I have no idea if this is for real or not. I just got it in email with no link but from a good source. Frankly I find it too good to be true. It reads more like what he should say rather than anything he would say. But either way, here it is.
UPDATE: The fellow who sent it to me told me he fell for a hoax
UPDATE #2: TO BE PERFECTLY CLEAR: THIS SPEECH IS A HOAX AND WISHFUL THINKING
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu just made the following speech in front of the Knesset:
To Ismail Haniya, and the leaders and operatives of Hamas:
We, the people of Israel, owe you a huge debt of gratitude. You have succeeded where we have failed. Because never before, in the history of the modern State of Israel, has the Jewish people been so united, like one person with one heart. You stole three of our most precious children, and slaughtered them in cold blood. But before we could discover the horrible truth, we had 18 days of pain and anxiety while we searched for them, during which our nation united as never before, in prayer, in hopes, in mutual support.
And now, as you continue to launch deadly missiles indiscriminately, intended to maim and murder as many civilians as possible, while you take cowardly refuge behind your own civilians – you continue to inspire us to hold strongly onto our newly discovered unity. Whatever disputes we Jews may have with each other, we now know that we have one common goal: we will defeat you.
But we are offering you now one last chance. Within 24 hours, all rocket fire – and I mean all rocket fire – will cease. Completely. Forever.
I give you formal notice that our tanks are massed at the Gaza border, with artillery and air support at the ready. We have already dropped leaflets over the northern parts of the Gaza strip, warning civilians of our impending arrival, and that they should evacuate southward, forthwith. If you fail to meet our ultimatum, we are coming in, and, with God’s help, this time we will not leave. Every centimeter of land that we conquer will be annexed to Israel, so that there will never be another attack launched at our civilians from there.
Even so, we will continue to keep the door open to allow you to surrender gracefully. The moment you announce that you are laying down arms, we will halt our advance, and there we will draw our new borders. If you continue to attack our citizens, we will continue to roll southwards, driving you out of territory that you will never again contaminate with your evil presence.
It pains me deeply that your civilians will be made homeless. But we did not choose this war; you did. And if our choice is between allowing our citizens to be targeted mercilessly by your genocidal savagery, versus turning your civilians into refugees, I regret that we must choose the latter. If only you loved your people as much as you hate ours, this war would never have happened.
To the rest of the world: Israel has tired of your ceaseless chidings that we should “show restraint”. When you have your entire population under constant missile fire from an implacable enemy whose stated goal is the of murder every man, woman and child in your land, then you may come and talk to us about “restraint”. Until then, we respectfully suggest that you keep your double standards to yourselves. This time, Hamas has gone too far, and we will do whatever we have to in order to protect our population.
Hamas, once again, I thank you for bringing our people together with such clarity of mind and unity of purpose. The people of Israel do not fear the long road ahead. Am Yisrael Chai.
###
UPDATE:
I just found this:
Hello there….its me again……Don Laird…….
If this speech is genuine……I have only a few words.
Go Israel!!!!!
Let it be breathtaking, let it be awe inspiring, let it be effective.
Godspeed…….
Regards Don Laird
Dogtown Bastard
Alberta, Canada
I am not sure if this never happened speech is a joke, a suggestion or what? One of the stupidest action Israel could do would be what the blog suggests. It would immediately double Israel’s arab population and would require resources that are not available.
Well the doodoo is hitting the fan. I wonder if this is also a step to stop ISIS from gaining a foothold in Gaza!
At least part of the speech was, I heard it.
But I didn’t hear anything from: “It pains me deeply …” on.
That’s what I heard!
The other is what I wanted to hear.
Every centimeter of land that we conquer will be annexed to Israel, so that there will never be another attack launched at our civilians from there.
At last Israel is doing the right thing, if that is, this report is true.
Wrote this on LGF in 2004
Jihad is about the conquest of territory, especially Jewish territory. For Israel to win against the Jihad, not only no territory be given to the enemy but actually Israel should make it plain, that after each terrorist attack, any territory seized from the PA, would be irrevocably annexed to Israel.
This is fair, as murdered Israelis cannot be brought back to life. The whole Jihad business then begins to be counterproductive, while Israel starts to gain its historic land, and gain strategic depth as well.
I think this supposed speech is wishful thinking. The PM of Israel is far too diplomatic to say such things, even in private. It may be possible in the future, but not now.
I agree. There’s no way the Israelis are going to just start annexing land in Gaza. Can you imagine the fuss? I’d have to see it on video to believe that BB said all that… Sounds good though…:)
I hadn’t read your comment, DP, when I submitted the wishful-thinking response just above.
I think you’re should not making a hoax in such serious matters like: war and peace.
Someone sent me this tonite as well. My immediate thought: if Netanyahu HAD been so frank in an open speech, his slurred speaking would have given away the fact that he had just suffered a major stroke. As you say: too good to be true! Thanks for posting the clarifying update.
We want to know how authentic this sopeech is .
Yeah me too, there were a few things in it that were red flags to me.
David:
Please read the top. I posted it with a warning that it didn’t seem like the way he speaks and then I got, and posted, an update that specifically said it was a hoax and i put that in red at the very top.
What a shame though. Its a great speech. Whoever wrote it should be Israel’s real PM.
I really thought I had heard the first part.
Nevermind, Eeyore.
You made me happy for a little while.
Vlad –
When I tried to validate the report of the speech, I was led to your blog. Now you say some source, anonymous to me, said it was a hoax. What is that source? Is it reliable? Please provide some verification, acceptable to most, that his last report is true.
Sheldon:
Someone who sends me good material every day got this email and got very excited about it and sent it out to everyone before he verified it.
I read it and thought it was likely too good to be true and didn’t read like one of BN’s speeches, but, thought I, the source is good and it is possible that Israeli leadership has actually turned a corner, so I thought I would post it with the caveat that its possibly not true but here it is anyway.
An hour or so later, my source emailed me back and said that he had been had, that it was a hoax, and that he was now trying to do damage control and so I posted that immediately at the top of the post. The reason i did that is I feel its more honest to post that a thing isn’t real than just delete it and hope no one notices that you did that.
Then another person felt that wasn’t sufficient to I added another clarification.
Interestingly, the Israeli leadership does appear to have adopted some of the sentiment of this bogus speech though if CBC is to be believed, which frankly it is not but in any case:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/israel-s-benjamin-netanyahu-gaza-offensive-won-t-stop-due-to-world-pressure-1.2703698
Also if you search Youtube etc. for the speech in this post you won’t find it. So chances are it is bogus. Is there anything more I can do for you on this?
Eeyore
Some time back, an Australian cabinet minister was supposed to have made a speech warning Muslims to integrate or leave. It sounded so good but alas
http://www.hoax-slayer.com/howard-muslim-speech.shtml.
DP111 I remember that one well. It circulated as being from a few prominent people, historical and contemporary. Again though, somewhat ironically, the Oz gov’t seems to be moving very much in that direction at this time.
I think I posted a link from a current cabinet member in the last 48 hours sometime where he stated something in the spirit of the bogus speech.
How can anyone thing war is good? Killing children good?
In the past 11 years, rocket fire from Gaza has claimed 17 Israeli lives; in the past three days, Israeli attacks in Gaza have killed at least 81 Palestinians, among them 22 children-and over 550 injured as a result of the air force dropping hundreds of bombs. A driver for journalists was killed, as were Palestinians watching the World Cup at a beach coffee shop.
Israel has an absolute right to self defense but The Occupation is wrong. It is akin to apartheid as John Kerry alluded during the negotiations. The United States should make it clear we do not support apartheid and The Occupation through economic and political sanctions.
Sue
Are you serious, Sue? What you are actually saying is that 1) because fewer Israeli’s have been killed by Palestinian rockets than Palestinians by the Israeli response, Israel should stop trying to hit the rocket launch crews and just take the fire without complaining; 2) because Israel occupies parts of what was supposedly going to be Palestinian land under a one-time international agreement (which, by the way, was NEVER accepted by the Arab/Palestinian side in the first place), Hamas is actually JUSTIFIED in firing at Israeli civilians. How can you even look at yourself in the mirror after spewing such vile and ignorant load of garbage?
