Outraged or Head Stuck in the Sand
Do you wish to know how pro-Arab career diplomats are at the State Department? Do you wish to know why the U.S. State Department has been a headache for implementing Bush Foreign Policy? It is all because the State Department is so pro-Arab that it looks the other way when American diplomats are murdered by Islamofascist terrorists.
Yasser Arafat was complicit in the murder of American diplomats when a PLO terrorist group (Black September) assassinated American diplomats in Sudan in the year 1973 because America did not cooperate in releasing terrorist prisoners in Israel and America.
Here is what is outrageous: The State Department then arranges peace talks on American soil that takes place in the White House and Camp David. How moronic is that? Arafat orders the death of Americans yet diplomacy is put forth rather than protection or eradicating an enemy.
It is the pro-Arab element in American bureaucracy that hinders the War on Terror.
Comments
Oh, the shifting sands that heads are stuck in. So, when is a terrorist a terrorist and when is he a freedom fighter?
Back during the pre-birth day of Israel, the British placed the label of terrorist on Jewish groups that were using violent means in pursuit of their ends. Today, some see them as freedom fighters and extreme circumstances required extreme measures. Like the 1946 bombing of The King David Hotel by a members of the Irgun (a British labeled terrorist organization).
The bombing had been ordered by Irgun leader Menachem Begina, a future primeminister. The blast took close to a hundred lives, a dozen and a half that were Jews. Of course this was neither the start nor end to rampant violence, and it was not one sided. Neither was this the only high profile incident.
In 1948 Count Bernadotte, a UN peace negotiator, was assassinated by the Stern Gang. The act was approved by the triumvirate leadership, one of whom was Yitzhak Shamir, a future prime minister of Israel. Bernadotte had been able to negotiate a cease fire that was seen as a threat to the efforts of some Jewish freedom fighters. The United Nations Security Council condemned the killing of Bernadotte as "a cowardly act which appears to have been committed by a criminal group of terrorists in Jerusalem while the United Nations representative was fulfilling his peace-seeking mission in the Holy Land".
What made this assassination very difficult for some to take, even by members of the Jewish community, was because Bernadotte had near the end of WW II led a rescue operation that had negotiated with Heinrich Himmler the saving of about 15,000 people from NAZI concentration camps, up to 10,000 of whom were Jews.
So if you want to go from being a terrorist to a freedom fighter, just hang around.
This is an ecellent point! Indeed Irgun and Stern executed acts of terrorism a Jew should be ashamed of. On the otherhand, you failed to mention that the Jews were fighting for their lives from Arab (not Palestinian) terrorists because of the belief in "dar es Islam." Once conquered for Islam a land is never to be released to the original infidel inhabitants. This is the gist of the problem with Jews to this day with Islamic terrorists.
In the case of Irgun and Stern those organizations were fighting in a time when 6,000,000 Jews were extirminated by the Nazis. Keeping that in mind The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem aided Hitler by actually lending Mohammedans to the SS to murder Jews in the Balkans. Do you think the Grand Mufti had halted the final solution after WWII. I am surprised Irgun and Stern (mostly Europeans that lost relatives in the Holocaust) were not even more vicious.
Yet you are right, terrorism is terrorism and should never be justified. Currently the practices of Stern and Irgun are not practiced today, however the Mohammedans are still trying to complete Hitler's "Final Solution."
Do I support the existence of Israel? Yes, but mostly the one that I envisioned years ago. Back in the late 1940s, the ghastly nature of the Holocaust became more apparent following the defeat of Hitler’s Germany. In response, a large number of people in this country, and our government, finally came to the conclusion that there should be a homeland for Jews. We were not quite willing to give these people Southern California, but why not a place in which this long-abused people found historical root.
It was easy to support a homeland for people that had so suffered and thus knew intimately about its destructive power. Thus, one could expect this people to avoid doing unto others what had been so unmercifully done unto them—they new in full measure what such evil could do.
However, it is not quite the inclusive place of refuge that some supporters expected. To some current outsiders, Israel seems to have become an exclusive ethno-theocratic state for those that are self and communally recognized as Jews—a land where those accepted only need place one foot and they are a citizen as long as they never renounce their Jadishness. To do so will also cost them their citizenship.
For these people it is the Promised Land, but it is not for all of those that God had placed there before Moses even pointed across the Jordan and let his people go. Thus, today there are some citizens of Israel, living and fighting there, who never in the history of mankind had any ancestors living on the land that they now claim exclusively as their own. And there are people displaced from their ancestral homes that were there even before Abraham had been wandering around far up to the North.
In an age in which there exists within human reach the capacity to blow far more of the planet to hell than just Israel, it is naive to think that violence is going to bring anything but more violence and eventually the final violence for all of God’s children—chosen and un-chosen.
I agree with you ... to a point.
Violence begets violence and those who live by the sword will die by the sword.
However as long as Mohammedans are unwilling to allow a Jewish State on an extremely small sliver of land, violence and retaliation to violence will proceed.
Since I am a Christian Right kind-of-guy I wholly support by what ever means necessary for Zionis/Jewish Israel to exist and protect itself. I know that is not politically correct and even rubs some of my fellow Republican Conservatives the wrong who see more of an economic future in supporting a Arab/Mohammedan point of view.
I maybe fanatical but I am not crazy. Israeli retaliation including the bull dozing of the houses of a Shahid family occur only as a response to Mohammedan violence. It is a tit-for-tat thing in the Middle East. The Jewish State understands the Mohammedan mind. Weakness only encourages greater violence by Middle Eastern Mohammedans.
Keep in mind that the modern Land known as Israel was a nearly deserted cess pool in the 1900's. Jews began immigrating there in larger numbers due to the Zionist moverment started by Theodore Herzl and continued by Ezer Weisman. These Jews actually reconstituted the Land and made agriculture a viable enterprise again. It is only then that Mohammedans took interest in a Land that the Ottomans had pretty much forsaken. Initially Arab interest in the land was a mutual enterprize between Jew and Arab. The Jews needed employees to work the Land they transformed and Arabs needed employment.
Then the old superiority complex of Mohammedanism began to creep in as the Arabs realized they employers were Jews and not fellow Mohammedans. The the people who made the Land usable again were gaining wealth and the Arab was working for what they believed was not an adequate slice of the pie. This is unacceptable to Mohammedans that still enforced Dhimmi and Jizya taxes on unbelieving non-Mohammedans prior to WWI.
If Mohammedanism could transform and give up their egotistical superiority complex the tiny slice of Land called modern Israel should not be a problem. Until that happens the violence will occur until the Jewish, Christian, or Mohammedan Messiah returns to prove who is right and who is wrong.
In the 21st century Jews and Christians are tolerant and patient enough to wait for validation, the Mohammedans are not.
Sorry, I may have put a response to your observation about “21st century Jews and Christians” under the wrong heading, ie “Lawmakers Listen to Will of the People in Mass” at http://theway2k.vox.com/library/post/lawmakers-listen-to-will-of-the-people-in-mass.html
Don't sweat it. I still read it. I probably made a comment without even looking at the primary myself.
:-)