Thursday, November 26, 2015

The LATimes Can't Vet Its Op-eds for Facts?

In writing "Palestinian denialism, while existent and problematic, is a function of politics. If anything, there’s evidence to show that Palestinians did not deny the Jewish connection to the land until it was used to justify Palestinian dispossession after the creation of modern Israel in 1948."  I am not accusing Munayyer of racism for this but simply total misrepresentation, defactualization of history and  propagandizing.

The first Jew to be killed for obtaining a license to purchase property in Jerusalem in was Avraham Tzoref in...1851. Before the founding of a political movement, Zionism, to return Jews to the historic homeland illegally conquered, occupied and settled by Arabs who invaded the area in 638, Jews were killed and it went on before and during the Mandate which the League of Nations recognized that Jews had, Article 5, a right that their immigration should be facilitated and further, the Mandate power "shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes."

In 1920, Arabs rioted. And in 1921. And in 1929. And during 1936-39. Over 700 hundred Jews were murdered, many horribly.  In a prequel, Arabs claimed Jews wanted to destroy the Haram compound.  A campaign of ethnic cleansing was under way as thousands of Jews who had lived for centuries in areas now termed the "West Bank" (after in 1950 Jordanians (a people created in 1922 when a Saudi Arabian was granted an Emirate in part of the territory originally part of the Jewish homeland was separated from the terms of the Mandate) illegally annexed the area becoming the first state to deny local Arabs their rights. Munyyaer lies; there certainly was denial before 1948.

There is so much more there.

He claims  that razing of villages "effectively wiping most of the Palestinian presence off the map."  But there seems to be enough villages and Arabs around still.

Ah, propaganda.


Tuesday, November 24, 2015

'Palestinian' Poet Sentenced to Death

According to MaanAshraf Fayadh was sentenced to death on Nov. 17 for "alleged blasphemous statements" which he denied.

Human Rights Watch announced

"Regardless of what Fayadh said or didn't say, Saudi Arabia should stop arresting people for their personal beliefs...The fact that Ashraf Fayadh is facing the prospect of being beheaded only adds to the outrageousness of this court ruling."

I think his alleged statements had nothing to do whether a Palestinian people exists or whether they have superior claims to Jews regarding the territory of the Land of Israel. 


Monday, November 23, 2015

Where Is Shiloh?

This new EU labeling campaign is producing some silly things.

Here is a picture accompanying a story on that German KaDeWe store's policy of boycott and its reversal:

But there is a caption:

As EG pointed out to me, that German reads:

From the city of Ramallah in the West Bank wine is exported. Such products must be labeled in future.

Shiloh is not located in Ramallah.  We're outside Palestinian Authority-supervised territory, north about 18 kilometers.   

And those cartons are from Shiloh Winery situated in Shiloh.

And the wine is superb.


The Status Quo and Arab Terror

That American Yeshiva students are killed in Eretz-Yisrael while studying Torah as has just occurred is not, unfortunately, a new phenomenon.

Already in 1929, eight Americans were murdered in Hebron and their names are:

William Zev (Wolf) Berman, Philadelphia; 
David Sheinberg (Shunberg), Memphis; 
Benjamin (Bennie) Hurvitz (Horowitz), Brooklyn; 
Harry Frohman, Chicago; 
Wolf Greenberg, Brooklyn, N.Y.;
Hyman Krasner, Chicago; 
Aaron David Epstein, Chicago; 
Jacob Wexler, Chicago. 

But did you know just how parallel a situation exists between the events of 1929 and 2015?

The 1929 riots broke out due to the Mufti fueling the flames of religious hatred based on the false claim that 'Al-Aqsa is in Danger' and that the Jews not only desired more rights at the Western Wall but also sought the rebuild the Temple.

Here are the words of Binyam Hurwitz, 19 years old, from a letter he wrote two days before he was knifed slashed and hacked to death in Hebron:

The Arabs began to realize that the Jews could  manage without upsetting the status quo, but the Arabs started to build.  They built a new gateway near the Western wall, they opened a doorway so that they could disturb the Jews, and they declared that the status quo pertained only to the Jews and not to them.  The Jews protested, but to no avail.  The Arabs began to disturb those engaged in prayer.  The British government was silent!  Only the Jews were causing trouble!  On last Thursday, youth from the Trumpeldor legion [Betar] rallied against the government regarding access to the Western Wall.  They marched to the wall and decried the Zionist leaders for their weak stand.  But they did not hit or even touch anyone.  The next day the Arabs rallied too.  But this was an entirely different protest.  They marched out of the new gate and hit Jews in the midst of prayer, tore up prayer books, and removed the notes of beseechment that had been placed in the crevices of the Wall.  The British police did nothing, not only that but they did not even permit the Jews to approach the Wall to pray.  And this is the status quo?!  Then the British issued a statement that equated the two protests!

Reads like today's news.

Palestine Bulletin, September 2, 1929:-


Tuesday, November 17, 2015

J Street Does the Green Line

Jeremy Ben-Ami's latest campaign letter appeal includes this:

The future and security of Israel as the democratic national home of the Jewish people depend on establishing a border between Israel and a new state of Palestine. There’s no other way to approach drawing the border than with the Green Line -- the only demarcation the world recognizes -- as the starting point.

And there's a web site.

The Green Line demarcation was not quite so recognized.

It was infiltrated constantly.

It was but a cease-fire line, where the armies stopped fighting in early 1949.

The armistice agreements were never fully observed.

The Green Line was dangerous and provides Israel with no strategic depth.

Why should Israel yield on this matter so that J Streeters can feel comfortable living in...America?


A 'Who Wrote This?' Quiz

Who wrote this?

I joke to my friends that six years in jail will still leave me a whimpering’s hard enough working on explaining an occupation to the outside, without having to fight from within for everything…from getting your work travel cheque reimbursed to asking serious questions about the financial management of work places.

New York Times' Diaa Hadid.



'Gone With The Wind' and Fascism

As we all should know

"Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn" 

is a line from the 1939 film Gone with the Wind starring Clark Gable and Vivien Leigh. The line is spoken by Rhett Butler (Gable), as his last words to Scarlett O'Hara (Leigh), in response to her tearful question: "Where shall I go? What shall I do?"

But I discovered this:

the Italian comparable phrase, which is me ne frego, meaning 'I don't give a damn'  was the motto of the Italian fascist militia during the 1930's.  The Blackshirts – the Fasci di Combattimenti were usually ex-soldiers and it was their job to bring into line those who opposed Mussolini. It was the Blackshirts who murdered the socialist Matteotti – an outspoken critic of Mussolini. The motto of the Blackshirts was “Me ne frego” (I do not give a damn”).

From Mussolini's treatise:

... Fascism carries this anti-pacifistic attitude into the life of the individual. "I don't care a damn" (me ne frego) - the proud motto of the fighting squads, the Squadrista, - scrawled by a wounded man on his bandages, is not only an act of philosophic stoicism, it sums up a doctrine which is not merely political: it is evidence of a fighting spirit which accepts all risks. It signifies new style of Italian life. The Fascist accepts and loves life; he rejects and despises suicide as cowardly. Life as he understands it means duty, elevation, conquest; life must be lofty and full, it must be lived for oneself but above all for others, both near bye and far off, present and future.



Sunday, November 15, 2015

April 1936: How Did It Start, Mr. American Consul-General?

According to the US Consulate-General Leland B. Morris, who wrote back to Washington on the first month of what was to be a three-year terror campaign by Arabs against the British Mandatory regime and the Jewish community therein,

described how it started

but did manage to include how Arabs killed Jews before they walked into a 'crowd of irresponsible Arabs'

Isn't that a bit backward?

Saturday, November 14, 2015

The Way the NYTimes Equalizes

Note the "valiant" attempt by the NYTimes to equalize between Arab terror and Israel's measures of defense:

The attack on Friday took place near Hebron in the southern West Bank, which has emerged as a locus of the uprising. It brought the number of Israelis killed in the latest surge of violence to 13.

During the same period of time, at least 82 Palestinians have been killed. Some of them were attacking or attempting to attack Israeli soldiers and civilians; others were killed during violent demonstrations in the West Bank, in East Jerusalem or on the border with Gaza. 

Not one Israeli was attacking an innocent Arab.

Not one was a terrorist.

Not one was demonstrating.

They were all going about their business, not harming or potentially harming any one.

All those Arabs killed in "demonstration", actually riots, were identifying with the Arab terrorists.


Friday, November 13, 2015

No Regrets, All Pain

Another interesting document:


Feisal Admitted - Palestine To Be Set Aside

At a meeting conducted in Paris of the Council of Ten * with the Emir Feisal regarding his post-war demands from the Versailles Conference:

I understand that to mean that Palestine was not to be part of the Arab state contemplated.

At a meeting on February 13, one Chekri Ganem, a Christian Syrian domiciled in Paris and editor of a newspaper, Al-Mustakbal, made this statement, p. 1037:

Those present:


Was A Jewish State An Agenda Item From the Beginning?

From the archives of the United States Department of State
Papers relating to the foreign relations of the United States, 1919. 
The Paris Peace Conference (1919)

American plans and preparations for the peace conference, p. 69

Reads that way to me.


Seven US Factors 1947

Let the document speak for itself:

Memorandum by Mr. Fraser Wilkins of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs1

[Washington,] January 14, 1947.secret
The Palestine question is one of the most difficult problems with which the Department is faced. Our policy toward Palestine is based on seven factors:

1) Present responsibility of Great Britain for administration of Palestine under League of Nations mandate to which administration United States consented in American-British-Palestine Mandate Convention of December 3, 1924.
2) The intense desire of Jewish DP’s in Europe to emigrate to Palestine.
3) Support for Jewish National Home in Palestine as expressed in Presidential statements, Congressional resolutions and party platforms.
4) The Arab population of Palestine outnumbers the Jewish population two to one. The Arabs in Palestine and neighboring countries are opposed to the partition of Palestine and to Jewish domination in any form.
5) Religions importance of Palestine to Christians, Jews and Moslems.
6) Strategic and economic importance of American oil, aviation and telecommunications facilities in Palestine and neighboring countries.
7) Practically speaking, the unsettled Palestine problem, made more difficult by the pressure for post-war migration of displaced Jews from Europe to Palestine, is an irritant in Anglo-American relations. It is also prejudicial to American-Arab relations in the fields of education, trade, petroleum and aviation. Continued agitation and uncertainty regarding the Palestine question, by weakening the Anglo-American position in the Near East, permits a more rapid extension of Soviet Russian objectives, and is distressing to Christians everywhere because the Christian interest in Palestine tends to become submerged in an Arab-Jewish controversy.
American policy in Palestine, as now developed, has five principal aspects:

1) In Palestine, which now contains 1,250,000 Arabs and 600,000 Jews, neither group shall dominate the other. Palestine should be neither a Jewish State nor an Arab State, but the people of Palestine should be granted full independence as soon as practicable in one or more states in which the form of government will satisfy as nearly as possible the national aspirations of both Jews and Arabs. Accomplishment of such a solution through a workable partition of Palestine, with the exception of the Holy Places, into an Arab State, which might join a neighboring Arab State, and a Jewish State, in control of its own immigration and economic policies, could be supported by the United States. Pending full independence, Palestine would enjoy partial self-government under United Nations trusteeship.
2) Immediate transfer of 100,000 Jews from European DP camps to Palestine. Immigration laws of other countries, including United States, should be liberalized to permit admission of other DP’s from Europe.
3) Continued development of Jewish National Home in Palestine through immigration and land purchase, both of which are now restricted, if partition proves impracticable.
4) Broad political, economic and cultural development of Arab population in Palestine.
5) Obtaining acquiesence of all Arab states to whatever solution gives promise of settling the Palestine question.

1 Mr. Wilkins was the desk officer in charge of Palestinian affairs.