Mahmoud Abbas strongly condemned Israel doing the PA's job:
"Israel will have to assume all the consequences of its barbaric crimes against our people," said a statement from the office of president Mahmud Abbas.The use of the word "barbaric" is interesting. To my knowledge, Abbas has never used that word before, and yet now he is using it to describe Israeli actions against undeniable terrorists who have been behind suicide bombings and other attacks on civilians.
"Our people remain attached to their land and will continue their resistance to free from it the occupiers and the settlers and to establish a state with Jerusalem as the capital," it said.
"These barbaric crimes reveal the true face of Israel, which speaks loudly about peace and security all the while committing murders and executions against our people," said the statement.
What is Abbas' reason to use that terminology?
The reason is that this same word was used in a different context last week:
"I condemn in the strongest possible terms the terrorist attack in Jerusalem that targeted innocent students at the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva," Bush said in a statement released at the White House after the president spoke with Olmert on the phone. "This barbaric and vicious attack on innocent civilians deserves the condemnation of every nation."Mahmoud Abbas relies on the world's considering Palestinian Arabs to be the ultimate victims. This is a conscious strategy on their part - to hammer away at how they are always, always victimized and have no responsibility for any violence ever, how everything is Israel's fault, no matter what happens.
Then, last week, a vicious and brutal attack was unleashed on kids that really are innocent victims, taking away the momentum of the perceptions of Abbas' culture of victimhood.
By George Bush using the word "barbaric" the Palestinian Arabs found themselves on the PR defensive, and PR is their major weapon - worth the sacrifice of hundreds of their own.
So Israel's attack against terrorists in Bethlehem needed to be spun in such a way that Abbas could claim once again the mantle of undisputed victimhood. Hence he specifically used the word "barbaric" three times in the statement (also referring to the "barbaric holocaust" in Gaza) in order to make the deaths of 5 terrorists worse than the massacre of 7 teenagers and a young adult in school.
This betrays Abbas' real feelings. He does not distinguish between Palestinian Arab civilians and terrorists - their deaths are, according to Abbas, equally reprehensible (and the deaths of Islamic Jihad terrorists may in fact be worse.) And he also betrays his feelings that the lives of Arab terrorists are worth far more than the lives of innocent Jews, as can be seen by his pretend "condemnation" of the yeshiva massacre.
His statement is also interesting in that it sure sounds like he is referring to all of Israel as "occupied" and that "resistance" - i.e., terror - is the proper way to "free" it.
Which is entirely consistent with his statements of two weeks ago:
In an interview with the Jordanian daily al-Dustur, Abbas said that he was opposed to an armed struggle against Israel - for the time being.Now it is crystal clear how "moderate" Mahmoud Abbas is. His opposition to terrorism is only tactical - he supports the morality of murdering random Jews in Israel, just not the timing."At this present juncture, I am opposed to the armed struggle because we can't succeed in it, but maybe in the future things will be different," he said.
His vehement reaction to Israel's killing jihadists proves that to Abbas, the terrorists are the real heroes. By any objective yardstick, he is no "moderate" and his goals are exactly the same as those of his heroes in the Islamic Jihad.
If anyone has been proven to be "barbaric" in the past few days, it is Mahmoud Abbas.
Previous articles:
Mahmoud Abbas, the warmongering extremistAbbas' support for terror
Fatah official: Abbas wants Israel destroyed
Mahmoud Abbas: Terrorist