The Palestinians and the jihadi motive: being clear
In a post from last Friday, I wrote on the attitude of many people about the Palestine/Israel conflict and the prospects for peace. The people I’m describing are not the rabid, vicious demonstrators who chant “from the river to the sea.” Nor am I talking about people who live in Israel; the vast majority there have disabused themselves of the notion that there can be a negotiated 2-state solution without a significant war, destruction of the jihadi elements in Palestinian society, and re-education of the Palestinian citizenry. When I wrote the following, I was thinking of the majority of the people I know, who believe in the “cycle of violence” which labels both sides as equally culpable and equally unwilling to give up anything. Such people believe that with goodwill it could and can all be settled peacefully:
Much better to believe that we all want peace and that there is some sort of negotiated solution possible without so much violence. But it is crystal clear that it is a fantasy, even if it wasn’t quite as clear many decades ago.
So, why am I writing about this topic again? I realize that I need to explain what is now so clear and why it wasn’t so easy to see it before.
In my perception of the situation there were several turning points. One was the 1972 Munich massacre. It’s hard to convey to those who are younger and don’t remember those times how shocking that event was. The Olympics were off-limits, athletes were immune from politics and violence – and if this seems hopelessly naive well, it was. The massacre was an eye-opener. And one of the most horrific things about it was that much of the world seemed to shrug, and another was that afterwards Arafat’s stock and that of the Palestinians seemed to rise in the world.
But I bought – as did most people – the idea that the Palestinians really did want a state and that under some set of circumstances they would be willing to live alongside Israel in peace or relative peace. Should I have believed that back then? Probably not. But coverage of Arafat’s rhetoric when speaking in Arabic was in its infancy, and the way the MSM and the government were talking about the situation it was easy to believe that a settlement was possible. Oslo and Camp David and their disappointments and failures were in the future, and it was more possible to see that some sort of negotiated 2-state solution could be achieved and that this was the goal of the Palestinians.
I distinctly recall when I started to think this was not the case. It was some time during the 1990s, and I was reading a lengthy article about the education of Palestinian children. I’ve never been able to find this article again, so I can’t quote it. I don’t even remember where it appeared, although I have a vague recollection that it might have been The New Yorker, to which I had a subscription. But I remember the content. It described in detail how the Palestinians were being taught to hate Israelis and Jews and consider it the highest honor to kill them. And I realized, with a sinking heart, that the situation was far worse than I had ever thought. Simply put, if the article was true – and it turned out that it was – peace through negotiation was unrealistic.
Later developments in my thinking stemmed from the failure of Camp David, discovering how much lying the Palestinians did (see my pieces on the al Durah incident, for example), and watching the Second Intifada develop. So it was that by the early years of the twenty-first century I had largely given up the notion that mere negotiations would ever work.
With 9/11 we also had become aware of the seriousness of the worldwide jihadi threat. But still – at least in my mind – the Palestinian terrorists were somewhat different. Although they were connected to the jihadis it seemed their goals were more localized and focused on eliminating Israel and that it was primarily the land they wanted. It wasn’t just a land dispute about borders, but that seemed to be the strongest motive.
However, what 10/7 finally made clear was that the Palestinians have been merely playing to the western left in using the rhetoric of national liberation and/or nationalism. What they want is for Israel to be obliterated and for the Jews to be wiped off the face of the earth – and then the Christians – and/or converted to Islam. In other words, they are jihadis first, Palestinians second. And this is one of the reasons they have wreaked havoc in the Arab countries that made the error of giving them refuge – an error those countries are not likely to repeat. Why are they trying to overthrow the Jordanian monarchy? Because Jordan, although a Muslim country, is not jihadi enough. Why the same in Egypt? Because Egypt, although a Muslim country, is not jihadi enough.
What percentage of the Palestinian people are onboard with this? Unfortunately, it seems to be the vast majority.
Leftists in the west have chosen to ally with this group. They have bought the nationalistic rhetoric and deny the jihadi motive, which is why they scream that it’s the Israelis who are committing genocide against the poor victimized Palestinians. It fits the leftist worldview quite neatly, and the Palestinians and other jihadi propagandists are well aware of that and exploit it. If the jihadis ever win, modern-day leftists will be just as surprised as the Iranian leftists were when Khomeini took power and massacred them. I wonder how many of today’s young leftists are aware of that history.
Khomeini also said this after taking power:
Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled or incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of [other] countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world. . . . Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers]? Islam says: Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us?…Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Qur’anic] psalms and Hadiths urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all this mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.
That’s the jihadi creed.
Here again, we see that our biggest threat is not actually Islamism, or Russian revanchism, or Communism, or climate change, or a major meteor impact. The reason reality is so clouded, that so many people who ought to no better don’t, is multifold, but one _big_ one is that the Western elite media/academic/business/state class deliberately presents a false world and an imaginary set of options.
To put it another way, Trump was right when he called the ‘mainstream’ press enemies of the people. They, as a group, _are_ . They have been for decades.
There’s an old joke to the effect that if it wasn’t for the media, Massachusetts would vote like Texas, and Texas would vote to the right of Genghis Khan. There’s some truth in it. For that matter, without the constant leftward/globalist pressure of the ruling elite, much of England would vote like Texas, or at least like Missouri.
Which is why the culture war/social issue/nationalist arguments raging across the West are not a sideshow or a distraction. They are the Main Event.
Lessons from the battlefield
https://www.prageru.com/video/dear-infidels
Miguel: More Americans need to see that video, especially college students.
What the Islamic fanatics are courting is nuclear destruction. If not by the West, then by the CCP. They’re pursuing a future in which Mecca has been turned into a glass parking lot.
“What they want is for Israel to be obliterated and for the Jews to be wiped off the face of the earth – and then the Christians – and/or converted to Islam. In other words, they are jihadis first, Palestinians second.”
Thank you Neo, that’s exactly what they want. They’re not afraid to say it out loud and the left is ignoring it. By the time they wake up it will be too late. What is the expression, something like “first the Saturday people and then the Sunday people.”
Yes israel is the near enemy for them, we are the far enemy
Thomas harris had this notion, in black sunday
That was ostensibly why they were going to fly the blimp into the superbowl (a plot borrowed by tom clancy in some of all fears)
In the early years of the modern “Palestinian” movement, they used resident Christians as spokesmen (or spokeswomen, like Hanan Ashrawi), to fool Westerners into thinking the movement was broad-based. More recently, they have pushed out their Christian residents and have become blatantly Islamic jihadi, no longer pretending to represent any other viewpoint. Those Christians were, essentially, useful idiots, thinking that because they spoke Arabic they wouldn’t be targeted. There are still some of these useful Christian fools in the region, but not nearly as many.
The Marxist left and the Islamists both hate America. So too, do the authoritarian governments.
The Islamists find their reasons in the Quran. The Marxist left finds their reasons in the Frankfurt School of Marxism. The authoritarians (Russia, China, Vietnam, Nicaragua, Nigeria, etc.) don’t like democracies because they make authoritarian governments look bad – thus threatens them.
They’re not officially allied, but they make common cause against the democracies at the UN and in any other way that seems to advance their interests against democracies.
The Muslim countries are unable to mount modern militaries, so they rely on terror, blackmail, and propaganda.
China and Russia have modern military capabilities, but are not, at this time, superior to the democracies. They watch and wait for their opportunities and foment trouble for the democratic world wherever possible.
The international left is still mesmerized by their dream of an egalitarian utopia. So, they work to tear down the fabric of democracies planning to replace them with their worldly paradise. This, in spite of all evidence that socialism/communism have never worked wherever they have been tried.
If and when the democracies are destroyed, these three groups will fight it out for supremacy.
Democracy and freedom are, unfortunately, not widespread in the world. About 29% of the world live in democratic countries
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/how-many-people-live-in-a-political-democracy-today/#google_vignette
Our founders, and many wise men since, have rightly pointed out that freedom is fragile. It’s not a given. In fact, the tendency of humans is toward authoritarian governments.
This stuff should be known by every citizen educated in our schools. Again, unfortunately, it’s not.
Democracy, free enterprise, and Judeo-Christian values are under attack. The most immediate danger is from the termites that are eating away at our society. In the meantime, however, we have to keep our guard up against the Islamists and autocracies. It’s a multi-front situation. We have to defend ourselves if we want to remain free.
Tariq aziz was the honorary christian in saddams cabinet if memory served most were sunni some in the army ranks were nasquabandi sufis
You look at the great span of human history and republican government is so rare like fine diamonds greece descended into oligarchy
rome into Empire with nary an objection it
Was only a question of who would hold the crown sort of the fantasy at the heart of Gladiator that one could return to the Republic even if a dying Emperor wished it
Flying a blimp into the Super Bowl was the idea in the movie Black Sunday. Clancy’s terrorists wanted to detonate a nuclear device outside the stadium at the Super Bowl in Sum of All Fears.
In fact black sunday is referred by one of thd characters in sum of all fears the american indian one i think
The premise was behind the first world trade center attempt according to notes from ali mohammed (the guy who fooled andy mccarthy) then skipped town and cased the embassies
Eventually was captured and was a source for at least one of the pdbs the most informative one in 99
William ayers the utility magnates son turned wannabe terrorists never knew the lesson of the social revolutionary they could not topple the czar from the outside this was the lesson lenin took to heart after his brother was killed
Martha Gelhorn, better known as Hemingway’s ex, wrote this article in 1961 for The Atlantic. The Arabs of Palestine. Gelhorn visits a UNWRA camp in Lebanon. What are the children taught in school?
Gelhorn asks several Arabs about Partition. In 1947, the UN planned a partition of Israel: one part for the Jews and one part for the Arabs. The Arabs, as we well know, overwhelmingly rejected Partition, while the Jews accepted Partition. Over a decade later,in 1961, Gelhorn finds some Arabs who favor Partition.
Gelhorn gave another example of Partition dialogue, with the same result: we want Partition now that we have lost, but if the Jews had lost, there would have been no Partition- Jews would have been “all dead or in the sea.”
Like Gelhorn wrote, it is hard to have empathy for such people.
Gringo:
A wonderful, true comment. I swear I can hear the Old Man’s voice in Gelhorn’s writing.
I read an interpretation of the Palestinian campus protests. The objective is not to bully the Universities into divestment; nor is it to obtain public concessions from the University’s leadership; nor is it to advance Palestinian 2-state solutions. The objective is far simpler than that, and much longer term: The normalization of Jew Hate, of the concept that all the Jews should be killed; the normalization of genocide, in other words.
What we’ve been seeing reveals one of the principle weaknesses of American culture: Attention span. Because things that are outrageous, are quickly forgotten before they’ve been resolved. Today’s catastrophe is replaced in tomorrow’s News Cycle, unless it’s really, really bad. And this short-term memory dynamic guarantees that eventually, there will be a really, really bad event. Twin-Towers-bad.
No – the objective of these well-funded, very well-organized protests is to normalize the presence of hate displays in day-to-day society. People may be repulsed by the virulent anti-semitism from protest crowds today – but tomorrow, it will become an aggravation, not a transgression. Next week, we’ll be working around the congestion on campus by taking an alternate route. Next year, your college freshman daughter may be taking part in one, wearing the scarf and vocally hating Jews because that’s what her sorority crowd is all doing, during rush.
Americans just aren’t willing to be outraged, and then do something about it now. There are too many alternatives readily available to distract us, to let us get on with our schedule. Until something like the Twin Towers, that is. Then we start getting the message, and taking action. And, as a matter of course: Then we’re all standing in line at the airport, from now on – thanks to our policy leadership, who also don’t know how to pay attention.
Kind of like the objective of “Biden” is America Hate….
– – – – – – – –
And some war stories…
“The Gaza tunnel where hostage bodies were found;
“A visit to the 10-meter-deep pit opening to where the corpses were recovered by the Paratroopers Brigade.”—
https://www.jns.org/the-gaza-tunnel-where-hostage-bodies-were-found/
H/T Powerline blog.
Key phrase:
“…Tell their story.”
I have been yakking for 30 years there is only one way to deal with Islam. The West absolutely refuses to accept this. Even though the facts are before our eyes we make excuses why it’s not “necessarily that way”. We get what we get.
But, but, but…religion of peace(tm).
Which it has never been
What are you chopped liver then
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/05/qassem-soleimani-iran-middle-east/678472/
Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword!
Mao wrote “political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.”
Feel the same amount China as about Iran? If not, why not? Both continue to sponsor wars, terrorism, and subversion.
The end of the Cultural Revolution and fall of the Shah were contemporaneous.
The treaty freeing Ireland was signed in 1921. Have “the troubles” ever ended?
The British burned the White House in 1812. One hundred years later, many Americans thought the British deserved their fate in WW1.
The last battle of America’s Indian wars is dated to 1911.
The last American slaves were taken by Moslems in 1805. This is hard to verify as Google’s search bias only documents when Moslems were enslaved by Americans.
Slavery ended in Western European 1945. In Eastern Europe in 1991.
The USSR transitioned to the EU in 1991.
The last pogrom in Russia was in 1921 during the civil war.
The katyn massacre was in 1940. If I were Polish, I’d hate Russia, too.
The last invasion of the United States by a Mexican army was in 1916, followed by the last invasion of Mexico by an American army.
I don’t think you expect people to regard the past as hazy and forgivable until it’s of one’s great-grandfather’s time. At best that’s about 150 years. For other peoples the past will never become hazy and forgivable.
I know Catholics who are still mad at Henry VIII. Socialists have denounce capitalism as practiced during the Roman Empire.
People(s) hate each other for good reason.
Sadly, that sort of indoctrinating the children is NOT unusual.
Pre-Civil War (1.0), it was the abolitionists that targeted their children (and other people’s) to, not just oppose slavery, but to HATE all those living in Slave States. The overblown rhetoric, used by many in the movement, but particularly the women, defined the Us (the GOOD ones) against Them (the EVIL ones). As is common today, failure to toe the line in every way marked people to be cast out of any association they belonged. It was largely enforced by women, something they are particularly adept at.
After the war, the enmity was fairly even-handed. The North could have made the terms of re-association more palatable, but the Rabid Radical Republicans were out for blood.
By the time Reconstruction had ended, the cultural split was well established. Both sides considered the other the essence of despicable, and it would be many years before there was a lessening of that bigotry.
World Wars I and II helped reduce that divide. The modern Civil Rights movement split the South – some were ready to move on from Jim Crow, others were not. Over time, many Northern Black people with experience in both places decided to move back to the South, and entered leadership roles in businesses and government.
The general good feeling about Obama’s first election to the Presidency evaporated after the extent of his readiness to make ALL White people “The Official Enemy”. Subsequent administrations doubled down, putting partisans in place, and seemingly impossible to get rid of.
The worst part of The Left’s March on American Institutions was the schools – not just k-12, but the colleges and universities. Only the unaffordability of tuition, the bad economy for job creation, and the general failure of schools to educate children has exposed the soft underbelly of the targeted institutions.
With or without Trump, things are going to change. They have already changed at the state and local level, and further change is accelerating.
Hang onto your hats! It’s going to be a bumpy ride.
Leftists in the west have chosen to ally with this group. They have bought the nationalistic rhetoric and deny the jihadi motive, which is why they scream that it’s the Israelis who are committing genocide against the poor victimized Palestinians.
One thing that really bothers me about this narrative is that it’s like Egypt and Jordan don’t exist. If they truly believe Palestinians are victimized, they also ought to believe in the complicity of Egypt and Jordan with that victimization.
Some context here
https://www.memri.org/reports/%E2%80%98-sheikh-slaughterers%E2%80%99-abu-musab-al-zarqawi-and-al-qaeda-connection#_edn7