Thursday, April 10, 2014

Israel's Worst Enemy: Lies and Myths

> > By Bruce Thornton, FrontPage Magazine > April 8, 2014 > > The Washington Post reports that some members of Secretary of State > John Kerry's senior staff think it's time to say "enough" of Kerry's > futile and delusional attempts to broker peace between the Israelis > and Arabs and implement the "two-state solution." That's a revelation > one would think the chief diplomat of the greatest power in history > would have experienced decades ago. Since the failed 1993 Oslo > Accords, it has been obvious to all except the duplicitous, the > ignorant, and the Jew-hater that the Arabs do not want a "Palestinian > state living in peace side-by-side with Israel," something they could > have had many times in the past. On the contrary, as they serially > prove in word and deed, they want Israel destroyed. > > As Caroline Glick documents in her new book The Israeli Solution, the > "two-state solution" is a diplomatic chimera for the West, and a > tactic for revanchist Arabs who cannot achieve their eliminationist > aims by military means. But the "Palestinian state" is merely one of > many myths, half-truths, and outright lies that befuddle Western > diplomats and leaders, and put the security and possibly the existence > of Israel at risk. > > First there is the canard that Israel is somehow an illegitimate > state, a neo-imperialist outpost that Westerners created to protect > their economic and geopolitical interests. In this popular myth, > invading Jewish colonists "stole" the land and ethnically cleansed the > region of its true possessors, the indigenous "Palestinian people." > This crime was repeated after 1967 Six Day War, when Israel seized the > "West Bank," occupying it as a colonial power and subjecting its > inhabitants to a brutally discriminatory regime. The continuing power > of this lie can be seen in the frequent comparison of Israel to > apartheid South Africa. And this false historical analogy in turn > drives the "Boycott, Divest, and Sanctions" movement, which is > attempting to make Israel even more of a pariah state in order to > duplicate the success of those tactics in dismantling white rule in > South Africa. > > Every dimension of this narrative is false. The state of Israel came > into being by the same legitimate process that created the other new > states in the region, the consequence of the dismantling of the > Ottoman Empire after World War I. Consistent with the traditional > practice of victorious states, the Allied powers France and England > created Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Jordan, and of course Israel, to > consolidate and protect their national interests. This legitimate > right to rewrite the map may have been badly done and > shortsighted--regions containing many different sects and ethnic > groups were bad candidates for becoming a nation-state, as the history > of Iraq and Lebanon proves, while prime candidates for nationhood like > the Kurds were left out. But the right to do so was bestowed by the > Allied victory and the Central Powers' loss, the time-honored wages of > starting a war and losing it. Likewise in Europe, the Austro-Hungarian > Empire was dismantled, and the new states of Austria, Hungary, > Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia were created. And arch-aggressor > Germany was punished with a substantial loss of territory, leaving > some 10 million Germans stranded outside the fatherland. Israel's > title to its country is as legitimate as Jordan's, Syria's and > Lebanon's. > > Then there is the melodrama of the "displacement" of the > "Palestinians," who have been condemned to live as stateless > "refugees" because of Israel's aggression. This narrative of course > ignores the fact that most of the Arabs fleeing Palestine left > voluntarily, the first wave, mainly the Arab elite, beginning in > November 1947 with the U.N. vote for partition. At the time it was > clear to observers that most of the Arabs chose to flee their supposed > ancestral homeland. In September 1948 Time magazine, no friend of > Israel, wrote, "There is but little doubt that the most potent of the > factors [explaining the Arab flight] were the announcements made over > the air by the Arab Higher Committee urging the Arabs to quit." These > were followed in 1948 by 300,000 others, who either were avoiding the > conflict, or were induced by the Arab Higher Committee with the > promise that after victory they could return and find, as Arab League > Secretary-General Azza Pasham said in May 1948, "that all the millions > the Jews had spent on land and economic development would be easy > booty, for it would be a simple matter to throw Jews into the > Mediterranean." Indeed, the withdrawal of Israelis from Gaza in 2005 > confirmed the prediction that failed in 1948. The Gaza greenhouse > industry, which American Jewish donors purchased for $14 million and > gave to the Palestinian Authority in order to help Gaza's economy, was > instead destroyed by looters. > > But from a historical perspective, it is irrelevant how the Arabs > became refugees. When in 1922 the Greeks lost their war they fought > against the Turks in order to regain their sovereignty over lands > their ancestors had lived in for nearly 3000 years, 1.5 million Greeks > were transferred out of Turkey in exchange for half a million Turks > from Europe. After World War II, 12 million Germans either fled or > were driven from Eastern Europe, with at least half a million dying. > In both cases, whether justly or not, the wages of starting a war and > losing included the displacement of the losers. Yet only in the case > of the Palestinian Arabs has this perennial cost of aggression been > reversed, and those who prevailed in a war they didn't start been > demonized for the suffering of refugees created by the aggression of > their ethnic and religious fellows. > > In still another historical anomaly, in no other conflict have > refugees failed to be integrated into countries with which they share > an ethnic, religious, and cultural identity. Most of the some 800,000 > Jews, for example, driven from lands like Egypt and Iraq in which > their ancestors had lived for centuries, were welcomed into Israel, > which footed the bill for their maintenance and integration into > society. The Arab states, on the other hand, kept their brother Arabs > and Muslims in squalid camps that have evolved into squalid cities, > their keep paid for by the United Nations Relief Works Agency, the > only U.N. agency dedicated to only one group of refugees. Thus the > international community has enabled the revanchist policy of the Arab > states, as Alexander Galloway, head of the UNRWA, said in 1952: "It is > perfectly clear that the Arab nations do not want to solve the Arab > refugee problem. They want to keep it an open sore, as an affront > against the United Nations, and as a weapon against Israel. Arab > leaders don't give a damn whether the refugees live or die." > > This brings us to the chief myth: that there exists a distinct > Palestinian "people," the original possessors of the land who have > been unjustly denied a national homeland. In the quotes above notice > that no Arab ever refers to these people as "Palestinians," but as > "Arabs," which is what most of them are, sharing the same religion, > language, and culture of their Arab neighbors in Jordan, Lebanon, and > Syria. In fact, as Sha'i ben-Tekoa documents in his book Phantom > Nation, the first U.N. resolution referencing "Palestinians" instead > of "Arabs" occurred 3 years after the Six Day War, marking > international recognition of a "Palestinian people" and nation as yet > another Arab tactic in gaining support in the West by exploiting an > idea alien to traditional Islam. Before then "Palestinian" was a > geographical designation, more typically applied to Jews. Numerous > quotations from Arab leaders reveal not a single reference to a > Palestinian people, but numerous one identifying the inhabitants of > the geographical entity Palestine as "Arabs." > > For example, in 1937, Arab Higher Committee Secretary Auni Abdel Hadi > said, "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a country > the Zionists invented. 'Palestine' is alien to us." The Christian Arab > George Antonius, author of the influential The Arab Awakening, told > David Ben-Gurion, "There was no natural barrier between Palestine and > Syria and there was no difference between their inhabitants." Later in > his book he defined Syria as including Lebanon, Palestine, and Jordan. > In testimony to the U.N. in 1947, the Arab Higher Committee said, > "Politically the Arabs of Palestine are not independent in the sense > of forming a separate political identity." Thirty years later Farouk > Kaddoumi, then head of the PLO Political Department, told Newsweek, > "Jordanians and Palestinians are considered by the PLO as one people." > After the Six-Day War a member of the Executive Council of the PLO, > Zouhair Muhsin, was even more explicit: "There are no differences > between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all > part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully > underline our Palestinian identity... Yes, the existence of a separate > Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a > Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against > Israel." > > Such examples can be multiplied, which makes all the talk of a > separate Palestinian "people" deserving of their own nation nothing > but propaganda supported by a bogus history that claims the Arabs who > came to Palestine in the 7th century A.D as conquerors and occupiers, > or later as migrant workers and immigrants, are the "indigenous" > inhabitants descended from Biblical peoples like the Canaanites or the > shadowy Jebusites--a claim unsupported by any written or > archaeological evidence. Meanwhile, of course, abundant evidence > exists showing that the Jews have continuously inhabited the region > since 1300 B.C. Once more the logic of history is turned on its head, > with the descendants of the original inhabitants deemed alien > invaders, while the descendants of conquerors and occupiers are > sanctified as victims. > > Such an inversion is worthy of Orwell's 1984. Yet these lies and > myths--and there are many more-- have shaped and defined the conflict > between Israel and the Arabs, and set the parameters of diplomatic > solutions. But we should heed the Biblical injunction about the > liberating power of truth. And the truth is, for a century fanatics > filled with genocidal hatred have violently and viciously attacked a > liberal-democratic nation legitimately established in the ancient > homeland of its people. Until our diplomacy and foreign relations in > the region are predicated on this truth, the "two-state solution" will > continue to be a dangerous farce. > > > > Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, > a Research Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution, and a Professor of > Classics and Humanities at the California State University. He is the > author of nine books and numerous essays on classical culture and its > influence on Western Civilization.

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Obama, the Brotherhood, and the Jewish left

October 15, 2012,

Mike Lumish

Is the American Jewish left suffering from cognitive dissonance?

The Muslim Brotherhood is the foremost anti-Semitic organization in the world today. During the Morsi campaign they called for the conquest of Jerusalem. During World War II they supported the Nazis. Sayyid Qutb, one of their founding figures, wrote a pamphlet entitled “Our Struggle with the Jews.” They believe in an international caliphate in which sharia would reign throughout the world, thus making Jews, and other dhimmis, second- and third-class citizens; women the property of men; and gay people, quite frankly, dead. Yet, somehow, against all reason or common human decency, the American Jewish left supports the Muslim Brotherhood.

Barack Obama supports the Muslim Brotherhood and progressive-left American Jews support Obama; thus those Jews, whether they will admit it to themselves or not, and however they might otherwise justify it, support the Muslim Brotherhood. I find this situation to be absolutely unfathomable. How is it possible that after so many centuries of abuse throughout Europe and after 1,400 years of unjust violence and oppression against us in the Muslim Middle East, American Jews could possibly support an American president who helped usher the Muslim Brotherhood into power in Egypt? How is this possible? How is it possible that American Jews would support a president of the United States who referred to the rapes, and murders, and riots that collectively make up the misnamed “Arab Spring” as something akin to the American Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and, revoltingly enough, as something akin to the Revolutionary Spirit of 1776?

Denial plays a big role in this phenomenon, because if you were to ask your average American Jewish supporter of Barack Obama just why they are supporting the Muslim Brotherhood they probably would not know what the heck you were talking about. When explained to them that the Muslim Brotherhood is not only anti-Semitic, but even genocidal toward Jews, and that Barack Obama has supported their rise throughout the Muslim Middle East, particularly in Egypt, they would probably look at you as if you yammering at them in Swahili.

It’s pure denial. It is a willful turning away from very serious facts and a deadly serious situation for the Jews in Israel.

And if you do not think that Obama has actively supported the Muslim Brotherhood, how do you explain the fact that administration officials met with the Brotherhood on several occasions before they came into power in Egypt? How do you explain the fact that, over Mubarak’s objections, Obama invited the Brotherhood to his Cairo speech of 2009? How do you explain the fact that when Obama called for the deposing of Mubarak he knew that the Brotherhood would likely fill the power vacuum? How do you explain the fact that Hillary Clinton flew to Egypt to ensure the transition from military control of the country to Brotherhood control? However one slices and dices these facts, it is simply undeniable that Obama promoted the Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East.

Another reason, aside from mere denial, is a suicidally naive faith in the wisdom of Barack Obama, in the good-will of Barack Obama, and in the intelligence of Barack Obama. After eight years of a militaristic and jingoistic Bush II administration, Obama seemed like a huge weight off the shoulders, a huge relief from all the hokum and trumpery, as Kurt Vonnegut might have put it, of the Bush years. Obama was president of the Harvard Law Review, after all. This is therefore a highly intelligent man. And, like us, and unlike Bush, he’s a liberal. And, on top of that, he’s a black man, and G-d bless America, racist as it allegedly remains, for finally raising up an African-American to the foremost political position in the land.

I mean, I voted for Barack Obama, and I couldn’t have been more pleased that we had elected our first black president. These things, taken together, can form quite an emotional attachment to the individual, which is particularly true when almost everyone you know keeps telling one another how the Democrats stand for human decency, social justice, and universal human rights, while the Republicans stand for racism, greed, misogyny, guns, and all things that are just plain wrong.

But there is yet another way in which “progressive” Jews justify their support for Obama, despite his support for the Muslim Brotherhood: democracy. That’s right: The Muslim Brotherhood is misogynistic, homophobic, anti-Semitic, and anti-democratic, yet we must support Obama’s efforts to bolster the Brotherhood out of support for democracy! After all, democracy can be a messy business, so who are we to deny the legitimate national aspirations of the Egyptian people? Sure, those national aspirations may include the conquest of Jerusalem and the genocide of the Jews but, hey, that’s democracy.

This line of reasoning is just rampant on the Jewish left. I see it constantly on places like “Daily Kos” or “The Huffington Post” or the “Guardian.” They seem to think that supporting democracy is some sort of suicide pact, and that we are obligated to honor any choices made by any people anywhere so long as those choices are expressed via the voting booth. Well, excuse me, but didn’t a particularly nasty individual rise to power in Germany during the 1930s via democratic means? I think he did.

We should support democracy, but we are also allowed to take sides — and we are under no obligation to support any political party, much less the foremost anti-Semitic political party on the planet. What I think is that American Jews are making a truly awful mistake in supporting this presidency. I voted for the guy in 2008, but I also watched and learned. The main thing that I learned was that I was dead wrong to support Obama to begin with. No Jewish person should support a politician who supports the Brotherhood.

Progressive-left American Jews are holding two contradictory notions in their minds. They, for the most part, support the State of Israel, but they also support president Obama. Obama supports the Brotherhood and the Brotherhood tells us that they want to conquer Jerusalem.

Is this not cognitive dissonance?

The opinions and facts here are presented solely by the author, and The Times of Israel assumes no responsibility for them. In case of abuse, click here to report this post.

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Ayalon hits back: South Africa remains an apartheid state



After South Africa mandates special labels on products originating in the West Bank, Deputy FM takes a stab at country over killing of 34 striking miners; Israel also set to summon SA ambassador to register displeasure.

Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon late Wednesday hit back against South Africa over its decision to mandate special labels on products coming from settlements, saying the decision proves the country is still an apartheid state.

"The changes that took place in South Africa over the years did not yield a truly fundamental change," Ayalon said. "South Africa remains an apartheid state."

Ayalon also took a stab at South African authorities for killing 34 striking platinum miners in the bloodiest operation since the end of white rule. "At the moment South Africa's apartheid is aimed at Israel, and against miners within South Africa itself," Ayalon said. "Instead of deciding to label Israeli products, South Africa should have acted courageously towards the 34 innocent miners that were just asking for an improvement in working conditions."

The Foreign Ministry also released a statement Wednesday, saying South Africa's decision “brings to mind ideas of a racist nature which the government of South Africa, more than any other, should have wholly rejected.”

The Israeli backlash followed the South African cabinet’s decision to approve a plan to require labels on products coming from the settlements so that they do not read “Made in Israel.”

The South African government’s approval came about three months after the plan was first broached by Trade and Industry Minister Rob Davies, and despite a flood of protests from South African Jews and other pro-Israel supporters in the country.

The Foreign Ministry statement said the measure adopted was unprecedented and constituted “blatant discrimination based on national and political distinction. This kind of discrimination has not been imposed – and rightly so – in any other case of national, territorial or ethnic conflict. Israel and South Africa have political differences, and that is legitimate. What is totally unacceptable is the use of tools which, by essence, discriminate and single out, fostering a general boycott.” The Foreign Ministry will summon the South African ambassador Thursday to register its displeasure.

The South African cabinet issued a statement saying it “approved that a notice in terms of the Consumer Protection Act, 2008, be issued by the minister of Trade and Industry requiring the labeling of goods or products emanating from IOTs (Israel Occupied Territories) to prevent consumers being led to believe that such goods come from Israel. This is in line with South Africa’s stance that recognizes the 1948 borders delineated by the United Nations and does not recognize occupied territories beyond these borders as being part of the State of Israel.”

The decision came at a cabinet meeting where the government also noted the “importance” of South Africa’s participation in the upcoming Non- Aligned Movement meeting in Tehran.

The UN never delineated borders in 1948, so it is not clear whether the South African government is referring to the 1947 UN Partition Plan or the 1949 Armistice Lines.

Avrom Krengel, the chairman of the South African Zionist Federation and South African Chief Rabbi Warren Goldstein, issued a statement saying the South African Jewish community was “outraged” over the cabinet’s decision.

“In acting in so cavalier a manner, government has not only bypassed the consultation process set in motion by the notice but shown itself to be completely dismissive of Jewish concerns,” the statement said.

The Jewish community was denied “any meaningful opportunity” of explaining its position to the government, the statement said.

“It is the firm belief of the Jewish communal leadership that the proposed measures are discriminatory, divisive and inconsistent with South African trade policy and seriously flawed from both an administrative and procedural point of view,” the statement read. “At bottom, they are believed to be motivated not by technical trade concerns but by political bias against the State of Israel. All attempts to discuss these concerns, however, have come to nothing.”

While the EU since 2003 has required Israeli exporters to specify on their export invoices where their products are made, so that products manufactured in settlements would not enjoy the same duty-free status as those manufactured inside the Green Line, the products themselves never bore any “settlement” label. The South African policy is the first at a national level, though both Denmark and Ireland have spoken of following suit.

The step is certain to make even worse already strained ties between Jerusalem and Pretoria.

Last week the Foreign Ministry said that a call by South Africa’s deputy foreign minister Ebrahim Ebrahim to discourage the country’s residents from going to Israel was tantamount to a South African boycott.

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

Over the years, there have been hundreds of stories like this one.

One of the worst forms of racism that we see is that, over the years a few thousand Jewish girls have ‘married’ Arab husbands, but not a single Arab girl has ever married a Jew. Why? Because every attempt at an Arab trying to convert to Judaism is met with extreme violence. The girls are simply beaten to death.

best regards,

Mordechai Ben-Menachem

P. O. Box 53061, Yerushalem (Jerusalem), 91530, Israel

055-2259763, Mail:, Skype: qualitymbm

Access a subset of papers on SSRN:

please see my books on Amazon!

Jewish woman rescued from Arab village after 28 years


A dramatic rescue takes a Jewish woman and her two young children out of the clutches of a brutal Palestinian Authority Arab husband with whom she lived for 28 years.

The anti-missionary Yad L'Achim organization, which also works on behalf of Jewish women trapped in relationships with Arabs, revealed the extraordinary story, after "Dinah, the daughter of Leah," was safely back among Jews.

Dinah was born in the mixed Arab-Jewish city of Lod 48 years ago but became estranged from her family during an emo­tional crisis, which led her to a relationship with an Arab man. Since then, she was declared as missing, and her family did not know whether she was dead or alive. At one point, Israeli authorities mistakenly thought they had identified her in a morgue.

She lived with her husband in a Palestinian Authority Arab village in the area of Tulkarm, east of Netanya. She said her husband traumatized her and once tied her to a tree for 13 hours, without food or water The husband said he wanted "everyone to see what will happen to you" if she were to leave the house without permission.

Three weeks ago, ties were suddenly re-established with her family, which finally had a sign that Dinah was still alive. They contacted Yad L'Achim officials, who were given her telephone number and other personal information that enabled them to go into action to rescue her.

When they first got in touch with Dinah, she begged them, "Get me back to my homeland."

With the help of Interior Minister Eli Yishai and the IDF, special permits were prepared for Dinah and her children to cross the checkpoint near Tulkarm after the rescue, which was carried out in strict secrecy. This past Sunday evening, her husband gave Dinah 12 shekels to travel with her two children in a taxi to a clinic for medical care Monday morning.

In a pre-arranged scheme, she and her children got out of the cab shortly after it left the village and hurriedly got into a rescue vehicle that Yad L'Achim sent, with advance permission from a senior IDF officer. Soldiers at the checkpoint had been alerted to allow the vehicle to enter the Palestinian Authority for the rescue operation.

During the journey of nearly an hour to the checkpoint, Yad L'Achim instructed its workers to stop what they were doing and say Psalms for the safe return of Dinah.

The rescue vehicle returned to the checkpoint, and the soldiers confirmed they saw the mother and her two children in the rescue vehicle. Once past the checkpoint, the vehicle stopped, and Dinah burst into tears, along with the soldiers.

The children begged her, "Mommy, promise us you never will go back there again."

One of Dinah's first actions was to take off her Muslim garb and tell Yad L'Achim officials, "Throw them in the trash can."

The organizations' social workers are treating her and she is staying at a secret location in central Israel, after having made contact with her family. She filed a complaint with police against her Arab husband's brutality. Police said they doubted that Palestinian Authority police would take any action against him but added that if he steps one foot beyond the checkpoint, he will be arrested.

My story 2

Friday, April 1, 2011

Day 200, April 1st, 2011

"Life is the sum of
all your choices."

Albert Camus