Saturday, December 27, 2008

The Dilemma That Is Gaza

By Morgan Strong
December 27, 2008 (Republished in view of new Israeli bombing raids)

Gaza was and is an anomaly, a piece of land left over from the calamity of history, created it seems in a moment of distraction.

Read on.

6 comments:

sam said...

On the whole, a fair account. Two kvetches. I ti is hardly "at their whim" that Israel shuts off Gaza. It is cabinet decision a d the cabinet is full of ambitious rivals. Compare the account in today's Haaretz of the process leading leading to the latest IDF attaks.

Secondly, the police are complicit int he drug trade not only in Gaza but most places. A conservative professor of Criminal Justice ocne said to me? The only result of the war on drugs is the corruption of our police forces."

Anonymous said...

"Let the Jews, who claim to be the chosen race, prove their title by choosing the way of non-violence for vindicating their position on earth."--Mahatma Gandhi, Nov. 26, 1938
==========================================================================================================
April 10, 2008

"All of the Palestinians must be killed; men, women, infants, and even their beasts." This was the religious opinion issued one week ago by Rabbi Yisrael Rosen, director of the Tsomet Institute, a long-established religious institute attended by students and soldiers in the Israeli settlements of the West Bank. In an article published by numerous religious Israeli newspapers two weeks ago and run by the liberal Haaretz on 26 March, Rosen asserted that there is evidence in the Torah to justify this stand. Rosen, an authority able to issue religious opinions for Jews, wrote that Palestinians are like the nation of Amalekites that attacked the Israelite tribes on their way to Jerusalem after they had fled from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. He wrote that the Lord sent down in the Torah a ruling that allowed the Jews to kill the Amalekites, and that this ruling is known in Jewish jurisprudence.

For over Sixty years the World has been "guilt tripped" and milked of "reparations" by the SAME people who invented the very crimes of which they complain. Now they piously proclaim their desire for "peace, peace", as they parade these rules around their places of worship, and KISS the scrolls on which these odious "rules" are codified.
It was the Israelites that introduced to the world, and codified in their religion, Bigotry, Genocide, everything CRIMINAL that they now condemn in the Nazis
The Nazis called themselves "superior" people. The CHOSEN People of GOD do not like the competition.
The Nazis stole property from their victims.
Aside from stealing ALL of Palestine, as well documented in the Torah(the 1st 5 books of the Bible) "for a place to live",
which they are repeating today, and the Nazis copied and called "growth room" how about ........
STEAL FROM YOUR NEIGHBORS:
Exodus c.3 v.22
Exodus c.11 v.2
Exodus c.12 v.35-36 (obviously "Thou SHALT NOT STEAL" does not apply to NON-Jews.)

The Nazis killed their own crippled and crazy.
KILL THE SICK and CRIPPLED
Numbers c.5 v.2-4 "putting them out of camp" means go die in the desert

The Nazis killed homosexuals and sexual "deviants" ..............
KILL HOMOSEXUALS AND SEXUAL DIVIANTS
Leviticus c.20 v.13 well, really the whole chapter

The Nazis killed those who dissented from the "party line" .................
KILL ALL DISSIDENTS:
Exodus c.32 v.27
Numbers c.11 v.1-2
Numbers c.16 all
Numbers c.21 v.5-6
Numbers v.26 v.10

The Nazis held themselves apart from other people...................
NO "diversity", NO "integration":
Numbers v25 v.4-8
Deuteronomy c.14 v.2

The jews complain that Nazis demonized those they did not like, calling them perverts, parasites, unclean .....
The Jews today call YOU "Gentile, GOYIM, Shiska" pejorative names equal to "the 'N'" word.
Demonizing, DEHUMANIZATION, is commonly used in order to justify killing people.
The entire Torah/Books of Moses is a dehumanization of all NON-israelites.
Accusing others of deviant sexuality, unclean practices, worshiping the "wrong" god, eating the "wrong" food.
HATE codified in the Bible.

FINALLY, the BIG evil ...........
The Nazis engaged in GENOCIDE, deliberately killing men, women and children... because of their difference:
After DEhumanizing the Native People of Palestine, the Israelites introduced GENOCIDE to the World:
Numbers c.21 v.03 Canaanites
Numbers c.21 v.24 Amorites
Numbers c.21 v.33 Bashan
Numbers c.31 all Midianites
Numbers c.32 v. more Amorites
Deuteronomy c.2 v.34 People of Heshbon
Deuteronomy c.3 v.6 really the whole chapter. threescore cities
Joshua c.12 A list of victims of Israeli GENOCIDE
Where are THEIR "holocaust" Memorials!


Genocide codified in their religion:
Numbers c.33 v.31-34
Deuteronomy c.7 v.2
Deuteronomy c.12 v.28-30
Deuteronomy c.20 v.11-16

Terrorism codified in their religion:
Deuteronomy c.2 v.2
Deuteronomy c.7 v.16

BURNING FLESH is "A sweet savor unto the Lord" - JUST A FEW of MANY MANY examples
Exodus c.29 v.18, 25, 41&42
Leviticus c.1 v.17
Leviticus c.2 v.2&&9&12
Leviticus c.3 v.5

Now some will say "Oh, the Bible is not FACT, it is allegory or whatever."
To which I answer, FINE, then so is the portion where God supposedly "gave" Israel the land of Palestine.
You cannot deny one verse, then use the next verse as justification to murder and steal land from People.

Anonymous said...

Your hypocrisy is typical toward Israel. Imagine Mexico or Canada advocating the destruction of the US, and indiscriminantly lobbing rockets across our border! Would we not respond because of the plight of the poor Mexicans or Candians? I seriously doubt it.

The far left has this love affair with extremist muslim regimes. Jewish blood is cheap, and even though Israel is surrounded by 200 +million Arabs committed to its destruction, you are always bemoaning the poor palestinians. What about the Jews from Arab countries who lost everything and were absorbed by Israel? The Arab countries have purposely left their brethern in a state of limbo.

Anonymous said...

For anonymous who asked,what would we do if Canada lobbed rockets at us. I ask what would you do if it was decided that you and all your family and friends and neighbors must give up your homes and move...somewhere.. because you land was to be given to the people of Israel. You might lob a few rockets yourself.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Morgan Strong:
I read your article "The Dilemma that is Gaza". At first I thought you had something new to solve or analyze the problem of Gaza. Unfortunately your entire article was about car theft and drug smugglers in Gaza...
Is this all you had to say about the problems in the Middle East and especially in Gaza? I am sure I could learn more if I had read a fairy-tale story or watched a cartoon movie...
There is no question that we can find car thieves and drug smugglers and finally corruption in Gaza or better to say in every city and country in the world. You were better to write about the roots of poverty and violence in Palestine rather than the problems at the surface.
If you really are an independent, knowledgeable and honest writer; you should write about the roots of the Palestinian miseries, not just car thefts and drug smugglings.
I wonder what or where was the conclusion of your so called masterpiece article? Did you want to say that Israelis were victims of those cruel, thieves or drug smugglers (Palestinians) and expected a kind of sympathy for them?
I know in some parts of your article, you criticized Israel and their policies toward Palestinians but mostly you were moving zig-zag way and analyzing car theft, drugs & etc... I wonder if I should call your article a political, social or maybe ethical essay in order to teach or inform your readers...

Anonymous said...

Daniel Pearl and the Normalization of Evil

When will our luminaries stop making excuses for terror?Article

By JUDEA PEARL
This week marks the seventh anniversary of the murder of our son, former Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. My wife Ruth and I wonder: Would Danny have believed that today's world emerged after his tragedy?


The answer does not come easily. Danny was an optimist, a true believer in the goodness of mankind. Yet he was also a realist, and would not let idealism bend the harshness of facts.

Neither he, nor the millions who were shocked by his murder, could have possibly predicted that seven years later his abductor, Omar Saeed Sheikh, according to several South Asian reports, would be planning terror acts from the safety of a Pakistani jail. Or that his murderer, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, now in Guantanamo, would proudly boast of his murder in a military tribunal in March 2007 to the cheers of sympathetic jihadi supporters. Or that this ideology of barbarism would be celebrated in European and American universities, fueling rally after rally for Hamas, Hezbollah and other heroes of "the resistance." Or that another kidnapped young man, Israeli Gilad Shalit, would spend his 950th day of captivity with no Red Cross visitation while world leaders seriously debate whether his kidnappers deserve international recognition.

Those around the world who mourned for Danny in 2002 genuinely hoped that Danny's murder would be a turning point in the history of man's inhumanity to man, and that the targeting of innocents to transmit political messages would quickly become, like slavery and human sacrifice, an embarrassing relic of a bygone era.

But somehow, barbarism, often cloaked in the language of "resistance," has gained acceptance in the most elite circles of our society. The words "war on terror" cannot be uttered today without fear of offense. Civilized society, so it seems, is so numbed by violence that it has lost its gift to be disgusted by evil.

I believe it all started with well-meaning analysts, who in their zeal to find creative solutions to terror decided that terror is not a real enemy, but a tactic. Thus the basic engine that propels acts of terrorism -- the ideological license to elevate one's grievances above the norms of civilized society -- was wished away in favor of seemingly more manageable "tactical" considerations.

This mentality of surrender then worked its way through politicians like the former mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. In July 2005 he told Sky News that suicide bombing is almost man's second nature. "In an unfair balance, that's what people use," explained Mr. Livingstone.

But the clearest endorsement of terror as a legitimate instrument of political bargaining came from former President Jimmy Carter. In his book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," Mr. Carter appeals to the sponsors of suicide bombing. "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Road-map for Peace are accepted by Israel." Acts of terror, according to Mr. Carter, are no longer taboo, but effective tools for terrorists to address perceived injustices.

Mr. Carter's logic has become the dominant paradigm in rationalizing terror. When asked what Israel should do to stop Hamas's rockets aimed at innocent civilians, the Syrian first lady, Asma Al-Assad, did not hesitate for a moment in her response: "They should end the occupation." In other words, terror must earn a dividend before it is stopped.

The media have played a major role in handing terrorism this victory of acceptability. Qatari-based Al Jazeera television, for example, is still providing Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi hours of free air time each week to spew his hateful interpretation of the Koran, authorize suicide bombing, and call for jihad against Jews and Americans.

Then came the August 2008 birthday of Samir Kuntar, the unrepentant killer who, in 1979, smashed the head of a four-year-old Israeli girl with his rifle after killing her father before her eyes. Al Jazeera elevated Kuntar to heroic heights with orchestras, fireworks and sword dances, presenting him to 50 million viewers as Arab society's role model. No mainstream Western media outlet dared to expose Al Jazeera efforts to warp its young viewers into the likes of Kuntar. Al Jazeera's management continues to receive royal treatment in all major press clubs.

Some American pundits and TV anchors didn't seem much different from Al Jazeera in their analysis of the recent war in Gaza. Bill Moyers was quick to lend Hamas legitimacy as a "resistance" movement, together with honorary membership in PBS's imaginary "cycle of violence." In his Jan. 9 TV show, Mr. Moyers explained to his viewers that "each [side] greases the cycle of violence, as one man's terrorism becomes another's resistance to oppression." He then stated -- without blushing -- that for readers of the Hebrew Bible "God-soaked violence became genetically coded." The "cycle of violence" platitude allows analysts to empower terror with the guise of reciprocity, and, amazingly, indict terror's victims for violence as immutable as DNA.

When we ask ourselves what it is about the American psyche that enables genocidal organizations like Hamas -- the charter of which would offend every neuron in our brains -- to become tolerated in public discourse, we should take a hard look at our universities and the way they are currently being manipulated by terrorist sympathizers.

At my own university, UCLA, a symposium last week on human rights turned into a Hamas recruitment rally by a clever academic gimmick. The director of the Center for Near East Studies carefully selected only Israel bashers for the panel, each of whom concluded that the Jewish state is the greatest criminal in human history.

The primary purpose of the event was evident the morning after, when unsuspecting, uninvolved students read an article in the campus newspaper titled, "Scholars say: Israel is in violation of human rights in Gaza," to which the good name of the University of California was attached. This is where Hamas scored its main triumph -- another inch of academic respectability, another inroad into Western minds.

Danny's picture is hanging just in front of me, his warm smile as reassuring as ever. But I find it hard to look him straight in the eyes and say: You did not die in vain.

Mr. Pearl, a professor of computer science at UCLA, is president of the Daniel Pearl Foundation, founded in memory of his son to promote cross-cultural understanding.