The Brits have pulled a Michael Berg on Israel. Michael Berg, in case you don't remember, is the father of Nick Berg, an American beheaded in front of a video camera by Muslim freedom fighters in Iraq. After watching the film, the grieving father announced to the world that Bush and Cheney were solely responsible for his son's death. The Brits have done the same thing. Most of the Muslim freedom fighters involved in the heroic martyrdom operation on July 7 in London were British citizens by birth. None of them came from the Middle East, in general, or Israel, in particular. Nevertheless, the Brits blamed the atrocity on the Israeli-"Palestinian" conflict. This may seem illogical at first, but only to an extraterrestrial.

Imagine a family that hires a known member of North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) to babysit their young son. It would be reasonable to expect that, sooner or later, the babysitter will rape the kid. When that happens, the parents will need to blame someone besides the rapist. They won't blame themselves, even though the outcome of their experiment was easily predictable. They won't blame NAMBLA, even though its explicitly announced goal is to rape little boys. I won't be surprised if they will blame the rape on the Israeli occupation of "Palestine". Why? Because blaming things on the Jews is such a time-honored tradition that I am not even going to bother explaining the reasoning behind it. I can't explain the reasoning behind the theory of relativity either, but that doesn't disprove Einstein, does it?

Isn't my comparison of British-born Muslim freedom fighters to the NAMBLA babysitter totally brilliant? Well, not totally. As a supporter of the Jewish State, I can see that the Brits do have a valid reason to blame Israel for it.

Let's be honest. We haven't bought into the enemy propaganda or the saccharine lies of the PC establishment. We know that 9/11 in New York, 3/11 in Madrid, 7/7 in London, and the unending war of the Arabs against Israel are all battles of global jihad. We know that the very same enemy is behind all those atrocities. We know that the very same enemy will commit new atrocities in the near future; we just don't know the time or the place. We know with absolute certainty that the Israeli-"Palestinian" conflict is only a flimsy excuse. The Muslims do not support the so-called "Palestinian people" in anything - anything at all - except the murder of Jews. The recent tsunami has proven how much Muslims really care about each other. Nothing - absolutely nothing - unites Dar el-Islam except for the murderous hatred of Muslims to Dar el-Harb. This is called jihad.

Of course, we don't say aloud that Britain, along with the rest of Europe, has fallen victim to its own politically-correct cowardice, because we don't want to create an impression that we are blaming the victim. And yet, it is just common sense that if you harbor Muslim freedom fighters, you shouldn't be surprised when they decide to fight for their Muslim freedom by attacking you at home. Your home is your castle? Sure, but only until you let Muslim freedom fighters in. After that, they own you, your castle, your firstborn, and your pet canary.

We've been raving about the ongoing Islamization of Europe; we've been complaining that the Old Continent has turned into an incubator for terrorists; we've been absolutely correct to conclude that the dangers of such infestation are global rather than local, no matter where the infestation takes place. All this is true, but let's ask a very simple question: Which non-Muslim country harbors the most known terrorists, both per capita and in absolute numbers? The answer is - imagine that - Israel! Terrorists and their ardent supporters constitute close to 20% of all Israeli citizens. Israel was the first Western country that demonstrated to the enemy that all our military might notwithstanding, our civilization was not going to put up any meaningful resistance to jihad. Israel was the first Western country that failed to uphold its national identity and allowed the enemy to settle on its land and to call its own citizens settlers. Israel was the first Western country that chose to respond to the wholesale murder of its citizens with actions that even in theory could not deter the enemy. Israel was the first Western country that sacrificed the lives of its citizens to the politically-correct idiocy of the left.

And you are saying that Israel is not to blame for the spread of terrorism to the United States and Europe? How many times have you heard that Israel is the last fortress defending the West from jihad? If you take this seriously, you should blame Israel, because it folded first, despite being perfectly capable of standing up for itself, for the Jews around the world, and for our entire civilization. The conflict in the Middle East goes on only because Israeli leaders lack courage to end it.

But is it only Israel's fault? How would the world react if Israeli leaders summoned up courage comparable to the courage of Israeli soldiers and civilians and did the right thing?

We get an idea from the world reaction to the right thing Israel did 24 years ago, on June 7, 1981. Saddam Hussein was building an A-bomb. "A" as in Arab. Israel was extremely likely to become Saddam's testing grounds. Nevertheless, bombing the Iraqi reactor was not the very first choice of Israel. The Jewish Virtual Library (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/osirak1.html) describes details of Israel's diplomatic efforts to avert the disaster. I will summarize it here in a few sentences. Every country Israel tried to engage, including the United States, found a plausible excuse not to interfere. The world reacted like a Ukrainian village would to a fire ravaging the home of its only Jew. It didn't matter to them that the fire was likely to spread to their houses. Seeing the Jew jump was worth the risk, and so nobody would help him put out the fire.

Israel had to put out the fire alone. The mission involved fourteen F-15s and F-16s and took less than 4 hours. The actual attack lasted just about 80 seconds. The reactor was destroyed. There were no Israeli casualties. On the ground, one person died in the attack. Several more were executed by Saddam Hussein in its artermath. It wouldn't be a far stretch to say that the raid achieved more than the two American wars against Iraq combined.

How did the world react? Exactly the way a Ukrainian village would react to the news that its only Jew successfully defended himself against an attempted murder by one of the villagers. This is how the Jewish Virtual Library (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/osirak1.html) describes it:

The attack was universally criticized. The United States voted for a Security Council resolution condemning Israel and, as a punishment, delayed a shipment of aircraft to Israel that had already been authorized.

Israel survived both the unanimous condemnation of the global Ukrainian village and US sanctions. What was the alternative? We don't need to guess. Israel is not planning to attack Iranian nuclear installations. The rest of the world behaves as if they are immune to radiation that kills Jews. And why not? The rest of the world behaves as if they are immune to the terrorism that kills Jews, even though Muslim freedom fighters, time after time, easily and convincingly prove them wrong.

The question is, will Israel survive its own desperate attempts to please the world? I don't believe so. Is there any hope that the world would become a better place without the shitty little country? Has the world become any better without South Africa? Only for Desmond Tutu and Winnie Mandela.

God's promise to curse those who curses Jews works every time. The mechanism behind it does not require any specific form of religion. It doesn't really matter whether you believe that Jews were chosen by God to serve some holy purpose, by devil to serve as a scourge of humankind, or by humankind to serve as a scapegoat for everything that goes wrong. Here is how the curse works. If there is an epidemic, antibiotics may help. But if you decide to blame the epidemic on the Jews, there is no pressure to obtain antibiotics. There is pressure for a pogrom instead. Pogroms are wonderfully satisfying. Of course, statistics show that they never cure the problem that was used to instigate them, but most pogromists are not interested in statistics, and those few who are never bother to inform the rest. Therefore, the epidemic will keep spreading exactly as it did before the pogrom, which, in the eyes of any reasonable person, proves the urgent need to kill more Jews.

This time, however, both pogromists and their victims were British citizens. A Jew or two among the victims were not targeted on purpose; they just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. How can one avoid coming to the conclusion that it was all Israel's fault? How can a decent person even mention the fact that this time, just like it happened so many times before and, I assure you, will happen again many times in the near future, the only thing that sets the murderers apart, the only characteristic they all share is their religion. Inexplicably, it's not Judaism. It's another religion. Better yet, it's just another religion. But can you imagine how convenient it would have been if Jews had been highjacking airliners and slamming them into skyscrapers? How decisive our victory in Iraq would have been had people blowing themselves up amidst Arab crowds hid their faces behind prayer shawls instead of dirty kuffiehs! How easily the beheaders would have been captured had they mixed the blood of their victims in matzo dough! How quickly we would have stopped them if they had come from Israel rather than from countries we keep calling our allies, without ever specifying against whom.

But let's not talk about Israel's survival. After all, Israel has survived two thousand years of hatred and homelessness. Jewish churches can be neither razed nor converted to mosques. Jewish holy images cannot be painted over. The statues of Jewish gods cannot be blown up. One way or another, with heavy losses, Israel will outlive jihad. I am not so sure about the rest of Judeo-Christian civilization.

Take the Brits, for example. I have a tremendous respect for the Brits. They were the only European nation that resisted Hitler. They survived the V-2's; they will survive the bombings of the underground. But will they survive Tony Blair's hurried declaration of his utmost respect for the British Muslim community that produced the bombers, indoctrinated them in murderous hatred of their own country, armed them, and sent them to die in the commission of mass murder?

After 9/11, I was amazed by Osama bin Laden's naïveté. How could he possibly hope that the United States will not survive the absolute worst he could possibly throw at us? I am not so sure, however, that my proud country will survive George W. Bush's assurances that Islam is not the enemy or his friendship with Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. My country can demolish any army in the world. Well, almost any. But can it survive its own multi-culturalism?

Can our civilization survive the consequences of its own political correctness?

 
Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant. To read other articles by the author, go to http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/ or email ysagamori@hotmail.com

_________________________End of Story___________________________

HOME

Jul-Aug.2005 Featured Stories

Background Information

News On The Web

Archives