The farce of supporting the Slow Jihadists of Fatah, consisting of suitably be-suited grey-faced men (with emphasis on the plausible technocratic facade presented by Fayyad, whom a Muslim or Muslim-apologist reader makes so much of in order to “reward” it for something), infuriates. For what are we rewarding Fatah? For its leaders, from Arafat on down, being corrupt and building villas, and parcelling out all that Western Jizyah-aid to themselves and keeping it away from those in Hamas? For having been so easily defeated, and so publicly humiliated, by the far smaller forces of Hamas, while Fatah had three or four times as many men under arms in Gaza, and had been receiving all kinds of weaponry, and training (see General Dayton’s “mission”) from the Americans, but ran away anyway? They ran away because Hamas consists of True Believers, and Fatah of men on the make, men who are happy to work for Israel’s destruction, but have for now chosen to differ with Hamas on timing and tactics, in order to ensure that they keep receiving that Jizyah.
It is a terrible thing, in the ongoing war, to continue to pay, or to resume payment, to any Muslims, by any Infidels, of what is essentially a Jizyah — that is, a payment which the Muslim recipients believe is their due, and for which they show no gratitude. To stop it is to behave against the will of Allah, for Infidels should be paying these sums. When they stop, this is the stoppage of the transfer of billions of dollars from Infidel taxpayers to Muslim recipients who have long been used to being on sort of dole or another, whether it be the Jizyah from Christians and Jews extracted, once their lands were conquered, over the last 1350 years, or the vast wealth taken from the enslaved (or murdered by the tens of millions) Hindus in India, or the vast wealth received from Hindus and Buddhists elsewhere, in Central Asia, in the East Indies, everywhere that Islam managed to dominate and Muslims to rule. There is even the disguised Jizyah of the “bumiputra” system in Malaysia.
And in Indonesia, the Muslim-dominated governments have over the past few decades, since the days of the Dutch and of Sukarno (far more tolerant than Suharto and those following) passed many laws that discriminated against Christians and Buddhists, or even prevented the rebuilding of churches and temples by those defined as insufficiently “Indonesian” — that is, by the ethnic Chinese (both those born in China and those who have lived in Indonesia for generations). They have also placed many other constraints on the linguistic, cultural, and religious practices and freedoms of the ethnic, i.e., non-Muslim, Chinese. The humorful Abdurrahman Wahid finally removed that systematic legal discrimination only in 2000, when he was briefly in power. This is the same Wahid who, as his visit to Israel suggested, is an unusual Believer, if a Believer at all.
The war of self-defense against the Jihad, that is the war that must be fought by all Infidels, to withstand the state of permanent war that Islam mandates for all Muslims against all Infidels — a state of war if not always open warfare — should not be called a “war that will take generations” or even “a long war.” Both such descriptions miss the point. It is a war without end, but a war that can be made manageable, endurable, if the Infidels, or enough of them, recognize the nature of that war, the promptings of that war, the instruments of that war, and the weaknesses as well as the strengths, within the Camp of Islam, and the way to diminish those strengths and to exploit those weaknesses. Those strengths can be diminished chiefly by diminishing the use of oil, and therefore diminishing oil revenues on which Arabs and Muslims are so dependent for their Money Weapon. Chiefly to be recognized and exploited are the potential divisions and demoralization of the Camp of Islam arising from the sectarian divide, or Sunni-Shi’a, split, the ethnic divide, or Arab-non-Arab split, and the financial divide, or oil-rich/oil-poor Muslim split.
This is an entirely manageable situation, if the money weapon is diminished and if the rich Arabs are made responsible for sharing their wealth with the poor Arabs (while the Infidels lay down forever, and do not pick up again, not even for a minute, the Infidel Man’s Burden), and if campaigns of Da’wa are carefully monitored, carefully circumscribed, and countered by anti-Da’wa campaigns that will convey certain disturbing truths about Islam. These truths include the undeniable fact of Islam’s inculcated hatreds, the view of the world as being permanently divided between Believer and Infidel, with the latter having eventually to submit, as by right, to the former, as well as the habit of mental submission (which explains the absence of scientific investigation, as well as free and skeptical inquiry), and the severe limits placed on both artistic expression and human autonomy, including freedom of conscience, by the collectivist mind-forged-manacled, retrograde, doubly-totalitarian — in G. H. Bousquet’s phrase — Total System of Islam.
Such a “war” of self-defense can be won, in a sense, by keeping Islam from spreading, by keeping every potential division within the Camp of Islam simmering. The environmental crisis insures that billions of Westerners who might, for other reasons, be inattentive or indifferent to the menace of Islam, will nonetheless be working, for other reasons, toward a goal of reducing reliance on fossil fuels — that is, will be working toward a goal which, if achieved, can only weaken the Camp of Islam. That is a good thing. Fewer boots on the damn ground. More lightening raids, when called for, to damage or destroy major weaponry possessed by Muslim states or groups. An end to policies held in thrall to the desire not to offend but rather to placate Muslims. All that is to the good.
The rewarding of Fatah by the Bush Administration, the unseemly haste with which it has done so, disturbs and disgusts. Fatah is no better today than it was yesterday. Its ultimate goal remains the same. The fact that members of Hamas attacked Fatah positions and overran them does not imply any turn toward genuine and permanent acceptance of an Infidel state by Fatah, or for that matter by Muslim Arabs. No such acceptance is possible, and it is silly to work for it. The government should have taken advantage of the new situation to declare the “two-state solution” now unworkable. It should have hinted that “other things would have to be undertaken” — and then worked to make sure that the Infidels around the world understand that the war on Israel is a Lesser Jihad, and that any “peace” treaty that Muslims make with Infidel states is a treaty that they believe they not only may but are required to break whenever they, the Muslims, become strong enough (on the model of the Treaty of Al Hudaibiyya, which is the basis of Muslim treaty-making with non-Muslims). If this is understood, it will be clear also that the continued pressure on Israel to willingly give up more land, and control of the aquifers and the invasion routes, so that Israel, already the state whose people are most imperiled in the world today, lives permanently on the edge of a volcano, is both cruel and stupid.
We need Israel. We need Israel for geopolitical reasons. If the Israelis are not pushed back further, they can continue to be a strong ally, militarily, to Infidels, and by example, can continue to be a civilizing example to the Muslim locals. We need Israel for civilizational reasons. Christians and those who are part of Western civilization that is so connected to Christianity can only be guaranteed access to the Holy Land if Israel retains control. If the Muslims should ever triumphantly seize it, that would be the end of such access, save on the same terms of abasement that were once in place. We need Israel for moral reasons. After all that has happened to the most persecuted tribe in human history, the Jews, the damage to Western morality, and morale, if Israel were to be thrown to the Islamic wolves only because Western leaders were at a loss as to know how to handle Islam, and thought that appeasement, paid in the coin of Israeli lives and Israel’s existence, was the way to go, those still capable of thought would find all thought intolerable.
Fatah is not “better” than Hamas. Fatah is run by men whose shared goal is not to build a “Palestinian” state so much as it is to build a “state” that will be a way-station on the road to the necessary, inevitable destruction of another state, the intolerable, because Infidel, state of Israel. Fatah differs from Hamas only in two things. First, its leaders are more realistic, in its choice of tactics and its timing. Second, its leaders are eager to turn on the Jizyah tap, because they have lived all their lives not on the fruits of any hard work or entrepreneurial flair or anything like that, either on their own part or that of the so-called “Palestinian” people, but rather on the amounts that long ago Arafat and the PLO found they could squeeze first from other Arabs (such as the Saudis), and then, in the early 1990s, found they could extract much more easily, in much larger amounts, from Infidel governments that were so willing to believe, just because it was absurd, in the goodness of Arafat and the benign intentions of the peace-processing PLO.
Now, after that revealing display of the contempt felt for Fatah’s corruption, after the trashing even of “beloved” Chairman Arafat’s villa (one of so many he possessed, just like all those bank accounts, with those Infidel billions for “Palestinian” aid squirreled away, and now apparently not to be found, for only a few, such as Mahmoud Abbas, know where the money really went), would be the perfect time to do nothing. Do nothing to help out Fatah, and certainly not to turn on the aid tap which means turning on the renewed possibilities for corruption, and for Hamas to point to that corruption as justifying its approach. Do nothing. Let the “Palestinian” cause in all its hideousness and obvious disarray be put on display for Infidels. Then perhaps even those of the BBC and The Guardian and Le Monde will begin to realize that the war on Israel is not a “nationalist” struggle — as it has been carefully presented ever since the 1967 defeat brought home to the Muslim Arabs the need to re-package the Lesser Jihad against Israel, and to use against it the refusal of the Arabs to make a real peace, and therefore to use the renamed local Arabs, and those in other countries, as “Palestinians” rather than as “Arabs” or “Arab refugees.” That is what they had always been called, not least by Arab diplomats and leaders, since 1948.
Part of the waking-up to their own dismal reality and the menace of Islam requires that those in Western Europe realize that the war against Israel is based on Islam, the tenets of Islam, the attitudes and atmospherics of those raised up in societies suffused with Islam. Those attitudes have been adopted as well, even long internalized as part of the coping strategy of menaced dhimmis, by such “Palestinian” islamochristians as Hanan Ashrawi. At this point, despite the clear attacks on Christians in both Gaza and in the “West Bank” in such places as Bethlehem, its Christian population dimidiated in the little-more-than-a-decade of rule under the “Palestinian Authority.” See what foreign clergymen have reported about Bethlehem, see what the bravest Arab Christians have dared to testify to about their treatment at the hands of “fellow” but Muslim “Palestinians.”
If the war against Israel is seen, properly, as a Lesser Jihad, then all those wasted efforts at shuttle diplomacy, and negotiations, and peace-processing, and final photo ops in the Rose Garden while the photographers swarm and the phony handshakes and phony smiles are exchanged, will come to an end, and the true peacekeeper in the Middle East — that is the IDF, and its ability to prevent, or respond to, or punish, military aggression — will be recognized, along with the principle not of treaties (for there is no “pacta sunt servanda” in the Muslim world — treaties are not to be obeyed, but to be disobeyed, to be breached, by the Muslim side, whenever that becomes possible), but of Darura. That’s it. For the Jihad’s hideous goals remain the same.
This understanding of the Lesser Jihad, and how to limit its effect, is a necessary prelude or accompaniment to girding various national loins in preparation for a large-scale effort to halt and reverse the Muslim advance through demographic conquest in the lands of Western Europe.
The black-balaclav’ed Kalashnikov-clutching bezonians goosestepping in Ramallah, and called “Islamic Jihad” or “Al-Aksa Martyr’s Brigade” — two groups that will benefit, being tied to Fatah, by the turning on of the tap of European and American Jizyah — are little different. They are in fact no different from the black-balaclav’ed Kalashnikov-clutching bezonians goosestepping triumphantly in Gaza City.
They are peas in the same damn pod. They are like the Bloods and the Crips. If the Bloods were to promise to be just a little bit less gruesome in their behavior than the Crips, or perhaps agree to give up dealing in one particular drug, would that mean we should fall all over them and let incarcerated leaders of the Bloods out of jail (as one Israeli idiotically suggests should be done for Mahmoud Barghouti, currently serving time for five murders of Israeli civilians, in order to “strengthen Fatah”)? Should we then pile on the money, from everywhere, just to show how fond we are of this group of b-b K-c b’s as they goosestep about?
No. For god’s sake, no.