The Arabs And Modern Algebra (Not Whatcha Think...)

Arabs And The Mastery of Modern Algebra…

by Gerald A. Honigman

It’s official now...


Soon, Israel will once again be expected to give away the entire store because Arabs have merely agreed to discuss the giveaway.


That’s what’s to be expected when Israel finds itself in the final status, direct negotiiations scheduled for early September when it’s surrounded by Arabs who openly state that their idea of negotiations is Israel--and Israel only--doing all of the concrete giving while their role is purely receiving.


Add to this an American President who has repeatedly stated that Israel “would be crazy” not to accept the Saudi Peace Plan, which calls for a total withdrawal to the ‘49 armistice lines (i.e., giving up the promise of UNSC Resolution 242 regarding secure, defensible borders and a return to a fragile, sub-rump state existence instead) and an inundation of Israel by “returning” jihadi refugees, and you can see the fun which awaits those who care just in time for the High Holy Days. Oh yes, there will be others of the same ilk present adding yet more to the one-sided nature of what’s to come.


In light of this breaking news, it’s essential to look deeper into the heart of what Israel really faces in its conflict with the Arabs. So, let’s begin...

Two newspaper articles caught my attention over the last month that really got me thinking--about math...algebra, to be specific. More about those particular articles later...

When asked to give an account of Arab or Arabized (Islamic) peoples’ contributions to civilization at large, the invention of algebra always makes the top ten. I agree--and it continues to have a far-reaching impact on the world today, far beyond students’ nightmares.

The word “algebra” itself comes from the Arabic word al-jabr (reunion) from the title of the book al-Kitāb al-muḫtaṣar fī ḥisāb al-ğabr wa-l-muqābala’ translated as The book of Summary Concerning Calculating by Transposition and Reduction. It was written by Muhammad ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī in 820 C.E. While other much earlier civilizations developed algebraic methods of solving problems, Al-Khwarizmi is often considered to be the “father of algebra” because some of his techniques on solving various types of equations are still in use today.

Okay, enough of math history. Now let’s take a look at a more practical use of this Arab invention or innovation; but, before we begin, there is yet one more piece of history which we have to recall...

In 1938, Hitler’s Germany demanded the rich Sudetenland area of Czechoslovakia largely because millions of ethnic Germans lived in that region. The story is recounted often .

The Czechs had a respectable army and were willing to stand up to Nazi imperial designs. Hitler was testing the waters to see just what he could get away with.

Czechoslovakia was soon forced by its “friends” to cave in to Hitler’s demands after Great Britain’s Neville Chamberlain’s famous sellout of it for “peace for our time” at Munich. Sane minds understood that Hitler’s appetite would only be encouraged further by such appeasement, but--like today--too many folks back then also had their heads in the sand over the obvious. The world was at war anyway by the next year after Hitler’s move on Poland. Keep this in mind as we proceed...

The first of the newspaper articles mentioned above appeared on July 23rd. It was just a short piece titled, “U.N. court backs Kosovo independence.” Here’s some excerpts...

The ruling deals a blow to Serbia. Serbian Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic vowed never to accept the former province as a separate state and warned the ruling could embolden separatist movements around the world. Kosovo (note: Albanian Muslims call it Kosova)Foreign Minister Hashim Thaci hailed the ruling as a historic victory and “the best possible answer for the entire world.”

Now, for a bit more background...

Think Sudetenland and you’ll see how, like the Czechs, the Serbs have been similarly shafted.


Albania is an independent nation southwest of the former Yugoslavia. The Serbs fought their first major battle for Kosovo against the spread of the Dar ul-Islam (this time led by Turkish jihadi imperialists) in 1389--over six centuries ago.


Albania had become at least nominally converted to Islam via the Ottoman conquest. Over the centuries, ethnic Muslim Albanians increasingly encroached upon traditionally Christian Serbian lands.


Enter the late 20th century…


Everyone knew that with the death of Marshal Tito, Iraq’s virtual twin--the artificially glued together state of Yugoslavia, composed of diverse folks who largely hated and mistrusted each other--would fall apart.


Now, if you’re an Albanian in Serbia and you already have one ethnic Albanian state in existence (so you can’t claim “statelessness"), how do you press your claim for additional territory--at another people’s (Serbs’) expense?


Well, you can do what Arabs did when, only relatively recently, they renamed themselves Palestinians so they can claim “statelessness” even though there are twenty-one Arab states to date--including one on some 80% of the original April 25, 1920 Mandate of Palestine and now renamed Jordan.


So, you see, it’s not really Albanians who have been progressively taking over Serb lands...it’s poor, stateless “Kosovars"--the ones who got assorted jihadis from the rest of the Arab/MuslimWorld to assist them in their spread of the Dar ul-Islam....and NATO as well. Those same Kosovars whom the U.N just gave its blessing of independence to.


There is no doubt that too much of the conflict regarding the breakup of Yugoslavia was deliberately biased against the Serbs.


Atrocities occurred (as they had for centuries)--but on both sides, with Serbs often the victims…victims the American State Department ignored as it sought Muslims it could point to as championing while America was fighting other jihadis in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and elsewhere. American jet bombers led the final dismemberment of Yugoslavia.


The second article appeared on August 15th, “Troops Open Fire On Kashmir Protestors.”


Arab jihadi settler, imperialist, colonialist armies burst out of the Arabian Peninsula and spread out in all directions in the 7th century C.E. Millions of native, non-Arab peoples died in the process. Before long, Arabs moved from a conquered Iran eastward into the Indian subcontinent. The nations of Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh are a modern legacy of those conquests.


While the main partition of the subcontinent came in 1947 (the same year that Arabs would reject a second partition plan which would have given them about another 10% of the original 1920 Mandate of Palestine to add to the 80% already given over to Arab nationalism in 1922), Muslims based in Pakistan have continuously tried to encroach upon Indian territory in a variety of ways. The second article deals with one example of what they have in mind.


Guess what nation has the largest population of Muslims?


India...about two hundred million...!!!


Now, there’s about nine hundred million other folks--Hindus, Sikhs, and so forth--who have a vibrant democracy and also see to it that the Muslims who remained after ‘47 refrain, for the most part, from jihadi pipedreams.


Kashmir, however, is that border area with Pakistan where Islamists infiltrate from and which has a large Muslim population. Pakistan holds part of it, but India controls most of the territory. Again, think Sudetenland--and Kosovo/Kosova--because the game plan that Muslims have for Kashmir fits into a very similar mold.


So, forget about Muslims having states of Pakistan and Bangladesh on the Indian subcontinent carved out for them. Now, Kashmiris also are “stateless” too. Shame on those mean, selfish Indian Sikhs and Hindus!


The main difference here, however, is that India won’t give a hoot about what the press, the U.N, or others will say about this. It’s a huge country--both in territory and in population--and is not subjected to the usual “special treatment” the Jews receive on their own version of this problem. India will act as it needs to in order to prevent further external jihadi incursions or an internal Islamic takeover of its country.


Alright...Now that we have one half of the modern Arab/Arabized algebraic equation covered, Kosovo and Kashmir (K + K), we have to supply the other side of it as well.


Despite Arab claims, so many Arabs were newcomers themselves into the Mandate of Palestine after World War I and the breakup of the Ottoman Turkish Empire (which controlled the land for over four centuries) that when the United Nations Relief Works Agency--UNRWA--was set up to assist Arab refugees (after a half dozen Arab states invaded a nascent Israel in 1948 to nip it in the bud and their attempt backfired), the very word “refugee” had to be redefined from its prior meaning of persons normally and traditionally resident to those who lived in the Mandate for a minimum of only two years prior to 1948 to assist these people.


More Jews fled the “Arab” World then vice-versa--but with no UNRWA to assist them.


Hamas’s own patron saint, for whom its terror brigade and rockets are named for, Sheikh Izzadin-al-Qassam, was born in Latakia, Syria. Arafat was from Egypt. And both of those alleged “native Palestinians” had plenty of company, pouring into the Mandate because of the economic development going on due to the Jews. The Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission of the League of Nations and official correspondence from Churchill, Roosevelt, and others give ample testimony to this huge influx of Arab settlers setting up Arab settlements in Palestine...


Colonial Secretary Churchill convened the Cairo Conference in 1921 where (amongst other things) he engineered the separation of the lion’s share of the Mandate of Palestine to give as a gift to the Brits’ Arab allies in World War I. The Emirate of Transjordan was created the following year.


To distinguish the rest of the Mandate from Transjordan on the East Bank, the name West Bank was born--a direct result of the Brits’ 20th century imperial shenanigans. The area had been known as Judea and Samaria for millennia...The New Testament states that Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea...not Bethlehem of the West Bank-- and so forth.


Adding further to this distinction, upon its rebirth in 1948, Transjordan’s Arab Legion--led by British officers--joined about five other Arab nations in attacking Israel. Seizing Mandate land across the Jordan River (the West Bank), Transjordan--now holding both banks-- renamed itself Jordan. Only two states recognized Transjordan’s illegal conquest of the territory.


Judea and Samaria were non-apportioned parts of the Mandate where all residents--Jews, Arabs, and so forth--had rights to live. Indeed, Jews lived there for thousands of years and owned land clear up to the Arab massacres of them in the 1920s and 1930s. Jerusalem, Beth-El, Shechem, Hebron, Shiloh...Now, where have we heard those names before? Arabs claim them to be purely Arab land. But they do the same for all of Israel and most of the entire region as well.


After Jordan grabbed the “West Bank,” it made it Judenrein as it had done earlier on the east bank. At the same time, more and more Arabs continued to settle the area.


So now, drum roll, please...We come to the second half of our Arab/Arabized equation...


As Hitler told the world that all he wanted was the Sudetenland and used resident ethnic Germans to further his claims; as Albanian Muslims got the world to cave in to hand them Kosova; as Arabized jihadis plan a similar takeover in Indian Kashmir, we are also now told that if only Israel returns to its 1949 armistice lines (not borders)--which made it 9-15 miles wide at its strategic waist ( virtually invisible on a world globe), where most of its population and industry are located--then all will be fine...peace for our time, once again.


The Arabs really don’t want all of Israel--just all of Judea and Samaria.


Oh, but you reply, all of Hamas’s and the “moderate” Mahmoud Abbas’s maps, textbooks, websites, and so forth show “Palestine” replacing all of Israel, not just the “West Bank.”


Well, they’ve all had a change of heart.


Unfortunately, however, modern Arab/Arabized algebra states otherwise...


K + K = J + S


http://q4j-middle-east.com

Treating Col(e)itis...Juan Cole and anti-Israel Academia

Treating Col(e)itis…

by Gerald A. Honigman

The University of Michigan’s Juan Cole is, among other things, a contributor to Salon on-line magazine. He is a prolific spokesman for academia’s numerous Israel bashers.

While I have written about Cole, specifically, and others of his ilk in my own new book (The Quest For Justice In The Middle East...The Arab-Israeli Conflict In Greater Perspective, http://q4j-middle-east.com), I have The Jerusalem Post’s Caroline Glick to thank for once again drawing him back to my attention. Her recent article, See No Evil, mentioned his March 23rd gem, “Ten reasons why East Jerusalem does not belong to Israel.” Among Cole’s many assertions, he indulges in a familiar anti-Israel favorite, attacking the peoplehood of the Jews. While he does also momentarily hint that others’ identities might also be flawed, it’s the Jews and Jews only who always seem to have his attention on such issues. His reason, of course, is to do what all Israel-bashers do--deny the right of the Jewish nation to exist.

Cole claims that Jews are, by definition, simply “...adherents of the Jewish religion...founded between 3000 BCE and 2600 BCE by a West Semitic people or possibly the Canaanites, the common ancestors of Palestinians, Lebanese, many Syrians and Jordanians, and many Jews.” While there are some elements of truth in that statement, it’s what he constantly leaves out on such subjects which is revealing.

Since the peoplehood issue is central to folks like Juan Cole’s thinking, let’s explore what they conveniently omit in their discussions…

On July 3, 2003, the highly respected Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) translated an interview with Ahmed Qurei’ ("Abu Alaa"), one of Arafat’s chief marionettes.

When asked about the Arab problem with having the word “Jewish” placed in front of the words “State of Israel,” he replied..."What is the meaning of a Jewish state? Do we say...Sunni state...Shi’ite state....Christian state? These are definitions that will bring...turmoil.”

Cole and Abu Alaa are of the same mind, no doubt. The “moderate” Mahmoud Abbas has the same things to say, as well as numerous colleagues of Cole in the Ivory Tower.

Now, think about this for a minute…

Someone from England is English, from Poland is Polish, from Sweden is Swedish, from Ireland is Irish, etc.

While there are other ways of describing one’s nationality or ethnicity, the addition of the suffix “-ish” denotes this “peoplehood” as well. Indeed, that’s how Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary primarily defines it.

So, what’s the Juan Colish problem here. Is it really about claims to Jerusalem as his above article states?

Naaaaa.…

It’s really very simple..

If the Israel-bashing crew admits that Jews are a nation or a people, it makes their rejection of the Jews’ own national liberation movement--Zionism--more difficult to defend; i.e., how can one demand the birth of the Arabs’ 22nd state, and second--not first--one in “Palestine” while denying Jews their one, sole state? Well, they could--as they do with Imazighen ("Berbers"), Kurds, and everyone else living on what Arabs claim to be “purely Arab land,” and with silence on this from Cole and the Arabs’ other assorted rah rah crews running the show in too many classrooms. Yet, it makes the selling of the argument to knowledgeable and reasonable minds that much more difficult. Cole takes care of the problem by simply stating that the “Palestinians” today are simply yesterday’s Jews who converted to Islam. His March 16th Salon article, “The Unmaking of the Palestinian Nation,” gets into this and other related issues as well.

Notice that he never asks such questions about the truly fabricated “Palestinian” people--Arabs, mostly from elsewhere, who simply renamed themselves much later to deny the Jews the same rights on one tiny sliver of land which Arabs demand on over six million square miles of territory which they themselves gained by waging centuries of imperialist, colonialist, murderous jihad against mostly non-Arab native peoples...still going on as I write this very article. The only “colonialism” Cole worries about in this vein is that which he refers to when he speaks of Jews building in Jerusalem…

Unlike Cole’s claims for a purely religious identity of Jews (he deliberately places “Jewish People” in quotations), the truth is something far different. As Caroline Glick accurately observed, Cole indeed speaks in half truths and fabrications.

“Jew” comes from the name Judah, originally the Hebrew tribe named after one of Jacob’s sons and later Judah/Judaea as the land was known in the times of the southern kingdom and the Greeks and Romans.

Judaean equals “Jew.”

When Rome suppressed the first major revolt of the Jews for their freedom and independence after 70 C.E., it issued thousands of Judaea Capta (not Palaestina Capta) coins that can be seen in museums all over the world today. Judaea was the land, Judaeans were the people of that land.

Check out this quote from Vol. II, Book V, The Works of Tacitus, one of the most important of the ancient sources…

“It inflamed Vespasian’s ire that the Jews were the only nation which had not submitted...Titus was appointed by his father to complete the subjugation of Judaea...he commanded three legions in Judaea itself...To these he added the twelfth from Syria and the third and twenty-second from Alexandria...amongst his allies were a band of Arabs, formidable in themselves and harboring towards the Jews the bitter animosity usually subsisting between neighboring nations.”

Now, does the above sound like Tacitus was talking about a religion or a people? Look at the last word in the above quote if you need further assistance…

But, granting the Colish people their just due, here’s the somewhat confusing part…

That particular other people--whom the Colites deny--also had a peculiar set of religious beliefs which Juan & Co. solely want to identify them by: Jews indeed worshipped a totally spiritual G_d, whom no man could see, and who demanded that man live by a strong moral code. The contemporary Roman historians--Tacitus, Dio Cassius, and so forth-- were amused and spoke of this peculiarity in their writings and had lots more to say about the Jews as a people as well. Hey, what do they know? Cole swears otherwise…

While it is true that the Hebrews were likely a Semitic group with similarities to others (though some Kurdish sources now claim an Aryan identity linking Jews to Kurds via the Medes and Hurrians), Abraham and the Hebrew patriarchs lived centuries earlier. Jews emerged as a people/nation after the experience at Sinai, some twelve hundred years or so before Jesus. They came to inhabit a distinct land, had their own culture, language, history--and, again, their own distinct set of religious beliefs.

While fabricating Cole claims that there is no documentation of anyone like Hebrews in the Egyptian or other sources, the Amarna Letters are an amazing archaeological treasure from ancient Egypt which show repeated correspondence between Pharaoh and surrounding Hittite, Hurrian, Babylonian, Canaanite, Assyrian and other kingdoms filled with complaints about invasions by the “Habiru"/ “ ‘Apiru.” While there is on-going debate about the Habiru-Hebrew linkage, and the names seem to identify different groups of people at different times, many if not most scholars agree that the Hebrews emerged from at least one group of such folks. And the Amarna treasure trove dates back to just around the time scholars have dated the Biblical conquests of Joshua and the Hebrew people. Given the Colite academic agenda, the deliberate and total omission of such information by such folks is beyond mere coincidence.

While Cole’s half-truth is correct in that one may join one’s destiny to the peoplehood/nationhood of Israel via religious conversion to the faith of that people, faith itself-- while a part of the picture-- is still just that… one part of the greater picture. So, Ruth the Moabitess, became a convert when she told Naomi in the Hebrew Bible, “Whither thou goist I shall go, your people shall be my people, your G_d, my G_d.”

Note, please, that even here, in the religious writings of the Jews, peoplehood is mentioned before religion--perhaps a coincidence, most likely… not. But the Colites aren’t interested in such things…

As I have written earlier, when Jews were repeatedly humiliated, massacred, demonized, and so forth throughout subsequent centuries (in the Muslim East as well as the Christian West), as soon as Napoleon released them from the mandatory ghettos and granted them citizen rights, many tried to redefine themselves so that their distinct peoplehood identity would not cause them future problems. So, they became “Frenchmen of the Jewish persuasion,” “Germans of the Jewish persuasion,” and so forth. Captain Alfred Dreyfus remained a dirty, “G_d-killing” Jew anyway to even much of the French elite, and the Nazis laughed as German Jewish World War I veterans showed them their metals. More Jews fled “Arab” lands than Arabs who fled the Mandate because of the fighting which Arabs started upon Israel’s rebirth. So many Arabs were indeed newcomers into the Mandate themselves that the very definition of the word “refugee” had to be revised by UNRWA to accommodate them--a fact backed up by the Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission of the League of Nations, official correspondence of Churchill, Roosevelt, and others, and so forth.

Thus, I have two words for the duplicitous Coles on such matters...and they ain’t Merry Christmas.

Indeed, it is far beyond ironic when Cole and other assorted Arab mouthpieces bring this Jewish peoplehood issue up. As usual, they rely on the innocent ignorance of most of their captive audiences on such matters.

Why, for example, do the Colites never discuss “Arab” identity?

Because of their own widespread imperial conquests and forced Arabization (still going in places like North Africa, where the once majority Berbers’ language and culture have largely been outlawed; in the Sudan, where millions of Blacks have been killed, enslaved, turned into refugees, and so forth resisting this; the gassings, massacres, and such in Syrian and Iraqi Kurdistan; etc.), the definition of “Arab” has come down to language spoken, paternal (so to claim the children of those conquered as their own) ancestry, and/or one’s own actual or willingly adopted identity as such.

Not exactly precise, if you get my drift…

As just one of many examples of this, closely observe the pictures the next time you see “Arabs” on television, in magazine articles, or wherever. Frequently, you’ll see some very obvious “Arabs” of black African ancestry--many born of slave mothers, grandmothers, and so forth. Black slaves are still arriving into Arab lands via the Sudan and elsewhere.

Now, keep in mind that these are the folks who, along with their Colite cheerleaders, like to focus upon alleged Zionist racism, colonialism and such.

Indeed, Juan constantly complains about Israeli “racialists” while ignoring tens of millions of Amazigh parents in “Arab” North Africa (who pre-date conquering Arabs by millennia) being told that they must name their own children with Arab names, can’t even speak their own language, and so forth.

Ditto for Kurds in “purely Arab” Syria. Typically, the Colites want to know nothing about such things as Ismet Cherif Vanly’s book, The Syrian ‘Mein Kampf ‘ Against The Kurds (Amsterdam, 1968).

As just one more of far too many other examples of this see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil attitude of the Colites regarding Arabs when it comes to such issues, perhaps Egypt’s most famous modern day Copt, Dr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, warned Israeli author Amos Elon that Israel must be Arabized it if ever wanted to gain “acceptance” in the region.

But the only problems the Colites can see are those of the Jews.

The Colite stench nauseates--yet it pervades academia and elsewhere these days, where Israel is routinely placed under the high power lens of moral scrutiny while the far greater sins of the “Arab” world are more often than not simply given a free pass.

The same can be said for too many scholars dealing with the Turks as well. Many of these folks also jump on the Colite bandwagon, demanding that 22nd state for Arabs--on the ashes of Israel--while totally ignoring the plight of some fifteen million subjugated, native “Mountain Turks”...Kurds. I witnessed both of these deceitful behaviors firsthand during my own doctoral studies several decades ago. And those few of us who dared to protest and raise the unmentionable issues often had a severe price to pay as a result.

I certainly did.

Forget about “academic freedom” and such if you’re a student in far too many courses on the Middle East. The Rashid Khalidis and Juan Coles mostly run the show these days and frequently intimidate those who might want to inject something contrary to the approved party line.

Returning to the definition of “Arab"--which the Colites don’t seem to be concerned about while attacking the very existence of Israel on such peoplehood issues--we have seen above that there’s certainly no purity of blood, genes, and/or nation demanded for the Arabs’ own collective self-definition (even though there are ethnically pure Arabs). Yet that of the Jews becomes a prime concern for the Arab cheerleading squad.

Since the Colites stress the religious angle of the Jews, it is also worth noting that the 7th century C.E. Arabian Peninsula’s Islam, of the millennial Dar ul-Islam vs. Dar al-Harb jihadi conquests, is the forcibly imposed official religion of state of virtually all of the almost two dozen Arab states that exist so far and is professed as such in most of their constitutions and so forth. And they let it be known in those same documents that all of those states are “Arab” as well--despite the blurriness of what that term means and the presence of tens of millions of native non-Arab peoples in those lands. Despite this, nothing stops the hypocrisy of the Colites from raising such issues of identity, racism, and such with the sole, microscopic, resurrected state of the Jews.

As just one last example of where the Colites are coming from in their version of “academic truth and objectivity,” consider Juan’s March 16th Salon e-magazine article mentioned earlier.

Cole provides a series of maps of the Palestine Mandate in that piece and, by his own words, describes what he chose to include as “Palestine as of the mid-1920s.”

Now, to the innocent, there may seem to be nothing wrong with this. Yet, Cole deliberately utilizes a bold-faced lie that all of the Arab rah rah crew promote to the rest of the world--that Jews got most of “Palestine,” the name the Roman emperor, Hadrian, gave to the land after the Jews’ second revolt for freedom in 133-135 C.E. To pour further salt onto their wound, Hadrian renamed the land itself after the Jews’ historic enemies, the invading non-Semitic “Sea People” from the area around Crete,” the Philistines.”

Notice that the Colite maps start after 1920. They always do.

Not an accident…

The original Mandate of Palestine--that the Colites surely know but rarely, if ever, share with anyone--included all of the present Arab country of Jordan as well as Israel and the non-apportioned (not “Palestinian,” as the Colites profess) parts of the Mandate...Judea and Samaria, for example (known by those names for millennia and also called the “West Bank” after the imperial division of the land by the Brits in the early 20th century).

That original Mandate was issued on April 25… 1920.

Why do the Colites ignore that map? Geez, I wonder...not.

To award Arab allies in World War I, British imperialism colluded with Arab nationalism in 1921 at the Cairo Conference where Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill engineered the separation of almost 80% of the Mandate as a gift to Arab nationalism the following year, 1922.

The Emirate of Transjordan was thus created from the lions’ share of the total territory--a gift Emir Abdullah discussed himself in his memoirs. Among others fully aware of the meaning of this action in terms of balancing conflicting Arab and Jewish aspirations was none other than Britain’s East Bank representative, Sir Alec Kirkbride, who had lots to say about this in his own account, A Crackle of Thorns.

Among others shafted by this collusion of Arab nationalism with British imperialism were the Kurds--some thirty-five million truly stateless people who saw their one best chance at independence aborted because of this. My own work on this subject, British Petroleum Politics, Arab Nationalism, and the Kurdish Struggle For Independence, can be found--among other places--on the recommended reference list in Paris’s acclaimed Institut d’Etudes Politique--Sciences Po...not bad for someone denied a Ph.D. dissertation advisor by one of Juan’s tenured, chief honcho, elder duplicitous clones.

Now, dear readers, the treatment of colitis varies.

For example, depending upon the cause, medication may be prescribed to control or cure it. Antibiotics may be helpful in colitis caused by infections, and anti-inflammatory and immune suppression drugs can be used to control the symptoms of inflammatory bowel disease. That’s the good news…

The bad news is that the treatment of Col(e)itis is much more difficult.

You see, it involves employing a true objectivity and openness in dealing with the admitted imperfections of all players in the Middle East in their respective quests for slices of the relative justice pie--something the Juan Coles refuse to do. If the real or alleged sin is not Israel’s, most act deaf, dumb, and blind.

So, the reality, of course, to all of the above, is that whether the Colites are discussing peoplehood, maps, Jerusalem, or whatever, their biased agenda constantly has the same objectives in mind--regardless of the specific issues they are allegedly dealing with.

As always, the name of the game is denying Jews their one, sole state and the de-legitimization of Israel.

Israel: Muster Your Musts!

Israel: Muster Your Musts!

by Gerald A. Honigman

Even with “hard line” Benjamin Netanyahu at the helm, Israel is falling right into the trap the American State Department and the current occupant in the White House has set for the Jewish State. Things were supposed to be different once Bibi was elected...

An Associated Press story making the rounds on July 18th was titled, “Abbas: Israel must accept foreign border guard.” Arafat’s chief lieutenant, Palestinian Authority President, Fatah’s Mahmoud Abbas, was quoted as demanding that Israel must consent to once again become a nine to fifteen mile wide sub-rump state by returning to the 1949 armistice lines and must allow an international force to guard the border (not Israel itself) before he’ll return to direct negotiations.

Not in this story, but none-the-less another one of Abbas’s absolute musts put forth repeatedly elsewhere, is that after Israel once again becomes virtually invisible on a world globe when it’s forced to return to the 1949 armistice/Auschwitz Lines (not political borders), it must next also consent to allowing its Jews to be overwhelmed by millions of alleged “returning” jihadi Arab refugees. Recall that more Jews fled from “Arab” lands than Arabs did vice-versa as a result of the war that Arabs started with their invasion of a miniscule, reborn Israel in 1948. All of these “musts” make up the alleged Saudi Peace (of the grave) Plan--the one which President Obama repeatedly has said that Israel would be crazy not to accept and is trying to cram down Israel’s throat.

Once again, Israel is dropping the ball here...

Yes, its leaders are under enormous pressure--but that’s still no excuse. American leadership changes too...and if more American Hebrews remove their heads from the sand, this might happen sooner rather than later.

There is no doubt that the State Department demands Hebrew wimps to deal with so Israel can be maneuvered into making suicidal concessions that no sane nation--given the same circumstances, rejectionist enemies, and situation which the Jews face--would ever consent to. Because Avigdor Lieberman--Israel’s Foreign Minister--refuses to become Foggy Bottom’s next Hebrew eunuch, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton won’t have anything to do with him. She (and Obama) prefers the type whom she can scream at for forty-five minutes (like she did with Bibi) over such extremist thoughts as Jews living in Jerusalem. Heavens! Jews aren’t allowed to put forward their own “demands"--only Arabs.

President Obama has been doing his best to neuter Prime Minister Netanyahu as well--mostly behind the scenes, and besides recent public relations moves to try to prevent too much Hebrew gelt from not finding its way to Democrats with elections approaching. Both key American players have sown discord between Netanyahu and Lieberman, often bypassing the latter to work with Israel’s Labor Party and more pliable Ehud Barak instead. This is not good news, unless you agree with Abbas’s above “must list"--which the current Washington team does.

Look, do you really want to know what’s needed at this moment?

Israel’s own “Must List”...

Here it is--and it’s reported in that future, hoped-for AP story...

Israel Presents Its Own Must List Before It Will Resume Negotiations

Israel set forth its own demands today at a news conference in response to Mahmoud Abbas’ “must list” set of conditions for resumption of direct negotiations. Furthermore, Prime Minister Netanyahu went one step further and refused to continue even indirect negotiations, calling them a waste of time and simply an attempt to strong arm Israel into making dangerous, key concessions with no cost whatsoever to its alleged Arab partners for peace. He said negotiations must be based on true compromise--and so far, Arabs are not willing to do this.

Netanyahu continued that Israel must have its own military presence on its border with any new Arab entity which emerges on its eastern flank.  He noted that Israel had been repeatedly attacked since 1948 by combined Arab armies coming in from the east trying to severe it in half. He added that the fiasco of the alleged “guarantees” Israel received years ago in southern Lebanon are a warning as to what can be expected if this is not the case and Abbas gets his earlier demand for an international force stationed there instead. He elaborated that the International forces placed in southern Lebanon, supposedly to assure that Hizbullah would not reenter nor rearm that border area with Israel, have largely become a sick joke. Those few forces which rarely do try any real enforcement of the “guarantees” are increasingly being disarmed, bullied, and so forth.

Netanyahu stated that the only thing which such an international force would accomplish in Judea and Samaria (known also as the “West Bank” only as a result of British imperial shenanigans in the last century) would be to protect the Arabs from Israeli counter-measures after it was attacked from Judea and Samaria as it has been repeatedly attacked from Gaza after its unilateral withdrawal from that territory years ago.

He then stated that a return to the 1949 armistice lines--as Abbas and Obama insist upon--will never happen.

He pointed out that those lines simply marked the point where fighting came to a halt after a half dozen Arab states invaded Israel in 1948. As would become the pattern, the UN did nothing when Arabs launched their aggression, but moved in later only to prevent further Arab losses after Israel finally turned the tide. For the most part, they were never meant to be political borders.

Netanyahu then stressed that the final draft of UNSC Resolution 242--largely, the basis for peace-making--called for the creation of real, secure borders to replace Israel’s indefensible armistice lines, and all of 242’s architects (Britain’s Lord Caradon, Eugene Rostow, etc.) agree that Israel was to get a territorial compromise to achieve this. Presidents Johnson, Reagan, Secretary of State Shultz, and others have spoken of this need as well.

Thus, the Prime Minister emphasized that there will be no total withdrawal, as Abbas and others demand, to the pre-’67, 1949 armistice lines which made Israel a mere nine to fifteen miles wide at its strategic waist--where most of its population, industry, and so forth are located. He said that until Arabs understand that Israel must have some meaningful, tangible protection in the form of territorial compromise and such on the ground to make up for likely, future lapsed Arab promises and international guarantees, Israel will stop playing the one-sided game where it alone gives and the Arabs do nothing but take. So, Israel will cut off such indirect “negotiations.”

In a statement which then left the foreign press corps astounded, Netanyahu next proclaimed that Israel will never recognize the proposed new 22nd Arab state that Abbas, Obama, Clinton, and most of the rest of the world insists upon (the second, not first, Arab one within the original April 25, 1920 borders of the Palestine Mandate since Jordan sits on about 78% of the original total area) until Arabs grant Israel official recognition as the sole State of the Jews. This must occur or Arabs can forget about state # 22.

He suggested that if Jews wanted to play the Arab game, instead of demanding just one Jewish State, Jews could rename themselves, as Arabs have done, and demand multiple states as well. There are more Moroccan Jews living in Israel and elsewhere than Arabs who got to have Kuwait--as just one example. And those Jews lived in North Africa long before Arabs invaded it in the 7th century C.E. Along with the majority non-Arab Imazighen ("Berbers"), they resisted the Arab invaders for centuries--deeds recorded by none other than the great Muslim scholar, Ibn Khaldun, himself. Perhaps another Jewish State should be demanded in part of Morocco? Etc. and so forth.

Netanyahu elaborated that the same way scores of millions of non-Arabs live in states which now solely identify themselves as Arab and belong to the “Arab” League, a small amount of Arabs who, again, for political purposes renamed themselves only recently “Palestinians” (many, if not most, of whom--as is well documented--came into the Mandate from other surrounding countries) must get used to the idea of living in someone else’s designated state. Arabs must give up on the idea that the entire region is merely “purely Arab patrimony"--as they indeed insist upon.

Those Israeli Arabs who protest may move to that new, second proposed Arab state in Palestine--if a fair compromise meeting the essential needs of both parties can ever be reached and that state ever emerges. The difference will remain that those Arabs who choose to peacefully remain in Israel will continue to have far more rights and freedoms than any of those non-Arab peoples have who are living in almost two dozen “Arab” countries --and with none of the subjugation and intimidation which they have to cope with on a daily basis as well.

Finally, the Prime Minister released his final shot for this news conference.

He said that, in reality, there is no room for third state to be created within the borders of the Mandate of “Palestine"--the name Romans gave to Judaea after the Jews’ second revolt for freedom in the years 133-135 C.E. To further rub salt into the wound, the emperor, Hadrian, renamed the Jews’ land after the Jews’ historic enemies, the invading “Sea People” from the Greek isles near Crete--the Philistines (of Samson and David and Goliath fame, but mentioned in the records of Pharaoh as well).

Netanyahu stressed that the Mandate of Palestine (created after World War I with the collapse of the Ottoman Turkish Empire, which ruled the land for some four centuries) was partitioned to meet the needs of two peoples--Arabs and Jews--not additional, renamed Arabs who later designated themselves “Palestinians” simply to deny Jews their rights.

He reminded his audience that Arabs got the lions’ share of the territory in 1922 with the virtual separation of what would later be renamed Jordan--almost 80% of the total area. Another proposed partition in 1947 would have given them about an additional 10% as well--almost 90% of the whole shebang. Arabs refused that offer. The rest is history...

Netanyahu sternly warned that, no matter who abroad was tightening the screws, the sole, lone resurrected State of the Jews must not sacrifice itself on the petroleum-greased altar of international hypocrisy so that Arabs could obtain their 22nd state.

He stated that if Arabs truly wanted peace, they must abandon their openly admitted “Trojan Horse,” destruction-in-phases games that they have constantly been playing to get Israel to consent to its own suicide.

He said that Israel indeed wanted peace with all of its neighbors--but one based on mutual respect, considering the balanced needs of both parties to the conflict...not just those of Arabs whose schools, textbooks, maps, assorted media, websites, childrens’ camps, mosques, and so forth still call for Israel’s destruction and refer to Jews as dogs and sons of apes and pigs. Netanyahu ended by insisting that Arabs must show true progress especially in these regards--so critical if an atmosphere of peace is ever to be created for their people--before Israel will return to any negotiations whatsoever.

http://q4j-middle-east.com

No, My Friends, Europe Ain't The Problem

No, My Friends, “Europe” Ain’t The Problem...

by Gerald A. Honigman

Recently, during an Internet discussion regarding Arab-Israeli issues, one commentator suggested that the Jews’ European connections were the main source of the Arab problem with Israel. Not so...

While there never was such thing as “the fastest gun in the West,” there is also no one reason for why Arabs are at war with Israel. Arabs, indeed, would have others believe what that gentleman above suggested--one version or another of those “nasty Crusader invaders” arguments.


But, far more truthful to their kilab yahud “Jew dog” problem is something far worse--something rarely discussed, for a variety of reasons.


As I have written often about (but, given the world’s persistence in unfair treatment of Israel, must be repeated over and over again), there are scores of millions of non-Arabs who are native to the region and who pre-date the Arabs in much of it by millennia. Since the 7th century C.E., they fought, were massacred, and watched their lands turned into what Arabs refer to today as “purely Arab patrimony.” This is something which did not happen just “long ago” in history. It is happening right now, but most of the outside world plays deaf, dumb, and blind. If a problem doesn’t involve Israel, few want to know...


Today, scores of millions of non-Arab “Berbers” (Imazighen), Kurds, Copts, black Africans, native Semitic but pre-Arab Lebanese, Assyrians--besides those kilab yahud (half of whom in Israel who were refugees from the “Arab” world and who know nothing of Europe)--suffer the consequences of this conquering, subjugating Arab mindset which declares that the whole region must be Arabized with Arabs and only Arabs as the rulers and everyone else the ruled. Indeed, when the Israeli author Amos Elon visited perhaps the most famous Egyptian (non-Arab) Copt of the 20th century, Dr. Boutros Boutros Ghali (President Anwar Sadat’s Foreign Min. and later Secretary General of the United Nations), Elon was told point blank that for Israel to be accepted, it must be Arabized. I have the book with the exact quotes.


For Christians and Jews, they were the “protected” people--the dhimma. The Egyptian scholar and Jewess, Bat Ye’or, and the Tunisian Jewish scholar, Albert Memmi, have written about dhimmitude, as have others. The latter’s Jews and Arabs is short and powerful. I have incorporated this topic into my own writings for over 4 decades as well. Arab and willingly-Arabized, non-Arab Muslims allowed the “People of the Book” to live if they paid large taxes and submitted to various, demeaning degrees of subjugation. But this brought no guarantees, and such folks never knew/know what the morrow has in store for them. Others--millions--had to either convert to Islam or were massacred.


Today, tens of millions of “Berbers” in “Arab” North Africa are not allowed to practice their own culture, speak their own language, and are increasingly being told that they must use only Arab Islamic names to name their own children. Ditto with millions of “Arab” Syria’s Kurds. Ismet Cherif Vanly wrote The Syrian ‘Mein Kampf’ Against The Kurds back in 1968 (Amsterdam). Now, what does that title tell you?

Things are no better today. This was the same for millions of “Arab” Iraq’s Kurds until the overthrow of Saddam Hussein--but he was not the cause of the problem, just the latest Arab leader to try to find a “cure.” Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Kurds were indeed slaughtered, however, during his rule.


Now, keep in mind that both Kurds and Berbers are Muslim...but non-Arab. Ditto for the western Darfur region of the Sudan’s black Africans (though the Arab/Arabized north has waged war against the non-Muslim south of the Sudan for much longer as well).

So, “the problem” goes far beyond the religious issue. It is, racism--pure and simple...and being perpetrated by those who dare call Israel and Zionism racist...a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black to deflect attention away from the Arabs’ far more horrendous sins. And much of the ignorant (whether innocently or deliberately so) world concurs.


My book, The Quest for Justice In The Middle East...The Arab-Israeli Conflict In Greater Perspective (http://q4j-middle-east.com), covers such topics--ones not touched with a 10-foot pole in far too many college courses nor discussed at State Dept. briefings nor in the mainstream media. Who demands a roadmap for 35 million truly stateless Kurds? Careers are indeed at stake--as mine was deliberately nipped in the bud during my own doctoral studies--over such issues.


Among numerous other places where my work on these taboo subjects--key to really understanding the root cause of many of the Middle East’s problems--can be found is Paris’s acclaimed Institut d’Etudes Politique--Sciences-Po. It includes my earlier extensive study, British Petroleum Politics, Arab Nationalism, and the Kurdish Struggle For Independence, on its recommended reference list.


As but one of too many examples of how this works, the same expert on non-Arab, but Muslim and increasingly Islamist Turkey, who taught one of my own doctoral seminars, placed Israel constantly under the high power lens of scrutiny while never even mentioning the subjugation of 1/5 of Turkey’s 70 million people--some 14-15 million Kurds who Turks refer to as “Mountain Turks” and treat as Arabs have treated the others mentioned above.

Millions of dollars in funding comes from the Arab oil spigot, Turks, and others in the region. If you don’t believe that this has an impact upon what does and doesn’t make it onto the typical academic syllabus, I have 10 bridges to sell you. And, beyond this, the American State Department has been in bed with the Arabian American Oil Co. (ARAMCO) since before Israel’s rebirth, and this has also had a huge impact on our foreign policy. Folks tied to the Arab petro-buck routinely move from government to those businesses and back again. Former Sec. of State, “f_ _ _ the Jews, they don’t vote for us anyway” James Baker III, is but one of many other cases in point.


Thus, it is no accident that half of the Foreword to my new book is written by the President of the Kurdistan National Assembly/Syria and some of the jacket comments are written by the publisher of an Amazigh ("Berber") publication, Afrique-du-Nord.


Simply put, forget the European excuse...

Arabs have a problem with an independent state for kilab yahud--Jew dogs--for the same reason why they call the birth of an independent Kurdistan “another Israel,” etc. and so forth. And this, indeed, goes far beyond the Europe thing. The latter is simply used to mask what the real problem has always been and continues to be...a conquering Arab Islamist mindset which allows no room whatsoever for compromise, partition, nor anything else which grants anyone else but themselves a slice of the justice pie in the new age of freedom and nationalism which came to the region after the collapse of empires in the late 19th/early 20th century.

Now, If you want to grasp this even more, please contact me at my e-mail address Honigman6@msn.com (best way) or by http://q4j-middle-east.com to see the book that The New York Times best-selling author, Brigitte Gabriel (one of those pre-Arab Lebanese victims of the Arabization of Lebanon), calls “a must read” for a true understanding of what is happening today in the region. I will send you your own personalized copy.

From Prison To Palace...The Presbyterian Church and the Jews

From Prison To Palace...The Presbyterian Church and the Jews

by Gerald A. Honigman

Now, Presbyterians aren’t the only folks who think that they’ll gain Brownie points with their Maker if they win over Jewish souls to their theology. Others, besides them, feel this urge as well. So, it’s not their ambition to convert Jews that has me particularly miffed at this time.

Having said that, I’d just love to see what their reactions would be if Jews actively sought to convert their own children...you know, television and radio programs, numerous organizations, phony “Christian” front groups which reject the divinity of Jesus (the real main sticking point between Jews and Christians), etc. and so forth--like what Jews are constantly subjected to. While the latter are just supposed to passively accept all of this treatment and disrespect ("love"), I just wonder how those who worship the Prince of Peace would handle the shoe being placed on the other foot.

Well, as I said, the conversion thing isn’t my gripe in this article. So, let me explain...

Driving down the road, I passed a sign on the lawn of the local Presbyterian Church which is promoting a program or whatever called, “Joseph--From Prison To Palace.”

The irony just hit me...

Here is the Church which is now in the forefront of nastiness regarding the resurrected state of the Jews--Israel--promoting the amazing story of Jacob (later “Israel")’s son, Joseph in the community.

Yet, given replacement theology, I guess it makes sense.

I know intelligent Christians who read the Bible and afterwards give the Jews credit for barely nothing more than Judas in the New Testament...the non-Hebrew part of the Bible. So, for many, Joseph has simply been hijacked too.

The Joseph of the Hebrew Bible, however, was a man closely connected to the history and fate of Israel--both his father, and his people.

The hypocritical double standards that the Presbyterian Church (and others like it) has been employing for some time now in judging modern Israel’s attempts to survive the fate that its Arab and other enemies have in store for it are certainly not things which Israel’s son, Joseph--whose actions, while in the service of Pharaoh, saved both his father and his people--would have looked kindly upon. By the way, there is good archeological evidence supporting the story of Joseph--Semitic tribes seeking permission to enter into the fertile Nile Delta, the reign of friendly Semitic Hyksos rulers, and even an Egyptian account of a Semitic prime minister who did Joseph-like deeds for Pharaoh and Egypt.

The Presbyterian Church is in the lead in pushing for divestment from Israel allegedly for its abuse of Arabs and expects Joseph’s real people--no “replacement” here--and reborn nation to merely out-Christian Christians in the face of enemies sworn to destroy them both by turning cheek after cheek after cheek after cheek. No doubt that they are Apartheid Israel Jimmy Carter’s best friends.

Of course, Israel’s very rebirth is a problem for rejection theology types--like those gotta “save” those Jews Presbyterians. After all, that was not supposed to happen for the alleged “G_d-killers.” Perpetual wandering and such was supposed to be the ticket instead. 1948 upset their theological applecart.

And for those non-religious types, they still have religious bigots running the show and too often also fall for the easier to blame the victim than have to deal with the source of the real problem routine.

The suffering of Arabs--which and whom Jews truly care about--occurs mainly because Arabs have always rejected any solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict which would not be another Final Solution for Jews. The Arab nakba is indeed mostly self-inflicted.

Given this, a tiny Israel--which sits on a mere fraction of one percent of the region’s territory-must do what it must do to survive.

Arabs have carved out almost two dozen states for themselves to date via the conquest and forced Arabization of mostly non-Arab peoples’ lands. This is still going on in full force today. Just ask tens of millions of Copts, Kurds, black Africans, Imazighen (Berbers), native “kilab yahud” (Jew dogs), and other victims of a subjugating Arab mindset which declares the entire region to be merely “purely Arab patrimony.” Indeed, this is what the Arab-Israeli conflict has always been all about...not checkpoints, settlements, and such.

As I and others have stated often before, it’s not how big Israel is, but that Israel is which is the problem for Arabs...and for the same reason that Arabs won’t allow millions of native Imazighen and Kurds to even speak their own language, nor name their own children their own native names, forcing them to use Arab ones instead. Funny, I haven’t heard anyone in the Presbyterian Church pontificating about any of this, however.

So here’s the deal...

The day the Presbyterian Church (and other Jew-baiters of its same ilk) addresses the much greater sins of the “Arab” world which surrounds Israel (which make an imperfect Israel look like a nation of saints by comparison)--a world which has scores of millions of non-Arabs living in various states of true subjugation and intimidation--is the day when such an organization will have a right to point its finger at Israel.

Until then, it’s simply that same age-old Jew thing again--only now it’s also aimed at the Jew of the Nations.

Now, if I have offended some folks by what you just read, well...

Good!

It’s well past the time that you finally got a dose of what you’ve been constantly dishing out.

http://q4j-middle-east.com

In The Days Of Achashverosh—The Ties Of Two Ancient Peoples

In The Days of Achashverosh...The Ties of Two Ancient Peoples

by Gerald A. Honigman

A Kurdish friend, Hamma Mirwaisi, recently had his book published, Return of the Medes--An Analysis of Iranian History. While Hamma and I disagree over some of his assertions, his book is an important contribution to the literature of his people and promotes a better tomorrow for all of the Middle East’s inhabitants.

Hama’s story is that of a truly stateless people--some thirty-five million Kurds, descendants of the Medes, and part of the greater Airyanem Vaejah nations --who still have no “roadmap” demanded for them by the world to better their future. Arabs must have almost two dozen states--including one born on at least part of what was earlier promised to be an Independent Kurdistan instead (Iraq)--but Kurds are simply ignored (or worse) in this regard by an assortment of users and abusers...both locally and from afar.

As I began reading Hamma’s own labor of love (I know of those things too), I noticed important names and events which I was already familiar with surfacing in the words of this modern day Kurdish freedom fighter, or peshmerga.

Follow these excerpts from the Hebrew Bible’s Book of Esther (the Megillah), which is read around early spring each year, to commemorate the rescue of the Jews in ancient Iran to see what I mean...

And it came to pass in the days of Achashverosh… who ruled from Hodu to Cush, one hundred and twenty-seven provinces...when Achashverosh sat on his royal throne, which was in Shushan (Susa) the capital, in the third year of his reign, he made a feast for all his ministers and servants; the army of Persia and Media, the nobles and all the ministers of the provinces in his service.

After these events, King Achashverosh promoted Haman, son of Hamdata, the Agagite and placed his seat above all his fellow ministers… All the king’s servants...bowed before Haman, for so had the king commanded...but Mordechai would not kneel or bow...he had told them that he (would never bow )because he was a Jew.

When Haman saw that Mordechai would not kneel or bow before him, Haman was filled with wrath. But he thought it contemptible to kill only Mordechai, for they had informed him of Mordechai’s nationality. Haman sought to annihilate all the Jews, Mordechai’s people, throughout Achashverosh’s entire kingdom… Haman said to King Achashverosh, ‘There is one nation scattered and dispersed among the nations throughout the provinces of your kingdom, whose laws are unlike those of any other nation and who do not obey the laws of the King. It is not in the King’s interest to tolerate them.  If it please the King, let [an edict] be issued for their destruction...’

Jews have had to deal with many Hamans over the course of their long history--including those who walk Planet Earth right now. At least one, indeed, currently lives in the same place where Haman lived.

Corroboration is very important to historians. I have written about ancient corroboration, by other peoples, of Hebraic accounts in earlier years. One example, also involving ancient Iran and the Jews, is worth mentioning again given what’s happening these days with the Iran of Ahmadinejad and the mullahs vis-a-vis Israel.

Here are some excerpts from the Kurash Prism, the decree of Cyrus the Great for the return of the Jews to the current nation of Israel in 539 BCE. This version is found in the CAIS website, the Circle Of Ancient Iranian Studies...

“I am Kurash, King of the World, Great King,...King of Babilani, King of Kiengir and Akkade, King of the four rims of the earth, Son of Kanbujiya...to the region from as far as Assura and Susa, Akkade, Eshnunna, the towns Zamban, Me-turnu, Der as well as the region of the Gutians, I returned to these sacred cities on the other side of the Tigris the sanctuaries of which have been ruins for a long time, the images which used to live therein and established for them permanent sanctuaries. I also gathered all their former inhabitants and returned them to their habitations. Furthermore, I resettled upon the command of Marduk, the great lord, all the gods of Kiengir and Akkade whom Nabonidus had brought into Babilani to the anger of the lord of the gods, unharmed, in their former temples, the places which make them happy.”

Now, follow these events in the Jews’ own writings in the Hebrew Bible, Ezra 1:1-8 :


“In the first year of Cyrus, king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the Lord spoken by Jeremiah, the Lord inspired King Cyrus of Persia to issue this proclamation throughout his kingdom...: “Thus says Cyrus, king of Persia: “All the kingdoms of the earth the Lord, the God of heaven, has given to me, and he has also charged me to build him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Whoever belongs to any part of his people, let him go up, and may his God be with him! Then the family heads of Judah and Benjamin and the priests and Levites---everyone, that is, whom God had inspired to do so---prepared to go up to build the house of the Lord in Jerusalem. All their neighbors gave them help in every way, with silver, gold, goods, and cattle, and with many precious gifts besides all their free-will offerings. King Cyrus, too, had the utensils of the house of the Lord brought forth which Nebuchadnezzar had taken away from Jerusalem and placed in the house of his god.”

Okay...now let’s return to Hamma’s book...


I will never hear The Megillah being read again during Purim without thinking about my Kurdish friends...Remember King Achashverosh in the Book of Esther?


Check out these excerpts and paraphrases from Hamma’s Story # 10, “Emperor Cyaxares I Plan To Liberate the Medians from the Scythians”...


“Cyaxares invited Madius (the Scythian ruler and subjugator of Medes) and a large number of his warriors to a festival...many laid down their arms and became drunk, but no Median warriors did so...When Cyaxares called out “Ahashverosh,” the code word for the attack, the Medes attacked...Most Scythians were killed, some seized and arrested.


Cyaxares became known as the liberator of the Median people and was reinstated as the King of Kings of the Median Empire. He was nicknamed Ahashverosh, or Ahasuerus, for his attack on the Scythians. Aha means ‘now’ and shverosh means ‘revolution’ or ‘revolt.’ “

Subsequent chapters or “stories” discuss Cyrus, Queen Vashti, Assyria, Babylonia, Esther, and so forth...all important to the history of the Jews as well. Since I have not completed the book yet, I am sure that there will be other revelations yet to come.


The search for historical truth is tedious, exciting, and often leads us in directions unknown before. An open mind is always essential if truth is indeed what is sought.


Despite our best efforts, lots of “facts” will remain forever missing or open to various interpretations. And, as the saying goes, behind every myth, there is usually an element of truth. Among other things, the study of history involves an exploration of this latter relationship. It is especially exhilarating when the pieces all start to come together--hence, the importance of corroborative evidence. So, as just one last example for now, while scholars may debate the exact relationship between the Habiru / Apiru of ancient Egyptian and other peoples’ correspondence with vassals in the very area where the Hebrews were invading (and at about the same time) after the Exodus, such discoveries as those in the above Tel el-Amarna tablets and elsewhere are valuable indeed.


I am thankful to Hamma for opening yet another one of those doors for me in the study of my own people’s history as well as that of his own.


The stories of his new book, The Return of the Medes--An Analysis of Iranian History and that of my own, The Quest For Justice In The Middle East--The Arab-Israeli Conflict in Greater Perspective, focus on the plight of two ancient peoples for a slice of the justice pie which history had/has long denied them. Both aim for a future in which the relative rights of all peoples in the region can at last be achieved--for the benefit of the Middle East and beyond…

http://q4j-middle-east.com

Fatah's Decline...Pardon My Dry Tear Ducts

Fatah’s Decline… Pardon My Dry Tear Ducts
by Gerald A. Honigman

An Associated Press story on June 20th reported on the West’s darling, Fatah’s Mahmoud Abbas, calling off elections in the West Bank because Fatah candidates appeared to be on the verge of getting trounced–like they did in years past to Hamas. Only this time, Hamas was not even running…

Of course, Fatah blames all of this on Israel, as do the alleged “good cop’s” supporters as well.

Since at least the days of President Clinton’s “Oslo Peace”–when the more Israel gave, in concrete tangibles to Fatah’s Arafat (aka Master of the Swiss bank account), the more it bled instead–the West, especially the American State Department, promoted Fatah as the good cops that Israel must play ball with lest the bad cops of Hamas win the day.

Truth be told, there’s not a nickel’s difference between them when it comes to the subject of the acceptance of a viable state of the Jews living in the neighborhood. And the blood of Jewish innocents has been shed equally by them as well. Both cops teach their kids, starting at a young age, to hate and kill Jews and to destroy the nation of the kilab yahud–Jew dogs. A look at either of their websites, listening to sermons in either of their mosques, etc. and so forth confirms this to anyone with eyes open.

The State Department rejected Israel’s right to exist right from the start and has been usually nasty towards it ever since. It has routinely placed a moral equivalence on the actions of those who deliberately target Jewish innocents and Israel’s belated efforts to finally go after the murderers.

Additionally, the State Department has worked very hard over the decades to make Israel as dependent on America as possible–so the Jews would necessarily be more pliable to serve America’s own oil-tainted interests.

Thus, the Foggy folks have been consistent in trying to undo the small piece of justice that Israel finally received in the wake of the 1967 War with the final draft of UNSC Resolution 242. The latter promised that Israel would finally get real secure, somewhat defensible borders to replace the previously imposed armistice lines of 1949 which made it virtually invisible on a world map–a mere 9-15 miles wide in its waist, practically begging to be cut in half via an attack by any combination of assorted enemies.

With different men in the White House to counter its influence–Johnson, Reagan, and Bush II, for example, especially in the latter’s earlier days in office–the State Department was somewhat restrained in just how far it could push the Jews. Unfortunately, things have changed quite a bit today.

The Foggy Folks now have a willing partner in the new American leader to pursue all of their goals vis-a-vis Israel. He too demands that Israel forsake the promise of territorial compromise built in to 242 and return to its 9-15 mile wide existence, placing its kids in Tel Aviv, Haifa, Jerusalem, and elsewhere in the same situation that those in Ashkelon and Sderot have been in since Israel’s last attempt at land for peace with Arabs via its withdrawal from Gaza several years earlier.

The reason that there has not been progress with Fatah is not because of Israel’s stubbornness nor because of “settlements” as the mainstream media is so quick to report. It is because Fatah’s idea of “peace” is Israel caving in to all of its demands.

Thus, Israel must give up its recognition as a Jewish State, while Arabs insist that their own 22nd state and member of the Arab League be formed–despite the fact that scores of millions of non-Arab, native peoples live in most of those allegedly “purely Arab” states and predate the Arab conquests by millennia.

There is no peace because those Fatah “moderates”–whose army is now being trained, supplied, and funded by America–have openly stated that in any negotiations with Jews, their job is to take while Israel’s job is to give. So, forget about Israel getting the territorial compromise promised by UNSC Resolution 242 and such. The settlements are all about Israel getting that necessary buffer promised by 242. Why is there never context given to this issue when it is frequently reported and discussed?

As has been written often, Abbas’s late Fatah colleague and mentor, Arafat, used to call such a “peace” that Fatah has in mind for the Jews the “Peace of the Quraysh”– the temporary halt in hostilities that the Muslim prophet, Muhammad, allowed his enemies so he could muster the strength to deliver the final blow. And just as Abbas smiles to the west in exchange for billions of dollars in support, Arafat & Co. also had a tradition of saying one thing in English and quite another in Arabic to his own folks back home. Indeed, Fatah’s showcased model “moderate,” Faisal al-Husseini, openly called any “negotiations” with Jews merely a “Trojan Horse”–calling for a “Palestine” from the River to the Sea, i.e., an Arab state which replaces Israel, not existing along side of it.

Nothing has changed today, except that Fatah has now been propped up by the West, especially America, to be the Arab recipient of Israeli one-sided concessions.

Since Hamas has not been willing to mince words regarding its goals for Israel’s destruction, not even the State Department could pull off forcing Israel to make those dangerous, concrete concessions.

By dealing with a Fatah–which is now being strengthened and enriched by the West, so temporarily plays the game (remember the “peace of the Quraysh”)–the State Department now has an alleged partner that it can shove down Israel’s throat.

In return for this temporary quiet (hudna, etc.)–which turns bloody every time Israel caves in to Washington and loosens up on such things as checkpoints and such, resulting in murdered Jews soon afterwards–Israel is literally expected to give away the store.

That’s not how true peace comes about between enemies anywhere. It usually happens in one of two ways…

The first involves a total defeat of one’s enemies, with the terms of peace dictated by the victor.

Israel has truly held back in doing this for fear of the backlash from an assortment of hypocrites elsewhere. For the latter, Jews are not allowed to really “win” their wars–even given the fact that their enemies seek their total destruction. Firebombing Dresden and nuking Hiroshima were the Allies’ answers to their enemies. Or, gassed Kurds, genocide in the Sudan, the “Hama Solution,” Black September, etc. and so forth when it comes to how Arabs handle their own “problems.”

The second way that enemies make peace is via true mutual concessions–real compromise.

Regardless of how difficult a task it will be–especially given the age-old Arab subjugating mindset which states that the entire region is simply “purely Arab patrimony” and part of the Dar ul-Islam–if true peace is ever to come in the region, at some point some Arab leaders must be honest with their own people and state that others, besides themselves, have legitimate rights there too. So far, all of Israel’s alleged peace partners are simply plotting its destruction–and then get angry because at least some Jews refuse to play along.

The reason Fatah has not made progress with Israel towards peace is because “peace” is not what Fatah wants. It wants the Peace of the Quraysh. And it has promised that very “peace” to its people.

So far, at least, Israel’s currents leaders–despite tirades from State’s current chief, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and repeated insults from the President himself–have at least partially withstood the pressure to totally cave in on this.

In reality, I will shed no tears if Fatah is defeated.

The army that America has been building up for it will only kill Jews yet again down the road. Indeed, the latest murders of Jews have been committed by factions of Fatah. Additionally, the American general charged with training Fatah recently complained that if the Jews don’t cave in soon to Fatah’s “peace” demands, he won’t be able to control their trigger fingers.

It is better for Israel to face a more honest enemy.

If (when?) Hamas takes over the Arab-ruled portions of Judea and Samaria (aka the “West Bank” only since the 20th century) as they did Gaza, Israel will know how to handle the situation.

While true peace is always the goal, wishing it won’t change the dominant, subjugating Arab mindset which prevents it. And neither will yet additional, one-sided concessions by Jews which Arabs only interpret as weakness.

Unlike the gist of that June 20th AP article, peace could come tomorrow, if Israel finally had true partners to deal with–folks who understood that compromise involves both parties in conflict giving and making hard concessions…not just one.

And, shame on the Associated Press and most of the rest of the mainstream media for not telling you what you just read here.

http://q4j-middle-east.com

The PKK & Hamas...A Tale Of Two Terror Camps

The PKK & Hamas...A Tale Of Two Terror Camps

by Gerald A. Honigman

Increasingly, the Turks appear to have visions these days of once again spearheading the forces of Islam as it confronts the West and those whom they see associated with it.

The focus of this essay will not be on why or how modern Turkey’s transition from Ataturk’s officially secular state to one closely aligned with the Islamists has occurred, but rather on recent events which Ankara has been closely involved with which are the result of this transition...the Gaza/Hamas flotilla incident, in particular.

For quite some time now, Turkey has wanted to have it both ways with Israel.

It has sought economic and military ties, and has especially expected Jerusalem to help it in its own matters of “internal security.” In turn, Israel obtained a powerful Muslim, but non-Arab, neighbor which was not looking to have it for dinner and with which it could have somewhat reasonable relations. Additionally, Jerusalem was also expected to allow Ankara to dicate the terms of this relationship

Not mincing words, the cost has been too high--for Israel.

Specifically, it has had to engage in shameful behavior to assist its alleged Turkish frie
nds in the suppression and subjugation of another entirely different people, the Kurds. Israeli intelligence and weaponry have indeed helped Ankara in these matters, and --for a number of reasons--this must finally come to a halt.

I have written about the analogy between what Arabs face vis-a-vis Israel and what Kurds face vis-a-vis Turkey elsewhere (Between Ankara and Jerusalem http://www.north-of-africa.com/article.php3?id_article=556 and State Department Math http://www.krg.org/articles/detail.asp?smap=&lngnr=12&rnr=77&anr=6589 for example), so won’t elaborate on this here. Please open those urls above, however, to see some information very relevant to this discussion.

My aim now is to showcase the differences between what Israel faces relative to its terrorist enemies and what Turkey faces regarding those whom engage in terror against it as well.

The assorted Arab enemies which Israel faces among “Palestinian” Arabs (most of whom were newcomers into the Mandate themselves)--Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and so forth--have one goal...the destruction of both Israel and its Jews. Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah plays relatively nice now simply to milk dhimmi nations for $$$ billions while building up his own modern military, courtesy of Uncle Sam. His dead boss’s Swiss bank accounts are legendary. Hamas is simply more honest. Look at both of their websites and such in case you think there really is a difference in their plans for Israel.

An Arab state emerged after World War I on almost 80% of the original April 25, 1920 Mandate of Palestine. In 1922, most of the original territory--all the land east of the Jordan River--was handed over to Arab nationalism by Great Britain. So, right from the start, and contrary to Arab storytelling, most of the land was given over to them--not to the Jews. Had Arabs accepted the 1947 partition, they would have wound up with almost 90% of the total area. They rejected it, because, in Arab eyes, no one except themselves had any rights at all in what they call “purely Arab patrimony” and the Dar ul-Islam.

Since those days, the Jews (one half of whom who were refugees from the so-called “Arab” world) have made repeated attempts to reach peace via additional land-for-peace measures.

Palestinian Arabs (and most others as well) have rejected all such efforts to reach a modus vivendi with their Jewish neighbors. So, that brings us to where we are today...

Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad & Co. have been engaged in continuous efforts to eradicate Israel and its Jews...blown buses, restaurants, teen nightclubs, shopping malls, ice cream parlors, schools--civilian targets have been the most sought out.

How has Ankara dealt with its alleged “friend’s” attempt to deal with this violence?

By expecting Israel to simply put up with it.

On more than one occasion, it has withdrawn its ambassador and has taken other measures in rebuking Israel for its retaliation.

While Israel has dropped thousands of leaflets, made phone calls, and the like to try to avoid civilian casualties, when Arabs deliberately use non-combatants as human shields (a common tactic that they deploy), this is hard to do. And when Arabs fire at Israeli civilians from behind Arab civilians, they are committing a double war crime according to the Geneva Conventions--which no one seems to care about.

The flotilla backed by Ankara and sent to Hamas-ruled Gaza was sent to break Israel’s legal maritime blockade of a enemy sworn to its destructions and which acts on its pledge repeatedly. Faced with such an enemy, the Turks would have never given back Gaza to their own enemies if the situation was reversed. No doubt here...

So, given this stance, it’s time to examine problems the Turks themselves have with another people...Kurds.

Kurds predate the Turks’ arrival in Turkey by literally thousands of years. Like the Jews in Israel, they were there long before an Arab or Turk ever invaded and conquered their land.

Some thirty-five million Kurds live in the Middle East, and about one-fifth of Turkey’s population is Kurd. The first Kurdish nationalist revolts in the area dated from the 19th century. Others would come as well.

The emergence of powerful Turkish and Iranian rulers after World War I wound up leaving tens of millions of Kurds stateless in the new age of nationalism in the region.

After Great Britain won a favorable decision from the League of Nations in 1925 tying the oil of Mesopotamia’s predominately Kurdish north to the new Arab state of Iraq, promises earlier made in support of Kurdish independence were aborted. The Kurds have been used and abused by many players ever since--including America and Israel.

Being a mere remnant of the former great Ottoman Turkish Empire, Mustapha Kemal’s (Ataturk) Turkey was determined to see no further geographical losses from its territory.

That being the case, what was there to do with millions of non-Turkic people who already predated you on the land?

Well, in the Turks’ eyes, you could just rename them, outlaw their culture and language, intimidate, murder, and subjugate them--etc. and so forth.

Bingo!!!!! That was the ticket...

And they have been all “Mountain Turks” ever since… not Kurds.

The violent, originally revolutionary Socialist Kurdistan Workers’ Party (the PKK), was born amid this subjugation of the Kurdish people.

Unlike Arabs, with twenty-one states to date (carved out largely from non-Arab peoples’ lands), Kurds are a truly subjugated, stateless people. They have suffered horrendously because of this condition, and long before Saddam Hussein’s Arab Anfal Campaign slaughtered over a hundred thousand of them in Iraq.

The 22nd state Arabs are striving for would be, as we have seen, the Arabs’ second one in Palestine (the name the Roman Emperor, Hadrian, bestowed upon Judaea after the Jews’ second revolt for independence in 135 C.E.), not their first. Today’s Jordan has that honor. And, much later, renaming themselves “Palestinians” instead of Arabs fools no one except those who want to be fooled in this game....Unfortunately, many folks fit into that category.

Thus, we see the whole world clamoring for the birth of that Arab 22nd state, have Turks themselves support it knowing full well that neither a Hamas nor a Fatah Arab state will accept a Jewish State of Israel as its neighbor; etc. and so forth. And now we also have Ankara threatening war with Jerusalem over this as well as it gets cozy with Syrian Arab butchers and Iran’s mullah maniacs.

What compromises did Turks make with their own national competitors, the Kurds?

Unlike Ankara, which outlawed the Kurdish language, Israel made Arabic the second national language of the state. By the way, the proportion of Jews to Arabs in Israel is the same as Turks to Kurds in Turkey...80% to 20%. About thirty-eight Israels would fit into the land mass of Turkey--for a little perspective.

Did Turkey agree to a partition with its fourteen million “Mountain Turks?”

Jews accepted repeated partitions with Arabs, resulting in Arabs getting most of the territory--despite their lies.

The answer, of course, to all of this is a glaring “no”!

Unlike Hamas & Co., the PKK was born out of this total denial of Kurdish rights.

And whatever its bloody sins are, the PKK has never sought the destruction of Turkey nor of its people. It has merely sought rights for Kurds, not “Mountain Turks,” which the Turks refuse to grant...ironically, those very same rights that the Turks expect Israel to grant to those who would indeed destroy it if given but half a chance.

http://q4j-middle-east.com

Send In The Marines!

Send In The Marines!

by Gerald A. Honigman

For quite some time in our nation’s relatively short history, whenever we faced severe difficulties regarding national interests, “Send In The Marines” was our frequent call.

Iran--that beacon of humanity (just ask the ghosts of those Iranians slaughtered in the streets struggling for the most basic freedoms, or those of Iranian Kurds and other minorities being hung and otherwise killed for the same reasons)--is contemplating sending Revolutionary Guard marines to escort future alleged humanitarian aid flotillas to Hamas’s Gaza.

Let’s step back for a moment to review...

In 1967, Egypt blockaded Israel (a casus belli), amassed 100,000 troops, tanks, aircraft, and so forth right up to the Israeli border in Gaza and the northern Sinai Peninsula, and repeatedly called for a war of extermination against the Jewish State. That’s how Egypt lost Gaza--which has been used since Pharaoh days to attack Israeli Jews. The latter also had millennial connections to the land as well.

For some perspective, America and other nations have acquired territories all over the world as a result of wars fought and perceived national security interests--often thousands of miles away from home. The examples are indeed many, and the war over the Falkland Islands is a beaut.

In a controversial move, several years back Israel decided to unilaterally withdraw from Gaza for the sake of greater peace with its assorted Arab neighbors. It had already done so from Sinai in exchange for a very cold peace with Egypt--especially after President Sadat’s assassination. Hundreds of tunnels move huge quantities of munitions into Gaza to kill Jews from Egyptian territory. Just imagine if things were reversed...

But the tunnels are just one of many unfortunate aspects of the frigid nature of the peace Israel has gotten as a result of its withdrawals so far. Keep in mind that Israel was not obligated to make any withdrawals whatsoever until real treaties of peace (not “hudna” ceasefires and such) were concluded between itself and those who have repeatedly tried to destroy it.

For good or for bad, Prime Minister Sharon withdrew from Gaza. Israel maintained some controls to see to it that Gaza didn’t simply become another Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and/or Iranian base from which it could be attacked--like that which it faces in Lebanon with Hizbullah.  Hence, the naval blockade.

The whole idea was to give Gaza’s Arabs a chance at what scholars call positive nationalism--state building, for example--rather than the negative nationalism Arabs indeed are such specialists at. While negative nationalism has different aspects to it, it can largely be summed up as holding one’s own nation/group superior and turning this difference into instruments of discrimination, subjugation, and other assorted nastiness towards others.

A look at how Arab nationalism has handled/is handling scores of millions of non-Arab peoples--Kurds, Imazighen ("Berbers"), Copts, Jews (kilab yahud--"Jew dogs"), black Africans (abeed--"slaves"), and so forth--who predate by millennia the Arabs themselves in the lands they conquered and forcibly Arabized--is telling indeed.  Yet few folks want to listen...If it’s not about Jews and Israel, evil simply does not exist in the region for the hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil majority when it comes to the “Arab” World.

Sure enough and true to form, Gaza’s Arabs did not disappoint.

Rather than positively responding to Israel’s peace gesture--the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza that it was not obligated to make but did anyway since there was no treaty of peace with its Arab Palestinian Authority and/or Hamas enemies--thousands of Arab rockets, mortars, and so forth soon rained down from Gaza on Israel proper. Think about how other nations--America, Russia, the Arabs themselves, for example--would have handled this situation. Israel tolerated such murder, terror, and destruction for years before reacting.

So, that’s how we got to where we’re at today.

Facing an enemy elected by Gaza’s Arabs themselves (so they are not “innocent") which is dedicated to its destruction and the killing of its people, Israel has thus kept up its naval blockade of the Gaza coast line. The blockade is totally legal in international maritime law, and is like others that have been used by nations against enemies. While others have used blockades (America included), few-- if any--have ever faced an enemy such as Israel faces--one dedicated to its very disappearance. So, if Israel’s blockade is not legit, there has never been one that was.

While numerous weaponry has made it into Gaza via the Egyptian tunnels mentioned above (nice “peace partner"), ships have no match when it comes to delivering massive quantities of materials. A number of ships filled with weapons destined for Hamas and Hizbullah have already been prevented from delivering such “humanitarian aid” in the past. In the Karine-A incident, behind the bags of flour and food were missiles, rockets, mortars, mines, and the like.

To any reasonable mind, Israel thus has good reason to want to see what’s aboard ships getting through to Gaza’s Arabs. And, remember, it didn’t have to be this way...Positive gestures towards peace by the Arabs themselves responding to the Israel withdrawal would have seen the blockade gone by now. Unfortunately, building the Arabs’ 22nd state is not the priority...destroying the Jews’ lone, miniscule one is and always has been.

As for humanitarian aid, please recall that thousands of tons of food, medicine, and other life essentials move freely overland each week into Gaza after inspection. No one is starving in Gaza. Yet in places where folks are truly starving, being daily oppressed, and struggling for the most basic of human rights, there are no flotillas to be found. Again, Jew devils aren’t involved--so there’s not much meaningful interest.

And that brings me back to the marines--Iran’s, that is...

Look--I don’t want to see anyone die, suffer, and so forth.

I truly want to see justice--the relative variety of positive nationalism, not the oppressive, exclusive variety of negative nationalism--for all peoples, in the Middle East and elsewhere. That’s what my new book aims for (http://q4j-middle-east.com). But that’s not what Gaza, Fatah, Hamas, the flotilla, Iran, and so forth are all about. They are about Israel’s destruction--sooner or later. There is no doubt about this.

Given these realities, Israel has no good choices. But, unless it wants to allow Gaza to be able to import all the Iranian and other weaponry that it wants, the blockade must stay in force.

I don’t want to see war come anywhere, but, Iran is not giving Israel much of a choice. It openly proclaims that it too wants Israel dead. One way for non-Arab Muslims to prove their worth is by out-Arabing the Arabs in their hatred of the despised kilab yahud. The mullahs and their followers excel at this.

The Twelver Shi’a ruling Iran have no fear of war. They especially expect a major catastrophe before the return of their “Hidden Imam,” their messianic mahdi.

Iran is a huge country with a large population. The mullahs calculate that even with massive Israeli retaliation, Iran will be left standing--while Israel, which one needs a magnifying glass to locate on a world map, will not.

Israel should have dealt with the Iranian issue years ago before new anti-aircraft systems and such were installed and the Iranian nuclear program became as advanced as it is today. It did not act largely because it feared the world’s reactions. Perhaps it also hoped that real sanctions and actions by the world community would also tame the mullahs a bit. If so, Israel has been as naive here as it was when it supplied paintball guns to its commandos coming aboard that Turkish ship off of Gaza a bit ago.

If Iranian marines are aboard any new flotilla aiming to break Israel’s necessary, legal blockade (not to supply poor starving Arabs), then Israel must either disable the ship--if possible--or sink it. As a fisherman, it will make a great artificial reef.

If war comes, well...it was coming anyway. Not a good thing, but what are Israel’s choices here--other than to roll over and play dead in order to appease the world’s assorted hypocrites and supporters of the double standard supreme? 

It’s worth noting that Iran, Syrian Arabs, and its new friends in Turkey are just playing that same old game other real oppressors often do: make folks look elsewhere so they don’t focus on the real subjugation, crimes against humanity, and such being perpetrated by those assorted pots calling the kettle black.

And Jews and their nation are always the scapegoats and whipping posts par excellence.

http://q4j-middle-east.com

Give 'Em Hell, Helen...

Give ‘Em Hell, Helen… Jews, That Is by Gerald A. Honigman

On May 27, 2010, at a Jewish heritage event outside of the White House ( timed most likely to recoup some better feelings among American Hebrew contributors to the Democratic Party in the wake of the current occupant’s persistent trashing of Israel on numerous fronts), Thomas stated that Jews “should get the hell out of Palestine” and that Palestine is a country of occupation, whose occupiers should leave the region, returning to “Poland, Germany and America...”

Notice that Ms. Thomas conveniently didn’t mention half of Israel’s Jews who fled with little but the shirts on their backs as refugees from the so-called “Arab “/Muslim world.

Iran’s Ahmadinejad says the same thing--demanding that Israel’s former Iranian Jewish president and Chief of Staff--and many others like them--return to Europe. Helen keeps good company.

Born to a Lebanese family with origins from Tripoli, her father’s original surname was Antonius, later changed to Thomas. So, what’s in a name?

Sometimes, not much.

But sometimes there is a lot that can be explained knowing both first and surnames.

Another famous Antonius was also from a Lebanese family who moved to Egypt and later claimed fame as a “Palestinian” leader.

George Antonius, author of one of the most important books about Arabs ever written (The Arab Awakening, 1938) would later become an informal advisor to Hajj Amin al-Husseini, mufti of Jerusalem and the Palestinian Arabs’ main political leader. Among the Mufti’s other accomplishments, he became close allies with Hitler to help solve both of their Jew problems. He thus helped to organize and recruit Bosnian Muslims into several divisions of the Waffen SS and other units. The largest was the 13th Handschar Division of 21,065 men, which targeted and committed atrocities against Jews, Gypsies, Communists, and their traditional Christian Serb rivals.

Now, the Mufti’s good buddy, George Antonius, was a Greek Orthodox Christian. It is my educated guess (and that of one of my scholarly mentors) that Helen Antonius/Thomas is also Greek Orthodox.

As with all other religions and peoples, there is both good and bad to be found among them.

Having said that, there is an unfortunate fact of life which comes into play here.

For a number of reasons, with a few exceptions, Christianity’s mix with Arab nationalism has stooped to the worst depths of a long-legacy of Church-inspired Jew hatred.

Please permit me to step backwards a bit to further elaborate on this. My widely-published, much earlier essay, Arafat’s Jesus, developed this topic extensively as well. Find it, among many other places, at http://www.palestinefacts.org/.....amaria.php

As the year 2003 began, the Greek Orthodox Metropolitan, Irineos, sought the appointment as Patriarch of Jerusalem. Letters with his signature on them to Yasir Arafat contained, among other things, the following gems:

“You are aware of the...disgust...all the Holy Sepulchre fathers feel for the descendants of the crucifiers of our Lord Jesus...crucifiers of your people...Jewish conquerors of the Holy Land of Palestine.”

Irineos claimed that his 6/17/01 letter, revealed in the Israeli newspaper, Maariv, was a forgery. Unfortunately, there were many other documents of the same flavor making the rounds as well.

Irineos’ attitude is not uncommon among many Christians, in the Middle East and elsewhere.

Indeed, the quote above is very similar to words often spoken by the Greek Catholic Archbishop of Jerusalem, Hilarion Capucci, decades earlier. So it’s safe to assume that many people share these beliefs. Even after people forsake religion, such teachings stick with them. Elsewhere, Soviet Russians or Nazi Germans still loathed the G_d killing Jew.

In the Middle East, some folks simply inherited and modified these beliefs from traditional Christian teaching. Others, feeling exposed and vulnerable themselves living among real or potentially hostile dominant Muslim populations, sought/seek common ground with their own off again/on again Muslim persecutors by turning the focus on the mutually-agreed favorite common demon, the Jew.

As with George Antonius, Christians--especially Greek Orthodox ones-- played an important role in the nascent Arab nationalist movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries ( also think George Habash and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and so forth). And the explanation in the above paragraph was certainly one of the main motivating factors. This was not unlike some Jews seeking to be absorbed under the potentially protective, inclusive umbrella of various socialist movements in Christian Europe around the same time.

To understand this animus a bit further, it is important to note the important influence that the 4th century Archbishop of Constantinople, Church Father Saint John Chrysostom, has had on the teachings of the eastern churches (not that the western were much or any better).

While in Antioch, John denounced Jews and Judaizing Christians in a series of eight sermons (homilies) delivered to Christians taking part in Jewish festivals and other Jewish observances. Among other things, it has been suggested that he wanted Jewish Christians, who for centuries had kept connections to their Jewish roots, to choose between Judaism and Christianity. Those sermons later played a considerable part in the further development of Christian anti-Semitism. Later, they were extensively used by the Nazis in their war of extermination against the Jews.

Here’s a taste of Chrysostom’s teaching in Homily 1, some sixteen centuries ago...

The Jewish people were driven by their drunkenness and plumpness to the ultimate evil; they kicked about, they failed to accept the yoke of Christ, nor did they pull the plow of his teaching. Another prophet hinted at this when he said: “Israel is as obstinate as a stubborn heifer.” … Although such beasts are unfit for work, they are fit for killing. And this is what happened to the Jews: while they were making themselves unfit for work, they grew fit for slaughter. This is why Christ said: “But as for these my enemies, who did not want me to be king over them, bring them here and slay them.”

Here’s an excerpt from Homily 6...

You [Jews] did slay Christ, you did lift violent hands against the Master, you did spill his precious blood. This is why you have no chance for atonement, excuse, or defense.

Now, check out that above 2003 quote again by Greek Orthodox Metropolitan Irineos in Jerusalem.

Helen Thomas was more than likely brought up around such powerful and penetrating teaching.

While other folks may have been able to resist acting on the deep-seated prejudice such religious “truths” promote, her constant singling out Israel and its Jews for alleged “crimes” which, in reality, are far less worse than those happening elsewhere--especially in the “Arab” world--strongly suggests that Ms. Thomas can simply not give a fair and objective assessment of anything having to do with Israel--the Jew of the Nations.

http://q4j-middle-east.com