By the way, Israel had DISoccupied the Gaza strip years ago, and look where that has gotten it! I can almost hear you say, “yeah, but they imposed a blockade on the poor Palestinians — what choice did they have but to continue to defend themselves.” If I anticipated your argument correctly, here is my reply: 1) the blockade was imposed IN RESPONSE to the Gaza rocket fire, not the other way around; 2) if a government whose avowed and PUBLIC goal is to expel (and murder, if need be) every single jew from ALL current Israeli territory were allowed to freely import and export any goods it desired (including ever more advanced rockets!) without ANY control or interference from the Israelis, do you think this would lead to MORE or FEWER rockets being launched at Israeli civilians?
Knowing everything you know about your beloved Palestinians (including the fact that 44% of ordinary Gaza strip AND West Bank residents actually believe that Israeli civilians SHOULD be targeted for death through rocket fire and suicide bombings), please think HARD about my last question and tell me what you believe the outcome would be.
Thanks, Oleg.
You have much more patience than I do.
And you said it well.
Excuse me Sue, but you need to look at history. When you do, you’ll find that Israel is not “occupying” anything. It’s a shame you’ve automatically come to the conclusion that Israel is. Do you know something that history doesn’t, or are you so gullible to believe the media that you’re simply promoting the nonsense that they’re feeding you, without checking it out fotr yourself to see if it’s really, REALLY true?
My God, what is with people?
On PI tonight
Das grausame Morden wird ewig so weitergehen. Bis endlich das Problem identifiziert ist: Es heißt nicht ISIS, Al-Qaida, Boko Haram, Hamas, Hizbollah oder Al-Shabab – es heißt I-S-L-A-M.http://www.pi-news.net/2014/07/video-so-grausam-toeten-moslems-im-irak/#more-414988
extremely graphic video posted on a now deleted facebook page on July 8th 2014
video -Muslims shooting and beheading prisoners in Iraq
don’t necessearily click on the link :
( the problem is not ISIS, Al-Qaida, Boko Haram, Hamas, Hezbollah or Al-Shabab – it’s I S L A M )
http://livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=3512
Sue:
I hope that you will show the patience in reading my reply, that I will show in writing it. This may take a while.
1. Thinking of war as good or not I find kind of childish. The question is, will war obtain the objective or goal more effectively or more economically than some other method? Once you establish that, the next question is, what is the objective you feel you need to achieve? That part certainly should be judged for its moral or ethical value.
Hamas, as well as all islamic groups, as far as I can tell, in the world, has as it’s objective, the extinction of the Jewish people beginning with the destruction of a Jewish state in the middle of a sea of totalitarian Islamic rule. The fact that muslims who live in Israel have more rights, more freedoms, prefer to live in Israel than anywhere else (Israel does have the right of exit unlike North Korea, the former Soviet Union etc) gives some idea of the ethical nature of Israel as a classically liberal state.
I am not saying that Hamas and Islamic groups seek the extinction of Jews by the way. They are. From their various charters (The Hamas charter for one) to their most sacred scriptures to the chants muslims make across the world expressing this desire. The Kybar chant most famously. You will not, by contrast, hear Jewish groups chant for the extinction of all Arabs or muslims, although I myself would like to see the ideology of Islam vanish from the face of the Earth, there are no groups that seek this. You will hear Jewish people and groups chant for the right to their own survival often however and for the survival for their one tiny state. Am Israel Chi I think is the chant.
This would suggest that the two sides do not have morally equivalent reasons for fighting. One seeks the extinction of the other, while the other wishes to continue to exist.
At this point it bears mentioning that Israel has the military capacity to eliminate the threat to itself utterly and completely in about 25 minutes from whenever they want.
The end of the Palestinian threat is one red button push away. For that matter, the end of the Iranian threat, Saudi and so on. Unofficially, the Israelis have had this capacity since the 1950s. But they have never used it nor have they even threatened it, and even when horrifically attacked by enemies, they have not resorted to WMD’s.
I think it is safe to assume that even you know, if the enemies of Israel had a nuke they would use it against Israel at first opportunity.
So this should cover the notion of the goodness of war somewhat. Basically the idea of war being bad is what held the allies back from stopping Hitler before he started something so big it cost 50 million dead and an incalculable cost to civilization. It was in fact, the peace freaks that multiplied the horror of WW2 by 10,000X. Had they just read Mein Kampf and saw what Hitler was doing they could have moved in before he took Czechoslovakia.
2. Killing children as a good thing.
If you have been paying attention to this conflict and frankly all the other ones with muslims on one or both sides, the Israelis have been doing everything in their power not only to save their own children but actually costing themselves opportunity, blood and treasure in their own defense trying not to kill children of the people in Gaza. You may also notice that Muslims, especially in Gaza but ISIS and Al-Qaeda as well have been slaughtering children for being spies or whatever reason, infidels and so on, or have been turning their own children into suicide-bombers feeling this was a great and noble thing to do. There are many MEMRI videos with interviews on this subject from across the islamic world.
Take your time and watch them. Palestinian Media Watch also shows kindergaartens full of kids leaning the art of killing Jews and wearing explosives and training for both killing and dying. I would argue this shows a different ethos than yours. At least I hope so. So lets take that off the table as its too easily demonstrated who thinks killing kids is good, and who thinks its bad.
Now we come to 3. Your idea that a score can be kept of the dead as a moral compass and that the side with the higher number of kills must be the more morally inferior.
I have to say that is a false idea. The question is always who was killed and why, not how many. If a column of 5000 jihadis were marching on a town of 200 people with the intention of killing all the men and old people and taking the young women as life long sex slaves (and yes, historically this happened a lot as well as now in Africa) and then taking the town for Islam, I would be perfectly OK if those townsfolk could hit a button and wipe those jihadis off the face of the earth till not even the stench of them remained.
Seriously, i would donate money to see that happen.
This is because there is no moral equivalence between offense and defense. That a people should have the moral right to do whatever it is in their power to do to defend themselves from that kind of aggression. Because this is a natural truth even to muslims, islam developed complex rhetorical devices to convince each other and their victims that what they do when they attack you, is defending their faith. That is, that by killing you or enslaving you or subjecting you to sharia law, they are defending themselves and their religion against you, because you would stop them from doing it. So their offense is defensive, if you can follow that logic without an Aspirin.
Now the matter of collateral damage. I will concede the part that claims people who should not have suffered did in Israeli response to the hundreds and hundreds of rockets fired at civilian infrastructure, elementary schools and so on and point out that in the entire history of warfare around the world the amount of collateral damage that has been done is so massive that it is measured in the millions when not in the hundreds of thousands. The fact that you can in this case, actually find the individual names and occupations of all the people who may have suffered in this way is the best, yes the best possible testament to the compassion of the IDF.
Again, seriously. I mean that.
Tell me about the people in the last 4 hours that Al-Qaeda, Al Shabab, and other Muslim Brotherhood groups have murdered in Africa and the Middle East and the Maghreb. Tell me their names and occupations. And when you can’t remind yourself that they were not collateral damage but the actual intended targets of these groups. They meant to murder as many people as they could and the weakest people they could. And why? Because of Ishaq:326
“If you come upon them, deal so forcibly as to terrify those who would follow, that they may be warned. Make a severe example of them by terrorizing Allah’s enemies.”
Many more examples of Islam’s scriptural justification for the use of terror can be found with a simple google search. Try the keywords: ‘Allah has made me victorious with terror’
So once again, your choice of examples to try and draw moral equivalence is, shall we say, baseless.
I am curious to know what exactly you mean by ‘the occupation’ and before you answer you better make sure there is no other country on earth with a similar enough circumstance about which you do not use that phrase and have never objected. I also recommend that you read some articles or watch some videos by black men who actually lived under South African Apartheid and then try and explain how that is the case in Israel for anyone at all.
While you do that consider this.
A Jewish man buys land from a muslim man who is the rightful owner. The deed is legal and all is free and voluntary as the Jewish man is offering more money than the land would be worth on an open market. The muslim man’s family finds out about the sale and then murders the muslim man who sold his property to the Jewish man and then proceeds to claim that the Jewish man has no right to live on land claimed to be for muslims.
And now I would like to ask you:
Exactly how is this Apartheid applied?
If you read this far, thank you for your patience.
@ Eeyore
If we were not in polite company as we are here, I would dismiss the person you address your answer to as a mere “useful idiot” and if she was the only one one reading it, I suspect it might be “pearls before porkers”, but I won’t and s/he won’t be the only one reading it (if s/he reads at all – s/he strikes me more as a fan of vulgar stepmotherhood statements à la John Kerry, that dangerous village idiot).
But your essay (because that’s what it is imo) will be in my personal reference files and I really recommend anyone who has been walking upright (ethically and intellectually) for more than 1 generation, to read it! HD, or 20/20, whatever education marking you want to use 🙂
@ Martin: Thank you for the warning. As “progress” or at least continuous “movement” is a law of nature – where will this “evolve/devolve” towards? How much further can that go?
where will this “evolve/devolve” towards?
toward the Apeman.
How much further can that go?
down to bedrock.
* * *
Sorry to be so laconic, Rita. I’m kinda depressed. Though I’ve not responded properly lately, I miss you when you’re not here 24/7.
My Russki’s kid is in Israel with his family, and most of the Russki crowd have close family there as well. Plus my friends, of course. Life has come to a halt.
The long-range missiles can’t be destroyed by air w/o an unacceptable number of civilian casualties. So a ground incursion will be necessary. Hopefully very limited.
Why would you post something if you are not sure it’s true? Why not do a little research rather than stir the pot?
Bobbie C:
That is a fair question. Probably one that is at the center of journalistic ethics for all of time.
Someone who is reliable sends me something which is exciting and important if true. So what do you do?
What I did is write the person back immediately not once but twice asking if he had checked his source and then posted it with my own uncertainties and an explanation of exactly why and where I got it in a different colour at the top of the post so people would know exactly as much as I did about it. In fact, I even explained what my misgivings were. The second I heard that it was not legit I also posted that.
When a somewhat dense reader felt that wasn’t clear enough I posted a second red explanation that it was not a real speech. That makes three explanations for the likelihood that it isn’t a real speech before you get to the text of the bogus speech.
The reason for leaving it up is because its better to leave up an error with the explanation that its an error than pretend it was not made and also, frankly most of us wish it was real. Its what the Israelis should be doing in the opinion of many who read and frequent this site. As it turns out, Netenyahu seems to be making statements that do reflect the spirit of this speech today. You can find links in subsequent posts on this site from today.
Too true.
America and Europe attacked Iraq because
they were planning WMD but Israel has a
Country which is not just planning to use
weapons against them but are daily attacking
their Country with Rockets.
David Cameron has offered his full support
to Israel on behalf of the British people.
After all the British nation 70 years ago was
being daily attacked from Nazi Germany with
V1 and V2 rockets – in response the world
did not ask Britain to show restraint and stop
bombing Germany.
If Israel declares total war on Hamas in Gaza
they should be fully supported by the World
Community.
Israel need not defend wiping out its enemies, as every nation and people possess this inherent right. The Palestinians should be angered at Hamas right now (Which some wisely are), not Israel.
Brilliant and cogent thought is advanced in many of the foregoing responses. My reaction will be brief: In gratitude for the current situation, with the Muslims having united Israeli thought and (hopefully) action, Israel should repay them quickly by uniting them with their promised rendezvous with 70 virgins…..
Amen.
Thank you for your thoughtful replies. I made the comment concerning war after reading the seemingly angry tone of the posts on the site. No one has explained how The Occupation is helping Israel. If you have lived or visited Hebron you will understand my comments concerning apartheid. Is it on par to that which existed in South Africa, NO! Israel is better than that and needs to change.
Israel’s acceptance of U.S. aid hurts the peace process, weakens Israel, and invites criticism. The U.S. asks Israel to show restraint because U.S. weapons are being used. Israel has a chance to lead, to promote their own peace plan, and not rely on the U.S. whose interests are not necessarily aligned with the region.
If you feel that the current situation is sustainable, then support it.
Sue
Sue: No, I DON’T feel the current situation is sustainable. Israel cannot keep starting a job and then leaving it unfinished. I wonder what YOUR vision is of a viable alternative to what you call “occupation.” What I see is a country (Israel) that is trying to hold the fort against an implacable enemy sworn to its destruction. Palestinians have been offered a state how many times now? The offer still stands. Why don’t they take it? Because they will only have a state on THEIR terms, which include Israel ceasing to exist (either completely or as a democratic state). Why do you think they have made the so-called “right of return” such an essential plank in their agenda and a pre-condition to a peace deal?
I would LOVE to see a negotiated two-state solution, with a responsible Palestinian administration that keeps its house in order, takes good care of security across its entire territory and ensures Israel doesn’t get attacked. I’d love to see ordinary Palestinians pressing their OWN government for such a solution, and the day that happens, I’ll support THEM and champion their cause.
I’d love to see all that happen, but I just don’t think it will. I know there must be many sensible, civilized, intelligent people living in the West Bank and Gaza, but unfortunately, they are not the ones making the decisions, and in fact, are basically hostages of their own corrupt and immoral government, much like Soviet dissidents were in the heyday of the USSR.
I hate to see innocent people being hurt in security operations, but what can you do when the enemy is shooting at you from behind their own women and children? Israel is already doing all it can to avoid civilian casualties, to the point of calling to warn the people living in the area of an incoming strike, even though it means tipping off the very enemy being targeted. I don’t understand what more “restraint” is being asked for from Israel.
What I believe is that Israel should re-occupy the Gaza strip, do a DEEP clean-up of all the weapons caches it can find, get out again and the TOTALLY seal its borders. The blockade should be made complete. If the Palestinians cannot, or will not, keep the piece, they should be treated like any other violent, anti-social person in civilized society — separated from the rest and kept in a place where they cannot hurt themselves or others. If that would mean turning Gaza into an effective prison, then so be it. What doesn’t make sense is for Israel to periodically go in, draw some blood from Hamas (at a great cost to its foreign relations and, unfortunately, Palestinian civilians) and then just leaving the southern border open so Hamas can re-arm.
So, to summarize, no, I don’t think the current situation is sustainable. I believe Israel should act decisively and finish the job it has started. I also think it should stop providing ANYTHING free of charge to either Hamas or the Palestinian Authority. Not electricity, not water, not food, nothing. The plight of the people trapped in these territories should be treated as a humanitarian crisis, and aid must be provided by the international community, INCLUDING Israel, but there is no reason Israel should shoulder a disproportionate amount of that responsibility. Perhaps after experiencing full logical consequences of letting bandits rule their roost, the more sensible and progressive contingent of the Palestinian people will rise up and demand a change of course from their own leadership, and THEN they may finally get the state they say they want.
Thanks again, Oleg.
Oleg,
I agree with you and thank you for not attacking me for expressing my views. The U.S. (may have) learned, after spending over a trillion dollars, and thousands of deaths, that an ideology can not be changed through war. Amy Chua, in World on Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability, explains the roots of terrorism and Richard Clarke’s, Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror, gives an interesting perspective of the early thinking on terrorism from a U.S. perspective.
I question if our leaders truly want peace or are more interested in politicizing extremists for their own gain. It may be cliche, but education, and journalistic freedom to report the facts, will do more to create an environment for peace, than bullets. Short term, defense of one’s country is the priority but that defense, must not be at the expense of the goal. How do we take moderate Muslims and bring them into the 21st century? I can tell you it won’t be done by killing or maiming their family.
Tribalism runs deep on the Middle East, it is a concept foreign to most Americans who most easily identify with the State. This is the key to understanding how to unravel an intractable situation for all involved. We do not know the answer, but bringing social media, the truth, without fear of reprisal to the Middle East can be a start.
Sue
Sue, you may find this op-ed interesting:
They Still Believe It’s All Israel’s Fault. The world is misled and prefers it that way
Israeli Jews find it incomprehensible that so many in the US and in the EU still point the finger at the Jewish State, accusing its leaders of deadly aggression toward the “poor, indefensible Palestinians.”
How could they? Israelis wonder. Can any country absorb lethal rocket fire aimed at its civilian population without trying to defend itself?
Unfortunately, the bashers’ answer to the above is: “You, Israelis are just like the Nazis… You, Jews, are baby killers… Look at the score—over 100 dead Palestinians versus 0 on the Israeli side… And, incidentally, did you say something?”
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/15309#.U8HjmlaPWvM
Sue,
You cannot simply flat-out state that “war is bad” or “war is good.” War can be something YOU decide to start without having a good reason, such as the one Bush unleashed on Iraq in 2003, whose price not only the US and Iraq, but the entire world is still paying and will continue to pay for a long time. But war can also be something that is foisted on you by those who are not amenable to reason or treaty, and that’s what is happening in Israel. Israel did not choose to fight the Palestinians. THEY and their Arab allies have been attacking the Jewish state incessantly from the day it was founded. For Israel, war is not an attempt to change someone else’s ideology, but a necessary response to having its civilians targeted by rockets, suicide bombs, kidnappings, murder, etc., etc. Would you say to a victim of attempted rape who delivers an effective kick to her attacker’s nuts that “violence is not the answer”? Well, guess what? Violence IS the answer for HER in that particular situation. On the other hand, it is the other party that should understand that rape is NOT the answer to their sexual or other frustrations. So, whom do you think this message needs to be directed at in the Middle East?
How about the palestinian right to defend themselves against occupation, against the people who stole their land and send them to refugee camps. Most of the residents of gaza are refugees from what is called ” Israel” now.
Walid: And how, exactly, did those people become “refugees”? Can you be a little more specific? Are you talking about what happened in 1948? If that’s the case, then you must know that there was a war, where the nascent state of Israel was attacked from all sides by several Arab armies. The Arab residents of Israel were promised a swift victory, that the Jews would be “pushed into the sea” (down to the last woman and child!) and that there would be a single Palestinian state covering the entire territory. Many heeded that call and left, in the hope of returning to a land “cleansed” of the Jews. They took their side. They didn’t stay to defend the young state of Israel, of which they were citizens and which was being attacked. When Israel won, naturally they weren’t allowed to return, as they had sided with the enemy. On the other hand, those Arabs who stayed, whether or not they fought on Israel’s side, have remained full-fledged Israeli citizens.
Tell me, then, what “stealing of land” are you talking about, exactly? And if you were to accuse me of being “brainwashed by Israeli propaganda,” then please set me straight on YOUR version of the historical facts. How do you think all this actually happened to lead you to say that the land which is now Israel had been “stolen”?
And finally, regarding what you call “occupation…” After the war of 1948, and every single other war that followed, Israel did NOT annex the conquered territories. After being attacked constantly and incessantly from these territories by their Palestinian residents, what choice did it have but to leave a strong contingent of troops to keep order and maintain at least a semblance of security? The Palestinians have never accepted just having their state ALONGSIDE Israel, which they have been offered all along. For them, it’s always been “Israel OR us,” and guess what? While they frame it that way, it’s ALWAYS going to be Israel.
Finally, as far as your question about the Palestinian right to “defend” themselves… Based on the foregoing, I obviously don’t see any REASON for them to defend themselves, since they are not being attacked. But, even if they were, even if the IDF were deliberately targeting Palestinian civilians (like the Hamas militants ACTUALLY do when they fire rockets), even then I wouldn’t agree that they have a right to retaliate by shooting at civilians. That is absolutely morally unacceptable under ANY circumstances, even when your own civilians are being targeted. The partisans, during World War Two (like, for example, the French Resistance), responded to Nazi atrocities by attacking the invading troops and installations, not by sending suicide teams into Germany to bomb German women and children. If they HAD done the latter, however, do you think they would have been praised and admired after the war? So, my answer is a categorical NO — NO ONE has the right to defend themselves by PURPOSELY attacking innocent civilians on the other side.
And, before you open you mouth and begin spouting about how Palestinian civilians die in Israeli security operations, how about you explain to me why the Hamas rocket teams set up their rocket launchers near (or AT) schools, hospitals, densely populated residential neighborhoods? If they were really fighting to protect their own people, don’t you think they would make sure to shoot from empty fields? And, on the other hand, why do the Palestinians allow these “freedom fighters” to expose their own kids to such danger? Why doesn’t the whole neighborhood get together at the first sight of a rocket crew and chase them out with sticks and stones (or with Kalashnikovs)? Perhaps it has something to with the fact that in the Palestinian education system, kids are taught from kindergarten about the virtues of being a martyr and trained in the use of suicide vests? Perhaps it is because, just as Hamas and, previously, PLO had explained a number of times, they “love death more than Israelis love life.”
So, if the Hamas fighters choose to shoot from behind their own civilians, what is Israel to do? Just stop responding to rocket fire and tell their civilians to live in bomb shelters 24/7? While the obvious answer to this question is, of course, NO, incredibly, by choosing to not finish the job it started, Israel has repeatedly taken exactly that position.
What I don’t understand is why the Israeli government doesn’t order its military to slap a REAL blockade on Gaza, sealing its borders completely, especially the southern border with Egypt, to cut off the weapons supply to Hamas once and for all. I have already written about this in a previous message, so I won’t repeat myself here.
Just to conclude, Walid, if you have any SUBSTANTIAL (i.e. backed up by facts) reply to this, I am waiting for it.