On terminology

Sar Shalom

When the Arabs and their sympathizers describe violent actions against Israeli civilians as "resistance," we rightly call them out for such usage. However, when they describe their actions as "jihad," we allow it to go forward and even use the same term for our own descriptions of their actions. In the interest of undermining their legitimacy, I would like to recommend a subset of Arabic terms identified by David Kilcullen, a former Australian military officer, scholar of counterinsurgency and adviser to David Petraeus during the surge, for describing religiously motivated terror.

Irhab (eer-HAB)- terror. The word form for the perpetrators of irhab would be irhabi or irhabiyoun.

Hirabah (hee-RAH-bah) - criminal war.

Istihlal (eesh-tee-LAHL) - the act of playing God.

The term istihlal is particularly notable due to the entire theological justification for reconquering Israel. According to the Koran, the Land of Israel was promised to the Children of Israel and the promise was never revoked. However, the Muslims have given themselves an out from that by saying that the promise is conditional on the Jews following the Torah. Absent Jewish obedience to the Torah, the land becomes open to claim for those who loyally follow Allah. How is it determined that the Jews are not following the Torah, and thus the Arab-Muslims are free to claim "Palestine?" Why it is the pronouncement of those Arab-Muslims that determines it. In other words, they are practicing istihlal.

While it is one thing to say that the Islamists describe their actions as jihad, and to use that word when it is clear that it is meant as their description, let's try to avoid using legitimating language ourselves for their actions, even if it is legitimating only to our enemies. Instead, as they earn their one-way trip to Jahannum (hell—note the cognate to the Hebrew Gehinnom), let's use language that describes why their actions are a one-way ticket to Jahannum.

Red Soxian Pussitude

Michael L.


It cannot be easy being this guilt-ridden and unsure of one's own moral standing.

Red Sox is a pussitudinous pro-Israel advocate on Daily Kos.

I almost feel bad for the guy, or lady, given the weakness of his or her advocacy for the Jewish minority in the Middle East.

In a hate-filled Harris-Gershon recent "diary" she writes:

We've certainly disagreed in the past, but (0+ / 0-)

I have found a lot of solace in your diaries. It's hard to see both sides as human with not only legitimate grievances but also with significant faults.

I don't dare discuss the issue with either my in-laws who think anything and everything that Israel does is right and whatever maladies happen to Palestinians/other Arabs is their own doing or my conservative friends who are probably at least as much anti-Palestine as they are pro-Israel. And I also don't bother discussing it with some leftist anti-Israel types in my family who think everything is Israel's fault and Hamas is an insignificant player.

It's impossible--for me at least--to be zealously pro-Israel (and I'd gather I'm one of the more pro-Israel posters here, albeit less active than in years past) while also seeing the results of the IDF's actions. The pictures of children in particular are especially heart-rending. I don't believe that Israel ought to be held to any higher standard than any other country, but I also don't think that their actions in Gaza reflect what we would expect from any country period--high standards or not.

I'm insufficiently pro-Israel for the standard hardcore Zionist, and too pro-Israel for the standard anti-Zionist. What it effectively amounts to is me arguing what looks like one extreme to the hardline pro-I/anti-P types, and the other extreme to the hardline pro-P/anti-I types.

It's a lonely place to both acknowledge that Israel is acting badly, innocent Palestinians are suffering and dying at outrageous rates, and that Hamas is a bunch of bastards and Israel is not the devil incarnate. It feels like you need to be in one camp or the other, and that just doesn't work for me.

Unapologetic Obama supporter. 

by Red Sox on Mon Aug 04, 2014 at 02:21:45 PM PDT

Oh, no, where do I stand?

What do I do?

Are my people immoral?

Which camp should I stand in?

Again, with friends like this, who needs enemies?

Red Sox says this:

Israel's actions against Gaza defy even the slightest sense of respect for human life...

Oh, the poor soul must be so tortured, but how tortured must one be to find "solace" in a David Harris-Gershon hit piece against Israel?

Oh, boo-fucking-hoo.

How is the condition of your navel, Red Sox?

I have to say, if there is one thing that I can stand less than Jihadism, it is Jewish equivocation in the face of Jihadism and in the face of their western-left allies who we tend to finance it.

Hey, Sox, why don't you stand the fuck up for your own people?

The Jews of the Middle East are a people under siege by a much larger, hostile majority population and you're sitting there wondering if they are moral enough to deserve your support.

You are kind-of like a wad of wet tissue-paper on the bathroom floor.

You stand for nothing.

How the West was Won

Michael L.

Arab Life is Dirt Cheap

Michael L.

For at least ten years southern Israel has been terrorized by rocket-fire.

Kassams and Katyushas dropped like rain and nobody in the international community gave a damn.  The people of S'derot and Ashkelon saw their economies hobbled and their children grow into adulthood with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

It is only when Israel strikes back that western-leftists leap from their chairs and raise their fists and cry to the heavens about Jewish Israeli aggression and the murder of the innocent children and the racist "genocide" of the local Arabs.

This is why the Hamas media strategy is so effective.  It plays directly into western-left inclinations to begin with.  Both non-Jewish westerners and Arab-Muslims understand that Jewish self-defense is simply intolerable and therefore they simply do not tolerate it.

In any case, Hamas' media strategy is very simple, but very effective.

It goes something like this:

1) Shoot at Israel from behind women and children until it must respond in defense of its own civilians. 

2) Scream to the heavens about Israeli aggression and genocide when it does respond. 

3) Let the western press and left-leaning politicians and activists and NGOs and bloggers run with the baton in the ongoing defamation.

And this is precisely what we are seeing right at this moment.

Hamas, in other words, is willing to see thousands of Gazans dead for the sole purpose of giving Israel a PR headache.

And this, my friends, goes right to the heart of the difference between us and them.

We love life and they love death... and they are certainly giving themselves enough of it.

The Arab Spring has turned into an Arab Hell.

How many are dead, now, from the Syrian civil war, by the way?

150,000?

250,000?

How many millions displaced?

Yet our friends on the left point their fingers at the Jews and tell us that we are committing a "genocide."

Have you listened to this young woman, yet?  She lives on the border of Gaza:

Teaching Arab-Muslim Children to Hate Jews

Michael L.



It is no secret that Hamas, and political Islam, more generally, has genocidal intention toward the Jewish people.

They make no secret of it.

It's just that most westerners honestly do not care.

Sydney In Solidarity 3 August 2014

geoffff

ABC news reported that 5000 people attended the pro-Israel peace rally in east Sydney and that organisers were forced to change venues to accommodate the unexpected crowd. There was heavy security.

The usual sunday pro-Hamas war rally in the City attracted about 3000.

If you watch very closely you should see Shirlee. She's the lady with the blue and white flag.