Palestinians improvise a barricade during clashes with Israeli troops near Ramallah, West Bank, Saturday, Oct. 10 / AP
Obama won’t hold the Palestinians accountable because that might jeopardize his policy of daylight between America and Israel. A policy that was intended to improve U.S. credibility in the Muslim world and thereby denuclearize Iran, disarm and remove Bashar al-Assad, and establish a peaceful Palestinian state. A policy that has instead destabilized the region, formalized the Russian-Iranian-Syrian axis, enriched and empowered the Shiite theocracy, rattled our allies, and done nothing to curtail Palestinian intransigence.
********************
More than 30 dead in Israel as Palestinians armed with knives attack innocents. What’s responsible? A campaign of incitement, which slanderously accuses Jews of intruding on the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem and murdering Arab children in cold blood.
And who is legitimizing this campaign? None other than Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority, whom President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have long held up as a peacemaker. “I think nobody would dispute that whatever disagreements you may have with him, he has proven himself to be somebody who has committed to nonviolence and diplomatic efforts to resolve this issue,” Obama told writer Jeffrey Goldberg in 2014.
That’s a strange view of commitment. This is the same Abbas, remember, who rejected then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s absurdly generous 2008 peace offer. The same Abbas who resisted negotiations with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during the 10-month settlement freeze in 2010, which Obama demanded explicitly on the grounds that it would give Abbas the cover he needed to begin talks. Abbas finally relented to Saudi pressure, and attended a few meetings with Netanyahu that September. But under no definition of what the word “negotiation” actually means were these meetings for real: The freeze was about to expire, the get togethers were perfunctory, and nothing of significance was discussed. The farce ended soon after.
It is a lie to say that Mahmoud Abbas is committed to a diplomatic resolution. Just as it was a lie when, the other day at Harvard, Secretary Kerry attributed the bloodshed to “a frustration that is growing” because of the “massive increase in settlements over the course of the last years.” As Elliott Abrams points out, there has been an increase in the population of the settlements, but not in their size. As if the settlements have any connection to what’s happening in the first place: The terror gripping Israel is the result of a Palestinian leadership so adrift and corrupt, so aggrieved and conspiratorial, that it encourages the radicalization of its youth and promotes an atmosphere of hatred and murder.
David Horovitz of the Times of Israel recounts the history. Not only did Abbas reject Olmert and Obama. He insisted in 2013 that the Palestinian “right of return,” which would irrevocably transform Israel into a bi-national state, be part of any deal. Declared in 2014 that Israel was committing “genocide” in Gaza. Announced in 2015 that the Palestinian Authority would no longer uphold previous agreements. Charged Israel, falsely, with infiltrating and violating Muslim sites. Encouraged Palestinians to lionize the knife-wielding assailants as martyrs, victims of Israeli “execution.” Spread the myth that 13-year-old Ahmad Mansara, recovering in an Israeli hospital from wounds he incurred in a botched terrorist attack—in which he critically wounded a Jewish teen—had been killed by an Israeli vigilante.
Concludes Horovitz: “The fact is that Abbas has quite deliberately fueled the flames of this latest Al-Aqsa-centered terror wave.”
And what has the United States done to stop him? Nothing. Not during this presidency. Obama’s focus has been laser-like when it comes to Israel’s missteps, Israel’s weaknesses, Israel’s moral code, and what he sees as Israel’s true interests. Abbas, on the other hand, is someone Obama has been content to puff up, placate, excuse, humor, ignore.
“I have to commend President Abbas,” Obama said during a bilateral meeting at the White House last year. “He has been somebody who has consistently renounced violence, has consistently sought a diplomatic and peaceful solution that allows for two states, side by side, in peace and security.”
In his interview with Goldberg, conducted around the same time, Obama added, “I believe that President Abbas is sincere about his willingness to recognize Israel and its right to exist, to recognize Israel’s legitimate security needs, to shun violence, to resolve these issues in a diplomatic fashion that meets the concerns of the people of Israel.”
But at that White House meeting, according to reports, Abbas explicitly rejected three key elements of any agreement: recognition of Israel as a Jewish State; renunciation of the right of return; and commitment to “end of conflict” language that would foreclose future Palestinian demands. As he has done with so many dictators, theocrats, and goons, the president offered an open hand—and was rebuked with a closed fist.
This rebuke was not met with forceful rhetoric, countermeasures, or a shift in policy to strengthen Palestinian institutions, develop Palestinian civil society, broaden and liberalize the Palestinian leadership. It was met with silence. The White House just looked the other way.
“My concern about Obama is that he never asks anything about the Palestinians. He gives them a complete pass,”says Ambassador Dennis Ross, a former Obama official whose new book Doomed to Succeed tells the story of the beleaguered U.S.-Israel alliance. “It makes it worse for the Palestinians. For the Palestinians, you have a political culture that is driven so much by this profound sense of victimhood and grievance—the idea that they should do anything towards the Israelis, they should make any accommodation towards the Israelis, is completely illegitimate.”
Why the pass? Jeffrey Goldberg says it’s because the Palestinians “have less power.” That’s no excuse. Another possibility: The president is occupied with Cuba, ISIS, Syria, Ukraine, and Iran. He doesn’t have the bandwidth to hold Mahmoud Abbas to the same standard as Benjamin Netanyahu.
But we know that’s not the case, either. The president has been more than happy to castigate Netanyahu all along. Can’t he say a few tough things about Abbas?
Obama won’t hold the Palestinians accountable because that might jeopardize his policy of daylight between America and Israel. A policy that was intended to improve U.S. credibility in the Muslim world and thereby denuclearize Iran, disarm and remove Bashar al-Assad, and establish a peaceful Palestinian state. A policy that has instead destabilized the region, formalized the Russian-Iranian-Syrian axis, enriched and empowered the Shiite theocracy, rattled our allies, and done nothing to curtail Palestinian intransigence.
Even the carrot Obama offered Israel as part of the Iran deal—interdiction of Iranian weapons to Hezbollah—has been exposed as an illusion. Russia has a no-fly zone in Syria and is arming Syrian regulars and presumably Hezbollah, too. How else to explain Netanyahu’s sudden visit to Moscow last month? Hezbollah with a nuclear umbrella was something the Iran deal was supposed to prevent. Now Hassan Nasrallah benefits from the Russian nuclear umbrella, in addition to the Iranian one that will be unfurled a decade hence. Great job Obama.
So here we are: Palestinians no closer to statehood, Israel terrorized, Jewish and Arab lives being lost, and an atmosphere so rife with revisionism and paranoia that the New York Times is questioning the history of Jews on the Temple Mount. All because President Obama forgot that daylight ends in darkness.
When it comes to Israel and terrorism, there is a standard one-size-fits-all default formula that works whatever the facts on the ground here are. This is fortunate for the multitudes of self-declared “Middle East experts” outthere, because it means that they can explain the situation here without having to resort to reality — in other words what is actually happening here — and without having to preoccupy themselves with understanding that reality.
As the Jewish radical and anti-Semite, Ilan Pappe, told the Belgian newspaper “Le Soir” in 1999: “Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts. Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers.”
Despite being outrageous and counter-intuitive to anything that the once truth-seeking Western civilization stood for, this quote and the worldview it represents — disturbingly similar to that of the former Soviet Union — has become the mantra, whether they are aware of it or not, of hordes of journalists, opinion makers, and politicians. You should keep that in mind, when listening to statements such as this one:
“And there’s been a massive increase in settlements over the course of the last years. Now you have this violence because there’s a frustration that is growing.”
In other words, it is “the occupation” — part one of the one-size-fits-all default formula. And no, the statement did not come from an obscure source in the Boycott, Divest and Sanction movement, but from U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.
Once the almost ritualistic “explanation,” completely removed from reality (since new settlement construction has been the lowest under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu than under any of his predecessors, according to data from Construction Ministry), of why Israeli cities and roads are made unsafe by Palestinian terrorists on the prowl to kill Jews had been established by Kerry, he proceeded to part two of the formula: “I am not going to point fingers [at the culprits] from afar. This is a revolving cycle that damages the future for everybody.”
The mysteriously self-igniting “cycle” of violence. No mention of the situation in Israel seems possible without “the cycle.” It has been in the formula — just like the settlements — for decades. And why shouldn’t it be? After all, it frees you from attaching any weight to the current reality of unprovoked Palestinians killing Jews just because they are Jews. In fact, the inherent bias implicit in this “cycle” concept is that it is all really the Jews’ own fault.
Coming from Kerry, the statements are naturally much more disturbing than when the identical analysis — or rather lack of analysis — comes from most other politicians and opinion makers, since the U.S. is still supposed to be our biggest ally.
In stark contrast, Canadian National Defense Minister Jason Kenney posted the following message on his Facebook page on October 14: “Canada condemns in the strongest terms possible the recent wave of terror attacks against Israeli civilians that has resulted in a number of tragic deaths and injuries. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families and friends of the victims. We are deeply concerned by escalating incitement and violence that does nothing to advance the interests of peace, stability, and security in the region. There can be no justification for these attacks, and we will continue to oppose efforts undermine Israel’s legitimacy or right to defend herself in the face of terror.”
It is a rare thing for the analysis of international affairs to be subjected to such reductionist and indeed static extremes, as is the case with Israel. The one-size-fits-all default formula is recycled in all situations, regardless of facts on the ground and regardless of Israel’s actions.
There are no signs of this trend changing in the near future. In fact, the willingness of the general international public to shut eyes and ears to reality and not let it interfere with the ideology inherent in this formula has indeed become comparable to a natural reflex. That is what will happen, when you repeat a lie long enough. There is indeed now, a whole generation of Western youth literally brought up with that lie, which explains the prevalence of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic activity on university campuses.
As a consequence, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas believes he can get away with openly lying about anything. This includes claiming the child terrorist Ahmed Manasra had been “executed” by Israel, when in fact Abbas was perfectly aware that the very same terrorist is being treated with excellent care at an Israeli hospital by the very people that he was brainwashed to kill, and at the expense of the Israeli taxpayer.
Abbas knows the default formula better than anyone and he is relying on it to accomplish his goals. He knows fully well that his lies work the moment they hit the airwaves or the internet and that no amount of proof to the contrary will change that fact. The world loves a blood libel and Abbas knows that. After all, he has a Ph.D. advocating Holocaust denial and years of experience telling him that lies about Israel — the “Jenin massacre” and the Muhammad al-Dura case, just to mention a few — gain a life of their own, once they are out there, regardless of how much proof is presented to the contrary.
The workings of this kind of logic would have made the old Soviets proud. This is no coincidence, of course, since so many of the old PLO terrorists learned their trade in the communist bloc. Abbas himself earned his Ph.D. at a university in Moscow.
The Cold War ended a long time ago, but the legacy of the Soviet ideological mindset is alive and well.
(Kirby: Israel has changed the status at Temple Mount. Whoops. I didn’t mean to suggest that. — DM)
Palestinians have launched at least 28 attacks on Israeli Jews over the past week, leaving seven dead and more than 70 wounded. These attacks, mostly using knives while a few involved guns or motor vehicles, have been encouraged by Islamic preachers on the West Bank and by Mahmoud Abbas.
This violence, while of great concern to Israelis, pales in comparison with the human catastrophes in Syria and elsewhere in the region. But as always, Israel and its tormentors occupy a disproportionate share of the world’s attention, including–unfortunately–that of the U.S. State Department.
Initially, John Kerry sparked outrage by suggesting that the Palestinian attacks were caused by Jews building homes in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem:
“There’s been a massive increase in settlements over the course of the last years,” Kerry said during a question-and-answer session, “and there’s an increase in the violence because there’s this frustration that’s growing.”
That makes perfect sense–the natural reaction to Jews moving into their ancestral homeland is to try to kill them, evidently.
Yesterday, State Department spokesman John Kirby made matters worse during his press briefing by maintaining an exquisite neutrality as between would-be murderers and their victims. The colloquy is too long to reproduce here, but it is helpful to read the whole thing to get a full understanding of the tone. I will reproduce some highlights, and comment on them:
QUESTION: Let’s start with the Middle East and some comments that Secretary Kerry made yesterday and also that the White House just made. … There’s been quite a bit of, I don’t know, uproar maybe is the right word about his comments about settlements contributing to – massive increase in settlements over the course of the last years being responsible for the current upsurge in violence. Recognizing that the settlement issue is one that is of serious concern to the Palestinians, is it the Administration’s view that settlement activity is, in fact, to blame for or is responsible for the current surge in attacks that we’re all seeing?
MR KIRBY: I think the Secretary was very consistent yesterday and has been over time in not trying to affix blame for the recent violence too particularly, and he was unequivocal yesterday, as you saw, in condemning the terrorist attacks against Israelis. What he has talked about is the challenges that are posed on both sides by this absence of progress towards a two-state solution. So – and he’s also highlighted our concern that current trends on the ground, including this violence, as well as ongoing settlement activity are imperiling the viability of eventually getting to a two-state solution.
QUESTION: So it is not, then, the Administration’s view that a massive increase in settlement activity in the last years is directly responsible?
MR KIRBY: I think the Secretary well understands that there’s a lot of nuance and context behind the violence that’s occurring recently. And as I said, he was careful not to affix blame in either direction on this in terms of past practices. What he did talk about – and you might have seen it if you saw him at Harvard last night – is that he understands there’s disenfranchisement, there’s disgruntlement, there is – there’s frustration on both sides that has led to this.
So, when dozens of murderous attacks are launched, it is important not to place blame on either the perpetrators or the victims.
State Department spokesman John Kirby
Now and then, the fog does lift and the administration’s position is clear. That was true with regard to an incident in Dimona, where an Israeli stabbed several Arabs in retaliation against the many attacks that had been carried out against Jews:
QUESTION: All right, this will be very brief. I understand that you have decided now how to qualify the stabbing attack on the Palestinians in Dimona?
MR KIRBY: Yes, we’ve had a chance to look at that attack more deeply, and I think you’re going to ask me what – do we consider it an act of terrorism. And we do.
QUESTION: You do consider it an act of terrorism. Okay, so that would suggest then that you believe that this is – that both sides are, in fact, committing these —
MR KIRBY: Well, I would say certainly individuals on both sides of this divide are – have proven capable of and in our view guilty of acts of terror.
There are terrorists on both sides, so neutrality is appropriate.
Kirby also ventured the opinion that the Israelis have been guilty of using excessive force. It wasn’t clear what he had in mind here; shooting terrorists who were in the midst of stabbing Israelis, apparently:
QUESTION: [I]n response to Michael’s question, you said you’d seen reports of what many would consider to be excessive use of force. And I presume that you were talking about from the Israeli side. Is that correct?
MR KIRBY: Yes.
QUESTION: You said what many would consider. So is the Administration among those who would consider what the Israeli actions have been to be excessive?
MR KIRBY: I think, again, without qualifying each and every one of them, we’ve certainly seen some reports of security activity that could indicate the potential excessive use of force. And again, we don’t want to see that anywhere. We don’t want to see that here in our own country. So yeah, we’re concerned about that.
QUESTION: So the – so you have raised this issue with Israelis? You’ve said that —
MR KIRBY: We – we’re always concerned about credible reports of excessive use of force against civilians [Ed.: I.e., terrorists armed with knives], and we routinely raise our concerns about that.
QUESTION: Okay. Now, that’s just a little bit different than what you said before. So you believe that these are credible reports of excessive use of force by the Israeli security forces on Palestinian citizens?
MR KIRBY: We’ve seen reports. We’re always concerned about those kinds of reports.
The Arabs have frequently used rumors of changes in the administration of Temple Mount as a pretext for violence, and apparently are doing so again. The Obama administration gave them aid and comfort:
QUESTION: All right. And then the visit to Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif by Israelis, is that – does the Administration consider that to be visits to there – does the Administration consider that to be incitement?
MR KIRBY: I’m not going to be able to characterize every single act with terminology. What the Secretary has said and stands by is that we want to see the status quo restored, the status quo arrangement there on Haram al-Sharif and the Temple Mount, and for both sides to take actions to de-escalate the tensions. …
QUESTION: Is it the Administration’s position that the status quo at the Temple Mount has been broken?
MR KIRBY: Well, certainly, the status quo has not been observed, which has led to a lot of the violence.
