Doc's Talk: Fighting for Israel, But Why?

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Fighting for Israel, But Why?

Ari Bussel and Norma Zager

"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins.” Attributed to Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

A senior minister of the Israeli Government is in Los Angeles this week with a message for Americans (Christians and Jews) to relate to the Administration: The Settlements are not the issue. The head of opposition from Israel, Israel’s foreign minister until just a few months ago, is arriving in LA toward the end of the week. She is coming with a completely different message than her counterpart, asking the very same people to send a contradictory message to the Administration.

Confused? No need to be.

Another visitor to Los Angeles and San Diego this weekend is Prof. Rivka Carmi, the president of Ben Gurion University in the Negev. Prof. Carmi is coming to meet with major donors who withheld University donations following an Opinion piece in the LA Times. Prof. Neve Gordon of BGU brands Israel an Apartheid state and calls for the world to “BOYCOTT ISRAEL.”

Professor Carmi will highlight all the good things happening at the University. Yes, she has been aware for years that there are a few bad apples, but as she wrote in a reply in the Los Angeles Times, “her hands are tied.” Professor Carmi may now have to deal with her major donors, who for some unknown reason took Prof. Gordon’s piece to heart, but she would like nothing better than to put a lid on the case and move on.

The call to BOYCOTT ISRAEL is neither new nor unique to Prof. Gordon. Professor after professor from Tel Aviv University, Haifa University, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Technion are standing behind Prof. Gordon. Some support his right to “academic freedom,” others his contention that for the sake of his two boys, Israelis and Palestinians, an effective, global boycott of Israel is necessary.

Confused again? Really, there is no need to be.

The Muslim Student Association at the University of California Irvine (UCI) has been highly successful at demanding free speech. The students as well as outsiders in their midst then abuse the right and perpetrate pure hate-filled speech. More worrisome is their denial of the same right to anyone who does not subscribe to their interpretation of radical Islam.

Freedoms are not absolute. The right to free speech doesn’t include the right to silence opposing views or espouse hate speech for propaganda. Academic freedom does not entitle rewriting history or spreading lies in the name of education. If misuse of freedoms is allowed, there is a danger the whole academic installation may collapse.

But let us focus on basics rather than on the academia.

A basic tenant common to Western Society is the Judeo-Christian belief that God promised the Land of Israel to the Hebrews. A Covenant, lasting for all time, for a thousand generations, between God and His people, serves the basis and the justification for the continued existence of Jewish people in the Land of Israel for over three millennia.

Today however, the Palestinian propaganda machine has excelled once again: The expectation of recognizing the (modern) State of Israel as a Jewish State and the Jewish Homeland is … RACIST? Is Italy racist because it is the home of Catholicism? Is Azerbaijan racist because it is a moderate Muslim country?

If there were no confusion thus far, now is the time. Israel is being challenged at the very essence of its being.

Confusion aside, the story continues.

At approximately the same time the Los Angeles Times published the Op-Ed “BOYCOTT ISRAEL,” the leading Swedish paper Aftonbladet published an Opinion piece by freelance journalist Donald Bostrom claiming (based on interviews with Palestinians) Israeli soldiers were harvesting organs from bodies of young Palestinian males.

Like Prof. Gordon, he was just “expressing his opinion.” He told CNN “he had no proof [emphasis added] that Israeli soldiers were stealing organs, and that the purpose of his piece was to call for an investigation into numerous claims in the 1990s that such activity was going on in the West Bank and Gaza.”

Two radical calls to action: one by the head of a department at a top university in Israel, another by a reporter in Israel. The Israeli Government Press Office is withholding the reporter’s credentials, and the university promised some internal action against the professor – nothing public of course – and wants the matter to go away.

Sweden’s foreign minister refuses to apologize and the paper’s editor-in-chief, Jan Helin, says he is not a Nazi. Is hatred and anti-Semitism confined to only members of the Nazi party?

The real question must be: is spreading lies and hatred to destroy a country protected or merely treasonous? As Joseph Goebbels was so fond of repeating, “tell a lie often enough it becomes the truth.” How much easier it must be for Israel’s enemies when the world is so willing to believe lies about a people they despise?

Conclusion?

Israel must decide: Are settlements good for her or not? Should there be multiple representatives sending mixed signals to the US Administration via her support base? Is she a Jewish state or not? Is Jerusalem her capital or not? Is Jerusalem divisible or not? Is Israel an Apartheid state or not? Should we boycott Israel or not? In fact, is it important she continues to exist or should the format or location change?

To hear there are “bad apples” in the mix is insulting to one’s intelligence. If left to rot, the entire bag of apples will ultimately be tainted and destroyed.

Israel cannot allow herself to ignore the above incidents. Prof. Carmi and Ben Gurion University’s Board of Governors must not sleep until they send a clear public signal to all the bad apples. Anything less than decisive, immediate and forceful action would be capitulating to propaganda.

Supporters and lovers of Israel sit and worry over what is taking place, even as Israel’s enemies evaluate, learn and implement more distorted lies. The enemy sees the Op-Ed piece in the Los Angeles Times by an Israeli Jew was effective against Israel. If these lies have convinced the world there are many vocal, powerful professors in Israel that believe a BOYCOTT is warranted, who can imagine what the next lie and call to action will be?

If the libelous accusation about murdering Palestinians males to harvest their organs is effective, imagine the next episode in their scripted propaganda play.

Who better to invent horrific lies than those who invented the practice of strapping bombs to their own children and sending them to die as martyrs? It is no wonder few can compete with the Palestinians at evil lies, when normal minds cannot conceive of such tactics.

Even if you can’t imagine, no need to worry. Israel’s enemies will. They are incredibly creative. They have perfected the art of propaganda. A Thousand and One Arabian Nights, moving full speed ahead and the next installment is on its way.

Malcolm Muggeridge said “People do not believe lies because they have to, but because they want to.” This is the key to the Jewish plight. As long as the world embraces anti-Semitism, it will welcome the lies.

Israel, please wake up. We cannot fight these lies when your own people call to support them. We cannot overemphasize the importance of Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria if you waiver about the about “settlements” and “East Jerusalem.” If you do not wake up, if the watchmen on the walls let down their guard, we will soon arrive at the end of days. Surely there are at least fifty righteous people left, forty-five, thirty, twenty, possibly even ten? Wake up before it is too late, or perhaps the eagerness to accept such treasonous lies is a sign it already is?

Comment: Folks, it is past time to change the language-if you don't do this, nothing will change. Long over due, the "settlements" are towns and/or cities in the disputed territories of Judea and Samaria inhabited by Israeli citizens. Please, the arabs who arrived therein the last 60 years are not called "settlers"! You fall head first into the political lexicon of our enemies-join me in refuting these terms and using them ever again. Do not expect our citizens to be respected as long as attributions that are undeserved are bestowed upon them simply by a concept driven descriptor "settler".

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