Monday, October 28, 2013

FROM A "PEACE-LOVING" PEOPLE


FROM A "PEACE-LOVING" PEOPLE....“Hitler’s sayings” published by PA-associated youth magazine

by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik 


PA-associated youth magazine published
list of sayings it claims are Hitler's

PA Deputy Minister of Education
on magazine's advisory board

by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik

The PA-associated educational youth magazine Zayzafuna, whose Advisory Board include PA Deputy Minister of Education Jihad Zakarneh and the Head of the Media Department of the PA Ministry of Education, Abd Al-Hakim Abu Jamous, published a list of ten short wisdom sayings that it claimed were said by Hitler. The youth magazine gave no introduction or comment on the list other than the title "Among Hitler's sayings."

Some of the sayings attributed to Hitler included:
"If you were stabbed in the back, know that you are in front"
"When the defeated smiles, he denies the winner the pleasure of victory"
"Don't challenge a man who has nothing to lose"
"Don't find fault in your wife's taste for she chose you in the first place"


Palestinian Media Watch has not found the quotes attributed to Hitler. Several of them appear with slight variations on "words of wisdom" websites, and are either anonymous sayings or attributed to other people. For example, "Don't argue with a fool because people won't be able to tell you apart" has been attributed to Mark Twain; "We are all like the moon - we have a dark side" has been attributed to Lebanese writer Khalil Gibran.

The purpose of attributing these "sayings" to Hitler, it seems, is to present Hitler as a sharp-witted and wise person.

This is not the first time that the PA-associated youth magazine has presented Hitler in a positive light. In 2011, PMW exposed an essay in Zayzafuna that glorified Hitler and portrayed him as a role model. The essay expressed admiration for Hitler because he killed Jews - an act presented as benefiting all of humanity. In the essay, Hitler says to a Palestinian girl in her dream:
"I killed them [the Jews] so you would all know that they are a nation which spreads destruction all over the world."


In the days after PMW reported on the Hitler glorification, UNESCO cancelled its funding of Zayzafuna magazine:
"UNESCO strongly deplores and condemns the reproduction of such inflammatory statements in a magazine associated with UNESCO's name and mission and will not provide any further support to the publication in question."
[UNESCO, www.unesco.org , Dec. 23, 2011]

The US Ambassador to UNESCO likewise condemned the PA:
"UNESCO must let the Palestinian Authority know that this double-speak, using a message of peace for the international community, and another message for domestic consumption that teaches hatred, is unacceptable."
[US Ambassador to UNESCO, David T. Killion, Dec. 22, 2011]

However, PA educators ignored the international outrage caused by the magazine's glorification of Hitler. Not only has Hitler been glorified again, but the essay honoring Hitler for killing Jews that PMW exposed in 2011 still remains on the Zayzafuna website.

The following is the complete text of the item from the August 2013 edition of Zayzafuna attributing sayings to Hitler:

Headline: "Among Hitler's sayings"

"Don't argue with a fool because people won't be able to tell you apart."

"When the defeated smiles, he denies the winner the pleasure of victory."

"Don't challenge a man who has nothing to lose."

"A man remains a boy until his mother dies. When she dies he suddenly grows old."

"If you were stabbed in the back, know that you are in front."

"Be a friend, but don't aspire to have a friend."

"When you love your enemy, he feels his small worth."

"We are all like the moon - we have a dark side."

"Don't find fault in your wife's taste for she chose you in the first place."

"We love the past because it has gone. If it should return - (sentence cut off in original)."
[Zayzafuna, August 2013]

More info about the Zayzafuna Association:

Zayzafuna's website states that the magazine's advisory board is comprised of Palestinian Authority officials and educators:
Dr. Walid Shurafa, lecturer in comparative literature at the Faculty of Journalism and Media, Bir Zeit University
Dr. Mahmoud Al-Atshan; Expert in Arabic and children's literature
Jihad Zakarneh, PA Deputy Minister of Education
Dr. Widad Al-Barghouti, the Faculty of Journalism and Media, Bir Zeit University
Abd Al-Hakim Abu Jamous, poet and journalist, Head of Media Department, PA Ministry of Education

The website also states that: "The Zayzafuna Association for Development of Children's Culture - a non-governmental non-profit educational organization, founded and received the required permits in 2009."
[Zayzafuna's website, www.alzayzafona.com , accessed Oct. 17, 2013]

In May 2011, the Deputy Chairman of the Zayzafuna organization Abd Al-Karim Ziyada explained on PA TV that the PA gives "a monthly payment of 10,000 shekels ($2,700) to cover the magazine's [costs]."
[Official PA TV, May 9 and 13, 2011]

The August 2013 edition of the Zayzafuna magazine states that "the opinions and the texts appearing in the magazine do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the association or the magazine."

http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=9882

Netanyahu: Mufti Demanded Nazis 'Wipe Out' 4,000 Children


Netanyahu: Mufti Demanded Nazis 'Wipe Out' 4,000 Children

Full text of Prime Minister's Bar Ilan 2 speech, in which he stresses Palestinian leader's "important" role in extermination of Jews.

Arutz Sheva

Prime Minister Binymain Netanyahu delivered a speech Sunday evening at Bar Ilan University's Begin-Sadat Center, in which he discussed the key security-diplomatic issues facing Israel: the Iranian threat and the attempts to reach an accord with the Palestinian Authority.

Unlike Netanyahu's first speech at the same venue in 2009, a speech in which he voiced acceptance, for the first time, of a demilitarized "Palestinain state," in this speech Netanyahu made clear that the problem preventing peace is "the profound objection by the hard core of Palestinians to the right of the Jewish people to its own country in the Land of Israel."

To illustrate this point, he brought historical evidence of Palestinian Arab leader Mufti Hajj Amin al-Husseini's deep involvement in the Nazi extermination of Europe's Jews. 

The text follows:

I recently read a hundred-page book by a wonderful American historian who passed away nearly 50 years ago. His name was Will Durant and he wrote many books. He wrote an eleven volume history of civilization, but at the end of his life, he wrote a hundred-page book, The Lessons of History. You should read it. Every line is carved from the stone of truth, and I will give you the bad news and the good news. The bad news is that when you finish reading this book, you understand that in history, greater numbers rule. They matter. But here is the good news. On page 17, if I am not mistaken, he mentions that there may be exceptions to this rule and that through the unification of a cultural force, that's what he called it, the odds could be overcome. He gives the State of Israel as an example of such an exception. I think that we have proven in the 65 years of Israel's existence that we are exceptional, but we must continue to be so, also by preserving our spiritual foundations.

Two weeks ago, archaeologists found a gold medallion near the Western Wall. The archaeologists dated it to the beginning of the seventh century and there is a menorah on the medallion – our national symbol. On one side, a Torah scroll and on the other a shofar. The entire Torah on one medallion and of course, this was after 2,000 years of Jewish existence in the Land of Israel. This existence has lasted for nearly 4,000 years. Apparently there is something special about this exception of ours, in our unique combination of our past heritage and the way that we look to the future with our full force and talents and I would even say genius. There is no doubt that this university is part of our national and international effort to preserve our heritage and of course combine it with the future.

Iran wants to take over the Middle East
I thank you for your invitation to speak here, on the 20th anniversary of the founding of the Begin-Sadat Center. Many things have happened to us during those years. On the political front, we signed a peace agreement with Jordan. During all that time, exactly 20 years, we have been conducting negotiations with the Palestinians, trying to achieve a peace agreement, and despite ups and downs during these two decades, we managed to maintain the peace accords with Egypt. This is not insignificant. However, without a doubt, the most significant developments in the Middle East during this entire period are those of the past few years, and they overshadow all the rest when taking a broad view. Two of these developments include the historic unrest taking place in the Arab world – unrest that is at its height and far from over if such a thing can actually end; and of course Iran's ongoing efforts to develop nuclear weapons. Iran's goal is to take over the entire Middle East and beyond, and to destroy the State of Israel. This is not speculation; this is their goal.

Israel and the United States agree that Iran must be prevented from arming itself with nuclear weapons. Just days ago, the Iranian president said at the UN that Iran is only interested in civilian nuclear power. That's what he said.

I do not believe him, but anyone interested in examining his statement should ask the Iranian regime one simple question – if you only want peaceful nuclear energy, why do you insist on centrifuges to enrich uranium and on plutonium reactors? Neither of these things is necessary to produce peaceful nuclear energy. There is no need for them; however they are the essential components for producing fissile material for nuclear weapons. This must be understood – they are not needed at all for peaceful purposes. Seventeen countries, including some of the leading countries in the world – Canada, Mexico, Spain, Switzerland, Sweden, Indonesia with a quarter of a million people – and many others produce nuclear energy without centrifuges, without plutonium reactors.

Only someone who wants to produce fissile material for nuclear bombs insists on these components – not only insists, but is willing to inflict great suffering on his people because this insistence involves sanctions and dictates by the Security Council. Why do they do this? Perhaps they are lacking energy resources? They have gas and oil. I mention natural gas on purpose because it is immediately available for industry and for everything else. The have so many resources that they can provide for the needs of considerable areas of the world for many years with what they have, certainly for the needs of their own country. Therefore, the international community should take the following position vis-à-vis Iran – we are ready to reach a diplomatic resolution, but only one that dismantles Iran's ability to produce nuclear weapons.

In other words, no centrifuges or enriched uranium, no plutonium reactor. As long as Iran does not dismantle its centrifuges and plutonium reactors, the sanctions must not be eased at all. On the contrary, they should be increased. The truth is simple, it is clear, it cuts like a razor through the fog they are trying to create. If their intentions are peaceful, they will agree. If they are not peaceful, they will not agree. But perhaps the formula should be put simply as follows: they dismantle, they receive; they don't dismantle, they don't receive. And this is a difficult struggle because it is human nature to hope, to believe, to try – we are willing to try but not to conduct an open experiment without criteria and certainly not without a realistic and clear-sighted view.

The real key to the Middle East conflicts
Parallel with the attempt to stop Iran's nuclear armament and preserve the peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, we are interested in bringing the conflict with the Palestinians to an end. Achieving a genuine and secure peace, with real security and not just on paper but on the ground – for us, our children, our grandchildren – this is the greatest wish of all citizens of Israel. In order to bring about an end to the conflict, the root of the conflict must be understood.

I bring this up because, in my opinion, in all the discussions regarding the conflict with the Palestinians, at least one thing has been achieved and that is that whoever believed that it was the core of the conflict in the Middle East – well, now it is difficult to say such a thing without sounding absurd. It is not the core of the conflict – not what is happening in Libya or Tunisia or Algeria or Egypt or Yemen or Syria or Iraq and so on and so forth. But for years they told us that the core of the conflict in the Middle East was the Palestinian matter and… how shall I put this? That sacred cow is one of the victims of the Arab revolution.

However, there is a second sacred cow in equal measure. When people are asked what the root of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is – since if you want to provide a solution or fix a certain problem, first you must correctly diagnose the illness. Well, when asked what the root of the conflict is, people usually have an answer at the ready: the occupation, the territories, the settlements and so on – it is all the same. Israel "taking control of the territories", the area of Judea and Samaria after the Six Day War, the settlements – this is what sustains the conflict, this is what created the conflict for the most part. And I ask, is it really?

In my opinion, if one must choose a process by which the conflict started in actual fact, I would set the date at 1921 on the day on which the Palestinian Arabs attacked the immigration hostel in Jaffa.

Many Jews were killed in this attack, including the well-known writer Y.H. Brenner. This attack was directed against Jewish immigration. My grandfather arrived in Jaffa, at that same hostel, the year before, as did many others. Clearly this attack was not about territory or settlements; it was against Jewish immigration to the Land of Israel. Later there were more attacks: In 1929, the ancient Jewish community in Hebron was brutally slaughtered. It had existed there nearly uninterrupted for close to 4,000 years. After that, there were attacks in '36, in '39 – what they called unrest. These were repeated and methodical attacks against the Jewish community in Israel. Later on there was the Partition Plan of 1947, wherein it was proposed that there be an Arab state – they didn't say Palestinian state, but rather Arab state – and a Jewish state. The Jews agreed, the Arabs refused. Because the matter was not at that time, nor is it today, the question of a Palestinian state, but rather was and remains, unfortunately, the Jewish state.

And even before 1967, for 19 years, they had us in a chokehold; there was a stranglehold around us with the sole goal of uprooting us, of extinguishing our lives. What was that about? There were no territories then either. There was no occupation, unless Tel Aviv is occupied and Jaffa is occupied. There were no settlements for 46 years, from 1921 to 1967, nearly half a century. We were excoriated by the Arab public unrelated to settlements, unrelated to what is presented as the historic heart of the struggle. I say these things because I can – well, so it ended there, but later everything changed.

Later on, events developed as they developed. We withdrew from Gaza, every last centimeter. We uprooted communities and the attacks against us continued – approximately 10,000 missiles were fired at us from Gazan territory, from territories from which we withdrew. And when we ask those who launch the missiles and those who stand behind them: why do you fire at Jews? They say: in order to free Palestine. And what is Palestine? Judea and Samaria? No. Of course, they are part of it, but they say: Beer Sheva and Ashkelon, Majdal and Acre and Jaffa. Fine, those who say such things belong to Hamas or Islamic Jihad, but the more moderate elements in Judea and Samaria, the Palestinian Authority – it is true that they do not engage in terror and this is an important distinction. They do not engage in terror, but when they are asked to say: Well, do you recognize? Not in Judea and Samaria, not in the West Bank, but are you ready finally to recognize the Jewish state? They answer: We are prepared to recognize the Israeli people; we are ready to recognize Israel. I say, that is not the question I am asking: are you prepared to recognize the Jewish state, the nation state of the Jewish people? And the answer so far has been no. Why not?

During my speech here four years ago, I said that the solution is a demilitarized Palestinian state. The reason for demilitarization is clear to everyone in light of our experience – true and ongoing demilitarization with very clear security arrangements and no international forces. But a Jewish state – recognize the Jewish state. Why are you not willing to recognize the Jewish state? We are willing to recognize your nation state, and that is at great cost – it involves territories, our ancestral lands, which is not insignificant. And I say this as well – this is a very difficult thing. But you need to make a series of concessions too and the first concession is to give up your dream of the right of return. We will not be satisfied with recognition of the Israeli people or of some kind of binational state which will later be flooded by refugees. This is the nation state of the Jewish people. If they want, Jews immigrate to this country. Palestinian Arabs, if they want, will go there. Recognize the Jewish state. As long as you refuse to do so, there will never be peace. Recognize our right to live here in our own sovereign state, our nation state – only then will peace be possible.

I emphasize this here – this is an essential condition. There are other conditions important for concluding the negotiations – not for conducting negotiations, but for concluding them, but I mention this because the political process with the Palestinians involves resolving complicated problems. It will be deemed successful only if it is built on the foundations of truth, the truth of the present and historic truth and unfortunately, the truth that is under constant attack from our enemies and opponents. They try to undermine the ancient connection of our people with the Land of Israel and obfuscate the basic facts of the conflict between us and the Palestinians in the 20th century.

The Palestinian Holocaust connection
For example, several days ago, I heard Iran's representative half-heartedly comment on the Nazi crimes – it is difficult for them to say Holocaust – but immediately he added vigorously that one shouldn't allow the Zionists to take advantage of the Nazi crimes, i.e. the Holocaust, in order to harm the Palestinians. Iran's representatives repeat time and again the familiar trope that the Holocaust occurred without any connection to the Palestinian question and only later the Zionist leaders came along and made use of the Holocaust to repress the Palestinians. Well, what are the facts? The undisputed leader of the Palestinian national movement in the first half of the 20th century was Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini. The Mufti was the living sprit behind those same attacks I described, from 1921 in Jaffa through the Second World War. All this is known, but here are some facts about the Mufti's activities that are less well known:

On November 28, 1941, the Mufti flew to Berlin and met with Hitler. He expressed to Hitler his readiness to cooperate with Germany in any way. And he did so – both by recruiting Muslim fighters to join the ranks of the S.S. in the Balkans and by broadcasting propaganda for the Nazis.

Here is a typical example of the propaganda broadcast by the Mufti in 1942. I quote, "If England is defeated and its allies overwhelmed, it will provide a final solution to the Jewish question, which in our mind is the greatest danger". Between 1942 and 1944, he worked from his base in Berlin and tried to prevent Jews from being saved – in Hungary, Germany, Bulgaria, Croatia – countries which, despite being enslaved to Hitler, allowed the Jews to escape to the Land of Israel and other places. The Mufti protested to the Nazis that they hadn't provided enough resources to prevent the escape of the refugee Jews from the Balkans. In his testimony at the Nuremberg Trials on August 6, 1947, the German commander Wilhelm Melchers said, "The Mufti made his protests known everywhere, in the Bureau of the Foreign Minister and the State Minister and in other headquarters of the S.S." On May 13, 1943, for example, the Mufti submitted a letter to the Nazi Foreign Minister Ribbentrop in which he objected to the understandings Germany made which allowed for the deportation of 4,000 Jewish children from Bulgaria. He asked to see, "everyone," and I quote, "everyone wiped out".

Eichmann's deputy, Dieter Wisliceny, provided the following chilling testimony at Nuremberg: "The Mufti played a role in the decision to destroy the Jews of Europe. The importance of his role cannot be ignored. The Mufti repeatedly proposed to the authorities with whom he was in contact, first and foremost Hitler, Ribbentrop and Himmler, to destroy the European Jews. He saw in that an appropriate solution to the Palestinian question". Wisliceny even provided hearsay evidence that the Mufti was directly involved in the Final Solution. "The Mufti was one of the initiators of the methodical destruction of the Jews of Europe and was a partner and consultant to Eichmann and Hitler on how to execute the plan. He was one of Eichmann's best friends and constantly pushed him to speed up the destruction. With my own ears," he said, "I heard him say that he visited the gas chambers of Auschwitz anonymously in the company of Eichmann".

Ladies and Gentlemen,

As opposed to the things being said by Iran's representatives and others, the Zionist leaders did not use the Holocaust to destroy the Palestinian national movement. On the contrary, the most senior Palestinian leader at the time, the Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini preached and acted to implement the Holocaust in order to destroy the Zionist movement. It almost worked. European Jewry was indeed wiped out, in part because of the Mufti's efforts, but Zionism was not wiped out and the State of Israel was established.

'This poisonous tumor'
I mention these things here because these roots, this poisonous tumor, must be uprooted. The Mufti is still an admired figure in the Palestinian national movement. Go look at websites, go to schools, look at schoolbooks. This is the tumor that must be removed, this is the root of the conflict, this is what keeps it alive and the root of the conflict was and remains that which has been repeated for over 90 years – the profound objection by the hard core of Palestinians to the right of the Jewish people to its own country in the Land of Israel. In order for the current process to be significant, in order for it to have a real chance for success, it is essential that we finally hear from the Palestinian leadership that it recognizes the right of the Jewish people to its own country, the State of Israel. I very much hope that it will happen so that we can move toward a real resolution of the conflict.

There are many other subjects that we will of course have to resolve during the negotiations. First and foremost, there must be a real and sustainable solution to Israel's security needs in the unstable and dangerous region in which live, because even if we do achieve this recognition, after years of incitement that still continues, we have no assurance that this recognition will filter down into all levels of Palestinian society and that is why we need very solid security arrangements, so that we will be able to defend the peace and defend ourselves if the peace is violated. This is a realistic and responsible approach, one that is ready to move forward but not blindly.

This reminds me of another issue. I think an essential condition for reaching a genuine resolution clearly was and remains the reversal of the refusal to recognize the right of the Jews to a nation state of their own in the land of their ancestors and this too is the most important key to resolving the conflict, recognition of this right.

I believe in the power of the people of Israel and I believe in the power of the State of Israel. What we have accomplished over the last 65 years is indeed wondrous. Today we mark 40 years since the Yom Kippur War. In the ensuing 40 years, the population of Israel has increased two-and-a-half fold. Israel's GNP has increased 25 times. That is like taking 25 economies of the State of Israel and placing them side by side. We can mark achievements in all fields – in immigrant absorption, immigration, technology, freeing up the economy, developing the Negev and the Galilee, in the cyber city we are building in Beer Sheva, in the biotech city which will be established now in Safed, which is rising before our very eyes.

These are tremendous things. We did not wait for our neighbors in order to develop our country. We continue to do so. There is a connection between the two things – as long as we continue to grow our power, as long as we fortify our country, as long as we build our economy, as long as we strengthen our society, as long as we are strong – there is a chance that this change will also occur among our neighbors. We cannot give up on this – it is essential for safeguarding our future and ensuring our safety.

Thank you.


http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/172625#.Umajmiv4gU5

Revealing the truth about Gaza: concrete matters


Revealing the truth about Gaza: concrete matters

Click for the BBC Watch website
The excellent BBC Watch site today offers some spot-on comments about the latest chapter in the tendentious, and frequently quite shabby, way in which news of the conflict between Arabs and Israelis is delivered up, carefully filtered and aligned with UK official policy, to the BBC's global audience.

A brief extract from the article posted there this morning:
BBC audiences have not been informed of the attempted infiltration in the Negev town of Meitar on October 20th, the shots fired at an IDF patrol near Kibbutz Sufa on the southern part of the border between Israel and the Gaza Strip on the evening of the same day, the discovery of an IED on the Gaza border on October 21st or the attempted stabbing on a bus travelling between Beit Shemesh and Beitar Illit – also on the evening of October 20th – as captured on the bus’ security camera. These latest additions to the BBC’s record of omission are of course less surprising when one considers that it elected not to include the issue of terrorism in its definition of the so-called “core issues” of the Middle East conflict.
For BBC management; for those of its program-consumers who see no evil, hear no evil; for anyone who might have lost sight of what it means to have a jihad-based regime running a statelet of some 1.6 million wretched people (plus several hundred local millionaires whose profit is not unrelated to their fellow Gazans' suffering), we pass along this graphic courtesy of the IDF:

BBC Watch also reminds us that BBC audiences have, consistent with past practice, yet to be informed that Hamas has officially taken responsibility for the construction of the massive, most-recently discovered cross-border tunnel

So there is neither reason nor incentive for any of the BBC's veritable army of reporters, journalists and editors to take up with the Hamas leadership in Gaza or with its many UK-based supporters and apologists those tough questions of how Hamas justifies its ongoing massive mis-allocation of resources and the ongoing and scandalous trampling of their people's lives and futures in the name of a terror war. 

Under normal circumstances, "Hard Talk" might have been a suitable forum for this, were it not for the depressing record that program has chalked up on such matters.

http://thisongoingwar.blogspot.co.il/2013/10/22-oct-13-revealing-truth-about-gaza.html

Sunday, October 27, 2013

Islam, Not Nazism was the Mufti's Motivation: Part 2


Islam, Not Nazism was the Mufti's Motivation: Part 2

Hajj Amin el-Husseini's animating ideology was Islam, not Nazism.

Dr. Andrew G. Bostom
Part 2

Just before his concluding admonition for a jihad to annihilate the Jewish community of historical Palestine, Hajj Amin el-Husseini recapitulates the dominant thematic narrative, woven together from a myriad of specific, canonical Islamic motifs, throughout the 1937 proclamation:

"[T]he Arabs have learned best how they really are, that is, as they [the Jews] are described in the Koran and in the sacred scriptures… The verses from the Koran and hadith prove to you that the Jews have been the bitterest enemies of Islam and continue to try to destroy it."

El-Husseini’s own apt summary assessment of the proclamation raises basic, important questions for those, in particular, who expound the view that his Islam was a form of modern “ideological chimerism,” spatchcocked from “fundamentalist elements” of the Muslim creed, engrafted, fiendishly, to Nazism.

What did attentive, full tallies, comparing the numbers of Islamic and non-Islamic motifs cited by El-Husseini, demonstrate?  Specifically, regarding the latter, what examples (if any), derived from Hitler’s Mein Kampf, or the writings of Nazi racial theorists were presented? Did invocations of the Czarist Russian era forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, accompany, or complement these references to Nazi ideology? Was there any evidence that central themes from European Christian anti-Semitism were invoked, to confirm Paul Berman’s fulmination about how “Nazified Islam” strove to demonstrate “that European and Christian superstitions ought to be regarded as authentically Middle Eastern and Islamic”?

What in fact could be readily gleaned from a careful, objective reading of el-Husseini’s proclamation was there were no concrete, substantive references to any of these major non-Islamic sources of ant-Ssemitism. This absence of references contrasted starkly with the numerous and specific anti-Semitic motifs from Islam’s canonical texts—the Koran (consistent with its gloss in authoritative Koranic commentaries), hadith, and sira—which el-Husseini’s declaration invoked continuously, from opening to closing.

A simple enumeration conveyed el-Husseini’s extensive use of references from Islam’s canonical texts: ten explicit references to Koranic motifs (including eleven separate verses quoted directly in the proclamation), with an additional six implicit references; two explicit citations of the sira, and five implicit references; and two major, explicit citations (with quotation) of hadith, accompanied by three additional implicit references to the hadith literature. These citations are complemented by an explicit reference to the great early Muslim scholar al-Tabari (d. 923), and his monumental History.  

Moshe Perlmann, an eminent scholar of Islam’s Medieval era anti-Jewish polemical literature, made this rueful summary observation in 1964:

"The Koran, of course became a mine of anti-Jewish passages. The hadith did not lag behind. Popular preachers used and embellished such material."

The numerous salient examples of Islam’s canonical Jew-hatred punctuating Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s 1937 declaration validated Perlmann’s concise overarching assessment of these foundational Islamic sources, and their tragic application across space and time, into the modern era.



El-Husseini’s promulgation of jihad and canonical Islamic Jew-hatred in pursuit of the destruction of Palestinian Jewry, and later, the nascent Jewish State of Israel, has reverberated across the ensuing decades.


El-Husseini’s promulgation of jihad and canonical Islamic Jew-hatred in pursuit of the destruction of Palestinian Jewry, and later, the nascent Jewish State of Israel, has reverberated across the ensuing decades.

Consider two complementary fatwas, one written January 5, 1956, by then grand mufti of Egypt, Sheikh Hasan Ma’moun, and another January 9, 1956, signed by the leading members of the Fatwa Committee of Al Azhar University—Sunni Islam’s Vatican—and the major representatives of all four Sunni Islamic schools of jurisprudence.

These rulings elaborated the following key initial point: that all of historical Palestine—modern Jordan, Israel, and the disputed territories of Judea and Samaria, as well as Gaza—having been conquered by jihad, was a permanent possession of the global Muslim umma (community), “fay territory”—booty or spoils—to be governed eternally by Islamic law.

"Muslims cannot conclude peace with those Jews who have usurped the territory of Palestine and attacked its people and their property in any manner which allows the Jews to continue as a state in that sacred Muslim territory. [As] Jews have taken a part of Palestine and there established their non-Islamic government and have also evacuated from that part most of its Muslim inhabitants. . . . Jihad . . . to restore the country to its people . . . is the duty of all Muslims, not just those who can undertake it. And since all Islamic countries constitute the abode of every Muslim, the Jihad is imperative for both the Muslims inhabiting the territory attacked, and Muslims everywhere else because even though some sections have not been attacked directly, the attack nevertheless took place on a part of the Muslim territory which is a legitimate residence for any Muslim… Everyone knows that from the early days of Islam to the present day the Jews have been plotting against Islam and Muslims and the Islamic homeland. They do not propose to be content with the attack they made on Palestine and Al Aqsa Mosque, but they plan for the possession of all Islamic territories from the Nile to the Euphrates."

Although free of  eschatological references, the January 1956 Al Azhar fatwas’ language and arguments—pronounced from Sunni Islam’s most esteemed religious teaching institution—are otherwise indistinguishable from those employed just over three decades later by Hamas (in its 1988 covenant), revealing the same conjoined motivations of jihad, and conspiratorial Islamic Jew-hatred.

Recent polling data indicate that these traditionalist Islamic views—espoused across a continuum of 75 years by el-Husseini, Al Azhar University, and Hamas—resonate with the Palestinian Muslim population.

American pollster Stanley Greenberg performed what was described as an “intensive, face-to-face survey in Arabic of 1,010 Palestinian adults in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.” As reported in July, 2011 these data revealed that seventy-three percent of Palestinian Muslims agreed with the dictates of the apocalyptic hadith (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6985; included in both el-Husseini’s 1937 declaration, and the 1988 Hamas Covenant) calling for the annihilation of the Jews, to bring on the messianic age.

Eighty percent  supported the destruction of Israel by jihad,  and the need to recruit the entire global Muslim community, or “umma” in this quintessential Islamic cause.

Almost four decades ago Bat Ye’or published a remarkably insightful analysis of contemporary Islamic Jew-hatred, in particular, its annihilationist predilection. She hypothesized that the rise of Jewish nationalism—Zionism—posed a predictable, if completely unacceptable challenge to the Islamic order—jihad-imposed chronic dhimmitude for Jews—of apocalyptic magnitude.

The pejorative characteristics of Jews as they are described in Muslim religious texts are applied to modern Jews. Anti-Judaism and anti-Zionism are equivalent—due to the inferior status of Jews in Islam, and because divine will dooms Jews to wandering and misery, the Jewish state appears to Muslims as an unbearable affront and a sin against Allah. Therefore it must be destroyed by Jihad.
Here the Pan-Arab and anti-Western theses that consider Israel as an advanced instrument of the West in the Islamic world, come to reinforce religious anti-Judaism.

Bat Ye’or’s 1974 observations have now been confirmed by the first thorough textual analysis of the exclusively Islamic sources utilized in a critically important 1937 pronouncement by Hajj Amin el-Husseini. One can only speculate as to why such an investigation was not conducted decades earlier.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/13981#.UmaXFiv4gU4

Islam, Not Nazism, Motivated Hajj Amin el-Hussini, Part 1


Islam, Not Nazism, Motivated Hajj Amin el-Hussini, Part 1

Islam's canonical works are replete with anti-Semitism.

Dr. Andrew G. Bostom
Part 1

During his October 6, 2013 speech at Bar Ilan University, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu alluded to the ex-Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin el-Husseini. Mr. Netanyahu characterized el-Husseini as, “the undisputed leader of the Palestinian national movement in the first half of the 20th century.”

The Prime Minister highlighted the ex-Muft’s role in fomenting pogroms (dating back, in fact, to the so-called “Nabi Musa” riots of  1920) during the decades between the Balfour Declaration, and the eventual creation of the State of Israel in 1948.

Netanyahu’s address also focused on el-Husseini’s World War II era collaboration with the Nazis, the clear implication being that the Mufti’s murderous, Jew-hating ideology was simply another manifestation of Nazi evil, transplanted to a local “nationalistic struggle” in the Middle East.

I have just published an extensive analysis (available as a downloadable pdf  of 51 pp., and 120 references, embedded at the end of this blog) entitled, “A Salient Example of Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s Canonical Islamic Jew-Hatred—Introduction, Text, and Commentary” which demonstrates that Netanyahu’s repeating of this conventional, pseudo-academic “wisdom,” does not withstand any serious, objective scrutiny.

On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States unanimously endorsed the “Mandate for Palestine,” confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine—anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. The Congressional record contains a statement of support from New York Rep. Walter Chandler which includes an observation, about “Turkish and Arab agitators . . . preaching a kind of holy war [jihad] against . . . the Jews” of Palestine.

During this same era within Palestine, a strong Arab Muslim irredentist current—epitomized by Hajj Amin el-Husseini—promulgated the forcible restoration of sharia-mandated dhimmitude for Jews via jihad. Indeed, two years before he orchestrated the murderous anti-Jewish riots of 1920, that is, in 1918, Hajj Amin el-Husseini stated plainly to a Jewish coworker (at the Jerusalem Governorate), I. A. Abbady, “This was and will remain an Arab land . . . the Zionists will be massacred to the last man. . . . Nothing but the sword will decide the future of this country.”

Despite his role in fomenting the1920 pogroms against Palestinian Jews, el-Husseini was pardoned and subsequently appointed mufti of Jerusalem by the British high commissioner, in May 1921, a title he retained, following the Ottoman practice, for the remainder of his life.

Throughout his public career, the mufti relied upon traditional Koranic anti-Jewish motifs to arouse the Arab street. For example, during the incitement which led to the 1929 Arab revolt in Palestine, he called for combating and slaughtering “the Jews.” not merely Zionists. In fact, most of the Jewish victims of the 1929 Arab revolt were Jews from the centuries-old dhimmi communities (for example, in Hebron), as opposed to recent settlers identified with the Zionist movement.

The mufti remained unrelenting in his espousal of a virulent, canonical Islamic Jew-hatred as the focal tenet of his ideology, before, during, and in the aftermath of World War II, and the creation of the State of Israel. He was also a committed supporter of global jihad movements, urging a “full struggle” against the Hindus of India (as well as the Jews of Israel) before delegates at the February 1951 World Muslim Congress: “We shall meet next with sword in hand on the soil of either Kashmir or Palestine.”

Declassified intelligence documents from 1942, 1947, 1952, and 1954 confirm the mufti’s own Caliphate desires in repeated references from contexts as diverse as Turkey, Egypt, Jerusalem, and Pakistan, and also include discussions of major Islamic conferences dominated by the mufti, which were attended by a broad spectrum of Muslim leaders literally representing the entire Islamic world (including Shia leaders from Iran), that is, in Karachi from February 16–19, 1952, and Jordanian-occupied Jerusalem, December 3–9, 1953. Viewed in their totality these data do not support the current standard assessment of the mufti as merely a Palestinian Arab nationalist, rife with a “transplanted” Jew-hatred.

There is another parallel negationist trend, which is widely prevalent: the claim that el-Husseini’s canonical Islamic Jew-hatred somehow represented a sui generis “Nazification” of Islam, which has “persisted” into our era. Paul Berman articulated an unabashed formulation of this broadly held thesis, proclaiming, that abetted by the Nazis, el-Husseini “monstrously,” and “infernally,” “blurred Islam and Nazism,” achieving
"A victory of Himmler’s Islam…A victory for the Islam of fanaticism and hatred over its arch-rival, the Islam of generosity and civilization."

During 1938, a booklet Muhammad Sabri edited, "Islam, Judentum, Bolschewismus (Islam, Jewry, Bolshevism)", was published in Berlin by Junker-Duennhaupt [Dünnhaupt]. Sabri’s booklet included Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s 1937 declaration—also deemed by some as a “fatwa” (an Islamic religious ruling)—appealing to the worldwide Muslim umma. El-Husseini’s declaration was extracted and reprinted, separately, by the Nazi regime as "Islam und Judentum (Islam and Jewry)", and distributed to Muslim SS units in Bosnia, Croatia, and the Soviet Union.

As best as I can determine, the first complete, annotated translation of this pamphlet, directly from the German, was provided in my essay. Moreover, no scholar had ever identified, let alone comprehensively explicated, the anti-Semitic Islamic motifs which punctuate el-Husseini’s pronouncement, from beginning to end. Accordingly, the translation was followed by a detailed commentary which addressed this critical (and frankly, self-fulfilling) lacuna in the scholarship on el-Husseini’s Jew-hatred: identifying and analyzing its traditionalist Islamic origins.
What follows in part II, is the crux of my analysis, but to fully understand  its arguments requires a careful reading of all the evidence adduced in the original essay.


http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/13982#.UmaVIiv4gU4

Just Blame Israel - the World Bank Does


Just Blame Israel - the World Bank Does

If the PA can place the responsibility for its abject economic failure on Israel, it has no incentive to change.

Dr. Phlip Brodie

The World Bank’s latest Report on the Palestinian Authority (PA) is entitled, ‘West Bank and Gaza Area C and the Future of the Palestinian economy’, (report AUS2922, October 2, 2013).

With this Report, the World Bank ignores the central issues that threaten to torpedo the PA’s economic viability. Instead, it chooses to support the war against Israel.

David Singer writes that this Report reveals how PLO decision-making has been disastrous for the PA (“Op-ed: World Bank exposes PLO’s disastrous miscalculations,” Arutz Sheva, October 15, 2013). But while Mr Singer is absolutely correct to criticize PA decision-making, the main focus—and the conclusion—of this Report is to blame Israel for that disaster.

The Report discusses economic problems and opportunities for a place called Area C of the 'West Bank', which makes up 61 per cent of' West Bank' geography—the area we call Judea-Samaria, in which only 4% of Palestinian Arabs live and all the Jewish communities have been built.

Area C is known for three reasons: (1) It fell into Israel’s hands in the defensive 1967 six-day war—after Jordan attacked Israel; (2) in response to Arab attacks against Jews, Israel’s military maintains restrictions on Arabs in Area C; and (3) Arabs claim Area C belongs to them as well as Areas A and B.

The Report blames Israel for the PA’s economic woes. It asserts that Area C is the key to saving PA’s economy. As if to illustrate this assertion, the Report presents an assumption: if Israeli restrictions there were lifted, economic activity in Area C would add 35 per cent to PA GDP (a World Bank press release even suggests that lifting Israeli restrictions in Area C determines if the PA can survive).

The World Bank sees agriculture in Area C taking stage-center for PA economic prosperity. But their Report veers from objectivity to propaganda when it blames Israel for the Area’s farm-productivity and water problems.

In the Middle East, water is a life-or-death issue. Israel has developed solutions to its water problems. The PA has not and refuses Israeli solutions. In fact, in areas A and B controlled by the PA, reports circulate that up to half of all water used in the PA is classified as UFW—unaccounted-for water. That means that up to half the water ‘disappears’.

Israel is not responsible for this ‘disappearance’ because the problem is associated with Arabs primarily inside PA-controlled land. Nevertheless, the World Bank ignores UFW. It blames Israel for Area C water shortage.

That’s absurd. In the Arab world, stealing water is epidemic. Thomas Friedman has exposed this. While he writes of Syria and Yemen (and not Area C), he demonstrates that the reason for serious Middle East water problems is not Israel, but incompetent and corrupt officials who, while tasked with preventing illegal wells from being dug, are themselves digging wells in their own back yards.

Illegal wells plague the PA (and Gaza). It’s called Palestinian water piracy. It affects water availability for commerce, agriculture and residents.  The World Bank Report does not highlight the role water piracy plays in Arab economic and agriculture problems in Areas A, B and C. It simply blames Israel.

The World Bank wants us to believe that the only thing that keeps the PA from economic success is Israeli restriction. This is patently absurd. The PA has never proven itself capable of developing a successful economy.

What the PA is capable of, however, is corruption. A recent European Union report suggests that much of 1.95 billion Euros transferred to the PA between 2008 and 2013 has been ‘misappropriated’. Monies desperately needed to keep the PA’s sinking economy afloat have either disappeared or been misused. The large number of PA government workers is one of the main factors stifling productivity and siphoning off funds earmarked for development.

Apparently, the Bank does not believe that massive Arab corruption (and the incompetence that corruption breeds) causes problems for the PA’s economy.  It prefers to blame Israel.

To bolster its case that Arab agriculture in Area C can be successful, the Report highlights Israeli agriculture successes. But it is fantasy—not economics--to assume that if Jews farm successfully on a large scale, as they have in all of Israel, so would Arabs.

There is already Arab agriculture in Area C and not that much Jewish agriculture. But between 1995-2011, Arab farm productivity in Area C plummeted. The fundamental problem causing that drop is not Israel. It’s Arab corruption, stolen water and a history of not addressing difficult problems with resources already available.

If the World Bank wants to foster Arab prosperity, it cannot ignore Arab actions that hurt the PA’s economic potential. It cannot make unrealistic assumptions about Authority competence. It certainly cannot ignore cultural and communal problems that hold back Arab self-development: corruption, a pathological hatred of Jews that fosters violence instead of cooperation and a beggar mentality that promotes a sense of entitlement instead of ‘let’s work’.

For example, just weeks before the Report, Arabs forced an Israeli company to cancel a proposed economic opportunity—and jobs--for Arabs in Ramallah. Forget a 22 per cent PA unemployment rate: there will be no ‘normalization‘ with Israel!

This Report ignores Arab responsibility for their own problems. Instead, it claims states that, ”The key to Palestinian prosperity continues to lie in the removal of” Israeli restrictions in Area C [emphasis mine].

In the face of Arab corruption, Jew-hate, incompetence and piracy, the World Bank blames Israel for PA troubles?


http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/13988#.UmaUYiv4gU4

Friday, October 25, 2013

The Turkish Betrayal: Global Implications


The Turkish Betrayal: Global Implications

Why was the information leaked now?

Mark Silverberg, Ariel U. Policy Research Center

On October 17th, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius reported that in 2012, Turkey, a NATO member, directly gave Iranian intelligence the identities of 10 Iranians who had been meeting in Turkey with their Israeli Mossad handlers.

Subsequent reports suggest that they may have already been executed by the Iranians. But, as Boaz Bismuth writes in Israel Hayom: “There is more than one riddle here. The first is, of course, what the exact details of the story are and how great the damage is. Another riddle, no less intriguing, is who benefited from exposing the story at this time and why?”

Clearly, this Turkish betrayal represents a significant loss of intelligence to the Israelis. According to Ignatius, the Turkish intelligence chief (Hakan Fidan) is suspect in Israel because of what are seen as his close ties to Tehran. Several years ago, Israeli intelligence officers described him to CIA officials as “the MOIS station chief in Ankara,” a reference to Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security, but this has not affected the continuing contacts between the U.S. and Turkish intelligence communities.

As Caroline Glick pointed out recently: “Rather than taking action against Turkey, or simply acknowledging that the actions of Prime Minister Recep Erdogan represented a fundamental shift in Turkey’s strategic outlook, President Obama shrugged off Turkey’s betrayal without even a protest over Turkey’s despicable deed.”

The lack of  official U.S. reaction to the exposure of Israeli intelligence assets in Iran by Turkey may be because President Obama remains intent on cultivating Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan as a “model partner” and key Muslim ally at virtually any cost. As Ignatius noted, it has been U.S. practice to wall off intelligence issues from broader U.S. foreign policy objectives in the region and, if so, then Turkey’s outing of Israeli intelligence assets falls within that foreign policy paradigm.

What is puzzling is how the U.S.-Turkish intelligence relationship can continue when Turkey’s actions have not only undermined the interests of a major strategic ally (Israel), but facilitated a major intelligence setback for Western efforts to halt Iran’s nuclear program.

Steven Cook and Michael Koplow wrote recently for the Council on Foreign Relations: “That Erdogan and/or his intelligence chief, Hakan Fidan, were willing to undermine a broad Western effort to stop Iran’s nuclear development for no other reason than to stick it to Israel should be a wake-up call as to whether the current Turkish government can be trusted as a partner on anything.”

Nevertheless, Turkish-American relations have continued to warm to the point that Erdogan remains among Obama’s key confidants. This was reflected when the administration made Turkey co-chair of its signature Global Counterterrorism Forum in June 2012 – a Forum which controversially excluded Israel.

According to Debkafile, Israeli intelligence believes that Ignatius may have been provided with this information at this particular moment not so much to disclose an Israeli intelligence betrayal by Turkey, but as a warning from the Obama administration to Israel’s Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to drop his objections to certain U.S. concessions that Obama hopes will coax Iran into abandoning its nuclear weapons aspirations.

There may be some merit in that assertion.  After all, why leak the story now? Consider that Ignatius’s article was published Thursday, Oct. 17th, the day after a two-day conference in Geneva between six world powers and Iran concerning the latter’s expanding nuclear enrichment program. A chorus of Western powers led by the U.S. hailed the event as “substantive” and “forward-looking” despite widespread skepticism within the U.S. Congress, the Senate, and a wide range of global nuclear experts familiar with the Iranian nuclear program and Iran’s history of deception relating to it.

If Ignatius does have a close relationship with the upper echelons of the Obama administration as some have argued, and if this disclosure was provided by the Obama administration (whose history of “leaks” is disturbing if not outright dangerous to U.S. interests), then Netanyahu can expect to be pressured to accept President Obama’s “new Middle East vision" and the role he has assigned to Iran in that vision in the months to come.

If Netanyahu persists in his defiant attitude against Iran’s nuclear enrichment program (and he is not alone in his concerns), Israeli intelligence may well face more disasters like the Turkish betrayal.

Although U.S. officials treated the exposure of the Israeli network in Turkey as an “unfortunate intelligence loss”, they continue to work with Hakan Fidan on sensitive issues despite his suspected collaboration with Tehran. That being the case, Ignatius may be correct in predicting that “kaleidoscopic changes” lie ahead for the Middle East, and countries like Israel, Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt will no doubt begin searching for new alliances in the constantly shifting sands of the Middle East.

If Netanyahu wishes to avoid further intelligence betrayals of Israeli espionage assets, he may be forced to change his approach and accept the “new realities” in the Middle East that appear to be taking shape based upon a pending U.S.-Iranian rapproachment that will (despite administration assertions to the contrary) culminate in a nuclear Iran.

The same message applies to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, both of whom oppose Obama’s policy approach to the region in general, and Iran in particular – most notably his insistence that deposed President Mohammed Morsi be returned to office (which would further destabilize Egyptian politics), and his pending concessions to Iran which are said to include releasing $50B in frozen Iranian assets in the U.S. and Europe – an action, that would enable Iran to bypass the global oil and gas sanctions against it and develop nuclear weapons and a nuclear shield under which they will export their global Islamic revolution with impunity.


http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/13987#.UmaTsCv4gU4