Ah, so, are we all familiar with my coping skills when it comes to the Gaza war? If not: I have none. I’m all kinds of bitchy over it. There was a pro-Israel rally on campus yesterday, which I heard about NOT because it was a hot topic on the facebook, but because the “counter-protest the pro-Israel rally” WAS a hot topic on facebook. I walked through the crowd and stood a far ways off with a fellow grad student and observed. Overall it was a hell of a lot tamer than other rallies and protests going on around the world. Still, I left feeling disapointed, making scrunched-up faces. I could hardly hear the pro-Israel groups’ speakers over the incessant chants of “free Gaza,” “end the siege,” and “Shame! Shame!”

Not to mention all the booing. A few student leaders spoke, but the speaker that really caught my attention was a rabbi from the Texas Hillel House. James, the other grad student, despite not being jewish, had heard him speak before and recognized him. I really wish I could have heard more than a few fragments of sentences. The rabbi spoke not to the pro-Israel crowd, but to the counter-protestors who, rather than listen, continued to chant and boo the same things over and over again. He chanted prayers for peace in Gaza in english, hebrew, and then a student translated the prayer into arabic. This elicited more booing from the crowd. The other speakers, from what I could tell, spoke mainly against Hamas, and spoke very little about the attacks on Israel, so as not to sound like they were justifying the war. They spoke of their desire to obtain peace with palestinians.

It was very sad to see the dynamic the exists in the middle east nearly replicated here: Supposedly pro-Gaza crowds, claiming they want peace, doing little more than occluding the message of the other side, being unwilling to even listen to a peaceful message, directed at them, by people who wish to end the suffering in Gaza.

I told James to pull me out of there if I started frothing at the mouth, so when my repetive exclamations of “what are these people, fucking stupid?” began to climb in decibals, we left.

There are some more solemn facts of the matter, beyond the willingness of Israelis and a relatively few Gazans, which will make peace an improbable objective. But I’ve noticed a stronger anti-Hamas message in the public domain lately (public domain = youtube).

Below is a series of videos, some show the extent of indoctrination that palestinians are subjected to, and the message of the Hamas leadership to it’s people. The last couple videos are a home-made documentary, narrated by a christian-arab. Weird, I know. But he explains quite clearly why the theocracy and militia of Hamas has little chance of being overthrown, as well as the nature of Muslims in Palestinian lands.

Hamas Human shield confession, in which the Hamas PM advocates the use of women and children as human shields, in fact glorifying their deaths.

Children of Hamas, the indoctrination of toddlers and children. Disgusting. In the middle, a kid who is probably no more than 4 years old, says he wants to be a martyr. When asked why, he says “to kill jews.” Another child is asked, “what is that in your hands?” (he has a toy rifle) “A rifle,” he says. “What will you use if for?” “Killing jews.”

“The beauty of Hammas and the ugliness of Israel” parts 1 and 2, is the anti-Hamas video. I don’t know why they titled it so, but I think it is to lure some of the pro-Gaza crowds into coming to terms with what they have been chanting for.

Part 1

Part 2

What Hamas is doing to the palestinian people is not unlike what Sadam Hussein’s goons did to Iraqis. It’s amazing, to me, that no one is calling for more support for the invasion and the removal of Hamas and terrorist from Gaza and the West Bank. But, as is explained, these people do not think like us; they are Muslims, and in Muslim law, it is ok for Muslims to kill other Muslims, including children of their country. They cheer for the death of their own people and the deaths of others (remember 9/11?), but they want sympathy and call for a stronger anti-Israel movement when their children are killed by Israeli IDF strikes.

Here is a video of Hamas launching rockets from the UN school. Shortly after, the IDF targeted the school, not because they are trying to crush the infrastructure of Gaza, or target civilians, but because that was where Hamas militants were launching rockets. This is a tactic Hamas uses to raise an international stink.

I hope the call to end Hamas rule in Palestinian lands grows louder. I really think both the pro-Gaza and pro-Israel sides in this country want the same thing, peace, but they can’t agree on who the real assholes are. It is clearly Hamas, and similar parties, not Israel.

Judd sez:

“One of my deepest held problems with our friends on the left is what, in my view, is the naive assumption that, really, we aren’t all that different.  They believe that everyone is, like them (and I use this term very very loosely) a “reasonable person” with similar values.  I reject this out of hand and that forms part of the basis for how I view the world, particularly people whose life experiences are significantly different than mine.

In some circles, I’ve just admitted to being a racist xenophobe.  It counterbalances my view that people who would pillory me with the aforementioned slur are themselves clueless morons.

A year or two ago Sally Field was on stage at the Emmys and said that “if mothers ruled the world there would be no goddamn wars in the first place.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20824064/

As this news story points out (and I know it’s from MSNBC so it should be taken with a grain of salt) her remarks drew praise from the left, including the man who, but for a few hundred confused Floridians, would have been the President of the United States.

“This is how they see the world.  Mothers love their children and would never want any mother’s child to die and so if mothers had all the power we could all spend our days singing kumbaya and doing trust falls.

I think their whole premise is, well, really stupid.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48178

The exchange beneath the image of this mother holding the two pictures of her sons is one of the most telling I’ve come across. “

……

The above article, in my oppinion is a must read. It begins like this:

“In an insightful television interview, a Palestinian legislative candidate told why her Islamic faith required her to sacrifice three of her sons to terrorist operations and why she believes there are no prohibitions against killing civilians until the Jews are completely banished from Israel.”

And it ends with this interview:

“Farhat: “The word ‘peace’ does not mean the kind of peace we are experiencing. This peace is, in fact, surrender and a shameful disgrace. Peace means the liberation of all of Palestine, from the [Jordan] to the [Mediterranean] Sea. When this is accomplished – if they want peace, we will be ready. They may live under the banner of the Islamic state. That is the future of Palestine that we are striving towards.”

The conversation concluded, with Farhat declaring herself “proud and honored to be a terrorist for the sake of Allah”:

Interviewer: Some say this kind of reasoning is the obstacle to peace, because the Israelis will never agree to be banished. … Farhat: Let them refuse. We do not expect them to accept this. These people are occupiers, and we want to banish them from our land.

[...]

Interviewer: Umm Nidal, who sits here in front of me, is classified as a terrorist throughout the world. Not just a terrorist, but also as a producer of terrorists. …

Farhat: They can classify as much as they like. I am proud and honored to be a terrorist for the sake of Allah. ‘Prepare for them whatever force and steeds of war you can, in order to strike terror in the hearts of the enemy of Allah and of your own.’ I am happy to implement this Quranic verse myself, and to be a terrorist for the sake of Allah.

[...]

Interviewer: You have 10 sons.

Farhat: Yes, Allah be praised.

Interviewer: If another is killed …

Farhat: There are many young men. …

Interviewer: Will your heart be filled with unbearable sorrow?

Farhat: No, no. Allah be praised, I am preparing myself. I will sacrifice them all. If my duty requires me to sacrifice them all, I will not refuse – even if it costs me a hundred sons.”

Yikes. While it cannot be said that this mother doesn’t/didn’t love her sons, her idea of a mother’s love is indeed drastically different from what many hold as true about the concept.

I’ve heard a lot of buzzing about radical islamics, but as of the start of this post, hadn’t actually looked into radical Islam versus non-radical Islam views on the events in the middle, and on one another – that is, I haven’t probed beyond what the journalists and a limitted section of the blogosphere have put before me. So I set out to do some research of my own. Here’s what I found. It isn’t much, but I am at work (and thus have only a few minutes of play time between experiments):

Islamic Extremists: Who are they?

After searching a couple tens of pages with various key words, I picked up on a repeated reference to the Muslim Brotherhood. Upon looking it up (I used professor Wikipedia  so take it as you will), here’s what I found:

The Muslim Brotherhood is stated to be a Sunni movement and is currently considered the largest and most influential organization, and is known for abiding by a very strict interpretation of the Quran. The Muslim Brotherhood, or MB, is not itself a politcal party, but rather a movement, and an organization of Islamic factions whose credo is:

“Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

Though it is not a political party, members of the MB are known to have started political movements such as Hamas. Hamas is said to be staffed with followers of the MB, but sources are wary to directly link Hamas to the MB. If I had to guess, it would be because the MB must remain a clear movement and not a political party in order to continue promoting its charter. The MB movement has been banned in several Arab states.

MB officials have decried the use of violent means to achieve their goals, however, because many  members of the MB are often described as oppressed and  dangerously violent (I’m gonna go ahead a spitball a guess that many is really more like a fuck-ton considering how prolific this movement is amongst the more violently embroiled regions of the Middle East. It’s not a very logical connection, but I’m just sayin’), the MB’s officially stated anti-terror position is quite controversion. Even moreso,  it has caused disputes within the movement, with more radical, violent members at times breaking away to form other groups such as the Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya (The Islamic Group) and Al Takfir Wal Hijra (Excommunication and Migration).

Quite frankly, I have a hard time accepting that the Muslim Brotherhood condemns the use of violence to achieve its goals. As stated above, the group’s credo commits them to Jihad and dying for Allah. To be fair, this could be interpreted in a more or less extreme manner, with the more extreme  being the possition of Umm Nidal, in the article from Judd. Though I don’t see how encouraging martyrdom via suicide bombings can in anyway be construed as a non-violent means of Jihad or dying for Allah, but what the hell do I know.

Non-Islamic-Extremists: Who are they?

Not all Muslims interpret Jihad as a holy war or view large scale acts of violence against those they consider adversaries as Jihad, and nor do they promote martyredom as Umm Nidal and like-minded Muslims are doing. Examples of these Muslim subsections are the Twelver, Ismaili, and Zaidi Muslims. These are recognized branches of Shia Islam. If this is old hat, I apologize. All three branches define Jihad as a two-fold struggle: the internal and external struggle, or greater and lesser struggle, respectively. The internal struggle is recognized by Shia Muslims as the greater struggle, while the external struggle, the war to fight against those objects which remove one from the divine presence – is considered a lesser struggle. Whether this compells one to commit acts of violence is debateable. The Shia groups are more outspoken about being pacifists, and make the distinction between Jihad and holy war.

So why are the Sunni factions the most popular and largest Islamic groups? In part, this appears (to me) to be due to the Muslim Brotherhood. Giving to the community is mandated by all of the Islamic factions, Sunni and Shia, however, the MB demands extra portions of it’s members income. This income is also used to create charities for the Muslim poor, which in turn draws in more members. There’s nothing wrong with charity, but the violence displayed by the organization’s corrupt (that’s me be optimistic) members is a compelling force, especially because the MB is a vigorously non-pluralist group. That, essentially, makes it a veritable cult.

Well, I was spurned by the 10 invites to the “end the aggression against Gaza” group”. I’m definately going to lose friends over posting this on facebook:

Maybe a ground invasion of Gaza needs to happen.

I know I’m going to be accused of being a peace-hating, cold-hearted republican again. I am not a republican, and I do not love wars. This sentiment has spent about a week in the cooker, and has ripened from mild annoyance to full-fledged, uh, well, annoyance. Annoyance at the first suggestions that Israel shouldn’t have responded with airstrikes after Hamas launched rockets over the borders, annoyance at the UN, and annoyance at the stupid hippies with signs who probably don’t know the first thing about Hamas. Yes, Israel has a tendency to overreact, but to suggest that a counter attack was unwarranted is just about one of the stupidest things I’ve heard on CNN. I forget his name, but his line of reason was that no one was killed by any of the 70 rockets launched by Hamas and thus the intensity of the Israeli response was unwarrented.

Hel-lo?! That doesn’t make it ok, and that doesn’t mean that Israel shouldn’t have responded with airstrikes to remove the threat. It’s not as though Hamas used nice, cuddly, fluffy little rockets; the fact that no one was killed by their attacks was an accident.

As for a cease-fire as the UN suggested? Impossible, sadly so. For the first time in recent memory, I actually agree with something Barack Obama has said: that Israel agreeing to a cease-fire with Hamas would be like us agreeing to a cease-fire with Al-Qaeda. Bravo, Barry, for the intelligent statement.

Unfortunately, Palestinians elected Hamas to be the governing party, and Hamas has repeatedly vowed to destroy the state of Israel. In fact, I don’t know if it is even proper to use such a phrase, because Hamas won’t acknowledge the existence of the state of Israel.

From http://www.cfr.org/publication/8968/

“Hamas combines Palestinian nationalism with Islamic fundamentalism. Its founding charter commits the group to the destruction of Israel, the replacement of the PA with an Islamist state on the West Bank and Gaza, and to raising “the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine.” Its leaders have called suicide attacks the “F-16″ of the Palestinian people. Hamas believes “peace talks will do no good,” Rantisi said in April 2004. “We do not believe we can live with the enemy.”"

I’m not heralding the ground invasion of Gaza. It sucks, really. War sucks, violence sucks, it’s all very, very negative, and it makes me a saaaaaaad panda. But what are the options? How can Israel hold peace talks with a governing party that doesn’t acknowledge that Israel has a right to exist? Should they try a cease-fire as suggested by U.N. ? I’m sure they will eventually, but I’m also sure that they will fail. Israel does have a right to defend to defend itself. This isn’t me merely echoing Bush’s recent statement, this is the fact of the matter. Most nations prioritize protecting their people. Israel has a right to do this, as does Palestine. But Hamas must stop training suicide bombers and sending them into Israel, and they really need stop vowing the Israel’s destruction. Seriously.

I  honestly do pledge my support to Palestinian civilians in Gaza. But Hamas needs to go, or revamp its foundations and charter. If there is anything left of Palestine after these terrible times, then I hope that Palestinians will rise up and kick Hamas to the curb and elect a governing party that doesn’t swear the total destruction of its neighbor, because that shit is violent and totally not cool, umkay? But, this will probably be unlikely to occur (see post-WWI Germany).