FresnoZionism.org — ציונות פרסנו

NY Times:

JERUSALEM — Israel worked Wednesday to defuse rising international anger by agreeing to a rapid release of all detainees — including those suspected of attacking its soldiers — taken after the deadly nighttime raid of six ships seeking to break its blockade of the Gaza Strip…

The release seemed most immediately aimed at repairing dangerously eroding ties with Turkey, Israel’s main ally in the Muslim world [where has the Times been for the last few years?], as demands continued to intensify around the world to end a blockade that critics say has kept Gazans isolated and impoverished…

Still, Turkey, which withdrew its ambassador to Israel, continued to press for an end to the blockade as a condition for restoring full diplomatic relations.

Why is it so hard to see that this won’t work?

It’s not possible to appease them. In the Middle East — in fact, in life in general — the weak guy loses. When you back down in front of your enemies, they don’t say “you are being reasonable, we’ll be fair to you.” On the contrary, they say “you’re weak, you can’t protect yourself, so we’ll take even more.”

Israel’s soldiers were beaten up, humiliated. Now isn’t the time to let their assailants go free. On the contrary, now is the time to be tougher. Now is the time to humiliate the enemy, to re-establish deterrence.

The Times calls it “a bid to quell anger.” Anger? Israel should be angry that its soldiers were hurt. Turkey should be relieved that its ship wasn’t torpedoed. The Turks should be the ones trying to “defuse anger.”

All the jackals are circling now. The Obama Administration, famously never allowing a crisis to go to waste, is preparing to sink its teeth into the juicy carcass as well.

NY Times again:

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration considers Israel’s blockade of Gaza to be untenable and plans to press for another approach to ensure Israel’s security while allowing more supplies into the impoverished Palestinian area, senior American officials said Wednesday.

The officials say that Israel’s deadly attack on a flotilla trying to break the siege and the resulting international condemnation create a new opportunity [!] to push for increased engagement with the Palestinian Authority and a less harsh policy toward Gaza.

“There is no question that we need a new approach to Gaza,” said one official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the policy shift is still in the early stages. He was reflecting a broadly held view in the upper reaches of the administration.

“Increased engagement with the Palestinian Authority,” of course, means things like extending the construction freeze and humiliating Israel further by damaging its sovereignty in Jerusalem. And “a less harsh policy toward Gaza” means empowering Hamas, politically and physically.

This is precisely the opposite of the approach that Israel should take.

Perhaps it’s not surprising that the academics of the Obama Administration don’t understand this, but surely Netanyahu and Barak, who live in the real Middle East should.

Here is what is supposed to be an old Bedouin story:

There once lived a rich and powerful man. One day, bandits stole a water jug; but instead of taking it back and punishing the bandits — which would have been easy, since he had many sons — he said “it’s only a jug, it’s not worth a fight. Anyway, I have more jugs.” Then they took  a goat. “Oh well, I have more goats, and after all the bandits were hungry,” he said. One day he woke up to find that they’d killed his sons, taken his camels, his tent and his wives to boot. Then, since he had no goods, no sons and no honor, they killed him.

The moral of the story, of course, is this: do not allow your enemies to humiliate you, because it weakens you and strengthens them. And always maintain a credible deterrent.

Technorati Tags: Israel

The IDF Spokesperson reports that 20 truckloads of aid taken from the captured flotilla ships was taken to the Keren Shalom crossing into Gaza.

But Hamas has refused to accept it, in keeping with their philosophy that it is always more important to hurt Jews than to help Arabs.

Here are some photos from the IDF of some of the ‘aid’ that was not transferred to Hamas:

Bulletproof vests, also worn by attackers

Gas masks

Night vision equipment and rifle scope

When the IDF naval commandos landed on the deck of the Mavi Marmara, paintball guns ready, they were met (video here) by a large number of thugs wearing face masks, bullet-proof vests and swinging various weapons including metal pipes cut from railings, etc.

Several cut-off saws used by the ‘peaceful aid workers’ were found on the deck. Here is a photo of how some of the weapons were prepared:

How railings, etc. were converted into weapons

A pile of the metal pipes used to club the commandos

They also used slingshots to shoot marbles, bolts, etc. These can be deadly.

The ‘humanitarians’ also had numerous knives and other tools that they used in the attack:

Knives and tools used as weapons on Mavi Marmara

So who were the gangsters that lay in wait on the deck? They did not include the 80-something Holocaust survivor, or any of the other celebrity dupes on board:

On board the Mavi Marmara ship that arrived as part of the flotilla to Gaza was a group of approximately 40 people with no identification papers. This was disclosed by the Israeli Security Cabinet, which gathered on Tuesday evening (June 1) for a special meeting.

According to intelligence disclosed during that meeting, these protesters wore bullet-proof vests, and carried with them night-vision goggles, weapons, and large sums of cash.  Each person in this group had the exact same amount of cash in his pockets.  While the rest of protestors [sic] was sent to the lower deck during the Shayetet Naval Special Force’s interception of the ship, the group divided into cells and remained on the upper deck in order to attack the soldiers. — IDF Spokesperson

So far there’s no hard information, although we do know that at least four out of the nine dead — we can assume that the passengers who were shot were most likely among those who attacked the Israelis — were Turkish. MEMRI has an interesting piece about some Arabs who were on board the ships, but it does not mention the Turks.

It seems to me that the violent reception given the Israelis was carefully planned and well-organized.  Here the thugs are getting ready. Note the vests, life jackets, and helmets — in addition to the poles, slingshots, etc.:

Usually, when ‘civilians’ are ‘martyred’, the anti-Israel forces go to great lengths to generate pathos. But in this case there is total silence about who they are and what they were doing. This is because they are not humanitarian activists.

They are terrorists and should not be released until they have been interrogated and it’s discovered who organized and financed them. And Israel should demand an accounting from Turkey if it is determined that the Turkish authorities had any knowledge of the plan.

As I wrote yesterday, Israel’s operation was totally legal, and Israel’s only mistake was in not understanding that their naval commandos were being sent into combat.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Gaza, flotilla, Mavi Marmara

Yesterday the UN Security Council issued a ‘Presidential Statement’ on the events surrounding Israel’s interception of the Free Gaza Flotilla.  A ‘Presidential Statement’ does not have the force of law, but it represents the unanimous opinion of the 15 council members. Supposedly the US argued for and got significant concessions in the final version; the Turkish ambassador used words like ‘piracy’, ‘banditry’, ‘murder’, etc.

Before considering the statement, you should keep three things in mind:

• The operation was entirely legal under international law (see sect. 7.7 of the laws of naval warfare here), insofar as Israel was enforcing a blockade of a hostile entity, Hamas, the vessels were warned, etc.
• The operation was planned and intended to be carried out with minimal force. The fact that five out of six ships were commandeered without incident proves this.
• Israeli personnel were met with preplanned violence as they landed on the Mavi Marmara. They were unprepared for it but did not use their weapons for 40 minutes, and until the attackers were shooting at them.

So let’s see, in part, what the USA voted for. You can read the whole statement at the link above.

The Security Council deeply regrets the loss of life and injuries resulting form the use of force during the Israeli military operation in international waters against the convoy sailing to Gaza. The Council, in this context, condemns those acts which resulted in the loss of at least 10 civilians and many wounded, and expresses its condolences to their families.

I suppose one could understand the “use of force” to include the actions of the gangsters waiting on the deck with their clubs and knives for the Israelis to land, but it doesn’t sound that way, does it?

The mention of “international waters” is meant to suggest that Israel somehow violated some kind of legal principle, but the law of naval warfare is quite clear that  “attempted breach of blockade occurs from the time a vessel or aircraft leaves a port or airfield with the intention of evading the blockade” and not when it enters the blockaded area. This appears only for the propaganda impact.

The Security Council takes note of the statement of the United Nations Secretary-General on the need to have a full investigation into the matter and it calls for a prompt, impartial, credible and transparent investigation conforming to international standards.

This is supposed to be a big favor from the US, in that it calls only for an investigation “conforming to international standards,” and not an “international investigation.” Perhaps the investigation is intended to determine who organized and led the lynch mob on the Mavi Marmara? Somehow I doubt this.

The Security Council stresses that the situation in Gaza is not sustainable. The Council re-emphasizes the importance of the full implementation of resolutions 1850 (2008) and 1860 (2009). In that context, they reiterate their grave concern at the humanitarian situation in Gaza and stress the need for sustained and regular flow of goods and people to Gaza, as well as unimpeded provision and distribution of humanitarian assistance throughout Gaza.

Resolution 1850 mandates a two-state solution according to the Road Map, something that is now moot thanks to Hamas. 1860 called for an immediate end to the Gaza war, and for the provision of humanitarian assistance.  The suggestion of the Statement is that there is a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and that aid has not been provided. Both propositions are false.

The truth is that the conflict and Israel’s responses to it are the responsibility of Hamas, an outlaw regime which took control of Gaza illegally, engages in illegal aggression against Israel and subversion against Egypt, employs terrorism, espouses racism, and violates the rights of Gaza residents in multiple ways. It is the major obstacle to a negotiated solution in the region.

And yet the statement suggests that Israel is somehow at fault!

The Statement — or resolution — that I would write, and that the US should have proposed, would condemn Hamas. It would call on the nations of the world to work together to remove this rogue regime from power in Gaza, and to punish its leaders for the various violations of human rights and war crimes that it has committed.

It would state clearly that the Israeli operation was not in violation of international law.

It would call for an investigation of the lynch mob and provide that its sponsors compensate Israel for the injuries to its personnel.

It would commend Israel for providing humanitarian aid to Gaza residents, despite the hostility of Hamas. It would point out that Israel has shown remarkable restraint in its actions toward Gazans, and compare this to the historical treatment of  civilian populations in times of war.

Unfortunately, I am not the US ambassador to the UN.

So while it’s true that the Statement that was agreed to is toothless, it is also clearly an anti-Israel propaganda document. It will be understood as a condemnation of Israel and a call for punishment.

Does the Obama administration believe this? Does it accept the implied equivalence between the legitimate state of Israel and the outlaw regime of Hamas? Or between the IDF and the gangsters that lay in wait on the Mavi Marmara? One hopes not.

The US should not have signed on to this unfair and misleading proclamation. But it is only what one expects nowadays, as the US distances itself more and more from its most reliable Mideast ally.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Gaza, flotilla, UN Security Council