Skip to main content

Israel’s Back

Getty Images

On October 7, 2023 Hamas terrorists swooped down upon a peaceful gathering of young Israelis enjoying themselves at a concert.

ABC in mid-October provided us with a textual description of the ensuing slaughter: “Then the video [made by Hamas terrorists] gets grisly. Other militants are busy mashing a dying man's face with their boots. Another pair screams ‘Allahu akbar [God is great] as they use a garden hoe to try to decapitate another man. In another house, a gunman sticks the muzzle of his rifle into a room inhabited by a family. It's a mash of colors. In one, a terrorist is standing on an Israeli man's chest and shoots him point-blank in the face.”

The slaughter was filmed by what some news outlets in the West are pleased to call “militants” rather than terrorists. These horrific clips, used by Hamas terrorists to convince the brethren they seriously intend to displace Israel with a forward marching conquering Islam, are a trifle too bloody to appear in internet news reports or in the pristine news outlets scattered about the internet. The Iran supported terrorists doubtless plan to use the clips as recruitment devises.

The Iran supported Hamas terrorists slaughtered 1,200 Israelis and 144 foreigners. The assassinated included 859 civilians, 281 soldiers, 57 policemen and 10 Shin Bet members. The attack wounded 3,400, and 247 soldiers and civilians taken hostage, later to be bartered for an Israeli ceasefire following a declaration of war by Israel against Hamas.

Videos taken by Hamas terrorists, too grisly to be shown in the United States, show terrorists busily mashing a dying man's face with their boots, while pair of terrorists scream in the background "Allahu akbar, (God is great!)" as they use a garden hoe to try to decapitate another man.

The clips, edited by some prominent Iranian film director, would be certain to receive the equivalent of Iran’s Palme d'Or. And it will not be long before the clips find their way into Iran’s lower grades where young students are regularly taught that the killing of Jews is a religious obligation.

Israel’s unilateral disengagement from Gaza began in August of 2005 and “by September,” according to one report, “around 9,000 Jews living in 25 settlements were evicted and the Israeli troops completely withdrew from the Gaza Strip to the Green Line -- a 1949  Armistice Line drawing boundaries between Israel and its Arab neighbors.”

So much for Israel’s colonialist ambitions.

Hamas is both a terrorist organization sponsored and financed by Iran, which appears to be having some difficulty in establishing itself among diplomats in the United States as an enemy of the “Great Satan,” and, it is not often noted in news reports, highly oppressed Gazans. Iran’s Hamas government in Gaza has been left to its own devises ever since Israel pulled out of Gaza 18 years ago.

In 1979, following the abdication of the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the U.S. embassy in Tehran was attacked and its staff held prisoners for 444 days. Numberless politicians in the United States were incensed by all this. They now pronounced themselves disturbed by the Hamas slaughter in the dessert, but these irruptions and American rhetorical disfavor had not prevented Hamas and other Iran supported terrorists from raining missiles down on Israel since 1989, two years after Hamas was formed.

Democrat President Barack Obama sent planeloads of cash to Iran, secretly, in the dead of night, to purchase Iran’s compliance with his disarmament plan to rid Iran of nuclear material production. Iran’s Supreme Leader, the stiff upper lipped Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, took the fungible cash and, some suppose, routed much of it to Iran’s terrorist proxies in Gaza, Somalia, Lebanon and Syria. Iran’s drive to produce a nuclear weapon was not materially affected by Obama’s clumsy attempt at appeasement.

In reality -- rarely consulted by progressive Democrat administrations or Hamas supporting students at Colombia University -- peace between the “Great Satan­, a derogatory term used in some Muslim majority countries to refer to the United States, and Iran remains elusive – as witness the latest attack upon Israel by Iranian backed terrorist proxies.

The Biden administration, faithfully following the lead of world healer former President Barack Obama, has unfrozen Iranian assets, though Obama was cautious enough to provide the sworn enemies of “The Great Satan” with fungible cash on the sly by shipping to Iran planeloads of cash.

In a luminescent article in the Washington Examiner provocatively titled “It’s Obama’s Middle East Mess”, Washington, D.C.-based foreign affairs analyst Sean Durns remarks, “He [Obama] entered office seeking rapprochement with the Islamic Republic of Iran, the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism. Ostensibly, the 44th president wanted to contain its illegal nuclear weapons program. But as Middle East scholars Tony Badran and Mike Doran have convincingly argued, the president was really after something different: a realignment of the U.S. alliance system in the region — away from Israel and the Gulf and toward the mullahs in Iran.”

The possibility of a diplomatic realignment between the Unites States and Iran, manfully resisting any realignment of its own uncompromising anti-Western posture, should have been shattered permanently by Hamas’ murderous attack on innocent Israeli civilians just weeks ago.

How many times must the wooed reject the wooer’s advances before he abandons a murderous realignment of reality?

The D.C. waffling following the attack suggests that the back-protection offered by Biden is adjustable. And the Jews of history, so often tormented by its temporary victors may, in the not too distant future, begin to feel at their backs the point of a dagger wielded by its political friends.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p