Segacs’s World I Know

B’nai Brith is suing the Canadian government in attempt to force it to outlaw the so-called “political” and “charitable” (read: fundraising for terrorism) wings of Hezbollah. Hamas and the Islamic Jihad were finally (belatedly) banned this week, and Hezbollah’s military wing on the terror list as well. But where do they think these people get their funding from?

Ottawa is resisting pressure to outlaw the political wing, which Foreign Minister Bill Graham has described as a legitimate movement. The government said on Friday that the law suit, filed by B’nai Brith, would have no effect.

Bill Graham had better hope that his quotes don’t come back to haunt him.

It’s unbelievable that the same Canadian government that seeked to strip the Canadian Magen David Adom – a lifesaving organization – of its charity status, would allow Hezbollah – a lifetaking organization – to operate freely. Especially if it looks like Hezbollah might be linked to yesterday’s bombing in Kenya. In case there was any doubt just what kind of “legitimacy” Hezbollah should have, this ought to take care of it:

The leader of Hizbollah on Friday urged Palestinians to ignore international criticism of suicide attacks and keep up the armed struggle against Israel.

These are murderers and terrorists, make no mistake. The fact that they’re legally allowed to fundraise in Canada is a scandal. And everyone else seems to “get it” except for Bill Graham.

The European Union is meddling in Israel’s elections. According to the Jerusalem Post:

Palestinian newspapers are full of paid advertisements calling for an end to terrorist attacks inside Israel in order to help Mitzna and his Labor Party. Palestinian sources say Dr. Sari Nusseibeh, the PLO’s representative in Jerusalem, is behind the advertisements. The European Union, they add, is financing the campaign.

The surprise isn’t so much that the Palestinian lobby wants a Labour victory. With a softer government, more prone to concessions, they probably figure they can get more out of Israel. But what’s the EU doing backing the ads?

And notice what else is obvious by reading between the lines. The ads are calling upon people to end terror attacks inside Israel – their way of saying that terror attacks in the Disputed Territories may still continue against innocent civilians. Plus, the call for a moratorium on attacks in the leadup to an election implies that they can resume once the election is over. Not to mention that it’s blazingly obvious that terror is being sanctioned as a political weapon.

If the EU wants to intervene to end terrorism, then it should do it unequivocally. Support a campaign to end terror attacks, period. Instead, the EU is attempting to manipulate the Israeli election so as to elect a leader it feels woud be more pliable to Europe’s demands. I doubt the Israeli people will listen, as polls show Likud leading by a landslide margin. Still, the EU has no business getting involved.

The Concordia Palestinian Solidarity movement’s favourite Jewish poster boy, Aaron Maté, claims that the anti-Zionists aren’t really antisemites in today’s Gazette:

The attempts to “de-legitimize” Israel’s occupation of Palestine are as anti-Semitic as the attempts to “de-legitimize” apartheid South Africa were “anti-Caucasian.”

The number of times that the Gazette and other publications have given voice to this thug – Jewish or not, he’s a thug – is incredible. This is the same Aaron Maté (VP Campaigns of the extremely anti-Israel CSU) who was arrested back in April for holding an illegal sit-in in the offices of Irwin Cotler, MP and human-rights activist. The same Aaron Maté who was arrested on September 9th at the Netanyahu protests. The same Aaron Maté who, in effort to make it seem like he speaks for a significant proportion of Jews, makes a point of prefacing every anti-Israel remark he makes with “as a Jew”.

His twisted logic would have Israel blamed for all of the Palestinian violence. But either he willfully closes his eyes to the virulent antisemitism within the Palestinian movement at Concordia, or else he simply does not think it important or relevant. Perhaps he wilfully closes his ears to the chanting of “death to the Jews” that can be heard at the riots. How else would he be able to rationalize his participation? Most often, he simply claims that the antisemitism is a fringe element among the minority:

Of course, no serious activist will deny that there are elements of anti-Semitism in the pro-Palestinian movement. But I also know that the vast majority of Palestinians whom I have met in Montreal or on the West Bank have denounced anti-Semitism and taken great efforts to oppose it when displayed by others.

Then, he has the audacity to follow with:

That protest was not anti-Semitic. Sept. 9 was a sign of a growing movement of people across the world in solidarity with Palestinians, a group that includes thousands of conscientious citizens and brave “refusenik” soldiers in Israel itself. And despite some unfortunate and deplorable exceptions, it is a movement that recognizes and supports the legitimate rights of the Jewish people.

The anti-Zionists love Maté because they can hold him up as “evidence” that anti-Zionism is not antisemitism. “After all”, they can claim, “one of our best friends is Jewish”. Why Aaron Maté lets himself be used like that is beyond me. But what people need to realize is that:

a) Jews who share his views are in the extreme fringe minority, and do not reflect the views of most mainstream Jews worldwide (left, right, or center).

b) Despite claiming otherwise, anti-Zionism of Aaron Maté’s brand is antisemitism. Merely criticizing Israeli policy is not, as he correctly points out, but when anyone goes so far as to deny the legitimacy of the mere existence of the state of Israel, it is antisemitism. Why? Because when you really look at what’s being said, the argument comes down to the fact that Israel is a Jewish state. Whether they argue that it is “infringing on Muslim land” or “racist because of its Jewish character”, this is what is really being said. As Adam Spiro explains (in response to an incident where professional shit-disturbers and buddies of Maté, Samer Elatrash and Laith Marouf, showed up at a Sukkot party):

Next time you hear the SPHR say “we’re anti-Israel, not anti-Jewish” think about it for a few minutes. If their sole concern was Israel, they would not have felt the need to protest a Jewish holiday. I have no need, or desire (nor do I know any Jew who does) to go monitor how Ramadan is observed. Furthermore, someone who was not anti-Jewish would not have played the role Marouf and Elatrash did in the riots where Jews were spat at, and Jewish men had their kippot torn from their heads. I still have yet to see anything (from the SPHR or anyone else), formal or informal, condemning those actions, or even expressing any regret whatsoever. And they say that they’re not anti-Jewish.

These are the people with whom Aaron Maté aligns himself. To exempt him from criticism simply because he is Jewish, while criticising his cohorts, would be racist.

Sounds ludicrous, I know. But, according to strategic consultant Kalman Gayer (as reported in Ha’aretz), Yasser Arafat wanted a Likud Prime Minister to win in 2001, and wants one to win again in 2002:

On the eve of the 2001 elections, strategic consultant Kalman Gayer reached the conclusion that “Arafat prefers a leader from the Likud and not from Labor to head the Israeli government.” His analysis was based on three strategically important events that occurred in swift succession: In May 2000 the Barak government decided on a unilateral pullout from southern Lebanon; two months later, the Camp David summit was held, and failed; and two months after that, on September 29, the intifada began.

Arafat reached the conclusion that he would achieve his political goals by means of terrorism, Gayer wrote. The escalation in terrorism and the suicide bombing attacks worked in Sharon’s favor.

When you think about it, it makes a strange kind of sense. Arafat was getting too close to the point where he would have to either accept a peace deal, or turn down something eminently reasonable. The next step at Camp David in 2000 with Ehud Barak was going to necessitate a willingness on Arafat’s part to make some concessions and to accept the premise of statehood in exchange for peace. But he couldn’t do it. He was too much of a coward, and he realized that his people were not ready to accept it. Things were moving too fast, and Arafat saw them spinning out of control – if he signed a peace treaty he’d be an international hero but a traitor in the Muslim world, and that wasn’t the legacy he wanted. Hence the strategic decision to put a grinding halt to the peace process and start a wave of terror and violence that has cost far too many hundreds of lives so far.

But Arafat also knew that, faced with an Israeli leadership willing to make major concessions for peace, the Palestinian side would look bad for turning down these concessions. He needed a scapegoat. He needed an Israeli leader he could villanize. Someone who he could blame for all of the violence, and who the international community would readily see as a hard-line extremist. He needed a Likud Prime Minister. Preferably one with as hard-line a reputation as possible.

Ariel Sharon has been Arafat’s dream come true.

So why, then, is he still so popular amongst Israelis? Why did they just vote him back in as leader of the Likud party (effectively giving him another mandate as Prime Minister)? Why, when everything in Israel is a disaster is Sharon enjoying unprecedented popularity?

This is what the Ha’aretz article attempts to explain. It’s an interesting read. Check it out.

The abortion debate once again rears its ugly head. James Kopp, a fervent anti-abortionist, is on trial for second-degree murder. He admitted shooting Dr. Barnett Slepian, but claimed to regret having killed him.

Yeah, right. This guy has been murdering doctors for years.

Kopp is wanted in Canada for allegedly wounding three doctors. He is charged with the 1995 attempted murder of Hugh Short, a doctor shot at in his home in Ancaster, Ont., near Hamilton.

He is also wanted for questioning in the shooting of a Winnipeg doctor, another in Vancouver and has been implicated in a similar shooting in Rochester, N.Y.

And he also fired his original lawyer, apparently because he “had pledged not to turn the trial into a forum for the abortion debate”. I suppose he thinks he has a better chance with an anti-abortion lawyer, who will attempt to turn the trial around and put abortion rights on trial. The only question is whether this a calcluated legal strategy to better his chances for acquittal, or whether he’s delusional enough to think that he’s somehow entitled to kill doctors who perform abortions?

I’m fervently pro-choice, but I can (somewhat) respect the views of people who merely believe abortion is wrong. As long as they stick to verbal arguments rather than violence, they’re entitled to their views as much as I’m entitled to mine (so long as they don’t impose them on others). But I’m frequently amazed at the hypocrisy of any movement calling itself “pro-life” whose members go around KILLING people.

This quiz link (courtesy of Mike Silverman), can help you find out. It’s humourous, but it also surprisingly accurately described my beliefs as fitting most closely in with secular humanist Judaism. I’m a 3-day-a-year synagogue-goer, and my synagogue happens to be of the Orthodox denomination, but I’m also a skeptical agnostic who tends to view Judaism more culturally than religiously. I rather like what these folks have to say:

Judaism is much more than a set of religious beliefs and practices. Secular Humanistic Jews have a strong connection to Jewish history and culture and are committed to the future of the Jewish People. Secular Humanistic Jews rely on reason, rather than faith, to understand the world and believe that human intelligence and experience are capable of guiding their lives.

Secular Humanistic Jews believe that Jewish history is a human saga, a testament to the significance of human power and responsibility. We identify with the experience and culture of the Jewish people and we celebrate our Jewish identity at holidays and special moments of our lives using practices, rituals and language that are consistent with our secular beliefs and ideals. We enrich our knowledge by studying the collected teachings and experiences of the Jewish people, as well as modern ideas based on rational inquiry.

There are other interesting quizzes at SelectSmart too. According to the Mideast Selector Quiz, I’m an average Israeli (but choice #2 was Israeli far-right wing, which makes me wonder how they define “far right wing” based on the answers I provided). Last place in that quiz was Palestinian suicide bomber . . . I wonder if they track IP addresses of anyone who takes the quiz and gets that as a result? Perhaps they should start.

Oh yeah, and apparently I should move to Alaska, read Nietzsche, and vote for the Marxist-Leninist party in Canadian politics (as you can see, some of these quizzes are more accurate than others).

Another typical demonstration of European Union hypocrisy:

The EU’s foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, said “these tragic incidents come as a sad reminder that no region in the world is immune from terrorist attacks.”

“This should strengthen our common determination to intensify as a matter of priority co-operation with our African partners – among others -as part of our global fight against terrorism,” he said.

Hey, Solana, these attacks are happening almost daily in Israel, and I don’t see you calling for an intensification of your co-operation with Israeli partners as part of the “global fight against terrorism”. If you would take your head out of the sand for five seconds, you would realize that the best way to fight terrorism is to fight it wherever it occurs. And where is it occurring most? Israel, of course.

Terrorism is like a cancer. Fight it there and you’ll help prevent it from spreading elsewhere. Wait for it to spread elsewhere and, well, you see what happens.

Jerusalem, New York, Bali . . . now Kenya has been added to the list. Suicide bombers blew up a hotel in Kenya that catered to Israeli tourists, killing 11 people plus themselves. The three Israelis killed included two children, brothers aged 13 and 12.

Al Qa’eda is being blamed for the attack. The Palestinian leadership is seizing on the opportunity to distance itself from the whole thing:

“There is no connection whatsoever between these unfortunate events in Kenya and the Palestinian people or authority,” Palestinian Labour Minister Ghassan Khatib told The Associated Press.

That’s just bullshit. The Palestinian terror organizations have nothing to learn from Al Qa’eda on how to target innocent civilians. They just assume that as long as they target them in Israel, and not abroad, they can get away with it by demonizing Israel in the international press. But the lesson here is that if terror is not stopped in Israel, it will spread – to Bali, to Kenya, even to our own backyard.

The victims don’t care about political alliances, or which group is responsible for the attacks. Their families don’t care. All they care is that their loved ones and friends are dead, for no reason other than their nationality or religion or just plain bad luck, being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Beyond that, little matters. But the world needs to take note: terror will spread as long as it keeps winning. It will stop when it starts losing. Any government who preaches appeasement or wants to give in to the demands of the terror groups can consider itself partially responsible for today.

Update: Media sources are now reporting that 14 people have been killed, and more than 80 wounded. It is unclear whether these figures include the three suicide bombers. Also, simultaneously to the attacks, missiles were fired at an Israeli plane, but thankfully missed.

This attack took careful planning and execution. This was no case of an angry extremist going nuts, the way the Palestinian propaganda groups tend to portray suicide attackers against Israelis. This was a coordinated, calcluated attack by a network with a lot of experience. But then, so are the attacks in Israel – the terror network is many things, but it is not haphazard nor is it crazy. Terror is being used as a weapon, and legitimatizing this weapon will only lead to its increased use.

Breaking news – Arafat’s top deputy admits uprising was a mistake.

Yasser Arafat’s top deputy said the armed uprising against Israel has been a mistake for the Palestinians and must be stopped, declaring it had held up Palestinian independence and let to a reoccupation of West Bank cities by Israeli troops.

Mahmoud Abbas is widely considered to be a potential successor to Arafat, and these comments mark a pointed departure in Palestinian Authority policy. Among Abbas’s remarks, he stated that:

“Many people diverted the uprising from its natural path and embarked on a path we can’t handle, with the use of weapons … such as mortars, grenades and shooting from houses and populated areas. [. . .] If we do a calculation of the gains and losses … we will see that without any doubt is that what we lost was big and what we gained was small. [. . .] We should … ask ourselves where we are headed, not by beating ourselves up, but by reviewing the mistakes we have made. [. . .] What happened in these two years, as we see it now, is a complete destruction of everything we built.“

According to the Jerusalem Post, Abbas is further quoted as saying:

“Every Jew in Israel is now with Sharon because they believe he is defending them. I want to take this excuse from him by saying that we want our rights and we don’t want war. Then the number of Israelis who stand with us will grow.”

Pre-election posturing? Or does he really feel that way? If so, does he have enough will or clout to sway public opinion among Palestinians, or even bring about a reduction or cessation of violence? Little is known, but clearly Israel is watching this guy closely and trying to figure out what the next move should be.

Unfortunately, I doubt he will live long enough to make these statements too many more times. I’m sure he’s at the top of some Hamas hit list as we speak. Sadly, voices of moderation have been historically drowned out by extremists – and not just in the Middle East.

But his comments may serve a larger purpose, even despite the threat. They may be giving a voice to a rising sentiment among the Palestinian population.

A poll released last week showed more Palestinians expressing doubts than before about the effectiveness of the uprising. Asked if it was achieving its goals, 39 per cent said it was, while 36 per cent said it wasn’t, according to the survey by the Palestinian Centre for Public Opinion, which had a margin of error of three percentage points.

Like I said earlier, peace can only be achieved with the support of the people involved. And it looks like more Palestinians are questioning the use of violence. Optimism is so unlike me, but this does seem like a step, albeit a small one. Hope? Is it even possible?