The unchecked Dagmoush influence is a reflection not only of an enduring instability in Gaza, but also of early shortcomings in the new Palestinian coalition government, which has been unwilling or unable to handle this challenge to its power.
"If there is a way to describe Gaza, it is Mumtaz Dagmoush," said a veteran Israeli security official who has tracked the rise of the family. He spoke about the issue on the condition of anonymity because of the classified nature of his work. "It's clan, it's business, it's terrorism, it's international terrorism and it's a place where everybody has lost hope that the government is going to do anything about it."
Members of the new Palestinian Authority recognize the threat. But they're reluctant to challenge the family's power, which often trumps all other Palestinian loyalties.
"If I try to arrest someone I will end up in a confrontation with the whole society," said Ali Sartawi, a member of the Muslim fundamentalist movement Hamas and the Palestinian Authority's new justice minister. "An agreement with the families is very important for establishing law and order. They have to be partners. Confrontation is not an option."
The Dagmoush family has tried to stay out of the public eye. But with pressure on the clan increasing, one of its leaders went public this week to deny any role in the kidnappings. Talat Dagmoush told McClatchy Newspapers that his family is willing to cooperate with the new government only if it demonstrates that it's willing to crack down on all crime in Gaza, not just on one group.
Stanley Kurtz has analyzed this phenomenon in detail at National Review Online, here, here, here, and here.
Go now and read them all.
1 comment:
great post!
this is why i think that we must open up another front in the cou8nter-attack against jihadism:
the social front - and we don't need the military on this front, either.
on this front we attack the anti-humanist/anti-modern social structures which promote jihado-terror, xenophobia and the rest of the horrific aspects of militant islam.
we do this by outlawing endogamy, misogyny and polygamy.
we demand that states which permits these practices to cease permitting them they way we demanded the end to the slave trade.
these in-bred xenophobic misogynistic clans are the incubators of jihadists: this is where they learn that it's okay to murder your daughter/sister for violating "family honor" - and if you can regain honor by murdering your mother or sister or daughter then of course committing genocide against infidels is as easy as pie.
the "international community" could do this without the force of arms: the un and the wto and the imf and world bank could ostracize all states which permit endogamy, misogyny and polygamy. none would be permitted loans, aid, trade rights or credits.
none could survive long without them.
these sanctions would work.
and they would pull the plug on the archaic and anti-humane incubators of jihadism. and help liberate another 500 million people. IOW: the women and children of islam.
NOW::::::
how copuld any leftiist object to this!?!!?!?!
only on the basis of "multiculturalism."
but wouldn't that therefore permit SLAVERY!? (if it was ":culturally acceptable!?)
yes.
which is why multiculturalism is a vapid amoral ideology. an immoral sham.
one that can never liberate a human soul anywhere or anytime.
Post a Comment