BlogMatrix
 

Just one reason to support DAAT on April 19th

edit secondgenerationradical 2009-02-05 19:31 UTC 1  comment  ·

This incident is from last year.   It is one of the reasons we have to take to the streets on April 19th.   A world that is not terribly bothered by Hamas inciting and praising this type of incident, but reserves all its condemnation for the IDF when it, despite enormous measures to the contrary, kills Hamas supporting civilians, is clearly immoral.

Bradley Burston writes for Israel's left wing newspaper Ha'aretz.  Left wing and right wing are agreed on this.

 
Palestinian terrorism as a natural act
By Bradley Burston
Tags: bulldozer, terror 

Click here for more from Bradley Burston

JERUSALEM - What, exactly, is a decent person supposed to think?

On a quiet and clear morning in Jerusalem, a woman is driving toward the heart of the city, her infant with her in the car. There is nothing to fear.
Advertisement

It is not a military area, it is not a sector of occupation, it is not a settlement - Jews have lived and worked here for more than a century. Jewish doctors and nurses were treating Arab infants, women, the elderly and the infirm here as early as 1902, when Shaare Tzedek Hospital opened across the street.

There is nothing to fear.

Except for the man behind the wheel of a bulldozer, who has taken it upon himself to kill Jews. Not Israeli security force personnel, not occupation troops, not the Shin Bet. Jews. Women and children and the elderly and the infirm. Jews who may be in favor of an independent Palestinian state. Jews who have nothing against Arabs. Jews who may work to end the occupation. Jews.

When the killing starts, the woman behind the wheel does what Jews have learned to do since the Holocaust, and for 2,000 years before that: Save your child. Whatever it takes.

She manages to throw her infant out the side window and clear of the car before the Hero of Palestine steers the massive earth mover toward her car for a second time and crushes it flat.

It doesn't take long, after the he has finished overturning buses full of Jews - and Arabs as well - and driving over other cars, even backing up to crush one twice, before the public relations and marketing department of Hamas had formulated its praise for the attack.

"We consider it as a natural reaction to the daily aggression and crimes committed against our people in the West Bank and all over the occupied lands," Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri told the press.

Natural. Only natural.

The Islamic Jihad's armed wing could not have agreed more."The Jerusalem Brigades bless the heroic operation in Jerusalem as the natural reaction to the crimes of the occupation," it announced.

The attack came after the latest in a series of attempts by groups in the states, some of them atheist/anarchist, some of them Muslim, some of them Jewish, to lobby Prostestant churches and respected universities to divest from Caterpillar, because the IDF uses its bulldozers to demolish Palestinian homes.

I would like to hear them now. Just once. I would like them to divest from terrorism. Not understand it as the natural outgrowth of the crimes of occupation. For once, I would like my sisters and brothers on the left to be every bit as hard on their comrades the Palestinians for taking a bulldozer and crushing Jews, as they are on Israel for bulldozing homes.

Write a letter to Ismail Haniyeh, to Mahmoud Zahar, to Sami Anu Zuhri. Protest in your own communities, for once, calling terrorism what it is. Intentional, brutal, premeditated, immoral. Murder.

What's a decent person supposed to think?

That it's all right to launch rockets against residential areas during a cease-fire, because the occupation is still going on? That it's all right to crush Jewish civilians, because the occupation has not been halted and settlers continue to build homes?

What's a decent person to think when Palestinian groups fall over one another trying to claim the bulldozer attack? And when one of the groups is the Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade?

What's a decent person to think when the man who drove the bulldozer was himself the father of two, a construction worker from East Jerusalem, whose desire to kill Jews - and, in so doing, further soil and damage the cause and name of Palestine - was greater than his feeling for the mother who had to throw her baby from a car to save it?

I, for one, would like to ask for proof of what it is that Palestinians really want. I no longer believe that it's as simple as wanting statehood.

This is what I don't yet want to admit: that for all these years, in 2008 no less than in 1902, what a critical mass of Palestinians want most, perhaps even more than statehood, may be as simple as the vile thrill of vengeance, as straightforward as nothing more than seeing Jews dead and gone.

What Obama and the Left-Liberal Tolerists Do Not Understand (and why it could end the world as we know it)

edit secondgenerationradical 2009-02-04 01:08 UTC 1  comment

From the website of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East.

I suggest that if Obama does not "get" this and get it quickly, we could be in for a very bad few decades.

Previous PagePrevious Page  E-Mail This PageE-Mail This Page  Print This PagePrint


LOUIS RENé BERES: TERRORISM, SACRIFICE AND LIFE EVERLASTING UNCOMMON INSIGHTS FOR PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA
  January 21, 2009


Dealing with terrorism will be at the very top of our new president’s agenda. Here it is important that he understand something odd. The core basis of Jihadist terror has little if anything to do with strategy and tactics. Rather, it is “normally” an expression of religious sacrifice.

The links between sacrifice and politics have a long history.

President Obama should look first to ancient Greece. Plutarch's SAYINGS OF SPARTAIN MOTHERS reveals the female parent as one who rears her sons for civic sacrifice. This mother was always relieved to learn that a son had died "in a manner worthy of his self, his country and his ancestors." Indeed, those Spartan sons who failed to live up to this standard of sacrifice were reviled.

One woman, whose son had been the sole survivor of a disastrous military engagement, killed him with a tile. It was the correct punishment for his apparent cowardice. The eighteenth-century philosopher, Jean Jacques Rousseau, citing to Plutarch, described a certain citizen-mother as follows: "A Spartan woman had five sons in the army and was awaiting news of the battle. A Helot (slave) arrives trembling; she asks him for the news. `Your five sons were killed.' `Base slave, did I ask you that?' The slave responds: `We won the victory.' The mother runs to the temple and gives thanks to the gods."

Why recount these tales from ancient Sparta about sacrifice? What have they to do with current threats of terrorism against the United States? Why should they matter to President Barack Obama?

History speaks volumes. The roots of Jihadist terror originate, in part, from cultures that embrace similar views of sacrifice. In these cultures, however, the true purpose of sacrifice goes far beyond civic necessity. Here, sacrificial practice is a determinably sacred expression of religion. In these cultures, sacrifice derives from a desperately hoped-for conquest of personal death. Above all, with such practice, the Jihadist terrorist hopes to realize an otherwise unattainable promise of immortality.

The Jihadist terrorist insistently claims to “love death,” but this is a lie. Paradoxically, he ecstatically kills himself and innocent others only to ensure that he will live forever. The so-called “death” that he expects to suffer in “suicide” is merely a momentary inconvenience on every martyr’s fiery path to life everlasting.

“Martyrdom” operations have always been associated with Jihad. After all, unequivocal and celebratory invocations for such killing can be found in the Koran (9:111), and, even more explicitly, in the canonical hadith.

For President Obama, the survival implications of this doctrinal fusion of religion and violence warrant very careful study. Convinced that Shahada (“Death for Allah”) violence against the United States will lead to martyrdom, the Islamist terrorist can never be deterred by ordinary threats of reprisal and retaliation. Falling outside the usual boundaries of “rationality,” Jihadist terrorism should compel us to seek very different and more purposeful measures of dissuasion. This means that to keep America safe, President Obama will have to look well beyond orthodox military and political solutions to terrorism.

It still appears to most observers that Jihadist terrorists are unafraid of death. But nothing could be further from the truth. It is precisely their unique and overwhelming terror of death that leads these killers to “suicide.” Ironically, because dying in the act of killing “infidels” and “apostates” is presumed to buy freedom from the penalty of death, these terrorists aim to conquer mortality by “killing themselves.”

While America’s terrorist enemies often calculate in this way, our political leaders calculate in another. In the fashion of so many of its Islamist enemies, America still imagines, for itself, life everlasting.

But unlike these enemies, America does not see itself achieving immortality, individually or collectively, by mass killing of "others." Rather, we generally see our national survival as the logical product of both mainstream diplomacy and traditional military power.

America and its terrorist enemies have decidedly different orientations to "peace." This stark asymmetry puts the United States at a foreseeable disadvantage. While America’s enemies manifest their "positive" expectations for immortality, individual and collective, by the intended and doctrinal slaughter of “heathen,” our leaders have thus far remained blithely unaware of these enemies’ murderous decisional calculus.

America’s new president now faces a real and expanding threat of unconventional war and unconventional terrorism. Faced with adversaries who are not only willing to die, but who also seek their own "deaths" - because this sacrificial death is presumed to yield personal immortality - Mr. Obama should quickly understand the critical limits of ordinary warfare, national homeland defense and deterrence.

The danger to America lies at two discrete but interrelated levels. First, it exists at the level of the individual Jihadist enemy who chooses “martyrdom” through a path of terrorism. Second, it exists at the level of states, the individual “self-sacrificers” in macrocosm, which may someday soon choose collective self-sacrifice through their frenzied initiation of chemical, biological or nuclear war against the United States. Significantly such a war might not be fought for traditional military purposes, but for "liquidation” of “infidels.” To be sure, any such choice would represent the unholiest of marriages between aggressive war and genocide, two clearly codified crimes under international law.

he root problem here is Jihadist death fear and the consequent compulsion to sacrifice certain despised "others." This compulsion, in turn, stems from a widespread and doctrinal belief that killing unbelievers, and also being killed by unbelievers, is the path toward immortality. Terrorist unwillingness to accept personal death leads, then, to the killing of others to escape this death. The ironies are staggering, but the connections persist. For President Barack Obama, they must be examined immediately and with great care.

For so many of our terrorist enemies, both individuals and states, killing Americans offers an optimal immunization against death. The death fear of the enemy "ego" is lessened by the killing, the sacrifice, of the infidel. This generic idea has been captured by Ernest Becker's paraphrase of Elias Canetti: "Each organism raises its head over a field of corpses, smiles into the sun, and declares life good."

The Jihadist enemies of America do not intend to do evil. Rather, they commit to the killing of Americans and other “infidels” with conviction and purity of heart. Perversely sanctified killers, these enemies will gleefully generate an incessant search for “profane” victims. Though mired in blood, this search will be tranquil and self-assured, born of the presumption that its warrior perpetrators are neither infamous not shameful, but sacrificial and sacred.

President Obama; please take heed.

LOUIS RENÉ BERES was educated at Princeton (Ph.D., 1971) and publishes widely on world politics, terrorism and international law. He is the author of some of the earliest major books on nuclear war and nuclear terrorism, and is Professor of Political Science and International Law at Purdue University.