An Israeli saying has it that the “Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” Jared Kushner, architect of President Trump’s Peace to Prosperity plan, the so-called Deal of the Century, accepted this premise as a challenge, and devised an opportunity so good that no “Palestinian” could possibly miss it, or so he thought. In the event, the “Palestinians” rejected with contempt an aid package ten times more lucrative per capita than the Marshall Plan had injected into a Western Europe that had been devastated after World War II, and this before they had even seen it. Kushner and company might have been stunned, but Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was not in the least surprised, although he knew better than to gloat. When a $4,762 per capita gift is rejected with contempt before it was even given, then it is obviously not about the money or poverty or development. From the “Palestinian” perspective, $50 billion was no opportunity at all. This begs the question, what constitutes an opportunity for the “Palestinians?” This question Kushner did not ask, and as yet, it seems very few are asking it.
“The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity” is a seductive sound bite; too seductive to question its own presumptions. Anyone, at least any non-Muslim, any kafir, who has ever offered the Palestinians anything, has always assumed they are offering the Palestinians something they want. If the question elicits the same seemingly illogical answer decade after decade, then surely, it is time to either revisit the question or proceed as planned without them. The advocates of the Peace to Prosperity Plan, sensibly, opted for the latter. This essay is about what constitutes an opportunity to “Palestinians,” and will show that they always find an opportunity to find an opportunity.
Knowledge of the Qur’an and of the life of Muhammad teaches non-Muslims, the infidels, the kufaar, that treaties, agreements and solemn declarations mean nothing to Muslims, except as reprieves from their enemies’ attacks until they are able to strike again. The infidels come to learn that the Qur’an and Muhammad set the standards for all Muslims in all matters. They become familiar with Muhammad’s conduct in the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, with how Muhammad abused the generosity of the Jews of Khaybar and his subsequent massacre of them, and expect Muslims today to conduct themselves in exactly the same way. They know how directly and intimately Muslims emulate Muhammad. All of this and more they would know, and well-equipped they would be, to detect all the wiles and subterfuges of Muslims, if only they knew the Qur’an and the life of Muhammad. Instead, on Yom HaShoah, 10 Tevet, Holocaust Remembrance Day, 20-21 April 2020, the podium of the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, was handed over to the Muslim Brotherhood.
A member of Knesset Mansour Abbas, leader of the United Arab List party and Deputy Head of the Islamic Movement, the Muslim Brotherhood’s organ inside Israel, took the most prominent point in the highest chamber of the Jewish State. From that esteemed position, Abbas made his “anti-Holocaust-denial” interfaith monologue and became an instant darling of the most naïve and deluded segment of Israeli society. This essay will show that Abbas’ speech was perfectly consistent with the ideology and modus operandi of the PLO’s Yasser Arafat, Hamas’ Yahya Sinwar, major jihad figures internationally and the prophet of Islam, Muhammad, himself. We will show that Mansour Abbas’ appalling stunt in the Knesset is one-of-a-piece with similar stunts performed by prominent Muslim leaders visiting Auschwitz, and also show that the real Holocaust deniers are the Jews who cling to the deluded hope of peace with the Muslim Arabs, whose forebears were not only instrumental in the Nazi Holocaust, but whose religion, Islam, has its own Holocaust lined up for the Jews.
When Yasser Arafat signed the Oslo Accords with Israel in the 1990s, he so incensed Muslim “Arab-Palestinians,” that it was necessary for him to explicitly invoke the Treaty of Hudaybiyya that Muhammad had signed with his enemy, the Quraysh, to quell his followers’ outrage at what to them looked like peace with the Jews. Once Arafat had assured them that, despite appearances, he had actually conceded nothing from the Muslims’ plan for the Jews and Israel, calm was restored (more on that Muslim plan below). It would serve the reader as this essay unfolds, at this point to quote Robert Spencer on the significance of Hudaybiyya to Arafat’s conduct during Oslo.
“By invoking Hudaybiyya to justify Oslo, Arafat was saying that despite appearances, he had actually conceded nothing. Muhammad had undertaken the treaty of Hudaybiyya …so that the Muslims could recover their strength after a series of costly battles with the Quraysh. When the Muslims were strong enough to fight again and defeat the Quraysh, he broke the treaty. Arafat was telling Muslim audiences, who would have been familiar with the Treaty of Hudaybiyya, that he had entered into the treaty with Israel not as a retreat from the Palestinian jihad against the Jewish state, but as a tactical move to further the aims of that jihad. And when the Palestinians were strong enough not to need the treaty anymore, he would, like Muhammad, break it,” (The Palestinian Delusion: The catastrophic history of the Middle East Peace Process, Bombardier Books, 2020)
For a Muslim to address the Knesset is to play with fire, all the more so on Holocaust Remembrance Day. Muslims will be combing over every word, every gesture and every tonal inflection, to make sure that the Islamic imperative is not in any way compromised. Mansour Abbas was not about to repeat the Oslo mistake of his fellow “Arab-Palestinian,” Yasser Arafat. Non-Muslims have to read Abbas’ speech very carefully, multiple times and always with Muhammad in mind. Contrary to what delusional Israelis heard, this was not a speech against the Holocaust. It was a speech only against denial of the Holocaust, and even that was negated before the speech was over.
I
To oppose Holocaust denial is not to oppose the Holocaust. MK Mansour Abbas’ Muslim audience will have watched and listened carefully, as they watched and listened carefully when Arafat was signing the Oslo Accords. They are satisfied that Abbas did not go against the Holocaust, something that Muhammad himself had mandated for the Jews, and in which “the Palestinians,” as we shall see, already had a hand in bringing about. To be doubly sure that his speech did not backfire, Abbas carefully crafted his own Holocaust denial that again, every Muslim will have understood, but most non-Muslims would have missed.
“Bosnia’s former Grand Mufti Mustafa Cerić declared: ‘The danger of genocide denial is not only denial of the truth regarding the physical murder of a people, because any one who denies the real evil of genocide is ready to perpetrate this evil again.’”
“Genocide denial?” Is this merely Abbas generalising from the more specific “Holocaust denial?” Not a bit. He was merely accurately quoting Mustafa Cerić. The whole truth, though, as Abbas well knew, is that the former Grand Mufti was not referring to the Holocaust at all, but to the Bosnian Christians’ (ethnic Serbs and ethnic Croats) massacre of Bosniak (Bosnian Muslim) men and boys in Srebrenica in 1995. Cerić sought to equate that massacre of Muslims to the Holocaust, saying,
“If you ask the Jewish people if they predict that the holocaust (sic) can be repeated, you will never get the answer ‘no’— even though they say ‘never again.’ So after what happened in Bosnia — this ‘never again’— failed.”
Except that what took place in Srebrenica, horrific and condemnable as it was, was not a Holocaust by any stretch of the imagination. It was not even genocide. It was a massacre. 8,200 to 8,300 Bosniak men and boys were systematically slaughtered over 11 days in July 1995. Exactly one year earlier, though, Hutu in Rwanda attempted to exterminate Tutsi, Twa and other peoples, killing 800,000 – 1,000,000, over the three months ending in July 1994. What happened in Rwanda was genocide; what happened in Bosnia was not. Describing a massacre as genocide does not lend to such massacre the gravitas of genocide. It merely distorts the facts, and draws into question the integrity of the one who so does. The first anniversary of the ending of the Rwanda Genocide will have been commemorated right in the middle of the Srebrenica Massacre.
Someone concerned with the human capacity for such evil, as Mustafa Cerić ostensibly is, is apparently not sufficiently moved by the exactly one-hundred-times larger Rwanda Genocide of twelve months earlier to see a link between its commemoration and the Srebrenica Massacre commemoration taking place at the same time. Yet he manages to contrive a link between the Holocaust of the Jews and massacre of Bosniaks. There is a link, but not the one Cerić was conjuring.
One does not wonder that so many Bosnians objected to Al-Azhar graduate Mustafa Cerić receiving the Ducci Foundation Peace Prize, describing him as “nothing less that (sic) a fundamentalist, hidden under a fake image of tolerance.” Indeed. What was a jihadist to gain from linking the Srebrenica Massacre to the Rwanda Genocide? Nothing. But there was jihad capital to be made from riding the Srebrenica Massacre on the back of the Holocaust. We shall subject Cerić’s speech to a more thorough critique below.
Mansour Abbas’ was about to do exactly the same as Cerić: ride the Palestinian “resistance” on the back of the Holocaust, and the gullible Jews will shower him with praise for doing so. Abbas’ Muslim audience will have understood the significance of his invoking “Bosnia,” “Grand Mufti,” and “genocide” all in the same sentence, during his Knesset speech commemorating the Holocaust. It was among the Muslims in Bosnia, the Bosniaks, that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini, recruited his SS 13 Division of the Waffen-SS, the military wing of the Nazi SS that directly participated in precisely that genocide that became the Holocaust. It was this same “Arab-Palestinian and religious Muslim” Al-Husseini, who sought and gained an audience with Hitler, from whom he begged support in opposing a National Home for the Jews in Palestine, the very country in whose highest chamber Abbas now uttered these words, and to gushing Jewish applause, unaware that they were being humiliated.
Grand Mufti Al-Husseini is not a topic for polite dinner-table conversation. According to declassified CIA reports on Hajj Amin al-Husseini,
“G M and his cousin HUSSEINI claimed …to have been instrumental in planning with Nazis the extermination of European Jewry and that both aided SS general eichmann (sic) in Budapest,” (IN 33649, SI Vienna. Mar’ 4, ’46).
“Lebanese security says subject [Amin al-Husseini] is known throughout the world as a Nazi collaborator and the Jews will exploit this,” (FBIB-73, [redacted], B-3, 25 Oct 1947).
The “interfaith” infidel, always in pursuit of “relevance” and that fell-good factor that comes with imagining peace now, would rather not know about al-Husseini and, as chance would have it, the Muslim Holocaust jihadist is just as keen to oblige. By unspoken agreement, al-Husseini is not a suitable topic for interfaith dialogue either, a personage best forgotten, an endeavour already well-underway in June of 1945, according to the CIA:
“Palestine Arab political parties are showing particular interest in the fate of the Mufti, and are attempting to ensure his return to Palestine or, at least, his safety and permission to live in a Moslem country. The Arabs have conveniently forgotten his cooperation with the Germans. …[T]he “Morgen Journal” of New York …accused the Mufti of responsibility for the extermination of Jews in Europe and demands his trial as a war criminal,” (GX-002-625a, Saint, Cairo, 6/25/45).
Is a more gross insult to the memory of the Shoah than invoking Al-Husseini in the Knesset even imaginable? Yes, we are very sorry to say, it is.
II
Mansour Abbas’ inspiration, Grand Mufti Mustafa Cerić, went one better. Inside Auschwitz, Cerić had managed to reduce the Holocaust to “genocide,” in itself Holocaust denial, even as he railed against Holocaust denial, of which more later. As we shall soon see, Abbas made sure to deny “the real evil of genocide.”
“The power of the Holocaust obliges us as human beings to separate momentarily from national and religious disagreements, and of course political views, so as to be alone with the victim and feel the pain.”
Who is this “us as human beings,” of which religious Muslim Abbas, speaks? Abbas’ non-Muslim audience will hear the high ethics of species-awareness, and marvel at the magnitude of the moment, and they will “separate momentarily from national and religious disagreements, and …political views,” lowering their shields to let the psychological assault through. This top leader of the jihad against Israel would have the world indulge him in a moment of common humanity, blissfully unaware that for a religious Muslim, there is no common humanity. There are Muslims, i.e., humans, and non-Muslims, i.e., sub-humans closer to animals. The words, “to be alone with the victim and feel the pain,” are pure sop, designed to impress people with civilised sensibilities. It is a tactic that Mustafa Cerić applied to like effect at Auschwitz, as we shall show.
“I have no explanation for why this happened. I do not know. I have an understanding that human beings are capable of doing this again when they lose the Image of God within them and when they ignore the right of the other to life in dignity and in liberty.”
As was reported of the Grand Mufti of Bosnia, “Cerić has two opposite faces. One is his foreign policy, where he is a peace-preaching, and a peace-prize-winning Muslim leader. But in his own country, he is promoting everything but peace. He invites Muslims to hate the “godless”, and threatens them, very directly and publicly, with violence.” “Godless,” of course, means not being Muslim, and in the Bosnian context, being Christian. Mansour Abbas is of like mind.
After just having used Cerić to invoke Hajj Amin al-Husseini and his Bosnian Muslim SS troops, Abbas will have his Jewish audience believe, “I have no explanation for why this happened. I do not know.” And to his Muslim audience: everyone is born a Muslim, but they lose the “Image of God within them,” when they are imbued with another religion (in this context, Judaism) and they “ignore the right of the other to life in dignity and in liberty,” i.e., seize Muslim land and oppress Palestinians. Not for one moment did Mansour Abbas “separate from national and religious disagreements.” His Jewish audience though, once in his hand, ate from his hand.
“A politician or a religious leader or any person who fails to shed away racism and hate for others and who does not stop instigating fighting and wars, should not touch the Holocaust and should not desecrate its memory. Some Jews say and emphasize Never Again in the Jewish collective context. Some Jews say Never Again in the universal context, for all humanity. Both are right. As a believing Muslim and as a member of the Palestinian people who suffered and continues to suffer, for dozens of years, I pray that all the inhabitants of this land, Jews and Arabs, will draw and internalize the humane lesson.”
Mustafa Cerić plays exactly the same game. “If you ask the Jewish people if they predict that the holocaust can be repeated, you will never get the answer ‘no’— even though they say ‘never again.’ So after what happened in Bosnia — this ‘never again’— failed.” The reader should note that in the Muslim value system, “Never again” did not fail with the slaughter of 1,000,000 Tutsi and others in 1994, no. It failed only with the massacre of 8,000 Muslims in 1995. Such is the humanity Islam permits. Those familiar with Islam and Muslims can be forgiven their scepticism when the Auschwitz-Birkenau museum reports that in August 2009,
“Eight of the most influential North American Imams and Muslim leaders visited the Memorial and issued a statement in which they used emphatic language to confront Holocaust denial: ‘We condemn all actions that deny this historical fact and proclaim that any such denial or attempts to justify this tragedy are contrary to the Islamic code of ethics.’”
The average non-Muslim, but especially the “interfaith” advocates, hearing the words “Islamic code of ethics,” would not for a moment consider that this could be anything other than good. It is ethics. Ethics is ethics; what more is there to say? Except that Islamic ethics is not at all what the non-Muslim thinks of as ethics. Without going into too much detail here, we wish to refer the reader to only a selection of prize Islamic doctrines pertaining to ethics, in particular Al-Wala’ wa al-Bara’ (doctrine of hatred and contempt for non-Muslims), Shari’a (forcing everyone to live by the ethical standards of barbaric, seventh-century Arabia), Taqiyya (doctrine of lying, misleading, obfuscating and deceiving to advance the cause of Islam) and Jihad (fighting, i.e., war, in the cause of Allah till there are no non-Muslims left in the world). The “Islamic code of ethics” is nothing more and nothing less than what was acceptable conduct to Muhammad, a successful barbarian warlord in a brutal world. Holocaust denial is not at all “contrary to the Islamic code of ethics.” It is very much at home in the Islamic code of ethics, and as this essay will show, another front in the jihad onslaught on the non-Muslim world, the Dar al-Harb, the House of War.
Elevating himself to the highest moral ground, right alongside the people who have had the Holocaust experience, Mansour Abbas is finally ready to hoist his tawdry “Palestinian resistance” up there with him, and look down upon the Jews of Israel, who now have less right to invoke the Holocaust than he, “a believing Muslim and as a member of the Palestinian people,” and of course, Mustafa Cerić, whose 8000 Muslims were massacred at Srebrenica.
“That all of us will recognize the suffering of the other people, its rights for liberty and dignity, and that we shall realise the vision of peace, security, partnership and tolerance, between the two peoples and the two states.”
Et voila! By elevating the “Palestinian struggle” to equal gravitas with the Holocaust, Abbas has denied “the real evil of genocide” — Holocaust denial in all but name. Mansour Abbas had started out talking about the Holocaust and ended up talking about a Palestinian state. Somewhere along the way, unnoticed, he made the switch, his audience still enthralled to his “momentary” peace proposal. Hudaybiyya is a subtle business, as is all Muslim deceit.
In subsequent installments of this essay, we shall examine more closely how the Grand Mufti of Bosnia, Head of the Scholars, had taken the sick little game Mansour Abbas’ later played with a few local Jews on the 75th anniversary of the Holocaust, to a whole other level on a jaunt to Auschwitz-Birkenau, ostensibly to commemorate the 66th anniversary of the liberation of this most notorious of all Nazi death camps.
spiro says
What does the word Islam mean
Answer that and you know they have no interest in anything but your submission
Nothing else.matters
mortimer says
Response: ‘Islam’ is a euphemism for enslavement. Muslims are enslaved by a doctrine that makes them supremacists, no matter what the cost … even if they are impoverished or destroyed by their own ideology.
James Lincoln says
mortimer,
A thought provoking post.
So muslims in an islamic “republic” somehow feel “supreme” while they exist in abject squalor.
All the while the Israelis prosper.
Absolutely mind-boggling…
mortimer says
The Pally rhetoric has made it impossible for them to make deals even if they wanted to. Self-defeating.
gravenimage says
Jihading the Holocaust: Auschwitz and the Knesset (Part 1)
To oppose Holocaust denial is not to oppose the Holocaust.
………………….
*Very* true. That sums this up. Fine article from Anjuli Pandavar.
Ray Jarman says
+ 1 I totally agree.
Kathy says
In other words, and if I understand the writer correctly:
On the very day when Israel was remembering in deep sorrow the terrible murder of millions of its people during the Holocaust, this Arab MK took to the podium in Israel’s Knesset not to deny the Holocaust occurred, not to commiserate with the Jewish people over the dreadful misfortune which had befallen them at that time, but to advise them that this genocide of their people, which had quite undeniably occurred, was the direct result of their having rejected the One True Faith, i.e. not submitting to Islam;
And that the Jewish people had, by this very rejection of Islam, this losing of the ‘Image of God”, set themselves outside the realms of those who could expect humanity and compassion, i.e. human beings (all non-Moslems being considered therefore nonhuman);
And furthermore, their continued rejection of the One True Faith would naturally mean that they could expect a repeat performance of genocide from time to time – as had the Rwandan non-Moslems (and therefore non-human population), for instance, experienced later on through their own denial of Islam;
And that it was all most unfortunate and hard to understand etc, etc, but however completely unavoidable and predictable given the circumstances, that this kind of necessary ‘evil genocide’ will continue to devolve onto the various nonhumans of Dar al-Harb (those who set themselves outside and therefore in opposition to Islam) until such time as they reject the evil of their ways, submit to Islam and become part of ‘humanity’, i.e. Muslims worthy of humanity and compassion;
And that the very act of denying the Holocaust was to be condemned, since by doing so both Muslims and non-Moslems would be ignoring the very real and very present message of the Holocaust from Islam’s perspective: that these ‘genocides’ of non-humans would need to be repeated again and again until all mankind are brought into the House of Dar Al-Salam, i.e. all mankind submits to Islam.
And that, while Islam has strategically adopted certain key words and terms such as the use of the word ‘Holocaust’ to describe the unfortunate but unavoidable eradication of certain of Europe’s Jews during WWII – entirely due to their ongoing and persistent rejection of Islam, of course – the only true Holocaust is the murder of Muslims by non-Muslims, such as happened in Srebrenika in 1995.
And that the Arabs will never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity to seek war and bloodshed, gleefully ramming their so-called religion (which is in actuality a death cult established to further their aim of world domination) down our throats at every opportunity until such time as we, the infidels, finally submit to their subjugation and accept our completely unavoidable and predestined fate as Arab slaves! Viewed within the prism of total world domination, with all non-Arabs as their slaves (for all Muslim non-Arabs are indeed nothing other than Arab slaves, pure and simple) – the paltry and pathetic offers of such negligible personas as Kushner and Company are laughable indeed!
…
And from a purely personal perspective, the sentence I found most chilling was: “to be alone with the victim and feel the pain”! How can anyone read that sentence and not feel the agony of someone undergoing the most horrific torture, alone and at the mercy of his tormentor, who is most thoroughly enjoying his victim’s pain?!
Eva Golding says
I believe that the sentence ‘to be alone with the victim and feel the pain’ means, to them, to revel, wallow in, to imagine and enjoy the pain of the victim.
Exactly like the vile tlaib with her ‘warm feelings’…you just know she fantasises herself as the torturer, the one plying the knife, the gas, the beatings.
What sick scum they are!!!!
Artist says
and just as recently as March of 2020, Benny Gantz wooed the Joint List Ayman Odeh, Ahmad Bibi and Mansour Abbas, and now in a mere 18 months he will be PM of Israel!
“Unity” Government, a concept more idiotic than “Land for Peace”
Eva Golding says
He is as foul and treacherous as they are!!! I hope Bibi has something up his sleeve to stop this. I can’t imagine him allowing the traitor gantz to destroy Israel.
libertyORdeath says
Another brilliant essay Anjuli! Thanks!