…One woman screamed at volunteers collecting remains, “Where is my sister? Where is my sister?”
“A Palestinian man detonated nail-studded explosives on a Jerusalem bus crowded with high school students and office workers Tuesday, killing himself and 19 passengers in the city’s deadliest suicide attack in six years. Forty people were wounded,” The Atlanta Journal Constitution reports.
The blast tore through the bus just before 8 a.m., sending bodies flying through windows and peeling off the roof and sides. The attack came as President Bush prepared to make a major Mideast policy statement.
Many of the passengers were students at a nearby high school. Education Minister Limor Livnat said seven students were among the dead and wounded.
[…]The Islamic militant group Hamas claimed responsibility and identified the assailant as Mohammed al-Ghoul, 22, from the Al Faraa refugee camp near the West Bank city of Nablus. The Palestinian Authority condemned the attack. In 21 months of fighting, Palestinian extremists have carried out 70 suicide bombing.
Tuesday’s explosion went off as the bus waited at a crowded intersection in southern Jerusalem. Shlomi Kalderon, 32, had just dropped off his children at kindergarten and was two cars behind the bus at the time of the blast.
‘All the pieces went flying up into the air,’ Kalderon said from a Jerusalem hospital where he was being treated for a whistling in his ears. ‘People from the cars behind me came running up to the bus and started pulling people out of the windows. They didn’t save many. … I saw a head next to me after the blast.’
Rescue workers lined up the dead on a sidewalk and covered them with black plastic bags. A tent was set up where body parts would be identified. One woman screamed at volunteers collecting remains, ‘Where is my sister? Where is my sister?’
[…] A visibly angry Sharon made an unusual visit to the scene 90 minutes after the blast. He inspected the wreckage and then walked slowly past the row of bodies on the sidewalk.
‘This terrible thing that we see is a continuation of Palestinian terrorism, and against that terrorism we have to fight and struggle — and that is what we will do,’ Sharon said, without saying what sort of response might be expected.
[…] The suicide attack came as Bush was preparing to outline his vision for an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal and the steps needed to get there. Bush has repeatedly criticized Arafat, saying the Palestinian leader has not done enough to prevent terror attacks in Israel.
Bush was said to be considering backing a provisional Palestinian state on some West Bank and Gaza land. Sharon, who objects to the idea, questioned what sort of state the Palestinians would create.
‘The terrible sights we have seen here are stronger than any words,’ Sharon said. ‘It is interesting to know what kind of Palestinian state they mean. What Palestinian state?’
Yes, George. What Palestinian state?
It seems that every morning now I wake up to news like this, news that some human so suckled on the poison tit of hatred and lies and false promises has — in a fit of ecstasy and in the service of some despot — proven eager to kill as many unsuspecting humans as possible, intentionally targeting the softest targets, civilians. Today, the “enemies” of the Palestinian “cause” happened to be a bunch of commuters on a bus, many of them high school students. Tomorrow, the enemy will be infidel toddlers playing imperialistic Jewish pre-school games…
Want to discuss root causes? Fine. But do so seriously. This conflict is not about “occupation” — a condition that anyone who studies history knows is an utter lie (even under favorable readings of oft-cited UN resolutions). It’s not about humiliation — at least not humiliation of the kind we’re told Palestinians suffer at the hands of “oppressors” (indeed, the humiliation, where it exists, is the humiliation of Arab nationalism — its inability to destroy the thriving Jewish democracy flourishing right under its nose, despite five decades of trying).
No, the culture of hatred — fostered by leaders who use their own people as pawns in a game of territorial chest thumping — is what lies at the root of this problem. And everyone knows it. “Martyr” medallions traded among school kids like Pokemon stickers. State-run Arab television preaching antisemitism and anti-Americanism. Blood libel stories printed by the “moderate” Arab press. Arab “Academics” and “scholars” and “Doctors” of all stripes preaching genocide and the bliss of suicidal immolation (provided the suicide results in lots of dead Jews).
The whole region needs to be de-Nazified. And the only way such a thing will happen is if the civilized world throws over the realpolitik goal of maintaining “stability” in the region and instead condemns this culture of undisguised hatred — and in no uncertain terms. The US should insist the UN condemn, not justify, Palestinian suicide bombings, or it should withdraw its support. Statements from international “aid” agencies like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch should be ignored by the mainstream western media until the time when these highly politicized groups re-establish their credibility as objective observers of world conflict. University professors who exercise their free speech rights to support divestiture and preach the sobriety and righteousness of Palestinian “resistance” through the act of blowing up high school kids or shooting little girls in their beds should be challenged — consistently and tenaciously. And so on.
The problem with the Middle East is one of virulent Islamism, out of control pan-Arab nationalism, and a lack of western resolve to take a principled stand against such a virulent and ascendent ideological mishmash — despite our having recognizing its true nature and tendencies.
[Related: More from Den Beste and the commentariat at LGF.
Tal G in Jerusalem adds:
Often [when commenting on these attacks] I receive emails from people who say things like ‘Don’t you realize that Arafat is really trying to hold these people back?’ or ‘Don’t you realize that if you just did X (freeze settlements, clear checkpoints etc.) , they wouldn’t be so angry anymore and would stop launching attacks?’.
I appreciate and try to respond to most email, and, in my daily entries, I provide plenty of documentation that these views are not correct. But today my most basic reaction is: ‘Do you really think that seeing this on the BBC or hearing it on NPR enables you to understand things better than the people who actually live here — day in and day out?’
Unfortunately, Tal, certain people do think just that — including, it now seems, our President and our Secretary of State. To their shame.]
AMEN
The U.S. SHOULD pull out of the repugnant Saudi Arabia, but not for the reasons Osama wants us to. Personally I don’t want a penny of my tax dollars going to support or defend these billionaire demons, with their disgusting anti-Jewish anti-Christian anti-Israel propaganda. Let Iraq invade Saudi, let all these despicable Arab leaders busy themselves warring with each other, and we’ll clean up the mess afterwards. I’m sick of them all.
I think everybody is missing an opportunity here. Give the Palestidiots a state; grant it diplomatic recognition. then, the next suicide bombing becomes a casi belli, cause of war, and Isreal can nuke the bastards.
I’d love to comment on this, but I did a little experiment with my own high school yearbook and wound up dead.
Jeff (and Tal G):
I have been engaged in a running debate w/ friends of mine over things like the “Not in My Name” letter about the War on Terrorism.
One of the things that folks like Peace Now, and our home-grown version such as that ridiculous letter, fail to recognize is that their words and comments ABSOLUTELY have an impact. American Left-wingers (and quite a few liberals) hear the words and stances of groups like Peace Now and Gush Eminem (sorry, couldn’t resist), and argue that “people on the ground” clearly view things the way Tikkun and Rabbi Lerner do here. Benny Morris’ book has probably done as much as anything to convince American liberals that, well, maybe Israel IS in the wrong.
I’d comment on what I think Palestinian crazies get from this sort of thing, but that would be just a guess (and you can probably figger where I stand on that anyway).
I agree. But I believe that the West errs by not treating the conflict as one between Islamists and Seculars. Within the Muslim world, the secular governments – Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Algeria, (non-Moslem) Nigeria, etc – are on the ropes. The Egyptian government would be tossed if they released the 20,000 Islamists that are rotting in their jails. The Seculars need to adopt hair-trigger policing methods against religious criminals, without Western governments attacking them for human rights abuses.
Democracy and liberty are only possible where there is separation of church and State. That is the real salient that the Islamists are attacking. Want to know why the West’s clerics have faced constrainment since the 17th c?
Read: “We shall be predisposed to believe that that which is really black is actually white, if the church hierarcy so dictates.” (Loyola, Spiritual Exercises, 1540)
Where general liberty interests are engaged, specific freedoms, including freedom of conscience, may be suppressed.
I think that Lauren’s comment is right on the mark. Give these scumbags their pathetic little state, and when the attacks continue, Israel would be in the right to declare war and wipe them off the face of the Earth.
The only way to achieve ‘peace’ is to win the war.
At one point I actually had some sympathy for the Palestinians – but that has been gone for some time now. It is obvious to anyone with an IQ greater than their shoe size that their entire culture is diseased beyond repair…
“Nuke the bastards”?…
Not a real bright idea. The west bank is to close, fallout would be a real bitch.
The Mossad is the ticket. Let’s see some Islamofascist Kings/Princes/Dictators start dropping dead from Beri-beri or something. Lots of ordinary folks in SA/Iraq/Iran/Pak would love the chance to overthrow their “masters”…
MDT:
consider Neutron Bombs
they produce very little radiation.
I’m sure they beat the idea of inducing an avitaminosis (a vitamin deficiency) such as Beri-Beri in one of these bastards
I personally may enjoy the experiment of depleting the vitamin content of one of the Saudi royals (preferrably by squeezing hard)
“”Nuke the bastards”?…
Not a real bright idea. The west bank is to close, fallout would be a real bitch.””
Well, except that Israel’s nuke stockpile includes lotsa lotsa “neutron” weapons which wipe out all living flesh within the effective radius, but leaving significantly less residual radiation than regular atomic or thermonuclear devices.
The fact that Israel’s weapons are so configured suggests that they have known for a long time that they would eventually need to do war on or near their on soil.
At this point, I have lost all hope for the Palestinians. They have all but devolved now to a pure death cult, and nothing short of a crushing defeat, overwhelming in its raw force and brutality, will ever bring them back to the fold of humanity.
as there seems to be some disagreement about the long term effects of nuclear weapons on the west bank, why not use massed artillery and air strikes instead?
Lauren’s idea is interesting in principle, but I’m guessing it won’t work simply because there is nothing Israel can do to gain “legitimacy” in the eyes of the UN. If they declare a Palestinian state, and then invade it, they will still be condemned for the invasion and “not showing restraint,” etc.—and also for invading another country. There is nothing to gain diplomatically by doing this.
And there’s plenty to lose. Suppose that the Palestinians start stockpiling weapons in earnest—well, they can do that, given that they are a state and all. What is Israel to do then? Wait until they strike, by which time a response would be terribly costly? Or go in pre-emptively, in which case it’ll just get more condemnation? Nope, no easy way out here.
As far as the genocide of Palestinians (and let’s not bullshit each other—nuking their cities would be genocide), the Israelis would have to get pretty desperate in order for that to happen. (Though by now, I don’t consider that impossible.) As for methods, nukes are probably a dumb idea, but conventional weapons and joyful things like napalm would do the job just fine.
The root cause of the mess is certainly not “occupation.” It’s about Arab “humiliation” and Arab recalcitrance in refusing to accept defeat. They went to war with Israel 3 times and lost all three, but have refused to accept it.
Nukes, massive bombing and the like will not work in Gaza or (especially) the West Bank because they are riddled with Israeli settlements. Since there is no real Palestinian government (it’s more like a Mafia family, or a gang) there would be no real battles. Just declare the two areas part of Israel. Then the residents could either leave, stay and become citizens, or get shot.
More here, if you like:
<a href=”http://sproteus.blogspot.com/2002_06_16_sproteus_archive.html#85181365″>http://sproteus.blogspot.com/2002_06_16_sproteus_archive.html#85181365</a>
Nuking any conceivable Palestinian state is overkill. Israel has more than enough military might to raze the West Bank; why break a nuclear armistice that’s nearly 60 years old? I can’t think of one advantage to nuclear involvement, and many enormous disadvantages. Not least of which is it’ll prompt every Muslim nation with nukes to consider whether Israel should continue to exist.
So let me get this straight. We’re all completely outraged at the depths of depravity shown by the heartless murders commited by the Palestinians on the Isreali civilian population, and our solution is obliterate hundreds of thousands (or all) of them via some weapon of mass destruction. We realize that even their childred are being inculcated with a doctrine of hateful Muslim fundamentalism, and we decide that it’s best get rid of their entire culture. Why, because it’s too hard to fix? Not worth the effort?
The comments I read here are obviously from people that have strong emotions on the subject, but no real knowledge of the background of this conflict.. a conflict that is into its third generation of peoples fixed on hating each other. A diplomatic and political enigma as perplex at the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has no right or wrong side by this point, or a resolution surely would have been devised by now. The situation is this: two societies of otherwise peaceful people are dragged along by leaders hell-bent on distrusting one another, each with very different military options at their disposal. The Israeli military is not legitimately threatened by any means by the Palestinians, who then feel so desparate to fight back to the point of reverting to terrorism. While nothing can justify the killing of innocent civilians, it remains a fact that the Israeli army has killed more Palestinian civilians than the number of Israeli citizens killed in all of the suicide attacks. That people are calmly discussing the nuclear obliteration of an entire “diseased” culture is as disturbing as any similar conversation that probably took place hundreds of times among SS officers in the 1940s. To anyone reading this, get your facts straight and think with your mind, not your heart, before judging anyone.. or jumping to hasty conclusions about the right way to bring peace to Isreal.
I have plenty of knowledge on the background of this conflict. And it’s spelled “IsrAEl,” by the way.
I won’t respond at length, because I’m no longer interested in trying to convince people who trot out these ludicrous equivalency arguments. Quickly, we killed more Germans and Japanese in WWII than they killed Americans– so we were the bad guys?
Obliterating a culture that’s bent on your destruction is not immoral. It’s a sad option in a war for survival. I don’t advocate nuclear weapons here, but I certainly advocate the serious and committed use of force.
And by the way, pointing to the duration of a conflict as evidence of its ambiguity in terms of decided culpability is as asinine a piece of thinking as I think I’ve ever encountered. Ever. And that’s saying something.
Jeff G., thank you for proving my point. Your best counter-argument is a typo in my comment. Otherwise, your statements are backed up by.. well, nothing but a lack of exposure to other “pieces” of thinking. And who said the American government wasn’t guilty of similar ruthless killings of non-combatants during WW II itself? (Hiroshima or Dresden escape your memory?) The U.S. has been kissing Israeli ass ever since Israel stole nuclear secrets and material from the U.S. in the 70’s. The United States is now stuck defending a government that would otherwise be lobbing those nukes in all directions in the name of protecting the Holy Land from those darn Muslim fundamentalists. And may I ask, at what age did you become set in your convictions? Recently, after becoming interested in the subject? Or were you raised this way, growing up around a system of beliefs that have created a mind closed to alternative viewpoints? (This form of indoctrination is usually the main driving force in any religious or patriotic beliefs, which I am merely pointing out as a matter of fact, not as a form of criticism.) If your response is the latter, then you yourself are a product of “the duration of a conflict as evidence of its ambiguity in terms of decided culpability.”
When did I become fixed in my convictions? Well, chatting with you has certainly helped.