In Defence Of Israel’s Right To Self Defence!

And so the lunacy continues. As I write this, Israel is now being accused of – wait for it – piracy!

Wouldn’t you love to see what Egypt would have done if faced with a ship full of rabid enemies determined to ram her shores…?  But of course, these ‘innocent aid workers’ wouldn’t dream of trying a stunt like this with the Egyptians. And we all know it.

If you only read one article on the latest events, then make it this one by Daniel Greenfield, over at the superb Sultan Knish blog.

All photos courtesy of Sultan Knish.

The Non-Violent Murder of Jews

“The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.”

Al Bukhari, quoted in the Hamas Charter

Let there be no mistake about it. This is about genocide. This is what it has always been about generations back, when Hamas forefather, Hassan al Banna was writing fan letters to Hitler.

A Non-violent Gaza Flotilla Activist

This in a single paragraph is Hamas. This is what it stands for. And this is what anyone who talks about “the People of Gaza” really supports.

The “People of Gaza” is a euphemism for Hamas which won the last PA election and rules with popular support in Gaza. Israel responded to this takeover by a genocidal terrorist group by closing its border with Gaza. Hamas cynically responded by lying and claiming to be out of power and starving. That allowed their supporters to try and pass off their pro-Hamas agenda as a humanitarian agenda.

But real humanitarians don’t sympathize with only one side in a conflict where civilians on both sides are dying. Real humanitarians don’t bring guns and knives on a humanitarian mission. And real humanitarians don’t chant calls for the murder of Jews calling themselves “The Army of Mohammed”.

That’s what the pack of racist Islamist killers hiding behind their Western useful idiots did. And the Western useful idiots conducting a propaganda mission on behalf of a terrorist organization are no better than the murderers who exploited them.

The Hamas charter begins with a quote from Hassan al Banna calling for the destruction of Israel. Hassan al Banna was an ally of Hitler whose movement distributed Arabic translations of Mein KampfGaza Flotilla was as cynical an expedition as if a bunch of Nazi supporters had gotten in a boat to bring supplies to Berlin in 1944.

The Hamas supporters on board the Gaza flotilla called themselves the Freedom Flotilla. A brilliantly Orwellian name, considering that they were headed to support an organization that had eliminated what little freedom there had been in Gaza. Hamas had banned music, outlawing the piano, the flute and the violin because they weren’t in the Koran.

It banned mixed sex music festivals and jeans. It imposed a curfew on public gatherings It banned male hairdressers and women riding on motorcycles. Its morality police have carried out brutal murders of women they decided were immoral. The lack of freedom in Gaza had one common denominator. Hamas. And the Anti-Freedom Flotilla were there to give Hamas a propaganda victory.

Israel sent aboard soldiers armed with paintball guns and stun grenades expecting token resistance from entitled Western left wing protesters. Instead the Westerners were serving as beards for Turkish Islamic radicals.

The IDF force functioned under strict rules of engagement that prevented them from defending themselves until the situation escalated so badly that soldiers were suffering serious injuries including gunshot wounds. Only then did the Israeli soldiers return fire with live ammunition. Long after any military or police force would have done so.

Hamas leader Haniyeh speaks under Turkish flag

Turkey’s Islamist regime of Erdogan which recently vowed to repeat the Armenian Genocide, if the Armenians continued to protest about it, lost no time in staging protest rallies and delivering self-righteous condemnations.

Over a violent encounter that their own people deliberately staged with exactly this intended outcome. And the hypocritical double standard of a world community that gave Erdogan a pass for openly threatening ethnic cleansing, even as he seeks to join the EU, will now begin their usual howls of hypocritical outrage. “Massacre”. “Genocide.” “Human Rights.”

The truth is that there is hardly a regime in the Muslim world that could spell “Human Rights” if those magic words weren’t a useful weapon against those damned infidels.

Turkey’s Erdogan in addition to his genocidal threats is busy jailing opposition politicians, raiding synagogues and imposing religiouswhich jailed Western backpackers for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, have done to a ship filled with radicals trying to kill its soldiers?

What would Saudi Arabia do, which doesn’t even allow Westerners into Mecca unless they’re there to suppress a domestic uprising? Both countries are Hamas backers. And this is how Hamas treats resistance. By throwing them off roofs.

But genocide and massacres don’t even merit a sigh when carried out by Muslim regimes. But when those countries arm and fund a genocidal Islamist group inspired by the Nazis, the liars and phonies demand that Israel open up its borders to its terrorists.

And when Israel intercepts a ship carrying out a mission of propaganda for Hamas, those same liars and phonies start shrieking, “Massacre,” “Genocide” and “Human Rights”.

You want to see massacres, genocide and human rights– take a weekend trip to Tehran, try to buy a bus ticket to Mecca, run for office in Ankara or try to be a Christian in Karachi.

Turkish group on Flotilla burns US flag

This is about genocide. The Muslim massacre and ethnic cleansing of Jews. A history that goes back to Mohammed, who ethnically cleansed Jews from the Arabian Peninsula.

When the “non-violent killers” on board the flotilla chanted, “Remember Khaibar, Khaibar, Oh Jews. The Army of Mohammed will Return!“, they were invoking an ugly history of over a thousand years of Muslim oppression and butchery of the region’s Jews. Those non-Muslims on board were collaborators in the latest phase of that genocide.

There is no such thing as the non-violent murder of Jews. Supporting the murder of Jews is not a “humanitarian mission“, unless your ideas of humanitarian mission match those of Hitler, Hassan al Banna and Hamas.

This is indeed about our freedom and genocide. Our right to be free of those who carry out their fanatical dreams of mass murder, whether they happen to be Austrian painters, Hamas politicians or Irish Nobel Prize winners.

The State of Israel will not serve the same purpose that Jews have always served for 2000 years, to be the whipping boy of hypocritical moralists. Nor will we apologize for refusing to be murdered. And if you want to kill us, expect us to fight back. Fight us with words, and we will fight back with words. Fight us with knives and guns, and we will do the same. We will not be murdered. We will not be driven into the sea. We will not die. Get used to it.

Well, the chances are against it and the odds are slim
That he’ll live by the rules that the world makes for him
’Cause there’s a noose at his neck and a gun at his back
And a license to kill him is given out to every maniac

Neighborhood Bully, Bob Dylan

Judenfrei

My, how easily the world condones the notion of this new, racist Palestinian state as championed by Obama.

The plan supported by his administration will lead to a new Palestinian Arab nation – in which Jews and maybe also Christians are banned from living.

At the same time, of course, Israel is being told she must kick out  Jews in Judea and Samaria, to make way for this new, ‘Judenfrei’ Palestinian Arab state.

The world either doesn’t care, or doesn’t recall, that 80% of what was Palestine is already taken up by Jordan – which is already Judenfrei, as  no Jews are permitted to live there.

Has anyone, ever,  read any pieces in the international press condemning Jordan for this racism…?

I know I haven’t.

Thus while the world yells in rage the second Israel lifts a finger to respond to Palestinian terrorism, Israel is  held to a far higher standard than either Jordan, or any Muslim country, or the new Palestinian state which is being carved out of Israel by the Arabs and Obama.

In other words, land is being taken from Jews, to form part of a Palestinian Arab, Judenfrei state.

And the world nods and smiles and mutters ‘about time’ as it sits back and watches this happen.

So when a few of my regular readers and even blogger friends chastise me for claiming that Obama is less than fair to Israel, well, they can chastise all they want.

What – am I as a Jew now meant to praise an American leader who seeks to turn the only middle eastern democracy into the size of a postage stamp?

Am I expected to cheer the idea of a Palestinian Arab state alongside Israel that will serve as a base for yet more terrorism?

The world is, again, either forgetting or ignoring what happened when Israel left Gaza. Israel gave the Palestinian Arabs what they were demanding – and what happened? Increased terrorism.

A new Palestinian Arab state beside Israel will just be Gaza redux. So excuse me if I’m not throwing a party and cracking open the champagne at the prospect.

And just to illustrate how Palestinian Arabs truly feel on these issues, here’s a fascinating glimpse into their hopes for this new state, courtesy of Arutz Sheva:

A poll released this week showed that PA Arabs are reluctant to grant rights to Jews or Christians within areas demanded for a PA state.

A survey conducted by the Arab World for Research and Development among 1,200 Arab residents of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, found that many felt Jerusalem should not be shared with Jews and Christians.

When asked to what extent they agreed with a statement made by Barack Obama that Jerusalem should be “a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims,” less than 17% said they agree, while 20 percent said they “somewhat agree.” More than 42 percent said they disagree with the statement, while 17 percent “somewhat disagree.”

More than 45 percent of those surveyed disagreed with a second statement of Obama’s in which the president called on the Arab world to reject violence and killing as a means of struggle.

Twenty-two percent did not give an answer, while the remainder said they “agree” or “somewhat agree” with the statement.

Roughly 300,000 Jews reside in Judea and Samaria,   and approximately 250,000 more live in Jerusalem neighborhoods now being demanded by the Palestinian Authority.

The PA demands that any future Arab state in Judea and Samaria be rid of the current Jewish minority.

Jewish holy sites in Judea and Samaria include the Tomb of the Patriarchs (Me’arat Hamachpelah) in Hebron, Joseph’s Tomb in Shechem, and Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem.

Jews are currently allowed full access only to the latter site, while the Tomb of the Patriarchs is split into Jewish and Muslim sections, and Jews are allowed to visit Joseph’s Tomb only intermittently.

I think we can all envisage the rage and the threats 0f violence if Muslims  were not allowed total access to their holy sites! Yet many of them would ideally ban Jews and Christians from Jerusalem.  Talk about rank hypocrisy.

Jerusalem was holy to Jews and Christians before Islam even existed.

So to those who complain when Jews dare to use words like ‘Judenfrei’ and ‘Judenrein’ in connection with Obama’s plans for a new Palestinian Arab state, I say: tough.

It’s the ugly policy that you should be protesting – not the accurate words Jews use to describe it.

Additional information:

The excellent Elder Of Ziyon blog offers this information about Jordan’s bans on both Jews and Israelis:

In 1933, a number of prominent Arabs in Transjordan asked Great Britain to allow Jews to settle there, to help its ailing economy, and Zionists were enthusiastic about the idea. But since the British saw the riots that were happening in Palestine at the time they didn’t want to worry about more problems of that type, so they created a law banning Jews from living there.

This policy was ratified — after the emirate became a kingdom — by Jordan’s law no. 6, sect. 3, on April 3, 1954, and reactivated in law no. 7, sect. 2, on April 1, 1963.

It states that any person may become a citizen of Jordan unless he is a Jew. King Hussein made peace with Israel in 1994, but the Judenrein legislation remains valid today.

So, yes, Jordan really has a law banning Jews – not Zionists, but Jews – from becoming citizens. And the original source of this law was none other than Great Britain.

Here’s the law: (h/t british18)

The following shall be deemed to be Jordanian nationals:

(1)Any person who has acquired Jordanian nationality or a Jordanian passport under the Jordanian Nationality Law, 1928, as amended, Law No. 6 of 1954 or this Law;

(2)Any person who, not being Jewish, possessed Palestinian nationality before 15 May 1948 and was a regular resident in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan between 20 December 1949 and 16 February 1954;

(3)Any person whose father holds Jordanian nationality;

(4)Any person born in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan of a mother holding Jordanian nationality and of a father of unknown nationality or of a Stateless father or whose filiation is not established;

(5)Any person born in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan of unknown parents, as a foundling in the Kingdom shall be considered born in the Kingdom pending evidence to the contrary;

(6)All members of the Bedouin tribes of the North mentioned in paragraph (j) of article 25 of the Provisional Election Law, No. 24 of 1960, who were effectively living in the territories annexed to the Kingdom in 1930.

But what if a Jew wants to become a naturalized citizen? Well…

Any Arab who has resided continuously in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan for not less than 15 years may acquire Jordanian nationality, by decision of the Council of Ministers taken on a proposal by the Minister of Internal Affairs, if he renounces his nationality of origin and the law of his country permits him to do so..

‘Judenfrei‘ and ‘Judenrein’

Nazi terms used to designate an area free of Jewish presence. The words bear slightly different connotations; while Judenfrei merely refers to “freeing” an area of all of its Jewish citizens, Judenrein (literally “clean of Jews”) demands that any trace of Jewish blood be removed as an impurity.

Some of the locations declared Judenfrei

Establishments, villages, cities, and regions were declared Judenfrei after they were ethnically cleansed of Jews.

• Gelnhausen, Germany – reported Judenfrei on November 1, 1938 by propaganda newspaper Kinzigwacht after its synagogue was closed and remaining local Jews forced to leave the town.
• German-occupied Luxembourg – reported Judenfrei by the press on October 17, 1941.
• German-occupied Estonia – December, 1941 . Reported as Judenfrei at Wannsee Conference on January 20, 1942
• German-occupied Belgrade, Serbia – August, 1942
• Vienna – reported Judenfrei by Alois Brunner on October 9, 1942
• Berlin, Germany – July 16, 1943

Check out also ‘Jordan’s Identity Crisis’ over at Elder Of Ziyon:

Calling All Jews:

I urge you to read this article;  what are your thoughts…?

Obama’s ‘Jewish Experts’

by Jack Engelhard

This is getting uncomfortable.

A few days ago, George Mitchell once again expressed his position, and opposition, even to “natural growth” in Judea and Samaria. Both Mitchell and Hillary  Clinton speak for themselves and for President Barack Obama, who’s made this – Jewish life in the “settlements” – his priority above all other international disputes.

