UNTIL THE 1967 WAR, many in Western Europe saw Israelcorrectlyas a tiny and besieged state, surrounded by enemies who wished to destroy it. In this respect, they were helped along by the fact that the leader of those who would after the Six-Day War be carefully renamed as the "Palestinians," were not yet called "Palestinians" but simply "the Arabs" or "the Arab refugees." And their putative leader, Ahmed Shukairy (who was himself half-Turkish), had the habit of expressing himself as a truthful Muslim, and told the world that his goal was the destruction of Israel.
The Arab leaders said the same thing. And those Arab leaders, at the time, did not have the enormous oil wealth that the member-states of OPEC really began to acquire only in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Then they enjoyed a really fantastic jump in oil revenues, and thus an equally fantastic increase in perceived power and real ability to buy all kinds of influence along with other, more tangible goods and services, only when OPEC quadrupled the price of oil in the fall of 1973.
And beginning with their defeat in the Six-Day War, the Arabs realized that they would not be able to defeat Israel militarily, at least not yet, not under the new conditions, and with Israel now in possession of "the West Bank" and Gaza and all of the Sinai (some 95% of the territory Israel won by force of arms in that war). They would have to formulate a new strategy to force Israel to disgorge what it had won, to make Israel appear not to be what in fact it still was, a tiny state subject to this unending Arab and Muslim hostility, that no concessions by Israel would ever truly assuage (at least not for the Muslims who took Islam seriously, and that meant, at least, all of the Arab Muslims). So they did several things. They decided on a campaign of diplomatic and economic warfare, accompanied by terrorist acts within Israel and against Israelis overseas, and on a campaign to weaken Israel and to force its former friends to sever ties, or at least to cease being friendly toward Israel, and ready to misunderstand its plight, and the real nature of the warthe Jihadbeing waged against it.
All of these countries, or almost all, within a year or two after the Six-Day War, had been persuaded by Arab money and the promisenever fulfilledof more money to come if they did what the Arabs wanted, cut off diplomatic relations with the Jewish state.
Read it all as noted JW contributor Hugh Fitzgerald outs the liars and puts the truth back where it belongs.
JUST IN CASE the point has been missed, allow me to clarify that the ongoing opinion of The Bellicose Augur syncs with one I found floating about the ether this morning, and it goes like this: Israel belongs to Israel. The real “myth” here is Palestine. Palestine is a region, not a nation… and it never was. In fact, Israel shows more respect for the Palestinian people than all the other Islamic nations combined. Word of advice to my peacenik and anti-Israel friends. Don't be a doofus. And don't get snookered by the well-honed Arab propaganda machine. Grab a clue. Make the world safe for peace. The Arabs and their Islamicist battle hounds can't and won't. End of story.
P.S. The mainstream media's Michael Jackson swoonfest for days on end, drowning out any covert coverage of the brave Iranian people who were resisting their own violent totalitarian regime, nauseated me. The President Obama's response to the Iranian revolt kicked it up another level, compelling me to be ashamed of my country for the first time in MY life. But then, there's a lot of that going around these days...
From our friend Hershel Tsvi Yehuda in a pithy response to everything the pro-Palestinean activiists have to say on this very old, very bloody topic:
HISTORY SHOWS THAT THE CONFLICT here in Israel is not over land, but has to do with the inability of our Arabs/Muslim neighbors to recognize that Jews and Christians have any claim, religious or historical, to the land of Israel. Time and time again throughout the middle east, and even now in Asia, it becomes the goal of radical Muslims to destroy religious sites from other religions and build Mosques over them. From the destruction of Buddhist statues in Afghanistan to the constant religious battles in India, and back to the middle east, this history repeats itself over and over again.
But while we are on the subject, let's dig that swimming pool a little deeper, shall we, again from the rife pen of Hershel Tsvi Yehuda:
The first thing to note is that the conflict between Jews and Arabs in the land of Israel predates the settlement movement that started in 1967, and even pre-dates Israel's re-establishment as an independent state in 1948. There were pogroms that included the sadistic rape, murder, dismemberment, and burning of thousands of Jews and their properties here going back to the middle of the 19th century. There was no Israeli state, no settlements, and there was no "occupation" of an Arab people called Palestinians.
Next, it it important to point out that the Palestinian Arabs have been offered a state multiple times and rejected it outright, preferring to wage war on the Jews with the hopes of "throwing them into the sea." The entire land of the British mandate was designated as a Jewish state, and in contradiction to official British policy, 80% of the land was given to the Heshemite monarchy to establish the Kingdom of Jordan (which is now over 80% Palestinian.) Of the 20% of the land remaining, the United Nations (League of Nations at the time) offered partition, half to the Palestinian Arabs, half to the Jews. The Jews accepted the small and virtually indefensible borders and immediately established Israel. The Arabs rejected and sent 5 national armies and legions of Palestinian Arabs to destroy the new Jewish state. Thank G-d, the Jews won, and were happy to have a state even though it did not give them authority over it's most holy sites in Jerusalem.
From 1948 until 1967, after every Jew living in east Jerusalem, the West Bank, or Gaza Strip, (places Jewish families have lived consistently since temple times) had been murdered or exiled, Israel still suffered hundreds of murderous attacks from the Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. From bus hijackings resulting in the murder of the passengers, to schools being raided by child murdering terrorists, shootings, bombings, kidnappings and more. All these attacks despite the fact that there was no occupation, no settlements, and the Arabs did not make a single attempt at establishing an independent state called Palestine.
In 1967, when the Arab countries called up their armies and pledged to throw Israel into the sea, Israel launched a pre-emptive attack destroying the Arab armies, and re-claiming the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. Since then, Israel re-built Jewish towns (settlements) in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, reestablishing ancient Jewish communities from biblical places such as Hebron, Bet El, and Shilo, and Israel finally gained control over it's most holy site, the site of the ancient temple that Jews had been forbidden to visit since the Arabs controlled it in 1948. With Israeli control over all of Jerusalem, Christian and Jewish holy sites were restored and for the first time in many years, all religions had access to their holy sites.
Suddenly the Palestinian Arabs decided that the reason they are murdering Jews is because of the occupation. To reiterate, these attacks had been going on all along, before the West Bank and Gaza Strip were "occupied." Throughout this war of terror, Israel has repeatedly tried negotiating with the Palestinian Arabs. They have been offered a state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip 2 times by Israeli leaders, most famously by Prime Minister Ehud Barak who against the security interests of Israel offered them 97% of the West Bank and Gaza Strip with a capital in east Jerusalem. The answer Israel received was a "no," and a wave of suicide bombings and shooting attacks that murdered and injured thousands of Israelis.
THIS MORNING IN THE WEE HOURS, we on the East Coast were greeted by a speech from Cairo which will surely and eerily live in infamy. Perhaps it's time to recall these scorching words about one of the most remarkable stories in the history of mankind. That story is Israel. Dylan doesn't pull punches in this track, and delivers a scathing and sarcastic attack at the politically correct viewpoint, now at its zenith some twenty-five years later, which tends to support the Transjordanian Arabs, now redubbed the Palestinians after a brainstorm by PLO leader Yasser Arafat in 1969 hit upon the idea of a "race" without a homeland.
The Middle East war is not now and never was a conflict between Israelis/Jews on the one hand and Palestinians on the other. In fact, the Arab-"Palestinians", while currently the perpetrators of most of the anti-Jewish atrocities, were never a very important part of the conflict. In fact, before about 1970, virtually no one in the world considered the Middle East conflict to be one between Israelis and Palestinians. The term "Palestinian" itself had referred to Israeli Jews back in the 1940s, and had been slowly deconstructed and redefined to refer to the Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza. The Middle East Conflict was always a war by Arabs against Jews, not a conflict between Israelis and "Palestinians." The war was repackaged as a conflict between Jews and Palestinians as a public relations gimmick by the Arab fascist regimes. These regimes had never had any interest in "Palestinians," in creating a "Palestinian" state, or in "Palestinian nationalism" before 1967. That is because Palestinian nationalism did not and DOES NOT exist. The Palestinians were a regional group of Arabs having virtually no cultural nor national distinctive traits separating them from Syrians, Lebanese, and Jordanians. They are all basically Arabs!.
The bulk of what are called "Palestinian Arabs" are members of families who migrated into the Land of Israel beginning in the late 19th century. Palestinian nationalism is a mislabeling of Arab nationalism. Arab nationalism exists, although it is closely bound up with Islamic nationalism and even Islamism. Palestinian nationalism, however, is a phantom. It is nothing more than genocidal hatred of Jews!
The Arab assaults and aggressions against Israel in 1948, 1956, 1967, 1968, and 1973 had nothing to do with Palestinians. The Palestinian terror campaign would itself be easy to suppress today and eradicate if the Middle East conflict were really a Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Israel would simply obliterate the terrorists and expel their supporters to Syria and Lebanon. The Middle East war continues because it is really an Arab-Israeli war, not an Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is also in large part a war between barbarism and civilization. In many ways an Islamic religious jihad against the Jews.
From the masterful voice of our conservative, yes, I wrote conservative crooner (read radical centrist), poet and prophet Bob Dylan straight off the prescient 1983 "Infidels" LP:
Well, the neighborhood bully, he's just one man, His enemies say he's on their land. They got him outnumbered about a million to one, He got no place to escape to, no place to run. He's the neighborhood bully.
The neighborhood bully just lives to survive, He's criticized and condemned for being alive. He's not supposed to fight back, he's supposed to have thick skin, He's supposed to lay down and die when his door is kicked in. He's the neighborhood bully.
The neighborhood bully been driven out of every land, He's wandered the earth an exiled man. Seen his family scattered, his people hounded and torn, He's always on trial for just being born. He's the neighborhood bully.
Well, he knocked out a lynch mob, he was criticized, Old women condemned him, said he should apologize. Then he destroyed a bomb factory, nobody was glad. The bombs were meant for him. He was supposed to feel bad. He's the neighborhood bully.
Well, the chances are against it and the odds are slim That he'll live by the rules that the world makes for him, 'Cause there's a noose at his neck and a gun at his back And a license to kill him is given out to every maniac. He's the neighborhood bully.
He got no allies to really speak of. What he gets he must pay for, he don't get it out of love. He buys obsolete weapons and he won't be denied But no one sends flesh and blood to fight by his side. He's the neighborhood bully.
Well, he's surrounded by pacifists who all want peace, They pray for it nightly that the bloodshed must cease. Now, they wouldn't hurt a fly. To hurt one they would weep. They lay and they wait for this bully to fall asleep. He's the neighborhood bully.
Every empire that's enslaved him is gone, Egypt and Rome, even the great Babylon. He's made a garden of paradise in the desert sand, In bed with nobody, under no one's command. He's the neighborhood bully.
Now his holiest books have been trampled upon, No contract he signed was worth what it was written on. He took the crumbs of the world and he turned it into wealth, Took sickness and disease and he turned it into health. He's the neighborhood bully.
What's anybody indebted to him for? Nothin', they say. He just likes to cause war. Pride and prejudice and superstition indeed, They wait for this bully like a dog waits to feed. He's the neighborhood bully.
What has he done to wear so many scars? Does he change the course of rivers? Does he pollute the moon and stars? Neighborhood bully, standing on the hill, Running out the clock, time standing still, Neighborhood bully
ENOUGH SAID. Consider this blog, Zionist friendly, which actually prefers all Arabs to remove themselves to Syria and Jordan, drop this palestinian pretense and become civilized human beings (hope springeth eternal). We have welcomed those who repeat the mantra that anti-zionism is not the same as anti-semitism to speak their peace at the Bellicose Augur. Speak plainly though, dear world, to suffer inarticulate joy riding fools is a waste of time, and encourages more of the same...
On the one hand Mr. Moyers considers Israel to be entitled to defend herself (as if she needed his permission) on the other hand, he wants, from the vantage point of his snug PBS studio to be able to pass judgment on what a fitting (proportional?) defense would be.
Proportionality? Yes, that grand doctrine of proportional warfare. Taking the old dictum (Newton's Third Law of Physics) about an equal and opposite reaction to its contemporary extreme, we are always stuck in some unwinnable war. Israel’s armed forces always has done and continues to do their best at separating Hamas from their human shields and killing only the combatants. But that is not enough for Bill Moyers. He uses two examples, examples which all media professionals by the time he used them knew to be suspect, to imply that the Israelis are no better than those who want only to murder them. He pointedly ignores the obvious difference in the morality of the two sides.
He pretends, as it were, that he has just walked into the room and sees Israel beating up the Palestinians without knowing any of the background. According to him, it is an onslaught and a slaughter and he hurls those epithets at Israel, not the hate-filled murderers who have caused the problem and intentionally placed their own people between them and the tiger they had taunted once too often.
He crowns his assault on morality with the remark that first caught our attentionthe one he has already backed away from as “obviously not sufficiently precise”. (Ah, suddenly the man who has traded in words all his professional life has “misspoken?
More likely he spoke too quickly and revealed too much) Not only did he state that it was the bible that “genetically encoded” violence in the Jewish people, even as he goes on to say, “A radical stream of Islam now seeks to eliminate Israel from the face of the earth,” he compounds his betrayal of common sense and moral decency by adding “Israel misses no opportunity to humiliate the Palestinians with checkpoints, concrete walls, routine insults” as if he agrees with the Islamist honor/shame formula that their humiliation must be avenged in blood.
A little late to the story, but I was stunned to come across this article highlighting an astonishing point of view from my own local paper. How did I miss this one? The atrocity, the madness, the upside down worldview that parades around as journalism today, uh, leaves me speechless to my core. But in a splendid case of serendipity, if mem'ry serves, I believe that the WP article in question was published about the same time I finally picked up the telephone to cancel my subscription to the Post after 25 years of readership.
In another bout of journalistic malpractice, The Washington Post ran a story Tuesday declaring that officials had uncovered the true motivations of the Mumbai terrorists: 400 years of persecution by the West and the existence of Jews, especially in Israel. WaPo reported:
...Indian officials suspect that the group allegedly behind the attack, Pakistan-based Lashkar-i-Taiba, draws support from security and intelligence forces within that country and is fueled by a growing list of grievances that stretch from the 17th century to the subcontinent's partition in 1947, which created the independent nations of India and Pakistan.
The Post quotes one of the murderers who telephoned officials as simply asking that the destruction of mosques and "killings" be stoppedand that all imprisoned terrorists be set free to kill again.
In addition to presenting the terrorists as a justifiably aggrieved population, laboring under 400 years of "grievances," the Post notes Western provocations against Mohammedans did not end 60 years ago in the postwar world. "The grievances also include India's increasingly warm ties with the United States and Israel, counterterrorism experts say."
During the three-day siege that claimed the lives of more than 170 innocent people, one of the terrorists, Imran Babar, called an Indian television station to discuss his motives. After breaking into the city's only Jewish center, the Chabad House, and killing six people including its spiritual leader, Rabbi Gavriel Noach Holtzberg and his wife, Rivka, Babar used the slain rabbi's cell phone to call and complain about the Jewish state. Babar voiced outrage that Israeli Major General Avi Mizrahi visited Kashmir in September to discuss counterterrorism with Israel's democratic ally, India:
"You call their army staff to visit Kashmir. Who are they to come to J and K?" Imran told the anchor, referring to the disputed Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir. "This is a matter between us and the Hindus, the Hindu government. Why does Israel come here?"
[And yet all of the Muslim world rises up in outrage over the Israeli-Arab conflict. Does the Post detect the double standard? Not on their life. Same tired rhetoric. End of story.]
Like Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount, a pretext was fitted to an act of premeditated violence. Nor is this the only incident of blatant provocation the Post could find.
India and Israel have had a defense alliance since 1992, when diplomatic relations between the countries were established. India has become a major purchaser of Israeli weapons, which has angered some of India's Muslims. The visit by the Israeli general was kept secret for days, news reports said, for fear of riots by Muslims in Kashmir, a predominantly Muslim area patrolled by more than 300,000 mostly Hindu Indian troops.
Once again, Jewish merchants and interlopers are setting off waves of Muslim violence around the globe by, being Jews. Inevitably, the very existence of Israel as a state was introduced near the end of the piece, as a summary of the Pakistani terrorists' case:
"Kashmir is a symbol, like Palestine, of a sense of injustice. It is a rallying cry for a much larger anger at India and the West," said Bruce Riedel, author of "The Search for al Qaeda."
Thus, the real problem in India is the existence of Israel. And Kashmir, Kosovo, Andalusian Spain, and any other province that strains against the pressures of Islamic irredentism.
In fairness, the Post story does mention the force of Islamofascism, though, needless to say, not by that term. Lashkar-i-Taiba radicalism is mentioned, though it is given less space than passages that present the terrorists as victims:
"Lashkar has a very specific pan-Islamic vision: the recovery of all Muslim lands once ruled by Muslims, including India, Central Asia and Spain. And they've gone after those countries that they believe were usurped from traditional Muslim rulers," said Ashley J. Tellis, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace who has been tracking Lashkar since 2001. "The goal is very apocalyptic and simple: attack these enemies and the symbols of those enemies," he said.
It is this apocalyptic vision that has led Lashkar to kill hundreds of Indians, at times dressed as Hindu holy men. Whatever the immediate goals of (LIT), the ultimate goal of Islam is worldwide submission to Shari'a law. "No babe is born but [as a Muslim]," said Mohammed. "It is his parents who make him a Jew, or a Christian, or a polytheist." This universal compulsion explains all expressions of Islamic jihad. The recounting of centuries of oppression, overlooking centuries of their oppression of others, explains the depth of self-pity and victimization in the Muslim mind. To place this self-pitying narrative alongside Jewish arms merchants and Indian self-defense is an abrogation of journalism at the highest level.