Exclusive: The “Flotilla of Ideology”

by D.L. ADAMS, DR. BILL WARNER June 2, 2010
Despite endless calls to desist from the post-modern international community, Israel continues to cause consternation and confusion by defending itself. Most recently, after numerous calls to turn back from the blockaded Gaza coast and assurances that the “peace flotilla” of “peace activists” would not be allowed to dock, the Israeli Navy landed commandos on the Turkish ferry Mavi Marmara, one of the main vessels in the so-called "aid flotilla". Upon boarding, the Israeli commandos were immediately attacked by the "peace activists" aboard the vessel.
According to reports in Haaretz (May 31, 2010), Israel's left-leaning newspaper, the naval commandos were viciously assaulted as they arrived on the final ship from helicopters, prompting live fire self-defense measures from the Israeli soldiers.
“One of the commandos said some of the soldiers were stripped of their helmets and equipment and several were tossed from the top deck to a lower deck, forcing them to jump into the sea to escape.
‘They jumped me, hit me with clubs and bottles and stole my rifle,’ one of the commandos said. ‘I pulled out my pistol and had no choice but to shoot.’” 
In our post-modern world in which Israeli self-defense is viewed as aggression and in which the existence of Israel itself is considered sufficient provocation by many for violence, the self-defense response of the Israeli commandos is now widely condemned. Without the false filters of post-modernism and equivalence, however, the actions of the Israeli forces in defending themselves were appropriate and necessary. (Video of “peace” activists attacking Israeli commandos.)
Soldiers of every nation have a right to defend themselves when attacked; every nation has a right to defend itself when attacked - except, in our confused world, Israel. The standard of non-response to aggression, non-response to border breaches, non-response to rocket fire and terrorism, non-response to attempts to break naval blockades is applied to one country on this planet only, Israel.
Al-Jazeera TV documented the atmosphere on the "Peace Flotilla" on Monday, as the passengers on at least one ship were shouting chants of “Khaybar”. The mood onboard the "peace ships" was nothing short of preparation for war and murder.
 ‘[Remember] Khaybar, Khaybar, oh Jews! The army of Muhammad will return!’
Palestinian Media Watch, May 31, 2010.
Here is the core tragedy—there appears to be no one in power in America or Israel who understands what this war cry means. It goes to the heart of the matter—the doctrine of political Islam that comes from the Koran and Mohammed. It was 1400 years ago that Mohammed crushed the last of the free Jews in Arabia at Khaybar. It was 1400 years ago that Muslims declared war on the Jews and enslaved, exiled, murdered, raped and ethnically cleansed them. The first judenrein territory was Khaybar.
The real offense of Israel is that it is not a dhimmi state, subservient to Islam. The Jews’ very existence in the middle of the Islamic world is the core of the problem.
Although Islam has a special hatred of the Jews, based upon Mohammed’s doctrine, if every Jew in Israel were replaced by a Hindu, nothing would change. How do we know this? Look to Kashmir in India where the same battle between political Islam and kafirs (non-Muslims) is being waged.
The word Khaybar goes to the DNA of the war between Islam and all kafirs, particularly the Jews. The outcome, based upon previous reruns, is that bluster and defense will go back and forth and the real reason for the war will go unnoticed, except for all Muslims. The reason that 1.5 billion Muslims can keep a secret is that they can yell it at the top of their voices and no one can hear.
There are now the unsurprising calls for "inquiries" and "explanations" and threats of retaliation and "consequences" from a number of countries against the state of Israel. This event is now the newest flash point in the demonization of Israel. But where will this event lead? Perhaps the Islamist forces have overplayed their hand, and the truth of the matter will sway more levelheaded observers.
Among the passengers on the flotilla it is possible that some were unaware of the violent purposes of some of their fellow travelers. If there were such people of good will on those vessels will they speak the truth of what they saw? Such people of good will, if there were any on the “peace flotilla”, may now have their own positions against Israel challenged by the violence that their fellows have caused - and they may suddenly realize that they have been played. This is unlikely, of course, but it is possible never the less.
Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, explained that the soldiers defended themselves.
Netanyahu says Israel wanted to check the cargo to ensure it contained no weapons. He says this was done successfully with five ships, but the sixth did not cooperate. He says hundreds of people on board that ship beat, clubbed and stabbed soldiers, and there was a report of gunfire. He says that forced soldiers to attack.
The evidence at this early stage is overwhelming that the soldiers were attacked without provocation and fired in self-defense. It also shows unequivocally that the "peace" flotilla was nothing of the sort.
Every state has the right to self-defense; this is the foundation of international law and the concept of the nation-state; Israel alone has long been the exception to this rule. This event is so clear that perhaps some who otherwise would be fooled by the propaganda and falsehoods from post-modernists and Islam apologists may see the truth. The use of anti-Jewish Islamic war cries aboard the vessels, and the attack on the Israeli commandos shows that Israel's insistence that the flotilla turn back was justified.
When does moral and ethical confusion get overturned and clarity return? It can only return when context is understood, and when events are seen as they occur without the cloudy filters of post-modernist equivalence and anti-intellectualism interfering. We must understand the context of this struggle between Israel and the Arab/Islamic world and see it in the Islamic doctrinal context in which it truly originates; there is no compromise that Israel can make with the Islamic world short of non-existence.
The post-modernists of the West, ignorant of Islamic doctrine and its profound importance in the Islamic world are more often than not confounded by the entire situation because they know nothing of its true character and foundations. The Khaybar reference is specific to Islamic doctrine and the Sunna of Mohammed. The conflict in Israel is not political or based on land issues; it is entirely founded on Islamic doctrine and the importance of this doctrine in the Islamic world.
The conflict has never been resolved between Israel and the Palestinians because the nature of the conflict itself has always been mischaracterized by those in the West who claim to want to assist in bringing peace to the region. History shows that peacemakers who know nothing of the nature of the conflict they are trying to resolve can be nothing but failures.
In our world of moral and ethical confusion, in which peace is war and war is peace, rarely has such a clear illustration of falsehood, confusion, and the truth been on display.
Dr. Bill Warner is founder and director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam, and noted scholar. Dr. Warner’s website is PoliticalIslam.com. D. L. Adams is an analyst and historian. His writing has appeared in Family Security Matters, American Thinker, New English Review, and elsewhere. Mr. Adams’ blog is ahollowreveille.com.

blog comments powered by Disqus

FSM Archives

10 year FSM Anniversary