It is equally painful to listen to the refrain about "Palestinian youth no longer subject to any control," after seeing the series of sermons published by the Middle East Media Research Institute, in which preachers from Gaza, facing the camera, dagger in hand, call upon followers to take to the streets to maim as many Jews as they can, to inflict as much pain as possible and to spill the maximum amount of blood; doubly painful to hear that refrain from Mahmoud Abbas himself, at the outset of this tragic chain of events a few weeks back, describing as "heroic" the murder of the Henkins in the presence of their children, and then expressing indignation at seeing the "dirty feet" of Jews "defiling" the Al-Aqsa Mosque and declaring "each drop of blood" shed by "each martyr" who dies for Jerusalem "pure."
Not only painful and intolerable, but also inapplicable, is the canned phrase about "political and social desperation" that is used to explain - or excuse - criminal acts. Everything we know about the new terrorists, their motives and the pride their relatives take in converting, post-mortem, crime into martyrdom and infamy into sacrifice, is, alas, much closer to the portrait of the robotic jihadist who yesterday would take off for Kashmir and today turns up in Syria or Iraq.
It is highly doubtful that "intifada" is the right term to apply to acts that bear more resemblance to the latest installment of a worldwide jihad of which Israel is just one of the stages.
It is doubtful that erudite disquisitions on occupation, colonization and Netanyahu-esque intransigence explain much about a wave of violence that counts among its favored targets Jews with sidelocks - that is, those Jews who are the most conspicuously Jewish, those whom their killers must consider the very image of the Jew, and who, by the way, are often at odds with the Jewish state when not in open secession from it.
It is doubtful that the very question of the state, the question of the two states and thus the question of a negotiated partition of the land - which is, for moderates on both sides, the only question worth posing - has anything to do with a conflagration in which politics has given way to fanaticism and to theories of vast conspiracy, one in which some decide to stab random others as they pass by because of a vague rumor reporting a secret plot to deny Muslims access to Islam's third holiest site.
It is doubtful, in other words, that the Palestinian cause is being helped in any way by the extremist turn. On the other hand, it is absolutely certain that the cause has everything to lose by it, that the reasonable heads within the movement will be the ones who wind up flattened by the wave, and that the last proponents of compromise, along with what remains of the peace camp in Israel, will pay dearly for the reckless condemnations of the imams of Rafah and Khan Younis.
Intolerable and inapplicable, too, is the cliché of the "cycle" or "spiral" of violence, which, by putting the kamikaze killers and their victims on the same footing, sows confusion and amounts to an incitement to further action.
Intolerable, for the same reason, are the rhetorical appeals "for restraint" and disingenuous pleas "not to inflame the street," which, as with the "spiral of violence," reverse the order of causality by implying that a soldier, police officer or civilian acting in self-defense has committed a wrong equal to that of someone who chooses to die after spreading as much terror as he possibly can.
Strange indeed, how tepid are the condemnations of the stabbings of innocent passers-by and rammings of bus stops - condemnations that I have to think would be less half-hearted if the acts had occurred on the streets of Washington, Paris or London.
More than strange - disturbing - is the difference in tone between the equivocal reaction to the recent killings and the unanimous and unambiguous international outpouring of emotion and solidarity elicited by the fatal hatchet attack on a soldier on a London street on May 22, 2013, a scenario that was not very different from those unfolding today in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.
Intolerable, again, that most of the major media have paid the grieving Israeli families only a fraction of the attention they have paid the families of the perpetrators.
Intolerable, finally, the minor mythology growing up around this story of daggers: The weapon of the poor? Really? The weapon one uses because it is within reach and one has no other? When I see those blades, I think of the one used to execute Daniel Pearl; I think of the beheadings of Hervé Gourdel, James Foley and David Haines; I think that the Islamic State's videos have clearly gained a following, and that we stand on the threshold of a form of barbarity that must be unconditionally denounced if we do not want to see its methods exported everywhere. And I mean everywhere.
10 DEADLY LIES ABOUT ISRAEL
10/21/15, 7:50 AM CET Updated 10/21/15, 3:23 PM CET
Ron Dermer is Israel's ambassador to the United States.
As Israeli civilians are butchered by Palestinian terrorists, the truth about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is also being butchered by a campaign of vicious lies. Here are ten of the most pernicious myths about the current attacks:
FIRST: Israel is trying to change the status quo on the Temple Mount.
False. Israel stringently maintains the status quo on the Temple Mount. Last year some 3.5 million Muslims visited the Temple Mount alongside some 200,000 Christians and 12,000 Jews. Only Muslims are allowed to pray on the Mount, and non-Muslims may visit only at specified times, which have not changed. Though the Temple Mount is Judaism's holiest site-where Solomon built his Temple some 3,000 years ago-Israel will not allow a change in the status quo. The ones trying to change the status quo are Palestinians, who are violently trying to prevent Jews and Christians from even visiting a site holy to all three faiths.
SECOND: Israel seeks to destroy al-Aqsa mosque.
False. Since reuniting Jerusalem in 1967 Israel has vigorously protected the holy sites of all faiths, including al-Aqsa. In the Middle East, where militant Islamists desecrate and destroy churches, synagogues, world heritage sites, as well as each other's mosques, Israel is the only guarantor of Jerusalem's holy places. Palestinians have been propagating the "al-Aqsa is in danger" myth since at least 1929, when the Palestinian icon, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini, used it to inspire the massacre of Jews in Hebron and elsewhere. Nearly a century later, the mosque remains unharmed, but the lie persists.
