Guest Post by Alex Berenson
This is not a rhetorical question; its answer will determine whether peace between Jews and Palestinians is even theoretically possible
Remember Sept. 11?
I sure do. I apologize to those of you who’ve heard this story before, but I flew that morning, a 90-minute hop from North Carolina, where I’d been researching an article for the Times, to Newark. The flight was smooth and landed early and I was riding my motorcycle back to Manhattan on the New Jersey Turnpike when I noticed drivers pulling over.
What happened, I asked one. A plane hit the World Trade Center, he said. I looked up and saw the truth myself: in the distance, the twin towers were on fire, matches a quarter-mile high, sending huge plumes of smoke into the brilliant blue sky.
—
That fast the West was at war with Islam.
Only it wasn’t.
In the 22 years since Sept. 11, Western nations have faced a grand total of two major Muslim terror attacks – in London in 2005 and Paris in 2015. Even those, though gory, relied on only a handful of attackers.
The lack of Islamist terror has not resulted from the West begging for peace, either. Over the same two decades, the United States occupied two Muslim countries and used lethal force in many others.
Obviously, one reason for the relative peace is that the American ability to track communications networks helped us kill or capture jihadists around the globe, making it difficult for Islamist groups to stage complex plots.
But that isn’t the only reason, or even the main reason (ask Israel about the dangers of relying too heavily on technological superiority against a motivated enemy).
The main reason is that after a short flirtation, Muslims worldwide largely turned away from Osama bin Laden’s call for global jihad.
This rejection did not result from prescient American policy.
The American invasion of Iraq, always legally dubious, went south within months of Saddam Hussein’s ouster (I know, I was there). The violent insurgency that followed cost tens if not hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives and paved the way for a radical Islamist takeover of large swaths of Iraq and Syria which took a decade to undo.
—
(Remember the Green Zone? And the boot-wearing bureaucrats of the Coalition Provisional Authority? We tried to warn them. They didn’t listen.)
(SOURCE)
—
Our invasion of Afghanistan, while far more justifiable, lasted at least a decade too long. Along the way, it turned into the nation-building project that the Bush Administration had rejected at the outset. (For 200 years, the Pashtun in southern Afghanistan have just wanted the world to leave them alone. Maybe it’s time to stop arguing with them.)
But despite the best efforts of the world’s most cutthroat jihadis, from Osama bin Laden to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the American misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan did not stir the dar al-Islam to war with the dar al-harb.
That’s why this week’s flirtation from the usual progressive suspects with bin Laden’s letter justifying the Sept. 11 attacks is the definition of irony. Bin Laden claimed to speak for the ummah, the Muslim community, but the ummah never agreed.
So too with the Islamic State, aka ISIS, al Qaeda’s even crueler successor.
In 2015, as the Islamic State reached the peak of its power and controlled vast swaths of Syria and Iran, most Muslims supported the American-led effort to destroy it. 77 percent of Jordanians and more than half of Palestinians agreed the United States should take military action against ISIS, according to a Pew Research poll in December 2015.
Another poll one month earlier showed just how much Muslims worldwide hated the Islamic State:
—
In every way (except for its use of video and the Internet to broadcast its atrocities), the Islamic State profoundly rejected modern and Western life.
But its vision did not resonate with Muslims. They profoundly rejected the Islamic State, opening the way for the American-led campaign to destroy it. The Turks and Kurds do not agree on much – to say the least – but they both recognized that the Islamic State could not be allowed to survive.
—
Though it controls less territory, Hamas is more polished and better-armed than the Islamic State ever was. Its leaders live in splendor in Qatar rather than in squalor in the desert.
Still, the deliberate atrocities of Oct. 7, planned by Hamas’s military commanders and cheered by its political leaders, mark Hamas as the Islamic State’s true successor. The two groups have in common the use of terror for propaganda, a profound indifference to civilian life, and a reliance on the Quran’s bloodiest verses as a foundational text.
But they differ in their enemies.
The Islamic State intended a modern caliphate on Muslim lands and thus spent most of its time killing other Muslims. Hamas – for now and the foreseeable future – is focused on destroying Israel, from the (Jordan) River to the (Mediterranean) Sea and back again.
Hamas’s project has far more support among Muslims and Arabs. A large survey of Arab nations last year found overwhelming support for the Palestinian cause and opposition to the establishment of diplomatic ties with Israel.
How overwhelming? 84 percent of respondents said their countries should not establish relations with Israel; only 8 percent thought they should.
—
(Whole lotta red)
(SOURCE)
—
As I wrote earlier this week, the overwhelming rhetorical support for the Palestinian cause has not yet translated into action among either Muslim countries or their leaders – perhaps in part because Hamas overreached in its brutality on Oct. 7 and conjured memories of the Islamic State’s cruelties.
But the real question is whether in the next months and years Muslims will view Oct. 7, unlike Sept. 11, as a call to arms. Israel can defeat Hamas.
Beating back the fury of the entire Muslim world is another matter.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
I could spend hours dismantling this article, and writing a rebuttal, but I won’t.
Berenson is just another Jew masquerading as an investigative journalist, and spreading lie after lie. He’s completely full of shit, and he knows it.
I work for a large publisher, and we are currently working on a teaching reference book … ..we would love to have permission to publish your comment with references to this article in our book.
Your comment would head up the chapter:
“Logical fallacies online.”
TIA
Not so sure that Israel can beat Hamas, the creature Mossad, CIA and MI6 created to control the Palestinians. They created a Frankenstein and now are trying to kill it with lots of collateral damage.. Terrorists may not win but the target always loses.
The big concern should be that those 3 U.S. love boats (carriers) in the region are looking like a tasty piece of cake for a vengeful power. The USS Liberty comes to mind.
I condemn all violence, false flags especially so.
Benghazi was the fork in the road for me, when I realized that ‘our side’ created, funded, and guided the whole rise of terrorism. So that we would be able to have a war on terror to justify anything the borg wanted to accomplish. Covid even fits into this umbrella, climate change, destruction of the monetary system, etc.
The problem with this topic is manifold.
We are not allowed to discuss it unless we agree with the people who control the means of communication.
It appears to go back many, many generations, widely dividing the perceptions of the differing sides.
There is no chance for the public to participate in the debate, no referendums or plebiscites and the representatives that are elected, regardless of party are in lockstep on this issue.
In many countries there are actually laws forbidding discussion, use of words or symbols and prohibitions against personal decisions to boycott. In short the public may not have an opinion except that approved by government.
Without these means of working out disagreements and determining solutions you are left only with two choices- comply with the narrative set by one side and allow them to behave however they choose, or develop a concealed and long simmering desire to settle the score.
While this may, for a time at least, give the impression of a single, unified and monolithic approval of the side in control, it leads to an eventual reckoning that erupts and burns out of control in ways far worse than a simple debate or disagreement ever could.
I don’t see a peaceful resolution ever being possible in the scenario described above and while this strategy works for a time, it appears in the historic sense to be a failed approach that almost always yields a far less desirable result for everyone.
I believe that is why genocide is what’s for dinner.
“The problem with this topic is manifold.”
That is true, but the same can be said about most problems. This particular one is obvious in the fact that the Palestinians had their land stolen and forced by “Peace Treaties” brokered by US Presidents into walled in countries. How many times have you heard that it was nothing but a broken down desert and how the Israelis made it blossom, or it was the Jew’s originally, or because of Hitler, or half a dozen other excuses.
Most countries were colonized, and Muslim ones are no exception, so I can see their hatred can be justified. I don’t know of the authenticity of the recent Bin Ladin letter, but the part asking of how one could expect to kill citizens of a Muslim country and not expect to have theirs killed sounds logical to most people. Just human nature which sounds flippant but that is what it is, not minding one’s own business.
Though knowing there are several who despise a Biblical reference here is one anyway.
“Whoever meddles in a quarrel not his own is like one who takes a passing dog by the ears.”
Proverbs 26:17 ESV translation
“The problem with this ARTICLE is manifold.”
There. FIFY.
Once a jew, always a jew.
no…most such attacks implicating “muslim” terrorists are military based psy-ops – designed to sway public opinion against an invisible enemy, usually living in the region of the middle east, & to incense both muslim and christians sentiments — and which usually leads to ridiculous wars with purported tyrannical leaders or invisible terrorists…it’s all hogwash!—all of it…there is an agenda by those in the world cabalisitic (usually elitists) who want only to sell their high-dollar military hardware and diminish “societies” that they deem unworthy or in their way somehow…
Still, the deliberate atrocities of Oct. 7, planned by Hamas’s military commanders and cheered by its political leaders
Way to swallow the whole propaganda load in one go!
Go deep throat!
The MORE IMPORTANT question is how much HATE kikes have for humanity.
Remember September 11, the movie. Buy your tickets now.
Deep Shekel’s looting of the USSR is complete, now the Deep Shekels looting of America reaches peak ass rape as all the Evangitards go yaaayyy….bless demz who bless Israel. smh. …shikata ga nai
This Judeo-4Th Turning gonna’ be a bitch , especially when 31 BRIC members become 100 and they sanction the USA…Somalia here we come.
“Yeltsin hired Jeffrey Sachs, the head of the Harvard boys, in Moscow and Sachs, who nowadays pretends to be a critic of NATO, sold off the entire industry of Russia.
It was called a “shock therapy” but we prefer the term looting because this is what it was.
These massive privatizations transferred the wealth of Russia into the hands of foreign capitals in a process quite similar to the one occurred in Italy, where another economic hitman in the guise of Mario Draghi, former ECB president, sold off the Italian public industry to JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs.
Russia underwent a period of tremendous hardships and brutal economic crisis. Abortions skyrocketed and famine was spreading in the country like Maria Zakharova, the mouthpiece of the Russian foreign ministry, remembered in a debate hosted on the national Russian TV.”
https://www.theyeoftheneedle.com/the-resurrection-of-russia-and-the-multipolar-world-prevented-the-new-world-order/
Based upon Nazi propaganda.
How so? Because Osama Bin Ladin? Whatever. Muslims can indeed be dangerous, though. Towns in Michigan that became majority Muslim now make the residents listen to calls to prayer 5 times a day. I don’t want to live under Sharia law or Noahide law.
I did come across this and it made me laugh.
I recognized that cat from Jan 6 videos.
He works for the FBI.
“Our invasion of Afghanistan, while far more justifiable, lasted at least a decade too long.”
Yeah, that line stuck out for me also. Let’s go back to 2001 and a bit of buried history. Bush demanded that the Taliban turn over Bin Laden to the US. The Taliban asked for any evidence that Bin Laden was responsible. Bush said the US would give zero evidence, just turn over Bin Laden or else. (Note that the refusal to give any evidence took place at the same time that the US was claiming it had overwhelming evidence and had already shared it with other nations — but not with Afghanistan.) The Taliban responded that they absolutely did NOT agree with murder of innocent civilians, so if the US would show them any evidence of Bin Laden’s guilt they would immediately turn him over to the World Court at The Hague for trail. Again, Bush told them “either turn him over to the US, no evidence, no questions, no legal justification, no World Court — or we will wage war on your country.” US attacks started shortly afterward.
The US NEVER wanted Bin Laden. Bin Laden was just the patsy blamed for a false flag. They wanted a war. I remember reading reports in the Indian press during the summer of 2001. Indian officials had been warned that the US was planning a war in Afghanistan sometime that fall. I remember thinking, “Afghanistan?! Why?” The only big thing they had been in the news about was that the Taliban had been destroying Buddhist shrines and statues. “We’re going to war over some statues?!”
when the taliban came to power they also destroyed the opium crops
“How much do Muslims hate Israel?”
Not as much as I hate the jews.
When the article begins by promoting the LIES about 9-11 and muslims, I stop reading.
“How much do Muslims hate Israel“…probably a little more than I do…but it couldn’t hold a candle to my contempt for the Commie Democrats.*
I think the more appropriate question would be: How Much Do Muslims Hate Themselves?
After all, they’re the ones strapping suicide bombs on themselves and their children…not Israelis.