By Ted Belman
Arab’s play offense while Israelis play defense. Nowhere is this more evident than in the field of propaganda.
But first I want to look at the negotiations. Can anyone tell me what the Israelis are demanding. I’m waiting.
On the other hand,the Arabs are demanding the holy city in Jerusalem, the greenline as the border and the “right of return”. It seems Israel is always struggling to meet their demands in part, hoping it will suffice. No such struggle on the part of the Arabs, Just the reiteration of their demands. They have a sense of entitlement while the Israelis have a sense of indebtedness. That’s no way to win a ball game.
The Arabs always rejected the State of Israel and in the seventies made a conscious decision to convince the world to do likewise. So they began a propaganda war to demonize and delegitimate Israel and Zionism. The infamous, Zionism is Racism, resolution at the UN was the first volley.
David Matas, famed human rights lawyer from Canada, in his excellent book Aftershock, written in 2002, reviewed the attacks on Jews and Israel throughout the world, and asked how could this happen sixty years after the Holocaust? He answers,
-
“The root cause of the revival of antisemitism is anti-Zionism. Zionism is the expression of the right to self determination of the Jewish people. Anti-Zionism, by definition, denies and rejects this right by denying the right to a state by the Jewish people. Anti-Zionism is a form of racism. It is the specific denial to the Jewish people of the basic right to which all people of the world are entitled.
Israel exists because of the Holocaust, because of antisemitism and as a place of refuge for Jews fleeing persecution, for the cultural survival of the Jewish people and their right to self-determination, because of the ties of the Jewish people to the land of Israel, and because of international acceptance and recognition. The logic of anti-Zionism requires attacking each and every one of these reasons for the existence of Israel.”
Thus the Holocaust is denied or trivialized and the creation of Israel is discredited as western colonialism or a “mistake”, if you will. In addition, the Arabs have created a narrative to compete with the Jewish narrative. The Arabs deny that both the First and Second Temples were located at or near the Temple Mount. In their narrative they have the roots and rights in and to the land and the Jews have virtually no connection to it. They also deny the peoplehood of the Jews while at the same time claiming their own and their right to self determination.
Beyond that, they attack the Jews/Israel for all the worst crimes known to man. Their charges are not at all based in reality. It doesn’t matter if there is any evidence to support them, nor that they are outrageous or perverse. They will distort facts or fraudulently present “facts” to support their allegations. They also misrepresent the law in order to more easily conclude that Israelis have committed a crime, or better still, a war crime.
The list of “crimes” include; perpetrating genocide or another holocaust, ethnic cleansing, the commission of war crimes for disproportionality, intentionally killing innocents and creating an humanitarian disaster.
They are relentless in stigmatizing Israel as an Apartheid State so that they can create a worldwide movement to delegitimate Israel similar to the movement that undermined a real apartheid regime, namely South Africa. Once again, to do this, the reality and the nature of an Apartheid regime are distorted and falsified.
Their lies also include the following;
- the occupation is illegal
- the settlements are illegal
- Judea and Samaria are Palestinian lands
- Israel is the aggressor
- Jerusalem is holy to Islam
- the Arabs support a two-state solution
- the Jews want to take over the world pursuant to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion
David Matas and others have convincingly debunked all of these lies.
The Arabs follow Goebbels dictum to a “T”,
-
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
The phrase, “big lie”, was also used in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing Hitler’s psychological profile.
-
His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.
This too they follow to a “T”. Its only natural since Haj Amin al Husseini, the father of militant Palestinian Arab nationalism, a previously unknown concept, was a close confident of Hitler and asked of him to acknowledge the Arab right
-
… to settle the question of Jewish elements in Palestine and other Arab countries in accordance with the national and racial interests of the Arabs and along the lines similar to those used to solve the Jewish question in Germany and Italy.
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
What the Israeli government must do is to challenge every one of these lies at every opportunity. That’s what its PR should be about and not about the babes on the beach.
That is playing offense.
ADDENDUM
I received this email from a fair minded person
A quick question is there, at the very least, one settlement that is illegal? If you say, no, please explain in simple terms, why Haaretz keeps presenting articles, by articulate, and famous Israelis that say that most of the settlements are illegal. Is Haaretz an anti-Israeli newspaper or does it know something that you don’t want to admit? And, no, I’m not in the least defending the vitriol of Arab propoganda, e.g. the Protocols. But, I am lookinhg for some balance.
In my opinion Haaretz spins the news and facts to suit their agenda. Here is the law. You decide.
The British Mandate gave the Jews the right to settle in Judea and Samaria and all of the lands in the Mandate. That right has never been ceded. It has never been cancelled because no one has the right to do that except for the beneficiaries of the trust (Mandate).
I might mention that the international community in supporting the Arab desire that Judea and Samaria be “Judenrien” is itself in violation of Human rights. Canada and other countries have long ago held that restrictive covenants are illegal. Would this restriction not fall to the same axe. That is to say nothing about the crime of ethnic cleansing.
So what then is the international community hanging its hat on?
The Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War contains an obligation not to transfer civilian populations to occupied territories. This was put there to protect against what Germany did in WW II when it carried out forced transfers.
This provision was so minor that there is no individual liability and there is no duty on states to penalize violations.
A Protocol to this Convention does make it a serious offense. The object of the exercise is to protect the people being transferred. In other words it is against forced transfers. Even so, Israel did not sign this protocol so isn’t bound by it.
To get around this obvious barrier many argue that the Convention not only means a state can’t force transfers but also can’t induce them. This argument gets no support from legal scholars. For instance if the crime is inducement, the settlers are not guilty of it. Ordinarily the Criminal Code makes it an crime to induce people to commit a crime. You see the distortion here yet again.
There are more legal arguments that can be made, but the foregoing is the essence.
So, yes, all settlements are legal.
Now if the Haaretz’ eminent writers take a contrary position, they need to support it and not just allege it.
Now a distinction has been made where some settlements are “unlawful”. But that doesn’t mean they are illegal. This adjective applies only to settlements that didn’t have Israeli administrative approval.
The foregoing question and my answer prove my point. The propaganda has been so pervasive that fair minded people assume it as fact.
Peskin, it is a fact that The Arabs are alway on message and their message is simple KISS, but the main fault lies with Our side, Peres always said that our policies were always the best propaganda and we don’t need professional propagandists or a single agency that would be the central speaker for Israel. One address! Peres is an arrogant fool and is largely responsible for most of our internal and external woes. He always manipulated every situation where is was center fold, regardless of fallout and bad programs he spun it so it was always the other guys fault or we did ‘t go far enough. Never took responsibility for his mistakes , never admitted to err and has been the main propagator of Israels weakness and the prevailing concept of NO MILITARY SOLUTION. He was and is not alone but is and always has been the main criminal in anti Israelism and much of our lack of national self confidence. Peskin see if you can relate to the following article as I believe you are one of those who fit the description:
Politically Correct anti-Semitism
Israel Commentary
Neglected information and opinion relative to Israel, the Middle East and the immediate world.
Who are its advocates? What are its goals?
The Holocaust, in which over six million Jews were brutally murdered by the Nazis and their enthusiastic collaborators, happened over 60 years ago. So horrific were the events that — even today, about two generations later — nobody would wish to identify himself with them. Yet, a new anti-Semitism is now rearing its head. It is important to be aware of it.
What are the facts?
Who are the new anti-Semites? The new anti-Semites do not publicly proclaim their desire to bring about a second Holocaust or to subject the Jews to mass murder or annihilation. The hatred is aimed against the state of Israel, which, according to the new anti-Semites, represents all that is evil in the world and which is the main violator of human rights and guilty of virtually every other abuse that can be conceived. This poison is now so widespread that a poll taken in Europe not too long ago found Israel to be the greatest menace to the peace of the world — far ahead of such murderous regimes as those of Iran or of North Korea.
The leaders and instigators of this new anti-Semitism are concentrated on the political left, its most active and vocal spokesmen being found in our prestige universities. Such is the anti-Zionist (anti-Semitic) focus of the left that, almost incomprehensibly, it includes a fair number of Jewish professors and other “intellectuals,” not just here in the United States, but even in Israel itself.
Those on the extreme left call for the abolition of the State of Israel outright, although they do not tell us what they propose to do with the five million Israeli Jews. They would presumably be left to the tender mercies of the Arabs, who would of course, have no greater joy than to emulate or perhaps even to “improve” on the Nazi model and to give “final solution” to the Jewish problem” once and for all. That isn’t going to happen, of course, not because anybody in the world would lift a finger to prevent it, but because, fortunately, Israel is a very strong and most capable nation.
A Death Wish for Israel.
In deference to “world opinion” and to the wishes of the United States, Israel has allowed itself to be pressured into innumerable concessions to those who are sworn to destroy it. However, it seems clear that, when the chips are really down, a most decisive response on the part of Israel can be expected.
With the possible exception of Carthage during the Punic Wars, almost 2500 years ago, no country in the World, no country in recorded history, has ever been threatened with extinction Israel is the one exception. Fueled by the extreme left, the “legitimacy” of Israel is a constant topic of discussion. The abolition of the “Zionist entity” gets serious attention, even in the hallowed halls of the United Nations.
Iran feverishly pursues the Holy Grail of atomic weapons. Its president has publicly declared — not once, but repeatedly — that Israel is a “tumor” that must be excised and that it must be wiped off the map of the world. Medium-range missiles (so far, fortunately without atomic warheads) are being paraded through the streets of Teheran, with signs attached to them, shamelessly giving their destination as Jerusalem. A few eyebrows are being raised around the world, but otherwise nothing is being done about it.
Because the memory of the Nazi Holocaust still lingers after all these years, the new anti-Semitism is disguised as the socially more acceptable “anti-Zionism.” It is pursued and propagated by the radical left. Every leftist demonstration — be it about the war in Iraq, against globalization, for or against whatever else — does inevitably include appeals against “Israeli subjugation of the Palestinians,” the “occupation of Palestinian lands by Israel,” or simply asks for the elimination of Israel. Sadly, quite a few Jews, having been saturated with Leftism from their early years, participate in such demonstrations.
While the propagation of the new anti-Semitism by prestige universities started in Europe (mostly in England), it has found fertile ground among the universities of the United States. The active participation in the new anti-Semitism by the American clergy (beginning with the Presbyterians) is a scandalous reality.
Surely, not everybody who criticizes Israel is an anti-Semite. The actions of Israel, just as the actions of any other country are subject to examination and criticism. But the viciousness, volume and consistency of this criticism against Israel is such that it cannot be considered as anything but anti -Semitism — the new anti -Semitism, disguised as anti-lsraelism or anti-Zonism.
The foolish professors and the hypocritical preachers are besotted by their Leftism and by their hatred against Israel and America. Overt vilification of America has to remain muted — it’s somewhat dangerous to be too outspoken about it — but Israel, perceived as the satrap and the handmaiden of the United States in the Middle East, is an easy target. Nobody should be fooled. Anti-Semitism is Jew-Hatred in whichever way it may be disguised.
FLAME
Facts and Logic About the Middle East
P.O. Box 590359 San Francisco, CA 94159
Gerardo Joffe, President
With regard to the issue of propaganda, Israel is a priori at a great disadvantage-the fact that human nature being what it is, most people sympathize with the plight of the underdog. Israel is now thriving and the Palestinians are not .Israel is viewed as a prosperous , with a powerful military and the Palestinians as poor stateless people. The most skilfull propaganda in the world cannot possibly change that perception .That situation was totally reversed when Israel was attacked by the Arab states during Israel’s infancy . The media then depicted the Israelis as the hapless underdogs and the Arab states as wilfull aggressors, which was a fair reflection of the reality of that time.
But now we a have a completely changed situation. The Palestinian are now what the Israelis were then.
What is an obvious and serious self defeating error committed by pro Israelis is the attempt to demonize NGOS who aid the Palestinians. Labelling such highly regarded organizations as Doctors without Borders, Amnesty Internatonal and similar groups as anti-semitic is stupid. It has the totally opposite effect than intended. Most people are completely turned off by such misstatements.
There is no question that the Arabs are, on a global scale, winning the public relations war. What is frequently tried but is woefully ineffective is to counter the arguments of the other side, by relating the history of the conflict. That goes contrary to the first rule of good propaganda- K I S S, which translates to, keep it simple stupid.
There are no quick fixes here. We have enough intelligent people to provide good advocates, but essentially (Bellman might relate to this), your only as good as your case.
Te whole of the west bank except territories administered by the PA so called Area A and B of the Oslo accords is under Israeli military Law. Now any building or settlement that has no signed authorization by the IDF and the DM is still technically not fully legal. But, all roads leading to and into those settlements where layed by an Israel government company called MAATZ. The budget is part of a government allocated budget. Electrical grid. All settlements connected to the grid has been authorized by the infrastructure ministry as the Electric Company is a government monopoly. Mortgages if subsidized are subsidized by the housing ministry a government of Israel ministry. Water, if connected to national water carrier is a government infrastructure ministry authorized function. Schools and kindergartens are a function of Education ministry who builds all schools and kindergartens even the private religious school systems get budgets based on head counts. The final authorization as to whether these settlements are fully legal or not depends upon the current or present political outlook of DM or Government. But since all of the in fracture has been built, financed and or subsidized by some government agency, they must be considered quasi legal even without final sign off by any given DM.. These are all political decisions and have less to do with America, Arabs or any other reasons other than the positions of any PM or DM and the makeup of the coalition at any given time. The Government can then defect pressure by America and other by promising to destroy some of these settlement . They can play internal politics by giving authorization or not, thereby controlling both opposition and coalition partners by using settlement authorizations as political payoffs or penalties depending on a given specific issue.
I received this email from a fair minded person
In my opinion Haaretz spins the news and facts to suit their agenda. Here is the law. You decide.
The British Mandate gave the Jews the right to settle in Judea and Samaria and all of the lands in the Mandate. That right has never been ceded. It has never been cancelled because no one has the right to do that except for the beneficiaries of the trust (Mandate).
I might mention that the international community in supporting the Arab desire that Judea and Samaria be “Judenrien” is itself in violation of Human rights. Canada and other countries have long ago held that restrictive covenants are illegal. Would this restriction not fall to the same axe. That is to say nothing about the crime of ethnic cleansing.
So what then is the international community hanging its hat on?
The Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War contains an obligation not to transfer civilian populations to occupied territories. This was put there to protect against what Germany did in WW II when it carried out forced transfers.
This provision was so minor that there is no individual liability and there is no duty on states to penalize violations.
A Protocol to this Convention does make it a serious offense. The object of the exercise is to protect the people being transferred. In other words it is against forced transfers. Even so, Israel did not sign this protocol so isn’t bound by it.
To get around this obvious barrier many argue that the Convention not only means a state can’t force transfers but also can’t induce them. This argument gets no support from legal scholars. For instance if the crime is inducement, the settlers are not guilty of it. Ordinarily the Criminal Code makes it an crime to induce people to commit a crime. You see the distortion here yet again.
There are more legal arguments that can be made, but the foregoing is the essence.
So , yes, all settlements are legal.
Now if the Haaretz’ eminent writers take a contrary position, they need to support it and not just allege it.
Now a distinction has been made where some settlements are “unlawful”. But that doesn’t mean they are illegal. This adjective applies only to settlements that didn’t have Israeli administrative approval.
The foregoing question and my answer prove my point. The propaganda has been so pervasive that fair minded people assume it as fact.
There is no question that Israel missed the boat by not annexing the land previously.
It is not too late. The Israeli government does not represent the people. The people need to replace leadership and have the Israeli government pressure GW Bush and the US to contact the “Royal” family in Jordan to finally take their people home. The home for the “Palestinians” is Jordan.
The is no negotiation available. Millions of Germans were expunged after WW2 and sent back to Germany…
Since the wall/fence is working it is time to make the changes. Sderot & Ashkelon should be the warning that worse is to come.
You all know that the Matsav will only get worse and that the UN of Arabs are out to get us all.
After the Arabs are relocated to Jordan and Gaza , Judea & Sammaria are annexed…
Then negotiate a peace that says Israel will not blow you off the face of the Earth in exchange for peace.
All talk of positional negotiations is futile unless it includes no movement on and…period.
We all want this conflict to end, and just like a bad relationship even the Arabs don’t realize how better off they will be in Jordan at peace.
Let’s show them
Avi
# 8 email rec’d from a Jew
Let me begin by replying that you are not a Jew and cannot be a jew by anyones criteriaa except maybe your own. Now That I have established this lets look at your arguments.
Israel is nominally a Jewish State but has by and large western secular system and laws.
Criticism should be based on issues which do not single out Israel for specific criticism that are not applied across the board to every other nation. If criticism is only advanced against Israel; that is racist and antisemitic.
I and most Jews in Israel ascribe to this definition, Judaism is a combination of Torah, People hood, and centered in and on the Land of Israel.
Simply put, G-d give the Jewish people a place and that place is the Land of Israel. The question of why the Land of Israel is thus answered. If a Jew is to accept one tenant of the Torah, he must, in order to be logically consistent, accept the whole of Torah. Likewise, if a person is to accept that he is Jewish then he must define this concept upon viable and authentic Jewish sources and render precise his own actions accordingly.
Jews have always lives in The Land of Israel and at various ties in the past 2000 years Jews made up the majority, and when not it was because of persecution and mass murder by outside forces. Religious Jews have always when they could migrated to Israel from almost every country. The return to the Land of Israel was and is a primary commandment of the Torah , ergo; the Jewish religion! up and until the emancipation some 250 years ago. Then only a small part of Jews waived this commandment along with most of the Other commandments and made Judaism into something not Jewish except maybe in name. Political modern Zionism was a secular national liberation movement accepted by most leftist, communist, adherents to national rights. There cannot be any believer in the Bible that does not accept the concept that god Gave the Jewish People the whole of the Land of Israel. and that includes most Muslims by the way. So if half the people in the world accept the bible as true and the foundation for all monotheistic religions, any claim by Jews that the Land of Israel belongs to them because a God whom half the people in the world believe in said so. I agree that we have no historical rights other than what we can gain for ourselves and can keep by our own determination and assertion of power.This is our methodology but not our justification for the land as we believe for our own reasons it is ours and we will keep it and remain as long as we have the power to keep it and when we don’t we will not endure. This is the logical bottom Line.
Without some form of Zionism, religious, or national secular, what Jewish state other than these are you referring to?
You cannot separate the Jewish State from either a National Secular or Religious definition. If the criticism is based on racism( not applied to other peoples and states equally) it is thus racism. We here in Israel are constantly criticizing The Israeli Government, our politicians our religious leaders etc. There is a difference though for an outsider to pick on Israel or Zionism and for similar easons give others a wink or a pass.
I don’t know where you are coming from here Arabs have been very consistent for most of the past 100 years, have co-opted much of Nazi and antisemitic material and concepts from both the Nazi’s and communists and have far out done most of the antisemites on the right in the US. This might differ somewhat from country to country, as much of their propaganda is tailored to different countries and cultures. The information is well documented from hundreds if not thousands of sources and sites. I am sure Ted could forward you a very inclusive list for ref. if you are serious and really don’t know which I doubt.
I agree that one of the reasons the Arabs hate Jews today is that they believe with some justification that we stole and occupy their land. I respect them for the thought but bear in mind they were hating and killing Jews long before the establishment of our State for example the Hebron massacres in 1929, 33-35. It was never about land it has always been that Muslims refuse to accept non Muslims in control of any lands that they consider were once under Islamic sovereignty.
Now I have you pegged!!! How many Arabs have we actually killed? How many have we incarcerated instead of killing? How many could we kill if that was our joist goal and purpose? Using that argument the Blacks in America would be justified and condoned by you for killing white, as Native Americans. What about Mexicans how many thousand’s and tens of thousands has America Killed. What about Chinese, Koreans, Germans Italians,Japanese, Vietnamese,and many more. according to your beliefs all would be justified in taking up arms against America for past and present murders or killings of those peoples.
Why am I not surprised that you included this statement of faith in that we Jews are guilty and Your friends the Ishmaelites are poor victims of global Jewish genocide against a just and helpless ancient people, who we usurped their land by force?
You are no Jew and if you do claim yourself Jewish you would be considered, traitorous, a dirty Jew in all that those word imply , a Kike in the truest sense of the word. I would have a hundred Arabs than one like you. I consider you not human but filth to be dealt with as filth.
I find #8’s email very disturbing because the reasoning of this person is what fuels the propaganda, willful ignorance and self-righteousness that give life to anti-Semitism and anti-Israel movement. It is the thinking of the academic left and various unions which seeks to undermine Israel to promote its destruction through their “peace studies” programs in western universities. It is the thinking of those who direct the “Israel Apartheid” movement and hate throughout Canadian and American campuses.
His thoughts represent the same lack of humanity that we see in the UN where nobody in the audience says anything when Iran tells that debauched body that they will destroy Israel.
This writer denies Israel’s existence after 3000 years of being in one physical location. Where does he live? How does he justify the ownership of his home when, by his own reasoning, he has no claim to his Canadian/American home because other indigenous people were displaced by him to create his home, town, province/state and country?
I don’t suppose that he is donating his own house to those he has knowingly oppressed – he seems to be very comfortable in his superior role as a conqueror. However, he assails the indigenous people of the Middle East (the Jews) for wanting to live in a land that is theirs and has been long before Islam was founded.
I would say that this person hates indigenous people worldwide. He has stolen their home from them in Canada and now he attacks them abroad for living in a place that is historically, biblically and in every other way theirs by virtue of having defended it, lost it and regained it for the past several millennia – but they have always been inhabitants of it.
The writer is also upset that we call Arabs, guess what, Arabs! He sees subtle differences in them that for all intents and purposes do not exist. What he is trying to do is manipulate the world into seeing peaceful intent where none exists. He wants to humanize the killers and put down his own people in the west. All the literature that supports this kind of self-hate combined with the glorification of those who engage in terrorism is found in modern universities in departments that are feeding this propaganda of hate to their students.
This person has the nerve to say that “I do not expect you to change. Your beliefs are set.” I think that he really needs to examine his own views which are more “set” than anyone and focused on his agenda of hate and his acceptance/justification of anarchy, terrorism and extremism in the world.
Sort of Amused by most of the comments till now but I must say Peskin you are ever the consistent anti Israel nay sayer. An attack on Iran is already to a large extent leveraged into current oil prices. If the real threat of Iranian Nukes is eliminated or delayed substantially, this might even reduce some of the speculative nature to todays high prices. The prices today oar all speculation and Capitalism run amok with no controls. Placing controls like removing margins for oil investment could go along way in reuducuing prices. Taxing winfall profits by 90% or more would also reduce prices. What is for sure that there is no shortage of oil and it is 100% based on cynical uncontrolled speculation.
I saw the statement but not the disavowal send a link so I can verify and respond.
Are you suggesting then that Israel does nothing to protect herself in the face of almost daily threats of annihilation because The world and you will have to pay a larger price for energy? Are you suggesting that we should be complicit in our own annihilation because some EU countries will be unhappy with us? Are you saying that Israel and the Jews conform to the Christian view of being a sacrificial Lamb on the alter of some stupid theology? You appeasers have brought the world to this point and then when it comes time to pay for your cowardice of these many years you say in so many words that its the Jews fault and we can continue in our appeasement , Just let them have the Jews and we can continue . This is Leftist antisemitism run Amok, classic blood libel.
I can tell you that Mofaz is correct if the world will not handle Iran in defense of itself we we not play dead for your fears and comfort. Dam the consequences if it comes to a point where we have no options. mofaz should keep his mouth shut and as far as Israel is concerned , in the words of Dirty Harry, IF YOU ARE GOING TO SHOOT, SHOOT!!
You should know though that Israel will in such an event have to use tactical nukes as our overall capability is less than Americas but rest assured that when it does happen, for better or worse that the World and the Middle East will never be the same.
Mr. Peskin:
Perhaps you are right about the likelihood of a prospective Israeli attack on Iran, but I wouldn’t bet on it.
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but my understanding is that the nuclear reactor which makes up the centerpiece of Iran’s program, sold to them by Russia, will “go hot” by the end of the summer. This means that the fuel rods are inserted, and attacking it will be much more problematic from a collateral damage perspective. The fact that Iraq’a Osirak complex was about to go hot determined the timing of the Israeli attack in 1981; this is instructive.
If the above is true, then Israel will have little choice but to act, unless this process can be delayed perhaps by saboteurs acting from within. Yes, the economic conflagration following from an Israeli strike will be terrible, but a nuclear war in SW Asia will be far more terrible…and will be practically assured, in my view, if Iran is permitted to deploy nuclear arms.
We live in far too interesting times.
Re Jonathan’s comment:
I disagree. Forget about countering their lies. The best defence is a good offence. We should give a time limit on taking back the West Bank and destroying Gaza. We should criticize all Muslims for their unholiness, terrorism, barbarian attitudes, and for not helping the Palestinians.
My response to your tough talk.
Friday June 6, Israeli minister Mofaz issued a statement that Israel will be required to attack Iran, If the latter’s nuclear bomb project is not terminated. Almost immediately the price of oil spiked by $10. a barrel, gas began to sell at $4.00 a gallon in most parts of the States, and the N.Y. stock exchange index plumeted 400 points. President Bush made a hurried announcement that America favors a diplomatic solution and the Israeli Gov’t quickly disavowed Mofaz’s statement.
Which goes to show that there are too many powerful interests throughout the world that will lose by Israel attacking its enemies be it Iran, the Palestinians or whomever you might name. Israel is not Belize or some obscure Carribean Island. Remember that fact when you call for Israel to take some unilateral, drastic military action. It just will not happen.
I have always advocated a “strong offense”. This does not consist of merely repudiating Arab claims. That is still defensive behavior.
A strong offense – in PR terms – first means establishing a basic standard of behavior by which all relevant “players” are measured. Then, apply this standard aggressively to all sides, and see who comes up most “wanting’.
I have often asked progressive, left-leaning Israel-basher types just what it means to be “progressive”. Aren’t “progressives” primarily concerned with matters such as freedom of expression, religious tolerance, labor rights, womens’ rights, etc.? And who, between the two sides in the Arab/Israeli conflict best reflects these values? It is Israel, of course. Self-described progressives who habitually whine about Israel (like the Jewish Israel-basher who commented above), who applied the same standards to Israel’s enemies that they do to Israel, and who traveled to these countries (e.g., Egypt, Iran, Syria, Jordan, etc.) and agitated on behalf of such values, would simply be creamed in those societies.
While I can’t claim that my tactics have ever turned a dyed-in-the-wool anti-Israel type around 180 degrees, it has often had the effect of “stumping” them, of at least making them scratch their chins and “shut up” for a while. It is at least somewhat effective. (A small caveat: This only works to a degree on non-Moslem/non-Arab Israel bashers. It doesn’t work on Moslems or Arabs. Nothing works on them, at least in terms of rational argument. Believe me, I’ve tried. Ted is right. They only understand brute force. I’m sure there are exceptions, but I haven’t personally met or corresponded with even one. Sad but true.)
The fact of the matter is that the Arab-Israeli conflict is merely one part of a larger war between the Islamic community of SW Asia and the rest of the world, primarily the developed, first-world secular countries. Propped up by oil money, their clerical ruling class is scared to death that the seepage of Western values by means of modern trade, communications, etc., will destroy the legitimacy of the various imams and mullahs who have held positions of power and privelege for centuries. That these societies are as backward and unable to compete with the rest of the world serves as both clear evidence of the inadequacy of their rule, as well as the engine for the fear, loathing, and insecurity that many of their subejects – especially the male ones – feel in regards to the West.
Thus, Israel is for them what West Berlin was to the Soviets during the Cold War: Not the cause of the conflict, but a high-profile “lightening rod” of primarly psychological importance to them, right on their doorstep. Just as handing West Berlin over to the Soviets would not have ended the Cold War a day sooner, but instead probably would have emboldened them, so too would placating Arab demands with respect to Israel merely legitimize their barbarous and bloody program.
Some, who fear having to face the grim consequences of confronting a dying and desperate Moslem SW Asian civilization over Israel or anything else they complain about (e.g., Danish cartoons), will engage in the most obtuse mental gymnastics to make our side out to be the “bad guy” and the murderous SW Asian polities merely the hapless victims of “imperialism”, as the Jewish writer above attempts. We saw these same cringing gyrations before WW2, when Hitler was described by many respectable figures of the day as merely a “misunderstood nationalist”.
What is most galling in all of this is the objective weakness of the enemy we face. In relative terms, compared with the Imperial Japanese or Nazi Germany of their day, the Soviet Union of the Cold War, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc., are midgets by any of the conventional measures of national power…except one, this being NATIONAL WILL. And this is precisely where our collectively guilt-ridden, post-colonial, post-Vietnam civilization is weakest today…and the bad guys know this in spades, taking advantage of this at every turn in our media, on our college campuses, etc.
At the street level, Israelis know what they are up against and by and large, are determined to do whatever is necessary to defend their state, but how can they maintain the courage of their convictions when the rest of the developed secular first world – who should be four-square in their corner by all rights – is so unsure of what they themselves stand for, and what is worth fighting for and preserving in their societies? And then goes on to rationalize their collective weakness by chastising Israel for standing up to the bastards, to the extent that this is even happening these days under Olmert?
Speaking of Olmert and what ought to be Israeli demands, I’d start with one: Require the PA to amend their charter so as to formally recognize the right of Israel as a Jewish state. Objectively, this should be no more controversial than Russian recognizing Poland’s right to exist as a Polish state, or Germany recognizing France’s right to exist as a French state. This would be a precondition for ANY negotations, explained to the world community in those terms. Indeed, this would be a precondition to any negotiations between Israel and any of her adversaries (e.g., Syria, Lebanon).
I could go on, but this post is already too long as it is. Thanks to all who’ve read this far. I hope I’ve at least helped a few readers to map out some basic parameters for what a “good offense” really means.
Hi
I disagree. Forget about countering their lies. The best defence is a good offence. We should give a time limit on taking back the West Bank and destroying Gaza. We should criticize all Muslims for their unholiness, terrorism, barbarian attitudes, and for not helping the Palestinians. Forget about distinquishing moderate Muslims and Islamists. Paint them all with the same brush and let them defend themselves. This is not a Canadian court of law and there is no need to treat them all as innocent until they are proven guilty. The French system of making them prove their innocence should work fine here. That way they will be forced to prove who among them are the moderates. It will put them all on the defensive for their continuous “you hurt my feelings” attitude when they are correctly criticized for not behaving up to minimal Judeo-Christian moral standards
Reality based scorecard:
1. Israel: the government that founded Israel believed in atheistic socialism, but also in nationalism. They called this sophomoric contradictory ideolgy “Zionism.” With time, they remained militantly atheistic, moved the economy to a mixed capitalist/ welfare state, and joined the leftists in adopting the “futility of nationalism.” They are thus at a loss for justifying their continued existence as Jews in Israel, and are committed to slow-motion suicide.
2. Arabs: Arabs (and Muslims) hate Jews, whether they are religious or not. They want to destroy Israel and will never accept its existence as an independent Jewish state. They are happy to engage in “peace negotiations” with the Israeli government, but the only terms they accept from Israel are ones that will weaken Israel and lead to its ultimate destruction.
3. The goyim (leftists, the UN, the EU, the US State Department, the “mainstream” media and the academic world): they allow Jews to live as long as they can control them as citizens of countries where they are a minority. Like the Arabs, they are opposed to the very existence of an independent Jewish State of Israel, and are equally obsessed with its destruction. Thier view of the “peace process” is the same as the Arabs.
Now, how hard is that to understand?
email rec’d
email rec’d from a Jew
email rec’d
email rec’d
email rec’d
‘But first I want to look at the negotiations. Can anyone tell me what the Israelis are demanding. I’m waiting.’
Israel’s lack of demands is indeed the problem. It seems to me that Israel is almost embarrassed by it’s presence in that part of the world because She refuses to recognize WHY the Jews have a right to that specific piece of real estate and exactly WHO was there when the Zionists began their settlements.
By the same token Israel refuses to address the moslem claim for their presence [From Time Immemorial/not] in the area, ie, the moslems settled in the area AFTER the Jews began creating jobs in the late 1800’s.
Israel needs to make friends with Abraham and Isaac again.
We have to get over the historical distortion that Israel is the product of the Holocaust. Israel exists because “it is ours”. The bible is our deed. Whether you believe in the divinity of the bible or not, sufficient millions of people over 2,000 years have accepted as fact that Israel is the holy land, that Jerusalem is the capital of the Jewish people and God gave the land to Abraham and the children of Israel. Even anti-Semites acknowledge that claim despite their hatred for Jews. Anyone who defends the Jewish right to Israel on the basis of “the world owes it to us” or as atonement for the evils done to us is doing a disservice to the Jewish cause.
It is ours because it is ours. We don’t have to defend the veracity of the claim, we just have to defend it against Amelek.
Gary , good points. There’s an article on Front Page Mag about the historical amnesia regarding the violence done to the world by Muslims.
Here they dwell on what may be the reason for this amnesia:
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=BD353E11-0000-4BBB-9617-603119B0BFE6
At the same time that we challenge and refute/debunk/expose their lies and destructive ignorance, we must also point out how Islamic countries have distorted the truth about their actions, their history and their objectives.
It is important to examine how some in the Muslim world (largely unchallenged in their views by the silence of the lambs) have twisted their own religion into a cult and how they have insulated themselves by choice and force from a world that conveniently forgets that Islamic problems in the world today are minor and mostly self-inflicted. They are the victims of no one despite their protests to the contrary. We will be their victims or potential victims if we don’t wake up. Their primary objective is to conquer or transform us into followers/slaves of Islam.