Professor Judith Butler's "progressive" terrorists.
“Understanding Hamas/Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the left, that are part of a global left, is extremely important,“ proclaimed leftist Columbia University visiting professor Judith Butler, who is also an executive member of the Faculty for Israeli-Palestinian Peace in the United States and The Jenin Theatre in Palestine. Then, in a disclaimer so typical of the leftist apologists for terrorist organizations cloaked as “resistance fighters,” Professor Butler assured us that she does not favor violence.
Hezbollah and Hamas, like all terrorist organizations, are defined by the violence they regularly commit against innocent civilians. Both have called for the destruction of Israel by any means necessary. Not only do they aim rockets and arm suicide bombers to deliberately target women and children. They use their own women and children as human shields and human bombs. Indeed, they glorify the “martyrdom” of young girls.
For example, here is an excerpt from an Al-Aqsa TV (Hamas) phone interview broadcast on January 22, 2010 on Hamas TV kids' program, Tomorrow's Pioneers:
Host to girl on phone: "How was it for you during the [Gaza] war ? Were you afraid that you would die, that you would leave this world?"
Girl: "No. I wasn't afraid. I wished for Shahada (Martyrdom) -- Shahada for Allah."
Host: "How wonderful. Even this little girl - how old are you?"
Host: "[She] is not more than ten years old, and wants to die as a Shahida (Martyr) for Allah. We all wish for this [Shahada]."
Is this really what self-declared feminists such as Judith Butler wish for little Palestinian girls? To die violently as a “martyr” reciting a memorized script? No, she would likely say, but she would nevertheless insist that Hamas and Hezbollah are still worth supporting for their non-violent “political” and “charitable” activities.
In reality, their “political” and “charitable” arms feed their militant operations, much as tumor blood vessels bring the nutrients to cancer cells that those cells need to grow. They are all part of one indivisible whole. But leftists like Butler pretend that such “anti-imperialist” groups, as they call them, can compartmentalize their “progressive” deeds from their armed activities.
Hezbollah Secretary General Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah demonstrated what his organization is really all about when he proclaimed on the last day of the twentieth century that “we will write our history with blood." He was aiming his remarks against Israelis, whom he promised “will see more suicide attacks.” But his hatred is not reserved just for Israel.
During a February, 2006 speech he led a crowd in chants, "America, America you are the Great Satan … America, America, the enemy of the Muslims.” At the time, he was hosting radical professor Noam Chomsky, a great admirer of Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations and reviler of his home country, the United States. And, going further than Butler, Chomsky said that he had no problem supporting Hezbollah’s use of arms. After all, he rationalized, they were fighting “imperialistic forces.” Lebanese observers who heard Chomsky’s unequivocal support for Hezbollah were not impressed. One such observer, quoted in the Lebanese weblog Ya Libnan, said: "Chomsky needs to live here for a while to understand what happened during the past 30 years and why most Lebanese are against the Hezbollah arms."
Chomsky and his comrades on the Left couldn’t care less what happens to real people as a result of the actions of terrorist groups like Hezbollah. Any group that hates the “Great Satan” has got to be alright for the Chomskyites, who meanwhile seek comfort and security in the land they so glibly condemn.
Such willful moral inversion is not confined to academia, of course. For example, former U.S. ambassador to Iraq and Gaza flotilla spokesman Edward Peck said after meeting with a group of Hamas leaders, including Hamas's leader, Khaled Mashaal: “These guys were entirely rational." Peck added that he found Mashaal to be "moderate in many senses."
Mashaal projects a moderate image to Westerners when it serves Hamas’s interests, much as its parent the Muslim Brotherhood does. But it is all taqiyya – a bunch of lies – meant to deceive the gullible like Peck.
For example, in interviews with Western journalists, Mashaal said that Hamas would be open to a long-term hudna (truce) with Israel so long as Israel ended its occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza, and agreed to the right of return of millions of Palestinians living in refugee camps or exile.
"We are ready to resort to a peaceful way, purely peaceful way without blood and weapons, as long as we obtain our Palestinian demands," Mashaal told CNN in an interview last November. In other words, if Israel concedes away its Jewish identity and capitulates to all of the Palestinian jihadists’ demands, there need not be any bloodshed. But only a month later, emerging from a door built into a large-scale model of a rocket fired at Israel, Mashaal whipped up the masses in Gaza celebrating Hamas’s 25th anniversary: “We are not giving up any inch of Palestine. It will remain Islamic and Arab for us and nobody else. Jihad and armed resistance is the only way. We cannot recognize Israel’s legitimacy.”
“Resistance” is the code word used by groups like Hezbollah and Hamas and their supporters, meant to justify their violence and distinguish it from terrorism. Richard Falk, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights and avid apologist for jihadist violence, illustrated this perverse logic when he wrote in Al Jazeera last December:
“It gives perspective to imagine the situation being reversed as it was during the Nazi occupation of France or the Netherlands during World War II. Resistance fighters were uniformly perceived in the liberal West as unconditional heroes, and no critical attention was given as to whether the tactics used unduly imperiled innocent civilian lives. Those who lost their lives in such a resistance were honoured as martyrs. Meshaal and other Hamas leaders have made similar arguments on several occasions, in effect asking what are Palestinians supposed to do in the exercise of resistance given their circumstances, which have persisted for so long, given the failures of traditional diplomacy and the UN to secure their rights under international law.”
Here is an idea for what Palestinians could be doing. How about negotiating in good faith for a two-state solution that recognizes Israel’s legitimacy as a Jewish state living in peace and security alongside an independent Palestinian state? For more than six decades Palestinians leaders have refused multiple opportunities for just such an outcome. Instead, as Hamas’s leader continues to demonstrate, they hide behind the nice-sounding but false narrative of victimhood and “resistance” to “neo-colonialists” in order to justify their all-or-nothing campaign of jihadism to the death. Perhaps the current Israeli-Palestinian negotiations now underway will lead to a more positive outcome, but don’t bet on it.
The United Nations, for which Falk is a Special Rapporteur, enables such behavior by failing to come to agreement on a definition of “terrorism,” let alone apply the term to Hamas and Hezbollah where it belongs. These jihadist groups and their supporters use the United Nations as the stage where they act out their fictions of Zionist and Western crimes against them. Zionist Israel and its “Great Satan” protector, the United States, are cast as arch villains conspiring to control the world. Any human rights violations alleged to have been committed by Hamas or Hezbollah are either denied altogether or shrugged off in comparison to the supposed inhumanity of Israel and Western democratic societies. Suicide bombers are morphed into heroic resistance fighters.
These groups count on Western guilt and ambivalence to advance their cause. The European Union provides a perfect example of a Western organization that took far too long to arrive at what ended up being only a half-way measure in dealing with Hezbollah’s record of global terrorism.
On July 22, 2013, the Foreign Affairs Council of the European Union finally, after years of malignant neglect, agreed to add Hezbollah's military wing to its list of terrorist organizations. This should have been a no-brainer, but it was made possible only after confirmation by Bulgarian government officials that Hezbollah had been responsible for conducting a terrorist attack there in July 2012 and after a Hezbollah operative was caught in Cyprus while preparing for a similar attack in February 2013. Hezbollah’s military support for the Assad regime in Syria also helped push the reluctant EU to do what it should have done years ago. And even so, it still tries to thread the needle between Hezbollah's military wing and its political wing, instead of flatly declaring the entire organization a terrorist entity as the United States did in 1995. In fact, as discussed above, Hezbollah’s military and political operations are intertwined, making any distinction between them completely artificial. Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah mocked the EU decision, "Soak your terrorist list in water and drink it…I will propose the appointment of members of the party’s military wing in the prospective government."
Downplaying the danger of groups like Hezbollah and Hamas is a recipe for disaster. Stop the deception and call them out for what they truly are – jihadists who use terrorism as their tactic of choice to realize their malignant intentions. Israel is merely the canary in the coal mine. The ultimate target is all infidels, especially those with Western secular democratic values.
Don't miss Jamie Glazov's video interview with Daniel Greenfield about the Left's Unholy Alliance with Radical Islam (beginning at 5:00 mark):
Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.