RICHARD BAEHR: HAMAS DEATH CULT CELEBRATES ITS FIRST SUCCESS

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=9151

The death cult known as Hamas is celebrating its first great success of the current ‎campaign to murder Jews indiscriminately across the length and width of Israel. ‎Today it struck gold as Israel suffered its first death from rocket or mortar fire ‎from Gaza. This required The New York Times, America’s paper of record for those ‎who would vote for President Barack Obama for a third term if they only could, to point out that this ‎one Israeli casualty has to be placed in context with the approximately 200 dead ‎Palestinians in Gaza from Israeli bombing attacks. This disproportionality ‎of Israeli versus Arab deaths has been a constant concern for Israel’s enemies on ‎the Left in every engagement the nation has had with terror groups starting with ‎the war withHezbollah in 2006.

For pretty much every other nation in the history of the world, the goal in any war ‎has been to win quickly and decisively, with the lowest casualty cost to your own ‎side, and if morality is a part of your culture (which of course eliminates many war ‎participants, including all of those who have fought Israel in its modern history), ‎with no needless suffering caused to the other side’s civilian population. William ‎Saletan, hardly a down-the-line supporter of Israel (he is a fierce critic of home ‎demolitions of the families of terrorists) has applauded Israel for its enormous ‎efforts to accomplish its military goals in the current air campaign, while avoiding ‎civilian casualties.

As in the previous mini-wars with Hezbollah and in Gaza, the ratio of male to ‎female deaths among adult casualties has been 3 to 1 or 4 to 1. If Israel were ‎indiscriminately targeting civilians, or committing grave human rights violations, ‎the ratio would be much closer to 1 to 1. But for the major newspapers and ‎television stations in America, it is as if Israel had done something wrong for ‎having experienced so few deaths of its own (so far). The war would be “fairer” if ‎there were only more dead Jews. Since many on the Left and in the media have ‎trouble choosing between Hamas and Israel on the merits (or even prefer Hamas), ‎the pox on both your parties belief system leads to a longing for comparable death ‎tolls.‎

Israel’s critics won’t be moved by Saletan’s argument or any statistical analysis that ‎suggests Israel is behaving honorably. They want Israel to disappear, and they are ‎not at all uncomfortable with dead Jews. For years, the major nations of Europe ‎have argued that they are critics of Israel, but won’t tolerate anti-Semitism. It would ‎be hard to tell the difference these days, with police chiefs in Frankfurt turning ‎their bullhorns over to a violent mob attempting to attack Jewish institutions in the ‎city, and France descending into a full fledged state of nature if you happen to be ‎Jewish — with congregants locked into synagogues in Paris for their safety as masses ‎of Arabs call for a new Holocaust and attempt to storm the doors, while others ‎firebomb synagogues in communities outside Paris.

And then there is the prominent Green ‎Party member, Pierre Minnaert, who justified the attacks on the synagogues since ‎pro-Israel messages were being delivered there:‎ ‎”When synagogues behave like embassies it is not surprising that ‎they face the same attacks that embassies do.” Minnaert would be ‎happier if the rabbis kept their messages to fighting the war that ‎counts — against carbon fuels.‎

Dennis Prager has ‎provided a nice summary of the character and record of the two sides in the ‎current conflict that he has labeled Entity A and Entity B.‎

Entity A has this track record:‎

Declares that its raison d’etre is to annihilate Entity B.‎
Sends missiles to explode in the most populated parts of ‎Entity B in order to kill as many civilians as possible.‎
Uses families and individual civilians as human shields to ‎protect its own leaders from attack.‎
Tortures and kills domestic political opponents.‎
Has no political or religious freedom and has no freedom of ‎speech, press, or assembly, and no independent judiciary.‎
Is a theocracy.‎
Violently oppresses gays.‎
Saturates its education and airwaves with a demonic hatred ‎of Entity B.‎
Rated a 6 by Freedom House in its 2013 report on freedom ‎in the world. Seven is the worst possible rating. Entity A ranks ‎‎6 in freedom, 6 in civil liberties and 6 political rights.‎
And then there is Entity B:‎

Recognizes the right of Entity A to an independent ‎existence.‎
Has never begun a war with Entity A.‎
Has never targeted civilians in Entity A. In fact, it has ‎sacrificed soldiers in order to avoid killing Entity A civilians.‎
Domestic political opponents — including even supporters of ‎Entity A — not only have freedom of assembly, press and ‎expression; they have political parties with representatives in ‎Entity B’s parliament.‎
Has freedom of the press, assembly, religion, and a ‎completely independent judiciary.‎
Allows gays full civil rights.‎
Has innumerable human rights groups dedicated to the ‎welfare of people belonging to Entity A.‎
Has no education or broadcasts comparable to the daily hate ‎in Entity A.‎
Freedom House rating for 2014 is 1.5 in freedom (1 is best ‎possible); 2 in civil liberties; 1 in political liberties.
When asked which side they support in the current conflict, just ‎‎39 percent of self-identified American liberals support Israel, otherwise ‎known as Entity B. Seventy-seven percent of self-identified conservatives back Israel, ‎with 4 percent backing the Palestinians (Entity A). The gap between ‎Left and Right, and between Republicans and Democrats in terms of ‎support for Israel has never been wider in American history.

One might think that with support for Israel fading on the Left and ‎demonstrations against Israel getting more raucous and violent ‎even in American cities, that the major lobbying group for Jewish ‎Democrats would be cheerleading for Israel as more than a 1,000 ‎rockets hit the country. But you would be wrong. Today’s National ‎Jewish Democratic Council press release is concerned ‎with a more important war for Jewish Democrats, the so-called war ‎on women conducted by the Supreme Court. The NJDC makes a ‎call to arms to its members on this top issue for the group, backing ‎a piece of legislation introduced with no chance of becoming law, ‎but important nonetheless for setting the fall campaign agenda:‎

‎”Last month, the Supreme Court ruled in the Hobby Lobby case that ‎corporations have more right to religious liberty than the women who work for ‎them.‎ In response, Democrats have introduced the Protect Women’s Health from ‎Corporate Interference Act of 2014 (H.R. 5051/ S. 2578) — known as the Not My ‎Bosses’ Business bills — which requires any for-profit employers that provide ‎health care plans to cover contraception and any other vital health services ‎required by federal law. This week the Senate will take up the bill, but the House ‎Republican leadership has not yet agreed to take up this legislation before the ‎August recess. This bill is too important to women and families’ well-being to be ‎ignored.”‎

This political posturing for the November midterms is par for the course for ‎Jewish Democrats. It takes too much work for the NJDC or the few remaining ‎liberal Democrats who support Israel, to defend the Jewish state among polite ‎company on the Left, so why try. On the other hand, left-wing Jews, members of ‎groups like Jewish Voices for Peace, or Students for Justice in Palestine, are ‎among the most vocal of those cheerleading for Hamas and the Palestinians, ‎marching with their “Arab brothers and sisters” who are calling for death to the ‎Jews, and showing the way by assaulting them when they can. For the liberal ‎Jewish establishment, defending the Obama administration and advancing its ‎political agenda by pandering to women voters, is no trouble at all. Israel is a ‎country a long way away, and there are no votes to be won for Democrats by ‎backing Israel. And somehow, those disproportionate casualty numbers are a ‎real tough one to explain or defend. If they don’t sound fair to The New York ‎Times, maybe that means there really is a problem.‎

Comments are closed.