Dr. Abdallah H. Al-Kahtany
I. Early Beginnings of Contemporary Zionism
II. Zionists Reject Uganda for the Sake of Palestine as a Home
III. Balfour Declaration and the Zionist Opportunistic Nature
IV. Zionist Propaganda and the Myth of the Holocaust.
V. Genocide of Jews on the Hands of WZM.
VI. The United Zionist-Colonial Efforts and the Fragmented Muslims
VII. Great Israel in the Schemes of Early Zionist Sages.
VIII. Expansionist Steps to Fulfill the Devilish Dream.
IX. Zionists’ Monopoly of Christian Sympathy.
X. Is Jesus the Messiah Awaited by Zionists.
XI. Zionist Terrorist Guerrillas exerting Massacres.
XII. Six Strategic Aims Achieved Through Peace Talks.
XIII. ” Only the Branch of the Young shall Survive…”
XIV. The Forgotten Victims of the Holocaust: The Role of Deceptive
XV. The Paradox of Zionist Generosity.
Among the few Western Middle East specialists who have handled Middle Eastern issues with objectivity and in depth is Robert Fisk, the Middle East correspondent for The Independent. Reading his interesting book (Pity the Nation), helped me to deduce his journalistic talent, seriousness and neutrality in handling issues of the region.
Fisk revealed unheard of atrocities committed at Lebanon during the time of 1982 Israeli invasion, specially the massacre committed against the Palestinians in Sabra and Shatila. In his documentary From Jerusalem to Bosnia, he exposed in sound and pictures the horrible atrocities that the Palestinians were facing as a daily routine under the Zionist oppressive occupation. It also revealed the reluctance of world leading countries to lift oppression from the helpless Bosnians while facing a genocide that was similar to that committed by the crusaders eight centuries ago in Palestine.
I have been informed that this documentary was banned in the U.S, not by a congressional decree, but instead the copy right for distributing the film was purchased by a Zionist firm which was able to prevent the American public from knowing the truth of what was happening in the Holy Land via the support of the American tax dollars. What a brutal censorship!!, Such behavior reminded me of Paul Findley’s valuable book (They Dare to Speak Out), in which he unveiled the great influence the Jewish lobby has on national policy towards Middle Eastern issues. Before the book was finally accepted for publication by Lawrence Hill, twenty publishing houses had rejected taking the risk of publishing it.
Nevertheless, the book faced many attempts to curtail its sales and distribution. A few sentences from the book clearly describe to what extent the Israeli influence is so effective in shaping decisions about the Palestinian issue: “Washington is a city of acronyms, and today one of the best-known in Congress is AIPAC. The mere mention of it brings a sober, if not furtive look, to the face of anyone in Capitol Hill who deals with Middle East policy. AIPAC – the American Israel Public Affairs Committee – is now the preeminent power in Washington lobbying.” (p.25). Findley cited the words of a former Congressman, Paul N. McCloskey, who lost his seat in Congress because he revealed some of the mal practices of the Jewish lobby that he thought were against the interest of the American people; “Congress is terrorized by AIPAC.”
One of the primary aims of international Zionism has been to establish influence over decision-making bodies in predominant countries, starting with Great Britain at the beginning of this century and ending with the United States. To commemorate the Israeli celebration of their 50 years of occupation, demolition and suppression of human rights, light will be shed on some historical steps the international Zionist movement has gone through.
The name Zionism was derived from the word Zion, a hill in Jerusalem claimed by the Jews to be the original location of the Temple of Jerusalem. It aimed at uniting the Jewish people of the Diaspora (exile) and settles them in Palestine. Some historical sources refer to the beginning of Zionism as an organized political movement to the late 19th century and culminated in 1948 in the establishment of the state of Israel, immediately after the British mandate over Palestine.
However, the Austrian Jewish philosopher Nathan Brinbaum was the first to apply the term Zionism to this Jewish movement in 1890. Based on the Talmudic teachings, religious Zionists associated the hope of the return with the coming of the Messiah; according to them a savior whom God would send to deliver them. In contradiction to the understanding of the majority of many fundamentalist Christians who support the Jewish occupation of Palestine, the Old Testament (The Torah) is not the basis for the doctrines of contemporary Judaism. In the words of the modern Jewish writer Herman Wouk in his book; This is My God: “The Talmud is to this day the circulating heart’s blood of the Jewish religion. Whatever we are Orthodox, Conservative, Reform or merely spasmodic sentimentalists, we follow the Talmud. It is our common law”.
Based on such belief, many individual Jews often migrated to Palestine to join the Jewish communities who have been granted their religious freedom under the Islamic rule for centuries. Two European Orthodox rabbis, Juhuda Alkalai and Zevi Hirsch Kalischer led this religious approach toward Zionism. They adapted the idea that Jews ought to furnish the way for the coming of the Messiah. Influence of this ideology led the Jewish German Socialist Moses Hess to publish his book Rome and Jerusalem, in 1862, in which he rejected the idea of assimilation into European society that some Jewish leaders had suggested, insisting that the essence of the Jews’ problem was their lack of a national home.
Secular Zionism on the other hand was greatly influenced by the political and social upheaval of the French Revolution. Around 1791, the European Jewry began to achieve political equality in most of Europe during the next few decades. This process of secular Zionist was called Haskalah (enlightenment). It was greatly influenced by the ideas of the German Jewish philosopher Moses Mendelssohn. This period marked the beginning of a move a way from traditional religious orthodoxy and created a need for Jewish feeling to replace religion as a unifying force. The initial trend at that time was to assimilate into the European society. By doing so, the liberal Jewish reform movement in Germany, for example, sought to reduce Judaism to a religious denomination, allowing Jews to adopt German culture. Such situation was very similar to the status Jews have in Western Europe nowadays, with the exception that they still maintain their Jewish identity and Zionist affiliation to Israel.
Nevertheless, the secular proposals of Jewish acculturation and social and political integration into the European society was rejected by many Zionists who had aspirations of having a Jewish homeland as a secure heaven for the Jewish people in Diaspora. In 1896 Theodor Herzel, an Austrian Jewish journalist, published a booklet titled The Jewish State, in which he analyzed the causes of hatred toward Jews and proposed the creation of a Jewish state, as the only cure. When such plans to have a homeland for the Jews in Palestine were introduced to As-sultan Abd al-Hamid II by the influential Jews in Germany and Turkey, he courageously refused them and firmly indicated that Palestine is a Muslim land and its Jewish population was enjoying its religious freedom. The Turkish Jewry later on united with Al-itihad wa Taragi party with an influential role by Jews of Ad-Donama to depose As-sultan Abd al-Hamid and the Othman Empire along with him. The Zionist movement was able to achieve its long-lived dream of establishing a state in Palestine in 1948; even if that meant displacing its original people and conducting horrible atrocities.
When Herzl’s attempts to obtain a charter to grant the Jews a home in Palestine failed because of Sultan Abd al-Hamid’s complete rejection of the idea, he organized the first Zionist Congress in Basel, Switzerland. Two hundred Jewish delegates attended from all over the world. The conference formulated the “Basel Program” which continued to be the platform of the Zionist movement. The delegates reached a consensus to define the Zionist major goal as to create a homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine. The congress also founded a permanent World Jewish Organization (WJO) and instructed the establishment of branches in every country with a substantial Jewish population.
After he had succeeded in establishing the WJO, Herzl directed his diplomacy toward Britain in an attempt to grant the opportunity to create a Jewish state in Palestine. However, his attempts were faced with rejection for the second time. As an alternative to Palestine, the British offered to discuss the probability of Jewish colonization in East Africa. Such proposal was known as the “Uganda Scheme”, nearly split the Zionist movement which was so eager to create a homeland for the Jews. When the 7th Zionist congress in 1905 rejected the East African scheme, another leading Zionist Israel Zangwill formed the Jewish Territorial Organization, the goal of which was to seek territory anywhere suitable for Jewish colonization. However, such organization never attracted large audience. The majority of Zionist leaders were having their eyes on Palestine partly because of religious aspirations.
When the Zionist ideology became widespread among the world Jewish population, different varieties of Zionism emerged to reflect the influence of different ideologies that they have been exposed to in the land of their Diaspora. In Russia, a variety of Zionism headed by Ahad Ha-am, a Russian journalist, aiming at emphasizing the importance of making Palestine a center for the spiritual and cultural growth of Jewish people without compromising any land for it. Such ideology was referred to as cultural Zionism.
Another type of Zionism can be labeled as socialist Zionism that had been influenced by Marxist ideology in a time when Marxism was prevailing on the hands of Jewish sociologists to provide Marxist justification for Zionism. It was based on the idea that “the Jews needed a territory of their own in which to set up a normally stratified society, where they could then engage in class struggle and thus hasten the revolution”.
Social Zionism based on Marxist ideology was able to develop cooperative agricultural communities named Kibbutz (collectives), which provided the political, cultural, and military backbone of the Yishuv (settlements) before the state of Israel was established. The effect of these Kibbutz continued even after the creation of Israel. They played a major role as collaborative communities that received Jewish immigrants from all over the world to provide them with these basic skills to function in the hostility against the indigenous people of the land.
By the emergence of the 20th century, International Zionism sprang as a highly organized political entity regardless of the many factions of Zionists. The majority was determined and united to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine and not in anywhere else in the world. At that time, the Uthman Khilafah that used to represent the Muslims was losing its control over the scattered and disunited Muslim World, while Europe as well as the Jews living in it were very much sophisticated and organized, and well prepared for their new role in the world.
The 20th century witnessed the two greatest achievements of Zionism:
(a) the commitment made by the British government in the Balfour Declaration of 1917 after several previous efforts that resulted in failure.
(b) the establishment of the Zionist state in 1948. Balfour Declaration was prepared in March 1916 and issued in November 1917, during the World War I, by the British foreign secretary, Arthur James Balfour, under the Cabinet of Prime Minister David Lloyd George.
Regardless of accusing the British government of connivance in granting what it did not own to people who did not deserve, the Balfour declaration approved the Zionist scheme to establish a national homeland in Palestine. The declaration committed the British government “to making the best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this objective, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country”. Such a decision was unilaterally taken by the British government undermining the rights of the indigenous people of Palestine, regardless of their different religious affiliations. In Balfour Declaration, the Palestinians were referred to as communities and the Jews as people; a very paradoxical linguistic use of the words, which reflected the attitudes the British colonizing machine, was having against the Palestinians in comparison with the Jews.
A similar unforgivable mistake was executed against the Muslim people of Kashmir when their country that they have inhabited for thousands of years was handed to India by the British; just like the way Palestine was handed to the Zionists. Such irresponsible decisions have resulted in great catastrophes that the two Muslim peoples have been experiencing until this moment and may continue for long time to come.
Against the conditions prescribed in the Balfour Declaration, the Zionists savagely violated the civil and religious rights of the Palestinians. The declaration did not explicitly mention the establishment of a Zionist state named Israel in Palestine. What has Great Britain done to lift oppression against people of the Holy Land in order to maintain its credibility and correct its grave mistake?, Why did the great empire of the time do to implement its own conditions?, Nothing was done!, It simply withdrew from Palestine while leaving it an easy prey to the criminal Zionist guerrilla groups of Irgun Zuni Leumi. Thereafter, Britain was among the first countries to recognize the State of Israel when declared in 1948.
Because of the great importance of revealing major aspects about the history of Zionism, two more essays will be devoted to providing a historical account of the international Zionist movement. A number of rationales were behind such discourse: (a) The current need of the Muslims to know about the major historical developments that led to the occupation of Palestine by Zionists. (b) The great efforts and sacrifices that many devout Zionist have executed to achieve their ultimate aim of establishing a Zionist state in Palestine. (c) Realizing the weak spots in our recent history that allowed such atrocities and catastrophes to take place in the heart of Muslim land.
During the previous two articles on Zionism, I tried to shed light on:
(a) The beginning of Zionism and the principles on which it was established.
(b) The main Zionist figures and some of the major roles they have played in promoting Zionist aspirations.
(c) The different schemes they followed to keep the Zionist front united for the sake of exerting a strong pressure on the world’s leading countries to support their cause.
This essay will be concerned with the real reasons behind the Balfour Declaration and Zionist investment on it and the exaggerated Holocaust in attracting international sympathy to establish the ultimate goal of Zionism, which is a Jewish state in Palestine.
The Zionist Movement invested in World War I by selling the support of the world Jewry in exchange for the Balfour Declaration in 1917. However, I think there are other factors that convinced the British Government to take such a daring step in granting the Jews a homeland in Palestine and seek the approval of the League of Nations.
Among the main factors behind the Balfour Declaration are Chaim Weizmann’s personal efforts and connections. Weizman was a Russian-born chemist and Zionist leader who became the first president of Israel (1949-52). He became a lecturer in chemistry at the University of Geneva in 1901 and reader in biochemistry at the University of Manchester in 1904. In 1910, he became a British subject. He invested on his key position as director (1916-19) of the British admiralty laboratories. Weizmann became more influential and was responsible for the discovery and development of a method for synthesizing actone, used in explosives manufacturing which was highly appreciated by the British government; he was personally admired for a discovery which was most needed. He invested in his key position and convinced Balfour of the (claimed) historical right of the Jews to have a homeland in Palestine.
The New (20th Century Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge) stated that “the Balfour declaration was a product of religious as well as political activities” (p.894).
Christian Zionists who believe that the Messiah will appear in Palestine pressured the British government to grant the Jews a homeland in Palestine. Using his personal contact, Weizmann invested on misinterpretations of the Old Testament to convince the British Cabinet of the time and the foreign minister Balfour about the legitimacy of the decision. So, there is no doubt about the existence of religious motivations behind the Declaration.
Other claimed rationale was to obtain the support of the International Jewry during the war.
The latter rationale as a reason behind Balfour Declaration could be refuted because of two reasons:
First: the Jews formed a small minority among the population of the countries they lived in during the war.
Second: the Arab leader of the time King Hussein ibn Ali of Alhijaz sided with Allies during the World War I and later led the Arab revolt against the Ottomans in 1916 and proved to be reliable ally with the British. In contrast, the Zionists rebelled against the British White Paper decree.
So, none of the rationales presented by the British to legitimize their decision to displace a nation from its own country and place in another. The only possible interpretation is the one mentioned above.
After World War I, the Zionist movement faced two major setbacks. The new Soviet regime sealed off Jewish migration, the traditional source of increasing the Jewish population in the newly established settlements.
A dispute erupted between two of the main Zionist leaders: Judge Louis Brandies, leader of the American reform Jews, and Dr. Chaim Weizmann the man credited for obtaining the Balfour Declaration and the president of the World Zionist organization (1921-29) and lately became the first president of the Zionist State. The dispute involved both personal issues and an ideological debate over the future of Zionism.
American Reform Judaism, for example, proclaimed that Palestine was no longer a Jewish land and that the USA was “Zion”. To these Jews, Zionism was damaging to the fabric of Judaism and only served to stir up Russians that resulted in the claimed death of thousands of Jews on the hands of Russian army units (1919-1921). However, the unbelievable killing of millions of Jews during the exaggerated Nazi Holocaust during World War II drew all Jews together in support of Palestine as a Jewish commonwealth a heaven for the persecuted and the homeless. Even if that would result in creating another genuine Holocaust against the original people of Palestine who were driven out of their homes at the point of the gun to become unwanted refugees.
Therefore, Weizmann’s synthetic Zionism, which advocated both political struggle and colonization, won over Brandeis’s pragmatic approach, which concentrated on colonization with no reference to future nationhood.
Due to these emerging events, Weizmann was turned into an unchallenged Zionist leader. Nevertheless, Brandeis and his group gave up their difference with Weizmann and turned into supporters of his proposals.
After obtaining the support of major Jewish leaders and organizations, Weismann set up the wider Jewish Agency in 1929, a body that harnessed the financial support of Jews who were willing to aid their brethren in Palestine. This political and financial support resulted in the increased number of Kibbutz and the escalating inhumane deportations of Palestinians. The number of Jews emigrants jumped from 50,000 in 1929 to 600,000 during the British mandate, which was one of the factors encouraging Jews immigration. In the next essay, discussion will be focused on the many historical fallacies behind the Holocaust.
IV. Zionist Propaganda and the Myth of the Holocaust.
In continuation of my review of the history of the international Zionist movement, I think it is crucial to reevaluate the strong version of the Zionist claimed Nazi Holocaust. Because of the intensive and exaggerated propaganda around the Holocaust, the Zionist movement was able to attract a lot of sympathy from many internationally influencing countries and sought their support when declared their Zionist state in 1948.
I think it is essential for the respected readers, to rethink the truthfulness of the strong version about the Holocaust.
First: a brief background about the continuous efforts of the Zionists to attract larger numbers of Jewish immigrants under the protection provided by the British mandate over Palestine.
Second: reassessing the truth of the Holocaust by providing evidence that may negate many exaggerated claims by the Zionists.
During the heydays of Yishuv (settlements) around 1935, a more radical Zionist terrorist group emerged. It was called the National Military Organization (Irgun Zvai Leumi). Its major aim was to advocate the establishment of the Jewish state on both sides of the Jordan River. This group was led by the Zionist Ze’ev Vladimir Jobotinsky who later formed the New Zionist party in the late1930s. He devoted himself to a futile campaign to arrange the evacuation of European Jews to Palestine while executing all possible means to terrorize the Palestinians and drive them out of their homes; in order to make space for the flush of immigrating Jews. Nevertheless, hundreds of thousands of Jews rushed to Palestine during and aftermath of the World War II as a result of the anti-Zionist sentiments in Europe and not because of Zionist aspiration like that of Zionist leaders.
A few years before World War II (1933), the Nazi regime came to power in Germany and immediately began to take systematic measures against non-Aryans; including communists, Zionists and others. During the years 1941-1944, the Zionist movement accused the Germans of killing six million Jews in concentration camps for the purpose of: (a) drawing sympathy of the Allies who turned out victorious after WW II for the Jews, and (b) hasten the Jews in many countries to immigrate to Palestine in order not face the same destiny as those who were in German controlled areas.
It would be unfair to deny the fact that Jews and other non-Aryans had faced persecution on the hands of the Nazis. However, the count of deaths among the Jews was highly exaggerated for the reasons mentioned below: (1) There is no historical tangible evidence for the strong version of the Holocaust exemplified in the burning of six million Jews in Nazi gas chambers.
(2) Most evidence was based on contradictory testimonies given by Jewish survivors.
(3) There is no census evidence regarding the number of Jewish population living under Nazi controlled countries.
(4) Historical records can only estimate the number of Jews under German controlled areas before World War II to be fewer than four millions. Two millions were able to find their way into the Soviet Union and one million were able to escape the war and were compelled to migrate to Palestine under the influence of Zionist propaganda.
In 1975, Simon Witzntal (a Jewish writer) wrote an article in which he confirmed what the French intellectual Roger Garaudy’s supported doubts that the burning of six million Jews by the Nazis was a fabrication and a wild exaggeration. Witzntal argued that the Jewish victims were not burnt in gas chambers in Germany as many were made to believe, but rather in Poland with much smaller number of victims than exaggerated by the international Zionist movement. Fred Lauschter, an American specialist in designing and constructing gas chambers, visited Auschwitz (the city claimed to be the center of gas chambers where Jews were burnt). After examining these chambers, reported that it would be ridiculous to claim that such chambers were used for executing people.
The only evidence collected that Auschwitz was used as a death camp came from the Rudolf Haus’s (one of the captured commanders of the Nazi army) confessions that were extracted under sever torture and interrogation by British Intelligence. Such confessions cannot be used as reliable evidence. Especially when having the fact that they contradict with professional opinions. The estimated number of Jews killed during the war was 300.000; much less than the number of Muslims killed in the Jewish Holocaust in Palestine.
As the number of Jewish settlements increased and more Jews were attracted to Palestine, the question of coexistence with the original people of Palestine became increasingly a problem that the Zionist leaders wanted to solve the problem based on their radical way of displacing the helpless Palestinians. The Zionist movement adapted various approaches, including that of Judah L. Magres, president of the Hebrew University, who advocated the foundation of a joint Arab-Jewish State. However, David Ben-Gurion argued that accommodation with the Arabs could come only from a position of Jewish strength.
The next essay insha’allah will shed light on how the Zionists with the unlimited support of world leading powers took advantage of the situation of disarray in the Muslim world to achieve their goal of establishing a Zionist state in Palestine.
V. Genocide of Jews on the Hands of WZM.
In an earlier essay, I brought in a number of counter evidence to argue against the truthfulness of the strong (exaggerated) version of the Holocaust committed by Nazis against non-Aryans, including Jews during World War II.
Monopolizing their strong grip on the media, the Zionists were able to make people, (especially Americans and a large portion of the Europeans), believe that the Nazis had eliminated six million Jews in a very short period of time. By doing so, they were able to derive sympathy from the majority of Americans towards the Jews, the Jewish cause, consequently, winning them to their side. This sympathy helped the Zionists tremendously to execute their plans and establish their state on an occupied land whose original people went through a genuine holocaust and were mercilessly forced into Diaspora.
In addition to generating support for the Jews, the Zionist leaders were able to hasten the Jewish migration from all parts of the world to escape any possible holocaust against the Jews in other places where they had settled.
In previous writings about the Holocaust, a number of factors were also listed defying the exaggerated version of the Holocaust. These included the absence of any tangible historical evidence; presumably all pieces of existing evidence were fundamentally based on contradictory testimonies by some Jewish “survivors”, confessions that were extracted under severe torture, and interrogation from very few captured Nazi commanders by the British intelligence. My counter evidence was based on the writings of several prominent historians and scholars; among them were Simon Witental (a Jewish historian), Roger Garudy (a French philosopher) and Fred Lauch… (An American specialist in designing and constructing gas chambers).
In writing the previous article about the Holocaust, I had little evidence about the involvement of World Zionist Movement during the World War II in the genocide of Jews who were judged unfit for migration to Palestine. This will be the theme of a number of forthcoming articles. Rabbi Moshe Shonfeld, in his book The Holocaust Victims Accuse (Part I, Neturei Karata of the U.S.A., New York, 1977), quoted Dr. Chaim Weizmann (the man behind the November 1917 Balfour Declaration and the first president of the State of Israel in 1941 during the Zionist Congress of 1937, which was attended by Zionists only) as saying:
“The hopes of Europe’s six million Jews are centered on emigration. I was asked: “Can you bring six million Jews to Palestine?”, I replied: No … From the depth of the tragedy I want to save two million young people … The old ones will pass. They will bear their fate or they will not. They were dust, economic and moral dust in a cruel world … Only the branch of the young shall survive … They have to accept it.” (P.5).
So, the Zionists’ aim was to force the young to migrate. Children and the elderly were to be sacrificed since they could not participate in creating the Jewish homeland.
Another Zionist leader was also quoted by Rabbi Shonfeld boasting that, “Only through blood will the land be ours”.
Zionist leaders were very selective about the type of Jews who should escape the miseries of Europe and participate in the creation of Israel through working in the Kibbutz or waging a war of aggression against Palestinians in the battlefield. There is very strong evidence that the Zionist leaders in charge of the European Jewry were, one way or another, involved in escalating the death of Jews under German control during World War II.
The ultimate goals of the World Zionist Organization during WWII were to:
(a) establish a Zionist State in Palestine, after they were promised a homeland by the British government, at any cost, and (b) push for the escalation of Jewish settlements in Palestine by bringing in young and skillful Jews from all over the world while eliminating the old and the disabled.
Yitzhak Greenbaum, chairman of Rescue Committee of European Jewry, arrogantly repeated his slogan about the type of Jews who should be allowed to migrate to Palestine, while disregarding cries of the sick and the elderly by saying:
“One goat in the Eretz Yisrael is more important than an entire community in the Diaspora” (Reported in Faris Glubb, Zionist Relations with Nazi Germany, New York Press, New York, 1979, p.44).
Another evidence of the role played by the Zionist leaders in intensifying the misery of the European Jewry is exemplified by the behavior of Henry Mentor of the United Jewish Appeal. While collecting tremendous wealth from rich Jews all over the world, he played a decisive role in hindering the migration of children, women, old and sick people to Palestine. Instead they were left to face the agony of sickness and starvation in concentration camps, not gas chambers as claimed by many Zionist leaders.
In the next article on the topic, I will bring historical supporting evidence on some of the criminal practices perpetrated by prominent Zionist leaders against their own people during one of the supposedly decisive period in Jewish history.
VI. The United Zionist-Colonial Efforts and the Fragmented Muslims
In the aftermath of the World War I and the turmoil of the collapse of the Ottoman Caliphate, the fragmented Muslim World was cut into pieces by colonial powers. Therefore, it was not in a position to rightly respond to the many dramatic catastrophes.
The collusion of most world powerful countries of the time (Great Britain, The United States and France) with the Zionist against the Palestinians and the rest of the Muslim World hindered any successful and united reaction by the Muslims against the Zionist well planned proposal to establish a state in Palestine. All what the Muslims did was, simply condemn the grave atrocities committed against the Palestinians by notorious Zionist militia in addition to some sporadic but extremely unorganized military actions. Nobody thought that such efforts by the Zionists would result into the establishment of a Jewish State in the heart of the Muslim’s Holy Land. Moreover, the Muslims lacked an influential Islamic leadership capable of uniting the fragmented Ummah against this vicious Zionist-Crusader invasion.
In a tactical move to appease the anger of the Muslim people and to disavow its responsibility towards the creation of the problem via Balfour Declaration, the British declared their termination of Britain’s commitment to Zionism in a document known as the “White Paper” in May 1939. This action left the door wide open for Jewish immigration to Palestine. The decision was in no doubt in the best interest of the Zionists, regardless of a minor displeasure shown by the Jews.
During the years following the White paper, atrocities of extremist and well-organized Zionist guerrilla groups became more violent. The year 1944 witnessed notorious crimes committed against the Palestinians by the Irgun Zvai Leumi terrorist group led by the future Israeli prime minister Manachem Begin, among which the massacre of Dair Yasseen in the 9th of April 1948. In that massacre, Begin and his villains butchered hundreds of civilians including children, old people, and women; even unborn babies were not spared.
As a mere exchange of role among the superpowers, the Zionist were able to secure the support of a more reliable and powerful surrogate mother, the United States of America, with a very well organized and powerful Zionist community that managed to exert great influence on matters related to Palestine.
Zionist efforts to secure the support of the United States started as early as 1897 with the establishment of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA). The ZOA played an instrumental role in mobilizing support for the Zionist plans in Palestine. Their influence penetrated U.S. Congress and the Senate to reach the President himself. President Truman was the first to recognize Israel as an independent Jewish State eleven minutes after the Zionist declared the establishment of their state in 15 May 1948.
In May 1942, the American Zionist leaders meeting in Baltimore Hotel in New York City demanded the establishment of a Jewish Commonwealth that is a state in all of western Palestine, as a part of the new world order after World War II. They also approved the establishment of organized military militias lately known as ‘Haganah’ who played an oppressive role in crushing the Palestinians and driving them out of their homes in order to make room for the newly migrating Jews. Since then, the U.S. has become the most reliable ally to Israel and extended its financial, military as well as full diplomatic support to the Zionist State.
Great Britain contradicted its own decision (the White Paper) by exercising certain measures favoring the Jews and promoting their grab of Palestine. The Labor Party approved a bill in May 1944 to encourage the Palestinians to leave their homeland in front of the new floods of Jewish immigrants. At the same time on the opposite shore of the Atlantic, the American Congress asked the American government to exert all international diplomatic efforts to ease the way for Jewish immigration to Palestine. This was the first step in order to achieve the Zionists immediate goal of turning the country into a Jewish Commonwealth and then hasten the establishment of a Jewish state.
The UN plan of 1947 proposed that, upon termination of the British mandate on May 15,1948, Palestine be partitioned into separate Jewish State with 56% and Palestinians with 43%, with the city of Jerusalem under UN trusteeship. When the General Assembly of the UN proposed then approved the resolution for partition in October 29th, 1947 that was never applied; the Zionists had control over 5% of Palestine only. So, what an unjust decision it was!, Such an international measure worked as a historical landmark to remind the Muslim World that the World Order after the WWII was no different from the one being proposed today. Both have the same features when dealing with Muslims; they use unjust double standards. What was really astonishing was that the Arabs were blamed for not complying with the UN resolution regarding partition; overlooking the fact that the UN was granting a country to the occupiers as a reward for their vicious brutality against the indigenous people. No Muslim could bare the historic responsibility towards the Muslim Ummah and generations to come by trading their Holy Land in order to please the UN. Nevertheless, the Palestinian authority accepted a much lesser share of Palestine in the Oslo Accord, but will never peacefully have the rest.
Another more serious step was taken when the British government ended its mandate over Palestine at the midnight of May 14,1948. Such decision paved the way for the Jews to immediately declare their new Zionist State. The Palestinians were so powerless to gain their independence and consequently have their state while the Jews were having all the military, political and financial support of the world most powerful nations. With the declaration of Israel as a Zionist state in May 15, 1958, the Nakbah (catastrophe) has started and continued for 50 years until now. When it will be cleared out? The answer to such a question is on the hands of Allah the Almighty.
VII. Great Israel in the Schemes of Early Zionist Sages.
Zionists never had in mind to have the tiny land between the Dead Sea and the Midetrainnian as the Eretz Yisrael of the Talmud but rather the claimed Promised Land from the Euphrates to the Nile, as stated at the entrance to the Kenest.
This aspiration is reflected on the Israeli flag. The two blue stripes symbolize the Nile and the Euphrates and what they claim to be David’s star in between the two blue stripes, stands for the land of Israel.
A look at the currently used Israeli coins constantly reminds the Jews of their dream of Greater Israel. Many Zionist leaders declared that they could not coexist with the Arabs on the same land. All Arabs should be deported to make room for the greedy Jews!!
Yes, such an aspiration sounds like a wild dream. However, we should not forget that the establishment of the Zionist State a century ago seemed impossible. The Jews are well known for their opportunistic tactics and deceitful maneuvering, not just in politics and the military, but in all aspects of life.
When prophet Mohammad was in war with all Arab tribes who surrounded Madinah during the 7th year of Hijrah, the Jewish tribe of Banu Guraydhah who had signed a treaty with the Muslims to unite against outside attacks, sided with the polytheists and tried to stab the Muslims in the back. When the chance to occupy the Goaln Hights emerged during 1967, they did not hesitate. They did the same in Sinai and later on in Southern Lebanon. So, such Zionist dreams must be taken seriously.
While visiting Washington D.C. in July 1945, Ben-Gorion held a meeting with nineteen American Zionist leaders who promised to purchase the most sophisticated American weapons and weapon factories for Zionist guerillas. Only four months after the military deal was wrapped and weapons were already received by the Zionists, the US through its Department of State imposed a ban on all types of weapons to be sold to the Palestinians or any Arab countries. Yet, most Arab countries were still under occupation at the time.
All the previously mentioned unjustified sympathy and support towards the Jews (I talked about in detail in a number of preceding essays) took place by linking the question of Jewish refugees in Europe with the right to a state in Palestine under the extensive Zionist propaganda of the claimed historical rights in Palestine. The Soviet Union and the US kept the Jewish refugees’ issue linked to the right to have a homeland in Palestine. Arabs, weak out cries, were overlooked in a world where the oppressed is only brutally crushed. Some Arab and Palestinian armed groups (like that of Al-Jihad troops led by Al-Husaini) showed extraordinary courage in resisting the Zionist occupation.
Many Christian fundamentalist sects and Zionist Christians, like the Jehovah’s witnesses, adopted the position of full and unlimited supports for the Jews. They were misled by the claim that the Jews will establish the kingdom of the lord in the Holy Land as if they were blind to the fact that Jews do not even recognize Christianity as a legitimate religion nor Jesus (peace be upon him) as a messiah; an issue that I will be discussing in coming essays insha’allah.
The Zionist dream of Greater Israel, from the Nile to the Euphrates, has been the basis for the industrious and continuos planning and hard work of the genuine father of contemporary Zionism, Theodore Herzel, the Austrian Jewish Journalist. His dream from the beginning was the claimed land of the Torah (Old Testament). Palestine was perceived as a base from which the Zionists could launch the execution of their ultimate plan. This plan was saliently stated in his diary as follows: “the base should be Palestine or its surroundings … we have got to establish our state based on our Jewish nationality. Therefore, we must obtain the means for political attraction… I cannot say more than this” (P1473).
In another place, Herzl stated that “the slogan we must raise is Palestine of David and Sulaiman”.
According to the Zionists, the land of claimed Greater Israel was referred to in the Old Testament as the land promised to Prophet Abraham (Peace be upon him) in Genesis (15:19); It was on that occasion that the lord made a covenant with Abraham saying: “To your descendants I give this land, from the Wadi of Egypt to the Great River (the Euphrates)”.
In other words, the real State of Israel is different from the Palestine that we know from current political maps, with its defined boundaries; but rather is to extend Greater Israel from the Nile to Euphrates. To Zionist extremists, who have become very influential in current Israeli governments, it is the Promised Land.
In his diary, Hirzl designed a scheme for Zionists to follow in order to achieve the dream of Greater Israel, by stating:
“The area from the Nile to the Euphrates… we need a transitional period under the control of our Jewish leadership and institutions. Afterwards, political relations like that of Egypt and the Ottoman Sultan could be established. [He said this before his efforts to get a permission to have a homeland for the Jews in Palestine from Sultan Abd Alhamid II were rejected. However, his followers were able get a much stronger support through Balfour Declaration] As soon as the Jewish population reaches two thirds in one area, the Jewish administration will be in control” (Herzl’s Diary, 2:711).
Most of these aspirations, written a century ago when the Jews were in the Diaspora for about 2000 years, became a reality fifty years later. Is Netanyahu and other Jewish leaders still getting guidance from Hertzl’s master plan?!, The Israeli government is now (during Netanyahu’s government) executing a plan to expand the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem in order to accommodate a large number of Jewish settlements out-side the city, thus outnumber the Palestinians living in the city then the Jewish administration will be in full control. It is a deliberate plot aimed at blocing any efforts for future negotiations over the final status of Jerusalem.
Do the Jews have these rights in the land they claim to be their Promised Land? Can they achieve their plan of establishing Greater Israel? The next essay will shed light on these issues insha’allah.
The last essay focused on the issue related to the Zionists’ ambitions in establishing their state on the larger scale claimed to be promised in the Old Testament from the Nile to the Euphrates. This essay will be concerned with the possibility of expanding the current occupied Muslim land to achieve the Zionist dream.
For the past one hundred years, the Zionists have proved that they were very serious about accurate planning and strong commitment in executing that in which they believed. In a gradual process to accomplish their larger goal of Greater Israel, they accepted the UN resolution for partition in 1947.
However, as soon as they had the chance to exceed the boundaries drawn by the UN, they expanded their control to seize all Palestine and ruthlessly invaded neighboring Arab countries. This hostility resulted in the seizure of the Golan Heights from Syria and the forceful abduction of Sinai from Egypt in 1967. They also occupied the rest of Palestine including all of Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
The second step was the neutralization of the most influential and militarily capable Arab country by signing the 1979-peace treaty with Egypt. By doing so Israel achieved one of its most important aims of fragmenting the Arab front at both political and military fields. Such strategic step gave the Zionists the courage to invade Lebanon in 1982 and commit unimaginable atrocities. As a result of this invasion they were able to drive the PLO from Lebanon and secure most needed water resources as well on the expanse of thousands of people in southern Lebanon and Sabra and Shatila.
A third step was taken toward achieving the dream when the majority of Arab countries including the PLO were dragged into recognizing Israel’s right for existence as an independent state right after the PLO had accepted Oslo Accords in 1993. Some went even farther to normalize relations and establish political and economical ties with Israel.
The fourth and probably the most dangerous step is the plan to change the geographic as well as the demographic structure of Jerusalem which has started since the Israeli invasion of Jerusalem during the 1967 war.
In June 18th, 1998, Netanyahu announced the plan to expand the municipal boundaries of the city to be six times the current area and attract 60,000 new settlers. As Netanyahu stated, it is a move aimed at fulfilling the promise he had made to the Jewish people of asserting the status of Jerusalem as the eternal capital of the Jews. This move to expand the boundaries of Jerusalem was preceded by two very dangerous steps: (a) The tunnel which was dug beneath Al-Masjed Al-Aqsaa (The Furthest Mosque). (b) Unleashing settlers at Abu Ghunaim Mountain, which resulted into the suspension of the application of Oslo Accord and the freezing of peace talks.
Moreover, Netanyahu arrogantly expressed his pride in taking such a decision, which reinforces the status of Jerusalem as the historical capital of the Jewish people. He emphasized that Jerusalem will not be divided. The mayor of Jerusalem referred to the step as “a historic start”. A start for what!!, It is a symbolic move for the intention to release the plan for Greater Israel. According to the expansion plot, Jerusalem will occupy about 10% of the total area of the West Bank. By doing so, the demographic distribution of Jews in Jerusalem will change their status from a minority into a majority and therefore, allow them to have full control of the city at all levels. (This is one of the tactics proposed a century ago by Herzl to strip the Palestinians out of their demographic power in Palestine).
Another pressing question is that “Why did the Israelis announce the expansion decision at this time while the peace treaty with the Palestinians has not been fully implemented?”.
The answer to this question is multifold:
(a) The Zionists think that this is a golden chance to invest in the salient division among the Arab states and their inability to form a united front to hinder the Zionist move.
(b) They concocted this plan to put more hurdles on the way of peace talks with the Palestinians and hence prevent the remaining substantial applications of Oslo Accord which was only a tactic to absorb the outrage of Muslims after the Gulf War II.
(c) The Zionist government thought it is the right time to achieve a very important episode of the Zionist dream of establishing Greater Israel by uniting Jerusalem and then converting it into a Zionist cultural, religious, as well as a political capital.
(d) The current Jewish government is not interested in exchanging land for peace because this contradicts with the dream of greater Israel that is the back of its policy maker’s minds. Therefore, continuation in peace talks that will eventually lead to the establishment of the Palestinian State with true sovereignty and independent authority can be a big hurdle in the way of achieving the dream.
(e) Netanyahu aspires to be one of the preeminent Jewish leaders like Herzl, Ben Gurion or Wiesmann; he has two more presidential years to achieve that. The American Jewish lobby celebrated the 50th year after the establishment of the State of Israel with the participation of Netanyahu as the guest of honor. He was viewed by the American Zionist leaders as a national Jewish hero who will implement Zionist aspirations. The American Jewish lobby (AIPAC) played a major role in hindering any successful initiative to salvage the trembling peace talks.
If the Zionists were not planning to expand the boundaries of Israel to fulfill their misinterpreted claimed promise of the Old Testament, then why had they been constantly and arrogantly ignoring the UN resolutions and international outcries opposing Jewish settlements in the occupied land and in Jerusalem in specific?
Religion and politics have been intertwined through history. It has become impossible to discuss events of rise and fall of nations and ideologies without having a comprehensive analysis of both (religious and political factors). So, any ideological account of events that divorces politics from religion will result in immature conclusions and interpretations. It is undeniable that what goes on in Northern Ireland, Southern Philippines, Kashmir, Palestine, India, Bosnia, Kosovo, Southern Sudan and many other hot spots in the world is very much a product of religious-political factors. Therefore, politically motivated solution cannot offer complete and final resolutions. The Palestinian conflict is one of that type.
In order to attract sympathy of Christian people, the Zionists linked the existence of the State of Israel to the coming of the Messiah who will establish the Kingdom of God on earth. However, do the Zionists have the same belief about the advent of the Messiah as that of Christians? Do Zionists regard Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) as the coming Messiah as the Christians? In a number of previous essays, I highlighted that religious factors were behind some of the most decisive decisions taken by Western leaders in relation to the Palestinian Issue and the Arab-Israeli conflict. As a matter of fact, Balfour Declaration, which was the igniting spark for the establishment of the Zionist State, was influenced by religious factors as stated by The Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (1991, pp. 893-895).
Another question should be addressed and then answered first: Are the Jews the only descendents of Ibraheem (peace be upon him), and therefore the sole legitimate inheritors to receive the claimed Promised Land? The Zionists along with Zionist Christians refer to Genesis 15:19 as the statement which gives Jews the right to occupy Palestine and the neighboring areas, extending from the Nile to Euphrates as Ibraheem’s, [Abraham], (peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) claimed Promised Land.
First of all, was Ibraheem (Abraham) the forefather of the Jews only? The answer is definitely no. The first son and the only son that was born to Ibraheem for about thirteen years was Ishmael (peace be upon him), the forefather of a large portion of the Arabs. As a matter of fact, Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) was a descendent of Prophet Abraham’s progeny through Ishmael. According to the Old Testament, Abraham said to God:
Let but Ishmael live on by your favor! … As for Ishmael, I am heeding you: I hereby bless him. I will make him fertile and will multiply him exceedingly. He shall become a father of twelve chieftains, and will make him a great nation (Genesis 18: 18-21).
A question immediately emerges for those who believe in the Old Testament; who is the great nation of the descendents of Ishmael (peace be upon him)? Aren’t they the Muslims who believe in all the prophets appointed by Allah with no distinctions?
Say ye: “We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma’il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to Allah (in Islam)” [The Qur’an 2:136].
If it is a fact that the Muslims are descendants of Abraham (peace be upon him), aren’t they legitimate heirs to Abraham’s promise in the Old Testament?
It was on that occasion that the Lord made a covenant with Abram, Saying to your descendants I give this land (Genesis 15:19)
If the Jews, as they claim, believe in the Torah (Old Testament) and derive guidance from it, why did they strip the Muslims from their right to the land promised by Abraham? Is it their arrogant nature, which they have practiced even against Allah and His prophets? Aren’t they the ones who killed their prophets according to the Bible?
That upon you may come all the righteous bloodshed upon earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily, I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation (Matthew 23:35).
Can such a people, who rebel against the teachings of God and kill his prophets, be given priority and be chosen over other nations?
Another fallacy that needs to be addressed here is the claim that Jews make that Abraham was a Jew. They even made such a claim long prior to the advent of Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him).
Ye People of the Book (Jews and Christians)! Why dispute ye about Abraham, when the Torah and the Gospel were not revealed till after him? Have you not understanding? Ah! Ye are those who fell to disputing (even) in matters of which you had some knowledge, but why dispute ye in matters of which ye have no knowledge? It is Allah who knows, and ye know not! Abraham was not a Jew nor yet a Christian; but he was upright and bowed his will to Allah’s (which is Islam) and he joined no gods with Allah. [The Qur’an 3:65-68].
If it is agreeable that Abraham (peace be upon him) had lived probably thousands of years before the revelation of the Old Testament, why would the Jews claim that he was Jewish and promised the Jews the Holy Land?
