The Myth Of Palestine Part II

The famous painting by Otto Dix 'The Skat Players' 1920, Gallerie der Stadt Stuttgart, Germany

 

One of my readers on the "The Israel Lobby" A Perfect Excuse For Anti-Semitism' thread, dismisses in the most cavalier fashion the centrality of historical and religious reality of the Israeli and Palestinian conflict and prompts me to write this post clarifying the issues involved.

There were no states or nationalities in the Middle East, certainly not among Sunni Muslims, until the Brits and French redrew the map after WWI. There never was, historically, any "Palestinian" Arab identity- and this area never had political sovereignty. After the Roman Empire, it was part of the Byzantine Empire. After the Islamic Conquest, it was part of, first, the Umayyad Empire; then the 'Abbasid Empire; then the Tulunid Empire; then it went briefly to the Byzantines, then the Saljuqs, then the Crusaders (the only time it was an independent political entity, by the way, between the end of Jewish sovereignty in the ancient world and the renewal of Jewish sovereignty in the modern one- the Kingdom of Jerusalem, not "Palestine"); Ayyubid Empire; Mamluke Empire; and, finally, the Ottoman Empire.

At no time was there a country called "Palestine." Occasionally the geographic region the Romans had designated as "Palestine" was used as a geographic term in the medieval Arabic geographies, but it had no political meaning whatsoever. As has already been noted, under the Ottomans the area was divided among 3 different administrations- the Province of Beirut; the Province of Damascus; and the Sancak of Jerusalem (comprising roughly today's southern coastal plain and the hills of Judea).

What the "Palestine" apologists ignore, is that the Palestine Mandate, which was created by the League of Nations at the San Remo conference solely for the purpose of establishing the Jewish National Home and awarded to Britain under those terms (which she violated), included all of the area which Britain then quite illegally separated into the Mintaqa (region) of Eastern Palestine or Transjordania- today's Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (which also, incidentally, does not allow Jews to be or become citizens- although, unlike the Saudis, the Jordanians permit Christians).

Could someone please explain convincingly why, in addition to already getting 4/5 of the only "Palestine" which has ever existed since Roman times, the very same Arabs- ethnically, religiously, culturally, and even tribally and familialy- should get yet another country in this tiny area?

The "Palestine" crowd were singularly unperturbed when the areas allocated by the U.N. Partition Plan of 1947 to an Arab state were swallowed up by Egypt and Jordan. One heard literally not a peep out of them. It seems that the only thing to which they object to is the exact same thing for which this whole extremely modern identity of "Palestinian" was invented: as a negation of Israel and the Jews. This is why the Arabs of the area have always rejected a state at every opportunity- most recently at Camp David in 1999; their goal is not to establish a state for themselves, but rather to destroy Israel.

If Israel did 1/10 of what the Palestinian Authority accuse it of doing (and their imagination is quite fecund, and not restrained by any over-scrupulous respect for truth- witness the Jenin "massacre"), it is still, morally, light-years ahead not only of any country in the Middle East, Africa, or Asia, but also of countries such as France when they have been confronted with wars which were not existential.

Yet my reader, and the other anti-Semites of this world have never been perturbed by real massacres and genocides, true viciousness and injustice. No, the only country in the Middle East where Arabs can freely vote and speak out against their own government- where even terrorists don't get the death penalty- that's the place that their ilk can't abide.

As Golda Meir once said, "Israel is the Jew among nations."

The "Palestine" lovers are so concerned with a right to a state for a completely new and unprecedented nationality, whereas for some reason the right to self-determination for the world's oldest nationality extant-- one which has acted, by any moral barometer, with infinitely more compassion, civilization, and care for human life than the new-fangled murderous one he is championing--seems to be extremely limited if it exists at all. That is the classic definition of anti-Semitism: one standard for everyone else, and then an impossible one for the Jews.

A  warped moral equivalence: a favorite trick of the left, something they did all the time during the Cold War (US no better than Soviets with their gulags, etc.) and that they do today (US and al-Qa'ida are morally equivalent). To quote Tolkien from the Lord of the Rings, when the Ent, Treebeard, muses that he might lash out like Saruman if his home were threatened: "The difference is that you never plotted to cover the whole world with your trees..."

The allied forces in Afghanistan have been in situations vaguely resembling the situation of Israel in the Arab-populated parts of the Unallocated Portions of the British Palestine Mandate (what the "Palistine" lovers so revel in fallaciously referring to as "the occupied territories"): I say vaguely, because the Allies in Afghanistan don't have innocent populations of women, children, etc. a twenty-minute drive away from downtown Kabul. Never would the Allies have done what Israel did in Jenin, solely out of mercy for the terrorists' families: namely, launch a ground offensive. According to the official figures of the Palestinian authority, 59 people- mostly armed terrorists- were killed in that operation; the ones who weren't armed terrorists were murdered by the terrorists when they blew up the entire street, which they had booby trapped. Israel lost 39 soldiers.

If the "Palestine" lovers don't understand that Israel could have leveled the whole place several times over without ever losing one of its own, then they clearly are even more ignorant of Israel and its abilities than I already know them to be. No other country in the world- including the US, UK, Denmark, etc.- acts with such reverence for the life of those who wish to destroy them, even at the high cost of its own precious sons.

In short, whatever else its shortcomings, Israel has acted with a restrain and decency unparalleled in the face of unprecedented barbarity and brutality. Perhaps the "Palestine" lovers would like to expatiate on the murder of the Hatuel family 2 years ago, when PA al-Aqsa Brigades shot and stopped a car driven by an 8-months pregnant woman, with 4 little girls in the back seat, ages 2 to 10, whom the terrorists then walked over to and deliberately shot at point-blank range.

Even the most vicious and mendacious Arab propagandist has not been able to claim any savagery remotely in the realm of that...Clearly, the moral compass of the anti-Semites is warped beyond repair.

And yes as I have said before, The Myth Of Palestine (Part I) is alive and well.

UPDATE I: Don't miss out on Mark Steyn's brilliant article to be published tomorrow @ NRO, wandering what Palestinians have to do to get some bad press. Indeed.

UPDATE II: I would just like to say thank you so much, to hundreds of my readers, who have sent me incredible emails, which I will always treasure. It goes to show how important it is to keep this subject alive and the truth in tact.

It reminds me of a quote from an article by Charles Moore:

"All I want to ask my fellow Europeans is this: are you happy to help direct the world's fury at the only country in the Middle East whose civilization even remotely resembles yours? And are you sure that the fate of Israel has no bearing on your own? In Iran, the new President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad makes the link. The battle over Palestine, he says, is "the prelude of the battle of Islam with the world of arrogance", the world of the West. He is busy building his country's nuclear bomb."

Comments

[Chris Arnell]

Great article. I found this site by accident while searching for something else. I have not read all the comments but I advise anyone interested in the subject to visit this site also.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mftoc.html

and visit this one too.

www.carnellknowledge.com

[Thameen Darby]

Waw. So it took you all this long text to prove that there was no Palestine as a state before one hundred years.

But SO WHAT? there was no Palestine as state, so what?

There was always peple in Palestine and these ppl now, call them the KUKOs, if you like, they want a state, self determination? do u have a problem with that?

Find some other useful things to do with ur time. Ur empy message has zero reflection on reality.

[Doreen Ellen Bell-Dotan]

I think the subject of an essay I just completed and uploaded in pertinent to at least some of the topics treated on this blog.

The State of Israel is semi-fascist to be sure, but it is not Imperialistic.

Too many critics fail to discern between Imperialism and Fascism. They assume that they are identical or that the one cannot exist without the other.

In circles of the critics of the one, the leveling of accusations of the other is well-nigh de rigueur. Among those circles are the Anarchists, to which I belong. It behooves me, then, to clarify this conflation.

My essay "An Anarchist Explains Why Israel is Not an Imperialist State" comes to elucidate how it is that while the modern State of Israel is semi-fascist, it cannot correctly and fairly be said to be Imperialistic.

http://www.geocities.com/dordot2001/IsraelIsNotAnImperialistState.htm

You can find more of my writings on Anarchy on the following link:

http://www.geocities.com/dordot2001/Mystical_Anarchy.html

Doreen Ellen Bell-Dotan, Tzfat, Israel

[click here to visit my board]

There was not a palestine before 1948 but certainly there were palestinians.

The text bellow was written in 1929

" The vast areas of the U.S. never contained more than one or two million Indians. The inhabitants fought the white settlers not out of fear that they might be expropriated, but simply because there has never been an indigenous inhabitant anywhere or at any time who has ever accepted the settlement of others in his country. Any native people – its all the same whether they are civilized or savage – views their country as their national home, of which they will always be the complete masters. They will not voluntarily allow, not only a new master, but even a new partner. And so it is for the Arabs. /.../
They look upon Palestine with the same instinctive love and true fervor that any Aztec looked upon his Mexico or any Sioux looked upon his prairie.

/........./

Every indigenous people will resist alien settlers as long as they see any hope of ridding themselves of the danger of foreign settlement.

That is what the Arabs in Palestine are doing, and what they will persist in doing as long as there remains a solitary spark of hope that they will be able to prevent the transformation of “Palestine” into the “Land of Israel”.".

Who wrote these lines ?

Jabotinsky ( The Iron wall ).

He was a smart person and realized the Arabs were there and they would resist .

These lines remain true today.

There was no palestine . There were no palestinians.., but there was an indigenous people in the territory
One can call them Arabs , or palestinians.., or blue feet..., but that does not change the fact that the fellows do not identify themselves with the Jewish State..., and many want a state of their own.
Sharon realized that and realized the Jews could actually become a minority in palestine.

Having realized that he withdraw from Gaza and was prepared to withdraw from parts of the west bank.

[Joseph Marshall]

Well, I'm happy to report that my hope for the sensibleness of a majority of Israelis has been fulfilled. The election is over, disengagement will proceed, the rest will become moot, and the toughest knot in the tangle of the world will finally have been loosened.

Shalom to all.

[Michael (van der) Galien]

Good question David, why?

[DavidByron]

Michael, one thing: why do some people feel they have to resort to ad hominem attacks?

Richard, To claim that Israeli defense is a form of "genocide" shows that you are not capable of critical thinking

I didn't say defence was a form of genocide. I was talking about their ethnic cleansing and the killing of Palestinian civilians. That's what I was calling a form of genocide, which it is, under the terms of genocide convention.

[Michael (van der) Galien]

Two things:
1- Why does someone come here just to troll?
2- Why is that person unable to make less than 10 spelling errors per sentence?

[Washington]

Israel will not be moved. They are the power in the region, rightfully so, and we will continue to support them by whatever means are necessary. You don't have to like it-but there it is.

[Josh]

DavidByron, you should read it again. You misunderstood me.

I DO take a side for America today, it's to NOT take a side for either Israel or Palestine. That's where I take a side to not take a side, thanks.

[Richard]

David Byron:
I am not going to respond to such pearls of wisdom as "Male civilians were prevented from leaving. Ambulances and civlians were targeted and destroyed. It was an act of genocide." since some arguments, do not warrant a response. But I will respond to your Hitler comparison which is despicable and disgusting. To claim that Israeli defense is a form of "genocide" shows that you are not capable of critical thinking. As I have previously written, the Jews must be incredibly incompetant "genociders". I am sure that the Arabs in general and the Palestinians in particular are much better at the "genocide" job as they have proven this to us countless times.

David, since you can read neither Hebrew nor Arabic don't pretend that you know what is written or not. The address I posted is a web site of Hadash party, a nationalistic Arab Israeli party that runs in the current Israeli elections. The quote that I quoted is from their own web site, freely published on Israeli domain. If this is not enought for you, then learn a foreign language before you contradict me.

Now to the point. Do you fail to admit the historical fact that as Israel was recognized by the UN, the armed forces of Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Syria and the irregular forces of the Palestinians attacked it? You seriously say that there was no threat to Israel's existence? You don't know that Arafat's uncle, the Mufti of Jerusalem, appointed by Her Majesty Government by the way, the notorious Haj Amin al Husseini, cooperated with the Nazis? You don't know that he was a personal guest of Adolf Hitler? You don't know that he organized Arabs to serve in the SS under the command of Kaukji? You don't know that he escaped prosecution by the allied forces by escaping to Egypt? You are not aware that Israel acquired the territories of West Bank and Gaza in a defensive war? You think this is invention of Jews? Are you really so dense or is it just a result of years and years of liberal arts education that closed your mind?

Furthermore, the epitaphs of "racism" and "genocide" that you are throwing around mean nothing. And the reason they mean nothing is that people like you made those words meaningless. You have abused them and you are abusing us with them. Whenever you are unable to respond in a coherent manner, you throw a petard, "genocide, racism" Discussing anything with you or with one of your ilk is like discussing astronomy with a member of flat earth society. Nothing one can say will convince him, since his mind is closed to facts. So good luck to you and have a great life.

Richard

[DavidByron]

Josh, No, I'm not taking sides.

Ignoring an injustice that your government maintains by arming the Israeli occupation forces is hardly neutrality.

epaminondas; Byron, you insist on conidering the EXEPTIONAL quotes of people from who, Stern Gang?, isolatied Ben Gurion quotes, Jabotisky ? as if that is the equivalent of an Israeli goverment

Wasn't Ben Gurion the first Israeli head of state? Israel was born of these trerrorist leaders. Born by an act of terrorism and continued by oppression.

Chris:I am not aware of too many counterinsurgent operations carried out in urban centers in Afghanistan, but you need only look at the ones being carried out in Iraq by the same Allies (predominately the U.S.), especially the second siege of Fallujah. We certainly could have eliminated a terrorist sanctuary by bombing the city flat after cordoning it off. We did not. Civilians were encouraged to leave

Male civilians were prevented from leaving. Ambulances and civlians were targeted and destroyed. It was an act of genocide.

Michael:your arguments are fake yet again. Once again you act as if there is something as a 'palestinian people'. There is not. Why are you constantly denying that?

If there are no Palestinians then who are all those people the Israelis are busy shooting and imprisoning? Who were all those people living in Palestine? This spin of yours to justify the Israeli ethic cleansing is sickening. It's holocaust denial really. You're like someone who says the Germans never really killed any Jews. Your repetition of these sick lies really just reflects poorlly on you. Why do you seek to cover up such a huge crime against humanity?

RichardThe "crimes" you accuse Israel of committing are nothing more than it's determination to defend itself aggressively.

Just as Hitler was defending Germany "aggressively". Sadly this "self defence" which has been going on for 60 years now without any military threat to justify it happens to be genocide by the terms of the convention.

Richard:Their foreign policy - supports the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem, supports the return of all Palestinian refugees to Israel and their domestic policy - demands that the Israeli government recognize the rights of the Arab minority in Israel to cultural and educational autonomy. If you read Arabic or Hebrew you can read the Hadash's party platform on your own at www.hadash.org.il

I couldn't read the site you sourced. I'm sure this observation is just as truthful as the idea that Palestinians attacked the State of Israel prior to the existence of the State of Israel thus prompting the "aggressive" self defence, ethnic cleansing and on going occupation of Palestin for 60 years together with a formal claim of soivereignty over Plaestinian land.

[Liquid]

Sig--It is astonishing and breathtaking how footloose and fancy free you are with the truth, even when confronted with reality.

You know, sometimes I think the reality is just too scary for some, so they pad their perception so thick that they eventualy they become paralyzed in their fear.

