web analytics
July 24, 2014 / 26 Tammuz, 5774
Israel at War: Operation Protective Edge
 
 
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Abu Jihad’

Clever PR Move: Al-Quds University Offers Course on Hate Speech

Tuesday, December 24th, 2013

In early November, a rally vilifying Israel and glorifying jihad and martyrdom took place on the campus of Al-Quds University. Following articles about this appearing in various media outlets, there was a public outcry, particularly amongst those in some ways affiliated with American universities that have academic relationships with Al-Quds.

After his initial clumsy public relations move to quell the outcry fizzled, Al-Quds University president Sari Nusseibeh has now moved on to a more subtle form of what still appears to be faux contrition. Al-Quds University, home of the Abu-Jihad Museum, named for one of the most notorious Jew/Israeli/American murderers of all time, will be offering a course this summer on “Hate Speech and Racism.”

Still, this effort is a far more masterful public relations move than Nusseibeh’s original “Blame The ‘Jewish extremists’” for making a big deal about an anti-Israel hate-theater performance on his campus which took place on Nov. 5.

In a move that clearly surprised Nusseibeh, the presidents of two American schools with long-time close links to Al-Quds were not satisfied with his offensive statements and finger-pointing (at Jews!).  As Brandeis President Fred Lawrence said, Nusseibeh’s public response was “unacceptable and inflammatory.”

Because of the rally and Nusseibeh’s response to criticism about it, both Brandeis and Syracuse universities severed their ties to Al-Quds. Brandeis also removed Nusseibeh from the board of advisers of its Center for Ethics, Justice and Public Life.

SPECIAL SUMMER COURSE ON HATE SPEECH ONLY APPEARS IN ENGLISH VERSION WEBSITE

In a move that might be lauded as nearly brilliant by westerners, and a sell-out by his own constituency if word gets out, this coming summer the Al-Quds University will offer a summer course on “Hate Speech.”

In a posting on the English version – and only on the English version – of its website, Al-Quds announced that in June and July of 2014, Al-Quds will be offering a course on Hate Speech and Racism.

Of course nothing at all about the summer course on Hate Speech appears on the main, Arabic language version of the Al-Quds University website. And once you get past the perfectly reasonable-sounding title, a few alarm bells may go off.

For one thing, the course on Hate Speech and Racism which Al-Quds University is offering this summer not only does not appear on the Arabic website for the school, the course will be taught in English.  Given that the vast majority of Al-Quds University students speak Arabic, this program appears to be geared for a special audience, not its regular students.

The Nov. 5 rally that started the whole kerfluffle (which actually was simply a repeat of a similar Jew- and Israel-hating rally which took place on May 10 at Al-Quds University) was held entirely in Arabic.  Do you get the sense that the Hate Speech course is not really directed at the people who glorified martyrdom and trampled on the Israeli flag?

There’s more that should raise the eyebrows of a jaundiced Al-Quds/Nusseibeh watcher.

The announcement of the course refers to the “anti-Israeli para-military” rally which sparked the disruption between Al-Quds and the two American schools.  But the language used still seems to place the onus of blame on the “American Jewish sources” which were “critical” of the rally.

There is no mention in the course description of Nusseibeh’s offensive response to Brandeis President Fred Lawrence which blamed “Jewish extremists” for starting a “vilification campaign” against Al-Quds.  The language is softer, but the blame remains squarely on the Jews. Nusseibeh’s “unacceptable and inflammatory” response to the original situation has softened in tone, but not in spirit.

Abbas Honors Al-Quds U ‘Hero’ Responsible for Most Dead Jews

Thursday, December 12th, 2013

The acting leader of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, has awarded the Star of Honor to the arch terrorist known as Abu Jihad, as reported by Palestinian Media Watch on Dec. 11. The PA isn’t the only Palestinian Arab institution to honor this mass murderer. So does the former partner of Brandeis University: Al-Quds University.

Abu Jihad, whose nom not de guerre was Khalil Al-Wazir, was responsible for the murder of 124 Israelis. He was  a co-founder of Fatah, he was its military strategist and he was the second-in-command to Yassir Arafat. Abu-Jihad helped form the Shabibah – the Fatah Youth Movement. The Shabibah formed the nucleus for the first “intifada.”

Abu Jihad is significant not only for the many Israelis whose lives he cut short, but also because he was involved in some of the most heinous murders, including the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre, in which 11 Israeli athletes were murdered, and the 1978 Coastal Road massacre, in which 38 civilians were murdered, including 11 children.

It was not only the number of Israelis Abu-Jihad murdered that makes him so special to the Palestinian Arab leaders. Abu-Jihad also was responsible for the torture and murder of two American diplomats in Khartoum, in 1973.

He was part of the team that kidnapped, tortured and then murdered two American diplomats, U.S. Ambassador Cleo Noel and Charge d’Affaires George Curtis Moore, in Khartoum, Sudan, in 1973.

Those diplomats were kidnapped in order to force a trade in which the U.S. would release prisoner Sirhan Sirhan, the Palestinian Arab who murdered American Senator Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. The deal went bad and the diplomats were murdered.

In the ceremony marking the posthumous awarding of the Star of Honor to Abu Jihad, Abbas signed a decree describing the esteem in which Abu Jihad, mass murderer of athletes, children, and American diplomats:

in recognition of his honorable national role and his history of struggle as one of the founding leaders of the Palestinian revolution, and out of great appreciation for his high position and significance in the defense of Palestine as a country, a nation, and a cause. He was the model of a true fighter and devoted leader [and] through his commitment and contribution he left his mark on the history of the Palestinian revolution and the PLO.

But the honorifics bestowed on Abu Jihad’s widow and the glorification of his murderous past is not limited to the Palestinian Arab leader Abbas.

BRANDEIS FACULTY REPORT WHITEWASHES AL-QUDS UNIVERSITY LONG HISTORY OF HONORING TERRORISM

The Palestinian Arab university, Al-Quds, the one from which Brandeis University recently severed its ties, also glorifies the mass murderer Abu Jihad.  It is at Al-Quds University that the Abu Jihad Museum, originally known as the Al-Quds Abu-Jihad Center for Political Prisoners, is located.

Arab Palestinian political prisoners, of course, are those terrorists who have been caught. The official university website explained that the Center is named for Khalel Al-Wazir. His nickname, Abu-Jihad, means “father of the holy war.”

Abu Jihad is honored by al-Quds University in the way Brandeis honors the scholars and philanthropists whose names grace buildings and research centers on its campus.

But you’d never know this based on the Al-Quds Brandeis Partnership Report authored by several Brandeis faculty members, including Daniel Terris, and released on Monday, Dec. 9.  That report does its best to exonerate Al-Quds University president Sari Nusseibeh in particular, and the university in general.

The Report whitewashes the Nov. 5 demonstration at which Al-Quds students trampled on pictures of the Israeli flag while attired in full military regalia, and sang songs extolling the beauty of martyrdom, and ignores the fact that this demonstration was almost an exact replica of one that took place in the spring, on May 10, as shown in this YouTube video. The excuses offered for the fall demonstration ring particularly hollow given it had already happened before.  And it is just plain hard to ignore the many other ways in which terrorism is glorified at Al-Quds. But the Terris Report manages that feat.

The Terris Report, astonishingly, pooh-poohs the language used by Nusseibeh in his public response to the Nov. 5 demonstration, in which he begins by blaming “Jewish extremists” for inciting criticism against his university. It was that language that Brandeis President Fred Lawrence described as “unacceptable and inflammatory,” and which led to the disruption in the Al-Quds-Brandeis relationship.

It is useful to line up the Nusseibeh statement and its characterization in the Terris Report. One might conclude, based upon its treatment, that the Terris Report was written on behalf of the Al-Quds administration, rather than as an objective factfinding report prepared by Brandeis faculty for the Brandeis administration.

The Terris Report concludes with a call for bravery.  But the bravery this Report calls for is the bravery to overlook the repeated glorification of murderers – murderers of Jews, murderers of Americans, murderers of children – because hey, it’s a tough neighborhood.  “Supporting the Al-Quds University administration in these efforts will take courage on the part of Brandeis University.”

They continue:

We recognize that abhorrent speech events happen on all college campuses, including our own, but these events do not at all speak for the university as a whole; and that universities are charged with the challenge of education students for a civil society in which such acts will not recur. It is thus crucial to exploit such student events as opportunities involving heightened attention to the salience of the values of tolerance rather than as occasions for rupturing a longstanding institutional relationship.

Not surprisingly, there is no mention anywhere in the Terris Report of the longstanding honors paid to Arab mass terrorists at Al-Quds University, in particular the murderers of children, athletes, diplomats or American teenagers.

That would probably require too much courage.

When Empowered Undergrads Ignore a ‘Victims’ Malevolence

Thursday, September 12th, 2013

The young woman who wrote the article, “The Problem with Band-Aids,” is a junior at the University of Pennsylvania.  Her article appeared in Penn’s highly regarded newspaper, the Daily Pennsylvanian, on September 8.  The subtitle of O’Conor’s article is: “From Palestine to Penn/ When Talking About Dialogue, Empowerment and Reform Does the Rhetorical Work of Oppression and Injustice.”  At Penn, Clarissa O’Conor focuses on Gender, Sexuality, and Women’s Studies and Modern Middle East Studies.

But O’Conor, who presents herself as an advocate for those who are disempowered, is fed up with what she claims is the oppressive force behind the term “empowerment.” This fall O’Conor is studying at al Quds University, in a place she calls, without quotation marks, “Palestine.”

In this article, O’Conor explains why Penn, which apparently gives her college credit for studying at al Quds, and Bard College, which  created at al Quds “a small honors college at which Palestinian students can earn a dual-degree with American accreditation,” earn her contempt.

Why?

“Especially at Penn, we like to ‘empower’ people.  We have all sorts of organizations and initiatives to do this.  We really like to ‘empower’ communities and women,” she writes, but O’Conor is above all that.  She disdains the Western efforts to empower her comrades in “Palestine.”

Bard’s program is going about things in a contemptible way, O’Conor contends.  You see “the discourse of empowerment makes us feel good about putting a Band-Aid on something while avoiding actually questioning our role in systematic racism, oppression and injustice.”

You’ve probably guessed it by now: O’Conor thinks that Western efforts to “swoop in and empower” the Arab Palestinians, ignores that what oppresses them is the “worldwide systems of white supremacism and colonialism in which we are complicit.”  That’s you and me.  Also her.

O’Conor crams in all the invective she can into a college newspaper op-ed.  She describes the “26-foot-high Apartheid Wall” built by Israel which is a “settler-colonial apartheid state whose modus operandi is and always was policies of ethnic cleansing, displacement and systematic racism.”  And O’Conor thinks places like Penn and Bard and, indeed, all universities and the U.S. government itself should cut all ties to Israel.

So, rather than yawn about an undergraduate thinking and writing like an undergraduate, here’s the part that should…empower you readers.

It is not a surprise that an undergraduate from the middle of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania knows little to nothing about the history of the Middle East.  But why is a school like Penn giving credit to a student to be spoon fed hatred?

Here is a more interesting question: why is it that someone who holds herself out as a defender of the oppressed has no problem aligning herself with the brutal, murderous history and affiliations of the university she so proudly attends?  And again, why would Penn and schools like it countenance such an association?

Al Quds University is a place where terrorists are honored not only by the students, but officially, by the university administration, as heroes.

Let’s pick a few discrete moments through al Quds history, and see whether it is an institution worthy of Ms. O’Conor’s protection, and whether the many installments of her pleas on its behalf – her blog “From Palestine to Penn” appears every other Tuesday in the Daily Pennsylvanian – are trustworthy sources of information for the collegiate, as well as the wider, community. (No less an actively and acidly anti-Israel media source than Mondoweiss eagerly laps up her content.)

So we’ll start at the top.  The current president of the school, Sari Nusseibeh, is generally considered to be a moderate, but there is certainly evidence to the contrary.  This evidence includes his praise of homicide bombers; calling Israel a “racist, Zionist entity”; and helping Iraq direct scud missiles at Israel during the first Gulf War.

For those disinclined to count Nusseibeh as a promoter of violence, there’s much better evidence about where al Quds stands on the issue of the sanctity of human life.

For example, there’s the case of Sami Salim Hammad, an al Quds dropout who carried out a homicide bombing in Tel Aviv during Passover, on April 17, 2006. In this bombing, 11 innocent people were killed, including a 16 year old American, Daniel Wultz.  While it is true that Hammad dropped out of al Quds, that didn’t stop the students there from claiming him as their own.  Immediately after the bombing, once Hammad’s “martyr’s video” was released, they hung a huge poster of Hammad in one of the al Quds University buildings.  They were so proud of their “shahid.”

Palestinian Authority Celebrates PLO Arch-Terrorist Abu Jihad

Wednesday, May 2nd, 2012

The Palestinian Authority (PA) launched an all-out publicity campaign to mark the anniversary of the death of Abu Jihad, the PLO terrorist responsible for the deaths of 125 people over his odious career.

Abu Jihad, whose real name was Khalil Ibrahim al-Wazir, was one of the founders of Fatah and a long-time confidante of Yasser Arafat. In his role as commander of Fatah’s armed wing al-Assifa, he was responsible for masterminding – among others – the Savoy Hotel attack in 1975, which resulted in the deaths of 11 Israelis, and the Coastal Road massacre, in 1978, which left 35 Israeli civilians dead. He was also instrumental in fomenting the first Intifada. He was killed in Tunis by Israeli commandos on April 16, 1988.

According to information compiled by Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), the PA’s week-long celebration of his life and Israeli deaths included the broadcast of several documentaries on his life and successful “operations”, the commencement of six sporting events named in his honor, and the publication of news pieces spotlighting and glorifying his exploits. The Open University in Bethlehem also marked the anniversary with an event.

The documentaries, broadcasts, events, and activities did not shy away from his murderous activities, but rather highlighted them in gory detail, for Palestinians of all ages to learn from and enjoy. For example, an article that appeared in the official PA daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, on the anniversary of his death said this:

“Abu Jihad was killed by the Israeli Mossad in Tunisia on April 16, 1988… and was crowned the Prince of the Martyrs of Palestine… Among the military operations planned by Abu Jihad: the explosion at the Zohar reservoir in 1955; the operation to blow up the Israeli National Water Carrier in 1965; the operation at the Savoy Hotel in Tel Aviv, which killed 10 Israelis, in 1975; the blowing up of a truck bomb in Jerusalem in 1975; the killing of Albert Levi, the senior sapper, and his assistant, in Nablus in 1976; the Dalal Mughrabi operation (i.e., bus hijacking), in which more than 37 Israelis were killed, in 1978; the shelling of the Eilat Port in 1979; the Katyusha fire on the northern settlements [in Israel] in 1981…”

PA TV broadcast a documentary, which was obtained by PMW, called Abu Jihad: Revolution of a man; a man in the Revolution. In it, Abu Jihad details plans “to turn the Tel Aviv day [operation] into destruction…Tel Aviv will be closed that whole day with blood and destruction.” According to PMW, “the film was produced in 2010 under the auspices and supervision of Fatah MP Ashraf Jum’a.”

In order to appeal to the youth and retain his relevance with them, the “Abu Jihad table-tennis championship” was held, as was the “Martyr Abu Jihad judo tournament,” and the “Martyr Khalil Al-Wazir, Abu Jihad, (boxing) Tournament.”

Not to be left out of the festivities, the office of PA President Mahmoud Abbas released a statement lauding Abu Jihad’s memory:

“On days like these we recall one of the founding members and leaders who risked their lives and fought quietly, without making a show and without the media, but they created men who brought about victories, who brought about acts of heroism… Abu Jihad will remain in our hearts and in the pulse in our veins. He will never die among us; rather, he will be renewed with every young boy, with every young girl… When Abu Jihad died as a Martyr, we felt – I personally and all who knew him – that we had lost not only a symbol, but a father, a brother, a teacher and ideal; a model in every way” (emphasis added).

The perverse celebration of an unabashed and committed genocidal murderer, one that emanates from the top down and extends to sports and culture, lays waste to the Palestinian claim that “settlements” are the main obstacle to peace.

Palestinian Media Watch contributed to this piece.

Jblogs: Are You an Anti-Semite if You Have Absolutely Nothing to Say about Jews?

Wednesday, May 2nd, 2012

We’re a seriously self-obsessed nation, goes without saying. And if we spot you even mumbling something under your mustache or into your beer – we just know it was about us and how we control things, and grab your money and all that. But what if you say nothing about us – and you’re Gore Vidal? Tricky, right? We’ll answer that and 9 more mysteries.

Is It Ant-Semitism to Say Nothing about Jews?

Judith Miller, Tablet Magazine’s theater critic, reviews Gore Vidal’s “The Best Man,” a 1960 play about “the descent of American presidential politics into gutter warfare,” and muses about whether or not the fact that there are no Jews roaming around Vidal’s stage means that the playwright is an anti-Semite, as he had been accused on occasion.

Miller doesn’t think so. In her entry titled “Gore Vidal’s Judenrein Politics,” she writes: “Jews were not nearly as well-organized or politically powerful in 1960 as they are today. While Jews were integral to party machines in the cities, they were largely confined to Jewish law firms, investment banks, and the entertainment industry. They were not integrated into America’s broader culture.”

She proceeds to offer a well written, thoroughly educational note on the emergence of AIPAC style Jewish political muscle. Enjoy.

Is the NSA the New Mossad?

Alex Joffe reviews in Jewish Ideas Daily a new book titled “Find, Fix, Finish” by U.S. counterterrorism professionals Aki Peritz and Eric Rosenbach, which “shows that the United States may be catching up to Israel in experience and understanding.”

As Joffe puts it, “Find, fix, finish” is shorthand for “Use intelligence to locate enemies, then employ the vast array of U.S. firepower to fix them in place.” His conclusion is that “Many Israeli approaches to counterterrorism and low-intensity conflict have been adopted by the United States, but on a global scale.”

Tom Clancy fans – this should be your read today.

Kick ‘Em While the Body’s Still Warm

You think men are tough on politicians? Hell hath no fury like a woman’s scorn of a female pol she really dislikes. Take Batya, who writes the Shiloh Musings blog and who isn’t one for understatements when she ushers out former Kadima chairperson Tzipi Livni: “Tzipi Livni Quits, Thank G-d, Not Even Kadima Wants Her.” Reading Batya, it almost appears as if even G-d isn’t interested in poor, dejected Tzipi…

Batya writes: “Tzipi’s vision was limited to just being negative. I guess she called it giving the people a choice. But the closest thing to vision she had was imagining herself as Prime Minister of Israel.”

All I can say is, if Batya is ever invited to do my eulogy, I’d like to see a draft first.

What’s Wrong with a Full-Length Friday?

Personally, I never keep the early Shabbat schedule, unless we’re staying with friends who do. As far as I’m concerned, the hectic period just before candle lighting contracts and expands according to the season, and I manage to accomplish in five extra summertime hours exactly as little as I do in a winter’s half hour. That’s me.

But do you know why doing early Shabbat is wrong according to Rabbi Ari Enkin? Because of women. There you go, add it to our list of sins starting with the fruit thingie.

Seriously, though, according to Rabbi Enkin in Hirhurim, “Some authorities frown on making ‘Early Shabbat’ due to the possibility that some women might mistakenly light the Shabbat candles before the earliest permissible time. They argue that many women do not always know what time plag hamincha is. So too, women may not understand the severity of lighting Shabbat candles before this time and do so anyway. A woman who lights Shabbat candles before plag hamincha accomplishes nothing and the blessing recited upon the candles is in vain.”

See? I was right. Better to light candles when it’s almost-almost than to do it closer to Friday morning.

In Sickness and in… Re-Education?

Daniel Greenfield, the “Sultan Knish,” argues that “The left has always been enamored of “Forwardism” or “Progressivism” which mean much the same thing. Before MSNBC had Lean Forward, Mao had the Great Leap Forward which killed some 40 million people, far more people than MSNBC can ever dream of tuning in to their programs.”

It’s a very entertaining piece of research, whether you’re left- or right-wing (if you’re a righty you’ll probably be pleased, if not you’ll at least get to see how lefty verbiage sounds across the aisle.

The article is named “The Forwardism Disease,” which totally makes the author’s point. Except that inherent in calling it a disease is the notion of what we do with sick people – and part of why the Left has been so scary historically were those re-education camps, where bourgeois minds were “healed.”

Palestinian Hate, U.S. Silence

Wednesday, April 28th, 2010

There they go again. Palestinian Media Watch reports that the official Palestinian Authority newspaper, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, announced Prime Minister Salam Fayyad’s plan for an upcoming fencing tournament for youth named after terror chieftain Abu Jihad.

You read right. Salam Fayyad, the man who is constantly touted by Western leaders as a “moderate” and a “peace advocate,” is heading up a tournament that glorifies mass murderer Abu Jihad.

A founder and longtime leader of Yasir Arafat’s Fatah movement, Abu Jihad (real name: Khalil al-Wazir) had a long resume of atrocities on his resume, including planning the hostage-taking at the Savoy Hotel in Tel Aviv in 1975 in which eight hostages and two Israeli soldiers were killed, until his career was cut short by an assassination in 1988.

Funny: The U.S. media played up ex-president Bill Clinton’s warning about the dangers of hateful rhetoric here in America on the anniversary of Oklahoma City. But our pundits and policymakers don’t seem to worry much about the PA’s far more active promotion of violence.

PA newspapers, radio stations and school textbooks routinely characterize Jews as insects, animals, terrorists, Nazis and demons.

During Vice President Joseph Biden’s visit to the region last month, the PA named a public square in the El Bireh neighborhood of its capital city, Ramallah, after the notorious terrorist Dalal Mughrabi. She was one of the leaders of a terror group that murdered Gail Rubin – a relative of the late former senator Abe Ribicoff – and 37 Israeli bus passengers in another attack devised by Abu Jihad.

That outrage was drowned out in all the furor over the Israeli announcement of construction in an East Jerusalem neighborhood the PA has its eyes on. Eventually, the Obama administration expressed some mild disapproval of the PA action. But while anger over the Israeli building generated lists of specific U.S. demands for Israeli concessions, the response to the Palestinians contained no demands, no deadlines, no consequences of any kind.

The square in Ramallah and the fencing tournament join a long list of schools, summer camps, streets, and computer centers named after terrorists in PA-controlled territory.

Assistant Secretary of State Philip Crowley said last week that the PA’s policy of publicly glorifying terrorists “must end.” Good words, but where’s the beef? The deadline? The consequences for not going along?

Crowley made his statement the day after President Obama signed an order to continue U.S. financial aid to the PA – now more than $500 million a year.

“The words we use really do matter,” Bill Clinton said last week. Yes, they do. The words of the Palestinian Authority – on its street signs, in its newspapers, on the banners at its fencing tournaments – really do matter. When will the Obama administration take meaningful steps to change them?

Terrorists and U.S. Presidential Politics

Wednesday, October 10th, 2007


If this president does not get us out of Iraq, when I am president, I will,” pledged Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in a televised Democratic debate broadcast nationally and around the world.


“The first day, I would get us out of Iraq by diplomacy,” said New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, on the debate stage with seven other Democratic presidential hopefuls.


“We are one signature away from ending this war,” declared Illinois Senator Barack Obama, adding that if Bush won’t change his mind about vetoing a bill requiring troop withdrawal, Democrats need to work on rounding up enough Republican votes to override him.


Former North Carolina senator John Edwards, who together with Clinton and some other Democrats voted to authorize the Iraq war, apologized for his earlier support and said he wanted to see a withdrawal.


The debate, held in April, was followed closely in the Middle East, where it was covered by Arabic news outlets and partially broadcast on major Arab satellite networks. Among those watching were Palestinian terrorist leaders.


There is a tendency to think of terrorists as living like barbarians in caves. Actually, a lot of terrorists, certainly those in Gaza and the West Bank, reside in well-decorated apartments with all the trappings of a modern production company. They have some of the most advanced communications equipment in the world and are quite Internet-savvy.


While terrorists spend much of their time in the field carrying out or planning attacks or undergoing or leading military training, they also find the time to follow the news media closely. Many of the terror leaders I’ve spoken with understand some English, although they pretend not to and almost always demand we speak with the aid of an Arabic interpreter.


I know they understand my English because during in-person talks they have responded at times to my statements with gestures or laughter or disagreement before my words were translated for them into Arabic. Some Palestinian terrorists actually speak fluent Hebrew, from time spent in Israeli jails.


I was stunned by how closely some terrorists follow U.S. developments – how familiar they are with our political system and a lot of the top players. The day after the April Democratic debate, I happened to call Abu Jihad, one of the leaders of the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades terror organization, for an article I was writing about Palestinian rocket capabilities. Out of the blue during our interview, without any prompting on my part, Abu Jihad commented on how thrilled he was with the Democrat debate.


“We see Hillary [Clinton] and other candidates are competing on who will withdraw from Iraq and who is guilty of supporting the Iraqi invasion. This is a moment of glory for the revolutionary movements in the Arab world in general and for the Iraqi resistance movement specifically,” said Abu Jihad. “I think Democrats will do good if they will withdraw as soon as they are in power.”


Wow, I thought. A terrorist sounding off about an American political debate. I quickly called one of Abu Jihad’s bosses, Nasser Abu Aziz, the deputy commander of the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades in the northern West Bank. He, too, paid attention to the Democrat debate.


Aziz said the debate proved “the invasion of Iraq was judged by Allah to be a failure. America needs to stop letting its foreign policy be dictated by the Zionists and the Zionist lobby. The Democrats understand this point and want to prevent this scenario.” He declared it is “very good” there are “voices like Hillary and others who are now attacking the Iraq invasion.”


“I think the more Americans receive the bodies of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, the more the conservatives in the U.S. will be sentenced to be thrown in the garbage,” he said.


Rooting for the Democrats


With America heading toward 2008 presidential elections, I talked with the terrorists about which parties they favor and who specifically they want to see in the White House.


Overwhelmingly they told me they hope Americans sweep the Democrats into power, in part because of the party’s position on withdrawing from Iraq – a move, as they see it, that ensures victory for the worldwide Islamic resistance.


“Of course Americans should vote Democrat,” said Jihad Jaara, an exiled member of the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades and the leader of the 2002 siege of Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity.


“This is why American Muslims will support the Democrats, because there is an atmosphere in America that encourages those who want to withdraw from Iraq. It is time that the American people support those who want to take them out of this Iraqi mud,” said Jaara, who talked to me from exile in Ireland, where he was sent as part of a deal that ended the church siege.


I asked the terrorists what they thought of statements from people like Senator Barbara Boxer and Representatives Barbara Lee and John Murtha that the U.S. must immediately withdraw from Iraq. What do they think when they hear prominent politicians comparing Iraq to Vietnam?


“These Democrat leaders are starting to ask the right questions: what are we doing in Iraq after we got rid from Saddam Hussein?” stated Jaara. “You succeeded in killing him and in establishing a new regime but why are you still there? And this is what these Democrats are asking. They understand that the American occupation causes the resistance and we are glad the resistance is succeeding to beat the Americans.”


(I must stop Jaara here and point out his deceptive rhetoric. When it suits them, terrorists claim the American occupation of Iraq is the reason for their attacks. But terrorists have been waging their war for Islamic domination far before the U.S. deposed Saddam Hussein. 9-11 occurred before the Iraq war. Jihadists constantly struggle to find new U.S. policies to blame for their terrorism.)


Regarding the Democrat debate, Ala Senakreh, chief of the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades in the West Bank, said making statements is not enough, but Democratic policies make him hopeful.


“It is not enough to compare Iraq to Vietnam. There must be a big campaign to start this withdrawal. What is happening now in the Congress is encouraging, it gives hope for a change, but I am afraid that it will still take time. As for us, this proves that the resistance always succeeds by the end of the day.”


I read to the terrorists an interview on CBS’s “60 Minutes” in which then-House Minority Leader and now House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, stated, “The jihadists [are] in Iraq. But that doesn’t mean we stay there. They’ll stay there as long as we’re there.”


Muhammad Saadi, a leader of the Islamic Jihad terror group in the northern West Bank city of Jenin, laughed. “There is no chance that the resistance will stop,” he said.


An American withdrawal from Iraq, Saadi explained, would “show the resistance is the most important tool and that this tool works. The victory of the Iraqi revolution will mark an important step in the history of the region and in the attitude regarding the United States.”


Abu Ayman, an Islamic Jihad leader in Jenin, said he is “emboldened” by those in America who compare the war in Iraq to Vietnam.


“[The mujahedeen fighters] brought the Americans to speak for the first time seriously and sincerely that Iraq is becoming a new Vietnam and that they should fix a schedule for their withdrawal from Iraq,” he boasted.


The exiled Al Aksa member Jihad Jaara said an American withdrawal would “mark the beginning of the collapse of this tyrant empire [America].” He added that America’s vacating Iraq would also “reinforce Palestinian resistance organizations, especially from the moral point of view. But we also learn from these [insurgency] movements militarily. We look and learn from them.”


Hamas’s Abu Abdullah argued that a withdrawal from Iraq would “convince those among the Palestinians who still have doubts in the efficiency of the resistance.”


The terror leaders each independently urged American citizens to vote for Democratic candidates. I never once came across a single terrorist who supported any Republican. And why would they? The Democrats largely want to withdraw from Iraq. They want dialogue with Syria and Iran. The terrorists share those same goals, because they believe it will lead to the downfall of the American empire and the spread of Islam.


It was under a Democratic president, Bill Clinton, that PLO leader Yasir Arafat returned from exile in Tunis, established a fiefdom in the West Bank and Gaza and was built up as a legitimate leader, becoming the most frequent foreign dignitary to visit the White House.


The terrorists love that. They believe the Democrats are their ticket to victory and they are hopeful a Democrat will soon sit in the Oval Office.


Hillary’s the One


I asked them about particular presidential candidates. Overwhelmingly, they favored Hillary Clinton in 2008.


Brigades chief Ala Senakreh, who planned and orchestrated multiple suicide bombings and has himself carried out at least a dozen shooting attacks against Israelis, told me he “hope[s] Hillary is elected in order to have the occasion to carry out all the promises she is giving regarding Iraq.


“I hope also she will maintain her husband’s policies regarding Palestine and even develop that policy. President Clinton wanted to give the Palestinians 98 percent of the West Bank territories. I hope Hillary will move a step forward and will give the Palestinians all their rights.”


Abu Hamed, leader of the Al Aksa Brigades in the northern Gaza Strip, said that Hillary’s antiwar position “proves that important leaders are understanding the situation differently and are understanding the price and the consequences of the American policy in Iraq and in the world.


“The Iraqi resistance is succeeding. Hillary and the Democrats call for withdrawal. Her [Clinton's] popularity shows that the resistance is winning and that the occupation is losing. We just hope that she will go until the end and change the American policy, which is based on oppressing poor and innocent people.”


Ramadan Adassi, leader of the Al Aksa Brigades in the Anskar refugee camp in the northern West Bank, said he also backs Hillary. With a straight face, Adassi said he was worried that if Hillary defies Israel she will be brought down like her husband, claiming White House intern Monica Lewinsky was an Israeli implant sent to lure Bill Clinton into a sex scandal after he pressured the Jewish state to evacuate territory to the Palestinians.


“If Hillary goes too much against the Zionist interests she will face the same conspiracy like her husband who fell into the trap of Lewinsky,” said Adassi. “I have no doubt [Lewinsky] was planted by the Zionists, who wanted to send a message to all future American presidents – do not go against the Israeli policy. Bill Clinton made the Oslo agreement and promoted peace but the Israelis did not give him a chance.”


The notion of Lewinsky as an Israeli agent is commonly believed in the terror community. It came up many times in my conversations and interviews with Palestinian terrorists.


Hating Rudy


The terrorists weren’t familiar with the particulars of some of the other presidential hopefuls, but they all knew of former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani. He is quite famous in terror circles for the time in 1995 when he booted Yasir Arafat from an invitation-only concert at New York’s Lincoln Center celebrating the UN’s fiftieth anniversary. Arafat attempted to crash the event. When Giuliani saw the PLO leader and his entourage making their way to a private box seat near the stage, the mayor immediately ordered Arafat off the premises.


The incident occurred at the height of Oslo euphoria, when Arafat was being promoted as some sort of statesman and even most mainstream Jewish groups disgracefully embraced the murdering terrorist.


“Giuliani doesn’t deserve to live or even to be mentioned,” said Brigades leader Ala Senakreh. “He wants war and he will most probably receive war. He hates Palestinians and we hate him. He hates Arafat and I tell him that it is Arafat who brought us to be very close to our independent state after decades during which Israel and your government did everything in order to prevent us from having our state.”


Ramadan Adassi threatened Giulani: “If I had the occasion to meet him, I would hurt him. For the sake of the American people Giuliani shouldn’t be elected. He is a disgusting guy and I think Americans must think very hard about their future and their soldiers who will be killed when they come to elect their leaders.”


While the terror leaders each independently urged American citizens to vote for Democratic candidates, not all believed the Democrats would actually carry out a withdrawal from Iraq. They believe most American politicians are controlled by Israel.


“Unfortunately,” said Islamic Jihad’s Saadi, “I think those who are speaking about a withdrawal will not do so when they are in power and these promises will remain electoral slogans. It is not enough to withdraw from Iraq. They must withdraw from Afghanistan and from every Arab and Muslim land they occupy or have bases.”


He called both Democrats and Republicans “agents of the Zionist lobby in the U.S.”

 


Aaron Klein is Jerusalem bureau chief for WorldNetDaily.com and a weekly columnist for The Jewish Press. This essay is adapted from his new book, “Schmoozing With Terrorists,” available at Barnes & Noble, Amazon.com and other major booksellers.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/terrorists-and-u-s-presidential-politics/2007/10/10/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: