The enormity of the terrorists' evil is now clear, as we haved learned more and more about the killings of Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg and his wife Rivka.
Here's Prager:
Why would a terrorist group of Islamists from Pakistan whose primary goal is to have Pakistan gain control of the third of Kashmir that belongs to India and therefore aimed to destabilize India's major city devote so much of its efforts - 20 percent of its force of 10 gunmen whose stated goal was to kill 5,000 - to killing a rabbi and any Jews with him?It's always a serious thing to invoke the memory of the Holocaust to explain contemporary threats to international security and Western civilization.
The question echoes one from World War II: Why did Hitler devote so much time, money, and manpower in order to murder every Jewish man, woman, and child in every country the Nazis occupied? Why did Hitler - as documented by the late historian Lucy Dawidowicz in her aptly named book "The War against the Jews" -- weaken the Nazi war effort by diverting money, troops, and military vehicles from fighting the Allies to rounding up Jews and shipping them to death camps?
From the perspective of political scientists, historians, and contemporary journalists, the answer to these questions is not rational. But the non-rationality of an answer is not synonymous with its non-validity.
For the Islamists, as for the Nazis, the destruction of the Jews -- and since 1948, the Jewish state -- is central to their worldview.
If anyone has a better explanation for why Pakistani terrorists, preoccupied with destabilizing India, would expend so much effort at finding the one Jewish center in a country that is essentially devoid of Jews, I would like to hear it.
With all the Pakistani Islamists' hatred of Hindus, they did not attack one Hindu temple in India's major city.
With all their hatred of Christian infidels, the terrorists did not seek out one of the 700,000 Christians in Mumbai.
To reinforce my point, imagine a Basque separatist terrorist organization attacking Madrid. Would the terrorists take time out to murder all those in the Madrid Chabad House? The idea is ludicrous. But no one seems to find it odd that that Pakistani Muslim terrorists who hate India and want it to give up control of Indian Kashmir would send two of its 10 terrorists to kill perhaps the only rabbi in Mumbai. As Newsweek reported during the siege, "Given that Orthodox Jews were being held at gunpoint by mujahideen (sic), it seemed unlikely there would be survivors." Newsweek, like just about everyone else, simply assumes Islamists will murder Jews whenever and wherever possible.
They are right.
For years I have warned that great evils often begin with the murder of Jews, and therefore non-Jews who dismiss Jew-hatred (aka anti-Semitism, aka anti-Zionism), will learn too late that Jew- and Israel-haters only begin with Jews but never end with them. When Israeli Jews were almost the only targets of Muslim terrorists, the world dismissed it as a Jewish or Israeli problem. Then it became an American and European and Filipino and Thai and Indonesian and Hindu problem.
But because of the ineluctable conclusion that of all the deaths last week, the killings of the Holtzbergs was the result of singularly unspeakable design and diabolical guile, the reference to the Nazi program of anti-Semitic eliminationism is completely appropriate.
7 comments:
It's late, so I read the Prager piece pretty quickly. I agree with the substance (if not perhaps always the tone) of a good deal of the column.
I take some issue, however, with the second to last paragraph of the column, where he says it's "exquisitely fitting" that the UNGenAssembly passed 6 "anti-Israel resolutions" the week of the Mumbai attacks. It's not "exquisitely fitting" b/c the 2 things actually have rather little to do w each other.
Speaking of fitting, it might be fitting for you to express some outrage at the killing of the other 170-some people who died in the attacks. Perhaps you've done that in an earlier post which I didn't read.
"It's not "exquisitely fitting" b/c the 2 things actually have rather little to do w each other."
LFC: I gather you don't know what anti-Semitism is...
I do know that if one cares about the fate of Israel the last institution they'd defend is the U.N. General Assembly.
The Muslim nations and the nations bought off by oil money in the UN are trying to chip away, little by little at the legality of the Jewish State.
Once Israel is declared an illegal state, then it would be legal for the Arabs and Iranians to attack at will.
Of course, no one at the UN gave a damn that 400 Muslims and Christians killed each other this past week in Nigeria. But they are outraged when Israel defends itself against rocket attacks or a tunnel under the border by Palestinians to kidnap more Israeli soldiers.
If one takes the time to follow the unbelieveable anti-Jewish hatred in the media of Muslim countries, then there would be no surprise that these terrorist want to kill Jews.
The hatred against Jews in Muslim
media is disgusting. However, in the new democracy of Iraq that allows a free press, the anti-Jewish bias is very limited.
In fact, the Iraqi high court just held that all Iraqis can visit every country, including Israel, without fear of legal ramifications
I wasn't "defending" the UN General Assembly; I was questioning the idea of a causal or other link between the anti-Israel resolutions and the attack on the Jewish center in Mumbai.
The UN Gen Assembly has been regularly and severely and often unjustly critical of Israel since the 70s. The infamous "Zionism is racism" resolution dates from the 70s. Yet the forces that have produced the current wave of 'jidahist' terrorism -- exemplified by but not limited to al Qaeda -- have much more to do with what happened in the world in the 80s (eg 'Arab-Afghan' resistance to Soviets in Afghanistan) and 90s (eg US troop presence in Saudi Arabia, etc).
Anti-Semitism has been around for a long, long time, in many manifestations, and it won't do, as an analytical matter, just to invoke it and think you've automatically explained everything. I thought you were supposed to be a political scientist.
You clearly know nothing about Islam.
p.s. that was directed to Grace.
Post a Comment