[Sigmund, Carl And Alfred]

Mr Byron, why do you find deceit so attractive? Why do delibertqely misrepresent the truth to fit yout own agenda?

It is astonishing and breathtaking how footloose and fancy free you are with the truth, even when confronted with reality.

[Richard]

Gert:

"of corse Palestiene exhists, so do Palestienians: your pseudo-historicel quackery doen't change that in the slihgtest..."

What is the meaning of this comment? Is the history of the region in question out of bounds for you? Do you consider statements of historical facts "quackery"? Please enlighten us and tell us what is not quackery for you?

Richard

[Liquid]

I just feel inspired to post this today...

Genesis 12:3 "And I will bless them that bless thee and curse him that curseth thee; and in thee shall all nations of the earth be blessed."

[Washington]

Gert:

I, for one, believe the little fellow to be an anti-Semite. Not because he agrees or disagrees with my positions but because of what he states. Period.

As for tiresome, nothing is so tiresome as a late comment by a person who does not state her views.

[Gert]

Is that all you guys ever do? Accuse those who don't agree with you of anti-Semitism?

This is like a disscussion on the gende of the angels: of corse Palestiene exhists, so do Palestienians: your pseudo-historicel quackery doen't change that in the slihgtest... You really are a tiresome, buring lot.

[Richard]

David Byron:
Again, I would like to correct you. The "crimes" you accuse Israel of committing are nothing more than it's determination to defend itself aggressively. There is nothing wrong with it from either, humanitarian nor military point of view. As far as accusations of "genocide" against the Palestinians, let me remind you that the total Palestinian casualties in Arafat's war, between 2002 and 2006 amount to less than 4,000 people. That's everybody, armed combatants and civilian casualties as well as Palestinian murders of suspected "collaborators". By the way, this figure includes self inflicted death such as suicide bombers. If this is "genocide", than the Palestinians should thank God every day for giving them Jews as enemies. Compare this to the so called "Black September", of 1970, where Jordanian army killed 11,000 Palestinians in two (2) weeks.

[Josh]

Yes I was serious. And what about "..Zundel? Faurisson? CODOH? IHR?.." You never consider what they say makes any sense, because the mainstream wants you to think they're all hateful liars, read it yourself and see what THEY cite, from the Bible to Jewish scholars to Israel Prime Ministers and Herzl...etc. Hardly any of the book is even 'opinions', read it yourself, I DARE you!

You're using 'guilt by association' again, if Holocaust deniers or anti-Semites (if these people were even that) advocated drinking clean water I must advocate drinking dirty water, right? We can NEVER agree on anything because somebody's afraid of being called a hatemonger or anti-Semite or racist, you can go read what I've posted hear, honestly accuse me of any of these things, can you?!

[Richard]

David Byron
You wrote at one of your posts:
"Although Palestinians in Israel have the right to vote, Israeli law does not allow an Arab political party to run in the Knesset election if its platform demands full and equal rights for Palestinian citizens."

This statement as quoted by you is simply a lie. Israeli law allows any party, be it Arab, Jewish, religious, communist, socialist or other to run for the Knesset. In fact, tomorrow, 4 independant Arab parties will compete in the Israeli elections. United Arab List(Raam), Balad, Hadash,and ODA (Da'am in Arabic), Some of them, like Balad (National Democratic Assembly) seeks (their own words) "to transform Israel from" a "state of the Jews" to a "democratic state with equality for all of its citizens". Their foreign policy - supports the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem, supports the return of all Palestinian refugees to Israel and their domestic policy - demands that the Israeli government recognize the rights of the Arab minority in Israel to cultural and educational autonomy. If you read Arabic or Hebrew you can read the Hadash's party platform on your own at www.hadash.org.il.

Please David, before you make this kind of statement, check the facts. Please, consult more than just Arab propaganda rags.

[DavidByron]

This is something I can't get round: Mr. Byron is an obvious anti-Semite. He doesn't hide it, deny it, nor does he offer anything other than hate filled empty rhetoric.

Finally Washington's true argument is brought out.

Btw, is it just me or has the number of comments on this blog, like doubled or something recently? I guess the Palestinian issue is one that usually gets people pretty worked up. I'd just like to say thanks to everyone who hasn't decided to start accusing me of being an anti-Semite.... or something else silly. Honestly this is probably the most informative discussion I've had on it and I am suprised to say this but you all seem more polite on this issue than Democrats / progressives are. I usually get called a "Nazi" on progressive boards pretty much by about the third or fourth post.

I don't really know whty this issue is so emotional. I would hazard the guess that few here have any personal stake in it, certainly I do not. The nature of the crimes by Israel while horrible are by no means unique. It's not like people get nasty when discussing say abortion rights -- arguably a much closer to home issue.

[Alexandra]

Jack,

Thank you, and hundreds of others who have sent me incredible emails, which I will treasure. It goes to show how important it is to keep this subject alive and the truth in tact.

It reminds me of a quote from an article by Charles Moore:

"All I want to ask my fellow Europeans is this: are you happy to help direct the world's fury at the only country in the Middle East whose civilization even remotely resembles yours? And are you sure that the fate of Israel has no bearing on your own? In Iran, the new President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad makes the link. The battle over Palestine, he says, is "the prelude of the battle of Islam with the world of arrogance", the world of the West. He is busy building his country's nuclear bomb."

[Jackas]

Alex,

Sites like yours freshen the air.

Well Done.

[Michael (van der) Galien]

apples and oranges eey?

[Michael (van der) Galien]

Byron,

your arguments are fake yet again. Once again you act as if there is something as a 'palestinian people'. There is not. Why are you constantly denying that?

Furthermore, you really should take some history lessons and while your at it, some law classes as well. Maybe 'history of law'. Your comparison is not right for different reasons, one of them being that the US was a colony. One thing the Americans were the first ones to acknowledge is that colonies have a right to form their own countries / become independant from their 'ruler nations'. The US was a colony and the British oppressed the inhabitents severely.

Palestine is not an Israeli colony.

[Gabriel Stiles]

Personally, I so wish to thank you for this information about the terrorists that, to be politically correct, American media and her leaders falsely call 'palestinians'. The people the world call palestinians never existed before in history. In fact, Israel was called palestine by the Romans who conquered, because the word Israel has the word 'el' as part of it, which means "God". The implications of that reality are very telling, but not getting into that.

The people we call palestinians are terrorists who have murdered and/or maimed thousands of people because they are Jews. And yet George Bush does all he can to support them, going so far as to send military advisers to train palestinian police. Police who then go and murder Israelis. George Bush sends almost a half a billion dollars of American's money, to the terrorist. Money that Bush knows is being used to murder Jews. George Bush demanded the creation of the state that never existed, palestine. To do this, more then ten thousand Jews were forcibly thrown from their homes and their homes given to terrorists from which they now launch rockets into Israel. Rockets that hit a kindegarten.

And for the Bush fans, Bush is not a republican, nor is he a christian. He played both of those people as the absolute fools Bush is convinced they are. Bush has hurt this nation America like no one can even imagine. We are so fallen, nothing more then a state in the new world. Now our children's futures are no longer what they were. They are just 'cattle'. Yes, just as Bush has crippled America and made her nothing more then a state in his moronic fantasy of a new world order, he is trying to do this to Israel. And guess what? G-d is real, america has begun to pay and a LOT worse is coming. Nuclear weapons, which terrorists planted here years ago and which they use to blackmail Bush to pull up he skirts of America's daughters, are here and will be detonated. Thousands upon thousands of Americans will die. And what will america do about it? Just like the attack on 9-11 that killed at least three thousand american women, men, and even children, nothing will be done. Or maybe in response to another Saudi Arabian attack, America will invade Japan. Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, and they were in fact one of the most Western arab nations in the world. Hence the reason Bush THREW AWAY the lives of so man of america's soldiers. To put on his show and pretend to do something about the Saudi attack on 9-11.

[Chris]

Alexandra, I found your post compelling except for one detail. You said that the Allies in Afghanistan would never carry out an operation on the lines of what the Israelis did in Jenin. I am not aware of too many counterinsurgent operations carried out in urban centers in Afghanistan, but you need only look at the ones being carried out in Iraq by the same Allies (predominately the U.S.), especially the second siege of Fallujah. We certainly could have eliminated a terrorist sanctuary by bombing the city flat after cordoning it off. We did not. Civilians were encouraged to leave, and then the city was assaulted house by house, block by block by infantry, at the cost of some 50 American lives. Actual civilian casualties were minimal. Thousands of terrorists were killed or captured. Many escaped because we did not simply destroy Fallujah from a distance.

[Washington]

Josh,

Was your last post serious?

[Thomas]

Anti-semitism is clearly alive, judging by some comments.

Alexandra, thanks for your original post. Really useful and enlightning.

[epaminondas]

Byron, you insist on conidering the EXEPTIONAL quotes of people from who, Stern Gang?, isolatied Ben Gurion quotes, Jabotisky ? as if that is the equivalent of an Israeli goverment, or as if this is somehow the same as arab goverments across the generations since 1919 (Musafa Tlas's little best seller as Sec Def of Syria, Al Jazeera of KSA's wonderful encomium in 2003 about jews using blood to make holiday pastries, by a GOVT PROFESSOR in a GOVT PAPER...and THOUSANDS of others), or the Hadith of the Stone and the Tree which make clear salafist (which is PRECISELY what the jewish people face) arab thought about jews MILLENIA before any Israel, in fact when the Arabs CONQUERED an Israel made EMPTY BY ROME, and now home, as DNA HAS PROVEN to that same people.

I love it when people quote Garaudy.. Cmon Josh -how about Zundel? Faurisson? CODOH? IHR?
C'mon...let's rock. I want the sunshine to fall on people who start quoting KKK think alikes. This is like being with my gulf arabs friends.

You have a REAL problem fella. I met people like you right across a voter registraion table in 1966 in the south.

The people who RIGHT IN HERE say what they say about Israel make it clear just how RIGHTEOUS it is that Israel exists. You are in denial about bigotry.

If I were you I'd worry about Russia and China frustrateing US efforts to stop Iran, because the result will be that Israel, who cannot afford to lose even one war, will have NOTHING to lose by acting, and thus be compelled, and setting off a large regional war, resulting I think, in the use of nuclear weapons.

Israel is. These bigoted attempts to deligitimize it are not only a waste of breath, but are moving the 'deck chairs' around while the main problem proceeds.

We face here, what they face. We face a bunch of people who think making up our own laws out of our own heads means we cannot be following god's. The jews just do that, as HAMAS puts it on a muslim waqf, but then of course, so are the Buglarians, Serbs, Austrians, Spaniards, etc, .wherever muslim feet have once tread....make no mistake, absurd racism in this over Israel AIDS those who regard us here as a whispering satan, tempting the pious and devout with GAP commercials, and MTV, and the things of this world, which to them is only a trial for the next.

Get some help

[Josh]

Oh, great, I love guilt by association! If European anti-Semitism advocates drinking clean water I must advocate drinking dirty water, right?

I don't need to boycott Israel. I said I have no problem with what Israel believes or what they are doing, as long as I'm no part of it. Do I need to compare Zionism with Hitler? I hate using Hitler as an example of iconic cliche bad guy, but if you've read Der Judenstaat by Theodor Herzl, you can see great parallels to Mein Kamf, see yourself (and I didn't say there's anything wrong with either of these works)!

As far as racism is concerned, Hitler and Zionism are no worse than any other nationalism, nations are all essentially racist. I think I've been fair to Israel and not judged them for their religion or racism, all I ask is the accusations are not put on me.

I also recommend you read 'The Founding Myths of Modern Israel' by Roger Garaudy. You'll see what I'm talking about (I don't know if you've ever heard the other side of the story), including arguments that Hitler supported Zionism as a segregative protection for both Germany and Jews (as opposed to accusations of genocide to destroy Jewry altogether).

[Liquid]

Josh, I can't help but feel your words have revealed undeniable similarities to those like the european anti-semitism right before the Holocaust. You probably support boycotting Israel too eh? I'd bet you have compared zionism with Hitler at some time or the other.

*shakes my head*

I am off to bed...
I have read enough of your demonizing Israel for one night.

[Josh]

No, I'm not taking sides.

I said, IF you think being indifferent and isolationist is standing with the bad guys, I'd still rather be that (but if you think standing outside and not taking a side simply means nothing other than not taking a side, cool, that's it). Go back and read the previous post I made.

[Liquid]

Josh: And yes, I will feel safer to know that innocent Israelis are being killed by brave suicide bombers and I was part of neither side.
------------

Aren't you taking sides though? Wasn't it you that said, " I'd rather stand with the bad guys than with Israel. Again, Israel did nothing for us, nothing good I can think of."

[Josh]

No I do not think Arafat was a hero. I'm sure it makes you feel better to think I'm a terrorist sympathizer.

Most of us love more than ourselves? Fine, I won't argue with you on that. Go for it! I'm a cynical selfish asshole who just doesn't want to get caught in the crossfire.

Don't get me wrong, I love my country. I'm no socialist cry baby that thinks if we don't invade Iraq or Iran we must save the money and spend it on education and health care. I simply think the more you do the more you harm, even if your intentions were good.

And yes, I will feel safer to know that innocent Israelis are being killed by brave suicide bombers and I was part of neither side.

I don't care about anything behind my generation, because I'm barely guaranteed my own life (sorry, my gov't and my society has made me hopeless).

As for 'Sharia law' I've never been for religion mixing with politics, regardless of religion. So leave me out of that. You paranoia that we'll be under that if we don't fight Muslims is exactly the Islamophobia that Zionists want you to believe. I don't care what religion you are, you can choose to be a puppet for the Zionist machine.

Speaking of which, modern Zionism is the best example of political hypocrisy. They use the identity 'Jewish' by both religious and racial perspectives, then accuse others for being racist or irrationally fanatic of their religion(theorocratic). America is slowly becoming the same.

[Liquid]

*deep breath*

Josh, you say, "America shares the guilt with Israel because we stand with them, nobody else in the world suffers the same hatred by Muslims of Arabs (not that I give a shit about them liking us anyway"

Guilt of what?

I find it very sad that you as an American sit here on this blog and make statements like if they don't cooperate with their neighbors, and I am quoting YOU here...
"they can just expect more suicide bombers, TOUGH LUCK"

It's one thing to not understand the situation but to side with the as you call them "bad guys" says alot about the mentality that can't be bothered with the truth of the Islamist agenda and so you would rather join "victimhood" with the terrorist because you think its gonna make you somehow safer? It's this same type of thinking that says, 'I don't care as long as it doesn't affect my generation!'

You see, that kinda thinking doesn't jive with most of us Josh, because most of us love more than ourselves and we want to see our children and grandchildren have a chance at life under freedom...not sharia law. Do you think you will be happier and less bothered living under sharia law Josh? Let me ask you this... are you a person that thinks Arafat was a hero?

[slowtrain]

There was no Palestine in the Geographic location where Arabs now claim as Palestinian lands, until about 135 C.E., when Roman emperor Hadrian's army crushed a Jewish revolt, destroyed Judea, sold Jews into slavery and exiled many Jews to North Africa. Jews were forbidden to live there in Judea and were only allowed to enter Jerusalem on the 9th of Av to mourn their losses in the revolt. Hadrian changed the country's name from Judea to Syria Palestina. Palestine as we know it today, came from the name Syria Palestina, which Hadrian intended as an insult to Syria.

[Josh]

Hey Liquid, thanks for the reply.

Trust me, I know what I said, and I meant what I said. And yes, you read it right. I literally meant (with no sympathy or support to terrorists and murder) that this world is lawless, you either kill or be killed, you make peace with the bad guys or they'll make you. Israel brought on the hatred themselves, they have to deal with it. America shares the guilt with Israel because we stand with them, nobody else in the world suffers the same hatred by Muslims of Arabs (not that I give a shit about them liking us anyway).

You can go ahead and tell me 'if you do nothing, you're standing with the bad guys', so be it. I'd rather stand with the bad guys than with Israel. Again, Israel did nothing for us, nothing good I can think of.

I don't care what Israel does, good or bad, right or wrong, just don't make me pay for it, just don't make my homies die in wars for them.

[Liquid]

Great articles Hutch..thanks!
I will share this with ya...

Back in 2003, Sheikh Abdul Palazzi, professor at the Research Institute for Anthropological Studies in Rome, was in the United States recently guest lecturing at Yale University on the possibility of bringing democracy to the Arab world.
The Koran says before the end of days the Jews will return to their land. At the end of World War One, Sharif Al Hussein, the leader of the Hashemite family and governor of Mecca said, when he saw the Jews returning to Palestine, "We are seeing what was foretold in the Koran. When others settled there the land stayed barren, but now the land recognizes its original sons and it is producing."

It's too bad the Palestinian Arabs don't know that.

They can't know it because these passages have been removed from their books. The PA selected only certain sources for their books. All of the proofs are deleted. But in other Islamic countries you do find all proofs in the Koran. You know, before 1967, Islamists referred to the Jews as Palestinians and the present-day Palestinians were called Jordanians. In Jerusalem, Imam Tabari, an important cleric, wrote an important book, "Lives of Prophets and Kings" He described the life of King Solomon and the Temple he built. Anyone who denies this not only denies history, but denies Islamic sources.

The Palestinian Arabs even deny that the Holy Temple ever stood on the Temple Mount.

I was part of an international delegation that visited Israel in 2000. The Wakf took us to visit Al Aksa. Right outside of the Dome of the Rock is a small chapel on the eastern side. "What is this place?" I asked. "It is the place where Solomon stood to dedicate the Temple," was the reply. "Then why do you deny this?" I asked. With a smile I was told, "For political reasons."
Exclusive Interview With Sheikh Abdul Palazzi

[hutchrun]

Took me some time locating it, and here it is-the nexus between Islam and nazism:
http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/amin_en.html

PHOTOS AND DOCUMENTS CLICK ON ANY PICTURE TO ENLARGE
http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/

[hutchrun]

PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein admitted in a 1977 interview with a Dutch magazine.

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism. "
http://groups.msn.com/NoPalestinianState

[Liquid]

I never said Israel 'stole' land, nor should they give it back, I certainly don't buy the UN resolutions bullshit, but if they don't cooperate with their neighbors, they can just expect more suicide bombers, TOUGH LUCK.
----

Wow Josh, when I read your words I kinda felt like a video tape might be rolling and then I started looking around for the duct tape or ummm or the voice muffled behind a masked face saying "If you don't comply to our demands....this or that is going to happen!" Maybe you can reword that for me another way? Hopefully I am reading that all wrong! Please say I am!

[Washington]

Mr. Marshall:

I don't believe that it is a question of conservative v American liberal either. However, the goals for Iraq and Iran are very different. Iraq is discussed ad nauseum so I will assume that we understand the rationale behind that invasion.

Iran has four corps, roughly, with no ability to move them from position to position-nothing like we saw with Operation Swarmer, for example. The goal in Iran would be to decapitate the head of state and his minions and to destroy, or damage, any facilities that are used in the production of "glow" stuff. :-)

One can be achieved without the other. There is no need, nor desire, to plant a quarter of a million troops in Iran. In fact, tactically, it would not have been the goal three years ago. So with respect the goals were/are different. Studying military history teaches you that trying to compare two theaters of war is like trying to compare Mozart with Robert Plant-it's difficult and not likely to make much sense.

Diplomacy is to military action what kissing is to sex. Eventually if you kiss enough...anyway. The threat of action works ONLY when the opponent views that action as undesirable. Far too many in the Islamic world want to go and receive their 77 virgins and thus the threat of military action adds very little to diplomacy. Moreover, diplomacy can only work if both sides are genuine in wanting to achieve a common goal. With respect to Islamism, just as we witnessed with nazism, there is no common goal - only preparation for war.

[Huan]

Palestinian as a nation does not predate that of the Israeli nation. That hardly matters as they consider themselves a people now.
I support whoever can control that strip of land (right of conquest) and rule it with justice. Thus far the Israeli have managed to do so, the Palestinians has not. Too bad the Palestinians seem to have abandoned morality in their war of terrorism, all the while whining for continued financial dependency, lacking guiding moral principles. Sorry but claims of "I was there first" seems rather immature.

[Josh]

Name another time that a country has won land in DEFENSIVE WAR(s) and the world started screaming that they had to give some of the land back?

Maybe none, but doesn't matter. Name another country that violates that many UN resolutions, duh! Obviously neither of these arguments make any sense or difference. My point stands, there's no right or wrong or rights (G-d given or government issued). I never said Israel 'stole' land, nor should they give it back, I certainly don't buy the UN resolutions bullshit, but if they don't cooperate with their neighbors, they can just expect more suicide bombers, TOUGH LUCK.

We owe Israel what we owe ourselves: integrity. We should judge them by the same standard by which we judge ourselves.

Whoa? Serious? Ok, first of all. We obviously don't judge Israel the same standards we judge Arab countries or Asian countries. But judging them the same way we judge ourselves? Hmmm, we don't depend on foreign aid, sorry! Tell Israel to try that! We don't discriminate people based on national origin or religion (if you think we do against Mexicans or Muslims, you're thinking like a Zionist, not American).

I have no moral or legal judgment against Israel (or Palestine, or any other country for the matter). But I only believe the least Americans can do is stay out of their conflict.

[Joseph Marshall]

Washington, this is really not a matter of Conservative vs. Liberal, though you happen to be one and I happen to be the other. A failure of statescraft is a failure of statescraft.

The Clinton Administration clearly failed in the case of India, North Korea, and nuclear weapons. And [I think] the Bush Administration has clearly failed in Iraq, Iran, and nuclear weapons.

In both cases the roots of the failures were two. First, as I have stated, it was paying too much attention to what people think and say rather than to what they actually do. Clinton was deceived by putting too much stock in the agreement with North Korea, and Bush was deceived by putting too much stock in Saddam's desires and not enough into his actual capacities.

Second, both failures were caused by a misunderstanding of the true uses of military power in statescraft. By far the most useful thing in foreign relations is the threat of military action. Neither an actual war, nor an "agreement" which is mere window dressing, and not coupled to military threat are desirable.

At the fall of the Taliban, Iran was in the most precarious position it had ever been faced with. The United States military was far closer to it than ever before, and that same military was virtually unfettered with other duties.

At that point, had we turned our attention to it, and been willing to put a threat behind it, the Iranian nuclear development could have been effectively halted.

As it is, we have not only diminished our ordinary capacity to be a military threat to Iran, we have also proved that even when we defeat a country, we do not have the capacity to make that defeat stick.

The Iranians thus can quite reasonably take the view that, with a little diplomatic shadow-boxing, their nuclear ambitions can finally be achieved. Under the current circumstances I would give it even odds of happening.

I would not have given such odds three and one half years ago and I would have been justified in not doing it.

The most important thing is to understand why the failures have occurred. Too many in a row are going to be lethal for this world.

As to Islamic hostility, it means little unless it leads to some action. Such threat as there is in it is a threat of what it can actually do rather than what it may wish to do. In this regard capacity is far more important than intention. This is why Iran should have been Job One from the fall of Afghanistan forward.

[Raimondo]

Wow..Excellent post Alexandra...and some great posts...Liquid, J. Marshal. Washington.

Islam is not the religion of peace. There are peaceful Muslims. But Islam as a whole does not preach peace by any means. Countless horrors practiced only in the last thirty years in the name of Islam have been brushed under the rug. Look at Somalia, Sudan, Nigeria, etc...Nobody mentions the religious motivations of some of the massacres that heve taken place in Africa, they are written off as tribal. Somehow when atrocities are performed in the name of Islam, they are sugarcoated by the media.

It's nice to read blogs that aren't afraid to state the truth.

[Joseph Marshall]

Well, Tiburon, if the solution can be had by paying people to leave, more power to it. But you must consider that they also need somewhere to go in such large numbers. One of the most impressive things to my mind has been the way Jordan has adapted to no longer having sovreignty over the West Bank and the people who are living on it.

Perhaps I am deceiving myself, but it seems to me that the Kingdom more or less regards the matter with a quiet and continuing sigh of relief to now have a river between them and everybody on the other side of it. And I see no great enthusiasm in Egypt for dealing with the people in Gaza again.

So I wish Israel luck if monetary payment will do the job, but I'm frankly not very hopeful of it.

[Washington]

DavidByron:

This is something I can't get round: Mr. Byron is an obvious anti-Semite. He doesn't hide it, deny it, nor does he offer anything other than hate filled empty rhetoric. At what point, if any, do people realize that debating him is futile?

One cannot argue with a chair, at least for very long. I know that many will state that he has a right to his opinions, blah, blah, blah... I agree. In that same vein did Hitler have a right to his opinions? How about Mao? How many people here would debate with Bin Laden on a daily basis?

My point is this-Mr. Byron does not have a blog, nor does he state how he came to his positions, nor does he offer DEBATE.

I have stated it before but am certain of it now - he simply states things to stir people up. He doesn't have the guts to write on his own-he merely picks at what Alexandra writes. He is a sophist.

I love debate but debate is spoiled when someone like Mr. Byron refuses to act in a civil manner, refuses to state his positions=read the other threads for proof of that, and constantly attacks those who dare to speak about freedom, or God forbid, the Jews.

Hate has a forum all it's own. It is widespread. I refuse, on principal, to address Mr. Byron anymore. If his rants were not directed at Israel and the Jews would he ever find a place to comment? I doubt it. This may seem like a freedom of speech issue but it is hardly that - it is hate disguised as debate-and a poor disguise to top it off. The wretched little people eat this stuff up-thoughtful people turn away in disgust. In diplomacy there comes a time when talking is no longer useful. It's never easy but it happens. Now is the time for me, personally, to stop addressing Mr. Byron.