Tags: Discussion | Readers' | Responses | 'American-Israeli | Military | Technology | War

Discussion of Readers' Responses to 'American-Israeli Military Technology at War Against Genetics'

Sunday, 19 May 2002 12:00 AM

I think it would be proper to begin with the following e-mail greeting I received on May 10:

Please note that Barry Farber, who, apart from everything else, knows 26 languages, is "alive and kicking" on his national radio show and also writes for NewsMax.com.

Before going to the responses, let me mention some relevant events that occurred after the two installments of the article had been posted on April 20 and May 2, respectively.

Every Tuesday, from 4 to 5 p.m., I speak on the Russian-language radio network, the New Century, and so I did on May 7. When the program was opened to calls from listeners, a caller said that I ignore the good side of Sharon's invasion of the West Bank: The suicidal terrorism in Israel had stopped.

I answered that Sharon also said so about 20 years ago, after his invasion of a contiguous country (Lebanon). He said it again before April 10. But after the suicidal terrorist attacks in Israel of April 10, 11 and 12, he said that the invasion of the West Bank had to continue, since more destruction of "the infrastructure of terror" was still necessary.

When I spoke on the New Century radio network on May 7, between 4 and 5 p.m., the listener was triumphant: no suicidal terrorist attacks since April 12! Sharon's invasion of the West Bank had succeeded!

There was no television screen in front of us, and no radio news program was on within our hearing. So we did not know that a suicidal terrorist was killing 15 and wounding 50 Israelis near Tel Aviv just as the New Century radio listener was explaining that Sharon's invasion of the West Bank had eliminated suicidal terrorist attacks in Israel.

On May 19, there was another suicidal terrorist attack in Israel, in Netanya.

A similar coincidence between the announcement that suicidal terrorism had been eliminated and a terrorist attack might have taken place 20 years ago. Indeed, this is what Douglas Brown e-mailed me on May 2:

Let us suppose that Sharon again invades Lebanon (as 20 years ago), the West Bank, Gaza, and all other contiguous countries and territories, and claims that his invasions have eliminated many, or at least some, suicidal terrorists in these countries and in these territories.

This would be a stupid assertion, because Sharon's military operations in the past 20 years could not possibly eliminate a single suicidal terrorist.

For in contrast to all kinds of gunmen who fought Sharon's tanks with their rifles, a suicidal terrorist before his terrorist attack is as undistinguishable from any civilian as is a common criminal before his commission of his crime. Indeed, it is more difficult to spot a suicidal terrorist than a common criminal.

Who could even imagine,

In Sharon's logic, if U.S. tanks had invaded the respective five states at the time Sharon invaded the West Bank, and destroyed "the infrastructure of terrorism," including all those who could supply suicidal terrorists with explosives or money or whatever, then there would have been no terrorism by Luke Helder, for there would have been no one to give him the explosives, or the money, or whatever he needed for his terrorism.

It is comical that whenever a native American has launched a terrorist attack in the past 10 years, no one has "linked" him with Khadafy, bin Laden, al-Qaeda and the Taliban, Arafat, Hussein, the KKK, the CIA, Hamas, or any other government or organization.

But whenever suicidal terrorists are Moslems, many Americans and Israelis are successfully persuaded until they are absolutely sure that these Moslem suicidal terrorists cannot act on their own! There must be a certain government or a well-known "terrorist organization" in charge of them, as of their subordinates, soldiers, agents, fulfilling orders and following instructions from above.

Hence, forward march for a "brilliant" war against Afghanistan, the West Bank, Gaza, Iraq and other such militarily defenseless countries (not, mind you, against China or Russia or even Pakistan with its nuclear weapons) instead of a boring and difficult daily struggle against terrorism, such as a three-mile-wide "separation zone" between Israel and its Islamic neighbors, a zone that should have been established 20 years ago.

As soon as the terrorist attack of May 7, 2002, occurred, Sharon declared it to be Arafat's handiwork. Of course! How can a Moslem suicidal terrorist act on his or her own? Where will he or she get the explosives, the money, the orders, the instructions?

Now Arafat's complicity, invented by Sharon on the spot, was to justify his invasion of Gaza as Arafat's domain. (Compare the invasion of Afghanistan to "capture or kill" bin Laden, who had boasted of his having "planned and carried out," from an Afghan cave, the hijacking and ramming of American passenger liners in New York and Washington, D.C., though he knew nothing of American passenger liners, New York or Washington.)

Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that, owing to Sharon's invasions, no suicidal terrorists can exist "in the contiguous territories." But the 19 terrorists of Sept. 11, 2001, had not come to the United States from any contiguous country. Indeed, 15 of them were Saudis. President Bush asked, "Why do they hate us?"

Having started his devastation of the West Bank, Sharon described in the New York Times of April 4 how he would love and be loved by the independent Palestinian state he was looking forward to as well as by "all Arab countries." Actually, he has enraged Moslems to such an extent that future suicidal terrorists from all over the Islamic world will be likely to explode themselves not only in the United States, but in Israel as well.

Imagine 15 Saudis (and not one Palestinian) as a totally independent team of suicidal terrorists killing not 4,000 Americans but 4,000 (or 40,000) Israelis. What will Sharon do if he survives? Move his tanks and bulldozers to devastate Saudi Arabia on the arbitrary false assumption that these 15 Saudi terrorists are guided by the government of Saudi Arabia? This would be comical if it were not so tragic for Israel.

Christopher Leadbeater e-mailed me on May 4:

My only comment is that Chris should have added "and for so many Israelis," for Sharon's "comical stunt" means a higher probability of suicidal terrorism in Israel from all over the Islamic world.

In the 1970s the editor of the prestigious American Jewish magazine "Commentary," in which I published, told me: "We do not use the words "Palestine" or "Palestinians." There are Moslems or Arabs, but there are no Palestinians. This is a political propaganda misnomer, like the word 'USSR,' which you never use."

So even the words "Palestine" and "Palestinians" were political taboos in an American magazine. Why? Suppose most "Palestinians" want the destruction of Israel (they probably do, after Sharon's devastation). Then the "Palestinian state" will become a state tool of the Islamic world for the destruction of Israel, apart from non-state suicidal terrorism.

The Likud Party was especially resolutely against an "independent Palestinian state." And here Sharon, contrary to his own Likud, hailed in the New York Times of April 4, 2002, the independent Palestinian state and explained how he would love it and be loved by it. Why this declaration of love?

Sharon's devastation of the West Bank was producing such a negative reaction all over the world that he had to show how humane, liberal, kind to the Palestinians he was. Thus the "independent Palestinian state" has become, owing to Sharon's devastation of the West Bank, a global political axiom, accepted as such by the United Nations and President Bush.

The Oslo agreements of 1993 had been unanimously accepted in the West and in Israel as the best proof of Arafat's ill will: Israel offered Arafat "everything," yet Arafat refused to make the deal.

On May 11, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres declared in a "Novak, Hunt & Shields" TV interview that the Oslo agreements had been mistaken since they had not offered an independent Palestinian state! Hence the entire Israeli foreign policy toward the Palestinians had been a 54-year-long mistake!

On the same day in Tel Aviv, a rally was held that looked grandiose even on television screens, with a sea of posters such as "Get out of Occupied Territories for Israel's Sake!"

When the suicidal terrorist attack of May 5 occurred in Israel, the initial reaction of Sharon was to "strike a triple blow in response to a blow of the enemy," to quote Stalin. But on May 12 Israeli Defense Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer said in a Wolf Blitzer TV interview that the Israeli troops had not been ordered to invade the Gaza Strip (a week after the terrorist attack of May 5). Nor did they move after the May 19 terrorist attack.

There seemed to be the realization that the more "brilliant wars" launched by Israel, like the invasion of the West Bank, retaliating with a "triple blow," the more the suicidal terrorism would grow, finally involving suicidal terrorists not only from Palestine but from all over the Islamic world.

On the same day the Tel Aviv rally was held, Sharon received what correspondents described as "a crushing blow" and "a slap in the face." His own party, the Likud, overwhelmingly voted against his proposal for an independent Palestinian state!

Sharon began to propose the independent Palestinian state to deflect the world's revulsion caused by his devastation of the West Bank, including Jenin. But that was

In my book and my articles I contend that when the Soviet dictatorship was in full vigor, the West feared Soviet military aid to all countries fighting the West. But after the Soviet dictatorship collapsed, Western foreign policy was reduced to reverence for China and attacks on militarily defenseless countries like Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan and the West Bank.

An illuminating episode: In 1999 NATO bombed Yugoslavia for 78 days because Slobodan Milosevic had allegedly killed 45 Albanian civilians (actually, these were fallen soldiers of the terrorist Kosovo Liberation Army, which dressed their corpses in civilian clothes). The number of Serbian and Albanian civilians killed by NATO bombs certainly ran into thousands, yet the NATO countries did not seem to care or even to notice.

But lo and behold: NATO bombs killed three (yes, three) Chinese in Yugoslavia. President Clinton could not stop apologizing to the Chinese rulers, assuring them that the NATO bombs had cut short the three infinitely valuable Chinese lives by sheer accident. It seemed that President Clinton would finally drop on his knees and try to kiss the Chinese rulers' boots, to be forgiven, but Western servility had not yet reached that stage.

The Bush administration has not been noticing the development of post-nuclear superweapons in China since 1986 (just as the Soviet development of them was ignored by the West until President Yeltsin in 1992 opened to international inspection the gigantic bioweapons project).

On the other hand, President Bush seems to be looking forward to an attack on Iraq to stop its development (if any) of "weapons of mass destruction" at the level of World War I.

In his long e-mail of May 3, A.J. Bima disagreed with my differentiation between technologically modern and hence militarily powerful countries, such as NATO countries (especially if combined), Israel, the former Soviet Russia, and last but not least China, and technologically backward and hence militarily defenseless territories, such as Afghanistan and the West Bank.

He colorfully described as a great victory the resistance, to the Soviet ground forces, of Afghanistan (that is, the 42 Afghan tribes, helped by many Moslems from many countries, by Pakistan, and by the CIA with its contribution of $5 billion). Mr. Bima does not take into account the following two facts:

So Israel, NATO, the United States, Russia or China was "forced" to "hunt down and kill said armed Palestinian fighters at the risk of Israeli [or NATO or U.S. or Russian or Chinese] lives," one of which was, indeed, lost.

It is true that an Islamic terrorist, on May 7, 2002, killed 15 Israeli civilians, as it is true that Luke Helder wounded six Americans. Helder did not become thereby a military equal of the United States any more than did any other American terrorist of the past decade. A terrorist is not a militarily powerful country or a combination of countries, such as NATO with its bombers that bombed Yugoslavia in 1999, or Israel with its 60-ton tanks that raided the West Bank in 2002.

Also, with the help of its nuclear weapons, Israel could have turned the West Bank into a radioactive desert, while China has been working on superweapons capable of destroying the West without the possibility of Western retaliation with nuclear weapons. This is overwhelming, or infinite, military superiority, and this is when the West (as well as the Islamic world or Russia) will be militarily defenseless.

But what is interesting in Mr. Bima's fantasy is his last line, declaring to me that the "Palestinians" have "legions [!] of brain damaged warriors, such as yourself."

In ancient Rome, this was called an argument

In my debates on radio and television programs I have noticed that born-and-bred Americans (even card-carrying members of the American Communist Party, against one of whom I had a public debate) rarely argue

Many denizens of Islamic tyrannies argue

PUBLISHERS: Should you be considering the publication of Lev Navrozov's book in progress, "Out of Moscow and Into New York: A Life in the Geostrategically Lobotomized West in the Age of Terrorism and Post-nuclear Superweapons" (please bear in mind that substantial advance is expected), the 27-page Proposal and the first 106-page section of the book can be mailed to you if you apply to me (


© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

1Like our page
I think it would be proper to begin with the following e-mail greeting I received on May 10: Please note that Barry Farber, who, apart from everything else, knows 26 languages, is "alive and kicking" on his national radio show and also writes for NewsMax.com. Before...
Sunday, 19 May 2002 12:00 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved