisi's illogical exercise brings up another important question: Why the need to control the Palestinian border in the first place?
 
The answer is clear: because the Palestinians have a nasty tendency to smuggle weapons across the border, and to use those weapons. After they broke through the border with Egypt, they came back with Iranian missiles that they launched at the Israeli city of Ashkelon. (In case it needs repeating, Ashkelon is not a settlement. It is a major city on the Israeli coast.)
 
But what is Makdisi's solution? "End the occupation," by which he means stop controlling the border, since there are no more Israelis in Gaza. So now according to Makdisi, Egypt and Israel are occupying Gaza since they both control parts of Gaza's border, and this "occupation" should stop. Well, we already know what would happen if it stopped and there were no controls at all on the borders. Palestinians would be smuggling weapons in without restraint, and the rocket fire on Israel would escalate. This is what Makdisi wants Israel to allow.
 
And since, by Makdisi's logic Egypt is also occupying Gaza, it would be gentlemanly of

him to direct at least some of his outrage towards Egypt. Why let Israel hog it all?

By the way, Makdisi should be very relieved to learn that today Israel opened its border to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza, including over 160 trucks containing medical supplies and equipment. Another country would have laid siege to Gaza. But unlike Hamas, Israel is not trying to make civilians suffer. Now will Hamas ease its aggressive policies in response? Would anyone like to risk a little money on it?

Makdisi begins with a kernel of truth and turns it into a deadly lie. Following his prescription would not produce peace but would guarantee a dramatic increase in the violence, leading to many more deaths on both the Israeli and Palestinian sides. This is what results from the premise that Israel is responsible for every single aspect of Palestinian life, no matter what the Palestinians do, no matter how many schools and hospitals they target, and the Palestinians are responsible for nothing.
 
Unfortunately, it does not end here. The Palestinian lie, which Makdisi represents and which the Palestinians have apparently successfully sold to most of the world, threatens Israel's existence and the stability of the entire region - which means the stability of the entire world.
 
It is as much because of what the lie conceals as because of what it already has revealed. This is the deadly subtext: Hamas is taking a page from the playbook of its ally to the north, Hezbollah. Hezbollah has established a battery of rocket launching sites all along Israel's northern border, stocked with thousands of projectiles much more powerful than the Palestinian qassams. During the most recent Lebanon war Hezbollah devastated Israel's northern cities and inflicted serious damage as far as Haifa. For all of Israel's efforts during that war, and the pretense of the United Nations to do something about it, the threat is worse now than it was then. And while Hezbollah picks and chooses its times, and is no doubt waiting for an opportune moment to strike, Hamas is using some of those heavier weapons right now.
 
Since last Wednesday Palestinians have fired more than 200 rockets at Israel. These include at least 21 of the longer-range Katyusha-style rockets, which the Palestinians don't make themselves but smuggle from the outside. The use of these Katyushas is an ominous sign that Hamas is beginning to adopt the Hezbollah strategy.
 
"I have no doubt that the people who built Hezbollah's military machine are now building the military machine of Hamas," said Israeli spokesman Mark Regev. He also noted that the longer-range rockets used by both Hezbollah and Hamas were made in Iran, and that Iran gives Hamas both training and logistical support. Hamas is also using another cynical but effective Hezbollah tactic: launching attacks from civilian areas and even storing weapons in people's homes. This presents Israel with the "Sophie's choice" of either risking harm to Palestinian civilians or allowing its own civilians to be murdered at will. The Palestinians bank on world sympathy to make this tactic work, and it has.
 
Is this comparison to Hezbollah simply Jewish paranoia? Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum announced that, like Hezbollah, Hamas had "gone from the stone to the rocket." He added: "What we learned from Hezbollah is that resistance is a choice that can work." The course seems clear: Hamas is pursuing a Hezbollah strategy in Gaza.
 
And so Regev noted that if Israel does not do something about it now, it will one day wake up to find much of its population within range of far more powerful Hamas rockets. And Hamas will not wait for a war in Lebanon to use them.
 
Hamas is openly and unapologetically sworn to Israel's destruction. Can anyone seriously imagine that supporting Hamas while it is building its military capability will promote the peace that we all (except Hamas) want? Yet that is exactly what people are doing. Condemning Israel for trying to protect its citizens supports Hamas. It sends the terrorists a message that the more they persist and wait it out, and the more Palestinian casualties, the better their chance of prevailing. What does Hamas care? Martyrdom is, after all, a blessing, even when imposed on people without their consent. With over 100 Palestinian dead, Hamas staged a victory celebration.

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, showing no more sense than his predecessor, said "I condemn the disproportionate and excessive use of force that has killed and injured so many civilians, including children." Yes, the death of civilians on either side is damnable, but why not also condemn, in terms just as strong, the aggression by Hamas that led up to this? Why not condemn, in terms just as strong, the deaths and injuries of Israeli civilians? Why not condemn the evil practice by Hamas of deliberately putting Palestinian as well as Israeli civilians in harm's way?
 
If the world waits until Israel fights back before it issues its condemnations, then one thing is certain. Hamas will take it as encouragement, will build up its arsenal and use it, and before we know it there will be a Lebanon war in Gaza. It is the same old story: the terrorists attack, Israel tries to stop the attacks, international pressure forces Israel to withdraw, the terrorists celebrate and claim they have won, they launch an even more devastating attack and the whole dance repeats itself. Only each time it gets worse and the stakes become even higher. Even the United States is guilty of this insane approach to the problem. How often must this cycle repeat before people come to their senses?
 
Strong international pressure must be put on Hamas to stop its war against Israel's citizens. Then Israel will have no excuse to intervene in Gaza, nor will it want to. And then the peace talks can continue. I don't expect Ban Ki-Moon to love Israel. But if he and all those who think like him don't acquire a sense of proportion, the day will come when the entire region will erupt in flames, and the self-righteous moralizers will be asking, "How did it ever come to this?" "What could we have done?"
 

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

 

Gaza media wars and proportionality.

By Ami Isseroff

 

Almost everyone agrees that Israel is losing the infotainment media wars. I personally am very happy about this. I am happy not because I am a left-wing progressive Zionist, though I am also that. I am happy because I am an Israeli and a patriot. I am happy not because I am a "defeatist." Quite the opposite.

Every day, the media all over the world show terrible pictures of fighting in Gaza. A picture is worth a thousand words, 2,000 words for people who move their lips when they read. Terrible pictures and terrible statistics. One Israeli was killed by a rocket. 60, no 101, no 120 Hamas terrorists militants and associates were killed by Israel.

I hope it keeps going in the same way. Is that a cruel thing to say? Think about it. We Israelis did not chose this war with the Arabs of Gaza. They freely elected a government of genocidal war criminals in democratic elections, as we are reminded constantly. Then the genocidal war criminals took over all power illegally, because that is what genocidal war criminals have a tendency to do. They bombard our towns with rockets and smuggle in illegal weapons. They refuse to recognize our right to live in peace as a free people. I have nothing against innocent people in Gaza. The Arabs of Gaza may be sorry that they brought to power a government of genocidal war criminals, as all the polls show, but that is not relevant. The Germans were also sorry they brought Hitler to power, once it was clear that they were losing the war. Wars are only fun for warmongers when they are winning. I am sorry for every innocent person who is hurt in Gaza, for every home that is ruined for no reason by mistake. But imagine if it were the other way around? I would be much sorrier if all those homes were in Sderot or Ashqelon, and all those dead people had voted for a government that declared its determination to make peace.

Israel is losing the media wars not because, as hysterical op-ed columnists claim, we have an incompetent government of traitors who should be hanged and an incompetent and cowardly army. We are losing the media wars because we have the best army in the Middle East and perhaps, qualitatively, in the world. We are losing the media war because, while the people of Sderot and the rest of the Western Negev, some 250,000, are terrorized by little rockets that carry a few pounds of explosives, 1.5 million Gazans have to reckon with bombs carrying hundreds of pounds of explosives, with 175 mm howitzer shells and deadly accurate missiles. As long as we keep killing tens of Palestinian Arabs for every Israeli we have to be losing the picture book infotainment media wars.

The media wars are going precisely according to script. In the previous episode of Media Wars, I predicted about the Gaza media war:

The following stage is that Israel is forced to stop the operations, and the enemy declares a big victory.

.
We are now at the next stage. Hamas has declared a victory. Like the narrator in any serial TV melodrama, my predictive success is not due to prophetic abilities. BBC sends me the script in advance. It is not clear why the media are angry at Israel. Don't they sympathize with the underdog? That is the freely elected Palestinian government as we are told. Those are their policies and those are their victories. So what is the problem for BBC, the Guardian, the Independent, Reuters, and Al-Jazeera? They should be celebrating the victory with their admired friends, the Hamas. They should be showing all the happy faces of the Gazans celebrating their victory.

Pictures cannot show policies. They can't show what is in peoples' hearts and minds. Children look like children, whether they have been learning to love their neighbor, or whether they have been learning about the Hamas bunny that eats Jews. Women look like women. When they are in pain or dead, there is no way to know which woman would say with pride, "My son, the doctor gets so many pretty girlfriends," and which would say "My son, the Shihad suicide bomber got 72 virgins." There is no way of knowing who voted for a party that promised to work for peaceful coexistence with its neighbors, and who voted for a party that promised to wipe its neighbors off the face of the earth in order to bring about the end of days.

In this war, whoever kills the most people will lose the mindless infotainment media wars. Had there been camcorders and Internet in 1944, there is no doubt that pictures of the suffering civilians of the Third Reich would have been flashed around the world. Poor little Fritz in his crib, and Frieda knitting warm socks for her husband, the guard at the camp in Oswiencem, poor little Siegfried dead in his starchy and neat Hitler Jugend uniform, and poor Marlene in her dainty and spotless Bund Deutscher Madschen uniform, now stained by blood - all civilians. The kids were on a Strength Through Joy outing, you see.

The Nazis would have won the media wars hands down in 1944 and 1945. They were being pounded by overwhelming force. People would be just as sorry for them as they are for poor little Ahmed who died with his cuddly giant toy bunny that eats Jews, and Fatima, who died while dreaming of blowing herself up to liberate Jerusalem. All of them - the Germans and the Arabs of Gaza - were victims of monstrous regimes and monstrous societies. We can't blame a ten or fifteen year old kid for believing the hate they are taught by their elders. Perhaps many of those Germans who got killed by the bombs were socialists and pacifists who hated Hitler and Nazism, and perhaps many of the Arabs who will die - or even most - are wonderful people who want peace. We mustn't ever dehumanize or demonize the enemy. Heinrich, the guard at Bergen-Belsen, had a loving family and so does Ismail Haniyeh. Wars are made by ordinary people, and most of then are "innocent." The tragedy is that wars work that way. We did not start this war.

It is important however, that thinking people. now as then, remember what the war is about. The Hamas are an illegal government of a genocidal and racist militant terrorist organization that insists that they want to wipe out Israel and kill all the Jews. The Reuters news organization cannot be suspected of Zionist sympathies. They interviewed, and proudly quoted, a Hamas militant terrorist who had this to say:

"In the end, Israel will have to agree to our terms. There is no alternative to returning all of our Palestine."

That is the Hamas manifesto. What talks can one have with such a group, and what compromise, and what coexistence? What choice is there other than to fight these people? Who can return to the Arabs of Palestine what was never theirs? They never ruled Palestine since the time of the early Caliphs. Imagine if a Zionist had made such a statement - that all of the land of Israel must be "returned" to the Jewish people. The Zionist would be on much firmer historical ground, but Reuters would no doubt portray him as a fanatic. The unconsciously ironic Reuters headline for this encomium to terrorism was Inspired by God, Hamas fighters battle on. The "god" of Reuters inspires people to be terrorists.

Everyone who reads or sees or hears about Gaza must remember what it is all about. The Hamas is an illegal government of genocidal, racist terrorists. Their medium term goal is to wipe out Israel and murder or subjugate the Jews of Israel in an Islamic apartheid regime. They are a branch of the Muslim brothers. Their long term goal is to institute a caliphate in the Middle East. The short term goals of Hamas, the goals of these rocket attacks, are to sabotage the peace process and unseat the Palestinian Authority government.

When the BBC reports, "1 Israeli killed by Qassam, 120 Palestinians killed by IDF" they think they are reporting war crimes of the Zionist war criminals and "disproportionate response." When the BBC reported, "1 Londoner killed by V-II, 500 Germans killed in RAF night raids" it was treated as a great victory, was it not?

Ami Isseroff

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.