Pages

Thursday, 17 March 2011

The 'massacre of the innocents'

A must read article by Jeff Jacoby at Boston.com says most of what I have been trying to say regarding the murder of five members of the Fogel family. Please read the whole article and understand what is really happening in the Middle East.

'LAST WEEKEND in Itamar, an Israeli settlement in the Samarian hills, terrorists infiltrated the home of Udi and Ruth Fogel and perpetrated a massacre of the innocents.

The killers started with Yoav, the Fogels’ 11-year-old, and Elad, his 4-year-old brother. Yoav’s throat was slit, and Elad was stabbed twice in the heart. Then the attackers murdered Ruth, knifing her as she came out of the bathroom. In the next room they killed Ruth’s sleeping husband, Udi, and their infant daughter, Hadas. Apparently they didn’t notice the last bedroom, where the two other boys, Ro’i, 8, and Yishai, 2, were asleep. It wasn’t until half past midnight, when 12-year-old Tamar came home from a Friday night youth group, that the horrific slaughter was discovered. Much of the house was drenched in blood, and the 2-year-old was shaking his parents’ bodies, crying for them to wake up.

What explains such unspeakable evil? What sort of human being deliberately butchers a sleeping baby, or plunges a knife into a toddler’s heart?

As news of the massacre in Itamar spread, candy and pastries were handed out in Gaza in celebration. The Al-Qassam Brigades, a branch of Hamas, argued that the murder of Israeli settlers was permitted by international law. A day later it changed its tune, insisted that “harming children is not part of Hamas’s policy,” and suggested instead that the massacre might have been committed by Jews. The Palestinian “foreign minister,’’ Riyad al-Malki, also voiced doubt that the killers could have been Palestinian. “The slaughter of people like this by Palestinians,’’ he claimed, “is unprecedented.’’ Actually, the precedents abound.

The atrocity in Itamar recalls the 2002 terror attack at Kibbutz Metzer that left five victims dead, including a mother and her two young boys. It brings to mind the murder of Tali Hatuel and her four daughters, who were shot at point-blank range as they drove from Gaza to Ashkelon in 2004. It is reminiscent of the bloodbath three years ago in a Jerusalem yeshiva, where eight young students were gunned down. Unprecedented? If only.

The civilized mind struggles to make sense of such savagery.

There are those who believe passionately that all human beings are inherently good and rational creatures, essentially the same once you get beyond surface disagreements. Such people cannot accept the reality of a culture that extols death over life, that inculcates a vitriolic hatred of Jews, that induces children to idolize terrorists. Since they would never murder a family in its sleep without being driven to it by some overpowering horror, they imagine that nobody would. This is the mindset that sees a massacre of Jews and concludes that Jews must in some way have provoked it. It’s the mindset behind the narrative that continually blames Israel for the enmity of its neighbors and makes it Israel’s responsibility to end their violence.
The truth is simpler, and bleaker. Human goodness is not hard-wired. It takes sustained effort and healthy values to produce good people; in the absence of those values, cruelty and intolerance are far more likely to flourish.

For years the Palestinian Authority has demonized Israelis and Jews as enemies to be destroyed, vermin to be loathed, and infidels to be terrorized. Children who grow up under Palestinian rule are inundated on all sides — in school, in the mosques, on radio and TV, even in summer camps and popular music — with messages that glorify bloodshed, promote hatred, and lionize “martyrdom.’’

None of this is news. The toxic incitement that pervades Palestinian culture has been massively documented.

What children are taught in Palestinian classrooms, Hillary Clinton said in 2007, is “to see martyrdom and armed struggle and the murder of innocent people as ideals to strive for. . . . This propaganda is dangerous.’’
An estimated 20,000 mourners accompanied the Fogel family as they were laid to rest in Jerusalem Sunday. In his eulogy, Vice Premier Moshe Ya’alon predicted bitterly that in time the Palestinian Authority would honor the Fogel family’s murderers and name public squares after them. His comment might have seemed gratuitous — except that at that very moment, in the West Bank town of Al-Bireh, Dalal Mughrabi was being celebrated at a public square named in her honor. It was Mughrabi who, 33 years earlier, led a PLO terror squad on a savage rampage on Israel’s Coastal Road. Thirty-eight innocent Jews died that day, 13 of them children.'
So where are the voices willing to support Israel , where are they on the BBC? Nowhere because the BBC want to see Israel destroyed and don't care how many Israelis die or suffer. The BBC's conduct over the reporting of the murder of the Fodel family is nothing short of vile and I hope they are punished for their actions, whether in this life or not.

4 comments:

  1. What, exactly, would the BBC gain from "destroying" Israel? That's not a rhetorical question, by the way. The BBC have reported on the murders, it's there on the website.

    Whenever I wonder about my views, I like to visit this site, safe in the knowledge that your ridiculous views will always be confined to the blogosphere and never shared by the sensible, free-thinking public.

    Also, if you want your views to be taken remotely seriously why do you intersperse supposedly fact-based articles with videos of scantily-clad women and frankly sexist takes on women's rugby? That is rhetorical, by the way.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Since you asked. The BBC's world view is one of oppressed Muslims fighting back against imperialism, imperialism which was represented by Britain when it was the 'occupying power' and is now Israel and its main supporter the USA. The BBC's links with its own large Arab speaking station and political theorists from the left ensure that its group think position is maintained. Just contrast the coverage given by the BBC to Palestinian civilians killed by Israel to that given by the BBC to this murder of a family. The BBC's original article was disgusting in the way that it sought to excuse the murderers and if you cannot see that then I feel sorry for you.

    I cannot control who comes to my site so I won't tell you not to bother to visit, nor will I bother trying to explain that this is my blog not yours and thus I can choose what to post about. I like to discuss both 'light and shade'. The darker, political articles do take over which is why I try to lighten the mood with more fluffy ones. My apologies if it offends you but I, and many others, like scantily clad women and if you cannot see the article on womens rugby as anything other than tongue in cheek (although I seriously did admire the passing and ball handling skill shown by the Engalnd womens rugny team) then I fear for.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes, it is your blog. However, as you've chosen to make your thoughts public you should expect criticism of those thoughts and opinions from time to time.

    I choose to read your blog because I think you should be able to justify your posts with facts and reasoned arguments. The fact you consider asking me not to read it suggests you're unable or unwilling to do this. The former seems more likely.

    "The BBC's links with its own large Arab speaking station and political theorists from the left ensure that its group think position is maintained."

    Can you identify these political theorists and state what the links are specifically? The BBC does of course broadcast in many languages all across the globe, so why single out one aspect of that?

    ReplyDelete

By clicking "Publish your comment" you indemnify NotaSheepMaybeAGoat and accept full legal responsibility for your comments