<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; condemnation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/condemnation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 07:56:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>Condemnations and Double Standards</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ari-lieberman/condemnations-and-double-standards/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=condemnations-and-double-standards</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ari-lieberman/condemnations-and-double-standards/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2014 05:45:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ari Lieberman]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[condemnation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jen Psaki]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[turkey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White House]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=245398</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What if Israel had destroyed 800 homes in Gaza instead of the Egyptians? ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/u-s-state-department-spokesperson-jen-psaki.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-245399" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/u-s-state-department-spokesperson-jen-psaki-409x350.jpg" alt="u-s-state-department-spokesperson-jen-psaki" width="312" height="267" /></a>Let us engage in a brief thought experiment. Imagine three US service members disembarking off their ship docked in the Israeli port of Haifa. They paint the town but are suddenly and unexpectedly surrounded by a group of 12 or so hooligans, who yell epithets at them, call them “murderers,” throw garbage at them, rough them up and then place bags over their heads. Imagine further that the hoodlums are caught and arrested by Israeli authorities but are inexplicably released shortly thereafter.</p>
<p>Let us engage in another thought experiment. Imagine that Israel, under the pretext of ensuring its security, dynamites eight-hundred “Palestinian” homes. The Israelis argue that smuggling tunnels under some of those homes warrant drastic action and announce their intention to construct a barrier where those homes once stood, displacing ten-thousand residents.</p>
<p>These two incidents actually occurred but not in Israel. On November 12, in a sickening display of brute thuggery, three US sailors in Istanbul were <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/12/politics/turkey-navy-sailors-bags-over-heards/"><span style="color: #0433ff;">assaulted</span></a> by a group of Turkish nationalists. They were roughed up, humiliated, had bags stuffed over their heads and chased to chants of “Yankee go home.” Some of the suspects were apprehended and despite the fact that they showed little remorse, were inexplicably <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/11/13/turkish-nationalist-group-defiant-after-attack-on-us-navy-sailors/"><span style="color: #0433ff;">released</span></a> by Turkish authorities.</p>
<p>The second incident, involving the wanton <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/30/world/middleeast/egypt-sinai-peninsula-gaza-buffer-zone.html?_r=0"><span style="color: #0433ff;">destruction</span></a> of some eight-hundred homes and the displacement of some ten-thousand residents occurred in the Egyptian controlled part of Rafah that straddles the border between Sinai and the Hamas enclave of Gaza. It seems that the Egyptians had had enough of Hamas’s shenanigans and decided to act resolutely after as many as 31 Egyptian soldiers were killed in an attack that the Egyptian government blamed on Hamas.</p>
<p>Now let us return to our thought experiment. What was the State Department’s reaction to these two occurrences? In the latter example, there was simply no reaction, only silence. There were no condemnations from John Kerry, no claims by Jen Psaki that such drastic measures were disproportionate and no protests from Obama shills Ben Rhodes, <a href="http://www.timesofisrael.com/lecturing-us-on-security-as-the-rockets-fly-in/"><span style="color: #0433ff;">Phillip Gordon</span></a> and Josh Earnest that such sweeping actions amount to collective punishment, are a source of regional instability and present obstacles to peace.</p>
<p>In the former case, the State Department did issue a condemnation but that’s as far as it went. The hooligans responsible for the cowardly attack took their cues directly from their anti-American, Islamist government. During his 12-year reign, President Recep Erdogan worked tirelessly to create a toxic environment conducive to such base anti-American displays. More astonishingly was the muted response from the State Department after the charges against those responsible for the assault were <a href="http://www.voanews.com/content/assault-sailors-highlights-turkish-anger-us/2519444.html"><span style="color: #0433ff;">dropped</span></a>. The lawless message Turkey is conveying to the United States is clear; your servicemen and women can be humiliated and assaulted on Turkish soil with impunity.</p>
<p>Had any of these incidents occurred in Israel, the State Department would have been up in arms. If there’s any doubt about that assertion, consider Jen Psaki’s comments concerning Israel’s decision to <a href="http://www.timesofisrael.com/us-condemns-terrorist-home-demolition-directive/"><span style="color: #0433ff;">demolish the home</span></a> of a terrorist responsible for crushing a pedestrian with a stolen excavator in August.</p>
<p>Psaki condemned the Israeli decision stating that it amounted to “collective punishment.” In Psaki’s eyes, the destruction of 800 Rafah homes, most of which have no connection to illicit activity, suits the State Department just fine but the targeted demolition of a single home belonging to a confirmed depraved Palestinian terrorist amounts to “collective punishment.”</p>
<p>Now consider the administration’s lackadaisical response to the humiliation of its servicemen on Turkish soil and subsequent dropping of all charges against the culprits by Turkish prosecutors. The State Department’s silence on the matter is deafening. By contrast, when a Palestinian terrorist with U.S. citizenship was shot while throwing gasoline bombs at vehicular traffic, Obama’s State Department went into high gear expressing its “<a href="http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/10/233356.htm"><span style="color: #0433ff;">deepest condolences</span></a>” to the terrorist’s family and demanding a “speedy and transparent investigation” into the shooting.</p>
<p>It appears that the Obama administration, which treats friends like enemies and enemies like friends, has adopted one standard for Israel and another for the autocratic governments that surround it. While Russia invades Ukraine, Turkey absorbs chunks of Cyprus and China continues its ethnic cleansing and occupation of Tibet as well as creeping annexation of areas within the South and East China seas, the administration appears besotted by the idea of tearing Israel away from parts of its ancestral land and creating yet another hostile and dysfunctional Arab country right on Israel’s doorstep. The administration’s continued haranguing of one of its closest allies is indicative of the disdain Obama has for Israel and serves only to embolden its genocidal enemies.  But then again, maybe that’s precisely what he wants.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ari-lieberman/condemnations-and-double-standards/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Israel’s Morally Impossible Self-Defense</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/richard-l-cravatts/israels-morally-impossible-self-defense/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=israels-morally-impossible-self-defense</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/richard-l-cravatts/israels-morally-impossible-self-defense/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2014 04:49:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard L. Cravatts]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[condemnation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hamas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=236821</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The only nation that is required to enter a suicide pact with its enemies.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/gh2.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-236822" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/gh2-450x253.jpg" alt="Israeli soldiers stand in front of Western Wall in Jerusalem's Old City" width="327" height="184" /></a>Seeming to give credence to Orwell’s observation that “Everyone believes in the atrocities of the enemy and disbelieves in those of his own side, without ever bothering to examine the evidence,” the world’s attention has turned once again to the clash between Hamas and Israel, as the Jewish state launches its ground incursion into Gaza in what is being called Operation Protective Edge. And predictably, as the body count rises on the Palestinian side, the moral arbiters of acceptable political behavior have begun condemning the Jewish state for its perceived abuses in executing its national self-defense.</p>
<p>Forgetting that Israel’s current campaign was necessitated by ceaseless rocket and mortar assaults on its southern towns from Hamas-controlled Gaza, international leaders and diplomats have initiated their moral hectoring of Israel as it attempts to shield its citizens from harm. Britain’s deputy Prime Minister, Nicolas Clegg, was <a href="http://www.barenakedislam.com/2014/07/18/uk-deputy-prime-minister-says-israeli-strikes-on-gaza-are-deliberately-disproportionate/">adamant</a> that Israel cease its self-defense. “I really would now call on the Israeli government to stop,” he said. “They have proved their point,” and had done so, in his opinion, through a deliberately “disproportionate form of collective punishment.”</p>
<p>UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, who presides over a morally bankrupt group comprised largely of despotic, authoritarian regimes, <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3179848/posts">was quick to decide</a> that “Too many” Palestinian civilians have been killed, and that he “feels a sense of responsibility for the Palestinians who, especially in the Gaza Strip, have long been denied the sense of freedom and dignity that they deserve,” presumably overlooking those same human rights being denied to Israelis who have lived under a rain of rockets since 2005.</p>
<p>But the most insidious refrain, one uttered only when Israel’s enemies are killed (certainly not when Jews are murdered), is that Israel’s military response is too aggressive, that the force and effect of the excursion into Gaza are beyond what is permitted under human rights law and the rules of war. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, for instance, <a href="http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2014/07/09/Israel-hits-160-Gaza-Strip-targets-overnight.html">brushed aside any talk of justifiable self-defense</a>, asserting that “. . . Israel is not defending itself, it is defending settlements, its main project.” Moreover, the deaths so far of some 200 Palestinians in the latest incursion is, according to Mr. Abbas, tantamount to “. . . genocide—the killing of entire families is genocide by Israel against our Palestinian people,” indicating both an ignorance of what that term actually signifies and a blindness to actual genocides occurring presently at the hand of his co-religionists elsewhere in the world.</p>
<p>The UN’s Humanitarian Coordinator for the Occupied Palestinian Territories, James Rawley, <a href="http://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/remarks-humanitarian-coordinator-occupied-palestinian">had thoughts</a> only for the Palestinian victims of the conflict, sanctimoniously announcing that the Israeli response must be “proportionate” to the threats posed by Hamas attacks, and that “Our thoughts must first be with those many [Palestinian] civilians who have already lost their lives, and the even greater number of who have suffered physical or psychological injuries.”</p>
<p>The remonstrations of its many and far-flung critics aside, Israel is not the international outlaw here, but a victim now involved in a defensive countermeasure to terrorism against its citizenry. In fact, in a 2008 <a href="http://www.jcpa.org/text/puzzle1.pdf">report</a>, Justus Reid Weiner and Dr. Avi Bell, two legal scholars at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, noted that Hamas’s shelling of civilian targets within Israel’s borders—the direct cause of the current conflict—clearly violates international law and requires a military response from Israel, even though world observers have been oddly silent on the Palestinian incitement that is the cause of the present clashes.</p>
<p>“The Palestinian attacks,” they wrote, “violate one of the most basic rules of international humanitarian law, the rule of distinction, which requires combatants to aim all their attacks at legitimate targets – enemy combatants or objects that contribute to enemy military actions. Violations of the rule of distinction – attacks deliberately aimed at civilians or protected objects as such – are war crimes,” exactly what Hamas has been committing with its relentless rocket assaults. Hamas militants not only commit a war crime each time they lob a rocket or mortar into Israel from Gaza by virtue of the fact that the targets of those attacks are specifically and purposely civilian, not military, assets—a violation of the “distinction” rule—but also, in not wearing military uniforms and often posing as civilians, Hamas terrorists are also committing another crime, that of perfidy.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.icrc.org/ihl/4e473c7bc8854f2ec12563f60039c738/8a9e7e14c63c7f30c12563cd0051dc5c?OpenDocument">Article 48 of Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions of 1949</a> is very clear about this prohibited behavior of combatants, stating that “[i]n order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.” Since the rockets Hamas aims at southern Israeli towns are launched randomly into civilian enclaves, and lack the technical sophistication to reliably be aimed at military targets even if that was Hamas’s actual intention, each of the 12,000 or so rockets that have come into Israel from Gaza since 2005 (including over 1000 this month alone) represents both an <em>causis belli</em> and a war crime.</p>
<p>“It is a central principle of just war theory,” <a href="http://strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/articles/09spring/walzer.pdf">observed</a> Dr. Michael Walzer, Professor Emeritus at the Institute for Advanced Study, “that the self-defense of a people or a country cannot be made morally impossible.” Israel faces that precise dilemma every time it is forced to suppress Palestinian aggression and protect its populace from unending rocket assaults, particularly since its actions are widely and almost immediately denounced as excessive, disproportionate, and in violation of international law. Perceived as having unjustly dispossessed the Palestinians and accused of still occupying both the West Bank but also Gaza (and holding the latter under siege), and collectively punishing the Palestinian Arabs living there, Israel has been stripped of its moral standing in the community of nations and so its attempts at self-defense are at best tolerated.</p>
<p>Rather than serving as a deterrent against attacks of terrorists, Israel’s military strength and capabilities are instead looked at as an unfair advantage in the asymmetrical war in which it finds itself. Few leaders in the West and none in the Arab world ever condemn Hamas for its chronic, unlawful terroristic behavior toward Israel, but the moment Israel undertakes military action it receives strict warnings for restraint, censure for its success in neutralizing Hamas strongholds, and eventual condemnation for the inevitable deaths of civilians—the collateral damage that is the tragic byproduct of conflicts fought in neighborhoods rather than battlefields.</p>
<p>Israel, which is promiscuously condemned for committing “crimes against humanity” and human rights violations, not only waited years before responding to Palestinian terrorism, but then, in one of the most populous areas on earth, scrupulously followed the rule of distinction by precisely targeting Hamas terrorists and infrastructure, with minimal, though still unfortunate, collateral damage to the Gaza civilian population – a feat made all the more difficult by Hamas’s insidious tactic of embedding rocket launchers and armament stores within homes, apartment buildings, schools, and mosques in residential neighborhoods.</p>
<p>Combat in the crowded streets and alleys of Gaza obviously makes warfare more difficult for Israel, especially in its attempt to minimize civilian casualties while maximizing the suppression of enemy fire and attempting to neutralize Hamas’s ability to continue to pose a threat in the future. Since, as mentioned, Hamas militants do not wear identifying uniforms, and embed themselves within civilian environments, Israel’s effort to maintain “distinction”— that is, scrupulously determining who is a legitimate military target and who is a civilian— is normally challenging and dangerous. And, knowing that the world community is apt to be harsh about any civilian deaths that result from Israel’s offensive—even though it Hamas who has created the circumstances by which those civilians will and have perished—Israel has resorted to extraordinary measures to avoid the death of non-combatants, including “knocking” on roofs to warm of imminent bombardment, distributing flyers, and using other warning techniques, all of which compromise Israel’s strategic advantage while helping to minimize civilian deaths. Even so, when the inevitable Palestinian civilian deaths occur (which seem to be a welcomed part of Hamas’s cognitive war against Israel), Israel is accused of violating the rule of “proportionality,” the other aspect of warfare which international law requires that prohibits a military response that causes more civilian deaths than would be considered necessary in achieving a set military objective.</p>
<p>In fact, collateral damage – the accidental killing of civilians during military conflicts – is itself allowed by international law, provided the actions that caused the civilian deaths are not, according to Weiner and Bell, excessive in relation to the military need. But the fact that deaths occur in civilian populations – even what might be perceived as excessive deaths – are not in and of themselves indicative of violations of international law, and, says Weiner and Bell, “if a state, like Israel, is facing aggression, then proportionality addresses whether force was specifically used by Israel to bring an end to the armed attack against it.”</p>
<p>The practice of Hamas of using human shields, as well as storing munitions and weaponry in civilian neighborhoods and non-military buildings, also absolves Israel from some of the proportionality requirements, since the use of human shields and the perfidy of Hamas in the first place puts the fault for civilian deaths on it, rather than Israel. Israel indiscriminately pummeling Gaza with bombardment from the air—with many resulting civilian deaths—would violate the rule of proportionality and could be considered a war crime; Israel responding to rocket fire from an apartment building and, in the process, killing civilians (even a large number of them) who were in the building with Hamas combatants is allowed, as long as Israel’s intent was to achieve a military objective and not just to exact revenge or capriciously murder civilians. Even errors which lead to the death of civilians are acceptable, as long as the military purpose was the motivating factor in the assault, since, as Jonathan F. Keiler<em>,</em> former captain in the Army&#8217;s Judge-Advocate General Corps, <a href="http://www.army.mil/article/25298/The_End_of_Proportionality/">noted</a>,“we do not determine criminality based on outcome, but intent.”</p>
<p>Proportionality also does not require that the number of deaths—either of Hamas militants or Palestinian civilians—be equal to the number of deaths suffered by Israel, or to damage done to Israeli infrastructure or military targets. One moral challenge in asymmetrical war is that observers in the world community intuitively feel that Israel’s disproportionate military strength makes the conflict fundamentally “unfair,” that because it is technologically and logistically able to exact more harm on the Palestinians, Israel should restrain itself to minimize enemy casualties. That may be a compelling emotional response, but it is, of course, not a legal or moral argument with any weight. In fact, it is precisely because of Israel’s military superiority that a rational adversary would have been deterred from attacking in the first place.</p>
<p>The fact that Hamas chose to challenge an adversary with disproportionate military capability indicates that the decision was either irrational or some type of collective death wish; in either instance, the Palestinians, and the world at large, cannot now expect Israel not to use every means possible to protect its citizenry from both immediate and future assaults by genocidal terrorists who wish to murder Jews and destroy the Jewish state. No nation is required to enter a suicide pact with its enemies, and no nation can be expected to wait until enemy rockets successfully reach an apartment building or school, forcing Israel to play, in the <a href="http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB123085925621747981">words</a> of Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, “Russian roulette with its children.”</p>
<p><strong>Richard L. Cravatts, PhD, President of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, is the author of <em>Genocidal Liberalism: The University’s Jihad Against Israel &amp; Jews</em>.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank"><strong>Click here</strong></a><strong>.   </strong></p>
<p><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><strong>Subscribe</strong></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <em>The Glazov Gang</em>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>Facebook.</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/richard-l-cravatts/israels-morally-impossible-self-defense/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>44</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pro-Palestinianism: A Movement of Hate, Pt. I</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/robert-harris/a-movement-of-hate-pt-i/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=a-movement-of-hate-pt-i</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/robert-harris/a-movement-of-hate-pt-i/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 May 2010 04:01:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rob Harris]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aengus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[collective entity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[condemnation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[course]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fellow irishman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Galloway]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[haughtiness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[invasiveness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ireland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[israeli palestinian conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jerusalem post]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jordan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[matter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[palestinian movement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proper recognition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[question]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[symbol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Syria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tiny state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warsaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[western attitudes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=59827</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The ugly face of the Western pro-Palestinian movement. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/mideast-israel-palestinian-human-rights-2009-12-11-8-10-38.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-59844" title="mideast-israel-palestinian-human-rights-2009-12-11-8-10-38" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/mideast-israel-palestinian-human-rights-2009-12-11-8-10-38-300x193.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="193" /></a></p>
<p><em>[Editor&#8217;s note: This is the first installment of a four-part series. To view later segments of &#8220;Pro-Palestinianism: A Movement of Hate,&#8221; please click: <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2010/05/11/a-movement-of-hate-pt-ii/">Part II</a></em><em>, <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2010/05/12/a-movement-of-hate-pt-iii/">Part III</a></em><em> and <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2010/05/13/a-movement-of-hate-pt-iv/">Part IV</a></em><em> .]</em></p>
<p>It should be patently obvious to anyone with a passing interest in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that the Western pro-Palestinian movement has long since gone beyond the bounds of justifiable criticism and moral acceptability.</p>
<p>Israel is of course facing ever-increasing hostility at every level internationally. This immense hostility has largely been brought into effect by the populist successes of the Western anti-Israeli/pro-Palestinian movement so it is time to expose this collective entity to greater scrutiny &#8211; to ask difficult questions due to the significant power it now wields. This article seeks to establish that hatred is the driving force behind many elements of this movement, and since Israel is the sole existing Jewish nation, serious questions need to be asked about anti-Semitic sentiment.</p>
<p>A particular, rather unique haughtiness is one of the most notable features of Western attitudes towards Israel. Fellow Irishman Donnchadh O’Liathain wrote an article in the Jerusalem Post in 2004 describing the European attitude towards Israel: a dichotomy of “good Israelis” and “bad Israelis” – those who are pro-peace and those who are less so. The theme of his article was the invasiveness of attitudes towards Israel, an intense meddlesome desire to impose a solution on the conflict without proper recognition of Israel’s needs. It is indeed galling when the citizens and leaders of larger secure states that have luxuriated in peace for many decades, bar the occasional fracas in distant lands, pass judgement so readily on a tiny state surrounded by continuous extreme hostility, which is clearly not as a consequence of its actions but of its very existence. If we consider the fear experienced in the US after the tragedy of 9/11, and also consider the trauma and political changes experienced in other nations after very serious terrorist attacks, it is not difficult to see how such countries would respond if faced with similar conditions.</p>
<p>There are several forms of pro-Palestinianism which can be categorised in terms of extremism. Moderates think the Palestinians are largely the victims in this conflict and do not advocate terrorism at all and may even support a fairly just two-state solution. The second group support the Palestinian cause without endorsing the more extreme acts of Palestinian terrorism but nonetheless tend to find them “understandable” and may demand solutions that nullify Israel’s Jewish identity, e.g. the “right to return.” The most extreme group supports all acts of Palestinian terrorism no matter how debased or destructive to Israeli civilians. By implication they support a one-state solution – namely, a Palestinian state or a greater Jordan/Syria. This article focuses principally on the latter two groups of Palestinian supporters, which have grown greatly in popularity in the last decade. Such people are often highly vocal and may campaign vociferously for the Palestinian cause. The opinions of these people may require some interpretation as they might not be completely forthcoming with their views on the conflict. Those who have extreme opinions often appear to present their views as being milder than they truly are, hence the usual contention that they support peace. This would be especially important if they hold positions of power in influential political institutions or the media.</p>
<p>A pertinent question needs to be asked: what is the primary motivation of the Western anti-Israeli/pro-Palestinian movement? Is it a genuine concern for human rights, which is always admirable if not necessarily justified, or is it a rank anti-Semitism masquerading undercover of darkness as a concern for the Palestinians? Obviously, I subscribe to the latter opinion but whichever view the reader may endorse, one question should be addressed in order to clarify the matter at hand: where does legitimate sensible (i.e. reasonably fair and moderately justifiable) criticism of Israel end and become abusive condemnation that overtly goes beyond what is evidential? The answer indicates the sincerity and intent of the pro-Palestinian movement, for their words and actions ought to be their measure.</p>
<p>It is indeed important to recognise that no state should be above criticism, just as no individual or group should be above criticism for the simple reason that all agents have the capacity to commit acts that are harmful to others. Thus, the question here is not should Israel be criticised generally speaking but rather how is Israel being criticised?</p>
<p>A detailed understanding of the contrast between reasonable criticism and abusive condemnation would be useful &#8211; of course other word use with similar meaning is also applicable. Something is considered abusive where coercion or bullying occurs, where there is a desire to cause distress or harm. Abuse is described as the “Improper treatment or usage; application to a wrong or bad purpose; misuse; perversion; … verbal maltreatment; An unjust, corrupt or wrongful practice…; … insulting speech; abusive language.”/ [Wiktionary]. Condemnation is of course censure by attributing blame, strong disapproval or even demonization. An abusive condemnation would be highly damaging, distressing and motivated by ill intent, in which case it could well deliberately exceed what is clearly indicated in evidence. This would not simply be applicable to Israel as a state. It would apply to its citizens, its interests, and by its very nature the malicious intent could apply to Jewish people generally, of which Israel is principally composed.</p>
<p>While many conflicts are compared with World War II and aggressors are compared with the Nazis, this motif has never been more widely used than when judging Israel. No pro-Palestinian demonstration is complete without the symbol of the swastika within the Star of David on badges and placards. Indeed, this symbol more so than any other has come to represent the pro-Palestinian movement. Since the Star of David is also the prime symbol of Judaism it can also be clearly interpreted as a symbol highly abusive to the Jewish religion and those that constitute the Jewish people, especially due to the tragedy of the Holocaust. Comparing Israeli figures with leading Nazi figures is also not uncommon. In Ireland, during Operation Cast Lead, Sein Fein (IRA) member Aengus O’Snodaigh repeatedly compared the Israeli ambassador to Ireland with Josef Goebbels, the master propagandist, for merely trying to explain that the invasion was due to continued attacks. Divisive figures such as disgraced Scottish politician George Galloway declared during a UK protest last year: “Today, the Palestinian people in Gaza are the new Warsaw ghetto, and those who are murdering them are the equivalent of those who murdered the Jews in Warsaw in 1943.”</p>
<p>Palestinian sympathisers make it abundantly clear that Israel does not have a right to defend itself. Clearly some will say this is a misrepresentation: that in fact they criticise Israel’s response as being heavy handed. This may be true for some but the dominant theme in the pro-Palestinian monologue is that Palestinians have a right to “resist” as they put it, while Israel has no essential right to respond. This is clear time and time again in their argumentation.</p>
<p>Judging by the views held by more extreme pro-Palestinians it would appear that Palestinian terrorists have a right to do whatsoever they wish to Israeli citizens. We see very extreme language used in the media and even more so on internet websites throughout the West. It does become essentially irrelevant or morally justifiable if Hamas rains missiles on Israeli citizens because according to so many pro-Palestinians, Israel is (to borrow their commonly used terminology) a “pariah”, “colonial”, “apartheid”, “fascist”, “criminal”, “nazi”, “jihadist”, “terrorist” state. Israel is a state that butchers women and children, harvests Palestinians for body parts, and of course has “ethnically cleansed” the Palestinians. Israel has committed many “holocausts” against the Palestinians, so accordingly some even think it more reprehensible than the Third Reich. With such extraordinarily twisted extreme black and white understandings of the conflict that contravene the most obvious truths, it is little wonder that no justification of Israel’s right to defend itself will satisfy such individuals. No reasoned argument based on facts will be sufficient.</p>
<p>Considering such information, it is fair to say that very many (probably a majority) of pro-Palestinians have a very real hatred of Israel. Some may protest that this is not so but, for example, would any reasonably impartial observer with a modicum of fairness deny one state the right to respond to continued extreme aggression when it is a genuine affliction to its citizens? Would such a fair, impartial observer not accept that Jihadist Palestinian terrorism is part of the problem and its moral legitimization not a solution? To take a recent issue, many pro-Palestinians defended the Goldstone report because it is now yet another weapon in their arsenal to bash Israel. Would any impartial observer accept such a report when a Mrs. Mary Robinson, primary architect of the Durban I anti-Semitic hate-fest, declined to accept the biased brief? Any impartial observer would obviously accept justice must be fair, so why support it? Other than ill-intent, there can be no justification for continually propagating severe exaggerations and outright lies.</p>
<p>The issue of proportionality was frequently raised by Palestinian supporters during Cast Lead. It was often said that the rockets fired into Israel were actually home made or little more than flares. However, the principal rockets were Grad rockets supplied by Iran and simple yet quite potent Kassam. While such rockets have basic guidance systems they are nonetheless of a military grade. Grads have the capacity to destroy a house, for example. Hundreds raining down on towns leading up to the Israeli response was clearly not sustainable. Condemnation and talk of a holocaust swiftly followed even before the ground invasion. The association of Gaza with the Warsaw ghetto was a common motif. Pro-Palestinians characterise the dead in Gaza as primarily innocent civilians but it is worth noting various sources indicate 70 to 74% of those killed were males between the ages of 15 and 40 &#8211; the most relevant for combat.  Clearly the only acceptable Israeli response for Palestinian sympathisers was to put up with it, other than the ideal of surrender to Hamas. The inference that Israel had no right to defend its citizens can be asserted because no other rational conclusion to such arguments can be arrived upon. The issue of proportionality cannot be answered by simply discussing casualty figures. If the citizens of any state are exposed to intolerable conditions where they cannot go about their daily lives with a basic level of safety for an extended period of time, that state has a moral obligation to stop the forces causing that situation. Therefore, a proportional response is to take the necessary action to stop the attacks and prevent them from reoccurring within a reasonable timeframe; nothing more and nothing less.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/robert-harris/a-movement-of-hate-pt-i/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>37</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama’s OIC Envoy Didn’t Just Defend Al-Arian</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/justin-elizabeth-tabler/obama%e2%80%99s-oic-envoy-didn%e2%80%99t-just-defend-al-arian-2/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=obama%25e2%2580%2599s-oic-envoy-didn%25e2%2580%2599t-just-defend-al-arian-2</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/justin-elizabeth-tabler/obama%e2%80%99s-oic-envoy-didn%e2%80%99t-just-defend-al-arian-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 05:05:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Justin Elizabeth Tabler]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[al Qaeda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[article]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bigot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brandon Mayfield]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brotherhood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capt. James Yee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Columbus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[condemnation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conference]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cover-up]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[envoy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[front group]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hat tip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[house]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[indictment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[islamic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[islamic jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[José]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Gerstein]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Laila]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[last friday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Madrid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[material]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[material support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[middle east affairs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[muslim brotherhood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[muslim students association]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[N.Y.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ohio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oregon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Organization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organization of the islamic conference]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Padilla]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[palestinian islamic jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prison]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prosecution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prosecutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rashad Hussain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sami]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saudi Arabia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sense of duty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sharia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terror]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terror charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terrorist organization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TIME]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. In]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[united-states]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[washington report on middle east affairs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=51547</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rashad Hussain's disturbing stances on U.S. terrorist prosecutions.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/alarian.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-51551" title="alarian" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/alarian.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="484" /></a></p>
<p><strong>Visit <a href="http://www.newsrealblog.com/">Newsreal</a></strong></p>
<p>He condemned the United States for prosecuting just about everyone who was under indictment on terror charges at the time.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1511" target="_blank">Obama</a>’s newly-named Special Envoy to the <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7453" target="_blank">Organization of the Islamic Conference</a>, <a href="http://www.newsrealblog.com/?s=rashad+hussain" target="_blank">Rashad Hussain</a>, came under fire last week for statements he made in defense of <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6448" target="_blank">Palestinian Islamic Jihad</a>’s leader in the US, <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=671" target="_blank">Sami al-Arian</a>, as well as for having initially lied about making them. Hussain had said that al-Arian, who pled guilty to providing material support to a designated terrorist organization, was a victim of “politically motivated persecutions,” then claimed that Laila, Sami’s daughter had made the statements, not him.</p>
<p>The <a href="../2010/02/17/rashad-hussain%E2%80%99s-samigate/" target="_blank">cover-up</a> itself is interesting for a couple of reasons.  First, it was large.  The <em>Washington Report on Middle East Affairs</em> deleted two paragraphs from a 2004 article – the two paragraphs quoting Hussain – and then claimed that Archive.org was lying and implied that anyone who wonders what happened to the article is a bigot. The White House then erroneously echoed Hussain’s claim that Laila al-Arian had made the statements. Then, last Friday, Hussain <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/02/obamas-envoy-to-oic-admits-he-defended-jihad-terror-leader.html" target="_blank">came clean</a> and admitted to having said it all, while the White House admits nothing.</p>
<p>Second, the cover-up is intriguing because the reason why Hussain admitted to making the statements was not out of  some sense of duty or honor, especially after having shifted the blame to another person, but because he got caught red-handed. Josh Gerstein of the <em>Politico</em> <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/33210.html" target="_blank">obtained audio</a> from the 2004 <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6175" target="_blank">Muslim Students Association</a> conference at which he made the remarks.  (Hat tip: <a href="http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2010/02/21/obamas-special-envoy-spoke-out-for-more-terrorists-audio/" target="_blank">Creeping Sharia</a>.)</p>
<p>Gerstein’s article also reveals (although the audio above does not) that Hussain’s defense of al-Arian was part of a much broader condemnation of U.S. terrorist prosecutions, which should not be surprising since his speech took place at a conference for Muslim Brotherhood front group and he was a law student at the time. What <em>is</em> surprising is that he stuck up for just about every individual under indictment on terrorism charges at the time.</p>
<blockquote><p><a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/33210_Page3.html" target="_blank">Hussain cited:</a></p>
<p>— The court martial of <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2349" target="_blank">Capt. James Yee</a>, a Guantanamo chaplain initially  suspected of treason and later charged with adultery. All charges were  eventually dropped.</p>
<p>— The case of <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=703" target="_blank">Jose Padilla</a>, who was held without charge for more than three years as an enemy combatant on suspicions of trying to detonate a radiation-laced “dirty bomb” in the U.S. In 2006, more than a year after Hussain spoke, Padilla was charged in a terrorist plot unrelated to the dirty bomb allegations. He was convicted by a jury in 2007 and sentenced to 17 years in prison.</p>
<p>— The imprisonment of <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/Free%20to%20Dissent.html" target="_blank">Yaser Hamdi</a>, who was captured in Afghanistan, held  as an enemy combatant and released to Saudi Arabia weeks after Hussain  spoke.</p>
<p>— The prosecution of an imam and a pizzeria owner in Albany, N.Y., for conspiring with an informant in a fictitious plot to use a missile launcher to attack a Pakistani diplomat. The men were convicted in 2006 and sentenced to 15 years in prison, though their lawyers claimed the pair were entrapped.</p>
<p>— The prosecution of a Somali man, <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6368" target="_blank">Nuradin Abdi</a>, in 2004 for plotting to blow up a shopping mall in Columbus, Ohio. He pled guilty in 2007 to conspiring to support terrorism and was sentenced to 10 years in prison.</p>
<p>— The imprisonment of an Oregon lawyer, Brandon Mayfield, who was jailed for more than two weeks in 2004 as a material witness on suspicion of involvement in the Madrid train bombings that year. He was never charged with a crime, received an apology from the FBI, which said it misidentified his fingerprints, and brought a lawsuit that led to a reported $2 million settlement from the government in 2006.</p>
<p>— The prosecution of four men as alleged members of a Detroit-based Al Qaeda “sleeper cell” plotting an attack. Two of the men were convicted on terror charges in 2003 but the convictions were thrown out at the government’s request after evidence emerged of prosecutorial misconduct and an unreliable informant. The prosecutor was charged criminally with concealing exculpatory evidence but later acquitted.</p></blockquote>
<p>He then backtracked, calling his remarks about al-Arian “ill conceived.” He did not, however, retreat in his condemnation of the prosecution (or his perceived motivations for prosecution) of nearly every individual indicted on terrorism charges between September of 2001 and September of 2004, when he made the statements, nor has he repudiated any of his <a href="../2010/02/18/rashad-hussains-troubling-ties/" target="_blank">many troubling ties</a> to the Muslim Brotherhood, a <a href="http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/mbhood_en.html" target="_blank">genocidal</a> organization whose <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22415" target="_blank">stated purpose</a> in the U.S. is to undermine our government and replace it with Sharia law. He spoke at a leadership summit hosted by a roll call of <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6181" target="_blank">Holy Land Foundation</a> unindicted co-conspirators as recently as <a href="http://globalmbreport.com/?p=2173" target="_blank">last May</a>.</p>
<p>The case of Rashad Hussain is disturbing on too many levels. One should not surprised that Obama appointed someone like Hussain as Special Envoy to the OIC, which seeks to outlaw free and honest discussion of Islam and undermine the national sovereignty of free nations. His <a href="http://www.brookings.edu/%7E/media/Files/rc/papers/2008/08_counterterrorism_hussain/08_counterterrorism_hussain.pdf" target="_blank">counterrorism approach</a> (why are lawyers crafting approaches to combating terrorism?) is one which essentially bends over backward to avoid dealing with the Islamic texts and tenets which call for violence, and which is pacifistic and appeasing in response to violent jihad both at home and abroad.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2406" target="_blank">Van Jones</a> may be a 9/11 Truther who defended a Marxist cop killer, but he never defended any leaders of explicitly genocidal international terror organizations or attempted mass murderers like Jose Padilla, and <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7491" target="_blank">Jones’ ties</a> to terror organizations pale in comparison to Hussain’s. Jones seems as innocuous as Opie from the Andy Griffith Show next to Rashad Hussain, yet, given the extent of the Obama administration’s dealings with <a href="http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/02/17/napolitano-meets-with-muslim-brotherhood-leaders/" target="_blank">individuals</a> and <a href="http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/02/18/hamas-linked-isna-facilitated-brennans-nyu-speech/" target="_blank">entities</a> affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, and given the fact that Obama appointed an envoy to the fascist murderers of the OIC at all, I do not expect Rashad Hussain to quietly resign in the middle of the night any time soon.</p>
<p><strong>The author writes for <a href="http://www.newsrealblog.com/author/jetabler/" target="_blank">NewsReal Blog</a>. She also runs <a href="http://theforceofreason.com/" target="_blank">The Force of Reason</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/justin-elizabeth-tabler/obama%e2%80%99s-oic-envoy-didn%e2%80%99t-just-defend-al-arian-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 681/695 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 03:16:54 by W3 Total Cache -->