Let me say from the beginning that I don’t hate anyone as a general rule. I look for and desire to see the good in every human being as I believe everyone else should do as well. If someone has been influenced by an evil mindset in ideology, then my first reaction is not to commence hating that person but rather to make an attempt to shake that person out of that destructive mindset by using logic and reason, along with a persuasive passion for what is spiritually right and true.However, because this is not always possible regardless of the amount of truth that is placed before certain individuals, and because there are those who will always love the evil inwardly more than righteousness, I believe that there can is righteous-based hatred regarding some humans. I don’t believe in living a life for the sole purpose of hating for any cause as do certain political, religious, and non-religious hate groups. But there are things in this life (including evil devoted people) of whom it's righteous to hate.
God judges hatred along with all motivations of the human heart by His law and not by man’s westernized liberal conceptions. There is a big difference between hating your personal enemy on a personal level for personal reasons, and hating an enemy of God on a spiritual level for spiritual reasons. Examine what the scripture states:
"Do not I hate them, O YHVH, that hate thee? And am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: They are become mine enemies. Search me, O God, and know my heart: Try me, and know my thoughts; And see if there be any wicked way in me, And lead me in the way everlasting." - Psalms 139:21-24. (also see II Chronicles 19:2)
In this segment from the book of Psalms, the psalmist was searching his heart before God in which he was making sure that his godly resistance towards his enemies - in the form of righteous hatred - was in check. In this passage Israel’s enemies are the ones who hates God. For the psalmist, his thought was that if he did not have a "perfect" hatred towards God’s enemies, then his thoughts of not hating God's enemy would be of a wicked way within his heart. From my point of view, the politically-correct secular world could learn volumes from the simple declaration that this psalmist proclaimed and of which the first and second Jewish Temple singers sang the psalm:1
“Do not I hate them, O YHVH that hate thee?” and "I hate them (God's enemies) with a perfect hatred"
.
I have heard people say that they may hate the things evil people do but not the person themselves. I agree with that concept in general but not as an overall concept. An individual can sink so much into evil that they become “as one” with their wickedness. There is a place in the realms of evil where a person has sold out "soul" lock, stock and barrel in effect crossing the point of no return where their whole lives can only be devoted as an enemy against God. Such was the case with Pharaoh during the time of the Exodus whose heart become more hardened after each manifestation of the ten plagues of Egypt.
To bring this reality into modern times, I do not and cannot love any part of Adolph Hitler including his very soul. I not only hate the things that he did on earth but I also hate him spiritually as God's enemy as well. How about you? Are you a hater of Hitler's very soul?
Fact: There is no separation between Hitler's soul and his Holocaust deeds that he did on earth both now and forever.
Hitler made a choice to become the image of evil rather than expressing the image of God he was made in. I don’t believe God loves him but rather hates him insomuch that Hitler’s soul (and not just the things he did) is in a place of the eternally damned where he will be forever separated from the God of mercy, justice, and righteousness. So in trying to be like minded with God’s thinking towards Hitler, I hate the expressed devil that Hitler was and forever shall be known. I not only believe that it's a righteous act to hate Hitler, but in fact it would be evil of me or anyone else not to do so as the above Psalm of David plainly points out. Furthermore, the so-called do-gooders who actually love Hitler are the ones most likely to support him and his deeds.
.
Hitler is not the only ambassador of evil to walk around in human form. I feel the same way with the likes of other such devils as Yassier Arafat, Louis Farrakhan, David Duke, and now Jimmy Carter who has devoted the rest of his evil life to the cause of Israel's murderous enemy. These men are not simply misguided fools that are followers of evil (a place where true repentance and the turning away from evil are still available to such a person) but they are in fact actual leaders and forgoers of evil for the sole purpose of leading others in their evil!
Since false prophets don’t repent, (no false prophet in the Bible ever did) I have no desire to pray for these men and others like them for a change of their evil ways. Rather, I choose to pray according to God’s promise to them which is for their destruction as God sees fit according to their relentless evil and unrepentant deeds upon this earth.
"And He repays those who hate Him to their face, to destroy them. He will not be slow to repay him who hates Him. He will repay him to his face." - Deuteronomy 7:10 (See also Isaiah 59:18).
Therefore, my Bible-guided prayer is, "May YHVH according to His holy and righteous Torah promise, repay the Arab-Palestinians to their face, along with and all who support them in their terrorist-expressed hatred acts against YHVH's chosen people."
The Palestinians:
There isn't a greater enemy towards the nation of Israel in all the world today than the Palestinians! The Palestinians have taken the title from the German Nazis as "the greatest threat" to the Jewish nation. Mein Kamph gave way to Jihadi - both meaning "my struggles" in both German and Arabic. When Hitler's struggles expired the Islamic struggles picked up the banner. What now is at stake in the conflict between the Jews and the Palestinians that wasn't at stake during Hitler's Final Solution is the possibility of the most evil people in all the earth, worshiping the most evil god (their god Allah), in the most holiest place (Jerusalem and the Temple Mount) in all the world!
The rebirth of Israel as a nation has given rise to Allah (an Arabian deity) wanting to be worshiped by his subjects at the very place designed for the God of Israel to be worshiped (see Psalms 132:13,14). Just the possibility of this scenario alone should show the secularists that there is a God of Israel that holds an everlasting covenant with the Jewish people (see Psalms 105:8-10). For it is impossible to ask for better stage to be set from what we see in the Middle East today to begin an all out "end of the age" showdown between good and evil.
.
There has never been of people in modern times besides the Palestinians whose paradigm is terrorism and whose ultimate goal as a people in the world is towards the annihilation of another people based upon their religion and spirituality. What makes this fact all the more significant is that the Palestinians are given the world's support (7.4 billion dollars worth of support recently > http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1207/west.php3) in their terrorist endeavors and annihilation aspirations, and this was after the Palestinians as a people overwhelmingly voted in the party of Hamas to run their government in January 2006!
.
There has never been of people in modern times besides the Palestinians whose paradigm is terrorism and whose ultimate goal as a people in the world is towards the annihilation of another people based upon their religion and spirituality. What makes this fact all the more significant is that the Palestinians are given the world's support (7.4 billion dollars worth of support recently > http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1207/west.php3) in their terrorist endeavors and annihilation aspirations, and this was after the Palestinians as a people overwhelmingly voted in the party of Hamas to run their government in January 2006!
World actions of this nature adds a greater significance to the end-time war between good and evil (Ezekiel 38:16-23). Besides the 7.4 billion pledged the to Palestinians, billions of dollars more are added in the form of state of the art weaponry being sold to the enemies of Israel >http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/07/28/saudi.arms/.
Along with the billions of dollars that the UN is pledging to the Palestinians, the world's plan for tiny Israel becomes very clear! If the nations hadn't taken upon themselves to support Israel's greatest enemies there would not have been a need for Zechariah 12:9 to have been written: "And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem."
.
To try and understand the depth of the very evil that lies within the Palestinian society, one must look at what they as a society are capable of. The following is a very small and incomplete list as to the kind of things that comes forth from out of the Palestinian people. While viewing this list ask yourself, "Why are the world nations (especially the United States lead by a conservative president) are so desperately seeking to grant these Palestinians (of all people) any kind of a political state?"
Remember, O YHVH , the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof. O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.
The psalmist is not promoting that idea of killing innocent children for the sake of killing children. That would be what the enemies of the Bible and Israel would have you believe! This is the same mindset that the "Human Rights Watch" tried to sell the world (which the world willfully bought) when they accused Israel of killing 54 children in Qana, Lebanon during the 2006 Lebanon-Israeli War. Because of their spiritual state they didn't have the ability nor the will to considered the 4,000 rockets that was shot from civilian locations into Israel to start the war by which was indeed meant to kill as many Israeli citizens including children as possible!
When given over to dark forces the human mind can no longer judge between good and evil. This scripture in the book of Psalms is about God's judgment (of what He will allow to occur) in the form of reaping and sowing. Babylon had "dashed" Jewish babies against stones in their invasion against the Jewish people much like the Palestinians shoot rockets targeting Jewish school children. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6977346.stm The scripture of Psalms 137:7-9 is stating that what the Babylonians did against the Jews would divinely return back to them in the form of the coming Persian Empire. In fact, one could argue that Babylon is still reaping from their deeds of old in today's Iraq!
Likewise, the prophet Ezekiel has declared that Israel's enemies would reap what they have sown at the End of Days (Ezekiel. 35: 5-11). Keep in mind that Psalm 137 is one of the most Zionistic portions of scripture in the entire Bible. In it we find the great love for God's chosen people - the Jews, and for Zion - God's chosen place of worship. But also we find in it a bitter hatred for all those who hate and try to kill God's chosen and possess Zion for their own - kind of like what the Palestinians do.
So why do I hate the Palestinians? Simply put; because God does! Not that every single Palestinian is hated by God, for I know that God loves Palestinians such as Walid Shoebat - a Palestinian who has a deep devoted love for Israel and Israel's covenant with YHVH. But according to the Hebrew scriptures God hates all those who hate His covenant with Israel, which puts the Arab-Palestinians as a people first in line to be hated by God!
.
To try and understand the depth of the very evil that lies within the Palestinian society, one must look at what they as a society are capable of. The following is a very small and incomplete list as to the kind of things that comes forth from out of the Palestinian people. While viewing this list ask yourself, "Why are the world nations (especially the United States lead by a conservative president) are so desperately seeking to grant these Palestinians (of all people) any kind of a political state?"
- Among the two great political parties that rule the Palestinians (Al-Fatah in the West Bank, and Hamas in the Gaza Strip) both covenants from both parties call for for an arms struggle and the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel. http://www.iris.org.il/plochart.htm http://www.palestinecenter.org/cpap/documents/charter.html
- The greatest forms of child abuse in all the world occur among the Palestinians. Children who are barely old enough to speak are taught to Jew-hate with words they don't even understand. http://www.youtube.com/watchv=ZL0C2QvqIlo This gives heed to the saying, "they drink the hatred with their mother's milk"! Just the picture alone (at the top of the article) speaks volumes of the Palestinian society.
- Children TV shows are shown in the name of Shahid (martyrdom). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gi-c6lbFGC4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4zgURMOZ6k
- Shahid (martyrdom) for children is glorified of official PA and Hamas television. http://www.pmw.org.il/ASK%20FOR%20DEATH.htm
- An exhibition of glorifying and celebrating suicide / mass murder is displayed with Palestinian gleeful acceptance at Al Najah University in the West Bank town of Nablus in September, 2001. http://www.gamla.org.il/english/feature/sbarro.htm This exhibition included many displays of body parts one of which was a bloody set of blue-jean wearing legs with no torso connected, still sitting on a chair. The bombing of Sbarro pizza restaurant in Jerusalem in which the exhibition re-enacts hits a little close to home. My wife and I personally eat there three years before this massacre occurred.
- School text books promote anti-Israel and pro shahid-martyrdom. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/patext1.html http://www.edume.org/research/testimonies/2007-05-15.html http://www.pmw.org.il/getresults/political/index.html#i214759
- Women who sends their sons to Jew-murder are given high status in Palestinian society, even to run for a government office. http://www.amitiesquebec-israel.org/texts/mother.htm
- Suicide murderers are glorified all through Palestinian controlled areas, in the form of billboards, street names, names of soccer fields, trading cards, names of hospitals, new babies named after suicide bombers, and children's events, songs, chants, and poems during parades, ect. http://programs.ssrc.org/gsc/gsc_quarterly/newsletter5/content/allen/ http://www.zoa.org/2003/07/palestinian_aut_13.htm Even "Saddam Hussein" whose Scud missiles hitting Tel-Aviv civilian areas brought Palestinian cheers, is honored in the Palestinian city of Jenin> http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53882
- Suicide for the murder of Jews is an accepted norm and is a high form of religious devotion. Outside of martyrdom, there is no guarantee of reaching paradise for oneself and family members. This is one of the reasons candy is passed out in celebration at suicide / murderer's funeral. http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/013234.php
- One Hundred Thousand citizens of the would-be future State of Palestine attended the funeral of Yahya Ayyash (a.k.a. "the Engineer") not to mention the many funerals of other Palestinian terrorist and terrorist spiritual teachers like Sheikh Ahmed Yassin! I wonder how many of these one hundred thousand funeral attendees of Yahya Ayyash would consider themselves Palestinian moderates? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahya_Ayyash Moreover, this Palestinian hero has traffic squares named after him in both Jenin and Jericho with no Palestinian complaints. Imagine that! This issue of glorifying and mass murderer among the Palestinians even became part of "peace" negotiation with such a people. See "article 6" section "h" > http://www.israelmfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace+Process/Guide+to+the+Peace+Process/Israeli+View+on+Palestinian+Security+Commitments.htm?DisplayMode=print
- Palestinians seek to destroy the God of Israel through a revised history of Holocaust and Temple denial, and stand as a barricade between God and His fulfillment of the covenant He has with His chosen people, the Jews. http://www.spme.net/cgi-bin/facultyforum.cgi?ID=1735
Muslim religious fervor has many different facets of Jew-murdering expressions that are fully exposed in the Palestinian society. From passing out candy at shahid funerals to eating flesh and drinking blood of Jewish victims as they did on October 12, 2000 in Ramallah> http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/014886.php Yet, the Muslim world has the audacity to vilify Israel as the blood-libel people and state. It is these Palestinians who are on the front lines (even occupying a huge portion of the ancient land of Israel) in the Islamic war against the God of Israel!
The 64,000 dollar question: Does the God of Israel "hate" the Palestinians?
The politically-correct answer would be, "God loves everybody". However, the Bible is never politically correct. The Bible states very clearly that God hated Esau, who like the Palestinians wished to destroy Jacob / Israel.
"I have loved you, saith YHVH. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith YHVH: yet I loved Jacob, And I hated (Hebrew: sanay-ti) Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. Malachi 1:2,3
The New Testament correctly applies this scripture of God's hatred of an individual as also to the nation that proceeded from that individual (see Romans 9:12,13). The land that should be considered for a Palestinian state is all contained in the ancient writings of which the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is all about -the Bible. Aside from Mecca, the Palestinian spiritual base is that of Esau's - Mt. Seir in Jordan, which is why the prophecies of Ezekiel against Israel's most vicious enemy is not against the West Bank, for that is Israel's land and not the Palestinians! http://www.danielpipes.org/article/298
Take another look at the list above as to what the Palestinians are capable of and then see if you notice any similarities in the following scripture: "Because thou hast had a perpetual hatred, and hast shed the blood of the children of Israel by the force of the sword in the time of their calamity, in the time that their iniquity had an end...Because thou hast said, These two nations and these two countries shall be mine, and we will possess it; [sound familiar? > http://inbrief.threatswatch.org/2006/02/palestine-from-the-river-to-th/ ] whereas YHVH was there: Therefore, as I live saith YHVH God, I will even do according to thine anger, and according to thine envy which thou hast used out of thy hatred against them; and I will make Myself known among them, when I have judged thee. - Ezekiel 35:5, 10-111
One of the hardest scriptures for most people to understand and one that I personally had an atheist use in trying to discredit the Bible, is Psalms 137:7-9 which reads:Remember, O YHVH , the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof. O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.
The psalmist is not promoting that idea of killing innocent children for the sake of killing children. That would be what the enemies of the Bible and Israel would have you believe! This is the same mindset that the "Human Rights Watch" tried to sell the world (which the world willfully bought) when they accused Israel of killing 54 children in Qana, Lebanon during the 2006 Lebanon-Israeli War. Because of their spiritual state they didn't have the ability nor the will to considered the 4,000 rockets that was shot from civilian locations into Israel to start the war by which was indeed meant to kill as many Israeli citizens including children as possible!
When given over to dark forces the human mind can no longer judge between good and evil. This scripture in the book of Psalms is about God's judgment (of what He will allow to occur) in the form of reaping and sowing. Babylon had "dashed" Jewish babies against stones in their invasion against the Jewish people much like the Palestinians shoot rockets targeting Jewish school children. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6977346.stm The scripture of Psalms 137:7-9 is stating that what the Babylonians did against the Jews would divinely return back to them in the form of the coming Persian Empire. In fact, one could argue that Babylon is still reaping from their deeds of old in today's Iraq!
Likewise, the prophet Ezekiel has declared that Israel's enemies would reap what they have sown at the End of Days (Ezekiel. 35: 5-11). Keep in mind that Psalm 137 is one of the most Zionistic portions of scripture in the entire Bible. In it we find the great love for God's chosen people - the Jews, and for Zion - God's chosen place of worship. But also we find in it a bitter hatred for all those who hate and try to kill God's chosen and possess Zion for their own - kind of like what the Palestinians do.
So why do I hate the Palestinians? Simply put; because God does! Not that every single Palestinian is hated by God, for I know that God loves Palestinians such as Walid Shoebat - a Palestinian who has a deep devoted love for Israel and Israel's covenant with YHVH. But according to the Hebrew scriptures God hates all those who hate His covenant with Israel, which puts the Arab-Palestinians as a people first in line to be hated by God!
As God commanded Israel to hate Amalek that his name be blotted out from under heaven for his deeds in using cowardly acts against Israel in possessing her land of inheritance (Deuteronomy 25:17-19) the modern Amaleks of today should be hated for their cowardly terrorist attacks on Jewish civilians who claim their land of inheritance as well. May Arafat's name and the names of those who support his goal be blotted out from under heaven! Amen? Amen!
"The boastful shall not stand in Your sight; You hate all workers of iniquity." - Psalms 5:5
"YHVH tests the righteous, But the wicked and the one who loves violence [terrorist Palestinians] His soul hates." - Pslams 11:5
Do not I hate them, O YHVH, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies. Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts: And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting. - Psalms 139: 21-24
.
Notes:
1. Psalms chapters 107-150 (the fifth section of the Pslams in the Hebrew Bible) are mostly liturgical psalms for pilgrimages to the temple and festivals.
"The boastful shall not stand in Your sight; You hate all workers of iniquity." - Psalms 5:5
"YHVH tests the righteous, But the wicked and the one who loves violence [terrorist Palestinians] His soul hates." - Pslams 11:5
Do not I hate them, O YHVH, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies. Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts: And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting. - Psalms 139: 21-24
.
Notes:
1. Psalms chapters 107-150 (the fifth section of the Pslams in the Hebrew Bible) are mostly liturgical psalms for pilgrimages to the temple and festivals.
3,878 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 3601 – 3800 of 3878 Newer› Newest»& lastly says
"So, to sum up, “Jacob’s trouble” refers first to the exile of Judah in Jeremiah’s day – out of which God delivered His people 50-70 years later; it provides a pattern of suffering and deliverance in Jewish history through the centuries; and it refers to the final time of trouble for Israel and Judah in the end of the age. The good news is that this time, there will be a lasting and glorious deliverance. In fact, it is the deliverance from trouble which is the great theme of the text. Let’s not forget the gracious promises of God!
“‘In that day,’ declares the LORD Almighty, ‘I will break the yoke off their necks and will tear off their bonds; no longer will foreigners enslave them. Instead, they will serve the LORD their God and David their king, whom I will raise up for them. So do not fear, O Jacob my servant; do not be dismayed, O Israel,’ declares the LORD. ‘I will surely save you out of a distant place, your descendants from the land of their exile. Jacob will again have peace and security, and no one will make him afraid. I am with you and will save you,’ declares the LORD. ‘Though I completely destroy all the nations among which I scatter you, I will not completely destroy you. I will discipline you but only with justice; I will not let you go entirely unpunished.’” (Jeremiah 30:8-11)"
On Amazon.com an interesting book to order is titled
"Holocaust Exposed: The Biblical Account of the Jewish Tragedy" by Nigel Woodley
The Description of the book says
"This book is a historical record of the Holocaust as seen through the eyes of Bible prophecy. It by no means offers a complete account of the Holocaust -- not at all. But it does offer a comprehensive account of what the biblical prophets of Israel had to say about it.
The release of this book on September 1, 2009, commemorated the seventieth anniversary of the beginning of the Second World War -- the war Adolf Hitler had declared would result in the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe. It did actually result in the resurrection of Israel after two-thousand years of statelessness.
From the Editor, Susanne Lakin
Nigel Woodley's book, Holocaust Exposed, is a thoughtful and sensitive exploration of Bible prophecy as it pertains to the rise of Nazi Germany and the subsequent brutal persecution and attempted genocide of the Jewish people. Woodley masterfully presents Scriptures that go into achingly pointed detail about the atrocities foretold to come upon the Jews in Europe, as well as reveal how this people were warned in advance of the horrors to come.
As a Christian with a Jewish background, with numerous relatives having died in gas chambers and concentration camps under the Third Reich, I can attest that this book -- contrary to what one might think -- is a great comfort and full of hope. Woodley shows how God's promise to restore Israel to her homeland and re-establish her as a people returned to her promised soil did not fail. In fact, the Bible shows that it is because of God's promise to restore favour to Israel that prompts the attempted genocide of His people -- a plot that nearly succeeded, were it not for God's intervention on many fronts, showing his miraculous hand manoeuvring events, resulting in Israel restored to her homeland only short months after the end of World War II. Much of these miraculous doings of God are foretold centuries earlier in Scripture, and bring the reader to an understanding of a merciful, loving, and compassionate God. My prayer is that Jews the world over will take time to read this book with an open mind and heart, as the Holocaust is the reason so many have lost faith in their Creator, unable to understand how and why a loving God could allow such horror to occur. This book will answer any doubt to great satisfaction. I plan to send it to all of my Jewish relatives to read. It is time for Jews to heal from this horrible dark period in history, and Woodley's book is just the balm needed.
About the Author
Nigel Woodley was born in 1961, at the height of the baby boom. He has been pastor of the Flaxmere Christian Fellowship in Hastings, New Zealand, since 1982.
His father, Stewart Woodley, was a police sergeant who with the help of his wife, Anne, founded the Fellowship in 1980. Nigel is the twin of Stephen, who was the Fellowship's first leader of intercessory prayer for Israel. Stephen zealously led God's troops in prayer at a time when Israel's intifada of 2000 was raging. He is now at home with the Lord. Nigel's wife, Joann, is his support and helps him to do what he does. There are nine in their family.
He is a New Zealand Trustee of the International Convention of Faith Ministries (ICFM), whose international base is in the United States. He also sits on the Board of Ebenezer Emergency Fund (New Zealand) -- an international Christian organization which is helping Jews worldwide to return to their ancient biblical homeland in Israel.
Nigel has had a keen interest in Israel for many years, having visited the nation twice and studied the biblical aspect of Israel both historically and prophetically. He has a genuine love for the nation and for the Jewish people, and a sense of the revelation of God regarding those things he writes about. He is a student of Modern Hebrew."
One person typed the following Review on Amazon.com about the
book "Holocaust Exposed" by Nigel Woodley
the person typed
4.0 out of 5 stars Fascinating hard truth
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on September 21, 2020
"Although this was a hard read with explicit details of Holocaust atrocities, the Scriptural references very clearly indicate the truth and amazing detail of the prophecies concerning this “time of Jacob’s trouble”. It gave me a deep sense of the power of God who is in complete control of everything that happens to His own people. The book is well written with great attention to detail in the Biblical references which have been well researched. One cannot help being astounded at the omnipotence of God and the absolute truth of His Word. It makes me long that everyone could see the truth of the Bible through prophecy, and fills me with a more profound reverence for God and His word. I award it 4 stars because of the harshness of the horrendous details which doesn’t make for pleasant reading but it deserves the highest commendation for the research and presentation of the Scriptural prophecies."
From the Intercessors for Israel website, ifi.org.il an article is headlined
"JACOB'S TROUBLE - PAST OR FUTURE"
The Article says:
A Watchmen from Jerusalem Teaching
This study was written by Chuck and Karen Cohen, authors of the quarterly Watchmen from Jerusalem, a biblical perspective on the news, to help believers pray with understanding, primarily for God's goals surrounding Israel. Chuck is one of the directors and a board member of Intercessors for Israel, an indigenous Israeli prayer ministry.
JACOB'S TROUBLE – THE QUESTION
Why should believers pray for and help Jewish people in the nations to make aliyah – to return to the land of Israel – if two-thirds of them are going to get slaughtered there in Jacob's trouble (Jer. 30:7)?
There is a current teaching in many churches and ministries that God is gathering His people back to the land and then will allow a second Holocaust – some say it will even be worse than the first – to befall them. The basis of this teaching is the belief that once the Church is raptured, then a seven year tribulation period begins (the "pre-trib rapture" teaching). At the start of this seven year period, the Anti-Christ is revealed. He signs a peace treaty with Israel, even allowing them to rebuild their temple in Jerusalem. Then in the middle of this period, after three and a-half years, he breaks his treaty with Israel and starts a war against them, in which two-thirds of them die. According to this teaching, this time period is referenced in Scripture as 'Jacob's trouble', a term found only in Jeremiah 30:7.
Why does God allow this? It is being taught that even after He brings His people home, they remain stubborn and stiff-necked, refuse to repent, or bow the knee to Jesus as their Savior. After, presumably, millions die, whoever remains alive finally accepts Christ and becomes a Christian. At the same time, the raptured Church is in heaven enjoying the marriage supper of the Lamb as the Bride of the Lord Jesus Christ. While there are many variations on the details of this teaching, this reflects the basic outline.
At Intercessors for Israel, we have often been asked why we pray for Jews to return to Israel if this is what the future holds for them. We can and do pray for them to return, for this teaching lines up with neither God's Word nor His nature."
the article continues
"We agree with the Apostle Paul that all of us know in part, and we prophesy in part (1 Cor. 13:9), and we see in a mirror dimly, not seeing the whole picture as clearly as we would like (1 Cor. 13:12). When God's Word prophesies, we see it clearly only after it comes to pass, and then we can say with the Apostle Peter, this is that which was spoken by the prophet (Acts 2:16). Based on that pattern, we can see that Jacob's trouble and the two-thirds cut off have already happened.
JACOB'S TROUBLE AND THE TWO-THIRDS CUT OFF: CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT
When interpreting prophecy it is most important to look at the context of the verse or section before deciding what it means. Second in importance is to interpret the prophecy literally. Messiah Yeshua used the prophetic word literally – and we trust that He knows better than anyone else how His Word is to be handled. Yet there are prophetic revelations of a non-literal nature, and we will look at this later on.
There are two verses most often used to 'prove' that just before the Lord returns another holocaust awaits the children of Israel. While there are other verses, these two are the main sources feeding this particular teaching stream. As we will see, both of them have already been literally fulfilled.
Jeremiah, in chapters 30 to 33, speaks of the last days of this world system. At least nineteen times in these four chapters God either says or indicates He will bring Israel back to its land, bringing Jacob's descendants out of captivity/exile and settling them in their God-appointed homeland. The proof that this restoration occurs in the last days is found in the final verse of Jeremiah 30: The fierce anger of YHWH shall not return until He has done it, and until He has fulfilled the purposes of His heart. In the latter days [lit. in Hebrew = 'the last days'] you shall understand it. (Jeremiah 30:24)
& continues
"As already mentioned, Jeremiah 30:7 is the only place in Scripture where the phrase Jacob's trouble appears. Here it is in context, And these are the Words that YHWH spoke concerning Israel and concerning Judah. For thus says YHWH, We have heard a voice of trembling, of fear, and not of peace. Ask now, and see whether a man is giving birth? Why do I see every man with his hands on his loins, like a woman in labor, and all faces are turned into paleness? Alas! For that day is great, so that none is like it; it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it. (Jeremiah 30:4-7)
Chapter 30 continues, identifying the overall timeframe for this to occur: For it shall be in that day [the time of Jacob's trouble], says YHWH of Hosts that I will break his yoke from your neck and will burst your bonds. And strangers [gentiles] shall no longer enslave him, but they shall serve YHWH their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up to them. And you, My servant Jacob, do not fear, says YHWH. Do not be terrified, O Israel. For behold, I will save you from afar, and your seed from the land of their captivity. Jacob shall return, and shall be in rest, and be quiet, and none shall make him afraid. (Jer. 30:8-10)
Often in biblical prophecy, there is a partial fulfillment while we wait for the final fulfillment. The overriding evidence of end-time prophecy is that Israel as a nation returns to the land in unbelief and then, in the land, God reveals Messiah Yeshua to them. So the scripture above talking about Israel serving God and David – most likely David's greater Son, Yeshua – are still to come to pass, although the growth of the Israeli Messianic Body since 1967 is nothing short of miraculous.
According to those verses in Jeremiah, Jacob's trouble occurs before Israel comes back to the land and before Israel becomes an independent nation again. Israel became a nation again in 1948. Did anything occur to Jacob's descendants before 1948 that could qualify as Jacob’s trouble? While some believe that the whole 1,900 year exile can be seen as Jacob's trouble – and there can be a good argument made for this – still the event that seems to be the climactic fulfillment"
& continues
" still the event that seems to be the climactic fulfillment was the demonically inspired Nazi Holocaust. Jacob's trouble has been fulfilled.
As noted briefly before, there can also be a future fulfillment, based on a spiritual principle of 'now-and-not-yet' that applies to some prophetic passages. That principle, if we are being honest with the text, would indicate that if there was another wave of anti-Semitic hatred leading to the deaths of many Jews, it would happen in exile. Jews who refuse to return to Zion are – and will continue to be – in much more danger than those Jews who have come home.
This is being written at the end of the summer of 2015. Here is a question to the Jews still in exile, of which most are in North America and Europe. Do you really trust Obama, Merkel, Cameron, et al, to have your back? Thank God that PM Stephen Harper of Canada is a blessed exception among leaders! But the exception proves the rule. Should the Jewish people trust their children and grandchildren to compromising, appeasing politicians, some of whom will not even mention 'Islam' and 'terrorism' in the same breath? Or would it not be much better to have someone like Netanyahu, with all his faults, and the miraculously resurrected Israeli army (Ezek. 37:10) looking out for them and their future in a nation restored by God according to His promises?
THE NASTY "TWO-THIRDS" VERSE
The second verse often used by those who believe in the teaching under discussion is Zechariah 13:8-9:
And it shall be in all the land, says YHWH, two parts in it shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left in it. And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried. They shall call on My name, and I will answer them; I will say, It is My people; and they shall say, YHWH is my God.
Zechariah 13:8-9
IFI's annual Intercessors Prayer Conference in January 2015 included a message on Zechariah 12-14 that explained why its middle chapter refers to the period around the Lord's first coming and not to the one for which we are all still waiting. In short, Zechariah 12 ends with all Israel being saved, as they look upon the One whom they have pierced and mourn for Him as if He were their precious only child (12:10). In the Hebrew, the word in the KJV translated upon, should be to/toward as with spiritual sight. After all, if all Israel is saved when they see Yeshua return, then we are saying that gentiles get saved by faith, but Jews get saved by sight. Nowhere in the Bible, and especially not in the New Testament, are we taught this. In fact, Paul is emphatic that the gospel is meant for the Jews as well as the gentiles (Rom. 1:16) and that all are saved by grace through faith – an amazing gift from God (Eph. 2:8)."
& continues
"Then Zechariah 13:1 clarifies how all Israel will be saved, prophesying, In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David, and to the people of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness. This fountain was opened at the Cross, which for Zechariah was still over 400 years in the future. But, if this was not fulfilled when Yeshua died, how have so many Jews been saved over the centuries since then? And if Jews have not been saved, how did gentiles ever hear the gospel? Recall that there were no gentiles at all in the Church until Acts 10. We thank God; this fountain was opened and remains open today.
The other proof that Zechariah 13 has already been fulfilled is found in verse 7: Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd, and against the Man who is My companion, says YHWH of Hosts; strike the Shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered. And I will turn My hand on the little ones.
Compare this to what Yeshua said as He and His disciples went out to the garden of Gethsemane: All of you will be offended because of Me this night. For it is written, 'I will smite the Shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad'. (Matt. 26:31; cp. Mark 14:27) So Yeshua Himself said this very verse would be fulfilled even before He went to the Cross.
The very next verse back in Zechariah says, And it shall be in all the land, says YHWH, two parts in it shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left in it. (Zech. 13:8) Did anything like this happen in the same general time period that this chapter is referring to? Remember, Yeshua wept over Jerusalem because He knew what was soon to come. And as He drew near, He beheld the city and wept over it, saying, 'If you had known, even you, even at least in this day of yours, the things for your peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. For the days will come on you that your enemies will raise up a rampart to you, will surround you, and will keep you in on every side. And they will tear you down, and your children within you, and will not leave a stone on a stone because you did not know the time of your visitation'. (Luke 19:41-44)
The Trumpet Sounds website has this: "… in the tragic massacres at the hands of the Romans in AD 70 and 132, the total population of Jews declined from 4.5 million to 1.5 million. Indeed, this prophecy was fulfilled exactly as Zechariah had foretold. Two-thirds of the Jewish people died in this ghastly purge, and one-third was left alive, to be scattered among the nations."
This article goes on to state that many other Christian and even some Jewish writers and historians have said this, listing a few: Matthew Henry, Keil & Delitzsch, John Walvoord, John Wesley and Josephus."
& continues
"Even though Gog and Magog and Armageddon are other end-times events that do not apply to what we are clarifying here, note that in the Gog and Magog battle (Ezek. 38-39), those who come against this land are the ones in trouble with God! And Armageddon can be compared with Zechariah 14, since this appears to be the final battle as the Lord Yeshua comes to set up His Kingdom on earth. In fact, let us look briefly at this.
AND HIS FEET SHALL STAND ON THE MOUNT OF OLIVES
Zechariah 14:1-4 describes the time period just before the Lord Yeshua's return. While these initial verses parallel what is said about the nations coming against Jerusalem in Chapter 12, here the intensity increases until the climax of His glorious return. Chapter 12 is taking place today – diplomatically and in a covert way, and physically as terror attacks increase. Almost all nations are challenging Israel's right to all of Jerusalem. As they go from this diplomatic stance to a more active military stance, actually sending troops to thrust Israel out of the land which God has promised to them, God will provide both divine and human protection (12:4-9). The human, earth-bound protection will be a result of God continuing to use the Israeli army as a mighty fighting machine (Isa. 41:14-16; Jer. 51:20; Ezek. 37:10; Mic. 4:11-13; Zech. 10:3-8, et al). The Hebrew translated 'governors' in 12:5-6 is allufim, which is the modern Hebrew word for 'generals', as in "army generals".
Yet there comes a time when God will allow Jerusalem to be divided again for a short period. For I will gather all nations to battle against Jerusalem; and the city shall be taken, and the houses plundered, and the women raped. And half of the city shall go into exile, and the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city. (14:2) This verse was hard to understand until recently. How do the nations take the city of Jerusalem – yet only take half of it? Does this not describe exactly what the world wants in pressing for the creation of a Palestine with eastern Jerusalem as its capital? And the description of what happens to the Jews who are caught on the wrong side of this international divide is an apt description of what has happened to Jews historically whenever they have been left to the 'mercies' of their enemies – whether of the 'Church' in Europe or of the Muslims in the Middle East.
Yet since this apparently triggers the return of Yeshua, it cannot be that this situation lasts for a long period of time. It is definitely not Jacob's trouble nor the two-thirds being cut off. So we suspect that we are much closer to the return of the Lord than many Christians in the West are considering. It seems that Christians in the deceptive comfort of the 'civilized' West are hoping, "Maybe after the children get married and we see our grandchildren – then it would be good for Jesus to return." For Christians now being severely persecuted, He cannot come soon enough."
& continues
"TO GOD BE THE GLORY
God is bringing His people back, but not because the Jews are smarter, nicer, better looking, or more righteous than any other people group. No, it is to fulfill His promises to the Jews for the exaltation of His Holy name. Anything that leads to that should be the goal of the life and prayers and works of all God's regenerated children. Although these two verses – Jeremiah 30:7 and Zechariah 13:8 have already been fulfilled, they are being misused to caution Christians not to help the Jews return home. Of course the Adversary wants the Jews to remain easily accessible in exile, but God desires them to come home now! He has been sending the fishers for over one hundred and twenty years. He has been sending the hunters for seventy years, and now the time is short indeed (Jer. 16:16).
GOD’S JUDGMENT ON ISRAEL – THE EXILE
In the two Old Testament chapters listing the blessings and curses associated with God's covenant, the final curse/judgment is exile. These two chapters deal with His chosen people, Israel, as a nation, not as individuals, and the ultimate threat is declared to be exile from Israel's promised inheritance – the land – with the people being scattered among the gentiles/nations. Not only would this bring shame to the Jews, who would be forced to live among pagans in darkness, but they would also bring God's name into disrepute – or as He says in Ezekiel 36:20-23, by their exile, they profane His name.
Here are the relevant verses from Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28.
But if you will not listen to Me, and will not do all these commandments; if you shall despise My statutes, or if your soul hates My judgments …so that you break My covenant, I will also do this to you: I will even appoint terror over you, consumption, and burning fever, consuming the eyes and causing sorrow of heart… You shall perish among the gentiles, and the land of your enemies shall eat you up. They that are left of you shall pine away in their iniquity in [exile]. Also they shall pine away with them in the iniquities of their fathers. Yet if they shall confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers, with their sin which they sinned against Me…If then [in exile] their uncircumcised hearts are humbled, and they then accept the punishment for their iniquity, then I will remember My covenant with Jacob, and My covenant with Isaac, and also My covenant with Abraham… And I will remember the land. The land also shall be forsaken by them, and shall enjoy its Sabbaths, while it lays waste without them…Yet for all that, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, neither will I hate them, to utterly destroy them and to break My covenant with them, for I am YHWH their God. But for their sakes, I will remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations, so that I might be their God. I am YHWH.
Leviticus 26:14-1638-45"
& continues
"It shall be, if you will not listen to the voice of YHWH your God, to observe to do all His commandments and His statutes which I command you today, all these curses shall come on and overtake you…You shall be left few in number, whereas you were as the stars of the heavens for multitude, because you would not obey the voice of YHWH your God. And it shall be, as YHWH rejoiced over you to do you good and to multiply you, so YHWH will rejoice over you to destroy you and to bring you to nothing. You shall be plucked from off the land where you go to possess it, and YHWH shall scatter you among all people…There shall you serve other gods, which neither you nor your fathers have known…Among these nations you shall find no ease…but YHWH shall give you there a trembling heart and failing of eyes and sorrow of mind. Your life shall hang in doubt before you, and you shall fear day and night, and shall have no assurance of your life.
Deuteronomy 28:15, 62-68
As you can see, these verses are a prophetic portrayal of what happened to the Jewish nation after the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in 70 AD, and the total scattering of the nation in 135 AD. This also matches the sense of Jacob's trouble mentioned in Jeremiah. We see that the worst curses/judgments waited for them in exile among the gentiles. The point is simply that for Israel as a nation – the ultimate judgment is exile. So should we expect God to change His method of dealing with Israel in the last days and save the worst, most horrific slaughter yet for when the Jews return home? For I am YHWH, I change not. Therefore, you sons of Jacob are not destroyed. (Mal. 3:6) God's prophetic promises to do better for His people after He has regathered them, is being seen and marveled at in Israel today.
REGATHERING, BLESSING AND SALVATION
Trying to prove an argument from the negative is difficult. So we want to look at a sample of His many promises of doing good to Israel when He returns Jacob from exile in the last days. What we will find is that the sheer number of these declarations far exceeds those few verses that are misused to come up with the 'Jacob's-trouble-is-yet-to-come' teaching.
Isaiah 40-66 contains many specific directives from God to His Church about Israel's end-time restoration. He tells His Body to cooperate with Him in the restoration of Israel to their land and to their Messiah. So even if it could possibly be a 'restoration to destruction', which we reject, the Church would still need to help because it is God's direct command to her. No way out of that one.
Comfort, O comfort My people, says your God. Speak lovingly to the heart of Jerusalem, and cry to her that her warfare is done, that her iniquity is pardoned; for she has received of YHWH's hand double for all her sins.
Isaiah 40:1-2"
& continues
"To whom is God speaking this? To a people who are not the Jews, yet a people who also declare that the God of Israel is their God. The only people in all of history to which this could possibly apply is the true Church. Now why would God ask the Church to comfort Israel if the worst is yet to come?
Fear not; for I am with you. I will bring your seed from the east, and gather you from the west. I will say to the north, Give up; and to the south, Do not keep back; bring My sons from far and My daughters from the ends of the earth; everyone who is called by My name; for I have created him for My glory, I have formed him; yes, I have made him.
Isaiah 43:5-7
This was not fulfilled when the Jews returned from just Babylon because at best that return was only from the north and east. Here God is prophesying of a worldwide return – the one which we see today. Jews have been streaming back to this land since the early 1880s from over 100 different nations. Why is this important? Because it has to do with God's glory, His name and reputation. We will see this more clearly when we look at Ezekiel, yet in this chapter of Isaiah, in verse 21, God adds icing to the cake, stating, This people that I formed for Myself; they shall declare My praise. So how could God receive all this glory and praise from those He fulfills His promises to, if He is still going to allow them to be slaughtered for unbelief?
Thus says the Lord YHWH, Behold, I will lift up My hand to the gentiles, and set up My banner to the people; and they shall bring your sons in their bosom, and your daughters shall be carried on their shoulders.
Isaiah 49:22
In the Tanach, the hand of God is often symbolic of Yeshua who now sits at God's "right hand" in glory (Psa. 110:1; 118:15-16). Who would be the only non-Jews in all of history who would even be looking to the hand of Israel's God? Only the true Church – and they are tasked here with helping to carry the Jews back home. Yet how could this provoke Jews to jealousy (Rom. 11:11), if gentiles were helping them back while saying that destruction awaits most of them? Even now, Jews in the Israeli media are condemning Christianity for such a sick hypocrisy, and they are right to do so, since some Christians who have come here to "help", have shared this teaching with Israelis."
& continues
"How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of him who brings good tidings, making peace heard; who brings good news, making salvation heard; who says to Zion, Your God reigns! Your watchmen shall lift up their voice! They lift up the voice together; they sing aloud, for they shall see eye to eye, when YHWH shall bring again Zion. Break out, sing together, waste places of Jerusalem; for YHWH has comforted His people; He has redeemed Jerusalem. YHWH has bared His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations; and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God.
Isaiah 52:7-10
The Hebrew word for 'good tidings' and 'good news' is what we use in modern Hebrew for 'gospel', literally the same 'good news' in the Greek of the New Testament. God here speaks to a people who are not Jewish, a people who know the good news of salvation, and tells them to declare to unsaved Zion, Your God reigns! If a believer cannot, in total faith, say this to an unsaved Jew, then exactly in whom does that believer put his trust? The God of Israel is the only God there is. Can it be that many in the Church today actually believe in another Jesus and another gospel because they are infected with another spirit (2 Cor. 11:4; Gal. 1:6-9), one refusing to see Israel as still God's chosen people and the Jews as still beloved for the sake of the forefathers (Rom. 11:28)?
The rest of this Isaiah portion says when Jerusalem's waste places will be restored, God will comfort and redeem His people. And this will result in something else that is often mentioned in prophecy – that the restoration of Israel leads to multitudes of gentiles coming to know Israel's God.
Arise, shine; for your light has come, and the glory of YHWH has risen on you. For behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the peoples; but YHWH shall rise on you, and His glory shall be seen on you. And nations/gentiles shall come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your dawning. Lift up your eyes all around, and see. All of them gather themselves; they come to you. Your sons shall come from far, and your daughters shall be nursed at your side. Then you shall fear…and your heart shall throb and swell for joy; because the abundance of the sea shall turn to you, the wealth of the nations/gentiles will come to you…All of them from Sheba shall come; they shall bring gold and incense; and they shall proclaim the praises of YHWH…and I will glorify the house of My glory. Who are these who fly like a cloud, and as doves to their windows? Surely the coastlands shall wait for Me, and the ships of Tarshish first, to bring your sons from far, their silver and their gold with them, to the name of YHWH your God, and to the Holy One of Israel, because He has glorified you. The sons of strangers will build up your walls, and their kings will serve you; for in My wrath I struck you, but in My favor I had mercy on you. Therefore your gates will always be open; they will not be shut day nor night, to bring to you the wealth of the nations…For the nation and kingdom that will not serve you will perish. Yes, those nations will be completely wasted.
Isaiah 60:1-12"
& continues
"This prophecy occurs when the darkness, also called gross darkness, covers the earth and its people. Welcome to today's world! To live a lifestyle that God calls abominable is now the 'new righteousness', while all who oppose it are seen as enemies of mankind, enemies of love and peace, even enemies of God – who, as cheap grace tells us, "really just loves us so much, that like, no matter what we do, it like, really doesn't matter." That is, it doesn’t matter unless you insist that the Bible really is God's Word and He actually means what He says; then you will be seen by the world as part of the problem and not the solution. But at the same time, there is a people who see God fulfilling His promises with His chosen nation of Israel. These gentiles help carry the Jews home – even providing finances to do so. Who are they? They are gentiles who proclaim the praises of YHWH and bring the Jews home for the sake of the name of YHWH your God, and for the Holy One of Israel. Again, this can only mean the true Church. While there have been others who are not Christians who have aided the Jewish return, it is the true Church that in both England and Scotland started praying for Jewish return from exile in the 1700s and the true Church that has helped hundreds of thousands of Jews make aliyah since the 1990s. What we are seeing is that which was spoken of by the prophet.
Of great weight is the above warning that God lays on the nations/gentiles who dare to interfere with His end-time restoration of His people: For the nation and kingdom that will not serve you will perish. Yes, those nations will be completely wasted.
For Zion's sake I will not be silent, and for Jerusalem's sake I will not rest, until its righteousness goes out as brightness, and her salvation as a burning lamp. And the nations/gentiles will see your righteousness, and all kings your glory; and you will be called by a new name, which the mouth of YHWH will name. You also will be a crown of glory in the hand of YHWH, and a royal diadem in the hand of your God. You will no more be called Forsaken; nor will your land any more be called Desolate; but you will be called 'My delight is in her', and your land 'Married'; for YHWH delights in you, and your land is married. For as a young man marries a virgin, so will your sons marry you; and as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride, so will your God rejoice over you. I have set watchmen on your walls, O Jerusalem, who will not be silent all the day nor all the night; you who remember YHWH [lit: YHWH's "reminders", from which we get the modern Hebrew for "secretaries"], do not be silent, and give Him no rest until He establishes and makes Jerusalem a praise in the earth.
Isaiah 62:1-7"
& continues
"God declares His will in this passage. In order for His will to be accomplished, He raises up intercessors, called here 'watchmen', who ask God to do His revealed will. True intercession is God revealing His will to us and then we, by the anointing of His Spirit, persistently ask Him to do it (Luke 18:1). Has He raised up so many to pray for this nation at this time so that the Jews will come back to be massacred? Does that sound like the God you know?
Behold, the storm of YHWH goes forth with fury, an intense storm; it shall break upon the head of the wicked. The fierce anger of YHWH shall not return until He has done it, until He has fulfilled the purposes of His heart. In the last days you shall understand it. At that time, says YHWH, I will be the God of all the families of Israel, and they shall be My people. Thus says YHWH, The people who were left of the sword [Jacob's trouble/the Holocaust of Jer. 30:7) found grace in the wilderness; even Israel, when I went to give him rest. YHWH has appeared to me from afar, saying, Yes, I have loved you with an everlasting love; therefore with loving-kindness I have drawn you. Again I will build you, and you shall be built, O virgin of Israel…You shall yet plant vines on the mountains of Samaria; the planters shall plant, and shall eat them as common things. For there shall be a day that the watchmen on Mount Ephraim shall cry, Arise and let us go up to Zion to YHWH our God! For thus says YHWH, Sing with gladness for Jacob, and shout among the chief of the nations. Cry out, give praise and say, YHWH, save Your people, the remnant of Israel. Behold, I will bring them from the north and gather them from the far corners of the earth, and with them the blind and the lame, the woman with child and she who is in labor with child, together; a great company shall return there. They shall come with weeping, and with prayers I will lead them. I will cause them to walk by the rivers of waters in a straight way; they shall not stumble in it, for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is My firstborn. Hear the Word of YHWH, O gentiles, and declare it in the coastlands afar off, saying, He who scattered Israel will gather him and keep/guard him, as a shepherd keeps his flock.
Jeremiah 30:23-31:10"
& continues
"Recall that there are no chapter divisions in the original Hebrew or Greek texts. So at times a message is divided by man-made chapters – and that is the case here in Jeremiah. When a chapter starts with At that time says YHWH, one needs to look back to find out exactly what time this refers to. It is clear that this passage refers to 'the last days', and also to a time that is after Jacob's Trouble (30:7).
This portion is full of major implications. First, the God of the Tanach, whom many still only see as a God of judgment, anger and war, speaks one of the most loving and gracious messages to be found anywhere in Scripture, and He speaks it to a still unsaved Israel. I have loved you with an everlasting love; therefore with lovingkindness I have drawn you. (31:3b) The Hebrew for 'lovingkindness' is chesed, which can be defined as God's stubborn love based on His commitment to His covenant promises, or simply, His covenant-love. His drawing of Israel is because of who He is and not who Israel is – just as He saves us because of who He is and not because of who we are. Thank God for that!
The result of His covenant-love is a restoration of His people to His land. The specific area to which God declares He is settling them – Samaria – is part of the so-called 'occupied territories' today! One would think that God should have known how this would upset the rest of the world and settle His people somewhere else, but then our God has never been known to be 'politically correct'.
The Hebrew word used here for "watchmen" is notzrim, which is the modern Hebrew word for "Christians". Obviously, it did not mean that to Jeremiah, and there is another, more commonly used word for watchmen that could have been used, shomrim. Yet the Holy Spirit, writing through Jeremiah (2 Tim. 3:16), chose this specific word. And since this is a last days prophecy, it is obvious that God is speaking to the Church, directing us to pray for the salvation of the remnant of Israel (31:7).
Here is His answer to that prayer: I will bring them home from exile to Israel (vv. 8-9). Then in verse 10, God specifically states that in these last days, it is here in the land that Israel will be afforded His personal protection. He who scattered Israel will gather him and keep/guard him, as a shepherd keeps his flock. As Derek Prince used to point out, since God has scattered Israel and is now gathering them, why doubt that He Himself will guard them? So where does the 'slaughter-in-the-land-is-still-to-come' teaching fit into this clear picture?"
& continues
"Behold, I will gather them out of all the lands where I have driven them in My anger, in My fury, and in great wrath. I will bring them again to this place, and will cause them to dwell safely, and they shall be My people, and I will be their God. I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear Me forever, for their good and for the good of their children after them, and I will cut an everlasting covenant with them that I will not turn away from them, to do them good, but I will put My fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from Me. Yes, I will rejoice over them to do them good, and I will truly plant them in this land with all My heart and all My soul. For thus says YHWH: As I have brought all this great evil on this people, so I will bring on them all the good that I have promised them, and fields shall be bought in this land of which you say, It is a desert without man or beast; it is given into the hand of the Chaldeans. Men shall buy fields for silver, and write it in a book, seal it, and take witnesses in the land of Benjamin, in the places around Jerusalem, in the cities of Judah, in the cities of the mountains, in the cities of the valley, and in the cities of the south. For I will cause their captivity to return, says YHWH.
Jeremiah 32:37-44
At times in God's prophetic statements, there is a joining of near and far future, with a long time gap in the prophetic sentence itself. Of course, we can only see this after the fact, but Yeshua interpreted Isaiah 61:1-3 in this way. In a synagogue in Nazareth, He quoted the first part of this prophecy as being fulfilled before the eyes of those who were listening to Him. The Spirit of the Lord YHWH is on Me; because YHWH has anointed Me to preach the Gospel to the poor; He has sent Me to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound; to preach the acceptable year of YHWH… (61:1-2a). Then He stopped in the middle of that sentence and sat down. The rest of that prophecy is being worked out in our day – before our eyes: … and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all who mourn [in Zion]; to appoint to those who mourn in Zion, to give to them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the mantle of praise for the spirit of heaviness; so that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of YHWH, that He might be glorified.
In the previous prophecy from Jeremiah 32, there is a brief mention of the Chaldean conquest of that day, but the final fulfillment is clearly for the days we live in. Again, God states that He will gather the Jews from all nations to which He has scattered them – and not just from Babylon. This is being fulfilled today. Also He says after He gathers them, then they will dwell safely and be saved as a nation – both of which we look forward to seeing before our eyes in the very near future."
& continues
"Do you realize that verse 41 is the only place in all of God's Word where He says He will do something with all of His heart and all of His soul? And it has to do with the physical restoration of the Jews to the physical land of Israel – including all of the 'occupied territories'. If God is doing this openly before the world for His glory, does it make sense that after they are settled and buying properties and being saved – as we are seeing right now – that He would allow another Holocaust to happen? Plus reread what He promises in verse 42: Thus says YHWH: As I have brought all this great evil on this people, so I will bring on them all the good that I have promised them. (Jer. 32:42) Good is not describing a genocide.
Are you in a church that is actually resisting what Your God is doing with all of His heart and soul? God's land that He is giving to His people for His glory – does your congregation ignorantly call it 'the occupied territories'? [See Ezek. 35] Is your denomination considering, or already boycotting Israel? If you attend a church that is hindering what Your God is doing with all of His heart and soul, have you asked Him if He wants you to stay? Error breeds more error, and missing what God is doing with Israel in these days is one of the gravest errors/deceptions in the modern Church.
Ezekiel 36 deserves an in-depth study by itself. This message to Ezekiel starts in Chapter 35 and warns nations that speaking against God's land is heard in heaven as blasphemy! "Because you [who have eternal hatred against Israel (v.5)] have said, These two nations and these two lands shall be mine, and we shall possess it; yet YHWH was there; therefore, as I live, says the Lord YHWH, I will act according to your anger and your envy which you have shown out of your hatred against them. And I will make Myself known among them [Israel] when I have judged you. And you shall know that I am YHWH, and I have heard all your blasphemies which you have spoken against the mountains of Israel, saying, Desolation! They are given to us to consume. Thus with your mouth you have boasted against Me, have multiplied your words against Me, and I have heard them. (35:10-13)
Those who speak against or falsely about Israel's mountains, God accuses of blasphemy/slander – of speaking lies and distortions against God's land and His nature. Why His nature? Because of the more than 200 times that He promises to give this land to His people, including 40 times when He swears to do it. As He says in Ezekiel 36, this restoration of His people to His land is for His holy name's sake (36:22-23). So if Israel's restoration could be prevented, it would prove our God both a liar and unable to do that which He has clearly promised."
& continues
"Does this mean that all the politicians and media people, even pastors and Christians, that call His mountains the 'occupied territories' are slandering God? He alone examines the hearts (Jer. 17:9-10) – but please understand that He takes this speaking against His land and His people very seriously (Gen. 12:3).
Ezekiel 36:8-12 God commands Ezekiel to speak to His mountains – symbolic for all of His land (v.4-5) – these words of incredible blessing: But you, O mountains of Israel, you shall put out your branches and yield your fruit to My people Israel; for they have drawn near to come home. For, behold, I am for you, and I will turn to you, and you shall be tilled and sown. And I will multiply men on you, all the house of Israel, all of it. And cities shall have people, and wastes shall be built, and I will multiply men and beast on you, and they shall increase and be fruitful… and I will do better to you than at your beginnings. And you shall know that I am YHWH. Yes, I will cause men to walk on you, even My people Israel, and they shall possess you, and you shall be their inheritance, and will not any more increase their bereavement.
While the complete fulfillment of this is still to come, this prophecy covers the time from the 1880s when the Jews started returning in large waves of aliyah until the time of their salvation, as the rest of this chapter points out. So where in these precious promises do we see another Holocaust? We don't; but just the opposite. Since God says that He is doing this for His holy name's sake – and not because Israel is such a righteous, holy nation (36:16-23, 31-32), why do people say He needs to allow His people to be slaughtered in great numbers just to save a few? Will that really bring Him glory? But God says despite who the Jews are, and what they have done, often profaning His name, He does this for Himself. He gathers them from the nations (v. 24), saves and cleanses them (v. 25-27) [the best description of being born-again in all of Scripture!], settles and blesses them in their land (v. 28-30), and after salvation they see their wrongdoing and repent (v. 31-32; cp. Zech. 12:10-14). The ultimate goal of Israel's restoration and salvation will be that many gentiles will see what God is doing in Israel and give Him the glory (v. 33-36).
A final note: in verse 37, we see the only thing that God is requiring from His people in order to do this is not repentance, not worship, not more congregational meetings, not an increase in finances – but that which He is always seeking for – intercession! He waits for us to ask Him to do that which He wants to do (Isa. 62:6-7; Ezek. 22:30; Matt. 6:9-10).
Thus says YHWH of Hosts: I was jealous/zealous for Zion with great jealousy/zeal, and I was jealous/zealous for her with great fury. Thus says YHWH: I have returned to Zion, and will dwell in the midst of Jerusalem, and Jerusalem shall be called a City of Truth, and the mountain of YHWH of Hosts, the Holy Mountain … There shall yet be old men and old women living in the streets of Jerusalem, each man with his staff in his hand because of their many days, and the streets of the city shall be full of boys and girls playing…If it is marvelous in the eyes of the remnant of this people in those days, will it also be marvelous in My eyes, says YHWH of Hosts? Thus says YHWH of Hosts: Behold, I will save My people from the east country, and from the west, and I will bring them, and they shall dwell in the midst of Jerusalem. They shall be My people, and I will be their God, in truth and in righteousness.
Zechariah 8:2-8"
& continues
"This word cannot be about the Babylonian captivity, as it was said originally to a people who had basically just returned from there! Also, God says He will regather His scattered people from the east and the west. West of Israel is the Mediterranean Sea and beyond. God adds that we will see old people and children in Jerusalem's streets. Living in Jerusalem, this is something we are seeing today, and it also lines up with Psalm 147:2, YHWH is building Jerusalem; He is gathering together the outcasts of Israel.
Again we see a general pattern that the Jews return and then Yeshua is revealed to them as a nation. After all, to be God's people in truth and righteousness can only mean to be found in Messiah (John 14:6; 2 Cor. 5:21).
We see Psalms 102:1-18 as a confirmation of all that we have said above. This chapter starts with a description of the Nazi Holocaust, then proceeds to the birth of modern Israel with an accompanying global revival and all of this gives the general timeframe of Messiah Yeshua's return.
A prayer of the afflicted, when he is overwhelmed and pours out his complaint before YHWH. Hear my prayer, O YHWH; let my cry come to You. Hide not Your face from me in the day when I am in trouble; bow down Your ear to me; in the day I call, answer me quickly. For my days are consumed like smoke, my bones are burned like a hearth.
vv.1-3
That last line is a clear picture of the end of the Jews in the concentration camp ovens.
My heart is stricken, and dried like grass, so that I forget to eat my bread. Because of the voice of my groaning, my bones cling to my skin.
vv.4-5
What an apt description of the concentration camp survivors.
…I watch, and am as a sparrow alone on the house top.
vv.7
This symbolizes someone who has lost their spouse.
My enemies curse me all the day; and they who are mad against me are sworn against me.
vv.8
Some say the Hebrew can also be translated, "they…use my name against me", which is a perfect picture of the infamous 'yellow star' the Jews were forced to wear.
For I have eaten ashes like bread and have mixed my drink with weeping.
vv.9
With all of the bodies being burned, ash got into everything, including the food.
Because of Your anger and Your wrath; for You have lifted me up and cast me down.
vv.10
In Scripture, there are no second causes, as both writers and those they write about really believed that God was sovereign, with nothing happening unless He either ordained it or allowed it. While Christians today may be hesitant to think about God as the ultimate cause of everything, or the One who takes ultimate responsibility for it all, the Bible is not. YHWH reigns. (Psalm 93:1a; 96:10b; 97:1a; 99:1a); YHWH has prepared His throne in the heavens; His kingdom rules over all. (Psalms 103:19); If there is a calamity in a city, has YHWH not also done it? (Amos 3:6b); For God gave into their [the ten kings] hearts to do His mind, and to act with one mind, and to give their kingdom to the beast [the Anti-Christ] until the Words of God will be fulfilled. (Rev. 17:17)
My days are like a shadow stretched out; and I wither like grass."
& continues
"All of these verses, in spirit, line up with what is said about Jacob's trouble in Jeremiah 30. Yet now, as the Psalmist looks to the Lord Himself, he begins to prophesy a wondrous future.
But You, YHWH, shall endure forever; and Your memory to all generations. You shall arise, and have mercy [rachem – from the Heb. root word for a mother's womb] on Zion; for the time to favor [lit., 'grace'] her, yes, the set time [moed – a time divinely appointed], has come.
vv.12-13
What a description of the rebirth of the modern state of Israel – since it happened right after the Holocaust and only because of God's amazing covenant love and His perfect timing. After all, what other nations were ever born – let alone reborn – when they were at their weakest point in all of their history (Isa. 66:8-9)?
For Your servants take pleasure in its stones, and pity its dust.
vv.14
Israelis are so prone to do this – whether by collecting rocks, or archeological items, or just loving and working this land that God has graced us with.
So the nations/gentiles shall fear the name of YHWH, and all the kings of the earth Your glory.
vv.15
Many of those who believe in the 'Jacob's-trouble-is-still-to-come' teaching, say that after Israel – whomever is left – gets saved, then there will be a huge worldwide revival. Yet this Psalm says the worldwide revival occurs as Israel is being restored to its land. Missiologists have reported that since around 1900, [Jews started returning in significant numbers around the mid-1880s with the First Aliyah], more people have come into the Kingdom of God than all previous centuries combined! Recall that the modern Pentecostal movement started shortly after that First Aliyah. And around the same time when Jerusalem was recaptured by Israel in 1967, and no longer trampled down by the gentiles, the Jesus movement and the modern charismatic movement occurred. Since 1967, more Jews have come to know their Messiah than at any time since the beginning of the book of Acts. Also, Muslims, Chinese, Hindus, Mongolians, Africans, and other people groups have seen huge numbers being saved – all around the time of Israel's restoration. So that huge end-time revival so many are waiting for is actually happening today – just not in the West where much of the Church is under the curse that accompanies replacement theory (Gen. 12:3; cp. Gal. 3:17).
When YHWH shall build up Zion, He shall appear in His glory.
vv.16"
& continues
"Here is one of the clearest markers of the timing of Yeshua's return, as Zion is restored after the Holocaust. Yeshua came the first time in humility, riding on a donkey's colt (Zech. 9:9). This verse 16 refers to His soon return in glory – riding on a war horse (Rev. 19:11-16). Then the sign of the Son of Man shall appear in the heavens, and then all the tribes of the earth [i.e., the land, Israel] shall mourn, and they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of the heaven with power and great glory. (Matt. 24:30)
He will turn to the prayer of the forsaken and not despise their prayer. This shall be written for the generation to come [literally, "the last generation"]; and the people who shall be created shall praise YHWH.
vv.17-18
WHAT KIND OF GOD IS HE?
Is He lying to the Church when He tells them to do whatever He says to help restore (Isa. 49:22; 60:3-11, etc.) and comfort (Isa. 40:1-2) and save (Jer. 31:7; Rom. 11:11, 30-32) His Jewish people? They were enemies of the gospel for the sake of the gentiles, and while most Jews still remain in that state – God says they are still beloved for the sake of the forefathers (Rom. 11:28).
Would the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God whose very nature is best expressed in the incarnation as Yeshua the Jew (Isa. 7:14; Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:3), celebrate His marriage supper while His covenant people, who are still beloved for the fathers' sake, are being slaughtered? Yeshua Himself said, He who has seen Me has seen the Father, (John 14:9) – and shortly after that, He wept over Jerusalem because of what He knew was coming about 40 years later [70 AD]. Would He now rejoice at His Marriage as Jerusalem is surrounded? Not so! God has declared that He is YHWH who changes not, therefore the sons of Jacob are not consumed (Mal. 3:6). Whenever this particular aspect of this troubling teaching appears, it blasphemes the very nature of our God.
CONCLUSION
Prophecy would be so much easier to understand if it was not about the future! God can fulfill His word in all of its details because He alone knows the end from the beginning. Yes, we can see through a dark glass – but not clearly enough to be dogmatic about details. Yet when we look back, we see how faithful God is to literally fulfill that which He said – in those prophetic statements that are to be taken literally.
But some of God's prophetic declarations are not to be taken literally, particularly when they have been written down from dreams and visions. Visions and dreams use symbol and metaphor to express a reality beyond what we usually consider "real". We are not expecting the Anti-Christ to be a real beast with seven heads, ten horns, ten crowns, and the title 'Blasphemy' on its heads, who comes out of the sea (Rev. 13:1). And while there can be 144,000 virgin male Israelis who will follow the Lamb, that number might also be seen as symbolic. It is important to know that sections of the books of Daniel, Zechariah and Revelation, are part of the genre known as Jewish Apocalyptic literature, which emphasizes visions, dreams, symbols and metaphors to share deep truths in a non-literal, more pictorial manner. While there can be literal fulfillments of much of what is written in these books, there does not have to be, in order for God to faithfully fulfill what He meant in sharing His word with us.
Does that bother us? Have we become so dogmatic in our end-time prophetic charts that if God fulfills what He said – but in a way that does not line up with what we have already decided – we would miss it even as it happens before our eyes? Are some so convinced that the rapture is pre-tribulation that if it is not, they would be unable to recognize the Anti-Christ, because according to their prophetic chart, the Church will be gone before he appears?"
& lastly says
"Do you who love Israel realize how the teaching dissected in this study comes across as total hypocrisy to many Israelis and Jews? They correctly understand it to mean that the Church wants the Jews to return home to Israel so that Jesus Christ will return – but only after the Jews are slaughtered. And, of course, the Church will be in glory – celebrating – while this happens here on earth. How does this even begin to provoke the Jews to jealousy? What Jew would even want to serve a God that allows His people to be slaughtered again – while saying He loves them? Jews have enough issues between them and their God because of the Nazi Holocaust. That did not draw them to Him. Rather it added some major question marks as to exactly what type of God He is – and for many Jews, to question if there even is a God. Also, does Paul not clearly say that it is the goodness of God which leads you to repentance (Rom. 2:4)?
We have laid out a more scriptural alternative to the teaching that Jacob's trouble and two-thirds being slaughtered in the land of Israel is still to come. We do not expect everyone who reads this to agree. In fact, we suspect this will anger some who have carelessly made this teaching a part of their 'prophetic' ministry.
Yet there is no doubt that God is bringing His people home today. And there is no doubt that He expects the Church to help. Therefore, you need to study and decide whether the God you serve, the One who tells the Jews, I have loved you with an eternal love, is really bringing the Jewish people back as lambs to the slaughter, or bringing them home for salvation. And if it is in order to meet their King, Messiah Yeshua, and if it is the goodness of God that leads one to repentance, and if He has promised His people a hope and a future, then maybe the prophecy charts we love to create need changing. It might be a good idea to start studying the Word contextually.
Try earnestly to present yourself approved to God,
a workman that does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of Truth.
2 Tim. 2:15"
From the Internet Archive, of Masada2000.org an article is headlined
"Accusing Israel of Apartheid, Ethnic Cleansing, Occupation" the article says:
"The Arabs have promoted concepts such as there is, or always was, a county called "Palestine," that there is a people called "Palestinians," that the Jews are "occupying" Arab lands and that the Jews living in their biblical heartland [Judea-Samaria and Gaza, a.k.a. the "West Bank"] are "obstacles to peace." These concepts, which are a complete invention by the Arab world and their apologists, have been swallowed hook, line and sinker by the liberal media and are now almost universally accepted as the Truth! What the Arabs have managed to achieve is to COMPLETELY falsify history!
There are others who are to blame. For many years, it has been obvious to us that anti-Israel propaganda and Israel bashing around the world are little more than disguised anti-Semitism. No one on earth really cares about the Palestinians, least of all Palestinian leaders. People pretend to care about the Palestinians because this helps them de-legitimize Israel. When King Hussein of Jordan murdered 10,000 Palestinians in September 1970, no one cared about the Palestinians, no one noticed they were having their "rights violated" no one thought they needed "self-determination". More generally, the world does not care about Arabs being killed unless it is Israel doing the killing in self-defense. When 100,000 Algerian civilians are murdered, no one notices. When far more are murdered in Sudan, no one notices. When Saddam Hussein gasses his own people, when Asad massacres 10,000 in Hama in Syria, no one cares or notices. But when Israel kills 20 people in Jenin while hunting down mass murderers who have murdered hundreds of Jews (many of them children), that is genocide and a war crime. And when Palestinians murder 1200 Israelis after signing the Oslo accords, that is protest against occupation.
Israel-bashing is naked anti-Semitism. The bulk of Israeli "critics" are motivated not by a desire to see this or that specific policy of Israel altered, a camp to which I myself would belong in spades, but rather who seek to see Israel destroyed. They object to Israeli military actions because they do not think Israel should employ its military to defend itself at all. They believe that the only legitimate response to Arab atrocities is Israeli capitulation and self-annihilation."
the article continues
" 1.Accusing Israel of "Apartheid"
Is Israel Guilty of Apartheid?Definition of APARTHEID: "An official policy of racial segregation formerly practiced in the Republic of South Africa, involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against non-whites."
Israel's policy toward the Palestinians is also being called "a new kind of apartheid, a crime against humanity, a form of genocide." Now let's take a look at this so-called" apartheid" within Israel. Within Israel today, Jews are a majority, but the large Arab minority (23% of total) are full citizens with voting rights and representation in the government. Under the former South African apartheid system, black South Africans could not vote and were not citizens of the country in which they were the overwhelming majority of the population. There is still some degree of discrimination within Israel, but Israeli Arabs have more political rights than any other Arabs in the Middle East... including their compatriots in the Palestinian Authority. And, whatever their grievances, they are still economically better off than the majority of their fellows in virtually every other Arab country. If they still face inequality it is because of the mutual hostility and mistrust between both communities, not because of race.
The situation for Arab Palestinians in the [West Bank and Gaza] territories, won by Israel in the 1967 defensive war begun by three surrounding Arab armies, is different. Israel's very real security requirements, brought about by two violent insurrections [Intifadas] in these "occupied" territories, have forced Israel to impose restrictions on their Arab residents which are not [yet!] necessary INSIDE Israel’s pre-'67 borders. This is because the Arab Palestinians in the territories dispute Israel’s right to exist whereas South Africa's blacks did not seek the destruction of South Africa... only the removal of the White apartheid regime.
Arab Palestinians Unleash a Deadly Assault on JewsUp until September 2000, when the Arab Palestinians from the [West Bank and Gaza] territories began their second violent "Intifada" and unleashed their non-stop Jew-killing, suicide bombing spree, they had been allowed to work inside Israel Proper and receive similar pay and benefits as did their Jewish counterparts. They were also allowed to attend schools and universities (which Israel built for them!). Palestinians were also given opportunities to run many of their own affairs. None of this was true for South African blacks."
& continues
"Israeli Muslims, Christians, Druse and many other minority ethnic groups enjoy exactly the same civil and political rights as Jews. They can sit in the Knesset, say what they like, go where they like, pray where they like, go into business, be elected to office and serve in the Cabinet. The first Middle East country to grant Arab women the right to vote was Israel! And nowhere else in the Middle East is there a democracy where the word "vote" has any real meaning! The only exception is that Israeli Arabs do not serve in the army. There is nothing more hypercritical than a single one of the 64 Arab/Islamic/Muslim theocracies and brutal dictatorships pronouncing judgment on issues relating to "discrimination" since not a single one among them treats their minorities in the same tolerant way as does Israel.
As for Israel's "racially based" Law of Return," this policy has nothing to do with race and is based solely on religious affiliation. If it were racist, why did Israel airlift 42,000 BLACK Ethiopian Jews between 1984 and 1991? In anything, that airlift marked the only time in history when blacks were systematically moved from one country to another while NOT in chains! When Jordan (the FIRST Arab "Palestinian" state) introduced its own law of return in 1954 for all former non-Jewish residents of Palestine. Yet when Israel did precisely the same thing for Jews, it suddenly becomes "racism!" We call it a "double standard!"
& continues
"Anti-Zionists (modern day disguise of anti-Semites) have leveled other discriminatory charges against Israel toward the Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza. Among them are that (1) Israel enforces different color license plates and computerized passes that restrict where West Bank and Gaza Arabs can go and (2) Israel builds "by-pass" roads for "Jews only."
In response to these charges... (1) All Israelis, whether they be Jewish, Christian or Arab, have the same color license plate. Only ["Palestinian"] Arabs living in theIsraeli Checkpoint. Stopping Arab Palestinian Terrorism West Bank and Gaza have a different colored license plate. This is for security reasons, especially at border crossings and other security checkpoints. This is similar to American and Canadian plates... the only real difference being that hardly any Canadians cross the border with the primary intent of killing Americans!!! (2) By-pass roads were built AROUND Arab areas because too many Jews were being slaughtered by Arabs on roads that went THROUGH Arab areas! They were not built to discriminate against Arabs. Nor were they built to give Jews a smoother ride. They were built to save Jewish lives!
Accusations such as the above are baseless. And who could ever believe that Israel's willingness to even DISCUSS handing over land (won in a war the Arabs started) to form a second independent Arab Palestinian state. Most "normal" people would have long ago concluded that the Arafat and his fellow Arab Palestinian psychopaths were never really interested in peace. Yet Israel's decades-long quest for peace, compromise and accommodation with these very same "Palestinians" is called a "crime against humanity" or a desire to commit "genocide" upon the Palestinians! If anything, it is the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hizbollah and all the other Arab Palestinian terrorist groups themselves that brought about the Israeli crackdown in the "occupied territories" which led to the deaths of hundreds of Palestinians... in addition to different colored license plates and by-pass roads just for Jews!
Now another definition... Anti-Zionism: 1. Refusing the Jews their God-given right to return to the land of their forefathers and their faith. 2. Denying the Jews the right to live in Israel in freedom, peace and with human dignity. 3. De-legitimize the State of Israel and denying it the right to exist. 4. Demanding a Jewish exodus... this time OUT of Israel and, preferably, INTO the Mediterranean Sea. 5. Wishing to erase the State of Israel from the map and ethnically cleanse the Arab Middle East of its "stinking Jews!"
Definition of Chutzpah (Nerve): The Saudi Ambassador to the UN, Fawzi Shobokshi, called Israel a "racist, terrorist state." Yet Israel has 24% non-Jewish citizens while Saudi Arabia has no Jews and no Christians... only Moslems! So which is the racist State? Also, no Israelis flew planes into the World Trade Center Towers while 15 of the 19 Arab terrorists who DID were Saudis! Talk about Deception, Denial and Deflection of Guilt! This is Chutzpah AND typical Arab propaganda against Israel."
.
& continues
" 2. Accusing Israel of "Ethnic Cleansing"
and "Genocide"
Is Israel Guilty of Ethnic Cleansing Against the Arab Palestinians? Turning the history of the Jews against them is another commonplace of anti-Semitism. If the Jews were victims in an actual genocide, what better way to transfer sympathy from them to their rivals than by painting them as modern Nazis, and their policies as a new holocaust? Genocide is an attempt to exterminate a people, not to alter their behavior. The Israelis -- who employed a third of the Palestinian population, armed the Palestinian Authority and offered Yasser Arafat a state consisting of 95 percent of the West Bank -- were hardly practicing genocide. Israel, however, is now sustaining a war for its own existence. A nation defending its citizens against terrorist bombings, mortar assaults, sniper attacks, and a military and diplomatic onslaught by an array of Arab foes is practicing survival, not genocide.
The 1,200,000 Arab Palestinians whose parents and grandparents opted for Israeli citizenship in 1948 now have a life in Israel. Despite their constant bitching and their seeming support for their Palestinian kin to destroy Israel, they have no intention whatsoever of leaving Israel for Arafat’s Palestinian State if, or when, it is declared. If anything, they are popping out Israeli-Arab babies in such high numbers that Israel will demographically no longer BE a Jewish State by the year 2030! Despite their perceived problems with Israel, they still like it there. They vote in Israel's elections and even have Israeli-Arab Knesset members. Free "democratic" elections such as this cannot even be imagined in any one of the 22 countries of the Arab League nor in any of the forty-four Muslim nations throughout Africa and Asia. However, should any of them wish to move out of Israel, we at Masada2000.org would wholeheartedly encourage them to do so!"
& continues
"Israel heavily subsidizes the health of all its Arab citizens equally with that of Jews and other minority groups. Whether they be clinics, hospitals or homes for the aged, all Israeli citizens have access to one of the highest standards of medicine in the world. Monthly subsidies also go to parents of large families (unfortunately, Arabs have the largest families!). And get this.... recently, when an Israeli-Arab man blew himself up taking a number of innocent Israelis with him, his family began receiving welfare checks from the government since they were now without a breadwinner! Is THIS what they call "apartheid" and "ethnic cleansing?" If so, then ALL countries should adopt policies of "apartheid" and "ethnic cleansing!"
On the other hand, the Arab/Muslim/Islamic nations who are Israel's accusers are the REAL ethnic cleansing "specialists." For example, Jews cannot vote in Saudi Arabia because the Saudis have ethnically cleansed their land of Jews and all other non-Muslims... except, of course, when they need American soldiers to drive out the likes of Saddam Hussein's Iraqi invaders. Then the Saudis are more than willing to have non-Muslims die in the service of Islam!
The oil-wealthy Kuwaiti also don’t allow their Jewish citizens freedom of religion or education. They don’t have to. They have no Jewish citizens. Jews and all other non-Muslims are forbidden in their Jew-free paradise. As with the Saudis, the only exception is when it's time to send American soldiers to protect them.
Jews in Jordan do not enjoy the same rights or facilities because Jordan also has no Jews. Their ethnic cleansing policies do not permit Jews to defile the purity of this Arab country either. These same policies are standard fare in all Arab/Muslim/Islamic countries. These same 1.2 BILLION voices who daily cry out for "rights of self-determination" for the poor, poor Arab "Palestinians" deny these same "right of self-determination" for the 4.5 Million Jews of tiny Israel.
Arabs and other religious minorities enjoy FULL freedom of their religion in Israel. In addition, Israel pays for Arab education, in the latter’s own language, in their own schools AND built by Israeli taxes. Israeli Arab primary, secondary and university students also have the right to teach hatred of the Jews at Israeli taxpayer expense!
And what about Jewish education or religion in the Arab Emirates, Syria, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Somalia, Sudan, Bahrain or any of the other Arab/Muslim/Islamic countries? Not to worry. There are no Jewish education or Jewish religious freedom to worship issues because Jews dare not even visit, let alone live there.
What happened to the ancient Jewish communities of Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia and Yemen? They all had their land and possessions taken from them and were driven out (or killed) by their Arab/Muslim/Islamic hosts... a case of REAL "ethnic cleansing!"
Finally, the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics just published the total Arab "Palestinian" populations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. It has grown from 1.1 million in 1967 (when Israel began "occupying" these territories) up to over 3.5 million. Does this population explosion sound like "ethnic cleansing and genocide" to you!
Conclusion: Don’t hold up the crime of Ethnic Cleansing and Genocide against the People of Israel!"
& continues
" 3. Accusing Israel of "Occupying" Arab Land
Is This Israeli Occupation of Is It Defending What Is Rightfully Theirs? To call the Israeli presence in THEIR OWN ancient homeland an "occupation," is ridiculous. An occupation of what? There was never an Arab "Palestinian" nation or people there before. There are no "Palestinians." They are a made-up people for the sole purpose of political propaganda! They have no separate culture, language, or country of their own; even their leader -- Arafat -- is EGYPTIAN!! He later moved to Jerusalem. If, at the moment, he is living in the West Bank, he is a "settler" there, not a native. Indeed, most of the Arabs living within the borders of Israel today have come from some other Arab country at some time in their life. They are all "settlers." Since 1967, the Arabs have built 261 settlements in the West Bank. We don't hear much about those settlements. We hear instead about the number of Jewish settlements that have been created. We hear how destabilizing they are – how provocative they are. Yet, by comparison, only 144 Jewish settlements have been built since 1967,
If there is an occupation, it would have to be the Arab occupation of Jewish historical land! Jews have lived in Judea and Samaria (Yesha, a.k.a. the "West Bank") for over 3,500 years. The only time Jews have been prohibited from living in Yesha in recent decades was during Jordan's 19 year rule from 1948 to 1967. At best, the Arabs are desert wanderers and squatters. As a matter of policy, Israel does not requisition private land for the establishment of Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Housing construction is allowed only on public land after an exhaustive investigation has confirmed that no private rights exist regarding the land in question.
The fact of the matter is that Jews choosing to live in the West Bank and Gaza are pioneers. They are returning to live in the heartland of Israel, the place which served as the cradle of Western civilization and the Jewish religion. These areas which Jews refer to by their original names of Judea, Samaria and Gaza were the scene of much of the drama described in the Bible. It is the place where King David walked and where the prophets of Israel gave the world a vision of peace and brotherhood. Ancient synagogues and archaeological sites attest to the long-standing Jewish presence in the region, a presence that is once again flourishing despite Arab opposition and terror. "
& continues
"Moreover, Israel did not “occupy” these territories, as the Palestinians and others would have you believe. In the 1967 Six-Day War, Arab armies massed on Israel’s narrow borders, vowing to destroy the Jewish state. In a war of self-defense, Israel succeeded in overcoming its enemies, in the process taking control over Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Under international law, territories are considered “occupied” only when they are taken in an act of aggression something which clearly does not apply to Israel’s case. It was 35 years ago this month that Israel prevailed in the 1967 war, returning to places such as Hebron and Shilo. For two thousand uninterrupted years, Jews had lived in the ancient Jewish quarter of Hebron, near the Tomb of the Patriarchs where Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are buried. Only in 1929, when local Arabs massacred them, was the Jewish community forced to flee the city. What could be more historically just than to rebuild the Jewish presence there?
One must also recall that prior to the beginning of the Jewish return and reclamation of their ancient homeland in the 1880s, there were BOTH Arab "Palestinians" and Jewish "Palestinians" living there. Neither group had a particularly significant numbers after centuries during which the land was ignore and neglected. Once the Jews began their Zionist movement to reclaim, beautify and resettle the land, Arabs from surrounding Arab areas also began returning. Unlike the early Jewish settlers who were willing to live in peace and share land with the Arabs, the latter was bent on sharing nothing! The Arab motto then is exactly what it is now 120 years later... "we will shed every last drop of blood for every last grain of Arab land!"
& continues
"The so-called "Israeli settlements" in the Judea and Samaria (a.k.a. the "West Bank") and Gaza have been blamed for all the Arab-Israeli and "Palestinian"-Israeli conflict when, in Truth, these settlements were the result of a war brought to Israel BY these very same Arabs! The land areas from which Jordan attacked Israel in 1967 is the "West Bank," the land from which the Egyptian Army attacked Israel in 1967 is the Gaza Strip and the land from which Syria attack Israel in 1967 is the Golan Heights. Had these Arab nations not threatened to destroy Israel in June of 1967, there would be no Israeli "settlers" on these territories! Have you ever heard of the expression, "To the Victor Goes the Spoils of War?" This would seem especially justified when the victor was attacked! Incredibly, "Israeli aggression" and "Israeli occupation" is what the Arab world calls it!
The Muslim/ Islamic world is greatly oppressed but it comes not from the little Jewish state of Israel and not from the United States. The oppression comes from the Islamic world's own tyrannical, NON-democratic leaders, most of whom act as if they have a divine right to govern for life! The answer to this problem is not creating more illegitimate Arab and Muslim dictatorships and theocracies. And certainly not by creating yet another terrorist state with yet another madman like Arafat at the helm.
Don't fall prey to the myth that the Arabs are merely seeking an end to "occupation" and "humiliation." If the Arabs desired peace and liberty, they could have achieved it years ago. They crave the destruction of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel!
New Item: What do the Arabs mean when they say they want an "end to the [Israeli] occupation?" Click HERE and HERE
Biblically Speaking...
The Palestinians claim that the land of Israel has belonged to them "from time immemorial." The Palestinian Authority (PA) claims that the entirety of Israel is "occupied" territory. We know what the Palestinians say. But what does G-D say? What does the BIBLE say about the land?
GENESIS 15:18-21: In that day the Lord made a covenant with Avram (Abraham), saying, "To your seed I have given this land from the river of Egypt to the Great River [referring to the Euphrates River which, during the reigns of kings David and Soloman, formed the northeast boundary of the Promised Land]
NUMBERS 34:1-12: And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying, Command the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye come into the land of Canaan...
GENESIS 17: 7-8 And I will establish my covenant between ME and thee and thy seed after thee throughout their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be a G-D unto thee and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and thy seed after thee, the land of your sojournings, all the land of Caanan,
There is nothing in the Koran which says the Land of Caanan (Israel) belongs to Muslims! Even the term "Palestine" is never mentioned there! So if anyone is "occupying" the Land of Israel, it is the Arabs.
Is Israel Really Threatening to Take Over Arab/Muslim Land?"
& continues
"Israel is a mere speck on the map yet the Arabs / Muslims claim that Israel is trying to take over "their" land!
- Arab and Muslim Land is in Green -
- Israel is in Red (can you even see it?) -
- Who is a threat to whom! -
* PLUS: What Arabs REALLY Mean When They Call for an "End to the Occupation" *
3. Accusing Israel of Starting the June 6, 1967 War
Resulting in the "Occupation" of 'West Bank, Gaza,
East Jerusalem, the Sinai Desert and the Golan Heights.
The Arabs say the Israelis grabbed this real estate in a war of aggression in 1967. In fact, Israel did not start that war. Israel did not want that war. Israel merely defended itself – very, very effectively – from coordinated attacks by Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Arafat's terrorists.
This is not opinion. This is fact. A friend of mine, Sol Jacobs, did something very simple – something very obvious – to document this fact, which seems to elude so many today. He went back and looked at what newspapers were reporting about the crisis before June 5, 1967 – before there was any alleged "Israeli occupation."
Here's what he found on his month-long timeline leading up to the Six-Day War: "
& continues
"
On May 7, the New York Times reported Syria had shelled the Israeli village of Ein Gev.
On May 17, the New York Times reported that the Palestine Liberation Organization, headed by Arafat, pledged to "keep sending commandos" into Israel.
On May 19, the Los Angeles Times reported Egypt stood accused of using poison gas in Yemen.
On May 19, the New York Times reported Egypt had deployed its forces along the Israeli border.
On May 20, the New York Times reported Egypt forced U.N. peacekeeping troops to leave the Sinai Desert in anticipation of its attack on Israel.
On May 21, the New York Times reported Egyptian soldiers were massing in the Sinai.
On May 22, the New York Times reported that the PLO would be stepping up its attacks in Israel, that Cairo was calling up 10,000 reserves and that Iraq would be sending aid to battle Israel.
On May 23, every newspaper in the world reported that Egypt took the provocative action of closing the Gulf of Aqaba to Israel.
On May 24, every newspaper in the world reported that the U.S. declared Egypt's military blockade of the gulf "illegal."
On May 25, the New York Times reported that Jordan would admit Saudi and Iraqi forces into its country to do battle with Israel.
On May 27, every newspaper in the world reported Egypt's fiery threats to destroy Israel.
On May 29, the New York Times reported the Egyptian buildup of military forces in the Sinai was continuing.
On May 29, the Washington Post reported that despite all of this provocation, Israel was still reluctant to have a showdown with its enemies.
On May 29, the New York Times reported new Syrian attacks on Israel.
On June 3, the New York Times reported that Britain declared the Egyptian blockade could lead to war. It also reported that four Syrian commandos were intercepted in Israel.
On June 5, 1967, the Six-Day War began. Israel rolled up all of its enemies faster than anyone would have believed. It took control of East Jerusalem from Jordan. It took control of Judea and Samaria on the west bank of the Jordan River from Jordan. It took control of the Golan Heights from Syria. And it took control of the Gaza Strip and Sinai Desert from Egypt.
You can read these news reports for yourself thanks to the work of Sol Jacobs.
Clearly, the so-called "occupation" of these territories came about as a result of Arab war-making on Israel. Israel merely defended itself well. Israel also proved it was willing to give these territories back to neighbors who would live in peace with the Jewish state, as demonstrated with the return of the Sinai to Egypt.
All of this raises a few questions: If Israel is occupying those territories today, who was occupying them until 1967? If the West Bank and Gaza belong to "Palestinians," why were they under the control of Jordan and Egypt until June 5, 1967? If Arab "Palestinians" just want their own state, why didn't they ask for it before 1967?
See http://masada2000.org/historical.html more maps relating to the above."
From the website meforum.org an article is headlined
"Kuwait Expels Thousands of Palestinians"
by Steven J. Rosen
Middle East Quarterly
Fall 2012, pp. 75-83 (view PDF) the article says:
"Much has been made of the Palestinian exodus of 1948. Yet during their decades of dispersal, the Palestinians have experienced no less traumatic ordeals at the hands of their Arab brothers. As early as the mid-1950s, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Libya expelled striking Palestinian workers. In 1970, Jordan expelled some 20,000 Palestinians and demolished their camps; in 1994-95, Libya expelled tens of thousands of long-term Palestinian residents in response to the Oslo process; and after the 2003 Iraq war, some 21,000 Palestinians fled the country in response to a systematic terror and persecution campaign. As recently as 2007, Beirut effectively displaced 31,400 Palestinian refugees when the Lebanese army destroyed the Nahr el Bared refugee camp during fighting between the militant Fatal al-Islam group and the Lebanese army.[1]
The expulsion of Kuwait's Palestinians was precipitated by the endorsement of Iraq's brutal occupation of the emirate (August 1990-February 1991) by Yasser Arafat (right, here with Saddam Hussein, hands raised). Whether true or not, Palestinians were viewed by Kuwait's rulers as "fifth columnists" and forced to leave their decades-old homes.
But the largest forced displacement of Palestinians from an Arab state took place in 1991 when Kuwait expelled most of its Palestinian residents in retaliation for the Palestine Liberation Organization's (PLO) endorsement of Iraq's brutal occupation of the emirate (August 1990-February 1991). It mattered little that this population, most of which had resided in Kuwait for decades, was not supportive of the PLO's reckless move: From March to September 1991, about 200,000 Palestinians were expelled from the emirate in a systematic campaign of terror, violence, and economic pressure while another 200,000 who fled during the Iraqi occupation were denied return. By September 1991, Kuwait's Palestinian community had dwindled to some 20,000.
Yet while this expulsion was near the order of magnitude of the Palestinian 1948 flight (estimated by the Israeli government at 550,000-600,000 and by the Arab League at 700,000),[2] driving PLO chairman Yasser Arafat to declare that "what Kuwait did to the Palestinian people is worse than what has been done by Israel to Palestinians in the occupied territories,"[3] it was largely ignored by the international community with neither the U.N. Security Council nor the General Assembly doing anything to assist the newly displaced refugees and punish their ethnic cleanser."
& continues
"A Settled and Integrated Community
The first Palestinian Arab immigrants to Kuwait arrived in 1936 at the invitation of its ruler, Sheikh Ahmad al-Jaber al-Sabah, and the positive impression they made inclined Kuwait to accept further workers, including many displaced by the 1948 war. Between 1948 and 1960, tens of thousands of refugee and non-refugee Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza arrived in Kuwait while the sheikhdom was still a British protectorate. Many were teachers, civil servants, and unskilled workers. By June 1961, when Kuwait declared its independence, its Palestinian community had grown to some 40,000, about 12 percent of the emirate's entire population of 321,621.[4]
Palestinian immigration accelerated after 1959 when Kuwait signed an agreement with Jordan cancelling visa requirements for Jordanian citizens.[5] Many Jordanian Palestinians, from both the East and West Banks, seized the opportunity, bringing relatives and friends into Kuwait. In ten years, the Palestinian population of the emirate quadrupled. By August 2, 1990, the day Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, the population had multiplied to 400,000-450,000, or four Palestinians for every five native Kuwaitis.[6]
Most of the Palestinians were not given Kuwaiti citizenship but were thoroughly integrated into the economy and culture of the emirate. According to American academic Laurie Brand,
It was the Palestinians more than any other single expatriate group who helped shape the country's social, economic, and political development. The length of their residence, the size of the community, their dedication to work in both the public and private sectors, and their consequent entrenchment in the bureaucracy, economy, professions, and the media enabled the Palestinians in Kuwait to develop into one of the most cohesive and active communities in the diaspora.[7]"
& continues
"Unlike their brothers in Lebanon, the Kuwaiti Palestinians occupied an honorable place in local society, giving them a sense of belonging and permanence lacking in many Palestinian communities elsewhere. In the words of American Arab academic Hassan El-Najjar,
[In 1962] Sheikh Sabah Al-Salem, then foreign minister and later the emir, said that Palestinians deserved to be well treated because of their skills and hard work. "Look at them. Among them is the best surgeon, the best doctor, and the best administrator." ... In recognition for their sincere services, about two thousand of the Palestinian pioneers were granted the [sic] Kuwaiti citizenship ... The 1967 war convinced Palestinians that their stay ... was becoming permanent. Their behavior started to change from using practical tactics for temporary stay to adopting strategies that aimed at permanent residence there. This meant that after getting jobs, Palestinian employees would get married or bring families, rent homes or apartments, and spend most of their income wherever they lived.[8]
That all changed dramatically with Saddam Hussein's invasion of the gulf principality.
Ethnic Cleansing, Kuwaiti-Style
Iraq's occupation of its "nineteenth province" (i.e., Kuwait) lasted approximately seven months. But even before the invaders were driven out, a deliberate decision to expel the Palestinians had been taken at the highest levels of the Kuwaiti government. In a February 21, 1991 interview with The Independent, Sheikh Saad al-Abdullah al-Sabah, Kuwait's crown prince, still in exile, called for "cleansing" Kuwait of "fifth columnists." By March 13, The Guardian cited government officials expressing the need to "clean out" the Palestinian neighborhoods, and in a speech on April 8, the emir himself urged Kuwaitis to continue the campaign of "cleansing" Kuwait of the alleged "fifth columnists." On July 9, Kuwait's prosecutor general Hamed Othman told USA Today, "Every country has the right to deport people it considers a security risk. You do it in Britain and America also."[9]
Interviewed by the Washington Post, Kuwait's ambassador to the United States, Sheikh Saud Nasser al-Sabah, openly defended the expulsions:
Sabah expressed bitterness at the behavior of Palestine Liberation Organization chairman Yasser Arafat, who embraced Iraqi president Saddam Hussein after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait last August, and at Palestinians generally who he said "helped destroy" Kuwait by collaborating with the Iraqis. Before the invasion, he said, there were 380,000 Palestinians in Kuwait ... Now, he said, thousands who do not have jobs will be deported or their permits will not be renewed. … "And I think we have a perfect right to demand" it, he said. "It's not just us in the government demanding it, it's the people in the street who are demanding it." … Having a large number of Palestinians in Kuwait would not be "helpful to our security," he added.[10]
The deportations decimated the Palestinian population in Kuwait from 400,000-450,000 to 10,000-22,000. "The former Palestinian neighborhoods in Kuwait now lie empty of residents," reported The Guardian. "There are plans to turn the Palestinian suburb of Hawali into an amusement park. Many of these Palestinians had lived in Kuwait for decades, and generations of their children were born there. Palestinian school teachers, doctors, nurses, administrators, financiers, accountants, engineers, and university professors who helped to build Kuwait, were forcibly uprooted and expelled."[11]
& continues
"Many of the deportees were subjected to abuse or worse during the process of expulsion. In March 1991, the Associated Press quoted a grave digger at the Riqqa Cemetery in Kuwait, talking about mass graves: "They were all Palestinians … One man had a severed head."[12] The agency later reported that even some members of Kuwait's ruling family were involved in the killings of Palestinians,[13] and Kuwaiti pro-democracy activists claimed the royal family had formed private "death squads" to execute people suspected of collaborating with the Iraqis. The director of the Palestine Human Rights and Information Center reported interviews with four Palestinian men who escaped Kuwait after being imprisoned there, saying that they were beaten with metal rods, burned with cigarettes, and interrogated by Kuwaiti officials during their imprisonment in Kuwait City.[14]
Palestinian children were expelled from public schools while heavy financial burdens, such as new health fees, were placed on Palestinians who wished to remain. According to the Palestinian group Badil, "About 4,000 people were killed, and 16,000 tortured in Kuwaiti detention and interrogation centers. Most of these were Palestinians."[15]
Kenneth Roth of Human Rights Watch detailed to a congressional committee some of the economic pressures used to compel Palestinians to quit Kuwait:
Roughly half of Kuwait's prewar Palestinian population of 350,000 fled the country during the Iraqi occupation … Those who remain in Kuwait are being subjected to a range of pressures seemingly designed to drive them out of the country. Most Palestinians have not been allowed to resume their jobs. Many have been unable to obtain new Kuwaiti license plates for their cars … Garbage has not been picked up since liberation in such Palestinian communities as Hawali, in contrast to Kuwaiti neighborhoods. Harassment at the ubiquitous checkpoints is commonplace. The combined effect of these actions and the terror unleashed by the official violence is a resignation on the part of large numbers of Palestinians that they will have to leave what for many is the only country they have ever known. But even flight is impeded by the Kuwaiti government's refusal so far to release the one month's salary per year of service which all workers accumulate as a form of pension although the government finally pledged last week that these funds would be made available.[16]
Approximately 180,000-200,000 Palestinians who had fled Kuwait during the Iraqi occupation were not permitted to return.[17] According to an account by Palestinian academic Shafeeq Ghabra, by December 1991, Kuwait's Palestinian population had dwindled from a pre-invasion strength of 350,000 to approximately 150,000.[18] Middle East Watch, a project of Human Rights Watch, reported that the Kuwaiti government had failed to appoint guardians to protect absentee property, and that in July 1991, the Kuwaiti cabinet approved regulations allowing Kuwaiti landlords to remove furniture and other items from rented premises previously occupied by foreigners who were not being allowed to return.[19]
& continues
"Drawing upon the records of the United Nations Compensation Commission, established by the Security Council in 1991 to deal with claims and compensation for losses from the Iraqi invasion, al-Jazeera filmmaker Miriam Shahin has detailed some of the economic losses inflicted on the Palestinians who were expelled or fled:
The vast majority of the Gulf war returnees [to Jordan] are close to impoverishment ... Thus far only 25% of those Jordanians and Palestinians working in Kuwait have been able to get back their bank savings and pensions, or have received compensation. ... 91,550 applications for financial compensation have been made to the Geneva office of the [Compensation Commission] through the Jordanian Ministry of Labour … All in all, the claimants are asking for $3bn in restitution. ... A quick departure and the chaos of occupied Kuwait are frequently cited by applicants as reasons why their legal and business papers are not complete. But [the Jordanian official tasked with processing Palestinian claims] fears that the Compensation Commission in Geneva will throw out incomplete applications.[20]
In the end, the U.N. Compensation Commission processed 43,975 Palestinian claims, of which 35,878—or 82 percent—were rejected. Total compensation for property lost in Kuwait claimed by evicted Palestinians was $33 billion of which $149 million were finally awarded—a compensation rate of 4.4 percent.[21]
International Law Violations, Feeble Interventions
Independent human rights organizations were more outspoken about abuses than any U.N. agency. Human Rights Watch accused Kuwait of violating major principles of international law, claiming that
These expulsions violate several provisions of the Fourth Geneva Conventions … because Kuwait has expelled some who said they would face persecution ... and others who are refugees or stateless and should not be expelled. ... The International Committee of the Red Cross has explicitly upheld the view that Palestinians in post-liberation Kuwait are protected persons. ... According to Article 36 of the [Geneva] Convention, any repatriation must be carried out "in satisfactory conditions as regards safety, hygiene, sanitation and food." The dumping of deportees in the middle of a mine-infested desert ... hardly comports with this legal requirement. ... Kuwait is making no apparent effort to ensure that the long-term residents of Kuwait who are sent to Iraq will not face persecution. Until a third country is found, refugees are entitled to the protection of the Fourth Geneva Convention, including ensuring the provision by Kuwait of the means of subsistence, through paid employment or state allowances ... Kuwait has wholly ignored these legal requirements.[22]
& continues
"In its congressional testimony, the human rights NGO further charged that:
Because they are stateless, there is international law that requires that at least people born within Kuwait be granted Kuwaiti citizenship, and the Kuwaiti government has simply refused to recognize that fact, to admit these people back home.[23]
In March, 1991, the International Committee of the Red Cross was able to begin visits to security detainees in Kuwait City.[24] A number of prisons were not accessible to the Red Cross until months later. By early December, the agency had been given access to all places of detention but still had not been permitted to see all detainees.
In July, the Red Cross reached an agreement with Kuwait to monitor the deportations of Palestinians, having alerted the Kuwaitis to the illegality of earlier deportations. The New York Times reported:
In early June, Kuwait began busing Iraqis, Palestinians and other foreigners from a jail in Kuwait City northward to the border with Iraq. Some of those being deported said they did not want to go. The Red Cross objected to the expulsions, saying that because it was not allowed to participate in the process, it could not determine whether the legal rights of the deportees were being respected.[25]
Most of the Palestinians who were living in Kuwait when it was invaded fell under the protection of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) rather than the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). Under the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, Palestinian refugees residing in the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria fell under the mandate of UNRWA,[26] but most of the Palestinians in Kuwait were under the protection of UNHCR because they were outside UNRWA's five fields of operation authorized by the U.N. General Assembly.
Unlike UNRWA, which by the 1960s had effectively abandoned the objective of "reintegration of the refugees into the normal life of the Near East," UNHCR considers settlement in other countries acceptable. While UNHCR believes that "voluntary repatriation [to the refugee's country of origin] ... where and when feasible, remains the most preferred solution in the majority of refugee situations,"[27] it also consider local integration into host countries a valid and desirable durable solution. UNHCR's Local Integration program draws its authority from the 1951 convention and 1967 protocol relating to the status of refugees:
In cases where voluntary repatriation [of refugees] is not a viable option, finding a home in the country of asylum and integrating into the local community could offer a durable solution to their plight and the opportunity of starting a new life. … In many cases, acquiring the nationality of the country of asylum is the culmination of this process. UNHCR estimates that, during the past decade, 1.1 million refugees around the world became citizens in their country of asylum.[28]
& continues
"But UNHCR confronted formidable obstacles. While 144 states are parties to the 1951 refugee convention, among Arab states, only Egypt and Yemen have signed it. Kuwait, a non-signatory neither adhered to the convention obligations nor had national asylum laws and procedures in place. Moreover, The New York Times reported that as late as July 1991, UNHCR had not been allowed to set up a permanent office in Kuwait City, preventing imminent deportees from obtaining refugee status that would allow them to get U.N. assistance in finding new homes in other countries.[29]
According to Human Rights Watch:
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees was also initially barred from opening an office in Kuwait, and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency… has not been allowed to operate. During the Iraqi occupation, the Kuwaiti government-in-exile solicited the help of international human rights organizations in monitoring violations committed by Iraqi forces in Kuwait. After liberation, the government encouraged these organizations to visit Kuwait to gain proof of Iraq's gross abuses. But when these organizations also condemned abuses then being committed by Kuwaiti forces, the Kuwaiti authorities restricted access to the country. For six weeks, in April and May, the Kuwaiti Embassy in Washington refused to issue visas to representatives from Middle East Watch and the U.S. Committee for Refugees. Thereafter, international human rights organizations obtained access to Kuwait without difficulty.[30]
Sadako N. Ogata, the U.N. high commissioner for refugees during this period, stated, "We had to move with caution, as the issue was delicate and required confidence building on all sides."[31] But overall, UNHCR was able to do very little to prevent the uprooting of the Kuwaiti Palestinians.
UNRWA, too, tried to intervene, also with little success. During a meeting of the agency's major donors in June 1991, its commissioner general, Ilter Turkmen, affirmed that UNRWA did have an obligation toward Palestinians who were being "persecuted, hounded, and expelled by the Kuwaiti government for supposed support of the Iraqi occupation … I consider that the responsibility of UNRWA extends to Palestinians in all parts of the Middle East [including Kuwait]."[32] Despite UNRWA's supposedly restricted fields of operation, Lance Bartholomeusz, former chief of the agency's International Law Division, noted that "General Assembly resolutions do not explicitly exclude UNRWA from operating in other areas."[33]
& continues
"An UNRWA official, who preferred to remain anonymous, provided the following additional information:
During the spring and summer of 1991, a number of Palestinians … started to contact UNRWA headquarters… Commissioner-General Turkmen … traveled to Kuwait once or twice to discuss their plight with the Kuwaiti leadership and also extended his influence through contacts with the Arab League and other parties. ... The idea of a mission came up during the spring of 1992. The purpose of the mission was to carry out a rapid survey among the remaining Palestinians in the country, and especially those originally from Gaza, who had nowhere to return to, to find out the extent to which they had links with other countries and the extent to which they would be able to financially support themselves.[34]
Turkmen later reported:
The Agency followed with interest the situation of Palestinians who had gone to Kuwait from the Gaza Strip and who carried laissez-passers issued by the Government of Egypt. Those Palestinians, although allowed to remain in Kuwait, faced particular difficulties since most could not obtain work permits. They had no Israeli-recognized residency privileges which would allow them to return to Gaza; the Government of Egypt did not seem inclined to permit them to settle in that country; and few other countries were willing to accept them. Some Palestinians subsequently left Kuwait for those few third countries that would allow them entry. A few were able to obtain residency privileges in the Gaza Strip under an Israeli program that granted such privileges to Palestinians who invested at least US$100,000 in the local economy. By the end of the reporting period, approximately 25,000 Palestinians remained in Kuwait.[35]
& continues
"Turkmen concluded by admitting that, like his counterparts at UNHCR, UNRWA was able to do little on behalf of Palestinians remaining in Kuwait.
Worldwide Collusion
Most of the world was silent in the face of this enormous expulsion, including Kuwait's fellow members of the Arab League. A Palestinian observer lamented that, "You can call it deportation ... But I call it the third catastrophe after 1948 and 1967. Imagine what would happen if Israel deported 300,000 people. The whole world would be up in arms. But when an Arab deports or kills his Arab brother, it's all right; nothing happens."[36]
No resolutions were adopted by the U.N. Security Council or by the General Assembly. Not a word was heard from the Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) or the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People, or the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the Situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Occupied Since 1967. All remained silent on the situation in Kuwait.
The General Assembly-established Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People did record twenty-four statements on expulsions and deportations of Palestinians during 1990-91,[37] but not one of these statements was about the 400,000 Palestinians deported by Kuwait. Instead, all twenty-four statements were angry protestations objecting to Israel's deportation of four convicted Palestinian terrorists with blood on their hands.
Similarly, the massive U.N. Information System on the Question of Palestine (UNISPAL) contains over 30,000 text documents. But only three documents in this entire U.N. library concern the Kuwaiti expulsion. Two were complaints from the PLO concerning the mistreatment of Kuwaiti Palestinians and the third was a Kuwaiti denial of wrongdoing.[38]
Even the PLO was reluctant to fully confront Kuwait. Voice of Palestine Radio blamed the expulsions mostly on the United States: The internal "cause of the Kuwaiti campaign" against the Palestinians was Kuwait's regrettable "clannishness," but the real "decision to punish the Palestinians is a U.S., not a Kuwaiti, decision."[39]
The U.S. ambassador, Edward W. Gnehm, Jr., did urge Kuwait not to tolerate "hatred and prejudice" against the Palestinians "no matter how emotionally difficult it is. Kuwaitis must now champion justice and fairness for all people in Kuwait in the same way the entire world stood for those principles for Kuwaitis. To do otherwise will give Saddam Hussein a victory of evil proportions."[40] But this was the only such statement from any official, and Washington did little beyond this.
A bipartisan delegation led by the majority and minority leaders of the House of Representatives visited Kuwait one week after the war's end, but only one of its members, Rep. Wayne Owens (Democrat-Utah), subsequently spoke out about mistreatment of Palestinians:"
& continues
"At that time of that visit, I heard stories of extrajudicial killings, of tortures and other ill treatment directed principally toward the 180,000 Palestinians remaining in Kuwait. ...These people are subjected to arbitrary arrests, incommunicado detention, and forced confessions. They are denied access to medical attention, legal counsel and family members. They are tried before Martial Law Courts without adequate time or assistance to prepare a defense.[41]
Owens made this statement at a hearing on human rights and democracy in Kuwait, at which various human rights organizations were permitted to address the Kuwaiti abuses. But the hearing received no attention from the press and led to no follow-up activity by the George H.W. Bush administration.
The U.N. Security Council did pass resolution 694 on May 24, 1991, condemning deportation of Palestinians, but the resolution was aimed at Israel for deporting the four Palestinian terrorists. Resolution 694 was one of eight separate U.N. Security Council resolutions devoted to condemning Israeli deportations, all of which ignored the fact that those deported by Israel were directly involved in terrorist acts.[42] By contrast, the Security Council said nothing in 1991, nor at any other time, about Kuwait's deportation of a far larger number of Palestinians, most of whom had committed no crimes.
But the height of hypocrisy was achieved by Kuwait itself. On December 22, 1992, just a year after it had expelled 400,000 innocent Palestinians, it had the temerity to send a Kuwaiti Students Union delegation to Lebanon to visit and express Kuwait's solidarity with the four Palestinians deported by Israel, boasting that Kuwait thus became the first Arab country to show its solidarity with the Palestinian refugees.[43]"
& continues:
Conclusion
Kuwait's ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians is notable not only because of its exponentially large scale but because it afforded the ultimate proof of the cynical Arab manipulation of the Palestinian cause. The Palestinian Kuwaiti community was arguably one of the most settled and economically integrated of Palestinian Arab diasporas, yet this did not prevent its uprooting in one fell swoop through no fault of its own. As such, the Kuwait expulsion constituted the greatest setback to the "reintegration of the refugees into the normal life of the Near East," presented by successive U.N. resolutions as a crucial step toward Arab-Israeli peace.
Steven J. Rosen is director of the Washington Project of the Middle East Forum.
Chart Palestinian Residents in Kuwait (number and percentage of population) [44]
1957 15,173 7.3
1961 37,482 11.7
1965 77,712 16.6
1970 147,696 20.0
1975 204,178 20.5
1981 299,710 20.9
1990 400,000* 18.7
1995 26,000 0.01
* Other estimates say 450,000"
& continues
[1] See "Secondary Forced Displacement in Host Countries: An Overview," BADIL Refugee Survey 2008-2009, BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, Bethlehem, Summer-Autumn 2010.
[2] Efraim Karsh, "How Many Palestinian Arab Refugees Were There?" Israel Affairs, Apr. 2011.
[3] Daniel Pipes, "The Hell of Israel Is Better Than the Paradise of Arafat," Middle East Quarterly, Spring 2005, pp. 43-50.
[4] "Population of Kuwait," Kuwait Government Online, accessed July 10, 2012.
[5] Alex Takkenberg, The Status of Palestinian Refugees in International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. 158-62.
[6] El-Najjar, "Palestinians in Kuwait: Terror and Ethnic Cleansing," chap. 10.
[7] Laurie Brand, Palestinians in the Arab World (New York: Columbia University Press 1991), p. 108.
[8] El-Najjar, "Palestinians in Kuwait: Terror and Ethnic Cleansing," chap. 10; Toufic Haddad, "Palestinian Forced Displacement from Kuwait: The Overdue Accounting," BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, Bethlehem, accessed July 3, 2012.
[9] USA Today, July 9, 1991.
[10] The Washington Post, July 4, 1991.
[11] The Guardian (London), Sept. 12, 1992.
[12] Associated Press, Mar. 28, 1991.
[13] Ibid., Mar. 29, 1991.
[14] U.N. General Assembly (UNGA), A/45/1056 S/23033, Sept. 13, 1991.
[15] Haddad, "Palestinian Forced Displacement from Kuwait."
[16] "Human Rights and Democracy in Kuwait," testimony before the subcommittees on Europe and the Middle East and on Human Rights and International Organizations, Committee on Foreign Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C., June 11, 1991, pp. 12-5.
[17] Takkenberg, The Status of Palestinian Refugees in International Law, pp. 158-62.
[18] Shafeeq Ghabra, "The PLO in Kuwait," Middle East International, reprinted in Green Left Weekly (Melbourne, Aus.), May 8, 1991.
[19] "A Victory Turned Sour: Human Rights in Kuwait since Liberation," Middle East Watch-Human Rights Watch, UNGA A/45/1056, S/23033, Sept. 13, 1991.
[20] Mariam Shahin, "Give us our due," The Middle East (London), May 1, 1993.
& lastly says
"[21] Computed by the author from five U.N. Compensation Commission reports: S/AC.26/Dec.207 (2003) , S/AC.26/Dec.216 (2004) , S/AC.26/Dec.232 (2004), S/AC.26/Dec.239 (2005), and S/AC.26/Dec.247 (2005).
[22] "A Victory Turned Sour," Sept. 13, 1991; "Human Rights and Democracy in Kuwait," The Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, testimony before the subcommittees on Europe and the Middle East and on Human Rights and International Organizations, Committee on Foreign Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C., June 11, 1991, p. 78.
[23] "Human Rights and Democracy in Kuwait," p. 78.
[24] International Committee of the Red Cross, Information Dept., press statement 91/23, Mar. 24, 1991.
[25] The New York Times, July 8, 1991.
[26] Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees, UNHCR, 1951 and 1967, U.N. General Assembly (UNGA) res. 2198 (XXI): 1951 convention, art. 1, para. A (2); 1967 protocol, art. I.2, accessed June 26, 2012.
[27] Chris Gunness, UNRWA spokesman, "Exploding the myths: UNRWA, UNHCR and the Palestine refugees," interview, Ma'an News Agency, Jerusalem, June 27, 2011.
[28] "Accepted by a Generous Host," Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), accessed July 3, 2012.
[29] The New York Times, July 8, 1991.
[30] Human Rights Watch World Report 1992 - Kuwait, Human Rights Watch, Washington, D.C., Jan. 1, 1992.
[31] Sadako N. Ogata, Turbulent Decade: Confronting the Refugee Crises of the 1990s (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2005), pp. 30-1.
[32] Takkenberg, The Status of Palestinian Refugees in International Law, pp. 300-1.
[33] Lance Bartholomeusz, "The Mandate of UNRWA at Sixty," Refugee Survey Quarterly, 2-3 (2009): 461.
[34] Author e-mail correspondence, Nov.-Dec. 2011.
[35] Report of the commissioner-general, UNRWA, July 1, 1992-June 30, 1993, UNGA A/48/13 (SUPP), Jan. 19, 1995, para. 21.
[36] Quoted in Donna E. Arzt, Refugees into Citizens: Palestinians and the End of the Arab-Israeli Conflict (Washington, D.C.: Council on Foreign Relations, 1997), p. 67.
[37] "The Question of Palestine: Expulsions and deportations," U.N. Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, accessed July 3, 2012.
[38] UNGA Security Council, A/45/1027, S/22732, June 24, 1991.
[39] Voice of Palestine, Algiers, Aug. 30, 1991.
[40] Los Angles Times, June 10, 1991.
[41] "Human Rights and Democracy in Kuwait," p. 2.
[42] UNSC res. 694. The others were UNSC resolutions 607, 608, 636, 641, 681, 726, and 799.
[43] Arab Times (Kuwait City), Dec. 22, 1992.
[44] Hassan A. El-Najjar, "Palestinians in Kuwait: Terror and Ethnic Cleansing," in The Gulf War: Overreaction and Excessiveness (Dalton, Ga.: Amazone Press, 2001), chap. 10, Table X.2
Israel always treats the so-called "Palestinians" Very Very Humanely, while the Arab Nations all treat the "Palestinians" like dirt, why aren't the Arab Regimes ever condemned for treating their "Palestinians" like dirt ??? Why the Double Standard & Hypocrisy ? Why ?
Clevelandjewishnews.com has an article headlined
"An Arab legacy of hate" by Edwin Black on October 8, 2010
Arab-Nazi ‘Farhud’ alliance rooted in earlier killing sprees of Jews the article states
"As Israelis and Palestinians struggle with a 21st-century peace process, the world must face the forgotten history that was so pivotal in determining the present crisis. In many ways, a turning point was the day Arabs massacred Jews because they dared to sit at the Wailing Wall while praying. This simple act of prayer was so unacceptable to Arabs that it helped launch a worldwide crisis of hate that provoked a global Islamic jihad, forged an Arab-Nazi alliance during the Holocaust, and still echoes today.
The year was 1929. Jewish Palestine was being settled by torrents of Eastern European refugees. The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine (1923) included the provision for a Jewish Homeland. The Balfour Declaration (1917), widely endorsed by many nations, was a matter of international law. But the Arabs in Palestine refused to co-exist with Jews in any way except as second-class dhimmis (free non-Muslims living under their law).
Islam had been at war with the Jewish people since its defining inception in 627 C.E., when Mohammad exterminated the Jews of Mecca and launched the Islamic Conquest that swept north and subsumed Syria-Palestina. For centuries, Jews and Christians in Arab lands were allowed to exist as dhimmis, citizens with limited religious rights. These restrictions were enforced by the Turks who, until World War I, ruled the geographically undetermined region known as Palestine, which included Jerusalem.
When the Ottoman Empire fell, after World War I ended in 1918, the British were obligated by the Mandate to maintain the Turkish status quo at the Wailing Wall. That status quo, according to numerous decrees under Sharia (Islamic law), maintained that Jews could pray at the Wailing Wall – the last remnant of the Temple – quietly and never sitting, even in the heat. And Jews were not allowed to separate men from women during prayer. The Jews revered the Wailing Wall as their holiest accessible place and a direct connection to God. But under Turkish and Arab tradition, the Wailing Wall was not the Jews’ holy site. Rather, it was revered by Muslims as al-Buraq, the place where Mohammad tethered his winged steed during his miraculous ascent to heaven. During that miraculous journey, according to Islamic tradition, Mohammad flew through the air on his magnificent horse to the furthest mosque. The furthest mosque was in Jerusalem, hence the al-Aksa, meaning “the furthest.” Therefore, the Wailing Wall became pre-eminently a Muslim holy place, only available for Jewish visitation with permission and under strict guidelines that would not connote independent worship or ownership of the Wall."
the article continues:
"On Yom Kippur, 1928, Jews decided to bring benches and chairs to sit while they prayed, and they also brought a mechitza, a flimsy, portable partition to separate men from women. This provoked outrage among Arabs, and the British even tried to pull chairs out from under people to force them to stand. The offense catapulted al-Hajj Muhammad Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, to sudden international Islamic importance as Muslims everywhere – from India to London – objected to Jews sitting. Husseini even convened an emergency international conference of Muslims in Jerusalem to stop Jews from sitting at the Wall to pray.
The Mufti and his machinery began a nonstop protest movement against the perceived Jewish encroachment on the Wall. As the chief religious authority, it was Husseini who directed that the muezzin, the man who calls Muslims to prayer from the minaret, position himself within earshot of the Wailing Wall pavement and then dial the volume up to rile Jews during prayer and prove Islamic dominance. At the same time, it was Husseini who directed the revival of the cacophonous dhikr ceremony, complete with repetitive shouts of Allahu Akbar, as well as loud gongs and cymbals, once again, disrupting Jewish prayers with strategic noise. The Mufti also permitted mules to be herded through the Jewish prayer area, dropping dung and creating the feel and smell of what one Jerusalem newspaper termed “a latrine.”
On Aug. 15, 1929, when Jews again marked the holiday by sitting and chanted “the Wall is ours,” the Arabs began yet another in a series of bloody massacres. The massacres in several cities culminated in unspeakable atrocities at Hebron.
It began in Jerusalem. “Itbach Al Yahood! Itbach Al Yahood!” Slaughter the Jews. Slaughter the Jews. With knives and clubs, the mob attacked every Jew in sight, burned Torah scrolls, and yanked supplication notes to God from the cracks in the Wall and set them aflame.
Attacks spread throughout the land over the following days. Jews were stabbed, shot, beaten down with rocks, maimed, and killed in various Jewish towns and suburbs. The chaos continued for days. With thousands of dagger- and club-wielding Arabs swarming throughout the city hunting Jews, wire services transmitted headlines such as “Thousands of Peasants Invaded Jerusalem and Raided all Parts of the City.”
Martial law was declared. Armored cars were brought in from Baghdad. British airplanes swept in to machine-gun Arab marauders.Violence continued to spread throughout Palestine. Jews fought back and retaliated with bricks and bars and whatever they could find. Then, on Aug. 23 and 24, Hebron became a bloody nightmare.
House to house, Arab mobs went, bursting into every room looking for hiding Jews. Religious books and scrolls were burned or torn to shreds. The defenseless Jews were variously beheaded, castrated, their breasts and fingers sliced off, and in some cases their eyes plucked from their sockets. Infant or adult, man or woman – it mattered not. The carnage went on for hours, with the Arab policemen standing down – or joining in.
One young boy, Yosef Lazarovski, later wrote of the horror: “I remember a brown-skinned Arab with a large mustache breaking through the door. He had a large knife and an axe that he swung through the doorjambs until he broke through. (He was) full of fury, screaming, ‘Allah Akbar!’ and ‘Itbach al Yahood!’ … My grandfather tried to hold my hand, then (he tried) to push me aside (and hide me), screaming, Shema Yisrael … and then I remember another Arab … with an axe that he brought down on my grandfather’s neck.”
& lastly says
"Not a single victim was simply killed. Each was mutilated and tortured in accordance with their identities, the specific information provided by local Arabs. The Jewish man who lent money to Arabs was sliced open and the IOUs burned in his body. The Jewish baker’s head was tied to the stove and then baked.
London dispatched special investigative commissions that determined that under the Sharia status quo, Jews were not permitted to sit. Jews were even blamed for provoking the massacres by deliberately sitting.
The Mufti of Jerusalem used the Wall controversy to continue his campaign against the British and the Jews. As part of that war, the Mufti led a broadly accepted, international and popularly accepted Arab and Islamic alliance with Nazi Germany. Eventually, when the British tried to arrest him, he fled to Iraq. There, the Mufti and Nazi agents helped inspire the 1941 Farhud, a two-day spree of killing, looting and raping the Jews of Baghdad.
Once the British finally helped restore order, the Mufti fled again, this time to Germany, where he was taken under the personal auspices of Adolf Hitler and Heinrich Himmler. The Mufti formed an 8,000-man plus Muslim Waffen-SS division, which partnered with the bloodthirsty Ustasha in Croatia to commit the most heinous crimes in the Holocaust. The Ustasha wore Jewish eyeballs on necklaces.
The alliance with the Nazis spanned every aspect of the war, from intelligence offices in Paris, to parachute units, to artillery battalions, to a plan to exterminate all Jews in Palestine. This alliance was more than one man, the Mufti of Jerusalem – it was a movement of popular international Islamic fervor that stretched across the Middle East and Europe.
After the fall of Hitler, the legacy of hate continued in the post-War expulsions of a million Jews from Arab lands. Periodically, the fervor that ignited the massacres of 1929 surfaces today. Intifadas arise, riots erupt, and the Arab rallying call, spoken and collectively remembered, continues in Jerusalem."
Another good book to order is titled "Israel’s Glorious Future: The Prophecies & Promises of God Revealed"
by Dr. Harold Sevener
Description
"As the nation of Israel struggles to regain control of the land… as Arabs fight and riot against her… how can we know that Israel’s future will indeed be glorious? By exploring the ancient prophecies, “Israel’s Glorious Future” reveals the faithfulness of God to the everlasting covenants.”
Other Descriptions of this Book can be found online
From honest reporting.com an article is headlined Featured
"Jesus Was a Jew, Not a Palestinian" the article states:
" Until fairly recently, the understanding that Jesus was a Jew was generally unchallenged. In recent years, however, a new generation of anti-Israel activists and academics are now trying to claim that actually Jesus wasn’t…"
by Emanuel Miller
September 5, 2019
"Until fairly recently, the understanding that Jesus was a Jew was generally unchallenged. In recent years, however, a new generation of anti-Israel activists and academics are now trying to claim that actually Jesus wasn’t just a Jew, but a Palestinian.
First, let’s back up a little. The last century has seen many schools of thought aimed at forcing us to question our basic beliefs. Some of these have led to great advances: the beliefs that women should have equal rights, that black people should have equal rights, that homophobia has no place in modern-society. All worthy causes. Others have challenged long-held conceptions, that “drinking is manly” or that women should be paid less than men.
Join the fight for Israel’s fair coverage in the news
When you sign up for email updates from HonestReporting, you will receive
Sign up for our Newsletter:
One of the conceptions challenged in recent years is the almost universal depiction of Jesus as white. Given that Jesus is described as living in the Holy Land, this would make him a native of the Middle East. In other words, there’s every reason to be concerned that depictions of Jesus as fair-skinned are inaccurate.
If only things ended there. A radical core of activists now seem bent on co-opting “brown” identity and excluding Jews, thus denying the historical truth that Jesus was in fact Jewish.
So… was Jesus a Jew or was he a Palestinian?
For the benefit of anyone exposed to this false claim, a brief recap of history is in order:
Jesus was born in Judea, a client kingdom of the Roman Empire, and identified as a Jew. Jews living there at the time would most likely have described themselves as living in the Land of Israel. Anyone referring to “Palestine” in the first century C.E. would have earned themselves strange look, especially from the indigenous Aramaic-speaking Jews. The land was subject to all the religious laws in Judaism that apply in Land of Israel.
A century later, the area was renamed. After a Jewish revolt was crushed in the 2nd Century CE, the vast majority of Jews were exiled and the Roman emperor Hadrian subsequently had the region entitled “Syria Palestina” after the Jews’ ancient enemies, the Philistines, in an antagonistic move designed to demonstrate that the Jews were no longer owners of the land.
Put simply, an Aramaic-speaking Jew living a century before this change of name would never have called himself Palestinian.
Indeed, while the New Testament mentions Israel and the Jews repeatedly, Palestine is not mentioned even once. Take for example the second chapter of Matthew, which begins thus:
“Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the reign of King Herod. About that time some wise men from eastern lands arrived in Jerusalem, asking, ‘Where is the newborn king of the Jews?’” “Indeed, it is believed that the cross above Jesus’ head bore the sign ‘INRI’ – ‘Iesvs Nazarenvs Rex Ivdaeorvm,’ which means Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews in Latin."
the article continues
"As for Jesus’ appearance, while it’s hard to determine for certain how any specific individual would have appeared, some documentation does exist on what Jesus’ contemporaries would have looked like. The Jewish Mishna (Negaim 2:1) records one rabbi describing “The children of Israel – [may] I atone for them – are like cedar wood, neither black, nor white, but in between.”
The entrance of Arabs to the Holy Land occurred only some 700 years after Jesus was crucified, when Arab conquerors took the area. The people identifying as Palestinian today are Arab, and hence it is clear that Jesus, quite simply, was not a Palestinian or an Arab, but a Jew.
Who cares whether Jesus was a Jew or a Palestinian?
Jews, on the whole, don’t tend to think about Jesus very much. But facts matter. History matters. If Jesus was not a Jew, but a Palestinian, then that serves a political end, as it calls into question the legitimacy of the Jewish connection to the Holy Land while suggesting that the Palestinians have ancient roots there.
Far from being an innocent claim, the assertion that Jesus was Palestinian serves to invalidate Jewish history. This is particularly useful to political activists and politicians who seek to undermine the Jewish people’s connection to the land of Israel.
This precise issue erupted in 2013 when a Christmas message released by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas referred to Jesus as a “Palestinian” messenger of hope. The claim came to prominence again in 2019 when, a few months apart, both congresswoman Ilhan Omar and asserted that Jesus was Palestinian.
In April, Democrat representative Ilhan Omar shared a tweet which said: “Don’t they [American Christians] know we’re Christian too? Do they even consider us human? Don’t they know Jesus was a Palestinian?”
The following day, a New York Times op-ed written by Eric Copage, a former editor at the New York Times Magazine and ex-reporter for the NYT, called into question whether Jesus was white, as he is popularly depicted. In Copage’s 600-plus words, he found no need to acknowledge the basic truth that Jesus was Jewish. He did, however, make space to call Jesus a Palestinian."
the article lastly says
"Let's just get this straight: the author asks what Jesus looked like, then calls him Palestinian, and totally omits the fact that Jesus was Jewish?!
Apparently this claptrap passes for legitimate, quality opinion at the @nytimes.https://t.co/m81rHm1295
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) April 20, 2019
Got it. So couldn’t Jesus be both Jewish *and* Palestinian?
This point is central to the ‘Jesus was Palestinian’ argument. Those claiming that Jesus was Palestinian generally do admit that Jesus was a Jew, or at least don’t attempt to deny it. Instead, they attempt to claim that as nationalities and religions are mutually exclusive, there’s no need to be offended by the statement that Jesus was of Palestinian nationality.
Quite apart from the fact that Jews and Arabs living in the land over the centuries before the establishment of Israel did not simply leave in “peaceful co-existence”, the suggestion that a person 2,000 years ago could have identified as both Palestinian and Jewish is patently false.
In the face of such attacks, Jews around the world have been quick to oppose those claiming that Jesus was Palestinian. Following the publication of Copage’s piece, Jeremy Burton, the executive director of Boston’s Jewish Community Relations Council, tweeted his response: “Important to point out that no, Jesus did not identify as Palestinian. He was a Judean Jew and for him, the term Palestine was that of the Roman occupier.”
Writing about tweets, the Jerusalem Post’s Seth Frantzman described the claim as “a modern day attempt at replacement theology: to replace historical Jewish connections to the land 2,000 years ago, recreating an imagined history of Palestinians in place of Jews.”
There is no disputing the fact that places where Jesus is recorded to have traveled and resided, such as Bethlehem and Nazareth, are now Palestinian or Arab cities. However there is also no disputing the fact that these places were Jewish when Jesus was alive.
As Seth Frantzman wrote: “There is no reason to repackage Jesus as Palestinian. He can be a historical figure from Bethlehem or Nazareth without being ‘Palestinian.’ attempt to reference the Quran is interesting because to not mention other aspects of how Jesus is described in Islamic theology. For instance, he is seen as a messenger to the ‘Children of Israel’ and an adherent of the laws of Moses. He is linked to the line of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes of Israel, as well as kings David and Solomon.”
No, Jesus was not a Philistine, either…
A variation of this claim, that Jesus was actually a Philistine, also features as a staple of anti-Israel propaganda, including the roundly debunked notion that Palestinians are actually Canaanites.
The idea that Palestinians are Philistines is equally false.
Unlike modern day Jews and Palestinians, the Philistines were an ancient, non-Semitic, sea-faring people, whose form of worship was unconnected to the Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
In other words, the Philistine ethnicity, culture and religion are all entirely different from that of modern day Palestinians.
The Philistine connection to the Israelites began when the former invaded and occupied a portion of the Kingdom of Israel in about 1000 BCE, but were later defeated by ancient Israel’s King David.
In roughly the seventh century BCE, the Philistines were conquered by the Kingdom of Babylonia and subsequently wiped out as a distinct culture.
In other words, in addition to being culturally, ethnically and religiously unrelated to Jews or Palestinians, the Philistines no longer exist.
However you look at it, the truth is in no doubt: Jesus was a Jew."
An article from the New York Post website, nypost.com is headlined
"Hitler’s sex life included S&M and incest, documentary claims"
By Joshua Rhett Miller May 3, 2021 the article says:
"Adolf Hitler's alleged private S&M sex life "fit perfectly" with his tyrannical personality, a historian says
Adolf Hitler had a complicated, kinky sex life filled with voyeurism, sadomasochism, porn addiction and even incest, a new documentary series claims.
The private sex life of the German dictator whose Nazi regime murdered 6 million Jews during the Holocaust also included urine play, despite the fact that he publicly shunned sex, according to “Hitler’s Sex Life,” which begins airing Sunday on Sky History.
The four-episode series delves into claims that Hitler’s personal doctor gave him amphetamines and bull semen to ramp up his sexual drive — and examines the incestuous relationship he allegedly had with his niece, Geli Raubal, the Sun reported.
In 1925, Raubal, then 17, began living with Hitler, along with her mother, Angela, who worked as the Fuehrer’s housekeeper. He then became obsessed with the teen, 19 years his junior, and the pair started a six-year sexual relationship that included having her urinate on him, the documentary claims.
“Hitler’s Sex Life” claims Adolf Hitler had an incestuous relationship with his niece, Geli Raubal (right).
Ullstein Bild via Getty Images
German defector Otto Strasser had claimed Hitler liked the “extremely disgusting” sex act and said Raubal told him she was forced to take on the role, according to the Sun.
“Hitler’s Secret Sex Life” airs Sundays on Sky History.
Sky TV
Some six years later, in 1931, Raubal, 23, was found dead from a gunshot wound to the chest in Hitler’s Munich apartment after having a conversation with Strasser about being made to squat over the dictator’s face and urinate, getting him sexually aroused, the documentary claims.
Raubal’s death was officially ruled a suicide, but some historians believe she was murdered and that Nazis destroyed files on a second investigation into her death, the Sun said.
The four-part series also examines Hitler’s relationship with girlfriend Eva Braun — whom he married on the eve of their joint 1945 suicide — and with German film actress Renate Müller, who reportedly fell to her death after the pair had sadomasochistic sex."
the article continues & lastly says
"The documentary claims Adolf Hitler was a sadomasochist, who also enjoyed urine play and voyeurism.
Getty Images
One historian told the Sun that the alleged private S&M sex life “fit perfectly” with Hitler’s tyrannical personality.
Adolf Hitler’s relationship with girlfriend Eva Braun is also examined in the new documentary series.
Getty Images
“On the one hand, he put himself forward as this master, this dominating character who walked around with a whip and loved all the uniforms, which is the sadist side,” Australian historian and forensic psychiatrist Robert Kaplan said. “But the other side of sado-masochism is to be humiliated.”
Hitler “internalized everything he didn’t like,” Kaplan insisted.
“It’s quite feasible that somebody like that would have these sexual practices,” Kaplan continued.
Müller reportedly began spending time with Hitler after being introduced to him by film director Alfred Ziesler. She later told Ziesler that she kicked Hitler as he lay on the floor at his request, causing him to get visibly aroused, according to the documentary.
Müller later fell to her death in October 1937 while being visited by Nazi authorities. It’s unclear if she jumped or was shoved, the Sun said.
“I think you can say quite reasonably, that Hitler had a sadomasochistic personality so mass murder came instinctively to him,” Kaplan told outlet.
SEE ALSO
The twisted sex lives of Nazis — and the women who loved them
“There is no shortage of experts on Hitler’s sex life who consider the Fuehrer’s predictions to be a barometer of the dictator’s twisted psyche,” Sky’s website reads. “Each episode will address a specific time period of Hitler’s alleged and proven sex life and explores the role it played in shaping Hitler’s behavior.”
This article from the New York Post, and other online articles document the Sick Twisted
Sexual Perversions of Adolf Hitler & The Nazis
From the website theconversation.com an article is headlined
"Labour antisemitism row: there was nothing Zionist about Hitler’s plans for the Jews"
April 29, 2016
Author
Rainer Schulze
Professor of Modern European History; General Editor "The Holocaust in History and Memory", University of Essex
the article says:
"When the former London mayor Ken Livingstone said in an interview that Hitler was “supporting Zionism” before he “went mad and ended up killing six million Jews”, he was quickly suspended from the Labour Party, which was already in the throes of a painful row over anti-semitism. But while Livingstone’s tone-deaf comments came at a very politically sensitive moment, the historical error at their heart is all too familiar.
Claims that Hitler was a Zionist, or supported Zionism, before his anti-Jewish policies turned into murder and extermination flare up at regular intervals. They usually cite the controversial Haavara Agreement (Transfer Agreement) of August 1933 as the most potent evidence of a wilful cooperation between Hitler and the Zionist movement. When viewed in a certain way, this deal does superficially seem to show that Hitler’s government endorsed Zionism – but just because it was a mechanism to help German Jews relocate to Palestine it does not imply it was “Zionist”.
The Haavara Agreement was the only formal contract signed between Nazi Germany and a Zionist organisation. The signatories were the Reich Ministry of Economics, the Zionistische Vereinigung für Deutschland (Zionist Federation of Germany) and the Anglo-Palestine Bank (then under the directive of the Jewish Agency for Palestine).
Under the agreement Jewish emigrants had to hand over their possessions before they left Germany, and the proceeds were used by a company specifically set up for this purpose in Tel Aviv to purchase German goods for sale in Palestine. The proceeds of these sales were then paid in Palestinian currency to the emigrants in Palestine.
Political analysis, without partisanship
The agreement was immediately criticised from all sides. The Zionist Federation was accused of collaboration with the Nazis, and the Nazi authorities were criticised by fellow Nazis for helping Jews when their official policy was to “solve the Jewish question”. Still, at this point in time, both sides no doubt saw potential benefits for themselves in such an agreement.
For the Zionist Federation, it was a way to save Jews from the claws of an increasingly hostile regime and attract them to Palestine, while for the Nazi state signing an international agreement was further proof of its legitimacy, broke the Jewish movement of boycotting German goods, and helped the recovery of German exports at a time when the German economy was still in the depth of depression.
Twisted road
The Haavara Agreement does not mean the Nazis were ever Zionists. Instead, it is testament to the fact that Nazi policy towards the Jews was not clear-cut from the beginning, but evolved greatly over the years. The only constants were a fanatical hatred of Jews, the insistence that the Jews were the root cause of all of Germany’s problems, and that the “Jewish question” must be “solved” once and for all."
the article continues & lastly says
"While this implicitly always suggested murder and extermination, it took time until it became clear how this extermination could be effectively executed and until the Nazi authorities felt that such a radical “final solution” could be pushed through. In the meantime, the Nazis tried various means of “ridding” Germany of its Jewish population – including “encouraging” Jews to emigrate, forced relocation, and outright evictions – while at the same time pauperising them and confiscating their possessions.
A transfer agreement from a consulting firm established for Jews wishing to emigrate under the Haavara Agreement. Wikimedia Commons
The Haavara Agreement is the first example of a Nazi programme of organised Jewish relocation. Other and more radical examples include the mass expulsion of Polish and stateless Jews from Germany to Poland in October 1938, and the so-called Madagascar Plan, the attempt to relocate the Jewish population to the island of Madagascar, then a French colony. The latter plan became unfeasible when Germany was unable to defeat Great Britain in 1940.
But it is crucial to remember that at the same time as these and other forced relocation plans were discussed, Jews were being increasingly marginalised and disenfranchised in Nazi Germany. They were expelled from German civil service and from the professions, their shops and businesses were boycotted and their German citizenship was taken away. Step by step, they were excluded from German political, economic, legal, social and cultural life.
And in the aftermath of the “night of broken glass” pogrom of November 9 1938, widely known as Kristallnacht, more and more Jews were deported to concentration camps.
Distorted history
These policies do not in any way resemble Zionism. However critical one might be of Zionist policies in action, Zionism was a movement based on the right of self-determination. It originated as a national liberation movement, both mirroring the aims and aspirations of other national movements in 19th-century Europe and responding to the surge of anti-semitism in the newly established European nation-states.
The Nazis’ plans for “concentrating” Jews in specific territories, be they Palestine or Madagascar, had nothing whatsoever to do with self-determination. These were expressions of the complete opposite: the use of force to strip Jews of all their rights, property and dignity.
As was proved by the establishment of the General Government in central Poland in October 1939, the Nazis were not in the least concerned that the territories where they intended to “concentrate” Jews were in a position to help their populations sustain themselves. They were looking for dumping grounds for Jews and other “undesirables”. These people were at best treated as ‘assets’ to exploit or, later, a stock of slave labour, and at worst simply expected to die of disease and starvation.
Any claim that Nazis and Zionists ever shared a common goal is not only cynical and disingenuous, but a distortion of clearly established historical fact."
It's terrible how even in 2021 Jews are still blamed for Everything Wrong in the World,
Jews are still unjustly blamed for all the Evils in the World, some Morons online have even claimed "The Jews Killed the Dinosaurs" can you believe that Insanity, There were no Jews in Existence when the Dinosaurs Lived, the Dinosaurs became extinct long before the Jewish people even existed
From Fathomjournal.org an article is headlined For a deeper understanding of Israel and the region
"Hitler and the Nazis’ Anti-Zionism"
by Jeffrey Herf
Jeffrey Herf, author of the award winning book ‘Jewish Enemy: Nazi Propaganda during World War II and the Holocaust’, and Professor of History at the University of Maryland, examines the historical inaccuracies behind ex-Mayor of London Ken Livingstone’s charge that ‘Hitler was a Zionist’. This week Cambridge University Press has published his new book, Undeclared Wars with Israel: East Germany and the West German Far Left, 1967-1989.
the article states:
"During the Cold War the Soviet Union, its Warsaw Pact Allies and the Western far-left spread a variety of lies about the history of Zionism, the most famous of these falsehoods being the assertion that Hitler and the Nazi regime were supporters of Zionism. It was a falsehood that fit well with another big lie of Communist Cold War propaganda, namely that Zionism was itself a form of racism. If the latter were the case, it would make logical sense that racists such as Hitler supported Zionism. The fact is however that Hitler and the Nazis despised Zionism and did all they could to defeat it.
Ken Livingstone, the former Mayor of London and a long-standing prominent figure on the British left, has now repeated the myth of Nazi support for Zionism. However, what was a required and standard slogan of the Communist regimes, parties and the Western far-left during the Cold War, now faces opposition from some members of the British Labour Party. That a man as prominent as Livingstone, whom the citizens of London elected as their Mayor for eight years, repeats such rubbish says a great deal about the ideas that have been circulating in what presents itself as a major cosmopolitan city. At least parts of Britain’s left have sunk to the status of a provincial intellectual backwater. Livingstone and those who agree with him are oblivious of the following well-established historical facts.
First, Hitler despised Zionism. In fact he ridiculed the idea as he was convinced that the Jews would be incapable of establishing and then defending a state. More importantly, he and his government viewed the prospect of a Jewish state in Palestine as part of the broader international Jewish conspiracy which his fevered imagination presented as a dire threat to Germany. While (after robbing them of most of their possessions) the Nazis did allow some German Jews to leave the country in the 1930s in order to travel to Palestine, that policy was primarily driven by a desire to get the Jews out of Germany rather than to build a Jewish state in Palestine. By the late 1930s the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, who later collaborated with the Nazis in wartime Berlin, had informed German diplomats stationed in Jerusalem that the entry of Jews into Palestine from Germany was angering local Arabs. For reasons of their own, the Nazis cut off Jewish emigration in 1941 to pursue their goal of murdering Europe’s Jews. This ignorance about the implications of the Holocaust is stunning. As the Israeli historian Anita Shapira has pointed out, it is only a half-truth to say that Israel was founded because of the Holocaust. The other half of the truth is that literally millions of Jews in Europe who might have contributed to the establishment of the Jewish state in Palestine could not do so because the Nazis had murdered them. The Holocaust itself was an enormous blow to the Zionist project."
the article continues
"Second, Livingstone displays an ignorance of the history of World War II in North Africa. In November 1941, Hitler promised the Mufti, then in Berlin, that if and when the German armies were successful in the Caucuses, they would drive south to destroy the Jewish population then living in areas controlled by Britain in North Africa and the Middle East. In the summer and autumn of 1942, German General Erwin Rommel’s Afrikakorps drove east from Tunisia to be met by forces from Australia, New Zealand and Britain at the Battle of El Alamein in Egypt. Nazi propaganda in those weeks and months urged Arab listeners to “kill the Jews,” dispensing with any distinctions between Zionists and Jews. As the German historians Martin Cuppers and Klaus Michael Mallman have demonstrated in Nazi Palestine: The Plans for the Extermination of the Jews of Palestine, it was only the Allied victory at El Alamein over Rommel’s forces that prevented the arrival of SS units eager to carry out mass murders of Jews in North Africa and Mandatory Palestine. Livingstone appears unfamiliar with this glorious page in the history of British anti-fascism.
While actions speak louder than words, Nazi propaganda aimed both at German audiences and at Arabs in North Africa and the Middle East constantly denounced Britain, the Jews and Zionism. This Nazi flood of anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish hatred is documented in my book Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World, which the leaders of the Labour Party really ought to read. Nazi propagandists claimed that a Jewish state in Palestine would be a “Vatican for the Jews,” that is a power centre of an international Jewish conspiracy and thus a threat to Germany. They also argued that an Allied victory would be a victory for the Jews. They repeated lies that a Jewish state in Palestine would be a threat to the religion of Islam in the entire Arab Middle East. Zionism was described as a form of “Jewish imperialism” that was linked to British and American imperialism, and even to “Jewish Bolshevism” in Moscow as well. In the postwar years, neo-Nazis and Islamists in the Middle East viewed the establishment of the state of Israel as confirming these Nazi anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. In short, in both word and deed, Nazi Germany did all it could to ensure that a Jewish state in Palestine never would emerge.
Livingstone appears ill-informed about the decisive role that British anti-fascism in World War II played in defeating Nazi Germany’s efforts to murder the almost one million Jews of North Africa and the Middle East. One of the great successes of the Cold War propaganda campaigns waged by the Soviet Union, its Warsaw Pact allies, Arab states most hostile to Israel as well as the Palestine Liberation Organization was its suppression of the actual history of Nazi anti-Zionism and even the role the Soviet Union played in helping to defeat it. In the immediate postwar years, before Soviet leaders sought to drive out Western influence in the Middle East and gain control over Western Europe’s supply of oil from the region, the Soviet Union supported the establishment of the state of Israel. After the “anti-cosmopolitan purges” of the early 1950s, the history of Soviet Zionism became as embarrassing as the actual history of Nazi anti-Zionism. Neither fit into the dogmas of Communist anti-imperialism which, it appears, have now filtered into some ranks of the Labour Party.
Anti-Semitism, like all forms or racism and religious hatred, is built on lies and distortions about the past and present. Around the world, London stands for worldliness, cosmopolitanism and often for an understanding of history. When the former Mayor of this city reveals how little he knows about World War II and Britain’s role in it, one has to wonder what has happened to the qualities we admire in British intellectual life."
From the website, historian-at-large.blogspot.com
"Was Hitler a Zionist?" on Friday April 29, 2016
Yesterday, British politics was plunged into an improbable, yet nonetheless frenzied discussion of Adolf Hitler and Zionism. Despite the multifarious threats of ISIS, the Migration Crisis, the EU's slow-motion car crash and the faltering world economy - journalists were quoting Mein Kampf and dissecting the finer points of Hitler's policies towards the Jews.
The reason for this rather preposterous state of affairs was the veteran left-wing politician, Ken Livingstone, who - on riding to the support of a Labour MP, Naz Shah, who was exposed as having made anti-Semitic remarks - successfully poured fuel on the flames. Apropos of not very much, he said in a radio interview:
"Let’s remember when Hitler won his election in 1932, his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel. He was supporting Zionism – this before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews."
Now, given the obvious historical ignorance on show in that sentence - Hitler didn't "win" an election, he was appointed Chancellor in 1933, he didn't "go mad" and Israel was not established until 1948 - it is perhaps surprising that Livingstone's suggestion that Hitler supported Zionism was given any credence at all, but the press (and others) nonetheless had a field day. So let's give the subject the once over.
Hitler was an anti-Semite. He was an ingrained and impassioned anti-Semite. Anti-Semitism was the guiding principle of his political life and it ran through his career like the text in a stick of seaside rock. Hitler's primary political ambition was to remove the Jews from Germany. As we all know, this he would later do by extermination in the Holocaust - but in the early years of the Third Reich, he sought to do it by "encouraging" emigration; making conditions for Jews within Germany so bad through boycotts, purges and persecution, that they would opt to leave of their own accord. In this, indeed, he was relatively successful. Between 1933 and 1939, the Jewish population of Germany fell from over 500,000 to little over 200,000, with German Jews finding refuge across Europe and the wider world. "
the article continues
"Some of those emigrants found their way to British Mandated Palestine - or, as Ken Livingstone would put it: "Israel". Indeed, there was a scheme in place called the Ha'avara Agreement, made in 1933 between the new Nazi government and Zionist German Jews, to facilitate emigration to Palestine. It required the payment, up front, of a £1,000 fee, which would be used to effectively 'purchase' the possessions of would-be emigrants, thereby neatly getting around the fundamental problem that the Nazis did not allow German Jews to remove their property and wealth from the country.
This shakedown of the desperate might feasibly be what Livingstone was referring to when he stated that Hitler "supported Zionism". But, there are a number of caveats that he should perhaps have borne in mind. For one thing, Hitler was no fan of the Ha'avara arrangement, fearing that the Jews - if concentrated in Palestine - would simply form a new outpost of his imagined "Grand Jewish Conspiracy". Neither were all German Jews "Zionists" - Zionism was a particular strand of Jewish political thought and was by no means shared by all German Jews, even in the increasingly perilous situation that they found themselves in the 1930s. Also, the British in Palestine were far from enthusiastic about encouraging a wave of Jewish emigration that would be bound to upset their fractious province. In addition to all that, the up front costs of the Ha'avara deal meant that many German Jews were unable to take up the offer, even had they wanted to. In the end, some 50,000 German Jews used the scheme, barely one in six of the total that left Germany between 1933 and 1939.
So, there was a Zionist arrangement of sorts with Hitler's Germany - but to conclude that Hitler therefore "supported Zionism" is not only historically inaccurate, it is historically illiterate. But then, this particular storm in a teacup was never really about history. It was just a crude, rather cretinous attempt to smear by association."
From the website allthatsinteresting.com an article is headlined
"The Black And Muslim Volunteers Who Fought For The Nazis During World War II"
By John Kuroski
Published January 19, 2017
Updated February 2, 2018 the article says:
How thousands of people that the Nazis categorized as subhuman ended up volunteering in the Free Arab Legion to fight for the Third Reich.
Free Arabian Legion Soldiers Lined Up
Helmuth Pirath/German Federal Archives
Air force soldiers belonging to the Arabian Legion stand at attention during training, 1943.
"Easily the most pervasive, enduring, and pernicious fallacy about World War II, at least in the U.S. and the U.K., is that it was “the good war,” a wholly noble, heroic endeavor (for its victors), one now rendered unto history in morally satisfy shades of black and white, good and evil.
And surely the largest reason for that fallacy’s very existence is that, on the evil side, World War II had perhaps history’s most easily detestable villains: the Nazis.
While the Nazis’ appalling wartime atrocities may indeed be without equal in the annals of history, a black-and-white understanding of “the good war” obscures, among many other things, the fact that those atrocities were augmented by the permissiveness and even the willing collaboration of dozens of foreign groups living well beyond Germany’s borders.
Perhaps most surprising, although not as numerous, among these foreign groups are those made up of some of the very people that the Nazis were rightly vilified for subjugating. This is precisely what makes truly uncommon groups like the Free Arabian Legion — a largely volunteer Nazi military unit made up of black and Muslim soldiers — both so empirically jarring and so discordant with the simplistic notion of “the good war.”
The Free Arabian Legion
Laughter Free Arabian Legion
Schlikum/German Federal Archives
Soldiers of the Free Arabian Legion in Greece, 1943.
When something sits far enough outside the agreed-upon narrative of history, it rarely makes the history books. And if it rarely makes the history books, information on it can be hard to come by. So it is with the Free Arabian Legion.
What we do know, at least according to Nigel Thomas’ The German Army 1939–45 (2): North Africa & Balkans, is that the Free Arabian Legion came together in Tunisia in January 1943 as an outgrowth of the German-Arab Training Battalion, formed by the Nazis almost exactly one year earlier.
That battalion, according to Robert Satloff’s Among the Righteous: Lost Stories from the Holocaust’s Long Reach into Arab Lands, represented the Nazis’ overall efforts to create and command units made up of Middle Eastern and North African troops, following cooperative strategical meetings between Nazi and Arab leaders in late 1941.
Given such cooperation, the Nazis were able to conscript some Arabs who had been taken prisoner after involuntarily serving in the opposing armies of the region’s colonial rulers: the French and British. However, many of the other men who joined the Free Arabian Legion did so as volunteers."
the article continues
"These men — some of whom could be categorized as black, some as Middle Eastern — hailed from places like Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Saudia Arabia, Tunisia, Algeria, and beyond. Taken together, Satloff writes, they made up between three and four battalions totaling as many as approximately 6,500 soldiers under Nazi command.
Soldiers Marching In Line
Helmuth Pirath/German Federal Archives
Air force soldiers of the Free Arabian Legion march during training, 1943.
While these men were now officially soldiers in the German armed forces, Nazi bigotry still shone through.
So, although the Free Arabian Legion served in the Caucuses, Tunisia, Greece, and Yugoslavia, often fighting the local anti-fascist partisans, the Nazis nevertheless “placed little value on the competence of these Arab volunteer units,” Satloff writes. “Even when they were pressed into battle, the Germans still did not view them as capable of doing more than rearguard duty or coastal defense.”
This kind of Nazi disdain for these men who had sworn allegiance to them begs the central question lurking behind the Free Arabian Legion, which is not where or how these men served the Nazis, but why.
Soldiers Of The Arabian Legion Fight In Greece
Schlikum/German Federal Archives
Soldiers of the Free Arabian Legion are issued hand grenades, Greece, 1943.
For the Nazis, the answers to that question were fairly straightforward: more manpower at a time when it was greatly needed, a greater foothold in the Middle East and North Africa, and new fodder for their propaganda mill which could now claim that yet another group had joined the Nazi cause.
But why would the members of the Free Arabian Legion join the Nazis, aligning themselves with an ideology that looked down upon their very races and religions, and entering into a war that didn’t directly threaten their safety and that took place largely beyond their borders?
Some of the reasons were relatively banal and practical — they needed work and pay, they wanted to ally themselves with what they thought would be the war’s winning side — but other reasons tap into deeper political and historical realities.
First, many of the Free Arabian Legion’s volunteers and the Nazis found two common enemies: the British and the French. For the Nazis, these two countries comprised their wartime enemies. But for the Free Arabian Legion’s volunteers, Britain and France were the region’s old colonial overlords, and aligning with the Nazis offered the volunteers a chance to unleash decades of pent-up anti-imperialist anger.
The Nazis played shrewdly upon this anger, using propaganda to remind locals that, unlike Britain and France, Germany had never colonized North Africa and the Middle East and had no plans to do so in the future.
And even the Free Arabian Legion’s very name, emblazoned on a patch worn by every member, was surely meant to cater to the prospective volunteers and suggest to them, erroneously, that the Nazis nobly supported their stand against the region’s colonial powers.
Officers Meeting Legion
Helmuth Pirath/German Federal Archives
Officers meet amid training of Arabian Legion soldiers, 1943.
The other major reason why some, not all, of the Free Arabian Legion’s volunteers would join up with the Nazis is altogether more malevolent, inflammatory, and perhaps likely to be misunderstood: shared anti-Semitism.
And that reason brings us to one of the very men (and a very controversial man at that) largely responsible for bringing together the Free Arabian Legion — and other similar units — in the first place."
& Continues
"Amin al-Husseini in Jerusalem, circa 1929-1937.
Born circa 1897 into a wealthy and powerful Jerusalem family that traced its roots back to the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad, Amin al-Husseini quickly became one of his era’s most prominent leaders in the cause of Arab nationalism.
Not to be confused with modern Islamism let alone terrorism, Arab nationalism of the early and mid-20th century was essentially an anti-imperialist movement that sought to remove Western colonial power from the Arab world and return the region’s leadership to the Arab peoples.
The movement blossomed just before and during World War I, as the Arab world’s longtime overlords, the Ottoman Empire, crumbled and fell to the British and French. When that happened, the existing British and French influence in the region only grew as the two countries divided up the territory that had belonged to the vanquished Ottoman Turks.
At the same time, Arab nationalism, now largely an anti-British and anti-French movement, only grew as well, and Amin al-Husseini — the grand mufti (highest religious official) of Jerusalem, then part of British-controlled Mandatory Palestine — became one of its leaders. Arab nationalism soon took on many forms in various areas across the Middle East, but al-Husseini’s take on the movement was particularly strident.
Arab Delegation In London In 1929
Library of Congress
Amin al-Husseini (front, center) stands amid other members of the protest delegation to London following rioting between Muslims and Jews over territory in Jerusalem in 1929. Many British authorities blamed al-Husseini for instigating the rioting, further souring relations between the grand mufti and his colonial overlords.
Because of the numerous and particularly violent clashes with the British powers in his native Palestine, al-Husseini’s brand of Arab nationalism was especially anti-colonialist and anti-British.
And likely because the tide of post-World War I Jewish immigration likewise focused on Palestine, al-Husseini’s brand of Arab nationalism was especially anti-Zionist.
Thus, given their shared anti-British and anti-Zionist sentiments, al-Husseini and the Axis powers became somewhat unlikely bedfellows at the dawn of World War II.
Amin al-Husseini And The Free Arab Legion
German Federal Archives
Amin al-Husseini (right, in black), founder of the Free Arabian Legion, meets with Muslim volunteers for the Nazi armed forces at the opening of the Islamic Central Institute in Berlin on December 18, 1942.
Chased from territory to territory in the Middle East by British authorities intent on stopping his revolutionary activities, al-Husseini ensconced himself in fascist Italy and Nazi Germany for much of the war, during which time he forged alliances with Mussolini and Hitler, doing all he could to promote Arab nationalism and stamp out Zionism.
These activities included taking strategic meetings with these leaders and their underlings, broadcasting and writing anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic propaganda via Axis channels, and recruiting troops to serve the Axis powers.
Amin al-Husseini Meet Heinrich Himmler
Kurt Alber/German Federal Archives
Amin al-Husseini meets with SS leader Heinrich Himmler, 1943.
This returns us to the Free Arabian Legion, just one of several military units made up of Middle Eastern and North African troops that al-Husseini helped create for the Nazis. Throughout 1942 and 1943, al-Husseini aided Nazi SS leader Heinrich Himmler in founding the Free Arabian Legion as well as three Muslim SS divisions (the 13th, 21st, and 23rd) in the Balkans.
And it’s the activities of these divisions, and al-Husseini’s involvement therein, that have recently allowed the already often distorted history of “the good war” to become distorted once more."
& continues
"Distorting History
Amin Al Husseini Meets Adolf Hitler
Heinrich Hoffmann/German Federal Archives
Amin al-Husseini meets with Adolf Hitler to discuss wartime strategies in Berlin, Germany on November 28, 1941.
As divisions of the Waffen-SS — the armed wing of the group most responsible for carrying out Nazi atrocities — the three Balkan units that Amin al-Husseini helped raise indeed committed many horrific acts.
In June 1944, for example, while overseeing Jewish civilians forced into labor in Tuzla, Bosnia, the 13th division abused the workers before massacring more than 20 who could no longer work. A month earlier in Pristina, Kosovo, the 21st division raided Jewish homes and rounded up approximately 280 civilians for transport to Bergen-Belsen concentration camp.
That number represents just half of the Jewish civilians that the 21st division rounded up for concentration camps in mid-1944, and such exploits certainly aren’t the extent of the Bosnian divisions’ atrocities.
With Soldier Rifle
Mielke/German Federal Archives
Amin al-Husseini among recruits to the Bosnian SS divisions in November 1943.
Furthermore, such atrocities don’t appear to be out of character with al-Husseini’s beliefs on the Jewish Question, at least those recorded by historians like Norman Stillman and Lukasz Hirszowicz. Both historians, for example, cite a March 1, 1944 radio broadcast from Berlin in which al-Husseini reportedly urged his Arab listeners, “Kill Jews wherever you find them, for the love of God, history and religion.”
And when al-Husseini wrote a pamphlet, Islam and Judaism, for the 13th division, he reportedly ended it with a quote attributed to Abu Hurairah, a companion of Muhammad’s, reading, “The Day of Judgement will come, when the Muslims will crush the Jews completely: And when every tree behind which a Jew hides will say: ‘There is a Jew behind me, Kill him!'”
Bosnian Soldiers
Mielke/German Federal Archives
Bosnian Muslim soldiers recruited to the SS by Amin al-Husseini read an inflammatory pamphlet written by him entitled Islam and Judaism in France, 1943.
It’s information like this that has compelled some today to exploit and misrepresent al-Husseini’s legacy in service of modern Islamophobia.
As recently as October 2015, none other than Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the World Zionist Congress in Jerusalem that al-Husseini persuaded Hitler to exterminate the Jews as opposed to deporting them when the two met on November 28, 1941, in essence blaming a Muslim for the Holocaust.
Several months before Netanyahu’s remarks, the Stop Islamization of America group sponsored large ads that ran on the sides of 84 Philadelphia municipal buses, baring a photo of al-Husseini’s meeting with Hitler and reading, “Adolf Hitler and his staunch ally, the leader of the Muslim world, Haj Amin al-Husseini” as well as “Islamic Jew-hatred: It’s in the Quran.” The year before, the same ads had started running on busses in Washington, D.C."
& lastly says
"Dc Ad
NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP/Getty Images
A bus displaying one of the controversial ads featuring Amin al-Husseini and Adolf Hitler drives through Washington, D.C. on May 23, 2014.
Those incidents, and the legacy of al-Husseini as a whole, have recently cropped up on sites like Jihad Watch, Breitbart, and the official website of Glenn Beck, where writers and commenters first inflate al-Husseini’s connection to the Nazis and then use that as a way to spread Islamophobia.
In this way, some posit al-Husseini as a kind of mythical missing link, the nexus of the great evil of the recent past, Nazism, and what so many in the West believe to be the great evil of today, Islam.
Arabs Who Fought With The Nazis
Mielke/German Federal Archives
Amin al-Husseini makes the Nazi salute while walking among Bosnian Muslim recruits to the SS, November 1943.
However, while al-Husseini’s anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism are indeed a matter of record and while he indeed aided the Nazis with propaganda and troop recruitment that led to some truly horrible acts, any attempt to turn him into this kind of missing link both ignores the vastly different geopolitical realities separating his time from ours and distorts the historical facts in question.
First and foremost, the long since published and widely available official record of al-Husseini’s meeting with Hitler contains, despite Netanyahu’s claims, nothing at all suggesting that al-Husseini initiated the Holocaust.
In fact, that record reveals the version of al-Husseini agreed upon by most historians, not to mention, say, TIME and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. That is, the meeting record shows al-Husseini to simply be an opportunist somewhat overstepping his bounds, a leader on the run lucky to be granted a meeting with Hitler and using that opportunity to plead his case for Arab nationalism, a cause that none of the European powers were actually interested in supporting.
Essentially, al-Husseini spends the entire meeting telling Hitler that they have common enemies in the Jews and the British and asking him to make a public declaration of German support for Arab nationalism. Hitler then declines, insisting that they could only make such an agreement in secret, and the meeting ends.
Does al-Husseini prove himself here to be a power hungry anti-Semite? Yes. Does he prove himself to be the instigator of any practical action beyond the raising of the several troop units he would go on to raise? No.
So it is that the Free Arabian Legion and the Bosnian SS divisions — born conceptually at this meeting and an immediately preceding one between al-Husseini and German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop — remain the practical extent of this surprising historical episode, one that denies, despite modern claims to the contrary, any ugly, black-and-white categorization of Islam as villainous.
Such episodes complicate popular understandings of “the good war,” a notion made possible by ignoring and distorting historical fact. Yet, at the same time, let us not distort the facts of such episodes themselves, painting over black and white with only more black and white."
From the website Newsweek.com an article is headlined Tue, May 04, 2021
"What If the Nazis Won? Rare Book Suggests Hitler's Plans for North American Holocaust"
BY DAVID BRENNAN ON 1/25/19 A
Nazi flag swastika North America Holocaust Hitler
A captured Nazi flag, signed by original members of Brtain’s Special Air Service (SAS), is on display in the National Army Museum in London, on March 15, 2018. The Library and Archives Canada (LAC) acquired a rare book that may have served as a blueprint for the proposed Nazi extension of the Holocaust to North America. the article says:
"The Canadian national library has acquired a rare book that may have served as a blueprint for the proposed Nazi extension of the Holocaust to North America.
The document—once part of Adolf Hitler's personal library—was published in 1944 and goes into chilling detail about Jewish communities across the U.S. and Canada, which may well have been used to implement roundups and genocide if the Nazis had triumphed in World War II.
According to CBC, the book—titled Statistics, Media, and Organizations of Jewry in the United States and Canada and authored by researcher and linguist Heinz Kloss—was acquired by the Library and Archives Canada (LAC).
Kloss lived in the U.S. in 1936 and 1937, and used his connections with American researchers and Nazi sympathizers to create his 137-page book, CBC explained.
The book includes details of Jewish communities in large North American cities such as New York and Montreal, but also smaller groups scattered across the continent, the BBC reported.
Rebecca Margolis, the president of the Association for Canadian Jewish Studies, told the agency the book is an "invaluable report" which goes some way to justifying "the fears felt so acutely and expressed by so many Canadian Jews" during the conflict.
RELATED STORIES
U.S. Home to Many Neo-Nazis, Half of Canadians Believe
GOP Congressmen Meet With Alleged Holocaust Denier
Holocaust Saw 1.5 Million Jews Murdered in 100 Days
The copy purchased by LAC is one of just a few that remain, The Guardian noted. It was bought from a private collector in the U.S.—who previously acquired the book from a Holocaust survivor—for $4,500 in June and will go on public display at LAC this weekend to mark International Holocaust Remembrance Day.
Michael Kent, a curator at LAC, told the newspaper the book "demonstrates that the Holocaust wasn't a European event—it was an event that didn't have the opportunity to spread out of Europe." He added: "It reminds us that conflicts and human tragedies that seemed far away could find their way to North America." (The Nazi presence, along with their anti-Jewish policies, actually extended beyond Europe, into North Africa, the Middle East, the Balkans, and the Caucasus.)
Experts believe the book was kept in Hitler's library at his luxurious villa in the famous Alpine resort of Berchtesgaden, where the Nazi leader spent many vacations. It was likely removed from the property by Allied soldiers or civilian officials after the town was captured in May 1945.
Though Nazi Germany never had any significant presence on the North American continent, the establishment of an automated weather station in the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador and reported U-boat forays up the St. Lawrence River and along the East Coast illustrate the Third Reich's global ambition.
The acquisition comes just after the release of a new Holocaust education study, which found that more than half of Canadian adults did not know that 6 million Jews were killed during the Holocaust."
From algemeiner.com Some Very Good News !!!! Excellent News !!!
an article on May 4, 2021 is headlined
"White Supremacist Killer of Three in 2014 Attack on Kansas Jewish Sites Dies in Prison"
by Benjamin Kerstein the article says
"Frazier Glenn Miller Jr., who killed three people outside a Jewish community center in Overland Park, Kansas in 2014, appears in court. Photo: YouTube screenshot.
The killer of three people at a Jewish community center in Kansas has died in prison, the Kansas Department of Corrections said Tuesday.
On April 13, 2014, Frazier Glenn Miller Jr. opened fire outside the Overland Park Jewish Community Center and Village Shalom care center, killing three: William Corporon, 69; his grandson Reat Underwood, 14; and Terri LaManno, 53.
In 2015, Miller — who was also known as Frazier Glenn Cross — was convicted and sentenced to death for capital murder. He received a further sentence of 32 years in prison for related crimes such as attempted murder.
Miller did not retain an attorney at his trial, instead representing himself and using the occasion to subject the court to his antisemitic, white supremacist ideology. He claimed that his crimes were an attempt to stop the “Jewish genocide against the white race” and that if he were ever released, “I’d do it again.”
Miller later told the Kansas City Star that he believed he was dying at the time of his crimes and “I wanted to make damned sure I killed some Jews or attacked the Jews before I died.”
He said he had cased the Jewish sites before his attack “for the specific purpose of killing Jews.”
He also expressed pride in the psychological trauma he had inflicted on the Jewish community, saying, “Because of what I did, Jews feel less secure. Every Jew in the world knows my name now and what I did.”
Miller did express regret for killing Underwood, because Underwood was a “white boy” who was not Jewish. None of Miller’s victims were Jewish, which he said surprised him. “I was convinced there would be all Jews or mostly Jews,” he said.
As a lifelong racist, Miller had founded a chapter of the Ku Klux Klan, and then a white supremacist “White Patriot Party.” He also issued a “Declaration of War” against Jews, Blacks, LGBT people, and government officials in 1987. He was arrested shortly after when authorities found a large stash of weapons and explosives in his trailer.
He served a three-year prison sentence and stayed mostly under the radar until his 2014 attack, when, as he put it, “I decided to cut loose as a lone wolf and kill them Jews.” Again, Good that Frazier Glenn Miller is Dead, Good that he's dead, he can Burn in Hell, he can eat shit in Hell, his Death Brings Glory to God !!!! Glory to God !!! The Brain Dead idiot Frazier Glenn Miller, did he ever stop to think during his Pathetic Miserable Life that Many Jews don't like being Jewish either
On YouTube there is a good video titled
"The Three Stages of Anti-Semitism - Lessons from Nehemiah #14"
326 views •Apr 26, 2021
Uploaded by
Christians United for Israel UK The Description of the video says
"Nehemiah chapter 4 reveals a stark warning about the dangerous trends of anti-Semitism. Identifying three phases of Jew-hatred in this chapter, CUFI’s Alastair Kirk uncovers a pattern that is remarkably recognisable throughout history and even today. Escalating in severity, they provide us with the warning signs that must not be ignored. We also consider why standing Israel is vital if we truly mean ‘never again’." about the Book of
Nehemiah Chapter 4
From the website, www.jackhayford.org an article is headlined TEACHING
"Why Stand With Israel Today?"
Written by Jack Hayford. the article says:
"Israel is a land about which God says uniquely, prophetically, redemptively, and repeatedly in the Bible This is Mine. God refers to Israel as He does to no other land on Earth. Israel was raised up to be a light to the Gentiles.
The Church at its inception was virtually entirely Jewish, and it remained so until the Gospel began to spread. Ultimately the Gospel spread to Antioch, where the first Gentile congregation began, the base from which the Gospel spread into all the world.
In the book of Romans, chapters 9 through 11, the apostle Paul deals with the question of the Jews in God’s providence and purpose. Within the whole of the Bible, these three chapters virtually stand alone as an elaboration of the theology of God’s dealing with Jews.
The Jews were the “firstfruit” …the “first people” (through Abraham) to understand a covenant God. They then relayed the riches of that truth to the world, and through their agency, the Messiah came into the world.
The Word of God calls Jews the “root” and Gentiles the “branches.” We’re reminded that while “because of unbelief, some of them were broken off and you stand by faith,” we are not to become haughty but to fear: “For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either.” When the fullness of the Gentiles is completed, “all Israel will be saved.” (Romans 11:16-27)
So why stand with Israel today?
We are living in a sobering moment in history that calls us, as believers in Jesus Christ, to take a stand with Israel. We could be people of the last hour. We are not to be passive in the face of prophecy; we are called to pray with passion, to intercede, and to minister according to the words of the Savior who said it is not our task to speculate when the end will be. It is our responsibility to do Kingdom business until He comes (Luke 19:13).
This is not about politics; this is about the Word of God, but the political ramifications are extremely dramatic. Scripture declares there will come a time when all the nations of the world will turn against Israel. It is so highly conceivable this could happen in our time that it is critical to outline why we should stand with Israel today.
Eight Reasons for Standing With Israel
1. Every believer is charged to make the Jews a priority in their value system and to render thanksgiving from their hearts for God?s work via them as a people.
Understanding the basis of the attention that we give to the Jews has to do with understanding God’s divine order and things that God said. It involves a people and a land.
-Every believer is charged to make Jews a priority in their value system because God has.
-The Lord selected a people…He began by selecting a man named Abraham. The Lord said that through the seed of Abraham (in relationship with his wife, Sarah, giving birth to the promised child, Isaac) all the nations of the Earth will be blessed…every human being having access to the divine blessing of Almighty God.
-In Genesis 12:3, the Lord says in the covenant He makes with Abraham: “I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”
-This relates not only to a people (the Jews), but it also relates to a land (Israel).
-God will judge nations and deal with them for their decisions, just as He does individuals."
the article continues :
"The Lord chose them for purposes: “…who are the Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.” (Romans 9:4)
–The Adoption: God’s divine choice of the seed of Abraham as a people.
–The Glory: the manifest presence of God revealing Himself.
–The Covenants: commitments that God makes:
–The Abrahamic Covenant: God says, “I will give you a people and a land, and through this seed the nations of the Earth will be blessed.” (Genesis 17)
–The Mosaic Covenant: The revelation of the law, given as a teaching means to lead us to Christ: redemption through the blood of the Lamb.
–The New Covenant: In Jeremiah and Ezekiel, God says in words almost parallel: “For the time will come that I will take My law and I will make a new covenant with you, and I will put My Spirit within you.”
-The Greatest Gift: the wonder of the gift of Jesus to mankind. “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son…” He gave Him through the Jews, and He came as a Jew. Jesus Himself, speaking to the woman of Samaria, said, “Salvation is of the Jews.”
So Scripture speaks to us very clearly: We’re dealing with the roots of everything that has to do with the revelation of God to humankind. The proof of this is in the very existence of the Jews as a people and the fact that they’ve been recovered as a nation. Today the struggle is over Jerusalem, over Israel, and over the presence of Jews and their right to have a land. There are few nations willing to make an abiding commitment to stand by the Jews and Israel, but the Bible says God will honor those who do.
2. Our place in God’s present order inextricably links us with the Jews as a people, and thereby the land of Israel, according to the Word.
When we put our faith in the Redeemer who came through the Jews, we enter into a line of those who have trusted God according to His revealed grace and redemptive purpose.
-Scripture declares that, spiritually speaking, when you receive the Lord, you become a Jew (Romans 2:28-29; Galatians 3:26-29).
-If you are a believer, you cannot be consistent with the whole of Scripture and take a position that is passive toward the Jews and Israel.
3. God has made unique declarations regarding the land of Israel which have never been rescinded:
-Leviticus 25:23 – The land is the Lord’s land, and it is His to assign and dispose of: “The land shall not be sold permanently, for the land is Mine…“
-Deuteronomy 32:43 – “Rejoice, O Gentiles, with His people…He will provide atonement for His land and His people.“
-2 Chronicles 7:20 – God says if the people violate Me “...I will uproot them from My land which I have given them…“
-Psalm 85:1-2 – “Lord, You have been favorable to Your land; You have brought back the captivity of Jacob. You have forgiven the iniquity of Your people; You have covered all their sin.“
-Isaiah 8:8 – This land belongs to Father God and it is the land of His Messiah: “…and the stretching out of his wings will fill the breadth of Your land, O Immanuel.“
-Jeremiah 2:7 – The Lord tells the people why there will come the loss, the destruction of the city of Jerusalem. “I brought you into a bountiful country…but when you entered, you defiled my land and made my heritage an abomination.“
– Ezekiel 38:16 – God is speaking to people in the end times who rise up against Israel. God is speaking of a confrontation that will take place in His land. “You will come up against My people Israel…I will bring you against My land, so that the nations may know Me, when I am hallowed in you...”
& continues
" – Joel 1:6, 2:18, 3:2 – Three times in this book, the land is referred to as belonging to the Lord. “For a nation has come up against My land…” (1:6) “Then the Lord will be zealous for His land…” (2:18) “I will gather all nations, and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat; and I will enter into judgment with them there on account of My people, My heritage Israel, Whom they have scattered among the nations; they have also divided up My land.” (3:2)
-Hosea 9:3 – This refers to the scattering of Israel: “They shall not dwell in the Lord’s land, but Ephraim shall return to Egypt, and shall eat unclean things in Assyria.“
-Zechariah 9:16 – “The Lord their God will save them in that day, as the flock of His people, for they shall be like the jewels of a crown, lifted like a banner over His land…“
When we talk about Israel, we are dealing with: 1) a piece of property that God has made pronouncements about and 2) God’s people to whom He’s given the land. It is a major issue with the Creator of all things, and it is non-negotiable. Things that God has said uniquely about Israel have never been rescinded.
-Not only does the land belong to God, but also God has committed the land to Abraham and his offspring via Isaac forever. (Genesis 17:7-8)
-“With a little wrath I hid My face from you…but My kindness shall not depart from you, nor shall My covenant of peace be removed…” (Isaiah 54:8-10)
-The loss of governance by Israel through sin and dispersion has not altered God’s announced commitment to make it theirs forever. (Read Ezekiel 37:1-28)."
& continues
"4. Israel’s present conflict is neither by their initiative nor perpetuated by expansionism or racism on their part.
The general attitude of the world today regards the Palestinians as the underdog, but Israel is defending the land covenanted to them in 1917 and established by the United Nations Assembly in 1948. The Palestinian goal is not to secure a homeland but to drive Israel out altogether. For the sake of mounting public opinion against Israel, surrounding, well-resourced Arab nations have never offered refuge to the Palestinians. The majority of the world doesn’t know this, and nobody is bothering to tell them because sympathies are so overridden by other forces.
5. To stand with Israel is not to oppose Arab peoples as an entity nor to oppose the rights of Arabs living in Israel to a peaceful, politically secure, and prosperous life.
God has no disposition against any human being, certainly not Arabs who are the offspring of, Ishmael, the other son of His chosen leader Abraham. Standing for Israel doesn’t require an anti-Arab stance and doesn’t require us to be loveless toward other peoples.
6. The relentless animosities of sectors of the Arab world are not merely political causes but are driven by spiritual powers that will not be satisfied until Israel ceases to exist.
The forces opposed to Israel are not simply those of people who don’t like Jews. We are caught in the stream of spiritual forces greater than humanity, forces that cannot be overthrown politically or by the power of persuasion. These forces can only be broken by intercessory prayer where principalities and powers are cast down.
7. The same spirit driving these animosities is equally opposed to Christians as to Jews, and in time will eventually bring persecution to both.
Just as Scripture states there are two witnesses that will be put to death in Jerusalem at the very end of time (Revelation 11), there have been two witnesses that have stood for God throughout history: the Jews and the Christians.
The hostilities and animosities are just as leveled at believers as they are at Israel, because there is a spirit in the world that is against all that is called God and everything about Him.
-God as Creator – to Whom we owe our worship.
-God as Judge – to Whom we owe our accountability.
-God as Redeemer – Who has shown Himself through His Son, Jesus.
-God as the moral Lawgiver of all humanity – to Whom we owe a responsibility in terms of our behavior."
& lastly says "8. A biblical assignment and a divine promise summon our stand in faith, our intercession with expectancy, and our support with promise.
We are called to stand with Israel today because we could be people of the last hour. The Lord has called us to be people with moral and biblical conviction, walking wisely and knowing His Word. He will honor those who make an abiding commitment to stand with the land He’s called uniquely His (Psalm 122:6).
Actions You Can Take To “Stand Up for Israel”
1. Equip yourself with reliable information, avoiding bigotry and disallowing “blind spots.” Recognize the disposition of the popular press. Assess reports cautiously but not with paranoia. Become familiar with the basics of history in the Middle East, and understand the past century.
2. Accept with continuing faithfulness the Bible’s call to “Pray for the peace of Jerusalem” (Psalm 122:6), and pray that our nation will govern in the light of Genesis 12:1-3 …”I will bless those who bless you…”
3. Prayerfully consider visiting Israel as a point of practical support.
4. Show friendship toward Jewish friends. Affirm that, as a believer, you stand with Israel as a point of your Bible-based commitment to God.
5. While acknowledging the terrorist habits of radical Muslims, be gracious to others.
Take action because it’s such a pivotally important time. Today, the showdown that we face is so close to being the nations of the Earth against Israel and whoever is left that stands with them.
The final issue will be “Who is for Christ and His way and who isn’t?” The Lord has called us to be a people who will touch people and will stand with moral and biblical convictions for critical issues…and this is one."
Firmisrael.org has an article headlined Join our community of monthly donors transforming lives in Israel with the love of Jesus
"3 REASONS CHRISTIANS SHOULD CARE ABOUT ISRAEL"
• By Avital Snow
August 7th, 2020 the article says:
Should we as Christians care about Israel?
If God cares about something, or someone, Christians should too. This would be a logical conclusion, right? Therefore, if Christians care about God, they should care about Israel, too.
Is this a logical conclusion also? When believers understand that Israel is all about Him, then yes, it is.
Why should believers care about Israel? The number of Christians today who disregard and dismiss Israel, who consider God’s promises to her as null and void, is growing. Anti-Semitic acts are on the rise and Israel is under attack constantly. What’s so important about this nation, the land of Israel, and this tribe – the people of Israel?
1. God’s Covenant with Abraham
The primary and arguably the most compelling reason we should care about Israel, is because of a covenant. This irrevocable bond between two parties, in this case between God and the descendants of Abraham, is directly related to us.
Consider Israel as a microcosm of all mankind. How God speaks, relates to, and deals with Israel is a pattern for how He speaks, relates to, and deals with the rest of the world.
Israel was chosen by God for a purpose, to be a blessing to the nations (Genesis 12:3). This is an election, an honor, and a responsibility all in one.
As we examine the Old Testament, also known as the Hebrew Scriptures, we witness failure after failure on Israel’s part. They continually failed at keeping their end of the deal. Israelites did not keep the commandments God ordained. They exhibited time and again a refusal to obey Him.
What does God do about this unfaithfulness? He gives them another chance. And another. He disciplines Israel, then reiterates His love, expectation, and desire for them.
The love story between God and Israel helps us grasp the character of God. As we learn of His enduring compassion and mercy towards His people, we better understand His compassion and mercy towards us. We also witness His standards and guidelines for how to live.
In spite of the repeated failings of Israel, there remains a plan and purpose for this nation. Despite the failings in my life and in your life, there remains a plan and a purpose for each of us. Man’s faithlessness thankfully does not nullify the faithfulness of God (see 2 Timothy 2:13).
Add to your Inbox. Get encouraging articles, an exclusive insider view, and connect with what God is doing in Israel.
GET EMAILS
2. Spiritual inheritance through the Jewish people
The second reason to support Israel is the spiritual connection all believers have to the land and the people of Israel.
As the birthplace of the Christian faith, followers of Jesus are drawn to visit Israel because they want to see and experience locations where much of Scripture took place.
Being able to visit the places where Jesus lived, and where He will return to establish His future kingdom, provides believers with a tangible connection to God. It gives them also a more intimate understanding of Scripture.
While visiting the land and studying the Bible, many Christians recognize there is a certain indebtedness related to the Jewish People. Consider that through the Jewish People we have the message of the prophets, the Scriptures, and the Messiah. Many Jewish People throughout history have given or risked their lives for the Word of God to continue to spread. "
the article continues
"This awareness should evoke a sense of humility and gratitude towards Israel. It should prompt an affectionate love for our Jewish brothers and sisters. And it should propel us to express that love by praying for and seeking ways to stand with them.
Gentile believers are dependent upon the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. As Paul lays out for us in Romans 11:17-21, the Jewish people are the support system of the Gentile believers. We begin to care about Israel when we understand Paul’s words:
Let us not be arrogant and cut ourselves off from the nourishing root. Respond with humility and love. The nations have a calling in this equation as well- to make Israel jealous, in the best way. Romans 11:11
3. The Restoration of Israel
Which leads us to a third, yet equally important point: revival. Beyond just caring for and about the Jewish people, generally speaking, believers in Jesus are called to provoke the Jewish people to godly jealousy.
In the same manner in which God is jealous for us and desires our committed love, so is the heart of a Jewish person pricked when they witness the relationship a believer has with God. Maybe even when they witness the believer’s knowledge of Scripture.
It is through the love of God, and loving and honoring His people, that the flames of Jewish revival will come forth. This is a responsibility that Gentile believers carry, one that has been entrusted to them by God.
“Gentile believers have a primary mission to love, affirm, and stand with the Jewish people,” says Pastor Jack Hayford, in Unity: Awakening the One New Man.
This is a really beautiful truth. When Gentile followers of God embrace this mission, the results are magnificent. Not only are Jewish people wooed by their Messiah, but healing and restoration between Jews and Gentiles can flow. Gentile believers can repent and rise from the destruction caused by antisemitic hatred has unfortunately been prevalent throughout history.
The Apostle Paul shares that Israel’s collective salvation will result in a great magnitude of blessing for the whole world:
Now, I speak to you who are not Jewish, since I am an apostle to reach the non-Jewish people. And I draw attention to this ministry as much as I can when I am among the Jews, hoping to make them jealous of what God has given to those who are not Jews, winning some of my people to salvation. For if their temporary rejection released the reconciling power of grace into the world, what will happen when Israel is reinstated and reconciled to God? It will unleash resurrection power throughout the whole earth! (Romans 11:13-15)
There is a unique parallel between the restoration of the Church and the salvation of Israel. In her book, Why Care About Israel?, the author Sandra Teplinsky puts it this way: “the blessings of Gentile and Jew are reciprocal. God’s plan of redemption depends on it.”
Christians should care about Israel because Israel is the key to understanding God’s love, purpose, and desire for humanity. He has established Israel to convey His love for all people. He has ordained Israel to bring His Word and the Messiah to Jewish and non-Jewish people. And He is beckoning Gentile Christians to participate in winning their Jewish brothers and sisters back to the God of their fathers. "
From goodreads.com a good Pro-Israel book to read is titled "Why Care about Israel?: How the Jewish Nation Is Key to Unleashing God's Blessings in the 21st Century"
by Sandra Teplinsky the description says
"No one can read the Bible and deny that God has specific plans for the Jewish nation. From the moment he created Israel, he loved her and set a plan in motion that is yet to be fulfilled. What is that plan? What does it mean for Arab peoples? How are Christians to respond?
With prophetic insight, Sandra Teplinsky unravels the historic roots of God's relationship with Israel and makes striking discoveries for Gentile believers today. Speaking from a Jewish-Christian perspective, she explains how revival will come as we emulate the Father's heart and learn to bless Israel.
Readers will find answers to puzzling questions about our world. But more importantly, they will resonate to the compelling call to bless and be blessed. " the book can also be ordered from Amazon.com
From www.barnesandnoble.com Another good book to order is titled
"Why Still Care about Israel?: The Sanctity of Covenant, Moral Justice and Prophetic Blessing" Published in 2013
by Sandra Teplinsky, Michael Brown
The Overview says:
"Could you be asking all the wrong questions about Israel?
Conversation about the Arab-Israeli conflict usually starts by asking if God is for or against the Jewish state--or Palestinians, Arabs or Muslims. In this updated and urgent book, Sandra Teplinsky, an American-Israeli Jewish believer, shows why many Christians are asking the wrong questions about Israel. With gracious honesty and solid biblical insight, she unravels the mystery and controversy of Israel--and shows how it impacts you--by taking you into the Lord's passion for all humankind.
"With precision and passion, Sandra Teplinsky weaves a wealth of material and presents a compelling case why we still need to care about Israel. It's a powerful treatise and treasure."
--Chris Mitchell, Jerusalem bureau chief, CBN News; author, Dateline Jerusalem
"An essential handbook of immeasurable worth for every thoughtful believer. Its message could not be more needed than in this present hour of global conflict, both political and spiritual."--Pastor Jack Hayford, author, Secrets of Intercessory Prayer; president, The King's University
"The dividing line of the true Church will be its position on the Jews and Israel. You must be on God's side. Read this book!"--Sid Roth, TV host, It's Supernatural!
"A much-needed and fresh approach to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Readers will be left well informed and caring deeply about the Jewish people (and others) because they encountered the heart and voice of God."--Jonathan Bernis, president, Jewish Voice Ministries International; author, A Rabbi Looks at the Last Days
"Inspirationally written, biblically accurate, extensively researched and user friendly to the common believer, Bible student or seasoned minister--a desperately needed message!"
--James W. Goll, director, Encounters Network; author, The Coming Israel Awakening
Some Customer Reviews of "Why Still care about Israel ?" are Sandra Teplinsky Has Done Extensive Research To Produce A Livel
Sandra Teplinsky has done extensive research to produce a lively, to-the-point, easily readable book. It is underscored with tenderness and sensitivity for people of all nations, including Palestinians. I found Why Still Care About Israel usable as a personal devotional, reflecting the love of God, as well as solidly educational. I recommend this work to anyone who appreciates the combination of deep spiritual nourishment with the excellence of intellectual, scriptural and historical integrity. I recommend it as a must read for Jews and Gentiles.
Originally posted on Why Still Care about Israel?: The Sanctity of Covenant, Moral Justice and Prophetic Blessing
Helpful?
Yes · 2 No · 0
Report
Anonymous
Review 1 Vote 1
☆☆☆☆☆
☆☆☆☆☆ 5 out of 5 stars. · 8 years ago
This Significantly Revised Version Of The 2003 Book Why Care Abo
This significantly revised version of the 2003 book Why Care About Israel, by the same author, is poignant, engaging, well balanced and timely. Sandra graciously names several groups of readers that might benefit from reading this volume, however in my personal opinion this is a "must read" for every Christian/Messianic Jew.
The reality is that God is moving in powerful ways in relation to His great Meta narrative, which holds at its very core the physical and spiritual significance of the people of Israel. Add to this the rise in anti-Israel theologies that are re-emerging at an alarming rate, not to mention the social injustices facing Israel as a nation and you will find ample reason to take the time to listen to this authors concise and revealing work.
With the ongoing deligitimization of Israel as a nation and the rise in new Antisemitism, every Christian should be concerned. Sandra presents a refreshingly optimistic truth, founded on the Father heart of G-d and a wealth of factual information. This book is a book of hope and future for both Israel and the Christian Church.
Don't miss your opportunity to read it. THIS IS A FIVE STAR knock it out of the park title!!!!!
Originally posted on Why Still Care about Israel?: The Sanctity of Covenant, Moral Justice and Prophetic Blessing"
Helpful?
Yes · 1 No · 0
Report
Additional Customer Reviews say
Teresa_Konopka
Reviews 223 Votes 111
☆☆☆☆☆
☆☆☆☆☆ 5 out of 5 stars. · 8 years ago
Wonderfully Written And Researched, Teplinsky Does A Phenomenal
Wonderfully written and researched, Teplinsky does a phenomenal job of articulating the swirl of controversy surrounding Israel. She uses Bible verses from both the New and Old Testament to show that the Bible in no way supports the idea that God is done with or doesn't care about Israel anymore. She touches upon replacement theology as well as Antisemitism. There is even a section of the book that goes through Church history and how there have been countless edicts throughout the years that have tried to rid Christianity of its Jewish roots--sometimes killing Jews in the process. Another interesting part of the book dives deep into how the media does not portray Israel accurately. There is even a vague reference to a Italian photojournalist who, in 2011, did an expose on how much media from the Middle East is staged (Google Ruben Salvadori). Teplinsky also goes in depth on fundamentalist Islam and what the Quran says on eradicating Israelities. This is an eye-opening read for people of all faiths that will make people think twice before demonizing a persecuted people who is currently fighting for its right to exist. I also liked how the author threw in Yeshua and Yahweh in her vocabulary of this text.
Originally posted on Why Still Care about Israel?: The Sanctity of Covenant, Moral Justice and Prophetic Blessing
Helpful?
Yes · 1 No · 0
Report
Anonymous
Review 1 Vote 1
☆☆☆☆☆
☆☆☆☆☆ 5 out of 5 stars. · 8 years ago
Sandra Teplinsky Has Hit Another Home Run! She Has Taken A Diffi
Sandra Teplinsky has hit another home run! She has taken a difficult, ever-changing subject, thoroughly researched it, cleared away the media bias we are constantly bombarded with, and presented a package full of passion, logic, and compassion. We sense God's heart for the individuals involved as well as the nations. Sandra's walk as an Israeli believer and mother coupled with her theological and legal training gives her a perspective we cannot find elsewhere. This is a must read for anyone concerned with biblical truth, the Middle East, and the plans and purposes of God. Thank you Sandra!.
Originally posted on Why Still Care about Israel?: The Sanctity of Covenant, Moral Justice and Prophetic Blessing
Helpful?
Yes · 1 No · 0
Report
Anonymous
Review 1 Vote 1
☆☆☆☆☆
☆☆☆☆☆ 5 out of 5 stars. · 8 years ago
Sandra Teplinsky Has Written Another Wonderful And Informative B
Sandra Teplinsky has written another wonderful and informative book. Why Still Care About Israel gave me a new way to look at Israel and the Arab-Israeli conflict. The book is packed with information that you would not read elsewhere and taught me more about God's plan for Israelis and Arabs. This is a well research book that should be on every student of the Middle East's reading list. I enjoyed every minute of it."
From the New York Post website, nypost.com an article is headlined
"Violence is Abbas’ way of distracting attention and seeking concessions from Biden"
By Jonathan S. Tobin May 10, 2021 | 7:35pm | Updated
A picture shows Israeli air strikes in the Gaza Strip, controlled by the Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas.AFP via Getty Images the article states:
"President Joe Biden is determined to reverse everything President Donald Trump did — not least, what many Democrats consider his misguided tilt toward Israel. Yet this week the world got a good look at what overturning Trump’s policies there means, with the eruption of fresh clashes of violence in Jerusalem, new missile attacks and fires raging in south Israel.
Democrats are hard-pressed to dispute Trump’s historic achievement in brokering the normalization agreements between Israel and Arab countries, known as the Abraham Accords. But liberals despised his decision to move the US embassy to Jerusalem, his demand for accountability from the Palestinian Authority for supporting terrorism and his cut of funding to UN agencies hopelessly biased against the Jewish state.
They wanted a return to an Obama-era “even-handed” approach that would signal to the Palestinians that, once again, they have a friend in the White House. And Team Biden has been moving in that direction. The result: emboldened Palestinians, from their leaders on down.
For several days, Palestinians have resorted to violence in the streets of Jerusalem, supposedly over concerns about the mosques on the city’s Temple Mount and a controversial property dispute. The Biden administration responded in exactly the way its predecessor would not have: with statements calling for restraint on both sides, plus an indication that it was taking sides in the property case in favor of the Palestinians.
The lawsuit involves Arabs who have been squatting in homes from which Jordanian forces evicted Jewish residents in 1948 when they invaded and sought to destroy the newborn Jewish state. Since the city’s reunification in the 1967 Six Day War, Jews have sought to reclaim property in which Arabs have been living for years without ownership rights or paying rent.
With Israel’s Supreme Court about to give a final ruling on the case, Palestinians are trying to ramp up pressure to prevent the squatters from being evicted — by threatening to make the optics bad and by providing a pretext for Palestinians to engage in violence.
That’s the context of the current violence, ginned up by the Palestinian Authority and its Hamas rivals. Both are also demanding that as Israel celebrates the anniversary of the city’s unification, Jews be prohibited from even visiting the city’s Temple Mount, the holiest spot in Judaism as well as the site of mosques that are important to the Islamic world."
the article continues
"All this has brought down on Israel condemnations from politicians like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who both think it is “abhorrent” that Jewish property rights be respected in Jerusalem. It’s also sparked assorted moral-equivalence noises from the Biden administration.
“We call on Israeli and Palestinian officials to act decisively to deescalate tensions and bring a halt to the violence,” State Department spokesman Ned Price said. “It is absolutely critical that all sides exercise restraint, refrain from provocative actions and rhetoric.”
Meanwhile, let no one be fooled about the biggest reason for the violence: Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas wants to divert attention from his decision to postpone elections again as he serves the 17th year of a four-year term to which he was elected in 2005. He fears defeat at the hands of Hamas or more militant members of his own Fatah Party.
Distracting Palestinians from the misrule and corruption of their leaders by fomenting hate against Jews is an old trick but a useful one. Hamas’ firing of rockets into Israel, including toward Jerusalem, and launching incendiary balloons in the south is its way of competing with Abbas.
When Americans fall for these tactics by condemning Israel, they aren’t promoting a two-state solution (which Abbas and Hamas have proven they don’t want in any case). They’re just validating rejectionism, and so making any possibility of peace even more remote.
It’s no coincidence that this is happening in 2021 rather than on Trump’s watch. Abbas is hoping to leverage this violence to win concessions from Biden. But the president needs to understand that the clashes and rockets are, at bottom, signs of Palestinians’ refusal to accept Israel’s existence, not a need for a more even-handed American policy.
Washington needs to tell the Palestinians, as Trump did, that they must stop the violence and accept the reality of Israel. Biden’s moral equivalence will only prolong the agony of Palestinians who are again being misled and betrayed by their leaders."
Jonathan S. Tobin is editor in chief of JNS.org. This Article by Jonathan S. Tobin appeared in the Print Edition of the New York Post on Tuesday May 11, 2021 , as always the conflict is the Fault of the So-called "Palestinians" and other Arabs, it's a
Always their Fault, Everything is Their Fault as Always, while Israel always takes the Moral High Ground,
From the New York Post website, nypost.com an article is headlined
"When the US leaves Afghanistan, the world will become less safe"
By Bill Roggio May 11, 2021 | 8:47pm | Updated
the article says
"Last weekend’s vicious school bombing in the Afghan capital killed more than 60 people and injured more than 150 others, most of them schoolgirls. Sadly, this was no isolated incident.
Since President Biden announced the United States would leave Afghanistan by Sept. 11, violence has soared. But it isn’t only Afghans who’ll suffer. With the return of the Taliban, a rejuvenated and dangerous al Qaeda will enjoy the same sanctuary it had over two decades ago.
The US withdrawal has emboldened the Taliban. The so-called “peace process,” which is really a capitulation, has failed. The Taliban believes it has won and is acting accordingly.
The jihadis can now say they have driven two superpowers, the Soviet Union and the United States, from Afghanistan by force.
In 2013-14, the Islamic State scored a massive propaganda victory after it seized control of large areas of Iraq and Syria. This victory sparked terror attacks in the United States, Europe and elsewhere. Now al Qaeda is poised to benefit in the same way.
The only peace Afghans can hope to see is the peace of submission to the Taliban. The group plans to install its emir, Mullah Hibatullah Akhundzada, as overall leader and impose its harsh version of Islamic law, replete with public executions, stonings, amputations and other horrors, on all Afghans.
The Afghanistan of the future will look much like the country did on Sept. 10, 2001.
As the Taliban retakes large areas of the country, it will settle old scores with those who collaborated with the current Afghan government. Judges, lawyers, reporters, women’s-rights activists, politicians and others who advocated a free and democratic Afghanistan will be killed or forced to submit to the Taliban or flee the country.
Millions of refugees are likely to flood Pakistan, Iran and other countries. Those unable to leave will suffer under a brutal, repressive rule.
As the Taliban’s fortunes grow, so will al Qaeda’s. To defend the withdrawal, US officials have misled the public into believing that there has been a split between the Taliban and al Qaeda. The truth is that they are as close as ever."
the article continues
"After the attacks of 9/11, the Taliban refused to turn over Osama bin Laden and his cadre of terrorists, knowing full well the United States would invade and destroy the Taliban’s original emirate. Mullah Omar, the Taliban’s founder, predicted the group would ultimately prevail as the United States would tire of the fight. It took two decades, but he was right. Now his successors are ready to pick up where he left off.
Al Qaeda won’t need to return to Afghanistan because it is already there. Since the fall of the Taliban’s first emirate, al Qaeda remained embedded with the Taliban in Afghanistan and continues to fight alongside it. Al Qaeda and other terror groups operate training camps inside Afghanistan to this day. Taliban rule will allow al Qaeda to flourish.
It is understandable that Americans want out. Our political and military leaders have been feckless, promising victory but never advocating the investments necessary to achieve it.
They refused to understand the nature of the Taliban and its religious motivations for fighting. They ignored or downplayed the deep and enduring ties between the Taliban and al Qaeda. They pretended Pakistan was our ally when it has always been our enemy. They pursued a phony peace process that was destined to fail.
They pretend that our adversaries — China, Russia, Iran and others — are not taking note of the defeat. One can hardly blame voters for assuming that more incompetence and deception would follow if our troops stayed on the ground.
If we leave, it should be with eyes open. We are not ending an endless war. We are just returning to the way things were. The endless jihad will continue, unchecked. The war will intensify, Afghans will suffer immensely, the Taliban will make major gains, al Qaeda will be emboldened, and the world will become less safe.
Just three years after the last US troops left Iraq in 2011, our troops had to go right back to deal with the new threat posed by the Islamic State. American leaders have yet to learn the lesson of that failure." This article appeared in the Print Edition of the New York Post for Wednesday May 12, 2021
Bill Roggio is a senior fellow at Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
Another Good Pro-Israel comment someone typed online
"The casualty argument Almost everyone had already made good points on the Israeli side, So I thought I might as well address a common argument used by anti-Zionists: the casualty argument.
This argument falls short from the get-go, And this is why:
- Israel spends a huge amount of its defense budget on creating defensive systems meant to reduce the casualty rates. Whether it's done by making bunkers around the country, Normalizing the addition of bunker rooms into civilian houses or the creation of defenses like the iron dome. Hamas does nothing even remotely close to that. On the contrary, In the 2014 conflict, Hamas used Palestinian civilians as human shields. The UN, Who's known for its bias against Israel, Has released a report outlining the issue: https://www. Un. Org/unispal/document/auto-insert-182027/
- Unlike in Israel, Getting precise numbers from Gaza is next to impossible, As Hamas is very likely to modify statistics to fit its agenda. It's also hard to determine who's a militant and who's a civilian.
- The Palestinians' medical system is likely using outdated gear, And are probably under-staffed and under-equipped, Unlike Israel's more advanced medical system. This means that even less-lethal injuries can eventually lead to death due their inability to treat it.
It may be worth noting that Israel's casualty rates during the intifadas were extremely high, Up to the point where border walls were erected to stop terrorists from infiltrating." Plus it has been noted that often in the Mideast Conflict, "Palestinians" and other Arabs will literally lie down on the ground pretending to be dead for when the Biased Anti-Israel Media does it's Media Coverage, then a few seconds later, these Arabs & "Palestinians" pretending to be dead will get up and start walking, and Most of these Arab & Palestinian "Civilians" Support Terrorism against Jews & Israel, and might end up becoming actual Terrorists later
More Pro-Israel comments People typed online :
"You are blinded by what you see on TV, Have you been to Israel? Fact: Arabs that live inside Israel borders are MUCH MORE happy than any other Arabs in the middle east.
Fact: Arabs that live with Israeli neighbors lead a much more fruitful and successful lives.
Fact: Most Israelis just want to live in peace with whoever!
Fact: There has not been a day in Israel that a terror attack was not prevented. The IDF stops several! Terror attempts on Israel EVERY DAY! Will your country allow that?
Fact: Arab kids are educated up to hate Jews. Jewish kids are educated to love people.
Fact: Arab kids who learn in Israeli schools are more educated
Fact: A jew that will walk inside Gaza strip is very likely to be executed. An Arab can do whatever he wants inside Israel.
Fact: Israeli prisons are filled with Arabs that murdered many Israelis, They are treated as any other inmate.
Fact: Arab woman in the middle east are treated like garbage, Arab woman inside Israel are treated like any other person.
Fact: Given the opportunity, ALL the surrounding countries to Israel will destroy Israel with all its civilians (including the Arabs)
Fact: Israel can destroy the Gaza strip in a heart beat, Yet will never do this.
I Dare you find ONE Israeli Arab that will choose (or could) to go and live in another country in the middle east.
Everyone judges Israel for being cruel, Yet the FACT is that any other country would have treated the Palestinian threat in a much more harsh way than Israel.
"Israel has never been aggressive Israel has always wanted to protect its land and its people. The Palestinian story focuses on victimhood, Their suffering and dispossession and their deep sense of injustice at being punished because of Europe’s treatment of Jews. They leave out the history of initiating wars, Their violence, Their faulty leadership and their constant refusal to take opportunities for accommodation.
The Israeli story emphasizes their long-time historic attachment to the land, The legitimacy granted by the UN partition plan, The hostility and constant threat of wars coming from their neighbors, And the rejection of their peace offers. Underlying it all is the ever-present trauma of the holocaust. They leave out their own role. They rationalize and downgrade the cruelties of the occupation. They further aggravate the situation by the historic western attitude of both condescending to and mostly disregarding the local Palestinian population."
From the New York Daily News website, nydailynews.com an article is headlined
"New York City and Jerusalem: Andrew Yang, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the truth about Israel and Hamas"
By DAILY NEWS EDITORIAL BOARD
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS |
MAY 13, 2021 the article says:
"Hamas terrorists lobbing more than 1,000 rockets at Israel — meant to kill civilians in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and Ashkelon and Ben Gurion Airport — is not the same as Israel trying to defend herself by targeting the launch sites. Andrew Yang gets that, which is why he was correct to tweet: “I’m standing with the people of Israel who are coming under bombardment attacks, and condemn the Hamas terrorists. The people of NYC will always stand with our brothers and sisters in Israel who face down terrorism and persevere.”
Yet there was no Iron Dome to knock down the rhetorical rockets fired by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others calling Yang “utterly shameful” for failing to condemn “a strike killing 9 children.” Of course, Yang grieves for innocents in Gaza, as do we, and he clarified to say: “I mourn for every Palestinian life taken before its time as I do for every Israeli.”
The Israel Defense Forces are as precise as possible in aiming at military targets, but even the world’s best air force misses sometimes, especially when Hamas infamously and insidiously hides weapons and combatants among civilians. Dead children are the last thing Israel wants; as the Yang blowback showed, the more bloodshed, the worse it is for Israel and the better it is for Hamas, which celebrates martyrs lost in their unholy cause to purge the Mideast of Jews. Hamas wants Arab-Jewish mob violence within Israel.
Any sane and fair observer, from odious miscreants like Ted Cruz and Stephen Miller, who praised Yang, to AOC, should recognize that Hamas is trying to kill civilians and Israel is trying to protect them.
Unlike Kathryn Garcia, who yesterday punted on the Mideast question on the ground that a mayor’s job doesn’t extend overseas, Yang is also right that New York City has long had a foreign policy: On Israel, on South Africa, on Northern Ireland, on Haiti, on Cuba. This wonderful polyglot place cares about its global cousins. And New York stands with Israel."
Also from the New York Daily News website, nydailynews.com
Another article is headlined
"In Congress, the knives are out for Israel"
By AARON KLIEGMAN
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS |
MAY 14, 2021 AT 6:00 AM
the article says
"Hatred for Israel is fueled by lies and conspiracy theories, which spread like wildfire over social media. And some of the chief arsonists are sitting members of Congress.
Consider the past week, during which Reps. Jamaal Bowman, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Mark Pocan, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and André Carson all perpetuated dangerous misinformation about the current round of violence between Israelis and Palestinians. Together, they asserted that Israel attempted to seize control of a sacred Muslim site and is attacking Palestinians for no justifiable reason. These claims create a false narrative that defends Hamas’s rocket fire from Gaza while excusing Palestinian rioting in East Jerusalem.
Some men sit on the rubble of a residential building in Gaza City, Gaza Strip, that was destroyed by an Israeli airstrike, on May 13, 2021 in Gaza City, Gaza. (Fatima Shbair/Getty Images)
The point of such inflammatory and demonstrably disprovable rhetoric isn’t to call attention to injustice or speak truth to power. Rather, the goal is to poison public opinion of the Jewish state, the practical effect of which endangers and stokes hatred against Jews.
Indeed, on Monday, Omar, Tlaib and Carson released statement suggesting that Israel instigated the violence by assaulting Al-Aqsa, a Muslim holy site, during Ramadan. But the proximate cause for what we’ve witnessed in East Jerusalem was actually last month. Palestinian state media began broadcasting vicious messages inciting violence, and Palestinian youth started attacking unsuspecting Jews, filming their exploits and posting them to social media.
Tensions escalated and police presence increased. The Palestinian Authority continued to encourage the riots, hoping the escalation would continue. And it got what it wanted. Weapons such as rocks, firebombs and fireworks were all used at Jerusalem’s holy sites and against Israeli police, who intervened to quell the violence. Palestinians claimed — erroneously — that the Jews were trying to capture Al-Aqsa, a blood libel that dates back decades (most memorably attributed to Yasser Arafat who used it as a pretext to launch the Second Intifada). This is the lie that was then repeated by members of Congress.
Smoke billows following an Israeli air strike in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip on May 13, 2021. (SAID KHATIB/AFP via Getty Images)
Next, Hamas in Gaza entered the fray and started to indiscriminately fire rockets at Israel, killing innocent civilians and destroying schools. In retaliation, Israel launched airstrikes at Hamas targets. Yet Omar, Tlaib and Carson inverted this cause and effect in their statement: “Today, the Israeli military launched air strikes into Gaza, killing 20 people, including nine children,” the statement read. “And Hamas fired rockets into Israel.”
Notice how the language is carefully crafted to make it appear as if Israel fired first and targeted children, and that Hamas simply responded out of self-defense.
The canard that Israel is the bloodthirsty aggressor has found an audience in the halls of Congress as well: The situation in Gaza can be boiled down to Israeli airstrikes “murdering Palestinian children” (Pocan’s words), that Israel is “brutalizing Black and Brown bodies” (Bowman’s words), and that Israel is committing “an act of terrorism” by defending itself (Omar’s words). Israel painstakingly tries to avoid civilian casualties by striking only military targets. Meanwhile, Hamas, an Islamist U.S.-recognized terrorist organization, both intentionally targets civilians and stores its weapons in civilian sites. A senior Hamas official even urged the people of Jerusalem to “cut off the heads of the Jews” and “humiliate the Jewish state.”
the article continues & lastly says
"Put more simply, unlike other countries, Israel shouldn’t defend itself — and should be condemned if it tries. There’s a name for that: a double standard.
It is true that these members of Congress did “condemn all violence in this conflict.” However, they only offer specific condemnations of violent incidents when it comes from Israelis, never from Palestinians. For instance, not one of them mentioned the Palestinian gunman who murdered a 19-year-old Israeli student in a drive-by shooting. Yet, whenever Palestinians are victimized, they’re quick to issue denunciations.
There’s nothing wrong with acknowledging that Israel has made some mistakes. However, Israel used force only to quell violent riots, not to initiate conflict. To portray Israel as some monstrous belligerent in the face of this reality is wrong, both factually and morally.
It’s bad enough when ordinary anti-Israel activists demonize Israel with lies. But members of Congress should be held to a higher standard. At a time when anti-Semitism is surging across the West, we need leaders to debunk lies and conspiracy theories about Jews and Israel, not perpetuate them.
Kliegman is an editor-at-large of the J’accuse Coalition for Justice." As Always, Israel is Morally Superior & Right, Morally & Legally Correct & Superior while Everything,
Everything is the Fault of the so-called "Palestinians" & Other Arabs, It's always their Fault, Everything is their Fault,
From the Jerusalem Post website, jpost.com an article is headlined
"Debunking the claim that “Palestinians” are the indigenous people of Israel"
By DANIEL GRYNGLAS MAY 12, 2015 the article says:
"The wars between Israel and its Arab neighbors were fought for many years on the battlefield between armies. In recent decades the arena of conflict has shifted from hand-to-hand combat to a war of narratives.
Everybody agrees that the current affluence of Israel, its modern infrastructure and economy were developed by the Jews. The Palestinian Arab narrative is that as the ancient, indigenous people of Palestine they feel dispossessed and they deserve to take over Israel’s riches. Jewish claims to their heritage in the land of Israel are supported by abundant archaeological artifacts and historical records.
Meanwhile, there are no records to support the Palestinian narrative. In history, art and literature there is no trace at all of any Muslim people referred to by anybody as “Palestinians.”
Records show that it was 19th and 20th century Jewish settlement and the resulting employment opportunities that drew successive waves of Arab immigrants to Palestine. “The Arab population shows a remarkable increase ….. partly due to the import of Jewish capital into Palestine and other factors associated with the growth of the [Jewish] National Home..” (The Peel Commission Report - 1937)
“..in the Jewish settlement Rishon l’Tsion founded in 1882, by the year 1889, the forty Jewish families settled there, had attracted more than four hundred Arab families.... Many other Arab villages had sprouted in the same fashion.” (Joan Peters - From Time Immemorial p. 252 - referenced further as: FTI)
British PM Winston Churchill said in 1939: “.. far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country [Palestine]..”
Before the Six Day War in 1967, when Jordan controlled the West Bank and Egypt ruled in Gaza, there was never any suggestion on the part of the "Palestinians" that they wanted independence in their ancestral homeland. The reason was that the "Palestinian" nation hadn't been invented yet.
In fact, before the State of Israel was born, the term "Palestinians" was used by the Jews to refer to themselves and their organizations. “The Palestine Post”, the Palestine Foundation Fund, Palestine Airways, and the Palestine Symphony Orchestra were all purely Jewish enterprises.
We first hear of Arabs referred to as "Palestinians" when Egypt’s President Nasser, with help from the Russian KGB, established the "Palestine Liberation Organization" in 1964. It was only during the 1970s that the newly minted “Palestinians” began to promote their narrative through murder and assassination. The Arabs have justified their attacks as acts of the indigenous people struggling for national liberation.
Joan Peter’s research has exposed the truth about Arab claims"
the article continues
"Many individual authors have challenged the “Palestinian” narrative. Among these, one of the most ambitious was Joan Peters, who in 1984 published her thoroughly researched study of Arab immigration into Palestine, From Time Immemorial (FTI). Peters assembled many accounts of 19th century travelers’ journeys through the Holy Land that paint the picture of a forsaken and almost uninhabited land.
Mark Twain’s comments in 1867 are probably the best known: “….. A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds… a silent mournful expanse…. a desolation…. we never saw a human being on the whole route…. hardly a tree or shrub anywhere.”
Peters documents how the current land of Israel with its millions of Arabs and Jews gradually emerged from its desolate 19th century beginnings. She analyzes the respective populations of Muslims, Christians and Jews based on data available from existing sources including Ottoman census figures, government documents, old publications, scientific research, etc.
Peters’ work was received with accolades and praise in most quarters and with predictable outrage by the supporters of the “Palestinian” narrative The vehemence with which Peters was attacked was very telling. She had undermined the basis for the delegitimization of Israel. She had shown that the vast majority of “Palestinians” are not indigenous to Palestine but rather descendants of the Arab economic migrants who arrived in the late 19th and 20th centuries.
Peter’s thorough analysis consists of 410 pages of text and 190 pages of documentary appendices. The general public could hardly be expected to wade through the 600-page tome full of data tables and quotes from hundreds of sources. Thus the book was unable to reverse the continuing fiction of the indigenous “Palestinian” people whose lands have been stolen by the Jews.
A simple new way to prove Peters’ key conclusion
In the midst of various arguments, what has been overlooked is a simple and incontrovertible way to prove that the vast majority of “Palestinians” are the descendants of the relatively recent Arab immigrants.
Peters calculated that in 1882, just the non-nomadic, settled Muslims in Palestine numbered 141,000. Among them, those that resided in Palestine before the 1831 Egyptian invasion numbered 75 percent, or 105,700 (FTI page 197). By 2015, descendants of these 105,700 persons can trace their linage in Palestine for almost 200 years. Therefore, one might consider them to be the indigenous residents. The date 1831 is important, because this was the beginning of the war with Arab Egypt, during which many thousands of Arabs settled in Palestine and changed its demographics."
& continues
"The number of 105,700 thousand settled Muslims is in general agreement with other important data. Walter Lowdermilk gives the total number of 200,000 people residing in Palestine in 1850 (page 76 – Palestine Land of Promise 1944). Lowdermilk's number includes Jews, Christians, travelling nomadic Bedouins and settled Muslims. It also includes Arabs that immigrated after the war of 1831. Arthur Ruppin estimates the total population in year 1882 as 300,000 Palestinian inhabitants, including nomadic and settled Muslims, Christians and Jews (The Jews in the Modern World, MacMillan - 1934 page 368).
If these 105,700 indigenous Muslims were to increase in numbers only through natural population growth, how many would they number today in 2015? This would represent the size of this population as if there were no Muslim immigration at all.
We can calculate the estimated 2015 native population, based on natural rates of population growth. I assume that the post-1882 Muslim population in Palestine -- apart from immigration — grew at approximately the same rate as the populations of neighboring Syria, Egypt and Lebanon for which rates we have reliable data. That rate of growth was 1.1% per annum. (FTI page 529 table in note 78) **
I used the compounded interest formula to do the math. Applying the 1.1% growth rate to the Muslim population resident in Palestine in 1882 yields a total number of 453,000 Muslim descendants in 2015 of these original 105,700 native people.
According to the 2015 World Almanac, the current “Palestinian” population, including Israeli Arabs, and Arab residents of Gaza, Golan, Judea and Samaria totals 10,523,715 people. 453,000 descendants of indigenous Muslim residents constitute only 4.3% of the current “Palestinian” population. Therefore the other 95.7% of present-day “Palestinians” are clearly those Arabs and their descendants who migrated to Israel between 1831 and 2015."
& lastly says
"Despite the substantial documentation assembled by Peters, demonstrating massive Arab immigration into Palestine, anti-Israel propagandists continue to deny it. Based on what we know today, and the simple truths of basic math, the issue has become clear and unambiguous. All historic records indicate that only insignificant number of long-term settled Muslims were present in Palestine before 1882, when the large Jewish immigration began. Muslim Arab numbers increased dramatically as Jewish settlements developed infrastructure and provided work opportunities to Arabs from the neighboring countries.
Also worth noting is that the “indigenous” 4.3% comprised many non-Arab nationalities. All of them were swamped by the Arab immigrants and within a few generations largely lost their identity.
Given the complete absence of any historical record to the contrary, we can authoritatively say that the “Palestinian people” never existed until they were invented in the 1960s as a tool for continuing the Arab war against Israel.
The claim that “Palestinians” are the indigenous people of Israel and that most of the present Palestinian Arabs have lived in these lands since time immemorial is a total fraud. Albeit posthumously, Joan Peters has had the last word on the subject.
Daniel Grynglas San Jose, 24 April 2015
** NOTE: Peters rejects birth rates for Palestinian Muslims given by the British Mandatory Government which purposely inflated the Muslim rates to justify British inaction in face of the massive illegal Arab immigration. To disguise that illegal immigration, British claimed that Arabs in Palestine had unbelievably high birth rates.)
I want to express deep gratitude to Mr. Sam Hilt for thoroughly editing and improving the above text."
From the New York Post website, nypost.com an article is headlined Facebook
"Rep. Ritchie Torres: Here’s why I’m supporting Israel — despite the Twitter mob"
By Ritchie Torres May 14, 2021 |
Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-Bronx) got backlash on Twitter for his remarks supporting Israel's right to self-defense in the face of Hamas rocket attacks. AP
"As Israel faced Arab riots and endless rocket attacks from Gaza this week, progressive Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-The Bronx) voiced his commitment to the Jewish state’s safety and sovereignty at a Zoom event sponsored by the UJA — triggering a harsh backlash for doing so. His comments appear below.
Israel is under siege not only from relentless rocket fire at the hands of Hamas but also from an endless propaganda war that has taken on a new intensity here in the United States and elsewhere.
I am here to affirm that, as a member of Congress — one who intends to be here for a long time — I have an unwavering commitment to both the sovereignty and security of Israel as a Jewish state.
With sovereignty and security comes the inherent right of self-defense, a right that every state, including our own, takes for granted. Why should Israel be an exception to the rule? Why should Israel be held to a deadly double standard in a moment of terror?
It is unreasonable to expect a nation state to be the passive target of hundreds of rockets and then forfeit the right to defend itself amid a constant stream of terror. No right-minded person would impose that kind of self-destructive burden on any other country.
What is under siege is not only Israel. What is under siege is the truth itself. Circulating on social media is a vicious lie — a lie that deceptively reframes the terrorism of Hamas as self-defense and deceptively reframes the self-defense of Israel as terrorism. Increasingly, we seem to live in an Orwellian universe where the truth no longer matters.
Now is not the time to be silent. All of us, especially those holding elected office, have to be visible and vocal — fearless and forceful — in standing up for our greatest friend in the Middle East.
Support for Israel, especially in moments like these, is not for the faint-hearted. The moment I sent out a statement denouncing the terrorism of Hamas, I was swiftly demonized by extremists as a white supremacist, as a supporter of apartheid, ethnic cleansing, genocide. Although these comments cause great pain to my loved ones, I remain as determined as ever to speak out. And if I can speak out, then anyone can. And everyone must.
We cannot allow ourselves to be silenced by an overbearing Twitter mob, dominated by the extremes of American politics. If we, in elected office, are not willing to say and do what is right, then we are unworthy of the office we hold.
I am here to state, in clearest possible terms, that I stand with Israel, because doing so, quite simply, is the right thing to do."
From the New York Daily News website, nydailynews.com "Voice of the People" Section, some readers typed "Readers sound off on Middle East violence, returning home and NYC’s past"
By VOICE OF THE PEOPLE
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS |
MAY 15, 2021 AT 3:00 AM
.
Hamas is to blame. (Adel Hana/AP)
"Palestinians are not the victims
Phoenix: In response to “Largest residential building in Gaza collapses after Israeli airstrike” (May 11): Instead of relying on information obtained from the partial and biased Al Jazeera, it behooves the reporter to learn from diverse sources about the reality of this conflict and what caused it before disseminating misinformation.
Israel’s attacks on Hamas are retaliatory, not the other way around. Had the writer watched carefully, there is a video of the Al-Aqsa Mosque with piles of stones inside. These were hurled at Israeli police who, as a reaction to that, entered the mosque.
You should have learned from previous Israeli-Palestinian conflicts that Hamas has the bad habit of using civilians as human shields. Hence their firing rockets from residential buildings, which Israel must then destroy. Israel notifies residents of such buildings prior to attacking but Hamas does not allow them to leave. Better PR if women and children are killed, don’t you think?
Have you mentioned Israeli children wounded and even a 6-year-old killed? A few Palestinian children were killed by misfired Hamas rockets, but is your newspaper reporting that? The Palestinians who face eviction are derelict in their rent payment to the owners of their homes. Have you bothered to check these facts? Wouldn’t anyone face eviction if rent were not paid? But why waste a crisis and not hurl this at Israel so the world again pities these “victims”?
The Palestinians have made it a profession and a virtue to be the perennial victims. Their PR is absolutely the best and the world has fallen for their every lie. Is it “de rigueur” to be against Israel, Zionism and the Jews?" Bela Fidel
"Who started it?
Gambier, Ohio: What a story! Israel knocks down the biggest building in Gaza and, according to you, Hamas “retaliates” by firing rockets at Israel! You know perfectly well that it was Hamas that started firing vast numbers of rockets into Israel and that it was Israel that was defending itself by going after the leadership of Hamas. You surely know that the Biden administration has condemned the Hamas rocket barrage that preceded the Israeli response. You know that it is always Hamas that begins a round of violence and drives Israel to reply. Why would you seek to prejudice your readers in favor of an internationally banned terrorist organization that proudly engages in open warfare against the Jewish state whenever it can? And I wonder why you side with the aggressor here. Or maybe I don’t wonder at all. "Fred Baumann
Plus on the New York Daily News website, nydailynews.com on May 14, 2021
an article by Dennis Ross & David Makovsky says the following in an article
"Unfortunately, with Hamas leaders and fighters deliberately embedded in densely populated areas, often making their command posts in hospitals or mosques, there will be a terrible civilian toll. The basic asymmetry of this conflict will be evident with Israelis calling ahead to residents located on top of military targets to evacuate buildings, while Hamas fires indiscriminately against civilians.
Hamas is trying to project the image as protector of the Palestinian people, but its tunnels are for protecting its weapons and its fighters, not its public.
Arab governments may criticize Israel for its actions in Jerusalem and the bombing, but they are very wary of Hamas’s desire to destabilize Israel-Arab relations. With the exception of Iran, Turkey and Qatar, leaders see what Hamas means to the region — and some, like Egypt, have real leverage to chart a better course. Egypt has been instrumental in shaping the ceasefires between Israel and Hamas over the last several years." Israel builds Bomb Shelters to protect it's citizens & Civilians, while the
"Palestinians" Build Terror Tunnels to Murder Israeli Civilians & Citizens
From the J'Accuse Coalition for Justice website , jaccusecoalition.org the Issues Page says
Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions
How they portray Israel: Individuals, organizations, universities, and businesses should be pressured to boycott, divest from, and sanction Israel in protest of their occupation of Arab lands and oppression of Palestinian people. Those who do not cooperate should be shamed for supporting an apartheid regime. Together, these tactics will pressure Israel to sue for peace, ultimately leading to Palestinian self-determination and a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The truth: For the founders and leaders of BDS, Palestinian self-determination comes at the cost of Jewish self-determination and implies the destruction of Israel. They define all of Israel as “Arab lands” and all Israelis as colonialist, despite the fact that Jews lived there continuously for thousands of years, immigrated in large part to escape persecution, and later granted full citizenship and civil rights to a large Palestinian minority. For other supporters of BDS who have been duped into believing this is about peace, singling out Israel for boycott is not only unfair, it also makes peace less likely. It places all blame for the current impasse on the shoulders of only one party--granting terrorism a free pass, ignoring previous Israeli overtures for peace, and making it harder for Palestinian leadership to accept compromise. It robs Palestinians of jobs, effectively undermining efforts which are supposed to improve their lives. And it contributes to a vitriolic, counter-productive delegitimization campaign, giving fuel to those whose motives are truly antisemitic. "
The Issues page continues
" Bias in the Media
How they portray Israel: The Arab-Israeli conflict is deserving of more air time, screen time, and column space than any other international conflict. The Palestinians are David and Israelis are Goliath; Israel controls its destiny and Palestinians have no control over their destiny. The media presents the volatile situation there as a co-equal cycle of violence, often tacitly condoning the behavior of Palestinians while judging the behavior of Israel as disproportionate.
The truth: Fewer people have been killed, displaced, or affected by the Arab-Israeli conflict than most other conflicts in the world, let alone the Middle East. One cannot fairly call this a cycle of violence because if the Arabs laid down their arms, there would be peace; if Israel laid down its arms, there would be genocide. While Jewish culture cherishes life, Palestinian society glorifies martyrdom. Israel has repeatedly made and accepted offers for peace, whereas Palestinians have consistently rejected offers for peace. One can also not equate the legal actions of a nation state defending its borders and citizens with the illegal actions of terrorists deliberately targeting those citizens.
Israel at the United Nations
How they portray Israel: More resolutions are passed condemning Israel than all other nations combined. The bylaws of the United Nations Human Rights Council require addressing, at every meeting, only Israel’s alleged human rights infractions. This treatment makes Israel the world’s pariah state and premier violator of human rights. Palestinians, on the other hand, have earned non-member observer state status, unique refugee status, and a UN-observed “International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People.”
The truth: As an international body, the United Nations is obligated to embrace equal standards and, when necessary, condemn member states in proportion to their alleged violations. No reasonable person can call an institution fair that singles out democratic Israel alone for censure, while giving a free pass to countries who subjugate women, hang gays, persecute religious minorities, torture dissidents, fund terrorism, and silence free speech. Meanwhile, the United Nations’ favorable treatment of Palestinians, including granting them their very own refugee agency and turning a blind eye to their staff and facilities’ well-documented complicity in storing weapons, renders them incapable of arbitrating the decades-old dispute."
& continue "Intersectionality & Zionism
How they portray Israel: All forms of social oppression are linked, including the discrimination of women, LGBT individuals, and racial minorities. Standing up against the privileged, heterosexual white male is a universal, joint effort shared not only by all who are oppressed, but also all who embrace progressive causes. Since Israel is a privileged white country that oppresses (colored) Palestinians, authentic social justice warriors must protest Israel. One cannot be both progressive and pro-Israel.
The truth: Intersectionality finds common cause among all social justice movements except those that support Zionism. Intersectional feminist groups protest only Israel, where women fly fighter jets and serve in all positions of government, instead of protesting gender policies in the Arab world, where women are subjugated and subject to honor killings. Intersectional LGBT groups protest only Israel, which every year hosts one of the world’s largest gay pride events, while ignoring LGBT policies in the Arab world, where there has never been even one gay pride event. And intersectional racial minority groups protest only Israel, where the conflict has nothing to do with race, where over half the population is of Middle Eastern descent, and where racial minorities enjoy complete civil rights, while ignoring real horrors in the Arab world such as the African slave trade and abuse of migrant workers.
Safe Spaces (from Israel) on Campus
How they portray Israel: Students on college campuses throughout the country are entitled to safe spaces, where they can be protected from micro-aggressions and ideas they find offensive. Israel is one such offensive idea, since it represents the subjugation and humiliation of Palestinians. The administration should therefore restrict activities that present views in support of Israel.
The truth: The selective censorship of activities supportive of Israel, amidst silence in the face of activities demonizing Israel or Jews in general, is antisemitic. The First Amendment protects a right to free expression, not a right to feel safe from ideas one might consider offensive. And if students have any right to feel safe from being offended, certainly Jewish students have at least an equal right to feel safe from antisemitism, safe from bullying, and safe to express or listen to ideas supportive of their nation state."
& lastly says :
"Holocaust Denial
How they portray Israel: Many people were killed in World War II. Jews exaggerated their victimhood in order to win the world’s sympathy and manipulate Western powers into granting them a state. Israel is thus a country founded on lies, at the expense of Arabs who were living in Palestine.
The truth: The systematic genocide of six million Jews during the Holocaust is the most well-documented crime in human history, and to deny or minimize this tragedy is antisemitic. To selectively question the legal and moral basis for Israel’s founding, while remaining silent about the legal or moral basis of any other modern state, is also antisemitic. The establishment of the State of Israel was the culmination of communal, legal, and diplomatic efforts that began in the late 19th century, long before World War II. Jews have lived in modern day Israel continuously for thousands of years, save periods of exile. Due to reasons that ranged from escaping persecution to pursuing religious destiny, the Jewish population began to grow rapidly first under Ottoman and later under British rule. The legal framework for Israel began with the lawful purchase of lands; continued through printed declarations, resolutions, and agreements with international powers; and concluded with an international vote of recognition. Arabs living in Palestine were also offered a state at that time, which they rejected. "
From the New York Post website, nypost.com an article is headlined D
"The truth about Sheikh Jarrah and other commentary"
By Post Editorial Board May 17, 2021
Supporters gathered at a pro-Israel rally near the Federal Building in downtown Los Angeles last week. AP
MORE ON:
ISRAEL
Israeli cockpit video shows mission being called off after spotting children
The article says:
“The truth about Sheikh Jarrah is the opposite” of the narrative peddled by media progressives, argue Avi Bell and Eugene Kontorovich in The Wall Street Journal. According to the narrative, Israelis seek to lawlessly evict Palestinians from the Jerusalem neighborhood. Yet “the Jewish claimants’ ownership of the few plots of land has been confirmed repeatedly in court, following laws that apply equally regardless of ethnicity.” The case before Israel’s courts now involves a Jewish title to properties dating back to 1875. When Jordan invaded Israel in 1948, it expelled the Jewish residents and seized their properties. The Jewish state recovered those properties following the 1967 Six Day War but allowed Palestinian residents to stay “in the many cases in which Jordan had officially transferred the title of Jewish-owned properties to Palestinians.” However, “title to the properties in dispute in Sheikh Jarrah was never given by Jordan to Palestinians, so Israeli law respects the unbroken title of the plaintiffs.” So much for “ethnic cleansing.”
Also from the New York Post website, nypost.com Another article is headlined
"Press lies about what’s happening between Israel and Gaza"
By Liel Leibovitz May 17, 2021
Enlarge Image
Israel's Iron Dome missile defense system intercepting rocket attacks from Hamas in Gaza on May 16, 2021.
"To hear most of the western media tell it, war’s afoot in the Middle East, fueled once again by Israel’s unquenchable belligerence.
“Israel struck the Gaza Strip again Monday,” began the Washington Post’s report, and readers leafing through The New York Times would have similarly learned that “Israeli warplanes began another round of attacks.”
The BBC, showing that famous British reserve, merely informed its readers that “Israel’s military operation against Palestinian Hamas militants in Gaza will continue,” while NBC added a bit of news analysis, boldly stating that “As Israel inflicts a lopsided death count on the Palestinians, it’s clear that U.S. funds merely polish the armor of a regional Goliath in its contests with David.”
Not often or ever mentioned were the following inconvenient facts: The Palestinians, not Israel, began the current round of violence, with rioting in Jerusalem quickly followed by a barrage of missiles from Gaza. As of Monday, Hamas and other Palestinian terror groups have hurled 3,313 rockets on Israel, with at least 460 of those landing inside Gaza itself and claiming Palestinian lives.
Israelis take cover in Tel Aviv amid rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip on May 15, 2021.
Photo by GIDEON MARKOWICZ/AFP via Getty Images)
Protecting its citizens from Hamas’s deadly campaign — which, to date, has claimed the lives of 10 Israelis, including a five-year-old boy — Israel is nonetheless meticulous about minimizing civilian casualties and provides advanced warning before shelling any building where Hamas had, in violation of international law and human decency alike, hid its men and ammunition amid innocent women and children.
What we’re seeing right now is the deliberate, methodical, and cynical weaponizing of the press as a tool of political warfare. This isn’t skewed reporting; this is full-on propaganda, the goal of which is to deny Israel the right to defend itself against murderous attacks.
If you’ve been paying attention to the overall degradation of the Fourth Estate, none of this should come as any surprise. When the anchor of a major nightly news broadcast, accepting an award named after Edward R. Murrow, says blithely that “fairness is overrated,” and when a previously excellent newspaper like The Times abandons fact-finding for factional knife-fighting, it’s clear that our media are just another wing of the partisan-industrial complex."
Israeli security force members transport an injured woman after a rocket attack in Ramat Gan near Tel Aviv on May 15, 2021.
Photo by OREN ZIV/AFP via Getty Images
If you don’t like Israel — and few in the elite circles that make up newsrooms these days do — you’re free to bash it, facts be damned.
You can ignore all this as merely some scuffle happening elsewhere to other people, but Americans reading the unconscionably mendacious coverage of the recent war should be afraid. The same reporters and editors are applying the same poisonous strategy to shape the conversation stateside about anything from COVID policies to policing practices.
To read the news out of Israel these days is to understand beyond any reasonable doubt that those who lie about Tel Aviv lie about Tampa, too." As Always the so-called "Palestinians" are the aggressors, Everything is their Fault, Everything is their Fault
From the New York Post website, nypost.com an article is headlined Rich Lowry RICH LOWRY
"‘Apartheid Israel’ is a toxic lie intended to destroy the Jewish state"
By Rich Lowry May 18, 2021 | 8:16pm | Updated
Enlarge Image
Rep. Rashida Tlaib called on Congress to "condition the aid we send to Israel..."
"Squad" member Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) says that Israel is "promoting racism and dehumanization" under an "apartheid system." AP Photo/Paul Sancya, File. the article says:
"The charge of apartheid is the new blood libel.
As Hamas rains rocket down on Israeli civilians, members of the Squad in the US Congress and other left-wing enemies of the Jewish state are using the occasion to amplify their accusation that Israel is an “apartheid state.”
This is a transparent attempt to delegitimize — and isolate and ultimately destroy — the Jewish state by associating it with a racist regime that the world united to squeeze out of existence.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) says that Israel is “promoting racism and dehumanization” under an “apartheid system,” and Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) refers to “Israel’s apartheid government.”
The charge is given a patina of legitimacy by Human Rights Watch, which recently issued a 213-page report devoted to the accusation, and other anti-Israel organizations that understand its potential power to define Israel out of the circle of advanced democracies.
It doesn’t take much moral discernment to understand, even if one takes a harshly critical view of how Israel conducts itself, that it is nothing like an apartheid regime in South Africa that depended on a rigorously enforced system of racial repression.
The Arab minority in Israel, about 20 percent of the population, may face obstacles, but it isn’t treated like black South Africans.
t
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and her ideological comrades tweeted the other day, “Apartheid states aren’t democracies,” which nailed the point, just not the way they intended.
Israel is a democracy that affords its Arab citizens full rights. They vote in elections, and Arab parties sit in Knesset, the parliament. These parties obviously have a profoundly different worldview than the Zionist parties, which has been a barrier preventing cooperation between them. But this year, in a first, Arab parties were part the negotiations over forming a new government before they broke down.
Arab Israelis are full participants in Israeli society. There are Arab justices on the Supreme Court. About 20 percent of doctors in Israel and about half of pharmacists are Arab. Roughly 17 percent of students seeking an undergraduate degree are Arab, a number that has roughly doubled over the last decade.
As Steve Kramer of The Times of Israel puts it, “they arguably are the most free Arabs in the Middle East.”
Then, there are the Palestinian Territories, where there is a marked lack of democracy, courtesy of Palestinians themselves."
the article continues
"Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who is still serving a four-year term that began about 15 years ago, canceled new elections scheduled for May 22. He found a way to blame Israel for this move, of course, but the bottom line is that his party, Fatah, feared Hamas would win, as it did in the last Palestinian election back in 2006.
The Palestinians have made postponing elections into a high political art, in keeping with the lack of democratic accountability in neighboring Arab states.
How Israel should handle the threat of another terror state devoted to its destruction arising on its borders is, any fair-minded person should concede, an inherently difficult question. It has offered the Palestinians a state twice, in 2000 and 2008, to no avail.
Israel evacuated the Gaza Strip entirely in 2005. It can’t be blamed for Hamas winning the aforementioned elections in 2006, taking over Gaza in a coup against Fatah a year later and misgoverning the territory ever since, with an emphasis on using it as a base from which to wage war against the Jewish state.
Much is made of its border controls in Gaza and the West Bank, but a border isn’t a denial of citizenship rights, rather a demarcation between two societies. If the Palestinians would ever accept the right of Israel to exist and embrace a program of peaceful development, they would get their own sovereign state.
Instead, they want to wipe Israel from the map and are getting an assist from purveyors of the malicious lie that Israel is an apartheid state."
From the website, defendinginerrancy.com an article is headlined
"JOSHUA 23:16—WAS GOD’S PROMISE OF THE LAND TO ISRAEL CONDITIONAL OR UNCONDITIONAL?" the article says:
"PROBLEM: When God gave the Promised Land to Abraham (Gen. 12–15), Isaac (Gen. 26), and Jacob (Gen. 46), there were no conditions. It was an unconditional covenant (“I will bless you”) with no conditions (“If you do such and such”) in which God swore by His own unchangeable nature (cf. Heb. 6:13–18). However, later both Moses (Deut. 31:16–17) and Joshua (23:16) speak of God expelling Israel from the land if they sinned against God.
SOLUTION: There are two ways Bible scholars attempt to respond to this criticism: spiritually and literally.
Spiritual Fulfillment in the Church. Some claim this promise does not find any fulfillment in literal Israel, but in spiritual Israel, the church. They appeal to the verse which calls believers the “Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16) and the spiritual “seed” of Abraham (Gal. 3:29). They point to Romans 11 which says that Israel was “broken off” because of their rejection of their Messiah (v. 17). Thus, while literal Israel sinned, God nevertheless will keep the Abrahamic covenant with NT believers who were unconditionally elected in Christ (Eph. 1:4).
Literal Future Fulfillment in Israel. Other Bible scholars take the eternal land promises to Abraham’s descendants literally, pointing to a future fulfillment of these when Christ returns to earth to reign (cf. Matt. 19:28; Rev. 19–20). In support of their position they note the following points.
First, the promises of possessing the land of Palestine “forever” (see Gen. 13:15) have never been fulfilled.
Second, unlike the Mosaic covenant (Ex. 19:1–8), this was an unconditional covenant based on God’s unchangeable character (cf. Gal. 3:18; Heb. 6:17–18). Thus God must literally fulfill it to the very people to whom He promised it, or else God would have reneged on an unconditional promise—in which case, He is not God.
Third, the NT church does not fulfill the literal land promises to Israel, but only the promises to receive the spiritual blessings of salvation through the seed of Abraham, who is Christ (cf. Gal. 3:16, 29).
Fourth, the NT could not be the fulfillment of these unconditional promises to Abraham’s descendants because they speak of them as yet future. Paul not only spoke of the nation Israel being cut off, but of their being “grafted in again” and being “saved” (Rom. 11:23, 26). Indeed, the Book of Revelation speaks of “one hundred and forty-four thousand of all the tribes of ... Israel” being reinstated in the end times (Rev. 7:4). Those who advocate this position also note that the word “tribe” is never used in a spiritual sense in Scripture.
Finally, Scripture makes a clear distinction between covenants that are unconditional (e.g., the Abrahamic) and those that are conditional (e.g., the Mosaic law). Paul told the Galatians clearly that “if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise” (Gal. 3:18). In view of this literal interpretation, all threats of non-fulfillment of a covenant refer either to the conditional covenant made with Moses (Ex. 19) or else they are merely exhortations about relating to temporary delays in fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant (Josh. 23:16)."
From the New York Post website, nypost.com an article is headlined
"Israel has acted like a moral beacon in the latest Gaza war against terror"
By John Podhoretz May 19, 2021 | 4:59pm | Updated
Video shows Gaza militants fire rockets over Tel Aviv
the article says:
"In 10 days of war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, more than 200 Palestinians have been killed, compared to 10 Israelis.
To many, this imbalance can mean only one thing. “War crimes!” thundered noted Geneva Convention specialist John Oliver. The New York Times blares, “humanitarian catastrophe.”
Israel began bombing targets in Gaza for one reason only: because Gaza started firing rockets at Israel. Period.
Many events led up to Hamas firing off the rockets. We can argue about those events — about who has title to the area called Sheikh Jarrah, about what motivated the cancellation of the June elections on the West Bank that Hamas thought it might win and about the cause of the showdowns between Israelis and Palestinians on the Temple Mount.
That’s all debatable. None of it justifies the firing of rockets at civilians. And everything the Jewish state has done in response since has been defensive.
The first day of the exchanges, Hamas shot off 750 rockets at Israel. In the days since, another 3,000 have flown. The idea that the act of defending citizens against incoming rocket fire could possibly constitute a war crime is the textbook definition of moral idiocy.
Rockets are launched toward Israel from Gaza City, controlled by the Palestinian Hamas movement, on May 18, 2021.
Mahmud Hams/AFP via Getty Images
War criminals don’t drop “knock-knock” dud bombs on buildings to provide warning to the residents and office renters that an attack is coming so they can get out of harm’s way. War criminals don’t telephone the owners of buildings to let them know a strike is coming, so that residents might be evacuated.
The fact that fewer Israelis have died than Palestinian Gazans is due entirely to the success of Iron Dome, the air defense system that intercepts and destroys Hamas rockets before they land. Israeli aircraft have also been searching out and bombing the sites from which rockets are fired and the command-and-control locations from which these attacks are planned.
An Israeli artillery unit fires shells toward targets in Gaza Strip.
Tsafrir Abayov/AP
Israel uses Iron Dome to protect its people from Hamas’ indiscriminate efforts to kill whomever it can and destroy whatever it can. This has led some other moral idiots to complain that Hamas doesn’t possess an Iron Dome system to protect it against Israel’s strikes.
Really? Hamas has something far simpler and more cost-effective: It can just not fire rockets. Problem solved.
Israeli medics evacuate a wounded man after a rocket fired from the Gaza Strip hit the central Israeli town of Holon.
Avshalom Sassoni/AP
The Iron Dome doesn’t just save Israeli lives and property. It has likely saved the lives of tens of thousands of Gazan Palestinians just in the past two weeks."
the article continues
"How? Imagine that the system didn’t exist, that Hamas had collected 30,000 rockets, and then began firing them. Israelis would perish by the hundreds or more. The response would, of necessity, be devastating. Israel would be compelled to enter Gaza with overwhelming force and go street by street, tunnel by tunnel, to locate the rocket caches and blow them up.
It is awful that 60,000 Palestinians have had to flee their homes or been rendered homeless. But every single one of them owes their current parlous condition to Hamas’ strategy of interlacing its weaponry in and around Gaza’s citizenry.
An Israeli soldier stands guard next to an Iron Dome air defense system.
Ariel Schalit/AP
That has other consequences, as well. As Jonathan Sacerdoti recently noted in The Spectator, more than 400 Hamas rockets fired from Gaza have landed … in Gaza. Hamas simply rolls the casualties from those inadvertent acts of self-destruction into the overall toll it blames on the Jewish state.
The central emotional claim against Israel is that disproportionate death toll. But consider what we are being asked to believe here. According to Hamas’ own numbers, something akin to 20 Palestinians a day have been killed. Every civilian death is a tragedy. But the relatively small figures — compare the Gaza figures to the mass horrors of the Syrian civil war — are a testament not to Israel’s barbarism, but to its determination to avoid civilian casualties.
Israel gets precious little credit. It does it anyway. History will record Israel as a moral beacon in this regard.
While there has been damage and deaths an Israel, the Iron Dome has prevented even more.
Heidi Levine/AP
As for those who are lining up with a terrorist group and serving its propagandistic interests? If they’re lucky, history will forget them, and their ignominy will not haunt their descendants."
From the New York Daily News Website, nydailynews.com Another article is headlined
"There is only one honest answer to this Israel-Palestinian conflict: Condemning Hamas terrorism"
By ALAN DERSHOWITZ
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS |
MAY 19, 2021 AT 1:30 PM the article says
"The tactic is obvious and recurring. Every few years, Hamas finds an excuse to attack Israel — by rockets, tunnels, terrorism. They know that: a) Israel will defend its civilians, as any country under attack would; b) the international community, the hard left and some of academia will condemn Israel for “overreacting”; c) Israel will win the military war, but Hamas will win the propaganda war; d) the trade-off will be worth it to Hamas, which will continue to employ this tactic so long as it reaps a propaganda benefit from it.
Hamas is a terrorist organization that commits a double war crime every time it fires a rocket at Israeli civilians while using its own civilians as human shields. Israel is a democracy that goes to extraordinary lengths to avoid hurting the civilians who Hamas hides behind. Yet Hamas can always count on Bernie Sanders, AOC and the Squad, other left-wing extremists, the United Nations, the International Criminal Court and others to blame Israel or declare a moral equivalence between terrorism and legitimate self-defense.
These one-sided critics should see through the recurring Hamas tactic and understand that their support for Hamas incentivized terrorism and rockets. Some do understand what they are doing and continue to do it despite — and in some cases because of — the reality that they are complicit in the killing of both Israeli and Palestinians civilians. They believe that as long as Israel loses, they win, regardless of the toll in death and suffering.
Rockets are launched from Gaza Strip to Israel, Thursday, May 13, 2021. Israeli airstrikes killed multiple senior Hamas military figures Wednesday and toppled a pair of high-rise towers housing Hamas facilities. (Hatem Moussa/AP)
This Hamas approach has aptly been called the CNN strategy (which is to say nothing against CNN, simply that the strategy is designed to exploit the 24-hour news cycle). Others call it the “dead baby strategy.” It is based on the recognition that the media loves to show dead children, and that Hamas always parades its dead and wounded in front of TV cameras. They know that “If it bleeds, it leads.” They also know there will inevitably be some civilian casualties among the human shields they deliberately deploy. They could easily fire their rockets from the many unpopulated areas of the Gaza Strip, but they deliberately choose to fire them from mosques, schools, hospitals and other locations that are densely populated with civilians.
This tactic leaves Israel with two choices: It could refuse to attack the rocket launchers, thereby exposing its own civilians to deadly rocket attacks; or it could attack the launchers, taking great care to minimize civilian casualties. Like every democracy including our own, Israel chooses to protect its civilians, knowing there will be some civilian casualties while seeking to minimize them. Israel has no incentive to harm Palestinians civilians, while Hamas has every incentive to kill Israeli civilians."
the article continues
"For Hamas, it’s a win-win strategy. For Palestinian and Israeli civilians, it’s a lose-lose tragedy. For those who hate Israel — especially the hard-left — it provides yet another excuse for bigoted demonization of the nation-state of the Jewish people and its supporters.
There is only one way to break this Hamas-induced cycle of violence and civilian death: The civilized world must recognize and acknowledge the cynicism of what Hamas has repeatedly been doing and the war crimes they are committing; it cannot take a “balanced” approach to this one-sided double victimization of civilians, both Israeli and Palestinian. It must condemn only the aggressor who is responsible for these civilian deaths, namely Hamas. No moral person can do what AOC and her Squad are doing: condemning Israel for defending its citizens from Hamas war crimes. To do so is the encourage the Hamas tactic and the double war crimes it employs.
So two cheers for President Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken for supporting Israel’s right of self-defense in the face of opposition from extremist Democrats and Israel bashers. Support for Israel must remain a bipartisan issue, especially when Israel is under attack from America’s enemies — Iran and its surrogate Hamas."
Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus at Harvard Law School and author of “Case Against the New Censorship: Protecting Free Speech from Big Tech, Progressives and Universities” and “Guilt by Accusation: The Challenge of Proving Innocence in the Age of #MeToo.”
From the website, blogs.timesofisrael.com an article is headlined
"The four absurd criticisms of Israel’s war conduct" by Salo Aizenberg
MAY 20, 2021, the article states:
"Much of the media and many experts and observers have succumbed to what can be described as a complete loss of rationale thinking when it comes to evaluating the current Israel-Hamas war. Israel’s critics have invented an entirely new set of illogical rules of war for Israel that one can only conclude is aimed at leaving the Jewish state defenseless and allowing the terrorist group Hamas to attack freely. There are four key themes that are propagated in articles, interviews, social media and by well-known comedians, all of which are simply absurd.
Using the Ratio of Deaths to Decide Which Side is Right or Wrong
It has been noted repeatedly that the ratio of deaths in Gaza to Israel is about 20:1. To those pointing out the disparity it therefore follows that Israel’s war conduct is unjust, while Hamas’ is not really of much concern, because, well look at the numbers. This thinking is infantile, as the stronger side in war usually inflicts more casualties on the weaker side, and ignores intent. If one reviewed the statistics for WWII the conclusion would be that Germany was in the right and the allies the evil aggressors.
The other conclusion that can be drawn by the focus on casualty ratios is that somehow Israel’s actions would be acceptable if more Israelis died. As Colonel Richard Kemp, former commander of British forces in Afghanistan put it, “many commentators seem to be suggesting that it would be better if more Jews were dead to balance the books.”[i] If Hamas succeeded in a rocket attack that resulted in a large number of Israeli deaths, perhaps due to an Iron Dome failure, would Israel’s actions suddenly be more acceptable to its critics? They never answer this question that exposes the ridiculous nature of their thinking.
The military campaign to eliminate ISIS in Syria and Iraq demonstrates the incredible hypocrisy in how Israel’s conduct is treated versus the rest of the world. The battle against ISIS was conducted in part by the Combined Joint Task Force, a U.S.-led coalition which included Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Jordan, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, UAE and UK. The task force reported that airstrikes from 2014 through 2019 led to 1,257 civilian deaths which were characterized as unintentional. Other credible estimates cited by The New York Times shows at least 7,500 civilians killed.[ii] Few coalition soldiers were killed resulting in a casualty ratio far above the current conflict in Gaza; in fact no one bothered to even calculate the ratio. While civilian deaths were lamented, the general international attitude was praise for the final destruction of ISIS."
the article continues
"
Urging Israel to Act “Proportionally”
The concept of proportional use of force is inane, as no country’s military operates on the principle of responding to aggression with no greater force than is used against it. To highlight the absurdity of the criticism some have jokingly suggested that Israel simply fire rockets into Gaza to respond in exact proportion against Hamas.
The actual concept of “proportionality” in war states that: “Launching an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated, is prohibited.”[iii] This is not what critics of Israel mean. They actually expect that Israel should “go light” on Hamas because Israel is stronger. A recent comment by television host Trevor Noah encapsulates this preposterous thinking: “I just want to ask an honest question: If you’re in a fight where the other person cannot beat you, how hard should you retaliate when they try to hurt you?” Writer Bari Weiss replied: “Just so we have this straight: A country should accept a terrorist group launching deadly rockets at its civilian population because a comedian thinks that the terror group won’t win?”
In fact, all military leaders seek to employ greater force than their enemy to ensure victory, which is obvious and should require no further explanation. The concepts of “overwhelming force” and “shock and awe” were implemented by the U.S. in wars in the Middle East and are regularly adopted by armed forces around the world to defeat their enemy. Somehow Israel is seen as immoral due to its greater power and is expected to use a lower amount of force against Hamas under some invented notion of “proportionality” that critics seek to apply only to Israel. Israelis interviewed on foreign television should refuse to answer the question on proportionality, act perplexed and ask the interviewer to explain what they mean with an example."
& continues
"Decrying Israel’s Iron Dome Compared to Gaza’s Lack of Defenses
Incredibly, Israel has been castigated for having a rocket defense system since Gaza does not have similar defenses for airstrikes. The bizarre notion is that it is inherently unfair that one side in a conflict has better defensive measure than the other. Under this thinking Israel should not aggressively respond to Hamas’s rocket fire since Israel can “deal with it” — ignoring the 12 civilian deaths, significant property damage and human trauma, tens of millions of dollars of cost for the Iron Dome interceptors, and the fact that rocket fire has caused 70% of the Israeli population to enter bomb shelters numerous times.
An article in The Washington Post even suggested that Iron Dome perpetuates the conflict as it allows Israel to avoid resolving the conflict through negotiation; the article does not suggest that the pathway to peace is for the international community to disarm Hamas.[iv] Not mentioned by Israel’s critics is that Hamas has neglected to construct shelters to protect its own people, yet has spent immense sums of money to build hundreds of miles of underground tunnels for its military forces. Not mentioned is that Israeli airstrikes are a response to Hamas rockets and if Hamas stopped firing rockets and disarmed its rocket stocks Israel would not engage in retaliatory airstrikes. As one Twitter post put it, Gaza’s Iron Dome system is “don’t fire rockets at Israel.”
In no other conflict in history has the lack of defensive measure been cited as a reason for one party to refrain from meeting their military objectives or to “go easy” on the enemy. The media has never decried the lack of defenses against U.S. drone attacks and human rights organizations never complained that civilian areas where ISIS embedded itself did not have bomb shelters against coalition air attacks. Once again the only conclusion from this absurd viewpoint is that if more Israelis died its actions against Hamas would be more justified. As Colonel Richard Kemp explained, “Even if Iron Dome was 100% effective, Israel would still have to respond. No country ever has or ever will accept a concerted attack on its civilian population or territory, which has severely disrupted daily life as well as the economy. In these circumstances — even without any civilian deaths — it would be the duty of any government to act decisively to end the attacks.”[v]
Civilian Deaths Automatically Mean Israeli War Crimes
It is universally acknowledged that civilian deaths are a tragic and unfortunate consequence of all wars, but when caused by Israel they are treated as automatic war crimes even when Hamas continues to fire rockets. In September 2009 German Col. Goerg Klein called an airstrike on Taliban fighters who hijacked two tankers, but the attack resulted in 90 civilian deaths including children. Klein was ultimately cleared of wrongdoing as the civilians were not killed knowingly. Even the obscure Falkland Islands war between U.K. and Argentina in 1982 led to three civilian deaths in a war that was hardly necessary. In April 2021 Turkish shelling in Syria resulted in three civilian deaths and recent examples abound worldwide. There is understanding by the media and analysts that civilian deaths are a feature of all conflicts, but when caused by Israel they are obsessed over in great detail as war crimes."
& lastly says
"In an editorial discussing civilian casualties caused by U.S. drone strikes in the Middle East, which number by estimates at over one thousand, The New York Times conceded, “no matter how precise the weapons, how careful the planners and how skilled the fighters, mistakes, faulty intelligence, even calculated decisions often led to civilians being killed” and that “There is no such thing as combat without risk.”[vi] In describing civilian deaths in the war against ISIS the Joint Task Force released a statement saying: “Although the coalition takes extraordinary efforts to strike military targets in a manner that minimizes the risk of civilian casualties, in some incidents casualties are unavoidable.”[vii]
In March 2017 The New York Times reported on American-led airstrikes in Mosul that flattened almost an entire city block and killed an estimated 200 civilians. The article quotes Iraqi commanders who “welcome the more aggressive American role, saying that coalition officers were too risk averse under the Obama administration” and that “fighting for the dense, urban spaces of western Mosul requires more airpower, even if that means more civilians will die.” Jim Mattis, the U.S. Defense secretary responded that “every battlefield where an enemy hides behind women and children” could lead to civilian casualties. He added “We go out of our way to always do everything humanly possible to reduce loss of life or injury among innocent people.” The Iraqi general, commenting on civilian deaths, said “We feel sad for them” but called the deaths “an unfortunate outcome in a nasty war.”[viii]
Such common sense understanding is totally missing when it comes to Israel despite significant evidence that Israel goes to great lengths to minimize civilian casualties from its “roof knocking” policies to precision guided attacks. As of this writing, after ten days hostilities, about 220 Palestinians have died in Gaza, and according to Israel well over a hundred are combatants and at least twenty were killed by Hamas rockets which fell short. While Israel has been accused of wanton destruction of property and lives, the death toll over this time period in a population of nearly two million is remarkably low, and compares favorably versus coalition actions in Mosul where over 6,000 civilians were killed.
How long would any nation tolerate the majority of its population in bomb shelters before demanding overwhelming force? Which nation would instruct their military to “go light” on their terrorist attackers because the attacks can be repelled? Which Defense Secretary would instruct their generals to only respond to the enemy “proportionally”? Which nation would be vilified for their better defense systems? When will the “international community” focus its efforts on forcing Hamas to stop firing rockets and stop spending international aid on military infrastructure as a condition for any future aid to Gaza? To what does Colonel Kemp attribute the absurd conduct of war expected only of Israel and no other nation in history? “Willful ignorance, in other words malice.”
[i] https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/306469
[ii] https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/1770907/combined-joint-task-force-operation-inherent-resolve-monthly-civilian-casualty/ also see https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/30/opinion/drones-civilian-casulaties-trump-obama.html
[iii] https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule14
[iv] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/14/israels-iron-dome-defense-system-protects-israeli-lives-it-also-perpetuates-israel-gaza-conflict/
[v] https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/306469
[vi] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/30/opinion/drones-civilian-casulaties-trump-obama.html
[vii] https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/1040266/cjtf-oir-announces-civilian-casualty-assessment-for-november/
[viii] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/27/world/middleeast/mosul-iraq-isis-civilian-deaths-us-airstrikes.html
From Thehill.com an article is headlined
"Alan Dershowitz: Time to tell the truth about the Palestinian issue" on January 22, 2019
BY ALAN DERSHOWITZ, the article says:
"The front page of the New York Times Sunday Review featured one of the most biased, poorly informed, and historically inaccurate columns about the conflict between Israel and Palestine ever published by a mainstream newspaper. Written by Michelle Alexander, it is entitled, “Time to break the silence on Palestine,” as if the Palestinian issue has not been the most overhyped cause on campuses, at the United Nations, and in the media.
There is no silence to break. What must be broken is the double standard of those who elevate the Palestinian claims over those of the Kurds, the Syrians, the Iranians, the Chechens, the Tibetans, the Ukrainians, and many other more deserving groups who truly suffer from the silence of the academia, the media, and the international community. The United Nations devotes more of its time, money, and votes to the Palestinian issue than to the claims of all of these other oppressed groups combined.
The suffering of Palestinians, which does not compare to the suffering of many other groups, has been largely inflicted by themselves. They could have had a state, with no occupation, if they had accepted the Peel Commission Report of 1938, the United Nations Partition of 1947, the Camp David Summit deal of 2000, or the Ehud Olmert offer of 2008. They rejected all these offers, responding with violence and terrorism, because doing so would have required them to accept Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people, something they are unwilling to do even today.
I know because I asked Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas that question directly and he said no. The Palestinian leadership indeed has always wanted there not to be a Jewish state more than it has wanted there to be a Palestinian state. The Palestinian issue is not “one of the great moral challenges of our time,” as Alexander insists in her column. It is a complex, nuanced, pragmatic problem, with fault on all sides. The issue could be solved if Palestinian leaders were prepared to accept the “painful compromises” that Israeli leaders have already agreed to accept.
Had the early Palestinian leadership, with the surrounding Arab states, not attacked Israel the moment it declared statehood, it would have a viable state with no refugees. Had Hamas used the resources it received when Israel ended its occupation of the Gaza Strip in 2005 to build schools and hospitals instead of using these resources to construct rocket launchers and terror tunnels, it could have become a “Singapore on the Sea” instead of the poverty stricken enclave the Palestinian leadership turned it into.
The leaders of Hamas as well as the Palestinian Authority bear at least as much responsibility for the plight of the Palestinians as do the Israelis. Israel is certainly not without some fault, but the “blame it all on Israel” approach taken by Alexander is counterproductive because it encourages Palestinian recalcitrance. As Israeli diplomat Abba Eban once observed, “The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.”
One striking illustration of the bias is the absurd claim by Alexander that “many students are fearful of expressing support for Palestinian rights” because of “McCarthyite tactics” employed by pro-Israel groups. I have taught on many campuses, and I can attest that no international cause is given more attention, far more than it deserves in comparison with other more compelling causes, than the Palestinians. It is pro-Israel students who are silenced out of fear of being denied recommendations, graded down, or shunned by peers. Some have even been threatened with violence. Efforts have been made to prevent from speaking on several campuses, despite my advocacy of a two state solution to the conflict."
the article continues:
"Alexander claims that there is legal discrimination against Israeli Arabs. The reality is that Israeli Arabs have more rights than Arabs anywhere in the Muslim world. They vote freely, have their own political parties, speak openly against the Israeli government, and are beneficiaries of affirmative action in Israeli universities. The only legal right they lack is to turn Israel into another Muslim state governed by Sharia law, instead of the nation state of Jewish people governed by freedom and secular democratic law. That is what the new Jewish nation state law, which I personally oppose, does when it denies Arabs the “right of self determination in Israel.”
Alexander condemns “Palestinian homes being bulldozed,” without mentioning that these are the homes of terrorists who murder Jewish children, women, and men. She bemoans casualties in Gaza, which she calls “occupied” even though every Israeli soldier and settler left in 2005, without mentioning that many of these casualties were human shields from behind whom Hamas terrorists fire rockets at Israeli civilians. She says there are “streets for Jews only,” which is a categorical falsehood. There are roads in the disputed territories that are limited to cars with Israeli licenses for security. But these roads are in fact open to all Israelis, including Druze, Muslims, Christians, Zoroastrians, and people of no faith.
The most outrageous aspect of the column is the claim by Alexander that Martin Luther King Jr. inspired her to write it. But he was a staunch Zionist, who said, “When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You are talking anti-Semitism.” It is certainly possible that he would have been critical of certain Israeli policies today, but I am confident that he would have been appalled at her unfair attack on the nation state of the Jewish people and especially on her misuse of his good name to support anti-Israel bigotry."
Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus, at Harvard Law School. His new book is “The Case Against the Democratic House Impeaching Trump.” You can follow him on Twitter @AlanDersh.
The Fact is Most of the Suffering of the Fake Invented Fictional people that call themselves "Palestinians" is their own Fault, it's their own fault, NOT the fault of Israel or Jews
Another article about the so-called "Palestinians" From TheHill.com an article on May 17, 2021 is headlined. "Why does the hard left glorify the Palestinians?"
BY ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ, the article says:
"In a world in which massive violations of human rights have, tragically, become the norm, why has the hard left focused on one of the least compelling of those causes — namely, the Palestinians? Where is the concern for the Kurds, the Chechens, the Uyghurs, the Tibetans? There are no campus demonstrations on their behalf, no expressions of concern by “the Squad” in Congress, no United Nations resolutions, no recurring op-eds in The New York Times, and no claims that the nations that oppress these groups have no right to exist.
On the merits and demerits of their claims, the Palestinians have the weakest case. They have been offered statehood and independence on numerous occasions: in 1938, 1948, 1967, 2000-2001 and 2008. Israel ended its occupation of the Gaza Strip in 2005. Yet, even now, Palestinian leaders refuse to sit down and negotiate a reasonable two-state solution. As the late Israeli diplomat Abba Eban once aptly put it, the Palestinian leadership never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
Nor are history and morality on their side. The Palestinian leadership allied itself with Nazism and Hitler in the 1940s, with Egyptian tyranny and antisemitism in the 1950s, and with international terrorism from the 1960s forward.
In 1947, the United Nations divided the land that the Romans called Palestine and the Jews called Yisrael into two areas. It provided a sliver of land along the Mediterranean and a non-arable desert called the Negev to the Jews, who were a majority in that area, and a much larger arable area to the Arabs. The Jews declared statehood on their land. Instead of declaring statehood on their land, the Palestinians and surrounding Arab nations declared war. The Arabs lost and the Jews captured more land. As a result of the war, there occurred an exchange of populations: Hundreds of thousands of Arabs left or were forced out of Israel, and hundreds of thousands of Jews left or were forced out of Arab countries and Arab Palestine."
the article continues :
"Again, in 1967, the surrounding Arab nations threatened to destroy Israel, which preemptively attacked and occupied the West Bank and Gaza, which it immediately offered to return — with some territorial adjustments necessary for security — in exchange for peace and recognition. The U.N. Security Council issued Resolution 242, which called for a return of captured territories in exchange for peace. Israel accepted. The Arab nations and the Palestinians, however, issued their three infamous “no’s” — no peace, no recognition, no negotiation.
The Kurds have never been offered independence or statehood, despite treaties that promised it. Nor have the Tibetans, the Uyghurs or the Chechens. But the Palestinians have, on multiple occasions since 1938, when their leader told the Peale Commission that the Palestinians don’t want a state — they just want there not to be a Jewish state.
The Palestinian people have suffered more from the ill-advised decisions of their leaders than from the actions of Israel.
Back to the present: Hamas commits a double war crime every time it fires a lethal rocket at Israeli civilians from areas populated by its civilians, who they use as human shields. Israel responds proportionally in self-defense, as President Biden has emphasized. The Israel Defense Forces go to extraordinary lengths to try to minimize civilian casualties among Palestinians, despite Hamas’ policy of using civilian buildings — hospitals, schools, mosques, and high-rise buildings — to store, fire and plan their unlawful rockets and incendiary devices. Yet the hard left blames Israel alone, and many on the center-left create a moral equivalence between democratic Israel and terrorist Hamas.
Why? The answer is clear and can be summarized in one word: Jews.
The enemy of the Kurds, the Tibetans, the Uyghurs and the Chechens are not — unfortunately for them — the Jews. Hence, there is little concern for their plight. If the perceived enemy of the Palestinians were not the Jews, there would be little concern for their plight as well. This was proved by the relative silence that greeted the massacre of Palestinians by Jordan during “Black September” in 1970, or the killings of Palestinian Authority leaders in Gaza during the Hamas takeover in 2007. There has been relative silence, too, about the more than 4,000 Palestinians — mostly civilians— killed by Syria during that country’s current civil war. It is only when Jews or their nation are perceived to be oppressing Palestinians that the left seems to care about them."
& continues :
"While the United States provides financial support for Israel, we also provide massive support for Jordan and Egypt. Even if the United States were to end support for Israel, the demonization of Israel by the hard left would not end.
The left singles out the Palestinians not because of the merits of their case but, rather, because of the alleged demerits of Israel and the double standard universally applied to Jews. That is the sad reality.
Former CIA director John Brennan as much as admitted this double standard when he complained in a tweet about the alleged lack of empathy by Jews: “I always found it difficult to fathom how a nation of people deeply scared by a history replete with prejudice, religious persecution, & unspeakable violence perpetrated against them would not be the empathetic champions of those whose rights & freedoms are still abridged.”
As Seth Frantzman, a writer for the Jerusalem Post, aptly put it: “In his telling of it, he implied that Jews must have special empathy for others while non-Jews have no special need to be empathetic. Brennan has not … held other countries to a higher standard based on the ethnic and religious origins of their citizens … In short, because Jews endured genocide, they have to live according to a higher standard than those who perpetrated genocide.”
This “benevolent” double standard may sound kinder than the malevolent double standard imposed by members of “the Squad” and others, but it has the same effect: it demands that Israel do less to protect its citizens from rockets and terrorism than is demanded from other countries. The same standard must be demanded of Israel as is demanded of other countries defending their citizens. In particular, the same standard must be demanded of Palestinians and their leaders as is demanded of other groups seeking the moral support of good people.
As of now, the Palestinians have failed to meet that standard.
I support the legitimate rights of Palestinians to a peaceful state, not so much because their history and actions merit it more than others, but because it would be good for peace in the region and for Israel. But I refuse to prioritize it over other more, or equally, compelling claims just because Jews are on the other side."
Alan Dershowitz, professor emeritus for Harvard Law School, served on the legal team representing President Trump for the first Senate impeachment trial. He is author of the recent book, “Cancel Culture: The Latest Attack on Free Speech and Due Process,” and his podcast, “The Dershow,” is available on Spotify and YouTube. You will find him on Twitter @AlanDersh.
-- People who support the So-called "Palestinians" don't really care about the "Palestinians" or give a rat's ass about them, they just use the "Palestinians" as Pawns to attack Israel and the Jews,
Another Pro-Israel book worth reading is titled
"Israel, Head of the Nations: A Bible Study in Prophecy"
by Gary Lee Roper, Lucy Booker Roper (Editor). The online Description says
"This study extrapolates on Deuteronomy 28:13. "And the LORD shall make thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath; if that thou hearken unto the commandments of the LORD thy God, which I command thee this day, to observe and to do them..." Other themes studied are: "Who is the 'seed' of Abraham?" "Prophecies on the Re-gathering of Israel," "Charles Haddon Spurgeon's thoughts on the re-gathering of Israel," "The Judgment of the Living Nations," "The Many Facets and Divisions of 'Zionism,'" "Why are some Jews 'One-Worlders?'" and "Why is there so much Anti-Semitism?" The book ends with a plea to "Pray for the Peace of Jerusalem."
From c4Israel.org an article is headlined
"Head of the Nations (Jeremiah 31 – part 2)" the article says
Rev Henk Poot - 26 September 2019
Last month (April 2019) Danny Danon, the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, addressed the UN’s General Assembly and held up God’s Word.
"After God’s promise that vineyards would be planted again in Samaria and that Israel would reap its fruits, God calls out to the world to rejoice at what is happening to His people: “This is what the Lord says: “Sing with joy for Jacob; shout for the foremost of the nations.” (Jeremiah 31:7). One might almost overlook this, but here it says that Israel is the head of the nations.
Reasons
And of course she is, when you think about it. Not because she is the biggest or the greatest but for other reasons. I will mention a few. God Himself created Israel (Isaiah 43:7). From all nations God chose Israel to be His servant in God’s plans with the world. Israel is God’s witness (Isaiah 44:8). The Bible was written by Jewish hands. Whichever prophet or apostle you mention, they are all children of Israel. God gave Israel its Covenants and the promises and the worship. Our praise goes back to the rich tradition of Israel’s psalms and hymns and before we knew what a service was, Israel already praised God in the Temple. Israel received from God its own portion to live there and He Himself lives there forever in the midst of His people (Ezekiel 43:7). The Kingdom of God will be established in the Land of Israel and Jerusalem will be the capital of the new world. And last but not least, Messiah was born in Israel. Christ is Abraham’s Son and David’s Son. The King of the Jews is the King of the Kings of the earth.
“One might almost overlook this, but Jeremiah 31:7 says that Israel is the head of the nations.”
Blessing
God is telling His people that Israel is not only allowed to cherish that position but also must use it to bless the world. And so, she does. She is a light for the Gentiles! (Isaiah 42:6). Jesus Himself says that salvation is from the Jews (John 4:22b). Physically that is so. The prophet Isaiah says that Israel will fill the world with her fruits in the future and that is already visible (Isaiah 27:6). Who blesses Israel will be blessed. That promise to Abraham still stands and is still in effect. But also, spiritually: without Israel no Bible and no Messiah. God could have done it differently, but He is doing it this way. Israel is the foundation of the salvation of the world.
And that is why God advises the nations to rejoice over Israel, the head of the nations, to shout with joy when they see Israel returning from their exile. God is busy with His people to do great things and that’s promising! Actually, that promises everything!
Whoever reads the Jewish commentaries on Jeremiah will see that some rabbis chose a different translation: “Shout from the top of the nations.” That means that Israel must make her testimony heard in all places, even from the mountain tops, but most certainly in the important places of the nations. And that is what the Israeli ambassador did.
Watch the video below.
TAGS
BibleUNGAIsraelRev. Henk PootDanny Danon
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Rev Henk Poot
Rev Henk Poot is affiliated with Christians for Israel. He writes articles, columns and books relating to Israel and the Bible. On behalf of Christians for Israel he also speaks at lectures, seminars, Bible studies and during divine services throughout the Netherlands.
Also from c4israel.org an article is headlined
"Seven Misunderstandings about Israel and the Bible" the article says
Rev. Willem J.J. Glashouwer - 14 September 2020
Israel is an awkward topic to many Christians. Does it even matter for a Christian? Why are some Christians so fanatical about Israel and why is it all so complicated? Does Israel mean anything today or is its significance all in the past? In this article Rev. Willem J.J. Glashouwer refutes seven misunderstandings that often come up in conversations about Israel and shows how you can respond.
Misunderstanding 1: The Church is God’s New Covenant people
This is absolutely false. All of the Covenants in the Bible were made with Israel. Israel is God’s Covenant people. Some eight Covenants are described in the Bible. The amazing thing is that in His mercy God opened one of these Covenants, namely the New Covenant (which was made with Israel like the rest, by the way), and welcomed us into it. So, as Paul says, we are grafted into that Covenantal relationship of the New Covenant that God made with Israel. We do not become Jews through this and we do not need to move to Israel either. God has called a people for His Name out from the gentile nations. Believing gentile Christians are a chosen people of God but they never ever replaced the Jewish people. We have received a share, a place on the nourishing root of the New Covenant (according to Paul in Romans 11 gentile Christians have become ‘engrafted’).
What about people who say that the Old Covenant has now been discarded and that only the New Covenant counts today? If you follow this line of reasoning you make God a liar. All of the Covenants that He made with Israel – with one exception – are unconditional. They do not depend on Israel’s behavior. They come from the Most High, the Everlasting God. Therefore each of those Covenants is everlasting, eternal, valid for all time, and He has reinforced each of them with an oath, He has sworn by His own Name. Some say, “Wait a minute, that only counted up until Jesus Christ. When the Jews said no to Jesus, God responded, ‘Fine, suit yourselves, I’m done with you.’” No! Eternal is for all time. He has sworn an oath by His own Name and He cannot lie. So if you develop this theory, you make God a liar.
We know who in the Bible is a called a liar from the beginning – the devil. Who is also a murderer from the beginning, John 8:44. This whole theory (which is called replacement theology in the Church) has caused rivers of Jewish blood to flow throughout church history in the past 2000 years. Lies lead to murders. So it is not just false theology, it is a sin before God, which needs to be confessed as sin. The church needs to repent radically of this theology. It is a horrible line of reasoning that goes far beyond a misunderstanding. Its demonic."
the article continues
"Misunderstanding 2: The Jews did not accept Jesus, so the Covenant with Israel was broken
This is impossible. God made everlasting Covenants with Israel. Take a look at Jeremiah 31. There you can see that the Creator Himself guarantees Israel’s continued existence. Verse 35 says, “Thus says the Lord, Who gives the sun for light by day and the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night, Who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar— the Lord of hosts is His Name: ‘If this fixed order departs from before Me,’ declares the Lord, ‘then shall the offspring of Israel cease from being a nation before Me forever.’” As long as heaven and earth exist, as long as there is the Universe, as long as the rhythm of day and night continue – Israel will continue to exist. “But”, those people say, “they did so many wrong things, and they don’t believe in Jesus.” The text in Jeremiah 31 continues, “Thus says the Lord: “If the heavens above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth below can be explored, then I will cast off all the offspring of Israel for all that they have done, declares the Lord.” So the Lord will not even cast them out for what they have done!
This was His choice. The origin of Israel was an act of creation by God. Abraham and Sarah were too old to have children yet the biological miracle happened: Abraham was 100 and Sarah 90 when Isaac was born. God says [of Israel], “My firstborn son, whom I have Created for My Glory, whom I have formed and made.” God joined Himself willingly to them with everlasting Covenants. He loves Israel as a father loves his son. Clearly the Jewish people are not just a chosen people, God Created them. He did this with the intention to bless the whole world – all nations – through this small nation of Israel. And He remains faithful to His plans and purposes by executing His everlasting Promises and Covenants."
& continues
"Misunderstanding 3: The Heavenly Jerusalem has nothing to do with the earthly city of Jerusalem
This is a gross misunderstanding. The roots of the earthly Jerusalem are in the Heavenly Jerusalem. Why is Jerusalem such a special city? Because God Himself decided to make His Name to live there. It was there that the Temple was built. It was there that the Glory of the Lord filled the Temple. It was there, in that same city, that Jesus was crucified, died, was buried, was raised and ascended into Heaven. It was there that the Holy Spirit was poured out.
God says of the land of Israel, “It is My land and I give it to you”. And of Jerusalem He says, “It is My city.” When Solomon prays in 2 Chronicles 6 that wonderful prayer at the dedication of the Temple he says, “The heavens cannot contain You, let alone this house in this city, with all of its gold and silver, all its beauty and grandeur. But it was Your desire. So Lord, I have built it as You wanted it. Will You now come and live in Your house?”
Every believing Jew completely understands that the earthly Jerusalem will only properly function and become the true Jerusalem when it is bound with its spiritual roots, with the God of Jerusalem. The Creator of heaven and earth. The God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. The God of Israel. Who is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is only then that Jerusalem will find its true place in the world. And later, as you can read at the end of the book of Revelation, even that Heavenly Jerusalem will come down to earth. Then the dimensional boundaries will be broken, eternity will fill time and God will live with humankind. As it was in the beginning. Then the nations will go to Jerusalem, and from Jerusalem peace will cover the whole earth."
& continues
"Misunderstanding 4: Modern-day Israel (the State) has nothing to do with the Israel in the Bible
This is another gross misunderstanding. What is modern Israel? It is a direct continuation of the Jewish people that started with Abraham, 2,000 years before Christ. A nation that was created by God and received His revelation. God has spoken to them during various times, in various places and to various people: the prophets of Israel. He nurtured them and made them grow into a very special people and nation, Genesis 12:1-3. To bless the world. He gave them the Promised Land of Israel, Psalm 105:7-11. He made them possess the city of Jerusalem. He made them to build the Temple, as the dwelling place for His holy Name. That Temple was destroyed and the Jewish people were driven out of the land of Israel twice. The first time was between 500 and 600 before Christ. We call it the Babylonian Captivity or Exile. At that time the Babylonians razed the city and the Temple to the ground and carried many Jews away as captives. Later they were allowed to return.
Then came the second Temple, which was subsequently destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D. The city and Temple were razed to the ground and the Jews were carried into exile a second time. The Roman Captivity. Yet throughout the past 2,000 years there have always been Jews living in Israel. It was their land. So the Jewish people today are simply the descendants of the Jewish people that we read about in the Bible.
But isn’t the modern state of Israel a secular state, in contrast to the Biblical state of Israel that lived closer to God, as some say? I challenge you to read the Bible more carefully, especially the books of Kings and Chronicles. You will see just how ‘closely’ the people of Israel lived to God. It was a stiff-necked people, as the Bible itself says. They were constantly going after other gods and leaving God by the wayside. They sought security in political alliances with the regional powers of their day. Over and over they heard the lashing words of the prophets and the disobedient son was disciplined by the Most High. Israel has never been a faithful people. But yes, they were deeply connected with the Most High. They knew very well who their Father was. Just as you may have stubbornly done your own thing as a child. Of course you knew who your father was, but you always thought you knew better.
Recognizing that they are still the same people, in the same land, is not the same as approving of everything the state of Israel does. That is not the point. When God started to gather the Jews from the four corners of the earth, from north, south, east and west (Isaiah 43:5-8), back to the Promised Land and they grew in that land as a nation, at a certain point they had to make a decision. They lived there as a people, as a nation in a country: What form of government should they choose? Would it be a dictatorship, an oligarchy, a democracy or a theocracy? They chose democracy following the western model. Is that the very best form of government according to the Bible? No, that would be Theocracy, in which you are led by God and obey Him. So it is clear that Israel has a long road ahead to grow into what it is meant to be in the end, namely a light for the nations under the leadership of the Messiah.
What the Bible teaches us and what Israel needs to learn as well is that you need to listen to God’s perspective and rules and try to act according to that. Fundamentally this is the meaning of the Torah: To realize, not just individually but also as a nation, how to achieve a just, peaceful and secure society under His leadership and with administrators who are deeply conscious that they have to answer to Him."
& continues
"Misunderstanding 5: Jews have a head start with God
No more than anyone else. Jews are just as much descendants of Adam as we all are. Sin is in our blood. Jews are exactly the same. They are not better than others. But God created them and uses them to bless others. We are all equally sinful, whether we are born Jewish, Chinese or Dutch. This is also a good thing. Luke reports in Acts 17:22-34 that the apostle Paul said to the people of Athens that God created the entire human race from one single person. That means that this fundamentally contradicts and goes against every form of discrimination. We can never say, “I am better than you.” My race is better than yours. My village is better that yours. My country is better than yours. We all have the same lineage as human beings. We are all sinners.
He did not choose the Jews because they are better people. He chose them because He wanted to use them as an instrument in His hand. He set them apart. Chosen in this sense means: set apart, as does the word ‘holy’. Israel is not a holy people in the sense of ‘holier than others’ or ‘perfect’, like some Roman Catholic saints are considered to be. To be holy means to be set apart. The same goes for Christians. Christians are not better than other people either but God has taken hold of them, has chosen them, to be an instrument in His hand to serve Him in this world – by loving Him with all of their heart and one’s neighbor as oneself. That is how it is with Israel too. Chosen to become a blessing for the world.
That puts you in a difficult position. If you are the chosen one, you suffer in this world. No one can stand a teacher’s pet, who is often bullied and hated by the rest of the class because of this. Clearly being chosen brings suffering. No other people has suffered in this world like the chosen Jewish people. Among the Jewish people the Chosen One, Jesus, has suffered like no other person in this world.
Christians, chosen out of the gentile world, suffer too. Millions are being persecuted around the world at this very moment. The entire history of the church is one long tale of suffering. Being chosen does not mean “I am better”. It is absolutely to your disadvantage. But in the end, what you receive from Him through this, discovering something of Who He is, brings a deep joy. Nothing in the world can compare and when we see Him, this joy will be perfected. Then that love will become so intense, so great and mighty, that you will be completely filled. To follow Him means suffering, persecutions plus everlasting life, according to Jesus in Mark 10:28-30."
& lastly says "Misunderstanding 6: Jesus was a Christian
This often reminds me of the story of an American Sunday school teacher. She told the children, “Children, you should all follow Jesus’ example. He was a perfect Christian. He went to church every Sunday.” There are several things wrong with this statement. A: He was not a Christian, but He was a Jew. B: He did not go to church but to synagogue. C: He did not go on Sunday but on Saturday, the Shabbat. So Jesus was a faithful Jew. When Jesus was asked what the most important law of Israel was, He said, “Love God with everything you have and everything you are: your reason, your will and your emotions – with all your strength. And after that: love your neighbor as yourself. On these hang all the law and the prophets.” Right up until the present day, every faithful Jew will give the same answer.
The name ‘Christians’ first showed up in Antioch, much later when the gospel started to spread among non-Jews. At that point they started to be called followers of Christ, ‘Christians’. The word ‘Christ’ means ‘Anointed One’. It is exactly the same as the Greek word ‘Chrestos’, or in Hebrew, ‘Messiah’. This means Anointed One as well, just in a different language. The new believers were followers of this Christ; that is why they were called Christians. The negative connotation of the name Christians to the Jews was caused by these theological developments in Church History that claimed that the Jews were rejected by and hated by God. According to this new replacement-theology or super-sessionism Christians, the Church, were considered to be God’s new [chosen] people, having replaced Israel. Wrong! Chosen? Yes! Replacing the Jewish people? No!
Misunderstanding 7: The New Testament replaces the Old Testament
I am reminded of a former professor in Utrecht, Dr. van Ruler. He called the New Testament a glossary at the end of the Old Testament. This is a very different approach. But what he meant was this. The whole Bible is simply one continuous revelation from God. Old Testament and New Testament. Inseparably connected.
Yet you always sense the tension: Them (the Jews) versus us (the Christians); The New Testament that is said to have replaced the Old Testament. It started early in church history and the more anti-Jewish thinking developed, the more the ancient church fathers started asking themselves, what use is the Old Testament to us? This way of thinking has continued throughout history.
Nowadays you still see Christian mission organizations and churches handing out New Testaments “because that’s what it’s all about.” Under the Nazi regime the Old Testament was seen as a Jewish book one Christians shouldn’t have anything to do with. So this is another strange line of reasoning that shows how deeply rooted replacement theology is and how deep our internal resentment against the Jewish people and God’s relationship with them goes."
Also from c4israel.org an article is headlined Christenen voor Israël
"The Israel of God"
Rev Kees de Vreugd - 11 February 2021 the article says:
‘Peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.’ (Galatians 6:16)
This verse is a bit of a peculiar sentence, almost at the closure of Paul’s letter to the Galatians. Who is Paul speaking about?
Most English translations connect the two parts of the sentence with the conjunction ‘and’, suggesting that the text points at two different groups: the one denoted as ‘them’, the other as the ‘Israel of God’. The word ‘them’ refers to the first part of the verse: ‘Those who will walk by this rule’. The Living Bible changes the whole sentence, apparently in an attempt to avoid mentioning Israel, and reads: ‘May God’s mercy and peace be upon all of you who live by this principle and upon those everywhere who are really God’s own.’ That translation is a clear example of how this scripture is often interpreted: the Israel of God is not the people of Israel, but instead is the church of Christ, whether you are Jew or non-Jew. While Paul has indeed said that neither circumcision is anything, nor uncircumcision, an alternative way of understanding might be preferable.
Let us have a closer look at the text. Which rule, which principle does Paul mean? He described that principle in the previous verse: In Christ, ‘neither circumcision is anything nor foreskin, but a new creation!’ He wishes peace and mercy to those who hold firm to that principal. And he wishes that also to the Israel of God.
Now we need to consider what the whole purpose of this letter is. Some found that the believers of Gentile origin had to be circumcised and to take upon themselves the rules of Judaism, such as the feasts, dietary laws, and so on. Paul combats this requirement strongly. A non-Jew does not need to become a Jew, and a Jew remains a Jew, but there is unity in the Messiah. In Him, we are even a renewed creation. The opposition, the enmity between Jew and non-Jew has been overcome. The difference is not dissolved, but reconciled, for peace has come. And the non-Jew, too, shares in God’s mercy. If that is the case, would that not also be valid for all Israel, then? Israel is and remains God’s own property, after all.
Another possibility is to translate the Greek conjunction kai as ‘even’. Then, both parts of the sentence refer to the same group: those who follow this rule are the Israel of God. Those believing Jews, who recognise that Gentiles need not be circumcised in order to belong to God, are the Israel of God. This would be true for rabbinic Judaism, too, by the way. Rabbinic Judaism judges that for Gentiles to receive salvation, it suffices to live according to the so-called Noahide laws, which do not include circumcision.
This rabbinic concept was elaborated in the Talmud, but an echo of the Noahide laws is heard in Acts 15:20. The congregation in Jerusalem may have been familiar with an early form of this concept. So, even for rabbinic Judaism, gentiles need not become Jews to inherit eternal life.
“It is important to understand that Israel never means anything else than Israel throughout the Bible”
Whatever interpretation we prefer, it is important to understand that Israel never means anything else than Israel throughout the Bible. So, we must bring strong arguments if we would want to spiritualise Israel’s meaning in Galatians 6:16. But both from the logic of the letter to the Galatians, and from the logic of the New Testament as a whole, it is inevitable that here, too, Israel is Israel. In Romans 9, there seems to be a split in Israel. However, chapter 11 makes clear that also those who have stumbled are still the Israel of God. Would it be different in Galatians?
It is time for the church worldwide to bless the people of Israel as the Israel of God."
Also from c4israel.org another article is headlined
"Israel, Light to the Nations"
Rev Henk Poot - 22 December 2020 the article says:
"Israel has been chosen by God. But as God’s chosen one the people of Israel are also God’s servant with the high calling to be a light to the world.
“In the Book of Isaiah, we read that God created Israel to proclaim His praise (Isaiah 43:12)”
In the Book of Isaiah, we read that God created Israel to proclaim His praise (Isaiah 43:12). And that is what Israel has done. We don’t always think about that, but for centuries Jerusalem has been the only place on earth where God was honoured. The rest of the world was living in ignorance and darkness. But in Israel the Book of Psalms was written, in the Temple God’s presence was tangible, and there the priestly choirs sang to praise God. And I think to myself, imagine if the Jewish people had stopped doing that. Would our world still exist today?
The Word of God
In the following chapter God says that Israel is allowed to proclaim everything that is yet to come (Isaiah 44:7). And that is what has happened. The entire Bible, not only the Law and the prophets, but also the New Testament was given to the world by Israel. The prophets and the apostles were Jews. Without Israel we would not have known about God.
Prayer
Especially at the Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot), but certainly on other moments, Israel prays for the world. So, that has been going on for centuries. While the nations vilify Israel, it constantly prays for the nations to get to know the Lord and walk with Him on the path of His commandments. We don’t always realize that: Israel intercedes for mankind. Israel also realizes that the future of the world is connected to Him. Psalm 67 – written in the menorah pattern when it is about the phrases: 2-2-2-3-2-2-2 – praying the Lord to bless Israel so that the world will see that God is the One.
History of salvation
Right through the course of ordinary history God is on His way to renew all things, towards His Kingdom. We call that the history of salvation. And that history runs through the riverbed of Israel. That is why Israel is also called the head of the nations (Jeremiah 31:7). Israel takes the lead. The rest follows. When something happens in its existence, we see God’s footsteps becoming visible. Israel is the first to get acquainted with God’s salvation but also takes the first blows of God’s opponents."
the article continues
" Messiah
When Paul mentions the eight prerogatives of his people in Romans 9, he mentions Messiah as the final and as pinnacle. The Son of God appeared in Israel and was born a Jew. In the Jew Jesus God’s heart is beating for Israel and for the world. Jesus Himself is also called the Light of the world. But he is that as an Israelite. So, when the apostle then writes in Romans 15:8 that Christ has become a servant of the circumcised (Jews) to confirm all of God’s promises to them, then those promises also contain the assurance that one day the nations will go up to Zion. Our future is indeed locked in what the Lord is doing to Israel.
“Israel is the light of the world. While Israel returns, it showers us with its fruits (Isaiah 27:6)”
You are the light of the world
In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus calls His disciples ”the light of the world”. The twelve apostles as Israel’s representation, will make His Name known unto the ends of the world. Insofar as the Christian Church does missionary work, that always remains a spin-off of Israel’s calling. And Israel does that in two ways. One part proclaims the message: “Prepare for the Kingdom. The time has come.” ”First to the Jew” (Romans 1:16). But if another part hardens oneself – and God has a hand in this – then this is to let the Gospel go out into the world: “But also to the Greek.” It is a special service, which Paul even describes with the words of the suffering and resurrection of Christ (see Romans 8:32 and 11:21 and verse 15!).
Israel is the light of the world. While Israel returns, it showers us with its fruits (Isaiah 27:6). And still, only in Zion the light will rise and God’s glory will be seen there. With that Israel is a bearer of hope. We owe a lot to the Jewish people."
From jcpa.org an article is headlined "Debunking 11 More False Assumptions Regarding Israel"
No. 608 January 2017 the article says:
"FALSE
Further to the recent publication of “Ten False Assumptions Regarding Israel,” which addressed many of the widely-held and universally-disseminated false and mistaken assumptions regarding Israel, a number of additional false assumptions – some even more willful and malicious – are addressed.
1. “Israel is committing genocide, mass murder and ethnic cleansing against the Palestinian People” – a false and malicious blood-libel.
This dangerous, cynical and dishonest allegation has become one of the “big lies” disseminated on campuses and within the international human rights community.
Its proponents include individuals and organizations that purport to advocate constitutional and human rights, but in fact indulge in the most acute form of legal acrobatics and distortion of facts.
They selectively and maliciously misinterpret and twist legal principles, statements, and writings in order to malign Israel and call into question its very legitimacy and basis for its existence.
The proponents of this blood libel cynically manipulate and reverse historical fact by accusing Israel of entertaining an “incipiently genocidal mentality towards Arab society,”1 and of committing out of revenge, the very acts perpetrated against the Jewish people.
The term “genocide” was coined in 1944 by the Jewish legal scholar Raphael Lemkin, whose entire family was exterminated by the Nazis in Poland for being Jews.2
Contrary to these false accusations:
Israel has never advocated, devised or entertained any plan, design or campaign, systematic or otherwise, to undermine or destroy the Palestinian people, or to act out of revenge or despair.
Israel, the Jewish people, and Zionist movement have never entertained and are prevented both constitutionally and morally from maintaining or implementing any military, political, religious, economic or cultural campaign, or policy intended to destroy the national, ethnical, racial, and religious structure of the Palestinian people.
Israel has never sought to prejudice the essential foundations of life of the Palestinian people, or even to question its right to exist as a people.
Israel has not indulged in mass-murder.
Israel does not engage in ethnic cleansing, which runs solidly against the moral, religious, and ethical codes of the Jewish people.
In its 1948, Declaration of Independence, Israel committed itself to ensuring “freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel and complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race, or sex.”3
Israel undertook to guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education, and culture. It committed itself to be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
Despite the offer of peace, good neighborliness, cooperation, and mutual help in a common effort for the advancement of the entire Middle East, the neighboring Arab states initiated a war in 1948, the declared aim of which was to annihilate the new state of Israel.
It was not Israel that initiated this conflict, but Israel was obliged to defend its existence, its integrity and its population. Casualties and displacement of persons during the conflict, as regrettable as they were, were not part of any design or intent to destroy the Palestinian people, but the results of armed conflict.
By the same token, the hostilities of 1967 were the specific result of attempts to strangle Israel militarily and economically. Israel’s resulting entry into the West Bank and Gaza areas was not motivated by any design to destroy or remove the Palestinian residents of the areas or to undermine their rights as a people."
the article continues
"Attempts to justify a claim of genocide by accusing Israel of “repeated military assaults on Gaza,” as if Israel’s actions were gratuitous and contrived, are no less absurd. They deliberately and manipulatively ignore the thousands of rockets, attack-tunnels and other forms of terror emanating from Gaza and directed against Israel’s civilian population by an internationally acknowledged terror organization.
It was not Israel but Hamas that murdered Palestinian children who were digging tunnels for Hamas in Gaza,4 and who executed Palestinian residents of Gaza for “morality crimes” and for “collaboration with Israel.”5
Clearly, no serious, bona fide and self-respecting human rights expert or organization could interpret Israel’s acting in self-defense as an act of genocide aimed at destroying a people.
In a similar context:
It was not Israel that massacred 15,000 Palestinian residents living in refugee camps in Jordan during the nine-day “Black September” Civil War between Jordan and the PLO in 1970.6
It was not Israel that expelled 400,000 Palestinians in 1991 from Kuwait in retaliation for the PLO’s support of Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990. 7
It was not Israel that caused the displacement of 390,000 Palestinian refugees in Syria since the Syrian conflict began in 2011.8
It was not Israel that laid siege to the Palestinian Yarmouk refugee camp in Damascus between 2013-2014 in which 18,000 civilians were trapped, with scarce food, water, and medical supplies, leading to instances in which Palestinian residents starved to death.9
From the regional demographic standpoint, since Israel’s entry into the West Bank areas of Judea and Samaria and into Gaza in 1967, the Palestinian Arab population has increased from 954,898 to 4,654,421. This indicates an increase of 387 percent.10
In this context, Palestinian life expectancy in the West Bank and Gaza has climbed from 68.5 in 1990 to 72.9 in 2014.
One may ask how such statistics could serve as any logical basis, or be considered compatible with the patently false, flawed and manipulative allegation of a purported Israeli genocide of the Palestinian People."
& continues 2.. “The Jews are not a people and have no rights in the Middle East” – False and Misguided
This curious claim would appear to be in total denial of the history of civilization, from pre-Biblical and historic times and up to present day.
The very existence of the Jews as an indigenous people, as well as its roots, whether in their historic homeland in the “Holy Land” or throughout the various Jewish diasporas and exiles, are borne out in pre-Bible historic narratives as well as in Biblical scriptures including the Hebrew Bible, the Christian Gospels and the Muslim Koran. This is all backed-up by readily available and duly documented and exhibited archeological proof in museums throughout the world.
Judaism, the Hebrew language, and the Jewish People originated some 3,000 years ago in the area of the “Holy Land.” Christianity grew out of Judaism, and the early Christian existence there was an integral part of the Jewish settlement there. The presence of the two Jewish Temples in Jerusalem, and their destruction (in 587 BCE and 70 CE), were acknowledged by Greek, Persian and Roman pagan and Christian authors, travelers and historians, as well as in Koranic references.
The right to reestablish a national home for the Jewish People was acknowledged in the 1917 Balfour Declaration. It was given international legal recognition in the 1920 San Remo Declaration by the Supreme Council of Principle Allied Powers. It was subsequently reaffirmed by the League of Nations in 1922 as part of the British Mandate for Palestine, the opening paragraphs of which gave recognition to “the historical connection of the Jewish people within Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”11
In addition to their historic and legal rights, the Jews, as one of the oldest indigenous and aboriginal peoples still in existence, have indigenous rights that are recognized by the international community."
3. “The establishment of Israel was a catastrophe for the Palestinians” – False
The perception of the creation of the State of Israel as a “catastrophe’ (Nakba) reflects a constant and on-going Palestinian narrative rejecting the creation of a national state for the Jewish people in any part of Mandatory Palestine.
This absolutist narrative sees uncompromising struggle against Israel as the common national aim of the Palestinians, the very heart of the dispute.
However, despite this, the establishment of the state of Israel was nevertheless effected following a recommendation of the international community in the 1947 UN General Assembly partition resolution, to establish two independent states in Mandatory Palestine – a Jewish and an Arab one. This reflected the acceptance by international community of the fundamental rights of the Jewish and Arab populations to govern themselves in their own independent sovereign entities.
The State of Israel was not established in place of, nor as an alternative entity to a Palestinian state. It was not established in denial of the existence of the Arab residents of Mandatory Palestine. It was intended to exist together with an Arab state in the area of Mandatory Palestine.
Rather than accepting this plan and thereby giving up their absolutist aim to create one Arab state in all the territory of Mandatory Palestine, the Arabs of Palestine, together with neighboring Arab states members of the Arab League, at the violent urgings of the Mufti of Jerusalem and Muslim Brotherhood, rejected the partition plan and went to war against the Jewish state. This despite some elements within the Palestinian Arab community who were prepared to live in peace with the Jews.
Despite the fact that the partition plan did not fully realize the hopes of the Jewish population of Mandatory Palestine, they nevertheless chose to accept it in the hope that is would indeed serve as a basis for peaceful coexistence between the Arab and Jewish communities in Mandatory Palestine.
It is widely acknowledged that the refusal by the Arab community and the neighboring Arab states, to accept the partition plan, and their subsequent failure to forcibly eliminate the Jewish state, and the sad consequences of such failure including the emergence of the refugee problem, were entirely their own doing. It was not the result of any action, inaction or injustice by Israel. It was the result of short-sighted and unfortunate misjudgment and a lack of clear, rational leadership among the Arab communities."
& continues
"The creation and subsequent acceptance of Israel by the international community were considered by them to be a disastrous blow and a severe mistake. Hence the use of the term “catastrophe” (Nakba) to symbolize the Palestinian refugee issue.
Nakba day has become an annual day of mourning, violent demonstrations and virulent incitement and propaganda in the attempt to undermine the legitimacy of Israel.
Presenting Israel’s creation as a “catastrophe,” rather than the misjudgment, misguided policies, and decisions by the Arab leaders, represents Israel’s detractors’ attempt to falsify and overturn the historic narrative from one of inherent denial of the right of existence of a Jewish state through aggression and rejectionism, to one of victimhood and denial of rights.
It is also indicative of the fact that the Arabs’ original 1948 rejection and denial of the right of existence of the state of Israel has not changed and remains the central aim of their narrative.
Through well-orchestrated international brain-washing and incitement, the Palestinian leadership seeks to further this false and fictitious narrative, which is perceived by many to replace the true facts of the events of 1948.
This attempt to undermine the very legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish state is particularly evident in recent calls by Palestinian leaders for the revocation of the 1917 Balfour Declaration, and their manipulation of international organizations.
Those subscribing to this false narrative, rather than relying on true historical fact, are in fact being manipulated into becoming party to this deception."
4. “Israel prevents the supply of water to the Palestinian population” – False
The false allegation by Palestinian leaders that Israel is waging a water war in order to starve the Palestinian population, to prevent them from leading a dignified life as a form of collective punishment, has been willingly taken-up and amplified by international media.
Additional false allegations include leaving thousands of Palestinians without access to safe drinking water during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, a period of fasting, which can take place in the summer, at a time when temperatures can exceed 35C. However, the opposite is the case. In order to accommodate Palestinian daytime fasting during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, the water supply was increased during night-time.
These accusations were recently repeated in a report issued by the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) claiming:
Palestinians are prohibited from maintaining or digging water wells, while Israel has been extracting much more water than the level stipulated by the 1993 Oslo Accords and confiscating 82 per cent of Palestinian groundwater. The Palestinians are left with no choice but to import their own water from Israel to cover 50 per cent of their consumption.”12
The very opposite is in fact the case.
Israel undertook in the Oslo Accords to increase the water supply to the Palestinians population in Judea and Samaria by 20 percent. In practice, over the last 15 years, the water supply increased by about 50 percent, most of which was designated for domestic consumption.13
World-wide global trends for water consumption indicate a general decrease in per-capita consumption over time due to population growth and deterioration of water resources. The opposite is the case with the Palestinian water usage, as a result of their increased access to water since 1967. In 1967, only 10 percent of Palestinian households were connected to water infrastructure, today, this figure has risen to 95 percent.
In fact, access by Palestinians to running water is better than by residents of Amman and Damascus.14
The net per-capita domestic water consumption of the Palestinians is higher than the ‘minimum human need estimate’ given by the World Health Organization – 100 liters per day per capita. This quantity is much above the 50 liters per day per capita minimum to sustain life.
In contravention of their commitments in the Oslo Accords, and ignoring the resultant dangers of deterioration and salinization of the water quality, the Palestinians unlawfully extract water by drilling and operating unauthorized private wells. These are connected by the Palestinian Authority to the electrical network. In addition, water-theft occurs through unlicensed connections by Palestinian villages to Israel’s water system in order to irrigate fields.
Due to mismanagement, faulty maintenance, the Palestinians have not succeeded in independently increasing their water supply.
Since hardly any Palestinian farmers install water meters on their wells and about half of the houses in the Palestinian towns and villages have no meters, their governing authorities cannot monitor usage. Thus most Palestinians do not pay for their water consumption and there is no monetary incentive to conserve water.15"
5. “Israel violates its obligations in the Oslo Accords” – False
Israel considers the Oslo Accords16 to be the major component in maintaining peaceful relations with the Palestinians. To this end Israel has implemented its obligations pursuant to the accords in good faith, irrespective of continuing obstructionism on the part of the Palestinian leadership:
Israel redeployed its forces from areas A and B as required in the security annex to the Interim Agreement, and transferred powers and responsibilities in over 40 spheres of civil administration to the PA, as set out in the civilian affairs annex to the Interim Agreement.
Despite ongoing threats by the Palestinian leadership to suspend the security cooperation and coordination in mutual security matters agreed to in the security annex, Israel has consistently maintained close security cooperation with the security authorities of the Palestinian Authority, including the provision of weapons for the use of the Palestinian police.
Israel regularly transfers funds, taxes and import duties to the Palestinian Authority in the context of its obligations pursuant to the annex on economic relations, irrespective of the huge debts owed by the Palestinian Authority to Israeli bodies for provision by Israel of electricity and to Israeli hospitals for medical treatment.
While Israel has attempted to maintain and conduct ongoing daily relations, at the professional level, with the various Palestinian administrative authorities, in order to enable continued implementation of various provisions of the agreements that require reciprocal coordination and cooperation, the Palestinian leadership has refused to permit such cooperation and has obstructed any such ongoing relations.
Regrettably the Palestinians refuse to implement the annex on Israeli-Palestinian cooperation programs, including the “People-to-People” Program, initiated by Norway as a program to enhance dialogue and relations at the grass-roots levels.
The long list of fundamental breaches by the Palestinians of some of their most central and basic obligations have frustrated and continue to jeopardize any further implementation of the Oslo Accords, or return to negotiations."
& continues
"Such fundamental breaches include:
Active support, encouragement and financing of terror and violence against Israel and its population, and the maintenance of terror infrastructure despite obligations to dismantle it;17
Wholesale acquisition, manufacture and provision of illegal weaponry for purposes of terror;18
Daily hate indoctrination and incitement to violence and terror, from the highest levels of Palestinian leadership and governance, through the Palestinian media and education system and down to elementary schools and kindergartens. This is in clear violation of the Palestinian obligation to foster mutual understanding and tolerance.19
Attempts to unilaterally alter the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip outside the negotiating process, through unilateral initiatives in the United Nations and its Specialized Agencies and other international bodies, including the false representation of the Palestinian Authority as a state, accession to international conventions and conduct of foreign relations in clear contravention of the accords;20
Initiation, organization and support, internally and internationally, of economic and cultural boycotts and sanctions against Israel.21
Israel has consistently expressed its readiness to resume and complete negotiations in accordance with the Oslo Accords, without any preconditions, on those core issues agreed-upon by both parties to be permanent status negotiating issues. These include borders, Jerusalem, settlements, refugees, security arrangements, relations and cooperation with other neighbors and other issues of common interest.
Regrettably the Palestinian leadership has imposed preconditions to any return to negotiations. Such preconditions, pertaining to the very issues on the negotiating table, in effect obviate any possibility of genuine and bona fide negotiation.
This calls into question their bona fides as a viable and serious partner for negotiation."
6. “Israel is denying the ‘right of return’ to millions of Palestinian refugees” – False.
There exists no “right of return” for refugees in international law or practice, and no international treaty or binding resolution by any international body imposes any such obligation on Israel.
Similarly, none of the agreements and documents agreed upon between Israel and Egypt, the Palestinians and Jordan grants the refugees a right of return.
The only specific, non-binding reference to “return” of Palestinian refugees appears in article 11 of UN General Assembly resolution 194(III) of December 11, 1948 where the UN recommended that refugees “wishing to return to their homes and to live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earlies practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return.” 22
This resolution, which was rejected by the Arab states, established no right and no obligation.
Security Council Resolution 237 of 4 June 1967 regarding “facilitation of the return of those inhabitants who have fled the areas since the outbreak of hostilities,”23 does not speak of a “right” of return and, like most Security Council resolutions, it is in the nature of a recommendation.
Throughout the peace process, Israel has acknowledged the need to solve the refugee issue through negotiation. In this context:
Israel accepted the UN Security Council resolution 242 (1967) which “affirmed the necessity for achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem,”
In the 1978 Egypt-Israel Camp David Agreement (Framework for Peace in the Middle East) Israel and Egypt agreed to establish “procedures for a prompt, just and permanent implementation of the resolution of the refugee problem.” They also established a “continuing committee” of representatives of Egypt, Israel, Jordan and the Palestinians to agree on the modalities of admission of persons displaced from the West Bank and Gaza in 1967.
Israel actively participated in the Multilateral Working Group on Refugees established by the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference and headed by Canada.
Israel and the Palestinians agreed in the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements of 1993 (Oslo I) that the modalities of admission of displaced persons should be decided by agreement in a “continuing committee,” and the issue of refugees should be one of the major negotiating issues on the permanent status negotiating table.
Similar provisions were agreed in the 1995 Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
Jordan and Israel agreed, in the 1994 peace treaty between them, on the need to solve the refugee problem both in the framework of the multilateral working group established after the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference, and in conjunction with the permanent status negotiations. The Treaty also refers to UN and other agreed international economic programs concerning refugees and displaced persons.
In the same context, Israel has consistently maintained that the issue of Jewish refugees and displaced persons from Arab states constitutes an inherent component of any negotiation on refugees."
7. “BDS is a progressive, non-violent movement in the best tradition of peaceful activism” – False and Deceptive
The publicly stated goal of the BDS campaign is to delegitimize and isolate Israel internationally. Its tactic is to portray Israel as the new illegitimate apartheid South Africa, with the strategic objective of causing Israel’s destruction through comprehensive political and economic warfare.
BDS leaders and activists characterize their activities as a complementary strategy to the policy of terror and political violence that Hamas, other Palestinian groups, and Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated organizations have long embraced as part of their avowed effort to dismantle Israel as a sovereign state.
This is readily evident in the statements of the BDS leadership, including:
BDS leader Omar Barghouti “Definitely, most definitely we oppose a Jewish state in any part of Palestine.”24
Ahmed Moor, BDS student leader and activist, “BDS is not another step on the way to the final showdown; BDS is the final showdown.”25
As’ad Abu Khalil, BDS activist, California State University “Justice and freedom for the Palestinians are incompatible with the existence of the state of Israel.”26
The common chant used by BDS supporters, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” belies any claim that BDS is limited to a political and economic agenda as a means of pressuring Israel to withdraw from the territories.
To the contrary, it reveals BDS true intentions to “liberate” both the disputed territories and pre-‘67 Israel from the Jews. This parallels the stated goal of Hamas (an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood), Hizbullah, Fatah, PLO groups, other radical Arab and Islamic organizations, which is to destroy the nation-state of the Jewish people.
This has been described by Michael Gove, former British Minister of Justice and Education as a “resurgent, mutating, lethal virus of anti-Semitism” reminiscent of Nazi boycotts of Jews on the eve of the Holocaust.27
A basic aim of the BDS campaign is to advocate internationally the delegitimization of Israel and to promote persistent struggle against the existence of a nation-state for the Jewish people in Israel. This is based on a Palestinian narrative that denies both the existence of the Jewish people as a sovereign nation, as well as the historic relationship of the Jewish people to the land of Israel/Palestine.28 This narrative presents the Palestinians as innocent victims of vicious Western and Israeli colonialism.
The BDS movement has exercised tactical sophistication in camouflaging its radical linkages and extremist ends in a language of peace, justice, and human rights that appeal to well-meaning Western progressive organizations, groups and individuals who generally support human-rights agendas."
& continues
"In this manner the BDS movement is manipulating and abusing the bona-fides of peace-loving and concerned people by misleading them into believing that it is a genuine social movement propelled by non-violent resistance and economic boycott, seeking to advance a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
While economic boycott of Israel is not a new phenomenon and has been used by the Arab League since the establishment of Israel in 1948, its reincarnation in the form of the BDS campaign is significant. In addition to the Muslim terror groups sponsoring and supporting it, it includes new but equally radical actors, including far-left Christian, and even Jewish and Israeli groups and individuals.
As part of its effort towards globalization and mainstreaming, it has also penetrated Western mainstream professional groups, trade unions, leading academic institutions, and even the world of cultural and entertainment icons.
Rather than advancing prospects for peace and normal relations between the Palestinians and Israel, the BDS campaign is inciting towards, and advancing a policy of total boycott of and anti-normalization with Israel. This serves to enhance polarization and hostility to Israel both in the Gaza and West Bank, as well as in the international sphere.
This is clearly the antithesis of any positive and constructive movement towards a peaceful solution and bon-voisinage (good neighborly relations) between the peoples of the area. In fact, it prejudices prospects for any future Palestinian political and economic independence and positive trade and security relationship with Israel. Its consequences include:
Encouraging radicalization of the Palestinian public discourse, particularly among Palestinian youth, and undermining agreed-upon areas of security and other forms of cooperation.
Distancing and alienating the Israeli public from considering further concessions to reach a peace agreement.
Harming the employment security and social benefits to families, and even causing the termination of more than 1000 Palestinian employees and managers, and their families, working in Israeli companies operating in those West Bank Industrial zones agreed upon and established pursuant to the Oslo Accords.
Distancing Israeli and foreign investors from investing in the West Bank and Gaza.
The BDS campaign has had little effect on Israel’s GDP, and in fact, several countries have taken steps to outlaw the BDS tactics, acknowledging that the path to peace and reconciliation is paved through mutual political social, economic and cultural engagement and normalization. In this context, Palestinian workers and managers, who have lost their employment because of BDS pressure, have begun to publicly oppose the BDS campaign.
At the same time, South African black intellectuals who suffered under the apartheid regime have similarly emerged as opponents of the global BDS campaign.
A similar sentiment has recently been enunciated by Jordanian Parliament member Abed Almaala:29
BDS is a reckless act of hatred that threatens the security and stability of not only Israel, but also my country, Jordan, and the entire Middle East.
BDS is a threat to us all – a threat to America as much as it is a threat to Israel, Jordan and our Palestinian brothers.
BDS is not only hateful and shameful, but also strengthens Arab dictators who hypocritically criticize Israel for alleged human rights violations when they, themselves, are the world’s top human rights violators."
8. “Israel is undermining the ‘two state solution’”- False and Misleading.
Successive Israeli leaders have reiterated Israel’s principled support for the vision of “two states for two peoples living side by side in peace and security,” as the outcome of the negotiation process. This vision, initially foreseen by former Israel Prime Minister Barak in 2000, was enunciated by President George W. Bush in 2002 and is almost universally acknowledged by the international community.
To accuse Israel of undermining or torpedoing the two-state solution would appear to be ingenuous, unrealistic and even gratuitous.
Logically, a two-state vision cannot be imposed by one-sided and politically generated UN resolutions, by an international conference or any other form of third-party intervention.
It can only be realized through active and bona-fide negotiation and agreement between the parties on such basic, reciprocal issues as bilateral borders, mutual recognition, essential security issues and bilateral economic, commercial and political relationships between them.
The Palestinian imposition of preconditions to any return to negotiations, prejudging the substantive issues to be negotiated, and their maintenance of an “all or nothing” negotiating strategy are incompatible with any logical, bona-fide negotiating process. Such strategy has consistently undermined efforts to resume negotiations.
The Palestinian Authority’s support for and open incitement and encouragement of acts of terror against Israel, their attempts to undermine the very legitimacy of Israel and to initiate judicial proceedings against Israel’s leadership, all demonstrate a clear determination against achieving a negotiated two-state solution or any form of peaceful, neighborly relationship.
A viable two-state solution envisages a unified Palestinian leadership. Regrettably this has not materialized. Rather than utilizing Israel’s 2005 withdrawal from the Gaza Strip to advance the two-state solution, the Palestinian leadership quickly lost power and control to the Hamas terror organization which established its own independent terror regime in Gaza."
& continues
"This Hamas regime, identified with the Moslem Brotherhood and in ongoing conflict with the Palestinian Authority, rejects any possibility of political dialogue with Israel, and has launched three major terror campaigns against Israel, in 2009, 2012, and 2014.
Failure of the Palestinian Authority to secure a viable governing administration in Gaza, together with the designs of Hamas to extend its control of other Palestinian cities of the West Bank, does not inspire confidence that the Palestinian leadership would be capable of honoring and maintaining security or other agreements with Israel.
The lack of a unified and agreed-upon Palestinian governance structure, massive, widely-acknowledged corruption, internal violence, and intense radicalization in schools, mosques and media in the West Bank and Gaza, further prejudice chances of progressing toward a two state solution.
Acceptance by the Palestinian leadership of concessions by Israel, while at the same time consistently refusing offers to reach an agreed-upon “end to the conflict” and to negotiate a final status, do not advance the chances of a two state solution.
Rejection and prevention by the Palestinian leadership, of viable neighborly relationships at the people-to-people level, and support of boycotts and divestment initiatives all run against any concept of bon-voisinage (good neighborly relations) between the two peoples."
9. “Israel’s maritime blockade of the Gaza Strip is illegal” – False.
It is widely acknowledged that the Palestinian Authority’s control in Gaza was usurped by the Hamas, an internationally regarded terror organization, sponsored and supplied with arms by Iran. Hamas and other terror groups such as the Islamic Jihad have turned the area into a base for mounting terror attacks against Israel.
To this end Hamas produces, smuggles into the area and stockpiles missiles, guns, and ammunition for use against Israel and its civilian population. It periodically directs such missiles randomly at Israeli civilian targets, in violation of all accepted norms of international humanitarian law.
In light of this acknowledged situation of armed conflict, Israel has the prerogative to institute a naval and land blockade with a view to prevent the introduction of weapons and materials that could serve the belligerent purposes of Hamas. The institution of such a blockade is well established in international law and practice.
A naval blockade in such a situation once instituted and maintained in accordance with the rules of international law with the appropriate public notification as to the area of sea that it covers effective enforcement, impartiality and consideration of humanitarian needs of the population, is fully in accordance with accepted international law and practice.
In accordance with the findings of the UN Secretary General’s Panel of Inquiry on the 2010 Flotilla Incident:
The fundamental principle of the freedom of navigation on the high seas is subject to only certain limited exceptions under international law. Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza. The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.”30
Despite the ongoing, declared hostile intentions of the Hamas administration in Gaza, and its renewed construction of tunnels and manufacture of rockets for use against Israel, Israel maintains an ongoing civilian policy enabling the transfer of commodities via the different overland crossings, civilian entry to and from the Gaza Strip with emphasis on the evacuation of Palestinian patients for medical treatment in Israel, the promotion of projects by international community, and coordination of operations and aid in agriculture, transportation, trade and industry. Pursuant to the recent agreement between Israel and Turkey, increased amounts of aid from Turkey are passing into the Gaza Strip."
10. Israel is conducting extrajudicial murders and is randomly and cold-bloodedly executing Palestinians – False and Malicious
In light of the clear video footage showing random knife attacks against Israelis by incited Palestinians passing through check-points and in other locations, it is incredulous to see how the Palestinian and Arab League leaders and spokesmen have the gall to manufacture a blatantly false narrative, boldly and openly accusing Israel of randomly executing these people in cold-blood.
It is no less incredulous to see the extent to which these lies are so readily accepted by the international media, by leading Western and Arab political personalities and even by various foreign and Israeli academics, who rush to accuse Israel’s police who are defending themselves against these knifings, of carrying out “indiscriminate,” “barbaric” or “extrajudicial” executions.
By allowing themselves to be influenced by such false and manipulative lies and by accepting and propagating them, the international media and some leading western political personalities are in fact giving encouragement and license to the Palestinian leadership to continue its incitement to such violence by individuals. The Palestinian leadership instigating this incitement knows that it will be viewed sympathetically in the West and that Israel will be condemned for defending against such attacks.
Claims by Palestinian leaders considered by the international community to be “moderate,” justifying such terrorist knifings and citing “lack of hope” or “desperation” by the perpetrators of such terror, cannot be considered acceptable by any moral standard.
Even the UN General Assembly annually resolves, “Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstances unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or other nature that may be invoked to justify them.”31
11. “Israel committed war crimes in the Gaza Strip including the indiscriminate murder of children” – False
Almost inevitably, whenever Israel is obliged to defend its population and territorial integrity from unbridled and indiscriminate terror emanating from beyond its borders, whether from Hamas in the Gaza Strip or from Hezbollah in Lebanon, Israel is accused of exercising “disproportionate force” and of committing war crimes.
Such accusations are gratuitous and inherently false. They ignore the unique and unprecedented nature of the terrorism unleashed against Israel, the tactics and strategy of which deliberately abuse and violate accepted civilized and humanitarian norms, and the realities of combat in the Gaza Strip.
The allegations against Israel knowingly manipulate casualty statistics in order to establish false and disproportionate equivalences between Israel, a sovereign country bound by international humanitarian norms, and terror groups that knowingly and deliberately abuse such norms.
They ignore the fact that the terror groups deliberately, as a matter of military tactic, take advantage of, and rely on the humanitarian limitations that Israel, as a member of the international community, imposes on its forces in seeking to avoid civilian casualties. Such tactics include:
Cruelly forcing civilians, including children to serve as human shields and denying them access to shelter;
the deliberate use of private homes, schools, medical facilities and religious locations for storage and operation of rockets and other ammunition, as access-points to operational tunnels and as headquarters for terror activity;
willful and indiscriminate targeting of populated civilian centers, public facilities, schools and religious locations within Israel;
a declared aim of kidnapping Israeli citizens for purposes of hostage-taking,
The use of civilian facilities and the forced use of human shields are a deliberate tactic and widely used strategy in the arsenal of these terror groups. They rely on the likelihood that any military and defensive retaliation by Israel would likely endanger and harm those innocent civilians and thereby generate the accusations levelled against Israel.
The Hamas terror organization has proudly admitted that its fighters are instructed to use human shields in order to purposely suffer civilian deaths and thereby increase international pressure and blame on Israel. 32
Former Hamas interior minister Fathi Hamad boasted in 2008 that Hamas fighters “formed human shields of the women, the children, the elderly, and the mujahedeen in order to challenge the Zionist bombing machine.”33
Such tactics and strategy are widely known and acknowledged throughout the international community. Leading political personalities in the U.S. and Europe, as well as the various international and local organizations and bodies purporting to uphold compliance with humanitarian norms are fully aware of the serious humanitarian dilemmas and challenges faced by Israel in attempting to defend itself against such terrorism, while at the same time minimizing civilian casualties."
& lastly says
"Leading military experts, after reviewing Israel’s military actions, have commented on the fact that “Israel had gone to extraordinary lengths to limit collateral damage and prevent civilian casualties in the Gaza conflict.”34(Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff).
Similarly, the British military expert Col. Richard Kemp has testified to the fact that Israel’s forces “did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.”35
In the absence of clear and accepted international criteria for dealing with unbridled abuse of humanitarian norms by terror organizations, those making allegations against Israel choose rather to ignore and overlook the dilemmas and challenges faced by Israel in defending itself against such terror.
Humanitarian norms are an inherent part of the legal obligations on Israel’s military. Israel’s judicial and military authorities are obligated to investigate accusations of abuse of humanitarian norms, and where relevant to taking the appropriate juridical measures."
From the website blogs.timesofisrael.com an article is headlined
"This has nothing to do with Sheikh Jarrah" by Bassem Eid the article says:
It's about Hamas seeing a chance to seize the narrative and increase its own influence and control over Palestinians in Jerusalem
MAY 12, 2021, the article says
"As I write this, rockets are raining down on Israel from Gaza, and protests are being instigated in cities throughout the country. People have already died as a result of this senseless violence and more will surely follow in the next few days. As a Palestinian living in Jerusalem, I am frustrated and angry — and I can only blame Hamas. The fanatics who rule over Gaza with an iron first cannot resist the opportunity to stir up anti-Jewish violence for their own political gain. If innocent Jews and Muslims die in the process, all the better for them.
The pretext for the latest missile barrage and social media incitement is Sheikh Jarrah, where a long-running legal dispute was scheduled for a court hearing. This had been a private matter between Jews who have an old property deed from the 1800s and the residents of four homes who have lived there for decades and do not want to pay rent. It is the kind of situation that should be handled by a local municipal court. This could happen in any other country and there would be no public interest. But this is Jerusalem, so you have to view everything in the context of the political situation. You also have to ask yourself: who stands to gain from political violence right now?
After Palestinian PM Mahmoud Abbas canceled highly anticipated elections, Hamas simply saw an opportunity it could not pass up, exploiting the Sheikh Jarrah situation and an already tense environment during the holy day of Leylat Al Qadr and Jerusalem Day. Hamas is currently running a social media campaign calling for Palestinians to incite violence during demonstrations in Jerusalem and elsewhere. They are encouraging Palestinian youth to throw their lives away by hurling rocks and makeshift bombs at police.
Hamas-led riots outside of the Al Aqsa Mosque prove that Israeli police are not at fault for the dangers preventing Muslims from praying. Hamas has incited mobs and provoked violence with the intention of framing Israel for ethnic cleansing. Just today, provocateurs filled several busses to travel to Jerusalem to participate in the “historic” riots and answer the Hamas call to incite violence."
the article continues
"Most significantly, Hamas leaders ordered hundreds of rockets to be launched in the general direction of major Israeli cities. Many of them did this from the comfort of their luxury villas in Doha, Damascus, or elsewhere, knowing full well they themselves are safe from any blowback. It is important to remember that Hamas’s penchant for murder is almost matched by their blundering incompetence, which is partly the reason one out of every three of their rockets crashes into Gaza where the only possible victims are Palestinian. They also apparently shelled Abu Ghosh, an ancient Arab village.
This dispute is not actually about four houses in East Jerusalem. This is about Hamas seeing a chance to seize the narrative and increase its own influence and control over Palestinians in Jerusalem. Don’t buy their fake news and let them dilute their own blame. In the coming days, Jews and Muslims are both likely to die because Hamas saw political upside in violence. Don’t forget it."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR Bassem Eid (born 5 February 1958) is a Palestinian living in Israel who has an extensive career as a Palestinian human rights activist. His initial focus was on human rights violations committed by Israeli armed forces, but for many years has broadened his research to include human rights violations committed by the Palestinian Authority (PA), and the Palestinian armed forces on their own people. He founded the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group in 1996, although it ceased operations in 2011. He now works as a political analyst for Israeli TV and radio.
Please Note, Israeli Armed Forces do NOT commit human rights violations, The so-called "Palestinians" and other
Arab Regimes are the Ones who are Truly Guilty of Human Rights Violations and Crimes Against Humanity
Also from blogs.timesofisrael.com an article is headlined "Lying about proportionality to accuse Israel of war crimes"
MAY 28, 2021, the article says:
.
Seeming to give credence to Orwell’s observation that “Everyone believes in the atrocities of the enemy and disbelieves in those of his own side, without ever bothering to examine the evidence,” the world’s attention has turned once again to the clash between Hamas and Israel, as the Jewish state launched its defensive air offensive into Gaza to suppress a deadly barrage of 4360 rockets that killed 10 civilians in Israel and injured 330 others. And, predictably, as the body count rose on the Palestinian side, the moral arbiters of acceptable political behavior began condemning the Jewish state for its perceived abuses in executing its national self-defense.
Forgetting that Israel’s current campaign was necessitated by ceaseless rocket and mortar assaults on its southern towns from Hamas-controlled Gaza, international leaders and diplomats initiated their moral hectoring of Israel as it attempted to shield its citizens from harm. Five so-called experts from The UN’s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), led by Special Rapporteur Michael Lynk, released a statement which suggested that “This most recent violence has a depressingly familiar pattern to it.” And what was the familiar tragedy? Not that Hamas had tried to murder Israeli civilians with no justification, but that “Israel and Palestinian armed groups in Gaza exchange missiles and rockets following dispossession and the denial of rights in the occupied Palestinian territory, with Israel’s far greater firepower inflicting far higher death tolls and injuries and a much larger scale of property destruction.” [Emphasis added.]
In addressing a special session of the 47-member UN Human Rights Council, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet was similarly condemnatory of Israel’s military behavior. While begrudgingly admitting that Hamas’s “indiscriminate” firing of thousands of rockets constitutes “a clear violation of international humanitarian law,” Israel’s response was equally questionable, especially the targeted strikes on buildings that were said to house terrorists and armaments. “Despite Israel’s claims that many of these buildings were hosting armed groups or being used for military purposes,” Bachelet noted, “we have not seen evidence in this regard.” And then, in creating a moral equivalence that is unsurprising when Israel is involved, she solemnly announced that Israel, too, may be condemned for its military misbehavior, that “If found to be indiscriminate and disproportionate,” Israel’s defensive “attacks might constitute war crimes.” [Emphasis added.]
The words “indiscriminate” and “disproportionate” are the most insidious refrains, uttered only when Israel’s enemies are killed (certainly not when Jews are murdered), and suggesting that Israel’s military response is too aggressive, that the force and effect of the sorties into Gaza are beyond what is permitted under human rights law and the rules of war.
The remonstrations of its many and far-flung critics aside, Israel is not the international outlaw here, but a victim now involved in a defensive countermeasure to terrorism against its citizenry. In fact, Justus Reid Weiner and Dr. Avi Bell, two legal scholars at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, have noted that Hamas’s shelling of civilian targets within Israel’s borders — the direct cause of the current conflict — clearly violates international law and requires a military response from Israel, even though world observers have been oddly silent on the Palestinian incitement that is the cause of the present clashes."
the article continues
“The Palestinian attacks,” they wrote, “violate one of the most basic rules of international humanitarian law, the rule of distinction, which requires combatants to aim all their attacks at legitimate targets – enemy combatants or objects that contribute to enemy military actions. Violations of the rule of distinction — attacks deliberately aimed at civilians or protected objects as such — are war crimes,” exactly what Hamas has been committing with its relentless rocket assaults. Hamas militants not only commit a war crime each time they lob a rocket or mortar into Israel from Gaza by virtue of the fact that the targets of those attacks are specifically and purposely civilian, not military, assets — a violation of the “distinction” rule — but also, in not wearing military uniforms and often posing as civilians, Hamas terrorists are also committing another crime, that of perfidy.
Article 48 of Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 is very clear about this prohibited behavior of combatants, stating that “[i]n order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.” Since the rockets Hamas aims at southern Israeli towns are launched randomly into civilian enclaves and lack the technical sophistication to reliably be aimed at military targets even if that was Hamas’s actual intention, each of the nearly 20,000 rockets that have come into Israel from Gaza since 2005 represents both a casus belli and war crimes.
“It is a central principle of just war theory,” observed Dr. Michael Walzer, Professor Emeritus at the Institute for Advanced Study, “that the self-defense of a people or a country cannot be made morally impossible.” Israel faces that precise dilemma every time it is forced to suppress Palestinian aggression and protect its populace from unending rocket assaults, particularly since its actions are widely and almost immediately denounced as excessive, disproportionate, and in violation of international law. Perceived as having unjustly dispossessed the Palestinians and accused of still occupying both the West Bank but also Gaza (and holding the latter under siege), and collectively punishing the Palestinian Arabs living there, Israel has been stripped of its moral standing in the community of nations and so its attempts at self-defense are at best tolerated.
Rather than serving as a deterrent against attacks of terrorists, Israel’s military strength and capabilities are instead looked at as an unfair advantage in the asymmetrical war in which it finds itself. Few leaders in the West and none in the Arab world ever condemn Hamas for its chronic, unlawful terroristic behavior toward Israel, but the moment Israel undertakes military action it receives strict warnings for restraint, censure for its success in neutralizing Hamas strongholds, and eventual condemnation for the inevitable deaths of civilians—the collateral damage that is the tragic byproduct of conflicts fought in neighborhoods rather than battlefields.
Israel, which is promiscuously condemned for committing “crimes against humanity” and human rights violations, not only waited years before responding to Palestinian terrorism, but then, in one of the most populous areas on earth, scrupulously followed the rule of distinction by precisely targeting Hamas terrorists and infrastructure, with minimal, though still unfortunate, collateral damage to the Gaza civilian population — a feat made all the more difficult by Hamas’s insidious tactic of embedding rocket launchers and armament stores within homes, apartment buildings, schools, and mosques in residential neighborhoods."
the article continues :
"Combat in the crowded streets and alleys of Gaza obviously makes warfare more difficult for Israel, especially in its attempt to minimize civilian casualties while maximizing the suppression of enemy fire and attempting to neutralize Hamas’s ability to continue to pose a threat in the future. Since, as mentioned, Hamas’s terrorists do not wear identifying uniforms, and, additionally, embed themselves within civilian environments, Israel’s effort to maintain “distinction” — that is, scrupulously determining who is a legitimate military target and who is a civilian— is understandably challenging and dangerous.
And, knowing that the world community is apt to be harsh about any civilian deaths that result from Israel’s offensive — even though it Hamas who has created the circumstances by which those civilians will and have perished — Israel has resorted to extraordinary measures to avoid the death of non-combatants, including “knocking” on roofs to warm of imminent bombardment, distributing flyers, and using other warning techniques, all of which compromise Israel’s strategic advantage while helping to minimize civilian deaths. Even so, when the inevitable Palestinian civilian deaths occur (which seem to be a welcomed part of Hamas’s cognitive war against Israel), Israel is accused of violating the rule of “proportionality,” the other aspect of warfare which international law requires that prohibits a military response that causes more civilian deaths than would be considered necessary in achieving a set military objective.
In fact, collateral damage — the accidental killing of civilians during military conflicts — is itself allowed by international law, provided the actions that caused the civilian deaths are not, according to Weiner and Bell, excessive in relation to the military need. But the fact that deaths occur in civilian populations — even what might be perceived as excessive deaths — are not in and of themselves indicative of violations of international law, and, says Weiner and Bell, “if a state, like Israel, is facing aggression, then proportionality addresses whether force was specifically used by Israel to bring an end to the armed attack against it.”
& lastly says
"The practice of Hamas of using human shields, as well as storing munitions and weaponry in civilian neighborhoods and non-military buildings, also absolves Israel from some of the proportionality requirements, since the use of human shields and the perfidy of Hamas in the first place puts the fault for civilian deaths on it, rather than Israel. Israel indiscriminately pummeling Gaza with bombardment from the air — with many resulting civilian deaths — would violate the rule of proportionality and could be considered a war crime; Israel responding to rocket fire from an apartment building and, in the process, killing civilians (even a large number of them) who were in the building with Hamas combatants is allowed, as long as Israel’s intent was to achieve a military objective and not just to exact revenge or capriciously murder civilians.
Even errors which lead to the death of civilians are acceptable, as long as the military purpose was the motivating factor in the assault, since, as Jonathan F. Keiler, a former captain in the Army’s Judge-Advocate General Corps, noted, “we do not determine criminality based on outcome, but intent.”
Proportionality also does not require that the number of deaths — either of Hamas militants or Palestinian civilians — be equal to the number of deaths suffered by Israel, or to damage done to Israeli infrastructure or military targets. One moral challenge in asymmetrical war is that observers in the world community intuitively feel that Israel’s disproportionate military strength makes the conflict fundamentally “unfair,” that because it is technologically and logistically able to exact more harm on the Palestinians, Israel should restrain itself to minimize enemy casualties. That may be a compelling emotional response, but it is, of course, not a legal or moral argument with any weight. In fact, it is precisely because of Israel’s military superiority that a rational adversary would have been deterred from attacking in the first place.
The fact that Hamas chose to challenge an adversary with disproportionate military capability indicates that the decision was either irrational or some type of collective death wish; in either instance, the Palestinians, and the world at large, cannot now expect Israel not to use every means possible to protect its citizenry from both immediate and future assaults by genocidal terrorists who wish to murder Jews and destroy the Jewish state.
No nation is required to enter a suicide pact with its enemies, and no nation can be expected to wait until enemy rockets successfully reach an apartment building or school, forcing Israel to play, in the words of Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, “Russian roulette with its children.”
Indeed, the very tactics of terrorism force nations to look at how sovereign states defend themselves against rogue actors. “Modern terror organizations” like Hamas, noted Professor Boaz Ganor, founder and executive director of the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism in Herzliya, “do not see themselves as being obligated to humanitarian international law . . . From this perspective, the states dealing with such terrorists find themselves being Gulliver, with their hands and legs bound by morality and by modern combat principles, fighting dwarfs that attack without pause and in violation of every legal or moral principle.”
Israel, once again, is faced with what seems to be a morally impossible self-defense."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR Richard L. Cravatts, PhD, immediate Past-President of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East and a Freedom Center Journalism Fellow in Academic Free Speech, is the author of Dispatches From the Campus War Against Israel and Jews and Genocidal Liberalism: The University's Jihad Against Israel and Jews.
Another article from blogs.timesofisrael.com is headlined "J’Accuse! Jessie Duarte"
MAY 28, 2021, the article states:
"South African apartheid has become a convenient and emotive tool of the BDS and other anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian groups. Comments from the ANC government resonates to the left-leaning Woke constituencies and the apartheid canard “milked” for obvious reasons. The ANC government is openly hostile to Israel and has embarked on a never-ending program of castigation of the Jewish State, more so resulting from the recent Gaza conflict.
The deputy Secretary General (SG)of the ANC (the current SG is under suspension as he stands accused of fraud and corruption) Ms. Jessie Duarte has a long record of bias and anti-Israel sentiment – therefore the below letter has relevance in the light of the ANC government’s stand against Israel.
J’Accuse Jessie Duarte
5
“J’Accuse…!“(I Accuse!) – was the title of an open letter printed on the front page of “L’Aurore “ an influential French newspaper in January of 1898 by Emile Zola addressed to the French President accusing him and his government of anti-Semitism.
J’Accuse — I Accuse you Jesse Duarte and your ANC government of blatant anti-Semitism!
You and your colleagues have incessantly been instigating hatred and false accusations at Israel since the start of the recent conflict in Gaza.
You stood in front of a rent-a-crowd of ANC supporters last week at the Israeli Consulate ranting about conspiracy theories, raving about the evils of Israel’s merciless onslaught on innocent civilian Palestinian’s, without any mention of the context of the conflict.
J’Accuse — I Accuse you Jesse Duarte and your ANC government of blatant anti-Semitism!
You stood in front of your rent-a-crowd “supporters” displaying an emotion hardly ever seen before. You ranted persistently that there was only one perpetrator and only one victim. Stirring up a frenzy of hatred hardly ever seen previously.
J’Accuse — I Accuse you Jesse Duarte and your ANC government of blatant anti-Semitism!
No one can recall you ever voicing any comment – let alone the emotion you displayed last week about the tragedy of Syria where your ANC government maintains such warm relations.
The U.N. estimated death toll in the Syria civil war of more than 594,000 to date. Another estimated 8 to 10 million Syrians have been displaced either living in refugee camps or surrounding countries — these are figures substantiated by Amnesty International. That same body reports a further 13,000 people were executed by February 2017 in government prisons.
J’Accuse — I Accuse you Jesse Duarte and your ANC government of blatant anti-Semitism!"
the article continues
"In 2016 in Aleppo alone the U.N. estimated that the death toll exceeded over 250,000 civilians and included in that figure were almost 4,000 Palestinians killed. Human Rights Watch states that a whole range of banned weapons were used against civilian populations by joint Syrian-Russian military operations. Banned cluster munitions, incendiary and chemical weapons were used in attacks in civilian populations specifically targeting hospitals, schools as well as mosques and other places where civilians gather have been seen as fair game.
The UN’s humanitarian affairs coordinator, stated that this onslaught could result in the worst humanitarian tragedy of the 21st century!
J’Accuse — I Accuse you Jesse Duarte and your ANC government of blatant anti-Semitism!
You nor your ANC government hardly raised a voice of condemnation against your BRICS partner, Russia for its culpability in the face of these atrocities. Neither much or any condemnation or even a hint of emotion against the Syrian or Russian regimes.
J’Accuse — I Accuse you Jesse Duarte and your ANC government of blatant anti-Semitism
The death of 4000 Palestinians in Aleppo alone went by totally unnoticed by you and your ANC government — That must speak volumes for your concern and empathy of the Palestinian people whose cause you falsely claim to champion.
This is not to mention the devastation of Idlib in Syria, The Yemen conflict and other tragedies around the globe. Therefore Jessie Duarte this leaves one with no other option but to Accuse You of anti-Semitism.
J’Accuse — I Accuse members of the mainstream media for the disproportionate, biased and one-eyed reporting. Sky News in the UK run a series called “Hotspots” who seem to be the only channel to highlight the tragedy of Syria — displaying a modicum of balance."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR Allan is a member of the South African (SA) Israel Media Team - lobby group that challenges negative reporting about Israel. The SA mainstream press is amongst the most hostile and biased press concerning Israel and supports BDS as is the ANC government of that country. He has been a contributor to combatting the false and sometime fabricated reporting on Israel and has had many letters to the editors published.
An article online by Pastor Paul Prather is headlined
"‘A sin against the Lord himself:’ Christians can’t love Christ and hate Jews."
BY PAUL PRATHER
JANUARY 07, 2021 the article says:
"For the past several weeks I’ve been mulling over something I normally have no call to think about: antisemitism.
I’m a Christian. I live in a small rural county where there are few, if any, Jews.
Prejudice against Jews, then, usually isn’t at the forefront of my mind. It’s something I assume belongs to some distant era. I don’t think much about Studebakers or Francisco Franco, either.
Yet it invariably turns out antisemitism isn’t a relic of the past. It’s an ugly manifestation of the present.
Of course, prejudice of any kind—racial, religious, national—makes little sense.
It results not just from malice, but also from lazy and irrational thinking that extrapolates from the specific to the universal.
It takes the crimes or quirks of a few members of a group and applies those shortcomings to everyone in the group. It creates guilt by association. It traffics in stereotypes.
This is cockeyed, obviously, as it denies humans their uniqueness and complexity. It also reveals an unwillingness to stop hating for five minutes to actually look at real people in all their diversity and complexity.
That same reasoning underlies bigotry no matter which group it’s aimed against: blacks, gays, women, men, Muslims, immigrants, Appalachians, Jews, you name it.
But the bigotry that makes least sense is the hatred of Jews by self-proclaimed Christians—of which there is a long and shameful history dating back centuries.
Still, around the nation, much of the bile and violence against Jews today is perpetrated by self-described Christian identity and nationalist groups.
Not only does Christian antisemitism include the hostility and lack of logic inherent in all bigotry, but there’s an added irony to it: no one owes more to the Jews than Christians do.
Because the New Testament tells us that hostile Jewish leaders pressured Roman authorities to crucify Jesus, antisemites within Christianity historically have slandered Jews as “Christ killers.”
That narrative, however, omits an equally clear part of the New Testament accounts.
Jesus was himself a Jew, descended from Abraham, the father of the Jewish faith. Jesus’ Jewish genealogy is included prominently in the scriptures. He quotes the Hebrew Bible. Most of his teachings come directly from Jewish traditions.
Mary was a Jew. Joseph was a Jew. The 12 original apostles were Jews. St. Paul was a Jew. All the early followers of Jesus were Jews, thousands of them. In its early years, what later came to be called Christianity was considered not a separate religion, but a sect within Judaism. The apostles seem to have believed initially that to become a disciple of Jesus you had to have been born a Jew or else must convert to that faith.
If you maintain that the people partly responsible for killing Jesus were Jewish, then you also must recognize that so were the mother who birthed, raised and loved him, the crowds who followed him and the leaders who took up his mantle after the resurrection.
For many Christians today, Jesus’ prophesied return to Earth revolves around modern Israel and the Jews, and some Christians expect Jesus to eventually reign from Jerusalem.
How then can a person who claims to be a Christian justify hating Jews?
Without Jews we don’t have our Bible as we know and love it. Without Jews there would be no Jesus. Without Jews there would be no Christianity. To hate Jews is to hate your own spiritual forbears. And your savior.
It’s beyond absurd.
No Jew should be despised by anyone for being Jewish, any more than any person should be despised for being brown, black, white, yellow, red, male, female, Muslim or atheist. People of all stripes are individuals who must be treated with respect.
But for someone to call himself by the name of Christ and hate Jews is uniquely repugnant. It’s a sin against the Lord himself."
From the website, Washingtonpost.com an article is headlined
"Why do people hate Jews and Judaism? (COMMENTARY)"
By Benjamin Blech | Religion News Service
May 21, 2015
"NEW YORK — As Jews around the world prepare to celebrate the holiday of Shavuot commemorating the acceptance of the Ten Commandments at Mount Sinai, we are profoundly disturbed by the resurgence of global anti-Semitism. What seems not sufficiently understood is the deep connection between these two, Sinai and anti-Semitism.
The link between the two can allow us to resolve one of the most perplexing questions surrounding the history of the Jewish people.
Seven decades after the Holocaust, the hatred of Jews and Judaism has reappeared with a vengeance in the major capitals of Europe. In the contemporary disguise of anti-Zionism, once again it made its way around the world. Jews as a people and Israel as their land are once more the scapegoats responsible for all the world’s ills and the cause of all of its wrongs.
For the longest time, scholars have attempted to understand what is it about Jews that made them the focus of this obsessive animosity. As fewer than one quarter of 1 percent of the world’s population, what could possibly have turned them into the supreme villains of mankind? And how did countries with not even a single Jew become rabid anti-Semites?
The question is so perplexing that many have simply given up trying to come up with an answer. Elie Wiesel, the Nobel Prize winner and Holocaust survivor, concluded that the endurance of anti-Semitism remains a mystery; he described anti-Semitism as an “irrational disease.” The unsolvable puzzle, he said, is that “the world has changed in the last 2,000 years, and only anti-Semitism has remained. . The only disease that has not found its cure is anti-Semitism.”
Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, expressed the fear that “we currently face as great a threat to the safety and security of the Jewish people as the one we faced in the 1930s — if not a greater one,” but he could find no better explanation for its persistent presence other than calling it “a spiritual and psychological illness.”
True, reasons for anti-Semitism have often been offered. Their obvious error invariably was the inherent contradiction of their explanations. Jews were despised because they were too liberal — and also because they were too conservative. They were too cheap and of course they were also too spendthrift; too passive and too pushy; too charitable and too selfish; too religious and too secular.
Pick any characteristic and Jews have been blamed either for possessing too much of it or not having it at all. Jews have been the scapegoats for the sins of every political system. Max Nordau, the great Zionist leader, had it right: “The Jews are not hated because they have evil qualities; evil qualities are sought for in them because they are hated.”
Still, that begs the question: Why?
A little over a century ago, with the beginning of the Zionist movement, Jews thought they at last had found the answer. Theodore Herzl fervently believed that it was all because the Jews had no land of their own. Stateless, they were natural victims. Only their abnormal political reality caused them to become international pariahs. No longer homeless, with Israel Jews would find acceptance and universal respect."
the article continues
"Yet the state of Israel has disabused Jews of Hertzl’s response to anti-Semitism. If anything, Jews with a state of their own have become far more vulnerable to the world’s hostility. Israel has the dubious distinction of being the only member of the United Nations whose right to exist is regularly challenged and whose elimination from the world map is the aim of other U.N. member states.
What then is the answer to the reason for anti-Semitism?
The rabbis of the Talmud saw it in the very name of the mountain on which the Ten Commandments were given. “Sinai” in Hebrew is similar to the word “sinah” — hatred. It was the Jews’ acceptance of a higher law of morality and ethics that was responsible for the world’s enmity.
Jews were the first to preach the message of the Ten Commandments, that worship of God includes the second tablet of respect for fellow mankind. As the mother religion of both Christianity and Islam, Judaism pioneered the ideal of the holy and the human need for acting in accord with divine law. But anti-Semitism stands in opposition to the very idea of civilization. It detests Jews because it acknowledges that Jews are the conscience of humanity and the lawgivers of ethical and moral behavior.
Amazingly enough, Adolf Hitler dared to verbalize it as justification for his plan for genocide of the Jewish people: “Conscience is a Jewish invention like circumcision. My task is to free men from the dirty and degrading ideas of conscience and morality.”
As Jews prepare to celebrate the reception of the Ten Commandments, anti-Semitism ought to be viewed as a badge of honor. Jews are hated not because they are bad but because they persist in reminding the world of what it means to be good. Anti-Semitism is nothing less than a visceral reaction to the cry of a guilty conscience."
(Rabbi Benjamin Blech is professor of Talmud at Yeshiva University in New York.)
From the New York Daily News on Sunday June 13, 2021 , a letter on the website Nydailynews.com
Voice of the People section says
"Nazi comparisons are out of line"
"Pleasantville, N.Y.: Voicer Joe Gomes compared what Israel is doing to the Palestinians to what Jews went through at the hands of the Nazis. As an Israeli-born Jew, I find this to be appalling and insulting.
First of all, the Jews weren’t being terroristic toward Germany or even anarchists, for that matter, but were law-abiding citizens. The only reason they were placed in concentration camps was for being Jewish. It didn’t matter where they stood on the issues of the time. When Jews were sent to the camps, they were meant to starve to death or get cremated.
More importantly, I don’t see how Gaza City is like a concentration camp, especially when it has everything any other city in the world has to offer — plus I never heard about any Jews firing rockets or any other projectiles when they were in the camps, or even trying to build tunnels to smuggle weapons to launch attacks and kill people, which is what Hamas is doing right now.
One other thing: Unlike the Nazi-controlled concentration camps, Israel hasn’t had control over the Gaza Strip since 2005 after agreeing to a unilateral withdrawal and giving it over to full Palestinian control in hopes of starting new peace talks. Instead, Israel has been hit by rockets ever since.
I would really like to know where exactly did he get such a comparison, because I hardly see anything similar between these events. Tal Barzilai "
From the website zionism-israel.com a Superb article is headlined
"Zionism and its Impact" the article says:
Impact of Jewish settlement on Arab Palestinian Economy and Society
July 15, 2005
What was actual impact of Zionist Settlement on the Arabs of Palestine?
A widely circulated article by Ann M. Lesch, entitled "Zionism and its Impact" (undated article at the Washington Report of Middle East Affairs originally at the "Encyclopedia Of The Palestinians" )1 charges that the Zionist movement had the aim of expelling the Arabs of Palestine, and accomplished its aim by carefully thought out policies from the start of the British Mandate until the Israeli war of Independence in 1948. Lesch claims:
The dispossession and expulsion of a majority of Palestinians were the result of Zionist policies planned over a thirty-year period. Fundamentally, Zionism focused on two needs:
to attain a Jewish majority in Palestine;
to acquire statehood irrespective of the wishes of the indigenous population. Non-recognition of the political and national rights of the Palestinian people was a KEY Zionist policy.
....
The implementation of those approaches led to the formation of independent Israel, at the cost of dismembering the Palestinian community and fostering long-term hostility with the Arab world.
Lesch's article is an amplification of the thesis propagated by Arab Palestinians and anti-Zionists since the inception of the Zionist movement, that Zionist settlement of Palestine was aimed at dislocating the Arabs and would have that effect. The unspoken reasoning behind the thesis was that Palestine was like a full box. If one person was put into the box, another would have to be taken out. The idea spread rapidly among the Arabs of Palestine, who managed to convince the British as well, and caused them to limit Jewish immigration to Palestine. That was the result of anti-Zionism and its impact.
Zionism and its Impact on Population of Palestinian Arabs
The evidence does not support Lesch's assertions. Zionist immigrants did not displace Palestinian Arabs in mandatory Palestine. Quite the opposite, the Arab population of Palestine grew at a tremendous rate between 1922 and 1948.2 In 1922, at the start of the British Mandate there were some 589,000 Muslim Arabs and 71,000 Christian Arabs in Palestine, a number that is probably an overestimate. By 1945, there were well over 1.2 million Arabs in Palestine and perhaps over 1.3 million by 1948. The Arab population of Palestine had about doubled during the years of the mandate. If the Zionists were plotting and planning to evict the Arabs of Palestine, the supposed Zionist policy would have to be judged a miserable failure. At the same time, the Jewish population grew to over 600,000. The land that had held 753,000 people in 1922, held about 1.9 million in 1948. The "full box" of Palestine turned out to have very elastic walls. As it has done elsewhere in the world, immigration to Palestine stimulated the economy and resulted in a higher standard of living for everyone. The immigration of Jews and the investment of Palestine were due directly to Zionism and its impact."
the article continues
"The people of Palestine enjoyed a far higher standard of living in 1945 than they did in 1922. The standard of living and the welfare of the Arabs of Palestine rose much more quickly than they did in neighboring countries. In 1922-25, average infant mortality for Muslims was 190.39 per thousand infants. By 1938, this figure was 127.58 per thousand. By way of comparison, infant mortality in neighboring Egypt was 163 per thousand. In Rumania in that year, the report of the League Mandates commission tells us that infant mortality was 183 per thousand, and in Poland it was 140 per thousand.3
Zionism and its Impact on Displacement of Arab Farmers
In 1936, a commission of inquiry found that 654 Palestinian families had lost their lands as the result of Zionist purchases, out of a total of 61,408 Arab families that owned or tenanted land. In other words, slightly over 1%. These families lost 46,633 dunams of land, which is less than 1% of the 6,440,000 dunams of land in Palestine that were deemed to be arable.4 That was the extent of the dispossession.
The land purchase used to dramatize the dispossession of the Arabs of the Galilee was the purchase of the Sursuk lands in the Valley of Jezreel. The Sursuks were absentee landlords who lived in Beirut. Much of the land had fallen into disuse, and was unirrigated. The claims of the Arabs of dispossession by this purchase were examined by Sir John Hope Simpson in 1930. The Simpson commission was set up to examine the causes of the riots of 1929. Very likely it was clear from the start that its purpose was to blame the riots on Zionist immigration, and to justify a finding that would require curtailment of Jewish immigration to Palestine. This they did. However, despite having every motivation to blame the Zionists for "dispossession" of Palestinian Arabs, Simpson wrote:
Government responsibility towards Arab cultivators.—The Jewish authorities have nothing with which to reproach themselves in the matter of the Sursock lands. They paid high prices for the land, and in addition they paid to certain of the occupants of those lands a considerable amount of money which they were not legally bound to pay. It was not their business, but the business of the Government to see to it that the position of the Arabs was not adversely affected by the transaction. In Article 6 of the Mandate it is the duty of the Administration of Palestine to ensure that the rights and position of the Arabs are not prejudiced by Jewish immigration. It is doubtful whether, in the matter of the Sursock lands, this Article of the Mandate received sufficient consideration.5
Thus, contrary to the assertions of Lesch and others, the Zionists did take into account the existence of the Arab population, and did consider their needs and the demands of justice and compromise."
& continues
"Moreover, Simpson quotes from a letter by Yehoshua Hankin, the Zionist land agent, who stated:
" . . . . Had we desired to disregard the interests of such workers of the land as are dependent, directly or indirectly, upon lands of the landlords, we could have acquired large and unlimited areas, but in the course of our conversation I have pointed out to you that this has not been our policy and that, when acquiring lands, it is our ardent wish not to prejudice or do harm to the interests of anybody. "
Zionism and its Impact: Who did not want a compromise?
Lesch is adamant that the Zionists were unwilling to entertain any compromise, but the record shows that it was the Arabs of Palestine who consistently refused to compromise.
In 1937, the British government announced a plan to partition Palestine, known as the Peel Commission plan. The plan was not the doing of the Zionists, but rather an attempt by Britain to renege on the international mandate commitment to a home for the Jewish people in Palestine, by making a tiny state for the Jews within Palestine. The plan was rejected by the Arabs, who refused to consider any compromise whatever. Lesch based much of her argument on this plan, which she presents as adverse to the Arabs. Lesch wrote:
...However, the British PEEL COMMISSION's plan, announced in July 1937, would have forced the Palestinians to leave the olive- and grain- growing areas of Galilee, the orange groves on the Mediterranean coast, and the urban port cities of HAIFA and ACRE. That was too great a loss for even the National Defense Party to accept, and so it joined in the general denunciations of partition.
Lesch's description of the Peel Plan is not quite incorrect. Haifa and Acre were part of the mandated area according to some versions of the Peel Plan, and not part of any Jewish state.
The plan began by offering a relatively small area to the Jews, and then, to meet Arab objections, this tiny area was made smaller in successive maps. The map at right represents the last map that the Arabs rejected. The "Jewish State" would have been a tiny area between Tel Aviv and Hadera, with a second tiny enclave below it, encompassing the area of Yavne, Zikhron Yaakov, Rehovoth and Gedera The Arab state would have extended down to include Gaza, and the rest would be "mandated territory." The Arabs of Palestine would not have lost Acre, Haifa or the Galilee, all of which would remain under mandate and closed to further Jewish immigration. ( Click for complete maps of the Peel Plan )
Because of the economic inequality between the Jewish state, which would hold about 27% of the population, and the Arab state, which would hold about 73% of the population of Palestine, the Peel plan required that the Jewish state would pay the Arab state a "subvention."
The Arabs of Palestine rejected the Peel plan as later, in 1947, they rejected the UN Partition Plan for Palestine."
"Along with their recommendation for partition, in order to create a state with a Jewish majority and ensure an end to the friction, the Peel commission had recommended transfer of the populations in the different areas:
If Partition is to be effective in promoting a final settlement it must mean more than drawing a frontier and establishing two States. Sooner or later there should be a transfer of land and, as far as possible, an exchange of population.
The Treaties should provide that, if Arab owners of land in the Jewish State or Jewish owners of land in the Arab State should wish to sell their land and any plantations or crops thereon, the Government of the State concerned should be responsible for the purchase of such land, plantations and crops at a price to be fixed, if requires, by the Mandatory Administration. For this purpose a loan should, if required, be guaranteed for a reasonable amount.
This bilateral, voluntary, and at that time accepted procedure caused quite a bit of debate in the Zionist executive, not because of doubts about the wisdom or fairness of uprooting Jews, but because of doubts of the morality of uprooting Arabs. Nonetheless, the imperative posed by the obviously looming tragedy in Europe, which required finding a safe home for Jewish refugees quickly, prevailed. This acceptance of the British program has since been turned by anti-Zionists into a lever to "prove" that Zionism is racist and intended all along to expel the Arabs. Equally, it has been used by Zionist extremists to falsely assert that transfer is moral and was always a part of the Zionist program. It was not. It was viewed as a necessary evil."
"Zionism and its Impact on Arab literacy
Another major complaint against the Zionists is that they did not provide for the welfare of the Arabs of Palestine, and in particular their education. Lesch wrote:
Finally, the establishment of an all-Jewish, Hebrew-language educational system was an essential component of building the Jewish national home. It helped to create a cohesive national ethos and a lingua franca among the diverse immigrants. However, it also entirely separated Jewish children from Palestinian children, who attended the governmental schools. The policy widened the linguistic and cultural gap between the two peoples. In addition, there was a stark contrast in their literacy levels (in 1931):
93 percent of Jewish males (above age seven) were literate
71 percent of Christian males
but only 25 percent of Muslim males were literate.
Overall, Palestinian literacy increased from 19 percent in 1931 to 27 percent by 1940, but only 30 percent of Palestinian children could be accommodated in government and private schools.
Palestinian Muslim Arab literacy improved, but not as fast as that of the Christians or the Jews. According to Lesch, this is the fault of the Zionists. It is difficult to see why the Zionists should be blamed, rather than the Christians for example, or perhaps the Muslims. The Zionists and the Christians did not prevent the Muslim Arabs from implementing their own school system. The Jews were not after all, to be expected to teach Arabic or to force their own children to learn Arabic, and the Arabs were not interested in learning Hebrew. The British for their part, were unwilling to host separate schools. The British collected taxes from the entire population of Palestine, and distributed benefits on a per-capita basis. Since by 1948 each Palestinian Jew was producing four times as much as his or her Arab neighbor. the Zionist enterprise in Palestine was subsidizing the health, education and welfare of the Arabs whether they liked it or not. The British, being insolvent, were unwilling to invest any funds of their own. The Arabs of Palestine used whatever group spirit and organizational capability they had toward the single end of expelling the Jews, and failed to erect communal institutions such as those developed by the Zionists. Nonetheless, owing in large part to the taxes paid by the Zionists, the literacy and health of Palestinian residents improved steadily from 1922 to 1948."
"Zionism and its Impact on Arab Economy
Despite the claims of the Mufti and his supporters, Arabs prospered in mandatory Palestine, whether because of improved British administration, or because of Zionist investment. Zionist investment in industry in Palestine was considerable and was noted by the British in their mandatory reports. True, the investment resulted only in creation of industries owned by Jews, but these industries also employed Arabs and did business with Arab businesses. Lesch claims that Jewish enterprises employed few Arabs. She does not mention that Arab enterprises employed almost no Jews at all.
The Simpson Report5 of 1930 noted:
Of existing industrial establishments 1,236, with a total capital in excess of one million pounds were in existence before the War. Since the War therefore the number of establishments had increased up to the date of the Industrial Census by 2,269 or 183 per cent, and the capital by two and a half million pounds, or 250 per cent. This is a very material increase and it is almost entirely due to the importation of Jewish capital and the immigration of a Jewish population.
The table below shows what was happening until 1931:
Zionism and its Impact:
Selected Indicators of Capital Formation and Infrastructure Development: 1922-1931 6
Capital Stock Capital Imports Capital Deepening Consumption of Electricity Telephone Lines Kilometers of Metalled Roads
1922 5,056 3,821 84.2 450
1924 6.541 5,522 90.3 3,526 580
1926 9,603 5,013 90.8 2,344 5,611 631
1928 12,022 2,891 98.6 2,974 8,780 706
1931 16,539 3,225 95.2 9,546 14,557 922
Almost all of the investment was Zionist investment. The telephone lines, roads and electricity were paid for by Zionist investment and taxes generated by that investment, and this was only the first decade of the mandate, before massive Zionist immigration.
There was of course, nothing to prevent Arabs from raising capital and investing in Palestine. They could have enlisted the patronage of King Ibn Saud of Saudi Arab for example. No Arabs were expected to invest in Jewish industries, so it is beyond understanding why Zionists should have been expected to invest in Arab industries. However, even without intensive investment or an overall plan or community framework, the Arabs prospered, because of the investment brought by the Jews and because the British employed a great deal of Arab labor to develop the port of Haifa. Undeniably, the British investments of the war years fueled Arab and Jewish prosperity in Palestine, but the figures we are giving here are mostly from prewar years.
The impact on Arab prosperity in Palestine was profound. Palestine had been the poorest country in the region Before the first World War, it had been a country of net emigration for Arabs. During the mandate period, it became a country of net immigration for Arabs as well as Jews. By 1932-36, it was one of the richest, and the Palestinian Arabs took part in the prosperity as shown in the table below.
Zionism and its Impact:
Economic Performance and Standards of Living In Middle East Economies: 1932-1936 6
Per Capita Income Industrial Daily Wages Per Capita Consumption of Foodstuff Net Productivity Per Agricultural Workerd
Egypt 12 NA 16.0 90.1
Syria 13 50-310 19.0 97.6
Iraq 10 40-60 13.8 93.2
Transjordan NA NA NA 90.1
Arab Palestinians 19 70-500 22.9 186.3
Clearly there is no evidence in the above figures to suggest that anyone was dispossessing the Palestinian Arabs or impoverishing them or wrecking their society. The greater prosperity of the Arabs of Palestine, was at least compatible with, and very possibly, it was in large measure due to, Zionism and its impact.
In 1922, there were 22,000 dunams of Arab land producing citrus crops. In 1940, there were 140,000 dunams of Arab citrus land, mostly producing crop for export in Palestine. In 1931 Arabs had 332,000 dunams of olive groves and apple orchards. By 1942 they had 832,000 dunams under cultivation.7
Zionism and its Impact: Why the Arabs had no part in the Government of Palestine
Lesch wrote:
"The Zionists were strongly critical of British efforts to establish a LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL in 1923, 1930, and 1936."
This implies that it was the fault of the Zionists that Arabs did not participate in the government of Palestine. That is untrue. The British were forced to note in their 1930 report to the League of Nations that the Arabs had refused every opportunity given them to participate in the government of Palestine:
... in February and March, 1923, an attempt was made to hold elections ...
"The attempt failed owing to the refusal of the Arab population as a whole to co-operate ...
"Two further opportunities were given to representative Arab leaders in Palestine to co-operate with the Administration in the government of the country...
"Neither of these opportunities was accepted... 8
It should be remembered that Palestine, prior to 1917, had never had any sort of representative government, and that the Arabs of Palestine had been governed by the Turks. They had at times raised revolts against the Turks, but these never took on a national character. Prior to the late 1920, when it was settled that Britain would have Palestine, that the French would have Syria and that there would be no Arab state that included Syria, the Arabs of Palestine had lobbied for their inclusion in the Syrian Arab state.
Fascism and its Impact in Palestine
The history of the Arab Palestinian community under the mandate cannot be understood from Lesch's article, because she left out an essential part of the story, one that is invariably omitted in anti-Zionist narratives of the history of Palestine. No history of mandatory Palestine and the Arab Palestinian community could be complete without understanding the career of the Grand Mufti, Hajj Amin El Husseini, who was, as far as all the evidence can show,, a convinced actual Nazi, as opposed to the figurative Nazis created by name callers. In large part it was Husseini who was responsible for spreading the myth of Zionist dispossession, as well as false rumors that the Jews were planning to violate the sanctity of the Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem, a perennial favorite in Middle East incitement."
"From the beginning of Zionist settlement, Husseini had been active in kindling anti-Zionist sentiment and fomenting riots against the Jews. Violent pogroms instigated by Husseini and his followers broke out in 1920, 1921 and 1936 - 39. (see Arab Riots and Massacres of 1929 Hebron Massacre Kiryat Haroshet Massacre-1938 The Arab Revolt in Palestine ) Non-Zionist Jewish communities in Hebron and Jerusalem, people who had been living there for hundreds of years were attacked. In the mosques, Imam's lectured "and you shall kill the Jews wherever you find them." Armed mobs and later gangs ("oozlebarts") screaming itbach al yahud (slaughter the Jews), Nashrab Dam Al Yahud (we will drink the blood of the Jews) and Filastin Arduna Wa Al Yahud Kibabuna (Palestine is our land and the Jews are our dogs) descended on defenseless civilians. People were cut in half with a sword thrust. Pregnant women were stabbed in the belly and left to die. Children were murdered. These horrors are euphemized by Lesch as follows:
When the Palestinians mounted violent protests in 1920, 1921, 1929, 1936-39, and the late 1940s, the yishuv sought to curb them by force, rather than seek a political accommodation with the indigenous people.
There was nobody available for negotiations. The Husseini family terrorized moderate Palestinians. It developed that there was nothing to negotiate. The Arabs of Palestine, represented by the Husseini clan's Higher Arab Committee, rejected any attempt at compromise. As Lesch noted, even the minuscule state proposed by the Peel Commission was rejected by the Arabs of Palestine.
The situation was complicated by the fact that the British allowed the intervention of the Saudi monarchy in British policy in Palestine, in effect inviting the King of Saud to block any compromise whatever. Saud rejected partition and demanded that the British curtail Jewish immigration. Saud said that if the British failed to follow Arab wishes in Palestine, the Arabs would turn against them and side with their enemies. He said that Arabs did not understand the "strange attitude of your British Government, and the still more strange hypnotic influence which the Jews, a race accursed by God according to His Holy Book, and destined to final destruction and eternal damnation hereafter, appear to wield over them and the English people generally." 9
By 1936 Husseini was apparently being funded by Fascist Italy. Coopting a revolt that had sprung up for largely local reasons (see Arab Revolt ) , he terrorized Arabs and Jews alike. About 1,500 people were killed in these "protests," and the majority of the Arabs were killed by Husseini and his gangs. It was Husseini, and not the Jews, who decimated the Palestinian leadership, killing off large parts of 11 different rival clans. It is not true that the British decapitated the Arab leadership by jailing the Arab higher committee, as Lesch claims. Rather, in September or October of 1937, after Husseini was involved in killing the British commissioner for the Galilee, he fled along with key members of the Arab higher committee to Beirut and thence to Iraq. In Iraq, the Mufti began fomenting a pro-Axis coup against the British. These plans came to fruition in the Spring of 1941. 10
The coup was crushed however, and the Mufti fled again. This time he fled to his spiritual home, Nazi Germany. There, he became a friend and confidante of Adolf Eichmann, organized SS Units and enthusiastically supported the German annihilation of Europeans Jews."
Mufti Haj Amin el Husseini
featured on the cover of Vienna Illustrated (Wiener Illustrierte) magazine, reviewing Nazi troops.
After the war, Husseini escaped from France where he was awaiting transport to Germany for trial by the Nuremberg tribunal. He advertised that his solution for the Jews of Palestine was the same as the solution adopted in Europe - annihilation. If all this could be attributed to Zionism and its impact, then certainly the Holocaust must have been due to Judaism and its impact.
It is with this man and his party that Anne Lesch insists the Zionists should have negotiated and sought an accommodation, but instead were inexplicably, according to Lesch, against any compromise. However, the Zionists did try to reach an accommodation with the Arabs of Palestine. Herbert Samuel, first governor of Palestine, a Zionist as well as a Jew, ensured the election of Husseini as Grand Mufti in the hopes that he would seek accommodation. The Zionists courted the Nashashibi family as well. They agreed to compromise after compromise in the Peel plan. Zionists, including Arthur Ruppin, Yehuda Magnes and others formed Brit Shalom to work for a bi-national state, but support for the bi-national state state melted away in the Jewish community because there were no Arab partners to be found who would support this idea. The binational state was the product of Zionism and its impact, not of any Arab proposals. The compromise plans to partition and repartition Palestine was again due to Zionism and its impact, and not to any compromise offer by the Arabs. One can say, as Lesch does, that Zionism was uncompromising, only by completely ignoring the entire history of Zionism and its impact under the mandate.
Lesch's claim that "The implementation of those [Zionist] approaches led to the formation of independent Israel" rests on shaky grounds. The first Zionist Congress called for a "national home" guaranteed by international law. While many believed that this home must be a state, that was not part of the official Zionist program, and certainly the Zionists accepted the British Mandate as a "national home." Bowing to Arab pressure, the British stopped Jewish immigration to Palestine. This precipitated a crisis. It was only in 1942 that David Ben-Gurion pushed through the Biltmore Program declaration, which made an independent Jewish state an official goal of the Zionist movement. The declaration was not accepted by many in the Zionist movement, and in particular by Chaim Weizmann. Even then, there would have been no Jewish state had the Arab states and the leaders of the Palestinians been willing to compromise. The US asked the British to admit 100,000 Jewish Displaced Persons to Palestine after World War II. However, the Arabs once again refused to compromise, and the British were forced to reject this idea. Had the British acceded to the American request, it is unlikely that the United States would have supported the idea of partitioning Palestine in 1947. Likewise, the USSR declared its support initially for a binational state. However, as Andrei Gromyko noted, since the Arabs (not the Zionists, as Lesch implies) rejected the binational state, the USSR had no choice but to support partition of Palestine."
"The Zionist plan was to build an internationally guaranteed national home for the Jews in Palestine, accepting whatever the international community would permit, including the British Mandate. It is correct to say that the Zionists initially largely ignored the existence of Arabs in Palestine and were less than urgently concerned about their fate. It is also correct to say that some Zionists, responding to Arab opposition, believed that the only solution lay in expelling the Arabs of Palestine. However, that is not the same as insisting that the Zionists were intent on dispossessing the Arabs from the first, or that that was the policy of the Zionist movement. The independent Jewish state came about owing to the vicissitudes of history and the stubborn refusal of the Arabs of Palestine to compromise at any point. The creation of Israel as an independent state was to a great extent the result of Arab opposition to Jewish settlement in Palestine. If you believe that the flight of the refugees was due to Zionism and its impact, then you must equally agree that the expulsion of Germans from the Sudetensland after World War II was due to Czech nationalism and its impact. In fact, the National socialist version of Anne Lesch could claim that if only the Czechs had been willing to compromise with Hitler, there would not have been a second world war.
Lesch concluded, "The land and people of Palestine were transformed during the thirty years of British rule." Indeed, the land and the people were transformed. Palestine, which had been the most neglected, disease ridden and forsaken corner of the Ottoman Turkish Empire, had become one of the most desirable places to live in the Middle East. From being a country of net emigration of Arabs before World War I, Palestine had become had become a country of net immigration for both Christian and Muslim Arabs. All of this could not have been possible if social and economic changes in Palestine had reflected the workings of a diabolical Zionist plot to displace and dispossess the Arabs. In 1948, more Arabs lived in Palestine than had ever lived there before, and they were richer and healthier than they had ever been in all history. That was the result of Zionism and its impact.
Tragically, the Mufti spread the myth of dispossession and the counsel of genocide against the Jews. The first was a self-fulfilling prophecy. Most of the Arabs of Palestine, convinced of the nefarious intent of the Zionists, saw no choice except to flee or fight. The Jews of Palestine, faced with a Palestinian leadership that wanted to repeat the European Holocaust in Palestine, saw no choice other than to defend themselves by whatever means possible. This was not due to Zionism and its impact The tragedy is perpetuated by those who continue to propagate the myth of dispossession and to insist on no compromise with Zionism. It is the result of anti-Zionism and its impact."
"The causes of Rural Arab Landlessness
The causes of landlessness among rural Arabs in Palestine were examined in detail by Kenneth Stein.11 They had little or nothing to do with Zionist settlement. Archaic land laws and the ill-begotten Tanzimat reform favored large and prosperous classes, who had been gradually buying up the land of smallholders. The devastation wrought by the Turks during World War I contributed to the indebtedness of smallholders, who were being forced to sell to rich magnates. They were also pressed by importation of inexpensive foreign agricultural produce. The extent of landlessness was also deliberately exaggerated by Hope Simpson, by erroneous interpretation of data. 12
Ami Isseroff
Notes
1. The Lesch article has been reposted in many locations on the Web (EG . ummah.com/waragainstislam/impact.htm). A search will reveal over 700 Web pages with the title or text "Zionism and its Impact," many of them being extensions or re-uses of the phrase, which has become a standard anti-Zionist jibe.
2. See population figures at The Population of Palestine before 1948.
3. Figures are from League of Nation Report - (http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/c61b138f4dbb08a0052565d00058ee1b?OpenDocument Geneva, April 1945. THE MANDATES SYSTEM Origin -- Principles -- Application Series of League of Nations Publications VI.A. MANDATES1945. VI.A. 1)
4. Michael Har-Segor and Maurice Stroun, Israel/Palestine:L'Histoire au dela des Mythes, Editions Metropolis, Paris, 1996. Translated into Hebrew as Yisrael/Falastin, Hametziut Sheme'ever Lamitosim - Masah, The Jewish-Arab Peace Center, Givat Haviva, 1977 , page 225 of the Hebrew edition.
5. All references to Simpson are from the "Hope Simpson" Report: PALESTINE. Report on Immigration, Land Settlement and Development. By SIR JOHN HOPE SIMPSON, C.I.E.
6. From > Fred M. Gottheil, The Smoking Gun, Arab immigration into Palestine, 1922-1931, The Middle East Quarterly, Volume X, No. 1, Winter 2003. We needn't agree with the thesis that this prosperity induced illegal Arab immigration, though Simpson had noted such immigration even in 1930. It is interesting however, that the same people who ridicule Joan Peters' theories about massive Arab immigration, accept Lesch's thesis without question, even though Lesch did not even bother to provide sources for the statistics or quotes she gives."
"7. Benny Morris, The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee problem, 1947-1949. Cambridge, The Cambridge University Press, 1987, pp 8-9.
8. From the report of the Palestine Mandatory to the League of Nations, 1930, prepared by the British Government: It is worth quoting at length
"On the 1st September, 1922, the Palestine Order in Council was issued, setting up a Government in Palestine under the Foreign Jurisdiction Act. Part 3 of the Order in Council directed the establishment of a Legislative Council to be composed of the High Commissioner as President, with 10 other official members, and 12 elected non-official members. The procedure for the selection of the non-official members was laid down in the Legislative Council Order in Council, 1922, and in February and March, 1923, an attempt was made to hold elections in accordance with that procedure.
"The attempt failed owing to the refusal of the Arab population as a whole to co-operate (a detailed report of these elections is contained in the papers relating to the elections for the Palestine Legislative Council, 1923, published as Command Paper 1889).
"The High Commissioner thereupon suspended the establishment of the proposed Legislative Council, and continued to act in consultation with an Advisory Council as before.
"Two further opportunities were given to representative Arab leaders in Palestine to co-operate with the Administration in the government of the country, first, by the reconstitution of a nominated Advisory Council, but with membership conforming to that proposed for the Legislative Council, and, secondly, by a proposal for the formation of an Arab Agency. It was intended that this Agency should have functions analogous to those entrusted to the Jewish Agency by Article 4 of the Palestine Mandate.
"Neither of these opportunities was accepted and, accordingly, in December, 1923, an Advisory Council was set up consisting only of official members. This position still continues; the only change being that the Advisory Council has been enlarged by the addition of more official members as the Administration developed.
9. The remarks are from the notes of a conversation or tirade delivered by ibn Saud to a British visitor, and reported to the Foreign Office. Report of Conversation of Col H.R.P. Dickson, with HRH Abd al Aziz ib Sa'ud, king of Saudi Arabia October 28, 1937 as published in Kedourie, Elie, Islam in the Modern World, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, N.Y. 1980. pp 70-74. Saud made it clear that his concerns about Palestine were not limited to the welfare of the Palestinian Arabs, but in fact stemmed from entirely different causes. He told Dixon:
'Our hatred for the Jews dates from God's condemnation of them for their persecution and rejection of Isa (Jesus Christ), and their subsequent rejection later of His chosen Prophet. It is beyond our understanding how your Government, representing the first Christian power in the world today, can wish to assist and reward these very same Jews who maltreated your Isa (Jesus)."
10. The accusation that the Mufti was a Nazi even before arriving in Germany is well founded. The coup was put down by decisive British action, but the Mufti had managed to get the help of the Luftwaffe as well as the Italians. The record of the Mufti's involvement with the Axis prior to 1941 is not as clear as we would like it to be, but it is reasonably well documented. For example, Count Ciano, the Foreign Minister of Fascist Italy, claimed in 1940 to have been funding the Mufti for many years, and complained that it was to no effect, according to Hirszowicz, Lukasz, The Third Reich and the Arab East London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1968, page 86. Moreover, in a captured OKW (Wehrmacht Central Command) document, Abwehr (military intelligence) director Admiral Canaris stated that " Only through the funds made available by Germany to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was it possible to carry out the revolt in Palestine." See full document and other sources. See also the notes here The history of the Mufti is detailed here:Grand Mufti Hajj Amin El Husseini . Some more materials about the Mufti are available online at this source: The Grand Mufti and in French , under the title: La Bibliothèque Proche Orientale http://aval31.free.fr/
11. Stein, Kenneth W., The Land Question In Palestine, 1917-1939, Univ. of North Carolina Press, 1984; Stein, Kenneth W., Palestine's Rural Economy, 1917 - 1939, Studies in Zionism, Vol. 8, no. 1 (1987); pp. 25 - 49; The Land Question in Palestine .
12. Stein, Kenneth W., The Land Question In Palestine, 1917-1939, Univ. of North Carolina Press, 1984 p. 109." zionism-israel.com is a superb online Resource Refuting Arab Lies and for Refuting Anti-Israel Lies
From the website, peacewithrealism.org A good article is headlined
"The Myth of the Palestinian Underdog"
by Carlos
Grad-type Katyusha rocket. (www.hnn.co.il)
Grad-type Katyusha rocket. (www.hnn.co.il) the article says:
"March 13, 2008 - This is for all who defend the Palestinians because they are "resisting an occupation" and have no option other than violence. This is for all who justify the Palestinians because Israel is an "oppressor." This is for all who defend the Palestinians because they are the "underdog."
After members of Hamas broke through the Gaza/Egypt border in January they came back with Iranian Grad rockets, much more powerful than the Qassams they are used to using. They immediately fired those rockets at Israel's southern cities, with devastating effect.
The symbolism reaches far beyond the event itself. We are getting a snapshot of the future.
It is also a flash from the past. During the Lebanon war of summer 2006 Hezbollah unleashed its missile capability against Israel in the north. Israel's northern cities were devastated. And there was no way to strike back. Since Hezbollah was hiding in civilian areas, Israel could not strike at Hezbollah without appearing to attack Lebanon. Israel's efforts to eliminate the missile threat in the north were futile, and the threat remains, stronger than before, the missiles poised for firing at any moment of Hezbollah's choosing.
The Palestinians are learning from Hezbollah's success, and are seeking to duplicate it. They have learned the Hezbollah tactic of firing at Israel from civilian areas, using their own people as human shields. And they will find more powerful weapons than Qassams to throw at Israel. And they will do so with the help of Iran.
Iran now has proxies fighting Israel in both the north and the south. Its hope is that the West Bank will also fall under its influence once the occupation ends, and it will have a front against Israel from the east. It doesn't need one from the west - the Mediterranean Sea will take care of that.
How real is the threat from the West Bank? Hezbollah activity in the West Bank is becoming more visible. And today the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the military wing of Fatah, repeated its demand that Mahmoud Abbas fire Prime Minister Salam Fayyad and form an alliance with Hamas. In Ramallah they distributed a leaflet saying: "We renew our call to President Abbas to fire Salam Fayyad and form a new government that would not abandon the armed struggle." They also called on Abbas to cut off contact with Israel and stop the peace process. The Gazan malignancy is spreading.
We are now witnessing the intermediate stages of a strategy to surround Israel with batteries of increasingly powerful missiles, capable eventually of reaching its major cities. On the ground this is already happening. We have further evidence in the pronouncements of Iran and its partner Hezbollah.
Last month Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in remarks that were televised, called Israel a "filthy germ" and a "savage beast" established by Western powers to interfere in the Middle East. Just a few days earlier Muhammad Ali Jafari, Commander-on-Chief of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, stated: "In the near future, we will witness the destruction of the cancerous germ of Israel by the powerful and competent hands of the Hezbollah combatants."
& continues
"Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki also predicted Israel's demise: "The West has tried to impose a fabricated regime on the Middle East but even after 60 years, the Zionist regime has neither gained any legitimacy nor played any role in this region." And with astounding irony he continued: "The era of imposing policies on other states by military threats is over. The nations in the region will no longer surrender to any threats."
Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah corroborated the Iranian threats. He stated that Hezbollah is preparing for a new war with Israel within the coming months. Speaking to a rally of thousands he proclaimed: "No one can protect the entire Israeli home front from our missiles. If they think of entering the south, to any valley, any hill, I swear you [Israelis] will carry your tanks and soldiers and your entire army will collapse under the feet of Imad Mughniyah.... Destroying Israel is an inevitable outcome, a historic law, a divine doctrine. When Israel won't have an army it won't survive, and that's what I said about Mughniyah's blood leading to the elimination of Israel."
Destroying Israel? So maybe this isn't really about an "occupation" after all? Hold that thought; we will come back to it.
So who is Imad Mughniyah? At first he was Hezbollah's head of security; later he became its chief of staff. He was one of the most wanted terrorists in the world, not only by Israel but also the U.S. Among his exploits: In 1985 he hijacked a TWA airliner to Beirut, and one passenger was killed. During that same period, through his planning and execution, dozens of foreigners were kidnapped in Lebanon. He masterminded Hezbollah's international terrorist attacks. He was responsible for two attacks in Buenos Aires: against the Israeli Embassy in 1992 and a Jewish community center in 1994. More than 100 were killed in those attacks.
Mughniyah was also associated with the fateful bombings of the Beirut Barracks and U.S. Embassy in 1983. He was at the top of the FBI's most wanted list, with a five-million-dollar price on his head. Only bin Laden surpassed him.
And Mughniyah had ties to Iran's Revolutionary Guard and symbolized Iran's presence in Lebanon."
"The ostensible occasion for Nasrallah's ire was Mughniyah's death by a car bomb on February 12. Hezbollah and Iran immediately blamed Israel. Israel has denied it. But no matter, Israel is guilty until proven innocent. Nevertheless, Mughniyah was involved in a lot of infighting, and even his widow claims that Syria was behind his death. As proof she notes that Syria has refused to allow the Iranians to investigate it. Mike McConnell, U.S. Director of National Intelligence, believes that either Syria or factions within Hezbollah itself may be responsible. But in the Middle East it doesn't matter. When a Muslim terrorist meets the fate that he deserves, the fault always lies with Israel.
So Hezbollah now proclaims as its sacred duty the sacrifice of Israel's people on the altar of a mass murderer. And not only Israel's people. It has also pledged to attack Jewish targets around the world.
Rockets being fired from the Gaza Strip. (Haaretz)
Rockets being fired from the Gaza Strip. (Haaretz)
And now back to the Palestinians. They say they are fighting an occupation, and the world believes them. But in the context of what we have just seen with Iran and Hezbollah, the Palestinians are an integral part of a much greater enterprise. The object is not to end the occupation - in fact it never was. The object is to end Israel. But to Hamas, Israel's very existence is the occupation.
Yossi Klein Halevi writes:
The Palestinian struggle is no longer about creating an independent state. It is about being a front-line participant in the Iranian-led jihad to destroy Israel, evolving from a nationalist to a religious war. The thousands of celebrants in Gaza who, following the yeshiva massacre, offered prayers of thanksgiving in the mosques and distributed candies to passersby weren't only indulging in feelings of revenge for Israel's recent military incursion but heralding the coming jihadist victory over the enemies of God.
Indeed, it seems that Hamas and its terrorist allies are doing everything they possibly can to prevent a separate Palestinian state. Whenever any serious movement towards peace takes place, they can be counted on to destroy it by escalating their violence. Just today Palestinians fired at least 10 mortar shells and 30 rockets and counting into southern Israel, two of them hitting Sderot. So much for encouraging the peace talks that are supposed to be going on."
"The Palestinians say they want an end to the occupation. Kadima, Israeli Prime Minister Olmert's political party, was elected on a platform for ending the occupation, for extending Israel's withdrawal from Gaza to the West Bank as well. One might have expected the Palestinians to welcome this. But instead they cranked up their war in the south, sending a clear message that this is what Israel can expect in the east if it withdraws from there too.
So why shouldn't the Palestinians want to end the occupation, if they are suffering so much from it? Why settle for half the pita when you can get it all? This is not a war to end the occupation, if indeed it ever was. This is a war to end Israel. And the way to end Israel is to cut off every avenue for peace while you build your capability to strike Israeli cities at will.
To get away with this war, the Palestinians need to keep selling their victim image, and to convince the world that the occupation is as strong and oppressive as ever. And so they engage in a bizarre game of semantics, claiming that Gaza is still occupied even though every last Israeli left the territory three years ago. As Eran Lerman writes in his cogent analysis:
Why should any electricity be provided, under the present circumstances, from the Ashkelon power station to people who fire at it? The facile answer from the UN and the humanitarian NGOs is that Israel is still "the occupying power." But this raises the question whether international laws are a sane answer. After all, we not only left Gaza, down to the last inch, but forcibly dragged out each and every living Jew therein, and even the graves of dead ones. Why are we still the occupying power? Because the presence of a terror government forces us to ensure that the avenues of communication into Gaza not be abused for the supply of more means to kill us? The logical loop here is impossible to resolve, since the terror state hides behind the irresponsible claim of statelessness.
This is the most bizarre catch-22 of all! Israel disengaged completely from Gaza, but is still called the occupying power. Why? Because it still exercises control over the border. Why? Because Palestinians are attacking Israel from Gaza and Israel wants to keep the weapons out! Therefore, if Israel is still "occupying" Gaza, it is because the Palestinians insist!"
"Clearly, if there were no traffic into Gaza of weapons used against Israeli citizens, there would be no need for any Israeli vigilance over the Gaza border. And therefore no "occupation." Now just what part of that doesn't the world understand?
We do not understand this conflict until we see the Palestinian "resistance" as part of something greater: a proxy war against Israel that is being waged by Iran, a jihad, a final overturning of the naqba (or "catastrophe") by which Palestinians describe Israels creation.
It has long been known that Hezbollah is Iran's surrogate in the north. But Iran has also been extending its influence into Gaza. As Klein Halevi writes:
Ironically, Hamas was initially more reluctant than Fatah to enter into an Iranian alliance, precisely because the Sunni Hamas takes religion more seriously than Fatah and was loathe to accept the authority of the Iranian Shiites. But that squeamishness ended three years ago with a formal alliance, orchestrated by the Damascus-based Hamas leader, Khaled Meshal, and today Hamas is an integral part of the Iranian war against Israel. Iran has trained hundreds of Hamas operatives - and, according to the former intelligence chief, continues to fund individual members of Fatah's Al Aqsa Brigades. Iran's goal is twofold: to extend its influence in the Arab world, and to transform itself, via proxies, into a frontline confrontation state with Israel.
So instead of the popular picture of little lone Palestine standing up to the Israeli behemoth, what we really have is an 800-pound Iranian gorilla in the back of the room helping its Palestinian proxies slowly tighten the noose around Israel from all sides. If the Palestinians wanted peace, they could simply start practicing it - stop the rockets and allow the talks to proceed. There is enough domestic as well as international pressure on Israel to make sure that concessions will be made. But why should Palestinians settle for only half, when the whole seems finally within reach?
Many believe that Israel's way out of this should be to declare a ceasefire with Hamas. But there is no need to declare a ceasefire. If the Palestinians stop trying to build up their rocket war, Israel will stop trying to stop them. A ceasefire declaration would play right into the jihad."
"Lerman asks:
How would Hamas use a prolonged ceasefire, given the lessons we learned from the bitter years of Hezbollah's build-up in Lebanon (now resumed, in breach of 1701 and under UNIFIL's noses)? And what would this do to the already tattered standing of President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad in Palestinian society?
And Klein Halevi answers:
A ceasefire with Hamas - which Prime Minister Ehud Olmert seems to be implementing even as he denies it - may well be the worst option of all. Hamas will likely use that interim period to turn itself into a second Hezbollah, equipped with Iranian weapons. And when Hamas feels empowered to break the ceasefire and resume its attacks, Israel will face a far more formidable enemy.
Dealing with Iran should not have to mean attacking Iran militarily. Recognizing the source of the threat, pressuring Iran through public opinion and through meaningful sanctions, can go a long way towards putting out the fire. Open war with Iran would be a disaster for the entire world. But that could still come as long as people in places that matter keep looking the other way.
One such person is U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who badly needs a copy of Middle East for Dummies. Here is what he said today to an Islamic summit in Senegal's capital Dakar: "Israel's disproportionate and excessive use of force has killed and injured many civilians including children.... I condemn these actions and call on Israel to cease such acts." How about mentioning the Qassams? How about mentioning Iran? How about mentioning Hamas deliberately putting "civilians including children" in harm's way? But this was an Islamic summit, and Ban apparently felt the need to pander to it.
So that's it, folks. Iran is prosecuting a proxy war on several fronts, and Ban's solution is to pressure - Israel! They must be laughing in Tehran. Ban does not want a "disproportionate" use of force. Would he like a proportionate use of force? How about one rocket fired into Gaza City for every rocket fired into Sderot? Maybe that would satisfy him.
By focusing the vitriol on Israel for responding to the provocations of Hamas, Ban and many others like him are enabling this terror war. They are helping to make certain it will continue until, God forbid, it becomes an open war with Iran for Israel's survival. Israel is becoming convinced that no solution can be reached in Gaza until Iran's role is addressed. "Israel will not exist side by side with this Iranian entity three kilometers from Sderot and 10 kilometers from Ashkelon," former Israeli Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh told Army Radio. And Klein Halevi states:
To deal effectively with the jihad requires an awareness that Israel is in fact at war with the Iranian regime, which manipulates proxies along Israel's borders, supplying them with weapons and training, and energizing them with the promise of imminent victory.
So why should anybody care? Because the price of Armageddon is too high, not only for Israel and the Palestinians but for everyone. Concentrating the pressure on Israel while Iran presses its jihad through its Palestinian proxies completely misses the root of the problem and pushes Israel into a desperate situation, in which the present conflict becomes more and more a fight for Israel's survival. As the rockets increase in number, in range, and in power, as inevitably they will, staving off a cataclysmic showdown becomes increasingly unlikely."
The article lastly says
"Kassam rocket launchers in Gaza. (IDF)
I would love to pressure Israel to end the occupation, if doing so would actually mean there would be peace. But this occupation seems to have a life of its own. It just doesn't want to end. Israel disengaged from Gaza, leaving the Palestinians to govern themselves, but Gaza won't disengage from Israel. The Gazans are following the withdrawing Israelis all the way into the Negev. They smuggle in weapons by the ton, and when Israel tries to control the flow they accuse Israel of still occupying Gaza. The rockets keep falling and the Qassams morph into Grads. How does this create any incentive for Israel to start uprooting settlements in the West Bank?
The Palestinians have far more control over their own destiny than they want spectators to believe. The ostensible resistance to an occupation that the Palestinians don't really seem to want to end masks a holy war whose aim is not Israel's withdrawal but its destruction. Meanwhile world reaction continues to push the parties toward the precipice.
Klein Halevi concludes:
So long as the international community tries to create a Palestinian state without seriously confronting the jihadists, Iran and its proxies will continue to make peace impossible - not by "derailing" negotiations, but by making those negotiations irrelevant.
The whole world wants an end to this conflict before it grows into a regional war.
Surprise. It already has."
From the website www.barnesandnoble.com a good book to read is titled
"The Saudi Terror Machine: The Truth About Radical Islam and Saudi Arabia Revealed" Published in 2018
by Pierre Conesa
The Overview says:
"The untouched political status of Saudi Arabia among the world’s nations constitutes a strange black hole in the analysis of radicalism that affects Islam and the Middle East today. Why has Salafism, the most intolerant and sectarian movement of Islam, become so prevalent throughout the Muslim world? Of all the religious radicalisms that rot the planet, it is the only one to enjoy the constant support of a country endowed with immense means: the Saudi kingdom.
Pierre Conesa’s explosive new book, The Saudi Terror Machine, reveals how the two sides of the kingdom—the conciliatory Saud dynasty and the more aggressive leaders of the Salafism sect—has for decades developed a religious strategy to conquer the Muslim community and the West without appearing as an enemy. The kingdom’s influence is largely unknown, due to the secretive nature of Saudi political policy, but it undoubtedly acts as a key player throughout the Muslim world through its financing of conservative Koranic schools, universities, and mosques as well as other international public and private organizations. But after years of financing radical Islamists in foreign lands, Saudi Arabia now finds itself threatened in its own territory, the monster it has given birth to turned against it.
Utilizing primarily Muslim sources, Conesa delves deep into the history and politics of Saudi Arabia tracing their connections to this radical form of Islam all the way back to the first days of the Saudi kingdom. The Saudi Terror Machine goes where few are willing to tread, questioning the motives of one of the most powerful and elusive countries in the world."
Editorial Reviews
An exciting and unprecedented investigation into the workings of...state proselytism” -Le Point
“An exciting and unprecedented investigation into the workings of...state proselytism” -Le Point
Fun Fact for Israel Supporters who are also fans of Batman , in the 1966 film Batman aka Batman: The Movie,
There is a Scene with the United World Security Council, the Nine Members of the Security Council are arguing amongst themselves, the Members shown in order of appearance are, Israel, Spain, France, Nigeria, United Kingdom, United States,
Japan, West Germany, & the U.S.S.R, No "Palestine" is shown, None of the Loser Arab Nations are shown in this Scene , Not a Single Ugly Loser Arab Nation is shown in the United World Security Council, while Israel is shown first !!!
The Scene on YouTube can be found here, "Batman: The Movie (1966) - The Villains dehydrate the Security Council!"
7,345 views•Feb 11, 2020
Uploaded by Benratbag1997
The Wikipedia article/entry for the 1966 Batman Movie says
Batman (1966 film)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Greenlawn Productions
Distributed by 20th Century Fox
Release date
July 30, 1966
Running time 104 minutes[1]
Country United States
Language English
Budget $1.37–1.5 million[2][3]
Box office $3.9 million (rentals)[4]
"Batman (also known as Batman: The Movie) is a 1966 American superhero film based on the Batman television series, and the first full-length theatrical adaptation of the DC Comics character Batman. Released by 20th Century Fox, the film starred Adam West as Batman and Burt Ward as Robin. The film hit theaters two months after the last episode of the first season of the television series. The film includes most members of the original TV cast, with the exception of Julie Newmar, who played Catwoman in two episodes of the series' first season; for the movie, she was replaced by Lee Meriwether.
Contents
1 Plot
2 Cast
3 Production
3.1 Tone and themes
3.2 Vehicles
4 Music
5 Release
5.1 Theatrical
5.2 Television
5.3 Home media
6 Reception
6.1 Box office
6.2 Critical response
7 Sequels
7.1 Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders
7.2 Batman vs. Two-Face
8 See also
9 References
10 External links
Plot[edit]
When Batman and Robin get a tip that Commodore Schmidlapp is in danger aboard his yacht, they launch a rescue mission using the Batcopter. As Batman descends on the bat-ladder to land on the yacht, it suddenly vanishes beneath him. He rises out of the sea with a shark attacking his leg. After Batman dislodges it with bat-shark repellent, the shark explodes. Batman and Robin head back to Commissioner Gordon's office, where they deduce that the tip was a set-up by the United Underworld, a gathering of four of the most powerful villains in Gotham City: the Joker, the Penguin, the Riddler, and the Catwoman.
The four criminals equip themselves with a dehydrator that can turn humans into dust (an invention of Schmidlapp, who is unaware that he has been kidnapped), escape in a war-surplus, pre-atomic submarine made to resemble a penguin, and recruit three pirate-themed henchmen (Bluebeard, Morgan and Quetch). Batman and Robin learn that the yacht was really a holographic projection and return via Batboat to a buoy concealing a projector, where they are trapped on the buoy by a magnet and targeted by torpedoes. They use a radio-detonator to destroy two of the missiles, and a porpoise sacrifices itself to intercept the last one. Catwoman, disguised as Soviet journalist "Kitayna Ireyna Tatanya Kerenska Alisoff" (acronymed as Kitka), helps the group kidnap Bruce Wayne and pretends to be kidnapped with him, as part of a plot to lure Batman and finish him off with another of Penguin's explosive animals (not knowing that Bruce Wayne is Batman's alter-ego). After Bruce Wayne fights his way out of captivity, he again disguises himself as Batman, and the Dynamic Duo returns to the United Underworld's HQ, only to find a smoking bomb. Batman is met with frustration rushing all over the docks in hopes of locating a safe place to dispose of the bomb but does so in the nick of time. The Penguin disguises himself as the Commodore and schemes his way into the Batcave along with five dehydrated henchmen. This plan fails when the henchmen unexpectedly disappear into antimatter once struck: the Penguin mistakenly rehydrated them with toxic heavy water used to recharge the Batcave's atomic pile, leaving them highly unstable."
the entry continues: "Ultimately, Batman and Robin are unable to prevent the kidnapping of the dehydrated United World Organization's Security Council. Giving chase in the Batboat to retrieve them (and Miss Kitka, presumed by the duo as still captive), Robin uses a sonic charge weapon to disable The Penguin's submarine and force it to surface, where a fist fight ensues. Although Batman and Robin come out on top, Batman is heartbroken to find out that his "true love" Miss Kitka is actually Catwoman when her mask falls off. Commodore Schmidlapp accidentally breaks the vials containing the powdered Council members and sneezes on them, scattering the dust.
Batman sets to work, constructing an elaborate Super Molecular Dust Separator to filter the mingled dust. Robin asks him whether it might be in the world's best interests for them to alter the dust samples, so that humans can no longer harm one another. In response, Batman says that they cannot do so, reminding Robin of the fate of the Penguin's henchmen and their tainted rehydration, and can only hope for people in general to learn to live together peacefully on their own.
With the world watching, the Security Council is re-hydrated. All of the members are restored alive and well, but continue to squabble amongst themselves, totally oblivious of their surroundings; however, each of them now speaks the language and displays the stereotypical mannerisms of a nation other than their own. Batman quietly expresses his sincere hope to Robin that this "strange mixing of minds" does more good than harm. The duo quietly leaves United World Headquarters by climbing out of the window and descending on their batropes."
& continues Cast[edit]
"The Penguin (Burgess Meredith), the Riddler (Frank Gorshin) and the Joker (Cesar Romero) in 1966. These actors also played the television roles.
Lee Meriwether acted as Catwoman in the film (pictured), replacing Julie Newmar, who played Catwoman in the first two seasons of the television series.
Adam West as Bruce Wayne / Batman
Burt Ward as Dick Grayson / Robin
Lee Meriwether as The Catwoman
Cesar Romero as The Joker
Burgess Meredith as The Penguin
Frank Gorshin as The Riddler
Alan Napier as Alfred
Neil Hamilton as Commissioner Gordon
Stafford Repp as Chief O'Hara
Madge Blake as Aunt Harriet
Reginald Denny as Commodore Schmidlapp
Milton Frome as Vice Admiral Fangschleister
Gil Perkins as Bluebeard
Dick Crockett as Morgan
George Sawaya as Quetch
Van Williams (uncredited voice) as President Lyndon B. Johnson[5]
The film includes most members of the original TV cast: the actors for Batman, Robin, Alfred, Gordon, O'Hara, Aunt Harriet, the Joker, the Penguin, and the Riddler all reprised their roles. Though Julie Newmar had at this point played Catwoman in two episodes of season one in the TV series, she had other commitments at that time[6] and was replaced by Lee Meriwether in the film. According to the Biography special Catwoman: Her Many Lives, aired on July 20, 2004, Newmar was unable to reprise her role because of a back injury. Catwoman was nonetheless played by Newmar once again in the following eleven episodes of season two of the series; Eartha Kitt would then play Catwoman in three episodes of season three.
Jack LaLanne has a cameo as a man on a rooftop with bikini-clad women.[7]
Production[edit]
William Dozier wanted to make a big-screen film to generate interest in his proposed Batman television series by having the feature in theaters while the first season of the series was rolling before the cameras. The studio, 20th Century Fox, refused because it would have to cover the entire cost of a movie, while it would only have to share the cost of a TV series (a much less risky proposition).[8]
The studio acquiesced after a 1965 screening of Columbia Pictures's 1943 The Batman serial in New York City renewed interest in the character and after the television series became phenomenally successful. The project was announced in a March 26, 1966, issue of Variety magazine.[9]
The film features many characters from the show. It was written by series writer Lorenzo Semple Jr. and directed by Leslie H. Martinson,[10] who had directed a pair of the television series season one episodes: "The Penguin Goes Straight" and "Not Yet, He Ain't". Semple Jr. completed the screenplay in 10 days. Principal photography began on April 28, 1966, and concluded within 28 days, with a further three days to complete second-unit photography.[9]"
& continues
"Tone and themes[edit]
Even though it is often described (like many contemporary shows) as a parody of a popular comic-book character, some commentators believe that its comedy is not so tightly confined. They felt the film's depiction of the Caped Crusader "captured the feel of the contemporary comics perfectly".[11] The film was, they remind us, made at a time when "the Batman of the Golden Age comics was already essentially neutered."[12]
Certain elements verge into direct parody of the history of Batman. The movie, like the TV series, is strongly influenced by the comparatively obscure 1940s serials of Batman, such as the escapes done almost out of luck.[12] The penchant for giving devices a "Bat-" prefix and the dramatic use of stylized title cards during fight scenes acknowledge some of the conventions that the character had accumulated in various media. However, the majority of Batman's campier moments can be read as a broader parody on contemporary mid-1960s culture in general.[13]
Furthermore, the movie represented Batman's first major foray into Cold War issues paying heavy attention to Polaris Missiles, war surplus submarines and taking a poke at the Pentagon. The inclusion of a glory-hunting presidential character and the unfavorable portrayal of Security Council Members marked Batman's first attempts to poke fun at domestic and international politics.[14]
Vehicles[edit]
The Batmobile as seen in the 1960s Batman TV series
Besides the Batmobile, other vehicles used by The Dynamic Duo include:
Batcycle with side car
Batboat, provided by Glastron
Batcopter
Of the three new Batvehicles which first appeared in the Batman film, only the Batcycle properly crossed over into the TV series as the budgetary limits of the TV series precluded the full use of the others. While the Batcopter and Batboat from the movie appeared briefly in episodes (including a use of the Batboat in the conclusion of the first post-film two-parter: "Walk the Straight and Narrow"), they primarily did so in the form of stock-footage scenes from the film intercut into the series.
Music[edit]
Nelson Riddle's original score to Batman the Movie was released in 2010 by La-La Land Records and Fox Music. The album contains the entire score as heard in the film in chronological order as well as an unreleased cue. This limited edition includes a lavishly illustrated color booklet which features exclusive liner notes by Brian Baterwhite. This Limited Edition was of 2000 units.[15]
It was newly re-issued in 2016. While the program and master of this release is identical to the 2010 release, this reissue features all-new exclusive liner notes by John Takis and art design by Jim Titus. This new Limited Edition is of 2500 units.[16]
Release[edit]
Theatrical[edit]
Batman premiered at the Paramount Theatre in Austin, Texas, on July 30, 1966 (between the first and second seasons of the TV series); it was moderately successful at the box office. The Batboat featured in the film was created by Austin-based company Glastron, whose payment was in having the film premiere in their hometown. In conjunction with the premiere, Jean Boone of Austin CBS affiliate station KTBC interviewed the film's cast, including Lee Meriwether, Cesar Romero, and Adam West.[17]
Television[edit]
ABC, the network which previously aired the Batman television series, first broadcast the film on the July 4, 1971 edition of The ABC Sunday Night Movie; the film was quickly rebroadcast on ABC September 4 of that year.
Home media[edit]
The film debuted on home video via formats VHS and Betamax release in 1985 by Playhouse Video, in 1989 by CBS/Fox Video, and in 1994 by Fox Video.[citation needed]
The film was released on DVD in 2001, and re-released July 1, 2008 on DVD and on Blu-ray by 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment.[18]"
& lastly says
"Reception[edit]
Box office[edit]
According to Fox records, the film needed to earn $3.2 million in rentals to break even and made $3.9 million (equivalent to $31.1 million in 2020).[4]
Critical response[edit]
The film has received generally positive reviews over the years. The review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes reported that 79% of critics have given the film a positive review based on 33 reviews, with an average rating of 6.4/10. The site's critics consensus states: "Batman: The Movie elevates camp to an art form—and has a blast doing it, every gloriously tongue-in-cheek inch of the way."[19] At Metacritic, the film has a weighted average score of 71 out of 100 based on 4 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".[20] Bill Gibron of Filmcritic.com gave the film 3 out of 5 stars: "Unlike other attempts at bringing these characters to life...the TV cast really captures the inherent insanity of the roles."[21] Variety stated in their review that "the intense innocent enthusiasm of Cesar Romero, Burgess Meredith and Frank Gorshin as the three criminals is balanced against the innocent calm of Adam West and Burt Ward, Batman and Robin respectively."[22]
Sequels[edit]
Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders[edit]
Main article: Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders
West and Ward announced at the Mad Monster Party that one or two Batman animated movies would be released in 2016 with the two doing voiced roles as their characters for the show's 50th anniversary along with Julie Newmar returning.[23][24]
The trailer for Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders made its debut on August 17, 2016.[25] The film was released on Digital HD and Digital Media on October 11, 2016 and on DVD and Blu-ray November 1, 2016.[26]
Batman vs. Two-Face[edit]
Main article: Batman vs. Two-Face
A sequel to Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders called Batman vs. Two-Face was released on October 10, 2017. The film starred William Shatner voicing Two-Face as the main antagonist.[27][28] Adam West died before it was released;[29] however, he did complete his voiceover work; it was one of his final performances before he died from leukemia."
From www.barnesandnoble.com a good book to read is titled
"Israel: A Simple Guide to the Most Misunderstood Country on Earth" Published in 2021
by Noa Tishby
The Overview says:
“This is not your Bubbie’s history book.” —Bill Maher, host of Real Time with Bill Maher
“A fascinating—and very moving—book that should be read by anyone for whom Israel is a mystery.” —Aaron Sorkin, award-winning screenwriter of The West Wing and The Social Network
A personal, spirited, and concise chronological timeline spanning from Biblical times to today that explores one of the most fascinating countries in the world—Israel.
Israel. The small strip of arid land is 5,700 miles away but remains a hot button issue and a thorny topic of debate. But while everyone seems to have a strong opinion about Israel, how many people actually know the facts?
Here to fill in the information gap is Israeli American Noa Tishby. Offering a fresh, 360-degree view, Tishby brings her straight-shooting, engaging, and slightly irreverent voice to the subject, creating an accessible and dynamic portrait of a tiny country of outsized relevance. Through bite-sized chunks of history and deeply personal stories, Tishby chronicles her homeland’s evolution, beginning in Biblical times and moving forward to cover everything from WWI to Israel’s creation to the real disputes dividing the country today. Tackling popular misconceptions with an abundance facts, Tishby provides critical context around headline-generating controversies and offers a clear, intimate account of the richly cultured country of Israel.
Israeli actor and political activist Tishby combines memoir and advocacy in this one-sided portrait of her native country. Sketching her journey from the daughter of a politically well-connected family (her grandmother was a cofounder of the country’s first kibbutz) to the star of a hit Israeli TV show in the 1990s and a Hollywood producer, Tishby recounts her dismay at how little the rest of the world actually knew about Israel, despite its status as a “hot-button issue.” She began to take an active role in countering social media “misinformation” when Israeli soldiers were accused of killing nine Turkish peace activists in 2010 (the group of 700 activists actually included 40 “hard-core Islamists with ties to terrorism,” according to Tishby), and founded the online advocacy group Act for Israel in 2011. In her brisk rundown of Israeli history, Tishby points out that it was the British and the French who betrayed the Arabs after they fought against the Ottoman Empire in WWI, and accuses Yasser Arafat and other Palestinian leaders of “prefer to dance with the right wing of Israel than to be a true partner to the peace camp.” Tishby is a brisk and informative narrator, though her approach is more likely to confirm biases than change minds. This history makes its agenda plain. (Apr.)
Publishers Weekly
Tishby tells her small country’s enormous story with wit and passion. Israel shouldn’t be the only book a reader opens about the Middle East, but it’s an excellent place to start.”
—New York Journal of Books
"A must read."
—Ben Shapiro, #1 New York Times bestselling author of The Right Side of History and How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps
“An energetic and intimate popular history of a fraught land...the author’s candid viewpoint offers good food for thought.”
—Kirkus
"Brisk and informative"
—Publishers Weekly
“In a funny, surprising, and straightforward voice, Noa Tishby rolls the entire history of Israel into a blunt and insightful read. The perfect anti-textbook for anyone who slept through class, this is not your Bubbie’s history book.”
—Bill Maher, host of Real Time with Bill Maher
“Noa Tishby writes with wit and authority. This is a fascinating—and very moving—book that should be read by anyone for whom Israel is a mystery."
—Aaron Sorkin, award-winning screenwriter of The West Wing and The Social Network"
The entry continues
“This is a book well worth the read for anyone who cares about, or needs a crash course on, the Jewish state.”
—Hadassah Magazine
“With passion, humor and deep intimacy, Noa Tishby reveals the real Israel that continually eludes even many so-called experts. Refreshingly straightforward, Tishby manages to be “simple” but not simplistic. She knows that real love requires honesty, and so she confronts Israel in its sometimes maddening complexity.”
—Yossi Klein Halevi, senior fellow of the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem and author of the New York Times bestseller Letters to My Palestinian Neighbor
"In this book Noa does what she does best, rising to the challenge of expressing a rooted, spirited, and often personal defense of her homeland when so many others have shied away. Good people like Noa do not remain silent when all else around them is failing. They speak up. Now that we have her toolkit, so must we.”
—Maajid Nawaz, author of Radical and coauthor of Islam and the Future of Tolerance
“Noa Tishby’s contemporary examination of Israel’s past, present and future is the book we’ve been waiting for. With insight, intelligence, levity and humor, she reintroduces us to a place we thought we knew so well. I found myself educated, inspired and ultimately moved to tears as she reclaims this complicated state in the name of its daughters and fights to restore its reputation for the next generation.”
—Sarah Treem, writer, director, Golden Globe winner, creator of The Affair
"Noa Tishby bravely provides a guide to understanding Israel through the personal story of her family. More than anything, this is a hopeful book that calls for a peaceful tomorrow through a courageous look at the past.”
—Gideon Raff, creator of Prisoners of War and The Spy and Emmy-winning screenwriter and executive producer of Homeland
“Noa Tishby is whip-smart, charming, funny, frank, and fearless. So is her book. Here is the real story of Israel told by a natural storyteller. Touching and captivating.”
—Rabbi David Wolpe, author of David: The Divided Heart
“Everything to do with this subject is controversial, but Noa Tishby doesn't shy away. In fact, she leans into it with conviction (and good writing), making the book an engaging and provocative invitation to debate.”
—Rodrigo Garcia, screenwriter and director
“Heartfelt, funny, and genuine – for anyone confused by the furious debates about Israel, time spent with Noa Tishby’s book feels less like a college class than like drinks with a smart and passionate friend.”
—Matti Friedman, New York Times op-ed contributor and author of Spies of No Country: Secret Lives at the Birth of Israel."
& lastly says
"Noa Tishby's book is a powerful antidote to the widespread misunderstanding and willful misrepresentation that often obscures the truth about Israel. Much like the book itself, Noa is a fearless truth teller in an age of fashionable lies.”
—Congressman Ritchie Torres (D, NY15)
“A timely and significant work, Tishby’s ISRAEL is essential reading for Arabs, Jews, Americans and the rest of the world. As an Arab reader, I am a son of that region, and yet reading the book I learned a lot about my birthplace and saw the other side of the paradox that was invisible to me. This book is supported by hard facts—not for the purpose of argument or debate, but rather, to build bridges between the Jewish and Arab worlds. The result is a beautiful and inspiring human journey which allowed me to learn more about my birthplace, my precious Jewish neighbors and our homeland.”
—Mosab Hasan Yousef, bestselling author of Son of Hamas and star of the documentary The Green Prince
"Having lived in Jerusalem for two years, I can assure the outsider that it is not possible to understand the modern Jewish state without an insider to guide you. Noa Tishby has written this book from that perspective to update our understanding of Israel for the 21st century. This is an important book by an essential voice struggling to find the hidden order within the balagan (Hebrew for chaos) that is the common linchpin of the world’s 3.8 Billion Abrahamic adherents.”
—Eric Weinstein, mathematician, managing director of Thiel Capital, and host of The Portal
"Noa Tishby provides a unique and remarkable perspective on Israel. An insightful writer and powerful woman, she creates a lasting image of the country's entrepreneurial spirit and contributions across the world.”
—Ray Kurzweil, Inventor, Author, and Futurist
From the Publisher
2021-02-10
A personal, unconventional defense of the state of Israel.
In her first book, Israeli actor, producer, and singer Tishby provides a straightforward yet opinionated look at modern Israel that’s meant to rebut common criticisms and debunk common stereotypes. As a secular, liberal Israeli working in the entertainment industry, she has often found herself in the role of apologist for her homeland. This book is an outgrowth of those experiences, an attempt to educate her peers about Israel. Tishby begins with ancient history. “Israel sits on so much freaking history and archeology it’s unfathomable,” she writes in a characteristically conversational tone, continuing, “when you dig in Jerusalem…you just dig wherever you can, and you’re bound to find something old and priceless buried underground.” The author then moves on to the colonial-era Middle East and early Zionism, leading up to the horrors of World War II and the establishment of the Israeli state in 1948. Tishby discusses the conflicts that have plagued Israel since its founding, especially regarding the Israeli-Palestinian divide. Declaring herself both Zionist and pro-Palestinian, the author argues that the conflict is exacerbated by other Arab nations and poor Palestinian leadership. “The conflict,” she notes, “is not between the Palestinians and the Israelis. It’s between the entire Arab world and Israel.” Finally, Tishby describes the people and culture of Israel, pointing out the many ways Israel has contributed to the global community and what it has to offer to the Middle East going forward. Pointing fingers at the U.N. as well as the anti-Zionism movement and the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions initiative, Tishby encourages her fellow liberals to be educated and fair about their views of Israel. Drawing heavily on her personal experiences as well as on expansive research, the author provides an accessible defense of her people. Scholars will find plenty to debate, but the author’s candid viewpoint offers good food for thought.
An energetic and intimate popular history of a fraught land." Kirkus Reviews
From the New York Daily News website, nydailynews.com an article from 2017 is headlined
"Here are 5 ways Saudi Arabia allegedly helped terrorists carry out the 9/11 attacks"
By LEONARD GREENE and VICTORIA BEKIEMPIS
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS |
MAR 20, 2017 the article states
A display at the National September 11 Memorial Museum shows the 9/11 hijackers. A new lawsuit details Saudi officials' alleged role in aiding the 19 hijackers who killed nearly 3,000 people.
A display at the National September 11 Memorial Museum shows the 9/11 hijackers. A new lawsuit details Saudi officials' alleged role in aiding the 19 hijackers who killed nearly 3,000 people. (STAN HONDA/AFP/Getty Images)
In a bombshell federal lawsuit, families of those who died on 9/11 are seeking to hold Saudi Arabia accountable for the terror attacks.
The suit, filed in Manhattan federal court, details how Saudi officials were complicit in the attacks — helping them financially, with training camps and passports — and details their alleged role in aiding the 19 hijackers who killed nearly 3,000 people.
It was only last year that pages of declassified documents established a long-suspected link between the Saudi government and terrorists who carried out the attack. The documents had also been held back by the Bush administration in the interest of national security.
Nonethless, the suit filed Monday compiles 28 pages of accusations that links al Qaeda to the Saudi government.
From a video showing suicide pilot Mohamed Atta. The lawsuit states officials in the Saudi embassy in Germany supported Mohamed Atta, the lead hijacker.
From a video showing suicide pilot Mohamed Atta. The lawsuit states officials in the Saudi embassy in Germany supported Mohamed Atta, the lead hijacker. (AP)
Despite a veto by President Obama last September, Congress passed JASTA — Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act — and paved the way for Americans to take legal action against countries who support terrorism.
Here's what we know about Saudi Arabia's connection to the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, according to the lawsuit:
Remembering the fallen first responders of 9/11
1.Fifteen of the 19 hijackers held Saudi passports — and some had connections with those in the Saudi Arabian government at home and abroad. Saudi officials even stamped passports in a certain way as to denote whether the person was an al Qaeda member.
*
2. Officials in the Saudi embassy in Germany, for example, supported Mohamed Atta, the lead hijacker, saying that a Saudi national was staying in the same Virginia hotel with several other terrorists the night before the attacks.
The Saudi embassy in Washington, D.C. Officials from Saudi embassies allegedly helped two hijackers in particular — Salem al-Hazmi and Khalid Al-Mihdhar — for a period of 18 months before 9/11.
The Saudi embassy in Washington, D.C. Officials from Saudi embassies allegedly helped two hijackers in particular — Salem al-Hazmi and Khalid Al-Mihdhar — for a period of 18 months before 9/11. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)"
the article continues
*
3. Officials from Saudi embassies allegedly helped two hijackers in particular — Salem al-Hazmi and Khalid Al-Mihdhar — for a period of 18 months before 9/11, providing them with money, advice, contacts, transportation, assistance with learning English, and obtaining IDs.
They also helped them attain access to pilot training and other material support and resources ultimately used on 9/11.
The twin towers of the World Trade Center burn behind the Empire State Building in New York, Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001. In a horrific sequence of destruction, terrorists crashed two planes into the World Trade Center and the twin 110-story towers collapsed. (AP Photo/Marty Lederhandler)
The twin towers of the World Trade Center burn behind the Empire State Building in New York, Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001. In a horrific sequence of destruction, terrorists crashed two planes into the World Trade Center and the twin 110-story towers collapsed. (AP Photo/Marty Lederhandler) (MARTY LEDERHANDLER/AP)
*
4. The Saudi royal family, who for years feared al Qaeda and tried to appease them in a bid to avoid losing power, were aware that funds from several charities had been funneled to Osama bin Laden's terror network.
The charities included the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, a group that had been designated by the U.S. as a terror sponsor.
.
Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. The Saudi royal family were aware that funds from several charities had been funneled to Osama bin Laden’s terror network. (Uncredited/ASSOCIATED PRESS)
*
5. Saudi Arabia - throughout the late 1980s - "adopted an extremist version of Islam - Wahhabism - as the state religion; declared that its propagation was a core function of the state; and sought to advance it around the world through Saudi Arabia's Ministry of Islamic Affairs, Embassies, Saudi Arabia's charity organizations and other government agents."
*
A representative of Saudi Arabia's embassy, based in Washington, D.C., did not respond to a request for comment."
From the website usnews.com an article is headlined
"20 Years After 9/11, Lawsuit Against Saudis Hits Key Moment"
As the 20th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks approaches, victims’ relatives and their lawyers are hoping they can finally prove in court what they’ve long suspected: that the Saudi government was complicit.
By Associated Press
|
July 5, 2021, at 8:45 p.m.
Share
U.S. News & World Report
The Associated Press
Brett Eagleson, son of Sept. 11 victim Bruce Eagleson, wipes grass off a memorial stone for his father at the baseball field where his father use to coach, Friday, July 2, 2021, in Middletown, Conn. Eagleson and others who lost family on Sept. 11 are seeking the release of FBI documents that allege Saudi Arabia's role in the terrorist attacks. As the 20th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks nears, victims' relatives are using the courts to answer what they see as lingering questions about the Saudi government's role in the attacks. A lawsuit that accuses Saudi Arabia of being complicit took a major step forward this year with the questioning under oath of former Saudi officials, but those depositions remain under seal and the U.S. has withheld a trove of other documents as too sensitive for disclosure. (AP Photo/Jessica Hill) THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
By ERIC TUCKER, Associated Press, the article says:
"WASHINGTON (AP) — As the 20th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks approaches, victims' relatives are pressing the courts to answer what they see as lingering questions about the Saudi government's role.
A lawsuit that accuses Saudi Arabia of being complicit took a major step forward this year with the questioning under oath of former Saudi officials, but those depositions remain under seal and the U.S. has withheld a trove of other documents as too sensitive for disclosure. The information vacuum has exasperated families who have tried to make the case that the Saudi government facilitated the attacks. Past investigations have outlined ties between Saudi nationals and some of the airplane hijackers, but have not established the government was directly involved.
"The legal team and the FBI, investigative agencies, can know about the details of my dad’s death and thousands of other family members' deaths, but the people who it’s most relevant to can't know," said Brett Eagleson, whose father, Bruce, was among the World Trade Center victims. “It's adding salt to an open wound for all the 9/11 family members.”
Lawyers for the victims plan to ask a judge to lift a protective order so their clients can access secret government documents as well as testimony from key subjects interviewed over the last year. Though the plaintiffs’ lawyers are unable to discuss what they’ve learned from depositions, they insist the information they’ve gathered advances their premise of Saudi complicity.
“We’re in a situation where only now, through the documents we have gotten and what our investigators have discovered and the testimony we’ve taken, only now is this iceberg that’s been underwater” floating to the surface, said attorney James Kreindler.
The Saudi government has denied any connection to the attacks. But the question has long vexed investigators and is at the heart of a long-running lawsuit in Manhattan on behalf of thousands of victims. The issue gained traction not only because 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi — as was Osama bin Laden, the mastermind — but also because of suspicions they must have had help navigating Western society given their minimal experience in the U.S."
the article continues :
"Public documents released in the last two decades, including by the 9/11 Commission, have detailed numerous Saudi entanglements but have not proved government complicity.
They show how the first hijackers to arrive in the U.S., Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, were met and assisted by a Saudi national in 2000. That man, Omar al-Bayoumi, who helped them find and lease an apartment in San Diego, had ties to the Saudi government and had attracted FBI scrutiny, investigators have said.
Among Bayoumi's contacts was Fahad al-Thumairy, at the time an accredited diplomat at the Saudi consulate in Los Angeles who investigators say led an extremist faction at his mosque. Bayoumi and Thumairy left the U.S. weeks before the attacks.
The 9/11 Commission, which assembled the most prominent accounting of the run-up to the attacks, detailed those connections but found Bayoumi to be an “unlikely candidate for clandestine involvement” with Islamic extremists. It said while it was logical to regard Thumairy as a possible contact for the hijackers, investigators didn't find evidence he actually assisted them.
More broadly, the commission in 2004 said it found no evidence the Saudi government or senior Saudi officials had funded al-Qaida, though it noted Saudi-linked charities could have diverted money to the group."
& lastly says
"In 2016, the final chapter of a congressional report on the attacks was declassified. The document named people who knew the hijackers after they arrived in the U.S. and helped them get apartments, open bank accounts and connect with mosques. It said some hijackers had connections to, and received support from, people who may be connected to the Saudi government. The document said information from FBI sources suggested at least two people who assisted the hijackers may have been Saudi intelligence officers.
But it didn't reach a conclusion on complicity, saying while it was possible the interactions could reveal proof of Saudi government support for terrorism, there were also possibly more innocuous explanations for the associations.
The FBI conducted its own investigation, Operation Encore, with some agents drawing a tighter link.
One former agent, Stephen Moore, stated in a 2017 declaration that al-Qaida wouldn't have sent Hazmi and Mihdhar to the U.S. “without a support structure in place.” He said he believed Bayoumi was a “clandestine agent” and that Thumairy knew the hijackers “were on a complex pre-planned mission" that would involve the use of airplanes. He said he'd concluded that Saudi Arabian diplomatic and intelligence personnel had knowingly given support to two of the hijackers.
Families of the 9/11 victims are hoping to prove similar allegations. They believe the entire story has not been revealed because of the U.S. government's reluctance for a full accounting. Any new evidence they might surface could be politically explosive given Saudi Arabia's role as a Middle East partner.
A spokesperson for the Saudi Embassy in Washington did not return a message seeking comment. Lawyers for the Saudi government declined to comment.
Andrew Maloney, another of the plaintiffs' lawyers, said that besides getting compensation for families, they hope Saudi Arabia will accept responsibility and commit to root out terrorism.
“If they did all three of those things, that would be a huge victory,” he said.
The suit gained steam with a judge's 2018 ruling permitting plaintiffs' lawyers to do a limited fact-finding investigation.
Bayoumi and Thumairy were questioned in recent weeks, as was Musaed al-Jarrah, a former Saudi embassy official whose name Yahoo News said was inadvertently revealed in an FBI filing last year that suggested he was suspected of having directed support for the hijackers.
The Justice Department, meanwhile, has given lawyers once-secret documents but under a protective order. Some information remains concealed entirely after the department invoked a “state secrets” privilege to block certain material seen as potentially jeopardizing national security.
“Sooner or later, this trial is going to become mainstream, and there's going to be a tremendous amount of public pressure, and they can’t keep things secret forever,” Eagleson said."
From Israeladvocacy.net an article is headlined Is it true that Israel stole Palestinian land?
"Accusation: Israel stole Palestinian land to build a Jewish State" the article says:
[the Muslim Brotherhood will] continue to view the Jews and Zionists as their first and foremost enemies … Jihad means making sacrifices in order to restore what has been stolen [Palestine].
– Mohamed Badie, Supreme Leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, January 2010
Fact or fiction: Jews stole Palestinian land before 1948
From the beginning of World War 1 Arabs began claiming that Jews had stolen Arab land and displaced its inhabitants. In reality, 80% of the land in the region was considered “state land”, owned by the Ottoman Empire (subsequently the British), the next largest landholders were absentee landlords like the Lebanese Sursuck family who owned most of the Jezreel Valley. In contrast, 80 percent of Palestinian Arabs were impoverished peasants, semi-nomads and Bedouins… not wealthy landowners.1
The region was severely underpopulated which meant the Jews were able to avoid buying land in areas where Arabs might be displaced, which they did. They sought land that was largely uncultivated, swampy, sandy, and most importantly, without tenants, like much of the Jezreel Valley. In 1920, David Ben-Gurion expressed his concern about the Arab fellaheen (peasants), whom he viewed as “the most important asset of the native population” he said “under no circumstances must we touch land belonging to fellahs or worked by them”. He advocated helping liberate them from their oppressors. “Only if a fellah leaves his place of settlement,” Ben-Gurion added, “should we offer to buy his land, at an appropriate price.” 2
The Jews overpaid for land they purchase
When British MP John Hope Simpson arrived in Palestine in May 1930 to report on Arab-Jewish violence and discovered the Jews were purchasing land at exorbitant rates: “They [Jews] paid high prices for the land, and in addition they paid to certain of the occupants of those lands a considerable amount of money which they were not legally bound to pay.” 3
In 1937 the British Government published the Peel Commission which found that Arab complaints about Jewish land acquisition were baseless. It pointed out that “much of the land now carrying orange groves was sand dunes or swamp and uncultivated when it was purchased. . . . there was at the time of the earlier sales little evidence that the owners possessed either the resources or training needed to develop the land.” Moreover, the Commission found the shortage was “due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population”. The report concluded that the presence of Jews in Palestine, along with the work of the British Administration, had resulted in higher wages, an improved standard of living and ample employment opportunities. 4
It is made quite clear to all, both by the map drawn up by the Simpson Commission and by another compiled by the Peel Commission, that the Arabs are as prodigal in selling their land as they are in useless wailing and weeping
— Transjordan’s King Abdullah, My Memoirs Completed, p88-89"
the article continues "As the violence escalated Arabs continued to sell land to Jews at outrageous prices, usually for tiny tracts of arid land. “In 1944, Jews paid between $1,000 and $1,100 per acre in Palestine, mostly for arid or semiarid land; in the same year, rich black soil in Iowa was selling for about $110 per acre.” 5
average-price-of-an-acre-of-land-in-Palestine
Land ownership from 1945-1947
In 1945 the British commissioned a survey of land ownership in Mandatory Palestine for the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry on Palestine. This survey was the research that the UN relied upon when suggesting how the region could be partitioned. The illustration below is a visual representation of this survey. It clearly shows that the UN’s suggested Jewish state would be in the area with heavy Jewish or state ownership (such as the barren Negev Desert). While the proposed Arab state was in the regions with heavy Arab ownership. The claim that Jews stole Palestinian land is factually incorrect.6
israel-arab-jewish-land-ownership-1945
By 1947, Jewish holdings in Palestine amounted to about 463,000 acres. Approximately 45,000 of these acres were acquired from the Mandatory Government; 30,000 were bought from various churches and 387,500 were purchased from Arabs. Analysis of land purchases from 1880 to 1948 show that 73 percent of Jewish plots were purchased from large landowners, not poor fellahin. 7 Those who sold land included the mayors of Gaza, Jerusalem and Jaffa. As’ad el–Shuqeiri, a Muslim religious scholar and father of PLO chairman Ahmed Shuqeiri, took Jewish money for his land. Even King Abdullah leased land to the Jews. In fact, many leaders of the Arab nationalist movement, including members of the Muslim Supreme Council, sold land to Jews. 8
Fact or fiction: Israel stole Palestinian land in the 1948 war?
As soon as Israel declared independence eight Arab nations invaded. With the battle cry of the Grand Mufti ringing in their ears, “I declare a holy war, my Moslem brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all”,9 the Arab armies, with the help of Palestinian militias, attempted their genocide against the Jews.
By some miracle, the Jews repelled the invaders and in defeating the Arab armies captured more land than that allotted in the UN partition. Much of this land had sizable Jewish populations and more defensible borders. Israel took the decision to retain this land to assure the safety of its citizens. It is this new border that most people refer to when they speak of the Pre-67 Lines (or the 49 Armistice Lines).
The Arabs also captured land. The Egyptians conquered Gaza, while the Jordanians usurped the West Bank. Unlike Israel, this was not for the safety of their citizens, but to increase their own territory. By the end of the war, according to Benny Morris, the “Arab war Plan changed . . . into a multinational land grab focusing on the Arab areas of the country. The evolving Arab ‘plans’ failed to assign any of these whatsoever to the Palestinians or to consider their political aspirations.”10
Fact or fiction: Israel stole Palestinian after 1948?
While Arab leaders boasted “strike the enemy’s settlements, turn them into dust, pave the Arab roads with the skulls of Jews”,11 their genocidal intentions were repeatedly crushed, often leaving Israel with even greater territory. Despite these gains, Israel had no intention of keeping the land – it always intended to return the land in exchange for peace.
In 1974 Israel returned territories to Syria that it had captured 1967 and 1973. Again in 1979 they returned the entire Sinai Peninsula, a mass of land rich in oil, with Jewish settlements and three times the size of pre-67 Israel."
& continues. "In September 1983, Israel withdrew from large areas of Lebanon to positions south of the Awali River. In 1985, it completed its withdrawal from Lebanon, except for a narrow security zone just north of the Israeli border. That too was abandoned, unilaterally, in 2000.
After signing peace agreements with the Palestinians, and a treaty with Jordan, Israel agreed to withdraw from most of the territory in the West Bank captured from Jordan in 1967. A small area was returned to Jordan, and more than 40 percent was ceded to the Palestinian Authority.
Finally in 2005, all Israeli troops and civilians were evacuated from the Gaza Strip and the territory was turned over to the control of the Palestinian Authority. In addition, four communities in the West Bank that covered an area larger than the entire Gaza Strip were also evacuated as part of the disengagement plan. As a result, Israel has now withdrawn from approximately 94 percent of the territory it captured in 1967.
israel-gave-land-for-peace-compared-to-britain
Israel has captured territory from those that wage war against the tiny state, but each time it returns the land in a heartbeat in exchange for peace.
Fact or fiction: Israel stole Palestinian land to build settlements?
From ancient times Jews have lived in the West Bank, the only time they did not was in recent decades when Jordan ethnically cleansed Jews from the region between 1948 to 1967. When Israel captured the territory from the Jordanians, following Jordan’s attack on Israel in the combined Arab attack of 67, Israel allowed Jews to move back to some select locations.
Numerous experts in international law believe that these settlements are not illegal. Stephen Schwebel, formerly President of the International Court of Justice, notes that a country acting in self defence may seize and occupy territory when necessary to protect itself. Schwebel also observes that a state may require, as a condition for its withdrawal, security measures designed to ensure its citizens are not menaced again from that territory. 12 In the seventies Israel made thousands of its citizens homeless when it returned the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt, it did so on the condition Egypt would make peace with the Jewish State – just as Schwebel described.
When Israel constructs its settlements it does not requisition private land for their establishment. Housing construction is only permitted on private land where the rights of others have not been violated. The vast majority of settlements have been built in uninhabited areas and even the handful established in or near Arab towns did not displace or steal land. In instances where it had been that settlements had been built on stolen land, the previous Arab owners took their case to the Supreme Israeli Court which ruled the settlements needed to be dismantled."
& lastly says:
"Jewish settlements
In the images below we can see Jewish settlements built in uninhabited areas, this was the pattern for the overwhelming majority of West Bank settlements.
gush-etzion-before-settlement
har-homa-before-2008
Arab settlements
What many people do not realise is that the majority of Palestinian urban areas are in fact modern settlements that did not exist a century ago.
silwan-east-jerusalem-19th-century
east-jerusalem-1914-arab-settlement
Summary
The claim that Jews stole Palestinian land is a lie.
The UN proposal awarded Israel the land where Jewish ownership was high
Jews massively overpaid for the land they acquired
Israel has captured land in defensive battles, but has always exchanged it for peace
Learn more about how Israel was created:
Did Israel get all of the good land?
Did America create Israel?
Is it true that Israel stole Palestinian land?
Was there ever a Palestinian people?
Was there ever a country called Palestine?
Was the Zionist movement a plot to colonise the Middle East?
Were the Jews unwilling to share Palestine?
Was the UN Partition Plan unfair to the Palestinian majority?
Are Israel’s borders expanding?
Is it true that Britain created Israel?
Why should the Palestinians pay for Europe's wrongs during the Holocaust?"
From Jihadwatch.org an article is headlined JIHAD WATCH
"Does Israel “Steal” Private Palestinian Land in the West Bank?"
JUL 7, 2020 10:00 AM BY HUGH FITZGERALD the article states:
"The Jerusalem Post has an enlightening – and depressing – article here on land ownership in the “West Bank”:
One of the most serious accusations against Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria to “end the occupation” and in the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaigns is that Israel systematically steals or “seizes” “private Palestinian land.” Not only would that be illegal, it is immoral. This seems to be the basis for the High Court’s decision to strike down the Regulation Law.
It is important to remember the reason for the Regulation Law. When Jewish communities (“settlements”) were established, it was done “in good faith,” and with government approval on vacant land. Arabs did not go to court to claim “their land.” Only much later, led by left-wing NGOs, were Arabs encouraged to make their claims.
Remember that the Palestine Mandate called for, in Article 6, “close settlement of Jews on the land, including State and waste lands.” The lands that Jews built settlements on were vacant at the time. Were they State or waste lands, on which Jews were allowed to settle, or were they the private property of Arabs? The Arabs did not press any claims at first; they did so only when encouraged by left-wing — i.e., anti-Israel — NGOs. That suggests they were not at all certain about their ownership.
The humanitarian purpose of the Regulation Law was to protect Jews who had built their homes “in good faith.” Most other countries have similar laws which protect homeowners in cases where the value of what was built far exceeds the value of the land. Destroying the homes of many thousands of Jews to resolve questionable or false Arab land claims would be unfair and unjust. Therefore, compensation was offered to Arab claimants, regardless of proof of ownership.
The source for the charge that “Israel is stealing privately owned land” is not only PLO/PA, Hamas, left-wing and anti-Israel media, and Arab propaganda, but an agency of the Israeli government: Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT).
COGAT, a unit of the Defense Ministry, is responsible for “implementing government policy in Judea and Samaria.” But COGAT not only “implements,” it also makes policy. And, as a separate independent military-legal administration, it is virtually unaccountable to anyone except the defense minister and the prime minister….
COGAT and the IDF legal adviser, in cooperation with the attorney-general’s office, the state prosecutor’s office, the Justice Ministry and the High Court (Bagatz), routinely decide that land claimed by Arabs is valid….
COGAT defends its decisions by citing the land registry (taba) for Judea and Samaria, which lists names of “owners,” mostly villages and tribes who were given state land during the early 1960s. None of the land was purchased, most of the land was never used, no taxes were paid and the original Arab recipients of land are no longer alive. To whom does this disputed land belong?
During Jordanian rule over Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”), the government gave out state land to Arabs. Those new owners didn’t pay anything for it, they often didn’t use it, they paid no taxes on it. In what sense were they the owners of that land? In the first place, did the government of Jordan have a right to distribute “state and waste lands”? That could only be true if Jordan were something more than merely the “military occupier”of the West Bank. But it never was. It had no claim to land under the Mandate for Palestine. It had not been the legitimate “inheritor” of the state and waste lands from the Mandatory authority, which had in turn inherited those “state and waste lands” from the former Ottoman ruler of the territory that became Mandatory Palestine."
the article continues "According to Mandate law, gifted land could not be inherited without approval by the sovereign. Moreover, land that was given by the sovereign could be claimed as private only if the land was used continually (usufruct) for 10 years and taxes were paid. Otherwise, unused land reverts to the sovereign by law. Jordan changed this law and registered the land as privately owned, permanently, without conditions.
Jordan, without any valid authority – it was never the legitimate sovereign in the West Bank – simply decided that the Mandate’s laws no longer applied. No legal argument was offered, for there was none. It was simply by fiat that Jordan turned state and waste lands in the West Bank into private lands, first by distributing them to Arabs without any payment required, then ignoring the requirement that the land given by a sovereign had to be continually used for ten years, and taxes paid on the land. Many of the plots distributed by the government were never farmed by their Arab “owners,” much less for ten years; no taxes were paid by any of these “owners.” Jordan decided on its own that the Mandate’s laws would not apply. It was determined to turn “state and waste lands” into “private lands” owned only by Arabs, who did not pay for the land, were not required to farm it, and did not have to pay taxes on it.
Since Jordan was never acknowledged as the legitimate sovereign over this territory, its occupation and anti-Jewish laws – including prohibiting non-Jordanian citizens from owning land and incurring the death penalty for selling land to Jews – have no validity; COGAT differs.
The status of land in Judea and Samaria was further confused by former High Court Chief Justice Dorit Beinisch, who, at the end of her term decided unilaterally that hazakah, the right to claim title to land by working it and paying taxes applied only to Arabs, not Jews.
Since COGAT considers the land registry for Judea and Samaria “confidential,” it restricts access to it by Jews, making it nearly impossible to challenge Arab claims of private ownership or for Jews to acquire land. COGAT’s secretive procedure is backed by the High Court, which defends COGAT’s rule as a government agency. COGAT refuses to explain why their rules prevail exclusively and why access to public documents is forbidden….
Since 2008, COGAT has prevented the operation of a sewage treatment plant between the Arab village of Silwad and the Jewish community of Ofra because, COGAT ruled, it is built on “private Palestinian land” which belongs to the village. The attorney-general and the High Court have ordered that the project – which would serve all residents of the disputed area – be removed."
Post a Comment