Doc's Talk: The ridiculously flawed reasoning and language currently in vogue to demonize Israel 'for peace'

Monday, April 13, 2009

The ridiculously flawed reasoning and language currently in vogue to demonize Israel 'for peace'

Guest Op-Ed

Today the WAPO featured an interesting letter to the editor entitled 'Israel Must Give Up The Settlements' by a Yale academic named Gregory Eow and a NY facial surgeon named Brian Rush Simpson. Both of them are huge Obama supporters by the way..what a shock, eh? It's valuable to look at this because it showcased the ridiculously flawed reasoning and language currently in vogue to demonize Israel 'for peace' . Let's go through this bit bit to see exactly how bigoted and wrong headed it actually is:

Last month, we traveled to the West Bank to see in person what was happening in this disputed land. Because seeing the Israeli settlement activities in the West Bank transformed our thinking on the Israeli-Palestinian question, we read with interest Elliott Abrams's remarks regarding settlements ["The Settlement Freeze Fallacy," op-ed, April 8].

Previously, we had thought it was Palestinian intransigence that prevented a two-state solution. A look at the settlements demolishes this explanation. The settlements and the maze of Israelis-only roads and military checkpoints to sustain them makes clear that successive Israeli governments -- Labor and Likud alike, as Mr. Abrams noted -- have actively pursued policies aimed at colonizing the West Bank.

For the record, I would be surprised if these men actually went to Judea and Samaria (AKA the West Bank). If they did, they certainly saw only what they wanted to see.

First of all, there's that loaded word 'settlements'. I discussed this before in some detail.

In 1948, when the Arabs attacked Israel at its birth and ethnically cleansed Jews from Judea and Samaria ( AKA the West Bank) and East Jerusalem, they simply appropriated a lot of Jewish homes and property...which is how the place CNN and al-Reuters refer to 'traditionally Arab East Jerusalem' came to be. It was 'traditionally Arab' for only 19 years, from 1948 to 1967. Yet somehow this illegally seized property somehow never got the label 'settlements.'

Gush Etzion, Ariel and many other areas in Judea and Samaria that comprise the Jewish communities there were in fact legally purchased by the Jewish national fund prior to 1948 from the Arab owners.These lands were STOLEN when the Jews were ethnically cleansed from the Arab world after `48 - something that did not happen to the Arab population living in what became Israel, many of whom chose to leave.

Even the UN never recognized the illegal occupation of this area by Jordan...who of course moved Arabs into the area with the idea of colonizing the area for itself, something Eow and Simpson conveniently forget to mention.

Even more ironically, when Israel retrieved these areas in 1967 after being attacked by Jordan, they let the Arabs who had participated in this theft hang on to their ill-gotten gains for the most part instead of retaliating in kind. So almost all the so-called settlements were built according to official Labor government policy on land that was either vacant or on Jordanian government land.

People like Eow and Simpson like the idea of depriving the legal owners of these areas of their land for a second time, regardless. And they fail to recognize that there is no reason whatsoever the legal owner's property rights could not be respected in a new Palestinian state no matter where the borders were - except for Arab racism and violence.

That's why the checkpoints and the separate roads exist, by the way. They were created out of necessity to protect Israeli civilians from indiscriminate Arab violence after Yasir Arafat unleashed a war on Israel's civilians. And I have a feeling that if Professor Eow or Dr. Simpson and their families were getting shot at on their way to work, they would see the whole thing differently. But let's move on:

That prevents the establishment of a viable and contiguous Palestinian state, and we are saddened that the conversation has degraded to the point that we now discuss whether illegal land grabs ought to be frozen rather than uprooted.

My goodness...an abysmal ignorance of geography, the history of the region, current events and law all in one paragraph.

First off, what stopped the emergence of a second Arab Palestinian state is simply the rejectionism, violence and infighting between the Palestinians themselves.

Just as it was illegal Jordanian aggression that created the 'West Bank' and so-called 'Arab East Jerusalem in the first place on land that was never theirs to begin with, it was the illegal Arab aggression against Israel in 1948 that torpedoed the original UN partition plan which set it up..which the Arabs rejected and Israel accepted, however grudgingly.

Likewise, the refugees of that war, almost a million Jews and about half that many Arabs if we go by the last British census of Palestine were created by the Arab states jihad against the Jews. Eow and Simpson have magically transferred the blame, the cost and the onus for a solution to Israel, the party whom was attacked!

As for an 'illegal land grab', we've already established that almost every one of the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria were built either on land legally purchased by the Jewish national fund prior to 1948 from the Arab owners, on vacant land or on land owned by the Jordanian government that was forfeited after Jordan's unsuccessful attack on Israel in 1967.

The real illegal land grab took place at the hands of the Arabs, and not only in Jordan but all over the Arab world. as Jews were illegally deprived of their property as they were driven from their homes. Eow, Simpson and those of their ilk always conveniently forget that little detail...I wonder why?

As for contiguous - are these people forgetting that the Hamas owned reichlet of Gaza and the Fatah owned reichlet in the Palestinian occupied areas of Judea and Samaria are separated by Israeli territory, both groups have avowed genocidal intentions towards Israel and at this point the chances of Israel willingly allowing a connection between the two is slim and none?

Another mere detail that frequently gets forgotten is that Israel signed on to the Road Map with the express acceptance by the US government that most of the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria would remain part of Israel as as well as a unified Jerusalem..something that doesn't jibe with Obama's acceptance of the Saudi peace ultimatum.

And now we get to the kicker, the reason this letter was written in the first place...to shill for Obama:

Unlike the previous administration, of which Mr. Abrams was a part, the Obama administration indicates that it values the international standing of the United States. We hope that President Obama will encourage the Israeli government to relinquish all of its settlements or forgo the considerable aid that implicates the United States in that government's activities in the eyes of much of the world.

Hmmm...Jordan gets aid from the US, and Jordan has killed and expelled far more 'Palestinians' than Israel has - remember Black September? Egypt gets $1,5 billion in aid from the US and actually turned machine guns on Palestinians trying to leave Gaza and cross the border. Iraq gets massive aid from the US and expelled Palestinians living there en masse..not to mention Christians. We give $1.5 billion to Pakistan, a major enabler of terorism where churches get burned on a regular basis.

Yet Eow and Simpson single out Israel, which, unlike those other countries is a valuable US ally of long standing and spends most of its aid right here.

I wonder why...it couldn't be that Israel has Jews in it? Now could it?

Look for this kind of horse manure to be peddled a lot as the Obama Administration seeks to appease the Muslim world by trying to give them the Jews.I have a feeling Eow and Simpson would be just fine with that. At least until they realized that the jihad wasn't going to stop with the Jews.

Oh, by the way -if anyone wants to see what a fair, realistic Middle East peace settlement might actually look like here it is...
Posted by Freedom Fighter at 3:58 PM

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"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.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"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."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk