Monday, September 24, 2007
Elder of ZiyonA couple of days ago, some Fatah members shot at a Hamas jeep in Gaza and allegedly injured two people. Some new group named the Abu Ghraib Martyrs or something like that took credit. This is hardly news, and in fact it was only reported in the pro-Fatah Palestine Press Agency.
What is more notable is the vitriol shown for Hamas by the Fatah supporters on the site. This is a bit more graphic than what one would see in even the most raucous Western websites. The autotranslation breaks down when the source material is written poorly, but the gist is pretty clear:
As with the Arab/Israeli conflict, the major source for the hate is the humiliation and shame suffered by the losers. The Shiite/Sunni divide, as with the JudeoChristian/Muslim divide, is not nearly as important as the fact that in these cultures there is no greater disgrace than losing a battle that you felt should have won. The words of these people are dripping with the desire for revenge and restoration of what little perceived glory Fatah once had.
Notice also the frequent invocation of "Allah the merciful" as they describe how much they want to butcher the Syrian/Iranian/Shiite/Hamas pigs. I don't think that Islam is as important a factor in their hate as their Arab honor/shame culture, but it certainly is a useful tool in magnifying the seething that is dripping from their keyboards and tongues.
Make no mistake, though - as much as they hate their fellow Muslims, their hatred for the entire non-Muslim world is much greater, with "Zionists" and "Crusaders" at the top of the list. The very idea that people who are raised in such an environment have the ability to even conceive of living in peace with Israel, or on a global level that Arabs or Muslims who subscribe to this worldview can learn to truly accept Western hegemony, is ludicrous. Being the rulers is where honor lies, and being ruled - even indirectly, or even to a small extent - is the definition of disgrace. Avoiding disgrace and trying to recapture honor is the driving force behind the entire Islamic war on the West, and everything else is BS that is meant to obscure this primal, visceral rage.
What is more notable is the vitriol shown for Hamas by the Fatah supporters on the site. This is a bit more graphic than what one would see in even the most raucous Western websites. The autotranslation breaks down when the source material is written poorly, but the gist is pretty clear:
Yes, it was the first good will, God willing winter rain and loss of blood
The Awadnakam you sons of adultery operations Here are the sons of Conquest are you strike again, and tell you that pork lo saying the rain Everyone to hell you build beggars, prostitutes who Basoko Pkponh Zahar of pork and Siam Yellowdog and Haniya Bugger Meselmeh liar and Mashaal Queer Shiites because you analyze this and the Burktm explosions and forward you sons of Conquest heroes and blessed Sutantkm tremendous victory or martyrdom and the mercenaries and lackeys of the Zionist occupation Shiite Iranian Syrian Country
Name of God the Merciful: Oh Burktm Giants blessed you pure driving trigger always blessed Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and Al-Quds military wing of the Islamic Jihad movement in Palestine yes pursued those pigs in Ghorham to Ahgo Almlain those who abandoned their God continued Dharbackm continued Jihad against the enemy of Allah and your enemy, you will bring glory of Jerusalem and Park God you forward Dear Jihadists, With greetings stormy Thundershowers
Blessed hands and wish that the news is true this gap kick Almenkellepin eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and initiator darkest also wish Conquest brave men to be very high security alert and be the person responsible for dealing with only one and that is a link to others so as not to be revealed as not official God as we wish them good selection Mujahideen selection of concealment of work and strict confidentiality, ethics and God used succession
The beginning of the end for owners of the Shiite doctrine in Palestine: Welcome these operations superb indelible lines injustice line and the line We at the hands of these heroes mujahideen sons opened honest
O Lord, drive and hit a shot against the Shiites Humasaoyen Rehana O Lord God of injustice
We say death and disgrace and shame of Savoyen infidel dogs Iran and Syria
And very soon we waited Oh dogs Hamas death and hell and Nhaitakm will not all of you will not exclude you only need one home and declared his innocence of Hamas Alangas
And tomorrow for the warden soon .. It is a struggle .. Jihad victory or martyrdom
May God never ماننساا our land and kill you Dignity sons Conquest and cruel الحمساوي putschists and the scourge of the next The punching of a fire Revolution to Mathdi Aztec destroy Beniankam Obsolescent Yamelchiat death
Kill them and the injuries are not Tafhein These Essou God, you and we each and every bullet you Alvthaoyen O heroes May peace and God's mercy and blessings be upon you
As with the Arab/Israeli conflict, the major source for the hate is the humiliation and shame suffered by the losers. The Shiite/Sunni divide, as with the JudeoChristian/Muslim divide, is not nearly as important as the fact that in these cultures there is no greater disgrace than losing a battle that you felt should have won. The words of these people are dripping with the desire for revenge and restoration of what little perceived glory Fatah once had.
Notice also the frequent invocation of "Allah the merciful" as they describe how much they want to butcher the Syrian/Iranian/Shiite/Hamas pigs. I don't think that Islam is as important a factor in their hate as their Arab honor/shame culture, but it certainly is a useful tool in magnifying the seething that is dripping from their keyboards and tongues.
Make no mistake, though - as much as they hate their fellow Muslims, their hatred for the entire non-Muslim world is much greater, with "Zionists" and "Crusaders" at the top of the list. The very idea that people who are raised in such an environment have the ability to even conceive of living in peace with Israel, or on a global level that Arabs or Muslims who subscribe to this worldview can learn to truly accept Western hegemony, is ludicrous. Being the rulers is where honor lies, and being ruled - even indirectly, or even to a small extent - is the definition of disgrace. Avoiding disgrace and trying to recapture honor is the driving force behind the entire Islamic war on the West, and everything else is BS that is meant to obscure this primal, visceral rage.
September 23rd, 2007 at 2:38 pm
My goodness! You’re all still at it. I salute your indefatigability.
Mr. Abourezk’s mention of Camp David piqued my interest as this was the issue that led me to takes sides on the Israeli/Arab confab. Given that we had the Israelis and the Palestinians in failed negotiations, why would one simply believe either side? It seems reasonable to at least turn to the mediators for some understanding. In this case, the two chief functionaries were Clinton and Ross, both of whom categorically blamed Arafat.
Given the enormous cachet that would have attached to solving this issue, it seems highly likely that the mediators did in fact seek a real solution and the balance of probability strongly suggests their accounts should be reliable.
Even if not, even if the stories about how it was a bad deal are true, it was the best offer ever. (I know this because the media in general was quite adamant and even at that time when I paid less attention to world affairs, I knew the general media was hardly pro-Israel.) Given that Israel was bending so far, what on earth was the point of not only not negotiating further, but starting an Intifada? It speaks volumes.
September 23rd, 2007 at 5:41 pm
I’m given to wonder whether both Elder and Brzezinski are in touch with reality. When Dennis Ross left the government, he returned to a component of the Israeli Lobby to work. I guess it’s OK to identify Wolf Blitzer as a part of the Lobby, mostly because he worked for AIPAC. If these folks deny that AIPAC is part of the Lobby, then I find it impossible to continue this debate.
And yes, I think Bill Clinton lied a lot about a lot of issues when he was president.
September 23rd, 2007 at 8:51 pm
Fair enough Mr. Abourezk, but I offered an argument even if Clinton & Ross were wrong. You have not countered what I said for that case.
It also strikes me that if someone working for “a component” of The Lobby is automatically disqualified from talking on this issue, then the same must apply to you on the other side for you have made your biases very plain.
September 23rd, 2007 at 10:21 pm
I appreciate that Mr. Abourezk finally acknowledged a couple of my comments, even if they were extremely peripheral to the major points I was making. (Wolf Blitzer indeed edited an AIPAC newsletter some thirty years ago although he never lobbied for AIPAC, and Dennis Ross indeed works for a pro-Israel think tank now - although I am not aware of any earlier work he may have done for the “Lobby” that Mr. Abourezk implies from the word “returned.”)
The implication that Mr. Abourezk is making, of course, is that anyone who is pro-Israel on any level is assumed to be a liar.
While I gave specific reasons why the books written by Ilan Pappe and Clayton Swisher can be considered unreliable, from their own words and/or omissions as well as my own original research, the best that Mr. Abourezk can do to cast aspersions of Ross’ book is to mention that he now works for that evil “Lobby.” Using that logic, of course, would allow us to assume that Abourezk is equally suspect for being an uncompromising supporter of Arab causes. I prefer to stick with facts, not guilt by association, and any problems I have with Mr. Abourezk come from his own words, most specifically his praise for Hezbollah and Hamas terrorists that was mentioned earlier in this thread and that he has studiously ignored so far.
In the end, the biggest flaw with Abourezk’s positions is that he consistently ascribes the best of intentions to Arab and Muslim countries and the worst of intentions to Israel and, often, the US. In one particularly hilarious paragraph in his review above he says that “both Iran and Syria have proposed a nuclear weapons free Middle East.” The reported events of recent weeks by British journalists who can hardly be considered pro-Israel indicate that not only did Syria have a clandestine nuclear weapons program, but also that there was a major chemical weapons accident this past summer killing dozens of Syrians and Iranian engineers with WMD that were meant to be placed on missiles. But Abourezk, quite willing to publicly assume that anybody who supports Israel is not trustworthy, has no such skepticism about the public pronouncements of dictators and the world’s worst human rights abusers.
This, in a nutshell, is the problem with Mr. Abourezk’s positions on the Middle East and of the “Israel Lobby.”