On Sunday just past, Sept 11 2011, we saw the 10th anniversary of Ground Zero at the WTC, NY. (A Spiritually based response of intercessory prayers and more is called for here.)
 |
| The UN Secretariat, Turtle Bay, New York |
Sadly, NY continues to be ground zero; as, for one instance this week coming, we will see the "lawfare" push for a unilateral declaration of statehood by the Palestinian Authority. In contemptuous defiance of the terms of the hitherto prevailing Oslo Accord of 1993, which (quite logically) calls for settlement of the conflict as a step towards statehood, this push is very likely to be rubber-stamped by the UN, over in Turtle Bay, New York.
Or at most, it will be barely held back by an unpopular, polarising Security Council veto that will itself carry an ominous and burdensome price tag.
Worse, it is unfortunately quite likely that many Caribbean countries will vote for Palestinian unilateral statehood, not realising what is implied.
For, our hearts and minds are filled to overflowing with post-colonial narratives and resentments that are ill-matched to the actual complexities of the Middle East and to the modern history of Israel as well as to the conflicts between Jews and their Arab cousins over right to nationhood; a struggle made all the more intractable by the impacts of IslamIST global supremacism and long-cultivated hatred for Jews.
We must not ever forget this from the concluding part of the Hamas Charter/Covenant, Article 7:
. . . The Islamic Resistance [= HAMAS, an Arabic acronym] Movement aspires to implement Allah's promise, whatever time that may take. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said: "The Day of Judgment will not come about until the Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them), until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: Oh Muslim! Oh Abdullah! [= servant/slave of Allah, a common Muslim name], there is a Jew behind me, come on and kill him. Only the Gharqad tree would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews."
Hamas' rocket campaigns since 2005 are no accident, or aberration, in short; they are a portent of what they would do if they had the power: genocide.
So, via David French's insightful National Review article [thank you, Reader X . . . ] let us reflect for the record, in warning -- a warning that needs to be made especially because it is just as likely to be ignored . . . -- on the undercurrents behind that seemingly reasonable demand for international recognition of a Palestinian state:
Possible rocket attack threats to Israel
from Palestinian territories
The Palestinian Authority has declared it will seek statehood at the U.N. as early as next week. They will do so with the full backing of every Islamic nation in the world and with the expected backing of numerous other nations that are historically hostile to Israel. It’s critical to understand, however, that if the U.N. recognizes the Palestinian Authority, it will violate its own charter, violate longstanding norms of international law, and further impair its credibility with vital (and powerful) members of the world community . . . .
By recognizing a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state, the U.N. would be an accomplice to a fundamental breach of the Oslo Accords which prohibit either side from taking any steps to change the status of the West Bank or Gaza pending the outcome of permanent status negotiations [i.e., resolving of the conflict on amicable terms] . . . .
U.N. membership is open to “states” only. Granting membership to an entity which cannot meet the most basic and accepted international legal requirements for statehood would not only be a violation of this foundational requirement, it would set a dangerous precedent in international relations. Note that the question of whether the Palestinian entity can qualify as a state is a distinct question from whether one thinks the Palestinians ought to have a state. To regard the West Bank and Gaza Strip as a “state” would mean stretching the meaning of the term beyond all reason.
The accepted international criteria for statehood are laid out in the Montevideo Convention of 1933: a permanent population, a defined territory, government and capacity to enter into relations with the other states. The West Bank and Gaza Strip clearly fail to meet these criteria. The only authority exercised by the Palestinian Authority (PA) is that which it has through the sufferance of Israel, the parameters of which are defined in the Oslo Accords: the population and territory under the PA’s authority, the extent of its governing power and ability to carry on foreign relations only extend as far as that to which Israel has agreed. If the PA presses ahead with its unilateral course, its breach of the Oslo Accords would allow Israel to actually dismantle the PA.
The danger of the PA’s approach is obvious. If the U.N. nullifies all objective criteria for statehood — leaving recognition open for all aspiring separatist movements with sufficient political influence — then it has laid a foundation for perpetual, bloody conflict. The floodgates would open for the multitude of secessionist groups worldwide who would easily qualify for statehood under the “new rules,” whether they be Tibetans, Tamils, Basques, Kurds, or any of the countless others seeking recognition of their “right” to independence and statehood . . . .
Any declaration of independence on 1967 lines leaves the most populous city in the new Palestinian “state” in the hands of Hamas, a terrorist organization at open war with Israel. Moreover, the Palestinian Authority and Hamas have declared an intention to form a unity government, leaving the whole of Palestinian territory under at least partial control of terrorists.
As for “equal rights,” the PLO’s ambassador to the United States declared that any new Palestinian state should be judenrein, cleansed of all Jews. This declaration stands in stark contrast to Israel, which grants its Arab citizens full civil rights — indeed, Israel’s Arab citizens enjoy more civil liberties than the citizens of any Arab country in the Middle East . . . .
The prevailing deeply-held belief (and longstanding practice) of the PLO and Hamas is that they are entitled to use violence — to advance the maximalist goal of destroying Israel, or the more modest goal of ending Israel’s so-called “occupation” of the “Territories.” The unrelenting campaign of Palestinian terror, the content of the charters of the PLO and Hamas, and the widespread incitement to violence in Palestinian society are beyond dispute.
This commitment to violence demonstrates that the Palestinians at present are simply not “able and willing” to carry out their obligations under the Charter. Even if, for argument’s sake, one were to accept that the Palestinians were genuinely “willing” to take on the obligations attendant to U.N. membership, very recent history shows they are not “able” to do so. The Palestinian Authority lost its short and vicious civil war with Hamas, leaving Hamas in total control of the Gaza Strip. Does any reasonable person believe that the PA is “able” to restrain Hamas? Has the PA ever demonstrated an ability to restrain Hamas? Can the Palestinian delegation to the U.N. provide any reassurance that Hamas won’t also seize the West Bank — either through bullets or the ballot? . . .
And, much more.
Let us note in particular:
The floodgates would open for the multitude of secessionist groups worldwide who would easily qualify for statehood under the “new rules,” whether they be Tibetans, Tamils, Basques, Kurds, or any of the countless others seeking recognition of their “right” to independence and statehood . . . .
The prevailing deeply-held belief (and longstanding practice) of the PLO and Hamas is that they are entitled to use violence — to advance the maximalist goal of destroying Israel, or the more modest goal of ending Israel’s so-called “occupation” of the “Territories.” The unrelenting campaign of Palestinian terror, the content of the charters of the PLO and Hamas, and the widespread incitement to violence in Palestinian society are beyond dispute . . .
Is this sort of agenda of easily stirred up civil wars and demand for a "right" to resolve problems by terroristic violence on any excuse by an aggrieved minority what we really want to advance in our region of vulnerable, small island states?
Or, in the wider world?
To more deeply appreciate this, we need to excerpt from the speech by former Muslim Michael Paul of Iraq, at the 9/11protest Freedom Rally held in New York on 9/11 by Spencer, Geller and others as an alternative to the censored official celebrations:
[MP:] I am here today, not to speak against Muslims, but to talk directly to those who adamantly demand to build a mosque here at Ground Zero and name it the Cordoba mosque [NB: which is being built with official support, within the debris footprint of the WTC 9/11 attacks, i.e within Ground Zero, at the same time when a church lost during the attacks is meeting all sorts of official delays and obstacles] . . . .
WTC, 9-11: A man is not a bird
or a bit of debris . . .
There are already many Sunni and Shiite mosques in New York. Some have been penetrated by terrorist ideology, others washed in the tide of Islamic Iran’s Revolutionary thinking. Now, that poison is being spread from here across the United States to other mosques. The true purpose of this mosque isn’t for daily worship. Most Muslims don’t worship on a daily basis because they are too busy working during the week. The true purpose is suspicious.
You, you who want to build the mosque, should appreciate America as a country that supports and sacrifices for the right of man to be free no matter what the sex, race, or religion. Muslims living here have the full rights given in the Constitution and American society. And those rights far exceed those given in your native country. Why do you now try to use the same laws that have set Muslims free from slavery as a weapon against the people who created those laws? Why do you want to build a mosque on the lives and wounds of the society that liberated so many Muslims around the world? Is it necessary to build the mosque here in this spot on ground that still moans from its wounds? Do you need to renew the pain of all those who’s loved ones were killed here?
The extremist ideology that killed them grew up in a mosque.
Ground Zero has seen the worst form of mass murder and crimes against humanity. The act was carried out by criminals who hate, even though they ate and drank of the best of this country, and breathed the human freedom she gave them. It is an act of shame that they attacked her and killed in the name of Islam.
It is a reminder of the ugly colonial history that is based on attacking people and trying to force a change of religious beliefs by the sword. A history that includes Spain, where the original Cordoba mosque was built over the Christian Church of Saint Vincent. Where that Christian country was occupied, men killed, and women captured and taken to Muslim’s countries as maids and servants who provided sexual pleasure for their conquerors. Many in Islam still boast about that and glory in that conquest. They consider it a symbol of their power and greatness. For them, this new Cordoba mosque will also be considered a symbol of Islamic supremacy, part of their long tradition of building structures on the holy ground of their conquered enemies.
Do you see how desiring the mosque to be named Cordoba is not just an innocent choice? It is being done because the name carries the seeds of dreams that destroy freedom and individual rights. The fruit will be the expansion of radical Islam.
I would like to refer to verse 107 of Sura Repentance [i.e. 9] in the Qur’an, which says “And there are those who put up a mosque by way of mischief and infidelity– to disunite the Believers – and in preparation for one who warred against Allah and His Messenger aforetime. They will indeed swear that their intention is nothing but good; but Allah doth declare that they are certainly liars.”
You, who want to build this mosque, know the story of Dirar. It was a mosque built at the time of Mohammad in Medina, by the tribe of Auf, on land they stole from Christian Priest Abu Amar. And you know it was stolen because of their jealousy of their cousin tribe who had already built a mosque nearby. The Christian priest told Caesar about the terrible injustice done to him by the tribe of Auf and Mohammad sent three men to burn the Dirar mosque . . . .
Most of the Muslim theologians said that the meaning of Dirar (which in English means devastating and is what Allah named the mosque in the story) is when you do something that doesn’t even benefit yourself while it damages your neighbor.
Most Muslim theologians have gathered and agreed that no mosque should be built on dirar, and if it is, it is not permitted by Allah to be prayed in.
My question to these men and women who are demanding construction of the mosque is, how do you believe in Islam and you don’t follow what your Prophet Muhammad has said? Instead you try to make the people fear you with your determination to build the mosque here. Muhammad said, “I swear in God’s name, anyone who causes his neighbor to fear him is not a Muslim Believer.”
Also, the Prophet of Islam said: By Allah, the ground of all the earth has been my mosque and cleansed for me. All the earth except five places. One of those five places is the cemetery or the grave, or place of death.
A second place that it is forbidden in Islam to build a mosque is coerced land. I am sure that those who want to build here will criticize me, because they will say that they obtained the land by the regular way. But Mohammed says that anything that you obtained the regular way from people who were bashful to give it to you is the same as coercing it from them.
You who demand to build this mosque and name it Cordoba know full well that this place is a place of death. A place where over 3,000 innocents died. It is a cemetery of their souls. To build a mosque here is forbidden by Islam. If you believe that Allah cleansed all the earth for a mosque, why must you build on this specific site? Also, you are in effect seizing the land by coercion because the majority of Americans don’t want it built here. And beyond that it doesn’t benefit you because there are already many mosques in the area, and other sites that you could build on. It doesn’t benefit you and it damages your neighbors.
This is dirar . . .
There are some terrible forces loosed in our world today, and we -- Muslims, Christians, peoples of other faiths, or of no faith alike -- need to think very carefully about what we are doing and where we are taking our common world.
Before it is unthinkably, bloodily, horrendously too late.
_______
* I count the Cold War as World War III. We must also remember that before the storm broke on May 10, 1940, with the decisive seven-division German panzer thrust through the Ardennes, World War II was reduced to what seemed to be a phoney war, after a relatively minor campaign in Poland. While terrorism seems to many to be mostly a minor problem best handled as a criminal matter, what is lurking is the rise of radical Islamist powers with ballistic missile technology and nuclear weapons. The next full-bore 9/11 is liable to be under the sign of the mushroom cloud.
No comments:
Post a Comment