Sunday, February 16, 2014

  • Sunday, February 16, 2014
  • Elder of Ziyon
I read translations of Arabic media all day. I see and post about the endemic antisemitism in the Arab world. But sometimes even I am surprised at how virulent it is.

There is no comparison between reading an antisemitic article in a newspaper and seeing it as a play broadcast on TV.

From MEMRI:



A play titled "The Spy," recently aired on the Egyptian Al-Hayat TV channel, displays antisemitic stereotypes and portrays Mossad officials preparing "for a huge operation of espionage and sowing disunity" which targets the entire Arab world.

Following are excerpts from the play, broadcast on January 31, 2014:


Mossad headquarters, Mossad officials listen to an Israeli child singing Umm Kulthum's Enta Omri. All male Mossad officials are named Binyamin and listed here according to their seating from left to right.

All Mossad officials: How great...

Binyamin I: What's wrong with you, Binyamin?

Binyamin V: Binyamin, why do you cry whenever you hear this song?

Binyamin III: To tell the truth, I don't understand a word of the song.

Binyamin I: Ummu Kulthum's song, Enta Omri, is very beautiful.

Binyamin II: Just beautiful?! That boy Elisha sings it better than Umm Kulthum herself.

Female Mossad official: Binyamin, do you think that the Egyptians stole this tune from us, or vice versa?

Binyamin III: They stole it from us, of course – just like they stole the pyramids and the Sphinx.

[...]

Our perspective is a simple and humble one. All we want is to control the whole world. Long live Israel!

Mossad officials: Long live Israel!

Binyamin III: Long live Israel!

Mossad officials: Long live Israel!

[...]

Binyamin III: Long live Israel!

Mossad officials: Long live Israel!

Binyamin III: Long live Israel!

Mossad officials: Long live Israel!

All Mossad officials break out in dance to the tune of Hava Nagila

[...]

Binyamin III: Lady, take your son and go away. We are preparing for a huge operation of espionage and sowing disunity, and we don't want anyone to know anything about it – not its target nor its location.

Mother of Ezra (a would-be Mossad operative): Where will it take place?

Binyamin III: In Egypt, God willing.

Ezra: And what is the target?

Binyamin III: The entire Arab world.

[...]

Binyamin IV: I don't understand, Binyamin #5, how come you are accepting this boy back into the Mossad so easily.

Binyamin III: If we don't, he will stand opposite the Mossad headquarters, and throw stones on us. He is mentally retarded.

Binyamin V: You're right, but let's focus on what's important – today begins the most important of the Arab Spring revolutions.

Binyamin I: I've heard that it is still a demonstration. It hasn't transformed into a revolution yet.

Binyamin III: That's why we need to keep an eye on that demonstration.

Binyamin V: Eyes are a thing of the past. Today, we know what is going on from Facebook and Twitter.

Binyamin II: We know everything but the color of their underwear...

They all burst into laughter

Binyamin I: Would you believe that they still have signs on buildings: "Keep Away" and "No Photography"?

They all burst into laughter

Binyamin III: Google Earth gives us all the information we need.

[...]

Binyamin IV: The most important thing that we need to know is whether the demonstrations are taking place only in Tahrir Square, or in other places as well.

Binyamin II: Right now, they are only in Tahrir Square, but soon enough, they'll spread all over. After all, the Egyptian people is demanding change...

[...]

Will the mainstream media, so anxious to find individual bigots in Israel, ever bother reporting on a play broadcast on TV with a crowd laughing at anti-Jewish stereotypes?
  • Sunday, February 16, 2014
  • Elder of Ziyon
From PressTV:

Seventy Iranian lawmakers have signed a letter to question Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif over his positions vis-a-vis the Holocaust and the Israeli regime.

“The signatures for this question have reached 70,” senior Iranian lawmaker Mohammad Javad Karimi Qoddousi, told Fars News Agency in a Saturday interview.

“The question has been sent to the Foreign Ministry and it will be reviewed in the first session of the National Security [and Foreign Policy] Committee of Majlis,” said Karimi who sits on the committee.

In the letter to the Foreign Ministry, Iranian legislators pointed to Zarif’s interview with a German TV channel in early February in which he slammed the Holocaust as a “a horrifying tragedy” that “should never occur again.”

The lawmakers also called Zarif’s remarks about Palestinians’ right to recognize Israel, as ‘passive’.

“What is the reason for the passivity in your views about the issue of the illegitimate Israeli regime and the Holocaust,” the letter asked.
There are 290 members of Iran's Majils, so nearly 25% of them have signed this letter so far.

Saturday, February 15, 2014

  • Saturday, February 15, 2014
  • Elder of Ziyon
Elihayu HaNavi synagogue in Alexandria
El Badil reports that members of "Ansar al Bayt al Maqdis", one of the Sinai Islamist groups fighting in Egypt, have admitted to plotting to blow up synagogues in Cairo and Alexandria.

The report says that they were doing surveillance of the spots.

It further quoted security sources as saying that they would not allow any such attacks and citizens should not worry.

I have not seen this verified anywhere else in Egyptian media.

It is hard to know what to believe, as the hatred of much of Egyptian media towards Islamists has caused them to make up stories in the past. It is quite possible that they want to ensure that the Jewish world is sympathetic towards Egypt's crackdown on civil and human rights in going after Islamists. On the other hand, the idea that Islamists want to attack synagogues is also quite believable.

None of Egypt's synagogues have any Jewish services anymore, and they are mostly preserved as part of Egyptian heritage.
From Ian:

Palestinians Confirm: It’s a “No”
The Palestinians may be aware that issuing an outright “no” to having any agreement with Israel ever would not play out well for their international standing. A “no” has to be delivered in such a way that it can at least be framed as merely a rejection of specific proposals. But by making every single proposal a red line it is clear that the Palestinians are in effect saying “no” to the whole thing. And if they are serious about pushing this line that they don’t have the authority to make an agreement with Israel, then they are essentially ruling out the very possibility of agreeing to anything. Presumably the only thing that would change this status would be new Palestinian elections–and there’s no sign of these coming anytime soon.
Whether the U.S. administration or the international community wish to acknowledge it, the Palestinians are saying loudly and clearly “no.” At some point policy will have to be adjusted to recognize this reality. (h/t NormanF)
Erekat: No to Recognition, No to Israeli Presence in 'Palestine'
Erekat, the report said, told his audience that PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas made it clear to the Americans that he would not recognize Israel a Jewish state, claiming that Israel's demand for recognition stems from its desire to change historical facts.
He further noted that Abbas will not agree that any Israeli civilians or military officials remain in the future Palestinian state.
Erekat also said that the PA demands that Israel compensate the so-called “Palestinian refugees” whether they decide to stay in their own countries, move to the Palestinian state, or return to Israel.
Anti-Semitic, Anti-American Conspiracy Theorist Set for Princeton Honors
The long tenure of Richard Falk at the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNHRC) – where for years he served as the body’s special rapporteur on Palestinian human rights – did not exactly cover that already controversial organization with glory.
In just a few months last year, he embroiled the UNHRC in controversy by blaming the Boston Marathon bombing on “American global domination” and “Tel Aviv,” trying to ban a pro-Israel human rights watchdog group from attending UNHRC sessions, and publishing anti-Semitic cartoons and articles on his blog.
U.S. officials routinely and repeatedly called for Falk to resign.
Under the headline “Trusting Khomeini,” Falk once praised the Iranian dictator as “a desperately-needed model of humane governance.” He is a quite open 9/11 conspiracy theorist. He has accused Israel of “slouching toward a Palestinian Holocaust.” In 2011 he defended the government of Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi as the “lawful diplomatic representative of a sovereign state.”
Now comes news from the Wall Street Journal that Princeton is preparing to honor Falk:

Friday, February 14, 2014

From Ian:

Dr. King’s pro-Israel legacy: His prophetic voice still speaks, part 1
Since his death, many groups have attempted to use the name of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as champion of their cause. His timeless quotes are applied to all things related to social justice, equality and political freedom. Of course, in addition to being a beacon for all of the above, Dr. King was also a staunch supporter of the State of Israel, and loyal friend to the Jewish people. Yet this historical, indisputable fact does not seem to phase anti-Zionists who also claim Dr. King’s posthumous blessing on their agenda. How do they reconcile such a blatant discrepancy? They simply label the Palestinians as victims and the Israelis as perpetrators, and voila: Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, becomes an obvious condemnation of the Jewish State.
The problem is, we have Dr. King’s unambiguous words supporting Israel, and none of his words to the contrary. In fact, his most full-throated endorsement of Israel may surprise you, not just because of its content, but its context.
Leftist figures did not set Schulz straight on facts
On Tuesday, European Union Ambassador to Israel Lars Faaborg-Andersen hosted a dinner in honor of Schulz at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. Among those in attendance was Naomi Chazan, a former Meretz MK and deputy Knesset speaker who is now a director in the left-wing NGO New Israel Fund; Yossi Beilin, former Meretz leader and cabinet minister and one of the architects of the Geneva Initiative; Ron Pundak, who helped draft the Oslo Accords in 1993 and is a former director-general of the Peres Center for Peace; Akiva Eldar, former Haaretz correspondent, and Professor Manuel Trajtenberg, chairman of the Planning and Budgeting Committee at the Council for Higher Education. Labor MK Hilik Bar was the only politician at the event. No government or right-wing representatives were invited.
At the event, Schulz said that he had just visited the Palestinian Authority, where he had been told that Israel did not distribute water fairly. He also said he was told of infringements on Palestinian freedom of movement. No one in the audience challenged Schulz on the facts or tried to set the record straight. Some of the people at the dinner said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be able to make better decisions if he faced more outside pressure.
Roving Sea Peoples may have settled Transjordan, archaeologist says
New evidence unearthed at an ancient site in the Jordan Valley suggests that the Sea Peoples — a group which includes the ancient Israelites’ nemeses, the Philistines — settled as far inland as the Transjordan, a Swedish archaeologist argues. Not everyone in the archaeological community, however, is convinced by the finds.
The find, made by a team digging at Tell Abu al-Kharaz, also strengthens the ties connecting the Sea Peoples and the Aegean — reinforcing the theory that the Philistines were among a number of tribes of non-Semitic peoples who migrated across the Mediterranean and settled in Canaan in the early Iron Age alongside the emergent Israelites.

  • Friday, February 14, 2014
  • Elder of Ziyon
From Rudaw.net:
In a humble apartment in Jerusalem’s Baka neighborhood, about a mile south of the walls of the Old City, the world’s oldest living Jew goes about his daily ritual. As he has for over a century, the rabbi rises in the morning, puts on his tefillin, or prayer phylacteries, with the help of one of his students, and says his morning prayers. Then, he sits to learn the Torah, Talmud, or kabbalah, examining it with the same fervor and passion he did when he started learning as a teenager.

In addition to being the world’s oldest Jew, Rabbi Zechariah Barashi, 114, is also the world’s oldest Kurd.

Barashi, still sharp and gregarious in his old age, remembers details from events 80 years ago with surprising clarity. He gives exact dates, names, and even prices of bus rides as he recounts his time growing up in the Badinan region of Kurdistan, and his journey to the British-controlled territory that would soon become Israel.

...Barashi remembers a man named Mirza as the Agha of Meriba, the town his family was living in. He was as “an important man, one of the greatest governors in the mountains of Kurdistan.”

Mirza’s wife saved Barashi’s life at the age of 11. It was after the Passover holidays, and not one speck of food remained in the house. For two days, the family did not eat, and Zechariah fell sick. His father was away trying to buy meat on the black market. After having lost so many children, his mother was determined to save him. She went to the Agha’s wife, and begged her for food. The wife hesitated at first, saying she was afraid her husband would find out, and be angry that he would now be forced to give to everyone who asked. Barashi’s mother persisted, her only son’s life was at stake, and assured her that she would hide the food under her dress, and no one would know. The Agha’s wife agreed, and the boy recovered.

The Agha was very committed to the Jews in his region, Barashi remembered. His family used to visit the Agha on Friday nights. But when his sons got older, they began to smoke while Barashi’s family visited. Eventually, Barashi’s father told the Agha that his family can no longer come by, as smoking is forbidden on the Sabbath, and they wished not to be around it. The Agha’s decision was swift. “You are forbidden from smoking in this house on the Sabbath,” he told his sons, thus ensuring that his Jewish guests would feel comfortable during their visits.

...At the age of 18, Barashi met the woman who would become his wife.

“I met her the same way people meet their wives today,” he said with a smile. “On the dance floor. On Friday night, after the festive meal, all the youths would go to the big plaza in the middle of the village and we would perform Kurdish dances until one o’clock in the morning. The next day, after the meal, we would meet again and dance until the third Sabbath meal. Her older brother was my friend, and her grandfather, Yosef Arbaya, and I asked my father to talk to him and ask for her hand in marriage.”

They got married two years later.

He still speaks of his wife, long since deceased, as if they were both teenagers in love on that dance floor in the middle of Sindor.

“You can’t buy love, and no one except God knows what draws a man to a certain woman and not another one. In the village, there were dozens of beautiful and good girls, but I fell in love with her, and good that it turned out this way. There was no bad in this woman that became my wife. Modest and quiet and determined and pretty.”

...Last year, a Kurdish journalist came to Barashi’s apartment to film an interview with him for a Kurdish TV. The reporter, stunned by the purity of Barashi’s Kurdish, stayed for hours. He wrote down words that he had never heard before, and looked them up when he got home, discovering that they were old Kurmanji words that had fallen out of use.

Barashi is happy to share a blessing with his visitors, and is always ready to share his secret to a long life. “There are three things,” he says. “Always be happy, never jealous. Stay active. And never overeat, always leave the table a little hungry.”

But does he ever wish he could go back to the old villages in Kurdistan?

“No,” he says, smiling. “I have had the fortune of living in Jerusalem for 75 years. I’m in heaven.”

(h/t Ellen)
From Ian:

PA tells Kerry no to framework deal in current form
The Palestinian Authority has informed US Secretary of State John Kerry that it will not accept his framework peace proposal as it currently stands, PA officials told The Times of Israel.
The officials claimed that the Obama administration’s current proposal, which is intended to serve as the basis for continued talks on a two-state solution, includes pretty much everything Israel demanded — almost down to the last detail — but does not address vital requirements from the Palestinian side.
The Palestinian officials detailed to The Times of Israel what they said were the main clauses of the framework proposal.
The obstinancy of Abbas
If anyone out there believes that Abbas is a realistic partner (following in the footsteps of Yasser Arafat), they should listen to former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who came out last week and explained what happened behind closed doors in the negotiating room. In an interview with Channel 2, Olmert said that in the 36 meetings he held with Abbas, everything was agreed The only thing that was missing was a signature.
Olmert gave up the Jordan Valley, divided Jerusalem, handed over control of the Temple Mount, returned to the 1967 lines, retreated to the settlement blocs, made territorial swaps, agreed in principle to the right of return, accepted the symbolic resettlement of 5,000 refugees, and invited Abbas to fly with him to the U.N. General Assembly, where they would jointly declare the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. He even held out a pen for Abbas to take so that he could initial the deal.
How surprising -- Abbas refused. Today, there is widespread consensus. Since Abbas didn't sign then, he won't sign ever.
Sarah Honig: A page from Barker’s playbook
The long and the short of it is that nobody will compensate the Arab realm’s Jewish refugees. Obama knows it. Kerry knows it. So why make promises that can’t possibly be kept? Well, of course Kerry’s entire misnamed peace framework is a promise that can’t be kept.
But the specific attempt to tempt Jewish refugees borrows a page from Barker’s playbook. Its premise is that the Jew will sell his soul for money. Hence, the promise of a windfall can magically transform Sephardi hawks into Ashkenazi doves – that is if you at all buy into the blanket generalization of facile (and inherently offensive) stereotypes. (h/t Norman F)

  • Friday, February 14, 2014
  • Elder of Ziyon
It is time for another episode of:

Where we follow our heroes from the Saudi Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice as they protect and serve the Saudi public, guarding them from evil forces!

From Arab News:

The Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (Haia) has officially prevented women from visiting medical clinics without male guardians.

This came after a member of the Council of Senior Scholars issued a “fatwa” (edict) prohibiting women from visiting male doctors without having male guardians present.

“Islamic law does not permit women to visit their doctors without male guardians,” said Qais Al-Mubarak, a member of the Council of Senior Scholars. “Women are prohibited from exposing body parts to male doctors in Islamic law, especially during childbirth. This does not include medical emergencies. Islamic jurisprudence makes exceptions,” he added.
If childbirth isn't an emergency, it is unclear what is. But,hey, you can understand how Saudi male obstetricians can get uncontrollably turned on at the sight of a sweaty, screaming woman exposing her private parts. It's only natural, and Islamic jurisprudence must guard against it.

Male guardians can only be the next of kin in Islam. They are sons, grandsons, husbands, brothers, fathers or uncles.

Al-Mubarak said male doctors could conduct medical examinations on female patients only if female physicians are unavailable and only if male guardians accompany them.
“Unaccompanied visits to male doctors can have negative implications,” he said.
I wonder if Saudi medical school textbooks censor gynecological diagrams. Maybe the students practice delivering babies with camels.




Other Saudi Vice news:

Of course, the annual Saudi war against Valentine's Day.

Also, if you are a woman in Saudi Arabia, don't try to go to the main library in the Grand Mosque in Mecca.

The good news? The Saudi king overturned a death penalty for an Indonesian housemaid who has been in jail for a while awaiting her execution. Her  crime? Sorcery.
  • Friday, February 14, 2014
  • Elder of Ziyon
Over the past two days I reported about how Hamas complained about UNRWA's "human rights curriculum," and about how UNRWA caved in to Hamas demands and agreed to suspend teaching about "human rights" in Gaza, also mentioning how this curriculum is in fact not about respecting others' human rights so much as it is about how to demand human rights from others.

As usual when a news story makes UNRWA look bad, they do not mention this on their website. On the contrary, exposure of their less savory aspects cause them to perform cover-ups rather than leading to full disclosure.

Given that UNRWA depends on international donors, shouldn't the agency be completely transparent? Not only should it report about Hamas' bullying (if it cared about this so-called "human rights" agenda then publicizing the issue would help,) but all school materials created by UNRWA should be on their website so everyone can see exactly what UNRWA is teaching hundreds of thousands of students.

By contrast, the other UN refugee organization, UNHCR, seems to bend over backwards to provide transparency for researchers.

UNRWA won't become transparent until the donors themselves start to demand answers about where their hundreds of millions of dollars is going. Our taxes ultimately pay for UNRWA's activities, so it is past time for everyone to contact their elected representatives and ask them to demand UNRWA less like a corrupt agency that is trying to hide something.
  • Friday, February 14, 2014
  • Elder of Ziyon
J-Street came up with a cute gimmick to push their version of a "2-state solution" as a Valentine's Day card:

Here's one of their cards:



It is funny, sure.

But it seems to be missing a little context, which would (in my humble opinion) make it even funnier.



Thursday, February 13, 2014

  • Thursday, February 13, 2014
  • Elder of Ziyon
This comes from a 1922 book called "Truth about the Jews, Told by a Gentile" by Walter Hurt. I have no doubt that Hurt felt he was sympathetic to Jews and that his advice was meant to help Jews worldwide. Yet his analysis, which sounds so thorough, was shown by history to be thoroughly wrong.
Zionism is sentimentalism. Its impractical aspects should be apparent to any who gives the subject serious analysis. This fatal sentimentalism is shown at the outset in the selection of Palestine as the site for a Jewish commonwealth. Sentiment alone, unmixed with any practical considerations, could have governed such a choice. Palestine is a comparatively unfruitful country, partly an arid region and partly malarial marshes. Its arable soil is sterile, its natural resources are exhausted, its topographical advantages are few and unimportant, it is not contiguous to centers of either supply or consumption, it is without navigable streams and has no adequate harbor, it is surrounded by hostile hordes and is internally overrun by antagonistic Arabs. All worth while that remain to it are its traditions, and, while these are historically precious, they are a poor foundation for an economic state. Moreover, the claim to its shrines must be shared with the mass of mankind, for every Christian and Moslem as well as the Jew calls it the Holy Land.

Modern Palestine is, in truth, a land of desolation. It may be the Holy Land, but it is not a happy land.

Because of its territorial limitations (its area is some 10,000 square miles—less than the little state of Maryland), it is not possible in these days for Palestine, however plethorically peopled, to become a national entity of importance and power sufficient to justify its existence.

And what Jews would migrate to Palestine? The persecuted and oppressed? The old Order of racial oppression rapidly is vanishing and soon will be no more than a historical memory. The Zionist movement was originated, I believe, chiefly to provide refuge for Jews from the cruelties of Russia, Poland, and Roumania. But such sanctuary no longer is needed. The regime of Russian tyranny has passed, Poland's barbarous power is broken, and Roumania will be made to behave itself. Persecution of Jews, incidental to their presence among Gentiles, persists to some extent in all lands, but this now is too limited to drive them to Palestine from the ends of the earth.

The comfortable classes will not go. Zangwill says of these that he finds "the majority more united for civilization than for colonization."

Prosperous Jews certainly can not be expected to emigrate to Palestine from the countries of their present contentment. The less affluent who are established in employment could not benefit by severing existing associations and removing to Palestine to make a fresh start.

Self-appointed leaders of Zionism have no intention of personally joining the Palestinian colony. They are leaders who will remain in the rear. They are no Moseses.

...What, then, is the aim of the Zionists as to the personnel of the Palestinian State? Do they plan to dump all their defectives, incompetents, and other dependents into the Holy Land, where collectively they can be cared for least expensively? These scarcely would make a creditable colony, one that would reflect favorably before the world the national aspirations of the race. They are not the material for the building of a powerful and permanent state. They could not successfully manage industries, direct government, and develop culture. Moreover, I fear there are not enough failures among the Jews to constitute a very extensive colony.

If the least capable are thus to be colonized, they inevitably would be exploited by designing demagogues of their own race, as well as become the prey of all predatory foreigners.

...There is no need today for a Jewish homeland, for there no longer are homeless Jews except as a common condition of European warfare. The Jew now is a powerful part of nearly every great nation, enjoying civic rights equally with the Gentile. When other governments shall cease fighting Russia, directly or indirectly, and allow the nation to function normally, that vast region of almost virgin resources will afford desirable residence for the Jews or any other race, and be a fit field for Jewish enterprise. Also, Australia, Canada, the United States, and all LatinAmerica give ample area for Jewish expansion.

Palestine is a land of traditions, where, if the Jew be thence transplanted, the burden of the past will weigh heavily upon him. He needs to dwell in new lands, where he always would face the future. It were better for him that he have a fresh outlook, instead of turning his vision forever backward.

The denationalized Jew is welcomed into every progressive community because he enlarges its productive capacity; he is cordially accepted by every advanced government because he adds to the aggregate of taxable wealth. As a national entity he would be a bone of contention among rival powers and an object of collective spoliation.

Among the diverse difficulties confronting such a colony would be the lack of a universal language. Few things are more conducive to inharmony among mankind than what Roget, the English philologist, laments as "that barrier to the interchange of thought and mutual good understanding between man and man, which now is interposed by the diversity of their respective languages."

As a practical vehicle for intercommunication, Hebrew virtually is a dead language. In its purity it is habitually spoken by only 5 per cent of the Jews of the world, being kept alive to this limited extent chiefly by the Chassidim. Consequently, the Jews in Palestine, gathered from all quarters of the globe, would be hampered in their intercourse by a polyglot nomenclature, consisting of Yiddish, Ladino, and other Jewish jargons, as well as all the various vernaculars of the different countries whence the colonists were transplanted.

From this condition would result a "confusion of tongues" such as we are told in biblical lore prevailed at the building of the Tower of Babel, where, according to Kipling's description, "each man talked of the aims of Art, and each in an alien tongue."

...Realized Zionism would be a reversal of the process of progress, a backward step across the chasm of 2000 years. Judaism should be expanded by emigration, not contracted by colonization. It is but natural, perhaps, that the Jews should chafe at their anomalous position of being a nationality without a nation—a people unique in this as in all other things. But it is precisely because the Jews are not a nation that they can become a part of all nations, to achieve international redemption. Israel was'' dispersed to discharge a mission to spread the principles of truth and justice and be a model of righteousness unto all the nations of earth." How, then, may it fulfill this mission if it withdraw again unto itself?

Modern Zionism simply would make of Palestine a magnified ghetto. The true Zion is a spiritual domain whose dimensions can not be defined by metes and bounds.

Jews should realize that Zionism is not exclusively their own concern. The Jewish mission is a world mission, affecting all the inhabitants of earth.

Wherefore, the destiny of Israel is not an individual destiny; it involves the destiny of all humankind.

It behooves the Jews to bear faithfully in mind the primal promise to Abraham, "Thou shalt be a father of many nations"—not just one paltry political state. And when disposed to be forgetful of the magnitude of their mission they should recall the covenant with Jacob that "in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed." For myself, I am one Gentile who is unwilling to be cheated of his part in this patrimony, but would hold the Jews to the ancient bargain with their fathers.

...Zionism holds in its plan a fatal contradiction. It would re-establish Jewish nationalism as a means of preserving the Jews as a people. A part of the purpose is to relieve the Jew of oppressive restrictions. As a matter of fact, persecution has been his only preservative. Racial cohesion is a consequence of resistance to invasion of his rights. Remove this cohesive agent, and Judaism would dissolve like a lump of salt in water.

So, the pressure of persecution being all that binds the Jews together, Zionism aims a death-blow at Jewish solidarity.

But the Jews now are so cosmopolitan in character, so thoroughly intermingled with other peoples, so firmly affixed in their associations, and have such enduringly established interests that never again will they attach themselves collectively to a territorial unit. They will remain distributed throughout the world, the better to disseminate the doctrines of Judaism.

Incredibly, after arguing that Jews are better off sprinkled throughout the world to spread their universal message, and that modern nations welcome their Jewish citizens, Hurt does a complete turnaround to justify the next argument:

...It is by no means a rash statement to affirm that at bottom Zionism is not a Jewish, but an anti-Semitic movement, despite the unimpeachable sincerity and unquestioned devotion of its Jewish proponents. Crafty Gentile leaders openlv encourage the colonization plan, while a majority of the dominant class secretly promote the project. Why? Is it because they love the Jew and have his best interests at heart? You know it isn't! Jews should again be reminded to "beware the Greeks bearing gifts." Now that the Jew has grown too strong in his dispersion to be longer despoiled, the Gentiles desire no more of him and would be rid of his presence among them. They would have the Jew go to Palestine, that they may seize upon the opportunities he will leave behind. In confession of their weakness, they would relieve themselves of his successful competition.

Again, while there is strength in unity, not always is there strength in concentration. Israel distributed but unified can effectively defend itself; Jews gathered in a single concentration camp can easily be suppressed and controlled. This was proved in a small way by the Pale. Shall Palestine become a larger Pale?

Progressive civilization soon will compel an end of pogroms; but a Jewish nation is a logical object of armed attack in "legitimate" warfare, pretext for which readily can be provided in conformity with "international law." With the Jews collected in Palestine and virtually defenseless, their wholesale slaughter can more conveniently be accomplished. This may be the Gentile solution to the Jewish Problem. This incredible suggestion will, of course, provoke skeptical smiles from confident and confiding Jews who have learned nothing precautious from the sanguinary lessons of racial history, nor even grasped the stupendous significance of the present world-wave of anti-Semitic agitation.

If preservation and not destruction of the Jews is the desire of the Gentile nations, why do they, while approving Zionism, permit in Europe exterminative war against the Jews without so much as a polite protest?—indeed, abetting that slaughter even to the extent of providing the Polish murderers and the anti-Semitic renegade Russian commander, General Wrangel, with the very bullets with which they butcher Jews. None can be so credulous as for one moment to suppose the complaisant powers could not, did they wish to do so, instantly stop this slaughter of Jews merely by indicating that wish. Certain it is that this result could be assured by refusing further aid until the atrocities cease.

Also, the Gentile fears the fulfillment of Israel's mission, which in his blindness he can not see as a universal blessing, thinking it means Jewish material dominance instead of spiritual supremacy—which misbelief is shared by some Jews. Furthermore, the Jewish ideal is opposed to his selfish interests. He would delay the New Dispensation with its reign of social righteousness, that he still may trample truth and justice. In Zionism he sees the surest means for the miscarriage of the Jewish mission and the defeat of humanity's highest hope.

...It is not a part of the predestined program of Jewish emancipation that the Jew should emigrate en masse from the lands of his persecution. That would be defeat. He must tarry and triumph. It is his mission to remain and civilize his persecutors, to the end that persecution may cease; thus, in self-defense, fulfilling his ordained destiny.

If he would be true to his mission, the last place a Jew should leave is the country of his oppression; that is where he most is needed. Instead of forsaking the inhospitable land for a place of paternalistic refuge, he should remain to redeem it and make it fit for the abiding of all men.

Zionism means evacuation and retreat—a desertion of the field and defeat for the cause.
Again, I really believe that the author believed that he was giving honest advice - and that he truly felt that the best thing for persecuted Jews to do is to stay and convince their persecutors to become better people. Unfortunately, too many Jews nowadays still hold onto this bizarre mindset.

Who are this generation's Hurts - Peter Beinart? Thomas Friedman? Roger Cohen? Ian Lustick? We have no shortage of self-proclaimed "experts" whose analysis and predictions are just as painfully wrong as Hurt's, yet who are just as earnest as he was.

The fact is that no one can predict a single move ahead in a geopolitical chess game where the opponent is playing with different rules, a different board and a different frame of reference. It is a generalization of what I have called the If/Then Fallacy - people say that if Israel/Jews do X, then the reaction will definitely be Y. And almost invariably, they are wrong.

None of these "experts" can predict a single future conditional event accurately, let alone a cascade of such events over the course of years or decades. If this essay above proves anything, it is the truth of the famous phrase of David Ben Gurion: "In Israel, in order to be a realist you must believe in miracles."

Just as Walter Hurt's assumptions were proven to be thoroughly at odds with what actually happened, today's "experts" replace the lessons of history with their hubris, making wild assumptions and predictions of dire consequences that are no less invalid than Hurt's was.
From Ian:

European companies should be concerned by the BDS campaign
When Transjordan conquered the West Bank in 1948 and annexed it in 1950, it did so on a territory that had been allocated to Jewish self-determination by post-World War I international treaties. Hence Jordan’s sovereignty over the West Bank was never recognized by the international community (with the exception of Britain and Pakistan). When Israel conquered the West Bank in June 1967, it did so in a legitimate act of self-defense (as opposed to Jordan’s military aggression in 1948). Israel did not cross an international border, but a temporary armistice line. It did not conquer a recognized sovereign territory, but one that had been allocated to the Jewish People by the League of Nations and that had been unlawfully controlled by Jordan for 19 years.
Therefore, many international lawyers dispute the assertion that the West Bank is an occupied territory and that the 1949 Geneva Convention applies to it. Article 49 of the convention, which prohibits the mass transfer of populations into occupied territories, was meant to prevent what was a common German practice during WWII, not the voluntary settlement of Jews in a land that was allocated to them for that very purpose by the League of Nations.
The actions brought against Israeli companies that operate beyond the 1949 Armistice Line are therefore legally groundless, even according to the disputable opinion that Israel’s presence beyond that line is illegal. However, were other European courts to vindicate anti-Israeli boycotters in the future, then hundreds of European companies would be exposed to lawsuits because of their activities and investments in countries that occupy territories or that control disputed ones. The list includes, among others, China (over Tibet), Russia (over Abkhazia), Turkey (over Cyprus), and Morocco (over Western Sahara).
Although BDS activists do not have a case, they are potentially exposing hundreds of European companies operating in the above countries to liability. I say bring it on and give Europe a taste of its own medicine.
Alan Dershowitz: Ten reasons why the BDS movement is immoral and hinders peace
As a strong supporter of the two state solution and a critic of Israel's settlement policies, I am particularly appalled at efforts to impose divestment, boycotts and sanctions against Israel, and Israel alone, because BDS makes it more difficult to achieve a peaceful resolution of the Mid-East conflict that requires compromise on all sides.
The BDS movement is highly immoral, threatens the peace process and discourages the Palestinians from agreeing to any reasonable peace offer. Here are ten compelling reasons why the BDS movement is immoral and incompatible with current efforts to arrive at a compromise peace.

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive