Military historian Victor Davis Hanson has a sobering review of the current situation in the ME and the questionable sympathies of the world press;
The old Arab agenda of recapturing “stolen” land has been superseded by a new Islamist jihad that is as fanatical as it is inhuman. The Islamists care not a whit for ground, but only for the abject destruction of the Jewish state and to finish the Holocaust that they claim did not take place. Few of the pundits now clamoring for “engagement” care to recall that Syria probably murdered Rafik Hariri, or that Iran promises to wipe Israel off the map.
The near criminal indifference of the international community is cause for greater depression still. No one says a thing about horrific Arab racism and anti-Semitism that brazenly offer the world pictures of our secretary of State as a primate and constant hate speech of Jews as apes and pigs. And here at home, a celebrity actor, the staff of a failed congresswoman in Georgia, and a crazed Muslim with a gun in Seattle all shout about the evils of the “Jews” — a good cross-section of just how insidious is the growing anti-Semitism.
The globalized media is absolutely discredited after the coverage of Lebanon. Reuters has destroyed its reputation, gained from 150 years of world reporting, by releasing doctored pictures and tolerating staged photo-ops. Almost all the Western media outlets failed to distinguish Lebanese civilian from military casualties — as if the Hezbollah terrorists they never filmed and never interviewed never died.
Indeed, thanks to the unprofessional reporters abroad, and their disingenuous chiefs back home, the world never saw the killers who sent the rockets nor many of their civilian victims on the ground in Israel. Nor did the reporters apprise their audience of the different landscapes in which they worked: candor in Israel might win loud disagreement; truth in Lebanon meant death. It would be as if Reuters, AP, or the New York Times embedded its reporters within the Waffen SS, beaming daily reports back home about the great morale and noble suffering of the Wehrmacht as it advanced into the snowy Ardenn.
… and near the end gets something wrong;
In an amorphous war of self-induced Western restraint, like the present one, truth and moral clarity are as important as military force. This past month, the world of the fascist jihadist and those who tolerate him was once again on display for civilization to fathom. Even the most timid and prone to appeasement in the West are beginning to see that it is becoming a question of “the Islamists or us.”
In this eleventh hour, that is a sort of progress after all.
Or rather, is proven wrong. Returning from Lebanon after spending a few days as guests of Hezbollah, two Canadian politicians have established themselves as this year’s leading contenders for the Nobel Prize In Bad Judgement,
It would aid the cause of peace if Canada dropped Hezbollah from a list of banned terrorist organizations, according to two Canadian MPs on a fact-finding mission to Lebanon.
When asked if he were in favour of Hezbollah being taken off the terror list, Etobicoke Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj said: “Yes, I would be.”
He likened the situation in the Middle East to Northern Ireland, where “if there wasn’t the possibility for London to negotiate with the IRA, you’d still have bombings.”
“Hezbollah has a political wing, they have members of parliament, they have two cabinet ministers,” Wrzesnewskyj said. “You want to encourage politicians in this military organization so that the centre of gravity shifts to them.”
New Democrat Peggy Nash, who represents the Toronto riding of Parkdale-High Park, said her discussions in Lebanon had led her to believe “that it is just not helpful to label them a terrorist organization.”
“If the political parties in Lebanon who may disagree with Hezbollah, and be opposed to them and their philosophy, can figure out a way to work with Hezbollah and try to get along internally, then perhaps we should take a cue from that.”
This was the message that both MPs said they would bring back to their caucuses, and eventually to the House of Commons, when they return to Canada this week.
Unbelievable.
Related – How Islamic Terrorists Manipulate the Media
Also – lots this morning on this at Blogging Tories.
Not a strawman at all. Yes, he uses the words, “terror” and “terrorist”.
But he uses them as though there is some lesser heft, a minimalizing of impact, if only, if… only…the Israelis would just understand that they…yes, THEY, need to look at their neighbor, and its various sectors, in a different light.
As though the Israelis, need ‘to make nice’, to make the Middle east function in peace.
It won’t do!
These guys in the Hezbollah and Hammas, and their collaborators, want Israel gone.
The writer can say that terror is used, but he cannot quite bring himself to say that Hezbollah is a “terrorist organization”.
Until he can identify that personal reluctance, he has no business telling Israel to let down their guard.
“Is it a terrorist organization? No. Not because it doesn’t engage in terror, but because its real power in the world of radical Islam, Israel-hate and America-hate, comes from this new model of the Islamic super-state.”
I’m not going to read Mr. W’s mind here, but that in itself is a logical error. Jaymeister 6:40 pm
Regarding the MSM quoting Borys, there’s an all-too-brief clip that CTV is showing of Hizb’allah’s Occidental Tourists viewing and photographing ruins with Borys saying, “There’re massacres that took place. It’s quite obvious that crimes were committed.” It appears that the site is Qana, although maybe CTV was running stock footage of Qana before cutting to the MPs’ guided tour. It’s pretty obvious he is referring to Israel and crimes against humanity and not referring to war in general.
I wonder if we were reading the same article. What I got out of it was that the author feels that Hezbollah is an organization that uses terror but has other facets as well. I don’t think he was suggesting that Israel “make nice” as much as to recognize that you’ll never be able to just go out and kill all of those who will do you harm. This isn’t a statist battle along nicely drawn lines. Ultimately there has to be a peace made between regional neighbours (Israel, Palestine, Lebanon) that isn’t just a tenuous piece of paper. The long term solution will require a multi-pronged approach.
“The challenge we face is to respect our enemies enough to know how to hang onto what is ours. To be strong enough to fight them when they come to kill us. But to be strong enough, as well, to remain open to those who want to find a way to live and let us live as well.”
There is nothing there about Israel letting down their guard.
Kate one could also look at Related at the bottom of your piece and insert How Colonial Annexationists Manipulate the Media. Or how they own the media and manipulate the public….or..well you get the point.
Was any reader of this blog as outraged when Conservative MPs appeared at events sponsored by supporters of the Mojahedin-E-Khalq, aka the People’s Mojahedin of Iran, aka the National Council of Resistance of Iran, all of which are listed as terrorist groups by the US and Canadian governments?
Conservative MPs Paul Forseth and Stockwell Day are mentioned here.
Conservative MP Jason Kenney is featured here, standing proudly between large posters of the founders of a group labelled ‘terrorist’ by the US and Canada.
The Canadian government’s designation of the MEK/PMOI as terrorist is here.
The American government’s designation is here, where you can read that “The MEK advocates the violent overthrow of the Iranian regime. The MEK philosophy mixes Marxism, feminism, nationalism, and Islam.”
Were Forseth, Day and Kenney–those evil ‘supporters’ of the ‘terrorist’ MEK–as worthy of outrage as Peggy N and Boris W?
If not, why not?
I do look forward to the most ingenious explanation.
sigh, yo mr missing link: the invasion was sold as a package where this wasnt going to happen !!!
the continuing deaths of muslim killing muslim is a consequence of the bushists BUNGLING THE WHOLE THING right from the start.
true motivation was wrong and methods are wrong = large casualty figures.
dubya is the dumb ass AND mass murderer.
by the way there mr link: your little trick of cut and paste a tiny portion of a huge article is PRECISELY the methods used by COMMUNIST LEADERSHIP HOPEFULS to discredit their rivals.
its called ‘out of context’, but you know that already, the tactic having been perfected and patented by the rightists.
Rather irresponsible headline.
leftdog
quoting articles from Haaretz (Israel’s equivalent of the Toronto Star) doesn’t do anything. what, did you just discover that there are delusional lefties in Israel too? (the country is full of them). Wow, you mean just like in Canada, everyone in Israel doesn’t think the same way? is this some kind of revelation to you? Does it prove you right because some leftist Jews said so – the Jews who agree with you (the good Jews)
Wrzesnewskyj And Nash – “Death To Jews”
Seems to me that “Death To Jews” would be the consequence of accepting Hezbollah’s political wing, akin to the acceptance of Hamas political wing. It is obvious that “Death To Jews” is not a quote from W or N.
Re: MP B.W.:
Kate. You’re not making this up also, are you? I mean, you really sandbaggered me with that ‘Eglin’ thing-ee . . .
I nominate Bo W for the Reversing&Backpedalling Walter Duranty Useful Idiot Award (Politaical Pawn Divison) for 2006.
Guys like Borys W (BTW, what’s wrong with Boris?) sure give the honest Ukies in Canada a bad, anti-semitic tinge. Probably why most good Ukie-Canucks refer th Mr B.W. as a ‘bah-N’YIACQUE’ and/or as a ‘doo-ROCK’. In order of appearance: a lidless pot, or a doltish foll.
Wot a mah ROUN!
Is there not some kind of protocol whereby members of Parliament must have approval from Foreign Affairs before embarking on an official trip.
It seems to me that the proper course would have been for these three to report when they got back to Canada. They would have then been free to say whatever they want, but to stand on foreign soil and declare that they are ashamed to be Canadian, is very distasteful.
This goes far beyond their personal views of the conflict, of which they only saw one side.
Stephen, do you remember the Canadian photo-journalist,Kazemi, who was arrested, tortured, and eventually killed while in prison in Iran?
3w cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/05/26/iran050526.
Day was the opposition critic for foreign affairs at the time. He had tried, with her son, to get her out in time.
Day had this to say about the Liberal government’s timing of asigning this designation to the group:
“Day says the timing of the announcement, just 48 hours after Iran told Canada to stop interfering in their investigation of the Kazemi case, will be interpreted by Tehran as a capitulation.
He questioned why a group that has existed for 40 years should only become terrorist now nearly two years after it announced it was laying down its arms.
“The timing and the intelligence around this is strange to say the least.”
Terrorist listings get reviewed and appealed regularly. Time is usually one factor in re-examining matters, for a new government.
There is lots to read, to try to understand this particular group which includes- as a member- the one you listed, at their link:
3w ncr-iran.org/
Note especially the news releases, and photos of dissidents being hung this summer, to understand what they are up against, the intricacies of the U.S. and Iraq interplay, and the new dangers with Iran’s new government.
The terrorist designation was given before the newest leader took his place in Iran….yes, that one in the news every day now.
Iraq gave the group a safe place to meet, until the latest twists and turns. It is all there to read.
Note the other countries and elected representatives in, democracies, that have come forward to *support* the group:
“For over two decades, the Iranian Resistance has ceaselessly endeavored to raise public awareness around the world of the clerical regime’s crimes against the Iranian people, and provided information to parliaments and international organizations. Resistance activists in countries throughout the world established ties with members of parliament, political dignitaries, intellectuals, labor unions, state representatives, mayors, etc., to inform them of the regime’s crimes and introduce the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI).
The NCRI is today widely recognized as the only viable democratic alternative to the mullahs’ regime in Iran. Thousands of parliamentarians, political leaders, parties and social figures have expressed their support for the National Council of Resistance and the Mojahedin. Majorities in the U.S. Congress and several parliaments in Europe, including Britain’s House of Commons, Italy’s Camera dei Deputati, Belgium’s Chambre des Représentants, Luxembourg’s parliament, among others, have issued joint statements on several occasions, declaring their support for the NCRI and the Mojahedin resistance movement in Iran.”
~~~
So, I guess the answer to your question is the timing of the designation by the Liberal government, same period Day was an opposition critic…and the particular event of Kazemi’s imprisonment.
The U.S. has its own complexities with their dance in Iraq, and Iraq formerly supporting this group against Iran.
There is no gotcha…lots of breakthroughs to find, though.
And this group did not have as a goal, the elimintion of an entire nation, like Hezbollah does.
Good thread Kate.
RE leftdog, “lawsuits – lawsuits -lawsuits -lawsuits – oh the lawyers are gonna love this!!!!”
oooooooooooooooh the lawyer threat.
There must be some liberals up against a wall again.
I gotta say that IMH and biased opinion some of the lefties here on sda sound like Harvard or Yale grads.
leftdog, are you an American moonbat with no job who believes nirvana can be reached in conjunction with a big settlement?
FYI Canadian courts do not award big settlements like the USA does even when there is real physical injury.
By the way, according to Wrz’s staff,
“Just to reiterate, Mr. Wrznewskyj paid for the trip out of his own pocket.
Regards,
Stan
Stan Granic
Parliamentary Assistant
Borys Wrzesnewskyj, M.P.”
That is, according to his staff, the trip was not funded by the Arab organization. I suspect, possibly without foundation, a ‘cover-up’. I can’t imagine an elected representative going on a trip, as an official (a member of the Liberal Party) and paying for it privately. I would expect that trip to be paid by his expense account.
But – according to ‘Stan’, the trip was ‘out of his own pocket’. What does this mean? From his expense account or from his salary/
Robert J
I am not sure why you are stuck on something that has already happened. This is typical of the socialist to always look backward instead of offering up something realistic to fix current realities. I suggest you look closely at the casualty figures out of Iraq. It has nothing to do with the US presence and everything to do with ethic hatred. The only thing stopping all-out slaughter are the coalition forces, accept it, live with it, move forward.
I am not sure what ‘cut & paste’ link you are refering to as I did not attach anything to my last email.
Steve Janke has an interesting angle today on B.W.’s trip and his stated purpose for going.
He also has a good post on Jason Kenney’s position re: Canadian appeasers of Hezbolla.
LeftDog, when this pathetic threat of a lawsuit doesn’t materialize, do come back so we can laugh at your zero credibility for your childish little lawyer rant that went NOWHERE.
Until then, go back to playing in your sandbox at CATNIPs blog.
Wrzesnewskyj And Nash – “Death To Jews”
The 2 MP’s did not say those words. The owner of this site may feel that it is a-okay to put her own interpretation on what she would like you to think they said.
The 2 MP’s did not say those words at any time, in any published or verbal form.
What does matter is that there is likely a very extreme ideological rationale that motivated the idividual to make up a false quote.
She should apolgize. If not, well that says that lies and falsehoods can be expected on this blogsite. If that does not matter to you, well, shame on you.
Buffalo Bean
I do recall the case of Kazemi: a brutal example of the Iranian regime’s conduct.
I am also aware the human rights groups like HRW and Amnesty have called for fair trails of MEK/PMOI members (or alleged members) in Iran: they are right to do so.
That the MEK wants to get rid of the regime in Iran seems to me beside the point: Canada’s terrorism legislation, as I have read it, does not contain escape clauses for terrorism carried out in a ‘just cause’ or ‘for a good reason’: terrorism is terrorism.
The US State Department report I cited above says this, among other things, about the MEK:
In 1991, the MEK reportedly assisted the Government of Iraq in suppressing the Shia uprisings in southern Iraq and the Kurdish uprisings in the north. In April 1992, the MEK conducted near-simultaneous attacks on Iranian embassies and installations in 13 countries, demonstrating the group’s ability to mount large-scale operations overseas.
The bloody suppression of the Kurdish uprisings, you’ll recall, is the crime for which Saddam Hussein is making the papers these days, while near-simultaneous attacks on embassies, you’ll also recall, has since made it into the playbook of Al’Qaeda.
One of the lessons of America’s, Saudi Arabia’s and Pakistan’s abysmal policy toward Afghanistan in the 1980s is that you shouldn’t back extremist terrorist groups, just because they happen to be currently aiming their rockets and guns at your enemy (the Soviet Union): some of the extremist terrorists backed by Washington, Riyadh and Islamabad (though not all anti-Soviets were extremists, by any means) went on to savage the country for years after the Soviet withdrawal, and help lay the groundwork for the Taliban (with continuing help from within Pakistan).
If we’re against terrorism, we should be against all terrorism, not just the terrorism aimed at us or countries whose regimes we like.
That’s why I don’t see that Ahmadinejad’s outrageous comments have anything to do with when or whether the MEK should be called a terrorist group, nor do I find anything very surprising or informative at the NCRI website you mentioned: I’m rather skeptical that the claims made are self-serving. Naturally, they’re going to try to win support in the west by playing up issues that resonate here (nuclear weapons, human rights).
Clearly, those issues exist with respect to Iran (and other countries), but is their mention by NCRI/MEK really informing us about whether or not it or its allied groups belong on a terrorist list where they currently reside?
Let’s look forward to a press conference featuring the stars of the Farce called “Three Stooges go to Lebanon”. The media twits will have it all planned by now, questions set up to clarify all the misunderstandings and all will again be right with their world.
Stephen offered:
“That the MEK wants to get rid of the regime in Iran seems to me beside the point: Canada’s terrorism legislation, as I have read it, does not contain escape clauses for terrorism carried out in a ‘just cause’ or ‘for a good reason’: terrorism is terrorism.”
And:
“If we’re against terrorism, we should be against all terrorism, not just the terrorism aimed at us or countries whose regimes we like.”
And:
“Clearly, those issues exist with respect to Iran (and other countries), but is their mention by NCRI/MEK really informing us about whether or not it or its allied groups belong on a terrorist list where they currently reside?”
I used the NCRI link, that you provided, in your initial post to see what your source was. When I went to it, I realized that I had seen it before in a discussion about who supplied the information about Iran’s nuclear progress.
It is a link with a wealth of information, that can be easily substantiated from other reputable (Western/European) sources, since this group meets with Western world leaders and groups regularly.
I appreciate the type of question you have added, for it makes research thoroughly interesting.
It brings us to ask how things happened to get us to where we are now. It is all good to discover and debate, and most importantly, to reassess from time to time.
In regard to your valid points re terrorist list components, I have no doubt that groups are added to this list, for reasons that can be both quite clear at the time, and ….eventually quite muddied, as the other motives start bubbling up to the surface.
Reading about this group specifically, we both accept that Iran is not one to take lightly where human rights are concerned.
Those of us in The West, are now playing catch-up with trying to understand some/any of the angles at play, between the various tribes, sects, and old enemies/alignments in the Middle East.
We know that they sometimes fight with one another, yet may fight side by side, depending on the issue, and who is being attacked.
In reading about this specific group ‘earning’ its asignment to the terror list in our country, and that of the U.S., there may be some questions arising about the motivation to do so at the time, considering the relationships to the Iranian leadership of the day.
The lists are reassessed for whether that application holds, hopefully. This is one that perhaps needs reassessment. That terrorist acts have been done by one member of their group makes that more problematic, to be sure.
But everything to do with the Middle East these days is problematic and challenging and complex, so complex.
The key for me remains that this group does *not* have, as a mandate, the *elimination* of a country and its people.
That they went about it, in the beginning, in some manner that aligns with acts of terror, is the point that comes back to bite them.
We can allow folks to read the vast amounts of information available to see for themselves, but the NCRI site that you provided, for me, is not to be discounted lightly.
The president-elect of that group, a woman, has good reason to be in a struggle for democracy in Iran(a fact which you agree with).
I have included it here for other readers who may, with us, love learning the wider picture.
3w maryam-rajavi.com/content/view/34/59/
“Rajavi began her activities during the anti-shah movement in early 1970s, as one of the leaders of the student movement while studying at the University.
The Shah’s regime executed one of her sisters, Narges, and the Khomeini regime murdered another, Massoumeh, who died under torture in 1982 while eight months pregnant. Massoumeh’s husband, Massoud Izadkhah, was also executed.”
ET, don’t let your personal bias blind you to the idea of Borys dipping into his personal savings to pay for the trip. If a Conservative MP used his/her own resources to go on a politically-motivated trip, would you be as sceptical? More likely you’d be pointing out the savings to the Canadian taxpayer.
Quite the partisan position, but perhaps that’s the point. There is no place for unemotional, rational discussion and debate in partisan politics… much less any real desire for a negotiated peace settlement in this horrid conflict. That’s where the hapless Borys went wrong, believing there was.
TangoJuliette, re your question of Borys vs Boris, what’s wrong with using the spelling on a person’s birth certificate? BTW, why aren’t you TangoJuliet?
So many self-righteous idiots frothing at the mouth here. Then again, maybe the headline was designed to invite it. Talk about manipulation. But hey, it keeps that hit counter ticking. Congratulations, Kate.
“Death to Jews” is an unjustified and sensationalistic headline. Mean while, I bet the Israeli Jews would like nothing more to round up all Arab Israelis and Palestinians into camps built by their own forced labour, then exterminate them for good. And then use their nuclear arsenal to bomb out a good chunk of land in surrounding countries, along with Iran and Syria, to create a militarized buffer zone like a medieval moat so they can finally live in isolated peace.
ah123 : No, the Israelis would not do such a thing, you seem to forget they are not radicals filled with hate. They are a tiny democratic state surrounded by people who hate them and want them driven into the sea, constantly forced to defend themselves. Their restraint is remarkable, given their power. Have to wonder just how much more they can endure from the scumbags of the world. Medieval more aptly describes much of the Islamic world and a big reason we are fighting the scourge of terrorism.
Sad really, how little so many understand of current events. Since when is it deomcratic to harrass someon for their opinion. Especially when the organization in question is not the terror machine Israeli apologists like to make it out to be. Some facts that many either do not know or ignore:
1. Hizbullah started in response to Israel’s prior occupation of Southern Lebanon.
2. only 6 countries call them terrorists
3. They have elected officials and run many social services.
5. The military action by Israel was approved by Washington a year prior.
6. According to the UN, skirmishes instigated by both sides have been occuring ever since Israel finally withdrew in 2000 and prisoner swaps have happened before
7. Bombing a country does not aissit in the safety of imprisoned soldiers but jeopardises them
8. Many Israeli’s and Jews around the world have condemned this war and a number of soldiers refused to serve.
Anyone who can condone what happened in Lebanon are heartless monsters who are racially prejudice against arabs, something equally as evil as being prejudice agains the jewsih people. If anyone’s head is in the sand it is those who support the Israei campaign of aggression. try finding out facts before you speak or type.
Sad really, how little so many understand of current events. Since when is it deomcratic to harrass someon for their opinion. Especially when the organization in question is not the terror machine Israeli apologists like to make it out to be. Some facts that many either do not know or ignore:
1. Hizbullah started in response to Israel’s prior occupation of Southern Lebanon.
2. only 6 countries call them terrorists
3. They have elected officials and run many social services.
5. The military action by Israel was approved by Washington a year prior.
6. According to the UN, skirmishes instigated by both sides have been occuring ever since Israel finally withdrew in 2000 and prisoner swaps have happened before
7. Bombing a country does not aissit in the safety of imprisoned soldiers but jeopardises them
8. Many Israeli’s and Jews around the world have condemned this war and a number of soldiers refused to serve.
Anyone who can condone what happened in Lebanon are heartless monsters who are racially prejudice against arabs, something equally as evil as being prejudice agains the jewsih people. If anyone’s head is in the sand it is those who support the Israei campaign of aggression. try finding out facts before you speak or type.
Sad really, how little so many understand of current events. Since when is it deomcratic to harrass someon for their opinion. Especially when the organization in question is not the terror machine Israeli apologists like to make it out to be. Some facts that many either do not know or ignore:
1. Hizbullah started in response to Israel’s prior occupation of Southern Lebanon.
2. only 6 countries call them terrorists
3. They have elected officials and run many social services.
5. The military action by Israel was approved by Washington a year prior.
6. According to the UN, skirmishes instigated by both sides have been occuring ever since Israel finally withdrew in 2000 and prisoner swaps have happened before
7. Bombing a country does not aissit in the safety of imprisoned soldiers but jeopardises them
8. Many Israeli’s and Jews around the world have condemned this war and a number of soldiers refused to serve.
Anyone who can condone what happened in Lebanon are heartless monsters who are racially prejudice against arabs, something equally as evil as being prejudice agains the jewsih people. If anyone’s head is in the sand it is those who support the Israei campaign of aggression. try finding out facts before you speak or type.