« NYT Reports Expedited Arms Shipment To Israel | Main | I Like The Sound Of This »

End Some Occupations!

The Saturday, July 22 number of The New York Times offers a handful of mini-op-eds on the current crisis of the Middle East. In order to rope a sufficient number of columnists to opine on the matter, the Gray Lady was forced to find a few ringers: Apparently Maureen Dowd, Bob Herbert, and Paul Krugman have not troubled themselves to discuss this subject, since they couldn't come up with a way of blaming George W. Bush for the whole thing.

Tellingly, almost all of these short op-eds argue for "solutions" to the crisis that are anti-Israel in effect. Many pine for a ceasefire--just the thing to allow Hezbollah to regroup and strike again. And, of course, they hope a UN force can be added to the Lebanese-Israeli border, presumably so that its soldiers can rape underage girls after aiding the terrorists.

But surely the most feculent piece that besmirches the Times comes from the pen of Rashid Khalidi, the Edward Said Professor of Killing the Jews at Columbia University. It commences as follows:

Washington needs to understand the real problem in Palestine and Lebanon. Viewing the current crisis through the distorting lens of terrorism, as the Bush administration and the Israeli government do, leads to the unreflective use of force.

Delightful, is it not? We dimwitted Americans believe that acts of terrorism speak to problems related to terrorism. How benighted, eh? Just because its neighbors pine for Israel's destruction through terrorist violence, doesn't mean there's any reason to get all hot and bothered about terrorism.

So, if the dastardly eliminationist dreams of Israel's enemies are merely a red herring, what's the real cause of this fuss? Thankfully, the ever-objective Mr. Khalidi is kind enough to inform us:

This crisis is rooted in Israel's nearly 40-year occupation of Palestinian lands and its occupation of Lebanon from 1982 to 2000.

Excuse us, Mr. Khalidi, but this is dead wrong. In fact, this is exactly what this crisis does not demonstrate. After all, if "occupation" were truly the issue, why did Arab armies attempt to destroy Israel in 1948 and 1967--before Israel controlled Gaza and the West Bank? And why aren't the Palestinians furious at Jordan and Egypt: They had control of these territories for some time, and they treated the Palestinians rather roughly.

But there's more: If the Lebanese despise occupation so much, why aren't they striking out at Syria, the power that occupied their country for years and still does so through Hezbollah, their surrogate? Pardon us for noticing, but the Arabs appear to detest occupations rather selectively.

In fact, if Mr. Khalidi is hell-bent on blaming occupation for the current conflict, we suggest the following: The US and Israel are still deeply disturbed about the Muslim occupation of Andalusia. And until they make amends for this, we'll be compelled to use the red herring called superior firepower to take out our frustration.

(Note: The crack young staff normally "weblog" over at "The Hatemonger's Quarterly," where they are currently counting sifting the lies from the bigger lies in Rashid Khalidi's oeuvre.)


Comments (7)

"Tellingly, almost all of t... (Below threshold)
Geoff Tate:

"Tellingly, almost all of these short op-eds argue for 'solutions' to the crisis that are anti-Israel in effect."

A ceasefire would be anti-Israel? Not killing people would be anti-Israel? Ridiculous. Fundamentalistic.

"After all, if 'occupation' were truly the issue, why did Arab armies attempt to destroy Israel in 1948 and 1967--before Israel controlled Gaza and the West Bank?"

Let's see -- maybe because Israel was "occupying" what it called "Israel," an area which had previously been inhabited primarily by the Palestinians?

"If the Lebanese despise occupation so much, why aren't they striking out at Syria, the power that occupied their country for years and still does so through Hezbollah, their surrogate? Pardon us for noticing, but the Arabs appear to detest occupations rather selectively."

One suspects that you read the news rather selectively as well. Many Lebanese have been protesting against Syria for months. But one need also remember that the Syrian occupation has not been nearly as brutal -- the Israeli actions have involved displacement, not just "occupation."

"We dimwitted Americans believe that acts of terrorism speak to problems related to terrorism."

The problem with Americans of the dimwitted variety is that they tend to define terrorism along racial and religious lines (i.e., they tend to be bigots) rather than by objective reference to the underlying acts a person commits. To call the abduction of 2 soldiers (and subsequently 15 civilians and 17 more soldiers) "terrorism" but the killing of 350+ civilians and the displacement of 500,000 more "self-defense" is racist hatemongering.

Geoff, I find myself fascin... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Geoff, I find myself fascinated by these poor people called the "Palestinians" and the hand Fate has dealt them. Tell me more about them and their history. Who were some of their notable rulers? What were the major events in their history? What form of governance did they have? How did they interact with other nations? Or here's a real simple one -- what did they call their currency?

The "Palestinians" are a constructed people. The Israelis can cite an uninterrupted chain of occupancy to that land dating back literally millenia. In fact, in contemporary accounts up until the 1920's, the term "Palestinian" referred to the Jewish occupants.

But yeah, a lot of modern-day Israelis can't claim a direct, uninterrupted line of occupancy. In fact, a lot of them came from about 800,000 Jews who up and moved to Israel all in one lump, arriving around 1948 -- when they were all driven out of their homes in various Arab and/or Muslim lands.

Everyone talks about the 800,000 Palestinians who fled Israel at its birth. Nobody ever mentions the roughly same number of refugees created heading in the opposite direction -- because they were not stuffed into "refugee camps" and kept that way for over half a century for future use as political footballs.

J.

I've heard Murtha referred ... (Below threshold)
Buckeye:

I've heard Murtha referred to as Al Qaeda's Senator. Along this same line of thinking I would call the NYT the terrorists' newspaper.

Geoff: "The problem with... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

Geoff: "The problem with Americans of the dimwitted variety is that they tend to define terrorism along racial and religious lines (i.e., they tend to be bigots) rather than by objective reference to the underlying acts a person commits"

So much wrong with your whole spew it seems silly (like you) to only comment on your final paragraph. But, so much BS, so little time.

First, you claim we "dimwitted Americans" divide terrorism along "religious lines". Well, golly Jeff with a G, these days it mostly IS. The Islamofascists around the world are committing their acts of TERRORISM in the name of a religion: ISLAM. They did the dividing...excuse us for noticing.

and then: "objective reference to the underlying acts a person commits". WTF?/b>

I suppose this means we need to elevate ourselves above considering what a Geoffry Dalhmer DOES, and consider WHY he does it. We should learn to see past the tools (we call them "victims") Geoffrey used to get attention.

Like the poor "freedom fighters" from 9/11. Or the moronic Islamofascists that routinely, and cowardly, go WAY out of their way to kill and maim the most defenseless humans they can find.

Look, Jeffrey with a G, the question for you is this: if a magic wand could be waved that would either
(a) totally disarm the Israelis or
(b) totally disarm the Muslim world

What would be tht effect either way? The answer is obvious...at least to us dim-witted Americans.

Cheerio.

Geoff Tate:Hitting... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:

Geoff Tate:

Hitting first is terrorism.

Hitting back is self defense.

Dear Crack Young Staff,... (Below threshold)

Dear Crack Young Staff,

It rarely gets any better than this:

"...comes from the pen of Rashid Khalidi, the Edward Said Professor of Killing the Jews at Columbia University."

Pure gold.

The occupation of the Edito... (Below threshold)
epador:

The occupation of the Editorial Offices of the NYT by self-centered egotistical traitors needs to come to an end.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy