Love of the Land: The message in Palestinian condemnation of terror on grounds of efficacy

The message in Palestinian condemnation of terror on grounds of efficacy

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA
Weekly Commentary
11 February '10

Compare and contrast:

"A loathsome, criminal act of murder was committed today at a site holy to both Jews and Arabs in Hebron.The Prime Minister and Defense Minister, government ministers and citizens of the State of Israel severely condemn this terrible murder of innocent people, which occurred during Ramadan prayer services."
Statement by Prime Minister Rabin on the Murders in Hebron, 25 February 1994.

'This incident condemned by us, which is incompatible with the Palestinian national interests, and with the efforts of the Palestinian National Authority, as well as with the commitments they have undertaken.. violence that has been proven to cause damage to the higher interests of our people."
Palestinian Prime Minister Dr. Salam Fayyad 10 February 2010

The differences are hardly subtle.

When an Israeli prime minister condemns an attack by a Jew against Palestinians he condemns it because it is in and of itself a "loathsome, criminal act."

When a Palestinian prime minister condemns an attack by a Palestinian against an Israeli, he condemns it because it is "incompatible with the Palestinian national interests."

And this isn't the first time.

In point of fact, official Palestinian condemnations of terror against Israelis consistently condemn it on the basis of its efficacy (does not serve interests) rather than because it is simply wrong.

Look back at the details of the charges that PA prosecutors have filed against the few Palestinian terrorists that they jailed (mostly in order to protect them from Israeli justice) and - that's right - they weren't sentenced for murdering Israelis but instead for acting "against Palestinian interests".

This isn't just a technical matter.

It goes to the very heart of the nature of how the Palestinian leadership relates to Israel.

And it should serve as an important warning for policy makers.

If the reason it is wrong to murder Israelis today is that it doesn't serve Palestinian interests and not that it is simply wrong to murder Israelis then what happens if circumstances are such that it does serve Palestinian interests to murder Israelis?

And given that this is the case, what restrictions are necessary for the arming, training, etc. of Palestinian security forces?

Love of the Land: The message in Palestinian condemnation of terror on grounds of efficacy

Love of the Land: Lancet Study Blames Palestinian Wife-Beating on Israel

Lancet Study Blames Palestinian Wife-Beating on Israel

Big lies now pass for top-of-the-line academic, scientific work

Dr. Phyllis Chesler
pajamasmedia.com
25 January '10

It’s official. Britain’s premier medical journal Lancet has been completely Palestinianized. It no longer bears any relationship to the first-rate scientific journal it once was. Perhaps Lancet is no longer a standard-bearer but has become a follower in the global movement in which standards have plunged, biases have soared, and Big Lies now pass for top-of-the-line academic, scientific work.

The post-colonial academy is itself thoroughly colonized by the false and dangerous ideas of Edward Said (please read my dear friend Ibn Warraq’s most excellent book Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said’s Orientalism). However, I once believed that Said’s paranoid perspective had primarily infected and indoctrinated only the social sciences, humanities, and Middle East Studies. We now see his malign influence at work in a new article, just out today, by professors who work at the Department of Medicine at Harvard University; the Division of Epidemiology and Community Health at Minnesota University’s School of Public Health; The Boston University School of Medicine; the School of Nursing at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey; and at the School of Social Work and Social Welfare at Jerusalem’s Hebrew University.

Their study is titled: “Association between exposure to political violence and intimate-partner violence in the occupied Palestinian territory: a cross-sectional study.” And yes, they have found that Palestinian husbands are more violent towards Palestinian wives as a function of the Israeli “occupation”— and that the violence increases significantly when the husbands are “directly” as opposed to “indirectly” exposed to political violence.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Lancet Study Blames Palestinian Wife-Beating on Israel