The UN's history of the "Question of Palestine" omits every single Palestinian attack on Jews

The UN has a webpage where it shows a timeline on the "Question of Palestine."

It is biased as hell. 

It starts with "1885 – The term 'Zionism' first coined by the Viennese writer, Nathan Birnbaum."

There is no mention of Jewish history in the region for thousands of years. No mention of Jewish kingdoms. No mention of the centrality of Eretz Israel and Jerusalem to Judaism.  No mention of the Bible. 

But after that, it simply ignores or whitewashes every single act of terrorism by Palestine's Arabs. 

It doesn't mention the murderous Palestinian pogrom against Jews in 1929.

It says, "1936/1939 – Palestinian rebellion against the British Mandate and Jewish immigration." But not that Arabs murdered Jews, just that it was a "rebellion." 

It doesn't say anything about the Arab League boycott of Jews. 

It doesn't mention any Arab attacks on Jews in 1947-48. No outbreak of hostilities hours after the UN Partition resolution, no mention of the constant attacks on Jewish civilians, no mention of the Hadassah Hospital convoy massacre or the many other attacks on Jewish civilians - but it does mention Deir Yassin, and exaggerates the number of dead as "hundreds." .

The UN gets the date of Israel's independence wrong, saying it happened on May 15, 1948.

There were scores of fedayeen attacks by Palestinian Arabs against Israel in the 1950s and 60s, and hundreds of Israelis were killed. Not one incident is mentioned.

But the UN describes the 1966 As-Samu incident, where Israeli and Jordanian troops battled after a land mine killed 3 IDF soldiers, as a "massacre" of Palestinians. 15 Jordanian soldiers and three civilians were killed. It was not a massacre by any definition. 

There is not one mention of Palestinian airplane hijackings in the 1960s and 1970s. 

It says, "1987 –  First 'Intifada' begins in the Jabaliya Refugee Camp in the Gaza Strip." It doesn't mention that the intifada killed hundreds of Israelis. The many terror attacks that occurred during the Oslo process are nowhere to be found. 

Similarly, it says, "Ariel Sharon’s al-Haram al-Sharif visit in September 2000 triggers the Second Palestinian Intifada."

Not a word about Palestinian suicide bombings, or bus bombings, or attacks on pizza shops and Passover seders and bar mitzvahs.

And of course no mention later about rockets from Gaza, massacring rabbis or kidnapping and murdering kids. Hamas is not mentioned as a terror group - or even militant group. In fact, the word "terror" is nowhere to be seen. Neither is "Islam," "Muslim" or "Jihad," although Jews are mentioned.

The Holocaust is not mentioned either. There is simply no information on why Jews might want to have their own homeland in the region.

There is plenty of other anti-Israel bias in wording and choice of incidents. 

According to this official UN history, Palestinians have not attacked, let alone killed, a single Jew. The only aggression mentioned is from Jewish and Zionist groups.

The UN's anti-Israel bias is unmistakable even in this public document that is pretending to be objective. 

---

---

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!

 

Read More

Today's "anti-Zionism:" "Jews cheated to win the 1947 partition vote"

Every day in Arabic media, the claim that antisemitism and anti-Zionism have nothing to do with each other is shown to be a lie, agaim and again.

Today's example comes from Watanserb, where Muhammad Al-Walidi writes:

 The division of Palestine by the United Nations in 1947 was the largest operation of deception and forgery in history committed by this international organization and the Jewish masters and their usurers...

What was important to global Zionism was to propose a legal division of Palestine at the United Nations, after which the role of Jewish money would come in bringing votes in favor of them, in another fraud.

Despite all the efforts of the Zionists, America and the West to make the decision to partition Palestine at the United Nations a success , the first vote, which took place on November 25, 1947, failed.

This prompted the intensification of the Jewish pressure for a re-vote and its success.....

There were two partition votes, and when the first one failed, the Jews managed to schedule another round?

Mr. al-Walidi is mixing up the vote by the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) recommending partition and the actual UN General Assembly vote. I doubt this was a mistake.

He gives many examples of pressure by the US and Israel for voting for partition. Some of those are true - but why is lobbying by Jews any less moral than lobbying by everyone else? The Arab nations lobbied intensely as well, and threatened multiple times that partition would lead to a slaughter of all the Jews in the Middle East, as well as threats of an oil embargo or to tilt against the US to the Soviets if the partition vote passed - all to sway delegates to their side. 

The representative of Guatemala carried out extensive activity within the corridors of the United Nations in order to advance the partition decision - British documents confirmed that he had received bribes from American Jewish organizations, not to mention his relationship with a Jewish girl.

I cannot find any record of these supposed British documents, but Guatemala representative Jorge García Granados was a committed Zionist, writing an entire book in 1948 detailing the birth of Israel that shows his love of the land and the people. It doesn't sound like the actions of a person who was bribed.

As usual, this piece of "anti-Zionist" writing is pure antisemitism. Jews are a nefarious force who cheat, bribe and steal to get their way. And the only reason is because...that's just how Jews are.

---

---

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!

 

Read More

12/04 Links: A House of Lies; Islamist Terror; Journalistic Error; Has antisemitism in US reached a tipping point?; One day’s headlines reveal the entire Israeli-Arab conflict

From Ian:

Jeffrey Herf: Islamist Terror; Journalistic Error

A review of Can “The Whole World” Be Wrong?: Lethal Journalism, Antisemitism, and Global Jihad by Richard Landes, 523 pages, Academic Studies Press (November 2022)

The failures of journalism that Landes examines did not begin in 2000 with the Second Intifada. The idea of Israel as oppressor and colonialist interloper and the Palestinians as innocent victims have been central to Arab and Palestinian Arab political culture since the 1940s. In the early 1950s, the Soviet Union, the support of which during 1947–49 was so important to the establishment of the Jewish state, joined Israel’s enemies in maintaining that first Zionists and then the state of Israel were to blame for the conflict. From the 1960s to the end of the Cold War, an anti-Israeli consensus emerged in the United Nations General Assembly. The Soviet bloc, communist China and other communist regimes joined Islamic states, many Third World nations, and the Arab states in denouncing Zionism as a form of racism and Israel as a practitioner of cruelty and aggression.

The description of Israel as an apartheid state began in the United Nations during those decades as well. After the Six Day War of 1967, the radical Left in Western Europe, the United States, Latin America, and Japan joined the anti-Zionist and anti-Israeli chorus, with intellectual ballast provided by Edward Said and other postcolonial writers and thinkers. Support for Israel became incompatible with membership in good standing in the panoply of progressive politics. It was in those decades that the Palestinians emerged as icons of global anti-imperialism, and the journalistic habits that Landes discusses entered international journalism.

Can “The Whole World” Be Wrong? urges us to take a fresh look at the critical months in the fall of 2000, when the idea of Palestinians as the world’s “most honored of victims” entered mainstream discourse in the West’s democracies. It is time, Landes argues, to “reread the Intifada, this time not as an uprising of the oppressed against the oppressor, but as the opening salvo of the Caliphator assault on Western democracies in the twenty-first century.” Landes asks his readers, especially those of liberal and leftist leanings, to recall the liberal nature of the Zionist project and the realities of Israel’s democracy, and to look honestly at the ideology of those seeking to destroy it. His book makes a compelling case that too many prominent journalists, political figures, NGOs, and academics were, in fact, wrong about the fundamental causes of terror. They misunderstood the war between Israel and its enemies, and as a result, they also misunderstood the facts of that war. Landes notes that there were journalists who resisted this consensus, but that they were the exception.

It turns out that, concerning the history of Israel and its secular and Islamist adversaries, the 20th century was a long not a short one. The modern hatred of the Jews, Zionism, and liberal democracy emerged in Europe and the Middle East during the 1940s, persisted into the 1950s, and found global reach by the 1970s and 1980s. The anti-Zionist impulse has drawn from Nazi propaganda, Soviet campaigns during the Cold War, 1960s style anti-imperialist ideology, as well as the traditions of the Islamists. Today, it remains alive and well in the assaults and threats to Israel that Landes examines in this book.

Richard Landes is right to call for a rereading of the Second Intifada, and to draw our attention to the way the images and interpretations of those years contributed to misunderstanding the years of terror, and to a new Islamist-inflected species of antisemitism. He makes a convincing case that, yes, “the whole world”—or at least too many very accomplished professionals in the media, public life, and politics—were indeed wrong about the causes of the terrorism directed at the Jewish state in recent decades. Twenty-two years after the Second Intifada erupted, it is time for a rethink.

A House of Lies

The UN in Perspective Israel’s formal acceptance as the 59th UN Member State on May 11, 1949 was consistent with the UN’s original core beliefs. The UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in Paris on December 10, 1948 by the UN General Assembly, was issued in response to the “disregard and contempt for human rights” that resulted in the “barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind” called the Holocaust—the attempt to annihilate the Jews of Europe by the Nazis. [7] Thus the Jewish state and the human rights revolution “were as one in 1948… . There is a clear symbolic—if not symbiotic—relationship between Israel and human rights… and Israel was born of that commitment.” [8]

“On May 14, 1948, Israel’s founders wanted to emphasize to the world that while the Jewish people had been born in Eretz-Israel [??? ?????, the land of Israel], its state was the adopted child of the United Nations” noted historian Martin Kramer. “Israel had a ‘natural and historic’ right to exist,” he said, “and that right had been recognized by the world. Nothing made this point more clearly than the crucial passage of the declaration: “By virtue of our natural and historic right and on the strength of the resolution of the United Nations General Assembly, we hereby declare the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz-Israel, to be known as the State of Israel.” [9]

“Does this suggest that the United Nations ‘created’ the state of Israel?” asked Kramer. “Hardly; if it were within the power of the UN to create states, an Arab state would have arisen in 1948 alongside Israel. After all, the Arabs of Palestine possessed exactly the same recognition of their rights and the same license to act as did the Jews (although not the historiical connection to the land, ed). The difference, to revert to the term invoked by the UN Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP), was that the Arabs didn’t constitute a “state within a state….absent a Jewish army, Israel wouldn’t have arisen in any borders, and certainly not in the expanded borders of 1949.”[10]

A Final Note
From their initial UN deliberations, the permanent representatives of the UN understood the gravity of the problems they confronted and how their decisions would affect the future of the world. In hindsight, their remarks were prescient.

Moe Finn, a Norwegian politician, who was a member of the UN Security Council from 1948 to 1949, viewed the UN’s attempt to find a solution as being “very well a test case,” since it “may be decisive for the future of the United Nations.” [11]

Addressing the Special Session of the General Assembly held between April 28 and May 5, 1947, Mr. Quo Tai-chi, Chinese representative to the Security Council, prophetically warned that unless Arabs and Jews “learn to love their neighbors as themselves.” there will be no peace in the Holy Land, or indeed, in any land.” Historical and legal procedures, political and economic considerations will never provide a solution for peace. Until Jews and Christians “return to the teachings of the prophets and the saints of the Holy Land … no parliament of man, no statement, no legal formula, no historical equation, no political and economic programme can singly or together themselves solve the problem.” [12]

For Asaf Ali, Indian ambassador to the United States in 1947, Palestine had “become the acid test of human conscience. The United Nations will find that upon their decision will depend [on] the future of humanity, whether humanity is going to proceed by peaceful means or whether humanity is going to be torn to pieces. If a wrong decision flows from this august Assembly…the world shall be cut in twain and there shall be no peace on earth.” [13]

Seth Frantzman: Has antisemitism in US reached a tipping point?

The main tipping point comes due to the amplification of these views in major traditional media and social media. Twitter has now suspended Kanye West’s Twitter account, which had 32 million followers. This comes after he appeared on Alex Jones’ far-Right InfoWars website and praised Hitler. One video of the appearance on the show has received more than two million views on Twitter. West, who is now called Ye, had posted a Star of David with a swastika inside of it on Twitter before being suspended. News about West was one of the top trending topics on CNN’s website on Saturday.

The news cycle of antisemitism has been flooding people’s homes with anti-Jewish views for two months now, since early October. Whenever a celebrity makes antisemitic comments they are then amplified by media and there are numerous interviews.

It is difficult not to see a pattern here. According to an October 11 report at the The Hill “Ye, the artist formerly known as Kanye West, made several antisemitic remarks… in unaired portions of his recent interview with Fox News host Tucker Carlson.”

However, that wasn’t the only major interview. Throughout October and November, numerous hosts on various media sought out the “controversy” of interviewing someone who would say “controversial” antisemitic things.

The tipping point comes because today, antisemitism is the “cool” thing that radio hosts and media people want to have on their shows in order to get maximum ratings and clicks. This is more than just “shock jock” culture.

The reason we are seeing a tipping point is because media isn’t rushing to interview people with homophobic or other types of racist views. There is only one group whose hatred they want to amplify.

Of course, they are “against” antisemitism. However, the most “controversial” antisemitic rhetoric is being amplified daily. How many millions of people who are being exposed to this are now beginning to think that the usual filters they might have can be taken off?

Read More

1947 Jaffa newspaper: "Arabs must stop being publicly antisemitic in front of the world"

I came across this snippet in an article in the Palestine Post, May 20, 1947:

"Was it advisable to say in front of an international body that we hate the Jews because they are Jews?" asked thc Jaffa daily Ash-Shaab yesterday in its leading article. 

It is no secret that the Arabs were completely unprepared in their evidence before various inquiry Commissions , and also before the UN meeting, the paper stated. "We must select very carefully the people who are to defend us."

In short, Arab antisemitism was a given - the article admits that Arabs hate Jews because they are Jews - but allowing that hate to be shown in front of international bodies is not smart, because the other dhimmis aren't as tolerant of antisemitism as the Arabs are. 

So the emphasis must be on how Arabs are welcoming to Jews and treat them well, and it is only Zionism that they have a problem with.

Indeed, two months later the Arab delegates to the UNSCOP meeting insisted that there was no discrimination against Jews in Arab countries, and even that the Mufti of Jerusalem was not a Nazi supporter.

---

---

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!

 

Read More

"Chaim Weizmann made up the myth of 6 million Jews killed"

As we've been showing, Mahmoud Abbas' outrageous antisemitism in Germany is prompting lots of Palestinians and Arab pundits to let fly their own Holocaust denial and antisemitism.

This example, from Ali Mohsen Hamid at Rai al-Youm, tries to prove that according to Chaim Weizmann, there were only six million Jews in all of Europe before the Holocaust, so therefore six million Jews cannot have died and it is all a Zionist lie.

Hamid quotes Weizmann testifying at the Peel Commission hearings, saying, "six million people pent up in places where they are not wanted, and for whom the world is divided into places where they cannot live, and places into which they may not enter."

He then quotes Weizmann at the UNSCOP hearings on Palestine in Lake Success, NY in 1947 where he says that six million Jews were murdered in the Holocaust - and uses this "contradiction" to claim that Weizmann made up the six million number out of thin air.

The Peel Commission quote is accurate - and incomplete. Weizmann was only speaking about Jews in specific parts of Europe where their rights were severely restricted, and he specifically excluded the Jews in Russia and Western Europe. In his address, he said:

 Poland has slightly over three millions: Germany had in 1932 or 1933 something like 600,000, but that number has since diminished. If one goes further afield, and rakes the Jewries of Rumania, Latvia, Lithuania, Austria. one sees practically the same picture, and it is no exaggeration on my part to say that today almost six million Jews in that part of the world are doomed to be pent up in places where they are not wanted, and for whom the world is divided into places where they cannot live, and places into which they cannot enter. 

Q. Did I gather from you that you thought the conditions which you mention as applying to Poland, apply equally to these other European countries you have mentioned? 

A. With the exception of certain small groups. one may say almost equally. 

Sir Laurie Hammond: Is it the case with Russia? 

A. I am not speaking of Russia, which is closed. As you were good enough to ask me, I will say a word about Russia. In Russia there are about three million Jews. We have very little contact with them. Russia is a closed country at present. ...

Based on this map, and assuming that Weizmann was also including countries like Hungary and Czechoslovakia, the six million number is reasonably accurate. 

Hamid is obviously not interested in the truth. The rest of the article is filled with similar lies, like the laughable claim that BDS only wants to boycott products from the territories. He tries to say that Einstein's Theory of Relativity means that one can compare the Holocaust to Palestinian suffering without being antisemitic. 

But anti-Israel propagandists will take a tiny grain of truth and extend it into the realm of fantasy, knowing that their audience will be impressed and wants to believe them as long as it aligns with their prejudice.

---

---

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!

 

Read More