The topic was revisited later, and Kirby reinforced his point:
QUESTION: So I just have two extremely brief ones, so we can move on after that. You said in answer to my question on the status quo whether – at the Temple Mount whether it’s been broken or not, you said that it has not been observed and that is what has led to – I think. I’ll go back and look at the transcript, but I think you said it had not been – it was not – has not been observed and that is what has led to a great deal of the violence. That certainly sounds like you’re affixing some kind of blame to Israel if this is, in fact, what the Administration believes has led to the violence – the visits by – visit by Israelis to —
MR KIRBY: Well, it’s not about believing it, Matt. I mean, you just looked at what’s been happening in that – on Haram al-Sharif and the Temple Mount recently. I mean, just if we’re looking at this in acute – through an acute lens, I mean, the activity there, the status quo not being observed, has led to violence. There’s – that’s indisputable. That’s not a belief; that’s a fact.
It is not a fact, however, and shortly thereafter Kirby took to Twitter to recant:
Emphasis added. The result of the State Department’s oafish diplomacy was to enrage our ally Israel:
Jerusalem reacted furiously Thursday to State Department spokesman John Kirby’s statement that Jerusalem was not maintaining the status quo on the Temple Mount and accused it of using disproportionate force to stop the wave of stabbing attacks.
“The comments by the US State Department spokesman are so crazy, deceitful and baseless, that I expect President [Barack] Obama and US Secretary of State [John] Kerry to distance themselves from them, and to clarify the US position today,” said Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan.
John Kerry’s State Department is a clown show, and Kerry drives the clown car.
Like the first and second intifadas, the current wave of terrorism is being exploited by Palestinian organizations and leaders, including by Palestinian President Mahmoud ‘Abbas, who attack Israel and accuse it of terror and crimes while making false claims and allegations. Some Palestinian organizations and leaders praised the perpetrators of the attacks, stating that they acted in self-defense. Fatah’s military wing, the Al-Aqsa Brigades, even called to escalate the attacks.
In his recent statements and speeches, ‘Abbas did not mention any violent Palestinian actions, but spoke only of “popular resistance,” which he advocates. This term is highly misleading, since it evokes nonviolent action such as peaceful protests and marches, whereas the recent wave of Palestinian terror has included mostly knifings, many of which resulted in grave injuries and deaths, as well as the throwing of stones and firebombs and the slinging of metal balls, which have also resulted in injuries and deaths.
PA and its head, Mahmoud ‘Abbas, have not only refrained from condemning the terror of the recent month, but are encouraging it to continue and are presenting the perpetrators not as attackers who deliberately set out to stab Israelis but as innocent Palestinians whom Israel executed under false pretenses. They call the injuring or killing of terrorists “war crimes” and even state that they mean to sue Israel in the International Criminal Court. The language used by ‘Abbas – such as “the terror of the Israeli government and the settler herds”, “execution in cold blood,” and “Israel’s hostile attack” – is obviously not conducive to calming the atmosphere, and in fact incites violence.
Granted, ‘Abbas and his security apparatuses are currently working to prevent the spread of the conflicts in the PA territories, and they have indeed arrested Hamas activists. Furthermore, ‘Abbas met with Fatah leaders in the various districts, apparently to instruct them to take measures to quell the violence. However, these measures seem to be motivated by the fear of losing control of the situation and by the desire to avoid giving Israel an excuse to retake the PA territories.
Mahmoud ‘Abbas (image: Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, London, October 14, 2014)
The Libel Of A Changed Status Quo At Al-Aqsa
In his October 14, 2015 speech on Palestinian television, ‘Abbas reiterated the libel that was the main catalyst for the current terror incidents, namely that Israel plans to alter the status quo in Jerusalem, despite repeated declarations by Israeli officials that Israel has no intention of doing so. ‘Abbas also declared that Israel’s actions were sparking a religious conflict. He said: “These days Israel’s hostile attack on our Palestinian people, its soil and its holy sites is intensifying, and the savage racism in its ugly form adds hideousness and repulsiveness to the occupation. These pose a threat to peace and stability and herald the lighting of the fuse of a religious conflict that will spark an all-consuming conflagration not only in the [Middle East] region but in the entire world. This is a warning bell for the international community to immediately intervene in a positive manner, before it will be too late.
“We say explicitly and unequivocally that we will not agree to a change in the status quo in the blessed Al-Aqsa and we will not allow Israel to carry out any plot intended to damage its sanctity and its purely Islamic [character]. The right [over Al-Qasa] is our exclusive right – Palestinians and Muslims everywhere. We seek rights, justice and peace. We have attacked nobody and we will not agree to attacks on our people, our homeland and our holy sites.”[1]
It should be mentioned that, one month ago, in a meeting with East Jerusalem residents, ‘Abbas urged them to continue opposing the “invasions” of Al-Aqsa and to prevent the Israelis from dividing it:
“The Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Church of the Holy Sepulcher are ours. They are all ours, and they [the Israelis] have no right to defile them with their filthy feet. We shall not allow them to do so, and we shall do whatever we can to protect Jerusalem. We are in Jerusalem and will remain there. We will defend the places sacred to Christianity and Islam and will not abandon our city. We will continue to cleave to every inch of its soil and do everything to make its voice heard. I am confident that no harm will come to Jerusalem, even though Israel is waging a war of extermination against it. We will continue defending it under any circumstance. We are talking with everyone, and everyone is asking what we are doing to make [Jerusalem’s] voice heard.”[2]
‘Abbas: Israel Is Executing Palestinians, Including Children, In Cold Blood
Another false accusation invoked by ‘Abbas in his speech, and which has recently become a prominent part of the Palestinian narrative, is that Israel is executing Palestinians, including children, on the pretext that they attempted to stab Jews. As an example he cited the case of Ahmad Manasra, the 13-year-old boy who, on October 12, stabbed and critically wounded an Israeli boy his own age in the Pisgat Zeev neighborhood of Jerusalem, although Manasra is only moderately wounded and is hospitalized in Israel. ‘Abbas said: “We have told the entire world from the U.N. stage that in no way will we accept the existing situation in occupied Palestine, nor will we surrender to the logic of oppressive force and to the policy of occupation and aggression adopted by the Israeli government and its settler herds, who are using terror against our people, our holy places, our homes and our trees and are executing our children in cold blood, just as they did to the boy Ahmad Manasra and to other children in Jerusalem and elsewhere.”
Abbas stated further that the PA would sue Israel for the executions at the International Criminal Court: “We will file new suits over the execution of our sons, daughters and grandchildren. Whoever fears international law and its penalties should desist from committing crimes against our people.”[3]
The claim about the Israeli executions was echoed by Palestinian chief negotiator and PLO Executive Committee secretary Saeb Erekat, who said at a press conference that Israel was executing Palestinians, while ignoring the fact that they were killed while stabbing or attempting to stab Israelis. He said: “We demand that the [U.N.] special rapporteur on human rights Christof Heyns arrive immediately and investigate the field executions… According to the directive of President [‘Abbas], we decided to collect information in order to submit three lawsuits, against Prime Minister Netanyahu, his defense minister and the heads of the Israeli security forces.”[4]
‘Abbas: The Martyrs’ Blood Is The Price Of Freedom; The Palestinian Struggle Has Gained Attention, Earned Respect Of The Entire World
In his speech ‘Abbas called to continue the “popular resistance” and congratulated Jerusalem and the martyrs, stating that the events are the result of Israel’s rejection of the hand extended in peace and the continued construction in the settlements: “O heroic Palestinians, in your struggle and steadfastness you have gained considerable victories and political achievements, and thanks to this wondrous steadfastness the Palestinian cause has gained the attention and earned the respect of the entire world. True, we have paid for it in the blood of our martyrs and wounded, in the tears of our mothers and the torment of our prisoners, but that is the price of freedom, which is now very close.
“[I] congratulate you, our glorious people, as well as proud Jerusalem and its residents who stand on the front line; [I] congratulate Gaza, the West Bank and our people in the diaspora. Victory will come, with Allah’s help… We will persist in our legitimate national struggle, which focuses on our right to defend ourselves, the nonviolent popular resistance and the diplomatic and legal struggle, and we will act with the required patience, wisdom and valor to defend our people and its diplomatic and national achievements, which were attained following decades of struggle and persistence and via the long road of the martyrs, wounded and prisoners.
“The instability and insecurity result from the Israeli government’s rejection of our hand that is extended in [a bid for] a just peace that will guarantee the rights of our people, its freedom and its national honor. [They result from Israel’s] stubborn persistence in building in the settlements and imposing dictates [upon the Palestinians]. Peace, security and stability will only be achieved if the Israeli occupation ends and an independent Palestinian state is established, with holy Jerusalem as its capital, in the June 4, 1967 boundaries.
“Members of the glorious Palestinian people, wherever you are, I call upon you to rally together and unite, and be alert to the occupation’s schemes that are designed to torpedo our national enterprise. We will never be deterred from defending our people and protecting them. That is our right. [I] congratulate the martyrs, the wounded and the prisoners.”[5]
Senior Fatah Officials Praise The Terrorists, Encourage Continued “Popular Resistance”
Saeb Erekat praised Fadi ‘Aloun, who carried out an October 4, 2015 stabbing in Jerusalem, as well as Muhannad Al-Halabi, who stabbed two Israelis to death in Jerusalem’s old city the same day. He also listed the names of “martyrs,” most of whom perpetrated terror attacks, while emphasizing their young age. He added: “The Israeli method vis-a-vis the Palestinian people is [carrying out] field executions… Israel kills civilians and children and imposes collective punishments.”[6]
Other senior Fatah officials justified the violence and/or encouraged its continuation. In an interview with the Amad press agency, Fatah Central Committee member and former West Bank General Intelligence head Tawfiq Al-Tirawi said that the Palestinian people had the right to defend itself and to resist in order to secure its future, for popular resistance was one of the methods of resistance.[7]
Fatah Central Committee member ‘Azzam Al-Ahmad said: “We must continue the national awakening, for diplomatic activity without popular resistance is valueless. The time has arrived to expand the circle of [those] joining the popular resistance, and all of us have to participate in the struggle, each according to his ability.”[8]
Fatah Central Committee member ‘Abbas Zaki told the Turkish news agency Anadolu: “Armed struggle against the occupation is a legitimate right that we will not relinquish. However, this [activity] requires unity among all the Palestinian factions and establishing a central war room and formulating plans so that the armed struggle exacts a steep price from the enemy while [also] benefiting the Palestinian people. We reserve the right to [engage in] armed struggle, which is an option we will not give up, but we must consider how and when to carry it out, and whether the climate is right to use it to our benefit. At present we support [waging] a popular intifada that will confound the enemy and paralyze his security and economy, and prompt the world to address the question of how to end the world’s last remaining occupation.
“Deciding on an armed struggle now will [only] serve the enemy, who has the military power to kill [us] on a daily basis. Today we are defending ourselves, and we will continue to do so. We do not want escalation, but the enemy is attacking and destroying our cities and villages. [The means] of self-defense differ from one Palestinian to the other, some of us use stones and others knives.”[9]
Overt And Covert Threats To Escalate The Violence
In addition to congratulating the perpetrators of the stabbings and calling to continue the violence, members of the Fatah Central Committee even called to intensify it. ‘Azzam Al-Ahmad stated that, if Israel continued its “crimes” against the Palestinians, events would spiral out of control, and added: “There is a resemblance between the Israeli forces and the ISIS terror organization.”[10]
An October 13 announcement issued by the Al-Aqsa Brigades welcomed the attacks and called to “escalate them on the ground against the Israeli occupation that has made everything permitted, including killing women, children and the elderly in cold blood… The response will be painful and shocking, and we will act to light a fire under the filthy feet of the Zionists.”[11]
Image on Al-Aqsa Brigades website shows knife cleaving a Star of David, with the caption: “Palestinian, stand up and resist, and never relinquish your right” (3asfa.com, October 13, 2015)
They will not drive us out because we have nowhere else to go | Anne’s Opinions, October 14th 2015 Professor William Jacobson, (a law professor at Cornell University, an avowed conservative, Zionist and staunch defender of Israel, whom I have had the pleasure of meeting a couple of times in Israel) who runs the law-blog Legal Insurrection kindly invited me to write a guest post on how we Israelis are feeling during this onslaught of terror. You can read my post at LI . Following is a slightly different version, taking into account the events of the past couple of days – anneinpt)
—-
The words in my headline express what I and most of my family, friends and acquaintances are feeling at the moment. And yet, being obedient citizens and not generally of a murderous nature even when faced with an onslaught of terror, these feelings are not expressed in anything more violent than a noisy demonstration (which was cancelled last night precisely because of the security situation) and angry talkbacks or letters to the editor.
Even so, when Professor Jacobson asked if I wanted to wrote a post describing how we Israelis are feeling under the current onslaught of terror and vicious incitement, I thought to myself “How do I expand “furious, angry, frightened and frustrated” into a few hundred words? It is rather hard to put these harsh emotions into words and explain how they affect our lives, but I shall try.
Having taken not one single survey, (so my apologies for generalizing and extrapolating from my own emotions) I think the dominant feeling amongst the Israeli populace is not fear or terror (though there is that too) but anger, accompanied by a good deal of frustration.
We are angry at the government, particularly at Binyamin Netanyahu who urges us not to let the terror affect our lives. Mr. Netanyahu, it IS affecting our lives! How could it not? And yet, we are also frustrated because we know that Bibi is right. We were more frustrated a few days ago because we felt the government wasn’t being forceful enough in confronting the wave of terror, and concentrating on defensive rather than offensive steps. But they seem to be on the right path now, with the piling on of extra security in Jerusalem, on public transport and on the roads, plus easing the rules of engagement for the police and IDF and easing the way to obtaining a gun licence.
For example, here is the (Arab) Joint List MK Zahalka screaming at Israelis;
“Why are you letting them in? It’s a disgrace, only to hurt Muslims’ feelings. This is not yours, get out of here, go home, you’re not wanted,”
Watch the video:
They are arsonists in a bone-dry forest, and they are as responsible for the terror as those miserable kids who are going around stabbing Israelis. The one piece of good news about which Israelis were very happy today (if that’s the right word) is that Bibi called for a criminal investigation against Hanin Zoabi for calling for a popular intifada. But knowing our soft-left Attorney General, I’m not holding my breath for an indictment to emerge.
It is not only the average Israeli who is angry at the Arab MKs. In a very unusual scenario, the Arab mayor of Nazareth, Ali Salam, hurled a furious tirade against MK Ayman Odeh, the head of the United Arab List, accusing him and the rest of his party of “ruining” the city.
The unrest throughout Israel, in which dozens of stabbings and rock attacks have taken place in recent weeks, has caused a dearth of traffic in public places throughout the country, and has badly hurt the economy of Israeli Arab-owned businesses in Nazareth, Jaffa, Ramle, and other areas with large Arab populations.
Salam, frustrated with the situation, spotted Odeh speaking to the Channel Two reporter – and in the midst of the interview, began screaming at the MK in Arabic, telling him how he had “ruined this city, ruined everything. We did not have even one Jew here today, not one.
“What are giving interviews for? You have done nothing! You have destroyed the world! Get Out of here!,” screamed Salam, venting his frustration.
Watch the video:
We are upset, and more than a bit mystified, at the President – Rivlin, not Obama (though him too, but that’s another story) for asserting that we are not at war with Islam. Those are pretty words meant to tamp down the fire that threatens to engulf us, especially in Jerusalem, and they may be true in theory, but in practice, Islam is at war with us. How does one square that circle? Not facing up to reality has been the cause of most of our woes.
We are both furious and frustrated with Mahmoud Abbas who incites to murder out of one side of his mouth with dreadful libels about the Jews desecrating Al-Aqsa with “their filthy feet“:
Yet calls for calm from his own chieftains, and then again pronounces his solidarity with the Temple Mount rioters from the other side of his mouth. He cannot have it both ways. He cannot be arsonist and firefighter, though the world seems to have no problem accepting him as such.
We are angry, frustrated and terrified of our own hotheads who take the law into their own hands and who could ignite a civil war with the throw of a stone or the touch of a match.
We are spitting mad at the international media who distort, lie, slander and generally lie about Israel, and in particular about our efforts at self-defence. No matter what we do or how we go about it, you can be sure that the BBC, CNN, the NYT et al will distort the news into “all the news that we see fit to print, and if it’s not to our liking, we’ll edit it or invent it accordingly”.
And I’ve been wondering, not for the first time, what it would take for the world to wake up and acknowledge — without equivocation, resort to moral equivalence, or diplomatic gobbledygook — that Israel, the lone liberal democracy in the Middle East, is facing violence that must be condemned unequivocally, and that it, like any other nation, has the obligation to defend itself.
It’s striking how, when it comes to these issues, some otherwise intelligent and thoughtful people in government, media, or think tanks, just shut down their critical faculties. Instead, they resort to a Pavlovian response mechanism that essentially rejects any possible legitimacy for the Israeli position and blindly defends whatever Palestinian narrative comes along.
In this mindset, if Israelis are being shot or stabbed, they must have done something to “deserve” it.
If Israeli authorities mobilize the army and police to stop the terrorism, then, by definition, Israel is using “excessive force.”
No matter how inflammatory President Abbas’s speeches at the UN may be, he is a man of “peace.”
No matter how many times Israeli leaders call for face-to-face negotiations with the Palestinians, Israel is always branded as the “obstacle” to peace.
Isn’t it long overdue to get real, see things as they actually are, and stop living in a world of self-imposed illusions and falsehoods?
…
While they do not hesitate to push, prod, and criticize Israel when they believe, rightly or wrongly, that Israel isn’t acting in the spirit of a two-state vision, they’re too often deafeningly silent when it comes to Palestinian behavior — including right now.
This double standard is the height of condescension or, indeed, infantilization.
Regarding the causes of this Palestinian blood fetish, Western news organizations have resorted to familiar tropes. Palestinians have despaired at the results of the peace process—never mind that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas just declared the Oslo Accords null and void. Israeli politicians want to allow Jews to pray atop the Temple Mount—never mind that Benjamin Netanyahu denies it and has barred Israeli politicians from visiting the site. There’s always the hoary “cycle of violence” formula that holds nobody and everybody accountable at one and the same time.
…
And would this be supplemented by the usual fake math of moral opprobrium, which is the stock-in-trade of reporters covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? In the Middle East version, a higher Palestinian death toll suggests greater Israeli culpability. (Perhaps Israeli paramedics should stop treating stabbing victims to help even the score.) In a U.S. version, should the higher incidence of black-on-white crime be cited to “balance” stories about white supremacists?
Didn’t think so.
Treatises have been written about the media’s mind-set when it comes to telling the story of Israel. We’ll leave that aside for now. The significant question is why so many Palestinians have been seized by their present blood lust—by a communal psychosis in which plunging knives into the necks of Jewish women, children, soldiers and civilians is seen as a religious and patriotic duty, a moral fulfillment. Despair at the state of the peace process, or the economy? Please. It’s time to stop furnishing Palestinians with the excuses they barely bother making for themselves.
We are angry at the Administration who “urge us to be calm” but don’t urge the Arabs to turn off the terror. And we’re both highly amused yet really furious at the inane John Kerry who appears dangerously clueless or menacingly malevolent when it comes to understanding the Middle East. Click on the links within the following tweets to read the relevant stories:
Kerry's comments linking Pal terror to isr settlements will encourage more terror and push Israel to settle more http://t.co/DPt0G6KY1g
The Elder of Ziyon has produced a great debunking of Kerry’s lies. proving that the conflict is not about the settlements at all:
The truth is that there has been next to no expansion. No land is being “gobbled up” by the supposedly voracious Jews. No Arab houses are being demolished so that Jews could move in.
The only reason these lies are so accepted is because people like John Kerry want to believe them.
More sickening is the idea that Kerry is justifying Arab violence by ascribing a bogus reason to it.
We are frustrated and depressed at the thought of this violence sparking up every few years for the smallest of reasons.
I find it profoundly depressing, almost nauseating, to realize that with the anti-Israel indoctrination by UNRWA-run schools with their extremist teachers, the anti-Jewish incitement from the rest of the Palestinian education system, and the malign influence of the Palestinian media, yet another generation of Palestinian children is brainwashed into vicious and unreasonable Jew-hatred, and there is not a chance in hell of us ever reaching any kind of workable way for the two nations to live at least in an armed truce if not peace in our little country.
It is terrifying to understand that the Palestinian masses can be “switched on” into an almost zombie-like mass hysteria by a few words – false words, vicious words, words that can, and do, light a conflagration; those words being “the Jews are attacking the Al-Aqsa Mosque!”.
Palestinian cartoons of incitement against Jews
It is even worse to bear when we all know that those words are utterly false. How many times does Bibi have to swear that Israel has no designs on the Mosque, that the Jews are not interested in entering the Mosque, that we have not changed that unholy status quo one iota; in fact it is the Muslims themselves who have changed the status quo by turning the holy site into a battlefield, complete with rocks, firecrackers and even weapons, ready to be turned on the Jewish worshippers at the Western Wall below the Mosque and on the Israeli police and troops who are there to protect those worshippers.
On these two subjects, the indoctrination of Palestinian children, and the Temple Mount libels, I would recommend two excellent articles from the Times of Israel, both of which describe the profoundly depressing nature of the conflict and its insolubility:
This generation of Palestinian youth has been named the “children of Oslo” by Palestinian society. They were born after the Oslo agreements of 1993, and after the establishment of the Palestinian Authority. They have heard about the old model of the Israeli occupation, but don’t really know what it means. The Palestinian Authority, from their perspective, has been the government since before they were born, yet they view it with open contempt and suspicion.
…
They’re addicted to the Internet and, of course, to Facebook. The official media outlets of the Authority, such as Palestinian television and radio stations, are so 1990s. They pass around videos and messages in WhatsApp and other apps — like the video of the terrorist from Nazareth who was shot in Afula by cops after they surrounded her on all sides — and in that way create a communication and news network all their own. Even al-Jazeera seems to them “news for old people.”
Yet more incitement from the Palestinian Authority
There is an almost surreal aspect to this particular eruption of conflict: Israel has been plunged into a terror war because of a false assertion that it intends to allow Jewish prayer at the holiest place in Judaism. This rather begs the question of why Israel would not allow Jewish prayer at the holiest place in Judaism, which it captured and liberated, to a great outpouring of Jewish emotion in the 1967 war.
The answer? Utilizing the rabbinical halachic consensus that forbids Jews from setting foot on the Temple Mount for fear of desecrating the site of the Holy of Holies, Israel’s defense minister 48 years ago, Moshe Dayan, took the pragmatic decision not to fully realize renewed Jewish sovereignty at the Temple Mount, and therefore not to risk a religious confrontation with the Muslim world. Instead, Israel opted to bar Jewish prayer there and to permit the Jordanian-run Waqf authority to continue to administer the Muslim holy places. That Israeli forbearance has all too evidently been misunderstood and misrepresented among many Palestinians as evidence that the Jewish state has no genuine attachment to the Mount. That Israeli forbearance is now rewarded with violence.
As to the fear that we are experiencing, yes, we are scared of the terrorist acts that are popping up all around us, not only on the dangerous roads of Samaria, but in the middle of Jerusalem, in our major cities like Tel Aviv and Hadera (and even my quiet little hometown of Petach Tikva!), and on our major highways.
But we Israelis have known a lot worse. The deadly days of the Second Intifada are not easily forgotten, when we thought twice about going to the mall or riding a bus into town. Yet we did go to the mall and ride those buses and eat in those pizzerias; we just did it all with our eyes darting around and our ears sharpened for strange noises. My own method for dealing with the terror in those days was: no mooching in the mall if it was for no particular reason (that applied mainly to my teenage children), but if you need to go there to buy something, then go. Ditto for driving in Judea and Samaria, for eating out etc. In other words, the terror did affect our way of life, but we tried to minimize the impact as much as possible. We simply hunkered down and just got on with it.
That is the attitude that is starting to take effect now as well, at least for myself and my circle of family and friends. We are trying to carry on as normally as possible: my husband still drove on Route 443 from Jerusalem the other day although it is regularly stoned along the way because it was the quickest way home; my son drives in and out of his settlement because he has to work near Tel Aviv even though an IED was discovered on the approach road a couple of days ago. But – I admit I’m having second and third thoughts about visiting both him and our daughter in her settlement because there have been several stoning attacks and even, allegedly, a shooting the other day. For the moment I can wait a while to see my grandchildren. But for how long? At some point, if this situation continues, I will take the risk to drive out there. I can’t stay away forever. And the settlement’s residents too have to drive in and out in their daily lives.
For that is the one thing that the Arab world has not internalized about us – they will never drive us out, no matter how much terror they pour on us, no matter how much delegitimization they activate against us in the international sphere, no matter what weapons they launch at us.
Body of terrorist victim evacuated from stricken bus
By noon, Tuesday, Oct. 13, three Israelis were killed, 27 injured in Jerusalem by three terrorists from the same Palestinian Jebel Mukaber city neighborhood, which has a long history of terror. Armed with a gun and a knife, two terrorists tried to commandeer a bus a bus in the Armon Hanatziv district of Jerusalem, killing one Israeli and injuring 16, at least six seriously. One of the pair was shot dead, the second injured.
This was the first terrorist shooting attack in the current wave of violence. One of the killers was on the payroll of Bezek, Israel’s biggest telecom company.
In downtown Jerusalem, within minutes, a Palestinian ran down a group of pedestrians waiting at the Malchei Israel bus stop. He then jumped out of the car and struck his victims with a cleaver – continuing to strike even after he was shot by a local security guard. He killed 60-year old Rabbi Yeshayahu and injured three injured victims before he was shot dead.
Earlier, five Israelis were injured in two stabbing attacks carried out by a single terrorist in the town of Raanana north of Tel Aviv. He was overpowered by a civilian with a pepper gun and a selfie stick before police shot him dead.
After the Jerusalem attacks, police spokesmen admitted for the first time that they must have been synchronized and deliberately set up, finally abandoning the “lone wolf” theory attributed hitherto by Israeli officials to the current wave of terror.
Jerusalem’s two highway links – Rtes 1 and 443 – were meanwhile briefly shut to traffic in both directions as security forces swept for terrorist cars suspected of mingling with the intercity traffic.
DEBKAfile reported Monday.
The Palestinian knifing spree in Jerusalem Monday, Oct. 12, the day after an Israeli Arab from Umm al-Fham mowed down, then knifed, four Israelis in central Israel, puts the Palestinians on the same bloody course as Israeli Arabs, who launched an anti-Israel general strike Tuesday.
The day began at the Lions Gate, Border Guards police stopped a Palestinian who acted suspiciously. He pulled out a knife and stabbed one of the police men. The blade glanced off his body armor and the terrorist was shot dead.
At noon, a female terrorist inflicted moderate injuries on another two Border Guards officers opposite National Police Headquarters in northern Jerusalem. She was stopped by gun shots and seriously hurt.
A short time later, further north at Pisgat Zeev, two terrorists worked a street in tandem. They knocked a 13-year old Israeli boy off his bike and stabbed him. He is fighting for his life at Hadassah hospital on Mt. Scopus. The terrorist’s partner attacked a second Israeli, inflicting major knife wounds. Police at the scene stopped the rampage by shooting. One was killed.
The Umm al-Fahm assailant, Ali Riyadh Ahmed Ziwad, 20, who had to be restrained by police and passersby, Sunday night, assumed an air of surprised innocence after his arrest. “It was just a traffic accident,” he said, after running over, then critically injuring a 19-year old Israeli girl with a knife and stabbing three others.
He went into an act that is typical of the Palestinian tactic of assuming the role of victim after committing terrorist outrages.
Leaders of the Israeli Arab community (roughly one-tenth of Israel’s population) including its elected members of parliament embark on a general strike Tuesday, Oct. 13, followed Wednesday by a grandstand performance by Arab MKs at Al Aqsa, accompanied by a flock of Israeli and international camera crews.
They will have plenty of microphones to proclaim how badly they are treated and, above all, to continue to spread totally unproven falsehoods about Israeli desecrations of the Muslim Mosque of Al Aqsa, which has provided the Palestinians with their most evocative and unifying emblem for most of the past century.
Seventy-nine years ago, on April 19, 1936 – when Facebook, television and an Israel state were far in the future – the Arab High Command of Palestine declared a general strike which swiftly escalated into terrorist attacks against Jews and the British and evolved into the Great Arab Revolt.
Then, too, the rallying cry was “the Mosque is in danger!” for triggering the order to “burn a thousand buildings in Tel Aviv.” By the time it was over in 1939, 600 Jews, 200 British officials and 5,000 Arabs were dead. Many of the last group died in internecine tribal feuds.
The same rallying cry has ever since fired Palestinian campaigns of terror. The “Al Aqsa Intidafa” called by Yasser Arafat on Oct. 1, 2000, which saw the first intensive use of suicide attacks for terror, cost the lives of 1,178 Israelis and 50 foreigners, injured 8,022 civilians.
The Palestinians lost 3,333 dead and 30,000 injured – many self-inflicted.
No one can tell how the latest Israeli Arab strike will develop. Their leaders are doing their utmost to inflame passions and have already incited the first Israeli Arab stabbing attack in tune with Palestinian terrorists.
Israeli Arab leaders looks as though they have the bit between their teeth and are trying to use the weakness of the Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas to set the pace of events for the Palestinians as well.
The Israeli government is trying to pour oil on these turbulent waters, turning to the slow-moving legislative process as a means of fighting terror, while beefing up police forces, who are barely able to keep pace with the slashing knives.
Officials and reporters still insist on the absence of a controlling hand behind the violence, despite the evidence of an unfolding stage-by-scale escalation. The policeman injured at Lions Gate Monday told reporters from his hospital bed that, while on duty at various sectors, he had traced systematic organization behind the stabbings; the knife terrorists kept on coming out at a steady, controlled pace, he said.
Israeli strategists are not moving swiftly or unhesitatingly enough to correctly evaluate this enemy and pounce strongly on his weaknesses.
Only in our sick Middle Eastern reality could there exist a scene as horrific as the one that took place in the Pisgat Zeev neighborhood of Jerusalem on Monday: a 13-year-old Arab boy and his 15-year-old relative, both armed with knives, on a spree to kill Jews. Fate decreed that the victim, who was riding his bike, was also 13. One 13-year-old — the Arab one — wanted to kill, even if that meant he himself would die. The other — the Jewish victim — wanted to live, even if life is hard sometimes.
Thirteen-year-olds are old enough to know that life is more important than anything, that death can wait. At least that’s supposed to be what they hear from us adults at home. But the wave of stabbing attacks against Israelis, which on Monday marked its 12th day, is showing us that not everyone in our Middle East shares the same values. The knife attacks are bringing us face to face with a psychotic reality in which young Palestinian boys and girls are not afraid to die as long as they die killing Jews.
If only it were the result of desperation. Then it would be easier to understand. And there is desperation in our region: in Syria, in Iraq, in Yemen, and in Libya. Ask the Muslims living under the control of the Islamic State group.
But there is no desperation here. Not among Jews, and not among Arabs. Can anyone explain why a 19-year-old Arab woman studying history at college, supposedly the daughter of concerned parents, should despair? Why should a 29-year-old mother, studying for her M.A., feel compelled to whip out a knife at the Afula Central Bus Station?
Why, with all the choices they had, did these two woman — just like the 13-year-old boy on Monday — opt for death? It’s not desperation — it’s something else. Something very, very depraved. We are seeing a new phenomenon: a kind of infectious disease of terrorism that is passed from one zombie to another. A kind of mental illness that is legitimized from holy places.
Because the Arabian Nights stories about Jews who want to build their Temple and demolish Al-Aqsa mosque is spreading online. Because Israeli MKs from the Joint Arab List think that they were elected to serve as pyromaniacs, even if in the media they present themselves as trying to quell the flames. All of a sudden, young people are being given Allah-sanctioned legitimacy to commit murder, and get killed in the attempt. These are nihilist youth, but it’s not the nihilism of Camus. The nihilism we’re facing doesn’t reject religious faith, it operates in its name. And that’s the last thing we needed.
We’ve been through tough battles, and should keep things in perspective. We can assume that after making it through the wars of 1948 and 1973, not to mention two difficult intifadas, we’ll survive this battle, in which the doomsday weapon can be a pair of ninja turtle-style nunchucks.
But in crazy times like these, we need forces in the field. A 13-year-old Jewish boy riding his bike should see uniforms around him. Not terrorists. This still isn’t an intifada, and let’s hope it doesn’t become one, but we’ve entered a war of raw nerves. Increased deployment of police and soldiers will help calm the civilian population.
Israel hasn’t been defeated fighting for its existence. Obviously, it will survive the current zombie plague, too.
Among the several unanswered questions about the ongoing terror onslaught against Israelis, one of the most pertinent is why this is happening now, entirely unprovoked and spurred on by the incendiary incitement of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his ilk.
Relying on brainwashed youths to perpetrate the terrorist attacks, Abbas instigated the onslaught now simply because he had to do something to take back the world stage.
Abbas and his flock are used to the spotlight on the international stage, but in recent months, the influx of migrants and refugees from the Middle East and North Africa into Europe has completely swallowed the headlines there, and Abbas saw himself being marginalized to the point of being entirely forgotten. Abbas had to do something, so he unleashed terror on Israel, and he knew from years of experience with the so-called international community, as represented by the U.N., the Obama administration and the international media that he would be able to do so with impunity. In fact, the choreography of his little dance with the international media is so well-rehearsed and so perfectly tuned to his interests that Abbas knows he can rely on it to achieve his goals.
And that is exactly what is happening now. Abbas knew he could count on the major news outlets not to question why the terrorism is occurring now. Instead, the ragged old cliches of the mysteriously self-igniting “cycle of violence” are being re-hashed, while Israel’s legitimate self-defense against the stabbings, shootings and rock throwings is being increasingly reported in negative terms.
True to form, Israel has been unable thus far to counter the media dynamic that has worked so well for Abbas in the past. It appeared to be too little and too late when Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely several days ago announced a media campaign, as well as the formation of an inter-ministerial team to prepare a series of informational videos on the subject of Palestinian incitement. We have had 20 years to prepare those videos. Do not wait for the international media to hold its breath.
In his next move, truly Orwellian in a way that only the old Soviet cadres could have trumped, Abbas is now asking the U.N. Human Rights Council to quickly dispatch a commission of inquiry to the region “to investigate all crimes perpetrated by Israel against our people.” While this may sound outlandish to right-minded people, Abbas is not entirely wrong in his calculations that the U.N. will respond to his exhortations. Abbas knows that the dance he performs for the benefit of the U.N. is usually met with applause, and is just as predictably choreographed as his dance with the international media. All is possible when it comes to the U.N., particularly the U.N. Human Rights Council, where Saudi Arabia is currently chairing the U.N. Human Rights Council panel in charge of appointing independent experts.
While Abbas is craving the attention, other Middle East players are stoking the fire to deflect attention from them. Iran’s puppet, Hamas, has not only been sending rockets into Israel, aiming to add tension to the situation, but has also been sending Gazans to riot on the border with Israel, knowing fully well that confrontations and the likelihood of Palestinian casualties will further stoke the headlines against Israel and deflect attention from Iran’s own murky business in the region. The brutal murder of the Henkin couple in front of their four children was committed by a Hamas terror cell.
The Soviet-style inversion of truth and lies and the incredible willingness of the mainstream media not only to play along with it, but to exacerbate it with uncritical and bigoted reporting, is of course maddening. The answer, however, is not bitter resignation or long deliberations over future strategies, but to present the truth, as it happens and when it happens. The truth needs to be put out there, because the media create its own truth according to a pre-rehearsed template that we have seen ad nauseam, most damagingly during Operation Protective Edge in the summer of 2014. The time to speak out is now.
This morning we saw an escalation as a female bomber blew up her car at a checkpoint outside Maale Adumim. Miraculously the only casualty was the bomber herself. severely injured. The circumstances of how the bomber was stopped sound almost like a spoof – but a diligent traffic cop stopped what could have been a massive terror attack in Jerusalem:
Police said officers noticed a “suspicious vehicle” driven by a woman toward a checkpoint en route to Jerusalem and signaled to her to stop. The woman then yelled “Allahu Akbar” and detonated a bomb in her car, a police statement said.
Army Radio reported the wounded officer is a traffic policeman who pulled over the bomber in her car for driving in a lane specified for public transport and carpooling.
…
Initial reports pointed to a possible suicide bombing, saying that the woman had died in the attack. Police later said the woman exited her car just before the bomb went off, indicating that it may not have been a suicide bombing attempt.
I wonder if the bomber was coerced into the attack to save herself from a “family honour” punishment. We’ll probably never know.
Hamas is obviously feeling neglected so they organized huge demonstrations at the border with Israel. After several protestors breached the border, the IDF opened fire, killing up to 7. In retaliation Hamas launched rockets at Israel last night, and in return the IAF bombed some Hamas targets.
Same old same old.
The question at the moment is how should the government, and Israeli citizens, react to this new uprising? Should we be taking a harsher stance with the Arabs or try to defuse the situation? Should Netanyahu be building more settlements davka now or is he right to placate and appease Obama and the Europeans?
I bring you some differing viewpoints here, and I find myself agreeing with them all, depending on the time of day and what’s on the news. I offer no solutions myself. I’m glad I’m not in the position to have to offer such and I don’t envy the government. On the other hand, that is what they were elected for, and the situation cannot be permitted to drift.
First I’ll quote from a few of Arlene Kushner‘s latest posts. She is well-worth following and reading on a regular basis. She always talks sense and her clarity is refreshing:
… I read what Kerry said yesterday in Valpariso, Chile, where he was giving a talk:
John Kerry
“Regarding Jerusalem, it absolutely is unacceptable on either side to have to have violence resorted to as a solution.
“And I would caution everybody to be calm, not to escalate the situation…it is very important to maintain a sense of calm that will minimize the instinct for escalation.”
Let me get this straight: Arabs are killing Jews, but our government should not ratchet up the response to the terrorists? And whatever we do, we should not use violence in persuading those terrorists to stop what they are doing? We should, maybe, reason with them? Offer them perks if they stop?
This is moral equivalency run amuck. Politically correct thoughts from an empty head.
What it illustrates is the breath-taking international bias against Israel that we must contend with. No calling out the Arabs for their execrable behavior. No recognition of Israel’s right to defend her Jewish citizens. It helps us to understand (though not excuse) some of Netanyahu’s reluctance (until now) to take a strong stand against Arab terrorists.
It has been revealed by media sources that during the Security Cabinet meeting Prime Minister Netanyahu held Monday night, after the close of Simchat Torah, the issue of threats by Obama was raised. Some of the right wing/nationalist members of the Cabinet (some within the Likud itself) were urging that part of the response to terrorism be increased building in Judea and Samaria.
This is not going to happen, Netanyahu informed them. For Obama has said that if there is building in Judea and Samaria, he will not veto a French resolution that is to be brought to the UN Security Council, a resolution that reportedly would declare “Palestine” a state and would declare the settlements “illegal.”
“We will not jeopardize international support for a declaration of building,” a senior source in the Netanyahu administration reportedly said, While the prime minister himself called for “a sober political maneuver.”
The question I want to explore, then, is whether Netanyahu simply “caved” to the US, as Arutz Sheva suggests, and as is his pattern, or whether he has valid reason to be cautious here.
My gut impulse is to say, damn them all, go ahead and build. Now is the time for us to stand up for what is ours by right. But I know that my gut impulse is not necessarily the wisest course of action.
In exploring precisely what IS the wisest course, I contacted two highly respected and knowledgeable international lawyers, and here share their responses. Please, walk this through with me:
One lawyer, deeply involved in legal issues in Judea and Samaria, was interested in looking at the repercussions in terms of international law.
…
His opinion (this is not a legal opinion) is that a resolution would be tempered, and would
“call for an immediate return to negotiations, with the aim of establishing a Palestinian state and recommending a freeze in settlements.” All this, he says would not “really dramatically change the present situation.”
“But the settlement issue as well as that of Jerusalem have regrettably reached panic proportions thanks to very clever Palestinian manipulation of Obama and the EU and their evidently existing predisposition to harm Netanyahu and hence harm Israel.” (My emphasis added here)
…
The other lawyer, a man with sterling international credentials, chose to look at other, non-legal aspects of the issue (my emphasis added):
”The SC resolution would be very very damaging. Not because of any particular legal point, but because it would lock in a fundamental delegitimization of Israel, trigger a wave of EU sanctions, and make it harder for future US presidents to support Israel.
