Thursday, May 17, 2007

All Jihad is Local

An Israeli doctor, responding to my post about Kassam rocket attacks on Sderot, recently sent us this email:

I am writing to you from Jerusalem, Israel.

I have a suggestion how to impress upon the readers of your blogs the essence of the complete insanity of the Israeli defense policy. Compare the distances from one point to another in two different reference systems.

In other words: take a map showing the distance from, for example, Gaza City or any population center in Gaza, to the City of Sderot.

Then take a map of where you live, with identical distances. Let’s say, for example, what if Brooklyn, New York was receiving twenty five Kassam missiles today from New Jersey, just across the Hudson River. How long would it take for the local police and Army to occupy and neutralize the attackers? Would the residents of Brooklyn resign themselves to receiving over three thousand missiles in the last year or two?

When the Arab terrorists in Bethlehem were shooting bullets at the Gilo section of Jerusalem two years ago or so, we could hear the small arms exchanges from our home. Only when the Army went in and “cleaned out” the terrorists, did “peace” return to Gilo.

The doctor has a good point. Israel is a small country, but it is also excruciatingly narrow. Go over to the Hatikvah site and scroll down to see the map — you can see how close the major population centers of Israel are to its borders. The Jewish state always has deadly enemies right next to its heart.

This map shows the situation in Sderot:

Kassam ranges

The primitive Kassam 1 rocket was unable to reach all the way from Beit Hanoun to Sderot, so the Palestinian entrepreneurs went to work and created the Kassam 2, which brought the town into range. Just imagine what would happen if the mujahideen in Gaza managed to obtain Katyushas from their cousins in Hizbullah.

So, taking the good doctor’s advice, I’m going to lay the same template over the landscape here in the USA.

And rather than tackle Brooklyn, Chicago, or L.A., I’m going to follow the time-honored dictum and write what I know.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Our local jihad scenario is set in the Piedmont area of Virginia, in the foothills of the Blue Ridge in Albemarle County. Let’s imagine that an alliance of halal hippies, horsy folks, and rednecks from the hollows near Afton and Mint Springs forms a group called the Western Albemarle Resistance Movement (WARM) to protest the high-handed rule of those snotty city folks in Charlottesville. The armed wing of this alliance then launches a series of guerilla attacks from the west into the outskirts of Charlottesville. After a cease-fire brokered by the UN, a “peace process” begins, with negotiations aimed at establishing a separate, sovereign country in Western Albemarle.

Unfortunately, the talks break down after the WARM delegation stalks out of the meeting, complaining angrily about “those Charlottesville apes and pigs”, and referring to the western suburbs controlled by the city as “Occupied Albermarle”.

Repeated suicide-bomber attacks into the fringes of Charlottesville cause the city authorities to build a high fence just beyond the Boar’s Head Inn to keep the jihadis out. Frustrated by their inability to attack their hated C-ville enemies, WARM imports Hamas technical advisors from Loudon County via Skyline Drive, who are able to design two crude homemade rockets, the Jouett 1 and the Jouett 2. The Jouett 1 has a range of 3 kilometers, while the more advanced Jouett 2 can reach a limit of 9 kilometers.

The militants of WARM have set up a rocket-launching site on the railroad bridge over US 250 in downtown Ivy. The map below shows the ranges available to them (pink for the Jouett 1, orange for the Jouett 2, and yellow for Katyushas, if they had any).

Charlottesville area

As you can see, they can only take out Farmington and its environs with the Jouett 1, but more than half of the city of Charlottesville lies within range of the Jouett 2. Heck, if they could somehow make contact with their Hizbullah brothers-in-jihad and smuggle in Katyushas, they could drop the crystal chandelier into the middle of the great dining table at the Keswick Country Club!
- - - - - - - - - -
Charlottesville, Va.

Observatory Mountain blocks line-of-sight for most targets in town, but with enough infiltrators among the clerical and services staff at UVA, they could correct the range and hit a variety of high-value targets.

Stonewall JacksonCourt Square is at the edge of their range, so the statue of Stonewall Jackson would be difficult to topple, but they could level the Amtrak Station and stop rail traffic going northeast and southeast out of the city. Collapsing the bridge over Emmet Street at the bypass would throw the entire area into gridlock. A Jouett 2 dropped into Barracks Road Shopping Center during, say, the last Saturday before Christmas would cause numerous casualties and spread mass terror throughout the metropolitan area. Fashion Square Mall is also within reach, and hitting it at the same time would be immensely effective.

U-Hall Imagine the roof of U-Hall collapsing during a Friday night basketball game, with the huge steel girders dropping onto the screaming spectators. During football season Scott Stadium would be another tempting target, given the possibility of the collateral damage when people are trampled to death as the crowds mob the exits.

The RotundaFinally, to sow destruction and terror at the symbolic heart of Charlottesville, bringing down the Rotunda onto the tourists would be the coup de grace. The flames over the treetops would be visible from the Downtown Mall, and the Lawn would be turned into a triage area for casualties, with fire engines and ambulances parked on the brick sidewalks. Hurriedly improvised basement shelters would become the place where students, tourists and townspeople meet.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

If all this happened, do you think the City Council would heed the UN’s call for convening new talks with WARM in order to restart the “Roadmap for Peace”? Do you think the mayor would accept the former President of France as a neutral broker in the “peace” negotiations? Do you think the city would cede the Boar’s Head to the insurgents as a “gesture of good faith”?

How long do you think it would be before the City of Charlottesville dusted off its assets at the National Guard Armory and sent an armored column down 250 West, maybe with close aerial support from a Pegasus helicopter hastily outfitted with air-to-surface missiles?

How long would it be until the town of Ivy was turned into a field of smoldering rubble?

How long would it take the good folk of Charlottesville to teach those inbred, slope-browed, slack-jawed, gap-toothed, sister-marrying hillbillies a LESSON?

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

If you live close enough to Charlottesville to imagine the above scenario, then you’ve got a feel for the insanity that has been imposed on the state of Israel for the last forty years, and for the criminal irresponsibility of the Israeli government in allowing the situation to continue this way, year after year.

If you live in a different part of the country, and keep a blog, I invite you to make up your own Local Jihad scenario and then send me the link to the post.

We’re bringing it all back home.


mikej said...

If there has ever been a redneck suicide bomber, I've never heard of him. As far as I know suicide bombers are all Muslims. If Americans had recently displaced a large Muslim population, shahids from West Albemarle might inded wage jihad against Charlottesville. But obviously, there were no Muslims here when Americans arrived, so the comparison is silly.

Israelis have recently displaced a large Muslim population, which is naturally waging war against them. The Muslims were there when the Israelis arrived, so they've made their own bed and now must lie in it. I'm puzzled as to why anybody thinks that this is any of our business.

I'm much more concerned about the millions of Muslims running loose in America. I've never understood why any Muslims were ever admitted to this country. I'm unable to understand why we continue to admit thousands of Muslims every year. We'll probably admit thousands of "Iraqi refugees," some of whom will repay our generosity by blowing us up. I've never understood why our government has chosen to play this game of Russian roulette.

camry said...

Great post, made sign up for blogger just to thank you for this! I think the reason why we examine Israel's position so much is just to reveal how crazy some Muslims can be.

We need to create quotas in this country for Muslims (obviously not all are bad, but still there is a good amount that are "dangerous").

ziontruth said...


In other words: we deserve it all. The suicide bombers going off in shopping centers in our cities (G-d forbid)--we had it coming. Yeah. And the Danish cartoonists had it coming too. The Iranian Hostage Crisis was because of the deposition of Mossadegh in 1953 (that's what Ron Paul said just yesterday). And don't forget those Crusades. It's all because of those Crusades.

Historical accuracy: when the first Zionist settlers arrived in the late 19th century, the Muslims were there in very small numbers; the land was as Mark Twain described it. Not a land without people, but without a nation certainly. The influx of Muslims into the Land of Israel came in the early 20th century, when Muslims from Egypt and Jordan saw the land was beginning to change away from Mark Twain's description. In any case, even if the land had been densely populated in the late 19th century, it'd still be ours, as per G-d's promise; when we Jews took it for the first time, more than 3,000 years ago, it was densely populated, but that didn't matter--G-d told us (Numbers 33:50-53) to drive the indigenous child-sacrificers away. On that last point, not a lot has changed in three millennia...

As for Muslims in America, your solution is the same as ours: away they must go, because they think their hosts are actually their guests.

History Snark said...

Love the main post here. It puts it all into perspective. Somebody once pointed out that, when the Palestinians are really fired up and strapping on their vests in large numbers, the casualties in Israel are, relatively speaking, equivalent to a 9-11 attack EVERY WEEK.

All that being said, I think the comments show the inherent problems. Both sides claim that they were there first, and have the best claim.

The problem is, there's no such thing as "the best claim". In the real world, it comes down to who can hold onto it. England for instance is "Anglo-Saxon", and the Celts have been pushed back into the fringes. The US was taken from the Indian tribes, many of whom had dispossessed another tribe. And so on.

If you can take it and hold it, it's yours. That's the way the real world works, and has worked for millenia.

Unless you're a Jew. Then if you can take it and hold it, you're a thief and a criminal, repressing the "rightful" inhabitants.

Somebody pointed out to me years ago that the Palestinians are the only ethnic group that is defined by the UN as "refugees" even when most of the people have never been to their "homeland".

It's been 60 years since Israel declared itself, and the Arabs- oops, Palestinians-(since they decided to adopt that name in the '60s)-living in the rest of the Arab world are still called "refugees", even though the overwhelming majority are under 20 years old.

I think it's time that people get over the fact that the Israelis are there. Like it or not, they're gonna have to be removed in a fight to the death.

At that point, history will judge that they couldn't hold their land, just like the American Indians.

Hopefully they'll survive someplace else.

comrade_tovarich said...

My understanding is that suicide bombing was first employed by the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, although certain Muslims adopted, nurtured, and cherished it to the point where it has become part and parcel of Islam.

ziontruth said...


Your justification is a secular, "law-of-the-jungle" type of defense of the right of people to hold their lands. It means land rights belong to those who have the force to take and uphold them. While adequate if your purpose is only to describe reality, as a moral precept this is abhorrent. "Might makes right" is the tenet of the bully.

The Jews were forced out of the Land of Israel by the harsh circumstances and heavy hand of the Romans, and then the Byzantines, after 135 CE. This never meant we had lost the right to the land. "Your lease is expired!" is the battle-cry of the anti-Zionists (see any Israel/"Palestine" diary on Daily Kos). This is no human matter; the core here is the belief that this land is a divine promise, for eternity. Therefore, saying "Hopefully they'll survive someplace else" is a misconception as well, because it assumes some place other than the Land of Israel is our home. This isn't how Judaism believes. Even 2,000 years outside the Land of Israel is temporary, a state of being guests in a foreign land.

I wanted to add some forgotten points in my response to Gringo Malo:

He says, "I'm puzzled as to why anybody thinks that this is any of our business". I must admit I'm puzzled too; yet there are many (again, check out any I/"P" diary on Daily Kos) who think it is; who think the USA's support of Israel is the one chief root cause of Muslim rage toward the USA, and that "the road to reconciliation with the Muslims runs through Jerusalem", i.e. through forcing Israel to capitulate to all their demands, including the "Palestinian Right of Return" (G-d forbid). Frankly, I often wish the world, including the USA, really did come to the conclusion it's none of their business, leaving us free to solve this problem without having to worry about world opinion. It's fear of what the world will say that's keeping our weak, pusillanimous leaders from teaching the Gazans why it isn't in their best interests to launch Kassam rockets at Sderot, just as it made Israel back off before having defeated Hizbullah last year.

In a different sense, the sense conveyed by the Baron in his point, this is your business, entirely: the jihad is by no means confined to Israel. Israel just precedes in giving the other non-Muslim states the warning: what happens to us now is what will happen to you some years from now. That the scene depicted by the Baron is imaginary is only because there aren't enough Muslims concentrated in one area and having a free hand to arm themselves and use those arms (but see "Islamberg"); unless nipped in the bud by anti-dhimmi measures, it's only a matter of time until the Baron's scene turns real. But people insist on not learning from us, on not taking advantage of us, instead regarding us as the cause of it. A classic case of shooting the messenger.

There is no prospect for permanent peace, neither for Israel nor for Thailand nor for Serbia nor for India nor for France nor for the United States of America, except by driving all the Muslims out, expelling them for the irredentist agents of empire that they are. The hourglass of the ability to stay soft and gentle and civilized is running out fast.

R. Hartman said...

As an Ayn Rand Institute's commentary correctly puts it: "Those attacking Israel [...] are terrorist organizations, dictatorships and theocracies, which deliberately violate the rights of their own subjects. Even if these organizations and regimes had never initiated force against Israel, they still would have no moral right to exist."

I think al Arab actions in the area stem from this, and it leaves little else to be said.

mikej said...


Kick me off my land and I'll do my best to kill you, though I won't intentionally commit suicide in the process. Surely you can understand why the Muslims want to kill you. However many Muslims there were in Palestine when the first Zionist settlers arrived, you must have driven off a sufficient number to cause the problems you have today.

I don't set much store by land claims based on the Bible. Anybody can invent a religious justification for taking someone else's land. Following your line of reasoning, we Americans might be forced to return our country to the Indians, who undoubtedly believe that the Great Spirit promised it to them. I consider this a reductio ad absurdum.

Force, and force alone, determines which group occupies what land, as gun-totin-wacko says, so I'm pretty much uninterested in your historical grievances as well. Everybody's got some sort of historical grievance.

I'm puzzled as to why my government, in chosing to involve itself in a foreign war that is none of its business, chose the side that has no petroleum to sell us. I'm even more puzzled as to why my government plays Russian roulette by admitting Muslims to America after making enemies of them by siding with Israel. I'd certainly like to remove Muslims from the United States, but if you want to remove them from your part of the world, then that's your problem. As things are, the government requires me to pay taxes to support Israel while it allows America to be overrun. It makes no sense.

None of the preceding should be construed as softness of Muslims. As I said, I would prefer to remove them, all of them, from the United States. In Iraq, if I had any say in the matter, I would abandon the government's current silly pretenses and simply seize the oil fields, using whatever force was necessary to that end. But jihad against Israel is not necessarily jihad against the United States. The American government should adopt an America First policy and abandon its present Israel First policy.

ziontruth said...

Gringo Malo,

You said: "Kick me off my land and I'll do my best to kill you, though I won't intentionally commit suicide in the process. Surely you can understand why the Muslims want to kill you." In other words: you both think that the land doesn't belong to the Jews, and show understanding for the Muslims killing of the Jews of Israel. It's settled, then: you're my enemy.

People may think my focus on Islam is primary. That is not so: my focus on Islam is a secondary issue, while my primary drive is my belief in the Torah, the Word of HaShem. You can be the most vehement in hatred of Islam, but if you say the Land of Israel doesn't belong to the Jews and show understanding to the Muslims' "resistance against occupation", then I don't care about your hatred of Islam. I don't want you as an ally. You're like the commenter Amsterdamsky on The Brussels Journal, who sounds like people here on most issues, but then, when Fjordman puts up a post voicing support for Israel, he suddenly writes like someone who just popped in from Daily Kos.

The Torah says the Land of Israel belongs to the Jews. There is no way I can compromise on that, any more than I can eat non-kosher food. Anyone who says the Land of Israel does not belong to the Jews and expresses understanding for the Muslims who fight us there is my enemy, no matter his stance on other issues.

You say America should abandon Israel? All right--but abandoning Israel completely, as in "letting Israel take the necessary steps unrestrained". For a lot of people, "abandoning Israel" means forcing it to make land concessions to the Pretendestinians. This isn't really abandoning Israel. Leave us alone if you wish, but really alone--leave us to inhabit our one and only land in this world, the Land of Israel, without restriction.

I'm now going for preparations for the Sabbath, and then about 25 hours of technological silence, so don't take my lack of response later as having backed out. Goodbye.

History Snark said...

Zionist, You are correct: My statements are strictly based in "reality". I understand your viewpoint, but not being Jewish, I don't necessarily agree with you.

It would be nice if everyone could just get along, but they can't. Especially in this instance. I believe Israel has made far more attempts to make peace than their foes.

I recently was shocked to hear from a good friend, who taught in the Mideast for several years. He essentially blamed all our problems with Muslims on Israel, and told me that the Arabs used to love us, and now hate us, and why do I suppose that is?

Anyhow, I also have to get going. I won't be back for a couple days myself. But I'll try and check this thread later.

David M said...

Trackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 05/18/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention.

Oran Woody said...

Here in the U.S., we have so much space that it is difficult to compare the threat to that of the Israeli population. Compare this problem that way. What is the percentage of Israel's population that is within range of the rockets and show that as a circle for the U.S.
I'll make an uneducated guess here, but I'd suspect that a greater percentage of Israelis are now under the gun than the percentage of British Islanders who were within the range of the Germans during the Blitz.

Shrimpville said...

Guys, stop with the Euro-centric misconception of Israel.

Only half of the jews in Israel are from the West. The other half is from the arab world (Myself from Iraque).
When my grandparents were young, all the arab world was not really divided into nations as it is now, in the mentality of the people, it was one arab ummah.
When Israel was formed then the muslim friends of my family told them not to go there, because jews are not supposed to have an independent country like muslims are allowed to.
--> This is the essence of the whole thing. under any other circumstances you would consider it as a population exchange. more jews from the arab world left it than arabs (who later created the term palestinians) that left palestine.
So what is so horrible? the thing that was horrible is that those jews, like my family in Iraque, who were their accountants, doctors and academia, but at the same time were controlled by them, suddenly took independence.
The dhimmis suddenly thought they have rights. what would be next? the assyrians and the lebanon christians and druze might join?
the kurds might break out of the arab oppression?
This is why Israel must be destroyd, so the Ummah may not be threatened.

And the Ummah is threatened.
Turkey is secular, and look at the anti-religious demonstrations there this month. Also look at the EU which condemns the seculars in Turkey and supports the Islamic government - this should have been covered in this blog for the readers, as it is so crucial for the understanding of what the EU is!
The kurds will have independence and can become secular like the majority of turks, but the EU is the power which would stop it and protect Islamo-fascists, and noone asks why?
wake up, guys.