Quotulatiousness

September 4, 2019

Japan, the Bureaucratic War Machine | BETWEEN 2 WARS I 1931 Part 2 of 3

Filed under: Bureaucracy, China, History, Japan, Military — Tags: , , , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

TimeGhost History
Published on 3 Sep 2019

In Japan there has been a gradual increase of militarism since the Great War and in 1931 the country goes to war again when they invade Chinese Manchuria based on a false flag terrorist strike at the Mukden railway junction.

Join us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/TimeGhostHistory

Subscribe to our World War Two series: https://www.youtube.com/c/worldwartwo…

Hosted by: Indy Neidell
Written by: Spartacus Olsson
Directed by: Spartacus Olsson and Astrid Deinhard
Executive Producers: Bodo Rittenauer, Astrid Deinhard, Indy Neidell, Spartacus Olsson
Creative Producer: Joram Appel
Post-Production Director: Wieke Kapteijns
Research by: Joram Appel and Spartacus Olsson
Edited by: Danile Weiss
Sound design: Marek Kaminsky

Sources:

A TimeGhost chronological documentary produced by OnLion Entertainment GmbH.

Sources:

James Fulcher, The Bureaucratization of the State and the Rise of Japan (1988)

Katō Yōko, “The debate on fascism in Japanese historiography”, in: Sven Saaler and Christopher W.A. Szpilman (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Modern Japanese History (2018), 225-236.

Ethan Mark, “Japan’s 1930s crisis, fascism, and social imperialism”, in: Sven Saaler and Christopher W.A. Szpilman (ed)., Routledge Handbook of Modern Japanese History (2018), 237-250.

Penolepe Francks, “The path of economic development from the late nineteenth centre to the economic miracle”, in: Sven Saaler and Christopher W.A. Szpilman (ed)., Routledge Handbook of Modern Japanese History (2018), 267-278.

Sandra Wilson and Robert Cribb, “Japan’s colonial empire”, in: Sven Saaler and Christopher W.A. Szpilman (ed)., Routledge Handbook of Modern Japanese History (2018), 77-91.

Mark R. Peattie, “Nanshin: The ‘Southward Advance’, 1931-1941, as a Prelude to the Japanese Occupation of Southeast Asia”, in: Peter Duus e.a., The Japanese Wartime Empire, 1931-1945 (2010), 190-242.

From the comments:

TimeGhost History
13 minutes ago
This is the third of several episodes that cover the developments in East Asia leading to World War Two. In this episode we look at how Japan by 1931 has developed to be on the brink of a fascist state without anyone specifically taking power or staging a coup. The democratic reforms from the past four decades are dying a death by a thousand cuts as the Japanese administration and military simply take one small decision after the other that erodes freedom, dials back democracy, and inevitably leads to war. It’s an anonymous, mechanic, gradual movement towards global conflict proceeding with clockwork precision.

This episode also sees the first change to the Between 2 Wars set as Astrid and Wieke have started adapting the set to the changing themes, while we move closer and closer to the outbreak of WW2 — we’d love to hear what you think!

August 9, 2019

What’s happening in Jammu and Kashmir?

Filed under: Government, History, India, Law, Religion — Tags: , , , , , — Nicholas @ 03:00

Pieter J. Friedrich reports on recent events concerning the unique constitutional status of Jammu and Kashmir within the Republic of India:

CIA map of the Kashmir Region in 2004.
Via Wikimedia Commons. Click image to see full-sized map.

Terror grips the most militarized zone in the world after India’s Central Government terminated Jammu and Kashmir’s 70-year-old “special status” as the first step towards stripping the disputed region of statehood entirely.

Internationally infamous as the world’s hottest potential nuclear flashpoint, J&K originally acceded to India in 1947 only on the condition that the newly-formed country be restricted from interfering in the domestic affairs of the mountainous northern region. The agreement was sealed between the last king of J&K, Maharaja Hari Singh Dogra, and the representative of the British crown, Governor-General Lord Mountbatten. In 1949, when passage of the constitution formed the Republic of India, the Maharaja’s conditions for accession were enshrined in Article 370.

