Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News: Nakba

Showing posts with label Nakba. Show all posts

Thursday, September 28, 2023

Arab writer admits that Arab leaders only pretend to care about Palestinians for their own purposes

Writing in Alaraby, Hulmi al-Asmar writes that normalization maybe isn't so bad - that perhaps if Arab nations act nicely to Israel, Israel will implode from infighting since it is dependent on aggression.

Setting aside his main argument, al-Asmar gives a brief description of how Arab leaders have used the Palestinian issue for their own benefit, and how they have actually hurt the Palestinians with this cynical pretense.

For years, official Arab discourse used to murmur a heavy [Palestinian] "nationalist" sentiment, to the effect that "Palestine is the Arabs' top issue." From this slogan, a series of canned phrases emerged that affirmed standing by the Palestinian people and calling for their victory. Preachers filled the space with resonant speech in forums all over the world, and printed millions of pages with them. Books, poems, and commentaries were written about it, and they pulled their voices and roared their throats with enthusiastic songs. Millions of statements, and thousands of conferences and summits were also held, all of which threatened the enemy, or at least “confirmed its position in support of the Palestinian people, and their right to establish their independent state and defeat the occupation.” More than that, under the heading of “confronting the Zionist threat,” billions were spent on arming their armies, while morsels of bread were withheld from the mouths of the hungry, in preparation for the decisive battle with the “enemy” to build what they called “Arab national security,” and for that purpose legislation, emergency laws, and martial law were enacted. How can it not, when the nation is in a state of war and on constant alert? Therefore, there is no time for the luxury of “democracy,” nor for the “mockery” of elections, social justice, and other rights. This is not the time (!), as the nation is passing through a “delicate circumstance” and a “turning point.” It is a "dangerous time in history" and a "sensitive stage" that requires not paying attention to these "trivialities", and focusing effort on confronting "the enemy's plans" aimed at tearing apart the Arab ranks, and undermining "national dignity and nationalism!", etc., to the end of this series of great lies that may have passed on the minds of the "masses"... So what was the result?

Israel is expanding and strengthening every day, while Palestine is withering, and its nakba has been “Arabized” and reproduced. It was not limited to the Palestinian people, but the Arab regime produced other versions and more and revised versions of the Arab catastrophes, so that almost every Arab country has its own nakba.

This is stuff we've been saying for many years. It is rare indeed to see these words in Arabic:

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Abbas once again tells Palestinians in Lebanon to go to hell

From Sama News:

Today, Monday, President Mahmoud Abbas received a phone call from the head of the Lebanese Phalange Party, Sheikh Sami Gemayel.

The President discussed with Gemayel, during the phone call, the unfortunate events that took place in Ain El-Hilweh camp.

He stressed support for what the government and the army are doing in Lebanon in order to impose law and order.

The President stressed that the Palestinian presence in Lebanon is temporary until they return to the homes from which they were expelled according to international resolutions.

That last sentence is a coded message, saying that Abbas - as head of the PLO, and therefore ostensibly the leader of all Palestinians worldwide - would not ask Lebanon to give citizenship to Palestinians who have lived there, stateless, for 75 years.

Abbas has said this explicitly in the past, numerous times.

Which means that his official position is for Palestinians in Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and other Arab countries should not become citizens of those countries - they must remain without any national protection until Israel is destroyed or somehow forced to commit suicide via "return" to destroy it as a Jewish state.

The cynicism of this position is breathtaking. The closest thing the Palestinians have to a leader wants to use his own people as pawns, with no national rights in the countries where generations have been born, lived and died.

The cynicism does not end there, though. Because in 2005, Mahmoud Abbas had a completely different position, as reported then in AFP:

DUBAI, 12 July 2005 — Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas told Arab countries hosting Palestinian refugees to give them citizenship, insisting such a move would not compromise their right of return.

“I call upon every Arab government wishing to give citizenship (to Palestinian refugees) to do so. What is wrong with that?” he said in an interview with Dubai Television late Sunday.

But the Palestinian Authority president insisted that obtaining citizenship in a host-country should not compromise the right to return to their homeland of which many Palestinian refugees dream.

“This does not mean resettlement (of refugees). A Palestinian would return to his homeland whenever he is allowed, whether he carried an Arab or non-Arab citizenship,” he said. “A fifth-generation Palestinian living in Chile also wishes to return when allowed ... It is an emotional matter, not related to citizenship,” he added.

The Palestinian leader, who visited Syria and Lebanon last week — both host to hundreds of thousands of refugees, slammed claims that the Arab League had banned naturalization of refugees as “mere excuses”. “There is no decision ... the Arab League only recommended (not to grant citizenship) but this was not a decision,” he said.

Once upon a time, Mahmoud Abbas asked Arab countries to naturalize Palestinian "guests." But only a couple of years later, he changed his position to being against them becoming citizens.

What caused the about-face?

Chances are, Lebanon and Syria and maybe also the Gulf countries that host hundreds of thousands of Palestinians told him to shut up. They don't want Palestinians to become citizens. And probably Hamas took advantage and portrayed Abbas as being weak on the mythical "right to return."

Whatever the reason, Abbas switched from acting as a real leader that tries to help his people into a corrupt leader who simply wants to abuse his people for his own political purposes.

Abbas was right in 2005. Citizenship has nothing to do with "return." Palestinian citizens of Jordan are given the clear message that they will lose citizenship if "return" would become an option. And for whatever bizarre reason, even though most of them are citizens of a state, they are still called "refugees" by the international community.

And Palestinians, when given the rare chance to become citizens of other countries, eagerly take that option. So those who say that Palestinians prefer statelessness to becoming citizens of their countries are simply liars.

Each stateless Palestinian adds an infinitesimal amount of pressure on Israel. That is the only reason for insisting that Palestinians remain stateless. Which proves that to Palestinian leaders, their own people's lives are worthless.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Morocco op-ed expresses anger at Palestinians

Moroccan choosing to care more about Gaza and Taza, a city in Morocco

Palestinians have been insulting Morocco for normalizing relations with Israel.

An op-ed in the mainstream Morocco Hespress news site lashes back at them, in ways that are still rare in Arabic language media:

It talks about how Palestinians made Arab nations feel guilty for allowing them to lose in 1948 and not destroying Israel since then:

This complex was copied by the Arab nationalists to the fullest extent, and they made the Arab peoples responsible for the loss of Palestine from the Gulf to the ocean, the holocaust of the Palestinian people, everyone who did not contribute to the liberation of Palestine or did not show support for the struggle of the Palestinians or showed signs of fatigue or abandonment is thrown with the lowest epithets and boycotted and considered an enemy of the cause. What is the fault of the Moroccans in the tragedy of the Palestinians?

The Palestinians are the ones who sold their property before the British Mandate, and they are the ones who fled from the Jews at intervals and sought refuge in the countries of the Levant, and they are the ones who drummed and honked for Gamal Abdel Nasser, who drugged the Arabs with the illusion of liberating Palestine and was defeated in a humiliating war with his Arab brothers in Jordan and Syria. All that happened was not caused by the Moroccans, whether from near or far.

In the summer of 1967, we, the boys of the Borj Omar neighborhood in the city of Meknes, were organizing gangs armed with sticks and slingshots and traveling six kilometers to attack the Jews in Al-Mallah. Who was inciting us? Who was organizing us into gangs? Why weren't the authorities getting in our way or punishing us? There is no doubt that the Arab defeat mixed with religious feeling was the only motive for our criminality.

There is a bad neighbor next to us [Algeria], one of the ugliest creations of history, threatening our country in terms of its geography, history and heritage, and slandering us with lies and incitement every day and every hour. Is there an issue more dangerous than threatening our existence?

If the Palestinians are unable to help us in this ordeal of ours, let them be neutral and let the Moroccans defend themselves by all means, and not choose these means for us according to their taste, mood, and interests.

The only problem is that this op-ed is (probably unintentionally) antisemitic, comparing the Western feeling of guilt over the Holocaust with the guilt that Palestinians have instilled in Arab people for their "nakba."

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Jenin resident confirms that Palestinian Arabs were told to leave in 1948 by their leaders

In the middle of a Haaretz article on humanitarian issues in Jenin, we see:

Another resident of the camp, who prefers to remain unnamed, refused to leave his home with his family of eight. "We will not leave our home even if it falls on our heads," he said. "Our forefathers left in 1948 and were told to come back after a week, and that week has been 75 years. We will not make the same mistake; our generation is ready to sacrifice for its homeland."

The idea that Arab leaders had instructed the residents to flee so they would be free to enter and quickly defeat the Jews has gone out of fashion in recent decades, as many historians cannot find too much primary source material for it. And even among those who accept that it happened, there is much controversy about how many Arabs may have left at the urging of their leaders.

But here is a Palestinian "refugee" who is not ashamed to say that his own ancestors indeed fled because they were instructed to.

Given that most Palestinians are conditioned to push the narrative of being forcibly evicted even when it is provably false, and the current mindset that it would have been shameful to have voluntarily left their homes, it is significant that a Palestinian admits (without allowing his name to be used) that this was in fact what happened to his family in 1948.

(h/t kweansmom)

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Interesting analysis of the evolution of Palestinian identity by an anti-Zionist

Zachary Foster has become a popular anti-Zionist tweeter in recent months, to the point of becoming essentially a troll more interested in scoring points than in facts. (Before he blocked the terrific Adin Haykin, they had a number of entertaining exchanges.)

Yet in the past, I have found his scholarly papers to be very interesting and illuminating, and they tell a story that does not at all support the current Palestinian lies about their history. Sadly, he seems now to be more addicted to "Likes" than to the truth.

A 2011 unpublished master's thesis by Foster also upends current Palestinian lies, especially from Rashid Khalidi.

The period 1914-1923 is what, the most influential of these writers, Rashid Khalidi, has called the “critical years,” in his widely-praised award-winning work on the subject, Palestinian Identity. He argues that as a result of the “rapid, momentous, and unsettling changes” from the outset of World War I in 1914 to roughly 1922 or 1923, “the sense of political and national identification of most politically conscious, literate and urban Palestinians underwent a sequence of major transformations. The end result was a strong and growing national identification with Palestine.” Importantly, Khalidi writes, this full-fledged national loyalty was felt by a “significant proportion of the Arab inhabitants of Palestine”and by 1922, “important elements of the country’s Arab population had already come to identify primarily with Palestine” (my emphasis). He adds that the “most common self-description of political groupings during the mandate was as Palestinian Arab.”....Although Khalidi might like to think that “no one” could possibly dispute the widespread existence of a Palestinian identity during this thirty year period, with careful attention to evidence rather than hyperbole and polemic, I believe we can gain a much more accurate understanding of precisely when, how and why a unique Palestinian identity became widespread.

Foster then demolishes Khalidi, showing that he primary identification of Palestinian Arabs before the 1936 revolt were with their cities, or with Syrians/Egyptians or Arabs in general.

Foster uses interesting analysis methods to come to this conclusion. For example, "not a single book was written on the history of Palestine out of sheer passion and love for Palestine until the 1930s. As we stated previously, this is in complete contrast to the city histories – all of which seem to have been written out of the authors devotion and love for the hometown." And then, "In 1936 and 1937, alone, eight books were published on the Palestine issue, more books than had been published in the preceding sixteen years combined. If the historical works are a guide to identity in Palestine, then, it seems that the major shift from city to Palestine did not obtain until the mid-late 1930s."

This is also fascinating (I put footnote text in parentheses):

The other major work on Palestine in the pre-1936 period is al-Barghouthi and Totah’s Tarikh Filastin, but, as previously mentioned, this was written at the behest of the British authorities to be used in the Mandatory education system. To be sure, this does not make the book irrelevant for the study of Palestinian identity. It does, however, suggest that it was not necessarily a natural idea for an Arab intellectual to pen a book on “the History of Palestine” in 1923.(Indeed, Totah wrote his Ph.D dissertation on the history of Arab education. Palestine is a totally irrelevant analytical category in his dissertation, as discussed above.) And, indeed, this point is reinforced throughout the text, such as in their etymological discussion of this place we now call Palestine. Four names are offered which have historically been used to describe the region, Filastin being merely one of them. (The other three are ‘ard kana’an, ‘ard al-mi‘ad, and al-‘ard al-muqqadisa.)

Those translate to the Land of Canaan, the Promised Land and the Holy Land. Foster doesn't mention that Khalil Totah was a Christian Quaker; while he was born in Ramallah his view of Palestine was through the lens of the Bible rather than as an Arab. It is curious that Foster doesn't spend more time talking about how religion was a more important marker of identity than being a citizen of "Palestine" as well.

As far as identifying as Palestinian, Foster notes,

While Filastin emerged as a geographical, social and political space by the 1920s, it seems that “al-‘Arab” (the Arabs) or “al-Muslimin” and “al-Masihiyyin” (the Christians) were still preferred over “al-filastiniyyin” (the Palestinians) throughout the Mandate period to describe the region’s inhabitants. Very rarely is the word Palestinian used to describe the people of the region, who instead preferred to describe themselves, their culture, their land and their people as Arab.

One reason that Foster doesn't mention is that Jews at the time enthusiastically identified as Palestinian, and Palestinian Arabs - especially the literate ones who were espousing nationalism - didn't want to be identified with the Jews.

Foster, quite reasonably, uses "loyalty" as a metric to see whether nationalism was more important to Palestinians than their hometowns or Arabness (he also seems to ignore clans, which were much more important in how Palestinian Arabs self-identified.) I'm still not convinced that most Palestinian Arabs identified as being loyal to Arab Palestine even into the 1940s. Here's why.

Foster is only looking at written texts of the time for evidence of loyalty. While literacy soared in Palestine between 1900-1948, a significant number of Palestinians, especially in rural areas and villages, were still illiterate in 1948, and there is no evidence that they identified with "Palestine." Moreover, Arab actions during the 1948 war speak louder than the printed word that Foster relies on. While many defended their own towns, practically none defended anyone else's town - they fled along with their own community members. There was no loyalty to, or sacrificing for, an Arab Palestine. The loyalty Foster sees is the written loyalty of intellectuals, a theoretical loyalty that they were trying to instill in their readers, not a reflection of actual loyalty that would make one fight for and die for one's country.

Indeed, it was the Arab intellectuals who fled the fastest in 1947-48. While the Jewish Palestine Post took heroic measures to ensure that it would put out a paper every day even during the worst fighting and when its own building was bombed, the Arab newspapers in Jaffa and elsewhere simply stopped publishing when the war reached them.

Last issue of "Falastin", blaming the British for Arabs fleeing Jaffa

So while Foster proves that loyalty to Arab Palestine was close to nonexistent before 1936, he doesn't go far enough because of his reliance on written materials as evidence of "loyalty" without keeping in mind that the loyalty espoused was more theoretical and prescriptive than real. It ignores the larger context that includes the people whose mindset hadn't changed for centuries. These were Arabs who easily moved from one part to another of the Arab world for economic reasons or because of wars, who did not accept the Western division of the region with arbitrary borders as relevant to their lives, and who thought that they could migrate to other Arab areas in 1948 as many of their ancestors migrated to Palestine - never dreaming that their fellow Arabs would refuse to accept them and treat them as brothers upon their arrival.

Their identity as Palestinians was forged largely because of their mistreatment by the rest of the Arab world and its refusal to integrate them in their own societies in the 1950s, not from the Arab intellectuals of the 1910s or 1930s who created a new nationalism as a response to Zionism. The shame of their being so badly mistreated by their own people is what fuels the desire to create theories after the fact of a pre-1948 Palestinian identity, an identity that was extraordinarily weak.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

The absurdity of "Palestine Refugees," illustrated by Al Jazeera

Al Jazeera published this graphic to illustrate who has been a refugee for the past 75 years.

Notice that the Palestine stream is the only one (besides "Others") that keeps getting bigger and bigger. Every other individual refugee situation either disappears eventually or, in the case of Afghanistan, cycles to an extent.

The UNHCR annual report gives all the proof we need to show how UNRWA should be dismantled.

Of course, if we would apply the Refugee Convention definition of refugee to Palestinians, there wouldn't be 5.9 million. There wouldn't be 30,000.

And even if you include descendants of refugees, the number would still be roughly one million, since nearly 5 million are either full citizens of another country (Jordan - 2M), they live in British Mandate Palestine (West Bank/Gaza- 2.2M) or they have already moved to other countries (most from Lebanon ~300K and many from Syria ~200K.)

Instead of 17% of world refugees being Palestinian, it is between 0-3% by any sane definition.

When statistics are subjective with different rules for different people, they are meaningless. And when they are weighted to damn only the Jewish state, they are antisemitic.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Finally, an Arabic article that describes the anti-Palestinian racism in Lebanon

Israeli Arab news site Arab48 has an article that discusses the plight of Palestinians in Lebanon and why they risk their lives to take dangerous boat trips to Europe.

Outside of rare NGO articles and articles by Palestinians in some maverick Lebanese outlets, it is the first Arabic article I've seen that calls out Lebanon's bigotry against Palestinians instead of pretending that they are friends.

The Palestinian camps in Lebanon have been witnessing a continuous and silent migration for decades, which intensified in the last decade.

Since 1948, the Palestinians of the camps in Lebanon have been suffering from a policy of isolation and deprivation, due to the racism of the sectarian political system, whose refusal to “settle” the Palestinians ...means keeping them in isolation and deprivation, blocking them from practicing any profession or activity in the country, until the Palestinians find another place to turn to other than Lebanon. In other words, the refusal to settle the Palestinians in Lebanon does not correspond to their right of return to Palestine, but rather a lack of welcome.

It is true that the position on the issue of Palestine and the Palestinians is divergent and contradictory between the Lebanese political forces. The position of Hezbollah and the left cannot be compared to the position of the Lebanese Forces and the right, for example. However, both of them are partners in producing the same system, and the same "sectarian political" system, which sees any attempt to integrate the Palestinians into Lebanese public affairs as a breach of what Lebanon ridiculously calls its "delicate balance." Considering that the settlement of the Palestinians may make a certain Lebanese sect prevail over the rest of the other sects in terms of influence and number. Lebanon settled some Palestinians immediately after they fled to it in 1948, but it was a limited settlement, limited to Christian Palestinians, mostly because of their wealth, while the vast majority of refugees succumbed to isolation and deprivation.

Lebanon did not ratify the 1951 Geneva Convention on Refugees, nor its 1967 Protocol, which explains its refusal to grant refugee status or permanent residency to refugees. Although this does not apply to Palestinian refugees due to the specificity of their status, the Lebanese state has accepted Palestinian refugees and called them "displaced", in order to evade its responsibilities towards them.

In general, the conditions of the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon has remained dire, even in light of the periods of Lebanon's stability and prosperity. Emigration was taking place in full swing, since after the Nakba. This is not to mention the periods of civil-sectarian strife in Lebanon, and the Israeli invasion of it in 1982, during which the Palestinians paid a heavy price in terms of massacres, displacement, deportation and uprooting. What do we think of Lebanon today, as a collapsed and plundered country at the level of the state and the regime? Who cares about the Palestinians and their tragedy, if Lebanon does not care about the Lebanese themselves?

So, the catastrophe of asylum in itself, and then the tragedy of the Palestinian camp with the sectarianism of the Lebanese regime, and the racism of its society, with its decades of isolation and deprivation, is from the Lebanese side. On the other hand, the Palestinian leadership and the PLO abandoned the refugees, for whom the Palestinian cause is no longer concerned or intended, even though the refugees are the first line of definition of the Palestinian cause. In addition to this, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees UNRWA has gradually retreated in the last two decades from providing support, aid, and funding to refugee camps.

The overwhelming majority of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon possess only a Lebanese travel document, and only a few of them obtained a passport issued by the Palestinian Authority. This closes the doors of regular immigration to refugees, leaving their only hope at sea! Is there hope in the sea?

The rest of the article describes the dangers of taking a sea voyage, and how even landing in Cyprus or Greece doesn't mean their asylum would be accepted - because Lebanon is considered a "safe 'country and Palestinians are not officially persecuted there.

Notice also that the article blames the Palestinian leadership for abandoning Lebanon. They could provide passports to ease their exodus. But they refuse to.

Such an honest Arabic article could only be written in Israel. Arab media outlets would never want to antagonize a fellow Arab state and upset the narrative of eventual Palestinian "return" from Lebanon. Palestinians in Europe or North America are too invested in ensuring that everything they publish blames Israel exclusively for all their problems.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

The Jews had every reason to fear genocide in 1948

There is an interesting thread by Yair Wallach, from the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in London, where he minimizes any threats made by Arabs towards Jews in 1948, and says that Jews exaggerate those threats in order to pursue their goal of Jewish supremacism:

So many people are attached to the "they wanted to throw us into the sea" myth based on extremely flimsy evidence - a couple of dubious quotes. If this was indeed a "genocidal war" against Jews, you'd expect such rhetoric to be easy to find. It isn't.

There is, in contrast, a considerable corpus of public discussions in Arabic on how to integrate Jews (inc. recent migrants) into the Arab Middle East. Those ideas, unsurprisingly, were unpalatable to the Zionist mainstream. But that's very different to "throwing into the sea".

But it's not enough to say: we had radically different political visions, therefore there was war. No, it has to be "they wanted to push us into the sea". Why?

Because it's a founding colonial myth. Israel is "the villa in the jungle." Arabs are genocidal and violent by nature, always a security risk. So equal rights are out of the question, and a 55 year military occupation is justified - because they want to push us into the sea.

It is true that in 1948, Zionist analysts felt that the war would go their way. It is probably true that some sober Arab leaders did not plan genocide against the Jews and "merely" wanted them to remain despised second class citizens as they had been forever under Muslim rule. But there is a huge leap in logic there to claim that there was no fear of another genocide, and an even larger leap to say that Jewish racism is keeping that myth alive in order to subjugate Palestinians.

First of all, there were threats - real threats - by Arab leaders promising a massacre of Jews that were recorded in major media, and not difficult to find at all. And they included at least one explicit call to throw Jews into the sea.

Here's one genocidal threat from November 1947:

Another one was from Abdul Azzam Pasha, secretary general of the Arab League. Right before the UN partition vote on November 29, 1947, he publicly threatened not only the Jews of Palestine but all Jews in the Middle East.

Abdul Azzam Pasha. secretary general of the Arab League, warned today that a United Nations decision to partition Palestine could mean only one thing for Arabs —"war against the Jews."

In a statement made as the UN general assembly prepared to vote on the explosive issue he declared: "Such a decision would mean the end of the first phase of the Arab struggle to have Palestine become an independent Arab state. The second phase of the struggle will now begin . . . the Arabs will have a long run of victories even it it takes us until 1950 or 1960.

"We have justice, time and numbers on our side—everything but arms— and we shall get them too."
...
The Arab spokesman said that if Haganah, army of the Jewish agency for Palestine, tries to enforce a partition decision after the British leave and Palestine Arabs seek the help of other Arab states "we shall not hesitate."

He declared: "Every Arab from Morocco to Afghanistan would rise in answer to the call of their Arab brethren."

He forecast "disturbances" and "persecution" of Jews in neighboring Arab countries "in an atmosphere of hatred and animosity which will prevail in case of trouble." The spokesman added, "Palestine Arabs will not stop to find out who is Zionist and who is not. They will be fighting one enemy--Jews."

..."If we suffer any defeats in the beginning then the Arabs will rally in huge numbers because it will be a question of racial pride."

Azzam Pasha is saying here that it is a point of pride for Arabs not to accept Jews as equals or victors. He proudly calls Arabs racists against Jews. So even if they wouldn't have literally thrown all the Jews into the sea, all the Arab proposals of what to do with the Jews ensured that Jews would be forever subjugated.

Now, let's look at what happened in the immediate aftermath of Azzam Pasha's threat. As soon as the UN partition vote ended - -within hours - Arabs in Palestine started attacking every Jew they could find.

Not Haganah members. Jews.

And for months, until the Haganah started going on the offensive, Jews were murdered every day just because they were Jewish.

In the Palestine Post of December 31, 1947, we read about:

- 39 Jews massacred at a Haifa oil refinery when 2000 Arab employees ran amok after an apparent Irgun bomb killed six Arabs.

- A funeral procession to the Mount of Olives (for Jews previously murdered by Arabs) was raked by gunfire, killing one of the mourners and a British policeman.

- Two Jews were killed in separate events near Safed.

- One Jew was killed and several injured in sniping from Jaffa to Tel Aviv.

And these are only the stories about fatal attacks. There were many others that were either repulsed or "only" resulted in injuries.

This is what the paper was like every day. Jewish doctors killed in hospitals. Jews killed trying to help Arabs in trouble. Arab neighbors who had been friends with Jews turned around and started ululating in support of Iraqi troops in their villages. It was open season on Jews.

And Jewish civilians in the Arab world were also targets at that time - in Tehran and Yemen, in Bahrain and Syria, in Morocco and Egypt.

These are not myths. Azzam Pasha's threats were coming true.

There was also at least one threat to throw Jews into the sea. In August, 1948, Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan Banna told the New York Times, "If the Jewish state be-comes a fact, and this is realized by the Arab peoples, they will drive the Jews who live in their midst into the sea." This is referring to the Jews of Arab countries, and the NYT added that "the Sheikh granted that this was a figure of speech," but later in the article he explicitly said that if it wasn't for politics, the Arab world would have "destroyed the Jews" in Palestine.

Wallach, whose Twitter feed has a number of statements disparaging those who are arguing with him because they are not real historians like he is, apparently found these explicitly genocidal statements against all Jews in the Middle East by Arab leaders too difficult to find. These are not "dubious" quotes - they are explicit calls to wipe out the Jews.

Coming only three years after the Holocaust, why wouldn't Jews take these threats seriously? More importantly, how can anyone consider these public statements from Arab leaders, backed up by Arab actions on the ground, not genocidal? The only thing protecting the Jews in Palestine was the Haganah - without them they would have been defenseless. They weren't defending themselves only from armies but from their neighbors. The Hadassah Hospital convoy massacre was not exactly an invitation by Arabs to work out their differences with the Jews.

Wallach's evidence that some Arabs discussed how to not eradicate the Jews and only subjugate them may very well be true, but there was also counter-evidence - the leader of the Arab Higher Committee being a Nazi collaborator, the organized attacks against Jews the previous decade during the Arab Revolt, the 1929 pogroms against Jews throughout the land - these were all fresh memories. Maybe Arab leaders really were against genocide, and maybe they just felt it was not a practical solution, but the Arab leaders throughout the Middle East were inciting their people to murder Jews, whether in the media or speeches to mobs.

No one says that every Arab wanted to kill every Jew. But given the events that followed the partition vote, and the recent history of Arab attacks on Jews, it would have been stupid indeed for Jews to rely on the goodwill of Arabs to keep them safe.

It is true that things aren't black and white. One can look at the relative strength of the armies and conclude that the Zionists probably wouldn't be destroyed. But at the time, as political winds swirled around - the US changed its position about partition before Truman recognized Israel, the UN meetings on Palestine brought different news every day, the British stumbled between pretending to defend Jews to abandoning them -- there was no room for the Jews to be confident. Thousands of Jews were killed during the war, and everyone knew friends and family who fell. The Jews had no less fear than the Arabs who fled - but the Jews had nowhere else to go. No matter how much Arab leaders insisted they weren't antisemitic, it isn't like the Jews of Palestine could expect safe passage or asylum in the neighboring states.

Wallach the historian also plays fast and loose in order to make his non-historic, purely political conclusion. What do these supposed "myths" of 1948 have to do with the "occupation" that began in 1967? If the "founding myths" were what animates Israel's actions today, then shouldn't they be treating Israeli Arabs the exact same as Palestinians?

He knows that Israeli Arabs having equal rights destroy his assertions, so he switches contexts to Palestinians who are not citizens, and jumps from 1948 to 1967.

Similarly, if Israel regards all Arabs as genocidal and violent, as Wallach asserts as a fundamental belief, then why did Israel make peace with Arab countries?

It is so sad when that reality gets in the way of a juicy, anti-Zionist theory.

Modern historians have the benefit of hindsight, and too often exhibit the proclivity to cherry pick the historic evidence that support their positions and ignore the inconvenient facts that say otherwise. But as we see here, being a historian does not mean being free of bias - on the contrary, it often gives the historian the hubris to discount or ignore the messy facts that don't fit their theories.

(h/t Nurit Baytch for Hassan Banna quote)

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Happy Nakba Catastrophe Day! Celebrate with cuisine that was stolen from others!

According to Palestine Chronicle, Palestinians now celebrate "Nakba Day" as a happy holiday.

For Palestinians, the catastrophic destruction of the Palestinian homeland, known as the Nakba, is not simply about mourning what has been lost, and the tragedy that has befallen the Palestinian people ever since.

It is also a celebration of life, of culture, of the past and the present, and a strong message of a rooted nation with a strong sense of peoplehood to a young generation that has grown up stateless or in exile.

This Palestinian community in the southern Gaza Strip city of Khan Yunis has done just that. The elders of the community led an event that exhibited the young talents of the area, their artwork, poetry and embroidery.

Can you imagine morphing Yom Hashoah (or Tisha B'av before the Messiah comes) into a day of happiness?

"Nakba Day" is not really about memorializing and mourning a "catastrophe." The first one was celebrated only 25 years ago, after all - for the 50th anniversary of Israel's founding.

Nakba Day isn't a day of sadness, and it never was. It began and remains primarily a day of protest against Israel's existence. It is meant to recast the rebirth of the Jewish state into something terrible. It is meant to blunt Yom HaAtzmaut by choosing the anniversary of Israel's independence - not the anniversary of Palestinians leaving Haifa or Jaffa, or Deir Yassin, or Lydda.

As with everything else about Palestinian nationalism, it is about getting the world to hate Israel.

There isn't a separate "Palestinian celebration day." As far as I can tell, Palestinians don't have parades in Ramallah on their "independence day" in November.

Nakba Day is a day to get the world to pay attention to Palestinian temper tantrums about Israel.

As such, Nakba Day has become the most important day on the Palestinian calendar. Demanding Israel's destruction to the world is the Palestinian national holiday. And since there is no other day on the calendar to celebrate Palestinian culture, the residents of Khan Younis chose the only real national holiday they have.

And since food plays an essential role in sustaining Palestinian culture and making it accessible to everyone, freshly made Palestinian bread, known as shrak, was shared among the community, along with freshly brewed coffee, done according to Palestinian Bedouin traditions.

Shrak is not "Palestinian bread." Most sites say it is Jordanian, Bedouin or simply Levantine, but no one says it is "Palestinian."

It always amazes me how Palestinian Arabs who are so quick to claim that their cuisine is being "stolen" eagerly claim others' cuisines as their own. Whomever came up with the idea of psychological projection would have a field day with Palestinians.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Recent "Nakba" memes

The Israel haters are making a big deal over Nakba Day, which will be officially marked at the UN. So I've been making some memes to describe the truth about the Nakba.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

A couple of EoZ cartoons

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Abbas: "Commemorating the Nakba must be our highest priority"

Palestinian dictator Mahmoud Abbas gave a speech to a number of dignitaries during a Ramadan Iftar meal on Saturday night at his presidential headquarters in Ramallah.

Part of his message was that the United Nations will officially commemorate for the first time, on May 15, the seventy-fifth anniversary of the Nakba.

Abbas said, "Commemorating the Nakba must be at the top of our priorities in order to preserve our narrative, which we must adhere to and convey to the whole world, which has become a shining truth with which we confront all lies and false narratives that attempt to distort history and facts."

His regard for truth included his saying "What we witnessed today in terms of attacks on our people celebrating the 'Sabbath of Light' in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in occupied Jerusalem, which was preceded by attacks on worshipers in the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque and the desecration of its courtyards, is something condemned and rejected, and it reveals the falsity of the occupation, which claims to allow freedom of worship in the Holy places."

In truth the Israeli police were enforcing agreements with the church officials and the Waqf for both those incidents.

The Nakba narrative that Abbas espouses is as false as everything else he says. But he has no disincentive to lie - after all, the UN really will commemorate the "nakba" on May 15 which will regard the establishment of the Jewish state in the wake of 2000 years of persecution of Jews to be an unparalleled evil.

The lying antisemites are winning, and the media and academia are happily colluding with them.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

02/15 Links Pt2: The Truth Behind the Palestinian ‘Catastrophe’; Irwin Cotler: To combat antisemitism, we must first agree how to define it; Moral idiocy: Academics fuel Palestinian terror against Israel

From Ian:

The Truth Behind the Palestinian ‘Catastrophe’

ON AUGUST 5, 1948, not quite three months after the new state of Israel was invaded by five Arab armies, a short volume titled Maana al-Nakba (later translated as The Meaning of the Disaster) appeared in Beirut to popular acclaim. The author was Constantine K. Zurayk, a distinguished professor of Oriental history and vice president of the American University of Beirut.

Zurayk was the wunderkind of the Arab academic world. Born in Damascus in 1909 to a prosperous Greek Orthodox family, he was sent off at 20 to complete his graduate studies in the United States. Within a year he had obtained a master’s from the University of Chicago. One year later, he added a Ph.D. in Oriental languages from Princeton. He then returned to Beirut and the American University.

Zurayk soon became one of the leading advocates of the liberal, secularist variant of Arab nationalism. After Syria won its independence in 1945, he was chosen to serve in the new nation’s first diplomatic mission in Washington, D.C., and also served with the Syrian delegation to the United Nations General Assembly.

Zurayk’s book reflected the sense of outrage among the Arab educated classes over the 1947 UN partition resolution and the creation of the Jewish state. Zurayk’s anger was even more personal, since he had participated in the UN deliberations on the Palestine question. His 70-page book then became a reference point for future pro-Palestinian historians and writers. Yoav Gelber, a prominent Israeli historian of the 1948 war, cited Zurayk’s work when he told me he didn’t think there was much new in Arafat’s 1998 Nakba Day declaration. “The Nakba was at the basis of the Palestinian narrative from the beginning,” Gelber said. “Constantine Zurayk coined the phrase in 1948.”

In previous writings about the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, I wasn’t able to comment on Zurayk’s book. A limited-edition English translation of Maana al-Nakba appeared in Beirut in 1956, but it was never published in the United States. It was only recently that I found a rare copy in a university library and finally read the real thing.

It was not what I expected. The Meaning of the Disaster actually isn’t about the tragedy of the Palestinian people. According to Zurayk, the crime of the Nakba was committed against the entire Arab nation—a romantic conception of a political entity that he and his fellow Arab nationalists fervently believed in. And, it turns out, Zurayk was no champion of an independent Palestinian state.

In an introductory paragraph, Zurayk writes about “the defeat of the Arabs in Palestine,” which he then calls “one of the harshest of the trials and tribulations with which the Arabs have been afflicted throughout their long history.” Zurayk’s only comment about Palestinian refugees is that, during the fighting, “four hundred thousand or more Arabs [were] forced to flee pell mell from their homes.” (All italics added.)

Zurayk predicted that all Arabs would continue to be threatened by international Zionism: “The Arab nation throughout its long history has never been faced with a more serious danger than that to which it has today been exposed. The forces which the Zionists control in all parts of the world can, if they are permitted to take root in Palestine, threaten the independence of all the Arab lands and form a continuing and frightening danger to their life.”

Irwin Cotler: To combat antisemitism, we must first agree how to define it

The IHRA definition provides examples of both forms of antisemitism. The examples addressing older forms include stereotypes of Jews as controlling the media, world governments and the economy. Examples of newer forms include denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination and holding Jews collectively responsible for the actions of the State of Israel.

These latter examples have provoked some opposition, with opponents alleging that the IHRA definition will stifle criticism of the actions of the Israeli government, as well as advocacy for Palestinian human rights. This claim is as misleading as it is unfounded.

In fact, distinguishing between what is and what is not antisemitic enhances and promotes free expression and peaceful dialogue. In particular, the IHRA definition explicitly states that “criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.”

Accordingly, the definition serves to protect speech that is critical of Israeli policy — which I have myself engaged in — so long as it does not cross the delineated boundaries into antisemitism. Conversely, using this definition, genuine antisemitism, such as those examples listed above, can be defined and recognized.

The IHRA definition therefore sets the parameters for a healthy, democratic, tolerant debate and dialogue. It fosters non-hateful communication, and prevents both actual instances of antisemitism as well as unjust labelling of antisemitism. In doing so, it aligns with Canadian values of equality, diversity and human rights.

My hope for 2023 is that the Canadian jurisdictions that have not yet adopted the IHRA definition of antisemitism will do so, and that the ones that have adopted it begin to implement and use it. The IHRA definition is an indispensable resource in helping to identify, recognize and define antisemitism, and adopting it is the critical first step towards Canada’s collective effort to combat the rising tide of antisemitism.

Gil Troy: Moral idiocy: Academics fuel Palestinian terror against Israel - opinion

Imagine the hate required to overrun fellow humans at a bus stop. Imagine the super-sized evil required to keep accelerating when you notice six- and eight-year-old brothers standing there, innocently chatting with their dad. And imagine the perversity involved in celebrating such murders. Friday proved – again – how deep anti-Jewish demonization has been drilled into too many Palestinian hearts, deforming their souls.

Until the world acknowledges this wickedness – which on Friday ended three lives – more such murderers will be mass-produced – with Western dollars, progressive encouragement, and, in modern Jewry’s sickest trend, some Jews’ validation too.

Too many Blame-Israel-Firsters discount this cultivated ugliness which mocks their delusions that peace will descend once Israel retreats, creating a Palestinian dictatorship – er, state – next door. These pie-in-the-skiers keep deciding that Palestinian abominations confirm Israeli iniquity. They theorize that only desperate individuals driven by evil “occupiers” would act so viciously.

Jews have often been blamed for their enemies’ enmity. This Palestinian addiction to violence, however, reveals more about the killers than those killed.

This, the real cycle of violence, with Palestinian rejectionism and antisemitism fueling terrorism, poses the biggest obstacle to peace. The terrorist rot infects Palestinian identity. Contrast Israel’s army, which will abort legitimate missions to minimize civilian casualties, with Palestinians’ death cult, which targets kids and often blackmails the most vulnerable Palestinians into terror.

The Terrorist-Intellectual Complex
An academic recently challenged some other centrists and me for attacking the Netanyahu-Deri corruption yet ignoring the “occupation’s corruption.” Actually, I’m struck by many critics’ corruption, judging us long-distance through ivy-clouded lenses.

Their “Terrorist-Intellectual Complex” perpetuates violence. Palestinians keep deluding themselves that terrorism works, emboldened by ever-accumulating stacks of UN resolutions, academic treatises, “human rights” proclamations, and student petitions – amplified by retweets and likes.

Many have long noted that only intellectuals could figure out how to call themselves “progressive” while supporting sexist, homophobic, Jew-hating, murderers. Today, “woke” parents training their kids in self-abasement and cravenness to dodge confrontations, even in self-defense, nevertheless cheer Palestinians’ killing cult. And self-proclaimed “Social Justice Warriors” justify this most unjust movement, forgiving the Palestinian Authority and Hamas autocracies.

12/08 Links Pt1: Lies, libels and the justification of terror; 12% of Gazans Have Fled Gaza Since Hamas Took Over; The UN envoy to Hamas; Far-Left Groups Accused of Campaign to Delegitimize IDF Soldiers

From Ian:

Lies, libels and the justification of terror

Nov. 29 marked the 75th anniversary of United Nations Resolution 181, which called for the creation of two states, a Jewish state of Israel and an Arab state of Palestine. The Jewish community accepted those terms, and declared the State of Israel, while the Arab community refused, and launched a war that they then lost. Over time, however, Palestinians developed their own version of the “big lie” in the form of the “nakba” myth, a retelling of the 1948 Arab-Israeli war in which the would-be genocidal Arab armies that failed in their mission to eliminate the Jewish state are reimagined as the helpless victims of a horrible catastrophe (or “nakba,” in Arabic) of destruction and displacement. The legend of the nakba is at the heart of much of modern anti-Zionism.

Right on cue, on Nov. 30 the United Nations General Assembly voted to officially commemorate the founding of the State of Israel as a nakba. U.N. resolutions are not legally or morally binding, and they obviously cannot create truths. But they do lend a sheen of credibility to an otherwise ridiculous claim. Such a resolution makes it easier for the big lie to spread, because people can rely on and appeal to the GA’s “authority” on the matter without having to defend or even care about the details of such a heinous accusation. And once a lie has become officially acceptable to speak in the halls of power, it is only a matter of time before it gets picked up and amplified by popular culture. This one certainly did not take long.

On Thursday, Netflix began streaming the Jordanian film “Farha,” which purports to focus on the experiences of a young girl during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The hero watches as Israeli soldiers, portrayed as inhumanly cruel, brutally and graphically murder innocent Palestinian families, including children. While the film claims to be “based on” true events, the director has admitted that it is not factual, and that these scenes did not actually occur. But that does not mean they will not have a very real-world effect on anti-Jewish hate and violence, because many will watch the movie, and few will read the disclaimer.

There are two reasons to publicly correct the record on the nakba. First, it is simply not true. There are primary sources, from the Jordanian side, attesting to the fact that the vast majority of Arabs who left their homes did so voluntarily, or under orders from the invading Arab armies, not the invaded Israelis. Many left confident that the combined armies of Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Egypt would quickly overwhelm the tiny Jewish state. As the Jordanian newspaper Filastin reported, “The Arab States encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies.” But as another refugee quoted in another Jordanian newspaper, Ad Difaa, explained that “The Arab government told us: Get out so that we can get in. So we got out, but they did not get in.”

Second, it is incredibly dangerous. In 1976, Mahmoud Abbas said that “The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but, instead, they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live” (emphasis added).

Israeli Ambassador to Ireland Lironne Bar Sadeh (Irish Times): Israel Is Not an "Apartheid" State

The letter in the Irish Times, "Israel and the Palestinian people" (Nov. 30), signed by various Irish luminaries, repeats the usual canard that Israel is an "apartheid" state.

This is an outrageous falsehood. Israel is in fact the only long-lasting liberal democracy in the entire Middle East. It is the only country in the region with freedom of speech, party, press, and association and judicial transparency.

It has equality under the law for all its citizens, a fifth of whom by the way are Israeli Arabs, both Muslim and Christian. It is also the only country in the region with rights and equality for the LGBTQ+ community. In terms of its legal and political systems, its vibrant press and rich civil society, Israel is remarkably similar to Ireland.

Those who signed the letter think they are helping in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, but in fact they are not. By constantly demonizing Israel and ignoring the deep flaws on the Palestinian side, such as the Islamic fundamentalism of Hamas, and the squalid corruption of the Palestinian Authority, they make themselves morally and intellectually bankrupt.

People who genuinely want to help the Palestinians should encourage democratic, moderate forces within Palestinian society and those who will eventually realize that peace with Israel can only come about through dialogue and mutual compromise, not by demonization and intransigence. It is tragic that some people in Ireland, instead of supporting Israel and the moderate Arab forces in the region, prefer to demonize Israel as much as possible and fail to condemn Iran and the forces of extremism which blight the region.

12% of Gazans Have Fled Gaza Since Hamas Took Over

In the 15 years since Hamas seized control of Gaza, 12 percent of the Strip’s population has fled, according to a study released by an organization associated with the terror group. The report appears to mark the first time Hamas is acknowledging — indirectly — widespread Gazan emigration since it violently seized control of the Strip in 2007.

The report, written by the Hamas-affiliated Council on International Relations, was published in September and recently seen by the Tazpit Press Service. It claims that over 60,000 Gazan residents have migrated from the Gaza Strip in recent years to escape poverty and war.

The CIR report blamed Israel’s blockade of Gaza for the Strip’s poverty driving Gazans to flee. Israel and Egypt imposed a blockade on Gaza in 2007 to prevent weapons smuggling.

The Strip has seen several waves of immigration due to dire unemployment rates, growing poverty, sanctions imposed by the Palestinian Authority, and rounds of conflict with Israel. The CIR did not acknowledge Hamas’s authoritarian rule as a contributing factor.

“Gaza is being emptied of its residents,” the authors of the report said.

The Palestinian Authority has no data on the scope of migration from the Gaza under Hamas rule. Till now, Hamas hid the data, making accurate numbers difficult for human rights organizations to gather. The CIR’s chairman of the board is Basem Naim, who is also a senior figure in Hamas.

Various estimates in the past year shed some light on the Gaza exodus.

Between 2007-2021, approximately 236,000 Gazans left the Strip, the Palestinian Authority’s official news agency, WAFA, reported during the summer. That number is also about 12 percent of the total residents of the Strip.

Based on those numbers, it appears that an average of around 17,000 Palestinians have left Gaza every year since 2007.