Saturday, June 23, 2012

Canada: Anti-Semitic Church Attack on Israel

Christine Williams
June 22, 2012 at 5:00 am
This hatred has nothing to do with the so-called "occupation," as Palestinian schoolchildren are taught to believe, but is instead fuelled by Israel having a different ideology of true Democracy and Human Rights in a region where most leaders are hostile to both.
The United Church of Canada has released the 26 page report of its Working Group on Israel/Palestine Policy, which the church will consider introducing as policy when the denomination's 41st General Council convenes in Ottawa August 11-18. The Working Group indicates that its recommendations were put forth in search of truth, justice and reconciliation when in fact it does little or nothing of the sort. It refers to Israel as the "thief," the "occupier," and the "oppressor," and compares Israeli policies to those of South Africa under apartheid, and more shockingly to Sudan, despite the fact that people from Africa risk their lives to get to Israel to escape the Islamist apartheid rampant throughout African countries such as Sudan, South Sudan and Nigeria, to name but a few.

While acknowledging Israel's right to exist, this biased and scathing report against Israel calls for "Christian economic action" against it, and points out that Canada does not recognize permanent Israeli control over territories occupied in 1967. Nevertheless it omits that these territories -- under dispute -- were taken by Israel in a defensive war, the second that united Arab countries had initiated against it since Israel's founding in 1948. It is difficult to imagine a view advanced by the United Church working group, along with the automatic majority of autocracies in the United Nations, that countries which start wars and then lose them should be rewarded. The Group also omits that Canada is the greatest friend to Israel and that it opposes anti-Israel labels, as well as attempts to exterminate Israel economically by means of divestment, boycotts and sanctions [BDS].
Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird recognized immediately what this working group failed to recognize: he stated in May that "the world cannot take the words of Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran as mere rhetoric and risk appeasing these malicious actors in the same way the world appeased the Nazis.… Under our prime minister, and under this foreign minister, Canada will stand with the Jewish state and people as they struggle to protect their very right to exist."
The three-member working group exerts a feeble attempt to justify the contents of its report by stating that anti-Semitism does not entail calling Israel into so-called accountability. In addressing the report's repeated referral to Israel as the "occupier," the so-called "occupation" must be understood through the lens of the historic 1967 six day war of which an inevitable preventative strike by Israel against the nations of Syria, Egypt, Jordan and Iraq occurred as these nations were preparing for a united attack upon the Jewish State.
The Syrian Defense Minister, Hafez Assad, and President Abdur Rahman Aref of Iraq had both declared that it was time to wipe out Israel's existence (reminiscent of Iran today), and Egypt -- preparing for war -- had illegally closed off the Gulf of Aqaba in preparation for attack. In response, Israel launched a preventative strike and won the strategic territories of the Gaza Strip, the Sinai Peninsula (Egypt), the West Bank and East Jerusalem (from Jordan), and the Golan Heights (from Syria) – all land which it is accused today of "occupying," even after giving back to Egypt 100% of its land in exchange for a peace treaty that as of this writing might be in danger of being abrogated by Egypt.
Israel's having taken this land in war was not from greed, but for Israel's strategic survival against mortal enemies that sought its destruction. With this in mind, it is worth remembering that nearly every state has achieved its current existence as a result of wars, most from greed. Our continent is no exception. According to the criteria of the stone-throwers against Israel, we too are "occupiers" on native lands, which includes the three-member United Church working group, who, being themselves "occupiers," have their own Christian "sins" to contend with.
Another historic event alluded to by the working group is the war that broke out when the British withdrew from the Palestinian region in 1948. The British Response to Jewish immigration in fact set a precedent of appeasing the Arabs – a practice followed for the duration of the Mandate for Palestine. The British placed restrictions on Jewish immigration while allowing Arabs freely to enter the country. As the British withdrew from the region in May 1948, Israel was attacked immediately (the next day) by five surrounding Arab nations. While acknowledging the attack on Israel, the working group report nevertheless emphasizes the Palestinian refugees created by this war, while leaving out the fact that Palestinian Arabs continued to refuse to recognize Israel, and instead began launching terrorist attacks from the Palestinian Arab community that became increasingly organized and dangerous through the course of time with the creation of the Palestinian Liberation Organization of which Yasser Arafat would eventually become Chairman. The Palestinian Authority in its revised charter still calls for the elimination of Israel, by stating that the revised charter incorporates everything in the previous version.
As the Working Group zeroes in on Palestinian victimhood, the exponentially growing number of Palestinian refugees each year is, in fact, a calculated scam -- one that is costing Western nations tens of billions of dollars per year in mandatory "donations." The number of refugees is projected to balloon to 20 million in the next 50 years, and would, at that time, include something like the great-great-great-great grandchildren of the original refugees, who by then would long since have died. By that token, is everyone in Greece now a refugee from the Peleponnesian War?
Although there are indeed poverty stricken areas in the Palestinian territories -- and often shocking discrimination against the Palestinians in (and by) their Arab host countries -- according to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, GDP growth in the Palestinian Territory of the West Bank was astronomically high at 9.9% in 2011, and the Gaza strip a staggering 23%. Ironically, the Palestinian Territories are, at this moment, enjoying greater growth than the North American taxpayers who are funding them.
The most basic problem at the root of the Palestinian-Israeli issue is not the so-called "occupation," as stipulated by this working group, but the refusal by Hamas and the Palestinian Authority to recognize Israel's right to exist, and the murderous hatred expressed by these leaders against the state of Israel and the Jewish people.
Even as Egypt was preparing itself for a runoff election, Hamas leader Ghazi Hamad said a win by Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohammed Morsi would be a boon to Palestinians, ending the frosty relationship between Hamas and Egypt. Hamad added that no one in Hamas supports recognizing Israel as a nation.
While the United Church Working Group acknowledges Israel's right to exist, it does so only in lip service, without taking into consideration Israel's need to protect itself. Israel has long faced threats of suicide bombers seeking to inflict as much injury as possible on victims, as well as trying unsuccessfully to cripple them with fear. The Working Group's objectives do not even take into account the Jihadist call to war against Israel , and children being taught in Palestinian schools to hate and kill Jews. This hatred has nothing to do with the so-called "occupation," as Palestinian children are indoctrinated to believe, but is instead fuelled by Israel having a different ideology of true Democracy and Human Rights in a region where most leaders are hostile to both. Israel is not an Islamic caliphate and herein lies the problem. The the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, worked hand in hand with Hitler during World War II and during the Holocaust to destroy the Jewish people simply because they were Jewish. Al-Husseini blocked attempts to rescue thousands of Jewish children from several countries under German control, effectively sentencing them to death. Few know that Yasser Arafat was a blood relative of the Grand Mufti; and that Arafat's his real name was Mohammed Yasser Abdel Rahman Abdel Raouf Arafat al-Qudwa Al-Husseini. Few also know that Arafat, whose mother was a cousin of the Grand Mufti, was a great admirer of this work.
As this working group attacks Israel, there are those Christians in abundance who support Israel, understand the struggles it faces, and also recognize the plight of the Palestinians as they are used as pawns by their own leadership to feed an agenda of hatred against the Jews and against the West in an effort to distract their people from the true source of their misery: the corrupt and wretched governance at home. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has lauded such Christian support, which even includes Mosab Yousef, the eldest son of Sheikh Hassan Yousef, a founding member of Hamas.
Mosab Yousef, who converted to Christianity, now exposes what is truly behind the "peace process." And speaking of conversions, an admirable moderate Muslim in Canada refers to what happened to a Christian convert in a Muslim regime as he discusses the brutality in Muslim societies where a " young man is pinned to the ground, his head is twisted and a knife held against his throat. In a few minutes the head is severed and held up for display to the public, who are loudly chanting, "Allahu Akbar!" ["Allah is Greatest!"]. In the video of this gruesome public execution of an apostate, the victim had converted to Christianity from Islam."
This brutality seen in Muslim societies brings us to a critical point outlined by the United Church working group: "holding Israel, like any other modern democratic state, accountable for its actions is one way civil society strengthens democracy and justice;" and, further, that Israel should be held to a higher standard than the surrounding non-democratic countries. This is nothing short of a highly racist statement, implying that the surrounding "barbarians" are capable of nothing more than savagery, so why expect anything of them or hold them accountable? In other words, they are the brown people from whom we should expect little more than violence and brutality. "Those Muslims" are quite capable of being civilized and should be called to the same -- admittedly flawed but higher -- standard as any other Western nation -- as many Muslim Reformists are trying to do today in efforts to protect the rights of women and human rights overall.
By contrast, in Israel, which is branded apartheid, Arabs are allowed full voting rights; positions in Knesset; employment rights, and for that matter, the freedom to be homosexual – the last, in their own countries, grounds to be murdered.
While all evidence attests to Christians having been driven out of Bethlehem by Muslims, the Working Group asserts, in yet another misinformed allegation, that it was the "occupation" that has driven out the Christians. The Hamas and the Palestinian Authority in fact violated – and continue to violate -- the human rights of Christians through beatings, intimidation, fire-bombings of their institutions, torture, kidnapping, and sexual harassment, thus leading to their exodus from Bethlehem: the very place honored as the birthplace of Christ.
In conclusion, the United Church working group needs to do its homework along with some other Church groups that condemn Israel. Israel is increasingly bullied by the OIC-dominated United Nations, as well as surrounding enemies that have historically sought its destruction. There are still many maps that exclude Israel, including one which was displayed at the U.N. and which was used to mark the commemoration of "International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People" on November 29, 2005. "The working group takes seriously questions about why Israel is currently the only country in the world being challenged by a global boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement (BDS)." In asserting this, the United Church would do well to observe its own faith by remembering that Christ, too, was ganged up against; so it is a moot argument to inquire why Israel is being challenged by a global BDS movement -- that is unjust and reprehensible -- as this small nation continues to fight for its existence.


Gerry said...

"Israel's having taken this land in war" Against the law according to an agreement signed and ratified by Israel. The world did not force Israel to sign. Security? Why not stay behind the partitioned borders and put up the biggest wall manned by hundred's of thousands of soldiers using all weaponry available to protect Israel? Security? Why send settlers - another violation of law endorsed by Israel - deep into the heart of what Israel considers hostile territory? Your arguments are bogus. The only way you can pull this off is to declare the world as Jew haters and Israel as feeble victim. Which is what this article attempts.

GS Don Morris, Ph.D./Chana Givon said...

Gerry thank you for taking time to read and reply to this argument. I note that you do not identify the "agreement" you refer to in your response-thus I am unable to directly comment. However, it is incorrect to say that Israel has signed any agreement re:land we took illegally. Exactly what "partitioned borders" do you mean? If you refer to the "1967 borders" than once again you are incorrect-there are no such "borders"-I can assume you do not know this or you do know this and are simply repeating "talking points". No, the Israeli citizens who choose to live in the disputed territories of Judea or Samaria are not illegal. Of course your arguments are based upon inaccurate and incorrect information.

Gerry said...

"The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies."

Geneva Convention signed by Israel August 12, 1949, ratified by Israel June 7, 1951.

UN Charter:"All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter."

Israel is admitted as a member of the UN: "Noting furthermore the declaration by the State of Israel that it ‘unreservedly accepts the obligations of the United Nations Charter and undertakes to honour them from the day when it becomes a Member of the United Nations"

Borders: Res. 181 created the State of Israel by partitioning the territory. These borders were distinct. (ironically it was a unilateral ruling without negotiations with the people living on the land - exactly the complaint in regards to the Palestinian bid for UN membership).

The 1967 borders are distinct as well.

These agreements are not complicated. If Israel is faithful to its legal commitments she should abide by them.

Arguing the Occupied Territories belong to Israel based on possession thousands of years ago is a different story. The world would be quite a mess if everyone demanded land their ancestors lived on at some point during ancient history. If Israel relies on a Biblical claim she must realize such claims are selective. Almost anything can be justified by the Bible if one chooses some text and ignores others.

Israel does exist and should exist. If Israel claims the adherence to democratic principles she must accept the rule of law and treaties necessary for any democracy to be valid and not a cover for aggressive land grabs.

The law or the Bible? Choose one. Israel can't have it both ways.

GS Don Morris, Ph.D./Chana Givon said...

Gerry, I welcome your reply.The UN was asked in 1947 to help resolve issues in the ME. The result was UN 181 [known as the 1947 Partition Plan], a non- binding recommendation to partition Palestine, whose implementation hinged
on acceptance by both parties – Arabs and Jews. The resolution was adopted on November 29, 1947 in the General Assembly by a vote of 33-12, with 10
abstentions. Among the supporters were the United States and the Soviet Union, as well as other nations including France and Australia. The Arab nations, including Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia denounced the plan on the General Assembly floor and voted as a bloc against Resolution 181 promising to defy its implementation by force.

The resolution recognized the need for immediate Jewish statehood (and a parallel Arab state), but the ‘blueprint’ for peace became a moot issue when the Arabs refused to accept it. Subsequently, de facto [In Latin: realities] on the ground in the wake of Arab aggression (and Israel’s survival) became the basis for UN efforts to bring peace. Resolution 181 then lost its validity and relevance.
Aware of Arabs’ past aggression, Resolution 181, in paragraph C, calls on the Security Council to:
“... determine as a threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression, in accordance with Article 39 of the Charter, any attempt to alter by force the settlement envisaged by this resolution.” [italics by author]
The ones who sought to alter by force the settlement envisioned in Resolution 181 were the Arabs who threatened bloodshed if the United Nations was to adopt the Resolution.

You know of course that the Geneva Convention applies to cooperating sovereign nations. Your continued used of "Occupied Territories" is legally inaccurate but certainly the mantra of our enemies. By this acknowledgment you have also determined that this area is not property of a sovereign nation (no such country of Palestine) and thus the Geneva Conventions are not applicable-legally.
Finally, you repeat the "1967 borders" lie-you know it is an armistice line, if not I am happy to direct to the source. You mix UN 181 language with "talking points" language of our enemies, equate the two as the same-disingenuous at best. As you must know UN 181 is a non-binding resolution, it has no authority, legal or otherwise. Your last sentence demonstrates your ignorance of history and culture in this region.

Gerry said...

I am ignorant of many things but not all things.

Resolution 181 stands. I know I won't change your mind because you can never accept the Partition Plan. But you can change mine mind.

Very simply. Show me the exact text, anywhere in any UN resolution or ruling that 181 has been withdrawn, rescinded, or revoked.

Show me anywhere in a UN ruling or resolution the resolution was contingent on both parties acceptance.

Show me anywhere in UN records that Palestinians were a participant in deciding 181.

The passage you quote from 181 does not render 181 null and void. "any attempt to alter by force the settlement envisaged by this resolution" will be dealt with by the Security Council. Force was used to try to alter it by someone but that doesn't alter the resolution.

The use of the term Occupied Territories is a term used by the UN. It's not a fabricated term invented by someone simply to slander Israel - unless you consider subsequent legal rulings and international law as slanderous - which you probably do.

Now, it's a different story if you consider 181 to have "lost its validity and relevance." That's ok, that's your opinion. Reject the Partition Plan and its ramifications but don't suggest it's position taken by the UN.

If the UN's rulings and resolutions are completely repugnant to you then don't bother using your time and energy interpreting the resolutions.

the 1967 Armistice line is a border, a demarcation separating one territory from another. It's a border but nothing you accept I'm sure. If there are no borders from 1948 or 1967 the territory is wide open.

I was wrong in the last sentence of my previous post. Zionists already use both ways. The land between the Nile and the Euphrates (I think that's the span) is Israel's according to their god. It seems like an absurd claim to me. But whatever.

Israel's attempts to claim ownership of the land using the law doesn't seem to work that well. Ancient text is in the wings ready to recite whenever necessary.

I admitted I'm ignorant in many things but I'm willing to learn. Show me in simple, clear and concise terms I'm wrong on 181. If you can't do be honest and simply admit the UN resolutions mean nothing to Israel.

I don't know much about "history and culture" but I do know what the difference is between right and wrong. Something very wrong is happening in a place that was clearly labeled on the map "Palestine." I don't see any place called Palestine on the map today.

GS Don Morris, Ph.D./Chana Givon said...

First of all I appreciate the tone of our discussion -it is refreshing to not having the other side shout and deny-thank you. I acknowledge that UN 181 was and is known as the Partition Plan. Here is the legal distinction. This resolution originated in the General assembly and all resolutions emanating from this body are considered as only recommendations-the only "legal" resolutions emanate from the Security council. Now, our enemies know this and yet began a strategy decades ago to misrepresent this and so many other resolutions. They knew that their "arguments" would be reinforced by their carefully planned PR program as well as an ignorant (unknowing) Western population. Therefore, there is no legal basis for UN 181's positions. Thank you for being willing to learn-all the best-doc