Israel, the ‘peace activists’ and ‘world fury’
Cranmer received an email this morning:
Dear Archbishop CranmerThere is no better assurance than a post on anything to do with Israel to bring out the extremists, the unthinking, the irrational and the obtuse. And doubtless the ensuing thread will not disappoint.
I am sure you have seen footage of the IDF taking over the aid convoys for Gaza. It can be no surprise. We should all know the Israelis will do anything to prolong the suffering of the Gazans. They are good at producing atrocities like this. After all, Israel is a racist apartheid state. My thoughts are, though, how are you going to defend your "plucky little Israel" after such sickening behaviour towards people delivering humanitarian aid?
Perhaps you would care to watch this You Tube clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xyIUju91DE Do you think Jesus would approve of the IDF's actions there?
(Name removed at the author's insistence [21 of them], because he now considers his communication to have been 'wrong, foolish, naive, badly written and a mistake', and His Grace has caused him 'a lot of stress' because he 'will face a lot of unwanted attention as a result if [his] name remains'. Being a sympathetic, understanding and compassionate sort of Christian, His Grace therefore grants the author anonymity).
In response to Mr X's final question, the answer is unequivocally ‘no’: Mohammed is the one who both used and condoned violence, death and destruction; Jesus refused to take up arms.
But the question is not one of speculating on what Jesus would have done, but on the example set to your co-religionists by Mohammed.
Whatever one’s knee-jerk reaction to Israel’s action against the flotilla of ships heading for Gaza, please watch the video embedded above. And then consider that these IDF soldiers were simply doing their job, obeying orders, and were instructed to use ‘minimum force’.
And then consider, as an armed soldier, faced with this degree of life-threatening violence and hostility from those who profess to be ‘peace activists’, whether or not you would use your weapon to defend yourself.
Consider that these 'aid workers' tried to stab and beat Israeli soldiers to death with iron bars. And then ask yourself if you would consider shooting the assassins and that such a response might be ‘proportionate’.
If your answer is ‘no’, then perhaps you are content to retaliate with a paintball gun and tell the IDF to martyr themselves for YHWH.
The reality is that the Mavi Marmara was on a mission, and that mission, according to Gaza’s Professor Abd al Fatah Nu’man, was to ‘awaken the nation’, to spread ‘the Islamic message worldwide: Islam is coming’ and that ‘these are people who wish to be martyred for the sake of Allah; as much as they want to reach Gaza’.
Further, according to Al Jazeera, these ‘peace activists’ were preparing for violence and described martyrdom as a ‘happy ending’.
If these were simply ‘peace activists’ concerned with nothing but loving their neighbour, then Jesus must have been a jihadist.
The so-called Gaza flotilla comprised eight ships and about 800 people. It was not assembled by peace-loving humanitarians primarily worried about relieving the suffering of Gaza residents; the people of Gaza already have access to food, medicine and other relief supplies provided by both Egypt and Israel. But both countries – jointly and with full military cooperation – have sought to limit the importing of military equipment or arms into Gaza which is compromising the security of both nations. In 2007, Israel and Egypt tightened the blockade of Gaza after the Islamist movement Hamas took power there. It is known by all countries in the region that ‘aid ships’ heading for Gaza have been a front for the importing of all manner of weapons and arms with which Hamas continue indiscriminately to murder and maim Israeli civilians irrespective of race or creed and to destabilise the Egyptian government.
The sea blockade along the Gaza strip is therefore considered necessary for the peace and security of the region.
Israel's actions in boarding the flotilla of ships bound for the Gaza Strip were entirely justified, and it is clear that numerous warnings were given which were ignored. Unfortunately, a legitimate military operation has become a political fiasco which only does further damage to the Israel’s tattered international reputation.
But the IDF are neither politicians nor PR professionals: in a war zone, they are not concerned with the BBC’s ‘world fury’.
Of course one should ‘deplore’ the loss of life, as David Cameron has done.
But it is naïve in the extreme to call on the Israeli government to lift their blockade on Gaza.
When Foreign Secretary William Hague calls for a ‘durable resolution to the Gaza crisis’, he appears not to realise that for the majority of Islamic countries this means a one-state solution called Palestine with the inconsequential slaughter of the Jews: the ‘two-state’ compromise has been on offer for over a decade and has been consistently rejected by both the PLO and Hamas. They want one state with Jerusalem as their capital.
Cranmer has already offered a mediated solution.
And if one requires evidence of the extremists, the unthinking, the irrational and the obtuse, consider that pro-Palestinian protestors in the UK have gathered in their thousands in London, Bristol and Manchester, where campaigners have threatened and intimidated BBC employees, targeted a BBC building, smashing doors and placing a Palestinian flag on the roof.
Anti-Israel, Hamas-supporting protestors targeting the pathologically anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian BBC?
Mr X, do you think Mohammed would approve of the actions of your co-religionists there?