Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Buddhist Lamas for the Annihilation of Islamofascist Terrorists

1. Apologies. That song to the tune of Officer Krupkie about the war
in my last post was composed by the valiant Ruth S. King, from Americans
for a Safe Israel. I should have noted the author.

2. Buddhists for the military extermination of terrorists:

Non-violence can't tackle terror: Dalai," from the Times of India, January

NEW DELHI: The Dalai Lama, a lifelong champion of non-violence on Saturday
candidly stated that terrorism cannot be tackled by applying the principle
of ahimsa because the minds of terrorists are closed.
"It is difficult to deal with terrorism through non-violence," the Tibetan
spiritual leader said delivering the Madhavrao Scindia Memorial Lecture

He also termed terrorism as the worst kind of violence which is not
carried by a few mad people but by those who are very brilliant and

"They (terrorists) are very brilliant and educated...but a strong ill
feeling is bred in them. Their minds are closed," the Dalai Lama said.
He said that the only way to tackle terrorism is through prevention. The
head of the Tibetan government-in-exile left the audience stunned when he
said "I love President George W Bush." He went on to add how he and the US
President instantly struck a chord in their first meeting unlike
politicians who take a while to develop close ties.

The Israel Exception
By Alan M. Dershowitz | 1/21/2009
Every time Israel seeks to defend its civilians against terrorist attacks,
it is accused of war crimes by various United Nations agencies, hard left
academics and some in the media. It is a totally phony charge concocted as
part of Hamas. strategy.supported by many on the hard delegitimate
and demonize the Jewish state. Israel is the only democracy in the world
ever accused of war crimes when it fights a defensive war to protect its
civilians. This is remarkable, especially in light of the fact that Israel
has killed far fewer civilians than any other country in the world that
has faced comparable threats. In the most recent war in Gaza fewer than a
thousand civilians.even by Hamas. skewed count.have been killed. This,
despite the fact that no one can now deny that Hamas had employed a
deliberate policy of using children, schools, mosques, apartment buildings
and other civilian areas as shields from behind which to launch its deadly
anti-personnel rockets. The Israeli Air Force has produced unchallengeable
video evidence of this Hamas war crime.
Just to take one comparison, consider the recent wars waged by Russia
against Chechnya. In these wars Russian troops have killed tens of
thousands of Chechnyan civilians, some of them willfully, at close range
and in cold blood. Yet those radical academics who scream bloody murder
against Israel (particularly in England) have never called for war crime
tribunals to be convened against Russia. Nor have they called for war
crime charges to be filed against any other of the many countries that
routinely kill civilians, not in an effort to stop enemy terrorists, but
just because it is part of their policy.
Nor did we see the Nuremburg-type rallies that were directed against
Israel when hundreds of thousands of civilians were being murdered in
Rwanda, in Darfur and in other parts of the world. These bigoted
hate-fests are reserved for Israel.
The accusation of war crimes is nothing more than a tactic selectively
invoked by Israel.s enemies. Those who cry .war crime. against Israel
don.t generally care about war crimes, as such, indeed they often support
them when engaged in by country.s they like. What these people care about,
and all they seem to care about, is Israel. Whatever Israel does is wrong
regardless of the fact that so many other countries do worse.
When I raised this concern in a recent debate, my opponent accused me of
changing the subject. He said we are talking about Israel now, not
Chechnya or Darfur. This reminded me of a famous exchange between
Harvard.s racist president, Abbott Lawrence Lowell, and the great American
judge Leonard Hand. Lowell announced that he wanted to reduce the number
of Jews at Harvard, because, .Jews cheat.. Judge Hand replied that
.Christians also cheat.. Lowell responded, changing the subject.
We are talking about Jews..
Well, you can.t just talk about Jews. Nor can you just talk about the
Jewish state. Any discussion of war crimes must be comparative and
contextual. If Russia did not commit war crimes when its soldiers
massacred tens of thousands of Chechnyans (not even in a defensive war)
then on what basis could Israel be accused of accidentally killing a far
fewer number of human shields in an effort to protect its civilians? What
are the standards? Why are they not being applied equally or selectively?
Can human rights endure in the face of such unequal and selective
application? These are the questions the international community should be
debating, not whether Israel, and Israel alone, violated the norms of that
vaguest of notions called .international law. or the .law of war..
If Israel, and Israel alone among democracies fighting defensive wars,
were ever to be charged with .war crimes,. that would mark the end of
international human rights law as a neutral arbitrator of conduct. Any
international tribunal that were to charge Israel, having not charged the
many nations that have done far worse, will lose any remaining legitimacy
among fair-minded people of good will,
If the laws of war in particular, and international human rights in
general, are to endure, they must be applied to nations in order of the
seriousness of the violations, not in order of the political unpopularity
of the nations. If the law of war were applied in this manner, Israel
would be among the last, and certainly not the first, charged.

Honig on Gaza

5. The REAL block to peace:

6. Just say you're sorry
By Nadav Shragai
January 20, 2009

Now, after the war and just before the election whirlwind sucks in our
politicians once again, it would be appropriate for many of them to go out
of their way and visit the mobile-home sites where those uprooted from
Gush Katif live. This way they can tell them one small thing: I'm sorry.

Tzipi Livni, Ehud Olmert, Shaul Mofaz and Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israel
Defense Forces and the police should do this - they, their agents and
everyone else who initiated, implemented and aided in using force to
uproot 10,000 people from their homes in Gush Katif and Northern Samaria,
maliciously and without any real purpose. Everyone who saw some good in
the evil of the disengagement and evil in the good of Gush Katif has
turned light into darkness and darkness into light. At the very least,
they are obligated to make this small apology.

This includes the judges of the High Court of Justice who did not even
bother to visit Gush Katif and made due with defense experts acting on
behalf of the state "because that is the postion of the court since it was
founded." The justices who ruled as they did because they automatically
assumed that such a plan "improves the security situation" because "the
evacuation reduces the desire of the Palestinians to harm the Israeli
population." It would be appropriate for the honorable justices to take a
vacation day as an act of forgiveness and go down south for a close-up
look at the results of their decisions.

This also includes the media, which provided a challenge for Ariel Sharon
and allowed him to turn a prosperous agricultural land, a world full of
communities, synagogues, yeshivas and magnificent educational institutions
into piles of rubble. Also the heads of the IDF and Shin Bet security
service who never spoke in public what they whispered in the backrooms,
and the soldiers and policemen who dragged the pioneers of Kfar Darom and
Neveh Dekalim from their houses while raining blows on the demonstrators
who understood what would come.

The apology must also include everyone who painted those who warned that
the rockets from Gaza would reach Sderot, Ashdod and Be'er Sheva as
delusional and opponents of peace. Everyone who promised that they would
"give it to them" after the first Qassam, but in the end cried about the
moral and international constraints that prevented them from doing so, and
for years abandoned the south. It must include those who took the name of
democracy in vain and aided Sharon in deceiving Likud members and breaking
his promises to honor Likud's decisions once it became clear to Sharon
that the party's members did not agree with him.

You, too, who paid almost no attention to the hundreds of thousands who
tried to stop the evil, who paid no attention to those who internalized
the lessons of Oslo and warned that we should not give them land and guns
again. You who paid no attention to those who warned of the Hamastan
state, foresaw exactly the trajectories of the rockets, and understood
that this was something we gave away for free, a further disintegration of
our power of deterrence and an adrenaline shot for terror.

Now rise and ask for forgiveness from those who paid the highest price,
with their bodies, souls and property for your close-mindedness, arrogance
and wickedness. Ask for forgiveness from the Gush Katif expellees, the
noble souls who did not steal land from anyone, who made the empty dunes
bloom as ambassadors of the State of Israel and who turned into the
south's security buffer and absorbed over 6,000 Qassams and mortar shells
with their bodies and belongings in the last years of Gush Katif.

Ask for forgiveness from those who swore to "win with love" - who believed
and sowed until the very last minute; from those who did not raise a hand
against the soldiers. Apologize to those who continued to enlist in the
IDF and pay the ultimate price even after they were expelled from their
houses, because they understood that the state - the national homeland of
the Jewish people, even within limited borders - is still bigger than any
mistaken and confused government.

There is no way to know if they will forgive you, but you at least need to

7. Another demand for an apology from the Moonbats:

The Jerusalem Post, January 21, 2009

Time for a Gaza Apology
By Michael Freund

8. Phila. Jewish Exponent taken over by Moonbats:


Blair's Sister-in-Law Incites Moslems: "We Want Israel Out!"

10. The Rev Lowery - Afro-fascist:

. 11. From the Wall St Journal:
. JANUARY 19, 2009, 11:43 P.M. ET
Israel Scored a Tactical Victory
But it missed a chance to finish off Hamas.
On the Gaza border
Atop a little hill near the beleaguered Israeli town of Sderot, a gaggle
of TV crews train their cameras on the Gaza Strip, sentinels to a
unilateral Israeli cease-fire that's barely 12 hours old. Earlier the same
day, Sunday, Hamas fired 20 rockets into Israel, raising questions about
its intentions but causing little serious damage. Later, a pair of Israeli
F-15s streak over Gaza City, releasing bursts of chaff but dropping no
Israeli soldiers stand on top of a tank at a staging area on the
Israel-Gaza border, Jan. 17, 2009.
And then comes word that Hamas has declared its own conditional, week-long
cease-fire. The TV people clear out. All wars eventually end. The question
most Israelis are asking is whether this one has merely gone on vacation.
So why are the top echelons of Israel's political and military
establishment delighted by the war's result? Long answer: They think that
Israel has re-established a reputation for invincibility tarnished in the
2006 war with Hezbollah; that they bloodied and humiliated Hamas while
taking few casualties; that they called overdue international attention to
the tunnels Hamas uses to smuggle its arsenal; and, with the unilateral
cease-fire, that they put the onus to end the violence squarely back on
Hamas's shoulders.
Short answer: They think the war may be a regional game changer.
In a wide-ranging interview, a senior military official offers perhaps the
most authoritative explanation of his government's war aims and his
interpretation of its effects. "We have no desire to go back into Gaza,"
he says. "We decided we're not going to spend five years [in Gaza] like
the five years Americans spent in Iraq."
On the contrary: Far from seeking regime change in Gaza, the official
seems at ease that the Palestinians will remain bifurcated between
Hamastan and Fatahland for many years more, the way Germany was divided
during the Cold War. The idea is that a Hamas state in Gaza -- somehow
deterred from mischief -- could become a kind of useful negative example
to the Palestinians of the West Bank, somewhat in the way East Germany
served West Germany as a monument to everything that was wrong with
This leads the official to his second remarkable comment, after I ask
whether Israel deliberately chose not to kill Ismail Haniyeh, the elected
Palestinian prime minister and Hamas's political leader in Gaza. "Israel
tried to target people from the security apparatus and military wing," he
answers. "At this moment, we prefer that the less-radical wing will take
The current divisions within Hamas are not the only ones the official sees
as a consequence of the war. Palestinians, he says, no longer look to
Hamas as the party of clean and competent government. Instead, they see a
group whose leaders needlessly provoked a ruinous war they didn't have the
courage to fight themselves. No wonder the third intifada in the West
Bank, on which Hamas had counted, never materialized.
Elsewhere, Hamas's former patrons in the Arab world have split with the
group ever since it became a client of Tehran. A dozen Arab states, along
with the Palestinian Authority, boycotted an emergency summit of the Arab
League, which had been intended as a show of support for Hamas supremo
Khaled Mashal.
Then there is Egypt. For years, it took an ambivalent view of Hamas:
partly worried by the threat it poses to its own secular regime, partly
delighted by the trouble it causes Israel. Now the Mubarak government at
last understands that Hamas is also a strategic threat to Egypt. "An
Iranian base can play against Egypt the same way it played against
Israel," says the official. Almost as an aside, he adds that the timing of
Israel's operation in Gaza was dictated in part by the assessment that
Hamas was just months away from obtaining longer-range missiles that could
reach Cairo as easily as Tel Aviv.

Now the Israeli government is prepared to believe that the Egyptians will
finally clamp down on the smuggling. Israel might even allow Egypt to
deploy its army in greater force in the Sinai, despite the provisions
against it in the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty.
Finally there is Iran. "They have drawn a lesson," says the official.
"Once again, they saw that Israel has a good air force and good
intelligence, and that the combination of the two can be deadly. Unlike in
2006, they saw a well-trained ground force. They found that asymmetrical
warfare does not always play for them; that we can use asymmetrical
approaches to overpower an asymmetrical threat."
All this, of course, could be overturned the moment Iran goes nuclear and
attempts to thwart Israel's freedom of action. Nor is it foreordained that
Israel will enjoy the relatively favorable international circumstances
that facilitated the past three weeks of war, or that Hamas will perform
poorly the next time. "Usually, the one who loses does his homework
better," observes the official.
Bottom line: Israel has scored an impressive tactical victory. But it has
missed the strategic opportunity to rid itself of the menace on its
doorstep. In the Middle East, opportunities don't always knock twice.
Write to

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?