I sent to my mailing list a satirical mock-up of the front page of the New York Times depicting the Warsaw Ghetto uprising as a disproportionate response of Jews to the Nazi holocaust. A number of respondents castigated me for making light of the holocaust and for the disgrace of mis-using the highly regarded Times to create this ironic piece.
If the point of my sending you the piece was not clear and if the irony of the piece was adumbrated by use of the renowned New York Times front page for the message, I point you to most of the world's news coverage of the Gaza War and the casting of Israel by all Muslim countries and many if not most of the other U.N. members, as the perpetrator of a holocaust while denying the fact of the Holocaust of the Jews. I do not believe this piece was a "disgrace" to the memory of the murdered Jews by the Nazis in the past and by the Arabs in the present.
I think the point of the piece was well taken. Did it deprecate the newspaper or disgrace the memory of the Holocaust? Not one jot or tittle!
The fact that there were and are "good" Germans and that there are "good" Arabs/Muslims does not mitigate or belittle the existential threat posed by the world of Islam to Israel and the Jewish People. When I see the grade-school textbooks in the Arab world teaching other than hatred of the Jews, and when I hear the Imams in their mosques preaching peace, I will have greater hope that one-on-one peace efforts will have meaningful weight for the future lives of my progeny and my People.
Perhaps you also may feel that Israel's response to the Hamas rocket attacks was, is, and will be, "disproportionate," and Hamas' use of civilians and civilian structures as strategic and tactical sacrificial lambs, and its continued rocket attacks despite its "truce" agreement, its holding a kidnapped soldier for over two years, its continued importation of war materielle rather than food and building materials, and its stated goal of Israel's destruction with the aid of Iran and Syria for sure and the surreptitious aid of other Muslim countries, is not disproportionate because unintentionally fewer Jews were killed.
I can tell you this from personal knowledge; Gaza civilians were the targets that Hamas set up to draw Israeli fire. Wherever and whenever possible, the Israeli army avoided civilian casualties. The army is trained that way. But shit happens, intentionally and unintentionally.
This struggle that you and I and many others are engaged in, has many faces. You may be on the cleanest end of it. That does not provide the same protection that kibbutz air raid shelters do. Nor does it save a life that the assassination of a terrorist does. Nor does it make the massive destruction of smuggling tunnels, rocket factories, terror cells, and rocket launching platforms more evil because it kills the population that willingly and enthusiastically supports Jew-killing and accidentally kills the civilians who are not involved directly or indirectly in the killing of Israelis.
I am not on the side of those who act to bring peace by deportation of Arabs and theft of Arab lands and destruction of Arab property. I am a realist and a pragmatist. As you perform to achieve the highest level of success you can in bringing peace to Jews and Arabs, so do I. And so do all my family and friends who have been and are in the Defense Army of Israel. And so do all the people who argue with me about the best means to achieve the impossible dream. Sadly, none of us have yet found the road to peace. But just as there are killers on both sides of the divide, I look for the moral people on both sides of the divide. I find a monstrously great difference between the way the Jews have been raised and the way the Muslims and specifically, the Palestinians, have been raised and educated. That foundational difference lies at the heart of our struggle for peace.
And equally important, the goals and interests of the many countries involved in the Middle East and its future may not be compatible with peace between the Palestinians and Israel.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
KILLERS NEED PEOPLE TO KILL
* OPINION EUROPE
* JANUARY 12, 2009
Ending the West's Proxy War Against Israel
Stop funding a Palestinian youth bulge, and the fighting will stop too.
By GUNNAR HEINSOHN |
From Wall Street Journal Europe
Mr. Heinsohn heads the Raphael Lemkin Institute at the University of Bremen, Europe's first institute devoted to comparative genocide research.
As the world decries Israel's attempt to defend itself from the rocket attacks coming from Gaza, consider this: When Hamas routed Fatah in Gaza in 2007, it cost nearly 350 lives and 1,000 wounded. Fatah's surrender brought only a temporary stop to the type of violence and bloodshed that are commonly seen in lands where at least 30% of the male population is in the 15-to-29 age bracket.
In such "youth bulge" countries, young men tend to eliminate each other or get killed in aggressive wars until a balance is reached between their ambitions and the number of acceptable positions available in their society. In Arab nations such as Lebanon (150,000 dead in the civil war between 1975 and 1990) or Algeria (200,000 dead in the Islamists' war against their own people between 1999 and 2006), the slaughter abated only when the fertility rates in these countries fell from seven children per woman to fewer than two. The warring stopped because no more warriors were being born.
In Gaza, however, there has been no demographic disarmament. The average woman still bears six babies. For every 1,000 men aged 40-44, there are 4,300 boys aged 0-4 years. In the U.S. the latter figure is 1,000, and in the U.K. it's only 670.
And so the killing continues. In 2005, when Israel was still an occupying force, Gaza lost more young men to gang fights and crime than in its war against the "Zionist enemy." Despite the media's obsession with the Mideast conflict, it has cost many fewer lives than the youth bulges in West Africa, Lebanon or Algeria. In the six decades since Israel's founding, "only" some 62,000 people (40,000 Arabs, 22,000 Jews) have been killed in all the Israeli-Arab wars and Palestinian terror attacks. During that same time, some 11 million Muslims have been killed in wars and terror attacks -- mostly at the hands of other Muslims.
What accounts for the Mideast conflict's relatively low body count? Hamas and their ilk certainly aim to kill as many Israelis as possible. To their indignation, the Israelis are quite good at protecting themselves. On the other hand, Israel, despite all the talk about its "disproportionate" use of force, is doing its utmost to spare civilian deaths. Even Hamas acknowledges that most of the Palestinians killed by Israeli air raids are from their own ranks. But about 10%-15% of Gaza's casualties are women and minors -- a tragedy impossible to prevent in a densely settled area in which nearly half the people are under 15 and the terrorists hide among them.
The reason for Gaza's endless youth bulge is that a large majority of its population does not have to provide for its offspring. Most babies are fed, clothed, vaccinated and educated by UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. Unlike the U.N. High Commission for Refugees, which deals with the rest of the world's refugees and aims to settle them in their respective host countries, UNRWA perpetuates the Palestinian problem by classifying as refugees not only those who originally fled their homes, but all of their descendents as well.
UNRWA is benevolently funded by the U.S. (31%) and the European Union (nearly 50%) -- only 7% of the funds come from Muslim sources. Thanks to the West's largesse, nearly the entire population of Gaza lives in a kind of lowly but regularly paid dependence. One result of this unlimited welfare is an endless population boom. Between 1950 and 2008, Gaza's population has grown from 240,000 to 1.5 million. The West basically created a new Near Eastern people in Gaza that at current trends will reach three million in 2040. Within that period, Gazans may alter the justifications and directions of their aggression but are unlikely to stop the aggression itself.
The Hamas-Fatah truce of June 2007 allowed the Islamists again to direct all their energy on attacking Israel. The West pays for food, schools, medicine and housing, while Muslim nations help out with the military hardware. Unrestrained by such necessities as having to earn a living, the young have plenty of time on their hands for digging tunnels, smuggling, assembling missiles and firing 4,500 of them at Israel since 2006. While this gruesome activity has slowed the Palestinian internecine slaughter, it forced some 250,000 Israelis into bomb shelters.
The current situation can only get worse. Israel is being pushed into a corner. Gazan teenagers have no future other than war. One rocket master killed is immediately replaced by three young men for whom a martyr's death is no less honorable than victory. Some 230,000 Gazan males, aged 15 to 29, who are available for the battlefield now, will be succeeded by 360,000 boys under 15 (45% of all Gazan males) who could be taking up arms within the coming 15 years.
As long as we continue to subsidize Gaza's extreme demographic armament, young Palestinians will likely continue killing their brothers or neighbors. And yet, despite claiming that it wants to bring peace to the region, the West continues to make the population explosion in Gaza worse every year. By generously supporting UNRWA's budget, the West assists a rate of population increase that is 10 times higher than in their own countries. Much is being said about Iran waging a proxy war against Israel by supporting Hezbollah and Hamas. One may argue that by fueling Gaza's untenable population explosion, the West unintentionally finances a war by proxy against the Jews of Israel.
If we seriously want to avoid another generation of war in Gaza, we must have the courage to tell the Gazans that they will have to start looking after their children themselves, without UNRWA's help. This would force Palestinians to focus on building an economy instead of freeing them up to wage war. Of course, every baby lured into the world by our money up to now would still have our assistance.
If we make this urgently needed reform, then by at least 2025 many boys in Gaza -- like in Algeria -- would enter puberty as only sons. They would be able to look forward to a more secure future in a less violent society.
If the West prefers calm around Gaza even before 2025, it may consider offering immigration to those young Palestinians only born because of the West's well-meant but cruelly misguided aid. In the decades to come, North America and Europe will have to take in tens of millions of immigrants anyway to slow the aging of their populations. If, say, 200,000 of them are taken from the 360,000 boys coming of age in Gaza in the next 15 years, that would be a negligible move for the big democracies but a quantum leap for peace in the Near East.
Many of Gaza's young -- like in much of the Muslim world -- dream of leaving anyway. Who would not want to get out of that strip of land but the international NGOs and social workers whose careers depend on perpetuating Gaza's misery?
Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
* JANUARY 12, 2009
Ending the West's Proxy War Against Israel
Stop funding a Palestinian youth bulge, and the fighting will stop too.
By GUNNAR HEINSOHN |
From Wall Street Journal Europe
Mr. Heinsohn heads the Raphael Lemkin Institute at the University of Bremen, Europe's first institute devoted to comparative genocide research.
As the world decries Israel's attempt to defend itself from the rocket attacks coming from Gaza, consider this: When Hamas routed Fatah in Gaza in 2007, it cost nearly 350 lives and 1,000 wounded. Fatah's surrender brought only a temporary stop to the type of violence and bloodshed that are commonly seen in lands where at least 30% of the male population is in the 15-to-29 age bracket.
In such "youth bulge" countries, young men tend to eliminate each other or get killed in aggressive wars until a balance is reached between their ambitions and the number of acceptable positions available in their society. In Arab nations such as Lebanon (150,000 dead in the civil war between 1975 and 1990) or Algeria (200,000 dead in the Islamists' war against their own people between 1999 and 2006), the slaughter abated only when the fertility rates in these countries fell from seven children per woman to fewer than two. The warring stopped because no more warriors were being born.
In Gaza, however, there has been no demographic disarmament. The average woman still bears six babies. For every 1,000 men aged 40-44, there are 4,300 boys aged 0-4 years. In the U.S. the latter figure is 1,000, and in the U.K. it's only 670.
And so the killing continues. In 2005, when Israel was still an occupying force, Gaza lost more young men to gang fights and crime than in its war against the "Zionist enemy." Despite the media's obsession with the Mideast conflict, it has cost many fewer lives than the youth bulges in West Africa, Lebanon or Algeria. In the six decades since Israel's founding, "only" some 62,000 people (40,000 Arabs, 22,000 Jews) have been killed in all the Israeli-Arab wars and Palestinian terror attacks. During that same time, some 11 million Muslims have been killed in wars and terror attacks -- mostly at the hands of other Muslims.
What accounts for the Mideast conflict's relatively low body count? Hamas and their ilk certainly aim to kill as many Israelis as possible. To their indignation, the Israelis are quite good at protecting themselves. On the other hand, Israel, despite all the talk about its "disproportionate" use of force, is doing its utmost to spare civilian deaths. Even Hamas acknowledges that most of the Palestinians killed by Israeli air raids are from their own ranks. But about 10%-15% of Gaza's casualties are women and minors -- a tragedy impossible to prevent in a densely settled area in which nearly half the people are under 15 and the terrorists hide among them.
The reason for Gaza's endless youth bulge is that a large majority of its population does not have to provide for its offspring. Most babies are fed, clothed, vaccinated and educated by UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. Unlike the U.N. High Commission for Refugees, which deals with the rest of the world's refugees and aims to settle them in their respective host countries, UNRWA perpetuates the Palestinian problem by classifying as refugees not only those who originally fled their homes, but all of their descendents as well.
UNRWA is benevolently funded by the U.S. (31%) and the European Union (nearly 50%) -- only 7% of the funds come from Muslim sources. Thanks to the West's largesse, nearly the entire population of Gaza lives in a kind of lowly but regularly paid dependence. One result of this unlimited welfare is an endless population boom. Between 1950 and 2008, Gaza's population has grown from 240,000 to 1.5 million. The West basically created a new Near Eastern people in Gaza that at current trends will reach three million in 2040. Within that period, Gazans may alter the justifications and directions of their aggression but are unlikely to stop the aggression itself.
The Hamas-Fatah truce of June 2007 allowed the Islamists again to direct all their energy on attacking Israel. The West pays for food, schools, medicine and housing, while Muslim nations help out with the military hardware. Unrestrained by such necessities as having to earn a living, the young have plenty of time on their hands for digging tunnels, smuggling, assembling missiles and firing 4,500 of them at Israel since 2006. While this gruesome activity has slowed the Palestinian internecine slaughter, it forced some 250,000 Israelis into bomb shelters.
The current situation can only get worse. Israel is being pushed into a corner. Gazan teenagers have no future other than war. One rocket master killed is immediately replaced by three young men for whom a martyr's death is no less honorable than victory. Some 230,000 Gazan males, aged 15 to 29, who are available for the battlefield now, will be succeeded by 360,000 boys under 15 (45% of all Gazan males) who could be taking up arms within the coming 15 years.
As long as we continue to subsidize Gaza's extreme demographic armament, young Palestinians will likely continue killing their brothers or neighbors. And yet, despite claiming that it wants to bring peace to the region, the West continues to make the population explosion in Gaza worse every year. By generously supporting UNRWA's budget, the West assists a rate of population increase that is 10 times higher than in their own countries. Much is being said about Iran waging a proxy war against Israel by supporting Hezbollah and Hamas. One may argue that by fueling Gaza's untenable population explosion, the West unintentionally finances a war by proxy against the Jews of Israel.
If we seriously want to avoid another generation of war in Gaza, we must have the courage to tell the Gazans that they will have to start looking after their children themselves, without UNRWA's help. This would force Palestinians to focus on building an economy instead of freeing them up to wage war. Of course, every baby lured into the world by our money up to now would still have our assistance.
If we make this urgently needed reform, then by at least 2025 many boys in Gaza -- like in Algeria -- would enter puberty as only sons. They would be able to look forward to a more secure future in a less violent society.
If the West prefers calm around Gaza even before 2025, it may consider offering immigration to those young Palestinians only born because of the West's well-meant but cruelly misguided aid. In the decades to come, North America and Europe will have to take in tens of millions of immigrants anyway to slow the aging of their populations. If, say, 200,000 of them are taken from the 360,000 boys coming of age in Gaza in the next 15 years, that would be a negligible move for the big democracies but a quantum leap for peace in the Near East.
Many of Gaza's young -- like in much of the Muslim world -- dream of leaving anyway. Who would not want to get out of that strip of land but the international NGOs and social workers whose careers depend on perpetuating Gaza's misery?
Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Friday, January 23, 2009
INTERESTS OF HISTORY
WHAT IS "HISTORY" AND HOW IS IT MADE?
Tracing any human institution from its inception to the present, or to its demise if that is the case, is simply a study of history and the impact the institution had on its times.
To fully comprehend any human institution, it is essential to find and evaluate the interests that brought it into being. What is meant here by the term, “interests,” is benefit, participation, welfare, good, influence, partiality, and a variety of situation-specific meanings such as wealth, power, position, and the like.
Probably the most wide-spread institution is that of “family.” The underlying interests are apparent. Sexual gratification, safety in numbers, economic need fulfillment and stability, procreation, two heads are better than one, companionship and psychological support, and other individualistic interests that are fulfilled by the family at all levels and by all its members.
Guarded financial and political institutions of power are the most difficult to enter and institutions that need members, volunteer workers, and money donors are the easiest to enter. The interests of the first are to guard and maximize their power. The interests of the second are to gain and expand power. All human institutions, in varying degrees and kinds, hold the same interests. And all of them want to leave their mark on history.
Dynasties, nations and kingdoms, ethnic groupings, families, political parties, religions, corporations, sport teams, universities, and other institutions of all kinds, when studied by themselves or in the context of their kind or in the context of their time of existence, open windows on history.
Competition between and among institutions leads to the windows on history being manipulated, generally by the stronger of the competitors or the winners of the competitions. Historians, being human and springing from their own histories, themselves manipulate the windows of history to achieve egocentric, ethnocentric, religious and other predetermined or desirable views of the particular era and area of study.
However researched and annotated, however impartial the historian, the resulting history is his story or her story.
Tracing any human institution from its inception to the present, or to its demise if that is the case, is simply a study of history and the impact the institution had on its times.
To fully comprehend any human institution, it is essential to find and evaluate the interests that brought it into being. What is meant here by the term, “interests,” is benefit, participation, welfare, good, influence, partiality, and a variety of situation-specific meanings such as wealth, power, position, and the like.
Probably the most wide-spread institution is that of “family.” The underlying interests are apparent. Sexual gratification, safety in numbers, economic need fulfillment and stability, procreation, two heads are better than one, companionship and psychological support, and other individualistic interests that are fulfilled by the family at all levels and by all its members.
Guarded financial and political institutions of power are the most difficult to enter and institutions that need members, volunteer workers, and money donors are the easiest to enter. The interests of the first are to guard and maximize their power. The interests of the second are to gain and expand power. All human institutions, in varying degrees and kinds, hold the same interests. And all of them want to leave their mark on history.
Dynasties, nations and kingdoms, ethnic groupings, families, political parties, religions, corporations, sport teams, universities, and other institutions of all kinds, when studied by themselves or in the context of their kind or in the context of their time of existence, open windows on history.
Competition between and among institutions leads to the windows on history being manipulated, generally by the stronger of the competitors or the winners of the competitions. Historians, being human and springing from their own histories, themselves manipulate the windows of history to achieve egocentric, ethnocentric, religious and other predetermined or desirable views of the particular era and area of study.
However researched and annotated, however impartial the historian, the resulting history is his story or her story.
GOLDA MEIR SAID
Golda Meir (former Prime Minister of Israel) said, "We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children. We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us."
There will never be sulcha - forgiveness - without learning that we are all children, Jews and Arabs. And there will never be learning so long as the people are exploited by their political and religious leaders to go out and "Kill the other!"
The world must know the difference between aggressive killing and killing in self defense. Since Israel evacuated Gaza, more than 6,000 rockets have been fired into Israel with aggressive intent to kill. Arab terrorist groups have sent suicide bombers into Israel on "Holy" missions to become martyrs by killing Jews.
Imams, Kadis, "Holy" men, preach death to the Jews as a holy mission. More than 70,000 Iranis volunteered to become martyrs by killing Jews in Israel when their president declared that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth.
How can peace be achieved in the face of this holy war against a People whose crime is existence? How can the children of Jews and Arabs be saved from the slaughter of these religionists? Where in the Koran can be found the solution to this enigma?
If history teaches a lesson here, there is no solution based on anything that is presently being done. Teaching our children to make war no more is not happening. Until that teaching takes place, they will die ever more excruciating deaths, as will their parents and their children.
There will never be sulcha - forgiveness - without learning that we are all children, Jews and Arabs. And there will never be learning so long as the people are exploited by their political and religious leaders to go out and "Kill the other!"
The world must know the difference between aggressive killing and killing in self defense. Since Israel evacuated Gaza, more than 6,000 rockets have been fired into Israel with aggressive intent to kill. Arab terrorist groups have sent suicide bombers into Israel on "Holy" missions to become martyrs by killing Jews.
Imams, Kadis, "Holy" men, preach death to the Jews as a holy mission. More than 70,000 Iranis volunteered to become martyrs by killing Jews in Israel when their president declared that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth.
How can peace be achieved in the face of this holy war against a People whose crime is existence? How can the children of Jews and Arabs be saved from the slaughter of these religionists? Where in the Koran can be found the solution to this enigma?
If history teaches a lesson here, there is no solution based on anything that is presently being done. Teaching our children to make war no more is not happening. Until that teaching takes place, they will die ever more excruciating deaths, as will their parents and their children.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
BARACK LINCOLN OBAMA
BARACK LINCOLN OBAMA - January 20, 2009
It is time!
The ghost of Abraham Lincoln stood next to Barack Obama at Tuesday’s inauguration of the 44th president of the United States. He saw the bible on which Obama’s hand rested as he swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States, his bible.
It is time.
He saw the 43rd president nearby and the assembled dignitaries and the assembled predators. He looked out to see the people massed past George Washington’s monument and uncounted hundreds of thousands more breathing the cold winter air as they listened to old words and new promises from the man, Barack Obama who was chosen, miraculously as he was, to lead his country at a time of parlous danger.
It is time.
Lincoln shrugged and wondered how this compleat man, experienced as he was and inexperienced as he is, would pilot his time’s ship of state through monstrous heaving seas of testing and peril. Lincoln felt he was father to this man as indeed he was in many ways. Would that he could stay the hand of Obama as was Abraham’s at his testing on Mount Moriah. Would that he could instill in this Goliath the wisdom to dodge David’s smooth stone and instill in this David the capacities to chasten the giants of war around him and lead them to peace to spare the killing of the small people of the earth.
It is time.
Would this man, President Barack Obama, see the dangers of hidden powers surrounding him, infiltrating the ranks of trusted advisors, influencing slyly small numbers to join forces to become the movers and shakers, observe the tactics of skilled manipulators of the People’s representatives in the halls of government, and having seen them, maintain the solid ramparts of honesty, fairness, humaneness, and equality to prevent the dam-bursting flood of evil where once stood good and good intentions?
It is time.
Lincoln himself also knew that if this man, President Barack Obama, succeeded, he would face mortal danger, and he shuddered. And if lightening were to strike,
it would not be time.
It is time!
The ghost of Abraham Lincoln stood next to Barack Obama at Tuesday’s inauguration of the 44th president of the United States. He saw the bible on which Obama’s hand rested as he swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States, his bible.
It is time.
He saw the 43rd president nearby and the assembled dignitaries and the assembled predators. He looked out to see the people massed past George Washington’s monument and uncounted hundreds of thousands more breathing the cold winter air as they listened to old words and new promises from the man, Barack Obama who was chosen, miraculously as he was, to lead his country at a time of parlous danger.
It is time.
Lincoln shrugged and wondered how this compleat man, experienced as he was and inexperienced as he is, would pilot his time’s ship of state through monstrous heaving seas of testing and peril. Lincoln felt he was father to this man as indeed he was in many ways. Would that he could stay the hand of Obama as was Abraham’s at his testing on Mount Moriah. Would that he could instill in this Goliath the wisdom to dodge David’s smooth stone and instill in this David the capacities to chasten the giants of war around him and lead them to peace to spare the killing of the small people of the earth.
It is time.
Would this man, President Barack Obama, see the dangers of hidden powers surrounding him, infiltrating the ranks of trusted advisors, influencing slyly small numbers to join forces to become the movers and shakers, observe the tactics of skilled manipulators of the People’s representatives in the halls of government, and having seen them, maintain the solid ramparts of honesty, fairness, humaneness, and equality to prevent the dam-bursting flood of evil where once stood good and good intentions?
It is time.
Lincoln himself also knew that if this man, President Barack Obama, succeeded, he would face mortal danger, and he shuddered. And if lightening were to strike,
it would not be time.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
A MASSACRE OF ONE
The concept of, “To save one life is to save the whole world,” grows out of the biblical creation of humankind, the world, through the creation of a single person, Adam. Jewish exegesis places demands on the Jewish People that flow from the Torah, the bible. Also, “To destroy a life is to destroy the whole world.” By extension, with or without knowledge, these concepts also apply to non-Jewish human beings.
For centuries, the course and demands of life failed to match humanistic and religious requirements to uphold these two mirror-image concepts. Reality finds religion in the roots of killing, in the roots of mass murder. Killing for wealth does not trample moral convictions, but killing for religion is totally at odds with moral convictions – or so it must be.
Rockets have been fired by Hamas, an Islamic terrorist group, at Israel in an attempt to kill its citizens.
Israel’s struggle to survive in the sea of Islamic hatred and Islam’s determination to commit genocide of the Jewish People in a second attempt after the Nazi holocaust is totally at odds with moral conviction by any definition. The Gaza War started years ago with daily rocket attacks on Israel by Islamist militants, terrorists by common definition, determined to kill Jews. Until Israel’s retaliation, this criminal immoral genocidal action was applauded by the population of Gaza. Palestinian, Muslim, and peace-loving people’s tears and rage flow from Israel’s reaction and no connection seems to connect the Arab action and the Israeli reaction.
The moral dilemma for Israel is whether it is trying to save life by destroying life? Is it trying to save the world by destroying the world?
The moral dilemma for the world, including the world of Islam, is whether it at all faces a moral dilemma? Apparently not.
For centuries, the course and demands of life failed to match humanistic and religious requirements to uphold these two mirror-image concepts. Reality finds religion in the roots of killing, in the roots of mass murder. Killing for wealth does not trample moral convictions, but killing for religion is totally at odds with moral convictions – or so it must be.
Rockets have been fired by Hamas, an Islamic terrorist group, at Israel in an attempt to kill its citizens.
Israel’s struggle to survive in the sea of Islamic hatred and Islam’s determination to commit genocide of the Jewish People in a second attempt after the Nazi holocaust is totally at odds with moral conviction by any definition. The Gaza War started years ago with daily rocket attacks on Israel by Islamist militants, terrorists by common definition, determined to kill Jews. Until Israel’s retaliation, this criminal immoral genocidal action was applauded by the population of Gaza. Palestinian, Muslim, and peace-loving people’s tears and rage flow from Israel’s reaction and no connection seems to connect the Arab action and the Israeli reaction.
The moral dilemma for Israel is whether it is trying to save life by destroying life? Is it trying to save the world by destroying the world?
The moral dilemma for the world, including the world of Islam, is whether it at all faces a moral dilemma? Apparently not.
Monday, January 19, 2009
KILL FUTURE NOBEL PRIZE WINNERS
The leaders of most of the Arab world, most of the preachers of Islam, all of the Arab terrorist organizations, and the president of Iran (a non-Arab Islamic country,) declare their enmity to the State of Israel and to the entire Jewish population of the world.
The impact of the success of their goal would be the deaths of nearly one quarter of all Nobel Prize winners into the future if statistics hold up.
The loss in lives of the rest of humanity would be stupendous if future products of present and future winners of the prize for medicine were wiped out. Now THAT would be a holocaust.
The Nobel Foundation of Sweden awards the Nobel Prizes to men and women who have rendered the greatest service to humankind. Of the 750 Nobel Prizes awarded worldwide between 1901 and 2007, at least 162 were awarded to Jews. While Jews are approximately 0.25% of the world's population, Jews make up approximately 22% of all Nobel Prize laureates worldwide.
Killing Iran's Ahmadinajad would be a boon to humanity. The murder of preachers of "Death to the Jews," would be a blessing to the world. Of course, by wiping out terrorrist organizations and their members, their killers would earn Nobel Peace Prizes.
And the blessings bestowed on mankind by the rest of the Jewish/Israeli prize-winners is incalculable if past inventions, discoveries, scientific achievements and all the rest of their life-time products were counted in.
Think about it.
The impact of the success of their goal would be the deaths of nearly one quarter of all Nobel Prize winners into the future if statistics hold up.
The loss in lives of the rest of humanity would be stupendous if future products of present and future winners of the prize for medicine were wiped out. Now THAT would be a holocaust.
The Nobel Foundation of Sweden awards the Nobel Prizes to men and women who have rendered the greatest service to humankind. Of the 750 Nobel Prizes awarded worldwide between 1901 and 2007, at least 162 were awarded to Jews. While Jews are approximately 0.25% of the world's population, Jews make up approximately 22% of all Nobel Prize laureates worldwide.
Killing Iran's Ahmadinajad would be a boon to humanity. The murder of preachers of "Death to the Jews," would be a blessing to the world. Of course, by wiping out terrorrist organizations and their members, their killers would earn Nobel Peace Prizes.
And the blessings bestowed on mankind by the rest of the Jewish/Israeli prize-winners is incalculable if past inventions, discoveries, scientific achievements and all the rest of their life-time products were counted in.
Think about it.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
PEACE BETWEEN ISRAEL AND THE ARABS?
Conflict between Israel and the Arab world has been ongoing before Israel’s War of Independence and the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948. Attempts to establish a Jewish state in harmony with the Arab countries that border the territory called Palestine began decades before and since 1948, without success. Those efforts failed, and future efforts may fail, because of territorial and biblical history, religion and the various conflicts engendered by and between them, the political natures and rivalries of the various Muslim states, the need for a non-Arab scapegoat for the Arab condition, economic structures built on two-class societies with their oligarchic leaderships intent on retaining their power and wealth, and above all, because education to peace did not override education to war between and among the parties to the conflict.
Attempts have been made to achieve “Peace Treaties” between Israel and its neighbors mostly by emissaries from the United States conducting marathon negotiation sessions with Palestinian Arabs and Israeli government functionaries. Historical records show that preparation for war on the part of all parties was constant during these negotiations and that the Palestinians were in intimate contact with leaders from the surrounding Arab oligarchies to obtain input, permission, and veto messages to carry back to the negotiating tables. Financial support for Palestinian leadership was a hidden controlling element in the negotiations.
Though the apparent goal of the negotiations was “Peace Treaty,” the true goal of the Arab world was continuation of the conflict, for numerous reasons of self-interest. No matter how close success appeared, an insurmountable obstacle for one side or the other somehow appeared at the table. Failure of negotiations thus conducted was fore-ordained.
Regardless of the historical truth or accuracy of these assertions, for one reason or another, after peace treaties were signed between Egypt and Israel and Jordan and Israel, no additional treaty was signed with any neighboring country nor with any representative Palestinian entity. Inasmuch as unforced treaties are generally viewed as mutually beneficial, it is apparent that peace treaties were not viewed as beneficial to the rest of the controlling Arab world regardless of how beneficial potential positive treaty outcomes might be for the Palestinian Arabs.
These dishonorable tragic relationships between the surrounding Arab states and the Palestinians and their multitude of refugees from the various wars between Israel and its Arab neighbors have wrought havoc on the economic and psychological conditions of this benighted group of people.
Now, in January of 2009, Lebanon led by Hezbolla and Syria led by Bashir al-Assad, both under the sway of Iran, the two remaining border nations at war with Israel, and the fragmented Palestinian people, the Gaza portion of whom are in a constant state of war with Israel since Hamas established control of the territory, do not appear to place value on achieving peace with Israel at this time. To the contrary, those three entities with overt military support from Iran are engaged in a race with each other to determine who will win the prize for destroying the State of Israel and murdering all the Jews who have the temerity to live there and who oppose the goal of their own extinction.
The remaining oligarchies in the Arab world appear to be unsure about whether to accept Israel’s existence at all and whether to formalize a relationship with her. It appears that the growth of Iranian military power is an important determinant in making this decision. Oil markets and religious competition are impediments to cooperative action in all areas of Islamic life except war. Unless and until a change takes place in the value systems of the nations of the world of Islam, there is little hope for a peace settlement of any kind acceptable to Arabs and Israel.
Attempts have been made to achieve “Peace Treaties” between Israel and its neighbors mostly by emissaries from the United States conducting marathon negotiation sessions with Palestinian Arabs and Israeli government functionaries. Historical records show that preparation for war on the part of all parties was constant during these negotiations and that the Palestinians were in intimate contact with leaders from the surrounding Arab oligarchies to obtain input, permission, and veto messages to carry back to the negotiating tables. Financial support for Palestinian leadership was a hidden controlling element in the negotiations.
Though the apparent goal of the negotiations was “Peace Treaty,” the true goal of the Arab world was continuation of the conflict, for numerous reasons of self-interest. No matter how close success appeared, an insurmountable obstacle for one side or the other somehow appeared at the table. Failure of negotiations thus conducted was fore-ordained.
Regardless of the historical truth or accuracy of these assertions, for one reason or another, after peace treaties were signed between Egypt and Israel and Jordan and Israel, no additional treaty was signed with any neighboring country nor with any representative Palestinian entity. Inasmuch as unforced treaties are generally viewed as mutually beneficial, it is apparent that peace treaties were not viewed as beneficial to the rest of the controlling Arab world regardless of how beneficial potential positive treaty outcomes might be for the Palestinian Arabs.
These dishonorable tragic relationships between the surrounding Arab states and the Palestinians and their multitude of refugees from the various wars between Israel and its Arab neighbors have wrought havoc on the economic and psychological conditions of this benighted group of people.
Now, in January of 2009, Lebanon led by Hezbolla and Syria led by Bashir al-Assad, both under the sway of Iran, the two remaining border nations at war with Israel, and the fragmented Palestinian people, the Gaza portion of whom are in a constant state of war with Israel since Hamas established control of the territory, do not appear to place value on achieving peace with Israel at this time. To the contrary, those three entities with overt military support from Iran are engaged in a race with each other to determine who will win the prize for destroying the State of Israel and murdering all the Jews who have the temerity to live there and who oppose the goal of their own extinction.
