    The Palestinians have no chance, unless we free our souls from Jewish control.

    Gaza: Of Mice and Men

    By Israel Adam Shamir

    http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Gaza_Mice_Men.htm

    A cat called to the mouse holed up under the floor: “Come out, you have
    nothing to worry about! I have become a pious vegetarian, preparing for
    my Hajj, you may play freely”. “Oh wonderful news”, cried the mouse and
    ran out of the hole; a moment of the eternity clock passed, and the
    mouse found herself in cat’s claws, goes Nizami’s fable.

    This is, in brief, the development of Gaza crisis that began with
    Israel’s phoney but much advertised “withdrawal” (a.k.a.
    “disengagement”) from Gaza in summer 2005, followed by their phoney
    permission to run democratic elections for the Palestinian government.

    - “Sharon changed his ways”, exclaimed the good-meaning Americans and
    Europeans; “he – and after him, Olmert – are ready for peace and
    reconciliation.”

    - “We liberated Gaza”, said Hamas.

    - “Oy vey!” cried the settlers.

    The cries of joy and sorrow of the fake withdrawal had not died out,
    when the real siege and bombardment of Gaza began. After a few months of
    shelling, this real takeover of Gaza and arrest of all Palestinian
    leadership completed the picture of a fat cat playing with the mouse.

    Our readers may remember that at the height of withdrawal hullabaloo we
    called (in Much Ado about Gaza) for everyone to tone down their
    expectations: an Israeli pull-out is always followed by a push-in, as in
    a rape scene. Do not expect to see the last of them: an Englishman
    leaves without bidding farewell, a Jew says his farewells but does not
    leave, quoth a Jewish joke. Readers of this list and site received, as
    always, the correct forecast: indeed the Jews came back.

    The intermezzo was quite sad, too. Gaza after the withdrawal was one of
    the most depressing places on earth, with widespread starvation and vast
    unemployment, and it was not the Gazans’ fault: whether under Hamas or
    Fatah rule, Gaza can’t stand alone; this narrow strip is surrounded by
    Israeli troops and barbed wire, the Gazans have no way to sell their
    goods or to import their needs but through Jewish-controlled ports.
    Remove the SS men from Auschwitz to its perimeter, give the camp full
    autonomy but keep its gates shut from outside, and you’ll get a picture
    of Gaza. The Jews destroyed the Gazan industry and trade by their siege:
    Gazan fruits and flowers for export withered at Karmi checkpoint, and
    multimillion-dollar investment went down the drain. Gazans openly
    regretted their new-found “independence”, because in the days of Israeli
    rule they could make a living working at Israeli factories, and the
    Israeli shelling was much more moderate, while "independent Gaza was
    subjected to incessant shelling. Hundreds of missiles and shells were
    launched against this small strip of land daily, killing a few but
    ruining the nerves of its residents.

    I, for one, know what that means: in 1974, my commando unit spent less
    than half a year in the fortified crater of an extinguished volcano some
    40 km (25 miles) to the south of Damascus. We were shelled daily by
    Syrian artillery, and we could not respond with our light arms to their
    cannons. At the first exiting boom we would hide in bunkers and wait for
    the salvo to land. Sometimes, it was a single shell, sometimes it was
    followed by the inhuman squeal of a Katyusha missile. We had very few
    casualties: a couple of wounded and one killed for this whole period of
    time, but our nerves were completely shattered. We stopped brushing our
    teeth and shaving: it did not make sense when death is so imminent. We
    ceased writing letters. Even the periods of the most intense fighting we
    went through with dozens of killed comrades were preferable to the
    attrition of incessant shelling. Gazans – children, women, men, - had
    now almost a year of attrition made worse by aerial booming, something
    we were free from by virtue of Israeli air superiority.

    Israeli tactics in Gaza resemble the strategy of “starving into
    obedience” applied by the Pentagon to North Vietnam, per the Pentagon
    Papers, - the single most evil piece of strategic planning in the 20th
    century:

    “Strikes at population targets are likely not only to create a
    counterproductive wave of revulsion abroad and at home, but greatly to
    increase the risk of enlarging the war with neighbours. Destruction of
    locks and dams, however, does not kill or drown people. By
    shallow-flooding the rice, it leads after time to widespread starvation
    (more than a million dead?) unless food is provided--which we could
    offer to do at the conference table.” [1]

    If the Jews were to bomb a hundred thousand Gazans to oblivion, probably
    there would be “a wave of revulsion”, but destruction, starvation and
    thirst are equally efficient, and do not disturb the world conscience
    all that much. The destruction of a Gazan power plant was a shrewd
    business decision as well: this American-build and insured station
    competed with the Israeli Electric Company for supply of electric power
    to Gazans. Even running at half-capacity, the power station undermined
    the Jewish supplier’s monopoly.[2] Now it is gone, and Gazans will have
    to buy all their electricity from Jews at a much higher price. Combining
    business with pleasure, this destruction also allowed Jews to “thirst
    Palestinians” in addition to starving them as Gaza has no rivers, and
    electricity is needed to operate pumps.

    Still, in this short time of Gazan “independence”, Gazans proved they
    are men, not mice. Their stubborn launching of Kassams were a sign of
    their unbroken spirit: they refused to be starved into obedience. Kassam
    is hardly a weapon in the modern meaning of the word. This is a medieval
    weapon, a catapult, at best: an iron mote propelled by a simple device,
    carrying no explosives. We built and launched such missiles when we were
    kids in prep school. Surely, an iron mote can kill in the unlikely case
    of a direct hit, but the chances are small indeed.

    Their brave and well-planned raid of an Israeli siege unit has restored
    our appreciation of Gazans’ fighting abilities. It is not a simple thing
    to attack tanks with your bare hands. True, Israel utilised this
    courageous raid to jumpstart a new invasion of Gaza, but do not make too
    much out of this linkage: Haaretz (29.06.06) revealed that the plans for
    mass arrests of Palestinian leadership and for re-invasion were prepared
    a long time ago.

    The Israeli government referred to the raid: “a horrific, serious terror
    attack was carried out by Palestinian factions, which ended in the
    deaths of two soldiers, the injury of an additional soldier, and the
    kidnapping of Shalit.” Our friend Jeff Blankfort wittily quipped: “One
    would think Shalit was a little boy walking to the candy store who had
    been seized by a notorious child molester and not a soldier on active
    duty”.

    A Palestinian Christian Professor and a Knesset Member, Azmi Bishara
    said well of the resistance fighters: “Some people chose to respond to
    the murder of Palestinian civilians by attacking an Israeli military
    installation. They made the hardest choice, and chose the difficult
    path. Those who did not take this path, who did not make this sacrifice,
    or put their courage to this test, or suffer the trembling nerves in the
    darkness of the tunnel, yet who have some delicacy of feeling towards
    the pains of the Palestinians could at least spare this operation the
    embarrassment of tainting it as terrorist.”

    Yea, when the Jews attack, that’s war, when they are attacked, it is
    terror. Uri Avnery called it “a unilateral war”, on a par with their
    “unilateral withdrawals”. But this unilateralism is a constant feature
    of Jewish-Native relations: when Jews attack natives, this is rightful
    vengeance, when they get some of it back, it is a pogrom. Long before
    the Jews defamed Palestinians as terrorists, they vilified their
    previous native neighbours, Poles, Ukrainians, Russians, Spaniards,
    Germans as subhuman and vicious antisemites. If we reject their
    defamation of Palestinians, we may re-examine their accusation of
    others, and the whole narrative of Jewish suffering will collapse.

    Then, the problem of Palestine, or rather the problem of Jewish
    mistreatment of their ‘goyim’ will appear as an old problem, for the way
    Jews act today probably is the way they acted – if they could –
    yesterday. Long before the apartheid wall spanned Palestine, the Jews
    did not allow a native Spaniard to enter the walled city of Lucena,
    where they held sway.[3] Long before they shelled Gaza, they filled
    Mamilla Pool in Jerusalem with blood of slaughtered Christians.

    This is a good news for the descendants of Jews: we were brainwashed in
    hatred to ‘antisemitic’ mankind; came the Rape of Gaza, and now we learn
    that mankind was right and good, while we misbehaved. It is better to
    find oneself in the wrong than to accuse the whole of mankind, for one
    can repent.

    This understanding began to seep into our conscience. A man of Jaffa,
    Anwar Sacca wrote to Dorothy Naor, a wonderful Israeli woman: “Through
    their [Jewish] history, unfortunately not only for Jews but for the
    whole world, they were always self-destructive supremacists. As a
    minority living within any country and enjoying its citizenship, they
    always antagonized their fellow citizens by totally dominating their
    economy, media, life styles etc...to a limitless extent which generated
    dreadful consequences they had to heavily pay for. The same case applies
    in Palestine…”

    The Rape of Gaza fits too well into this centuries-proven pattern. The
    Jewish leadership didn't intend to give their captive goy a chance to
    lead normal life. Sooner will a cat turn vegetarian. Whatever they do,
    expect the worst. Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes. “Their good deeds are
    as dangerous as their obvious crimes”. In 1880s, Dostoyevsky
    prophesised: if and when the Jews get power, they will skin the goy
    alive. In Palestine this prophesy is being realised. This is not a
    question of innate Jewish qualities: a Jew can be good and do good, a
    Jew can repent, but ‘the Jews’ can’t because this body politic exists to
    compete and combat the indigenes, whether in Palestine or elsewhere.

    Ideologically, a Jewish state will do the Jewish thing, that is, to
    fight natives and combat the Church, whether Christian or Islamic. “If
    the Jews of old were to come back”, - wrote Simone Weil, - “they would
    destroy our churches and massacre us all”. “The Jewish tradition is
    rampantly ethnocentric and dehumanises outsiders with a gusto that could
    hardly be exceeded”, - wrote Ed Herman in his Triumph of the Market[4].
    In the Jewish State, the Jews of old have come back, and the Jewish
    tradition has became paramount.

    Thus, the Hamas was right in refusing to recognise the Jewish state: in
    no way this state can become a tolerable neighbour, whether ruled by
    Labour of Peretz or by Kadima of Olmert, or even in extremely unlikely
    case of being ruled by Mr Avnery. This state has to be dismantled, like
    the Assassins’ extraterritorial State that once controlled the Middle
    East. The Assassins drew their power from their ability and preparedness
    to assassinate the prominent leaders of Crusaders and Muslims, while
    leaving alive only weak rulers who did not dare to touch them.

    In the days of old, salvation came from unexpected corner: West Asia was
    conquered by Mongols and these ruthless warriors flushed the Assassins
    out of their mountain retreats and utterly destroyed their conspiracy.
    Their harmless descendants are Ismailis, who live peacefully and do not
    disturb peace anymore. If we can’t solve the problem, some new Mongols
    will dismantle the State of Sodom and render descendents of Jews as
    harmless as Ismailis.

    Then, there is a milder way of dealing with the problem by introducing
    reciprocity instead of unilateralism. A medieval chronicle reports that
    the Jewish King of Khazar once said to a Muslim visitor: “We would
    destroy all the churches and mosques in our kingdom right away, but we
    can’t for fear that they will destroy the synagogues in Baghdad and
    Constantinople”. Indeed, if in response to the Jewish destruction of
    Gaza’s power plant, an Israeli power plant in Caesarea were erased, and
    the Jews had to survive our summer without air-conditioners, they
    wouldn’t do it again. If the Jews in Europe were limited to the rights
    their brethren granted to Palestinians, Palestine would be free
    tomorrow.

    But why should we indulge in daydreaming? Who could do such a deed? The
    Arabs are subdued. The US conquest of Iraq eliminated the last
    independent Arab state. Iran is being pushed hard and this powerful
    Muslim state is happy every day it is not bombed. Syria is in the
    crosshairs of the US whom the French are helping them to contain
    Damascus. Never before – since Saladin – has the Middle East been so
    helpless and powerless.

    Europe and America are equally subdued: none of prominent public figures
    dared to object to the Jewish Drang nach Gaza. “Why do you keep quiet?”
    exclaimed Jonathan Steele in the Guardian (July 6, “Europe's response to
    the siege of Gaza is shameful”). Don’t you know the answer, Mr Steele?
    Whoever tried, was invariably defamed as “antisemite” and “neonazi”, and
    lost his living and his good name. I know, I tried to defend the
    Palestinians, and was stabbed in the back by a couple of nice
    Palestinian activists, Mr Ali Abunimah and Mr Nigel Perry of Electronic
    Intifada, followed by a cabal of other pro-Palestinian activists. Only
    after that did the heavy guns of Jewish media – like Aaronovitch of the
    Times, or Wikipedia – go into action. These good activists deserve some
    credit for present destruction of Palestine: if an Israel Shamir from
    Jaffa is attacked like that, what could expect a John Smith from
    Wisconsin? Whoever tried to defend Palestinians, got this treatment,
    unless he observed the PC rule of never uttering the J word. Still, I do
    not regret speaking the truth, for if we keep silent, the stones will
    cry out.

    The Palestinians have no chance, unless we free our souls from Jewish
    control. And here we may turn to the second J word, more mighty than the
    first: Jesus. The present subservience of the West began with a minor
    step. In 1960s, the Western churches removed from their liturgy a prayer
    “Oremus et pro perfidis Judaeis”, “Let us pray for perfidious Jews that
    our God and Lord will remove the veil from their hearts so that they too
    may acknowledge the light of thy truth which is our Lord Jesus Christ
    and be delivered from their darkness”. This is a far cry from the Jewish
    prayer “Shepokh Hamatha”, “Lord, vent your fury upon goyim who do not
    know your name”. But the Jews preserved their prayer of vengeance, while
    misled and subdued Christians dropped their prayer of mercy. Say this
    prayer today, say it in your church, dismiss a priest who dares it not,
    and tomorrow you will not writhe in face of Jewish displeasure, and Gaza
    – and your soul - will be saved. And if your prayer will be answered,
    the Jews will be saved, too.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    -------

    [1] The Pentagon Papers, Gravel Edition, Volume 4 Chapter I, "The Air
    War in North Vietnam, 1965-1968," pp. 1-276. Boston: Beacon Press, 1971

    [2] http://www.counterpunch.com/bryce07032006.html Gaza in the Dark by
    Robert Bryce

    [3] History of Jews in Christian Spain by Yitzhak Baer, Philadelphia v.1

    [4] South End Press, Boston 1995 p 131