The rape of Israel

It's only fair to share...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+

Last Wednesday, New York's Jewish Week reported that the editor of Israel's self-described "newspaper of record" asked the US secretary of state to rape his country and told her that his erotic fantasy is to watch America rape Israel.

 

On September 10, at a dinner at the home of US Ambassador Richard Jones, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met with a group of Israeli "elites." Among the elitists was Haaretz editor David Landau. According to the Jewish Week, Landau "referred to Israel as a "failed state" politically, one in need of a US-imposed settlement. He was said to have implored Rice to intervene, asserting that the Israeli government wanted "to be raped" and that it would be like a "wet dream" for him to see this happen.

 

When questioned by the paper, Landau claimed this account of his comments was inaccurate, but then confirmed saying that "Israel wants to be raped" into a settlement and that he told Rice it was his "wet dream" to address her on the issue. He added that several people came up to him afterwards and congratulated him for his remarks, claiming, "I articulated what many Israelis feel."

 

Actually, almost no Israelis feel what Landau expressed. But his views are shared by his newspaper and by a significant portion of the elitists who dominate the country.

 

The pro-rape crowd's influence, which rose after Israel's defeat in the war with Hizbullah in 2006, became decisive over the past few months as the date of the publication of the Winograd Committee of Inquiry's final report on the war approaches. The report, set to be issued later this month, is expected to find Prime Minister Ehud Olmert responsible for Israel's failure to defeat Iran's foreign legion in Lebanon.

 

To offset the public's demand for his resignation that the report will likely trigger, Olmert has worked overtime to woo the Landau crowd. To this end, he courts Syria, advocates Israel's withdrawal from Judea, Samaria and parts of Jerusalem, and refuses to act against either Iran or the burgeoning Iranian-trained Hamas army in Gaza.

 

Then too, a week before George W. Bush's first presidential visit to Israel, Olmert gave an interview to The Jerusalem Post where he went out of his way to prove that Landau is right. His government does wish to be "raped" by the US.

 

Sounding more like a Palestinian spokesman than the leader of Israel, Olmert attacked his own country, claiming that it isn't abiding by its obligations to the terror-supporting Palestinians. In his words, "There is a certain contradiction… between what we're actually seeing and what we ourselves promised. We always complain about the [breached] promises of the other side. Obligations are not only to be demanded of others, but they must also be honored by ourselves."

 

Olmert argued that Israel must withdraw to the 1949 armistice lines with minor modifications, not because doing so will ensure peace with the Palestinians, but because if we don't we'll lose our Jewish majority.

 

The prime minister's contention is questionable for two basic reasons. First, the 1949 lines are not demographic borders but cease-fire lines. On the eastern side of the line live a half million Jews, and on the western side live one million Arabs. Second, the cease-fire lines are indefensible. So while not solving any demographic problem, withdrawing to the 1949 lines would imperil Israel militarily.

 

Beyond that, there is the fact that Olmert's dark demographic projections are based on falsified census data published by the Palestinian Authority in 1997. As the American-Israeli Demographic Research Group proved conclusively in January 2005, the PA's numbers were inflated by some 50 percent. Although demography is a problem, Israel is in no immediate danger of losing its Jewish majority.

 

The immediate danger Israel faces stems not from demography but from the ideology of jihad that has convinced the Arab and Islamic world to seek Israel's destruction rather than to accept it. Shrinking into indefensible borders will only exacerbate that problem by telling the jihadists that Israel can be destroyed through violence and terror.

 

Olmert also argued that Israel must give up its sovereignty over Jerusalem because Israel's supporters want it to. In his words, "The world that is friendly to Israel… that really supports Israel, when it speaks of the future, it speaks of Israel in terms of the '67 borders. It speaks of the division of Jerusalem."

 

So in an English-language interview a week before Bush's arrival in the country, Olmert essentially asked Israel's friend in the White House to pressure Israel to concede its vital national rights and interests.

 

In the same interview with the Post, Olmert acknowledged that his putative peace partner – Fatah leader and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas – does not recognize Israel's right to exist and demands the so-called "right of return" for millions of foreign descendants of Arabs who left Israel in 1948. But, he soothed, this is not a cause for worry.

 

Olmert's not worried, because he can see into Abbas's soul. As he put it, "If you ask [Abbas] to say that he sees Israel as a Jewish state, he will not say that. But if you ask me whether in his soul he accepts Israel, as Israel defines itself, I think he does."

 

For Olmert, intent as he is on securing the support of the pro-national rape crew, his faith in Abbas's peaceful soul is more important than the visible reality on the ground. And that reality is not merely reflected in the fact that Fatah and Hamas are rhetorically indistinguishable from one another. That reality is also reflected in the fact that the three Israelis murdered in the last six weeks – Ido Zoldan, David Rubin and Ahikam Amihai – were all killed by official, Abbas-commanded PA security forces.

 

The three terrorist murders show clearly that the PA itself, rather than Hamas, is the most lethal terrorist group in Palestinian society. And the same PA security organs involved in killing Israelis are funded and armed by Israel and the US – which together with the Europeans and the Russians also train them.

 

Rather than contend with this sordid reality, the Olmert government makes excuses for it. On Thursday, Olmert's spokesman Mark Regev told the Post that Israel will raise the involvement of PA security forces in the murder of Israelis with Bush, but Regev took pains to underplay the significance of the fact that the PA security forces themselves are the ones killing Israelis. He referred to the killers as "rogue, extremist elements inside the Fatah machine and the Palestinian security apparatus," and so sought to distance them from their leaders who encourage and celebrate their behavior.

 

Through their actions and statements, the Palestinians themselves show daily that there is no difference between Abbas and Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, or between Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. None of them is interested in peaceful coexistence with the Jewish state – whatever they may or may not feel in their souls. Just as happened in Gaza, so in Judea and Samaria and Jerusalem, any land that Israel transfers to their authority will be used as a base for operations against Israel. Any Israeli community relinquished will be transformed into terror training bases and missile launching pads.

 

But then, the reality of war doesn't have much to recommend itself under the looming specter of the Winograd Report. The only reality that interests Olmert is the reality of his quest to survive in office. And to stay in office, Olmert needs Landau and his friends. And so Israel's strategic straitjacket grows tighter by the day.

 

THIS
WEEK, Iranian strongman Ali Larijani paid an official state visit to Egypt. He met not only with President Hosni Mubarak and Foreign Minister Ahmad Gheit, but with Egypt's chief cleric, the head of the Al Azhar Mosque and Islamic University Sheikh Muhammad Tantawi. During his visit, Larijani offered nuclear collaboration with Egypt. He also worked to settle religious disputes between Shi'ite and Sunni Islam to facilitate jihadist collaboration against the common enemies of all Muslims.

 

On the heels of Larijani's visit, Mubarak broke his pledge to Defense Minister Ehud Barak from a week ago not to allow the thousands of Hamas terrorists seeking to return to Gaza after traveling to Saudi Arabia to enter the Strip through the Rafah crossing, where Israel has no security presence. On Wednesday, the terrorists marched across the border unopposed. Some were reportedly carrying more than $100 million in cash that they received from Iran and Saudi Arabia. Others were returning after receiving military training in Iran.

 

The Olmert government had nothing to say about Egypt's open collusion with Israel's enemies. And how could it? Admitting that Egypt is an enemy state would harm the pro-national rape gang's peace narrative. For them, Egypt is the head of the "moderate camp." Rather than acknowledge this reality, Olmert showers Mubarak with praise. In his interview with the Post, he said, "When I even think of how things would be if we were dealing with people other than Mubarak, well, I pray every day for his well-being and good health."

 

The truth is that so far, Olmert's gambit has been successful. All of the public's attempts to force him to resign – over Lebanon, Gaza and allegations of Olmert's massive corruption – have been scuttled. Guarding their man, the pro-national rape camp has given little to no media backing to popular calls for his removal from office. Landau and his friends are fully willing to lose wars and to be led by morally impaired, incompetent leaders if doing so facilitates the international rape of their country.

 

Take for example Landau's Haaretz employee, columnist Yoel Marcus. In his December 14 column, Marcus called for Olmert to be forced from office. Just one week later, emphasizing the importance of the peace process, Marcus said that Olmert must stay in power after the Winograd Report is published.

 

There are officials in Washington who claim that Bush is angry at Olmert. They say Bush expected Olmert to stand up to Rice when she became overtly hostile to Israel in the leadup to the Annapolis conference. These officials argue that if Olmert were just to stand up to Rice, the president would finally have the opportunity to marginalize her.

 

It is hard to know what to make of this claim. Unfortunately, we won't see it tested any time soon. Controlled by the rape-Israel crowd, Olmert needs Rice's pressure. And so he told the Post that Bush, (and by extension Rice), is "not doing a single thing that I don't agree to. He doesn't support anything that I oppose."

 

Bush's first presidential visit to Israel could have been a great opportunity for the country. But in his interview with the Post, a week before Bush's arrival, Olmert made it clear that the visit will be a disaster. Whether Bush wants to or not, ahead of the publication of the Winograd Report, Olmert will leave him no choice. Bush will be forced to rape Israel.

 

 

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

It's only fair to share...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+

4 Comments

  • NormanF 01/04/2008 at 18:30

    The demographic argument is false. First, in contrast to much of the Western World, Israeli Jewish women have at least three to four children. Among Haredi Israeli Jewish women, the birthrate is far higher. Israeli Jewish population replacement is well above replenishment levels and that’s not even counting future immigrant arrivals. Second, the Arab birthrate is leveling off. Arab emigration, if it was encouraged by the Israeli government should reduce the number of Arabs in the country in both absolute terms and in their share of the population. Third, the Golan Heights has a Jewish majority. Fourth, the areas Israel wants to annex have Jews and no Arabs living in them. Finally, we can arrive at the sensible conclusion that territorial surrender is not only unnecessary, its harmful to Israel’s national interests. Israel does not have a demographic problem that has justified the pursuit of the Oslo process and its progeny – at least not the specter of one that makes territorial separation a “de rigeur” policy outcome. Nor it does warrant the national rape Israel’s elites, led by Ehud Olmert would like to forcibly impose upon the country.

    Reply
  • Marc Handelsman, USA 01/04/2008 at 19:55

    As the Annapolis conference was a waste of U.S. prestige, so will the U.S. visit to Israel. As long as Israel has weak leadership, it can expect little from the U.S. Now is the time for Israeli’s to demand new elections and make it stick.

    Reply
  • marcel 01/04/2008 at 23:01

    You seem to still be in denial to this day that Puppet Olmert just parrots what Bush foreign p[olicy is towards Israel.
    Surrender and capitulation is the order of the day from Bush ,no friend of Israel.
    He follows his Road Map agenda spoken first by him on June 24,2002 and you still don’t get it.
    Olmert and miuch of faithless Israel are loyal to their messiah god of no peace as you ahve been for so long.
    You blame Olmert the puppet but go out of your way to continue to ignore the pivotal agenda Bush plays in all of this.
    CAROLINE,You are awarded the sash of Queen of Denial.

    Reply
  • Mordechai Kramer 01/12/2008 at 20:25

    Both Carolyn Glick and David Horowitz mention in last Friday’s Post-the Demographic Problem.
    I understand that the Arabs can attain a larger population than us in the future. But I don’t understand what leaving territory has to do with it. They reproduce just as well and remain as lethal and obnoxious as ever-in fact even more so.
    We destroyed the homes, and for many the lives, of the people in Gush Katiff by forcing them out of areas where no Arabs lived, supposedly for reasons of Demographic prudence. So what, our enemies are still there, and they’re making the lives of the people of Sedorot area into a living hell, even more than they did before we became so Demographically correct. Today more Israeli soldiers enter the Arab population centers of Gaza than they did before the disengagement. And yet they have the chutzpah to try to sell me the same nonsense again.
    Maybe the whole issue of Demography is a psychological spin used by politicians who want to impress us with big words. Maybe the elite of this country are afraid of loosing their grip on Israel to the settlers and in their hysteria they bombard us with insane mantras.
    They don’t even care if the West bank becomes another Gaza, where Hamas or the Fatach, or both, shoot missiles along the coast where they themselves live. Just as long as they destroy the counter culture of the Yishuvim.
    I now hear our Minister of Defense say that only the Jews will be transferred out of the West Bank but the army will remain to control the Arabs. So where does Demography come into the picture?
    The collusion of academics and politicians, of marking an imagined or artificially created line on a map, solves nothing. It is not a reason, it is an excuse. A spin nurtured by hatred.
    _________________________________________________________________
    Each individual of Israel has his nucleus in the Land of Israel, which is stored in the interior of his spirit with enormous longing and love.
    Rabbi Avraham Yitzhak Hakohen Kook-taken from Orot
    ——————————————————————————–

    Reply

Leave a Comment