Showing posts with label Israel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Israel. Show all posts

Friday, June 19, 2015

Two-state solution would destroy Israel

I like to write about Israel. They are our number one ally. They face the same threat of Radical Muslims as we do, although to a far greater extent than we do. As they try to create peace through strength, they are often criticized, much like George Bush was criticized when he used force against Iraq for harboring and supporting Muslim terrorists.

So Benjamin Netanyahu wins an election in a landslide. Here we are months later and Obama has yet to congratulate him. Instead, he went to the United Nations to undermine our ally, Israel, in favor of our enemies, Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah.

Because Netanyahu has promised not to allow a Palestinian State while he is in office, Obama has threatened to go to the United Nations Security Council to pass a resolution recognizing a Palestinian State. He is going to block the Israeli vote opposed to a two state solution.

Why? The only reason I can think of is that Obama, as do many liberals, believes that a Palestinian state is the only road to peace in the Middle East.

In the past the White House has worked with Israel to block such a resolution from passing.

Why? Mainly because past U.S. leaders understood that a Palestinian State would basically mean the end of Israel.

Why? Because the Iranian Caliphate was built on the notion of completely wiping out Israel. Likewise, both Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations with charters calling for the complete anihalation of Israel.

In the past, U.S. policy has been to work with Israel, our biggest ally in the world, and the only strong democracy in the Middle East. Yet Obama is planning to completely change course in such a way that would completely undermine our ally and promote Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.

In the past the U.S. has opposed the formation of a Palestinian nation, or a two state solution -- Israel and Palestine side by side, because it's leaders understood that such a two-state solution is not a two state solution.

Let me put it this way. Muslims live in Israel today, and they shop and enjoy life like any other person in Israel. If an Israelite left the borders of Israel and entered most Muslim territories, that person would likely be killed for being a Jew. So while the Israeliltes would be happy to live side by side with Muslims, the Iranians, Hamas, and Hezbola would not be happy to live side by side with Jews.

This is a fact that too many people fail to realize, even we hear the voices of radical Muslims all the time saying this stuff.  The leaders of Iran say quite often that they will settle at nothing less than a complete annihilation of Israel; meaning they will settle for nothing short of a one state solution.

The Palestinians do not want a two-state solution. They want a one state solution. They want a Palestine and no Israel. And history proves this as true, as every time Israel has agreed to a two state solution, Palestinian leaders have backed out time and time again. 

Many people fail to realize this, but the Palestinians were offered their own state of Palestine the same time the Jews were offered theirs.  The Jews accepted, and created Israel.  The Muslims rejected it.  So they are not victims.  They are victims, but only to their own rejection of a two state solution because they want a one state solution.  

The Camp David Accords are another perfect example of this. Jimmy Carter had brokered a deal with the Palestinians giving them everything they wanted from Israel, and their leader at the time, Yasser Arafat, refused to sign it.

Why? He did not want a two-state solution: he wanted a one-state solution. He wanted Muslims to live side by side with their brethren in Palestine. The only means to this end is the complete Anihalation of Israel, and the death of all Jews.  The Palestinians don't want part of the land, they don't want to share the land, they want all the land.

So the reason Netanyahu refuses to sign any treaty that would create a Palestinian State is because he does not want to sign a treaty that would result in the destruction of his own nation. The only way that happens if there is a war and Israel loses.

The only other way to peace in the region is an all out war that Israel wins.

Oh, wait, Israel did win an all out war with all the surrounding Muslim nations in 1967. How many people learned about that in history class.  Israel was outnumbered, out equipped, and it looked like it was going to be destroyed.  Israel took quite a few casualties at first, but it drove the Muslim armies out of Israel, and it won the war.  

This is how Israel got the West Bank and the Gaza strip.  They are not occupiers, they won this land in a war they didn't even want to fight. But many nations refused to see this truth, and continued to call the Israelites occupiers and the Palestinians victims.  

But this victory was not recognized by the United Nations. Israel may have been the only nation in the history of the world (besides the Americans, who defeated the Indians) to have won a war and yet were treated as the losers.

Wednesday, March 4, 2015

Netanyahu looked very presidential before Congress

Benjamin Netanyahu looked and sounded very presidential during his speech to Congress today. He said, "America's founding document promises life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Iran's founding document pledges death, tyranny, and the pursuit of jihad, and states are collapsing across the Middle East."

Yes, he sounded very presidential. He sounded like a person who is making a last minute plea to save Western Civilization; to convince Congress to thwart any plan to give the leading terrorist nation in the world (Iran) a clear path to nuclear methods. He reminded Congress that we must not forget Iran is the world's leading exporter of terrorism.

He reminded Congress of the failures of Neville Chamberlain in his efforts to negotiate with a thug named Hitler. He reminded Congress of the failure of inspectors in Iraq to realize the artful BS Saddam was using to fool the world about his nuclear arms program. He reminded Congress that inspectors in North Korea failed to stop North Korea form getting the Bomb.

He said we need to be aggressive toward Iran and do whatever it takes to stop them from getting nuclear weapons. He said, "Iran's regime is not merely a Jewish problem anymore than the Nazi regime was merely a Jewish problem. ... the greatest danger facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons. ... Many hope that Iran will join the community of nations, Iran is busy gobbling up the nations... We must all stand together to stop Iran's march of conquest, subjugation, and terror."

Now Obama and Kerry and other democrats believe they do not have the right to tell other nations what to do, regardless that they are lead by a totalitarian dictator thus or not. So they are trying to negotiate with Iran to get them to stop their nuclear program for ten years. They believe that will give them ten years to convince Iran not to develop nuclear weapons.

To this, Netanyahu said, "This deal does not block Iran's path to the bomb, it paves Iran's path to the bomb." To this he got a standing ovation. "So why would anyone make this deal? Because they hope that Iran will change for the better in the coming years. Or they believe that the alternative to this deal is worse. Well, I disagree. I don't believe that Iran's radical regime will change for the better after this deal."

He got a standing ovation because he is right: all that ten years would do is buy them time. While we are busy negotiating, while inspectors are in and out of their nation, Iran's leaders will lead them in one direction with one hand, while leading their nuclear program in another direction with the other.

He offered one final promise: “I can promise you one more thing: Even if Israel has to stand alone, Israel will stand.”

Yes indeed!  Netanyahu looked very presidential.

Tuesday, August 5, 2014

Is thinking now obsolete?

One thing missing on this blog is someone to counter my arguments.  Yet in the meantime, Thomas Sowell seems to ring some of the same themes we argue here in his latest column "Is thinking now obsolete?"

He wrote.
Some have said that we are living in a post-industrial era, while others have said that we are living in a post-racial era. But growing evidence suggests that we are living in a post-thinking era.
Many people in Europe and the Western Hemisphere are staging angry protests against Israel’s military action in Gaza. One of the talking points against Israel is that far more Palestinian civilians have been killed by Israeli military attacks than the number of Israeli civilians killed by the Hamas rocket attacks on Israel that started this latest military conflict.
Are these protesters aware that vastly more German civilians were killed by American bombers attacking Nazi Germany during World War II than American civilians killed in the United States by Hitler’s forces?
Talk-show host Geraldo Rivera says that there is no way Israel is winning the battle for world opinion. But Israel is trying to win the battle for survival, while surrounded by enemies. Might that not be more important?
Has any other country, in any other war, been expected to keep the enemy’s civilian casualties no higher than its own civilian casualties? The idea that Israel should do so did not originate among the masses but among the educated intelligentsia.
In an age when scientists are creating artificial intelligence, too many of our educational institutions seem to be creating artificial stupidity.
It is much the same story in our domestic controversies. We have gotten so intimidated by political correctness that our major media outlets dare not call people who immigrate to this country illegally “illegal immigrants.”
Geraldo Rivera has denounced the Drudge Report for carrying news stories that show some of the negative consequences and dangers from allowing vast numbers of youngsters to enter the country illegally and be spread across the country by the Obama administration.
Some of these youngsters are already known to be carrying lice and suffering from disease. Since there have been no thorough medical examinations of most of them, we have no way of knowing whether, or how many, are carrying deadly diseases that will spread to American children when these unexamined young immigrants enter schools across the country.
The attack against Matt Drudge has been in the classic tradition of demagogues. It turns questions of fact into questions of motive. Geraldo accuses Drudge of trying to start a “civil war.”
Back when masses of immigrants from Europe were entering this country, those with dangerous diseases were turned back from Ellis Island. Nobody thought they had a legal or a moral “right” to be in America or that it was mean or racist not to want our children to catch their diseases.
This article impresses on our theme that the media should look at both sides of the coin, rather than just the one.

Sunday, August 3, 2014

The truth about the Israel-Palestine conflict

So I'm sitting here watching the news and see that the media is all upset that John Kerry was unable to obtain a peace treaty between Israel and Palestine.  Much of the media, in fact, is blaming Israel, who is shooting bombs into the Gaza strip and killing many in the process.

I hate to the the informant of bad news, but there will never be peace between Israel and Palestine, and the reason is not because Israel is the aggressor: The reason is because the Palestinians do not want peace.  I am not making this up, their rulers have said it over and over and over and over and over again.  It's like no one wants to believe the Palestinian rulers.

Quite frankly, there is some bad information coming from the media about Israel. I keep reading, or hearing, people complaining about how Israel needs to stop firing at the Gaza strip. How Israel is killing innocent men, women, and children by shooting at homes that were recently built.

What ever happened to the media that is supposed to report all the news, and share stories from both sides? Where is the media that wanted to learn the truth about Nixon and dug so deep they found tapes that were hidden by the President of the United States?  If good investigative reporting still exists, I don't see it very often, because this reporting on Israel is absolutely pathetic.

Anyone who follows what is going on in Israel knows that Israel gave tons of cement to Palestinians living in the Gaza strip so they could build homes.  That doesn't sound like something a terrorist would do.

The problem is that Palestinian leaders took that cement, and they built homes, but under those homes they built tunnels so they could stock pile weapons to use against Israel.  When Israel learned of this they knew they had to do something, otherwise innocent citizens of Israel would be killed .  So they decided to act.

However, what they did was they told the Palestinians they were going to bomb those tunnels, and they warned all the people living in the homes above them to get out of the way.  They told them the day and time they were going to bomb those tunnels, giving the Palestinians plenty of time to get to safety.

Do you ever hear that from the media?

If the media did its job, and told the entire story about the Israel-Palestinian conflict, it would learn quite quickly that the Jews would love to live in peace with the Palestinians, but the Palestinians would never live in peace with the Jews.  The Palestinians themselves might be happy to live in peace with the Jews, but their leaders would never let that happen, and have said so over and over again.

Yet the media continues to ignore this fact.

So what is the true story?  What is the media leaving out?

For starters, there is no such thing as a Palestinian refugee.  The truth is, the rulers of Israel did not kick the Palestinians out of Israel. The truth is, the Palestinians were living in peace with the Jews in the land that is now the State of Israel, and they were all invited to stay.  The Jews wanted to live in peace with their Palestinian brethren.

However, Arabic leaders did not allow Arabs living in Israel to stay in their homes and live in peace, because these Arabic leaders did not want peace.  In fact, they even openly said, and have said many times since then, that they don't want peace with Israel: they want the complete annihilation of Israel.

So their Arab leaders made all the Arabs leave leave the comforts of their homes in Israel in the hopes that some day they could destroy Israel and return to their "home land" and create a Palestinian State.

In other words, the notion that the Arabs were forced out of Palestine and made refugees is a farce. They were provided homes on Muslim territories, treated as refugees, and made to look impoverished and suffering in order to gain the empathy, and the money, of gullible nations like the United States and France and Spain and Britain.

It worked too.  The U.S. and Europe have given millions, even billions, to the so called Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), an organization created long after Arabic leaders forced their fellow Arabs to leave Israel.  Yasser Arafat, the head of the PLO, even did such a good job of fooling the media that he won the Nobel Peace Prize.  It should be known here that Arafat was a terrorists, although he was treated as a hero, even by President Jimmy Carter.

In fact, in 1978 Jimmy Carter negotiated a deal to Yasser Arafat that would have given him everything he ever wanted for his fellow Palestinians.  They would be able to live in peace with Israel while having their Palestinian land.

Yet Arafat stunned the media when he rejected the offer.  A lazy and incompetent media couldn't fathom how he could have possibly rejected this offer.  But, if they did their research, or if they paid attention, they easily would have understood that Yasser Arafat was a thug, and he, like other Muslim Arabs, did not want peace with Israel: he wanted Israel dead.

There's yet another example of the medias ignorance regarding Israel and Palestine.  In 1967 nearly every Muslim nation in the Middle East started a war with the tiny Israel, and tiny Israel beat every single one of them to a pulp.  As a reward for its victory, all Israel wanted was the Gaza strip and the West Bank.

Yet the media continued to make out as though Israel was the bad guy here, and that they took this land from the innocent Palestinians.  That was not the case at all. Israel won a war they did not start, and they won fair and square  They fought the war to defend their tiny nation, and the media acted as though Israel took land that did not belong to them.  This is the only time in world history one nation won a war and was treated as though it was the loser (actually, there is one other example of this happening, where the losers of a war are treated as the victors.  Americans defeated the Indians and won the right to live on their land, and the Indians are often treated as the victors.  I'm not saying I agree with this, but such is how it happened).

Initially after the palestinians left Israel the rules of Israel welcomed them back. However, it has now been so many decades since that time, and the Palestinians (who are brainwashed daily that Jews are evil and should be killed) have multiplied so many times over that inviting the Palestinians back now would be suicide.  There is no way the Palestinians could be welcomed back into Israel.  While such a fate is the fault of the Palestinian leaders following the establishment of Israel, the media continues to blame Israel.

Recently, as an attempt to show how peaceful they are, in 2005 Arel Sharon gave the Palestinians the Gaza strip back.  He also gave the Palestinians cement to build homes so they could live as peaceful neighbors.  Yet Hamas, another terrorist organization (it's charter calls for the elimination of Israel), had other plans.

I first learned the truth about Israel about ten years ago, and first wrote about it about five years ago.  One of the books I read was "Battle Ground: Fact and Fantasy in Palestine."  The book was written in 1973 by Shmuel Katz, who was a South African native who emigrated to Israel in the 1930s.

So don't take my word for it.  Here are the words of Shmuel Katz.

The Arabs are the only declared refugees who became refugees not by the action of their enemies or because of well-grounded fear of their enemies, but by the initiative of their own leaders. For nearly a generation, those leaders have willfully kept as many people as they possibly could in degenerating squalor, preventing their rehabilitation, and holding out to all of them the hope of return and of “vengeance” on the Jews of Israel, to whom they have transferred the blame for their plight.

The fabrication can probably most easily be seen in the simple circumstance that at the time the alleged cruel expulsion of Arabs by Zionists was in progress, it passed unnoticed. Foreign newspapermen who covered the war of 1948 on both sides did, indeed, write about the flight of the Arabs, but even those most hostile to the Jews saw nothing to suggest that it was not voluntary.

In the three months during which the major part of the flight took place – April, May, and June 1948 – the London Times, at that time [openly] hostile to Zionism, published eleven leading articles on the situation in Palestine in addition to extensive news reports and articles. In none was there even a hint of the charge that the Zionists were, driving the Arabs from their homes.

More interesting still, no Arab spokesman mentioned the subject. At the height of the flight, on April 27, Jamat Husseini, the Palestine Arabs’ chief representative at the United Nations, made a long political statement, which was not lacking in hostility toward the Zionists; he did not mention refugees. Three weeks later (while the flight was still in progress), the Secretary General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, made a fiercely worded political statement on Palestine; it contained not a word about refugees.

The Arab refugees were not driven from Palestine by anyone. The vast majority left, whether of their own free will or at the orders or exhortations of their leaders, always with the same reassurance that their departure would help in the war against Israel. Attacks by Palestinian Arabs on the Jews had begun two days after the United Nations adopted its decision of November 29, 1947, to divide western Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish state. The seven neighboring Arab states Syria, Lebanon, Transjordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Egypt then prepared to invade the country as soon as the birth of the infant State of Israel was announced.

Their victory was certain, they claimed, but it would be speeded and made easier if the local Arab population got out of the way. The refugees would come back in the wake of the victorious Arab armies and not only recover their own property but also inherit the houses and farms of the vanquished and annihilated Jews. Between December 1, 1947, and May 15, 1948, the clash was largely between bands of local Arabs, aided by the disintegrating British authority, and the Jewish fighting organizations.

The earliest voluntary refugees were understandably the wealthier Arabs of the towns, who made a comparatively leisurely departure in December 1947 and in early 1948. At that stage, departure had not yet been proclaimed as a policy or recognized as a potential propaganda weapon. The Jaffa newspaper Ash Shalab thus wrote on January 30, 1948:

“The first group of our fifth column consists of those who abandon their houses and businesses and go to live elsewhere. . . . At the first sign of trouble they take to their heels to escape sharing the burden of struggle.”
Another weekly, As-Sarih of Jaffa, used even more scathing terms on March 30, 1948, to accuse the inhabitants of Sheikh Munis and other villages in the neighborhood of Tel Aviv of “bringing down disgrace on us all” by “abandoning their villages.” On May 5, the Jerusalem correspondent of the London Times was reporting: “The Arab streets are curiously deserted and, ardently following the poor example of the more moneyed class there has been an exodus from Jerusalem too, though not to the same extent as in Jaffa and Haifa.”

As the local Arab offensive spread during the late winter and early spring of 1948, the Palestinian Arabs were urged to take to the hills, so as to leave the invading Arab armies unencumbered by a civilian population. Before the State of Israel had been formally declared – and while the British still ruled the country – over 200,000 Arabs left their homes in the coastal plain of Palestine.

These exhortations came primarily from their own local leaders. Monsignor George Hakim, then Greek Catholic Bishop of Galilee, the leading Christian personality in Palestine for many years, told a Beirut newspaper in the summer of 1948, before the flight of Arabs had ended:

“The refugees were confident that their absence would not last long, and that they would return within a week or two. Their leaders had promised them that the Arab armies would crush the ‘Zionist gangs’ very quickly and that there was no need for panic or fear of a long exile.” [Sada at Tanub, August 16, 1948]
The exodus was indeed common knowledge. The London weekly Economist reported on October 2, 1948:
“Of the 62,000 Arabs who formerly lived in Haifa not more than 5,000 or 6,000 remained. Various factors influenced their decision to seek safety in flight. There is but little doubt that the most potent of the factors were the announcements made over the air by the Higher Arab Executive, urging the Arabs to quit.. . . It was clearly intimated that those Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades.”
And the Near East Arabic Broadcasting Station from Cyprus stated on April 3, 1949: “It must not be forgotten that the Arab Higher Committee encouraged the refugees’ flight from their homes in Jaffa, Haifa, and Jerusalem.”

Even in retrospect, in an effort to describe the deliberateness of the flight, the leading Arab propagandist of the day, Edward Atiyah (then Secretary of the Arab League Office in London), reaffirmed the facts:

“This wholesale exodus was due partly to the belief of the Arabs, encouraged by the boasting of an unrealistic Arab press and the irresponsible utterances of some of the Arab leaders that it could be only a matter of some weeks before the Jews were defeated by the armies of the Arab States and the Palestinian Arabs enabled to re-enter and retake possession of their country.”
Kenneth Bilby, one of the Americans who covered Palestine for several weeks during the war of 1948, wrote soon afterwards on his experience and observations:
“The Arab exodus, initially at least, was encouraged by many Arab leaders, such as Haj Amin el Husseini, 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.” [New Star in the Near East (New York, 1950), pp. 30-31]
After the war, the Palestine Arab leaders did try to help people –including their own–to forget that it was they who had called for the exodus in the early spring of 1948. They now blamed the leaders of the invading Arab states themselves. These had added their voices to the exodus call, enough not until some weeks after the Palestine Arab fighter Committee had taken a stand. The war was not yet over when Emil Ghoury, Secretary of the Arab Higher Committee, the official leadership of the Palestinian Arabs, stated in an interview with a Beirut newspaper:
I do not want to impugn anybody but only to help the refugees. The fact that there are these refugees is the direct consequence of the action of the Arab States in opposing Partition and the Jewish State. The Arab States agreed upon this policy unanimously and they must share in the solution of the problem. [Daily Telegraph, September 6, 1948]
In retrospect, the Jordanian newspaper Falastin wrote on February 19, 1949:
The Arab States encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies.
The Secretary General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, assured the Arab peoples that the occupation of Palestine and of Tel Aviv would be as simple as a military promenade. . . . He pointed out that they were already on the frontiers and that all the millions the Jews had spent on land and economic development would be easy booty, for it would be a simple matter to throw Jews into the Mediterranean. . . Brotherly advice was given to the Arabs of Palestine to leave their land, homes, and property and to stay temporarily in neighboring fraternal states, lest the guns of the invading Arab armies mow them down.
As late as 1952, the charge had the official stamp of the Arab Higher Committee. In a memorandum to the Arab League states, the Committee wrote:
Some of the Arab leaders and their ministers in Arab capitals . . . declared that they welcomed the immigration of Palestinian Arabs into the Arab countries until they saved Palestine. Many of the Palestinian Arabs were misled by their declarations…. It was natural for those Palestinian Arabs who felt impelled to leave their country to take refuge in Arab lands . . . and to stay in such adjacent places in order to maintain contact with their country so that to return to it would be easy when, according to the promises of many of those responsible in the Arab countries (promises which were given wastefully), the time was ripe. Many were of the opinion that such an opportunity would come in the hours between sunset and sunrise.
Most pointed of all was the comment of one of the refugees: “The Arab governments told us: Get out so that we can get in. So we got out, but they did not get in.”

So now Vice President John Kerry is disgruntled, and the media abuzz, as to why he couldn't broker a peace treaty, or a cease fire, between Israel and Palestine.

Besides, a ceasefire will only give the other guy time to rebuild and retool and to hide and stockpile more weapons.

It's like: Hello?  Anyone in there?  Have you not been paying attention for the past 57 years?

Now the Palestinians are under the rule of Hamas, and this is proof that democracies don't always result in freedom. In fact, the people of Palestine voted to be ruled by terrorist thugs who have a charter to destroy Israel.

Yet the media, a majority members in the United Nations, and the Obama administration, continues to see Israel as the bad guy.  In fact, as abcnews.com reported last Wednesday that the "White House Condemns Israel for Latest Attack of UN School in Gaza Strip."

You see, this is evidence that, while Hamas is openly advertising they are hiding weapons in schools and hospitals, so many people continue to be fooled, including our own president.

So you have Hamas purposefully putting sick people and children in harms way. Israel gives 20 minute warning shots so the kids and innocent people can get out of the way (something unprecedented in any war).  The media and the Obama administration still blames Israel because it refuses to see the whole picture.

Could you imagine if Canada hid weapons in Canadian schools and hospitals claiming that it was stockpiling weapons to destroy the United States, and the Canadians were proven terrorists with a doctrine to destroy America? Do you think we would sit idly by and do nothing?

Well, Obama might. Obama would probably blame America for being a greedy and selfish nation at the expense of the rest of the world.

I understand there is a lot of political gain to be had by claiming you are opposed to war and you want to prevent war casualties, but try again and again as you might, regardless of who you are and who is head of the PLO and who is Prime Minister of Israel, there will be no truce in the Israel-Palestine conflict absent an all out war.  In such case, the victor will get the land (unless Israel wins, then they will be considered the losers and treated as such).  Absent that, there will be no peace.

I'm not saying I want war, I'm just saying the truth that so many refuse to want to see, be it for political gain or all out ignorance.  Sometimes, the only way to peace is through war, as anyone who reads a history book will surely know. A good example is the Japanese and the Germans, who did not put away their primitive mindset until they were conquered by freedom.

Excerpt from Above is from the Blaze.com.

Further reading: