Friday, June 15, 2007

What Really Happened in the Middle East

Robert Spencer blogged The David Horowitz Freedom Center is releasing a 10-minute flash video, What Really Happened In The Middle East, that restores reality to the Israeli-Arab conflict, as a fifty-year war by Arab Muslims to reverse what they refer to as the “Nahkba” – the catastrophe of Israel’s birth as a nation. "'What Really Happened In The Middle East' restores the historical record and shows why the war against Israel is a central front in the Islamic jihad against the West,” says David Horowitz, founder and president of the Freedom Center.
Do you believe there ever was a country called Palestine? Do you believe that Israel is occupying Palestinean lands? Do you believe that the Arabs really want peace? If the answer to any of these questions is yes, then you need to click here and learn the truth.
“It is our goal to deliver this message to millions of Americans over the Internet so that they can be better equipped to defend themselves in the war that radical Islam is waging against them." You can view the video here.

6 comments:

Agathocles said...

Do you believe that Israel is occupying Palestinean lands?

Well, the jews were a minority of the population in the british mandate of Palestine when Israel was created, weren´t they? According to the official british statistics there were 83790 jews within the mandate in 1922, 174606 in 1931 (these years population cencuses were made) and by new year 1944-45 the number was calculated to be 528702 by the british, but 565000 by the Jewish Agency. The increase was to about 75% due to immigration. During the same period (1922-44) the arab population increased from 589177 to 1061277 and the number of christians from 71464 to 135547.

Still, you see this land as "jewish by nature"? Give me one reason, not related to the bible, to why the jews had an exclusive right to rule this piece of land (and if you say it´s because they were a majority in this land 2000 years earlier, then shouldn´t America be returned to the indians, who were a majority there up until 500 years ago?)

Considering the arabs were a majority, up until the thirties a large majority, is it fair that these people, who have lived there for generations, practicing islam or christianity, should be forced to live in a jewish state they had never wanted? And this because a european madman had tried to exterminate the jewish people? Shouldn´t it be Europes´s responsibility to make room for a jewish national home?

Today, Israel is a fact, and I don´t wish for it to be undone. But you mean that the arab population of what´s today called Israel and the Palestinian territories haven´t even got the right to claim the 22% of the collective landmass now known as the occupied territories (excluding the Sheba farms)? Since you deny that Israel is occupying any territory.

To answer your last question; Do you believe that the Arabs really want peace?

No, not the peace Israel offers. Just a few years ago the Arab league offered Israel peace and full recognition in exchange for a palestinian state on these 22% (Gaza and the West bank, a return to the pre-1967 borders) - a proposal backed by al-Fatah who were in power in the PA. Israel declined, and since then MORE illegal settlements have been built on the west bank (more land was confiscated through enlarging settlements on the west bank than was left in the pull-out from Gaza). Any lasting peace-settlement will have to include israeli withdrawal from all territories occupied in 1967, a Palestinian state with east Jerusalem as capital and the release of political prisoners (no, not convicted terrorists, political prisoners, of which there are many as well).

Don Singleton said...

the jews were a minority of the population in the british mandate of Palestine when Israel was created, weren´t they?

They lived all over the area. When a homeland for them was created they were pushed out of their land in other Arab countries and elsewhere in the mandate, and were not compensated for it but they left because they now had a homeland. They bought land in their new homeland from the Arab owners. They did not force the Arabs off. It was the Arabs that forced Arabs off, to get them out of the way so they could attack Israel, promising the displaced Arabs they could have their land plus the land the Jews bought when they finished the war. They lost the war, and then would not take the Arabs they had removed into their own countries.

Give me one reason, not related to the bible, to why the jews had an exclusive right to rule this piece of land

How did the Arabs get all of their land? Buy it? No they took it by force. Well they fought a war against Israel in 1948 and again in 1967, and lost both times, and Isreal won land.

Shouldn´t it be Europe´s responsibility to make room for a jewish national home?

They did, in land they won from the Ottomans in WWI.

No, not the peace Israel offers.

Do you mean giving up most of the land taken in 1967, including giving them East Jerusalem? They were offered that, and Arafat refused and waged another intefada.

How about this. Palestine was never a country, and Jordan ruled the land west of the Jordan the Palestinians want for their country. Let them move east of the Jordan and settle land there, in penalty for Jordan declaring war on Israel, and let Egypt settle the people from its former property in Gaza somewhere in Egypt, and let Israel have its own country with defensible borders.

Agathocles said...

When a homeland for them was created they were pushed out of their land in other Arab countries and elsewhere in the mandate, and were not compensated for it but they left because they now had a homeland.

In 1922 there were (app) 83790 jews, 589177 muslims and 71464 christians living in these lands.
The arabs (and the british) denied the jews unlimited immigration (which was what the zionists had demanded). Even so, the percentage of jews, due to legal and illegal immigration, grew from 12,9% of the population in 1922 to 30,4% in 1944. BEFORE there was a jewish state.

They bought land in their new homeland from the Arab owners.

It is true that rich jewish immigrants bought a lot of land from poor arab farmers, and this created worries among arabs that they be turned into feudal serfs for another people. The same thing tend to happen everywhere in similar circumstanses, just look at the chisese communities in different parts of Asia and the social tensions between them and the 'native' peoples of the countries where they live (native isn´t really the correct word, since the chinese often have lived their for several generations as well) - because the chinese often form a separate and economically dominant class and the 'native' population are afraid they´ll be dominated by them.

The british "white book" of 1939 tried to limit tensions by limiting jewish immigration and the land area they were allowed to buy. This lead instead to the jewish revolt against the british.

They did not force the Arabs off.

Ever heard of Deir Yassin? Many arabs fled the land for fear of being massacred by Irgun, Stern or Haganah, and their lands and property were confiscated and never returned.

How did the Arabs get all of their land? Buy it? No they took it by force.

Well, the arab empire conquered "Syria Palaestina" from the Byzantine empire between 638-640 CE, if that´s what you mean. In 638 CE, Caliph Omar Ibn al-Khattab and Safforonius signed Al-Uhda al-'Omariyya (The Umariyya Covenant), an agreement that stipulated the rights and obligations of all non-Muslims in Palestine and jews were permitted to return to Palestine for the first time since the 500-year ban enacted by the Romans and maintained by Byzantine rulers.

The US was conquered by europeans from 1492 and forward.

They did, in land they won from the Ottomans in WWI.

You forgot to mention that they won this land in alliance with the arabs. 1915 the british commissar in Egypt, McMahon, and sharif Husain ibn Ali struck a deal - the arabs fought with the british against the ottomans, in exchange for arab independence within an area roughly between Turkey, Iran, the Persian gulf, the Indian ocean, the Red sea and the Mediterranean, excluding the coastal strip west of the districts of Damascus, Homs, Hama and Aleppo. Since the exclusion was not clearly defined (look at a map) the british could later claim present day Israel/Palestine was included, while the arabs claimed it wasn´t.

The Oslo accord did not offer true independence and did not include all of pre-1967 Palestine. The offering made by the arab league the other year did. Your proposal is not realistic and will never be accepted. Most Palestinians accept the idea of a return to the pre-1967 borders today, and if such a proposal was implemented, palestinian terrorism would be possible to supress, since it would be carried out by extremist minority fractions and not have popular support. Contrary to the claims of hardliners on both sides, most Israelis and Palestinians would prefer a just peace rather than continued conflict based on wishes for a "greater Israel" or a removal of Israel.

Don Singleton said...

It is true that rich jewish immigrants bought a lot of land from poor arab farmers, and this created worries among arabs that they be turned into feudal serfs for another people

The had the money. If they did not want to be feudal serfs of another people, they could have gone to another Arab country and become serfs to fellow Arabs.

Ever heard of Deir Yassin

The killing of about 107 to 120 Palestinian Arabs? Do you want examples of the killing of hundreds of thousands of Jews, or the desire to kill millions?

The Oslo accord did not offer true independence and did not include all of pre-1967 Palestine.

It offered to exchange some Israel land for the portions retained that already had Jewish settlements on it, and it provided Israel with defensible borders.

The offering made by the arab league the other year did.

The reason the Arabs want to go back to 1967 borders is to give Syria access to the Golan Heights from which it can easily attack Israel, and because the greedy Arabs want to push the settlers out of towns they have built, to occupy them with Arabs.

Most Palestinians accept the idea of a return to the pre-1967 borders today, and if such a proposal was implemented, Palestinian terrorism would be possible to suppress, since it would be carried out by extremist minority fractions and not have popular support.

That is foolishness. They were offered the same amount of land, just without giving the Arabs a militarily superior position, and where they would have to build their own cities, rather than taking over Jewish ones, and they rejected it.

Do you really think Israel will believe an arab offer of a peace treaty? Qur'anic commentaries, tafasir, by Ibn Kathir, Ibn Juzayy, As-Suyuti and others also emphasize that Surat At-Tawba -- the Qur'an's ninth chapter -- abrogates every peace treaty in the Qur'an. Muhammad said "war is deceit". Peace treaties are only allowed for 10 years, and then only to allow the Muslims time to rearm and prepare to fight again.

Israel pulled out of Gaza and gave them what they say they want in the West Bank. No Jewish settlements. They could have taken over greenhouses and other property that the settlers owned and used to employ Gazans, and turned it into industry to improve the life for Gazans. Instead they turned them into places to store weapons with which to continue attacking Israel. And without any more Jews to kill, they turned to killing each other.

Agathocles said...

The had the money.

Yes, I´m just saying - that´s the way people everywhere have reacted to people of another etnicity buying up their land on a large scale (like the emigrant chinese communities in Asia).

Do you want examples of the killing of hundreds of thousands of Jews

Hundreds of thousands? In Israel/Palestine? Yes, please tell me about where and when that happened.

But I did not mention Deir Yassin as the only massacre of civilians, be it arab or jewish civilians. Their have been attacks on civilians by both sides, I know. Deir Yassin was just an example, and since Haganah, Irgun and Stern demonstrated their willingness to destroy entire villages and kill everyone in them, many arabs became afraid and fled for their lives - and when they did their land and houses were confiscated and never returned or compensated.

Occupation through settlements is forbidden in the Geneva convention. The settlements have been illegal right from the start! Still the israeli state subsidizes the taxes for people living in them! Why? I mean, they can´t necessarily control if deeply religious zionists move out there and build settlements, but why subsidize it? Why work to get MORE people out there?

And could you please explain how settlement enclaves could in any way give Israel more defensible borders?

The reason the Arabs want to go back to 1967 borders is to give Syria access to the Golan Heights from which it can easily attack Israel

An international force could have been deployed to the Golan heights and the area been "demilitarized" from Syrian or Israeli troops.

Muhammad said "war is deceit"

Yeah, well, in the Torah God tells the jews to clear the land of all other (lower) peoples, drive them out of the land, and that he will help them as well, so why should the arabs believe any peace offering from Israel? This illustrates just how big problem religion is in this conflict. If there wasn´t all this refering back to documents written thousands of years ago with no relation whats so ever to the current situation, it might have been possible to solve this situation already.

Israel pulled out of Gaza and gave them what they say they want in the West Bank. No Jewish settlements.

Are you kidding? They expanded the settlements in the West bank with a larger amount of land than the total amount of those settlements removed from Gaza.

Israel should be careful and try to broke a peace deal within the not to distant future. Most of the oil-reserves in the mid-east have peaked, and when the outpour of oil from that region starts to dry up, it´s not likely that the US is interested in carrying the heavy economic load of Israeli support it currently does...

Don Singleton said...

thats the way people everywhere have reacted to people of another ethnicity buying up their land on a large scale

So you prefer the Muslim approach of killing or enslaving the indigenous population and then giving the land to other Muslims, as was practiced from the time of Muhammad clear up to what is happening today in Darfur, to paying for the land like the Jews did.

Occupation through settlements is forbidden in the Geneva convention.

It depends on how they got the land. Did they do it the Muslim way, and just killed the people living there, or did they buy it, as you have admitted they sometimes did, or was it unoccupied land.

An international force could have been deployed to the Golan heights and the area been "demilitarized" from Syrian or Israeli troops.

Like the totally ineffective international force preventing Hezbollah from rearming?

God tells the jews to clear the land of all other (lower) peoples, drive them out of the land, and that he will help them as well,

I am happy you recognize that it is the Promised Land given them by God

so why should the Arabs believe any peace offering from Israel?

Because that same God promised to provide land for the decedents of Ishmael; just not the same land promised to the descendants of Isaac

Israel pulled out of Gaza and gave them what they say they want in the West Bank. No Jewish settlements.

Are you kidding? They expanded the settlements in the West bank with a larger amount of land than the total amount of those settlements removed from Gaza.


But in Gaza they had what they say they want. No Jewish settlements. And the residents continued to try to kill Jews by launching rockets into Israel, and they began killing fellow Arabs.

That is not the way to show you can live in peace with your neighbor. There is more peace in West Bank, which has settlements, than in Gaza, which has none. Maybe they need even more settlements in both.