Segacs's World I Know

Posts Tagged ‘hamas’

Of course it’s good news that Steve Centanni and Olaf Wiig were released unharmed. But Lynn B. is essential reading on the larger context here:

My elation at Steve and Olaf’s release was quickly replaced by outrage when I heard about their forced conversion. The video turned my stomach. It should turn the stomach of every American and every person of whatever nationality who believes that the concepts of liberty and freedom have any value and any meaning. What sort of religion, in this day and age, would demand converts at the point of a gun or the blade of a sword? What sort of religion would even want such “converts?”

In any event, as has been pointed out elsewhere (and it was my first thought after hearing about this “forced” conversion), Centanni and Wiig are now marked men if they retract their coerced statement of faith. That would make them apostates under Islamic doctrine, subject to the death penalty at the hand of any devout Muslim who wishes to glorify Allah by carrying out the sentence. So it isn’t over. Not by a long shot.

Read the rest. Now.

L. Ian MacDonald thinks that Harper’s position on the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon is one born out of conviction, not out of politics:

As Harper said: “There is a crisis because of the actions of Hamas and the actions of Hezbollah.” Exactly. Who kidnapped Israeli soldiers? Who fired rockets into Israeli neighbourhoods?

This is an interesting point of departure – the prime minister dares to speak truth, not to power, but to terror.

You can be certain that Harper’s unambiguous language was not written at Foreign Affairs. They don’t do plain speaking over there. They also like to be on both sides of this issue.

But the prime minister is making foreign policy himself, and he is realigning it significantly in the Middle East, as well as with the United States, to reflect first principles.

He can’t be doing it for the votes. The Jewish community in Canada votes overwhelmingly Liberal. Israel never had a better friend in Canada, until now, than Brian Mulroney, and it never got him anywhere with Jewish voters. There are also twice as many Muslim as Jewish voters in this country, and they’re not happy with Harper choosing sides. This is not even to mention the anguish in Canada’s Lebanese community, largely based in Montreal and Ottawa. As many as 50,000 Canadians, holidayers and dual citizens alike, found themselves stranded in the middle of a war zone last week.

If there’s no political gain in it for Harper, the only reason for him to be taking such a clear stand in favour of Israel is that he’s acting out of conviction.

MacDonald, who, it must be said, is a very intelligent man even on issues on which I disagree with him, is not giving Israel carte blanche. Far from it. He believes that Israel’s response to Hezbollah’s provocation is “disproportionate”. Okay, he’s entitled; a fair number of Israelis believe the exact same thing. But he’s applauding Harper for taking the stance that, proportionate or not, Israel’s reaction is one of defence against a terrorist organization, and that no moral equivalence can be drawn between the two.

Politicians who speak their minds are a bit of an anomaly in this country. Canadians aren’t used to them, and many aren’t quite sure what to make of Harper. I’ve never been a fan of Harper, but I do have to give him credit on this one. Trouble is, his “moral stance” is unleashing such a backlash that it threatens to cancel out the original intent. Would a waffling Liberal government have made itself such an easy target for criticism? Sure, that’s a backwards analysis. But think about it: If hatred of Israel gets stirred up into an even bigger frenzy because Harper is a convenient target as a right-winger who backs Israel, then who benefits in the long run?

In an early episode of The West Wing, Joey Lucas (played brilliantly by Marlee Matlin) bursts into Josh’s office demanding to know why the DNC is choking off funding for her candidate, who is trying to unseat a far-right Republican. The answer? Josh explains that “Every time he comes out with one of his declarations about brown people crossing the border, the DNC slaps it into a direct mail campaign and he’s good for two or three million dollars.” In other words, the Democrats get more mileage out of having a convenient poster boy for the far right to attack than they would get out of winning the seat.

Well, politics often work that way, unfortunately. In Quebec, for instance, support for sovereignty goes up during the years when the Liberals are in power, and down during the years when the PQ is in power. Why? Because it’s easier to attack from the opposition than to govern from the majority.

Is Harper, by signalling his clear intention to stand behind Israel in this conflict, doing more harm than good in a realistic sense, even though he’s theoretically doing the right thing? I wonder.

They’re celebrating and dancing in the streets of Lebanon, because they’ve kidnapped Israeli soldiers and fired rockets. They see all-out chaos in sight, and they’re celebrating.

In Gaza, Hamas is thrilled that they have more “martyrs” and more fodder for inciting hatred. They’re stepping up their attacks as Israel is caught fighting on two fronts.

In Israel, nobody is celebrating. Olmert is talking and reacting tough against Lebanon; Bush is including Syria and Iran in his warnings.

The powder keg is simmering, and appears to be nearing a boiling point.

Lynn asks, is it war yet?

If it is, I have no doubt that Israel will stand strong and do what is required, but I cringe nonetheless. Anxious parents with sons and daughters in the IDF know that the country will not cave or yield, but it doesn’t make the situation any easier. I fear this is going to get a whole lot worse before it gets any better.

In his own words, here’s Ehud Olmert addressing the world media:

The main purpose of the Israeli operation in Gaza is twofold: One, is to take measures in order to allow the release of the Israeli kidnapped soldier, Corporal Gilad Shalit, and the other is to stop the Kassam missiles from being shot at Israeli civilians in the south part of the country. Since about ten months ago, Israel pulled out entirely from Gaza back into the territory which is recognized by the international community as part of the State of Israel.

In other words, there are not any occupying forces in Gaza since August of last year. And since then, there wasn’t one day of rest for the people of Israel that live in the south part of our country. Almost on a daily basis, there are missiles shot at them, with one purpose in mind of those who are doing it. This is to kill innocent Israeli civilians in schools, or in their homes or in the streets as they are trying to do every day. This is something that is entirely intolerable. Israeli people like every other people, deserve to be protected.

More here.

Some things never change. Anti-Israel media bias is one of them.

From today’s Reuters: Israel rejects Hamas ceasefire call.

From the headline, the casual reader would make the assumption that big bad Israel is at it again, rejecting the perfectly reasonable offer of a peace-loving Hamas.

Hah!

Rocket attacks? Kidnapped soldiers? Terrorist attacks? The fact that any cease-fire offer by Hamas is nothing but a ruse anyway? Well, none of those are even suggested by the headline, and are only vaguely referred to in the text of the article itself.

A better headline might read something like “Israel stands strong against Hamas’s blackmail” or, perhaps, “Israel sees through Palestinian terrorist government’s transparent cease-fire ruse”.

But of course, headlines like that would be called – what else? – biased.

Update: Here’s Meryl with more anti-Israel-media-bias-of-the-week, this time from AP.

See if you can spot what crucial fact is missing from this Reuters piece on how the Palestinians are appealing to surrounding Arab states for aid money:

Saudi Arabia and other Arab states are expected to speed money to the Palestinian Authority within days to help it pay its employees after Israel halted tax payments, Palestinian officials said.

[ . . . ]

Hamas, which has carried out nearly 60 suicide bombings since a Palestinian uprising began in 2000, trounced Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’s long-dominant Fatah movement in the January 25 parliamentary election.

In a joint statement issued in Islamabad, Islamic allies Pakistan and Saudi Arabia urged the world to accept Hamas’s victory and “avoid premature judgments and hasty conclusions.”

Hamas has urged foreign donors to maintain aid but says it could still find other sources of funding in the Arab world. It has sent a delegation on a tour of Arab countries to urge them to keep the money flowing.

Unemployment in the Palestinian territories runs high, at 22 percent, and half the Palestinian population lives in poverty. In Gaza, many Palestinians live on an average of $2 a day.

Let’s see… we’ve got the requisite reference to Palestinian poverty, to Israel’s withholding of financial transfers, and to the election results and their aftermath. The implication, of course, is that it’s Israel’s fault that the Palestinians are living in poverty.

What’s missing? That’s right: no reference whatsoever to the fact that the billions of dollars of aid that have poured into the Palestinian coffers to-date used to finance terrorism, urge suicide attacks, build explosives and rockets, purchase weapons, and train militias. Oh yeah, and to line the pockets of the Palestinian Authority, and to finance Suha Arafat’s shopping habits. And no mention of the fact that Israel, if it were to release the money, would be contributing financially to attacks on its own citizens.

And the high Palestinian unemployment? No mention of the fact that, prior to 2000, unemployment was much lower because so many Palestinians were working in Israel and crossing the border daily without any problems. Nothing about how the chosen strategy of violence forced Israel to close these borders and therefore cost so many Palestinians their livelihood. No reference to how all the jobs were in Israel because the Palestinians haven’t built any industry, infrastructure or opportunity – in short, necessary ingredients for a sustainable state. Or how, despite claiming to want statehood, it doesn’t seem to have occurred to the Palestinians that a viable state can’t live forever on handouts. It’s so much easier to talk about destroying Israel than to talk about actually building a state, isn’t it?

And it’s more convenient to imply that Israel is to blame for Palestinian poverty than it is to tell the truth, I guess.

The US will cut off funds. The EU might make some noise but will probably keep the money flowing in the end. And Hamas has plenty of other funding sources.

Money’s tight for humanitarian causes. But to kill Jews? They’ll be lining up to write the cheques.

With the victory of Hamas, the media is awash with clichés such as that the Palestinians have chosen “terror over peace”. As if Fatah was a true peace partner, committed to reconciliation and the middle ground.

Bullshit.

The Palestinian people have chosen one form of terror over another form of terror. The only difference between Hamas and Fatah is that Hamas is open about its aims, while Fatah carries out terror attacks and then pays lip service towards “condemning” them. The people chose Hamas because it is perceived as less corrupt than Fatah, not because of any failings of the peaceful alternative. There was never a peaceful alternative.

The real question is, now what? There will be an element who insists on turning a blind eye to the truth and fooling itself that Hamas will reform, suddenly giving up its weapons because it’s got a role in government. These are the same people who keep insisting that there’s been a truce effective this past year.

The United States will refuse to deal with Hamas… maybe. Expect a lot of waffling on that one in the coming months. Europe will deal with them, probably with lip service about how much they’ve “changed”. Again, these are the same people who repeatedly insist that there’s a truce.

For Israel – dare I say – little is likely to change. Negotiations were a non-starter even with Abbas, and Israel will still have to prioritize security measures in defence of its citizens, just as before. Maybe there will be less hypocrisy now. But don’t count on it.

Tim Blair has a roundup of reactions. Jonathan has some day-after musings. And, as usual, Meryl has lots to say.

Normally, this is a topic on which I’d have an awful lot to say. Right now, however, I don’t have the time to blog it. Another busy blogger, Allison, links to The Head Heeb for some analysis, number-crunching, and thoughts.

There’s little I could add that isn’t being said all over the media or the blogosphere already. So I’ll just say this: While the results aren’t yet in and the implications are still to come, today’s election was both good news and bad news: Good news that democracy, of a sort, is beginning to take root for the Palestinians. Bad news that so many are flocking to candidates bent on extending the self-destructive path of violence and rejectionism that got the Palestinians to where they are today. After all, Hamas’s main goal is Israel’s destruction, and despite what the world media is saying, Fatah – far from being a force for peace or moderation – is not much better in the terrorism department. It kind of makes our Canadian party choices seem a whole lot more attractive by comparison.

British MP and general wackjob George Galloway has come under fire from Israel for promising to donate any money he wins from his participation on the reality show “Big Brother” to a terrorist front organization:

The Israeli embassy last night became the latest critic of George Galloway after it denounced him for choosing Interpal as his nominated Big Brother charity, claiming it is a front for Palestinian terrorists. The organisation vehemently denies the charge.

[ . . . ]

However, UK ministers are coming under increased pressure to ban Interpal. In August 2003, the US administration claimed it was “a principal charity utilised to hide the flow of money to Hamas”, branded it a “specially designated terrorist” organisation and froze its assets in America.

Interpal was also banned by Israel in 1997.

Surprised? Nah, not really. Galloway’s true colours have been clear for a long time, and this is far from the most shocking thing he has done. Then again, raising money for terrorists who blow up innocent Israelis is probably considered a good thing in Galloway’s twisted mind.

(Hat tip: Tom).