The crux of the article – in combination with Article 35A of 1954 – was that, while J&K accepted India’s handling of issues like defense and foreign policy, the state otherwise reserved the right to autonomy in handling its domestic affairs. Kashmiris, thus, lived under their own distinct laws. Notably, citizens of other parts of India were prohibited from settling permanently or owning property in Kashmir. In the eyes of many Kashmiris, this prevented settler colonialism. On August 5, 2019, the President of India abolished this “special status” by decree.

Simultaneously, Home Minister Amit Shah – charged with India’s internal security – introduced a bill in the upper house of parliament to strip J&K of statehood, downgrade it to a “Union Territory,” and partition the region.

As Shah did this, the Central Government shut down Kashmir. It imposed a virtual curfew, banning movement of the public, shuttering educational institutions, and barring all public assemblies or meetings. It severed communications, cutting off phone and internet access. And it conducted arrests of mainstream Kashmiri political leaders – such as former chief ministers Mehbooba Mufti and Omar Abdullah – on unknown charges.

India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, which was just re-elected in May, campaigned on promises to scrap J&K’s “special status.” The BJP’s manifesto alleged that it was “an obstacle in the development of the state,” while Shah insisted it stood in the way of of Kashmir becoming an “integral party of India permanently” and was necessary for “national security.” Indeed, the tumultuous region has suffered a significant influx in violence in recent years.

Since 2014, when Prime Minister Modi’s regime first came to power, terrorist incidents in J&K have nearly tripled and security forces deaths have nearly doubled. According to a July 2019 UN report, independent bodies documented 159 security forces deaths in 2018 – a figure comparable to US troop fatalities in Iraq in 2009. The latest round of escalating tensions traces back to at least 2010, when mass protests erupted over an “encounter killing” of three civilians by Indian Army troops. Protests again erupted in 2016. During suppression efforts, security forces killed hundreds of protesters.

The Central Government has responded by flooding J&K with more and more soldiers. The small region – slightly smaller than the United Kingdom – is already occupied by a bare minimum of 500,000 troops. Since late July 2019, India has deployed nearly another 50,000.

Delhi has additionally responded by repeatedly dissolving J&K’s elected state government, imposing direct rule three times since 2015. The last time was in June 2018, after India’s ruling BJP withdrew from a coalition with then J&K Chief Minister Mufti – apparently because she advocated “reconciliation” instead of a “muscular security policy” as the most effective solution to the Kashmir conflict. Elections have not been allowed since 2014.

The ongoing occupation as well as the long-term use of direct rule – imposed for approximately ten of the past 42 years – contribute to the perception of Kashmiris that they are nothing more than vassals within the Republic of India.

June 23, 2019

The state of play in the Strait of Hormuz

Filed under: China, Economics, Middle East, Military, USA — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 03:00

Arthur Chrenkoff wonders what would happen if Iran gave a war, but nobody came:

A satellite view of the Strait of Hormuz, 30 December 2001.
Jacques Descloitres, MODIS Land Rapid Response Team, NASA/GSFC via Wikimedia Commons.

Nearly twenty per cent of world crude oil shipments (from the Arab Gulf producers) go out to the rest of the world through the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran is threatening to close (hence its recent attacks on oil tankers).

However, through a combination of fracking, increased mainline well production and greater efficiencies, the United States is now finally energy self-sufficient. For all that America cares, Iran could cut off all the traffic through the Strait and it would have a minimal impact on the domestic economy, some minor logistical adjustments aside.

Nearly two thirds of the oil that travels through the Strait ships to Asia instead, and specifically to China, India, Japan and Korea, which are significantly more dependent on that oil to power their energy-hungry, export-oriented economies than other regions of the world.

China, notably, has been Iran’s tacit international ally. If Iran wants to interfere with the free navigation in its backyard and in so doing antagonise one of its few remaining backers, it should be left alone to do so.

These circumstances – the US doesn’t need the Gulf oil, China does – should convince the United States to stand back and not involve itself yet another time as the world sheriff to enforce the rules of international law and maintain the open international trading system. The rest of the world all too often free-rides on America’s good graces (not to mention its blood and treasure), while at the same time reserving the right to castigate the superpower for its interventionism. Why not let the world experience what it’s like without having the US solve all their problems (while getting all their blame)? Maybe the European Union or the United Nations can do something [canned laughter]. Or maybe the most affected Asian nations can try to solve their own oil supply problems. Good luck, lads.

June 19, 2019

Avoiding a hot war with Iran

Filed under: Economics, Middle East, Military, USA — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

Jay Currie responds to a recent article at ZeroHedge, on the US-Iran situation:

The game map for Gulf Strike, an early 1980s board wargame by Victory Games.
Image from https://pbem.brainiac.com/vg.htm

The article outlines all the ways that this approach to war with Iran would be folly and while I don’t necessarily agree with all the points made, the general point that massive force however strategically deployed will almost certainly produce results that the US and the rest of the world will not like one little bit. While you can bomb the Hell out of Iran, Iran has a number of retaliatory options ranging from the possibility of an EMP hit (they may have a rudimentary nuke) to closing the Strait of Hormuz to using Hezbollah sleeper cells in the US to hit critical infrastructure. While I have no doubt the US could beat Iran in a straight war, it would be long, bloody, politically suicidal for Trump and nasty for ordinary Americans.

Worse, it would be a strategic error. If the US leaves its current sanctions in place the Iranian economy will grind to something of a halt. Support for the current Iranian regime, already shakey, will decline. Yes, the current regime will continue with its provocations – I have no doubt it was Iranians who put holes in the sides of two tankers. But, so what?

Exciting as a hot war with Iran would be for assorted policy wonks, it would be an expensive exercise in futility compared to a longer term cold war with some clever extras.

First off, the Americans should make it very clear to the Iranians and the world that while they are committed to freedom of navigation, they are not interested in massive responses to minor incidents. If there is to be any response at all to the tanker mines (if that is what they were) it should be very local indeed. Find the boat in the video and sink it (or one very much like it – no need to be too picky).

Second, using US cyber assets – such as they are – it is time to see just how effectively infrastructure can be disrupted rather than destroyed. A sense of humour would be a huge asset here. Being able to cut into TV broadcasts is one thing, telling jokes at the Ayatollah’s expense is another.

Third, the Israelis did a very good business in the selective assasination of Iran’s nuclear scientists. A similar tactic against Iranian civil and military officials engaged in terrorism or attacks on shipping would be throughly demoralizing for the Iranian regime.

On point two, I’m reminded of a key scene in Robert Heinlein’s “If This Goes On—” (later published in expanded form in Revolt in 2100), where the United States has fallen under the control of religious fanatics (vaguely Christian, but carefully not identified with any then-current sect) so that “The Prophet” occupies the role of head of state and unquestioned all-powerful religious leader. The current Prophet performs a televised annual “miracle” where he is seen on-camera to transform into Nehemiah Scudder, the First Prophet, and give blessings and advice to the current Prophet and to the American people. The conspirators manage to take over the central TV feed and replace the “genuine” Prophet’s message with a skilled actor’s portrayal of Scudder calling America to arms to overthrow the false Prophet. This is the start of the armed rebellion against the Prophet. In the technology of the story, this required a strike team to attack and occupy the physical studio where the broadcast originated — literally a suicide mission. In our digital world, the “strike team” might never need to leave Fort Meade (or wherever the data centre might be)…

June 12, 2019

QotD: Militant Islam and the Western media

Filed under: Europe, Media, Quotations, Religion — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 01:00

Mark Steyn is a brave man. He doesn’t talk about his death threats or his security measures, but his public life speaks for itself. For the fifth anniversary of the Muhammad cartoon controversy, he stood on a stage in Copenhagen with the Danes who were not yet in hiding along with Lars Vilks, the Swedish cartoonist who had survived physical attacks, arson, at least three assassination plots, and an Al Qaeda hit list. Steyn returned for the tenth anniversary observance, a few months after the Charlie Hebdo massacre, but by then no cartoonists were left — they were all in hiding, including Vilks, after yet another attempt on his life.