…
“Unless Bibi has concrete assurances on this, it makes sense to assume there will be no veto and build anyway…His (Obama’s) promise may be worth something if made publicly or with some other additional indicia of reliability.”
…
What we see then is that this is not a simple matter and should be taken seriously, but received without panic. It is not easy, being the head of a state that is isolated internationally and against which much venom is directed.
In the end it may well be that now is the time to stand up and claim our rights. But I would not make light of Netanyahu’s hesitancy to move forward.
And here is Arlene in a more belligerent mood after detailing the active incitement promoted by Mahmoud Abbas and his PA, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and all the rest of those “peace-loving Palestinians”: War. Whatever they call it:
One way or another we must vanquish them, make them afraid of us. But how?
The war that should happen will not happen, because no one wants to call it a war.
I’ve read a lot of suggestions both on the Internet, and from readers’ emails. What I will say here is that some of the suggestions that seem appealing – from the gut – will not work. We cannot banish all the Arabs to Gaza. We cannot take down whole Arab villages. We cannot.
…
Abbas speaks with forked tongue
But please be assured, I am not suggesting that Abbas has us cornered and that there is nothing we can do. This is only the case if we allow ourselves to be cornered. I believe attitude has a great deal to do with it. We must convey a self-confidence – a belief that we are in the right – which we are, and IN CONTROL.
No expressions of gratitude to Abbas for his cooperation on security matters. How ludicrous. Rather, a very quiet message to Abbas that if he doesn’t let his people know that they should cool it, it will go very badly with them and he will pay the price.
David Rubin, former mayor of Shilo, makes a host of suggestions in a blog on Arutz Sheva.
“Declare the Levy Report, which in 2012 proved the legal basis for Jewish sovereignty in Judea and Samaria, to be the basis for government policy in ‘the territories.’”
That last suggestion, to implement the Levy Report – a campaign for which. called We have Legal Grounds, is being run by Arlene and others – is probably the best suggestion anyone has made for a long time. Don’t expect it to be implemented any time soon.
The blogger Abu Yehuda is also an excellent read and I would highly recommend you follow him and read his insights. His two latest posts contain interesting advice for our leaders (which of course won’t be followed):
The Prime Minister’s reaction to the escalating terrorism of the last few months is an example. On the one hand, he wants to get tough with the stone- and firebomb-throwers. But on the other, he rejects the idea of changing the status quo with the PA, either by increased building or cutting off subsides. This is an attempt to treat the symptoms while feeding and stimulating the disease.
In all of these situations Israel is being forced to give up its sovereignty bit by bit. In each case, the government chooses to give in to blackmail. Our ‘strategy’, if you can call it that, is to walk between the raindrops. Unfortunately, as time goes on it rains harder and there is less and less room. We may have reached the point in all three of these cases that the old non-strategy no longer works.
We have allowed our fear of international reactions to keep us from exercising our rights in Judea and Samaria, and our fear of terrorism to limit actions against the PA. But at the same time, the US and EU keep increasing the pressure, and the PA keeps inciting and financing terror. So what have we gained?
…
I’m not going to try to provide a detailed prescription for solving these difficult problems. But in all of them we are moving in the wrong direction, from strength to weakness, from more to less independence and sovereignty.
There is a reason for this: it is because we haven’t articulated a clear picture of the desired end result. Lacking clear objectives, we are passive. Everything we do is a reaction to our enemies’ actions. No wonder we get boxed in – they are writing the screenplay, and we are performing our role in it.
…
Do we think that all faiths should be able to worship on the Temple Mount, including Jews? If so, we should insist on it. Rav Shlomo Goren wanted to build a synagogue on the Mount (not a third Temple, a synagogue). Why should this be an impossible goal?
And isn’t it past time that the PLO, the organization that has murdered more Jews because they are Jews than any other since the Nazis, joined their Nazi role models in oblivion?
I am not a fan of Vladimir Putin, but we could learn from him. The chaos of recent times is also an opportunity.
I find myself nodding my head in support at these suggestions.
On a similar theme, in “Sovereign or satellite?” Abu Yehuda addresses the American threat not to veto anti-Israel UN resolution, and writes:
Israel ought to have a close relationship with the US, because we share many of the same ideals. We certainly have the potential to be a valuable ally in a dangerous part of the world. But the present administration in Washington does not behave like an ally. … the president and his appointees like to talk about how much they care about Israel’s security. But they continue to act in ways that directly damage it.
I propose that we do implement a freeze, not on construction, but on our relationship with the Obama Administration.
The Prime Minister should publicly announce that while Israel wishes to continue its close relationship with the American people, it does not see the Obama Administration as an appropriate partner with which to do so. Therefore, until January 20, 2017, Israel will downgrade its relationship with the administration to the minimum required for diplomatic relations.
The PM should say that Israel does not see the administration as an unbiased broker in any negotiations with the PLO or anyone else.
Questionable US personnel in Israel (those suspected of working for the CIA) should be made persona non grata and asked to leave. The US-operated X-band radar station on Mt. Keren in the Negev, which serves as much to spy on Israel as to warn of an Iranian attack, should either be transferred to IDF control or shut down. Intelligence cooperation with the US should be limited.
I admit I like this suggestion the best of all that I have read, but it’s probably in the realm of a pipe-dream. I’m prepared to be proven wrong however!
Meanwhile, Israeli citizens have been reacting in their usual courageous way – in addition to the many protests last night.
Read this message of outrage from the bereaved Henkin family (click “more) at the end of the English to see the whole message) or see the whole text below this:.
I have to offer you my sincere condolences, Ambassador Shapiro. It is your duty, after all to explain on a daily basis an unexplainable and unjustifiable policy.
You have to defend a US government which on the one hand demanded that Israel should not free Palestinian terrorists with American blood on their hands, and on the other hand demanded that Israel will free Palestinian terrorists with Israeli blood on their hand. Apart from the blatant hypocrisy the US government has seemed to forget that by doing so it raised the chances that more people, among them US citizens like my brother Eitam, would be murdered at the hands of cold blooded terrorists.
You have to defend a government that appeases its enemies and pressures its friends; A government that decided that its army will “no longer be sized to conduct large-scale, prolonged stability operations”, when apparently the government itself is no longer sized to conduct prolonged operations or policy of any sort, perhaps explaining how chemical weapons continued to be used in Syria and how Russia got back into the middle east with a vengeance. You have to defend a government which focuses more on Timetables than on results, succeeding in pulling out forces but and almost nothing else.
You have defend a government that was so full of itself, that in 2009 it let Rahm Emmanuel declare that that “in the next four years there is going to be a permanent status arrangement between Israel and the Palestinians… and it doesn’t matter to us at all who is prime minister”. How unfortunate it was that the Arab-Israel conflict cannot be solved by pulling US troops out and declaring that the war has been won.
And now we have Mr. Putin and co. making fun of the US in the Crimea, sending a clear message to the whole world not to trust America’s assurances and guarantees. We have him in Syria too. In 2012, President Obama has ridiculed senator McCain when the latter said that Russia is a bigger geopolitical threat than al-Qaeda. ” The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back”, said the president. Well, now the 1980s are calling once again, to ask if we, if the US, if the current administrations needs them to lend us some leadership, since apparently they had way more than we have today, and we have less than we need.
You Ambassador Shapiro, have to defend all that and more. It is a heavy burden for any honest man. I offer you my sincere condolences.
These words, written in anger and bereavement, ring out with the truth.
And finally – a reminder to everyone that Israelis have not lost their humanity while under attack, in stark comparison to our enemies, one of whom named his new baby after a murderous terrorist:
At the site of the stabbing at the Petach Tikva mall last week, Shacharit (morning prayers) was held at that very site:
Let these be a reminder that we Israelis, we Jews, hold on to our humanity even in the darkest and harshest of times, especially when our enemies act in the most inhumane way possible.
Palestinians improvise a barricade during clashes with Israeli troops near Ramallah, West Bank, Saturday, Oct. 10 / AP
anneinpt
artaxes
danmillerinpanama
davidking1530
Peter Hofman
Joseph Wouk
Peter
Louisiana Steve
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments