|
It takes place every night.
At 9 PM New York time Piers Morgan takes to airwaves at CNN where he interviews celebrities, politicians and newsmakers. Recently, he was in Israel, where he dedicated the full hour to a face-to-face with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The next night he talked to PLO representative to the U.S., Maen Rashid Areikat who responded to Netanyahu’s claim that Israel had no partner for peace. The PLO representative made it clear. “The Palestinians have already made an enormous compromise for the sake of peace,” he claimed. “They have agreed to a two-state solution.” Wow! Silly me! Why didn’t I think of that? Why did this down-to-earth veracity never cross my mind? I guess, my logical reasoning points me to believe that when one offers to give away something he is not in the possession of and will never be, he engages in a con game. For all I know, Israel could play along, provided that con games are in fashion nowadays. Israel could counter offer: “Dear Mr. Areikat, our deal is even better than a two-state solution. We offer Hawaii, Saudi Arabia and Norway, and if you are not fully satisfied, we will throw in New Jersey and the Brooklyn Bridge, merely for dessert.” Problem is, rules in the Middle East are not symmetric. The Arabs are allowed to lie, to pretend, to double-cross. They are allowed to commit war crimes by claiming “resistance.” They can be charming in English when speaking to western reporters and politicians, then be contradictory, reversing their positions when speaking in Arabic to their own people. In contrast, should Israel attempt any of these tactics, the sky will open and the acid will pour down in a tornado-packed thunderstorm. Sorry, the Jewish state is not allowed to play by the same rules… Damn! Case in point — the massacre in Itamar, an Israeli settlement in the Samarian hills, and its aftermath—it took place a couple of weeks ago. Palestinian terrorists broke into the home of Udi and Ruth Fogel and murdered the parents and their three children. The killers slit the sleeping children’s throat, stabbed them in the heart, then stabbed the parents. Following the horrific slaughter, Palestinians in the Gaza strip handed out candy and pastries, celebrating their great triumph. The Al-Qassam Brigades, a branch of Hamas, argued that the murder of Israeli settlers was permitted by international law. (Note the key rule they are playing by. They are allowed, I guess). A day later, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki, voiced doubt that the killers could have been Palestinian “The slaughter of people like this by Palestinians,’’ he claimed, “is unprecedented.’’ Really? Or does he get an F in history? No F. He knows he is lying. Al-Malki merely employs the “swindling rule,” another tenet allowed under Palestinian’s constitution. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas went on Israel’s Channel 2 and condemned the massacre. He was a loveable peacemaker on Israeli TV, a charming idol among the Israeli left. He called it “a disgraceful act, inhuman and immoral.” The world, including left leaning Israelis were impressed. “Abbas is a partner for peace,” they concluded. How could Netanyahu claim otherwise? But wait. Abbas never made it clear, never said it in Arabic to his own people. He did not try to stop the continuous incitement against Israel in the Palestinian towns. On the contrary, he failed to cease his glorification campaign of Palestinian terrorists and child killers. In fact, he kept on idolizing them as heroes, role model martyrs. What’s more, PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad honored female terrorists, including a terrorist who placed a bomb in a bus station. His praise for those terrorists came only a few hours before a bomb was placed at a bus stop in Jerusalem killing one woman and injuring 50. Fayyad later condemned that attack in English. There is plenty of evidence that incitement and brainwashing of the young, teaching hatred of Jews and of Israel, rewriting of history and falsifying truths constitutes a full-fledged industry within the Palestinian territories. The celebrations in Gaza in the wake of the latest massacre in Itamar merely serve to highlight that point. When the Palestinian Authority talks about the two-state solution, they are saying that they want Israel to dismantle its West Bank security check-points. They want the West Bank cleansed of Jews. They want more freedom of movement and ease in launching terror attacks on Israeli civilians. They dream of cooking the next phase — unifying the two-states under a single Islamic regime. If you don’t believe it, go learn Arabic. Listen to what they say in their own language; find out what lies they teach their young. Understand their con game.
1 Comment
The latest escalation of rocket and mortar attacks from Gaza on Israel’s civilian population is a new phase in the unremitting conflict between Israel and Hamas.
Israel’s retaliatory response to these attacks has not been successful in breaking them off or slowing them down. On the contrary, rocket and mortar attacks seemed to have gained momentum in response to Israel’s reaction. The irony of it all comes to light with Hamas’s announcement that it will cease its offensive if Israel puts a stop to its acts of violence against Gaza. Apparently, Hamas has gained expertise in playing a victim who retaliates in self-defense. The fact that they have been initiating inexhaustible acts of violence against the Jewish state since who knows when is notwithstanding. Israel must not act on Hamas’s fake offer. This is not a sincere offer: it’s a test. Hamas knows that once they cease their fire, Israel will stop retaliating. There is no need for their seemingly peaceful proclamations. Nevertheless, Israel’s acceptance of that fake offer will signal a weakness and lack of resolve on Israel’s part. It will be interpreted by Arabs as a license to kill Jews without bearing any consequences. The next peace initiative must come from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government. Israel should be the one making conditional ceasefire offers to Hamas, not the other way around. These offers should trail one more campaign to defeat and humiliate Hamas. Peace offers must be made from a position of strength. Otherwise they encourage and invite more aggression, since they signal a noteworthy weakness, a surrender. Historical examples bear out proofs that appeasing a ruthless enemy induces further hostilities, whereas offering peace to a vanquished foe provides for stability and true peace in its aftermath. So far, Israeli responses to Hamas’s attacks were confined to destroying buildings, tunnels and other inorganic targets. This must change. Israel should destroy these structures regardless of other terror acts by Hamas. Tunnels dug under the border between Gaza and Israel constitute serious acts of aggression on their own. They must be destroyed as soon as they are discovered. Israel should stop retaliating. The Jewish state should get down to eradicating— go after the evil leadership, make it personal, issue a fatwa on their heads, help them meet with their 72 Virgins, sooner rather than later. Once these Hamas terrorists feel the heat on their own skin, they will come to their senses; they will make genuine efforts to cool it; they will beg for an unconditional ceasefire. There is only one way Israel should deal with Hamas — make them an offer they can’t refuse. As forces loyal to Libya’s ruler, Moammar Qadhafi, continued their drive eastward toward the rebel stronghold of Benghazi, The Arab League has called for an urgent “humanitarian based” no-fly zone over Libya to be imposed by the US and its European allies.
Sunday talk shows on the major TV networks across the U.S. paraded Arab and Middle East expert-guests who argued that foreign (i.e., Euro-American) intervention in the Libyan civil war should be limited to an imposition of a no-fly zone. The experts explained that any introduction of Euro-American troops or even military advisors on the ground in Libya may backfire in view of the fact that the rest of the Arab world may interpret that move as a western imperialistic attempt to influence and control events, tilt the situation toward western interests. Aside from this senseless paranoia, typical of Arabs’ stance toward NATO in general and the U.S. in particular, an imposition of a no-fly zone is not a trivial, riskless matter. It requires a phased approach, where its first chapter involves the destruction of the entire Libyan air defense systems including military airports, military aircraft, ground-to-air missile batteries, radar systems, command and control systems, and more. In short, phase one is a “shock-and-awe” stage resembling the first days of the Iraq war. In other words, imposition of a no-fly zone is a full-scale assault. It’s a war. People will be killed, some of whom will be innocent civilians caught in the crossfire. And even if mistakes never come about, Libyan President Moammar Qadhafi will make certain that pictures and movies of staged massacres become major hits on Youtube, al Jazeera, and the rest of the international media. He will play to turn public opinion against the U.S. and Europe. After all, movie production of seeming massacres presented as authentic news is an Arab specialty. The Arab League wants the U.S. and NATO to launch a war on Qadhafi, to help the Libyan rebels defeat the dictator, while, all the while, making it look as if the Libyan people, on their own, were able to overthrow their ruthless tyrant. Although most people find the above plan reasonable, in spite of the risk involved, I tend to see it as a shortsighted, unfortunate design. My first problem has to do with the question of responsibility. Why should the Euro-American forces lead the way? Where is the formidable Egyptian military? Where is the best American-trained, American-equipped Middle Eastern war machine? If the Egyptians can’t handle such a “simple humanitarian act,” what was the purpose of building their military up to that sky-scraping level? Why do the Arabs always look to the West to take care of their own dirty laundry? And why is the West willing to go ahead and comply? Are they our naughty children? Are we their Jewish mama? The Arab League wants the U.S. and NATO to impose a no-fly zone over Libya. The Saudis want the U.S. to bomb Iran for their own sake. The Palestinian Arabs want the U.S. to force Israel to hand them out an independent state, cleansed of Jews, without consenting to non-violence, without ceasing their anti-Semitic incitement, or the need to abide by any former agreement with the Jewish state, without ending the conflict by recognizing Israel as a Jewish state. When will these Arabs grow up, take matters into their own hands, for their own good, help each other while utilizing their huge wealth, and behave more like the responsible western-minded caring people? The U.S. and Europe should stay out of Libya. If the Arab League wants a no-fly zone over Qadhafi’s head, let them have our permission; let them go ahead and move on it — not the other way around. In its aftermath, no Arab propaganda will be able to blame the West for its imperialistic, satanic tendencies. An imposition of a no-fly zone by a neighboring Arab country like Egypt will be a welcome shift of a long-lasting paradigm. Can you imagine an Arab country going to war for the sake of protecting human rights? What a fabulous dream. Except, there is a greater issue. We all want Qadhafi to go. (Some wish that he moves to Venezuela, others want him to go to hell.). At the same time, the no-fly zone, even if imposed by the U.S. and its European allies, does not guarantee the realization of that objective. Qadhafi may still win. He may still massacre the defeated rebels, their families, their relatives, their friends, and all those suspected of colluding against him. His winning odds are north of 50 percent even in the absence of air power. If we go to war (and as I argued earlier, an imposition of a no-fly zone is war), then let’s win; let’s go directly after the tyrant; let’s bomb his tent, kill his sheep; let’s demand his surrender lest he prefers his 72 Virgins. Let’s go after the real target; let’s pull off our true objective. It’s easier, it’s simpler, it’s less risky. Forget the no-fly zone. Let’s just win! Short Bio Dr. Avi Perry, a talk show host at Paltalk News Network (PNN), is the author of "Fundamentals of Voice Quality Engineering in Wireless Networks," and more recently, "72 Virgins," a thriller about the covert war on Islamic terror. He was a VP at NMS Communications, a Bell Laboratories - distinguished staff member and manager, as well as a delegate of the US and Lucent Technologies to the ITU—the UN International Standards body in Geneva, a professor at Northwestern University, as well as an Intelligence officer at the IDF and the Israeli Government. He may be reached through his web site www.aviperry.org |
Categories
All
|
