Archive for the ‘Arabs’ Category

Adolf Hitler / Nazis hated Arabs as an inferior “race”, yet praised Islam in its ‘war like’ TOTALITARIAN ideology

April 24, 2009
Adolf Hitler / Nazis hated Arabs as an inferior “race”, yet praised Islam in its ‘war like’ TOTALITARIAN ideology
 
He saw them as a great tool to be used against the Jews.
 
 
 
SPLCenter.org: The Swastika and the Crescent, Although he loathed Arabs (he once described them as “lacquered half-apes who ought to be whipped“), Hitler understood that he and the Mufti shared the same rivals…
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=242
 
ESSAY – May 2002
 
By Martin A. Lee
 
…Ahmed Huber: Neo-Nazi, Islamic convert…
 
The roots of the Muslim Brotherhood and, in many ways, the Nazi-Muslim axis go back to the organisation’s formation in Egypt in 1928. Marking the start of modern political “Islamic fundamentalism,” the Brotherhood from the outset envisioned a time when an Islamic state would prevail in Egypt and other Arab countries. The growth of the Muslim Brotherhood coincided with the rise of fascist movements in Europe – a parallel noted by Muhammad Sa’id al-‘Ashmawy, former chief justice of Egypt’s High Criminal Court, who decried “the perversion of Islam” and “the fascistic ideology” that infuses the world view of the Brothers.
 
Youssef Nada, current board chairman of Al Taqwa, had joined the armed branch of the Muslim Brotherhood as a young man in Egypt during World War II. Nada and several of his cohorts in the Sunni Muslim fraternity were recruited by German military intelligence. Hassan al-Banna, the Egyptian schoolteacher who founded the Muslim Brotherhood, also collaborated with spies of the Third Reich.
 
Advocating a pan-Islamic insurgency in British-controlled Palestine, the Brotherhood proclaimed their support for the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin Al-Husseini, in the late 1930s. The Grand Mufti, the preeminent religious figure among Palestinian Muslims, was the most notable Arab leader to seek an alliance with Nazi Germany.
 
Although he loathed Arabs (he once described them as “lacquered half-apes who ought to be whipped”), Hitler understood that he and the Mufti shared the same rivals – the British, the Jews and the Communists. They met in Berlin, where the Mufti lived in exile during the war. The Mufti agreed to help organise a special Muslim division of the Waffen SS. Powerful radio transmitters were put at the Mufti’s disposal so that his pro-Axis propaganda could be heard throughout the Arab world.
http://www.aijac.org.au/review/2002/275/essay275.html
 
 
War aims in the second world war: the war aims of the major belligerents …‎ –
by Victor Rothwell – History – 2005 – 244 pages (Page 41)
However, the Nazis were clear in their minds that the Arabs were racially inferior, and there would, therefore, be no pleasure to be had from helping them in anything except for the extermination of Jews in their region.
http://books.google.com/books?id=XfgLbSc94MEC&pg=PA41
 

Islam, Nazism, and Totalitarianism

During an interview conducted in the late 1930s (published in 1939), Carl Jung, the Swiss psychiatrist and founder of analytical psychiatry, was asked “…had he any views on what was likely to be the next step in religious development?” Jung replied, in reference to the Nazi fervor that had gripped Germany

We do not know whether Hitler is going to found a new Islam. He is already on the way; he is like Muhammad. The emotion in Germany is Islamic; warlike and Islamic. They are all drunk with wild god. That can be the historic future. 

Albert Speer, who was Hitler’s Minister of Armaments and War Production, wrote a contrite memoir of his World War II experiences while serving a 20-year prison sentence imposed by the Nuremberg tribunal. Speer’s narrative includes this discussion, which captures Hitler’s racist views of Arabs on the one hand, and his effusive praise for Islam on the other:
 
Hitler had been much impressed by a scrap of history he had learned from a delegation of distinguished Arabs. When the Mohammedans attempted to penetrate beyond France into Central Europe during the eighth century, his visitors had told him, they had been driven back at the Battle of Tours. Had the Arabs won this battle, the world would be Mohammedan today. For theirs was a religion that believed in spreading the faith by the sword and subjugating all nations to that faith. Such a creed was perfectly suited to the Germanic temperament. Hitler said that the conquering Arabs, because of their racial inferiority, would in the long run have been unable to contend with the harsher climate and conditions of the country. They could not have kept down the more vigorous natives, so that ultimately not Arabs but Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan Empire. Hitler usually concluded this historical speculation by remarking, “You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?”
http://www.andrewbostom.org/content/view/61/55/
 
The roots of Arab Anti-Semitism – By David Greenberg – Slate Magazine Oct 31, 2001 … As he notes, anti-Semitism in Arab countries (and non-Arab Islamic states such as Iran) …. East—they were eager to make common cause with Hitler, despite Nazi belief that they, like the Jews, were inferior to Aryans. …
http://www.slate.com/id/2057949/
 
The third Reich & the Palestine question – Francis R. Nicosia – 2000 – History – 319 pages (Page 85)
Most Arabs never realized that the Nazis would consider them racially inferior as well and that Germany had no intention of undermining British authority in …
http://books.google.com/books?id=xh4m-OMrhJUC&pg=PA85
 
The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism: Adolf Hitler and Haj … Chuck Morse – 2003 – History – 188 pages (page 53) … as Hitler was known to have described the Arabs as “lacquered half-apes who ought to be whipped,” to a lower race …
http://books.google.com/books?id=HGkthBwbNg8C&pg=PA53
 
Despite Hitler’s personal antipathy towards Arabs, who he once described as lacquered half apes who ought to be whipped, he nevertheless was prepared to …
http://www.thecst.org.uk/docs/An%20unholy%20alliance%201801%20original.doc
 
The Beast Reawakens: Fascism’s Resurgence from Hitler’s Spymasters …Martin A. Lee – 1999 – Political Science – 560 pages (page 122) Even though he loathed Arabs (he once described them as “lacquered half-apes who ought to be whipped”), Hitler was nonetheless the idol of the paramilitary …
http://books.google.com/books?id=SX4B7pNG3W8C&pg=PA122
 
 
Advertisements

Making the world ‘Judenstaatrein’ (Islamic Genocidal Anti Semitism)

March 2, 2009

Making the world ‘Judenstaatrein’ (Islamic Genocidal Anti Semitism)
jpost ^ | 02, 23, 09

Making the world ‘Judenstaatrein’

By IRWIN COTLER

Feb 23, 2009

Some 125 parliamentarians gathered together last week for the historic founding conference of the Interparliamentary Coalition for Combating Anti-Semitism (ICCA), brought together by a new sophisticated, globalizing, virulent and even lethal anti-Semitism reminiscent of the atmospherics of the 1930s, and without parallel or precedent since the end of World War II.

The new anti-Jewishness overlaps with classical anti-Semitism but is distinguishable from it. It found early juridical, and even institutional, expression in the UN’s “Zionism is racism” resolution – which the late US senator Daniel Moynihan said “gave the abomination of anti-Semitism the appearance of international legal sanction” – but has gone dramatically beyond it. This new anti-Semitism almost needs a new vocabulary to define it; however, it can best be identified using a rights-based juridical perspective.

In a word, classical or traditional anti-Semitism is the discrimination against, denial of or assault upon the rights of Jews to live as equal members of whatever host society they inhabit. The new anti-Semitism involves the discrimination against the right of the Jewish people to live as an equal member of the family of nations – the denial of and assault upon the Jewish people’s right even to live – with Israel as the “collective Jew among the nations.”

As the closing “London Declaration” of the ICCA conference affirmed: “We are alarmed at the resurrection of the old language of prejudice and its modern manifestations – in rhetoric and political action – against Jews, Jewish belief and practice and the State of Israel.”

Observing the complex intersections between the old and the new anti-Semitism, and the impact of the new on the old, Per Ahlmark, former leader of the Swedish Liberal Party and deputy prime minister of Sweden, pithily concluded: “Compared to most previous anti-Jewish outbreaks, this [new anti-Semitism] is often less directed against individual Jews. It attacks primarily the collective Jews, the State of Israel. And then such attacks start a chain reaction of assaults on individual Jews and Jewish institutions… In the past, the most dangerous anti-Semites were those who wanted to make the world Judenrein, ‘free of Jews.’ Today, the most dangerous anti-Semites might be those who want to make the world Judenstaatrein, ‘free of a Jewish state.’

Genocidal Anti-Semitism

The first modality of the new anti-Semitism – and the most lethal type – is what I would call genocidal anti-Semitism. This is not a term that I use lightly or easily. In particular, I am referring to the Genocide Convention’s prohibition against the “direct and public incitement to genocide.” If anti-Semitism is the most enduring of hatreds and genocide is the most horrific of crimes, then the convergence of this genocidal intent embedded in anti-Semitic ideology is the most toxic of combinations.

 

There are three manifestations of this genocidal anti-Semitism. The first is the state-sanctioned – indeed state-orchestrated – genocidal anti-Semitism of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Iran, dramatized by the parading in the streets of Teheran of a Shihab-3 missile draped in the emblem “wipe Israel off the Map,” while demonizing both the State of Israel as a “cancerous tumor to be excised” and the Jewish people as “evil incarnate.”

A second manifestation of this genocidal anti-Semitism is in the covenants and charters, platforms and policies of such terrorist movements and militias as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hizbullah and al-Qaida, which not only call for the destruction of Israel and the killing of Jews wherever they may be, but also for the perpetration of acts of terror in furtherance of that objective.

The third manifestation of this genocidal anti-Semitism is the religious fatwas or execution writs, where these genocidal calls in mosques and media are held out as religious obligations – where Jews and Judaism are characterized as the perfidious enemy of Islam, and Israel becomes the Salmon Rushdie of the nations.

In a word, Israel is the only state in the world – and the Jews the only people in the world – that are the object of a standing set of threats by governmental, religious and terrorist bodies seeking their destruction. The London Declaration – again in a significant clarion call – recognized that “where there is incitement to genocide signatories [to the Genocide Convention] automatically have an obligation to act.” This promise must now be acted upon.

Ideological Anti-Semitism

Ideological anti-Semitism is a much more sophisticated and arguably a more pernicious expression of the new anti-Semitism. It finds expression not in any genocidal incitement against Jews and Israel, or overt racist denial of the Jewish people and Israel’s right to be; rather, ideological anti-Semitism disguises itself as part of the struggle against racism.

The first manifestation of this ideological anti-Semitism was its institutional and juridical anchorage in the “Zionism is racism” resolution at the UN. Notwithstanding the fact that the there was a formal repeal of this resolution, Zionism as racism remains alive and well in the global arena, particularly in the campus cultures of North America and Europe, as confirmed by the recent British All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Anti-Semitism.

The second manifestation is the indictment of Israel as an apartheid state. This involves more than the simple indictment; it also involves the call for the dismantling of Israel as an apartheid state as evidenced by the events at the 2001 UN World Conference against Racism in Durban.

The third manifestation of ideological anti-Semitism involves the characterization of Israel not only as an apartheid state – and one that must be dismantled as part of the struggle against racism – but as a Nazi one.

And so it is then that Israel is delegitimized, if not demonized, by the ascription to it of the two most scurrilous indictments of 20th-century racism – Nazism and apartheid – the embodiment of all evil. These very labels of Zionism and Israel as “racist, apartheid and Nazi” supply the criminal indictment. No further debate is required. The conviction that this triple racism warrants the dismantling of Israel as a moral obligation has been secured. For who would deny that a “racist, apartheid, Nazi” state should not have any right to exist today? What is more, this characterization allows for terrorist “resistance” to be deemed justifiable – after all, such a situation is portrayed as nothing other than occupation et résistance, where resistance against a racist, apartheid, Nazi occupying state is legitimate, if not mandatory.

Legalized Anti-Semitism

If ideological anti-Semitism seeks to mask itself under the banner of anti-racism, legalized anti-Semitism is even more sophisticated and insidious. Here, anti-Semitism simultaneously seeks to mask itself under the banner of human rights, to invoke the authority of international law and to operate under the protective cover of the UN. In a word – and in an inversion of human rights, language and law – the singling out of Israel and the Jewish people for differential and discriminatory treatment in the international arena is “legalized.”

But one example of legalized anti-Semitism occurred annually for more than 35 years at the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. This influential body consistently began its annual session with Israel being the only country singled out for country-specific indictment – even before the deliberations started – the whole in breach of the UN’s own procedures and principles. In this Alice in Wonderland situation, the conviction and sentence were pronounced even before the hearings commenced. Some 30 percent of all the resolutions passed at the commission were indictments of Israel.

After the commission was replaced in June 2006 by the UN Human Rights Council, the new body proceeded to condemn one member state – Israel – in 80% of its 25 country-specific resolutions, while the major human rights violators of our time enjoyed exculpatory immunity. Indeed, five special sessions, two fact-finding missions and a high level commission of inquiry have been devoted to a single purpose: the singling out of Israel.

This week’s ICCA conference and London Declaration unequivocally condemned this “legalized” anti-Semitism, calling out that “governments and the UN should resolve that never again will the institutions of the international community and the dialogue of nations states be abused to try to establish any legitimacy for anti-Semitism, including the singling out of Israel for discriminatory treatment in the international arena, and we will never witness – or be party to – another gathering like Durban in 2001.”

The Resurgence of Global Anti-Semitism: Evidentiary Data

The data unsurprisingly confirm that anti-Semitic incidents are very much on the rise. Still, the available figures only show half the picture – they demonstrate an increase in this old/new anti-Semitism by concentrating on the traditional anti-Semitic paradigm targeting individual Jews and Jewish institutions, while failing to consider the new anti-Semitic paradigm targeting Israel as the Jew among nations and the fallout from it for traditional anti-Semitism. But the rise in traditional anti-Semitism is bound up with the rise in the new anti-Semitism, insidiously buoyed by a climate receptive to attacks on Jews because of the attacks on the Jewish state. Indeed, reports illustrate both an upsurge in violence and related anti-Semitic crimes corresponding with the 2006 Second Lebanon War and the recent Israel-Hamas war, which delegates to the ICCA conference characterized as a “pandemic.”

Conclusion

It is this global escalation and intensification of anti-Semitism that underpins – indeed, necessitates – the establishment of the ICCA to confront and combat this oldest and most enduring of hatreds. Silence is not an option. The time has come not only to sound the alarm – but to act. For as history has taught us only too well: While it may begin with Jews, it does not end with Jews. Anti-Semitism is the canary in the mine shaft of evil, and it threatens us all.

The writer is a Canadian MP and former minister of justice and attorney-general. He is professor of law (on leave) at McGill University who has written extensively on matters of hate, racism and human rights. He is a co-founder of the Interparliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism with UK MP John Mann.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=2&cid=1233304849224&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

At least one case of “Moderate” Arab Muslims’ bigotry – defeated [Arabism’s racism]

February 22, 2009

At least one case of “Moderate” Arab Muslims’ bigotry – defeated

Bret Stephens on http://www.foxnews.com/journal/“hits & misses”, The Fining of UAE over denial of visa to Israeli tennis player is a “defeat for bigotry”

WTA fines Dubai Open organisers after Israeli Shahar Peer denied visa – Feb 20, 2009 The Women’s Tennis Association has fined the Dubai Open organisers $US300,000 ($A465,000) after the United Arab Emirates refused to grant a visa to Israeli …

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,25086276-23209,00.html

Under-fire UAE likely to give Israel’s Andy Ram a visa
Israeli doubles specialist Andy Ram is likely to be granted a visa by the United Arab Emirates to play in the Dubai Championships next week, which could prevent a major crisis for tennis…
“To discriminate as the UAE did against one player in this way smacks of bigotry and racism,” the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organisations said in a statement. “This must be declared unacceptable by the WTA and all international sporting associations. As we learned in the past, failure to condemn such actions and take corrective measures, proves destructive to international sporting competition.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/atptour/4692024/Under-fire-UAE-likely-to-give-Israels-Andy-Ram-a-visa.html

Sponsors pull out of Dubai Open after UAE deny visa to Israeli
RACISM ROW: The Wall Street Journal Europe and the Tennis Channel have revoked their sponsorship of the WTA Dubai Open because the UAE denied a visa to Israeli player Shahar Peer.

http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,25072951-5005401,00.html

Tennis: Racism Rears Its Ugly Head Shahar Peer is an Israeli tennis player. The United Arab Emirates barred her from participating in the Barclays Dubai tournament

http://ballhype.com/story/tennis_racism_rears_its_ugly_head/

United Arab Emirates (UAE), which has no diplomatic links with Israel, denied her an entry visa into the country. “To discriminate as the UAE did against one player in this way smacks of bigotry and racism,”

http://www.javno.com/en-sports/jewish-leaders-call-on-wta-to-sanction-dubai-event_235390

ISRAEL’S PREFERENCIAL TREATMENT FOR ARABS

December 7, 2008

ISRAEL’S PREFERENCIAL TREATMENT FOR ARABS

(Dec 2008)

Israeli Police evict Jews from Jewish-owned Hebron home
As applauding Palestinian Arabs looked on, hundreds of Israeli police forced their way into a Jewish-owned home in the ancient Jewish city of Hebron Thursday and evicted the Jewish families living there.

http://www.jnewswire.com/article/2587

Israel’s Arabs, Muslims have more rights than Israeli Jews!

History Upside Down: The Roots of Palestinian Fascism and the Myth of Israeli Aggression

October 30, 2008

History Upside Down: The Roots of Palestinian Fascism and the Myth of Israeli Aggression
(Hardcover)

Editorial Reviews

Review

David Meir-Levi’s “brief
encounter” offers a solid approach to understanding the basics of the Arab-Israeli conflict, arguably the world’s most persistent and polarized political issue. History Upside Down applies great common sense where demagogues and ignorami too often dominate. — D. Pipes, director of the Middle East
Forum and author of Militant Islam Reaches America

In order for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to be resolved, the demonology will have to be taken out of it, and the historical and political facts allowed to speak forthemselves dispassionately. David Meir-Levi shows how this can be done. — David Pryce-Jones, author of Betrayal: France, the Arabs, and the Jews

Product Description

Forty years ago, a significant part of the political, religious, intellectual, and terrorist leadership of the Arab world declared an all-out war against the documented history of the Middle East and America’s role in the Muslim world. Arab PR professionals and spinmeisters have rewritten the record for political and propaganda purposes.
Blaming the Victim is the first wave in a counterattack against that Arab war on
history
.

http://www.amazon.com/History-Upside-Down-Palestinian-Agression/dp/1594031924/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1198171343&sr=8-

Annihilitory Politics: How To Get The World To Hate Israel

September 7, 2008

Annihilitory Politics: How To Get The World To Hate Israel
Richard L. Cravatts

Dr. Richard L. Cravatts, a lecturer at Boston University, Simmons College, Babson College, and Emmanuel College, is Director of Boston University’s Program for Book and Magazine Publishing at BU’s Center for Professional Education. He writes frequently on law, social policy, religion, marketing, politics, and housing development.

author’s email

view author’s other articles

Join this author’s mailing list

Your Name:

E-mail Address:

Richard L. Cravatts Ph.D.
August 10, 2008
As part of evaluating the competitive landscape of the popularity of nations, in a process referred to in marketing circles as ´place branding,´ Israel, to no one´s great surprise, comes up short in brand likeability, ranking last out of 35 nations included in an August 2006 survey conducted by nation branding expert Simon Anholt, even less attractive to respondents than Indonesia, Estonia, and Turkey.

How could this have happened to a country that is the Middle East´s only thriving democracy and enjoys a remarkably robust economy that has spawned some 1000 startup high tech companies, for example, second only to the U.S.? How, in short, would you go about making the world hate Israel?

This is how you would accomplish that objective if you were an enemy of Israel:

Even after 60 years of its existence, you question the fundamental right of Israel to even exist and regularly, though falsely, condemn it for being created “illegally”—through the “theft” of Palestinian lands and property—and thus decide, because of its original sin, it has no “right to exist.” You accuse the government of a “brutal,” illegal “occupation” of Palestinian lands, especially Gaza and the West Bank (but for many, all of Israel), of being a “colonial settler state,” a Zionist “regime” or “project,” a land-hungry nation, a usurper of property that was lived on and owned by a Palestinian “people” “from time immemorial.”

You describe the very existence of the country as being the “greatest threat to world peace,” the core cause of all Muslim anger toward the West, the root of all of the Palestinians´ suffering and economic plight, and describe Israel as a nation that has even been referred to publicly as a “shitty little country” by the French ambassador to Britain.

You make ´Palestinianism´ into a virtual cult whose members offer a world-wide reverence for the Palestinian cause and repeat without end that their nationalistic striving is inviolable, a basic human right, Of all the 100 million refugees who were dispersed around the globe and were re-assimilated since World War II, you chose only the Palestinians to languish, as if in amber, in barbaric refugee camps where their lives are used as political fodder to denounce the existence of an Israel that supposedly has deprived them of a home.

You have the United Nations set up an agency whose sole function it is to make sure that this one group of refugees in the whole world are coddled, advocated for, and repeat, mantra-like, that a human “right of return” has been sanctified and assured by international law for the Palestinians, giving only this group of refugees a collective, as opposed to individual, right of return—and not only to those refugees who supposedly lived in and left what is now Israel, but all of their descendents, as well.

You use the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council of the United Nations to further demonize and delegitimate Israel, making it a pariah in the world community and issuing an edict that equates Zionism with racism. In 2006-07, if you are the Human Rights Council, you pass one hundred percent of your condemnatory resolutions against Israel.

If you are the autocratic, despotic states of the Arab world, you initiate a prolonged, unceasing propaganda war against Israel and Zionism, in which it is your intention to encourage your citizens, not to question why they live under tyranny and despair under their own corrupt, defective governments, but that their circumstances are bleak because of the success and very existence of Israel. You depict Jews as apes, pigs, and subhuman monsters, and regularly produce Nazi-like propaganda and cartoons in your state-owned media that accuses Jews and Israelis of blood libels, bloodthirstiness, militarism, a desire for world domination, imperialism, and complicity with the U.S. and the West to destroy Islam—all which make Jew-hatred inevitable.

You inculcate Palestinian children, nearly from birth, with seething, blind, unrelenting, and obsessive hatred of Jews and the ‘Zionist regime,’ so that kindergartners graduate with blood-soaked hands while toting plastic AK 47s and dedicate their lives to jihad, and older children are recruited to hide explosives on their bodies to transform themselves into shahids — a new generation of kindling for radical Islam’s cult of death.

When Israel launches a military strike against nests of terrorists or in response to ceaseless rocket barrages, you term their response “disproportionate,” another escalation in the “cycle of violence,” a violation of human rights, aggressive, militaristic, with Apache gunships “pounding” terrorist neighborhoods. Whenever you refer to any attack on Israel by terrorists, or the barrage of thousands of rockets that have rained down on Israel towns for two years from inside Gaza, you characterize them as innocuous, carried out with “crude, homemade, rockets,” in order to gloss over their actual lethality.

If you are the Palestinian media, and members of the world media who are either intentionally biased or willing to be duped by anti-Israel propaganda, you repeatedly report on supposed Israeli human rights violations, such as an alleged “massacre of the 21st century,” a horrible war crime and example of “genocide” committed by Israel against Palestinians in the village of Jenin.

You talk about the Israeli security barrier as an “apartheid wall,” and describe it as a massive, soaring, unbroken division through Palestinian neighborhoods and communities, overlooking the fact that the wall is towering and solid concrete only in those regions that have been repeatedly assaulted by terrorism, and that 90 percent of the hundreds of miles of barrier is comprised merely of wire fence.

You use the “apartheid wall” image to create a broader misconception about the Palestinians living under a South African-style apartheid regime, disingenuously equating race restrictions that blacks lived under in Soweto with the open society of Israel in which Israeli Arabs have more rights than in any Arab state and are asked only not to murder Jews in their midst.

On campuses where a coddled and insulated professoriate often express antipathy for the perceived ills of capitalism, the usurpation of “Palestine” by Israel, “land grabs” through occupation, and the denial of the civil and economic rights of the Palestinians, you contend that Israel´s very existence is not at all about self-determination (something you deem appropriate only for the Palestinians) and all about greed, globalism, colonialism, exploitation, and undeserved political and economic might. No longer able to fight apartheid in South Africa, you now try to transmogrify that racist social system onto Israel, holding rallies and encouraging the signing of petitions which call from divestiture from companies doing business in Israel.

You fund Middle Eastern Studies centers on university campuses and use them as anti-Israel, anti-American “think tanks” where scholarship is tainted with ideology and singularly focused on the Palestinian cause. You fund the active and vocal Muslim Students Association on campuses across the country that hold “Israel Apartheid Week” and “Holocaust in the Holy Land” festivals at which propaganda, Jew-hatred, apologies for terrorism, and further demonizing of Israel takes place.

In the Arab world, you play fast and loose with history in your attempt to create a historical narrative conforming to your own political agenda, erasing any link between Palestine and the Jews. Though Jerusalem is mentioned not once in the Koran and over 669 times in the Jewish Bible, you claim that Jerusalem is now the “third holiest site to Muslims,” that, as Yasser Arafat announced at Camp David in 2000, the Temple Mount was never a Jewish site, that Jews now “occupy” Muslim lands, and that the archeological and historical evidence that confirms an uninterrupted 3000-year presence by Jews in the Holy Land is merely a “construct,” yet another lie promulgated by Israeli historians and archeologists as way of erasing and obscuring an Islamic past.

If you are in the Muslim world or the netherworld of Jew-haters, you question the actual extent and truthfulness of the Holocaust, first complaining that the Palestinians should not have been made to suffer the loss of their homeland because of the German´s extermination of European Jewry—leading in some part to the creation of Israel—and then at other times questioning whether the Holocaust even occurred and accusing Zionists of using the fictitious event as a way to falsely extract sympathy from the world community and force them into giving Palestine away to the Jews.

If you are in the traditionally Arabist U.S. State Department, or in the “realist” school of diplomacy, or part of the European Union, and you have an insatiable need for oil, you overlook the tyrannies and unfaithfulness of our Middle Eastern “friends,” and ask nothing of them, but demand that Israel, the only democracy in a sea of despotism, continually prove its loyalty to us and embrace policies that could potentially threaten their own security. You write academic books questioning the strength of the “Israel Lobby,” and wonder out loud if Jewish influence and wealth forces us to lose credibility and threaten our national security on behalf of Israel.

You do all of these things, as part of a concerted effort and also as random, independent efforts on the part of Israel´s enemies, and you do it for the 60 years of Israel´s existence, and then you are shocked, shocked, when Israel is shown to rank unfavorably in surveys which measure the public´s perception of nations and how they compare to one another in the world community. But you are pleased, because you know that if Israel cannot be annihilated with armaments and rockets, perhaps you can make it cease to exist simply by making the entire world loathe it for being what it is.
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/70990