Even the language is disturbing. Mitchell – top Middle East envoy along with Clinton – explained that the controversy centered on “the number of Jewish births.”

Where have we heard this before? To my mind, as someone who was born under similar conditions, in France under Vichy, where Jews were kept within “restricted zones,” this sounds too much like Verboten!

When I hear American diplomats, and Obama himself, count the number of children allotted per Jewish family, at the same time measuring Jewish growth by the inch, the images that come to mind, to my mind, are of an earlier time, though not so long ago, when the Third Reich confronted the “Jewish Problem” by way of the Nuremberg Laws and the Wannsee Conference.

I picture Reinhard Heydrich and Adolf Eichmann. They, too, were “Jewish Experts.”

I hear echoes of “none is too many.” That was the response from Canada’s Mackenzie King’s government on the question of how many Jews were to be allowed inside the country following the Holocaust. Those words still ring throughout Canada, especially among survivors, but how did “none is too many” become an American position so fast and furious?

On top of that, there’s The New York Times’ Blood Libel of the Day. Today, it’s Tony Judt’s turn for his “expertise.”

I’m not saying that Mitchell and Clinton are Heydrich and Eichmann – but I am watching too many scenes that feature (in my imagination) long speeches amplified by radio, round-ups, sealed trains, enclosures, ghettos, quotas. This takes me back to all that and it is unpleasant. We were supposed to allow this never again.

The past has returned, as my eyes see it, and we’re watching it unfold with diplomacy that’s too familiar.

When our ship came in – into Philadelphia – we were greeted, but not with brotherly love, back in April 1944. This boat was the Serpa Pinto (one of the few Jewish refugee voyages that were successful) and, as my sister Sarah recalls in her memoirs:

“The city arranged planks upon the docking area and had us under armed guards lest we step on American soil.”

We were, paradoxically, en route to Canada. America wouldn’t have us. (Finally and thankfully, yes.)

Here we go again – but now in Israel? None is too many?

Mitchell and Clinton, and certainly Obama – do they know the Jewish Experience and what it means to restrict Jews and place them into “zones”? I’m not talking politics and policy. That’s too complicated for this trip.

I’m talking about the sound, the roar of approval this brings to mind, from the beer halls in Bavaria on to the rallies in Berlin when the chancellor spoke.

I hear those sirens, still, and when they – Mitchell and Clinton – prohibit Jewish children, so diplomatically but emphatically, I can’t help myself. I find my father packing our bags to prepare for an escape, and when the language gets to “the number of Jewish births,” I’m not hearing Mitchell, but watching Leini Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will.

Those who’ve been there before, like me, are on alert for slippery talk like “peace process” when we know the merchandise being sold is the yellow badge.

“They make smooth their tongue,” wrote King David, “against Your anointed…. Save Your people and bless Your inheritance, Your children.”

(italics etc were mine; to read the original article, go to Arutz Sheva by clicking HERE

Day Of Reckoning

If someone decided they hated your family, and then rounded them up, at gunpoint, before torturing and finally killing them, would you ever cease trying to bring that person to justice?

I’m guessing most sane people would answer ‘no’. Let’s face it: most of us, if G-d forbid faced with such a loss, would have to be physically restrained from  hunting down the perpetrator and throttling them with our bare hands.

We would want, indeed we would yearn for, a day of reckoning.

Yet surprisingly, many of those who agree with the above sentiments when applied to their own loved ones, expect the suspected Nazi murderer, John Demjanjuk, to be let off.

On this very blog, someone has stated that to extradite him is ‘cruel’, given his ‘frail condition’. And let’s be clear on this: it is not, as that same person has said, , ‘you jews‘ that are responsible for this latest development. It is GERMANY that is extraditing Demjanjuk,  because prosecutors there believe they have overwhelming evidence that this man killed 29,000 innocent people.

Since when does a murderer – whether of one or one million people – get to escape justice purely on the basis that he – unlike his victims – was fortunate enough to reach old age? What an astonishing argument for anyone to use – yet use it they do.

Would those same people ever seek to generalise this ‘reasoning’? Is that how they would ever envisage a nation’s justice system operating? Presumably not.

Yet, again, when it’s Jews that have been the murdered souls, and when it’s a suspected Nazi who is facing his day of reckoning, somehow it’s deemed more moral to condemn the relatives of the victims for desiring justice, as opposed to agreeing that the murderer must be held to account.

I have no respect for those who argue that this man should be left alone to die of old age. He showed no mercy, no justice, no humanity to those 29,000 innocents. I see no reason why he should be entitled now to what he denied them.