“I’m always willing to stand with the guys in Denmark,” says Steyn. “But the reason all these left-wing Europeans end up on a stage with an eccentric right-wing Canadian like me is that no real A-list stars will agree to be there. At the tenth anniversary both the American State Department and the British Foreign Office even issued official warnings to their citizens to stay away from the Danish Parliament, where we were holding the ceremony. What kind of signal does that send? Why don’t the artists show up for these things? Why aren’t the movie stars there? When Theo Van Gogh was assassinated, no one at the Oscars had a word to say about it. They didn’t even put him in the obituary montage. And yet they congratulate themselves on their moral courage. George Clooney wears a Je suis Charlie Hebdo pin. Helen Mirren wears a brooch. But they were not with Charlie. Those guys died alone. This is gesture politics. No one would stand with them. I honour the genuine courage of Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Ayaan’s point is absolutely right — in the end you have to share the risk. Charlie Hebdo supported the Danish cartoonists, but the rest of the world didn’t. If every newspaper had published those cartoons, there would have been no point in killing anyone because there would have been too many people to kill. Instead, nobody stands with them, and so the small publication that does ends up massacred. The writer of the comic strip Doonesbury in America [Garry Trudeau] attacked the decision of PEN to honour Charlie Hebdo. Well, they were lying on the floor, bleeding and dying. I don’t think they noticed.”

The Danish cartoon controversy was actually the first moment the American press had been challenged by Islam and could do something in response — and their reaction was a spectacular failure of will and principle. In several countries around the world, it was actually against the law to publish the Danish cartoons, but many editors stepped up, published them anyway, and suffered the civil and criminal consequences. In the United States — where there was no such law — no major publication would print them.

Mark Steyn, interviewed by John Bloom, “Mark Steyn, Cole Porter and Free Speech”, Quadrant, 2017-05-11.

January 11, 2019

Jagmeet Singh’s plight

Filed under: Cancon, Media, Politics — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

Federal NDP leader Jagmeet Singh will finally get his chance to win a seat in Parliament on February 25 in the Burnaby South byelection. Things have not been going well for Singh since he was elected leader in 2017. At that time, I thought he would be a serious threat to Justin Trudeau’s popularity with the media (Justin’s teeny-bopper fan club) and allow the NDP to be taken more seriously as a potential government. That hasn’t happened and Singh’s media coverage has been much more critical than any NDP leader might have expected. Andrew Coyne explains:

It is safe to say Singh has not proved quite the rock star New Democrats hoped when they elected him leader in October 2017. Undertaker would be closer to the mark. While the party trundles along at a little under 17 per cent in the polls, about its historic average, Singh himself is in single digits, slightly behind Elizabeth May as Canadians’ choice for prime minister.

Singh’s trajectory is a cautionary tale on the importance of experience in politics. With just six years in the Ontario legislature, Singh was barely ready for the job of provincial leader, still less the much sharper scrutiny to which federal leaders are subject. It has showed.

He appears frequently to be poorly briefed, on one memorable occasion having to ask a member of caucus, in full view of the cameras, what the party position was on a particular issue. He badly mishandled what should have been a softball question on where he stood on Sikh terrorism, and alienated many in the party with his knee-jerk expulsion of Saskatchewan MP Erin Weir for what appeared to be no worse a crime than standing too close to women at parties.

The decision not to seek a seat in the House until now has robbed him of what visibility the leader of a third party can expect, though his manifest weakness as a communicator makes it debatable whether this is a plus or a minus. Fundraising has dried up. Party morale is in freefall. Caucus members speak openly, if not on the record, of their desire to be rid of him.

For the Liberals, on the other hand, Singh is the answer to all their prayers. The prime minister’s own approval ratings may have dropped precipitously, but as long as the NDP vote can be kept to current levels of support or less the Liberals are unlikely to lose. (The NDP’s average share of the popular vote when the Conservatives win: 19.5 per cent. When the Liberals win: 14.8 per cent.) And nothing so guarantees a calamitous NDP showing as Singh’s continued leadership.

Hence the curious unspoken subtext of the Burnaby South race, with Liberals more or less openly rooting for him to win — and New Democrats hardly less publicly hoping he loses.

December 28, 2018

“Local 473 of the Amalgamated Union of Lone Wolves” strikes again

Filed under: Africa, Europe, Media — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 03:00

Mark Steyn on the latest use of the ridiculous “lone wolves” excuse for terrorism:

A week before Christmas two young ladies from Scandinavia vacationing in Morocco – Louisa Vesterager Jespersen, 24, from Denmark, and Maren Ueland, 28, from Norway – were brutally stabbed and decapitated and then had the final moments of their lives uploaded as triumphal snuff videos to Facebook, Twitter, 4Chan and Reddit, the Four Horsemen of the Social-Media Apocalypse.

Fortunately, if you were thinking of getting a little nervous about your next holiday in the Maghreb, this bloody double-murder was the work of merely another “lone wolf”:

    In a press conference in Rabat yesterday, police and domestic intelligence spokesman Boubker Sabik labelled the suspects “lone wolves”…

Wait a minute: “lone wolves” plural? You mean, the wolf wasn’t lone? No, indeed:

    What ‘lone wolf’ gang did before Scandinavian tourist beheadings

There’s a whole gang of lone wolves?

    A motley crew of “lone wolves”, including two street vendors, a plumber and a carpenter, hunted backpackers to kill in the Moroccan mountains.

At last count, nineteen “lone wolves” have been arrested for the double-murder. That’s a rugby team plus bridge four of lone wolves. They’re the least lonesome lone wolves in town.

And are they really that “motley”? (See photo above for representative three-nineteenths of the lone wolf pack.)

For almost a decade, I have made mocking reference to Local 473 of the Amalgamated Union of Lone Wolves. But there’s no point to jokes, is there? Because, as absurd as they are, you wait a year or two and everybody’s doing them entirely straight-faced. The phrase “lone wolf” was created by the Pansy Media to ward off the suggestion that all these lone wolves might have something in common. Just as “all politics is local”, all jihad is lone. And, if you use the phrase often enough, it has such a pleasing anesthetizing effect you don’t even notice that you’re sitting there typing, perfectly seriously, about a gang of nineteen lone wolves.

Same number as the 9/11 hijackers, by coincidence. But we hadn’t yet taken refuge in such halfwit evasions.

Needless to say, the decapitation video went “viral”. Among those who were “spammed” with pictures of the severed heads were the mums of the girls, whose first Christmas without their beloved daughters was further enlivened by social-media enthusiasts posting snaps of the decapitated women to their mothers’ Facebook pages. But Big Social Brother knows its priorities: It was too busy banning Robert Spencer, whose Jihad Watch website is one of the few remaining outlets that doesn’t take refuge in platitudinous drivel about “lone wolves”.

November 13, 2018

A Kristallnacht album

Filed under: Germany, History, Religion — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

9 November, 1938. The Germans called it Kristallnacht, the “Night of Broken Glass”, Reichspogromnacht or simply Pogromnacht. Elisheva Avital tells the story of a photo album from that terrible event that came into her grandfather’s possession at some point during World War 2:

November 8, 2018

80 years on from Kristallnacht

Filed under: Germany, History, Religion — Tags: , , , , , , — Nicholas @ 03:00

Jerrold Sobel reminds us that 80 years ago today, the Nazis got their desired pretext to launch a domestic terror campaign against the Jews:

Destroyed shopfront of a Jewish business in Magdeburg, November 9, 1938.
Photo Bundesarchiv Bild 146-1979-046-19, via Wikimedia Commons.

Hitler came into power in 1933 with a plan to expand Germany’s rule and to completely annihilate world Jewry. During this time between his ascension and 1938, progressively strident anti-Semitic laws known as the Nuremberg Laws were enacted in which governmental policies regulated every aspect of Jewish life.

As conditions increasingly worsened for Jews, a Polish Jewish student, Herschel Grynszpan, whose family was being deported after a lifetime living in Germany, acted out against the Nazis and assassinated a German diplomat, Ernst vom Rath, on November 7, 1938. Hitler could not have been happier: it was the pretext he had been seeking to up the ante of anti-Semitism from “law-based” to mob violence.

By November 9, rioting was already in full swing in all quarters of the Reich, which by this time included Austria. Minister of propaganda Josef Goebbels encouraged Hitler to allow further punishment of the Jews through more “spontaneous demonstrations” of violence. According to Goebbels’s diary, Hitler responded: “[D]emonstrations should be allowed to continue. The police should not be withdrawn. For once the Jews should get the feel of popular anger.”

And did they ever. On the nights of November 9 and 10, 1938, unspeakable assaults upon Jewish women and men took place in Germany and Austria. When the majority of the mayhem finally ended on November 11, 30,000 Jewish men had been arrested and taken to concentration camps. Although figures vary, at least 100 fatalities were initially reported, the number growing into the hundreds due to subsequent mistreatment of those arrested.

Over 1,400 synagogues were burnt to the ground, and more than 7,500 businesses were likewise looted and torched. Jewish hospitals, homes, and schools fared no better. Those two nights of havoc would ignominiously become known as Kristallnacht: the night of the broken glass.

Soon, the world came to know the depredations wrought upon the Jewish people those nights. It was just the beginning, a precursor to the greatest ethnic mass murder of a people in the history of the world: the Holocaust.

November 5, 2018

Who Was Guy Fawkes? – Anglophenia Ep 18

Filed under: Britain, History, Religion — Tags: , , , , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Anglophenia
Published on 5 Nov 2014

Remember, remember the 5th of November: Guy Fawkes is one of Britain’s most infamous figures. Who’s the man behind the mask made famous by V For Vendetta and the protest group Anonymous? Siobhan Thompson explains.

June 27, 2018

Canada’s euphemistically named “High Risk Returnees”

Filed under: Cancon, Middle East, Politics, Religion — Tags: , , , , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

Judith Bergman on the Canadian government’s kid-gloves approach to dealing with Canadian citizens who return to Canada after volunteering to serve with terrorist organizations:

Canadians who go abroad to commit terrorism – predominantly jihadists, in other words – have a “right to return” according to government documents obtained by Global News. They not only have a right of return, but “… even if a Canadian engaged in terrorist activity abroad, the government must facilitate their return to Canada,” as one document says.

According to the government, there are still around 190 Canadian citizens volunteering as terrorists abroad. The majority are in Syria and Iraq, and 60 have returned. Police are reportedly expecting a new influx of returnees over the next couple of months.

The Canadian government is willing to go to great (and presumably costly) lengths to “facilitate” the return of Canadian jihadists, unlike the UK, for example, which has revoked the citizenship of ISIS fighters so they cannot return. The Canadian government has established a taskforce, the High Risk Returnee Interdepartmental Taskforce, that, according to government documents:

    “… allows us to collectively identify what measures can mitigate the threat these individuals may pose during their return to Canada. This could include sending officers overseas to collect evidence before they depart, or their detention by police upon arrival in Canada.”

Undercover officers may also be used “to engage with the HRT [High Risk Traveler] to collect evidence, or monitor them during their flight home.”

In the sanitizing Orwellian newspeak employed by the Canadian government, the terrorists are not jihadis who left Canada to commit the most heinous crimes, such as torture, rape and murder, while fighting for ISIS in Syria and Iraq, but “High Risk Travelers” and “High Risk Returnees”.

The government is fully aware of the security risk to which it is subjecting Canadians: According to the documents, “HRRs [High Risk Returnees] can pose a significant threat to the national security of Canada”. This fact raises the question of why the government of Canada is keen to facilitate these people’s “right of return” — when presumably the primary obligation of the government is to safeguard the security of law-abiding Canadian citizens.

May 28, 2018

Middle East: Palmyra Today – Afterword – Extra History

Filed under: History, Middle East, Religion — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Extra Credits
Published on 31 Oct 2015

Learn about Odenathus, King of Palmyra: http://bit.ly/1GDsDvz
____________

Palmyra is an embodiment of our shared past, but right now it’s under the control of ISIS. They have destroyed the antiquities that remind us of our shared past. We would like to take a moment to honor Dr. Khaled al-Assad, the museum director who gave his life rather than reveal the locations of more Palmyrene relics for ISIS to destroy.

May 24, 2018

The Hamas pay scale for freelance protest attendees

Filed under: Media, Middle East — Tags: , , , , , — Nicholas @ 03:00

Barbara Kay in the National Post:

Illuminating the validity of Col. Kemp’s statement, the Monday edition of the Wall Street Journal published an op ed by Israeli Brig. Ronen Manelis, spokesman for the IDF, titled “The Truth about Hamas and Israel.” In it Manelis reveals the depths of Hamas cynicism. Hamas provided free transportation to the security fence for all Gazans, including women and children. They were paid $14 a head or $100 per family to attend. The injured received $500. That’s pretty abominable. So’s this: Hamas gave everyone with a video camera VIP access to “the show,” and free wifi too to make sure no injury went unrecorded (both real and fake: one video shows an “injured” victim borne away on a stretcher hopping off completely unscathed when presumably out of camera range.)

According to Manelis, the “protest” theme was a complete fabrication: “The IDF had precise intelligence that the violent riots were masking a plan of mass infiltration into Israel in order to carry out a massacre against Israeli civilians.” Hamas operatives were dressed as civilians. On Facebook Hamas had posted maps for operatives indicating the fastest route from the border to nearby Israeli homes, schools and daycare centres. That’s abominable.

Manelis states that IDF soldiers “acted with courage and restraint, following strict rules of engagement to ensure minimum civilian injury and loss of life while still protecting the border.” The optics did not favour Israel, naturally, because the truth can’t make much headway when an enemy is prepared to put its own women and children in harm’s way, calculatedly using their bodies for propaganda purposes.

The IDF policy was indeed to warn first and shoot as a defensive action. Their first priority was, quite rightly, self-defence and defence of Israeli civilians. And as Manelis writes, “The soldiers of the IDF won this week by keeping Israeli families safe and by stopping Hamas from accomplishing its stated goals.”

But yeah, Hamas is winning the propaganda war, and the proof is that even a seasoned and objective journalist like Terry Glavin is so frustrated with the human cost of this reckless, feckless and essentially futile act of jihad, that he’s essentially asking Israel to find a way to stop it, as if there were some magical, casualty-free solution the IDF could employ, if only it chose to, in defending a border against a rabid mass of suicide-prone enemies.

Israel is constantly subjected to double standards — by the UN, by biased journalists, by anti-Semites on social media.

May 22, 2018

“[Hamas] knows there is a market for stories of Palestinian pain, and it is happy to flood that market”

Filed under: Media, Middle East — Tags: , , , , , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

In Spiked, Brendan O’Neill explains why Hamas is so willing to literally sacrifice Palestinian lives for media coverage:

A 2007 map of the West Bank and Gaza, showing Israeli settlements
Via Wikimedia Commons

It is becoming increasingly clear that Hamas pushes Gaza’s people into harm’s way because it knows their suffering will strike a chord across the West. Because it knows images of their hardship will be shared widely, wept over, and held up as proof of the allegedly uniquely barbarous nature of the Jewish State. Hamas knows there is a hunger among the West’s so-called progressives for evidence of Palestinian pain, and by extension of Israeli evil, and it is more than willing to feed this hunger.

The clashes at the Gaza border, in which more than 60 Palestinians were killed and hundreds injured, cannot be viewed in isolation from Western liberals’ peculiar and disproportionate obsession with Israel. It now seems undeniable that this was no instinctive, grassroots protest, but rather one that was carefully orchestrated by Hamas. As a New York Times reporter described it, after midday prayers clerics and leaders of Hamas ‘urged thousands of worshippers to join the protests’. And Hamas’s urging was littered with false claims. It told people ‘the fence had already been breached’ and Palestinians were ‘flooding into Israel’. This was a lie. A Washington Post reporter details how Hamas’s leaders told people to keep attacking the border fence because ‘Israeli soldiers [are] fleeing their positions’. In truth, as Hamas knew only too well, the IDF was reinforcing its positions.

Israel had made clear, including in an airdrop of leaflets, that anyone who sought to dismantle the fence in Gaza, the de facto border between this part of Palestine and Israel, risked coming to harm. And still Hamas encouraged the protesters to strike at the fence. Still it sought to swell the angry ranks by pleading with people to go from their mosques to the border. Why would it do this? Why would the governing party of a territory knowingly put that territory’s citizens into serious danger?

This is the rub. This is the central question. And the answer is a disturbing one: Hamas does this because it knows it will benefit politically and morally if Palestinians suffer. It knows there is a market for stories of Palestinian pain, and it is happy to flood that market.

Writing in the New York Times last week, Matti Friedman, a former AP desk editor in Jerusalem, touched upon this trade in Palestinian horror. He said that during his years reporting from the Middle East he even developed a certain respect for Hamas’s ‘keen ability to tell a story’. Hamas’s great insight was to recognise that the vast majority of the Western media wanted ‘a simple story about villains and victims’, says Friedman. Most Western reporters and commentators weren’t interested in nuance and certainly not in any reading of events that might seek to understand the Israeli position. No, they wanted stories of ‘dead human beings’, made dead by ‘unwarranted Israeli slaughter’, says Friedman.

May 19, 2018

“Don’t cry for Gaza. Gaza is a failed state and a failed society, marinated in hatred rather than aspiration”

Filed under: Media, Middle East, Military — Tags: , , , , , , — Nicholas @ 03:00

Barbara Kay on the impossible situation Israeli troops find themselves in, with the media acting as cheerleaders and active propagandists for the Palestinian terrorists:

Optics play a huge role in any asymmetric war Israel is involved in. The media tend to favour the “underdog,” and seize on every incident that casts Israel in an inhumane light. In one story about the death of a baby, allegedly at IDF hands, an image in the news showed a group of Palestinian women comforting a mother holding her shrouded infant. The message conveyed was that of a heartless machine that kills indiscriminately. A closer look at the story reveals that it was a combination of tear gas and a pre-existing heart condition that killed the baby, with no direct intention on the part of the IDF. Rather than reflexive condemnation of Israel, the takeaway from the story should be: who brings an infant to a battle site? Children are purposefully being used as human shields. This is a tactic routinely deployed by Hamas, but rarely called out for the despicable war crime it is.

Israel’s critics point to the mounting death toll of Gazans with indignation, failing to distinguish between actual civilians and Hamas terror foot soldiers. But even Hamas has stated that the overwhelming majority of fatalities were their own fighters. Israel is killing mostly bad actors, and even then, relatively few in number. No army in the world can do better than “mostly.” No other army in the world would act as prudently as the IDF. The IDF uses rubber bullets when it can, but they only work at short range. They are using tear gas when they can, but that’s no good when it’s windy. They have senior commanders stationed at every confrontation point. Every single hit is reportedly documented and investigated in Excel spreadsheets. The collateral damage of actual non-combatants is around 20 deaths or fewer. It doesn’t get more humane than that in war.

Some critics ask why they don’t just “arrest” the invaders. That’s not feasible. If soldiers came near the crowds, they would be swarmed and a bloodbath could ensue. They use live ammunition as a last resort, but use it they must, for they cannot allow hundreds or thousands of Gazans to infiltrate their territory and imperil adjoining Israeli communities.

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress