US set to betray Israel at UN Security Council

I look forward to the day when I can criticize the president without being called a racist.

This is so sad...and horrifying. I shouldn't be shocked by this by now, but it seems that each new low we sink to shocks me. I can't believe we are actually going to side WITH Hezbollah.

Going right now to a website that allows you to send pizza to IDF soldiers in the field. After that, contacting my Congressmen and Senators (although that isn't likely to help in my case).

The New American Government, NAG, is not Israeli friendly and is now going to tighten the noose...With the turmoil in the Mid East, a concern to Israel, with the turmoil going on in Iran and all its neighbors threatening Israel, the NAG takes the opportunity to turn its back on Israel...Good timing...I hope the NAG is nagged out of power in 2012...

The Muslim Brotherhood, since its creation in Egypt by Hassan al-Banna in 1928, has colloborate with or advised Hitler, and until today, still is Nazi-like, with another Islamic Nazi Qatar/Al-Jazeera based top cleric Yousuf al-Qardawi as its spiritual adviser who recently made a call to mass murder the Jews, and we're supposed to believe these evil Muslim Brotherhood's lies? Jimmy Carter, as of the suspected Muslim Brotherhood AGENT, Hussein Obama, are suspected to be Nazi-lovers too - what else could they be, for their slave-like worship of Islam and the Nazi Muslim Brotherhood?

The two unlikely countries that will eventually stand against the Islamists together with Israel is likely to be Russia and China.

Marxism and communism died in 1989 with the downfall of the Soviet Union. Russia and China no longer subscribe to Marxism.

Russia and China are the countries that know how to deal with the Islamists. For a start they should wipe out the Somali pirates not by going after them in the sea. But to attack the villages these pirates live. They have to go for the jugular. To annihilate them.

Written in the Koran is the call to exterminate the Jews. This threat should be treated with all seriousness. Destroy them before they destroy you.

l would like to ask any American liberal Jew why did you vote for Obumbler and continue to support the Demoncrats when they are so against Israel? the only thing l can come up with is that these liberals have a brain disorder and cannot help themselves to continue to elect Democrats.

It's too bad that siding with Islam will not get the US any new friends, but only obliterate the old ones. But what can we do. The Muslims are a million times smarter and are far ahead of the game. They got the third world, Latin America and Europe on their side. What can the US do under such pressures? They will force Israel to unilaterally withdrow from Judea and Samaria just like we did in Gaza without any peace agreement, any kind of commitment or even a recognition of Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state (which the majority of Europeans and "leftists" oppose anyway), and then they will attack us from all directions.

In this world, it's not only economic and military power that keeps you alive - in the human sphere intelligence counts a lot. The west has become dumb and crazy. Western academia has been taken over by radical leftists, turning much of humanities into politicized lies. These are the institutions that educate, or rather indoctrinate the future elites, shapers of public opnion, leaders, politicians and teachers. It's not for nothing Muslims get radicalized in the universities. It's not just the Muslim firebrands there, but the leftist firebrands who ideologically support them and affirm their worldview by vilifying the west while whitewashing the rest. Unless the west regains its brains it has little chance against adversaries and powers that are far smarter, absolutely selfish and long term strategists, as well as ruthless.

The leftist blinders prevent the west from correctly reading the global map. The west gives all kinds of advantages to its enemies, and thus will start from a lower point, which will make the conflict harder and demand far more casualties than necessary. Not taking the leftist road might have prevented this conflict altogether since it would have kept the west too strong to be chellanged.

As for Israel, we must, simply must, create and strengthen new alliances. The American-Israeli alliance is rapidly drawing to an end. Europe is still our largest export market, which might prove fatal for us. But Europe is in severe decline and will continue on this course if it doesn't take a sharp turn to the right in more than one way. The future is in Asia. Ben Gurion thought so 60 years ago, but at the time India and China didn't want relations with us as they were in the Soviet and Arab block. The Arabs got us kicked out and boycotted from anything Asian, even Asian sports games.

Things have change somewhat with the fall of the Soviet Union. The relations with India are growing on every level - military, sciense, technology, agriculture, energy, hopefully also culture in time. India had problems with its Muslim neighbors for a long time even when they were not speaking to us, so unlike the west, they will not see Israel as the source of the fallout with Islam and are less likely to panic into selling us to try and appease the unappeasable.

But we need to go beyond it, together with India, and create a union of Asian countries beleaguered by the Islamic-"Communist" alliance to somewhat counterbalance the increasing power of the anti-western Islamic-"Communist"-Latin American block because if we don't, Europe will join the winners, and then the US will have no choice.

A few classic articles from my files, on the subject of the new antisemitism which is antizionism, and on the subject of the Jihad against the Jews.

Here is the first: a marvellous satirical piece, dripping with sarcasm, which deserves to be read aloud, dramatically, at any pro-Israel rally.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=3CEC078B-97FB-40F6-9617-8447061C0998

We Are Not Anti-Semites
By Steven Plaut
FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, December 11, 2008

"We have nothing against Jews as such.

We just hate Zionism and Zionists.

We think Israel does not have a right to exist.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

Heavens to Mergatroyd. Marx Forbid. We are humanists. Progressives. Peace lovers.

Anti-Semitism is the hatred of Jews.
Anti-Zionism is opposition to Zionism and Israeli policies.

The two have nothing to do with one another. Venus and Mars. Night and day.

Trust us.
Sure, we think the only country on the earth that must be annihilated is Israel.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

Sure, we think that the only children on earth whose being blown up is okay if it serves a good cause are Jewish children.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

Sure, we think that if Palestinians have legitimate grievances this entitles them to mass murder Jews.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

Naturally, we think that the only people on earth who should never be allowed to exercise the right of self-defense are the Jews.

Jews should only resolve the aggression against them through capitulation, never through self-defense.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We only denounce racist apartheid in the one country in the Middle East that is not a racist apartheid country.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We refuse to acknowledge the Jews as a people, and think they are only a religion.

We do not have an answer as to how people who do not practice the Jewish religion can still be regarded as Jews.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We think that all peoples have the right to self-determination, except Jews, and including even the make-pretend Palestinian "people".

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We hate it when people blame the victim,

except of course when people blame the Jews for the jihads and terrorist campaigns against them.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We think the only country in the Middle East that is a fascist anti-democratic one is the one that has free elections.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We demand that the only country in the Middle East with free speech, free press, or free courts be destroyed in the name of democracy.
But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We oppose military aggression,
except when it is directed against Israel.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We really understand suicide bombers who murder bus-loads of Jewish children and we insist that their demands be met in full.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We think the only conflict on earth that must be solved through dismembering one of the parties to that conflict is the one involving Israel.
But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We do not think that Jews have any human rights that need to be respected, and especially not the right to ride a bus or sit in a cafe without being murdered.
But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

There exist Jewish, leftist anti-Zionists and we consider this proof that anti-Zionists could not possibly be anti-Semitic; not even the ones who cheer when Jews are mass murdered.
These leftist anti-Zionists and the Neturei Karta are the only Jews we think need be acknowledged or respected.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We do not think murder proves how righteous and just the cause of the murderer is, except when it comes to murderers of Jews.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We do not think the Jews are entitled to their own state and must submit to being a minority in a Rwanda-style "bi-national state," although no other state on earth, including the 22 Arab countries, should be similarly expected to be deprived of sovereignty.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We think that Israel's having a Jewish majority and a six-point star on its flag makes it a racist apartheid state.

We do not think any other country having an ethnic-religious majority or having crosses or crescents or "Allah Akbar" on its flag is racist or needs dismemberment.
But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We only condemn the "mistreatment" of women in the country of the Middle East in which they are not mistreated.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We only condemn the "mistreatment" of minorities in the country in the Middle East in which minorities are not brutally suppressed and mass murdered.
But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We demand equal citizen rights, which is why the only country in the Middle East in need of extermination is the only one in which such rights exist.

But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

We have no trouble with the fact that there is no freedom of religion in any Arab countries.
But we are mad as hell at Israel for violating religious freedom, and never mind that we are never quite sure where or when it does so.
But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.

So how can you possibly say we are anti-Semites?
We are simply anti-Zionists. We seek peace and justice, that's all.
And surely that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such."

Steven Plaut is a professor at the Graduate School of the Business Administration at the University of Haifa and is a columnist for the Jewish Press. A collection of his commentaries on the current events in Israel can be found on his "blog" at www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com.

Second item: from 26 November 2002. Comedian Larry Miller explains 'the middle East situation'.

http://www.jr.co.il/articles/politics/mideast.txt

"A brief overview of the situation is always valuable, so as a 
service to all Americans who still don't get it, I now offer you the 
story of the Middle East in just a few paragraphs, which is all you 
really need.

'Don't thank me. I'm a giver. Here we go:

'The Palestinians want their own country.

'There's just one thing 
about that: There are no Palestinians. It's a made up word.
Israel 
was called Palestine for two thousand years.

'Like "Wiccan", 
"Palestinian" sounds ancient but is really a modern invention. 


'Before the Israelis won the land in war, Gaza was owned by Egypt, 
and there were no
"Palestinians" then, and the West Bank was 
owned by Jordan, and there were no "Palestinians" then.

'As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big 
as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the "Palestinians," 
weeping for their deep bond with their lost "land" and "nation."

'So for the sake of honesty, let's not use the word "Palestinian" any 
more to describe these delightful folks, who dance for joy at our 
deaths until someone points out they're being taped.

'Instead, let's call them what they are: "Other Arabs Who Can't 
Accomplish Anything In Life And Would Rather Wrap Themselves 
In The Seductive Melodrama Of Eternal Struggle And Death."

'I 
know that's a bit unwieldy to expect to see on CNN.

'How about this, 
then: "Adjacent Jew-Haters".

'Okay, so the adjacent Jew-Haters want their own country.

'Oops, 
just one more thing.

'No, they don't.

'They could've had their own 
country any time in the last thirty years, especially, two years ago at 
Camp David.

'But if you have your own country, you have to have 
traffic lights and garbage trucks and Chambers of Commerce, and, worse, you actually have to figure out some way to make a living. 
That's no fun.

'No, they want what all the other Jew-Haters in the 
region want: Israel.

'They also want a big pile of dead Jews, of course--that's where the 
real fun is -- but mostly they want Israel.

'Why?

'For one thing, trying to destroy Israel - or "The Zionist Entity" as 
their textbooks call it -- for the last fifty years has allowed the rulers
of Arab countries to divert the attention of their own people away 
from the fact that they're the blue-ribbon most illiterate, poorest, 
and tribally backward on God's Earth, and if you've ever been 
around God's Earth, you know that's really saying something.

'It makes me roll my eyes every time one of our pundits waxes 
poetic about the great history and culture of the Muslim Mideast. 


'Unless I'm missing something, the Arabs haven't given anything to 
the world since Algebra, and, by the way, thanks a hell of a lot for 
that one.

'Chew this around and spit it out: Five hundred million Arabs; five 
million Jews.

'Think of all the Arab countries as a football field, and 
Israel as a pack of matches sitting in the middle of it.

'And now 
these same folks swear that if Israel gives them half of that pack of 
matches, everyone will be pals.

'Really? Wow, what neat news.

'Hey, but what about the string of 
wars to obliterate the tiny country and the constant din of rabid 
blood oaths to drive every Jew into the sea?

'Oh, that? We were 
just kidding.

'My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day:

'Just 
reverse the numbers.

'Imagine five hundred million Jews and five 
million Arabs.

'I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it.

'Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and 
dynamite to themselves? Of course not. Or marshaling every fiber 
and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab State 
into the sea? Nonsense.

'Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible.


'Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking 
their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting.

'No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst 
Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death.

'Mr. Bush, God bless him, is walking a tightrope. I understand that 
with vital operations coming up against Iraq and others, it's in our 
interest, as Americans, to try to stabilize our Arab allies as much as 
possible, and, after all, that can't be much harder than stabilizing a 
roomful of supermodels who've just had their drugs taken away.

'However, in any big-picture strategy, there's always a danger of 
losing moral weight.

'We've already lost some.

'After September 11 
our president told us and the world he was going to root out all 
terrorists and the countries that supported them. Beautiful.

'Then the Israelis, after months and months of having the 
equivalent of an Oklahoma City every week (and then every
day) start to do the same thing we did, and we tell them to show 
restraint.

'If America were being attacked with an Oklahoma City every day, 
we would all very shortly be screaming for the administration to just 
be done with it and kill everything south of the Mediterranean and 
east of the Jordan. (Hey, wait a minute, that's actually not such a 
bad id . . .ooh, that is, what a horrible thought, yeah, horrible.)".

Third item.

A brilliant and brief exposition of the fact that the Arab Muslim war on Israel - which the Arab Muslims are supported by non-Arab Muslims world-wide - is, at bottom, nothing other than Jihad against the Jews.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/06/why_islam_will_never_accept_th.html

Why Islam Will Never Accept the State of Israel

By Steven Simpson, THE AMERICAN THINKER June 30 2010

Click on the link, anyone here who hasn't read it. Copy it. Keep it. Print it off and read it over and over until you know everything in it by heart. And keep copies of it in the car, and the briefcase, and the desk drawer, and on the end of the dining room table, to give to anybody who hasn't yet understood.

Fourth item.

Part of a posting, radiant with holy and white-hot anger, that Hugh Fitzgerald made, a propos the UN and Israel, back in May 2004, in this thread.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2004/05/california-officers-learn-muslim-culture.html

Scroll down through the comments to the posting -
Hugh | May 30, 2004 5:56 PM

and then read down some more.

Here is the portion that can and should be copied, and printed off, and read aloud by someone, or more than one person, on the steps of the United Nations building in New York:

"When one reads about some U.N. vote, in the Security Council or in the General Assembly,

"where the votes against Israel are usually on the order of 189 to 2, with a few abstentions,

"one is prompted to ask aloud of those ambassadors from civilized, or quasi-civilized lands,

" whether they can, when they return home to their New York apartments that night, and perhaps, mimicking Jean-Paul Belmondo in a famous scene in Breathless, looking closely at themselves in the mirror, how can they stand it?

"How can they bear to be participants in such hypocrisy and stupidity?

"Do they really believe the Arab propaganda?

"Is there something in the very atmosphere of the U.N. that causes people to lose their moral sense?

"And even if they are forced to follow orders from the foreign ministries at home, do they never protest? Never think to try to change those policies? Never seek to understand what is really going on in the endless siege of Israel?

"Never once try to identify with the Israelis, whose state was created because the civilized nations of the world, with men such as Clemenceau and Lloyd George, thought that it was, on the whole, the right and proper thing to do --

and the League of Nations regarded all of western Palestine, from the Jordan to the sea, as the very least that could be set aside

(when the Mandatory Power, Great Britain, unilaterally declared that the mandatory provisions regarding Jewish immigration and settlement would not apply to the area east of the Jordan, the Mandates Commission was horrified -- curious that no one bothers to consult, or make public, their remarks at the time).

"Do you look at yourself in the mirror, grimacing in the Belmondo manner, and reassure yourself about the day's events: "Well done, thou good and faithful servant."

"Are you proud of having joined the pack of wolves as they snapped at Israel, trying to bring it down to go in for the final kill?

"Or do you really believe that this war on Israel is really about "two tiny peoples, blah blah blah"?

"Exactly how stupid, or unseeing, are you?

"Do you ever -- you ambassadors from Germany, Italy, Great Britain, France, Poland, Hungary, Spain, and so on-- ever think about Islamic teachings as the basis for the permanent refusal to permit Israel to exist, whatever its size?

"And if it is its existence that matters, not its dimensions, then surely the Israelis should choose those dimensions that will both make their own defense strongest, and also make the other side believe those defenses are at their strongest.

"For only darura, necessity, keeps Arab states from attacking.

"The only thing keeping the peace in the MIddle East between the Muslim Arabs and the Jewish state, is fear by the Arabs of the consequences, and the ability of their leaders to note that Israel still is more powerful.

"But if that state is reduced in size, it is not only Israel that will suffer, but the Arab leaders who may not really wish to go to war.

"For, with a reduced and seemingly vulnerable Israel, they will no longer have the excuse (for the few who might want one) of darura.

"The very pressure put on Israel to further retreat is in fact leading not to peace but to war.

"There is no "two-state solution" -- and how can there be?

"What would Muhammad say -- yes, it's okay for the Infidels to have their own state, where the shari'a does not apply, and they are free to live as they wish, on land that was once part of dar al-Islam? Nonsense. Double nonsense.

"Were I a schoolboy, and in my school at every assembly there was a denunciation by 188 of my 189 classmates, of the one small scholarly schoolboy, sitting in the third row on the right, who seemed to want only to be left in peace to study, and who was constantly being harassed and bullied and threatened by a gang of 22 of the most unpleasant and violent of my classmates (who, let it be said, did not confine their aggression to that one schoolboy),

"I would behave as the American ambassador so often behaves

{behaved, alas; this is now 2010, and under Obama the USA has joined the lynch mob and is howling right along with the other wolves and hyenas - dda},

refusing to agree to the bullying, the lynch-mob mentality, the pious lies uttered and repeated and blandly accepted, about the "threat" coming from this single small boy, supposedly directed at those 22 bullies.

"Not to take that boy's side would have been intolerable. I couldn't stand it.

"But a great many of you ambassadors, and the Chris Pattens and Mary Robinsons of this great wide wonderful world we live in, find no difficulty in beating up, and beating up, that boy

(and I won't go in to that boy's tortured, difficult life, or what happened to so many of his relatives, through time and space).

"How do you stand it, week after week, month after month, year after year, the nonsense and corruption and timewasting and hypocrisy and stupidity and paralysis and stench of failure on the East River? I couldn't stand it."

And another scathing and sombre Hugh Fitzgerald piece, from 2008.

Anyone who has joined us since November 2008, and has not yet come across this piece - read it!

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/11/fitzgerald-21-reasons-why-barack-obama-is-wrong-about-israel-and-the-saudi-peace-plan.html

'Fitzgerald: 21 reasons why Barack Obama is wrong about Israel and the Saudi peace plan'.

"This [the proposal for the recognition of Israel by the Arab world in exchange for its withdrawal to pre-1967 borders] might work, IF:

1. If Islam did not exist.

2. If the doctrines that are inculcated into the minds of Muslims were not so clear, so consistent, and so deeply imbedded.

3. If instead of being told that they had a duty to remove all obstacles to the spread and dominance of Islam all over the world, Muslims were told that they should accept unbelievers as equals and not try to subjugate them under Sharia.

4. If in the minds of Muslims the recapture of territory deemed to have once been part of Dar al-Islam were not at the top of the list.

It is at the top of the list because Muslims may once have possessed it , no matter when, no matter how, no matter for how long or short a time. This is because land that had once become part of Dar al-Islam and is then repossessed by non-Muslims constitutes an even greater and permanent affront to Muslims than the fact that parts of the world have as yet never been conquered by Islam, when Believers know (for they are taught) that the whole world belongs to Allah, and to the Believers, the "best of peoples" (Qur’an 3.110).

5. If there were anything in the historical record to suggest that these deep beliefs were not taken permanently to heart. They explain not merely the uncompromising attitude (which can hide, or disguise, or make palatable to powerful non-Muslims whose aid is sought to pressure other non-Muslims) toward Israel, but a great many other attitudes.

The notion that if Kashmir were yielded to Muslim rule, the pressure on India from Muslims in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and within India, including acts of terror, would do more than most temporarily diminish, is also false.

6. If there were some evidence that in the past negotiations and "treaties" the Muslim Arabs had ever shown themselves willing to stick to such treaties and not, as Majid Khadduri notes, always and everywhere regard such treaties with Infidel states or peoples as made to be broken (on the model of Al-Hudaibiyya).

7. If the Israelis in particular had any evidence save for a few words that the difference between the Fast Jihadists of Hamas and the Slow Jihaidsts of Fatah were differences on ultimate goals and not merely on tactics and timing.

8. If the re-establishment of the Jewish commonwealth in modern Israel were not the incredible achievement it is. This commonwealth has been built in what was a dusty backwater of the Ottoman Empire. Despite every effort by the local Muslim Arabs to destroy it, Israel managed to be built and to thrive, and to offer an example. It is an example that remains unrecognized, but it is an example nonetheless that has had a civilizing effect.

Israel is an example of an advanced polity in the midst of darkness, not least in its treatment of minorities.

Compare the treatment of all non-Muslim and non-Arab minorities everywhere in Arab-dominated land, from Kurds and Berbers and Copts and Assyrians to black African Christians, pagans, and even Muslims).

9. If Israel did not have a perfect right to hold onto what was after 1948 the "West Bank." This is because of the express terms of the Mandate for Palestine. That Mandate was set up for the establishment of the Jewish National Home.

10. If that territory, seized by the Jordanians, had not then come into the possession of Israel by force of defensive arms in the Six-Day War, so that Israel's claim is reinforced by all the ordinary rules of territorial adjustment after a successful war of self-defense.
See how the map of Europe was rewritten after each of the two last world wars. Start with Italy's claim to the Alto Adige, which was once the Sudtirol and 98% ethnic German. It was awarded to Italy, and quite rightly.

11. If Israel had the vast financial resources of the Muslim Arabs, who have received more than eleven trillion dollars since 1973 alone, because of an accident of geology.

12. If Israel did not need to hold onto the heights of Judea, the traditional invasion route.

13. If the history of the Jews had not been written in Judea and Samaria and the loss of that territory would not deal an incalculable blow to Israeli morale.

14. If the local Arabs really were this entirely factitious "Palestinian people" invented out of the local Arabs, for clear propagandistic reasons, only after the Six-Day War. See Zuhair Mohsein, see a thousand others.

15. If Israel did not depend on the aquifers under the "West Bank."

16. If the Arab leaders, and even the leaders of Fatah, did not make completely clear to their own people that what they were smilingly saying to the Americans and the rest of the West could not possibly change their real intentions. Those who had come to realize that an all-out immediate assault was not possible were pursuing the salami strategy.

17. If Mahmoud Abbas himself had not shown, like Arafat, but far more plausibly and cunningly, with a great show of no-one-here-but-us-mild-mannered accountants, those true intentions on so many occasions.

18. If the Arabs had any ability to grasp the very idea that smaller peoples too, the Jews but not only the Jews, had a right to their own states, states that existed not as rump states, essentially dhimmi-states that could be dispensed with if the non-Muslims managed not to show the proper dhimmi attitude. And how long would it take the Arabs to find that anything at all, including the "treatment" of Arabs in a state reduced to retreat behind what even Abba Eban once called "the lines of Auschwitz," could be used as a pretext to fight against that rebellious dhimmi-state?

19. If the Arabs gave any sign that they would now be satisfied not with 14 million square miles of territory, but with the addition of a territory so tiny to them, but that meant life-and-death to the Israelis.

20. If the Arabs were willing to start treating other non-Arab and non-Muslim peoples (those Berbers, those Kurds, those Assyrians, those Maronites, those black Africans in Darfur and the southern Sudan and everywhere that they have been enslaved, still, by Arabs), not only with semi-decency, but as if they too had a right to their own autonomy or states.

21. If there were not every reason for the well-informed to recognize that an insidious game was being played, one that could be played only because so many in power, in a display of "pensee unique," simply have not bothered to find out what it is they need to know in order to think carefully about the fate of Israel and about the entire Middle East, and North Africa.

Indeed, they have not thought about the fate of the entire world, given that Islam now spreads its tentacles deep into Western Europe, where the understanding of the ideology of Islam has been slow, and given that the attempt to push Israel back can only lead to tears, and will use up all kinds of energy and capital that should be devoted to learning about and coming to grips with the problem of Islam. Instead, those who presume to lead and instruct us continue to perform salti-mortali {back-flips} so as to pretend that there is no permanent problem.

Given the worldview that Islam inculcates, and given the fact (spelled out by many scholars, but one might begin with Majid Khadduri's War and Peace in the Law of Islam) that no treaty signed by Muslims with Infidels should be permanently obeyed, but regarded as necessarily to be breached when the occasion presents itself -- given all this and so much more that one could set out here,

it is madness and cruelty and wickedness,

for those who presume to make policy in this area

to continue to ignore the real history of the Middle East,

and the history of the Jews,

and the history of how all the non-Arab and non-Muslim peoples are treated by the Arabs, and have been treated over the past 1350 years.

Above all, it is madness for anyone to be kept on in a policy-making position who still has not bothered to study Islamic doctrine and its impact in Israel, or Iraq or Afghanistan or Pakistan, or in the countries of Western Europe and their own growing domestic distempers.

Yet they still have not bothered to do so, so long now after the 9/11/2001 attack.

That day should have led but did not lead those whose duty it is to instruct and to protect us to hit the books, that is, the texts of Islam -- the Qur'an, the Hadith, the Sira -- and the studies of Islam by the hundreds of great Western scholars who wrote in the age (roughly, 1870-1970) before the Great Inhibition set in.

Instead, these leaders have not known where to turn.

They have been greatly impressed with the smiling diplomats or accommodating and gracious and so-generous Arab hosts -- from Prince Bandar with his well-practiced schtick, to the "plucky little king" Hussein of Jordan, now replaced by the same slightly less-attractive, but still plausible (Deerfield! a beautiful wife! perfect English! what else do you want?) son and his entourage.

Then there are the assorted smoothies who have managed to persuade the Americans that if only, if only, that pesky little Israel were put out of its misery, and brought kicking and screaming to make the deal that -- as the James Bakers and Edward Djerijians and even the most exhausted, end-of-our-mental-tether Israelis seem to think might be possible -- "everyone knows the broad outlines of."

But those "everyones" are wrong. Those "everyones" do not know.

They do not understand, the texts, tenets, attitudes, atmospherics of Islam.

That is what they do not know, and that, I'm afraid, is just about everything that, in an intelligent and well-run polity, they would be required to know."

- Posted by Hugh at November 16, 2008 8:13 PM

And a news report featuring the wise Geert Wilders' views on those Jewish villages in Judea and Samaria, and those Jewish houses in Jerusalem. A news report introduced and analysed by Hugh Fitzgerald.

http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/31105

Tuesday, 7 December 2010

'Geert Wilders States What To All Educated People Should Be The Obvious'.

Final thought.

Canadian jihadwatchers should, perhaps, write forthwith to PM Stephen Harper and tell him that if he genuinely means to stick up for Israel no matter what, he is likely soon enough to be put to the test.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/11/canadian-pm-vows-to-stand-for-israel-regardless-of-the-cost.html

'Harper said Israel may be subjected to fair criticism, and noted that Israel subjects itself to such criticism as part of a healthy, democratic debate.

'But he spoke of a "solemn duty" to defend the vulnerable and challenge the aggressor at home and abroad.
"Not just because it is the right thing to do, but because history shows us, and the ideology of the anti-Israel mob tells us all too well, that those who threaten the existence of the Jewish people are in the longer term a threat to all of us."

Fine words, Mr Harper. The thing, though, will be to live up to them.

And it looks like Jose Maria Aznar and his 'Friends of Israel' group ought to get to work to see what they can do.

http://www.onejerusalem.org/2010/06/former-spanish-president-stand.php

"Once to every man and nation/ comes the moment to decide/ in the strife of truth with falsehood/ for the good or evil side;/ through each choice God speaking to us/ offers each the bloom or blight/ then that man or nation chooses/ for that darkness or that light".

It used to be that you could at least solidly count on the United States to vote in support of fellow democracy Israel on these things.

Under Obama, *that is no longer a given*.

On his show today, Glenn Beck read through several instances of Jihad madness, and then he came to this story.

He simply said, in a tone dripping with sarcasm, "that one made me proud to be an American".

With a heavy heart, I feel just the same way.

Wildjew it is true that Israel is not the number one priority of the majority of American Jews when they go to the polls, and there is a reason - American Jews (also British Jews, and Jews from all over the world) are starting to care more about what is going on in their own countries, where they are citizens, than what is going on in Israel.

Aid to (and even support of) Israel is no longer a top priority for Jews and others in many countries. Jews are starting to pay more attention to what is going on politically in the countries they are citizens of, and how it affects them as citizens, not just as Jews. In my view, for far too long, many American and other Jews have been totally focused on a country not their own (and the truth is, many of them would not dream of living there) – thus they ignore completely the problems of the countries they are citizens of, choosing only to consider how what goes on in America, the UK and other countries affects Israel and themselves as Jews. Somewhere along the way some of these Jews who are truly “Israel-firsters” have forgotten the loyalty they owe to the countries they live in, and how the push for the payment of billions of dollars of aid to another country affects these countries in the present dangerous financial climate. The UK and America cannot be blamed for wanting to look out for their own interests, financially and economically. Added to this, many non-Jewish Americans, Brits etc. see a group of people who appear to care only about themselves – so it is not surprising Americans and others are waking up to the fact that aid to Israel is a low priority, when their own country, America, the UK or elsewhere – is in poor financial (and political) shape. That is why I disagree with your statement that American Jews who don’t care about Israel will pay a high price one day. If those who don’t want to settle there do not acknowledge the aspirations and concerns of the country they are citizens of, and fight against injustice, corruption, and the steady invasion of Islamism in America, alongside their non-Jewish neighbours, they will truly pay a high price – when the true battle starts, they will be forced to stand alone because they do not see fit to consider themselves connected to the countries they live in.

I lived in Israel for many years. I came back to the UK, but I kept abreast of what was going on there. I know now that the Israel I once knew doesn’t exist any more – its idealism and integrity has been swallowed up by greed and racism, even between one Jew and another. Therefore, I will not go back – and I think that as a British citizen, my loyalty must be to the good of my country, the UK. That is not to say that I do not care what happens to Israel, because I do, and I support Israel’s right to exist in security – but I live here in the UK, and fighting Islamism here is more important to me than constantly fixating on what is going on in Israel.

Jamie, before I address some of your earlier points, allow me to address your misleading and (I believe) slanderous later charge that Israel has been swallowed up by "racism." You could say the same thing - indeed many do - about Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, David Horowitz, Frank Gaffney, Brigitte Gabriel, Geert Wilders and many other "anti-Muslim racists" and "Islamaphobes. I do not know where you are coming from with this allegation. Would you care to elaborate for the reader.

You say you disagree with my statement that American Jews who don’t care about Israel will pay a high price one day. I wrote earlier American Jews who do not care about Israel's welfare "could" pay a high price. I am not God. I am not a prophet. I have read some Jewish history. Jews and our leaders who spurned the Zionist movement in the early part of the twentieth century in Germany and parts of Europe; Jews who considered themselves "Germans first," Jews who were patriotic Germans, who were warned to evacuate the ghettos of Europe but chose (they, their rabbis and communal leaders) to remain in Germany and parts of Europe experiencing unprecedented anti-Semitism, many did indeed pay a high price. Many were murdered. Many died in Hitler's gas chambers. That is a fact Jamie.

Incidentally, I have long advocated that Israel should wean herself from American aid. I believe it would be good both for the U.S. and for Israel. Israel's unhealthy dependency is good for neither country. Nor do I accept your view that being a loyal American (or for that matter, British) citizen and at the same time, caring about Israel's security and welfare are mutually exclusive as you seem to think. Many American Christians and Jews support Israel based on their religious faith. Beyond that, Israel is on the front lines, fighting the global jihad. Given that fact alone, why do you believe American (and British) Jews and Christians should not support Israel?

Jamie sez: "but I live here in the UK, and fighting Islamism here is more important to me than constantly fixating on what is going on in Israel."

What happens in Israel will migrate to the UK and elsewhere...Everyone should watch closely what happens in Israel...

Wildjew - you say I have slandered Israel as being racist. This is not slander - it is the truth. Mizrachi Jews in Israel are considered second class citizens as compared to Ashkenazi Jews. When I first lived there Ashkenazim were concerned that their children should not marry "black" Jews (Mizrachim). You must have read how many orthodox Ashkenazim consider Mizrachi religious Jews "not Jewish enough". If this is not racism, then what is? Also, the contempt of religious Jews for Reform Jews in Israel is a form of racism, is it not?

This youtube tells of the complicity of the Israeli government in stopping reparation payments being paid to Holocaust survivors in Israel

http://rt.com/news/prime-time/israels-shame-as-holocaust-victims-die-in-poverty/

Not racism, exactly, but appalling treatment of elderly people.

These are not the actions of a democratic humane country, are they? The whereabouts of the money they should have received is still not known.

Regarding the Jews who spurned the Zionist movement in the years before the Holocaust and paid a high price - many Jews who did not spurn the Zionist movement also died in the Holocaust. I seem to remember reading that Golda Meir and her colleagues were considering letting only able bodied Jews who met certain criteria into Palestine at one time - a sort of quota system. What subsequently happened in Europe forced them to change their minds.

Wildjew, I do not think being patriotic to the country you live in and caring about Israel is mutually exclusive, however you must admit some Jews are obsessive about it, and constantly view everything that goes on in their own countries solely as being good or not good for Jews. Support of Israel is one of the main things they judge this by, calling those non-Jews who do not support Israel anti-Semites, (and Jewish people who simply have no interest in Israel self-haters) - and it increasingly ticks off many of their non-Jewish compatriots who are not anti-Semitic at all. Some of them feel they have the right to ask these Jews entirely innocently why they do not live in Israel, because they seem to be more interested in Israel than the country they live in - and they are smeared as anti-Semites in return. Some, especially those who have friends who have been killed and maimed in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, ask why Jewish people rush to join the IDF, and not their country's army. These are perfectly logical questions, but when reacted to in this way it hardly endears Jewish communities to their neighbours, does it?

Wildjew countries like America, the UK and others in Europe, are in crisis, both financially and because of the demographic dangers of Islamic migration. They cannot be blamed for wanting to put themselves first, and are becoming more and more nationalistic as time goes by. While we're concentrating on Jews who do support Israel right or wrong, shouldn't we spare a thought for those Jews who have no affiliation to Israel at all, to whom Israel is just another country, who are nevertheless tied in with this "all for Israel" group by those who don't realise this?

Geert Wilders, Friend of Israel, a Lover of Zion, speaking in November 2008 at the 'Facing Jihad' conference in Jerusalem, convened by MK Aryeh Eldad.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/12/geert-wilders-at-facing-jihad-conference-in-jerusalem-if-there-would-have-been-no-israel-islamic-imp.html

Excerpt:

'In the words of the brave Dr. Wafa Sultan: “It is a clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality”.

'Indeed also here in Israel you are not fighting a territorial war, it's not about territory it's about ideology.

'The Islamic ideology does not seek cooperation or assimilation but aims for submission and dominance over non-Muslims. '

And Hugh Fitzgerald, on the convener of that gathering, Aryeh Eldad:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/09/fitzgerald-a-tribute-to-aryeh-eldad.html

One more thing worth adding - 'world opinion' - until 1967 was largely sympathetic to Israel, since the conflict was phrased as b/w Jews & Arabs, and the latter was seen for what they were - owners of an empire stretching from Casablanca to Basra. It was only after 1967, when Arafat successfully started to define it as a conflict b/w Israelis & Palestinians - that it started changing, due to the slick campaign the Arabs managed to run. As a result, it now started to be perceived as the huge Israel - which then had occupied Sinai, in addition to Gaza, West Bank & Golan. And Israel letting go of the Sinai had no effect on the public perception that it almost doubled its area after 1967.

So as far as 'world opinion' goes (what on earth does that mean? Does the average guy on the street in Montevideo or Harare really care?) there is no way the Jews could win this, unless they somehow succeeded in showing it as a war b/w 1.3 billion Muslims vs 13 million Jews. And even then, given that 99% of those Muslims are non-White, it would still be an uphill task for Jews, just like it is an uphill task for Hindus, despite being another non-White people.

Best strategy - ignore 'world opinion'.

Wildjew, thank you for your answer to me. I wish you "hatzlacha raba" on your aliyah,whenever it may be, and I hope your aspirations are possible and your expectations will be met.

Regarding your understanding that the obligations Israel has to Holocaust survivors are being taken care of - sadly it's not the experience of Holocaust survivors I know personally. I fully appreciate your comments that you would not have accepted a penny from Germany and its allies had you been in the same position, however it should be realised that the day to day expenses of living, including medical care many survivors needed at the time, when in some cases they were the only ones to survive of their families and had nobody to give them financial help, were well nigh impossible, and still are for those still alive. What I do not agree with, and never have agreed with, is that even now, organisations seemingly representing holocaust survivors are still trying to get money out of Germany and its war time allies. These organisations have built an industry based on the Holocaust - and it is reprehensible (the World Jewish Congress is an example. Large sums of money have disappeared, which should have gone to those needing it - and the WJC threatens legal action whenever anybody tries to find out anything about it).

With regard to Jews being obsessive about Israel - I explained some of it in my last reply to you. These Jews are hyper sensitive even about constructive criticism, and use smearing tactics to shut anybody up who dares say Israel is not perfect. There are plenty of them in the Jewish community where I live. Again, I feel behaving like this puts each and every Jew under the spotlight of being unreasonable and uncompromising. You'll agree we have enough problems!

I am very vocal in my support for Israel's existence, as I said before. However I do not see why I should defend some of the mistakes Israel makes simply not to "rock the boat", either. Why, for example, should settlers stone and humiliate elderly Palestinians, and young children going to school?

Gravenimage I know Jews are heavily involved in the social life of the UK, America etc. However, they still isolate themselves and some of them adopt a dismissive attitude to non-Jews, in some cases even despise them. Thanks to multiculturalist/celebrate diversity idiocy, some Jews demand special treatment over and above others, and what is dangerous about it is, when Muslims see this happening, then they do the same, with threats of violence if their demands are not met. Before people were forced to celebrate diversity and other cultures, Jews, Christians, and others were cared for by their governments, their needs taken care of. What we have now is ordinary non-Jewish Brits looking on - they're the forgotten ones in all this - while Jews and Muslims are trying to outdo each other in their demands. Some I have spoken to believe that there isn't much difference between Jews and Muslims in this, and some Brits are becoming resentful. Not a pleasant thing to contemplate is it? When Jews insist on saying publically at every turn that Britain is an anti-Semitic country without giving a thought that we have two former Chief Rabbis as Peers of the Realm, countless Jewish MPs voted in by so-called "anti-Semitic" non-Jews - how do you think tolerant Brits, who have not an anti-Semitic thought in their heads, feel?

I respect your view that support for Israel is very much in the West's interests - but because of the behaviour of certain Israel focused organisations in the Diaspora, the level of patience and understanding of Israel's position by other countries is dwindling, in my opinion.

Of course it would be a disaster for Jews if Israel fell, however perhaps now should be the time for a bit of "tough love" - not seeing Israel through the rose tinted spectacles many Jews see her. We need to stop this "whatever Israel does is right" mentality - we would be doing Israel a favour, because after almost seventy years of her existence, I believe Israel needs to see the world as it really is, and compromise with it by acknowledging her own part in the continual misunderstandings.

I oppose Israel being forced to cede ground to the Ummah for any reason whatsoever - especially not land that carries far more emotional, historical and political significance for Jews, than for the Ummah, and that *also* comprises the military high ground that must be held if Israel is to survive as a free non-Muslim country assailed by the neverending Jihad - for precisely the same reasons as I would oppose anyone's trying to force India to hand over Kashmir, or any other Muslim-infested district of India, to the Ummah; and it is for the same reasons, also, that sane and decent people, had they realized what was going on, would have opposed forcing the Serbs to surrender Kosovo to the Ummah.

And to be frank, I would argue that if Thailand and the Philippines desire to survive longterm they will have to create a clear demarcation between themselves and the Ummah.

That means either letting the Muslims have Mindanao and Southern Thailand but fortifying the new borders against any further encroachments - and at the same time turfing out of the *rest* of the country ALL Muslims currently there resident, so as not to have, years or decades down the track, *another* Fifth-Columnist Muslim insurrection-for-the-seizure-of-turf ; or, if dar al Harb intends to keep the turf it currently controls, then the Philippines and Thailand have to evict ALL Muslims not only from their kafir-majority provinces, but *also* from those areas they [the non-Muslim polity] currently rule that are presently Muslim-majority. Let the Ummah lose some ground; why should death cultists be permitted to always get what they want?

I am thinking in terms of the big picture. I don't want the non-Muslim world to lose ground; I want the *Ummah*, the murderous Mohammedan Mob, to lose ground, wherever possible.

If Darmanad thinks that eretz Israel was somehow entirely Judenrein from AD 70 or AD 135 until the 19th century, and that therefore since there were no Jews in the house, so to speak, and the Arabs were squatting there 'continuously, the Arab 'squatting' rights cancel those of Jews, darmanad is grossly in error.

**Jews never ceased to live in eretz Israel, throughout the entire period first of Roman and Byzantine rule, and then during the entire Muslim imperium, despite the misery, degradation and periodic mass killings inflicted upon them by the Muslim colonists and occupiers.** What is more, the 'pull' to live in eretz Israel was so strong that throughout the entire period - despite the abusive treatment they suffered from the Muslims - there was always a steady trickle of Jews from all parts of the diaspora, coming back to the Land and merging with the remnant Jewish communities already present. The Jewish communities of Hebron and Safed are *ancient*.

For more on this topic, see James Parkes, "Whose Land?" which shows clearly that there never was a time, during the Muslim imperium, when there were no Jews living in eretz Israel. **Gaza** had a Jewish community; the 'Sabbath hymn' was composed there, during the Middle Ages.

And the reality is that most of the 'Arabs' who currently live in Israel *can't* trace their families in the land back beyond two or three generations; their grandparents illegally swarmed into the area during the time of the British Mandate, from places like Syria, Saudi Arabia, 'Jordan' and Egypt, or from further afield, such as parts of North Africa. Go back a few more generations, and you find groups of people with Turkish, Bosnian and Bulgarian ethnicity - Turkish Muslims, and Muslims of Slavic convert ancestry, who were resettled in the region by the Ottomans, when countries like Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria threw off the Muslim yoke and drove out most of the Muslims (whether Turks, or local converts to Islam). How 'Arab' is someone whose genetics are actually Slavic, descended from someone forcibly converted to Islam in the Balkan peninsula? What 'deep association' can such a person claim to have?

There is something else, too, that needs to be said. Islam recognises one thing and one thing only: the right of Muslims to grab anything they want from anybody else, by force or by fraud, and to hold it in perpetuity uncontested; and if anyone resists or prevents this process of Muslims taking other people's things, they howl with rage.

Islam, in other words, sees CONQUEST as conferring legitimare permanent possession - **so long as it is Muslims doing the conquering**.

But if someone else CONQUERS MUSLIMS, then cue the Muslims wailing and howling and crying about their ancestral rights and ancient homelands and all the rest of it; that is, invoking for their own benefit concepts which, as regards their own treatment of all the other peoples of the earth, and especially the indigenous peoples of lands conquered by Muslims, they do not recognise and which they in fact treat with absolute contempt.

For the benefit of those new to this site and to this subject.

First, perhaps *the* classic article on the local Arabs (mostly Muslim) in and around Israel.

Martha Gellhorn's "The Arabs of Palestine", from Atlantic Monthly, 1961.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1969/12/the-arabs-of-palestine/4203/

Doom and Gloom, you've already seen this; but I think new posters and lurkers need to see it.

I am going to quote two lengthy passages.

'Confronting one Arab Muslim girl, [inside Israel, living in a prosperous village] Gellhorn has had enough (especially since she had encountered lots of Arabs praising Hitler, and expressing out and out viciousness, nonsense and lies of all kinds - 'madhattery', as she dubbed it).

‘She [the Arab Muslim girl] opened her closed face to say, "Yes, I see. But it is our country."
‘It was too hot, and too futile.

‘I was tired of the convention, which apparently requires non-Arabs [non-Muslims – dda] to treat Arabs [Muslims? – dda] as if they were neurotic children, subject either to tantrums or to internal bleeding from spiritual wounds.

'This girl did not strike me as a pathetic weakling.

"Only by right of conquest," I said. "In the seventh century.

"The Jews got here first, about two thousand years ahead of you. You haven't lived as masters in your own house for a long time.

"Aside from the Crusaders, the Ottoman Turks bossed you for a steady four hundred years, before the British took over.

"Now the Jews have won back their land by right of conquest. Turn and turn about," I said, feeling as beastly minded as an Arab myself. "Fair's fair."…

More:

‘The emotional position of the Israeli Arabs is tormenting (and is held in that torment by the Arab radio stations), though they are materially secure, protected by equal justice under law, and by an almost exaggerated respect for their feelings.

‘If the Arab nations made peace with Israel, it is possible that all Israeli Arabs would relax, be happy, and wholehearted supporters of Israel. If not, not.

‘No one, after listening to Israeli Arabs, could believe that Palestinian refugees would be either contented or loyal citizens of Israel

‘Arabs {she could more correctly have said, ‘Muslims’ – dda} gorge on hate, they roll in it, they breathe it. Jews top the hate list, but any foreigners are hateful enough. Arabs also hate each other, separately and en masse. Their politicians change the direction of their hate as they would change their shirts. Their press is vulgarly base with hate-filled cartoons; their reporting describes whatever hate is now uppermost and convenient. Their radio is a long scream of hate, a call to hate. They teach their children hate in school. They must love the taste of hate; it is their daily bread. And what good has it done them?

'THERE is no future in spending UN money to breed hate {But that is exactly what happned and is still happening, under UNRWA, 1960s-2000+ - dda}.

' There is no future in nagging or bullying Israel to commit suicide by the admission of a fatal locust swarm of enemies.

'There is no future in Nasser's solution, the Holy War [Jihad – dda.] against Israel; and we had better make this very clear, very quickly.

'Long bleak memories will recall the Sudetendeutsch and Czechoslovakia. In a new setting, Palestinian refugees assume the role of the Sudetendeutsch. Israel becomes Czechoslovakia.

'Propaganda prepares the war for liberation of "our brothers."

'Victory over a minor near enemy is planned as the essential first step on a long triumphant road of conquest.

'A thousand-year Muslim Reich, the African continent ruled by Egypt [or, today, by Persia? – dda] may be a mad dream, but we have experience of mad dreams and mad dreamers.

'We cannot be too careful. The echo of Hitler's voice is heard again in the land, now speaking Arabic [and, today, it speaks Farsi as well - dda.].
…
‘The Palestinian refugees are unfortunate victims of a brief moment in history.

‘It is forgotten that Jews are also victims in the same manner, of the same moment.

' The Arab-Israel war and its continuous aftermath produced a two-way flight of peoples.

'Nearly half a million Jews, leaving behind everything they owned, escaped from the Arab countries where they lived to start life again as refugees in Israel.

'Within one generation, if civilization lasts, Palestinian refugees will merge into the Arab nations, because the young will insist on real lives instead of endless waiting.

' If we can keep the peace, however troubled, the children of Palestinian refugees will make themselves at home among their own kind, in their ancestral lands.

'**For the Jews there is no other ancestral land than Israel.’** {my emphasis - dda}.

And since I may as well supply, in this thread, a sort of compendium of sources that challenge the 'Palestinian narrative' which has been swallowed unquestioningly by so many people in the West and beyond it in the past fifty years, I will add the remarks upon Islam made by a clear-eyed Jew in Israel in 1955.

Remarks quoted by Edward Said, to prove 'racism' or suchlike, but which will strike any jihadwatcher as nothing more than the plain unvarnished truth.

Here is the original thread, and the passage from Carlebach/ Karlebakh, introduced by some acerbic remarks from Hugh Fitzgerald:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/05/fitzgerald-edward-said-hoist-by-his-own-petard.html

'Dr. A. Carlebach, whose analysis published in Ma'ariv (Oct. 7, 1955) would have been lost to history, one suspects, but for the fact that it is reprinted, amusingly and quite uncomprehendingly, in Edward Said's preposterous "The Question of Palestine."

'Fortunately for us, Said often provides quotes from various European and Zionist sources that are so deadly, so convincing, particularly in the light of all we have learned about Islam over the past few years, that as a work of propaganda it no longer serves its purpose.

'Here is what Said quoted from Carlebach, and what Said obviously thought was self-evidently absurd, but which we read now with quite a different frame of mind:

"These Arab Islamic countries do not suffer from poverty, or disease, or illiteracy, or exploitation; they only suffer from the worst of all plagues: Islam.

"Wherever Islamic psychology rules, there is the inevitable rule of despotism and criminal aggression.

"The danger lies in Islamic psychology, which cannot integrate itself into the world of efficiency and progress, that lives in a world of illusion, perturbed by attacks of inferiority complexes and megalomania, lost in dreams of the holy sword.

"The danger stems from the totalitarian conception of the world,

"the passion for murder deeply rooted in their blood, from the lack of logic, the easily inflamed brains, the boasting,

" and above all: the blasphemous disregard for all that is sacred to the civilized world...

{as amply demonstrated by the hysterical Arab Muslim adulation of the child-murderer Samir Kuntar, and by the murder, by Arab Muslims, of heavily-pregnant Tali Hatuel and her four little daughters, and by the tearing limb-from-limb of two unarmed Jewish reservists in Ramallah, and by the gunning down of unarmed Torah students on top of their holy books in the Mercaz Harav yeshiva, and - long before the foundation of Israel - by the wholesale rape and murder of helpless dhimmi Jews in Safed and Hebron in the 19th century and in the early 20 th century, including gang raping and mutilation of underage girls - dda}

"their reactions -- to anything -- have nothing to do with good sense.

"They are all emotion, unbalanced, instantaneous, senseless. It is always the lunatic that speaks from their throat. You can talk 'business' with everyone, and even with the devil. But not with Allah...

"This is what every grain in this country shouts.

"There were many great cultures here, and invaders of all kinds. All of them -- even the Crusaders -- left signs of culture and blossoming. But on the path of Islam, even the trees have died.

"We pile sin upon crime when we distort the picture and reduce the discussion to a conflict of border between Israel and her neighbors.

"First of all, it is not the truth.

"The heart of the conflict is not the question of the borders; it is the question of Muslim psychology.....

:Moreover, to present the problem as a conflict between two similar parts is to provide the Arabs with the weapon of a claim that is not theirs.

"If the discussion with them is truly a political one, then it can be seen from both sides.

"Then we *appear* {note; 'appear'; for the reality is in fact one of decolonisation, not of colonisation; of an indigenous people resisting an empire that had oppressed them for centuries - dda} as those who came to a country that was entirely Arab {it was, in fact, not so - dda}, and we conquered and implanted ourselves as an alien body among them, and we loaded them with refugees and constitute a military danger for them, etc. etc. ...one can justify this or that side--and such a presentation, sophisticated and political, of the problem is understandable for European minds--at our expense.

"The Arabs raise claims that {seem to -dda} make sense to the Western understanding of simple legal dispute.

"But in reality, who knows better than us that such is not the source of their hostile stand?

"**All those political and social concepts are never theirs** {my emphasis - dda}

"**Occupation by force of arms, in their own eyes, in the eyes of Islam, is not at all associated with injustice** {my emphasis - dda}.

"To the contrary, it constitutes a certificate and demonstration of authentic ownership.

" The sorrow for the refugees, for the expropriated brothers, has no room in their thinking.

"Allah expelled, Allah will care.

"Never has a Muslim politician been moved by such things (unless, indeed, the catastrophe endangered his personal status).

"**If there were no refugees and no conquest, they would oppose us just the same."** {my emphasis - dda}.

Now, as for those poor Palestinian refugees, here are the observations of John Roy Carlson, from 'Cairo to Damascus', 1951 (he who interviewed Hassan al Banna in person, and includes a nice long and informative chapter on the Muslim Brotherhood).

CARLSON’S ACCOUNT OF WHY MANY ARAB MUSLIMS (AND ARABISED CHRISTIANS) FLED DURING THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE, 1948.)

A lengthy footnote from chapter 12 'with the Arabs in Jerusalem' .

Carlson was personally in the thick of things during the 1948 war; mostly undercover on the Arab Muslim side, posing as a pro-Muslim Nazi sympathiser.

From the text proper, p.p 234-235 of the 1951 edition:
'Some fifty thousand Arabs had fled Jaffa'.

CARLSON'S NOTE:


"This flight-psychosis, which prevailed among the Arabs and ultimately resulted in the frantic exodus of many Moslems and Christians, is a difficult phenomenon to explain.

"It was a mass hysteria induced by poor morale *and by fear of revenge and retributiion for the Arab massacres and lootings from 1920 on* {my emphasis added - dda}.

"Arab leaders - particularly in the Mufti's Higher Committee - urged residents to clear the fighting areas, promising them that Palestine would be cleared of Jews within thirty days after the Mandate ended.

"After the Jews had been pushed into the sea, Arab leaders said, Palestinians could return to their homes and at the same time share in Jewish booty.

"*They implied that those who refused to leave were pro-Zionist; such people were threatened with retribution.* {my emphasis added - dda}

"In contrast, I [Carlson] know of instances where the Jews begged the Arabs, particularly the Christian elements, to remain, guaranteeing their safety and full respect for property.

"These Christians, however, joined the fleeing Moslems, *fearing the promised retribution following the promised Arab victory* {my emphasis added - dda}.

"As an instance, the Armenians, who had always got along well with Arab and Jew alike, joined the panicky Moslems, *horror-stricken by the memory of the Turkish massacres* {my emphasis added - dda}.

"Wealthy merchants, physicians, bankers, politicians and other leaders were the first to leave.

"Later came the poorer elements until, by the time the Mandate expired, those remaining were largely only the ill and the aged, *the looters*, and the innocents.

"**The exodus figure of 750 000 or more Arabs is sheer propaganda, a fictional number that cannot be supported by the facts** {nota bene - dda}.

"The populace in the country from Jerusalem north to Jericho was not disturbed by the fighting, nor were the Arabs and Christians resident in the congested areas within the quadrangle formed by Ramallah, Tulkarm, Jenin, and Nablus - Palestinian territory now annexed by Jordan.

"It must also be pointed out that many of the Moslem so-called refugees were homeless, nomadic wanderers in the first place.

"*Poor, nonrefugee Arabs, such as those in Gaza {NOTA BENE - dda}, have claimed refugee status in order to qualify for American aid* {my emphasis added - dda}."

END QUOTE FROM CARLSON

Another uncomfortable dose of truth from the forgotten past.

In Adolf Boehm's history of the Zionist movement, he depicts in detail the way the Young Turkish leader and Army Commander, Ahmet Cemal (Djemal),

**reduced the Jewish population of Ottoman Palestine by deportation and massacres, wiping out entire families of Jewish nationalist leaders** [my emphasis - dda}

Boehm concludes: "If Palestine had not been freed by the English at the end of 1917, the Jewish Yishuv (settlement) would have been exterminated by Djemal.

"By the war's end, it was reduced to 55,000 souls, **that is, half of the pre-war population.** {my emphasis - dda}."

[Boehm, Adolf: The Zionist Movement (Die zionististsche Bewegung). Vol. 1: The Zionist Movement until the end of the World War. 2nd, enlarged ed. Tel Aviv: Hozaah Ivrith Co. Ltd., 1935, page 643 ff. Published in German.]

And some observations from an Australian soldier, a Lighthorseman who was part of the great campaign from Egypt up through 'Palestine' in 1917.

'The Desert Column', Chapter 50, Page 183:

"I think this is the 17th (December, 1917). Yesterday we rode by numbers of vividly pretty little red-roofed towns. The inhabitants are very fair skinned, mostly Jews. They are by far the most cleanly people we have yet met. They are very hospitable although they do charge us a hefty/ p. 184 / price for brown bread, honey and tobacco.

'Lots of them have had a hard time from the Turks [for which see Boehm, as cited above].

'They seem to live between two devils, the Turk and the Arab. [both Muslim, of course - dda]

'Apparently the Turk prevents the Arab {i.e. the Arab MUSLIM - dda} from mssacring them outright, because the Jews are a very handy people to squeeze taxes from."

[And thus this Australian journalist. bushman and soldier sums up, in three simple sentences, centuries of Jewish dhimmitude under the Muslim scimitar in the land of Israel..].

The diary is not reproduced in full, and at this point there is a gap: I would very much like to see the original diaries, which are at the War Memorial in Canberra. Some 20 000 words were cut in passing from diaries to book – I think the diary may have had more to say here, about the Jewish towns and their situation, caught between Arab and Turkish Muslims].

'Distantly we see the city roofs of ‘Jaffa the beautiful’ – very pretty in its hills and trees and orchards, even at this distance…

'Some of our boys got wine yesterday from the [non-Muslim, obviously!] inhabitants of the little town near by, and things are a bit lively. I think the town is Richon.

'Yesterday we rode through the place along a narrow road, the inhabitants in such queer garments lining the roads and shady lanes to stare at these brown sleeveless soldiers. We must have seemed queer fighting men to them for they stared as if they had expected to see supermen, not rough-clad Australians.

'I don’t think they could realize that we actually were the men who had driven back their taskmaster of centuries [the Turk].

' They seem also to be on the verge of something they cannot believe, cannot understand; they tremble when they whisper of Jerusalem.

'It appears there is some prophecy, centuries old, that one day Jerusalem will fall and will be taken from the Turk or from whatever infidel [here, Idriess seems to mean, non-Jew] holds it.”

[Remember: Idriess wrote this in 1917, and published it in 1932].

“We passed a quaint little building with ‘Hotel’ prominently on a signboard, and other signs in Greek. A fair Hebe was leaning over the veranda with bared arms and a winning smile [so: not a Muslim]. She had won, too, for the place was full of officers of the forces taking occupation, others seemed to be arriving per horse and lorry every minute.

“These [Jewish; and Christian?] towns have plenty of flocks, plenty of wine, plenty of bread; the people are clean and civilized. We are coming into orchard towns now. The green oranges have given the whole regiment the tummy-ache. Reminds me of the melons of the Bardawil.

“…A beautiful period of our ride was after crossing the Wadi Hanein.

'We rode through tall mimosa hedges, in perfumed bloom, into the colony of Nachalat (the heritage of Reuben). Crowds of white men, women and children flocked the scented roads shouting: “Shallome! Shallome! Shallome!”

{No wonder; for the unexpectedly swift advance of the Australians and the English, driving back the Turkish Muslims and putting a bit of fear into the Arab Muslims, had quite possibly, averted a Muslim mass murder of the Jews in ‘Palestine’ – as Boehm tells us, some 55 000 of the population - numbering some 110 000 in 1914 - had already been either driven out, or killed}.