THIRD: A recent surge in settlement construction has caused the current wave of violence.
False. Annual construction in the settlements has substantially decreased over the last 15 years. Under Prime Minister Ehud Barak (2000), 5,000 new units were built in the settlements; under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (2001-2005) an average of 1,881; under Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (2005-2008) 1,774. All three were hailed as peacemakers. What about under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (2009-2015)? Just 1,554. Some surge.
FOURTH: President Abbas says that Israel "executed" the innocent Palestinian Ahmed Manasra.
False. Manasra is neither innocent nor dead. He stabbed a 13 year-old Jewish boy who was riding his bicycle. Manasra has been discharged from the same hospital where his victim continues to fight for his life.
FIFTH: Israel uses excessive force in dealing with terrorist attacks.
False. Using force to stop an attack by a gun, knife, cleaver or axe-wielding terrorist is legitimate self-defense. Israeli police officers are subject to strict rules that govern the use of deadly force, which is permitted only in life threatening situations. How would the American public expect its police to respond to terrorists stabbing passersby as well as police officers?
SIXTH: The current violence is the result of stagnation in the peace process.
False. Israel experienced some of the worst terrorism in its history when the peace process was at its peak. The reason for Palestinian terrorism is neither progress nor stagnation in the peace process, but the desire of the terrorists to destroy Israel.
SEVENTH: President Abbas is a voice of moderation.
False. President Abbas said on September 16 that he welcomes "every drop of blood spilled in Jerusalem.." President Abbas has not condemned a single one of the 30 terror attacks on Israelis over the last month. He and his Fatah movement continue to use the Web and the airwaves to incite the Palestinians to even more violence.
EIGHTH: International action is required to enforce the status quo on the Temple Mount.
False. Israel enforces the status quo. The international community can help most effectively by telling the truth and affirming Israel's proven commitment to maintaining the status quo. It can also help by holding President Abbas accountable for his mendacious rhetoric regarding the Temple Mount.
NINTH: The reason the conflict and the violence persist is because the Palestinians don't have a state.
False. The Palestinians have repeatedly refused to accept a nation-state for themselves if it means accepting a nation-state for the Jewish people alongside it. In 1937, the Palestinians rejected the Peel Commission report that called for two states for two peoples; in 1947, they rejected the UN partition plan that did the same. In 2000 at Camp David and again in 2008 the Palestinians rejected new proposals that would have created a Palestinian state. The Palestinians rejected peace both before and after the creation of Israel, before Israel gained control of the territories in 1967 and after Israel vacated Gaza in 2005. The Palestinians have always been more concerned with destroying the Jewish state than with creating a state of their own. The core of the conflict remains the persistent refusal of the Palestinians to recognize the nation-state of the Jewish people in any borders.
TENTH: Palestinian terrorism is the consequence of Palestinian frustration.
False. Palestinian terrorism is the product of incitement, which inculcates a culture of hatred and violence in successive generations. The biggest frustration of the terrorists is that they have failed to destroy Israel. They will continue to be frustrated.
WHAT ARE THE STAFF/BOARD MEMBERS OF BAY STREET & THE CONCERT GOERS THINKING/CELEBRATING A SUPPORTER OF BDS IS ODIOUS.
4>TED CRUZ PREVIEW OF AN INTERVIEW TO BE PUBLISHED IN FULL FRIDAY IN JERUSALEM POST, US SENATOR AND PRESIDENTIAL CONTENDER ISSUES SCATHING REBUKE OF OBAMA ADMINISTRATION'S HANDLING OF THE MIDEAST CONFLICT.
US Senator and Republican presidential contender Ted Cruz told The Jerusalem Postthis week that the Palestinians are the true barrier to peace.
Below are highlights of the telephone interview. The full interview will be published in Friday's Magazine.
SENATOR CRUZ, HOW WOULD YOU CHARACTERIZE THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION'S STEWARDSHIP OF US RELATIONS WITH THE PALESTINIANS?
CAROLINE B. GLICK \
US Senator and Republican presidential contender Ted Cruz told The Jerusalem Post this week that the Palestinians are the true barrier to peace.
Below are highlights of the telephone interview. The full interview will be published in Friday's Magazine.
Senator Cruz, how would you characterize the Obama administration's stewardship of US relations with the Palestinians?
This past week I publicly called for John Kerry's resignation as secretary of state. This is the second time I've done so. A number of months ago I called for Kerry's resignation when he wrongfullysuggested that Israel could become an apartheid state, which is a slander.
It is one often repeated by the terrorists and it should not be coming out of the mouth of a United States secretary of state.
This past week John Kerry and the State Department accused the nation of Israel of terrorism. That is a blatant lie. There is a qualitative difference between antics of Palestinian terrorists murdering innocent women and children in response to the relentless incitement from the Hamas, from the PA. There's a qualitative difference between that and the IDF defending the safety and security of the nation of Israel. And John Kerry's suggestion that they are morally equivalent is wrong, harmful and deeply offensive.
If you are elected president in 2016, what would your relationship be with the Palestinian Authority?