Yet, the above discussion might seem irrelevant to the political discourse about the Palestinian Issue by the World Community and international media, I think it is in the heart of the problem. Zionist leaders who plotted the occupation of Palestine took in consideration all possible means to attract the sympathy of powerful nation to support their cause.
Our next discussion will focus on the fallacy the Jews ride on to derive support of the Christian World and right wing parties, that is the claim of preparing the kingdom of God in Palestine to be ready for the advent of The Messiah. The question is what Messiah? Is it Jesus Christ (pbuh)?
X. Is Jesus the Messiah Awaited by Zionists.
In continuing my writing about the religious-political factors behind the Zionist claim to Palestine, focus in this article will be directed towards the Jews doctrine on Prophet Jesus (pbuh). Most importantly when we realize that most Christian support to the Zionists is based on the idea that they are the seed of Abraham (pbuh) who will inherit the Holy Promised Land and establish the Kingdom of God on Earth in which Jesus (The Messiah) will reign.
Do Jews have the same Messiah as the Christians?
Before answering this question, I will cite the following statements from Rev. T.W. Pike’s book Israel Our Duty… Our Dilemma to realize the extent to which Zionists (Rabbinic Jews) have been manipulating the Christian mind;
“… Modern or Rabbinic Judaism is the least understood of the great world religions. At the same time, there is no culture or religion that need to be understood, especially in light of events in the Middle East. … Christians today are unbelievably ignorant of the history, beliefs and literature of the Jews … In fact most Christians know next to nothing concerning Jewish history during the 1800 years after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD … It was during this period when the Jewish people returned again en masse to Babylon, that the bulk of modern Jewish attitudes and literature emerged.” (p.1)
There are some facts in which both the Muslims and the Christians believe; among them, is the Jews’ rejection of Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) and attempt to crucify him (The Christians believe that he was crucified); but Allah elevated him.
That they said (in boast), “we killed Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, The Messenger of Allah”; but they killed him not, nor crucified him. Only a likeness of that was shown to them [The Qura’n 4:157].
Jesus (pbuh), according to the New Testament, said addressing the Jews who rejected him as a prophet:
“Ye reject the commandments of God…” (Mark 7:9).
Have the Jews changed their position towards Jesus Christ (pbuh)? Until today, the Jews hold the belief that Jesus (pbuh) was not a legitimate son; neither do they believe that he is a mighty prophet of God. I invite the respected readers to look at these statements written in the Talmud (the Jewish Book of Guidance) about Prophet Jesus (pbuh) and his righteous mother who are highly regarded by Allah:
“R. Papa observed: This is what men say, She [referring to Mary] who descendant of princes and governors played the harlot with a carpenter5.  Did the children of Israel slay with the sword among them that [referring to Jesus] were slain by them? 6 Rab said: They subjected him to four deaths, stoning, burning, decapitation and strangulation.7” [The Babylonian Talmud, The Soncino Press, London, p.725 (106a-106b)]
This quote from the Talmud carries a boasting arrogant tone that leaves no room for rethinking who plotted the crucifixion of Christ (keep in mind that this is the Christian and the Jewish belief; not that of Muslims). According to (Acts 5:28), the Jewish leaders have the greatest fear of Christians “ …to bring this man’s blood upon us”. In his last words before (the claimed) crucifixion, Christ made it clear to his followers that they should not expect any more mercy from the Jews than that which he received. “ If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you.” (John: 15:20) As indicated in John 15:21, Jesus (pbuh) gave the reason why the Jews did not accept him as a prophet and a Messiah “But all these things will they do unto you for my name’s sake, because they know not Him that sent me…” The reason is that they do not recognize God (Allah).
Let’s look at what (the Jewish Encyclopedia) says about Jesus (peace be upon him):
“It is the tendency of all these sources (Talmud and other Jewish literature) to belittle the person of Jesus by ascribing to him illegitimate birth, magic, and a shameful death … All of the Toledo editions contain a story of a dispute which Jesus carried on with the scribes, who on the ground of that dispute declared him to be a bastard.” (P.170)
A timely posed ideological question related to the basic principle on which Israel is representing itself to the Christian Western world can be stated as; is Jesus the Messiah waited for by the Jews?
According to the teachings of the New Testament, Christians believe that the Jews have rejected Jesus (peace be upon him) when he declared himself as the Messiah; and they still do. The Jews went further to execute all means to persecute him and his followers after him. They were the ones named by Jesus according to the New Testaments as; “synagogue of Satan which say they are Jews and are not but do lie” (revelation 3:9) [in T.W. Pike, 1988, p 11].
Do the current Jews still have their ancestors’ belief about Jesus?
By looking at the statement above (taken from the Talmud), we realize the unfair and blasphemous image the Jews have about Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him). They put him in an extremely law status as a person of illegitimate birth, a liar and a magician, not to mention recognizing him as a mighty prophet of God and a Messiah.
Prophets before Jesus (peace be upon him) had realized this rebellious nature of the Jews. Prophet David (peace be upon him) repudiated and renounced such people by saying: “Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling block, and a recompense unto them: Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see and bow down their backs always.” (Romans 11:10).
Then, why do the majority of Christians donate tremendous support to a cursed and rebellious nation according to their Bible, one that does not even believe in the same Messiah as Christians? And yet, they expect them to establish the kingdom of Jesus before his advent! Isn’t that in contradiction with the words of Jesus according to the Bible?
During the heydays of yishuv (settlements) around 1935, a more radical Zionist terrorist group emerged. It was called the National Military Organization (Irgun Zvai Leumi). Its major aim was to advocate the establishment of the Jewish State on both sides of the Jordan River. This group was led by the Zionist Ze’ev Vladimir Jobotinsky who later formed the New Zionist party in the late1930s. He devoted himself to a futile campaign to arrange the evacuation of European Jews to Palestine while executing all possible means to terrorize the Palestinians and drive them out of their homes to make space for the flush of immigrating Jews. Nevertheless, hundreds of thousands of Jews rushed to Palestine during and aftermath of the World War II as a result of the anti-Zionist sentiments in Europe and not because of Zionist aspiration like that of Zionist leaders.
As the number of Jewish settlements increased and more Jews were attracted to Palestine, the question of coexistence with the original people of Palestine became increasingly a problem that the Zionist leaders wanted to solve based on their radical way of displacing the helpless Palestinians. The Zionist movement adapted various approaches, including that of Judah L. Magres, president of the Hebrew University, who advocated the foundation of a joint Arab-Jewish State. However, David Ben-Gurion argued that accommodation with the Arabs could come only from a position of Jewish strength.
Aftermath of the World War I and the turmoil collapse of the Ottoman Caliphate, the Muslim World was fragmented into pieces by the colonial powers. Therefore, it was not in a position to rightly respond to such dramatic catastrophes. Collusion of most world powerful countries of the time (Great Britain, The United States and France) with the Zionist against the Palestinians and the rest of the Muslim World hindered any successful and united reaction by the Muslims. All What they did was simply condemning such grave atrocities that nobody thought that they will result into the establishment of a Jewish state in the heart of the Muslim’s Holy Land. Moreover, the Muslims lacked an influential Islamic leadership that was able to unit the fragmented Ummah against this vicious Zionist and Crusader invasion.
In a tactical move to appease the anger of the Muslim people and to disavow its responsibility towards the creation of the problem via Balfour Declaration, the British declared their termination of Britain’s commitment to Zionism in document known as the ‘White Paper” in May 1939. Such action was taken by the British government while leaving the door open for Jewish immigration. Such decision was in no doubt for the best of the Zionists regardless of some minor displeasure shown by the Jews. During the following years of the White paper, atrocities of extremist and well-organized Zionist guerrilla groups became more violent. The year 1944 witnessed notorious crimes committed against the Palestinians by the Irgun Zvai Leumi terrorist group lead by the future Israeli prime minister Manachem Begin, among which the massacre of Dair Yasseen. In that massacre Begin and his villains butchered hundreds of civilians including children, old people, and women; even unborn babies were not spared.
As a mere exchange of role among the superpowers, the Zionist were able to secure the support of a more reliable and powerful surrogate mother, the United States of America, with a very well organized and powerful Zionist community that managed to exert great influence on matters related to Palestine. So, in May 1942, the American Zionist leaders meeting in Baltimore Hotel in New York City demanded the establishment of a Jewish Commonwealth that is a state in all of western Palestine, as a part of the new world order after the war. They also approved the establishment of an organized military militias lately known as ‘Haganah’ who played an oppressive role in oppressing the Palestinians and driving them out of their homes. Since then, the U.S. has become the most reliable ally to Israel and extended its financial, military and diplomatic full support to the Zionists.
Great Britain contradicted its own decision by exercising policies favoring the Jews. The Labor Party approved a bill in May 1944 to encourage the Palestinians to leave their homeland in front of the new flooding numbers of Jewish immigrants. At the same time on the opposite shore of the Atlantic, the American Congress asked the American government to exert all international diplomatic efforts to ease the way for Jewish immigration to Palestine. This was the first step in order to achieve the Zionists immediate goal of turning the country into a Jewish Commonwealth and then hasten the establishment of a Jewish state.
Forced out of their last trenches in Lebanon after the Israeli invasion in 1982, the PLO lost the ability to launch any serious military operations against Israel. In November 1988, the Palestinian National Council voted to accept UN resolutions 242 that was rejected in 1967 by the Palestinians and all Arab countries and 338 in 1973. By doing so, the PLO recognized the sovereignty of all states in the Middle East, and to use the resolutions, together with acknowledgment of the Palestinian right to self-determination, as the basis for an international peace conference. This opened the door for direct talks with the Jewish leadership that resulted in an overt recognition of Israel’s right for existence with the price of limited Palestinian self-rule in Gaza Strip and the West Bank city of Jericho.
However, the Israelis in a tactical and deceitful move delayed negotiations about the following most pressing three issues to an indefinite latter phase of talks: (a) The destiny of Jerusalem, (b) Jewish settlements in the West Bank and (c) The fate of Palestinians in exile (refugees in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and others).
By delaying negotiation over these issues, the Israelis were able to accomplish at least six strategic goals in order to strengthen their presence in the area:
(1) Giving the PNA (Palestinian National Authority) the densely populated areas pausing great security threats to Israeli national security was a gain in itself.
(2) Israel was able to put the PNA on the front line against any expected Palestinian Intifadha.
(3) Leaving the PNA to deal with the different Palestinian factions that have devastated the security of the Jews for years; especially Hamas, the Islamic organization that has the support of a great portion of the Palestinian and Muslim community at large.
(4) The Israeli negotiators were able to leave the door open to execute its plans in changing the demographic situation in the West Bank and most importantly Jerusalem via escalating the construction of many giant new settlements. Figures show that Israel established about 5,000 new apartments in 1997 alone in Nablus Ramallah and others not including Jerusalem.
(5) The Palestinian authority is left single handed to deal with the hassles left over of about thirty years of brutal occupation. Most of territories given to the PNA consist of slums that lack the most basic infrastructure.
(6) Since no fixed settlement has been reached to solve the issue of Jerusalem, the Israelis are executing all possible measures to dominate Jerusalem with newly established Jewish settlements and extending its municipal borders. Their major aim is to exploit the above gaps in Oslo Accords to establish new realities on the ground in order to oppose any future negotiations over destiny of Jerusalem, the claimed eternal capital of the Jewish People.
Now, what are the Palestinians going to do in the face of the Israeli arrogance and deceitfulness?
Continue calling for the Americans to come for rescue!!, I do not think that they will be able to respond.
Lucius D. Battle, assistant secretary of state for Near East and South Asian Affairs under president Kennedy and a former ambassador to Egypt, frankly criticizing the American administration of lacking genuine initiatives to remove obstacles from the way of peace talks by stating:
“The credibility of the Clinton administration has been put to the test and has been found wanting. The short comings of the U.S. policy have encouraged the Netanyahu Government to conclude that there is no price to be paid stalemates … a failure that has placed the United States in the danger of being led by events instead of shaping them” (in P. Findley’s Speak Out, Saudi Gazette 29 May ,2998, p.10).
Such strong criticism of the current American policy in Palestine by one of the U.S. foreign policy veterans was announced before the current Monica-Clinton affair, which will be inflected on an already stumbling foreign policy towards the Middle East. In the aftermath of Monica gate, I don’t think that President Clinton can come up with any operative proposal to save the currently standstill peace talks. This will be in the best interest of the Zionists to keep on with their expansionist and opportunistic plans. If any progress is it will definitely be for the benefit of the Israelis.
The Europeans will be too weak to have a firm collective action that might lead to a workable solution. The U.S. will even work as a stumbling block against any unexpected serious action or even a resolution by the UN, as long as it is against the Zionists. Serious decisions are prudently implemented against Muslims only. The only alternative in front of the Arabs and the stranded Palestinians is to work seriously to strengthen the fragile and fragmented Islamic front and enhance the commitment to stand for the Muslim Holy Land and dignity of the Muslims Ummah that have been humiliated by the arrogant and aggressive cavalier Zionist leadership. It only aims are to keep the exiled refugees displaced and placing the rest under siege and unjustly claim the right to occupy the Muslim Holy places. No wonder since the their nature as described by all prophets (Moses, David, Jesus and Mohamed).
Professor Israel Shahak of the Hebrew University spoke of his experiences during the days of World War II in Nazi Germany. He described the attitudes that many non-Zionist Jews had toward Jews who were collaborating with Nazis by saying that Jewish parents used to warn their children against Zionists. In the words of Professor Shahak: “As children during the Nazi period, we were told by our parents, if you come to crossroads and see Ukrainians, Germans, Poles, and Jewish militia- try the Jews last…” (in Christopher Hutchens, Prepared for the Worst. Hill and Wang, 1988. P. 30).
An example of the Zionists’ callousness in dealing with their Jewish brethren and to realize the rational behind Professor Shahak’s parents’ advice is Mentor’s (The United Jewish Appeal) refusal to pay for the transportation of a ship full of Jews who were escaping the war to Palestine by saying: “Many of the passengers are old people and women, unable to endure the harsh conditions on this type of trip… To come to Palestine are needed young men and women who understand the obligations of a Jewish national home… There could be no deadly ammunition than if Palestine were to be flooded with very old people or with undesirables.” (Glubb, p.25).
If this is the kind of treatment the ‘undesirable’ Jewish population had received from the Zionist leaders in charge, how will the poor Palestinians be treated in the hands of such ruthless leaders? Why are human rights activists silent about these atrocities? Are they afraid of being labeled as anti-Semitic?
So if the Zionist leaders were inclined to reject their own people and leave them to the devastation of the war, to the agony of old age and disease because they were helpless women or elderly, how did they expect the Nazis to treat them? Mortality rate among infants and the elderly in the Jewish community in Germany rose to about 70%, as reported by Rabbi Moshe Shonfeld in his book, The Holocaust Victims Accuse (part I, p.44). This had taken place at a time when young Jews were carefully selected and trained in agriculture and military activities in Europe before being sent to Palestine. Such policies were reflections of the already discriminatory policy set by the Zionist leader who was to be the first president of the State of Israel, Dr. Chaim Weizmann. He stated: “ Only the branch of the young shall survive…”.
In his book Zionist Relations with Nazi Germany, Glubb cited episodes of negligence of needy and helpless Jews by the Zionist leaders who were in close contact with the International Zionist Movement. To give an example of this, he refers to a February 1943 Tel Aviv speech delivered by Yitzhak Greenbaum, Chairman of the Rescue Committee of European Jewry, in which the Zionist rescue official said: “they (Zionist Leaders) come to us with two plans – the rescue of the masses of Jews in Europe or the redemption of the land. The more said about the slaughter of our people, the greater the minimization of our efforts to strengthen and promote the Hebriazation of the land. If there would be a possibility today of buying packages of food (for starving Jews under Nazi rule) with the money of Keren Hayesod (United Jewish Appeal) to send it through Lisbon, would we do such a thing? No! And once again no” (p.26).
This being the mentality of the Zionist rescue officials, needless to say, the helpless children, old men and women were left to face their doom at the Nazi concentration camps or in the miserable ghettos under the control of Zionist leaders. These leaders were in close contact with World Zionist Organization and had strong relations with high-ranking Nazis. In the words of Qureshi, ‘Any action taken regarding the Jewish people in those days was taken with the mutual consent of the Nazis and the Zionists. Both of them considered the Jews as a commodity fit for bartering, to be used as such to advance their heinous and ugly designs.’ (The Holocaust: Myth and Reality, (P.36)).
Thus, there is no doubt that the Zionist leaders were directly involved in creating a lot of the suffering that the unwanted leftover Jewish masses went through during the WWII in German controlled areas. Brutality seems to be an inherent characteristic of the Zionist leaders as exemplified by their cruel treatment of the Palestinians and the reckless behavior they demonstrate towards internationally recognized bodies.
The Role of Deceptive Propaganda…
It is true that non-Aryans under German controlled territories during World War II have suffered discrimination and persecution at the hands of the Nazis, but Zionist leaders in charge of the Jewish ghettos were in close contact with the Nazis despite the propaganda by the Zionist controlled media regarding the burning of millions of Jews in gas chambers?!
Michael Choukas, in his book (Propaganda Comes of Age, Public Affairs Press, Washington D.C., p. 97) stated that: “most of what was presented in British media during World War II was mere propaganda ploy to intensify public hatred against the German enemies. The propaganda included the British and Zionist allegations that the Germans were making soap from human (Jewish) fat and lampshades from their skins”.
In a previous article on the issue, I was able to collect historical evidence that conflicts with the Zionist extreme claims regarding the burning of Jews in gas chambers in Poland. The evidence was partly collected from the report of Fred Lauschter, an American specialist in designing and constructing gas chambers, who visited Auschwitz, the city claimed to be the center of gas chambers where Jews were burnt. After examining these chambers, Lauschter reported that it would be ridiculous to claim that such chambers were used for executing people. An article in the (Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 16, p. 864, 1974) under the subtitle “ Nazi Slave Labor” explains the evolution of Nazi death camps.
“In Nazi Germany, concentration camps (Konzentrationslager) were first established for confinement of opponents of the Nazi Party, mostly leaders of the communist and Social Democratic parties. But political opposition soon was enlarged to include others, particularly such persecuted minorities as the Jews. In the anti-Jewish pogrom of 1939, 20,000 Jews were taken into “protective custody” and sent to the concentration camps. By the year1939, six major camps had been established: Dechu, Sachsenhausen, Buchenwald, Mauthausen, Flossenburg, and Rabensburck.”
The article goes on to discuss the great need for laborers in Germany during World War II. Nazi authorities turned to the concentration camps to fulfill the need for laborers. Nine more camps were established. Thousands of forced workers, rounded up from countries under Nazi control, were sent to these camps in order to function as auxiliary laborers. The article goes on to report that:
“2,000,000 prisoners of war and some 7.500,000 foreign civilian men, women, children- Poles, Russians, Ukrainians, French, Belgians, Dutch, Danes, Norwegians, Luxembourgers, Czechs, Slovaks, Hungarians, Yugoslavians, Greeks, Italians, and Algerians.… Almost all of the millions were rounded up by force… and put to work in factories, mines, and fields under conditions, which were degrading and brutal.… Toward the end of the war, when food and fuel supplies become exhausted, thousands died of starvation and disease.” (p. 863).
It is obvious from the Britannica article that the majority of people forced in the German concentration camps were from around 16 different nationalities. Therefore, the Jews were no more than a minority among them; yet, we have not heard of a Polish, French or Greek holocaust though thousands have died in these camps under severe health and nutrition conditions. Only the Jews seem to clamor against their persecution in the past to promote their cause, while in reality, they were trading on the misfortunes of the Jewish elderly, women, and children to achieve their Zionist ends.
Some extremely important information seem to have been ignored or “concealed” by the Holocaust legend, which was the outbreak of the ‘typhus epidemic’ during World War II. This epidemic was responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of people, especially those who were living in concentration camps where cleanliness and hygiene were neglected. The Britannica article confirms this when it states that “the allied forces found the sick and the dead lying side by side in barracks. Camp after camp presented the scene of horror”.
Qurishi in his research entitled (The Holocaust: Myth or Reality) mentioned that: “new people brought to the camps where stripped, their heads and bodies were shaved and disinfected with something similar to DDT. This disinfecting method might have looked to people who were not able to make any sense of what it like the gassing process.” (P.38).
The Zionist-controlled western media has not ceased to pour out its deceptively furious propaganda about the Holocaust and the Arab threat to Israel; it is still doing so on a larger scale and in the most biased manner. The media often try to portray the persecuted poor Palestinian children as extremists, while the Zionist are often described as democratic and heroic, at the same time that they are shooting at unarmed protesting Palestinians.
Professor Israel Shahak, a critic of the discriminatory Israeli policies against the Palestinians, was most concerned about the misleading American media reports calculated to deceive the American people regarding the intentions and the actions of the Jewish State. He cited an example of such deception by saying:
“To take only the most salient example: the four billions of U.S. dollars which are seed of the special relationship are also enabling fund for annexation and colonization of the West Bank- a process from which official America then ‘officially’ dissociates itself. Analogues of the same hypocrisy can be found all over the mass media and academia.” (In Hetchens’ Prepared for the Worst, P.37).
XV. The Paradox of Zionist Generosity.
The Zionists have been known for their opportunistic tactics and deceitful maneuvering in order to achieve their aims. Hence, their exploitation of the Kosovan catastrophe to draw sympathy towards Israel is not an exception.
The Zionist and pro-Zionist propaganda is exerting great efforts to exploit the miseries of the terrorized Kosovars to highlight the suffering of Jews on the hands of the Nazis.
By doing so, they are trying to achieve three main aims:
(1) Revitalizing sympathy of the western world for the Zionist cause and State through reviving the Holocaust by investing on the real Holocaust of miserable Kosovars. The Zionists seem to have overlooked the fact that it is not only the Jews who suffered on the hands of the Nazis but other people also as stated in the following excerpt from (Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol.16, P.863):
“2,000,000 prisoners of war and some 7.500,000 foreign civilian men, women, children- Poles, Russians, Ukrainians, French, Belgians, Dutch, Danes, Norwegians, Luxembourgers, Czechs, Slovaks, Hungarians, Yugoslavians, Greeks, Italians, and Algerians… Almost all of the millions were rounded up by force… and put to work in factories, mines, and fields under conditions, which were degrading and brutal.…
(2) There is a second reason behind this “humanitarian” Zionist generosity via helping in accommodating a little over a hundred Kosovan refugees out of the many displaced hundreds of thousands to a kibbutz in Palestine. They are only doing so to cover up their own atrocities against the Palestinians and the lasting calamity of more than two million Palestinian refugees, who were forced out of their land and now denied the right to come back to their stolen homes.
(3) The Zionists also aim to maintain the feeling of guilt of previous Nazi countries by keeping them under moral pressure.
Palestinians have experienced on the hands of the Zionists atrocities similar to those of the Kosovars. Below, I will just give a list that could work as a sample of the Zionists’ criminal acts, providing that they are the last people to claim respect for human rights.
– In December 31st, 1947, the Haganah attacked Baldet Al-Shaykh and undiscriminating butchered 600 civilians, including old, young, male and females.
– Moshe Dayan, a former Israeli defense minister, and his commandos committed a massacre at Allud City where 426 Palestinians were killed, 176 of them were chased into one of the mosques.
– In November 3, 1956, the Zionist army was involved in genocide where 250 Palestinian refugees were slaughtered in Khan Yunis. Only nine days later, 275 were also killed at the same refugee camp.
– In Deir Yassein, in April 4, 1948, the National Zionist Organization (Irgun Zvai Leumi), the Haganah and Shitreen Zionist Organization led by the one to be later the Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin participated in one of the most vicious and cold blooded massacres against 360 Palestinians, most of whom were children, elderly people and women (Al-Mujtama’, May 12,1998, pp.22-23).
– The list can go on to include the manslaughter taking place in Sabra and Shatila refugee camp in September 18th, during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon of 1982 where hundreds of Palestinians were mercilessly killed.
– Even the UN refugee Camps were not spared; Cana refugee camp was attacked by the Israeli army and hundreds of refugees were left dead at the sight of the whole world. (From Beirut to Bosnia, A Documentary Film by Robert Fisk).
Can people with such a bloody history, with similar inhumane practices, (not very dissimilar from those implemented by the Serbs) have the credibility to arrogantly speak to the world about their exaggerated suffering while imposing the most arrogant brutality on the Palestinians, stripping them of their land and demolishing their houses? If the Serbs are committing ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, the Israelis have been doing the same for more than 50 years in Palestine. What a paradox?
Even in the midst of these atrocities committed against Kosovars, the Zionist-controlled western media has not ceased to pour out its deceptively furious propaganda on the Holocaust and the Arab threat to Israel; it is still doing so on a larger scale and in the most biased manner. The media often tries to portray the persecuted poor Palestinian children as extremists, while the Zionist are often described as democratic and heroic, while they are shooting at unarmed protesting Palestinians.
Professor Israel Shahak, a critic of the discriminatory Israeli policies against the Palestinians, was most concerned about the misleading American media reports calculated to deceive the American people regarding the intentions and the actions of the Jewish State. He cited an example of such deception by saying: “To take only the most salient example: the four billions of U.S. dollars which are seed of the special relationship are also enabling fund for annexation and colonization of the West Bank- a process from which official America then ‘officially’ dissociates itself. Analogues of the same hypocrisy can be found all over the mass media and academia” (In Hetchens’ Prepared for the Worst, P.37).
While the whole world is busy with the unprecedented catastrophe of the Kosovars, the Israeli leaders have not changed their method of brutality by launching military attacks at Arnoun. By doing so, they drove the people of their homes and occupied the town.
Source : http://english.islamway.com/