FresnoZionism.org — ציונות פרסנו

The murder of five members of the Fogel family is so chilling that it is beyond words to describe — at least, it’s beyond me. Try to put yourself in the place of 12-year old Tamar Fogel entering the house and finding her parents and three younger siblings, including 3-month old Hadas, dead in pools of blood, slaughtered like farm animals.

I am writing this because there are important lessons here. Maybe in this moment of horror, it will be possible to break through the walls that some people have built around themselves that prevent them from seeing simple truths.

The first lesson is that the perpetrators were not crazy. Their behavior was not an aberration. They have been brought up to believe in their hearts that Jews are creatures of the devil, that the ‘occupation’ of ‘Palestinian land’ — which is never presented as the 1967 territories, but the whole of ‘Palestine’ — is a direct insult to their manhood which must be revenged, and that their society approves of extreme violence as a solution. Indeed, they know that the more violent and bloody their actions, the more honor they will gain.

Some of the ways in which the official Palestinian media encouraged violence in the weeks leading up to the murders are described here by Palestinian Media Watch. Keep in mind that this goes on 100% of the time, in schools, mosques, radio, TV, etc.

Itamar is a tiny place, with about 160 families. Yet this isn’t the first time it’s been attacked:

In May 2001, Gilad Zar, one of Itamar’s founders and son of Jewish religious terrorist Moshe Zar, was shot dead in an ambush by Palestinians.

In May 2002, three yeshiva students: Netanel Riachi (17), Gilad Stiglitz (14) and Avraham Siton (17), were killed by a Palestinian gunman.

In June 2002, a Palestinian terrorist burst into the home of the Shabo family and opened fire. Rachel Shabo, the mother of the family, was murdered, as were three of her children: Neria (16), Zvi (13), and Avishai (5). Another two children were seriously injured. Yossi Tuito, who served as commander of the neighborhood preparedness team, was also shot to death as he approached the family’s house in order to help. — Wikipedia

The terrorists that committed the 2002 shooting of the three students in Itamar were honored just last month on official Palestinian Authority (PA) TV. I don’t doubt that this week’s ‘heroes’ will get the same treatment:

2002 Itamar terrorists honored on PA TV

The second lesson is that Israeli concessions short of suicide will not stop this. Every Arab map shows ‘Palestine’ in place of Israel, all of Israel, not a state composed of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Every time an Arab talks about ‘occupation’, ‘Palestinian land’, etc., he means the whole of Israel. There are many ways to prove this: maps, statements made by leaders, media, the insistence on ‘right of return’, the refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, etc.

But here is what we learn from this incident: if the conflict is only about borders, something that Israeli and PA negotiators have been relatively close to agreement about, why the viciousness, the blood? Why not just make an agreement and get on with building a state?

The answer is that it is not about a state — it’s about hating Jews. And it will be about hating Jews regardless of which side of the line they live on.

The third lesson, derived from the second, is that all Israelis are ‘settlers’. The BBC, which reflexively expostulates “illegal under international law” every time Jews living beyond the Green Line are mentioned, makes sure to call the murder victims “a Jewish settler family … in the West Bank.” But from the Arab point of view, there’s no distinction. So it is not helpful to write, as the AP did, that Itamar is “home to some of Israel’s most radical settlers,” as if somehow their determination to stay where they are despite terrorism makes them guilty of bringing said terrorism upon themselves!

If Israel acceded to all Arab demands, evacuated every last settlement, redivided Jerusalem, etc., and there was still terrorism (which of course would be the case), it would interesting to see how the BBC, the AP, etc. would spin it. Would they blame ‘radical Israelis’ for wanting to live in Tel Aviv, which “the Palestinians have said they want as part of their state?”

Technorati Tags: Israel, Itamar, Fogel murder

Palestinian media attributes the horrific murders in Itamar to a group associated with the Fatah al-Aqsa brigades.

Fatah, which is led by Mahmoud Abbas, is the dominant group in the Palestinian Liberation Organization, the ‘sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people’, which controls the Palestinian Authority that is intended to someday morph into the government of ‘Palestine’, should such a political entity come into being.

Hadas Fogel, 2010-2011. Her throat was slashed by Fatah terrorists.

One would think that the fact that terrorists associated with Fatah broke into a Jewish home and brutally stabbed to death five members of the Fogel family simply because they were Jews living in the Land of Israel would tell us something.

It should tell us that it would be a poor idea to allow these people to set up a sovereign state next door, to dismantle security provisions and just trust them.

When they speak Arabic they say they want to destroy us. Then they prove it by deeds like this. Over and over. And yet, members of the ‘peace camp’ say things like this:

I ask why the American Jewish community (at the JCPA annual plenum earlier this week) failed to pass a resolution proposed by the Reform movement asking Israel to abide by its agreements and dismantle ideological, illegal and unhelpful settlements…

I blame us. I blame us for not thinking creatively, collaboratively and swiftly to find a way out of the stalemate. I blame us for finding foes in not the system but each other, between Jews and between Palestinians. We bear this blame together. We should all be moved to end the conflict, instead of justifying the wrongs of the past.

— Jewschool, an idiot calling himself “Kung Fu Jew”

Beyond belief, isn’t it?

Since we are apportioning blame today, here is how I would do it:

• First and foremost, I blame the Palestinian Arabs, who have created a culture of hatred and death, a truly twisted travesty of human society, whose greatest aspiration is to be better genocides than Hitler.
• Second, I blame the ‘peace movement’, particularly in Israel, which has consistently held in the face of all logic and reason that the way to prevent someone who is bent on murdering you from succeeding is to give up every strategic advantage you may have, to arm him and invite him into your home.
• And third, I blame every Israeli government since that of Rabin, who have allowed themselves — against the clear wishes of the majority of Israeli Jews — to follow the program of the ‘peace movement’ to the letter, making concession after concession to the PLO, despite the fact that the response is always the same: murder.

Where is the logic, Mr. Kung Fu, that tells us that although the PLO has done nothing but kill Jews since they began, they will surely stop killing Jews as soon as they possess every last centimeter of Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem, etc.?

Why will it be different then?

Technorati Tags: Israel, terrorism, Fatah

Early reports indicate that a terrorist broke into a house in the settlement of Itamar (near Schechem [Nablus]) and stabbed five members of a family to death — a couple and three children, aged 11, 3 and three months. Three other children escaped.

It takes a certain kind of …thing… to stab a three-month old baby to death.

Shabbat shalom, if that’s possible.

Technorati Tags: terrorism

With all the discussion of Israeli concessions and Palestinian states — Carolyn Glick has a good article here — we shouldn’t forget the basis of the conflict, or who we are dealing with:

[Security] sources said Hamas activists believe they cannot keep Israeli hostages out of the Shin Bet and Palestinian Authority’s reach for long. So they plan to kill them, abduct and bury the bodies, then negotiate returning them to Israel…

On September 1, a day after a Hamas cell murdered four Israelis near the Beit Hagai settlement in the Hebron area, another cell opened fire at an Israeli couple from Ma’aleh Efraim in a car on the road to the Rimonim settlement east of Ramallah. The terrorists overtook Moshe and Shira Moreno’s car and opened fire at them.

At this stage their plan went wrong. The AK-47 (“Kalashnikov”) rifle the attackers were using jammed and the couple, although injured, jumped out of the car and rolled down the wadi beside the road. The terrorists stopped their car and approached the Israeli vehicle. When they saw it was empty they took a bag containing documents from the car and fled. The couple hid in the wadi and were saved by the darkness. The husband was moderately injured and his wife lightly injured…

The interrogated militants [sic] said they had intended to kill their targets and abduct the bodies. They had dug graves in advance near their home village of Silwad east of Ramallah, they reportedly said. — Ha’aretz

The arrested terrorists are presently in the hands of the Palestinian Authority (PA). Historically, Hamas terrorists that kill Israelis have been released or ‘escaped’ from PA custody before too long.

Terrorist activity in Judea and Samaria was suppressed in 2002 by Ariel Sharon’s very effective “Operation Defensive Shield.” Until recently, there were regular incursions by counterterror forces to arrest terrorists and break up terrorist cells. This activity has been reduced and security responsibilities given to the PA in an attempt to ‘strengthen’ it — the theory seems to be that the Arab population will support the PA if it is seen as reducing IDF activity. And of course it is supposed to show that a Palestinian state in the territories will not pose a threat to Israel.

Needless to say, this is irresponsible. Israelis are already paying the price.

What has happened in the past 20 years or so is that there’s been a progressive change on the Israeli side in which things that were formerly inconceivable, like redividing Jerusalem, giving up control of the Jordan Valley, even negotiating with the PLO — today it’s hard to remember that this was once illegal — have become acceptable compromises for ‘peace’.

Unfortunately, nothing has changed on the Arab side, whose position, has actually hardened as vicious radical elements such as Hamas and hardliners in Fatah have become more powerful.

Despite the fact that Israel has made more and more concessions, the Arabs have simply pocketed them without ever agreeing that a ‘peace’ settlement must include recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, a commitment that there will be no further claims against Israel, and give up the idea of ‘right of return’.

An agreement without these things is not a peace agreement — it’s simply a massive retreat that invites more war and gives the enemy an improved position.

Now there is even talk about a unilateral declaration of statehood according to the 1949 lines — ‘unilateral’ meaning that the Arabs get the territory and meet none of Israel’s demands!

Time to put on the brakes and to stop giving up land and security ‘on account’, so to speak, in the hope that some day the Arabs will suddenly turn around and start to reciprocate. Isn’t 20 years long enough to learn the lesson that this is stupid? Don’t the statements that Arab leaders — Palestinian and others  — make to their own people mean anything?

Reread the news item above and ask yourself if you want the IDF to be unable to enter the territories. Think about what happened when Israel withdrew from Gaza. What kind of crazy logic makes anyone think that continued concessions will bring peace?

Technorati Tags: Israel, Hamas, Palestinian Arabs, terrorism

Sometimes the Quote of the Week just gets me started, but on other occasions it’s so good that I find it hard to add anything. This week’s is like that:

No serious person I know is saying Muslims aren’t up to democracy (and what we’re talking about here is a Muslim issue more than an Arab issue). This is not a question of ignorance or incompetence. They understand the principles of our democracy. They just don’t want them. Any democracy worth promoting is a democracy that runs afoul of key sharia-law principles. Muslims don’t want our democracy because they believe their civilization — including its law and desired political structure — is superior. I think they are terribly wrong about that, but it’s a considered choice and one that is theirs to make.

— Andrew C. McCarthy: No Intervention in Libya

McCarthy gives good reasons for not intervening, particularly that although we don’t know who the rebels are and what kind of regime they would like to install — probably there’s more than one — it’s a pretty universal theme in the Middle East that they don’t want us telling them what to do.

But I think we need to think about a broader question. What people seem to mean when they talk about ‘democracy in the Middle East’ is actually a lot more than democracy, more than a government chosen by the people in some way. What we mean is liberal society, like we have in the US, Europe and Israel, where the following things exist, or at least are generally aspired to:

1. Freedom of information and expression: a free press
2. Reasonable literacy
3. An economy that provides for more than subsistence for most people
4. A commitment to development and peace rather than aggression
5. Equal treatment for ethnic, religious and gender groups under the law
6. A reasonable degree of tolerance for various groups in society
7. A police and court system that’s relatively free from politics and corruption
8. A minimal amount of corruption in government functions
9. Democratic elections

I’m sure you can think of more. Simply dumping a Mubarak or even a Qaddafi may be a start — or it may not. Even democratic elections don’t mean much. In a country where all politics is ethnic, like Iraq for example, elections just allow the majority ethnic group to institutionalize its dominance. Egypt today seems to have none of the above characteristics, and recent events show that attitudes toward Christians and women are less than liberal, to say the least.

Note that  proficiency with Facebook is not on the above list. Social media are a tool for communication which can be used to communicate liberal or profoundly illiberal messages, just like the TV or telephone.

McCarthy says “Muslims don’t want our democracy.” I think it might be more correct to say ‘Islamists’ than ‘Muslims’, because it’s possible to be a Muslim without calling for the state to be governed according to sharia (Turkey, at least until recently, has been a secular state of Muslims). But he is quite right that sharia — which calls for clerical rule and a hierarchy in which Muslims have more rights than non-Muslims and men more than women — is incompatible with a liberal society.

After 9/11 there was a lot of discussion about whether there was a “clash of cultures” between the Muslim world and the West. Clearly there is a clash between Islamism, which calls for societies to be governed according to sharia, and the liberal and democratic culture of the West.

Right now the House Homeland Security Committee is holding highly controversial hearings about the radicalization of some American Muslims and the possible connection of radicals to terrorism. Of course it’s important to find potential terrorists and prevent them from acting.

But the more fundamental issue that needs to be brought out into the open between Muslims and others in America is the question of how Muslims relate to our Constitution, and what they think the role of sharia should be in this society.

Just as it is wrong to accuse Muslims in general of being soft on terrorism, it is wrong to say that the main difference between Islam and other religious communities is that they have services on Friday, while Jews and Christians prefer Saturday or Sunday. We need to talk about the elephant in the room, sharia.

Technorati Tags: Islam, Andrew C. McCarthy