e-Letter 222: Waiting for the green light
 
June 6, 2004
 
Yesterday, 37 years ago, the Six Days War broke out and changed the course of Mideast realities because it kept Israel alive and stronger than ever. It is important not only because of the valuable outcome (that is now taken for granted by the West) but because Israel was threatened and it fired the first shot of the war to defend itself against complete annihilation. The (5th and) 6th of June also commemorate D-Day that changed the course of WWII and resulted in the allied victory over the Nazis. And the death yesterday of  Ronald Reagan brought into focus a president who ably conducted the free world to defeat Communism. Truly significant markers and reminders as we are now battling threats that are perhaps even more existential in nature.
 
The Israelis had their share of Arafat (and what he represents) and they expressed their disillusionment with him by restricting his movement to a virtual house arrest in his Ramallah compound.  There isn't a commandment out of the 10 he did not violate, so the abuse of UN ambulances to transport terrorists may almost seem like a minor infraction. Yet it is not [and charges that Israel does the same ("Soldier claims IDF smuggled troops in ambulances," Amir Buhbut, Maariv, June 6, 2004) do not necessarily mean that Israel behaves like the terrorists; one needs to be mindful who the aggressor is not what the defender does otherwise there is no ground to the notion of self-defense]. And even the Egyptians are fed up with him and threatened last week they may lift his "immunity" as a "live" leader ("Egypt tells Arafat: Reform or be removed," Joseph Nasr, The Jerusalem Post, May. 31, 2004).
 
If Arafat was impressed his external conduct did not betray it. Rather he lashed out at the Egyptians. Yet at least one top aid has resigned citing the increased lawlessness in Palestinian cities ("Chief Arafat aide Resigns," Khaled Abu Toameh, The Jerusalem Post, Jun. 1, 2004). Despite report to that effect it appears the Palestinian wave of violence is far from "dead" or over. The lack of eye-catching reports on terror incidents is due more to aggressive Israeli prevention efforts rather than lack of trying ("Palestinian Affairs: Death of an Intifada," Isabel Kershner, Jerusalem Report, June 14, 2004).
 
Indeed, Arafat and the PA draft women and children to do the fighting ("Engineering civilian casualties, Itamar Marcus & Barbara Crook, Jerusalem Post, June 2, 2004) and he has been successful in large part because Israel and the rest of the world are still looking at Palestinians as posing a political problem that needs to be solved through negotiations but also partly because international law impedes the ability of democracies to effectively fight terrorism.
 
This point was proven today when a senior Palestinian leader was sentenced in Israel to 5 consecutive life terms an dit was proven he received his murderous orders directly from Arafat ("Barghouti sentenced to 120 years in prison: Tel-Aviv District Court hands former Tanzim leader five consecutive life terms for murder of five Israelis plus 20 years for being member in terror organization. Barghouti: Judges and pilots who drop bombs on children are same." Adi Shalem, Maariv, June 6, 2004).
 
As noted by a reputable legal scholar ("Rules of war enable terror," Alan M. Dershowitz, Baltimore Sun, May 28, 2004) international law and international conventions should reflect the changing times and recognize that 1) democracies must be legally empowered to attack terrorists who hide among civilians, so long as proportional force is employed; 2) a new category of prisoner should be recognized for captured terrorists and those who support them; 3) the law must come to realize that the traditional sharp line between combatants and civilians has been replaced by a continuum of civilian-ness; and 4) the treaties against all forms of torture must begin to recognize differences in degree among varying forms of rough interrogation (see: "The Dark Art of Interrogation," Mark Bowden, The Atlantic Monthly, October 2003). 
 
Even in murder there are gradations. A soldier shot dead is sad but the world learned to live with realities of war and its outcomes. In the first world war soldiers used bayonets and gas. Yet, somehow, those realities change with greater atrocities pushing the envelop of human cruelty beyond previously unknown thresholds. The literal butchering of Daniel Pearl, Nick Berg, Russian soldiers, numerous Algerians, and now the hostages in Saudi Arabia ("Kidnappers 'cut throats of hostages,'" AFP, May 31, 2004) bring that point all too depressingly out. Already the beheading of scores of hostages in Saudi Arabia last week received far less attention than the beheading of Pearl or Berg.  And no less depressing is the fact that these murderers were let go ("Saudi security forces 'agreed to let al-Qa'eda killers escape,'" Robin Gedye, Daily Telegraph, 01/06/2004).
 
So on one hand the Saudis sent special forces to rescue the hostages and their diplomats try to convince the West with determined rhetoric of the necessity to fight terrorism ("Saudi Ambassador to Washington: 'We Must, as a State and as a People, Recognize the Truth about These Criminals... We Must All Obey Allah's Directive and Kill Those Who Spread Corruption in the Land'," MEMRI, Special Dispatch - Saudi Arabia, June 3, 2004, No. 725).  Yet, for internal consumption the rhetoric quickly resorts to the old canards to describe those responsible for the terror act as "95% sure that Zionism is behind the attacks;" this despite clear evidence as to who perpetrated the act, who is responsible for it and their link to Al-Qaida ("Saudi Officials Reinforce Crown Prince Abdallah's Accusation that Zionists Are Behind Terror Attacks in Saudi Arabia," MEMRI, Special Dispatch - Saudi Arabia/Arab Antisemitism Documentation Project, June 3, 2004 No. 726).
 
This low-level propaganda has irked some commentators who point to he real enemy and claim that the Saudis are it ("Reality Check on Saudi Arabia," Mark Steyn, Spectator-UK, June 5, 2004): "Given that it's the Saudi government that funds all the madrasahs that form the ideological backbone of Islamist terrorism, is there any point in pretending that the House of Saud and al-Qaeda are on opposite sides rather than twin manifestations of the same problem? The West backs the Saudi regime as a bulwark against local destabilization, in return for which they underwrite destabilization of the West across the entire planet." Despite Saudi (and U.S.) Rhetoric that they are America's ally their conduct clearly defies it ("The Saudi Connection: Their oil thicker than our blood." Rachel Ehrenfeld, Nationalreviewonline, June 01, 2004).
 
Even Tom Friedman recognizes the evil the Saudis represent but his solution is to buy less oil from them  ("The ABC's of Hatred," Thomas L. Friedman, June 3, 2004). One is hard-pressed to understand this logic as Friedman usually argues that we need to improve the economy of the "downtrodden." Therefore, if the Saudis are doing economically well now they should not be engaged in terrorism. And if they will have their economy worsened then according to Friedman they will have "reason" to become terrorists. Hence cutting imports will only make terrorism even worse.  Friedman simply does not comprehend that in this global jihad the issue is power and domination not merely economics.  In short, "it is domination stupid."
 
These extremists use as excuses being "oppressed by ‘infidels'" and they are quicker to express "rage" than an "infidel" sneezing ("To hell with Arab outrage!" Anonymous, MichNews.com, Jun 1, 2004), and they are helped out by civil right advocacy groups and newspaper editorials when a Muslim lawyer is detained on suspicion of assistance to terrorism ("Fighting Radical Islam," Edward I. Koch, NewsMax.com, June 5, 2004). The fact remains that 1) he was a good "probable cause"("If you are Muslim, you are suspect," Daniel Pipes, Jewish World Review, June 1, 2004), and 2) he was released once it was determined the suspicion was not borne out by facts. Oh yes, his head is still attached to his body.
 
Generally the West has tiptoed to avoid any direct blame of Islam and Muslims in general for the vileness of modern global terrorism yet the key Islamist leadership, illustrated by Iran, does not have any reservations from making blatant charges against its declared enemies ("Iranian Leader: 'The Source of Human Torment and Suffering is Liberal Democracy'; Iranian President: 'The Root of All Terrorist Activity is the Violence of the Superpowers,'" MEMRI, Special Dispatch – Iran, June 4, 2004, No. 727) such as "liberal democracy is devoid of morality," "Islam encourages emulating others without losing Islamic identity," that "Islamism is the core of the Iranian revolution," and that "one day the U.S. too will be history."
 
The Iranians do not only talk. They put their plans into action. A recruiting group declared it has thousands of people signed up to commit suicide bombings ("Iran group says thousands ready for suicide raids," Reuters, 05/06/2004) and it is more than reasonable to assume they may resort to WMD. They better be taken seriously. All they are waiting for is a green light from their leader.
 
The world (still) steadfastly refuses to understand how sinister the current threat is to the extent that it surpasses the Nazi menace.  With far more overwhelming numbers than the Nazis ever had, modern terrorists are not uniformed, have no (single) country of origin or even a central headquarter, and they believe they are sanctioned directly by god.  Therefore, appeasing terrorists by retreating from fighting them is the worst mistake the free world could make ("How We Will Lose the Islamo-Fascist War," Greg Crosby, Jewish World Review, June 1, 2004). 
  
This world is only too quick to blame Israel not because Israel is really "guilty" but because the constant blame is made in an attempt to erode and weaken Israel's standing in the world community ("Last Word in Anti-Semitism: The epithet is hurled at Israel in a bid to make hatred of Jews respectable." Walter Reich, Los Angeles Times, May 28, 2004). Yet, the West also steadfastly avoids blaming "all" Muslims for the havoc that Islamist terrorists are wreaking on the world or even understand "The Religious Sources of Islamic Terrorism" (Shmuel Bar, Policy Review, June, 2004). But unless such understanding is developed and unless an internal religious struggle within Islam takes place to exorcize radical Islamism from it, the flow of perpetrators of evil will continue in the (false) name of their religion: "A strategy to cope with radical Islamic ideology cannot take shape without a reinterpretation of Western concepts of the boundaries of the freedoms of religion and speech, definitions of religious incitement, and criminal culpability of religious leaders for the acts of their flock as a result of their spiritual influence. Such a reinterpretation impinges on basic principles of Western civilization and law. Under the circumstances, it is the lesser evil."
 
And this is evident not only inside Saudi Arabia but also by its tentacles in the U.S. Under the guise of a benign student organization that caters to Islamic needs the emergent Muslim Student Association proves itself far more sinister and threatening ("Islamism's Campus Club: The Muslim Students' Association," Jonathan Dowd-Gailey, Middle East Quarterly, Spring 2004): "There is overwhelming evidence that the MSA, far from being a benign student society, is an overtly political organization seeking to create a single Muslim voice on U.S. campuses—a voice espousing Wahhabism, anti-Americanism, and anti-Semitism, agitating aggressively against U.S. Middle East policy, and expressing solidarity with militant Islamist ideologies, sometimes with criminal results." The MSA resulted from Saudi-backed efforts to found Islamic bodies internationally in the 1960s. Yet, "ironically, although one of the founding missions of the MSA is to increase favorable awareness of Muslim life among non-Muslims, the effect of the MSA's activities is the opposite: they confirm the worst suspicions of American society at large."
 
There is indeed something sinister and ironic about a "student organization" that is comprised of largely foreign students who supposedly came to the U.S. to benefit from American higher education yet wanting to destroy the host country by turning it into a Muslim nation.  They also receive aid and comfort from their potential victims who do not yet realize their intended status ("No excuse for anti-Americanism," Armstrong Williams, TownHall.com, June 1, 2004 ) and such conduct has earned an apt description: "...this self-loathing and empathy for our attackers is worse than decadent, it is dangerous insofar as it reinforces to the radicals that attacking the United States is the best way to win concessions." 
 
Instead of focusing on the real enemy various sorts of scarecrows are erected daily to claim that there is "no plan" in Iraq, blaming "neo-conservatives" which now became a euphemism for bashing Jews, criticizing Israel - the only democracy in a desert of ruthless dictators ("Wartime Witch Hunt: Blaming Israel for the Iraq War," Dore Gold, Jerusalem Issue Brief, Vol. 3, No. 25, 3 June 2004), and blaring the mantra that there is "no link between Iraq and Al-Qaida" ("The New Defeatism: Are we giving up, even as we're succeeding?" David Victor Hanson, National Review, June 04, 2004).  Not surprisingly some are questioning/pointing whether "We are becoming a crazed culture of cheap criticism and pious moralizing, and in our self-absorption may well lose what we inherited from a better generation. Our groaning and hissing elite indulges itself, while better but forgotten folks risk their lives on our behalf in pretty horrible places."
 
And if we think we have problems in the US (and we do) they pale compared with the total immersion of European appeasement in a platitude of denial of the real threat. The French displayed their ungratefulness by having a reporter "asking" (stating!) president Bush that he is no better than Saddam Hussein and the terrorists.  The french now want the dead US soldiers out of the cemeteries in their country (which they would not have had not for the Americans). And french voices in connection with commemorating D-Day complain the US used "too much fire power" in D-Day, that the French citizens were not "warned" prior to the bombardment, they make victims out of the Nazis ("they suffered too") and claim that Americans were not really liberators. How pathetic.
 
Yet even in France (sounds almost like "even in Saudi Arabia") there are some sane voices or, better say, prophets of wrath.  In an eye-opener (for those needing it) no less than the editor of an influential French daily paper laments US bashing, defines himself unabashedly as an Americanophile (a lover of America) compares Islamic ideology to Nazism and points out that a world war was declared on the West ["The new insult," Ivan Rioufol, Le Figaro, (translated) June 4, 2004]: "The Islamic ideology, similar to the Nazism in many aspects (cult of the superior man, slavery to the dogma, hate of the Jews) can win the third World War that was declared on the 11th of September 2001. The West is effectively ready to admit to faults it did not commit, even at the expense of its Christian roots. It's because the Arab-Muslim world did not want to open up to the modernity of science, to democracy and capitalism that it distanced itself all along the centuries. The Occident has done nothing to bring about its regression that feeds speeches of humiliated (persons) among the fanatics, who gather in the Koran reasons to make war."
 
Some other rays of hope in the ghastly culture of death that dominates the Islamists narrative comes from (yet) untarnished corners. For example, Arab NGOs openly criticize the hollow declarations of "reform" made at the recent Arab Summit ("Arab NGOs: Arab League Summit Declarations are Not for Reform, But for Deceiving Arab Public Opinion and the International Community."  MEMRI, Special Dispatch - Reform Project, June 2, 2004, No. 724).
 
In the US. The American Islamic Forum for Democracy is showing that even if belated and modest in scope there are voices of moderate Muslims who support democracy and condemn terror as the narrative of Islam ("Taking Back Islam: Moderate Muslims say their faith is compatible with freedom." Erick Stakelbeck & Nir Boms, National Review Online, June 03, 2004).

Not less significant is the position taken by some Muslim scholars. In a recent interview Professor Khaleel Mohammed of San Diego State University cited the Koran as legitimizing Israel's right over its land as part of a biblical covenant that the Koran is based on ("The Koran and the Jews," Jamie Glazov, FrontPageMagazine, June 3, 2004): "...the thrust of my analysis is where Moses says that the Holy Land is that which God has "written" for the Israelites...So the simple fact is then, from a faith-based point of view: If God has "written" Israel for the people of Moses, who can change this?
 
As encouraging and refreshing is the addition of activism to a religious opinion.  A group called "Arabs for Israel" believes that "We can support the State of Israel and the Jewish religion and still treasure our Arab and Islamic culture" and it takes a courageous posture when stating: "We salute and commend Arab and Moslem writers, scholars and speakers, who found the strength, commitment and honesty in their hearts to speak out in support of Israel. We thank you for being the pioneers that you are and for holding such sophisticated and advanced views in the realm of Arab and Moslem thinking. You are inspiring us all." These are such exceptions that one is still hard-pressed to look at the text twice to believe it as THEY are so eloquently adding their voice to those who make the case for Israel ("Making the Case for Israel," Alan M. Dershowitz, FrontPageMagazine.com, June 1, 2004)  
 
An article on their site ("Israel – a state of mind," Tashbih Sayyed) reveals what was needed to be said by Arabs and Muslims for so long and could serve as a wonderful inspiration - a must text indeed - for Arab-Muslim leadership to adopt: "I consider the creation of the Jewish state as a blessing for the Muslims. Israel has provided us an opportunity to show to the world the Jewish state of mind in action; a mind that yearns to be free; a mind that longs to see the humanity enjoy life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. If the American civic faith has given the world a hope to be able to live with dignity, self respect and honor in peace, the Jewish traditions and culture of pluralism, debate, acceptance of dissension and difference of opinion have manifested themselves in the shape of the state of Israel to present the oppressed Muslim world with a paradigm to emulate. And if we want this world to be free of any kind of terror, we will have to defend this state of mind, whether it is seen in the shape of Israel or in the form of the United States of America." Indeed nothing less should be acceptable.
 
A paradigm to emulate. That is exactly what the Islamo-terrorists do not want.  And this exactly why it should be encouraged, nurtured, and defended before the green light is given to terrorists to cause even more harm.
 
© Robbie Friedmann, Ph.D.
 
To view previous e-Letters:
 
    "The Festival of Fools" (e-Letter #221)
 
    "Radical solution to radical extremism" (e-Letter #220)
 
    "Thou Shalt Not Kill! . . .?" (e-Letter #219)
 
 
 
 
    "It is terrorism stupid" (e-Letter #215)
 
    "Tolerating terror - testing our limits" (e-Letter #214)
 
 
    "Terrorists Murder Arabs Too" (e-Letter #212)
 
 
    "Omission" (e-Letter #210)
 
    "The Hague, terror, a movie: What is real?" (e-Letter #209)  
 
     "Jihad has discovered Australia" (e-Letter #208)
 
 
    "It was indeed a rude awakening" (e-Letter #206)
 
    "Murderers and proud of it" (e-Letter #205)
 
 
 
    "Virgins (still) on his mind" (e-Letter #202)
 
    "On Morality and Humiliation" (e-Letter #201)
 
    "Caught like a rat" (e-Letter #200)
 
    "Wannsee, Oslo, Geneva" (e-Letter #199)
 
    "Do not show a fool a job half-done" (e-Letter #198)
 
 
 
 
    "The greatest threat to world peace" (e-Letter #194)
 
 
    "Have you driven a Ford lately?" (e-Letter #192)
 
 
    "Saturday (lunch massacre) at Maxim's" (e-Letter #190)
 
 

 
 
    "Consuming hate - exporting terror" (e-Letter #185)
 

 
    "The sui-genocide bomber" (e-Letter #183)
 
    "Terrorists Do Not Apologize" (e-Letter #182)
 
 
     "When 'peace' means war" (e-Letter #180)
 
    "Old news we should pay attention to" (e-Letter #179) 
 
     "The poor bully and the unwilling victim" (e-Letter #178) 
 
    "Terror and the rhetoric of peace" (e-Letter #177)
 
    "To catch a terrorist" (e-Letter #176)
 
    "Spilling blood and ink" (e-Letter #175)
 
 
 
 
 
 
     "Golf Wars" (e-Letter #169)
 
     "1001 Baghdad tales" (e-Letter #168)
 
     "Taxi wars"  (e-Letter #167) 
 
 
 
 
Additional e-Letters and articles:    
 
                                                                       * * * 
   * Text of the e-Letter includes hyperlinks to the source articles (where available).
 
  * Your feedback, comments, suggestions, and your referral of additional sources are appreciated. For news sources on the web please provide complete and precise addresses (URL).
 
  * This e-Letter has been sent for the use of the intended recipients. The message may contain information that is privileged or confidential.
 
  * As a recipient of this e-Letter you have permission to distribute it. 
  
  * Should you wish to be taken off this mailing list please indicate so in a return e-mail.
 
                                                                      * * *