The EU moves closer to the dark side

June 6th, 2007

The policy of Hamas, expressed in their charter, their public statements, and most of all by their actions is to commit a genocide against the Jewish people in Israel. Terrorism against civilians, especially suicide terrorism, is their chosen tactic.

Furthermore, Hamas espouses an Islamic fundamentalist outlook in which (Muslim) women are second-class citizens, Jews and Christians are third-class, and Hindus and others are “polytheists” who should be killed. If possible, their attitude toward homosexuals is even worse.

The international community was nevertheless willing to support the Hamas-led Palestinian government if they would only agree to renounce terrorism, recognize that Israel — in some form — had a right to exist, and respect prior agreements between the PLO and Israel. Of course it was not prepared to give even minimal lip service to these principles.

Nevertheless, a significant number of secular, well-educated and supposedly enlightened European Union delegates believe that Hamas should be directly funded by Europeans:

“If we don’t end the boycott the region will descend into civil war and al-Qaida-type terrorist groups will emerge,” Belgian Socialist lawmaker Veronique De Keyser said ahead of a Wednesday parliamentary debate with the EU’s foreign policy chief Javier Solana on the situation in the region.

“The only solution is to recognize the government that was legitimately elected – and talk with all of its members,” she said.

She is among a large group of EU parliamentarians – as many as 250 in the 785-member house, according to some lawmakers – who would like to see the EU’s 27 member states radically change their policy toward the Palestinians.
Jerusalem Post

De Keyser, who has said that she would like to strangle the Israeli ambassador, is a particularly stupid and irrational individual, but it’s nevertheless shocking to see almost one-third of the EU parliament sharing her point of view.

They may not have noticed, but the region has descended into civil war, despite the large amount of unofficial funding reaching Hamas. And Hamas is an al-Quaeda-type terrorist organization; I’m not sure what the distinction is that De Keyser seems to see.

I’m sure that the EU will ultimately decide to fund the Hamas government, although in a practical sense it will be unimportant because of the various backdoor methods that have already been implemented to provide it with money for weapons and explosives. Official recognition, however will nevertheless implicate the EU as a partner of the antisemitic, terrorist and genocidal Hamas.

This will only bring the day closer that Europe finds itself, like Israel, locked into a death struggle with the forces of Islamic darkness. They won’t be able to say that I didn’t warn them.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Peace first, then land

June 5th, 2007

The UN has the cart a mile in front of the horse:

On the 40th anniversary of the outbreak of the 1967 Mideast War, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday remembered those who were killed and whose lives were shattered by the conflict, particularly Palestinians still living under occupation.

The anniversary serves as a reminder that “statehood for Palestinians, security for Israelis, and peace in the region cannot be achieved by force,” said a statement from Ban’s spokeswoman Michele Montas…

”An end to the occupation and a political solution to the conflict is the only way forward for Israelis, Palestinians, Syrians, Lebanese and the wider region,” the statement said.

“This will only be achieved through negotiations to bring about an end to the occupation, on the basis of the principle of land for peace, as envisaged in Security Council resolutions.”

The end of the occupation and a political solution to the conflict is not a “way forward”, it’s the end of the journey.

We don’t start on the path to peace by ending the occupation; rather, the occupation can end only when Arabs can live alongside Israelis without trying to kill them.

The occupation of Gaza ended. Peace moved further away, not closer.

How hard is it to understand this?

I propose negotiations to end the occupation based on the principle of peace for land: peace first, then we’ll talk.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Zogby poll is dishonest

June 5th, 2007

The Arab-American Institute and Americans for Peace Now recently commissioned a poll of Arab and Jewish Americans on their attitudes about the Arab-Israeli conflict. The poll was taken by Zogby International (whose President/CEO, John Zogby, is the brother of James Zogby, director of the Arab-American Institute).

The results of the poll were that overall, American Jews and Arabs share a remarkably common perspective on the conflict, which is that they support a two-state solution, think Israeli occupation and settlements are an obstacle to peace, think the US should enter negotiations with Iran and Syria, support the Arab League Peace Initiative, etc.

This poll is a perfect example of how easy it is to produce desired results by asking questions in the right way. For example, here’s a question about the two-state solution:

Read the rest of this entry »

Syria prepares — for what?

June 5th, 2007

What are they up to?

A member of the Syrian parliament, Muhammad Habash, confirmed on Tuesday that his country was actively preparing for war with Israel, expected to break out in the summer, Israel Radio reported.

In an interview with Al Jazeera, Habash said it was no secret that the Syrian military was arming itself for the upcoming confrontation with the IDF.

He also claimed that the Israeli government was the one that wanted the war so that it could survive politically. — Jerusalem Post

This last part is nonsense. This government would not be helped by war, and in fact is doing everything possible to avoid conflict, even in places where it should perhaps be more aggressive, such as Gaza.

The IDF is taking Syrian activity quite seriously:

OC Military Intelligence Chief Maj. -Gen. Amos Yadlin also referred to the northern border in his briefing to the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee of the Knesset.

“Syria is making very real preparations, cleaning army posts, conducting large drills and strengthening defenses. They are reaching a state of readiness for war more than in the past, but this doesn’t mean they’ll be ready for war tomorrow. The Syrians have a very large quantity of long-range missiles. They do not need to move forces around to attack with these missiles.

Within the IDF, movement of Syrian forces towards the Golan Heights border is considered a preliminary sign for potential escalation and allows the army time to prepare – usually 48 hours. Over the past few months the Syrian army raised its level of alert, thus effectively eroding most of the preliminary signs. Together with the long-range missiles mentioned by Yadlin, the implications of the latest developments are that Syria can potentially catch Israel by surprise. — Jerusalem Post

A surprise attack by Syria, especially if it targeted population centers with medium-range missiles, would be very, very foolhardy. Even combined (as it probably would be) with assaults by Hezbollah and Palestinian groups, there is no imaginable way it could prevent a massive Israeli counterstrike. It’s hard to imagine that Syrian President Bashar Assad is not well aware of this.

As I’ve written before, one possibility is a limited attack by Hezbollah and Hamas. In this scenario, the Arabs would be able to inflict significant damage on Israel and possibly force concessions on various issues while remaining under the international umbrella. In that case, the Syrian preparations might be seen as defensive, intended to deter Israel from hitting Syria, which will of course be supplying Hezbollah during the conflict.

Another possibility suggested by my own contacts in the IDF is that Syria is preparing for her role in a counterstrike against Israel if the US takes military action against Iranian nuclear sites. Such a counterstrike would certainly involve Hezbollah directly, and possibly covert action by Syria.

Although the political climate in the US does not appear to make an attack on Iran likely, the decision to do so is in the hands of the President. Something like a nuclear test or a terrorist attack in the US which could be attributed to Iran might trigger it.

Technorati Tags: , ,

What if Israelis had kidnapped Alan Johnston?

June 4th, 2007

Alan Johnston, the British academic boycott of Israel, and the incredible hypocrisy of the British media, all tied together:

Throughout Mr Johnston’s captivity, the BBC has continually emphasised that he gave “a voice” to the Palestinian people, the implication being that he supported their cause, and should therefore be let out. One cannot imagine the equivalent being said if he had been held by Israelis.

Well, he is certainly giving a voice to the Palestinian people now. And the truth is that, although it is under horrible duress, what he says is not all that different from what the BBC says every day through the mouths of reporters who are not kidnapped and threatened, but are merely collecting their wages.

Read the whole article by Charles Moore here.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,