The remaining oligarchies in the Arab world appear to be unsure about whether to accept Israel’s existence at all and whether to formalize a relationship with her. It appears that the growth of Iranian military power is an important determinant in making this decision. Oil markets and religious competition are impediments to cooperative action in all areas of Islamic life except war. Unless and until a change takes place in the value systems of the nations of the world of Islam, there is little hope for a peace settlement of any kind acceptable to Arabs and Israel.
Monday, January 12, 2009
IS THE FUTURE OF ISRAEL IN DANGER?
Israel serves as a military extension of the U.S. in the Middle East. Its population and military speak, read, and understand, high-level English. It stores huge amounts of munitions and tests weapons and weapons systems; it's scientists and engineers work closely with the American military. It is a major source of top-quality intelligence for the U.S. And, if push comes to shove, it is a U.S. fighting force of huge capacity and fire power. And the cost of all this, relative to the U.S. military budget, is miniscule. U.S. presidents did not maintain the relationship with Israel out of love but rather out of benefit and need.
(As an example, Israel intelligence and battle plans, if used appropriately, would have prevented or minimized the Iraq fiasco. Bush and Cheney learned this belatedly primarily because they did not understand what Israel was providing to the U.S. when they entered office.)
Obama will learn the lesson quickly. The people he has chosen to serve as advisers and cabinet members are not "Yes men and Yes women." They also have substantial knowledge of and experience with Israel.
Look at a map. Israel, Eqypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan, are lined up against Iran - the future enemy. Syria and Lebanon are cannon fodder in any future confrontation. Iraq has always hated Iran, so even with independence?? from the U.S., they are part of the anti-Iran coalition. Of all of these countries, Israel is militarily the strongest.
The money-driven European nations know the drill. They either keep out of the way or join forces or send forces in the event of a confrontation with Iran. Barack's real problem is to get those countries to join the anti-nuclear stance of the U.S. Israel knows Iran's nuclear sites should have been attacked and set back in their nuclear programs. Bush left the US decision to support such a strike to Obama. Let's see what happens.
The Islamic world's attack capacity - a factor of at least 5 greater than defensive capacity - is no where near what's needed to endanger Israel, with the single exception of Iran's nuclear capability. And that is a worry for the Western world no less than for Israel.
The Gaza War is a training ground for future conflict between the Islamic world and the Western world. Israel is paying the price for that Western-world training. It will be repaid many times over when this type of war is again initiated by the Arabs. The goal of such a future war, as is true of all wars, is economic.
Finally,"Oil Money" and oil itself from the Arab world is not enough of an incentive for consumer nations to destroy trade relations with the U.S. The future of energy supply lies in non-carbon-based fuels. Perhaps the major question that remains unanswered is the position of China in the relationships that would be called into question in the event of a confrontation between the developing world and the more advanced nations. China is getting a taste of the huge amount of wealth at stake in a future confrontation. At this point, it is difficult to determine with any security if China will weigh in as an ally of the Muslim world and the more backward nations to position itself for the real economic/market confrontation with the Western world that has to come. This requires a whole different analysis.
Though the Moslem world, in its religious dependency and primitive educational and economic systems, has convinced itself that Israel is the root cause of its misery and is therefore only worthy of extermination, it is unlikely that despite its numerical superiority, it can prevail in a war of any magnitude against that country. The Gaza war being waged at this time is providing clear evidence that if they attack Israel, they are doomed to defeat notwithstanding Iranian support.
(As an example, Israel intelligence and battle plans, if used appropriately, would have prevented or minimized the Iraq fiasco. Bush and Cheney learned this belatedly primarily because they did not understand what Israel was providing to the U.S. when they entered office.)
Obama will learn the lesson quickly. The people he has chosen to serve as advisers and cabinet members are not "Yes men and Yes women." They also have substantial knowledge of and experience with Israel.
Look at a map. Israel, Eqypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan, are lined up against Iran - the future enemy. Syria and Lebanon are cannon fodder in any future confrontation. Iraq has always hated Iran, so even with independence?? from the U.S., they are part of the anti-Iran coalition. Of all of these countries, Israel is militarily the strongest.
The money-driven European nations know the drill. They either keep out of the way or join forces or send forces in the event of a confrontation with Iran. Barack's real problem is to get those countries to join the anti-nuclear stance of the U.S. Israel knows Iran's nuclear sites should have been attacked and set back in their nuclear programs. Bush left the US decision to support such a strike to Obama. Let's see what happens.
The Islamic world's attack capacity - a factor of at least 5 greater than defensive capacity - is no where near what's needed to endanger Israel, with the single exception of Iran's nuclear capability. And that is a worry for the Western world no less than for Israel.
The Gaza War is a training ground for future conflict between the Islamic world and the Western world. Israel is paying the price for that Western-world training. It will be repaid many times over when this type of war is again initiated by the Arabs. The goal of such a future war, as is true of all wars, is economic.
Finally,"Oil Money" and oil itself from the Arab world is not enough of an incentive for consumer nations to destroy trade relations with the U.S. The future of energy supply lies in non-carbon-based fuels. Perhaps the major question that remains unanswered is the position of China in the relationships that would be called into question in the event of a confrontation between the developing world and the more advanced nations. China is getting a taste of the huge amount of wealth at stake in a future confrontation. At this point, it is difficult to determine with any security if China will weigh in as an ally of the Muslim world and the more backward nations to position itself for the real economic/market confrontation with the Western world that has to come. This requires a whole different analysis.
Though the Moslem world, in its religious dependency and primitive educational and economic systems, has convinced itself that Israel is the root cause of its misery and is therefore only worthy of extermination, it is unlikely that despite its numerical superiority, it can prevail in a war of any magnitude against that country. The Gaza war being waged at this time is providing clear evidence that if they attack Israel, they are doomed to defeat notwithstanding Iranian support.
Friday, January 9, 2009
HAMAS - ISLAMIC RESISTANCE MOVEMENT
Hamas (حماس Ḥamās, an acronym of حركة المقاومة الاسلامية Ḥarakat al-Muqāwamat al-Islāmiyyah, meaning "Islamic Resistance Movement") is a Palestinian Sunni Islamist paramilitary organization and political party which holds a majority of seats in the elected legislative council of the Palestinian National Authority.
Hamas was created in 1987 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi and Mohammad Taha of the Palestinian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood at the beginning of the First Intifada. (Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.) Notorious for its suicide attacks and other attacks on Israeli civilians and security forces, Hamas also runs extensive social programs and has gained popularity in Palestinian society by establishing hospitals, education systems, libraries and other services throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Hamas' charter calls for the recapturing of the State of Israel and its replacement with a Palestinian Islamic state in the area that is now named Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. Hamas describes its conflict with Israel as political and not religious or antisemitic. However, its founding charter, writings, and many of its public statements reflect the influence of antisemitic conspiracy theories. (Wikipedia is the source of this information.)
So what kind of truce can be meaningful between Hamas and Israel that allows Israel and its people to continue their existence? What is the United Nations looking for from Israel other than its suicide and from Hamas other than a rest-period in its goal of murdering the Jews in Israel and the acquisition of armaments from Moslem partners and arms merchants to continue its war aimed at the destruction of the State of Israel?
Is the U.N. Security Council kidding?
Hamas was created in 1987 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi and Mohammad Taha of the Palestinian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood at the beginning of the First Intifada. (Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.) Notorious for its suicide attacks and other attacks on Israeli civilians and security forces, Hamas also runs extensive social programs and has gained popularity in Palestinian society by establishing hospitals, education systems, libraries and other services throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Hamas' charter calls for the recapturing of the State of Israel and its replacement with a Palestinian Islamic state in the area that is now named Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. Hamas describes its conflict with Israel as political and not religious or antisemitic. However, its founding charter, writings, and many of its public statements reflect the influence of antisemitic conspiracy theories. (Wikipedia is the source of this information.)
So what kind of truce can be meaningful between Hamas and Israel that allows Israel and its people to continue their existence? What is the United Nations looking for from Israel other than its suicide and from Hamas other than a rest-period in its goal of murdering the Jews in Israel and the acquisition of armaments from Moslem partners and arms merchants to continue its war aimed at the destruction of the State of Israel?
Is the U.N. Security Council kidding?
Monday, January 5, 2009
IN THE MIDDLEAST MIDDLE AGES
Just in case there are a few people out there who are not knowledgeable, the Middle East Middle Ages are in Gaza right now, just as they have been since the Middle Ages of the Middle West - except for the weaponry and TV sets.
Food, clothing, and shelter are pretty much the same except now it's provided free of charge, paid for by taxes paid by working people in other countries.
Transportation for the masses is provide by two feet or four feet, for the most part. The four-footers still defacate in the middle of the street.
Hubris and honor are indistinguishable except that only men are allowed to possess either of them, just as only the men are allowed to sit in the coffee shops that line the main streets of every village and town, and women wust defer to men in almost any queue any place for anything wherever the women are permitted in the first place.
Whenever protest is allowed against anything, only males are allowed to protest. Look at the pictures. Unless a woman can grow a beard, she is not allowed to rally with the men.
She may join other women in calling for the extermination of Israel. That is the highest honor for women in the Middle Ages Middle East, except for the martyrdom of becoming a suicide bomber. She is only allowed to ascend to that high position once. And no virgins are waiting for her if she manages to get to heaven. That honor is strictly reserved for men.
Food, clothing, and shelter are pretty much the same except now it's provided free of charge, paid for by taxes paid by working people in other countries.
Transportation for the masses is provide by two feet or four feet, for the most part. The four-footers still defacate in the middle of the street.
Hubris and honor are indistinguishable except that only men are allowed to possess either of them, just as only the men are allowed to sit in the coffee shops that line the main streets of every village and town, and women wust defer to men in almost any queue any place for anything wherever the women are permitted in the first place.
Whenever protest is allowed against anything, only males are allowed to protest. Look at the pictures. Unless a woman can grow a beard, she is not allowed to rally with the men.
She may join other women in calling for the extermination of Israel. That is the highest honor for women in the Middle Ages Middle East, except for the martyrdom of becoming a suicide bomber. She is only allowed to ascend to that high position once. And no virgins are waiting for her if she manages to get to heaven. That honor is strictly reserved for men.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
FROM GAZA TO ISRAEL
The trip from Gaza to Israel may be accomplished in the mind of the traveller. The vehicles needed to go from one place to the other exist in the mind. Some of the vehicles may be simple and others complex, some speedy and some slow, some require sweat as fuel and others require knowledge. Stations along the way may describe illness to health, or poverty to wealth, ignorance to education, isolation to involvement, intolerance to acceptance. The traveller may bounce over rutted roads or fly through smooth air, encounter primitive communities or sophisticated metropolises. Fellow travelers may share their languages, thoughts, foods, and fears. The journey may last moments or years, from childhood to old age, or for as long as a bullet takes to reach its target.
The only prediction that can reasonably be made is that the journey cannot be foretold. Whatever will be, will be.
And the only choice for the traveler is whether or not to make the trip. As with a bullet, it goes only once and only one way.
The only prediction that can reasonably be made is that the journey cannot be foretold. Whatever will be, will be.
And the only choice for the traveler is whether or not to make the trip. As with a bullet, it goes only once and only one way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)