Refuting Myths Against Israel and the Jews Made Simple

There are an unbelievable number of lies, distortions and misconceptions about Israel, the Jews, the Palestinians and the histories of each. First thing that is needed to do is to dispel some of the most common myths. The Jews were given Israel as retribution made because of the Holocaust the biggest lie. The idea of Israel as the Jewish State in modern times began with the first Jews returning to Israel in the 1850s. The Zionist movement was founded by Theodore Herzl as a response to the Trial of Captain Alfred Dreyfus for treason by France which has become known as the Dreyfus Affair. Captain Alfred Dreyfus was wrongly accused and convicted of treason on the flimsiest of evidence, a single scrap from a note, mostly because he was a Jew. The scandal was eventually revealed after Émile Zola wrote his famous article, J’accuse. All of these events took place before 1900 and eventually led to the Balfour Declaration which was written in November 1917. The League of Nations set aside lands for the Jewish State to be founded upon under the Mandate System which established the French and British Mandates; the British Mandate was tasked with the establishment of the Jewish State in July 1922 and became effective following the ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in September 1923. All of these events were as a response to the end of World War I and were made between the winning nations and signed by representatives of the losing nations with the addition of representatives for the Jewish Zionists and the Arabs independent from the Ottoman Empire, which was dissolved as part of the settlements. Finally, the Faisal–Weizmann Agreement, which recognized and formalized the Balfour Declarations and related treaties and accords, was signed by King Faisal bin Hussein representing the interests of the Arab World and Dr. Chaim Weizmann representing the World Zionist Organization in January 1919. With all of these steps in place the formation of Israel as the Jewish State was set in motion and ratified by every conceivable interest more than a decade before the first stirrings which led to World War II and the Holocaust.

 

Another myth is that the Jews, Zionists and Israel have never made any territorial concessions. On this topic one can almost ask as to where should one begin? Let’s begin by taking things in reverse chronological order. The latest territorial concession Israel made was the complete and total removal of every single Jewish resident and IDF troop and any other Jewish or Israeli citizen or interest from the Gaza Strip turning it all over to the Palestinian Authority. When this was completed in August 2005 there was no Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip as none was deemed necessary while the area was under Palestinian Authority control. After Hamas took control of the Gaza Strip after a revolt in June of 2007, Israel then initiated the blockade in order to prevent Hamas from having the ability to import heavy weapon systems and larger rockets and missiles with which to launch attacks on Israeli civilians living in neighborhoods and towns near the Gaza Strip. When incorporating the Oslo Accords Israel relinquished both security and civilian control over all towns, cities, and lands within Area A and relinquished civilian control with coordinated security responsibilities within Area B in Judea and Samaria which is also called the West Bank in 1993.

 

When Israel and Jordan reached their peace agreement in 1994, Israel offered to return most of the West Bank but Jordan relinquished any claims to these lands leaving them under Israeli possession. Previously, when Israel and Egypt signed their peace accords in 1979, Israel returned all of the Sinai Peninsula after removing more than twenty Israeli settlements which had been constructed south of the Negev Desert in the Sinai while Egypt relinquished any claims to the Gaza Strip. This was a major compromise made by the Israelis as had they retained the Sinai Peninsula, which was an option available as they had won the territory in a defensive war, as it gave them access to one side of the Suez Canal, complete control over the Straits of Tiran, and they surrendered lands which would have quadrupled the size of the State of Israel. United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 Israel was required to retreat from the disputed areas retaining those lands as deemed necessary for the security and defense requirements of the State of Israel in order to secure the peace in the future. Israel had technically met all requirements of United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 once they had relinquished their control over the Sinai Peninsula. Just for the record, perhaps it would serve to denote the first lands which the Zionists relinquished and the guarantee they received in return for their sacrifice. After all of the papers, treaties, accords and Mandates had been established, the British were left with one nagging problem, their promise to the Arabs during World War I for their assistance with Lt. Colonel T.E. Lawrence, the Hashemite Family in particular who had lost their positions ruling over Mecca and Medina to the Family Saud. The British approached the Zionists demanding that they relinquish the lands east of the Jordan River for the establishment of a Palestinian Arab State ruled by the Hashemites. In return the Zionists were offered a guarantee that they would retain all lands west of the Jordan River and that these lands would be indivisible in perpetuity. This agreement is known as the Churchill White Papers of 1929, an agreement also ratified in principle by all the victors of World War I. The lands east of the Jordan River are today the nation of Jordan while the indivisible lands which were promised the Zionists west of the Jordan River are currently being divided up with the acquiescence of those same nations. So much for guarantees initiated by the British and backed up by the promises of the signatories to the Versailles Treaty among numerous other agreements, treaties, accords, and Mandate.

 

The last libel we will discuss is the claim that the Jews have no claim to any lands in the Middle East, never resided in or around Jerusalem, the Jewish Temples never existed, the Jews have had no presence in the Middle East for at least 2000 years, and the Jews in Israel are exclusively from Europe. As noted earlier, Jews started returning to Jerusalem and the lands around Jerusalem, especially in Judea and Samaria, since the middle of the Nineteenth Century. Even after the dispersion of the Jewish people by the Romans there has been a remnant of the Jewish people living in and around Jerusalem for the last three-thousand years. Even if one does not care to believe either the New Testament or the Jewish Bible (Old Testament) which both denote the Jewish existence in Jerusalem and surrounding areas including Judea and Samaria, there is corroborative evidence from Egyptian pictographs, Persian hieroglyphs, Greek historical records and manuscripts, Roman manuscripts and historical records, Byzantine records, Crusader histories, Ottoman tax and historical records, British histories, censuses and agreements, and Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain) and other writers bibliographies of their travels in the Holy Lands over the past two millennia. For the decades after the founding of the State of Israel there were over three-quarters of a million Jews expelled from across the Arab and Muslim Worlds, many of which ended up residing in Israel as well as some remnants in the United States and Europe. The population of modern Israel is almost of equal parts Ashkenazi and Sephardic. Modern DNA testing has revealed a common maternal root for both the Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews that predates their separation.

 

With the volumes of records from separate sources detailing the presence of Jewish communities in and around Jerusalem and their related histories, those pressing a denial of these facts are simply relying that most people will not do any research on their own and will simply accept their propaganda. With the historical contempt for the Jewish people throughout history, they are very likely correct that people will simply take their lies as facts as they simply reinforce their preconceived prejudices. Everything above can be validated simply by entering the names of the people or agreements into any search engine and follow the links. Some of these links will also tend to mention other histories but the original documents are available online and can be read in their unadulterated form. The body of evidence backs the right of the Jews to reestablish their historic homelands. There are other ancient peoples who also are entitled to their homelands but have been denied such by history and the powers which shaped it. Some examples, but not a complete list by far, are the Kurds who were victims of the European redrawing of the Middle East after World War I and their overriding preoccupation with their Arab allies, and the Tibetan Buddhists who had their country erased by Mainland China (it is non PC to call them Communists anymore) and have been victims of forced relocations and the involuntary immigration of Chinese citizens from all sides of the Chinese peoples. Perhaps the day will come when the indigenous peoples who have, despite the ravages of history and circumstance, kept a higher than normal cohesiveness will be permitted to reestablish their ancient homelands. Just because other such dispossessed peoples have yet to regain such privileges is no reason to prevent the Jewish People from reestablishing their ancient homelands, especially since they possess a guarantee in a treaty, the Churchill White Papers.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

The Truth of Worsening British Israeli Relations

Israeli Intelligence and Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz and British Foreign Secretary William Hague were at loggerheads this past week over the reason that the British people appear to be souring towards Israel. Yuval Steinitz told the Daily Telegraph on Thursday that there is a growing “animosity” towards Israel within the British Isles. He mentioned the main areas of contention as emanating from the British media, NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) and academics with many supporting the BDS Movement (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions). Yuval Steinitz described these emotional animosities as a form of “disguised anti-Semitism.”

 

British Foreign Secretary responded claiming, “Israel has lost some of its support in Britain and in other European countries over time – this is something I’ve often pointed out to Israeli leaders – because of settlement activity, which we condemn.” Hague told Sky News, “We strongly disagree with settlements on occupied land. Israel is a country we work with in many ways but we do disapprove of settlements.” He concluded adding that, “We want to see both Israelis and Palestinians really commit themselves to the peace process while there is still a chance of a two-state solution.”

 

These two opposing views need to be rectified and the truth uncovered as they are typical of the divide between the two sides of the Israel Palestinian debate, the Zionists and the anti-Zionists. Probably the best way to attack this issue is to actually look into the history, all of the history which will reveal that the British should know better than any other nation the promises made to the Jewish people and how those solemn promises were broken, compromised, broken again, and finally have been completely negated and forgotten by even the same peoples whose names appear as a primary guarantor of these promises. Well, maybe not all the history but we’ll cover the history since the start of World War I. Going into World War I the Ottoman Empire held the lands of the Middle East as well as Northern Africa and Iraq. The Ottoman Empire sided with Germany and the rest of the losing side in World War I. The Ottoman Empire had been slowly weakening in the century or two before World War I and was being propped up by Czarist Russia and a general lack of interest in starting any conflicts which allowed the Ottoman Empire to continue to limp along. After their defeat in World War I it became obvious that the Ottoman Empire had completely collapsed so the lands were divided up between two of the European victors which started a brief colonialist period. Of course Turkey was reduced to its current borders and was all that was left of the Ottoman Empire. Egypt was placed under British sovereignty with Egypt gaining their independence in 1922. Britain was also awarded the Iraqi Mandate from which Iraq gained their independence in 1932. Libya remained an Italian possession administered by Britain and France and finally received its independence on Christmas Eve of 1951. Algeria had been and remained a French colony wining its independence in 1962.

 

This leaves the main areas of the Middle East which are of concern with the history of promises, declarations, conferences and treaties concerning Israel. The area which today makes up Syria and Lebanon were placed under the French Mandate while the areas making up Jordan, Israel, and the contested lands claimed by the Palestinians and Israel made up the British Mandate. Upon this division of the area which the Arabs referred to as greater Syria there was a great commotion among the Arabs who were within the borders of the British Mandate. These Arab populations had two significant problems with being placed under the British Mandate while Damascus was relegated to the French Mandate. The British Mandate Arabs were greatly troubled that they no longer had easy access to Damascus which they viewed as their main Muslim holy city in the area previously known as Greater Syrian Province of the Ottoman Empire. They also demanded that they be referred to as Syrian and refused to accept the title of Palestinian Arabs. They had no problem with the Arab part but vehemently refused to accept the use of Palestinian instead of Syrian Arabs. The Arabs in 1920 when the two Mandates were formed dividing Greater Syria into a northern French Mandate for Syria and a Southern British Mandate for Palestine was referred to as Year of the Catastrophe (Am al-Naqba) which protested both their divisions from Damascus and being referred to as Palestinian rather than Syrian. This original use of the word Naqba to protest being labeled as Palestinian really does make its current use protesting the failure of the combined Arab Armies to destroy Israel immediately after the declaration of independence in 1948 quite strange and almost a complete reversal as they now demand recognition as being the Palestinian state.

 

The French Mandate for Syria eventually led to the formation of the modern states of Syria and Lebanon who would become completely independent in 1943 with all French forces removed by the end of 1946. Syria was established to continue as an Arab state while Lebanon was intended to be controlled and under the rule of Arab Christians remaining in that form through the end of the Twentieth Century. The entire of the British Mandate for Palestine was intended to fulfill the promise of the Balfour Declaration for the formation of a Jewish Homeland. Some have posited the notion that the sole reason that Israel was formed was due to the Holocaust, but that is impossible as it clashes with the fact that the Balfour Declaration was written in 1917, well before the Holocaust or the rise of Nazi Germany. The Balfour Declaration was formalized and codified by the League of Nations when establishing the British and French Mandate systems. In 1922 Britain issued the first of the White Papers. This one is often referred to as the Churchill White Paper. In this agreement the Zionist received promises that in exchange for their conceding the Mandate lands east of the Jordan River for the establishment of an Arab entity that the remainder of the Mandate lands west of the Jordan River would be reserved and indivisible for the future Jewish State. There were subsequent commissions and White Papers which mostly dealt with numbers of Jews allowed to immigrate each year, usually made in response to Arab violence in order to calm the situation. Such solutions never seemed to install a proper and lasting peace but that did not prevent the British from their constant attempts to pacify Arab anger. After World War II the Arabs were in a somewhat weakened position with the British as they had sided with Germany during the war. This situation did not persist and the British simply wished to be free of the entire problem. The United Nations General Assembly proposed a division of the Mandate lands west of the Jordan River into equal Arab and Jewish states with full British support despite their promises to the Zionist Agency. The Zionists accepted this proposed split feeling that any homeland was preferable to their current situation but the Arab League refused the proposed formation of two states as they refused to recognize any land being made into a Jewish State. The Zionist Agency and other Jewish groups declared their independence on May 14, 1948, and the combined armies of seven Arab countries (Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and militias and additional troops from Yemen and the Palestinian Arab militias) attacked the nascent Jewish state of Israel on the morning of May 15, 1948.

 

The genocidal intent of the war was made evident in the Arab leadership proudly claiming that this was to be a war of annihilation and that not a single Jew would be spared. When the Armistice was initiated, Israeli troops controlled over two-thirds of the lands west of the Jordan River. The Arab forces held on to some of the lands from the Mandate lands west of the Jordan River with Syria holding the Golan Heights, Jordan holding Judea, Samaria and portions of Binyamin (aka the West Bank), and Egypt held the Gaza Strip. Syria annexed the Golan Heights and this was recognized by most countries, Egypt never annexed Gaza and just ruled it as a semiautonomous colony, and Jordan annexed what they called their West Bank but this was recognized by all of two countries, Britain and Pakistan. When the combined armies of Syria and Egypt massed on Israeli borders threatening to once again hold a war of annihilation and Egypt cut off access through the Straits of Tiran, thus having committed a casus belli making war inevitable. During the first day’s fighting Jordan declared their intent to join the war reacting to the Egyptian and Syrian transmissions reporting on their glorious victories and the routing of the Israeli army and approaching Tel Aviv. The Israelis pleaded with Jordan not to enter the conflict telling them that the Egyptian and Syrian transmissions were lies and propaganda and that the reality was the Israelis were winning and winning convincingly. The Jordanians took the Israeli pleading as proof that Israel was losing and doing so badly and they first launched their attack into Western Jerusalem. By the end of the War after six days the Israelis held the Golan Heights and were on their way towards Damascus, held all of Judea and Samaria and all of Jerusalem holding everything west of the Jordan River, and held Gaza and the entire Sinai Peninsula from Egypt. Since then Israel pulled back to the Golan Heights on the Jordanian front, made a peace with Egypt and returned the Sinai Peninsula while Egypt refused to reoccupy Gaza and made peace with Jordan who surrendered all lands west of the Jordan River.

 

Subsequent to the Six Day War in 1967, there has been an additional war with Syria and Egypt in 1973 and two wars with Lebanon due to Fatah and Hezballah terrorism across the Israeli northern border. During the nineteen years for which Egypt and Jordan held between them Gaza and the West Bank there had been absolutely no mention or attempt to form a Palestinian state. Such an idea came only after Israel liberated these lands in 1967. The reason the Arab League stated for not recognizing the Jordanian annexation of the area they named the West Bank after the war in 1948 was because to have done so would have also meant recognizing borders for the state of Israel. Since the Arab League refused to recognize the existence of Israel they stated they could not recognize any Jordanian border with a state of Israel which does not exist. This makes their desire in the Saudi Plan to recognize borders for a Palestinian state which also denotes borders for Israel a real change of heart. There are other events which also never seem to be recognized such as the over three-quarters of a million Jews who were evicted and thrown from their properties, homes, businesses, and lives from one Arab nation after another from 1948 on through 1959 many of whom were absorbed into Israel. There have been other absorptions such as the Russian Jews from the old Soviet Union, the Ethiopian Jews brought out from wars and famines in Ethiopia, the gathering of the Menashe Tribe of Jews from India and the initial ingathering of the survivors of the Shoah in Europe. There are likely to be more ingatherings above the steady flow of Jews returning home making Aliyah from all over the world. There are those who predict, and we agree, that there is likely soon to be such from much of Europe and there are others who see the same eventuality to occur with the Jews of the United States. As we often end articles, let us just say, time will tell.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

How Can One Compromise with Those Holding Such Positions?

One of the leading representatives with Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority, Jibril Rajoub, was giving an interview on Lebanon’s Al-Mayadeen TV when he allowed the truth to leak out. Mr. Rajoub when queried as to whether the Palestinian would ever plan to return to negotiations with the Israelis replied that negotiations would be considered only if the Palestinian Authority’s preconditions are met. It was in further explaining what he viewed as the Palestinian Authority’s desire in place of negotiations that he stated, “Listen. We as yet don’t have a nuke, but I swear that if we had a nuke, we’d have used it this very morning.” Rajoub is the Deputy Secretary of the Fatah Central Committee and chairman of the Palestinian Authority Olympic Committee. This should make for some serious doubts as to the sincerity of any position including compromise with the Israelis the Palestinian leadership express in interviews given to western media outlets. As many other as well as we have pointed out, if only the world would take the time, investing some effort even if only to satisfy curiosity and translate what the Palestinian spokespeople express when speaking in Arabic translating and placing them in their reports with equal prominence they give their articles denouncing Israeli efforts at self-defense, the public would be well served in making an informed and balanced evaluation of the realities of the Palestinian-Israeli peace process. Unfortunately, it appears that truth and honest reporting are the first two casualties in the mainstream media coverage of virtually all things concerning the Middle East and its relevance and importance to the current world struggles.

 

In another recent television appearance, another senior PA official, Sultan Abu al-Einein on Palestinian Authority TV stated about the recent stabbing murder of Evyatar Borovsky by a Palestinian terrorist recently released from Israeli custody, Salam al-Zaghal, “We salute the heroic fighter, the self-sacrificing Salam al-Zaghal. He insisted on defending his honor, so he went against the settler and killed him. Blessings to the breast that nursed Salam Al-Zaghal.” Such comments being broadcast on Palestinian, Lebanese, Egyptian and other Arabic broadcast media are far from being the exception, they are by far the rule. It is solely due to the willful negligence of our Western mainstream media that prevents such claims from being widely known and the hidden truth behind who are the true impediments to peace being more broadly recognized. When covering the Middle East much of the media either omits information or represents misinformation unchallenged as if it were fact. There is a near constant drumbeat claiming that the presence of Israeli communities on established Palestinian claimed land which prevents any possibility for peace and stands in the way of negotiations. What is not explained are the facts that the Palestinians not only claim the areas known as the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem but also the rest of Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Haifa, the Galilee and all of the land that makes up Israel, every single square inch. The Palestinian leadership reserves the right to continue the resistance until all of Palestine is freed which is an actual declaration that the terrorist attacks must continue even after any peace accord which may be signed in the future. Whenever this fact is admitted in the Western media it is portrayed as belonging only to Hamas and Fatah and the Palestinian Authority are represented as being moderates who are willing to make peace. The unfortunate truth is that the Fatah, the PLO, the Palestinian Authority and the entire Arab League all hold fast to their claim to replace all of Israel with an Arab state and the eradication of any trace of Judaism as their only acceptable goal. Since the Khartoum conference of 1967 the entire Arab World has held to the Declaration of the Three No’s; No peace, No negotiations, and No recognition. Such a position does indeed make holding peace talks rather difficult.

 

The truths which are lost because of the ruse known as the Palestinian’s claim to reconstruct their ancient homeland called Palestine are that there never was in all of history such a place as Palestine, the British used the term Palestinian to describe the Jews who resided within the British Mandate, The Balfour Declaration addressed the rights of the Arab populations residing within the British Mandate, Transjordan (currently called Jordan) was created as the Arab State for those Arabs living within the British Mandate and required the Jews to relinquish their legal claim to 78% of the British Mandate, Israel was not required by UNSC Resolution 242 to relinquish any of the West Bank but to relinquish only those lands acquired as a result of the 1967 War that were not determined by Israel to be vital for secure borders. Of the lands under UNSC Resolution 242 Israel has already relinquished well over 75% of the area by returning the Sinai Peninsula to the Egyptians, and lastly the original conflict was never between the Israelis and the Palestinians but between the Arab World and Israel.

 

Even should one look at the Oslo Accords one would almost immediately draw some interesting conclusions. The Oslo Accords drew three distinct areas within what is often referred to as the West Bank, and was historically referred to as Judea, Samaria and Benyamin (which kind of explains why those wishing to prevent Israel from claiming these areas had to rename them), into three separate areas, A, B, and C. Area A was given over to complete control of the Arabs under the auspices of the PLO and Yasser Arafat. Area C was given over to total Israeli control. Area B was jointly controlled by both the Arabs and the Israelis. This makes an obvious demarcation suggesting the intended solution originally was that Israel required all of Area C as their minimum needs to have basic security and the Arab population already, as it existed, was concentrated within Area A. This left Area B which held some concentrations of Arab villages and farms, some open lands, and some lands claimed by Jews who had their lands confiscated by the Jordanians after the 1948 war which the Arabs referred to as the war to eradicate the Jews and Israel calls their War of Independence, which gives some insight to the perspectives of the two sides. Since Area B was placed under dual control one might be led to think that these were the lands disputed between the two sides as originally observed when the Oslo Accords were enacted. It also would be prudent to believe that the negotiations should have been over where the border should be placed in order to fairly divide the lands within Area B. Instead we have muddied the original intents to the point that there have been discussions of granting the Palestinian Arabs a corridor across the Negev Desert so that their areas near the Jordan River have easy access without entering Israel to Gaza and the Mediterranean Sea, never mind that by doing such Israel is cut in two and is no longer contiguous, as long as the Palestinian areas are contiguous everything should be wonderful. There was a period when Mahmoud Abbas felt he had such a strong position he began claiming the entirety of Jerusalem as the capital city for the Palestinians. Fortunately, somebody managed to disavow him of such a felonious concept. All of this is a prime example of how far removed today’s perceived realities are from the original ideas of the Oslo Accords, let alone from the decisions, treaties, conferences, and even the White Papers which were all ratified soon after World War I and blessed by the League of Nations, the United States, Russia, and even the leadership of the Arab World, King Faisal. Sometimes time worsen wounds, not heals them.

 

Beyond the Cusp