Thousands of Christians joined together with Jewish leaders to show their support for the nation of Israel as part of the annual Christians United for Israel Summit. Organized by pastor and televangelist John Hagee, the CUFI summit boasts plenty of big names—this year, they include TV host Glenn Beck, former US Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) and Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren.
Showing posts with label support for Israel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label support for Israel. Show all posts
(VIDEO) Muslim Student Defends Israel At The UN
EUJS speech at the UN during the Item 7 to support Israel, Against UN dispropationnal reaction.
As a muslim student, Amran Hussain wanted to explain himself and why he decided to make this speech.
EUJS is very impressed by him and his bravery!
(h/t: ElderOfZiyon)
As a muslim student, Amran Hussain wanted to explain himself and why he decided to make this speech.
EUJS is very impressed by him and his bravery!
(h/t: ElderOfZiyon)
(VIDEO) Melanie Phillips: "Zionism Is Not The Enemy Of The Jews"
It is hard to convey the sickening nature of this event, and not just because we lost. The sub-text of the motion was that the Jews are responsible for their own destruction; the real danger they are in comes not from Islamic terrorism, nor the attempt to ethnically cleanse the Jews from Israel, nor the rise in anti-Jewish feeling in Britain and Europe, but from the Jews themselves because the Israelis have turned into monsters. Thus the attacks on them, far from being deplored, are implicitly endorsed; and, to carry this thinking to its logical conclusion, the way to defend the Jews is to remove the source of the contagion — in other words, to destroy the state of Israel.
(VIDEO) An Arab Israeli Denies Israel Being An Apartheid State
This video features Arab-Israeli StandWithUs volunteer Ranya.
StandWithUs helps students fight against Israel Apartheid week.
(h/t: Israellycool)
StandWithUs helps students fight against Israel Apartheid week.
(h/t: Israellycool)
(NEWS) Americans Plan Pro-Israel ‘Buy-Cott’ Campaign Next Week
"American pro-Israel activists are planning a massive national 'Buy Israel Goods (BIG)' campaign next Tuesday and hope it will continue every day.
The www.BuyIsraelGoods.org website includes a locator for finding stores in different areas that carry Israeli products.
Previous 'buy-cotts' in the United States and Canada have been highly successful, leaving many stores with empty shelves after buyers cleaned them out, purchasing wine, snacks, cosmetics and hundreds of other Israeli-made products."
The www.BuyIsraelGoods.org website includes a locator for finding stores in different areas that carry Israeli products.
Previous 'buy-cotts' in the United States and Canada have been highly successful, leaving many stores with empty shelves after buyers cleaned them out, purchasing wine, snacks, cosmetics and hundreds of other Israeli-made products."
(BLOG) Dennis Prager: I Wish Settlements Were The Issue
"By Dennis Prager: According to every liberal editorial page in America (and virtually every editorial page abroad), according to President Obama, the United Nations and every other liberal institution, and according to Jews on the left, the major impediment to peace in the Middle East is Israel’s continuing construction of settlements in Jerusalem and the West Bank.
You have to say at least one thing on behalf of those on the left: They are consistent. In conflicts between a decent society and an indecent society, you can almost always count on the left to blame the decent society. The U.S. was wrong in overthrowing the mass murderer Saddam Hussein. The U.S. was wrong in fighting North Vietnam’s Stalinist tyrant, Ho Chi Minh. The U.S. was wrong in backing the Nicaraguan opposition to the Communist Sandinistas. Israel was wrong in its war against the murderous, Israel-denying, Jew-hating, Islamist totalitarian Hamas. And Israel is wrong today in its conflict with the Palestinians.
Actually, you can say one more thing: The left regularly confuses wishful thinking with reality. You see, I, too, wish that Israeli settlement construction — usually no more than apartment construction within existing Jewish communities within or right outside of Jerusalem — were the obstacle to peace between Israel and the Palestinians. But not being on the left, I am cursed with not assuming that what I would like to believe is reality.
If only these apartments were the problem. What a great day it would be for all of us who yearn to see the Jewish state accepted by its Palestinian and other Arab neighbors.
But, alas, this is make-believe. As Charles Krauthammer asked in a column he wrote a year ago, 'Is the peace process moribund because a teacher in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem is making an addition to her house to accommodate new grandchildren?'
Not quite. As Krauthammer noted, 'Blaming Israel and picking a fight over ‘natural growth’ may curry favor with the Muslim ‘street.’ But it will only induce the Arab states to do like Abbas: sit and wait for America to deliver Israel on a platter.'
Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, one of Israel’s most right-wing politicians, lives in a settlement. He has said that, to achieve peace he and his family would abandon their home. And for real peace, if necessary, Israel would force religious and secular settlers to abandon their homes as well.
If the conflict isn’t due to settlement buildings, then, why is there no peace between Israel and the Palestinians?
For the same reason the Jewish state was invaded by six Arab armies when it was born.
For the same reason Gamal Abdel Nasser, the Egyptian dictator, declared his intention to destroy Israel and, in partnership with Syria and Jordan, tried to do so in May-June 1967.
For the same reason that, in September 1967, the Arab nations gathered in Khartoum, Sudan, and declared their 'Three No’s': no peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel, no recognition of Israel.
For the same reason the Palestinians sent human bombs into Israeli schools, weddings, pizza parlors and buses to maim and murder as many Jews as possible.
For the same reason Yasser Arafat unleashed more terror on Israelis in 2001 right after he rejected the offer of a Palestinian state made by Israel’s left-wing Prime Minister Ehud Barak and by President Bill Clinton.
For the same reason Iran’s dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly called for Israel’s annihilation.
For the same reason Egyptian, Palestinian, Syrian and other Arab and Muslim countries’ media regularly broadcast the most anti-Semitic propaganda since the Nazis.
And that reason is that most Palestinians and most other Muslims in the Middle East, and many Muslims elsewhere, do not believe that a Jewish state should be allowed to exist, period, in an area once dominated by Islam. That — not Israeli apartment-building — is the problem.
Postscript: I just released the latest video course in my Internet project known as Prager University: prageru.com. It is, like the other courses, five minutes long. With the aid of maps and other illustrations, it explains what I have written here: The Middle East issue revolves around Arab/Muslim rejection of a Jewish state. According to YouTube, it has been viewed by 300,000 visitors in its first two weeks. I note this, first, to inform readers of this column about the video; second, to note how hungry people are for a clear explanation of the real reason for the lack of peace between Israel and the Palestinians; and third, because I have been moved by how many Israelis have written to me to thank me for the video. With nearly all the world — including many Jews — blaming Israel, they had forgotten why they don’t deserve to be.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host, columnist, author and public speaker. He can be heard in Los Angeles on KRLA (AM 870) weekdays 9 a.m. to noon. His Web site is dennisprager.com." (source)
You have to say at least one thing on behalf of those on the left: They are consistent. In conflicts between a decent society and an indecent society, you can almost always count on the left to blame the decent society. The U.S. was wrong in overthrowing the mass murderer Saddam Hussein. The U.S. was wrong in fighting North Vietnam’s Stalinist tyrant, Ho Chi Minh. The U.S. was wrong in backing the Nicaraguan opposition to the Communist Sandinistas. Israel was wrong in its war against the murderous, Israel-denying, Jew-hating, Islamist totalitarian Hamas. And Israel is wrong today in its conflict with the Palestinians.
Actually, you can say one more thing: The left regularly confuses wishful thinking with reality. You see, I, too, wish that Israeli settlement construction — usually no more than apartment construction within existing Jewish communities within or right outside of Jerusalem — were the obstacle to peace between Israel and the Palestinians. But not being on the left, I am cursed with not assuming that what I would like to believe is reality.
If only these apartments were the problem. What a great day it would be for all of us who yearn to see the Jewish state accepted by its Palestinian and other Arab neighbors.
But, alas, this is make-believe. As Charles Krauthammer asked in a column he wrote a year ago, 'Is the peace process moribund because a teacher in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem is making an addition to her house to accommodate new grandchildren?'
Not quite. As Krauthammer noted, 'Blaming Israel and picking a fight over ‘natural growth’ may curry favor with the Muslim ‘street.’ But it will only induce the Arab states to do like Abbas: sit and wait for America to deliver Israel on a platter.'
Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, one of Israel’s most right-wing politicians, lives in a settlement. He has said that, to achieve peace he and his family would abandon their home. And for real peace, if necessary, Israel would force religious and secular settlers to abandon their homes as well.
If the conflict isn’t due to settlement buildings, then, why is there no peace between Israel and the Palestinians?
For the same reason the Jewish state was invaded by six Arab armies when it was born.
For the same reason Gamal Abdel Nasser, the Egyptian dictator, declared his intention to destroy Israel and, in partnership with Syria and Jordan, tried to do so in May-June 1967.
For the same reason that, in September 1967, the Arab nations gathered in Khartoum, Sudan, and declared their 'Three No’s': no peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel, no recognition of Israel.
For the same reason the Palestinians sent human bombs into Israeli schools, weddings, pizza parlors and buses to maim and murder as many Jews as possible.
For the same reason Yasser Arafat unleashed more terror on Israelis in 2001 right after he rejected the offer of a Palestinian state made by Israel’s left-wing Prime Minister Ehud Barak and by President Bill Clinton.
For the same reason Iran’s dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly called for Israel’s annihilation.
For the same reason Egyptian, Palestinian, Syrian and other Arab and Muslim countries’ media regularly broadcast the most anti-Semitic propaganda since the Nazis.
And that reason is that most Palestinians and most other Muslims in the Middle East, and many Muslims elsewhere, do not believe that a Jewish state should be allowed to exist, period, in an area once dominated by Islam. That — not Israeli apartment-building — is the problem.
Postscript: I just released the latest video course in my Internet project known as Prager University: prageru.com. It is, like the other courses, five minutes long. With the aid of maps and other illustrations, it explains what I have written here: The Middle East issue revolves around Arab/Muslim rejection of a Jewish state. According to YouTube, it has been viewed by 300,000 visitors in its first two weeks. I note this, first, to inform readers of this column about the video; second, to note how hungry people are for a clear explanation of the real reason for the lack of peace between Israel and the Palestinians; and third, because I have been moved by how many Israelis have written to me to thank me for the video. With nearly all the world — including many Jews — blaming Israel, they had forgotten why they don’t deserve to be.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host, columnist, author and public speaker. He can be heard in Los Angeles on KRLA (AM 870) weekdays 9 a.m. to noon. His Web site is dennisprager.com." (source)
(IDF) IDF Soldiers Speak Out
The IDF has been accused of many things...
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has over 700,000 citizen soldiers and reservists who are expected to live up to the IDFs ethical standards. In any army, some soldiers violate the rules of combat. In the IDF, all alleged violations are investigated, and offenders are punished.
Yet today, there is an attempt to defame the IDF through allegations that there were instances of misconduct during Israel's Gaza operation. The accusations are based on unverified hearsay, and are proving to be false.
Many IDF soldiers feel a deep sense of injustice at how some are misrepresenting them and the IDF. They want to tell you, the public, about their personal experiences.
Yaron
Yaron served in Paratroopers during his service. In his testimony he describes how important it was to the IDF to fight as humanely as possible, even as they fight terror that inherently has no moral backing.
Samuel
Sameul is 25 year old goverment student who served as a 2nd sergeant in the Golani Brigade. Samuel describes how he helped a blind Palestinian reach the city of Nablus, taking him as close as he could get to the man's home with his military Hummer despite the constant threat of gunfire from terrorists.
Nina
Nina is 24 years old and studies government at university. She served as a commander of a combat medical course in the Israeli army for almost three years. She attends IDF reserve duty for more than a month each year at the Medic Division of the Home Front Command and was called up during Israel's recent campaign against Hamas in Gaza. She says that in training, IDF medics are taught "medicine first," even when faced with treating a badly injured terrorist over their fellow IDF soldiers.
Inon
Inon is a 25 year-old law and government student. He served as a lieutenant in the Golani brigade for four years and now serves in the IDF reserves. He fought in the second Lebanon War in 2006 leading troops in the battle against Hizbollah. Inon recounts how he and his unit were in combat with Hizbollah terrorists in Lebanon when they saw an elderly woman shouting out in pain. As he and a medic approached her in an attempt to treat her, they realized she was wired to a suicide bomb belt and was being used by Hizbollah as a human trap for the soldiers. "This is what we are up against," says Inon.
Daniel
Daniel, age 21, served in the Golani Brigade and was in Gaza for fifteen days. He talks about the IDF's extreme care for the safety of the Palestinian civilians, and the type of enemy the IDF is fighting; one that actively places children in the middle of their fight. The IDF works to minimize the affect of war on civilians even going so far as to clean a private home and leave food for the inhabitants.
Aviad
Aviad served in an elite Givati IDF unit for three years. In his interview he describes how the Palestinian civilians in Gaza felt safer under the IDF's protection than being exposed to the Hamas terror.
Jeremy
Jeremy, 24 years-old, fought in the ground war against Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006. Jeremy describes how his unit discovered a Hezbollah hideout but was ordered not to destroy the hideout because the terrorists were using civilians as human shields inside. The IDF chose to protect the lives of the Lebanese civilians even though it meant letting Hezbollah terrorists go free.
Ran
Ran is a 25 year-old law student and a sergeant-major in the Israeli army reserves. Ran spends at least 45 days a year doing reserve duty in the IDF's special forces Maglan. As part of his mandatory reserve duty, Ran has fought Palestinian terrorists in Jenin and other terrorist strongholds in the West Bank. He was also part of the IDF ground forces that fought Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon in the summer of 2006. Ran tells of the time he and his men risked their lives to rescue a nine-year old Palestinian girl being used by Palestinian terrorists to entrap Israeli soldiers.
Yoni
Yoni, age 22, served as a Staff Sergeant in Paratroopers Brigade 202. In his videos he talks about the extent to which the IDF restrains its self in order to preserve civilian life even in the face of clear intelligence of extreme danger. When they left homes they had been in, they cleaned them thoroughly. When there was a water shortage, they used their own drinking water to clean the floors, leaving the house cleaner than it was when they entered.
Shane
Shane is a 23 year old student who served as a 1st sergeant in an IDF special forces unit. He describes how the IDF is made up of ordinary Israelis who have families and regular jobs and who have a respect for family values.
Idan
Idan, age 37, is an information systems manager in Intel. He serves in an elite IDF Givati Unit. During operation "Cast Lead" against Hamas in Gaza, he was in command of several platoons of soldiers. Idan tells about the orders he gave to his soldiers, to ensure that the damage to the local civilians will be minimized, and so they understand that the IDF is fighting against the terrorists and not against the Palestinian population.
Yehoshua
Yehoshua, age 26, served as a First Sergeant in the Golani Brigade. In his interview he speaks about finding ammunition in school yards, civilian houses, and even in ambulances being let through the border for humanitarian aid.
Lior
Lior is a second year Law student at IDC Herzeliya. He tells of a time he was manning a long-distance nightvision camera watching over a no-man's area when two people were spotted there. Though they were obviously targets determined by both ground and air surveillance, the decision to engage was repeatedly negative.
Gil
Gil is a 26 year-old law student and a combat soldier in the Israeli army reserves. Gil was called into active duty to fight Hamas in the Gaza Strip, with the aim being to stop Hamas rocket fire into southern Israel. Gil had just finished a month of training, which is required annually for all reserves, and had started to get involved in his studies when he got the call. But after years of watching missiles being shot into towns in southern Israel, there was no question that he would take on a mission to end these attacks on Israeli civilians.
Ovadia
Ovadia is a 29 medical student in Jerusalem and a First Lieutenant in the IDF.
He speaks about a vehicle that was carrying children, but hidden beneath them was an enormous cache of weapons and ammunition. In his second video Ovadia tells of a time he was shot in the hand while doing routine security detail. He didn't return fire because he didn't realize a gunman had come out to shoot among the children- it seemed like a rock wound, and amry regulation forbids firing on people throwing rocks.
Amir
Amir, age 25, is a business and economics student. He serves in the Israeli army reserves where he works as a paramedic in the Givati unit. His unit has been called up to fight against Hamas terrorists in Gaza numerous times, including during the recent campaign against Hamas in Gaza. Amir describes a time he once came across a pregnant woman in labor in Gaza and coordinated with Palestinian medical workers to get her to a hospital.
Pinchas
Pinchas, age 29, is a Politcal Science student. He served in an elite IDF infantry unit and today performs almost 70 days of reserve service each year. During the operation against Hamas in Gaza, his unit was called to duty for additional service. Pinchas speaks about finding rocket launchers in a Palestinian ambulance and escorting a terrorist bomb-maker who helped the soldiers discover explosives hidden under civilian facilities such as schools and clinics.
Noam
Noam, age 24, is a Law Student in Tel Aviv University. He serves as an officer in the Givati Unit. Noam speaks about the risk he and his soldiers dealt with in order to avoid any innocent casualties. Despite the intentions of the Hamas, he and his team did the best to avoid any unecessary harm.
Soldiers Speak Out is constantly searching for more IDF soldiers to collect testimonies from.
Please help them by sending in names of eligible men and women who are willing to be interviewed to soldiersspeakout@gmail.com.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has over 700,000 citizen soldiers and reservists who are expected to live up to the IDFs ethical standards. In any army, some soldiers violate the rules of combat. In the IDF, all alleged violations are investigated, and offenders are punished.
Yet today, there is an attempt to defame the IDF through allegations that there were instances of misconduct during Israel's Gaza operation. The accusations are based on unverified hearsay, and are proving to be false.
Many IDF soldiers feel a deep sense of injustice at how some are misrepresenting them and the IDF. They want to tell you, the public, about their personal experiences.
Yaron
Yaron served in Paratroopers during his service. In his testimony he describes how important it was to the IDF to fight as humanely as possible, even as they fight terror that inherently has no moral backing.
Samuel
Sameul is 25 year old goverment student who served as a 2nd sergeant in the Golani Brigade. Samuel describes how he helped a blind Palestinian reach the city of Nablus, taking him as close as he could get to the man's home with his military Hummer despite the constant threat of gunfire from terrorists.
Nina
Nina is 24 years old and studies government at university. She served as a commander of a combat medical course in the Israeli army for almost three years. She attends IDF reserve duty for more than a month each year at the Medic Division of the Home Front Command and was called up during Israel's recent campaign against Hamas in Gaza. She says that in training, IDF medics are taught "medicine first," even when faced with treating a badly injured terrorist over their fellow IDF soldiers.
Inon
Inon is a 25 year-old law and government student. He served as a lieutenant in the Golani brigade for four years and now serves in the IDF reserves. He fought in the second Lebanon War in 2006 leading troops in the battle against Hizbollah. Inon recounts how he and his unit were in combat with Hizbollah terrorists in Lebanon when they saw an elderly woman shouting out in pain. As he and a medic approached her in an attempt to treat her, they realized she was wired to a suicide bomb belt and was being used by Hizbollah as a human trap for the soldiers. "This is what we are up against," says Inon.
Daniel
Daniel, age 21, served in the Golani Brigade and was in Gaza for fifteen days. He talks about the IDF's extreme care for the safety of the Palestinian civilians, and the type of enemy the IDF is fighting; one that actively places children in the middle of their fight. The IDF works to minimize the affect of war on civilians even going so far as to clean a private home and leave food for the inhabitants.
Aviad
Aviad served in an elite Givati IDF unit for three years. In his interview he describes how the Palestinian civilians in Gaza felt safer under the IDF's protection than being exposed to the Hamas terror.
Jeremy
Jeremy, 24 years-old, fought in the ground war against Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006. Jeremy describes how his unit discovered a Hezbollah hideout but was ordered not to destroy the hideout because the terrorists were using civilians as human shields inside. The IDF chose to protect the lives of the Lebanese civilians even though it meant letting Hezbollah terrorists go free.
Ran
Ran is a 25 year-old law student and a sergeant-major in the Israeli army reserves. Ran spends at least 45 days a year doing reserve duty in the IDF's special forces Maglan. As part of his mandatory reserve duty, Ran has fought Palestinian terrorists in Jenin and other terrorist strongholds in the West Bank. He was also part of the IDF ground forces that fought Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon in the summer of 2006. Ran tells of the time he and his men risked their lives to rescue a nine-year old Palestinian girl being used by Palestinian terrorists to entrap Israeli soldiers.
Yoni
Yoni, age 22, served as a Staff Sergeant in Paratroopers Brigade 202. In his videos he talks about the extent to which the IDF restrains its self in order to preserve civilian life even in the face of clear intelligence of extreme danger. When they left homes they had been in, they cleaned them thoroughly. When there was a water shortage, they used their own drinking water to clean the floors, leaving the house cleaner than it was when they entered.
Shane
Shane is a 23 year old student who served as a 1st sergeant in an IDF special forces unit. He describes how the IDF is made up of ordinary Israelis who have families and regular jobs and who have a respect for family values.
Idan
Idan, age 37, is an information systems manager in Intel. He serves in an elite IDF Givati Unit. During operation "Cast Lead" against Hamas in Gaza, he was in command of several platoons of soldiers. Idan tells about the orders he gave to his soldiers, to ensure that the damage to the local civilians will be minimized, and so they understand that the IDF is fighting against the terrorists and not against the Palestinian population.
Yehoshua
Yehoshua, age 26, served as a First Sergeant in the Golani Brigade. In his interview he speaks about finding ammunition in school yards, civilian houses, and even in ambulances being let through the border for humanitarian aid.
Lior
Lior is a second year Law student at IDC Herzeliya. He tells of a time he was manning a long-distance nightvision camera watching over a no-man's area when two people were spotted there. Though they were obviously targets determined by both ground and air surveillance, the decision to engage was repeatedly negative.
Gil
Gil is a 26 year-old law student and a combat soldier in the Israeli army reserves. Gil was called into active duty to fight Hamas in the Gaza Strip, with the aim being to stop Hamas rocket fire into southern Israel. Gil had just finished a month of training, which is required annually for all reserves, and had started to get involved in his studies when he got the call. But after years of watching missiles being shot into towns in southern Israel, there was no question that he would take on a mission to end these attacks on Israeli civilians.
Ovadia
Ovadia is a 29 medical student in Jerusalem and a First Lieutenant in the IDF.
He speaks about a vehicle that was carrying children, but hidden beneath them was an enormous cache of weapons and ammunition. In his second video Ovadia tells of a time he was shot in the hand while doing routine security detail. He didn't return fire because he didn't realize a gunman had come out to shoot among the children- it seemed like a rock wound, and amry regulation forbids firing on people throwing rocks.
Amir
Amir, age 25, is a business and economics student. He serves in the Israeli army reserves where he works as a paramedic in the Givati unit. His unit has been called up to fight against Hamas terrorists in Gaza numerous times, including during the recent campaign against Hamas in Gaza. Amir describes a time he once came across a pregnant woman in labor in Gaza and coordinated with Palestinian medical workers to get her to a hospital.
Pinchas
Pinchas, age 29, is a Politcal Science student. He served in an elite IDF infantry unit and today performs almost 70 days of reserve service each year. During the operation against Hamas in Gaza, his unit was called to duty for additional service. Pinchas speaks about finding rocket launchers in a Palestinian ambulance and escorting a terrorist bomb-maker who helped the soldiers discover explosives hidden under civilian facilities such as schools and clinics.
Noam
Noam, age 24, is a Law Student in Tel Aviv University. He serves as an officer in the Givati Unit. Noam speaks about the risk he and his soldiers dealt with in order to avoid any innocent casualties. Despite the intentions of the Hamas, he and his team did the best to avoid any unecessary harm.
Soldiers Speak Out is constantly searching for more IDF soldiers to collect testimonies from.
Please help them by sending in names of eligible men and women who are willing to be interviewed to soldiersspeakout@gmail.com.
(BLOG) A Principled Defense Of Israel
"First let me say that anyone who gives Hamas even an iota of support is morally complicit in genocide. Do I have your attention? Good.
Once upon a time – quite recently in fact – I thought that liberals in general supports Israel. It seemed so obvious. When a relatively free democracy is being attacked by terrorists there should be no doubt. You support the side that is fighting for freedom, not the side struggling to replace freedom with dictatorship. Yet, I find that many so-called liberals refuse to give moral support to Israel, and that they, at least by implication, often stands with Hamas and other organizations (e.g. Hezbollah) that want to see Israel destroyed.
There are a handful of objections that liberals frequently raise against Israel. One is that the Israeli state was created in an improper manner. Another says that Israel is violating the rights of innocent Palestinian civilians. A third that the blockade of the Gaza Strip is illegitimate. And so on. I intend to respond to these arguments in order to defend Israel. A more extensive historical analysis will be published at a later date (albeit in Swedish) by guest blogger Jakob Dlouhý.
Only one detail before we continue. There is no such thing as a Palestinian ethnicity. Palestine is the geographical region that today includes Israel, the West Bank and Gaza (which until 1917 was part of the Ottoman Empire). The existence of a Palestinian ethnicity is simply a media gimmick. Therefore, I do not talk about any Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Instead of Palestine, I say the Palestinian Authority (PNA), and instead of calling the people Palestinians I call them residents on the West Bank and in Gaza.
Israel’s founding is irrelevant
What happened in 1948, when Israel was founded, is irrelevant to assessing the current situation. Each individual is responsible for what he does, but not for what others do or have done. This means that one cannot judge today’s Arabs or Jews for something that happened more than sixty years ago. All those who had executive power in the 40’s are probably dead by now, and those who live (contrary to expectations) lack the power they once had. The point is that guilt cannot be inherited. Knowledge of the historical background of a military conflict provides increased understanding, but when one is to decide which side to support (if any) it is necessary to study the present. One cannot support or fight anything based on what it once was, but no longer is.
Most countries have (or when it has not been historically confirmed, is likely to have) been founded in a manner that is more or less incompatible with liberal principles. But so what? Just take Hong Kong as an example. Today it is one of the world’s freest economies, but it was founded as a result of war (the First Opium War) in 1842. The peace of Nanking meant that China had to cede the island, which became a crown colony under the British occupants. Should we then say that Hong Kong has no right to exist, because of what happened more than 150 years ago? Should we say that it was right to hand it over to Communist China in 1997? Certainly not. The manner in which a country was founded is irrelevant to whether it has a right to exist today. This applies to Israel, as much as it applies to Hong Kong.
We can merely examine various countries, as they are today, and ask which of them respects human rights the most. Israel is not an entirely free country, but it is a relatively secular parliamentary democracy, comparable to countries in the West. 'Palestine', on the other hand, is currently led by PLO and Hamas, the latter being more or less a Nazi-organization whose stated goal is to destroy Israel and replace it with a judenrein Muslim theocracy. This is the crux of the matter. One need not believe that everything Israel does is right, but in terms of essentials, it is Israel that deserves our support.
The PNA is responsible for civilian casualties
Many talk of 'peace in the Middle East' as if peace had an intrinsic value. On the contrary, peace can mean very different things, that differ in terms of desirability. It can mean that you eliminate a threat, or that you let yourself be eliminated by it. It can mean that you fought for and won your freedom, or that you gave up and allowed yourself to be shackled or executed. Peace can prevail between free people, or between masters and slaves. My firm belief is that freedom should prevail over peace; when freedom is threatened resistance, not peace, is desirable.
It is inevitable that civilians suffer in war; a country cannot defend itself against external threats if it must take the enemy’s civilian population into account. The attackers, not the defenders, are morally responsible for civilian deaths. Those who initiated and perpetuates the conflict (in this case the Palestinian Authority) are properly blamed. Israel has every right to fight back against their attackers, and if that results in civilian casualties, the blame is on men like Khaled Meshal and Ismail Haniyeh (both senior leaders of Hamas). Not to mention the many minions who carry out the actual attacks against Israel.
Does this mean that you, assuming the role as store owner, may use a machine gun and kill all your customers, just because one of them is caught shoplifting?
I have heard this comparison more than once, and the answer is no – for several reasons. For example, the shoplifter is not firing Qassam rockets at you, and his goal is not to destroy you and your store. A minor theft is also an isolated incident. A shoplifter can be arrested without it affecting other people. Suppose instead that the shoplifter went out on the street and put up a launch pad for a rocket. He is about to bombard your store, which would kill you and everyone else in the proximity. Do you, in this scenario, have the right to put a stop to his plans, even by means that would risk harming innocent bystanders? Now this scenario is on par with Israel’s actual situation. And the answer is unequivocally yes. You have every right to defend yourself against the threat, even with a machine gun.
Consider what the pacifist argument implies. The greater the threat, the lesser one’s right to defend oneself. If you get attacked by an aggressive military power you should passively await your demise. Instead of placing blame where it belongs – on the attacker – it puts it on the victims. I cannot think of any argument that more effectively undermines a country’s liberty. We see that Israel, in part due to such external pressure, often has to abstain from appropriately defending itself.
The blockade of the Gaza Strip is legitimate
Since 2007, Israel (together with Egypt) has maintained a blockade of the Gaza Strip. This is done to, as far as possible, prevent Hamas from importing weapons and other military equipment intended to achieve Israel’s annihilation.
It is sometimes argued that the blockade is an obstacle to free trade. This summer, for example, the Swedish liberal Johan Norberg wrote that it 'sabotages cross-border trade, which can establish contact and friendship.' I cannot for the life of me understand how 'friendship' between Israel and the PNA would benefit from Hamas acquiring more weapons to bombard the Israelis with. Norberg writes that blockades 'often strengthens the rulers', which is true. They give columnists like himself a reason to criticize Israel, which in the long run weakens Israel’s position in its conflict with the PNA. In the end, Israel cannot lift a finger without being condemned by the outside world, unless the finger is aimed at its own destruction. Norberg writes that Israel 'makes its neighbors bitter.' Of course. The Israelis insist on not dying.
One thing needs to be sorted out: it should not be legal to sell military equipment to terrorists. To assist the Palestinian Authority or Hamas in acquiring weapons is not free trade. It is to participate in genocide. The blockade is obviously not perfect. Hamas gets weapons anyway, and the measure strikes back at Israel in the form of foreign criticism. But what should Israel do? Sit idly by whilst its executioners grow stronger – not likely.
Hamas is something as exotic as a beloved Islamofascist terrorist organization. In Sweden, one quickly becomes badgered if one says anything bad about Hamas, as if there is nothing wrong with wanting to destroy all freedom in the Middle East, and to 'drive the Jews into the sea'. According to the Swedish debate, the Israelis are bad because they don’t cooperate with Hamas to fulfill this noble purpose – in fact so bad that it might be excusable to bombard them with thousands of rockets over many years. The same people who hold these views are quick to condemn Nazi Germany, and show outrage over the xenophobic Sweden Democrats who entered parliament in 2010. How is that for coming in like a lion and going out like a lamb?
Israel’s Enemy: The Morality of Death
What morality prevents the world from providing Israel with the necessary support for a triumph of freedom? The answer is the morality of altruism; it is the morality that says that life is not meant to be lived, but sacrificed. The Israelis want to live their lives. Hamas and its ilk are willing to sacrifice themselves and others to put a religious dictatorship in Israel’s place, and thus institutionalize the morality of sacrifice. It is not difficult to see which side appeals to traditional morality.
Decorum prevents most people from explicitly supporting terrorism and genocide. It does not prevent them from condemning the selfish Israel, a country that only aspires to its own freedom, and refuses to sacrifice itself for the civilians on the West Bank and in Gaza. Thus it falls on Israel to extend a hand to the Palestinian Authority rather than vice versa. Thus, Israel should apologize for its selfishness, lay down its weapons, and start cooperating with its executioners. The moral thing is for Israel to sacrifice itself, to accept its doom – so that peace may prevail.
To expressly support terrorism is wrong, but indirectly supporting it, by denouncing Israel’s struggle against it – that is right and proper! Here, the law of excluded middle applies. Either one denounces terror, genocide, and the Palestinian Authority. Or one does not.
Altruism is the main culprit behind arguments like 'but fewer die on Israel’s side' and 'but Israel is bigger and stronger than the PNA'. Implicit in these arguments is that Israel has a right to self-defence, only when they become weaker and when more Israelis have died, in other words: the weaker party in a conflict is always right. To speak plainly, this means that one has a right to exercise terror, so long as it is directed against anyone who is bigger and stronger than oneself. Why? Because the big and strong should sacrifice themselves for the weak! Thus, it is only right that Israel give concessions, undermines its advantage, and allows more Israelis to die. (This ignores the fact that Israel certainly has more enemies than the Palestinian Authority. In practice it stands against the whole Arab world – and compared to the whole Arab world, Israel is, of course, the smaller and weaker party.)
When Objectivists say that altruism is the morality of death it is not to sound bombastic. They mean it – literally.
A Brief Summary
This is a one-way apology. I think it is urgent to present one. Most texts on Israel get lost in a maze of concrete events, as if one had to know the tiniest of details from 1948 onwards in order to make up one’s mind. I have chosen to focus on what I regard as some of the essentials, and to reason based on simple principles of individual rights and human dignity. My judgement is that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself. As I have said, I don’t think Israel is always right about everything, but that it, in terms of essentials, deserves our support.
Let me conclude by saying that anyone who gives Hamas even an iota of support is morally complicit in genocide. Do I have your attention? Good." (source)
Once upon a time – quite recently in fact – I thought that liberals in general supports Israel. It seemed so obvious. When a relatively free democracy is being attacked by terrorists there should be no doubt. You support the side that is fighting for freedom, not the side struggling to replace freedom with dictatorship. Yet, I find that many so-called liberals refuse to give moral support to Israel, and that they, at least by implication, often stands with Hamas and other organizations (e.g. Hezbollah) that want to see Israel destroyed.
There are a handful of objections that liberals frequently raise against Israel. One is that the Israeli state was created in an improper manner. Another says that Israel is violating the rights of innocent Palestinian civilians. A third that the blockade of the Gaza Strip is illegitimate. And so on. I intend to respond to these arguments in order to defend Israel. A more extensive historical analysis will be published at a later date (albeit in Swedish) by guest blogger Jakob Dlouhý.
Only one detail before we continue. There is no such thing as a Palestinian ethnicity. Palestine is the geographical region that today includes Israel, the West Bank and Gaza (which until 1917 was part of the Ottoman Empire). The existence of a Palestinian ethnicity is simply a media gimmick. Therefore, I do not talk about any Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Instead of Palestine, I say the Palestinian Authority (PNA), and instead of calling the people Palestinians I call them residents on the West Bank and in Gaza.
Israel’s founding is irrelevant
What happened in 1948, when Israel was founded, is irrelevant to assessing the current situation. Each individual is responsible for what he does, but not for what others do or have done. This means that one cannot judge today’s Arabs or Jews for something that happened more than sixty years ago. All those who had executive power in the 40’s are probably dead by now, and those who live (contrary to expectations) lack the power they once had. The point is that guilt cannot be inherited. Knowledge of the historical background of a military conflict provides increased understanding, but when one is to decide which side to support (if any) it is necessary to study the present. One cannot support or fight anything based on what it once was, but no longer is.
Most countries have (or when it has not been historically confirmed, is likely to have) been founded in a manner that is more or less incompatible with liberal principles. But so what? Just take Hong Kong as an example. Today it is one of the world’s freest economies, but it was founded as a result of war (the First Opium War) in 1842. The peace of Nanking meant that China had to cede the island, which became a crown colony under the British occupants. Should we then say that Hong Kong has no right to exist, because of what happened more than 150 years ago? Should we say that it was right to hand it over to Communist China in 1997? Certainly not. The manner in which a country was founded is irrelevant to whether it has a right to exist today. This applies to Israel, as much as it applies to Hong Kong.
We can merely examine various countries, as they are today, and ask which of them respects human rights the most. Israel is not an entirely free country, but it is a relatively secular parliamentary democracy, comparable to countries in the West. 'Palestine', on the other hand, is currently led by PLO and Hamas, the latter being more or less a Nazi-organization whose stated goal is to destroy Israel and replace it with a judenrein Muslim theocracy. This is the crux of the matter. One need not believe that everything Israel does is right, but in terms of essentials, it is Israel that deserves our support.
The PNA is responsible for civilian casualties
Many talk of 'peace in the Middle East' as if peace had an intrinsic value. On the contrary, peace can mean very different things, that differ in terms of desirability. It can mean that you eliminate a threat, or that you let yourself be eliminated by it. It can mean that you fought for and won your freedom, or that you gave up and allowed yourself to be shackled or executed. Peace can prevail between free people, or between masters and slaves. My firm belief is that freedom should prevail over peace; when freedom is threatened resistance, not peace, is desirable.
It is inevitable that civilians suffer in war; a country cannot defend itself against external threats if it must take the enemy’s civilian population into account. The attackers, not the defenders, are morally responsible for civilian deaths. Those who initiated and perpetuates the conflict (in this case the Palestinian Authority) are properly blamed. Israel has every right to fight back against their attackers, and if that results in civilian casualties, the blame is on men like Khaled Meshal and Ismail Haniyeh (both senior leaders of Hamas). Not to mention the many minions who carry out the actual attacks against Israel.
Does this mean that you, assuming the role as store owner, may use a machine gun and kill all your customers, just because one of them is caught shoplifting?
I have heard this comparison more than once, and the answer is no – for several reasons. For example, the shoplifter is not firing Qassam rockets at you, and his goal is not to destroy you and your store. A minor theft is also an isolated incident. A shoplifter can be arrested without it affecting other people. Suppose instead that the shoplifter went out on the street and put up a launch pad for a rocket. He is about to bombard your store, which would kill you and everyone else in the proximity. Do you, in this scenario, have the right to put a stop to his plans, even by means that would risk harming innocent bystanders? Now this scenario is on par with Israel’s actual situation. And the answer is unequivocally yes. You have every right to defend yourself against the threat, even with a machine gun.
Consider what the pacifist argument implies. The greater the threat, the lesser one’s right to defend oneself. If you get attacked by an aggressive military power you should passively await your demise. Instead of placing blame where it belongs – on the attacker – it puts it on the victims. I cannot think of any argument that more effectively undermines a country’s liberty. We see that Israel, in part due to such external pressure, often has to abstain from appropriately defending itself.
The blockade of the Gaza Strip is legitimate
Since 2007, Israel (together with Egypt) has maintained a blockade of the Gaza Strip. This is done to, as far as possible, prevent Hamas from importing weapons and other military equipment intended to achieve Israel’s annihilation.
It is sometimes argued that the blockade is an obstacle to free trade. This summer, for example, the Swedish liberal Johan Norberg wrote that it 'sabotages cross-border trade, which can establish contact and friendship.' I cannot for the life of me understand how 'friendship' between Israel and the PNA would benefit from Hamas acquiring more weapons to bombard the Israelis with. Norberg writes that blockades 'often strengthens the rulers', which is true. They give columnists like himself a reason to criticize Israel, which in the long run weakens Israel’s position in its conflict with the PNA. In the end, Israel cannot lift a finger without being condemned by the outside world, unless the finger is aimed at its own destruction. Norberg writes that Israel 'makes its neighbors bitter.' Of course. The Israelis insist on not dying.
One thing needs to be sorted out: it should not be legal to sell military equipment to terrorists. To assist the Palestinian Authority or Hamas in acquiring weapons is not free trade. It is to participate in genocide. The blockade is obviously not perfect. Hamas gets weapons anyway, and the measure strikes back at Israel in the form of foreign criticism. But what should Israel do? Sit idly by whilst its executioners grow stronger – not likely.
Hamas is something as exotic as a beloved Islamofascist terrorist organization. In Sweden, one quickly becomes badgered if one says anything bad about Hamas, as if there is nothing wrong with wanting to destroy all freedom in the Middle East, and to 'drive the Jews into the sea'. According to the Swedish debate, the Israelis are bad because they don’t cooperate with Hamas to fulfill this noble purpose – in fact so bad that it might be excusable to bombard them with thousands of rockets over many years. The same people who hold these views are quick to condemn Nazi Germany, and show outrage over the xenophobic Sweden Democrats who entered parliament in 2010. How is that for coming in like a lion and going out like a lamb?
Israel’s Enemy: The Morality of Death
What morality prevents the world from providing Israel with the necessary support for a triumph of freedom? The answer is the morality of altruism; it is the morality that says that life is not meant to be lived, but sacrificed. The Israelis want to live their lives. Hamas and its ilk are willing to sacrifice themselves and others to put a religious dictatorship in Israel’s place, and thus institutionalize the morality of sacrifice. It is not difficult to see which side appeals to traditional morality.
Decorum prevents most people from explicitly supporting terrorism and genocide. It does not prevent them from condemning the selfish Israel, a country that only aspires to its own freedom, and refuses to sacrifice itself for the civilians on the West Bank and in Gaza. Thus it falls on Israel to extend a hand to the Palestinian Authority rather than vice versa. Thus, Israel should apologize for its selfishness, lay down its weapons, and start cooperating with its executioners. The moral thing is for Israel to sacrifice itself, to accept its doom – so that peace may prevail.
To expressly support terrorism is wrong, but indirectly supporting it, by denouncing Israel’s struggle against it – that is right and proper! Here, the law of excluded middle applies. Either one denounces terror, genocide, and the Palestinian Authority. Or one does not.
Altruism is the main culprit behind arguments like 'but fewer die on Israel’s side' and 'but Israel is bigger and stronger than the PNA'. Implicit in these arguments is that Israel has a right to self-defence, only when they become weaker and when more Israelis have died, in other words: the weaker party in a conflict is always right. To speak plainly, this means that one has a right to exercise terror, so long as it is directed against anyone who is bigger and stronger than oneself. Why? Because the big and strong should sacrifice themselves for the weak! Thus, it is only right that Israel give concessions, undermines its advantage, and allows more Israelis to die. (This ignores the fact that Israel certainly has more enemies than the Palestinian Authority. In practice it stands against the whole Arab world – and compared to the whole Arab world, Israel is, of course, the smaller and weaker party.)
When Objectivists say that altruism is the morality of death it is not to sound bombastic. They mean it – literally.
A Brief Summary
This is a one-way apology. I think it is urgent to present one. Most texts on Israel get lost in a maze of concrete events, as if one had to know the tiniest of details from 1948 onwards in order to make up one’s mind. I have chosen to focus on what I regard as some of the essentials, and to reason based on simple principles of individual rights and human dignity. My judgement is that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself. As I have said, I don’t think Israel is always right about everything, but that it, in terms of essentials, deserves our support.
Let me conclude by saying that anyone who gives Hamas even an iota of support is morally complicit in genocide. Do I have your attention? Good." (source)
(BLOG) Stephen Harper Is Exactly Right On Israel
"If Prime Minister Stephen Harper had the oratorical style of a Barack Obama, the nuanced elegance of a Pierre Trudeau, or the fire of a John Diefenbaker, his speech last week on anti-Semitism and Israel would be put on a pedestal.
It was blunt, it was courageous, and it stood tall and unflinching in its condemnation of the 'new anti-Semistism' now sweeping the world, as well as the growing hatred of Israel as it rightfully fights for its continued survival.
All Harper’s speech lacked — and remember, it was vitally important because it was addressed to 150 parliamentarians from 50 countries seeking answers to quell such hatred against both Jews and Israel — was the delivery of a master of the podium.
His words, however, were masterful words, and Canadians should be proud of their PM.
But not so proud of Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff.
As conservative columnist David Frum wrote elsewhere, Ignatieff’s speech to the same group on anti-Semitism was strangely 'ambivalent' about Israel — stating only that global anti-Semitism would be lessened by a settlement of the Arab-Israeli dispute.
This would make some sense, presumably, except for the fact that preaching the hatred of Jews has been a staple in the Islamic world long before Israel took its first breath.
Harper served strong coffee, wrote Frum.
Ignatieff served weak tea.
As we stated here following Canada’s rejection by the UN for a seat on the security council — losing out to debt-plagued Portugal, no less — if it was Canada’s unwavering support of Israel that led to its first loss of a such a seat since the UN formed in 1945, then it should wear that loss with immense pride.
Canada stuck to its principles and lost.
We call that loss a win.
It would be all too easy to take a leave of absence in the face of anti-Semitism, and to feign some sort of blinkered neutrality.
But Harper was precise about our moral obligations, stating that whenever anti-Semitism raises its head Canada will take a stand against it, and then stand tall in defending Israel’s right to exist.
His speech should be mandatory reading in every university.
And for every Canadian with blinkers." (source)
Related Article:
It was blunt, it was courageous, and it stood tall and unflinching in its condemnation of the 'new anti-Semistism' now sweeping the world, as well as the growing hatred of Israel as it rightfully fights for its continued survival.
All Harper’s speech lacked — and remember, it was vitally important because it was addressed to 150 parliamentarians from 50 countries seeking answers to quell such hatred against both Jews and Israel — was the delivery of a master of the podium.
His words, however, were masterful words, and Canadians should be proud of their PM.
But not so proud of Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff.
As conservative columnist David Frum wrote elsewhere, Ignatieff’s speech to the same group on anti-Semitism was strangely 'ambivalent' about Israel — stating only that global anti-Semitism would be lessened by a settlement of the Arab-Israeli dispute.
This would make some sense, presumably, except for the fact that preaching the hatred of Jews has been a staple in the Islamic world long before Israel took its first breath.
Harper served strong coffee, wrote Frum.
Ignatieff served weak tea.
As we stated here following Canada’s rejection by the UN for a seat on the security council — losing out to debt-plagued Portugal, no less — if it was Canada’s unwavering support of Israel that led to its first loss of a such a seat since the UN formed in 1945, then it should wear that loss with immense pride.
Canada stuck to its principles and lost.
We call that loss a win.
It would be all too easy to take a leave of absence in the face of anti-Semitism, and to feign some sort of blinkered neutrality.
But Harper was precise about our moral obligations, stating that whenever anti-Semitism raises its head Canada will take a stand against it, and then stand tall in defending Israel’s right to exist.
His speech should be mandatory reading in every university.
And for every Canadian with blinkers." (source)
Related Article:
(BLOG) Gabriel Latner' Positive Opinion On Why Israel Is A Rogue State & A Lovable One Too
A young man studying law in Cambridge, 19 year old Canadian Gabriel Latner, found himself debating at the Cambridge Union Society for the motion that Israel is Rogue State. He was placed on the “team” that included Lauren Booth, the ridiculous sister in law of Tony Blair who converted to Islam after a visit to that shining beacon of democracy and brotherly love, Iran, and who especially enjoys being photographed in Gazan supermarkets brimming with food although she publicly denounces Israel for starving Gazans.
According to some sources he presented the most brilliant defense of Israel since Moses parted the Red Sea. Prior to giving his speech he told his "ally" in a Cambridge Union debate, Lauren Booth -- "I am going to nail you to the f***ing wall up there." He duly did. He is now banned for life from the Cambridge Union for swearing in front of a lady.
Gabriel, who is also Jewish, was proposing the motion in the CU that Israel is a rogue state. He asked the fundamental question: well, what does rogue actually mean? He referred to the dictionary. 'Aberrant, anomalous, misplaced, occurring (especially in isolation) at an unexpected place or time'. In other words, just like Israel.
Here is his speech which got everyone thinking and which "nailed Lauren Booth to the wall".
According to some sources he presented the most brilliant defense of Israel since Moses parted the Red Sea. Prior to giving his speech he told his "ally" in a Cambridge Union debate, Lauren Booth -- "I am going to nail you to the f***ing wall up there." He duly did. He is now banned for life from the Cambridge Union for swearing in front of a lady.
Gabriel, who is also Jewish, was proposing the motion in the CU that Israel is a rogue state. He asked the fundamental question: well, what does rogue actually mean? He referred to the dictionary. 'Aberrant, anomalous, misplaced, occurring (especially in isolation) at an unexpected place or time'. In other words, just like Israel.
Here is his speech which got everyone thinking and which "nailed Lauren Booth to the wall".
This is a war of ideals, and the other speakers here tonight are rightfully, idealists. I'm not. I'm a realist. I'm here to win. I have a single goal this evening – to have at least a plurality of you walk out of the 'Aye' door. I face a singular challenge – most, if not all, of you have already made up your minds.
This issue is too polarizing for the vast majority of you not to already have a set opinion. I'd be willing to bet that half of you strongly support the motion, and half of you strongly oppose it. I want to win, and we're destined for a tie. I'm tempted to do what my fellow speakers are going to do – simply rehash every bad thing the Israeli government has ever done in an attempt to satisfy those of you who agree with them. And perhaps they'll even guilt one of you rare undecided into voting for the proposition, or more accurately, against Israel. It would be so easy to twist the meaning and significance of international 'laws' to make Israel look like a criminal state. But that's been done to death. It would be easier still to play to your sympathy, with personalised stories of Palestinian suffering. And they can give very eloquent speeches on those issues. But the truth is, that treating people badly, whether they're your citizens or an occupied nation, does not make a state' rogue'. If it did, Canada, the US, and Australia would all be rogue states based on how they treat their indigenous populations. Britain's treatment of the Irish would easily qualify them to wear this sobriquet. These arguments, while emotionally satisfying, lack intellectual rigour.
More importantly, I just don't think we can win with those arguments. It won't change the numbers. Half of you will agree with them, half of you won't. So I'm going to try something different, something a little unorthodox. I'm going to try and convince the die-hard Zionists and Israel supporters here tonight, to vote for the proposition. By the end of my speech – I will have presented 5 pro-Israel arguments that show Israel is, if not a 'rogue state' than at least 'rogueish'.
Let me be clear. I will not be arguing that Israel is 'bad'. I will not be arguing that it doesn't deserve to exist. I won't be arguing that it behaves worse than every other country. I will only be arguing that Israel is 'rogue'.
The word 'rogue' has come to have exceptionally damning connotations. But the word itself is value-neutral. The OED defines rogue as 'Aberrant, anomalous; misplaced, occurring (esp. in isolation) at an unexpected place or time ', while a dictionary from a far greater institution gives this definition 'behaving in ways that are not expected or not normal, often in a destructive way '. These definitions, and others, centre on the idea of anomaly – the unexpected or uncommon. Using this definition, a rogue state is one that acts in an unexpected, uncommon or aberrant manner. A state that behaves exactly like Israel.
The first argument is statistical. The fact that Israel is a Jewish state alone makes it anomalous enough to be dubbed a rogue state: There are 195 countries in the world. Some are Christian, some Muslim, some are secular. Israel is the only country in the world that is Jewish. Or, to speak mathmo for a moment, the chance of any randomly chosen state being Jewish is 0.0051% . In comparison the chance of a UK lotto ticket winning at least £10 is 0.017% - more than twice as likely. Israel's Jewishness is a statistical abberation.
The second argument concerns Israel's humanitarianism, in particular,Israel's response to a refugee crisis. Not the Palestinian refugee crisis – for I am sure that the other speakers will cover that – but the issue of Darfurian refugees. Everyone knows that what happened, and is still happening in Darfur, is genocide, whether or not the UN and the Arab League will call it such. [I actually hoped that Mr Massih would be able speak about this - he's actually somewhat of an expert on the Crisis in Darfur, in fact it's his expertise that has called him away to represent the former Dictator of Sudan while he is being investigated by the ICC.] There has been a mass exodus from Darfur as the oppressed seek safety. They have not had much luck. Many have gone north to Egypt – where they are treated despicably. The brave make a run through the desert in a bid to make it to Israel. Not only do they face the natural threats of the Sinai, they are also used for target practice by the Egyptian soldiers patrolling the border. Why would they take the risk? Because in Israel they are treated with compassion – they are treated as the refugees that they are – and perhaps Israel's cultural memory of genocide is to blame. The Israeli government has even gone so far as to grant several hundred Darfurian refugees Citizenship. This alone sets Israel apart from the rest of the world.
But the real point of distinction is this: The IDF sends out soldiers and medics to patrol the Egyptian border. They are sent looking for refugees attempting to cross into Israel. Not to send them back into Egypt, but to save them from dehydration, heat exhaustion, and Egyptian bullets. Compare that to the US's reaction to illegal immigration across their border with Mexico. The American government has arrested private individuals for giving water to border crossers who were dying of thirst – and here the Israeli government is sending out its soldiers to save illegal immigrants. To call that sort of behavior anomalous is an understatement.
My Third argument is that the Israeli government engages in an activity which the rest of the world shuns -- it negotiates with terrorists. Forget the late PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat, a man who died with blood all over his hands – they're in the process of negotiating with terrorists as we speak. Yasser Abed Rabbo is one of the lead PLO negotiators that has been sent to the peace talks with Israel. Abed Rabbo also used to be a leader of the PFLP- an organisation of 'freedom fighters' that, under Abed Rabbo's leadership, engaged in such freedom promoting activities as killing 22 Israeli high school students. And the Israeli government is sending delegates to sit at a table with this man, and talk about peace. And the world applauds. You would never see the Spanish government in peace talks with the leaders of the ETA – the British government would never negotiate with Thomas Murphy. And if President Obama were to sit down and talk about peace with Osama Bin Laden, the world would view this as insanity. But Israel can do the exact same thing – and earn international praise in the process. That is the dictionary definition of rogue – behaving in a way that is unexpected, or not normal.
Another part of dictionary definition is behaviour or activity 'occuring at an unexpected place or time'. When you compare Israel to its regional neighbours, it becomes clear just how roguish Israel is. And here is the fourth argument: Israel has a better human rights record than any of its neighbours. At no point in history, has there ever been a liberal democratic state in the Middle East- except for Israel. Of all the countries in the Middle East, Israel is the only one where the LGBT community enjoys even a small measure of equality. In Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, and Syria, homosexual conduct is punishable by flogging, imprisonment, or both. But homosexuals there get off pretty lightly compared to their counterparts in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen, who are put to death. Israeli homosexuals can adopt, openly serve in the army, enter civil unions, and are protected by exceptionally strongly worded ant-discrimination legislation. Beats a death sentence. In fact, it beats America.
Israel's protection of its citizens' civil liberties has earned international recognition. Freedom House is an NGO that releases an annual report on democracy and civil liberties in each of the 195 countries in the world. It ranks each country as 'Free' 'Partly Free' or 'Not Free'. In the Middle East, Israel is the only country that has earned designation as a 'free' country. Not surprising given the level of freedom afforded to citizens in say, Lebanon- a country designated 'partly free', where there are laws against reporters criticizing not only the Lebanese government, but the Syrian regime as well. [I'm hoping Ms Booth will speak about this, given her experience working as a 'journalist' for Iran,] Iran is a country given the rating of 'not free', putting it alongside China, Zimbabwe, North Korea, and Myanmar. In Iran, [as Ms Booth I hoped would have said in her speech], there is a special 'Press Court' which prosecutes journalists for such heinous offences as criticizing the ayatollah, reporting on stories damaging the 'foundations of the Islamic republic' , using 'suspicious (i.e. western) sources', or insulting islam. Iran is the world leader in terms of jailed journalists, with 39 reporters (that we know of) in prison as of 2009. They also kicked out almost every Western journalist during the 2009 election. [I don't know if Ms Booth was affected by that] I guess we can't really expect more from a theocracy. Which is what most countries in the Middle East are. Theocracies and Autocracies. But Israel is the sole, the only, the rogue, democracy. Out of every country in the Middle East, only in Israel do anti-government protests and reporting go unquashed and uncensored.
I have one final argument – the last nail in the opposition's coffin- and its sitting right across the aisle. Mr Ran Gidor's presence here is the all evidence any of us should need to confidently call Israel a rogue state. For those of you who have never heard of him, Mr Gidor is a political counsellor attached to Israel's embassy in London. He's the guy the Israeli government sent to represent them to the UN. He knows what he's doing. And he's here tonight. And it's incredible. Consider, for a moment, what his presence here means. The Israeli government has signed off,to allow one of their senior diplomatic representatives to participate in a debate on their very legitimacy. That's remarkable. Do you think for a minute, that any other country would do the same? If the Yale University Debating Society were to have a debate where the motion was 'This house believes Britain is a racist, totalitarian state that has done irrevocable harm to the peoples of the world', that Britain would allow any of its officials to participate? No. Would China participate in a debate about the status of Taiwan? Never. And there is no chance in hell that an American government official would ever be permitted to argue in a debate concerning its treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. But Israel has sent Mr Ran Gidor to argue tonight against [a 'journalist' come reality TV star, and myself,] a 19 year old law student who is entirely unqualified to speak on the issue at hand.
Every government in the world should be laughing at Israel right now- because it forgot rule number one. You never add credence to crackpots by engaging with them. It's the same reason you won't see Stephen Hawking or Richard Dawkins debate David Icke. But Israel is doing precisely that. Once again, behaving in a way that is unexpected, or not normal. Behaving like a rogue state.
That's five arguments that have been directed at the supporters of Israel. But I have a minute or two left. And here's an argument for all of you – Israel willfully and forcefully disregards international law. In 1981 Israel destroyed OSIRAK – Sadam Hussein's nuclear bomb lab. Every government in the world knew that Hussein was building a bomb. And they did nothing. Except for Israel. Yes, in doing so they broke international law and custom. But they also saved us all from a nuclear Iraq. That rogue action should earn Israel a place of respect in the eyes of all freedom loving peoples. But it hasn't. But tonight, while you listen to us prattle on, I want you to remember something; while you're here, Khomeini's Iran is working towards the Bomb. And if you're honest with yourself, you know that Israel is the only country that can, and will, do something about it. Israel will, out of necessity act in a way that is the not the norm, and you'd better hope that they do it in a destructive manner. Any sane person would rather a rogue Israel than a Nuclear Iran. [Except Ms Booth]
(VIDEO) Canadian PM - I Will Defend Israel
Video below: Prime Minister Stephen Harper says he is prepared to suffer any political backlash that comes his way for speaking out against anti-Israel rhetoric.
Harper told an audience Monday that while Israel is receptive to fair criticism, Canada is obligated to stand up for its ally when it comes under attack from others.
"Not just because it is the right thing to do, but because history shows us, and the ideology of the anti-Israel mob tell us all too well, that those who threaten the existence of the Jewish people are in the longer term a threat to all of us."
The prime minister acknowledged that his position is not popular with all governments and organizations, including members of the United Nations and the Francophonie.
"And I know, by the way, because I have the bruises to show for it, that whether it is at the United Nations or any other international forum, the easiest thing to do is simply to just get along and go along with this anti-Israel rhetoric, to pretend it is just about being even-handed, and to excuse oneself with the label of honest broker.
"There are, after all, a lot more votes—a lot more—in being anti-Israeli than in taking a stand. But as long as I am prime minister, whether it is at the United Nations, the Francophonie or anywhere else, Canada will take that stand, whatever the cost."
The prime minister's use of the phrase "honest broker" is an apparent reference to a recent speech made by Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff.
Ignatieff criticized the Harper government for using Israel as a wedge issue with his political opponents in Canada, at the expense of the country's influence on peace in the Middle East. The Liberal leader called for a return to a time when Canada was perceived to be an honest broker in the global community.
Harper made his remarks at the start of a two-day conference on anti-Semitism that is being held on Parliament Hill during Holocaust Education Week.
Harper told an audience Monday that while Israel is receptive to fair criticism, Canada is obligated to stand up for its ally when it comes under attack from others.
"Not just because it is the right thing to do, but because history shows us, and the ideology of the anti-Israel mob tell us all too well, that those who threaten the existence of the Jewish people are in the longer term a threat to all of us."
The prime minister acknowledged that his position is not popular with all governments and organizations, including members of the United Nations and the Francophonie.
"And I know, by the way, because I have the bruises to show for it, that whether it is at the United Nations or any other international forum, the easiest thing to do is simply to just get along and go along with this anti-Israel rhetoric, to pretend it is just about being even-handed, and to excuse oneself with the label of honest broker.
"There are, after all, a lot more votes—a lot more—in being anti-Israeli than in taking a stand. But as long as I am prime minister, whether it is at the United Nations, the Francophonie or anywhere else, Canada will take that stand, whatever the cost."
The prime minister's use of the phrase "honest broker" is an apparent reference to a recent speech made by Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff.
Ignatieff criticized the Harper government for using Israel as a wedge issue with his political opponents in Canada, at the expense of the country's influence on peace in the Middle East. The Liberal leader called for a return to a time when Canada was perceived to be an honest broker in the global community.
Harper made his remarks at the start of a two-day conference on anti-Semitism that is being held on Parliament Hill during Holocaust Education Week.
(VIDEO) PM Netanyahu's Speech At The General Assembly In New Orleans
Speech transcript below the videos.
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Speech By Netanyahu (h/t: Israel Politik)
The story of the Jewish people is that of great destruction followed by miraculous redemption.
That same resilient spirit is exemplified by your collective efforts to help this great city rebuild itself after Hurricane Katrina.
Just as you have rallied time after time to help Israel weather the storms it has faced, you rallied to help New Orleans to get back on its feet.
You should be proud of what you have been doing for the Jewish people and the Jewish state, and for others. I am doubly proud to be with you here today. Thank you.
On the eve of the 20th century, Theodore Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism, foresaw the great challenges that stood before the dispersed Jewish people. He charted a clear path to direct the Jewish destiny to the safer shores of a Jewish state. Herzl’s vision was guided by three principles: Recognize perils, seize opportunities, forge unity.
These same three principles should guide us at the dawn of the 21st century. We must recognize the dangers facing us and work to thwart them. We must seize the opportunity for prosperity and for peace with those of our neighbors who want peace. And we must forge unity among our people to shoulder these monumental tasks.
The greatest danger facing Israel and the world is the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran. Iran threatens to annihilate Israel. It denies the Holocaust. It sponsors terror. It confronts America in Afghanistan and Iraq. It dominates Lebanon and Gaza. It establishes beachheads in Arabia and in Africa. It even spreads its influence into this hemisphere, into South America.
Now, this is what Iran is doing without nuclear weapons. Imagine what it would do with them. Imagine the devastation that its terror proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas and others, would wreak under an Iranian nuclear umbrella.
This is why Israel appreciates President Obama’s successful efforts to have the UN Security Council adopt new sanctions against Iran. It values American efforts to successfully mobilize other countries to pass tough sanctions of their own. There is no doubt that these sanctions are putting strong economic pressures on the Iranian regime.
But we have yet to see any signs that the tyrants of Tehran are reconsidering their pursuit of nuclear weapons. The only time that Iran suspended its nuclear program was for a brief period in 2003 when the regime believed it faced a credible threat of military action against it. And the simple paradox is this: if the international community, led by the United States, hopes to stop Iran’s nuclear program without resorting to military action, it will have to convince Iran that it is prepared to take such action. Containment will not work against Iran. It won’t work with a brazen regime that accuses America of bombing its own cities on 9/11, openly calls for Israel’s annihilation, and is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism.
When faced with such a regime, the only responsible policy is to prevent it from developing atomic bombs in the first place. The bottom line is this: Iran’s nuclear program must be stopped. Iran’s nuclear program is the greatest danger we face. The assault on Israel’s legitimacy is another.
We know from our history that attacks on the Jews were often preceded by attempts to dehumanize the Jewish people – to paint them as vile criminals, as the scourge of humanity. This is why the attempts by our enemies and their misguided fellow travelers to delegitimize the Jewish state must be countered.
Herzl was right about many things. He was right about the conflagration that would soon engulf Europe. He was right about the need for a Jewish state and for a Jewish army to defend that state.
Yet Herzl was too optimistic in believing that the rebirth of the Jewish state would gradually put an end to anti-Semitism.
The establishment of Israel did not end the hatred towards the Jews. It merely redirected it. The old hatred against the Jewish people is now focused against the Jewish state. If in the past Jews were demonized, singled out or denied the rights that were automatically granted to others, today in many quarters Israel is demonized, singled out and denied the rights automatically granted to other nations, first and foremost the right of self-defense.
For too many, Israel is guilty until proven guilty. The greatest success of our detractors is when Jews start believing that too – we’ve seen that today.
Last year, at the UN General Assembly, I spoke out against the travesty of the Goldstone Report, which falsely accused Israel of war crimes in Gaza two years ago. The United States, led by President Obama, and Canada, led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, stood by Israel’s side against this blood libel. Many countries didn’t.
Well, last week, Hamas finally admitted that over 700 of its fighters in Gaza were killed by the IDF during that war. This is precisely what the Israeli army said all along – that roughly 50% of the casualties of the war were Hamas terrorists. Such a high percentage of enemy combatants and such a low percentage of unintended civilian casualties is remarkable in modern urban warfare. It is even more remarkable when fighting an enemy that deliberately and shamelessly embeds itself next to schools and inside mosques and hospitals.
The authors of the Goldstone Report owe the Israeli army an apology. And all those who supported and helped spread this libel owe the State of Israel an apology. The best way to counter lies is with the truth. That is why I commend your decision to establish the Israel Action Network and dedicate resources to fight this battle for truth. We must fight these lies and slanders together to ensure that truth prevails.
The threat from Iran and its proxies, and the continued assault on Israel’s legitimacy are great perils we must thwart.
Now let me speak about two great opportunities we must seize: peace and prosperity.
The opportunity today to achieve a broader Israeli-Arab peace derives not exclusively but mainly from the perception of a common threat. Today, Arab governments and many throughout the Arab world understand that Iran is a great danger to them as well. This understanding opens up new possibilities for a broader peace that could support our efforts to reach peace with our Palestinian neighbors.
Israelis want to see that the Palestinians are as committed as they are to ending the conflict once and for all. They want to know that just as we are ready to recognize a state for the Palestinian people, the Palestinians are ready to recognize Israel as the state for the Jewish people.
Israel also wants a secure peace. We do not want to vacate more territory only to see Iran walk in and fire thousands of rockets at our cities. That is exactly what happened after we left Lebanon and Gaza. We don’t want to see rockets and missiles streaming into a Palestinian state and placed on the hills above Tel Aviv and the hills encircling Jerusalem. If Israel does not maintain a credible security presence in the Jordan Valley for the foreseeable future, this is exactly what will happen.
I will not let that happen.
We do not want security on paper. We want security on the ground. Real security. I am willing to make mutual compromises for a genuine peace with the Palestinians, but I will not gamble with the security of the Jewish state. Palestinian leaders who say they want to live peacefully alongside Israel should sit down and negotiate peace with Israel. They should stop placing preconditions and start negotiating peace. The Palestinians may think they can avoid negotiations. They may think that the world will dictate Palestinian demands to Israel. I firmly believe that will not happen because I am confident that friends of Israel, led by the United States, will not let that happen. There is only one path to peace – that is through a negotiated settlement.
We should spend the next year trying to reach an historic agreement for peace and not waste time arguing about marginal issues that will not affect the final peace map in any way. I am confident that if there is goodwill on the Palestinian side, a formula can be found that will enable peace talks to continue. I believe that if we succeed, and I always like to confound the skeptics, and I continue to do that systematically, I believe that peace would unleash tremendous economic opportunities for Israelis, Palestinians, and peoples throughout the region.
But as the last years have shown, Israel has not waited for peace to seize the opportunity to develop a strong economy. As Prime Minister, then as finance minister and now again as Prime Minister, I have spent a great deal of time advancing economic reforms and removing obstacles to Israel’s economic growth – and I have the political scars to prove it. The reforms that we have been enacting have changed Israel’s economy beyond recognition. We are now building fast roads and rail lines that crisscross the country, to connect the Negev and the Galilee to the center of the country. I intend to complete a rail line that will link the Red Sea with the Mediterranean and the Jordan River to the Port of Haifa. This will enable Israel to take advantage of its strategic location as more and more goods are shipped from East to West.
As the world economy becomes more competitive, Israel is well placed to succeed. We are global leaders in high technology. Our scientists win Nobel Prizes. Our innovations in science, medicine, water, energy, communication, agriculture and in many other fields are literally changing the world.
Israel is a wellspring of technological, artistic and cultural creativity. Today, Israel is ranked 15th in the world in terms of quality of life – by the UN – so you knows we are at least 15th. And if that does not impress the young people in the audience, here’s something else that might. For those of you planning to travel world, Lonely Planet just ranked Tel Aviv the 3rd most exciting city in the world. I don’t agree – that of course is Jerusalem. Still, Israel’s best economic days are ahead.
If we hope to thwart and dangers and seize opportunities, we must strengthen our unity. The best way to strengthen Jewish unity is to strengthen Jewish identity. By deepening our connection to our shared past, we fortify our bonds to one another and to our state, and thereby strengthen our common future. That is why this year I decided to initiate a national Heritage Plan that will restore and renovate hundreds of Jewish and Israeli sites throughout the country.
I want young people to visit the place where David Ben Gurion declared our independence just as I want them to visit the place where our patriarchs and matriarchs, the mothers and fathers of the Jewish nation, are buried. Talk about distortions, can you imagine that UNESCO tried to deny the Jewish connection to Rachel’s Tomb next to Jerusalem and the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron? This absurdity to try to erase our past will fail as we reconnect a new generation of Jews with their history. Our young people will know that we are not foreign interlopers in our own homeland. They will know something that our enemies and politicized international bodies cannot bring themselves to admit: The Jewish people are not strangers in the Land of Israel. Israel is our home. It has always been our home and it will always be our home.
I have also decided to enhance Israel’s support for programs that strengthen Jewish identity in the Diaspora. In my first term as Prime Minister, I decided to invest Israeli government funds in what many then thought was a preposterous idea – that we would pay for young Jews to come on short visits to Israel. Since then, a quarter of a million Jews have come to Israel on Birthright programs, and we will continue. I am committed to working with Birthright, Masa and Lapid to ensure that every young Jew who wants to can come to Israel.
And I am committed to working with Natan Sharansky and the Jewish Agency to strengthen Jewish identity in the Diaspora.
I know that there are controversial issues that threaten to divide us. We need to resolve these issues in a spirit of compromise and tolerance. As Prime Minister of Israel, I promise you that I will not permit anything to undermine the unity of our people. Israel must always be a place that each and every one of you can call home. Our unity is a critical foundation of our collective strength. The more we speak with one voice, the more that voice will be heard. And in a rapidly changing world, it needs to be heard loud and clear.
At the beginning of the 21st century, the fantastic rise of Asia challenges many nations, but it is not a danger. It is a natural shift in global wealth and power that is lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. The great danger we face is not from the battle between East and West but from the aggressive force wedged between them that is spreading its tentacles far and wide. That force is radical Islam, whose fanaticism and savagery knows no bounds. If I can leave you with one message, it is that we must warn others of this peril.
History shows that the most advance weapons were usually developed by the most advanced societies. Yet today, primitive and barbaric tyrannies that stone women, hang gays, promote terror worldwide, send bombs to synagogues, and advance the most fanatical doctrines can acquire nuclear weapons. If not stopped, this means that the greatest nightmare of all – nuclear terrorism – can become a reality. The civilized world must not let that happen.
As we continue to build a modern and democratic Israel and as we seek peace with all our neighbors, we must also warn the world about this formidable peril. In standing up for modernity against medievalism, the Jewish people and the Jewish state play a vital role in securing our common civilization. And by helping dispel the shadows of a dark despotism, we can truly fulfill our destiny to be a beacon of light and progress unto all the nations.
(NEWS) VP Joe Biden Vows Support Of Israel To Country’s Largest Jewish Charity
"Vice President Joe Biden pledged to Israel his unwavering support and that of the President Obama in front of several thousand attendees of the annual conference of North America's largest Jewish charitable network.
Biden, speaking at the opening plenary of the Jewish Federations of North America, which brings in between $2 billion and $3 billion per year through its 157 federations, told the roughly 4,000 attendees at the Marriott New Orleans that despite tensions that may seem to exist between the Obama administration and Israel, the tension does not imply a weakening of ties between the two countries.
'This administration represents an unbroken chain in American leaders who have understood this this critical relationship,' Biden said, pounding his fist on his podium for effect. 'It is one that we will not yield one single inch. President Obama feels exactly the same way I do. The ties between our countries are literally unbreakable.'"
Biden, speaking at the opening plenary of the Jewish Federations of North America, which brings in between $2 billion and $3 billion per year through its 157 federations, told the roughly 4,000 attendees at the Marriott New Orleans that despite tensions that may seem to exist between the Obama administration and Israel, the tension does not imply a weakening of ties between the two countries.
'This administration represents an unbroken chain in American leaders who have understood this this critical relationship,' Biden said, pounding his fist on his podium for effect. 'It is one that we will not yield one single inch. President Obama feels exactly the same way I do. The ties between our countries are literally unbreakable.'"
(BLOG) From The Qur'an: Israel Is The Land For Jews Only
"By Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury: Following are quotes from Qur'an, in which it says that Israel is the Land for Jews only:
PROFESSOR SHAYKH ABDUL HADI PALAZZI OF ITALY COMMENTS:
'God wanted to give Avraham a double blessing, through Ishmael and through Isaac, and ordered that Ishmael's descendents should live in the desert of Arabia and Isaac's in Canaan.
The Qur'an recognizes the Land of Israel as the heritage of the Jews and it explains that, before the Last Judgment, Jews will return to dwell there. This prophecy has already been fulfilled.'
THE LAND OF ISRAEL IN QUR'ANIC EXEGESIS
The fundamentalist Muslim program to use Islam as an instrument for political warfare against Jews finds a major obstacle in the Qur'an itself. Both the Bible and the Qur'an state quite clearly that the right of the Israelites to the Land of Israel does not depend on conquest and colonization. This right flows from the will of almighty God Himself.
Both the Jewish and Islamic Scriptures teach that God, through His chosen servant Moses, decided to free the offspring of Jacob from slavery in Egypt and to constitute them as heirs of the Promised Land. Whoever claims that Jewish sovereignty over the Land of Israel is something new and rooted in human politics denies divine revelation and divine prophecy as explicitly expressed in our Holy Books (the Bible and Koran).
The Qur'an relates the words by which Moses ordered the Israelites to conquer the Land:
Therefore, from an Islamic point of view, there is NO fundamental reason which prohibits Muslims from recognizing Israel as a friendly State.
Sheikh Palazzi says:
'We read:
'All Qur'anic commentators explain that 'thy qiblah' [direction of prayer for Muslims] is clearly the Ka'bah of Mecca, while 'their qiblah' [direction of prayer for Jews] refers to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.
'To quote only one of the most important Muslim commentators, we read in Qadn Baydawn's Commentary:
'In complete opposition to what 'Islamic' fundamentalists continuously claim, the Book of Islam [the Qur'an] - as we have just now seen - recognizes Jerusalem as the Jewish direction of prayer.
'Some Muslim commentators also quote the Book of Daniel (Daniel 6:10) as a proof for this.
'After reviewing the relevant Qur'anic passages concerning this matter, I conclude that, as no one denies Muslims complete sovereignty over Mecca, from an Islamic point of view - despite opposing, groundless claims - there is no reason for Muslims to deny the State of Israel - which is a JEWISH state - complete sovereignty over Jerusalem.'
Dr Al-Husseini is a British imam who teaches a course on the Koran as part of interfaith studies at the Leo Baeck College, the Progressive rabbinic college in Finchley, north London. One of the texts he has taught is the following verse in the Koran (5:21), 'O my people! Enter the Holy Land which God has decreed for you, and turn back on your heels otherwise you will be overturned as losers.'" (source)
"To Moses We [Allah] gave nine clear signs. Ask the Israelites how he [Moses] first appeared amongst them. Pharoah said to him: 'Moses, I can see that you are bewitched.' 'You know full well,' he [Moses] replied, 'that none but the Lord of the heavens and the earth has revealed these visible signs. Pharoah, you are doomed.'"
"Pharoah sought to scare them [the Israelites] out of the land [of Israel]: but We [Allah] drowned him [Pharoah] together with all who were with him. Then We [Allah] said to the Israelites: 'Dwell in this land [the Land of Israel]. When the promise of the hereafter [End of Days] comes to be fulfilled, We [Allah] shall assemble you [the Israelites] all together [in the Land of Israel]."
"We [Allah] have revealed the Qur'an with the truth, and with the truth it has come down. We have sent you [Muhammed] forth only to proclaim good news and to give warning."
[Qur'an, "Night Journey," chapter 17:100-104]
PROFESSOR SHAYKH ABDUL HADI PALAZZI OF ITALY COMMENTS:
'God wanted to give Avraham a double blessing, through Ishmael and through Isaac, and ordered that Ishmael's descendents should live in the desert of Arabia and Isaac's in Canaan.
The Qur'an recognizes the Land of Israel as the heritage of the Jews and it explains that, before the Last Judgment, Jews will return to dwell there. This prophecy has already been fulfilled.'
THE LAND OF ISRAEL IN QUR'ANIC EXEGESIS
The fundamentalist Muslim program to use Islam as an instrument for political warfare against Jews finds a major obstacle in the Qur'an itself. Both the Bible and the Qur'an state quite clearly that the right of the Israelites to the Land of Israel does not depend on conquest and colonization. This right flows from the will of almighty God Himself.
Both the Jewish and Islamic Scriptures teach that God, through His chosen servant Moses, decided to free the offspring of Jacob from slavery in Egypt and to constitute them as heirs of the Promised Land. Whoever claims that Jewish sovereignty over the Land of Israel is something new and rooted in human politics denies divine revelation and divine prophecy as explicitly expressed in our Holy Books (the Bible and Koran).
The Qur'an relates the words by which Moses ordered the Israelites to conquer the Land:
"And [remember] when Moses said to his people: 'O my people, call in remembrance the favour of God unto you, when he produced prophets among you, made you kings, and gave to you what He had not given to any other among the peoples. O my people, enter the Holy Land which God has assigned unto you, and turn not back ignominiously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin.'" [Qur'an 5:20-21]
Moreover - and those who try to use Islam as a weapon against Israel always conveniently ignore this point - the Holy Qur'an explicitly refers to the return of the Jews to the Land of Israel before the Last Judgment - where it says: "And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd.'" [Qur'an 17:104]
Therefore, from an Islamic point of view, there is NO fundamental reason which prohibits Muslims from recognizing Israel as a friendly State.
Sheikh Palazzi says:
"PLO documents can in no way be regarded as Islamic. The PLO leaders are a gang of criminals and thieves, and Arabs will be the main victims of any supposed "Palestinian State" under their leadership.
"I do not believe that Islam is the factor preventing normalization between Arabs and the State of Israel. The real problem is that members of the ruling classes in Arab countries believe their authority and power would be threatned by democracy, modernization, and education in the Arab world. They use a distorted interpretation of Islam as a political tool, and unfortunately the majority of uneducated Arabs believe their poisonous propaganda.
'We read:
"...They would not follow thy direction of prayer (qiblah), nor art thou to follow their direction of prayer; nor indeed will they follow each other's direction of prayer..." (Koran 2:145)
'All Qur'anic commentators explain that 'thy qiblah' [direction of prayer for Muslims] is clearly the Ka'bah of Mecca, while 'their qiblah' [direction of prayer for Jews] refers to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.
'To quote only one of the most important Muslim commentators, we read in Qadn Baydawn's Commentary:
"Verily, in their prayers Jews orientate themselves toward the Rock (sakhrah), while Christians orientate themselves eastwards..." ( M. Shaykh Zadeh Hashiyaah 'ali Tafsir al-Qadn al-Baydawn (Istanbul 1979), Vol. 1, p. 456)
'In complete opposition to what 'Islamic' fundamentalists continuously claim, the Book of Islam [the Qur'an] - as we have just now seen - recognizes Jerusalem as the Jewish direction of prayer.
'Some Muslim commentators also quote the Book of Daniel (Daniel 6:10) as a proof for this.
'After reviewing the relevant Qur'anic passages concerning this matter, I conclude that, as no one denies Muslims complete sovereignty over Mecca, from an Islamic point of view - despite opposing, groundless claims - there is no reason for Muslims to deny the State of Israel - which is a JEWISH state - complete sovereignty over Jerusalem.'
Dr Al-Husseini is a British imam who teaches a course on the Koran as part of interfaith studies at the Leo Baeck College, the Progressive rabbinic college in Finchley, north London. One of the texts he has taught is the following verse in the Koran (5:21), 'O my people! Enter the Holy Land which God has decreed for you, and turn back on your heels otherwise you will be overturned as losers.'" (source)
(NEWS) Anti-Semitism & Free Speech Conference In Canadian Parliament This Weekend
"Stepping Up To Stop the Hate
Parliamentarians and Experts From Around the Globe Gear Up For 2010 Conference on Combating Antisemitism.
Parliamentarians and experts from over 40 countries are set to gather in Ottawa from November 7-9th to take part in the 2010 Conference on Combating Antisemitism. The conference, which is hosted by the Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA) with sponsorship by the Government of Canada, is the largest of its kind. Over three days delegates will explore data and exchange best practices to learn about the most effective ways to combat antisemitism around the world.
'Unfortunately, antisemitism continues to be a problem both in Canada and internationally, with 2009 being judged as one of the worst years on record,' said British Member of Parliament John Mann, Chair of the British All-Party Parliamentary Group against Antisemitism and Co-Founder of the ICCA. 'The lessons learned and the actions that will be put in place from this year’s conference will help in the study and hopefully the eradication of all forms of racism.'
The 2010 conference in Ottawa follows the inaugural ICCA conference which was held in London, England in February 2009, where Canada sent the largest international delegation of Parliamentarians. This year the Parliamentarian conference is running in parallel with the Experts portion and features a mix of guest speakers, plenary sessions, and expert discussions. With an impressive list of Parliamentarians from six continents, such as Michael Danby (Australia), Nthabiseng Pauline Khunou (South Africa), Chris Smith (U.S.), and Ram Jethmalani (India), the conference is shaping up to be a key international discussion on antisemitism, all taking place on Canadian soil.
'Antisemitism is the oldest and more enduring of hatreds – ‘a lethal obsession’ as it has been called – which has caused untold catastrophes,' said Member of Parliament Hon. Irwin Cotler, Co-Founder and Chair of the ICCA. 'As it has been said ‘while it may begin with Jews, it doesn’t end with Jews.’ We ignore antisemitism at our peril.'
The conference represents the largest ever international parliamentary gathering on antisemitism. The recommendations made by participants during the Conference will be made available broadly and be used as the basis for further action to help put an end to the world’s oldest and most enduring form of discrimination.
'I applaud the efforts of the Parliamentary Centre, the ICCA and the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism to host this conference,' said Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism Jason Kenney. 'By supporting this work, Canada continues to lead the worldwide struggle against antisemitism, a uniquely durable and pernicious form of hatred.'
About the Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA)
The Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA) brings together some 46 countries and over 250 parliamentarians from around the world to lead the fight against resurgent global antisemitism. Its principal purpose is to share knowledge, experience, best practices, and recommendations, encouraging their dissemination in an attempt to deal more effectively with contemporary antisemitism. For more information on the ICCA, please visit www.antisem.org.
Follow us on Twitter, http://twitter.com/icca2010
Follow our YouTube channel http://www.youtube.com/user/CombatingAntisemiti
We will be using the #icca2010 hashtag to identify our content
For more information, please contact:
Matt Salvatore; Fleishman-Hillard Canada; matt.salvatore@fleishman.ca; 613-288-3272" (source)
Parliamentarians and Experts From Around the Globe Gear Up For 2010 Conference on Combating Antisemitism.
Parliamentarians and experts from over 40 countries are set to gather in Ottawa from November 7-9th to take part in the 2010 Conference on Combating Antisemitism. The conference, which is hosted by the Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA) with sponsorship by the Government of Canada, is the largest of its kind. Over three days delegates will explore data and exchange best practices to learn about the most effective ways to combat antisemitism around the world.
'Unfortunately, antisemitism continues to be a problem both in Canada and internationally, with 2009 being judged as one of the worst years on record,' said British Member of Parliament John Mann, Chair of the British All-Party Parliamentary Group against Antisemitism and Co-Founder of the ICCA. 'The lessons learned and the actions that will be put in place from this year’s conference will help in the study and hopefully the eradication of all forms of racism.'
The 2010 conference in Ottawa follows the inaugural ICCA conference which was held in London, England in February 2009, where Canada sent the largest international delegation of Parliamentarians. This year the Parliamentarian conference is running in parallel with the Experts portion and features a mix of guest speakers, plenary sessions, and expert discussions. With an impressive list of Parliamentarians from six continents, such as Michael Danby (Australia), Nthabiseng Pauline Khunou (South Africa), Chris Smith (U.S.), and Ram Jethmalani (India), the conference is shaping up to be a key international discussion on antisemitism, all taking place on Canadian soil.
'Antisemitism is the oldest and more enduring of hatreds – ‘a lethal obsession’ as it has been called – which has caused untold catastrophes,' said Member of Parliament Hon. Irwin Cotler, Co-Founder and Chair of the ICCA. 'As it has been said ‘while it may begin with Jews, it doesn’t end with Jews.’ We ignore antisemitism at our peril.'
The conference represents the largest ever international parliamentary gathering on antisemitism. The recommendations made by participants during the Conference will be made available broadly and be used as the basis for further action to help put an end to the world’s oldest and most enduring form of discrimination.
'I applaud the efforts of the Parliamentary Centre, the ICCA and the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism to host this conference,' said Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism Jason Kenney. 'By supporting this work, Canada continues to lead the worldwide struggle against antisemitism, a uniquely durable and pernicious form of hatred.'
About the Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA)
The Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA) brings together some 46 countries and over 250 parliamentarians from around the world to lead the fight against resurgent global antisemitism. Its principal purpose is to share knowledge, experience, best practices, and recommendations, encouraging their dissemination in an attempt to deal more effectively with contemporary antisemitism. For more information on the ICCA, please visit www.antisem.org.
Follow us on Twitter, http://twitter.com/icca2010
Follow our YouTube channel http://www.youtube.com/user/CombatingAntisemiti
We will be using the #icca2010 hashtag to identify our content
For more information, please contact:
Matt Salvatore; Fleishman-Hillard Canada; matt.salvatore@fleishman.ca; 613-288-3272" (source)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
