« The Hospital Shuffle | Main | Saved by Peter Pan »

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Just bite me, OK?!

A few days ago the Israeli government published its list of 'Heritage Sites' that were slated for cleaning, refurbishment and improved access to the public. 

Among the sites on the list are the Ma'arat Hamachpelah (the Cave of the Patriarchs; the burial place of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Sarah, Rebbecca and Leah) in Hevron, and the Tomb of Rachel in Bethlehem.

These sites are among the holiest in Judaism, but are also important to Christianity and Islam because prominent figures in all of the three religions are buried there.

Needless to say, the Palestinians couldn't resist the opportunity to hold a riot, so they took Israel's announcement as a cause to burn tires, throw rocks and flaming bottles and attack soldiers and civilians.

Mahmoud Abbas, the so-called moderate leader of the Palestinian Authority announced that the Israeli move could embroil the entire region in holy war.  This corrupt puppet is supposed to be our best hope for an eventual settlement with the Palestinians.

Then the President of France declared that Israel's announcement could spark a third Intifada, a statement which once again paints the Palestinians as emotional infants; incapable of expressing discontent in any but the most violent terms.

Now the U.S. State Department has weighed in with the following statement:

"The [US] administration views the move as provocative and unhelpful to the goal of getting the two sides back to the table."

This, to me, was even more galling than the French statement.  At least the French seem to see the Palis for who they really are, a bunch of dangerous, violent children who are completely incapable of statecraft at any level.

But the U.S. seems to be completely ignoring the fact that Israel lacks a credible peace partner, and continues to insist that Israel unilaterally abandon any claims - territorial, political or religious - that might be at odds with the ever-changing Arab narrative.

Provocation?!  What about the fact that Rachel's Tomb is now housed inside a concrete bunker and can be reached only by armored bus?  What about the fact that nearly every week some Palestinian either attacks Jews near the Ma'arat Hamachpela, or is arrested with a weapon or explosive before he/she can do so?  What about the fact that Joseph's tomb has been burned and vandalized several times in recent years, resulting in the death of 8 IDFsoldiers? 

Why is it that we have to respect their holy places, but they don't have to respect anyone else's?

Natanyahu correctly (IMHO) called the latest sturm und drang over the heritage site list "hypocritical', and went on to point out that Hebron’s Cave of the Patriarch and Rachel’s Tomb near Bethlehem, were both “gravesites of the ancestors of the Jewish people” and as such were “certainly deserving of restoration and preservation.” 

Where was France when lethal attacks near Jewish Holy sites became so common that a decision had to be made to place soldiers near them around the clock and allow access only by bullet proof vehicle?  Where was the U.S. When Joseph's tomb was destroyed?

The entire world came down on Israel when our antiquities department performed a salvage excavation in the Western Wall plaza while making repairs on the ramp leading to the Temple Mount.  They said that Israel was not showing enough sensitivity to Muslim concerns about its holy places and historical legacy.

But nobody seems to be disturbed by the fact that the Waqf (the Muslim trust that manages the Temple Mount) has been using back-hoes and bulldozers to rip up and discard priceless Jewish artifacts in the holiest spot in Judaism! 

I rode the bus yesterday with three IDF officers who are Muslim Arabs.  Show me an Arab/Muslim country with Jewish officers and soldiers in its army.  We have Arab Members of Knesset. Show me an Arab/Muslim country which allows Jews in its governmental bodies.   Arabs can live in Israeli towns and Cities but Jews can be arrested (or killed) for daring to enter Arab only towns and cities.  Heck, our 'partners in peace' even have legislation that makes selling land or property to a Jew an offense punishable by death!

The Palestinians are constantly raving about what is owed to the refugees who were forced to flee their homes during the 1948 war of Independence.  What about the approximately one million Jews who were forced to flee Muslim/Arab countries, leaving behind all of their land and property?  Strange how that questions is always pushed aside.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.  The Palestinians (and their supporters) don't want a Palestinian State alongside Israel, they want to destroy Israel by any means possible.  There will never be an agreement with the Arabs for the simple reason that they can't agree among themselves what they really want, and are incapable of agreeing to anything less than our complete surrender and destruction.

Islam isn't a religion; it is an ideological weapon... a time bomb spitefully planted by the L. Ron Hubbard of the Seventh Century.  Those who continue to make concessions to Islam's 'sensitivities' are only encouraging kleptocracies and thugocracies to become more brazen and dangerous.

Posted by David Bogner on February 25, 2010 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c581e53ef0120a8d1a3f9970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Just bite me, OK?!:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Oh, can we get an A-MEN, brother!

Posted by: Leah Weiss Caruso | Feb 25, 2010 3:35:23 PM

Thank you for an articulate illumination of our reality in the world blinded by omission and inaccuracy!

Posted by: IMA2FOUR7 | Feb 25, 2010 3:41:08 PM

Unfortunately, much of what you say has merit. But what do you really think?

Posted by: Jordan Hirsch | Feb 25, 2010 3:45:36 PM

Leah Weiss Caruso... Now, now... :-)

IMA2FOUR7 ... Um, you're welcome. I think.

Jordan Hirsch... I think that pigs must be flying since you actually agreed with something I wrote. :-)

Posted by: treppenwitz | Feb 25, 2010 3:51:29 PM

Islam isn't a religion; it is an ideological weapon...

Yes, of course some of your points have merit, as Jordan said, but fanning the flames isn't really productive, assuming your words have influence with your many readers.
I understand that sometimes you categorize what you write as a "rant," thereby justifying a more strident tone. But if the thought quoted above does anything, it just encourages "less than positive interactions" with your neighbors and riles up the masses.
Perhaps it's necessary to interject a more leftward/centrist leaning thought into your comment section from time to time, just for counterpoint. I hope no offense is taken.

Larry

Posted by: Larry | Feb 25, 2010 4:21:27 PM

"Why is it that we have to respect their holy places, but they don't have to respect anyone else's?"

Isn't it actually worse?

They're that blind. They're that dumb.

Posted by: a. | Feb 25, 2010 4:32:41 PM

Great post and I agree 100%. But to answer your question, Iran has a Jewish seat in its parliament. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majlis_of_Iran.

Posted by: sne | Feb 25, 2010 5:12:48 PM

There's the problem right there: The "Palestinian" Arabs are, as you correctly put it, "dangerous, violent children who are completely incapable of statecraft at any level."

I don't care what people believe; I care what they do. And so far, all the "Palestinian" Arabs seem to be able to do is try to kill Jews, fight among themselves, and continue building the klepto-thugocracy that Yasser (PFUI) Arafat helped create. No thought of building an economy, no thought of anything except destruction and hate. And, sadly, the world views them as victims.

Which is true. They are victims. They're victims of their own nihilism and hate.

Israel made the desert bloom, and they could have helped the Arabs do the same. But when people would rather destroy greenhouses than use them, there's not much point in helping them, is there?

Posted by: Elisson | Feb 25, 2010 5:50:00 PM

Gaza is Haiti without mangoes.

Posted by: Barzilai | Feb 25, 2010 6:02:55 PM

It is just shameful.

Posted by: Jack | Feb 25, 2010 6:30:57 PM

I'm totally with you on the restoration of holy sites.

I will point out, however, that in regards to your comments about Jews in Arab/Muslim governing bodies...the Bahraini ambassador to the United States is a Jewish woman.

Posted by: Lena | Feb 25, 2010 6:45:46 PM

Europe is being destroyed by the very same islamic forces that they have supported against Israel for decades. Do you think its divine retribution?

Posted by: Laura | Feb 25, 2010 6:47:31 PM

Bahrain has Jewish MPs and a Jewish Ambassador to Washington.

Posted by: Noa | Feb 25, 2010 7:41:31 PM

I agree with Larry that your statement about Islam is unproductive. Islam *is* a religion, and there are many people who practice Islam in a productive way. They are, however, entirely irrelevant in regards to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In the I-P conflict, Islam has been used exclusively as a tool to rationalize hate against the Jewish state and inculcate that hate into children. As for this particular situation, I think the response of the US government was disgusting. I hope at some point someone will have the chutzpah to come out and remind everyone how we have no "peace partners," not in Abbas, not in Hamas, and not in the Palestinian people as a whole.

The reason Israel is the target of hatred like that directed at no other state is because Israel simply doesn't act like other states. Let's see: territory acquired in a defensive war? Ask Russia! When they conquered Königsberg from Germany, they annexed it, purged it of East Prussians, Germans, and Lithuanians, and filled it with Russians so no one would ever be able to take it away from them. How about: containing a violent separatist group? Ask Sri Lanka! When the Tamils wanted autonomy, the Sri Lankans killed thousands in a bloody rout of Tamil strongholds. Or perhaps: making peace with a country that invaded and was defeated? Ask Poland: they moved west, took Germany's provinces east of the Oder-Neisse Line, and cleared those territories of ethnic Germans. Or maybe: dividing a territory into ethno-religious states? Ask India and Pakistan, during whose separation entire populations of hundreds of thousands moved hundreds of miles to get into the "right" state. Israel, on the other hand, wants to be liked, and refrains from acting like other states, but in doing so creates animus against itself, because if it just acted like everyone else, no one would care.

Posted by: Bryan | Feb 25, 2010 8:32:20 PM

But is this Jewish ambassador from Bahrain an anti-Zionist token Jew? Often anti-Zionist Jews are used to provide cover for Israel-haters and to provide themselves with a shield against charges of anti-Semitism. We see this all the time. Look at George Soros, Norman Finkelstein, Noam Chomsky and many, many others like them who anti-Semites associate themselves with. Do you really think this woman would have the job of ambassador if she defended Israel?

Posted by: Laura | Feb 25, 2010 11:28:37 PM

Heh heh heh.

And just for the hell of it, here's a note from Geert Wilders regarding tonight's talk in Almere: "Als er vanavond mensen van de PvdA aanwezig zijn: hier is een boodschap voor jullie. Ik zal na afloop de tekst van deze speech in het Arabisch verspreiden zodat ook jullie kunnen begrijpen wat ik gezegd heb."
[Translation: If this evening members of the Labour Party (PvdA) are present, I have a message for you: I shall distribute the text of the speech in Arabic afterwards, so that you too can understand what I said.]

While I do not agree with much that Geert has to say, I thoroughly despise many of the same people and organizations that he opposes.
Such as the PvdA.

Posted by: At The Back of the Hill | Feb 25, 2010 11:56:35 PM

I agree with everything Geert has to say.

Posted by: Laura | Feb 26, 2010 2:38:46 AM

By remembering what Jordan did to Jewish religious sites 1948-67,and what the world said and did in response, we can see the hypocrits of 2010 for what they are. If we don`t stick up for our rights and history as a People,no one else will,and peace will be set back.

Posted by: Ed | Feb 26, 2010 4:25:53 AM

Actually, I said that much of what you say has merit. I did not point out that the PM discussed restoring Jewish Historical sites, and not Moslem or Christian ones. (Other than in Chevron, and I think you would have to be more cynical than Glenn Beck to think that qualifies as an act of multi cultural sensitivity). Larry makes the other point I would have.
That being said, it is tiring to deal with the constant ratcheting up of the rhetoric coming from the Palestinian and Arab side. If they don't like what they hear, let them come to negotiations and have real good faith bargaining. The fact that they don't is due as much if not more to their historical patience as it is to any slights, real or perceived coming from the Israeli side.

Posted by: Jordan Hirsch | Feb 26, 2010 4:47:07 AM

Laura,

While I will not argue about Geert Wilders here, I really must ask whether you speak and read Dutch? Far too often English speakers are quite unaware of both the slant and the context of Geert Wilders' remarks, and far too often they are willing to believe that they have an accurate picture of the Netherlands.
The situation in the Netherlands is more complex, and in many ways quite different, than has ever been reported in any English-language fora.

I should also mention, by the way, that very few of us Dutch-speakers wear clogs, live in windmills, or grow tulips.

Posted by: At The Back of the Hill | Feb 27, 2010 12:38:04 AM

"Show me an Arab/Muslim country which allows Jews in its governmental bodies."

uh, moshe hirsch is (was?) a minister in the pa.
oh wait, you said jews.

Posted by: Lion of Zion | Feb 28, 2010 9:21:56 AM

At the Back of the Class,
Nice to know that you think English-speakers are too ignorant to inform themselves concerning the incredible complexities of the Netherlands. Did you not know that Dutch is one of that very small number of languages that can be successfully translated into English or that some Dutch-speakers are civil enough to inform the world rather than snark at it?
Here is what we see from North America: the pathetic little republic that now occupies the Netherlands is too gutless and incompetent to defend elected officials like Ayaan Hirsi Ali so the US is forced to offer asylum and security to these victims of official Dutch gutlessness. Now we are offered the disgusting spectacle of a Dutch judiciary willing to whore the rule of law to deny the basic right of free speech to a citizen.
There is nothing complex about cowardice and nothing at all surprising about seeing some portion of Dutch speakers who are eager to lick the spittle of savages and collaborate with bullies. Fortunately North America has two free countries that will and have defended the Netherlands while the gutless portion of Dutch speakers muttered into their tulips about the complexity of matters.
Thanks for accusing Laura of ignorance, otherwise we might have thought you a mere fool and not noticed that you were also a poltroon.

Posted by: Walter | Feb 28, 2010 7:37:30 PM

Nice to know that you think English-speakers are too ignorant to inform themselves concerning the incredible complexities of the Netherlands.
As, indeed, your response seems to prove.
Dutch is one of that very small number of languages that can be successfully translated into English or that some Dutch-speakers are civil enough to inform the world rather than snark at it?
On the one hand, that is incorrect - Dutch does not translate well into English without tweaking (I have spoken Dutch and English as 'first' languages my entire life - please don't lecture me about either of my native tongues) - on the other hand it is quite clear that you have not read my blog. Had you actually read it, you would notice that I am one of those Dutch speakers who are 'civil enough' (as you put it). Please read my blog before you harangue me - you will find the labels 'Dutch' and 'Rottekaas' particularly useful.
the pathetic little republic
You mean 'constitutional monarchy'.
Now we are offered the disgusting spectacle of a Dutch judiciary willing to whore the rule of law to deny the basic right of free speech to a citizen.
Please be so kind to study the history of the Netherlands - freedom of speech has always had limits on it in the Netherlands, as indeed elsewhere in Europe, that would not be accepted in the United States. Mein Kampf, for instance, is not legally available. Lèse Majesty carries a prison sentence. Speaking against the monarchy is not advisable. And, for your information, laws against hate-speech do in practice cut both ways.
Do not, from this, assume that I am defending limitations on freedom of speech - for my view on that, read my blog - you will find the labels 'GeerWilders' and 'Fitna' particularly useful.
some portion of Dutch speakers who are eager to lick the spittle of savages and collaborate with bullies.
Care to say that to my face?
while the gutless portion of Dutch speakers muttered into their tulips about the complexity of matters.
Please be so kind as to get stuffed.
Thanks for accusing Laura of ignorance, otherwise we might have thought you a mere fool and not noticed that you were also a poltroon.
I did not accuse, I asked whether she spoke Dutch. Too many people define the Netherlands either as Geert Wilders OR as tulips and clogs. Several more, mostly Americans, think in terms of hashish and the Amsterdam red-light district. Such simplistic views are as irritating as the European idea that all Americans are Indian-killing cowboys and Rednecks. Geert Wilders is not the be all and end all of Western Liberal Humanist values. To think that he is, is to overlook both the complexity of his political evolution and the norms of Dutch politics. Mr. Wilders is perhaps best understood as providing the regular kick in the pants that 'sGravenhage ('The Hague', to you) so desperately needs. Other than that, Dutch politics has a depth and viciousness greater than you seem capable of understanding.

As to who the fools and poltroons are, I maintain that that is still a matter of some debate.

Posted by: At The Back of the Hill | Mar 1, 2010 4:53:00 AM

And, further to both the Geert Wilders adulation on the one hand, AND the ignorant comments about the Dutch on the other, this:
Quote:
"Voor de PVV is het helder: weg uit Uruzgan, weg uit Afghanistan. Natuurlijk moet de Taliban worden bestreden, maar niet meer, voor zover we dat al deden, door Nederland. Ons land heeft meer dan genoeg gedaan. Het is mooi geweest. "
End quote.

Translation: 'For the PVV it is clear; get out of Uruzgan, get out of Afghanistan. Of course the Taliban must be fought, but no longer, insofar as we actually did fight them, by the Netherlands. Our nation has done more than enough. It's been fine.'

Those are Geert Wilders' own words. Either he is right, and the Dutch have indeed done more than enough, or he's a spittle-licking gutless etcetera.
Please clarify which of those points of view you endorse.

Posted by: At The Back of the Hill | Mar 2, 2010 12:05:36 AM

Hi Treppenwitz - I have just discovered your blog when I did a search for "bread of affliction." Too cool! And you are in Israel. Hopefully more Americans will begin to educate themselves on Israel's plight. Geert Wilders has commented in a speech on Islamization that it is 5 minutes to midnight in Europe, and maybe 10 or 15 minutes to midnight in America. People need to WAKE UP!

One other blog I follow is Jihad Watch (http://www.jihadwatch.org/) - check it out some time if you haven't already. They report what our patsified MSM won't.

Shalom!

Posted by: Mab | Mar 3, 2010 11:43:36 PM

"...the L. Ron Hubbard of the Seventh Century..."

Actually, that's not quite an accurate comparison. The Hubster never raised an army to convert the world to Scientology at the point of a scimitar. And to the best of my knowledge, ol' L. Ron never, uh, "married" a 9-year-old.

I'm just saying...

Posted by: psachya | Mar 4, 2010 6:14:49 AM

And further to the Wilders issue, for those of you who worship his footsteps:

Poll results in the Netherlands today indicate that Geert Wilders has an ice cube's chance in Hell of becoming prime minister.
Two major pollsters both show him behind Jan Peter Balkenende

EenVandaag: JPBalkenende 17%, Geert Wilders 15%.
Maurice DeHond: JPBalkenende 25%, Geert Wilders 17%.

EenVandaag asked sixteen thousand voters.
Maurice DeHond asked 1500 voters.

Oh well.


Far-out favourite, according to both pollsters is a relative unknown....

EenVandaag: Job Cohen 52%.
Maurice DeHond: Job Cohen 55%.

Posted by: At The Back of the Hill | Mar 13, 2010 12:37:23 AM

Israel’s partners in peace are Chicago politicians; they kiss babies and when you’re not looking they steal the baby’s lollypop. Israel see’s these things but continues to play their game. There has to be a point when the relationship is just too far gone to salvage. The best thing Israel can do is put US/Israeli relations on hold until Obama is gone. If Israel would do that Obama would have destroyed more foreign relationships than G Bush supposedly did. There is no reason for the US to treat Israel this way; it is playing into the Arabs hands.

Posted by: Sonny USA | Mar 24, 2010 2:06:13 PM

Post a comment