TURNING POINT…ISRAEL ACTS FOR FIRST TIME

 

(from Into the Fray: Israel’s lethal land-for-peace laureates by Martin Sherman)

 

First picture Daily Mirror, picture above Daily Mail. Therefore we know! the people do know! These forces of the Jihad are hammering on the door of Israel especially from the Sinai. The only way that Israel can survive this Jihad is by sharpening its own resources and the only resource it has really is the State of Israel. The article by Martin Sherman is essentially about sharpening that state as are my remarks which follow. Please read, comment and get involved.

Thus, Begin surrendered the entire Sinai Peninsula (won in a war of anticipatory self-defense) with all its strategic depth, mineral wealth and economic potential

This is a nutshell is the theme of this article by Martin Sherman on Jerusalem Post today. It is a masterly exposure of a deadly theme, that if you surrender land as strategic position to an enemyy you will rue the day.

This is a universal theme in world history. In the Brest Litovsk treaty the Bolsheviks having won the revolution in 1917 were forced to bow the knee and to accept huge cuts to their empire. But as the following passage makes clear Trotsky (Lev Davidovich) did so with eyes wide open, open more than most:

 

“The strongest, in a military sense, proved to be Germany, due to the power of its industries and due also to the modest rational character of these industries side by side with a time-worn, anachronistic political system. It was shown that France, largely because of its petty bourgeois economy, had fallen behind Germany, and even so powerful a colonial empire as England, because of the more conservative and routine character of its industries, proved to be weaker in comparison with Germany. When history placed the Russian Revolution face to face with the question of negotiating peace we were not in doubt that we would have to settle the bill for the three and a half years of war – unless the power of the international revolutionary proletariat should decisively upset all calculations. We did not doubt that in German Imperialism we had to deal with an opponent thoroughly saturated with the consciousness of his colonial power, a power which in the course of this war, has come so plainly to the fore.”

 

Sadly what characterises all of the patched up “agreements” that Israel has made with a deadly Islamist enemy have been characterised not with that broadness of vision which was so characteristic of those two quite unique leaders Lenin and Trotsky – but (sad to say) with extreme narrowness.

 

Thus these “agreements” such as that of Begin, Dayan re The Temple, or Sharon were not based at all on any real knowledge but rather on pious hopes and “humanitarian” posturing of the very worst kind.

 

There was a complete lacking in even basic knowledge of what was Islam.

 

This had the telling experience (in another important área of combat on this theme) of leading American Jewish figures campaigning on behalf of the Islamist Killers in Bosnia and Kosovo and attacking Milosevic on behalf of reactionary British, German, French and US Imperialists of NATO

 

(“Conversations with Elie Wiesel”…in which he claims Milosevic wanted to expel and torment the civilians etc. which was all lies and based on the US propaganda machine and fed by the Jihadist lies of the Izetbegovic Islamists in Bosnia)

 

Wiesel shows that just because you have gone through one experience does not mean that you have understood it. Wiesel was supporting the Jihad in Bosnia even though the leader of the Jihad Hajj Amin el Husseini had been an instigator and supervisor of the Nazi death camps. In which Wiesel had paid the price. But his knowledge weas partial.

 

Sheer blindness and ignorance rather than stupidity has been at the base of almost all of the moves Israel has made since its formation. In fact the same lacking in, and of,  real knowledge is very evident in the founders of Zionism, like Hess even on to Herzl.

 

But there was one very sober analysis made at a most early stage (1852), that of the much maligned Karl Marx, who wrote emphasising the central truth of the present Sherman article in discussion:

 

QUOTE”The Koran and the Mussulman legislation emanating from it reduce the geography and ethnography of the various peoples to the simple and convenient distinction of two nations and of two countries; those of the Faithful and of the Infidels.”

A very simple statement indeed! Yet when you bother to absorb its content you will soon discover that Marx has written all there is to write about Islam and that if armed with that then none of this Jewish land would have been handed to this enemy. Not by Begin! not by Sharon! Not by Dayan! And not by Rabin!

 

I find it absolutely mind boggling the kind of barbs directed against socialism by the so called anti-Jihadists of today. The fact is that the founders of socialism were more clear than anybody else as to what precisely was Islam.

 

In fact Lev Davidovich in his clear calls for Jews in the 1930s to make their way to Palestine and to set up their state there, and specifying Mohammedanism as the enemy, and that the Jews had to make their state defensible in that regard, showed he too understood Islam as had Marx.

 

Looking back it seems that the more people grow old the stupider they get.

 

If only the Jewish people had been allowed to look the statement of Marx on Islam straight in the face and took it for what it was. The sheerest warning arguably  ever made about the Fascist nature of Islam – then things would have been very different indeed and today’s warning article by Martin Sherman would not have been so necessary.

 

Nowadays there are so many paid agents who are presenting as “marxists” people like Chomsky who explicitly hates us, or whatever, and do everything positive to present Islam as progressive. And the Anti-Jihadists in the pay of the state department who litter the blogs do exactly that as well. It is “leftist” this and “leftist” that all the way to perdition.

 

As Martin Sherman says clearly in this article – the events of today are being caterpulted in an alarming manner. Events do not proceed in slow evolution but in “Darwinian leaps” as presented by David Jay Gould, and this applies in spades to the critical situation facing Israel.

 

Israel has always been in war since 1948 but now must prepare for critical war situation on a scale that dwarfs 1948 and 1967.

 

This calls for sharpening the weapon and the only weapon Jews have is the weapon of the state of Israel. It is the state which must be sharpened.

 

A new role will certainly be found for the patriot Bibi Netanyahu who will forever remain in our hearts for his pioneering struggle against Iran, and especially against the sponsor of Iran President Obama, in Congress on March 3 2015. He articulates ideas better than anyone I know. But the ideas articulated by Bibi must be formulated elsewhere. Weare in a qualitatively different situation. Indeed in a different world.

 

Consider the steps that must be taken and we can understand better the way to achieve them:

 

SOME CONSIDERATIONS:

Be objective about Israel. What is it? Surely the Jewish Homeland. Only Jews can vote the the Knesset. The rest is nonsense.

 

That (the precious) Knesset of the Jews holds the power. Disband as of now the Supreme Court. Trust the Jews a great people to rule with firmness, wisdom and benevolence.

 

Place the Karl Marx understanding of Islam in front. No Muslims can live in the Holy Land. Islam is not Holy. Islam is an ideology of war on us all. We can though proceed in a humanitarian way here but with great firmness. Always with firmness to the strategic end which is no Muslims in the Holy Land!

 

Define the borders: They are Golan, Jordan Valley in fullest sense, the sense of Weismann on 3 january 1919 with support from no less than Feisal, border with Egypt having taken Sinai on defensive basis, and sea.

 

As for democracy that is a indeed the highest form of democracy in this case, which can only be defined as the democracy of preventing a new Holocaust of the Jews by defeating the Jihad.

 

ISRAELI LEADERS ARE PARALYSED INTHE FACE OF ARAB AND WORLD ANTISEMITISM

Sharon expressed this paralysis. He knew that the removal of Saddam by Bush would usher in a period of Iran dominance in Iraq and the Middle East, knew this very well based on his experience of the area, he was no fool! But he could not say so in public even though he argued with the political imbecile Bush. That seems to me to express just how unable to lead the Jewish people are all of the Jewish elites today. This leadership issue is central and creates great dangers which will only get worse!

All my reading on this subject of Israel and the way the world is attacking Israel, demands the need for a strong propaganda-like response from Israel

 

That is not forthcoming and under the leadership of the present groups/parties/individuals/blogs will not be forthcoming any time soon, meaning never.

 

That is the problem, the central problem, that dwarfs all else and is connected to Israel taking effective action to defend itself, which also it finds itself impossible to do. The Israeli elites were prepared to look elsewhere for about 7 years as the people of Sderot were bombarded weekly with hamas and Islamic Jihad rockets. They could not and did not take any action to block this which amounted to a second class citizen ship in effect being placed on these people next to this aza border.

 

So we have two things happening in synchronicity: the message abroad from Israel and the inability to take action to determine its future. Both of these are held together in a vicelike grip that will not let go.

 

The development of the world crisis of the capitalist system, with money markets as we speak more and more on edge and seemingly more vulnerable, the exposure of the world and its people to new forms of barbarity by the likes of IS flashing across our screens, and the obvious vulnerability to this by Israel, while the world as Martin Sherman says so well, corners on Israel, thus forcing Israel more and more into a Samson situation.

 

These are not small issues and cannot be answered in a  facile way.

 

This places great demands on Israeli leadership.

 

Here is the kicker though. It is possible for Caroline Glick to be enraged at EU reps but at the same time not to deal with the overall crisis in a comprehensive manner. (I am all for being enraged but rage in itself, like prayer, is never a strategy)

 

I will give two examples that point to the new aspect to the situation faced by Jews, Israel and the world.

 

  1. The methods of Netanyahu, ignoring then massive physical splurge on Gaza (Protective Edge) (Which episode in history has given no edge and which therefore was not protective) while at the same time tying the hands of the soldiers fighting in Gaza, have proved to be disastrously inadequate
  2. Related to that the reality in Britain, which I have looked at especially based on written reports, which were available and have been available but have not been discussed in any significant manner, that the old methods of defending Israel abroad have collapsed. I am referring to the bankrupt “friends” of Israel concept. I have showed that the “friends” quickly became the “enemies” as they effectively voted (many by abstaining) for a Palestine Jihad state. (Vote in Britain October 13)

Those two examples in our very recent past shows that there is needed an overall strategy for Israel, Jews and the rest of us, to fight this war and it simply is not there.

 

I think that is the starting point. The Antisemitic positions of European elites are just a symptom of this lack of strategy by the Israeli leaders. They are created because the Israeli leadership is vacuum territory.

 

It is impossible for Israel because there is no clear strategy inside of Israel on how it can defend itself and how the Jewish state can be brought forward in this situation. I need to return to that but the answer by Sherman to Bennett’s Saban tussle with Idyke is a starting point.

 

The leaders are paralysed because they do not know what to do and if they do not know what to do then they do not know what to say either

 

That may sound simplistic but it is true

THERE IS A COMPLETE VACUUM OF LEADERSHIP IN ISRAEL AND ISRAEL IS SINKING LIKE A STONE

this is the two state theory summed up in all its gory reality

From the recent Martin Sherman article on Jerusalem Post (http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Into-the-fray-The-Arabs-war-against-the-Jews-cont-Root-causes-and-red-herrings-383081 ) there is this paragraph among many memorable paragraphs:

 

From the newly elected president, Reuven Rivlin, to veteran Police Chief Yohanan Danino, statements explicitly alleging or insinuating that the Jews’ own conduct – such as exercising their right of access to religious sites or legislative initiatives to codify in law the values reflected in the Declaration of Independence – precipitated, or at least, exacerbated, recent Arab butchery of innocent Jews in the streets, on the roads, inside synagogues, and at building sites across the country. – end quote

 

Rivlin we know. Danino is head since a couple of years ago of ALL of the police in Israel. He is a top dog really! And the type of person elected to be top dog is a man who was behind the persecution of Liberman, the Russian Israeli politician and essentially patriot (despite many issues he is that)

 

Even this one paragraph throws up serious issue and offers a light into the reality of Israeli elitist betrayal of the Jewish Zionist cause

 

Meanwhile the various bloggers on sites such as Israpundit and on Sherman’s own Facebook page simply cannot get to terms with the central issue which is ESSENTIALLY totally about leadership and the absence of patriotic leadership which CAN lead.

 

Sherman himself who is principled does not engage in hero worship of anybody and in the paragraph previous to this alludes to my central point – that it is an overall crisis of leadership of Israel that is at stake. Read this first and carefully before I comment:

 

One senior public figure after another – not only on the Left of the political spectrum – have come out with declarations that have ranged from regrettably inappropriate, through hopelessly unfounded, to dangerously counter-productive. (end quote)

 

I do not wish to divert but…Note that Sherman uses this outdated and irrelevant term the “Left” when the issue is one of nationalism and patriotism and not the price of bread. It is a corrupt term leading to corruption of the mind – the worst kind!

 

But having said that Sherman is very clear! It is as he says and I repeat “not only on the Left of the political spectrum” … that the betrayal of Israel is taking place.

 

In other words he is saying as I am – It is a total crisis of leadership. As far as true and principled leadership is concerned it is vacuum country.

 

As I said about a year ago there is a complete vacuum of leadership in Israel where all kinds of (what can I call them lets be charitable) “idiots” creep in

 

To finish off let me see how Martin Sherman ends his piece and it is the way actually that he ends every piece:

 

 Unless the Jews convey the unequivocal message that any such challenges will be met with overwhelming force, they will increasingly be the victims of such force at the hands of their Arab adversaries.

 

There may be those who find this prescription excessively harsh.

 

Sadly, the only way the Jews can avoid living permanently by the sword is to convey convincingly to the Arabs that they have the resolve to do so. I invite everyone to consider the alternative.

 

Only Arab despair can bring any hope for peace. (end quote)

 

I agree with every word in the above but I say in the ABC of politics the above is a very tiny A or (a)

 

In reality it is really tame because it does not deal at all with power and with the former scenario of the PRESIDENT and the HEAD OF POLICE being absolute scoundrels, and as far as Jewish patriotism is concerned THEY ARE NOT remotely so!

 

ANOTHER TAME ENDING

 

There are just 3 paragraphs to read in the Caroline Glick latest article – again the last three THE ENDING!

 

After much good analysis about this strange new Netanyahu Bill Caroline ends like this:

 

Rather than doing the hard work of running a continuous, relentless campaign to accrue the requisite power to reform the system, politicians on the Right have embraced an unnecessary bill that will do nothing to protect Israel’s future.

 

On the other hand, their counterparts on the Left have shown that the Israeli Left is today largely indistinguishable from the international Left which rejects Israel’s right to exist and rejects the Jewish people’s right to sovereignty and freedom in its homeland. With Haaretz acting as the conduit between the BDS movement and government ministers, politicians on the Left have become unmoored from the basic requirements of national life.

 

In other words, the current maelstrom over the draft Nation State bill shows that Israel’s political Right is far weaker than it needs to be and that Israel’s political Left is far more destructive than it ought to be.(end quote)

http://carolineglick.com/the-storm-over-the-teacup/

 

I mean what an ending! What is THAT about!

 

I feel as if I am in the middle of a large and deep lough and unable to swim and Caroline has planted me there.

 

There is just no way out of that last sentence of Caroline´s. I am sinking and if this is the best (Caroline) that Israel can do it will sink like a stone.

INTO THE FRAY…URGENTLY IS NEEDED A NEW LEADERSHIP FOR THE JEWISH PEOPLE FACING WORLD JIHAD

Europe attacks Israel as their Muslim population expands massively

Into the fray: The two-stage ‘solution’ …article by Jerusalem Post writer Martin Sherman with our commentary

This is an historic article by Martin Sherman because it follows and is an answer to the pivotal decision of the Swedish and British Governments to recognize a “Palestine” state. Sherman makes it clear in this article, quoting Palestinian Arabs themselves, that such a state is untenable and is only for the purpose of tearing down, likely through terror of one sort or another, the Jewish state. At the end of the article Sherman refers briefly to the fault of the Israeli State in not refuting these claims and moves towards a “Palestine” Arab state. It seems from this article that if they had decided to so refute then there was more than enough ammunition to convince the world that “Palestinianism” is Jihadism.

 

But they have not and are not doing so and that is the crunch issue in this Sherman article. Every article should lead on to a question “What to do next?”

 

In reading around the Swedish/Holocaust issue and in the article I wrote yesterday I left out a significant fact. As I stated the Swedish state and government as opposed to the Swedish people were up to their eye balls in collaborating with the Nazis. What struck me and what I left out of the article was the way that Shimon Peres has brown nosed these Swedish elites for so many years. Peres is old now but he has probably spent from say 1950 to 2010 doing this kind of fiendish activity. You see the Swedes were in on murdering 6 million of his people the Jews in the years of the Holocaust. Then Peres spent the next 60 years telling the Swedish Government “Forget about all of that. That is past. Let us be friends as if nothing has happened”

 

There is the strange whiff of treason here in the thought which must have been in the head of Peres “Really we understand your (Swedish) collaboration with the Nazis because anyway we the Jews had it coming”

 

This goes on right across the board. Why would any Jewish Israeli business do commercial business with a country like Britain that seeks to destroy Israel by means of the “Palestine” state? They are not stupid. They know that would be the result. How would they like a Jihadist state in Kent next door to London?

 

The second thing is how Jewish big wigs in America attacked without mercy the Serbs and supported the NATO bombing of the Serbs, as Clinton reached a deal with Izetbegovic (for sure and inhis own writing an extreme Jihadist) to carry out a massacre for false flag purposes. That was Srebrenica.

 

In all of that activity in Bosnia and Kosovo a man called Michael Ignatieff was central in mobilizing support for the Clinton war on the Serbs on the false thesis that the Serbs were carrying out a Holocaust on the Muslims. But it was Yugoslavia that was being invaded by Jihadists and the first beheadings that I saw in this modern era were done on young Serb small farming lads in the woods of Bosnia – supported and more (we can say actually instigated) by Clinton and a foretaste of the Islamic State.

 

I said “used” the Holocaust. Sadly there were Jews connected to the Holocaust Museum too ready to work with Ignatieff in this evil propaganda against the Serbs.

 

Ignatieff is an academic today but he certainly finds the time to set up Assad in the same way that he did to the Serbs. In January of this year he was splashing across the Media photos that  a “dissenter” had taken out of Syria. These photos were something along the lines of the Srebrenica Hoax propaganda of the Media.

 

The reason that I mention this today is that last night I heard it reported that Ignatieff had joined forces with an American Holocaust Museum and that this was on the wires yesterday. I have googled under “back news ignatieff holocaust assad” but can find nothing this morning.

 

This does not deflect from the truth which is that Ignatieff and others used widely the Holocaust against the Serbs, and used the Holocaust to carry out the NATO Clinton war against the Serbs. This has another lesson in relation to the Sherman article I mention above which is that the ruling classes in today’s world will stop at nothing to carry out their aims.

 

As regards the mention that Martin Sherman makes in his article on the British vote in Parliament to recognize a “Palestine” state I plan to write an article on this to complement the article I did yesterday on the Swedish recognition of “Palestine”. As I read around this one thing struck me and sticks so strongly in my mind. Just about a year after the Holocaust was ended by the defeat of the Allies (1945) the British Government was hanging Jews in Palestine! I prisons that the British had set up in Palestine to hang Jews ONE year after the Holocaust. Please do not tell us that this recent British Parliament vote is without context or meaning.

 

What to do? As always I come back to the governments of Israel and the present one is led by Netanyahu. The leader gives form to his government. We are now being backed up by many who then were silent. Netanyahu had to use the situation to totally destroy Hamas. That meant the arrest of the Hamas leadership. The thesis put about by Netanyahu and his people (literally cronies) that Hamas was needed to keep the Arabs fighting with each other was treasonous.

 

But Netanyahu still remains in power. That is the weakness of I may be so bold of the Martin Sherman article.

 

It centres all of the time on the question “What to DO next?”

 

I had experience of the site called Israpundit.org. Those people there would talk and talk and talk. Is that a feature of Jewish politics? If it is it is decidedly treasonous.

 

There must be found a way to create a new leadership and that is the issue I pose.

Feix Quigley writing from Spain, but native of Ireland

 

 

 

FOLLOWS THIS HISTORICAL ARTICLE BY MARTIN SHERMAN

 

Into the fray: The two-stage ‘solution’

 

The entire issue of Palestinian statehood, and the Palestinian narrative on which it is based, are nothing but a giant hoax so transparent it is inconceivable that anyone even feigns credence to it.

 

 

‘With the two-state solution… Israel will collapse, because if they get out of Jerusalem, what will become of all the talk about the Promised Land and the chosen people? What will become of all the sacrifices they made – just to be told to leave? They consider Jerusalem to have a spiritual status. The Jews consider Judea and Samaria to be their historic dream. If the Jews leave those places, the Zionist idea will begin to collapse…. Then we will move forward.”

 

 – Abbas Zaki, senior PLO official. (ANB TV, Lebanon, May 7, 2009)

 

Two recent events have once again propelled Palestinian statehood into the forefront of media spotlight, after several months of it being overshadowed by other events like developments in Ukraine, the war in Gaza and the televised barbarity of Islamic State.

 

One was the statement by Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven (subsequently somewhat equivocally revised) that his country would recognize a Palestinian state. The other was the British Parliament’s (nonbinding, but in the eyes of some, historic) vote on recognition of statehood for the Palestinians.

 

In light of these incidents, I was invited to appear on i24news news and participate in a discussion with a Palestinian interlocutor on the prospects for, and the prudence of, establishing a Palestinian state.

 

Much of what follows reflects the things I said during that 20-minute debate – and the things I didn’t, but would have, had time permitted.

 

 Patently incompatible

 

I began by asserting that it should be obvious to anyone with an iota of intellectual integrity that establishing a Palestinian state, in any conceivable configuration, is incompatible with the security and survival of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.

 

It is incomprehensible for anyone who holds this view of Israel’s role in the world not to strive to have the issue of Palestinian statehood removed from the international discourse.

 

After all, the recent round of fighting in Gaza should have brought home dramatically the perils involved in a Palestinian entity with a short 50-km. border, abutting the sparsely populated, mainly rural South.

 

Thus, little imagination is required to grasp the horrific implications for Israel entailed in the establishment of yet another Palestinian entity in Judea-Samaria (a.k.a.

 

“West Bank”), but now with a 500-km. border, abutting the heavily populated urban center of the country – with Ben-Gurion, Israel’s only international airport, easily within mortar range.

 

Just what the significance of this latter element is should be vividly underscored by two disturbing features of the last clash in Gaza. First, Ben-Gurion was closed down by the landing of a single stray rocket in its approximate vicinity. Second, the Iron Dome defense system, highly effective against Kassam and Grad rockets, was markedly less so against mortar fire.

 

Disastrously disruptive

 

Little imagination is required to envision the disastrously disruptive consequences for Israel’s international air contacts were its only gateway subjected to incessant – even intermittent – short-range mortar barrages from nearby locations, far more accurate than any occasional rocket launched from the remote Gaza Strip.

 

Much the same could be said for the country’s land transport system – with the Trans-Israel Highway (Route 6) running for much of its length immediately adjacent to, and well within rifle range from, any prospective frontier.

 

Moreover, the impact of this chilling prospect is magnified by the fact that, unlike Gaza, much of the territory earmarked for a future Palestinian state comprises the limestone highlands which dominate Israel’s urbanized Coastal Plain. In it lie virtually all of Israel’s major airfields (civilian and military); main seaports and naval bases; vital infrastructure installations/systems (power generation and transmission, water, communications and transportation systems); centers of civilian government and military command; and 80 percent of the civilian population and commercial activity.

 

All of these could be disrupted at will, at minimal cost, by any hostile forces, whether regular or renegade, deployed on the western slopes of these highlands.

 

Clearly, recurrent disruption of their functioning – or even a tangible threat thereof – would make the maintenance of socioeconomic routine untenable.

 

‘Not since Dr. Goebbels…’

 

Amplifying the dire danger that a Palestinian state would pose for Israel is the undisguised intention of the Palestinians, of all political persuasions, to exploit such a state as a platform for further assaults on the Jewish state, until “Palestine,” from the River to the Sea, is totally free of the “Zionist invader.”

 

To convey the manifest mendacity of the Palestinian position, I drew on a quotation from an opinion column titled “Palestinian Lies” that appeared in Haaretz, towards the end of the near-hegemonic era of the Labor Party, then headed by Yitzhak Rabin: “Of all Palestinian lies there is no lie greater or more crushing than that which calls for the establishment of a separate Palestinian state in the West Bank… Not since the time of Dr. Goebbels has there been a case in which continual repetition of a lie has borne such great fruits…”

 

There was a tangible sense of surprise in the i24news studio when I revealed that these were not the words of some rightwing religious radical, but of Prof. Amnon Rubinstein, who was elected to the Knesset soon after penning the cited article, served for a decade as an MK for the far-left dovish Meretz party, and held the post of minister of education.

 

 One narrative; five myths

 

I took the firm position that Rubinstein’s assessment of the veracity of Palestinian claims is essentially accurate, and that the Palestinian narrative is nothing but a giant hoax, a gigantic political sleight-of-hand, comprising five transparent myths: Myth of Palestinian Peoplehood; Myth of Palestinian Nationhood; Myth of Palestinian Homeland; Myth of Palestinian Statelessness; and Myth of Palestinian Refugees.

 

I have discussed these myths in some detail in previous columns. All are easily refutable, indeed freely admitted, falsehoods, intended to blur the fact that the two-state prescription is a two-stage blueprint for the annihilation of Israel.

 

When my Palestinian interlocutor in the debate charged that my position merely reflected my own, uninformed prejudices, I replied that quite the opposite is true.

 

My contentions can all be conclusively corroborated by deeds, declarations and documents of the Palestinians.

 

I began by citing former Arab MK Azmi Bishara, described as a “Palestinian intellectual,” and forced to flee Israel to avoid investigation of alleged acts of treason during the 2006 Second Lebanon War.

 

One could hardly find a more resounding renunciation of Palestinian nationhood than that provided by Bishara when, in a 1994 Channel 2 program, he astounded his Israeli co-participants with the following assertion: “I don’t think there is a Palestinian nation at all. I think there is an Arab nation. I always thought so… I think it’s a colonialist invention – a Palestinian nation. When were there any Palestinians? Where did it come from?” Indeed, when? Indeed, where? A swift tour d’horizon of decades of what prominent Palestinians have done, said and written will convincingly confirm the flagrant falsehood of the Palestinian narrative and the sinister subterfuge on which their demand for statehood is founded.

 

Five myths (cont.)

 

For example, senior Palestinian leaders have admitted – openly, consistently and continually – that Palestinians are not, and never have been, a distinct people identifiably different from others in the Arab world (Myth of Peoplehood).

 

But not only do the Palestinians admit that they are not a discrete socio-ethnic entity – i.e. a people – they concede that as a political unit – i.e. a nation – their demands and aspirations are neither genuine nor permanent (Myth of Nationhood) and are merely a contrivance to undermine Jewish nationhood.

 

The Palestinians explicitly eschewed any sovereign claims to the “West Bank” (and Gaza), only incorporating them in their territorial claims after these territories came under Israeli control (Myth of Homeland), clearly vindicating the view that the concept of Palestinian “national identity” is a fabricated construct, conjured up to further the Arab quest to repudiate Jewish national claims.

 

Moreover, the Palestinians are “stateless” not as a result of callous Israeli malfeasance, but of deliberate Arab malevolence (Myth of Statelessness). It is the Arabs who either stripped them of citizenship they already had (as King Hussein did in 1988), or precluded them from acquiring citizenship they desire (as per the Arab League directive).

 

Finally, regarding the issue of refugees, it is becoming increasingly difficult to conceal the fact that the status of Palestinian “refugees” is totally different from that of all other refugees on the face of the globe (Myth of Refugees). Were the same criterion that applies to all other cases, applied to the Palestinians, the number of refugees would plunge dramatically – from around 5 million claimed today, to fewer than 50,000.

 

The malice behind the myths

 

Arguably the most dramatically revealing and comprehensive declaration as to the malicious mendacity that underlies Palestinian claims to statehood was provided by the late Zuheir Mohsin, a senior member of the PLO Executive, in an interview to the Dutch newspaper Trouw.

 

It is a declaration frequently cited by opponents of Palestinian statehood, yet seldom repudiated by its proponents. I, too, have referred to several portions of it in the past, but in the present international context, I feel there is great value in presenting it in its entirety.

 

In the interview headlined: “We are only Palestinians for political reasons,” Moshin stated frankly: “There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese.

 

We are all part of ONE people, the Arab nation… We are ONE people. Only for political reasons we carefully underwrite our Palestinian identity. Because it is of national interest for the Arabs to advocate the existence of Palestinians to balance Zionism. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity exists only for tactical reasons. The establishment of a Palestinian state is a new tool to continue the fight against Israel and for Arab unity.

 

“A separate Palestinian entity needs to fight for the national interest in the then remaining occupied territories. The Jordanian government cannot speak for Palestinians in Israel, Lebanon or Syria. Jordan is a state with specific borders. It cannot lay claim on – for instance – Haifa or Jaffa, while I AM entitled to Haifa, Jaffa, Jerusalem and Beersheba… The Palestinian state would be entitled to represent all Palestinians in the Arab world and elsewhere. Once we have accomplished all of our rights in all of Palestine, we must not postpone the unification of Jordan and Palestine for one second,” Moshin said.

 

 Two stages, not two states

 

It is hard to conceive of a more brazen confession that the true goal of the twostate principle is the two-stage destruction of Israel.

 

It would be a perilous error to dismiss this as unrepresentative of mainstream Palestinian opinion today.

 

Nowhere is it more clearly articulated than in the Palestinian National Covenant, still posted on the official “State of Palestine” site hosted by the UN. It proclaims: “Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time…

 

“Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history…”

 

Article 12 lays out the temporary nature of Palestinian identity in the staged strategy for the “liberation” of “Palestine” defined as “an indivisible territorial unit, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate.”

 

It states: “The Palestinian people are a part of the Arab Nation… [and] believe in Arab unity… however, they must, at the present stage of their struggle, safeguard their Palestinian identity…”

 

The present stage? See what I mean by two stages? Stage one: Create Palestine.

 

Stage two: Eliminate Israel – precisely as per Abbas Zaki in the introductory excerpt.

 

 The real tragedy

 

All of this is – or at least, should be –painfully obvious. Yet, Israel has failed – even refused – to make this case to the world.

 

This is inexcusable, incomprehensible and unacceptable.

 

For as Ronald Lauder, president of the World Jewish Congress, correctly underscored in bemoaning the Swedish initiative, (Jerusalem Post, October 14), doing so is a “strategic imperative” for the nation.

 

It is one that Israel has failed dismally to address. That is, perhaps, the greatest tragedy of all.

 

Martin Sherman (www.martinsherman.net) is the founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies (www.strategic- israel.org).

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Into-the-fray-The-two-stage-solution-379041

AFTER GAZA DISASTER NETANYAHU MUST BE OVERTHROWN

 

Gaza PALESTINIANS SIT in a damaged house as they watch a parade celebrating Hamas’s ‘victory’ over Israel, in the Shejaia neighborhood, Gaza. (photo credit:REUTERS)

 

The analysis of Martin Sherman on the Gaza War is surely correct. This war was conducted in the most disgraceful even farcical manner by the Israeli leaders.

 

Sherman is correct in that they dissipated the good will in the world by not advancing energetically in the first days to challenge Hamas Fatah power. Very quickly their hesitation gave the opportunity to Antisemites in various forums to themselves organise and advance

 

But Sherman is incorrect in one main respect which is that he expects the present elite to somehow create a programme which includes propaganda, they call it “Hasbara”. Propaganda is vital. But how can it be done and what is its content. Sherman is incorrect if he thinks or expects or even implies that the present lot can do this. The whole point is that they cannot

 

But if they cannot then who can.

 

There needs to be a new party leadership in Israel. Given the total bankruptcy of the present leadership right across the board this will have to be a Trotskyist Party. It is necessary to possess the state and the state apparatus…KEY CONCEPT!

 

I wish they were not actually necessary or a truth. Then we could all get back to our gardening.

 

But history ordains that it is not possible. We have to face up to the demands of the situation.

 

The present Israeli ruling class is very divided and is very bankrupt. LET US NUMBER THEM…There is the traitorous elite around Labour (that is not socialism in case you think it is the discredited Labour Parties of the world), there is a religious outfit called Shas, totally opportunist, not really political at all, there is the openly Shimon Peres residue BASURA (OSLO) as carried on by Livni. Then there is Likud who have various strains of patriotism but that is drowned out by their political ignorance, and their division among themselves. For example Feiglin INTERESTING GUY says good things at times, but the way he treated Glenn Beck shows he is a kind of doctrinaire who lives in the clouds. (Beck had to be welcomed to Jerusalem while never abandoning independence from Beck). These are basic primary school political lessons.

Martin Sherman is doing a very useful job in facing down the excuses for action (he is calling them “canards” Like it!

 

Sherman wants 1 per cent of budget, a cool billion, devoted to “Hasbara”

 

I agree and would even up it. That is how important!

 

It is always concrete. Lenin said Land Bread and Peace. THAT was Hasbara! It was concrete. It explained reality. It proposed action. It justified action. And the action was decisive and courageous.  For example Lenin pulled out of the War Bloodbath while Kerensky kept on the bloodletting. THAT alone won huge support.

 

First steps then 2 months ago LET US IMAGINE

 

  1. Explain the enemy. Clarify the enemy. That meant the “Protocols of Zion” of Hamas, An evil Nazi type organisation. And Caroline Glick did the second part. She explained how Fatah WAS Hamas at every point.
  2. So I think perhaps one relevant paragraph from the Charter of Hamas would be sufficient
  3. Thus explain the need for the necessary action. Do not overload! Ever!
  4. Which was to take over Gaza by means of a massive onslaught in the very first couple or three days
  5. Kill or arrest (then execute after military trial) the enemy leaders. Even be magnanimous and offer exile to some
  6. Explain through Hasbara that this is the only way to peace, and why there must be nobody who harbours Antisemitic views living in the state of Israel (Our central point which we continually make). Explain this by means of basic maps produced by the pioneering Mark Langfan (for example 3 dimensional maps which show that the hills of Judea and Samaria are overlooking the massively populated Coastal Strip of Tel Aviv and are in striking distance, easily, of the main Israeli airport
  7. Arabs of Palestine can expect a new and promising life elsewhere. Offer this challenge to the world governments to help them, especially Arab Governments to help the Palestinian Arabs find a new life. What happens if they refuse? No matter this is not predicated on the cooperation of our enemy!!!)
  8. Remind the world that the Arabs got 22 states since 1922, not bad going at all, and they are most rich
  9. Even among these Arabs in Palestine there are some who do really love Israel and love Jews. They are exceptional people. Love them! This is a humanitarian solution and not a racist thing in any way!
  10. From that position of decisive power and complete understanding of use of the state (we are never Anarchists a battle which goes back now nearly 200 years) the way opens up
  11. A new situation is created through action

BUT THERE IS NO OTHER WAY. THERE IS CERTAINLY NO OTHER WAY THAN THIS.

 

GIVE SOMETHING TO US PLEASE!!!

Do you agree? Good and we ask something in return. When you see attacks on Leon Trotsky do some digging because the above ideas are straight from our understanding of what Leon Trotsky was all about. Please. Do your own research. No sly digs either. I want the truth in everything. And I want some loyalty from my friends!

 

WE NEED A NEW PARTY TO SPEARHEAD NO ANTISEMITISM (PALESTINIANISM) IN ISRAEL

 

As Caroline Glick and Martin Sherman among many others are saying the whole of the Operation in Gaza has been a defeat for Israel. Israel and the IDF did not settle the issue of Hamas rockets and tunnels.

 

War is not casual. There is always a decisión. More than that targets always have to be set. The main problem in this case is that war was not declared and no targets were set.

 

Netanyahu and his group who control the Media and the State in Israel must not be allowed to ever spin it in any way that suggests a victory.

 

If no war was declared with clear aims that is a problem. If no targets were clearly set another big problem

 

War was NOT declared. Targets changed as things developed.

 

I am proposing that this looseness of language, action, aims, targets, is a result of how Israel is actually governed.

 

WAR RUN BY ONE MAN AND ONE OTHER

The war was run by two people, Netanyahu and Ya’alon (Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon)

 

The war, not called a war I repeat, was not run by a cabinet with the cabinet delegating. There was no delegation. Netanyahu decided.

 

It was also run by the Army Generals, that is the leadership of the IDF, in which Israeli Intelligence was involved too. But not by Cabinet.

 

A leader Danny Dayon was expelled from the Cabinet by Netanyahu because he did not toe THIS line, which is a line of ruling through a non cabinet cabal.

 

This is how no decisión was made to go to war and no targets were set, which resulted in something not war but “operation” (Operation Protective Edge), and not targets of war but tactics which were changing.

 

All of that has resulted in a failure. Every Israeli today knows that the rockets are not destroyed and the tunnels were not destroyed (Debka reports that only tunnels within a few miles of the border were hit by the IDF. Were they all hit? No! And that leaves the whole network in this strip which lead into these tunnels. The whole strip sits now on these deadly tunnels. And the same thing with the rockets, the majority still in existence in Gaza.

 

Politicaly too the war is lost totally. The Obama and Netanyahu line is to bring Abbas forward. But Caroline Glick shows that this is a récipe for disaster and for the introduction of rockets, powerful with guidance, into those tunnels

 

Lost too because Hizbullah and Iran are drawn in by Obama to this solution. That means defeat in spades for Netanyahu and his “Operation”

 

The question is how to form a clear point of opposition to Netanyahu?

 

4international has noted what a great job Martin Sherman has done in his last article in which he records in historical detail (Ben Gurion, Begin, Sharon) how Israeli héroes sell out at critical moments.

 

TURN OF BIBI TO BETRAY…BIG TIME

Now it is the turn of Netanyahu to betray. Netanyahu too is a favoured son of Israel, the brother of the Entebbe Raid hero, absolutely part of Jewish folklore. Caroline Glick has noted in great detail the ACTUAL (historical detail is her strong point) role of Abbas and how Obama, Kerry and maybe Netanyahu are pushing this person to the Forefront. Note as the UN was the front for Hamas in Gaza, as Caroline points out very clearly and above all comprehensively, detail very impressive, that now it will be Abbas, UN as front for Hamas.

 

http://carolineglick.com/obamas-new-plan-for-hamas/

 

There are many who are voicing the above feelings of dissidence with the ruling elite in Israel from the side of patriotism. (Note the use of left and right as commonly used in Israeli politics is not allowed on this site. These terms are meaningless in the broad world) (Martin Sherman I request you to be careful in using these terms…I have strong backing in this from Francisco Gil White, Jared Israel and Richard Landes)

 

But meanwhile back to this war situation and how practically to proceed.

 

I feel that complex issues can always be reduced down to simple things. In the case of Lenin it was BREAD the people were starving, PEACE the horrific world war 1, LAND many centuries of peasant oppression. (I know this example best so I use it and I think it should be used…this is not pushing “communism” even though I do that as well, and proudly so)

 

I see so many plans and schemes pushed forward by Jews. I know why. They are all trying to do their best and are so fearful of the future given their past.

 

But I try to reduce it to a simple concept. How about “Root out Antisemitism … out of the land of Israel”. Rephrase but keep the meaning.

 

To my studied political position as an irishman I hold that to throw a single Stone against a Jew in Israel (or anywhere on earth) IS ANTISEMITISM IN THE EXTREME.

 

So go figure! What does that mean in practice? it means it is ALL antisemitism in action today!

 

We can ask what does patriotism or authentic nationalism mean in Israel. It can have a religious aspect but still must be practical to survive … after all all human life is practical.

 

The whole of the campaign by Netanyahu in this Gaza Operation was an exercise in how to provide your Antisemite Enemies with all the ammunition they need to stir up vile Antisemitism in the world.

 

The biggest lesson is that the world is going to accuse Israel of being Nazi etc. anyway, whether they send warnings before destroying every empty house, whether they abort missions or not. So why do it?

 

The biggest lesson is that last paragraph above. Study any war, anywhere in the history of warfare and you will find that you attack the enemy with force and without warning. Also you do it decisively, brutally because war is brutal, and over as short a time period as possible. In other words you seek always to pulverise the enemy.

 

Those are the rules of warfare. But that is not adequate for this Jewish cabal who leads Israel since 1948. They want to have special rules for the Jews at war where the Jews are to be seen by the world as super humanitarians.

 

Why not just go to war TO WIN, end the war with victory in as short a period as possible TO WIN AND SAVE LIFE, having achieved victory and pulverized the enemy then be merciful if mercy is possible.

 

The very first consideration for a new leadership, as opposed to what has been in Israel since 48, is to face this consideration at the staart of this war.

 

Hamas control Gaza and the UN in Gaza is an arm of Hamas.

 

ANOTHER CONSIDERATION A NEW LEADERSHIP MIGHT WRITE ON THE BLACKBOARD AT PLANNING STAGE:

 

Evidence from Mohammed el Dura/France2 and from Qana (EU Referendum Reports) that the enemy have a vast Pallywood industry in operation.

 

We knew totally that the enemy control all aspects of the international media in Gaza, something which happened also totally in Yugoslavia against Milosevic and the Serbs.

 

So why did the Netanyahu group therefore do it like that, giving every opportunity and all of the time in the world for the enemy to promote their Pallywood productions and the international media to set up their extensive and long running campaigns of vilification of Israel AND OF JEWS?

 

I return again to these two great assets for Israel:

 

Caroline Glick has showed in the latest article in great detail how Fatah also is an arm of Hamas. This has great importance for the tactics now to be used.

 

Martin Sherman in his latest article showed how every Israeli leader since 1948, especially those with a bit of a name for bravery like Sharon and Begin, that they were a disaster in leadership

 

I cannot say that a Trotskyist Party can come forward this week or even next month and it pains me to say that. Trotskyisn was wiped out in 1940 by Stalin and by Hitler and by all capitalist governments. Roosevelt promoted Stalinism.

 

Nevertheless there must be a next practical step by patriots (Note again I shun the use of “Right” here a term that is lethally self-limiting for a great cause)

 

There must now be a new organised NEW party created on a platform opposed to a SECOND Palestine Arab state in Israel. Netanyahu has of course placed himself outside of this. Such a party is in opposition to Netanyahu. But note at times in unity and in defence of too.

 

Martin Sherman and Caroline Glick plus many others must continue their activity, telling Jews and the world the truth, but they must do it as part of an organised party which is in opposition to the present ruling group.

 

Of course such a party must defend Netanyahu and others who are actually our enemies if they come under attack from the Antisemites, but that is a necessary defence against the enemy, especially necessary to enable the discussion to proceed.

 

This defence of our political opponents becomes ever more necessary in a period like today when there is a Muslim Brotherhood man in charge of America with all the power that Obama brings to his mission to promote the Muslim Brotherhood. I return to this theme of how to defend Netanyahu at times agains the enemy precisely because of Obamam who is a Muslim hater of Jews

 

Now Obama clearly sees the need and the opportunity to rescue Hamas by promoting Abbas and Fatah.

 

El Sisi like Mubarak remains an Antisemitic Arab. The situation not to go along with Obama support for Abbas becomes ever more critical.

 

Israel does not need grand plans and it simply needs to find a way through a party to express its needs at each point

 

IMMEDIATE AND UNPOSTPONABLE STEPS

The very first step is to explain to the Israeli people that the Operation in Gaza did not and was never meant to defeat Hamas.

 

Moreover explain that Abbas is actually worse than Hamas. They are all part of the same Antisemitic scheme in the world against Jews and Israel.

 

That is the single most important issue to be fought out and clarified in front of every single Israeli today, and that includes those Arabs in Israel who love Israel.

 

It is a political and a practical task and not a religious one that has to be carried out. In this case freedom of religion means putting an end to Antisemitism in Israel. Start there at least!

 

 

 

ANSWER TO MARTIN SHERMAN LEON TROTSKY CALLED FOR ISRAEL TO BE SET UP AND PREDICTED THE HOLOCAUST…TROTSKY WAS A ZIONIST

(Martin Sherman is the founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies)

 

 

http://www.4international.me is reprinting this important analysis of the present leadership situation in Israel today because we (mostly as we will see) agree with it. Yet Martin Sherman makes very serious mistakes which are rooted in history which unless they are corrected, in the sense of a leap in consciousness among Jews taking place, will lead into another cul de sac.

 

In the recent week 4international has called for Zoabi and her party to be exiled from Israel. More precisely 4international has called on Netanyahu to do just that.

 

Zoabi is today’s Fascist Antisemitism. Her call supports the kidnapping of the 3 Young boys from Hebron. They may by now be dead. I hope not but we are dealing here with Fascist Islamic Jihad.

 

The Nazis did not teach the Arabs anything about Fascism. Islam in the shape of Hajj Amin el Husseini simply morphed the traditional Jihad into modern Fascism. That was the significance of Hajj Amin el Husseini joining his forces with the Nazis in the 1930s. This was cemented in the concordat which el Husseini made with Hitler in late 1941 and in the key role which el Husseini played in the Holocaust. Zoabi stands in that tradition. It is a deadly tradition. It links with all aspects of Jihad not least being Iran and ISIl.

 

Martin Sherman quotes the Israeli journalist Gideon Levi in the following:

 

“The only way still open for the Palestinians to remind the Israelis of…their plight is the way of violent struggle. All other paths have been blocked. If the Gaza Strip doesn’t fire Qassam rockets at Israel, the Gaza Strip doesn’t exist.”

 

For one thing the position of Gideon Levi is first of all a theoretical and an historical issue. Levi is talking above about the “plight” of the “Palestinians”.

 

That right there in the use of the term is a political position right on its own is modern Fascism and Antisemitism.

 

In war situations such as this there cannot be two sides to the problem. In a war you chose sides. You cannot sit on the sideline in a war.

 

The “Palestinians” are a continuation of the Holocaust. This is proved by the existence in the history of the “Palestinians” of Hajj Amin el Husseini.

 

The “Palestinians” cannot write el Husseini out. He founded them.

 

Martin Sherman knows all of this very well and we on 4international will work with him on this amd all else.

 

Where Martin Sherman runs into the buffers is in his inherent anti-communism. There is no communist revolutionary movement in Israel and there never has been. What came into Israel were forms of social democracy (think Tony Blair) and Stalinism (think the gravediggers of the Russian Revolution here)

 

A new generation in Israel must as I said make a theoretical and political leap. This new generation will be of youth but will and can include thinkers like Martin Sherman and Richard Landes, such is the great power of the Jewish national and religious struggle (Zionism) that is very possible.

 

It is fairly difficult to know how to characterise these people of the Israeli Labour Party and the Israeli Stalinists. They have become such a total mess having liquidated themselves many times over in various formulations based on opportunism.

 

They are only a danger in that people do not understand their real history. Understanding that history I refer to is not at all an easy chore. It requires quite detailed study.

 

To understand them, and also to understand the “Left” as in BDS today, you have to base yourself on a serious study of Leon Trotsky as he battled through the 1920s and 1930s, as he analysed the ravages of Stalinism and the growth of the Fascists.

 

Fascism today in the world is a growing trend. But the most dangerous Fascists are not actually in parties like Le Pen of France but in the “Left” I referred to above.

 

To understand this “Left” today it is necessary to understand that Leon Trotsky, leader with Lenin of the Russian Revolution of 1917, through his analysis of world events had by 1937 called for an Israel to be set up, and by 1938 had warned and basically predicted what the Nazis would do – the Holocaust of the Jews.

 

Thus after an analysis which 4international agrees with in much we cannot at all forgive Martin Sherman for this ending, as follows:

 

I believe that is was the Arab-Israeli poet, Aton Shammas who once wrote that one cannot be both a Zionist and a Leftist.

 

 It would appear that even left-of-center columnist, Ben Dror Yemini, is coming to a similar conclusion. Echoing Shammas’s sentiments , he writes with evident despair and anguish: “There used to be a national left. There used to be a responsible left. There used to be a Zionist left. All of them are disappearing.”

 

I Felix Quigley disagree most fundamentally with Shammas and Ben Dror Yemeni. They are ignorant people who have not studied the history I have studied. To Shammas I say that Trotsky was not a “Leftist” but was a socialist revolutionary based on the theory and practice of dialectical materialism, and Trotsky was a Zionist. To the other historical ignoramus, Ben Dror Yemeni, I say there NEVER “used to be a Zionist left”. Read above.

 

 

 

(Begin analysis by martin Sherman here http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Into-the-fray-Israels-loony-lethal-Left-359984)

 

Since signing the Oslo agreement in 1993, Israel has made a series of astounding concessions, which did nothing but produce further Palestinian demands for even more far-reaching concessions.

 

   If the Left cannot even admit to the theoretical possibility that its position might be refuted, that position is no longer a rational political perspective but an article of “religious faith. They [the kidnappers] are not terrorists… They’re people who don’t see any way to change their reality and are forced to use these means until Israel wakes up a little, until Israeli citizens and society wake up and feel the suffering of the other.

– MK Haneen Zoabi on Radio Tel Aviv, June 17.

 

The only way still open for the Palestinians to remind the Israelis of…their plight is the way of violent struggle. All other paths have been blocked. If the Gaza Strip doesn’t fire Qassam rockets at Israel, the Gaza Strip doesn’t exist.

 

 And if, in the West Bank, yeshiva students aren’t abducted, then the West Bank disappears from Israel’s consciousness. Abductions or murders are aimed at puncturing Israel’s intolerable complacency.

– Gideon Levy, Ha’aretz, June 15.

 

 Compare the substance of the sentiments conveyed by the vitriolic anti-Zionist Knesset Member Hanin Zoabi of the Balad list (more on its roots later), with those conveyed by well-known columnist, Gideon Levy of the Israeli daily, Ha’aretz.

 

Apologists for abductors

 

 Fair-minded readers would be hard pressed to detect any substantive differences between the two. Indeed the message they both articulate is, for all intents and purposes, identical.

 

 They both portray the recent abduction of three Israeli teenagers as a justifiable act of desperation. They both condone acts of Judeocidal terror as the last remaining resort to jolt the awareness of an apathetic Israeli public into recognizing the collective pain of the “Palestinian people”.

 

This is, of course, a staggering “misrepresentation” of reality.

 

 Since signing the Oslo agreement in 1993, Israel has made a series of astounding concessions, which did nothing but produce further Palestinian demands for even more far-reaching concessions.

 

 Indeed, as Jonathan Tobin rightly points out (Commentary, June, 16), the claim that “Israelis have blocked all other paths for the Palestinians except violence…is, to put it bluntly, a lie. It is the Palestinian Arabs who have consistently and repeatedly rejected offers of peace and statehood…” In an opinion piece “Terror apologists blame Israel for abduction”, Yedioth Aharonot’s Ben Dror Yemini, echoed Tobin’s assessment. With biting sarcasm, he writes “Not a day has passed since the kidnapping incident, and experts on Middle Eastern affairs and peace on earth have already informed us that it had actually happened because of us…We were wrong not to agree to release thousands of additional prisoners.

 

 We were wrong not to welcome the hand extended in peace by Hamas…In short, Israel is to blame for the abduction”.

 

Aiding and abetting the enemy

 

 Not only is it difficult to identify any tangible divergence between the positions espoused by Levy and by Zoabi, but in light of the naked mendacity of their accusations, we would be equally hard pressed to understand how their proclamations deviate in any significant way from what Israel’s current legal system stipulates as the grave offense of aiding and abetting the enemy.

 

 Clause 99 (Aiding the Enemy) in Section 7 (b) of today’s Penal Code dealing with “State Security, Foreign Relations and Official Secrets: Treason” states: A person who, with the intent of aiding the enemy in its war against Israel, commits any act to so assist it in this objective – is liable to the death penalty or life imprisonment.

 

 Clause 91 provides the following definitions: Enemy – Anyone who is at war with, or maintains a state of war against Israel; or who declares themselves to be one of these, whether or not war has actually been declared, whether or not there are ongoing military actions; and a terrorist organization.

 

 Terrorist organization – an organization whose aims or activities are directed at the destruction of the State, or at harming the security of the State or the security of its residents or harming Jews in other countries.

 

 Accordingly, it seems impossible not to interpret the proclamations of both Levy and Zoabi as conforming precisely to the specified offense.

 

 After all, given their endeavor to provide a demonstrably fallacious rationale for justifying/ defending/endorsing actions that are clearly aimed “at harming the security of the State or the security of its residents”, and perpetrated by what is, by law, indisputably an “enemy”, there seems no other way to construe their conduct but as acting “with the intent of aiding the enemy in its war against Israel.”

 

The Zoabi-Levy nexus

 

 So, whether or not one feels that Zoabi and Levy should be punished to the full extent stipulated by law, there can be little doubt as to the gravity of their egregious actions.

 

 Indeed, as Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman remarked “not only are the kidnappers terrorists, Hanin Zoabi is a terrorist too. The fate of the kidnappers and the fate of the inciter who encourages kidnapping Haneen Zoabi should be the same,” But while Zoabi’s vehement opposition to Israel’s existence as a Jewish state is undisguised, the case of Levy is far more invidious—and insidious.

 

 After all, Zoabi, an Arab resident of Nazareth, has “impeccable” anti-Zionist credentials.

 

 Her party, Balad, founded in 1995 by Azmi Bashari, later forced to flee the country under a cloud of suspicion of treason for aiding Hezbollah in the 2006-Lebanon War, openly opposes the founding rationale of the State of Israel as the nation-state of the Jews. Yet, in the profoundly perverse and promiscuous political system in Israel, Balad is allowed to compete in national elections and participate in its parliament.

 

 Zoabi herself, has overtly shown her identification with Israel’s enemies, arguably most vividly illustated by her 2010 presence on aboard the Mavi Marmara, in support of the frenzied Judeophobic mob, chanting calls to kill Jews, and their attempt to break the maritime quarantine of the Hamasruled Gaza.

 

 However, while it is possible (albeit not prudent) to dismiss Zoabi as representing a marginal—and thus tolerably minor—constituency in Israeli society, this cannot be said of Levy. Indeed, it would be a serious error to dismiss the essence of the views expressed by him as unrepresentative of large swathes of Israel’s left-of-center so-called “intelligentsia”. The fact that he espoused the same venomous anti-Israeli invective as Zoabi, has particularly grave implications.

 

Revered, not reviled?

 

 For while Zoabi’s political doctrine openly prescribes ending Israel’s status as a Jewish state, Levy purports to be striving to make it a better Jewish state.

 

 Indeed, the Haaretz columnist is hardly a figure who is shunned by mainstream society.

 

 Quite the opposite, he is a welcome and frequent guest on radio and television, given roles in widely viewed docu-dramas and feted by many for his alleged “journalistic courage.” He has been hailed by New York Times’ Tom Friedman as “a powerful liberal voice”.

 

Unsurprisingly therefore, “Commentary’s” Tobin cautions against “dismissing Levy as an outlier”, lamenting that “his callous dismissal of Palestinian terror as merely Israel’s due is very much representative of much of the commentary that is published internationally about the peace process.”

 

Worse, as Tobin correctly observes, “Levy’s arguments are the foundation of much of the criticism of Israel and its policies even by those who are too fastidious to justify terrorism.”

 

Dramatically corroborating Tobin’s diagnosis, Yariv Oppenheimer, secretary-general of “Peace Now” published an opinion piece on Wednesday, in which, after perfunctorily condemning the kidnapping, heartily condoned it.

 

 Echoing precisely the Zoabi-Levy rationale, he wrote: “It was clear that the despair…and anger on the Palestinian side would find their way out…. But in order to understand how to deal with the problem and prevent escalation, we must examine reality from the Palestinian viewpoint as well. The loss of hope on the other side, the Israeli arrogance and the unwillingness to compromise are blowing up in our faces”.

 

The Levy-Livni-Lapid nexus

 

 Of course many in the mainstream Left in Israel would howl in protest at any suggestion that their worldview/ political agenda is in anyway comparable to Gideon Levy’s.

 

 While such protest might be entirely sincere subjectively,it would be entirely wrong objectively. For although there might be differences in style, semantics and sentiment in the expression of their political perspectives, there is very little—if any— difference in the substance in the political credo they promote.

 

 Both Gideon Levy on the one hand, and Yair Lapid and Tzipi Livni, on the other, essentially allege that the Jewish presence across the pre-1967 lines (a.k.a. “The settlement enterprise)” is the source of virtually all iniquity in Israeli society.

 

 Thus, at last week’s Herzliya Conference, Livni accused the Jewish communities in Judea-Samaria of being “a security, economic and moral burden”, hinting darkly that they comprise a fiendishly cunning scheme “aimed at preventing us from ever coming to an arrangement” with the Palestinians.

 

 At the same conference Yair Lapid, who immediately following the elections sought to distance himself from the “Hanin Zoabis of the world”, railed against the Jewish presence across the 1967 Green Line, alleging that, if only it were removed, Israel would “end its international isolation, increase the personal security of every citizen, create an economic boom, dramatically raise the standard of living in Israel”.

 

There can be little doubt that Levy (and Zoabi) would warmly embrace/endorse this “mainstream” excoriation of the Jewish communities and their residence as the root of all evil in the Israel-Palestine conflict, as a common core to their respective political agendas.

 

Religion of retreat

 

 The proponents of Jewish retreat seem to be totally impervious to facts—clinging forlornly, if ferociously, to a failed doctrine that, time after time, has brought nothing but predictable (and predicted) disaster.

 

 Yet, undeterred, they refuse not only to admit error but even the very possibility of error.

 

 At last week’s Herzliya Conference, I had a brief encounter with one of the most prominent proponents of Jewish retreat (a.k.a. the two-state paradigm), Prof. Alan Dershowitz. Although Dershowitz is undoubtedly a stalwart defender of Israel as a Jewish state, he seems oblivious to the fact that his support for the two-state idea obviates the possibility of a Jewish state.

 

 In this regard, I asked him if he could imagine, theoretically, some scenario, which if it occurred, would persuade him that his support of the two-state principle was mistaken, and thus bring him to retract his call for a significant Jewish retreat from much of Judea-Samaria.

 

 His response was that he could not conceive of any such theoretical scenario, and since he wanted to maintain Israel as a Jewish democratic state, nothing could induce him to admit error.

 

 In the past, I have had similar responses from other well-known two-staters, including Gershon Baskin and Alon Liel. (If I have misrepresented/misunderstood them or if they have since revised their position on the theoretical possibility of error, I would be happy to be corrected.) Clearly, if one cannot even admit to the theoretical possibility that one’s position might be refuted, that position is no longer a rational political perspective founded on fact and logic but an article of “religious faith” held irrespective of prevailing realities and impervious to any changes that might occur therein.

 

The irrelevance of Palestinian goodwill

 

 The two-state paradigm has always been afflicted by “tunnel vision”, and its validity predicated on the alleged existence of a Palestinian partner of good faith, who could be trusted not to take advantage of the far-reaching Israeli concessions that would be required for its implementation.

 

 As I have pointed out, repeatedly, in the past, the alleged sincerity of any Palestinian “peace partner” is largely irrelevant. For whatever deal may be struck, its durability cannot be assured.

 

 Even in the unlikely event of some Palestinian with the requisite authority and sincerity to conclude a binding deal with Israel did emerge, he clearly could be removed from power as the Gaza precedent demonstrates.

 

 All the perilous concessions made, on the assumption of “sincerity”, would then accrue to a far more inimical successor, whose political credo is based on reneging on commitments made to the “Zionist entity.”

 

Even this caveat is being overtaken by on-going events in the Mid-East, with the sweeping victories of the ultra-extremist Islamists (ISIS) in Syria and Iraq, now threatening to destabilize Jordan… Would an ISIS take-over of Jordan induce Levy or Livni, Lapid or Deshowitz, Baskin or Liel to recant their “religion of retreat”? Or would they still hold fast to their loony and potentially lethal dogma?

 

‘There used to be a Zionist Left’

 

I believe that is was the Arab-Israeli poet, Aton Shammas who once wrote that one cannot be both a Zionist and a Leftist.

 

 It would appear that even left-of-center columnist, Ben Dror Yemini, is coming to a similar conclusion. Echoing Shammas’s sentiments , he writes with evident despair and anguish: “There used to be a national left. There used to be a responsible left. There used to be a Zionist left. All of them are disappearing.”

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Into-the-fray-Israels-loony-lethal-Left-359984