Abu Mazen's security adviser calls for 'armed resistance'
Former 'Palestinian' intelligence chief Tawfik Tirawai, who is currently 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen's security adviser, has issued a call for 'armed resistance' in light of the fact that the 'Palestinians' are not being offered everything they want in the current 'negotiations.'
"As things stand, we won't
have a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip even 20 years
from now. Therefore, we should consider resuming the path of armed
resistance. Maybe that will bring about change," Tirawi told the
Lebanese news channel Al-Mayadeen.
Tirawi, the PA's former intelligence chief,
stressed that the Palestinian will not agree to the outline currently
promoted by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and warned that both the
Palestinians and Israel should prepare for the security escalation that
is sure to follow.
"All Palestinian factions agree that we must
reject Kerry's plan. We cannot accept any of the principles detailed in
it … We have to work towards an agreement that would include all of the
[Palestinian] factions -- those under the PLO's leadership and those
external to it," he said, referring to Hamas and the Islamic Jihad.
Asked whether resuming violence does not
counter the principles set by Abbas himself following the Second
Intifada, Tirawi noted that the Palestinians "have never forsaken the
path of diplomacy, just like we have never forsaken the path of armed
resistance, which is an inseparable part of how we work."
Fatah, he noted, "does not dismiss any path
that may help us realize the Palestinian vision of having an independent
state with Jerusalem as its capital."
A new violent intifada is probably the inevitable result of the inevitable failure of the current 'negotiations.' But at least John FN Kerry got to spend some time in the limelight.
Israeli anti-Kerry demonstrators outside US consulate
I used this picture rather than the one on the JPost's website, because I know the man in the picture and I suspect that a lot of you know him too. He's Yisrael Medad, and he's an American Israeli who writes a blog called My Right Word.
Dozens of protesters gathered to condemn US Secretary of State John
Kerry Sunday at Jerusalem’s US Consulate for remarks he made Thursday
about the prospect of a third intifada due to Israeli intransigence,
which they said resulted in the Friday firebombing of a car in Judea.
The
protest was scheduled to feature the charred remains of the vehicle
allegedly firebombed by Palestinian terrorists Friday in Gush Etzion,
narrowing killing the married couple inside, but police did not permit
it to be delivered to the event sponsored by the YESHA Council.
In
Kerry’s statements, broadcast during a joint interview between Channel 2
and Palestine TV, he deemed Judea and Samaria settlements as
illegitimate, warned of Israel’s isolation if peace talks fail, and
asked, “Does Israel want a third intifada?”
Participants at the
Sunday morning protest denounced Kerry for inciting Friday’s violence,
which resulted in the couple’s hospitalization at Jerusalem’s Ein Kerem
Medical Center for moderate burns after their vehicle was struck by
several Molotov Cocktails.
Shai, who attended the demonstration,
but requested his last name be omitted, said his daughter’s teacher was
the driver of the vehicle.
“Where else in the world does your
daughter’s teacher not show up for school because miraculously she
survived a fire bombing?” he asked.
Deeming Kerry’s words a
“self-fulfilling prophecy,” Shai said he strongly questioned the
mediator’s impartiality, blaming him for the attack.
“He’s essentially acting as spokesperson for the Palestinian Authority, which continues to incite violence,” he said.
Orit Struck (Jewish Home) has become the latest MK to pen an open letter to US Secretary of State John FN Kerry blasting him as a dishonest broker.
The Bayit Yehudi MK thanked Kerry in her letter, saying his words
"finally and most strikingly revealed the extent to which you cannot
serve as an honest broker."
"Whose side are you on, Mr. Secretary?
On the side of terrorists who are waging an Intifada against women and
children? Or on the side of the soldiers who are saving human lives?"
she asked.
According to Struck, "the Intifada is already here."
She recounted her bus ride from Jerusalem to her home in Hebron on
Monday, during which the bus was ambushed by Palestinian terrorists
throwing Molotov cocktails.
"This serious incident is not an
isolated one, but rather one in a series of many similar events that
have been occurring in recent weeks on a daily basis throughout Judea
and Samaria, especially in wake of the release of terrorists carried out
as part of the agreement you brokered," Struck wrote.
Struck also
explained that it would be irresponsible to remove the IDF from the
West Bank, because the Second Intifada was only curbed by Operation
Defensive Shield, in which soldiers were returned to the area.
In
addition, Struck pointed out that the area Kerry refers to as a future
Palestinian state is "Israel's historic homeland," which includes
Hebron, her residence and "the city of Abraham and King David and the
Cave of the Patriarchs [that] was purchased by the father of our nation
for his descendants after him. Beit El, Shiloh and Efrat are all noted
in the Bible as Jewish towns, and when we returned to them after 2,000
years of exile, we were returning home."
She added that Jews
lived in these places centuries before the advent of Christianity and
over a millennium before the birth of Islam.
Finally, Struck
wrote, "we are not frightened by your threats...Your threats will not
have the outcome that you intend, but they have already proved very
effective in revealing exactly how unsuited you are to serve as an
honest broker."
Kerry's threats to Israel if a 'peace agreement' is not reached have set off many Israeli MK's. The threats were made in an interview on Channel 2 on Thursday night.
Just yesterday, US Secretary of State John FN Kerry warned that there would be a third intifada if Israel does not give in to the 'Palestinians' demands.
This morning, a 'peaceful Palestinian' took him up on it by firebombing an Israeli mother and her three children as they drove near Efrat.
The wife suffered moderate burns; the husband was also lightly
injured. Both were taken into custody by Magen David Adom medics and
transferred to Hadassah Ein Kerem Medical Center in Jerusalem. The
couple was lucky to have escaped the vehicle, which was engulfed
completely by flames. IDF staff is conducting sweeps of the region in
search of the perpetrators.
The head of the Gush Etzion Regional Board, Davidi Pearl, responded
to the terror attack by stating "it is a miracle today that we did not
begin the morning with the funeral of two of our citizens [. . .] Until
when will the government stop burying its head in the sand and running
blindly after the peace talks which have never yet existed?" Pearl
asked.
He continued: "How long can we wait? The government which releases
terrorists - which among the MKs can wash their hands clean [of that
decision] by saying that they, themselves, haven't spilled any blood?
What else has to happen to us until they realize that there is no one
with whom to discuss peace? When will they realize that the other side
has never ceased and will not cease to educate their children for
incitement, hatred, and murder? I call on the Prime Minister to get a
grip [on the situation] and to stop [. . .] to bring terror into our
homes and to stop the lawlessness."
Pearl's remarks follow a wave of terror attacks in Judea and Samaria since early in the weekOn Monday,
five firebombs were thrown at a bus carrying several passengers at
about midnight, among them Bayit Yehudi MK Orit Struk. On Wednesday,
terrorists fired on IDF soldiers near Modi'in and attempted to run one down. Just yesterday,
the IDF thwarted an attempted terror attack at terror hotspot Tapuah
junction. Then, a Palestinian Arab terrorist tried to stab a soldier
after firing a flare near a popular hitchhiking post.
John FN Kerry could - God forbid - have blood on his hands soon.
"The alternative to getting back to the talks is the potential of chaos," Kerry said. "Does Israel want a third intifada?"
The
Secretary of State's warnings of a third intifada came two days after a
poll conducted by the Arab World For Research & Development showed
that only 29% of West Bank and Gaza Palestinians said they would support
a third intifada, though 60% believe one is possible.
Kerry's
dire warnings echoed comments he made in Jordan after meeting King
Abdullah II, and before a second meeting in two days with Palestinian
President Mahmoud Abbas.
In a signal that the three-month old
talks were indeed in a troubled spot, Kerry extended his visit another
day and is scheduled to meet with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on
Friday morning, for the third time since Wednesday. A meeting the two
held Wednesday evening, following Kerry's first meeting with Abbas, went
on past midnight, Israeli officials said.
"I believe that if we
do not resolve the issues between Palestinians and Israelis, if we do
not find a way to find peace, there will be an increasing isolation of
Israel, three will be an increasing campaign of the de-legitimization of
Israel that has been taking place on an international basis," he said
in the interview..
"If we do not resolve the question of
settlements, and who lives where and what rights they have; if we don't
end the presence of Israeli soldiers perpetually in the West Bank, then
there will be an increasing feeling that if you cannot get peace with a
leadership that is committed to non-violence, we may wind up with a
leadership that is committed to violence," he added.
In a press
conference alongside Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh in Amman on
Thursday, Kerry reiterated this theme. "What is the alternative to
peace?" he asked. "
Prolonged continued conflict. The absence of peace
really means you have a sort of low-grade conflict, war."
It sounds like Kerry wants another intifada, because he believes that it will force Israel to make concessions it would not otherwise make. Well, he underestimates our resolve.
And by the way, this kind of talk is really going to encourage the 'Palestinians' to be flexible, isn't it?
Abu Bluff calls for third intifada; 'Martyrs' in waiting
In a speech to Fatah leaders in Ramallah on Thursday, the oh so 'Moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen accused Israel of seeking a third intifada. Meanwhile, Abu Mazen's primary military force, the al-Aqsa 'Martyrs' Brigades, announced that they are just awaiting orders.
Addressing Fatah leaders in Ramallah, Abbas said that Israel was
“apparently seeking to create confusion and chaos in the Palestinian
territories.”
Referring to the killing of two Palestinian teenagers near Tulkarem
earlier Thursday, Abbas asked: “How can peaceful demonstrations lead to
the death of two martyrs and before that others? Allah knows what is
going on.”
Charging a guard post with Molotov cocktails (seven were found at the scene afterward) is a 'peaceful demonstration'? Oh and by the way, the unit that was manning that post was Netzach Yehuda... the Nachal Charedi unit....
Abbas said that Israel’s actions show that it wants a “security
escalation” in the Palestinian territories. “If Israel really cared
about security, it would not be using lethal force against
demonstrators,” he added.
And if the 'Palestinians' really wanted to keep the quiet, they wouldn't use the death of a terrorist from malignant cancer as an excuse to stir up the pot.
He added that Israel alone bears full responsibility for what is
happening on Thursday and in the future. “Apparently Israel wants a
third intifada,” Abbas continued. “They want to avoid fulfilling their
obligations. They are apparently not interested, as a matter of
principle, in any step toward peace.”
Israel has nothing to gain from a third intifada. But apparently the 'Palestinians' think they have something to gain.
Meanwhile, armed members of Fatah’s armed wing, Aqsa Martyrs Brigades,
told reporters in Hebron that they are waiting for a “green light” from
Abbas to “respond to Israeli crimes.”
The gunmen spoke to reporters during the funeral of prisoner Maissara Abu Hamdiyeh, who died on Tuesday of cancer.
On Tuesday, the IDF
stopped a Palestinian in the Jordan Valley who carried four improvised
explosives.
Near Bethlehem, Palestinians threw stones at soldiers,
lightly wounding one. They also threw stones at soldiers near
Ramallah.
Separately, in a raid on a Palestinian home in Hebron, the IDF
found a cache of weapons, including bullets and night vision
equipment.
“Our forces are working day and night,” Alon told Channel 2.
The IDF has arrested Palestinians who have harmed Israelis such as those who
threw stones at cars on Route 5 earlier this month, he said.
But he added
that still, “there are scores of intelligence reports of attempts to execute
terror attacks. I am happy that we ended 2012 and the last few months without
fatalities [from terror attacks] in the region of Judea and Samaria.”
The
IDF, Alon said, has also taken steps to help diffuse the tense situation in the
West Bank such as deporting to Gaza earlier this month the Palestinian prisoner
Ayman Sharawneh who had been on a hunger strike.
Alon who signed the
deportation order said, “on one hand we have to maintain our legitimacy, refrain
from rash moves and make arrests when necessary.” On the other hand, he said,
“we need to know how to dismantle land minds.”
The IDF, he said, seeks to
find a balance between these two objectives.
You have to wonder how much trouble Alon has keeping his job from his personal life. His wife is a member of Machsom Watch, a radical Leftist group that harasses IDF soldiers at checkpoints. Remember Ehud Olmert?
Here's Soccer Dad's Middle East Media Sampler for Monday, March 18.
Cheerleading the Intifada
The New York Times has done it again. Less then two weeks after
publishing an intellectual attack against Israel, it publishes an
article glorifying physical attacks on Israel. The front page story of
yesterday's New York Times Magazine, Is This Where the Third Intifada Will Start?
by Ben Ehrenriech. (The cover has the more provocative phrase, "If
there is a third intifada, we want to be the ones who started it."
Chemi Shalev of the left wing paper Ha'aretz lets us in on a little secret about Ehrenreich:
In 2009, Ehrenreich published a direct attack on Zionism in the Los
Angeles Times entitled “Zionism is the Problem”. In the article,
Ehrenreich castigates not only the “deplorable conditions in which
Palestinians live and die in Gaza and the West Bank” but “the Zionist
tenets on which the state was founded “as well.
“The problem is functional”, Ehrenreich writes. “Founding a modern state
on a single ethnic or religious identity in a territory that is
ethnically and religiously diverse leads inexorably either to politics
of exclusion or to wholesale ethnic cleansing. Put simply, the problem
is Zionism.”
In other words, Ehrenreich is every bit the anti-Israel ideologue as
Joseph Levine who recently explained why Israel could not legitimately
be both a Jewish and a democratic state. The article is written in a
measured, professorial tone. So the outrageous aspects of the article
will be omissions that indicate that Ehrenreich is not telling the whole
story.
For example, Ehrenrecih writes:
But little was resolved in Oslo. A second intifada erupted in 2000, at
first mostly following the model set by the earlier uprising.
Palestinians blocked roads and threw stones.
But the second intifada didn't just erupt. It was orchestrated by Yasser Arafat. The available evidence is overwhelming. But Ehrenreich isn't interested.
At the blog, This Ongoing War, the Roths note another omission:
That's all he writes about Ahlam Tamimi but we can tell you more. She is
a Jordanian who was 21 years old and the news-reader on official
Palestinian Authority television when she signed on with Hamas to become
a terrorist. She engineered, planned and helped execute a massacre in
the center of Jerusalem on a hot summer afternoon in 2001. She chose the
target, a restaurant filled with Jewish children. And she brought the
bomb. The outcome (15 killed, a sixteenth still in a vegetative state
today, 130 injured) was so uplifting to her that she has gone on camera
again and again to say, smiling into the camera lens, how proud she is
of what she did. She is entirely free of regret. A convicted felon and a
mass-murderer convicted on multiple homicide charges, she has never
denied the role she embraced and justifies it fully.
Yet all the NY Times says about Nabi Saleh’s favourite one-time resident
is that she was an escort “who now lives in exile in Jordan”. Period.
This is no mere oversight. The editors at the New York Times showcased
this same psychopath once before, six years ago. Then, as now, we felt
someone needed to push back and we posted two blog articles: “7-Aug-07:
Hot House: Cold Truths” and “28-Jun-07: About sweet-faced young women”,
and got a little attention for a while. But it was clear to us that
those who thought they perceived greatness of spirit in the woman
continued to do so.
One of the children killed at Sbarro's by Ahlam Tamimi, was the Roth's 15 year old daughter Malki.
Israelly Cool notes the Roth's story and adds another detail that was somehow omitted:
I will add the following: As I posted recently with regards to a
Ha’aretz puff piece on Bassem Tamimi, his Tamimi Press Facebook page
clearly indicates he is fighting for a one-state solution – a
palestinian state – and supports terrorism and the terrorists who
perpetrate heinous killings in support of this very goal.
Ehrenreich's goal is to portray another intifada as a justified non-violent response to Israeli "occupation." But as Elder of Ziyon notes, rock throwing isn't exactly non-violent:
Too bad Mr. Ehrenreich didn't think of pushing back on Bassem Tamimi's
irritation at justifying his idea that stone throwing is supposedly
"non-violent."
Because today a three year old Israeli girl is in critical condition as a result of a stone-throwing attack.
Then again, that story cannot be found in the New York Times, so it must not be very important.
It's like the reporters wants it to happen. He wants another violent intifada in which hundreds will be killed, God forbid.
Believe it or not this isn't the first time the New York Times has glamorized an intifada. The Sunday Magazine of October 29, 1989 featured Inside the Intifada by then Israel correspondent, Joel Brinkley.
In the light from the nearly full moon, the shebab, crouching behind the
low boulders, watch the bus approach. Sitting in a front seat is a
soldier in olive green, pointing his M-16 out the window. In the jeeps
leading and following the bus, troops also sit with their weapons aimed
into the dark and their plexiglass face shields lowered. As they reach
the town the soldiers hear several shrill whistles - the shebab
signaling to one another. From the convoy, as if in reply, comes the
sound of rifle bolts snapping into place, loading bullets into chambers.
As the bus lumbers into range, the young Palestinians adjust their face
masks and rise quietly in the dark. Each takes careful aim and with all
his might hurls his baseball-sized stone. Even as the rocks fly, they
turn and run, not waiting to see the results.
...
Before the crunching sound of shattering glass has stopped reverberating
across the field, the soldiers are on the ground, firing volleys of
rubber and steel bullets at forms they think they see moving in the
dark. The driver, Itzik Meuchas, also leaps down, waving a pistol,
agitated and angry.
Joel Brinkley currently teaches journalism at Stanford University. I
wonder if he discusses the ethics of running with a group of vandals
intent on attacking civilians.
But the bigger problem is with the New York Times. The paper runs
frequent editorials castigating the Israeli government for not doing
enough for peace. However the paper uses its influence not to encourage
compromise, but to promote and prolong Palestinian grievances against
Israel. The hypocrisy of the New York is astounding.
“We see our stones as our message,” Bassem explained. The message they
carried, he said, was “We don’t accept you.” While Bassem spoke
admiringly of Mahatma Gandhi, he didn’t worry over whether
stone-throwing counted as violence. The question annoyed him: Israel
uses far greater and more lethal force on a regular basis, he pointed
out, without being asked to clarify its attitude toward violence. If the
loincloth functioned as the sign of Gandhi’s resistance, of India’s
nakedness in front of British colonial might, Bassem said, “Our sign is
the stone.” The weekly clashes with the I.D.F. were hence in part
symbolic. The stones were not just flinty yellow rocks, but symbols of
defiance, of a refusal to submit to occupation, regardless of the odds.
The army’s weapons bore messages of their own: of economic and
technological power, of international support. More than one resident of
Nabi Saleh reminded me that the tear gas used there is made by a
company based in Pennsylvania.
“This is the worst time for us,” Bassem confided to me
last summer. He meant not just that the villagers have less to show for
their sacrifices each week, but that things felt grim outside the
village too. Everyone I spoke with who was old enough to remember agreed
that conditions for Palestinians are far worse now than they were
before the first intifada. The checkpoints, the raids, the permit
system, add up to more daily humiliation than Palestinians have ever
faced. The number of Israeli settlers living in the West Bank has more
than tripled since the Oslo Accords. Assaults on Palestinians by
settlers are so common that they rarely made the news. The resistance,
though, remained limited to a few scattered villages like Nabi Saleh and
a small urban youth movement.
Really? Where are all the victims? Where are all the dead bodies? Where are all the funerals? Where are all the 'settlers' bragging about how many 'Palestinians' they have killed?
I sat down one afternoon in Ramallah with Samir Shehadeh, a former
literature professor from Nabi Saleh who was one of the intellectual
architects of the first intifada and whom I met several times at
Bassem’s house. I reminded him of the car accident that ignited the
first uprising and asked what kind of spark it would take to mobilize
Palestinians to fight again. “The situation is 1,000 times worse,” he
said. “There are thousands of possible sparks,” and still nothing has
happened.
It's like the reporters wants it to happen. He wants another violent intifada in which hundreds will be killed, God forbid. And look what he's complaining about: He's complaining that many 'Palestinians' have hope of a normal life:
Worse than any corruption, though, was the apparent normalcy.
Settlements are visible on the neighboring hilltops, but there are no
checkpoints inside Ramallah. The I.D.F. only occasionally enters the
city, and usually only at night. Few Palestinians still work inside
Israel, and not many can scrape a living from the fields. For the
thousands of waiters, clerks, engineers, warehouse workers, mechanics
and bureaucrats who spend their days in the city and return to their
villages every evening, Ramallah — which has a full-time population of
less than 100,000 — holds out the possibility of forgetting the
occupation and pursuing a career, saving up for a car, sending the
children to college.
...
Bassem saw no easy way to break the torpor and ignite a more widespread
popular resistance. “They have the power,” he said of the P.A., “more
than the Israelis, to stop us.” The Palestinian Authority employs
160,000 Palestinians, which means it controls the livelihoods of about a
quarter of West Bank households. One night I asked Bassem and Bilal,
who works for the Ministry of Public Health, how many people in Nabi
Saleh depend on P.A. salaries. It took them a few minutes to add up the
names. “Let’s say two-thirds of the village,” Bilal concluded.
The article, which some may interpret as encouraging a third
intifada, is decidedly sympathetic to the Palestinian cause and hostile
both to the IDF as well as to the Palestinian “Ramallah bubble”, which,
the author maintains, serves as an inhibitor to the “popular struggle”
of Palestinian villagers.
The article is likely to elicit sharp condemnation from Israeli and
Jewish critics who view the New York Times as harboring anti-Israeli
sentiments. The timing of the article, its prominent placement, its
provocative headline and its undeniable one-sidedness will all serve as
fodder for the critics, but their main line of attack may be the “track
record” of Ehrenreich himself.
However the article is attacked, it ought to be attacked. There is no excuse for this kind of bias in the media.
'Obama visit to Temple Mount a declaration of war'
Hamas continues to seethe about the possibility that President Hussein Obama will visit the Temple Mount next week, calling such a visit a 'declaration of war' (Hat Tip: Memeorandum).
Mushir al-Masri, a Hamas spokesman, called for a third intifada if
Obama visits the contested religious site in Jerusalem’s Old City
between Israelis and Muslims.
Public Security Minister Yitzchak Aharonovich believes the warning
will lead to violence flaring up in the region ahead of the president’s
visit.
“The Palestinians have not said the final word yet and we expect that
there will be attempts to take advantage of the upcomingevents, like
the visit by Barack Obama, in order to continue the violence,”
Aharonovich told Israel National News.
White House officials have said Obama doesn’t plan on visiting the Temple Mount during his trip.
In other words, like claims previously made that the Jews were destroying the Temple Mount, this is just another 'Palestinian' attempt to incite violence.
“We don’t want another intifada,” says Fatah leader in Dheisheh
Mohammed al-Jafari, facing the rows of new, empty graves. “We are the
last generation you can make peace with. There’s a five-year window of
opportunity.”
The new plot is near a small graveyard where dozens of martyrs from
Dheisheh are buried. Anyone killed in clashes with Israel is a martyr to
them − including youths who threw stones at military vehicles, armed
militants who died in clashes with soldiers and suicide bombers.
But younger 'Palestinians' do want a fight.
The younger generation, however, is spoiling for a fight. At a
procession in Dheisheh marking the Fatah’s 48th anniversary in January,
youngsters brandished weapons. Young people from al-Arroub this week
threw stones at cars on Route 60 until IDF troops drove them away.
Teens and children from Aida have been throwing stones, firebombs and
grenades toward Rachel’s Tomb, located in a Muslim cemetery adjacent to
the camp, for the past four months. A few years ago Israel surrounded
the site with walls. During Operation Defensive Shield 75 firebombs were
hurled at it within an hour. A catapulted explosive charge passed over
the wall and exploded in a soldiers’ guard post, which was empty at the
time.
Every clash with soldiers is filmed from local rooftops and uploaded
onto YouTube. Following the disturbances, the Border Police troops in
the area have been reinforced by snipers and commandos.
...
“If you tell them there’s no point in throwing stones they call you a
Shin Bet collaborator,” says al-Jaffrey. “So we ask people their age to
tell them they’re wrong. It would be a shame to have young people killed
here.”
More than ten years after the outbreak of the Second
Intifada, there are still journalists, former security officials, and
pundits who raise questions about the role of the Palestinian Authority
in the devastating violence during which suicide bombing attacks struck
Israel’s major cities, leaving more than a thousand dead and many more
permanently maimed.
What he has compiled shows:
This body of material, presented here in an unvarnished
way, reveals that Yasser Arafat and important segments of the
Palestinian leadership at that time were directly responsible for what
happened and no amount of revisionist history can exonerate Arafat for
standing behind one of the bloodiest periods in Israel’s modern history.
Halevi of course presented statements of intent. Halevi covers them
beginning with the earliest by Imad Falluji and continuing until Suha
Arafat's latest revelations. I'd like to point out two events that often
escape scrutiny.
The first was a report in Ha'aretz that was captured by IMRA at the time.
Over the past several weeks, the Palestinian Authority
has granted extended vacation leaves to dozens of jailed Hamas and
Islamic Jihad activists, among them militants who were involved in
serious terror attacks against Israel.Ha'aretz: PA granted dozens of
jailed Islamic Jihad, Hamas terrorists "extended vacation"
This was reported September 18, 2000, ten days before Ariel Sharon walked on the Temple Mount.
Also the first reported casualty of the so called "Aqsa intifada" was David Biri, an 19 year old soldier.
Sgt. David Biri died of wounds sustained in a bombing
near Netzarim in the Gaza Strip. Two pipe bombs were detonated
electronically by Palestinian terrorists hiding on the side of the road
as several civilian cars, escorted by an army jeep, drove by.
Sgt. Biri was killed September 27, a day before Sharon visited the
Temple Mount. The manner of his killing showed planning. Clearly there
was already a heightened level of organized violence against Israel
prior to the official beginning of the so called intifada.
It's important to remember that the second intifada was not a
spontaneous uprising against the occupation but a coordinated campaign
of violence against Israel. Now there are suggestions that a new intifada has started.
The New York Times reports Palestinians Dispute Israel’s Findings on a Prisoner’s Death:
“I hold Israel fully responsible for killing Arafat
Jaradat,” added Mr. Qaraka, who earlier on Sunday called for an
international investigation into the death. “The Israeli story was
forged and full of lies.”
The 4,500 Palestinians in Israeli jails refused meals on Sunday to
protest Mr. Jaradat’s death, and hundreds of Palestinians demonstrated
in several cities and villages in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
After days of such demonstrations, which have included violent clashes
between Palestinians and Israeli soldiers and settlers, Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu’s special envoy, Isaac Molho, sent a message to the
Palestinian leadership on Sunday that Israeli officials described as an
“unequivocal demand to restore quiet.” Israel also transferred to the
Palestinian Authority $100 million in tax revenue it had been
withholding.
Later on the New York Times in full sympathy mode reports:
Few issues resonate more deeply in Palestinian society
than the plight of prisoners: about 800,000 have been detained in
Israeli jails since 1967, according to Palestinian leaders; Mr. Jaradat
was the 203rd to die in that time.
Forget for a moment that 203 out of 800,000 is a very small proportion. (Elder of Ziyon noted
that young Palestinians die in Israeli jails at less frequently that
young American die anywhere.) Of course Palestinians weren't simply
arrested en masse to fulfill some sadistic need of Israeli officials.
They were arrested for violations of the law, often violent terrorist
incidents. In fact as the article observed that quite a few in Israeli
jails committed their crimes after Oslo; after the Palestinians promised
to forswear terror. (Many of these violent terrorists - who would never
have been released if they'd been arrested by any other country - were
released in the Gilad Shalit deal in late 2011.) But no New York Times
reporter would write, "The prisoner issue has deep resonance with
Israeli society as many of those incarcerated committed acts of violent
and sometimes deadly terror since the signing of the Oslo Accords." The
only statements evoking sympathy are in support of the Palestinian
narrative.
Finally we get this:
Several leaders and commentators warned Sunday that the
death, coming amid a severe financial crisis in the West Bank, could
lead to extended protests, with most predicting a largely nonviolent
movement of civil disobedience like the one Palestinians undertook from
1987 to 1993 rather than the campaign of suicide bombings that began in
2000.
The first intifada was not nonviolent. It was less lethal than the later one. Throwing rocks and firebombs are not nonviolent.
But now there are those who are trying to explain away the current unrest as another spontaneous "non-violent" intifada and justifying it.
Elder of Ziyon, Israelly Cool and Israel Matzav show different forms that this campaign is taking.
Back in December, Khaled Abu Toameh wrote about the rumors he was hearing from the Palestinian Authority and Hamas:
Both Abbas and Hamas see the two events -- the war in the
Gaza Strip and the UN vote — as "historic achievements" and military
and political victories over Israel.
Emboldened by the "victories," Abbas and Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal
recently reached a secret agreement on the need to launch a "popular
intifada" against Israel in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Palestinian
sources in Ramallah revealed.
The two men believe that such an intifada at this stage would further
isolate Israel and earn the Palestinians even more sympathy in the
international arena, the sources said.
Reporters aren't likely to look past the violence and explain it away,
but past experience shows that the violence is likely orchestrated. The
events of recent months seem to confirm Abu Toameh's reporting.
The Tower (an online news site produces by The Israel Project) observes:
Throughout 2012 senior Palestinian leaders – Fatah,
Hamas, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad – called for Palestinians to launch
a third Intifada and resume violent attacks against Israel. And as
predicted, recent weeks have seen an uptick in orchestrated
demonstrations and public violence among Palestinians targeting
Israelis, including lynching attempts that reminded Israelis and
observers of the lynchings that marked the beginning of the Second
Intifada.
As early as January of this year, military and security sources in
Israel were reported to have identified an emerging wave of violence
driven in part by Fatah’s failed diplomatic gambits, including those
strenuously opposed by President Obama who repeatedly warned of the
counterproductive danger of the PA’s unproductive diplomatic
maneuvering, and by a deliberate attempt by Fatah leaders to exploit and
provoke the frustration they themselves created...
Lynching isn't usually described as non-violent.
Jonathan Tobin believes that the surge of violence is intended to make an impression on President Obama:
It’s difficult to say yet what exactly will be on
President Obama’s mind when he heads to Israel next month, but an
all-out push for another futile try to make peace with the Palestinians
may not be on the agenda. It’s likely the president will continue his
advocacy for a two-state solution, but after more than four years of
failure even this administration appears to have gotten the message that
any more effort expended on the peace process will be sunk, as it has
every other time, by Palestinian intransigence. But the Palestinian
Authority, which has ignored every attempt by the Obama White House to
tip the diplomatic playing field in their favor, may be planning its own
little surprise for the president.
And Honest Reporting ties the current news to the Halevi report.
One theme that has emerged from the reporting is that Hamas and Fatah
are in agreement about the escalation of violence. In other words,
Abbas, who has failed to come to a power sharing agreement with Hamas,
has nonetheless found common ground with Hamas in fighting Israel. What
does that say about Israel's "peace partner?"
There has been a steady drumbeat of bad news coming out of the
Palestinian West Bank in recent weeks. Attacks against Israelis from the
West Bank are undeniably on the rise. The spike came in November,
around the same time Palestine Liberation Organization chairman Mahmoud
Abbas went to the United Nations seeking an upgrade in the status of his
mission, despite objections by Israel and the United States. His
message was simple: The Palestinians will not cooperate with Israel
while it controls territory that Palestinians claim as their own.
Coincidence or not, there were 70 recorded attacks in October, according
to Israeli security services, followed by a spike to 171 in November.
In December, a Palestinian motorist rammed an Israeli army jeep carrying
officers and then attacked them with an axe. In another incident, two
Palestinians breached an Israeli military base, assaulted a soldier, and
absconded with his weapon. Earlier this month, after residents
discovered undercover Israeli agents in Jenin, at least thirty people
were injured in a clash. There have been other cases, reminiscent of the
1987 intifada, where Israeli personnel have been pummeled with a hail
of stones.
Despite the increase in attacks, Schanzer writes that it isn't entirely clear that another intifada is going on or imminent:
Despite the daunting data, a new uprising is far from certain. For
one, activists don't appear to have galvanized the online community. The
twitter handle @ThirdIntifada has a modest 15,835 followers by last
count and the "Third Intifada" Facebook site has a little more than
8,000 "likes." Judging from social media, the threat of a mass uprising
isn't exactly acute.
It's also worth noting that "intifada" means different things to
different Palestinians. Some believe it means a full-fledged war, as it
did from 2000 to 2005, when suicide bombings dominated the headlines.
Others believe it means rock-throwing and civil disobedience, as was the
case (with violent exceptions) in the 1987 to 1990 disturbances.
As part of its exercises, the brigade drilled more than urban warfare
and joint operation with the IAF; extending its training to include
filming proof that the terror groups operating in its sectors are using
kindergartens and mosques as their bases of operations, as well as using
the local population as human shields.
Kfir Brigade officers explained that the troops will be required to make obtaining such proof part of their operational goals.
"The trends on the ground are changing," Kfir Brigade Commander Colonel Udi Ben Muha told Ynet.
In a report issued Monday on the military’s crowd-control techniques
in the West Bank, the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem said that
security forces were “extensively and systematically” violating their
own rules of engagement when using both non-lethal weapons and live
ammunition against protesters, with fatal results.
The report said 48 Palestinians had been killed since 2005 by live
ammunition fired by soldiers at stone-throwers, six more were killed by
rubber-coated bullets fired at less than the permitted range, and two
died when they were hit by tear-gas canisters fired directly at
protesters in violation of regulations.
While the army called the report a “biased narrative” and said the
incidents were exceptions, it has signaled its own concern over the
recent killings, which are being investigated by military police. The
commander of Israeli forces in the West Bank, Brig. Gen. Hagai
Mordechai, last week ordered commanding officers to review the recent
incidents and the rules of engagement, in order to “draw operational
conclusions,” an army spokesman said.
Why 2005? Is it to increase to pad the numbers? 48 deaths over seven
years hardly suggests an out of control military. Furthermore, the
situations over the past seven years change, so a report like this is
inflammatory, not informative. (In one of the cases of the stone thrower
who was hit by a tear gas canister, a photograph of the incident shows a
large rock headed towards the soldiers.) The reporter acknowledges at
the beginning of the article that there has been an increase in low
level violence. But by highlighting the B'tselem report, he distracts
from the main problem.
The phenomenon of "Palestine" is becoming a misfortune for any
international institution in which it crops up. This is because those
institutions are governed by councils whose members are states. Whenever
"Palestine" is on the agenda, these states vote according to the
policies of their respective governments, regardless of any principles
that are supposed to guide the institution in question.
He shows how in a number of areas, "Palestine" is treated uniquely much
to the detriment of any country or organization with which it is
involved.
The other side, as Elder of Ziyon shows in a couple ofrecent posts,
is that Israel, too, is treated uniquely, much to its detriment.
Not surprisingly those cheerleaders for Palestine are those who also
hold Israel to standards that no other country is expected to observe.
Jonathan Schanzer reports that some people believe that a 'third intifada' is already upon us.
There has been a steady drumbeat of bad news coming out of the
Palestinian West Bank in recent weeks. Attacks against Israelis from the
West Bank are undeniably on the rise. The spike came in November,
around the same time Palestine Liberation Organization chairman Mahmoud
Abbas went to the United Nations seeking an upgrade in the status of his
mission, despite objections by Israel and the United States. His
message was simple: The Palestinians will not cooperate with Israel
while it controls territory that Palestinians claim as their own.
Coincidence or not, there were 70 recorded attacks in October,
according to Israeli security services, followed by a spike to 171 in
November. In December, a Palestinian motorist rammed an Israeli army
jeep carrying officers and then attacked them with an axe. In another incident, two Palestinians breached an Israeli military base, assaulted a soldier, and absconded with his weapon. Earlier this month, after residents discovered undercover Israeli agents in Jenin,
at least thirty people were injured in a clash. There have been other
cases, reminiscent of the 1987 intifada, where Israeli personnel have
been pummeled with a hail of stones.
Israeli leaders are bracing themselves. Officials from the left-leaning Meretz party
warn that settlement plans forwarded by Israeli premier Benjamin
Netanyahu are putting Israel at risk of "a third intifada." Former Prime
Minister Ehud Olmert also warns that an intifada is nigh. One Israeli security sources source warned Agence France Press of a "certain (Palestinian) awakening." Another notes that
an uprising may be coming, but says things will become clearer "after
the Palestinians mark the Nakba and Naksa days [commemorating the 1948
and 1967 wars, respectively] and the Prisoners Day. That's a critical
window."
But some Palestinian leaders are not waiting for such a window. Hamas official Ahmed Halabiyeh urged Palestinians to "ignite a third intifada to save the Aksa Mosque and Jerusalem." Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti, currently in an Israeli jail for terrorism, also called for a third intifada of "wide-scale civil resistance." Nabil Shaath, a senior Fatah figure, warned that Palestinian boycotts and civil disobedience would escalate in 2013. On December 15, a "new brigade" in Hebron announced the beginning of a new intifada.
Palestinian security forces arrested the Hebron group some days
later. But there are signs that Palestinian-Israeli security
cooperation, widely praised across the international community, is under
strain. The Palestinian Maan News Agency reported in December that security coordination was "in a constant state of deterioration." The Israeli Ynet further reported
that "the number of arrests made by the Palestinian Authority's
security forces against Hamas operatives in the West Bank has plummeted,
and the PA no longer seems motivated to curb their activities."
Perhaps the harshest blow was Abbas' decision to allow for mass Hamas demonstrations in the West Bank
in celebration of the terrorist movement's 25th anniversary. Indeed,
security cooperation between the Palestinians and Israel for the last
half decade has been based upon mitigating the threat of Hamas (since
the violent takeover Gaza in 2007). Meanwhile, The Times of Israel reports that the Israeli military fears a complete Hamas takeover of the West Bank.
Depending upon who is Prime Minister and what coalition he has, I believe that we may see a much quicker response to another intifada than there was in 2000-04. The second intifadaOslo war started in September 2000 and Operation Defensive Shield started to defuse it in late March 2002. If there's a Right wing government in power after today, I would not expect a Defensive Shield-like response to wait that long.
Alaluf's assessment
of the situation was a pessimistic one: "The process lead by Abu Mazen
is over, replaced by the attitude promoted by Hamas. Abu Mazen
is trying to survive the Arab Spring and he understands that the path of negotiations with Israel is over.
"The question is – what will follow? We may see regional anarchy along a military campaign of our own."
The sector chief expressed concern that should Israel mount another military operation in Gaza,
or have to deal with a regional deterioration, "The IDF may face a shortage in reservists."
But not all is bleak:
Alaluf was optimistic as to the IDF's ability to deal with terrorist
threats, saying he does not foresee a string of suicide attacks, which
became the gruesome hallmark of the al-Aqsa Intifada.
"The third intifada won't be like the second one, which
surprised us. We're ahead of the game now and terror won't be able to
slither up to central Israel because we're better prepared."
'Palestinians' put terrorists in protective custody
You might recall that last month I reported on a group called the Brigades of National Unity, which was promising to bring us a third intifada. Most of the group has now been 'arrested' by the 'Palestinian Authority' in order to prevent the IDF from arresting them.
Sources in Hebron said that most of the masked men who appeared in
the video were now in being held by the PA's Preventive Security Force.
They identified three of the detainees as Mohamed Salaymeh, 18, Bilal
Salaymeh, 18, and Farid Salaymeh, 16.
Two other detainees have been identified as Munjed Ahmaro, 19, and Izzadin Tabaneh, 17.
The
families of the detainees said they have been told by PA security
officers that their sons were being held in Palestinian prison out of
concern for that they may be arrested by the IDF.
A Hamas leader is calling for a third intifada, ostensibly over Israel's plans to build in 'east' Jerusalem.
Ahmed Halabiyeh, director of the Jerusalem Department in Hamas, said
that armed Palestinian groups, including Hamas, should initiate a
confrontation with Israel over its plans to build new houses in
Jerusalem and its suburbs.
The Palestinians, he added, should resort to various methods of
resistance, first and foremost "martyrdom operations in the heart of
Israel."
Abu Halabiyeh urged Palestinians to "ignite a third intifada to save the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Jerusalem."
He
told reporters in Gaza City that the "enemy was waging a fierce
onslaught on Jerusalem and accelerating plans to Judaize the city
geographically and demographically."
Israel, he charged, was spreading the "cancer of settlements to all parts of Jerusalem."
The
Hamas official also accused Israel of working to undermine the
foundations of the Aqsa mosque to bring about its collapse so that it
could replace it with the Third Temple.
He also urged Arabs and Muslims to declare a state of full mobilization to "liberate Jerusalem, the Aqsa Mosque and Palestine."
But I'm sure that if we give them a 'state' they'll just drop all this war talk.... You've got to be kidding....
The fact is that Mahmoud Abbas is in the closing phase of his leadership
and there is no clear successor. Complicating the situation is the
specter of a generational transition. People can put forward in
conversation their preferred person to lead the PA, PLO, and Fatah or
speculate as to who it might be. But the truth is that nobody has the
least idea who will be the new leader or even who are the most likely
candidates.
A leader or faction or elements of the “young guard” might well decide
that an intifadah would suit their purposes. It would distance
themselves from the “failed” policies of Abbas and the current
establishment. By focusing on youth, violence, and the security forces,
such a strategy could benefit a takeover bid by “military” officials or
by young anti-establishment forces.
There is a difference between those two sectors. The PA “military” tends
to dislike Hamas but those who came of political age in the “first
intifadah” see things differently. They might view a war as the best way
to fuse Fatah-Hamas cooperation with themselves taking a leading role.
In March, Professor Rubin judged that if Fatah joined with Hamas to launch an intifada, that it was unlikely that Mahmoud Abbas would be party to the scheme.
Both Abbas and Hamas see the two events -- the war in the Gaza Strip
and the UN vote — as "historic achievements" and military and political
victories over Israel.
Emboldened by the "victories," Abbas and Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal
recently reached a secret agreement on the need to launch a "popular
intifada" against Israel in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Palestinian
sources in Ramallah revealed.
The two men believe that such an intifada at this stage would further
isolate Israel and earn the Palestinians even more sympathy in the
international arena, the sources said.
There may not be a renewed intifada, but conditions favorable to one are stronger now than any time in the past five years.
What's changed since March? For one thing, as Abu Toameh notes are the
"victories" of Fatah and Hamas, which probably emboldened both.
The poll, conducted earlier this month by the Arab World Research and
Development (AWRAD), a Ramallah-based research center, sampled 1,200
Palestinians from both Gaza and the West Bank. It set out to examine
political opinions among Palestinians following Operation Pillar of
Defense in Gaza and Mahmoud Abbas’s successful UN nonmember statehood
bid.
While both events are overwhelmingly viewed as positive by Palestinians,
adding popularity to both Palestinian factions, 42% of West Bank
respondents said they preferred the approach of Hamas to that of Fatah,
as opposed to only 28% who preferred Fatah’s approach.
Interestingly, more Gazans, 40%, said they preferred Fatah’s approach to
that of Hamas, which rules over them. Thirty-seven percent of Gazans
said Hamas’s approach was better.
Though, as Professor Rubin points out, an intifada that directly
threatens Israel will lead to the destruction of Palestinian
infrastructure when Israel responds, it appears that both Fatah and
Hamas think that the potential political gains internationally and
locally are worth the price.
Part of the reason for this (misplaced) confidence is the way the
international community treated the Palestinian bid for statehood in the
UN and the results of Pillar of Defense.
Hamas is flush over what it is billing as a victory for its armed
resistance against Israel, after fighting in Gaza last week ended with a
cease-fire and promises to remove some Israeli restrictions that have
devastated the coastal strip’s economy. Mr. Meshal’s remarks suggested
that he believed Hamas now held more cards to influence the P.L.O., and
the wider Arab world, to take a tougher stance in dealings with Israel.
More than 130 countries voted on Thursday to upgrade Palestine to a
nonmember observer state of the United Nations, a triumph for
Palestinian diplomacy and a sharp rebuke to the United States and
Israel.
Whether a war that eliminated much of Hamas's offensive capabilities or a
vote in an anti-Israel forum ought to be considered a victory is
debatable. But these were perceptions of the Palestinians nurtured by
much of the world.
In the meantime as Fatah reaches out to Hamas it suffers no opprobrium
for rejecting the premise of the peace process. (The New York Times, in
its editorials, advocates cooperation between the two as being necessary
for peace!)
According to a Palestinian source, the UN’s upgrade of the
Palestinian Authority’s status has prompted the change: “The reality
after November 29 is not the same as before. After (the vote) any
Israeli soldier inside the 1967 lines is a conqueror on occupied land.”
While the Palestinian Authority abrogates material aspects of its agreements with Israel, the world, instead, focuses on E1,
which was always envisioned to remain part of Israel. Is it any wonder
that Fatah and Hamas think they can get away with fomenting another war against Israel?
A new 'Palestinian' group, the Brigades of National Unity, with members from all of the major terror organizations, is promising a third intifada.
In a video posted on several Palestinian websites, a spokesman for the
new group said it consisted of members of Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad
and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
The spokesman said that although his group backed Palestinian Authority
President Mahmoud Abbas's statehood bid at the UN, "We will not give up
one inch of the lands of Palestine, from the river to the sea."
He said the group would "pursue our struggle until we expel the occupation and liberate all Palestine."
The
spokesman said that the new group has decided to launch the third
intifada "from the heart of Hebron so that it could extend to all
Palestine."
The spokesman also threatened to kidnap IDF soldiers and kill Israelis if Israel arrested or killed Palestinians.
"We
will strike at you with an iron fist with full force if you don't stop
your aggression against the Palestinian people," the masked man
threatened.
The spokesman demanded that Israel remove all
checkpoints and barriers in the West Bank, release all Palestinians from
Israeli prisons, withdraw fully from Palestinian territories, release
funds belonging to the PA government and reopen all the border
crossings.
Good luck with that.
I would bet that none other than Fatah and Hamas are behind this group. They learned well from Yasser Arafat. He always preached plausible deniability.
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
