There’s been a mass media blitz the past week about how Israel humiliates Obama by building in Jerusalem. There’s also starting to be analysis deconstructing Israeli settlements as obstacles to peace. Like the recent argument from the Guardian — of all places — that Palestinian demands to halt construction in East Jerusalem are a ruse to end negotiations, and delegitimise Israel. Which analysis, however sound, must be shouted down and drowned out through sheer volume from all siding with Palestinians that Israeli buildings in Jerusalem are worse than killings. That the worst detriment to peace is buildings — not killings.
Too much analytical superfluity. Too much ignorance regarding what glares most obviously. Do mass media pundits honestly expect consumers to swallow even tacit analogies between buildings and killings as legitimate? As uncontroversial, even?
Perhaps people don’t know. Rocketing has never stopped. It has only been reduced to dull roaring since Israelis assaulted Gaza rocketing. In the first quarter of 2010? About 30 rockets penetrated into Israel. Taken on average — two or three times weekly. Except last week — while President Obama was allegedly getting humiliated by Israeli buildings in Jerusalem — there were three in one day. Someone got killed.
But even if everyone agreed buildings are worse than killings. Even then. What’s with the humiliation language?
There should be no need to ask what more humiliates President Obama. Israeli buildings in Jerusalem — or Palestinian television calling for Jihad against America. Israeli buildings — or the Palestinian Authority naming an entire square after the murderer of an American photographer. Buildings — or a Turkish anchorman doing skits in blackface while Obama visits Turkey. Israelis not unconditionally respecting Palestinian aspirations to territories captured from Jordan in self-defensive war — or Islamist shooting, shelling, mortaring, bombing and rocketing at Israel never stopping?
There should be no need to ask. First, because it would be absurd expecting unconditional respect when someone can’t stop shooting — instead of expecting shooting to stop so there can ever be any glimmering respect. And second, there should be no need to ask what more humiliates President Obama — just because how presidential Obama is. Because there’s no way President Obama can so easily be humiliated. Regardless what side he’s on. Regardless what he happens to believe worst. Buildings or killings.
So. Regardless what anyone believes worst — buildings or killings. Regardless even who one blames all the killings on. Islamist societies, for never ceasing shooting at Israel, for always bragging how they will genocide Israel — for going so far as to charter themselves on Israel’s genocide. Or whether one blames Israel — if just because at this moment kill ratios so heavily favour Israel. Regardless. What’s with all the humiliation language in the media?
It isn’t new of course. Some years back it seemed everything Israeli was deemed to humiliate Muslims. It seemed there could be no coverage of the bitterness between Islamist and Israeli societies without humiliation of Muslims alleged in explanation. Until someone, somewhere, suggested of course Muslims are humiliated each every time Israel defends herself successfully. And, just like that, from one week to the next — all the humiliation language ceased and utterly desisted. Until last week.
Of course successful Israeli self-defending humiliates Muslims. How could it not? Genociding Israel in 1948 was expected to require days or at most weeks. Instead? Nothing but epic failing when it first came to genociding Israel in 1948.
It must have been unbelievable. Unthinkable. As if there was some error in divine judgment. That’s why Islamist societies absolutely had to unite and try again. And again. And each time they did? Went from bad to worst.
Nothing can unite Islamist societies like their endlessly advertised genocidal ambitions when it comes to Israel. Yet, in that sole and singular passion uniting Islamist societies? There has been only shame of endless failure. Islamism united cannot eradicate one country lesser than New York — City — in population. Like, whose side is g0d on, anyhow?
Of course such failure in a peoples’ manifest destiny and identity entails the most agonizing humiliation. It is the naqba. The catastrophe. Not the creation of Israel. The ongoing failure to destroy Israel.
And while the meaning of Islam’s humiliation was not understood? It was only natural for Western media to sympathize. Yet the moment it was even suggested the humiliation of Islamist societies was due to Israel not hurrying up and dying already? Then humiliation could not again be mentioned. Since mentioning it could no longer evoke sympathy in Western audiences. Only nausea.
Until last week, that is. When Western media once again adopted humiliation language. Not in reference to individual Muslims or to Islamist societies — but to Joe Biden and President Obama.
Never mind how humiliated President Obama isn’t. It is a terrible idea for Western media to adopt language insinuating he might be. Because once the connection has been made how Israeli survival entails Islamist humiliation? That’s right. Implications cannot be avoided that President Obama can be humiliated by Israeli sovereignty — and perhaps very survival — in the same way. And that’s an idea too terrible for words or language. The very idea that President Obama could feel in some manner humiliated by Israel independently surviving.
It remains to ask what prompted Western media to adopt humiliation language again. Could there be Western media elements feeling humiliated by Israeli sovereignty — and perhaps very survival? Might Western media elements be projecting that sense of humiliation onto President Obama? That’s worth asking. Next time.
Building in West Bank shows Israel will never make peace, it does not wnt peace. Making peace means giving up West Bank, you know as well as I do, that means NO PEACE!
You are sadly mistaken. Peace can't mean only Israeli concessions. It must also mean islamist societies stop shooting and chartering themselves on genocide.
But never mind what peace means. Do you honestly believe Israel does not want peace? That Israel mongers for war? Because you can't believe that. It is too easily refuted.
Try to remember the One Great Muslim who wanted peace with Israel. Who went to Israel to credibly promise peace. Who got killed by his Muslim (Brotherhood) for promising peace with Israel. Remember Anwar Sadat.
Did Israel turn its back on Sadat's genuine overture? As any proper warmonger should? Nope. Israel turned its back on the Sinai. Totally handed it back to Egypt. Handed back more land than pre-1967 Israel and the West Bank combined. Not for love. Not for money. All of it for credible peace and nothing else but peace. So nevermind warmongering. What pacifist, peace-loving nation does this? Ever. Hand over (way) more than half the territory it controls. Territory conquered in self-defence and maintained to buffer re-re-repeat genocide-boasting aggression. Territory but for which buffering there would not have been any surviving at least one (1973) war. Who? Nobody. Never. Except Israel.
The square mileage of Israel: about 8000. The square mileage of the Sinai: about 23000. Just try to imagine. Giving it all right back for peace. Try harder. It's alright to grunt a little — just keep trying. Ok? Alright. So: can you still believe Israel does not want peace?
Good enough. You can stop grunting now.
No you are wrong. Israel only gave Sinai back because Sinai is waste land. Israel did not give Sinai back for peace. Israel only gave Sinai back because Sinai had no use for Israel.
Israel never gave back the Sinai “for peace”. They gave it back because they couldn't use it.
The Sinai was not like the West Bank. It had no land suitable for human habitation. So that's why they are keeping the West Bank but gave up the Sinai: they can build their “settlements” in the West Bank. But nobody can live in the Sinai desert.
Do you really truly need to believe Israel gave back 3 times the land area it kept — because it had no use for it? Like, will believing such absurdity safeguard your ideology?
Yes, Sinai is desert. So was almost 80% of Israel. Google “Negev”. Check out how much “use” Israelis have for desert.
But Sinai isn't just desert. First off — it has oil. And that alone refutes your position. Sinai is also rich in coal, copper, gypsum, manganese and precious stones. And that's just some what's been discovered.
Ever hear of Sharm El Sheikh? Sinai is a treasure for tourism.
In military terms? Given how Egypt was Israel's most dangerous enemy? The Sinai would never have been returned but for credible peace with Egypt.
How did Sadat credibly promise peace? For one main thing — by coming to Israel. Even knowing it would probably get him killed.
What's really sad? The Sinai had tremendous value. Egypt so wanted the Sinai back. Gaza though? Egypt doesn't want anything to do with it. The West Bank? Jordan totally doesn't even want it back. Go figure, eh?
It was long before this question of Sinai. In 1948 Israel has stolen the Palestinians lands.
Israel made the Palestinians refugees.
Horst? That's 2 lies in one comment. Fine. Let's ignore the “stolen land” lie. Let's debunk the big lie.
First of all. Did you know there were more jewish than muslim refugees? No? Of course not. Because Israel settled her refugees. Whereas Muslim countries? Not so much. Muslim refugees remain unsettled in refugee camps over 3 generations later. How amazing is that? Why would that even be?
But wait. It gets even more amazing. Because Israel never ran muslims off the land. Never kicked them out. In fact? Israel begged them to stay.
Back in 1948? It went something like this.
Islamists united promised the ancestors of Palestinians that if they went on vacation for 2 weeks then they would be safe while Israel got genocided. Then Palestinian ancestors could come back and share looting the bodies and homes of all the dead in Israel. Of everyone that stayed behind. Christians, muslims, jews, buddhists — whatever.
So the muslims split for a couple weeks to let everyone left in Israel get properly genocided by Islamist armies united. Just for a couple weeks, mind you. No way would it take Islamist armies united longer than a couple weeks to genocide whoever was left. The remaining christians, muslims, jews, buddhists — whatever.
Too bad it didn't work out, eh? Them two weeks been going on for over 60 years now. The Palestinian name for how them 2 weeks keep on stretching is “Naqba”. Catastrophe.
Think Palestinians might figure it's time to try building their own country — instead of always trying to destroy someone else's?
And here's only some the evidence that's what happened in 48. It should go in a post — not a message. And it will. But there's not enough time yet. But for now, this will have to do. Just some of the Muslim voices acknowledging the big lie. The lie the “Israel made the Palestinians refugees”.
Like the voice of Mahmoud Abbas when he wrote (March 1976 in Falastin al-Thawra, the then official journal of the PLO in Beirut):
'The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny, but instead they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, imposed upon them a political and ideological blockade and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live in Eastern Europe… The Arab states succeeded in scattering the Palestinian people.'
Like the voice of Khaled al-Azm, Syrian Prime Minister during 1948-49, when he wrote in his memoirs:
'… the call by the Arab Governments to the inhabitants of Palestine to evacuate it and to leave for the bordering Arab countries, after having sown terror among them… Since 1948 we have been demanding the return of the refugees to their homes. But we ourselves are the ones who encouraged them to leave… We have brought destruction upon a million Arab refugees, by calling upon them and pleading with them to leave their land, their homes, their work and business…'
Starting to get the drift, Horst? No? Well, there's so much more.
Here's more evidence for you, Horst. Just to make sure you can get the drift. Evidence from muslim voices. Since you must believe muslims can tell the truth. Or at least told some truth back around 1948. Before the propaganda to de-legitimate Israel could really get started.
So how about this? From the Arab National Committee report, Haifa, April 27, 1948, to Arab League Governments:
'the delegation.. proudly refused to sign the truce and asked that the evacuation of the Arab population and their transfer to neighboring Arab countries be facilitated… The military and civil authorities and the Jewish representatives expressed their profound regret. The mayor of Haifa (Mr. Shabtai Levi) adjourned the meeting with a passionate appeal to the Arab population to reconsider its decision…'
Did you get that, Horst? How muslims asked jews to 'facilitate' their evacuation? How the mayor of Haifa appealed for muslims to reconsider?
Not convinced? Plagued by doubting? Check this. From Kenneth Bilby's New Star in the Near East, p. 30-31 (New York, 1950):
'The Arab exodus, initially at least, was encouraged by many Arab leaders, such as Haj Amin Al-Husseni, the exiled pro-Nazi Mufti of Jerusalem, and by the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine. They viewed the first wave of Arab setbacks as merely transitory. Let the Palestine Arabs flee into neighboring countries. It would serve to arouse the other Arab peoples to greater effort, and when the Arab invasion struck, the Palestinians could return to their homes and be compensated with the property of Jews driven into the sea.'
Starting to get this picture, Horst? The ugly truth? Ready to give up on the big beautiful lie that “Israel made the Palestinians refugees”? Almost? Good. Here's the best muslim voice yet. Just your average refugee quoted in the Jordanian paper Ad Difaa, September 6, 1954:
'The Arab governments told us: get out so that we can get in. So we got out, but they did not get in.'
How about it, “Horst”? Think you can handle the truth?
Palestinians have never been given an opportunity for self-determination. Freed by the British from the rule of the Ottoman Empire only to be subjugated again by the British Empire.
The 'fix was in' to deprive Palestinians of their own state since 1917 when the British, in their Balfour Declaration, promised the land to the Zionists. Irony of all ironies is the fact that today the Zionists argue that there never was a Palestine when the Balfour Declaration itself refers to 'the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people'.
Nobody argues “there never was a Palestine” Yvette. What some argue is that there never were Palestinians before 1967.
This, of course, is obviously wrong. Too obviously. Because the territory used to be called Palestine. And therefore people living there had to be Palestinians.
But. Just as obviously. The people living in Palestine before the creation of Israel? Those people were not just muslims. Everyone living in Palestine before the creation of Israel was Palestinian. Muslims, christians, jews, buddhists — whatever.
Get it, Yvette? Before 1948, jews were Palestinians too.
So. Do you wish to argue that jewish Palestinians got a better land deal than muslim Palestinians? If so — you would be very wrong. Because muslim Palestinians got 80% of Palestine for a muslim-only state where jews were not allowed. And they got this state 20 years before Israel got created.
Moreover. The jewish state — Israel? Even though it was only 20% of Palestine? Muslims were totally allowed in Israel.
See? No jews allowed in muslim Palestine (Trans-Jordan). But muslims were allowed in jewish Palestine (Israel).
And the jews said: “Yee-haw!” Because at least they finally had someplace to call theirs. But the muslims said: “No fr!ck!n' way!” Because they weren't gon'na settle for 90% of Palestine. They had to have it all.
Nevermind how the jews were the only un-interrupted (ab)originals always present in Palestine. Nevermind how even the Quran acknowledges Palestine as the homeland of the jews. Islamist societies decided to disobey their own g0d and take all Palestine for themselves.
Islamist societies been trying to genocide Israel ever since. But they cannot seem to do it. Even when united to genocide Israel, Islamist societies cannot seem to wipe out a country less than New York — City! — in population. It is almost as if, in always attempting to genocide Israel, in scorning their own g0d — Islamist societies have been scorned by their g0d.