ANALYZING THE FALSE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST ISRAEL, PART IV: LAND CONFISCATION
Many criticize Israel with the accusation that Jews stole the land. The truth is, no Arab land was confiscated. Most of the land was desolate, but there were many absentee Arab landlords who willingly sold their land to Jews. Not only did they sell it, but they sold it for outrageous prices, thus taking advantage of the Jews. And after selling their land, they cannot suddenly say it was stolen when it was bought and paid for.
People sometimes use this “land theft” argument regarding the security fence as well. However, whenever the fence is going through someone’s land, that person is paid either a lump sum or a monthly amount for the usage of their land. It’s no different from in the US, for example, when a cell phone tower goes up on someone’s land, and that person is paid a monthly fee. And whenever there is a dispute, the property owners can take it to court. If they win, that part of the fence is moved. And this has occurred many times. Israelalways complies with whatever the court decides.
What’s more, uninformed Israel bashers seem to think there was once some Arab nation called Palestine. This is not the case. There was never a sovereign Arab nation there. Just before the recreation of Israel, this land was governed under the British Mandate for Palestine. At that time, Palestine was a vast land which included what later became Jordan. The land was partitioned, and though it had all previously been allocated for the Jews, the British took between 75-80% of it and gave it to Arabs in the form of Jordan. They sent all Jews living there out. The British were very specific: Jordan was to be an Arab nation. No Jews. So if anyone can make a case for losing their land in Palestine, it would be Jews.
A large part of the remaining land was again offered to Arabs. The idea was that regarding the land West of the Jordan River, there would be an Arab State and a Jewish State. There were already Arab neighborhoods and Jewish neighborhoods which would stay put with no land swaps. While the argument is that the neighborhoods were scattered, creating odd boundaries, the point is that had that happened, there would have been no land swaps. But the Arabs did not want Jews to have their own state. They wanted all the land to themselves and wanted to push the Jews out or “send them into the sea” as many Arab leaders stated. So they turned down their offer for another state and went to war along with the surrounding Arab nations a day after the UN voted for Israel’s existence. They lost. Jews won their independence, and the modern nation of Israel was born, or reborn since Israel was far from a new nation.
This website explains what happened in very easy terms and with maps illustrating how the land was unfairly partitioned:
What then was stolen? There was no Arab nation there. Arab landlords sold their land to Jews. Much of the land was desolate. Jews already lived there and had already been working hard to cultivate the land. And many of the Arabs were recent immigrants. That brings us to the next argument, which is tied to this one that Jews stole the land. And that is the claim that Arabs are the natives and had been in the land for thousands of years. The answer to that claim is explained in this article: Spotlight: Are Palestinians the Indigenous People of Palestine?.
By: Rachel Molschky
Read the first three parts:
SENATE PASSES NEW IMMIGRATION BILL
The Senate has passed the new immigration bill by a vote of 68-32, though House Speaker John Boehner warned that passing in the House of Representatives would be a difficult feat. It is uncertain at this time whether the House will vote on it some time in July or not until the fall. Many House Republicans are not on board with the bill in its current state, opposing the notion of granting citizenship to millions of illegal immigrants and calling for greater border security. This victory in the Senate will be inconsequential if the bill does not pass in the House.
For more details:
HOW CAN THE RELIGION OF JIHAD CLAIM TO BE THE RELIGION OF PEACE?
Islam is hardly the religion of peace, yet this is exactly what its followers want the rest of the world to believe. But if it were the incredibly peaceful religion it proclaims to be, then Islamic terrorist group Hamas would not tell its Gazan constituents that the road to paradise is paved with Jewish skulls. Fatah, the reigning terrorist “political party” in power for the Palestinian Authority, would not display photos of armed children on its website, and neither group would encourage “martyrdom,” or rather, suicide bombing against innocent civilians. If it were a religion of peace, then what is the point of the Islamic Al Gharqad hadith, which states:
“Judgment Day will come only when the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them, until the Jew hides behind the tree and the stone, and the tree and the stone say: ‘Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah , there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him’ – except for the Gharqad tree.”
This hadith is part of the Hamas charter and is often preached toPalestinians on both Hamas and Fatah run television channels. But killing does not equal peace. Going berserk with violent protests over the Muhammad cartoons (which resulted in over 200 deaths, flag and embassy burnings and signs threatening to behead those who insult Islam), is not peaceful. And again, violent protests over some poorly made movie, resulting in over 75 deaths, were not exactly peaceful. Protests and parades which call for “death toAmerica” and “death to Israel” are not what I would label “peaceful.”
Popular Arab television network Al Jazeera celebrating terrorists’ birthdays and Palestinians commemorating suicide bombers by naming streets and schools after them is not promoting peace but instead, celebrating this violence. Raising children to be terrorists and teaching them that terrorists who murder innocent civilians, including women, pregnant or not; children; the elderly; the handicapped, etc., are martyrs who are rewarded in Paradise and using the religion of Islam to convince them, can hardly be called an act of peace. There are even terror training schools where children learn the art of terrorism.
Some examples of this “peace” are the 4731 rock hurling incidents, 642 firebombs, and 15 shooting incidents aimed at Israelis in 2012 in Judea and Samaria. In addition, the 1435 rockets fired from Gazathat hit Israel in 2012 and the Tel Aviv bus incident which wounded 28 Israelis were all evidently “peaceful.”
These incidents were all examples of Muslim terrorism directed at Jews.
For the Hamas 20th Anniversary celebration, nearly the entire population of Gaza was in attendance. The popular slogan chanted there was, “Jews, we have already dug the graves for you.” This past December, in 2012, Hamas celebrated 25 years. They celebrated the 2001 Sbarro incident, in which 15 civilians were killed, including seven children and a pregnant woman, and 130 more were wounded. And they spread the lie that “the Jews are behind each and every catastrophe on the face of the earth,” and the usual, “death to the Jews and to America.”
“Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases G-d, history and religion.”
– Haj Amin al-Husseini, Mufti of Jerusalem
(Radio Berlin, March 1, 1944; quoted in Robert Wistrich, Muslim Anti-Semitism: A Clear and Present Danger [American Jewish Committee, 2002], p47)
– Haj Amin al-Husseini, Mufti of Jerusalem
(Radio Berlin, March 1, 1944; quoted in Robert Wistrich, Muslim Anti-Semitism: A Clear and Present Danger [American Jewish Committee, 2002], p47)
“Allah will kill the Jews in the hell of the world to come, just like they killed the believers in the hell of this world.”
-Hamas
-Hamas
Not exactly the epitome of peace.
While these examples involve Israel, Jews are not the only target of Islam’s wrath. Christians are also in their path. In fact, all infidels, nonbelievers, are unsafe. Of course everyone is aware of 9/11, the UK’s 7/7, and the 2004 Madrid train bombings as well as the more recent Boston Marathon bombings and the Lee Rigby savage murder by Muslim terrorists. However, there are actually countless examples of Muslim terrorism around the world, many specifically against Christians in Egypt and Nigeria, for example, against other Muslims of different denominations, and first and foremost, against the West.
The final question is if Islam truly is the religion of peace, how can it be that 30 out of 32 people on the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorist List are Islamic terrorists? These people aren’t terrorists who “just happen to be Muslim”- they are committing their acts of terror in the name of Allah and in the name of their religion.
Calling Islam the religion of peace is nothing more than propaganda.
By: Rachel Molschky
MUSLIM IMMIGRATION IS ON THE RISE
A new report shows a significant rise in Muslim immigration to the US. The Pew Forum has analyzed the results and found that over the past 20 years, around one million immigrants have been granted permanent residency status every year. Sometimes they are able to obtain this status because they are family members of other residents, while other times they get work visas, are refugees and asylum seekers, or they have won a visa lottery. But as the report shows, where they are coming from is changing. Whereas before, there were more arriving from Europe and other parts of NorthAmerica as well as South America, now those numbers are decreasing while those from Asia, Africa and the Middle East are increasing. Surprise, surprise.
What this means is that while there are still many Christians immigrating to the US (though less than before), the number of Muslims is increasing steadily. In 1992, 68% of the new legal permanent residents were Christians, while this number has dropped to only 61% ten years later. Meanwhile, during the same time frame, Muslims comprised 5% of the new legal permanent residents before and have increased to twice as many, 10%, a decade later. Religious minorities once made up one out of every five new legal immigrants, but now they are one out of every four. Some of these religious minorities are Hindus and Buddhists, but they are generally productive members of society and contribute to the economy. They are not the ones responsible for 94% of the world’s terrorism, much of which is directed to the very same Western nations where they are immigrating, and much of which is done now through homegrown terrorism, that which is done by legal immigrants and mainly naturalized citizens, second generation immigrants or recent Muslim converts.
These numbers are troublesome, but what is worse is the fact thatObama is actually considering inviting Syrian refugees into our country, thereby increasing the number of legal Muslim immigrants even more. But that’s not all. Many of the Syrian rebels have professed their allegiance to Al Qaeda. If we invite them to infiltrate our borders, not only legally but actually welcoming them with open arms, what is to come of this great nation? While before they had to be sneaky about getting here to perform their terrorist acts, now they come legally and are protected. They have freedom of religion, which is an important thing so long as that religion does not preach hatred and violence and the destruction of your own civilization. In the case of Islam, it does just that. And if anyone criticizes this religion, Muslims then insist on anti-blasphemy laws, and they cry about unfair treatment and Islamophobia. The intent is to walk into the country legally, complain about Islamophobia and then proceed to plan the most destructive and violent terrorist attacks possible.
The LA Times has reported that in the near future we could see thousands of Syrian refugees in American towns and cities. There are currently 1.6 million Syrian refugees in other Middle Eastern countries. The idea is that these countries cannot support them all, but shouldn’t they be taking care of their brethren? Why is it the responsibility of the US?
According to the Times, “The United States usually accepts about half the refugees that the U.N. agency proposes for resettlement. California has historically taken the largest share, but Illinois, Florida, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia are also popular destinations.”
The US is not the only Western country considering taking in these refugees. Germany has already committed to taking in 5000 people. The US will likely take in a far more substantial amount than that if we typically accept half of what the UN proposes. On board to take in the refugees are Susan Rice, Obama’s new anti-Israel National Security Advisor, (a post once held by such people as Henry Kissinger, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice), and Samantha Power, Obama’s nominee for US Ambassador to the UN, another extremely anti-Israel and clearly anti-Semitic person in Obama’s camp, who showed her true colors several years ago when she suggested taking aid away from Israel, actually invading our great ally and instead helping Palestinian terrorists. These are the type of people serving in high ranking government positions now. With such people in power, the acceptance of Syrian refugees into our nation is likely to become a reality.
As of now, these refugees are mainly in Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon, and the 1.6 million number is expected to double to 3.2 million by the end of the year. Turkey is not happy and is demanding that the West relieve the burden. But imagine if Turkey, a Muslim country, is fed up, what will become of the West if we allow these people, who are already from a completely different culture from our own and who profess a religion which preaches hatred against us, to come and live in the very nations they hate? What’s more, according to theTimes article, approximately 80% of these refugees are women and children who have war injuries, both physical and mental. Rather than adding to our society, they will require care and will be a drain on the economy as the government sustains them. More taxes will be going to supporting these people, many of whom hate us. We are just asking for more homegrown terrorism.
We’ve already seen this effect with the massive amounts of Iraqi refugees we have taken in. There have been Iraqis arrested and convicted of terrorism plots, honor killings and other crimes, as well as a gang rape case involving who else, but Iraqis once again. Those poor, defenseless refugees.
Immigration has drastically changed in the US. In 1992, 41% of new permanent residents came from the Asia-Pacific region, the Middle East-North Africa region or sub-Saharan Africa. But by 2012, this number rose to 53%. Additionally, while the United States accepted around 250,000 immigrants each year in the 1950s, this country is now accepting around one million each year. Of that one million, 260,000 of them belong to other religions besides Christianity, and 130,000 do not belong to any religion. But how many of those 130,000 come from nations with cultures completely different from our own and cultures which teach that America is the enemy? In other words, many of that 260,000 are Muslim, and what about the 130,000 who claim to have no religion? Whether they claim to be religious or not, if they come from a Muslim country, the ideology is imbedded in their culture.
Then these Muslim immigrants have children, and their population multiplies. They build mosques and Islamic cultural centers, which is their right as legal residents and citizens of the United States, the land of opportunity which provides for them that very sought after freedom of religion. But it is in these mosques and cultural centers where many terrorism schemes have been masterminded. There have been multiple FBI and police undercover sting operations which have led to the capture of these terrorists. And secret recordings in mosques throughout the West have uncovered the truth about what imams really preach: it is not peace but rather, that the West is the enemy, that it is ok to rape non-Muslims, death toAmerica, death to the Jews, death to Israel, etc. This is the “religion” we are protecting.
The point is not if we agree with someone else’s religion. If someone wants to believe in G-d, multiple gods, or no gods, they should have that right. However, if people immigrate to a largely Judeo-Christian society, and their religion preaches the destruction of that very society which took them in, this is when it becomes an issue. Or at least, it should.
Not only is modern immigration changing the religious and ethnic make-up of the US and the rest of the West, but it is doing it at an incredibly rapid pace as these numbers demonstrate. Those who openly say without any hesitation that we are their enemy are welcomed with open arms. Diversity is one thing, but if that diversity means more terrorism against us and more economic instability, then it is time to rethink the approach.
By: Rachel Molschky
IMMIGRATION BILL LIKELY TO PASS IN THE SENATE
Good or bad, the immigration bill is well on its way to pass in the Senate. Still riddled with problems and facing criticism for not concentrating enough on border security, (although much improved but still lacking), as well as the simple fact that it grants amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants through a lengthy but still doable process, both sides are compromising and voting it through. What will this mean for our future as a nation?
An immigration overhaul that would legalize millions of undocumented immigrants while boosting border security passed a major test in the Senate on Monday, as lawmakers voted to advance a compromise measure despite resistance from some Republicans.
The Senate voted 67-27 to advance an amendment that was only submitted late last week. Critics complained that the Senate was voting on the 119-page proposal before having a chance to analyze it.
“This is exactly what happened with ObamaCare,” said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., one of the most vocal critics of the bill. He warned the chamber was voting on a bill “no one has read.”
But the tally late Monday was a positive sign for supporters of the legislation. Fifteen Republicans voted in favor of it.
The vote — which was technically a vote to shut down debate on the amendment — needed 60 senators to proceed. That it attracted 67 senators effectively demonstrates the entire bill likely has more than enough votes to pass the chamber. Supporters hope it will also nudge the House to act, though that could be a tough sell.
“The bill has been dramatically improved with this vote,” Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., a co-sponsor of the amendment, said Monday.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wants to tee up a vote on final passage before the Fourth of July recess.
Ahead of the vote, President Obama urged Congress to act.
“Now is the time to get comprehensive immigration reform done,” he said.
The measure voted on Monday includes changes to the original border security provisions in the bill that would double the size of the U.S. Border Patrol at a cost of around $30 billion and complete 700 miles of fencing. At the same time it sets out a pathway to citizenship for some 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally, who would be permitted to get permanent resident green cards only once all the border changes had been put in place, about a decade after enactment of the legislation.
Sessions and other lawmakers, though, warned that the mass legalization could happen even if the border security measures were not fully implemented.
Despite Monday’s Senate vote, the bill still faces uncertain prospects in the House, where many conservatives oppose citizenship for people in this country illegally. The House Judiciary Committee has been passing narrowly focused, single-issueimmigration bills — in contrast to the Senate’s comprehensive approach — and Speaker House Boehner, R-Ohio, has not indicated how he’ll proceed.
Negotiations between the two chambers are not expected until the fall at earliest, and opponents of the legislation are predicting it will be stopped in the House.
“It’s dead on arrival in the House,” Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said on Sunday.
But the sponsors behind the border security amendment — Sens. Corker and John Hoeven, R-N.D. — staunchly defended their effort ahead of Monday’s vote.
“I’ve seen reports of a ‘1,200 page bill’ no one has read or had time to read,” Corker said in a statement, presumably in response to Sessions. “To be clear, the tough border and interior enforcement provisions that Sen. Hoeven and I offered on Friday make up 119 pages added to the 1,100 pages that have been public since May.”
His office said the proposal would require an “unprecedented surge of security” on the border.
Some conservative groups were skeptical. The Heritage Foundation on Monday warned that the amendment would allow illegal immigrants to “receive amnesty now,” with the possibility of more border security “somewhere down the road.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
IMMIGRATION SECRETS NO ONE WANTS YOU TO KNOW, PART 3
An average citizen does not need hordes of foreigners in his own home. Who does need them?
First and foremost, politicians and their entourage: wives, lovers, secretaries… For them, immigrants are a source of income.
Mass media, used by the power elite to brainwash the public.
Lawyers; it should be clear why.
Various NGOs: the more immigrants, the bigger amounts of money they squeeze out of the budget- and the bigger part of this flow can be re-directed to their pockets.
Businesses, especially those with a high stake in this, those which need low-qualified labor; fields like construction, agriculture(especially seasonal jobs like fruit and vegetable pickers), the hotel industry, etc.
And who does not need immigration?
The absolute majority of the population.
This is modern “democracy” at work.
The horror of the situation with bringing immigrants to solve the tax problem consists in the fact that it does not solve it. Moreover, it makes this problem bigger.
At the initial stage of his immigrant career, an immigrant agrees to practically any job and is very obedient to the law. The secret is very simple: the first residency card is given for a year and will be continued only if an immigrant has a valid working contract. That is why an immigrant the first year is quiet, nice, pleasant and polite.
The second residence card is given for two years. And after this stage, an immigrant starts to show teeth. The unemployment payments start after two years of work. It means that an immigrant who worked, let´s say, 2.5 years, is less worried about being fired; he has at least 6 months of guaranteed unemployment payments, and during these 6 months he will be considered “legal,” even if he does not have a working contract. And he will be granted a third residence card for 5 years.
For the first 2.5-3 years of his life in the West, the immigrant usually does what is called “a reunification of the family,” which means he brings over his wife, who gets pregnant even before she steps off the airplane. After that, she gets medical treatment for free – and immediately. A child obtains citizenship rights after being born in the adopted country, and the happy parents start to get various kinds of the social aid for this child. Plus, the municipality pays a part- or all- of this immigrant’s family expenses including the rent for a flat or a house. Plus…Well, the list will be quite long, so let´s put it so: there are a lot of things an immigrant gets after the child is born.
And immigrants from Muslim countries, who have personal permission from Allah to have 4 wives, get to Paradise not in the Afterlife, but right here and now on our Earth. The scheme is simple. A Muslim guy marries a Muslim girl by Shariah law. Then he registers his marriage legally, waits until his wife gets pregnant – and then divorces her, ending his civil marriage- but his religious marriage goes on being valid. After that, he marries another Muslim girl, by the same pattern – and by the same pattern, ends his civil marriage, leaving his religious marriage valid. In some 2 or 3 years, we have a happy family of 4 “single mothers,” where each one of them gets social aid for her “poor fatherless child” (or two or more). But all four live together, in the same house paid for by the municipality. And our smart aleck: the Muslim immigrant, father of all the children and husband of each one of the women- lives together with them, in the same house. And after that he can live quite well without having to work: Life Is Good!
This is only one of the methods used by immigrants to cheat the country that accepted them; but there are others, many others.
So after some 3 years of legal residence in the Western country, the immigrant starts to milk this stupid Western country. Quite often, they do not work legally at all. But on those occasions when they do, their contribution to the budget in the form of taxes is much more inferior to what they – and their family members- get from it in the form of welfare and other types of social aid.
Well, what to do now?
Bring new immigrants of course.
People are not happy and even demonstrate some signs of anger? Never mind, now we shall have a word with journalists, and they will explain to the people as 2×2=4, that immigration “is a many-splendored thing” because it enriches our culture (sure, the rock drawings of African tribes and the Muslim technology of making suicide vests will without any doubt make our culture a lot richer), that it contributes to the growth of our economy (it would be interesting to see the concrete statistics about how and in what way exactly they “contribute,” but usually journalists who defendimmigration have serious problems with concrete figures.) We shall also be reminded that we had for centuries been exploiting the poor people of Asia, Africa and Latin America (who without this exploitation would now be murdering each other in tribal wars, sacrifice thousands of people to some Quetzalcoatl, burn wives together with the deceased husband, and in many cases, would be still sitting in the Stone Age.)Then we shall be informed that our duty as civilized and tolerant people is to respect the religion and traditions of immigrants (even if they kill a ram during Ramadan right on the staircase, and the poor ram is screaming like crazy for half an hour outside your door; sure, it’s only our duty to respect their religion and their traditions, but they do not have any obligation to respect ours.) And that immigrants from Muslim countries rape non-Muslim women and girls by the hundreds and in general are highly overrepresented in heavy crimes committed in Western countries (in Belgium, for example, 80% of all prison mates sentenced for heavy crimes are Muslim immigrants, and in Denmark and Sweden they commit almost 100% of all rapes), and that they hate us and do not even bother to hide it… It’s a curse of capitalism and colonialism, and we must be tolerant because we live in the 21stcentury, and we are humanists and stand for peace and progress.
And millions of immigrants come from the Third World, accept any job for practically any wages, pay taxes, and are very nice and pleasant…But only for the first three years. After that, they, together with all their wives and children, sit on welfare with a song of joy because sitting on welfare in Denmark or Great Britain is much more pleasant than to bust your hump in 122º F in Pakistan.
By: Y.K. Cherson
Read the first two parts in this series:
MEIN KAMPF AFICIONADOS
A new report has North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un gifting copies of Hitler’s Mein Kampf to his top officials during his birthday celebration in January. He allegedly advised them to study the book for leadership skills, encouraging them to get tips from the example of the Third Reich and its success in rebuilding Germany so quickly after WWI. The story comes from an unnamed source who is a North Korean official but was run by an online news group of North Korean defectors and picked up by all major South Korean newspapers. North Korea’s police agency says the report is only aimed at belittling its leader and threatened the treasonous “human scum” behind the article. Not exactly a denial, but with the political climate between the North and the South, it is difficult to discern the truth.
However, one thing that is certain is that the Arab world does promote the book as there are multiple translations of Hitler’s book in Arabic beginning in the 1930s. In order to attract Arabs, the original wording was changed in order to cater to Arabs who are also Semitic, such as changing “anti-Semitic” to “anti-Jewish” and toning down arguments for the supremacy of the “Aryan race.” And Hitler agreed to these modifications.
Then it was translated again and again, each time in order to be sensitive to Arabs so as not to offend them. It seems the publishers knew that since it’s such a bestseller in the Arab world, it must be changed to appease them.
And so it keeps getting translated and re-translated in order to suit their needs and appeal to them. Why? Because anything that is against Jews is going to sell like hotcakes in the Arab world. Anti-Semitism is higher there than anywhere else. Holocaust denial is also higher there than in the rest of the world, which is somewhat hypocritical since they’re such fans of Hitler, yet they deny what they consider to be his greatest work, the attempt to annihilate the world Jewish population. They share this dream, and this is whyMein Kampf is a bestseller among Arabs.
But Arabs are not alone. It is a Muslim favorite, and Bangladesh is a perfect example. This book is so much of a best seller there, that pirated copies are made and sold on the streets by children to motorists. Fifteen year-old Mabul is one of them. “For some reason Hitler’s book is all the rage among educated people – on a typical day I can sell as many as five or six,” he told the BBC.
“Educated” people. People are being educated in anti-Semitism. It is not simply some poor village people who don’t know any better but rather, professionals who live in the modern world. The bigotry is institutionalized and despite all the attempts at political correctness and the idea of acceptance and peace, these concepts are apparently supposed to catch on when they pertain to Muslims. When it comes to Jews, the 2000 year-old anti-Semitism is largely condoned. The popularity of Mein Kampf is just one example among many.
By: Rachel Molschky
ANALYZING THE FALSE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST ISRAEL, PART III: APARTHEID AND THE SECURITY FENCE
Apartheid. People throw that word around without really understanding what it means. First of all, Arabs in Israel are full citizens who have the right to vote, including women who, in many Arab nations do not possess this same right. And not only can they vote, but they can also run for public office, and many have. There are Arabs serving in the Knesset, or Israeli Parliament, and some have served as Cabinet members, Ambassadors and on the Supreme Court. Certain Arab Knesset members have even criticized Israel, but if they were blacks in South Africa under Apartheid, no such thing would ever have been possible.
Arabs are allowed the freedom of speech and can and do actually protest. They live wherever they want and cannot be discriminated against in their places of employment. If they are arrested, they get a fair trial, and while Jewish Israelis are required to serve in the military, Arabs do not have to fulfill this same requirement. Despite this, many volunteer for it, perhaps because they love their country. In recent poll results, the majority of Arabs answered that not only do they consider Israel to be home but that they wouldn’t want to live anywhere else, including in other Arab and/or Muslim countries. And finally, Arabic is an official language in Israel. It certainly would not be taken into consideration if it were Apartheid.
Most people like to use the security fence as an example of Apartheid. But Apartheid has nothing to do with it. This fence was put into place in order to protect Israeli citizens from the constant terror attacks which had been occurring and would continue to occur if not for the fence. It has provided protection for them and has severely limited these attacks. Why is it Apartheid? Because Arabs now have to walk a little bit further? Nonsense. Terrorists ruin everything. Because of terrorists there is now stricter airport security. Is it inconvenient? Yes. Is it necessary? Yes. If that hassle allows me to live because they caught a terrorist before he boarded my plane, then I’ll take the hassle, thank you very much.
The security fence has saved lives. This is a fact which cannot be denied. Israel’s goal is peace, which is precisely why the security fence has been built, to protect its citizens from terrorist violence.
In the 11 months between the erection of the first segment at the beginning of August 2003 and the end of June 2004, the Samaria-based terrorist groups have succeeded in carrying out only three atrocities within Israel. All three occurred in the first half of 2003, during which 26 Israelis were murdered and 76 wounded. (In two of the cases, the terrorists infiltrated via areas in Samaria where the fence was not yet completed. In the third, a female terrorist entered through the Barta’a crossing using a Jordanian passport.)
In contrast, during the 34 months from the beginning of the violence in September 2000 until the construction of the first continuous segment of the anti-terrorist fence at the end of July 2003, between Salem and Elkana in Samaria, Samaria-based terrorists carried out 73 atrocities (suicide bombings, shootings, car bombings) within Israel (including Jerusalem) in which 293 Israelis were killed and 1950 wounded.
A comparison of the above data shows a decrease of slightly more than 90% in the number of attacks: from an average of 26 attacks a year before the fence, to three attacks after erection of the anti-terrorist fence. This means a decrease of more than 70% in the number of Israelis murdered: from an average of 103 slain per year before the fence to 28 after erection of the fence. Similarly, this means a drop of more than 85% in the number of wounded: from an average of 688 a year before the fence to 83 wounded per year after it was built.
While the number of attacks dropped sharply, the number of attempted attacks that were foiled in various stages of preparation since the erection of the anti-terrorist fence in August 2003 remained high. During this period, the security forces prevented dozens of attacks by Samaria-based terrorist groups in the final stages of preparation. As a result of the arrests of terrorists and heads of cells, 24 explosive belts and bombs were discovered.”
Furthermore, between Israel and the areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority there is no natural or man made barrier. This enables the almost unhindered entry of Palestinian terrorists into Israel. During the last three years, [this was from 2004], 117 Palestinian terrorists took advantage of it, entered into Israel and in the act of blowing themselves up murdered 477 people- Jews, Arabs and Christians and wounded thousands of others. In contrast, the security fence between Israel and the Gaza Strip that has existed since 1996 has proven its effectiveness and the vast majority of terrorist attempts have been discovered and thwarted.
In other words, terrorists continue to get in where there is no fence, but where there is a fence, their attempts are thwarted.
The security fence:
1. Does not establish a border of any kind.
2. Does not annex any Palestinian lands to Israel.
3. Does not change the legal status of any Palestinians.
4. Does not prevent Palestinians from going about their lives.
1. Does not establish a border of any kind.
2. Does not annex any Palestinian lands to Israel.
3. Does not change the legal status of any Palestinians.
4. Does not prevent Palestinians from going about their lives.
The security fence currently being built between thePalestinians in the West Bank and Israeli population centers is a defensive measure. It is designed to prevent terrorists from carrying out attacks in Israel. Its path was chosen in accordance with security and topographic considerations, while making every effort to minimize disruption to the daily lives of the local Palestinian population.
If Palestinian land owners wish to dispute the location of the fence, it is built in moveable sections and can be moved if the land owners take their case to court, and the court decides in their favor. In which case, that section of the fence is then moved. Doesn’t sound like Apartheid to me.
In summary, 90% less attacks; 70% less senseless deaths; 85% less wounded. The fence has proven itself to be extremely effective as a much needed security measure, and its existence has nothing to do with Apartheid and everything to do with preventing terrorism. Now if the terrorists consider this a burden, they can call it Apartheid all they want, but that doesn’t make it true. It is inconvenient for terrorists, but Israel protecting its citizens against this violence is not Apartheid. It is no different from any other country in the world which makes protecting its citizens a priority.Israel should not be judged differently simply because it is the Jewish State. The charge of Apartheid is an ugly accusation and a false one at that.
By: Rachel Molschky
ANALYZING THE FALSE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST ISRAEL, PART II: “ILLEGAL” SETTLEMENTS
There is no such thing as “illegal settlements” in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. This is all Jewish land. Jerusalem is the eternal capital city. Judea is where the Kingdom of Judah once was, and the word “Jew” actually comes from Judah. Still, putting aside the argument that this is historically Jewish land and continues to be, the settlements are legal, and there is nothing to back up this claim that they are not. They do not affect negotiations with Palestinians in any way, shape or form as perfectly illustrated by how the removal of Israelis from Gaza in 2005 (after a 3000 year presence) did not do a thing to change the political climate and certainly did not stop the Arab violence against Jews. In fact what followed were rocket attacks, suicide bombings and other terrorism from the Gaza side toward Israel.
Building settlements does not change the political status of the land; hence there is nothing illegal here. Those opposing settlements simply do not want Jews in Judea, as ironic as that is. And keeping Jews out is their form of ethnic cleansing.
By: Rachel Molschky
Here are bits of an interesting article on the topic: (Thanks to the site “zionism-israel.com”)
“The various agreements reached between Israel and thePalestinians since 1993 contain no prohibitions on the building or expansion of settlements. On the contrary, they specifically provide that the issue of settlements is reserved for permanent status negotiations, which are to take place in the concluding stage of the peace talks. The parties expressly agreed that the Palestinian Authority has no jurisdiction or control over settlements or Israelis, pending the conclusion of a permanent status agreement.
It has been charged that the provision contained in the Israel-Palestinian Interim Agreement prohibiting unilateral steps that alter the status of the West Bank implies a ban on settlement activity…The prohibition on unilateral measures was designed to ensure that neither side take steps that would change the legal status of this territory (such as by annexation or a unilateral declaration of statehood), pending the outcome of permanent status talks. The building of homes has no effect on the final permanent status of the area as a whole…
Israel had established its settlements in the West Bank in accordance with international law. Attempts have been made to claim that the settlements violate Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which forbids a state from deporting or transferring “parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” However, this allegation has no validity in law as Israeli citizens were neither deported nor transferred to the territories.
Although Israel has voluntarily taken upon itself the obligation to uphold the humanitarian provisions of the… Convention, Israelmaintains that the Convention… was not applicable to the disputed territory. As there had been no internationally recognized legal sovereign in either the West Bank or Gaza prior to the 1967 Six Day War, they cannot be considered to have become “occupied territory” when control passed into the hands of Israel.
Yet even if the…Convention were to apply to the territories, Article 49 would not be relevant to the issue of Jewish settlements. The Convention was drafted immediately following the 2nd World War, against the background of the massive forced population transfers that occurred during that period. As the International Red Cross’ authoritative commentary to the Convention confirms, Article 49 … was intended to prevent the forcible transfer of civilians, thereby protecting the local population from displacement. Israel has not forcibly transferred its citizens to the territory and the Convention does not place any prohibition on individuals voluntarily choosing their place of residence. Moreover, the settlements are not intended to displace Arab inhabitants, nor do they do so in practice.
Israel’s use of land for settlements conforms to all rules and norms of international law. Privately owned lands are not requisitioned for the establishment of settlements. In addition, all settlement activity comes under the supervision of the Supreme Court ofIsrael … and every aggrieved inhabitant of the territories,… can appeal directly to this Court
The Fourth Geneva Convention was certainly not intended to prevent individuals from living on their ancestral lands or on property that had been illegally taken from them. Many present-day Israeli settlements have been established on sites that were home to Jewish communities in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) in previous generations, in an expression of the Jewish people’s deep historic and religious connection with the land. Many of the most ancient and holy Jewish sites, including the Cave of the Patriarchs (the burial site of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) and Rachel’s Tomb, are located in these areas. Jewish communities, such as in Hebron (where Jews lived until they were massacred in 1929), existed throughout the centuries. Other communities, such as the Gush Etzion bloc in Judea, were founded before 1948 under the internationally endorsed British Mandate.
The right of Jews to settle in all parts of the Land of Israel was first recognized by the international community in the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine. The purpose of the Mandate was to facilitate the establishment of a Jewish national home in the Jewish people’s ancient homeland. Indeed, Article 6 of the Mandate provided for “close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands not required for public use.”
For more than a thousand years, the only time that Jewish settlement was prohibited in the West Bank was under the Jordanian occupation (1948-1967) that resulted from an armed invasion. During this period of Jordanian rule, which was not internationally recognized, Jordan eliminated the Jewish presence in the West Bank (as Egypt did in the Gaza Strip) and declared that the sale of land to Jews was a capital offense. It is untenable that this outrage could invalidate the right of Jews to establish homes in these areas, and accordingly, the legal titles to land that had already been acquired remain valid to this day.”
IMMIGRATION SECRETS NO ONE WANTS YOU TO KNOW: PART 2
As we remember, the initial idea behind immigration was not about letting immigrants take root in Western countries. Immigrants were seen as temporal workers who would come to fill the positions that the native citizens were not interested in, pay taxes – and leave after working some years in the recipient country.
The reality, however, turned out to be very different.
Throughout history and up until more recent times, the immigrationpolicy of the West was quite coherent, logical and rational. Only those categories of immigrants who were really needed could enter, and in very limited numbers. Their attempts to stay after their working contract expired were met with open bureaucratic hostility which often moved an immigrant to leave the country. In the USA, that was especially so with immigrants who came from non-Anglo-Saxon countries. And taking root in the USA for non-white and non-Christian immigrants was next to impossible. And Lo! A Miracle: neither the half destroyed by the WW2 Soviet Union, who, besides, lost over 20 million people and twice as many crippled; nor a badly hurt and seriously destroyed Germany, who lost about 9 million people and about twice as many crippled; nor a seriously damaged Great Britain, felt any working power shortage, and could restore their economies and recover from the consequences of the most disastrous war in human history without having to import foreign immigrants.
The United States of America also managed quite fine without them until approximately the mid-sixties.
But starting from mid-sixties, the West all of a sudden felt an urgent need in working hands- and goes on feeling this urgent need until now. And this growth in the need of working hands in some mysterious way went hand-in-hand with the growth of automation and mechanization of industrial processes – and by slow but steady growth of unemployment! And it goes on being so even now, when unemployment in many Western countries is higher than it was during The Great Depression.
You just figure, what they tell us. The more native citizens of the country lose their jobs, our leaders narrate, the more immigrants we must bring – to solve the problem of unemployment among natives! Have you ever heard a more arrogant lie? And – just open the leading European newspapers: “Immigrants are leaving the country. The end of the world is near! We see Troy in flames! This process must be immediately stopped- and reversed!” The humor of the situation consists in that all this is published in the leading newspapers of Spain, the country that was most hit by the crisis and where the number of unemployed in the age category between 16 and 30 years exceeds 56%.
This anecdotic combination of the growth of the need in working hands combined by the growth of unemployment was, strange as it may seem, the direct result of the struggle of anyone for his/her “rights.” Starting from the early 60s, the struggle for rights spread in the Western countries like a wild fire. Blacks were fiercely struggling for the right to be equal with whites, women were waging a desperate war for the right to be equal with men, bed bugs were defending their natural right to suck blood…
And workers were, quite naturally, fighting for higher wages, longer holidays and periods of paid unemployment, for bigger welfare, Medicare, Medicaid… Putting it simple, for the right to work less- or not to work at all- but to get more from the public budget.
And to a large degree, their demands were met! These successes pushed them to continue their struggle and inspired them to more achievements. Long Live the Right of the Individual!
And very soon in Western countries there appeared a social strata of spongers, parasites who were sitting on different types of welfare for life, as well as the groups of professionals who served these parasites’ interests, gaining quite substantial political capital and no less substantial income: lawyers, various funds that squeezed out more money from public funds each year to support the able-bodied adult men and women (who agreed to accept not just any job they were offered and quite often refused to accept any at all), and journalists and writers, who with a lot of passion and talent narrated about how these men and women suffer…
And bit by bit, being a welfare recipient stopped being something shameful. Furthermore, people started to seek this position of leisure and any kind of welfare became welcomed. More and more people shamelessly explained at talk and radio show interviews how cleverly they were deceiving the State, i.e. the people who worked and paid taxes to support these parasites. After having tasted this sweet nectar, the welfare recipients started to mount the manifestations at which, if we simplify what they want right down to the core, we shall see something like: hey you, what you give is not enough, give us more!
The problem is that the number of welfare recipients increased as the number of taxpayers decreased. To better understand the solution found by Western politicians, let´s first make a couple of things clear.
Who are all these Presidents, Prime Ministers, Secretaries of State, Senators and Congressmen? They are public officials, like policemen, firefighters or, let´s say, postmen. And their wages are also paid from the budget, i.e. from our taxes. The only difference between President Obama and a NYC cop is that President Obama and his team have the opportunity to decide which wages they deserve while a NYC cop does not. So the more money paid to the budget through taxes, the more money there is which can be redirected to the ruling elite’s pockets. The difference between some medieval Baron who demanded taxes from his peasants and a President or a Prime Minister of some Western country is only in that we today are not hanged on the nearest oak tree or put in the iron frying pan if we do not pay taxes. But to send you to jail? Quite often and without any difficulties. Under the incantations that paying taxes is a manifestation of the citizen’s virtue.
The methods have changed- but the essence remains the same.
And when a current leader in a tragic voice informs us from the TV screen that “the situation is complicated,” and that he and his party would be happy to give us a better life but “because of the factors that are out of our control” the public budget is “overstrained”- it’s not about our well-being he is crying, and it’s not the State’s diminishing public funding which deprives him of sleep; it’s his own pocket. And when he, adding a firmness to his voice and a seriousness to his glance, assures us that “we must unite and demonstrate that we are worthy of our glorious fathers”- oy-wa-woy, expect wage cuts or tax increases, technical defaults, fiscal cliffs, or your own bank account being frozen – or more immigrants will be brought in to somehow reduce unemployment.
The fish smells from the head- but it’s scaled from the tail.
To be continued…
By: Y.K. Cherson
Read the first part in this series:
ANALYZING THE FALSE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST ISRAEL, PART I: ETHNIC CLEANSING
Anti-Semites who look for any excuse to criticize Israel will come up will all sorts of empty accusations in order to further their cause and attempt to legitimize their bigotry. One of the most common themes in anti-Israel propaganda is ethnic cleansing. The claim is that Israelis ethnically cleansing Arabs from the land. There is the claim, and then there is the truth of the situation.
Ethnic cleansing does not exist in Israel. Using this terminology, something we all know occurred in the Holocaust against the Jewish people, is a form of anti-Semitism because it is nothing more than twisting what happened to the victims and now blaming them and calling them the aggressors, thus victimizing them even more. The reality is that 20% of the population in green line Israel is Arab. They are Israeli citizens with the same rights as any Israeli Jew. In fact, they don’t even have to serve in the IDF as the Jewish citizens do. They have the right to vote, are represented in the Knesset (Israeli Parliament), can walk down the street without any problem, go into a restaurant and eat, etc. This is ethnic cleansing?
And where’s the ethnic cleansing in Judea and Samaria? It’s nonexistent. Arabs are living there. No one’s kicking them out. What’s more, the Arabs who are living there have been terrorizing the Jewish residents in the attempt to push them out. The terrorist activity in the year 2012 alone includes 4731 rock hurling incidents, 642 firebombs, and 15 shooting incidents aimed at Israelis in Judea and Samaria, according to the IDF blog. The year 2013 has been following the same trend. In one week in May alone, there were 98 rock throwing and 17 firebomb incidents.
In Gaza after a Jewish history in the land of thousands of years, all Jews left in 2005 under the orders of then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Even Jewish graves were moved out. Whatever ethnic cleansing exists, it is that of the Arabs ethnically cleansing the Jews. Despite no Jews living there, the terrorism continues, aimed at Jews living in green line Israel. In 2012, 1435 rockets fired from Gaza hitIsrael. Not to mention the Tel Aviv bus incident which wounded 28 Israelis. And in 2013, despite the ceasefire back in November 2012 after Operation Pillar of Defense , the rocket attacks from Gazacontinue.
Furthermore, the Palestinian Authority has stated that if they were to get their State, no Jews would be allowed to live there. And upon the creation of Israel up through the 1970s, Arab States ethnically cleansed nearly one million Jews from their lands. Their bank accounts were frozen, their money was stolen, they were fired from government jobs, and many had their land taken away. Hence, they were forced from their homes and had no choice but to move toIsrael, the only safe haven available to them. More Jews had to leave Arab lands during that time than those Arabs who voluntarily left Palestine in 1948 in order to go to war. The real ethnic cleansing is that of Arabs against Jews. This claim against Israel doesn’t have a leg to stand on.
By: Rachel Molschky
ANTI-ZIONISM IS THE NEW ANTI-SEMITISM
Across the Internet, anti-Zionism has become commonplace and even en vogue. It is today’s new anti-Semitism and is considered an acceptable form of Jew bashing. While Wilhelm Marr invented the term “anti-Semitism” in order to condone the hatred and make it sound more scientific (or PC as we’d say today), now people have realized that anti-Semitism is bad, so they’ve decided to say “anti-Zionism” instead to make it sound like an acceptable thing. Is it a camouflaged way of being racist? Absolutely.
The majority of the time anti-Zionists are anti-Semitic. When they criticize, they don’t often talk about how Netanyahu did this or that, or the Knesset voted for this or that. No, they say “the Jews” this or “the Israelis” that, as if it’s the people, not just the governmental policies. In America when people criticize the government they talk about how Congress did something or Obama did something that they don’t like, rather than blaming everything on “the Americans.”
Furthermore, when Muslims criticize in Arabic, they do not say “Zionists” but Jews. Imams across the Middle East and even the world are often broadcast on television programs as well as in their own mosques preaching the hatred of Jews (not Zionists), inciting the murder of innocent people. And when Muslims are gathered at protests, celebrations or marches of some type, one of their favorite phrases is, “Itbach al Yahud,” or, “Slaughter the Jews.” Jews, not Zionists. Yet in English, suddenly everything changes to “Zionists.” Why? Because they know that in English they must sound more politically correct, and in this world of today, it is politically correct to be anti-Zionist. How sad.
Often times the same people who claim not to be anti-Semitic will slip up and say something clearly hateful about Jews, encouraging false stereotypes and ridiculous conspiracy theories.
And let’s analyze what exactly anti-Zionism is. If you’re anti-Zionist it means that you don’t believe in the existence of Israel. But the re-creation of Israel was voted upon by the UN, and the world voted yes. Arabs got the majority of the land and were offered even more, but they rejected it and decided instead to go to war. They lost. End of story. Get over it and move on with life. Meanwhile Jews were expelled from their countries, but no one ever talks about that.Israel is the homeland and a safe haven for the Jewish people of the world. Its existence is essential. But even more importantly, Jews fought for their independence and won. There is nothing further to discuss regarding this issue. Israel exists and will always exist. Therefore, someone who is anti-Zionist is indeed anti-Semitic. If they do not believe that Jews have the right to have their own nation, and they do not believe that Jews belong anywhere, what is that if not anti-Semitism?
One thing to consider is the fact that many of the same Nazi slogans used against Jews are now being used against Israel. And this propaganda war was also a Nazi tactic used against the Jewish people. Muslim Arabs have learned well from their idols, and they are brainwashing their people to believe it.
And let’s analyze what exactly anti-Zionism is. If you’re anti-Zionist it means that you don’t believe in the existence of Israel. But the re-creation of Israel was voted upon by the UN, and the world voted yes. Arabs got the majority of the land and were offered even more, but they rejected it and decided instead to go to war. They lost. End of story. Get over it and move on with life. Meanwhile Jews were expelled from their countries, but no one ever talks about that.Israel is the homeland and a safe haven for the Jewish people of the world. Its existence is essential. But even more importantly, Jews fought for their independence and won. There is nothing further to discuss regarding this issue. Israel exists and will always exist. Therefore, someone who is anti-Zionist is indeed anti-Semitic. If they do not believe that Jews have the right to have their own nation, and they do not believe that Jews belong anywhere, what is that if not anti-Semitism?
One thing to consider is the fact that many of the same Nazi slogans used against Jews are now being used against Israel. And this propaganda war was also a Nazi tactic used against the Jewish people. Muslim Arabs have learned well from their idols, and they are brainwashing their people to believe it.
Why all the criticism about Zionism anyway? Zionism is simply the belief in and the support of Israel as the Jewish State. It’s not some terrible ideology. It’s simply being pro-Israel, pro-the-Jewish-people. Therefore, most Jews around the world are in fact Zionists. If 95% of Jews are Zionists, then it follows that to be anti-Zionist is to be anti-Jewish. And many other people in addition to Jews are Zionists as well, which means that anti-Zionism is an even greater hatred encompassing an even larger population than just Jews. But Zionism is not some terrible taboo thing. I am proud to be a Zionist.
If it is en vogue to be anti-Zionist, then it is en vogue to be anti-Semitic, just as it has been for over 2000 years. It does not matter if the hatred behind the politically correct terminology is called anti-Zionism or “an adverse belief against people who follow the Jewish religion”- the result is the same underneath the disguise of fancy words. Time goes by, but the same tired old scapegoating continues. Let’s call it what it is: anti-Zionism is the hatred of Jews. It is not en vogue. It is bigotry.
By: Rachel Molschky
IMMIGRATION SECRETS NO ONE WANTS YOU TO KNOW
There is a high probability that in just some 50 years, native Europeans will be substituted in their own countries by immigrants from the Middle East, China and Africa. Sociology, statistics and biology confirm this in one study after another. But to say it in public is taboo! It´s bad. It´s racism. And xenophobia. It´s something a decent man should not say. And to say that immigration should be stopped? It´s nationalism, and some crazy liberal journalists even tend to call such ideas something close to fascism!
But: who says that?
The liberal media, which are the mainstream today.
And who else?
Advocates, journalists, university professors; at least most of them.
Anyone else?
Yes, government officials of the liberal governments in power in almost all Western countries.
Oops! Supplanting the native populations of Western countries with immigrants is a governmental policy! If it were not so, governments would have found ways to make journalists and professors say something very different; if they can find ways to silence those who say they are against losing their national identity and being supplanted with immigrants in their own countries, they would have found ways to silence those who say they welcome it if that was what they wanted.
But State officials are representatives of the people, aren’t they?
No, they are not. People are needed only at the elections, and the famous Vox Populi- Vox Dei today is merely a declaration. After politicians are elected, the opinion of the people becomes the last of their priorities. If it were not so, they would have taken draconic measures against immigration long ago, as they are well aware that the people in Western countries are AGAINST immigration. The main reason why is because they do not want to lose their national identity and get melted in the ocean of immigrants from Africa, Muslim countries and China who demonstrate a much higher birth rate and when given the right to vote, tend to vote for those who belong to their own ethnic or religious group without paying much attention to the details of campaign promises and proposed programs, like it was with Barak Hussein Obama who was elected as the President of the USA mainly due to the votes of blacks, Muslims and Hispanics.
Politicians are a part of the people and act in the interest of the people? The first part is true, to a certain extent; politicians are a part of the system called the People, but what they do is not necessarily in the interests of the People; more often, they defend the interest of the system called the State. This system´s interests are closer and more important to them. And if in the interests of the State it´s necessary to bring immigrants, they will do it, although it puts in danger the vital interests of the people, telling to this people the wild stories about how bringing immigrants is absolutely necessary for the Western economy, because this desolate economy urgently needs the working hands. But with the number of unemployed in many Western European countries being higher than in Gaza, Egypt or Yemen ( in Spain, it´s 27%, and among the people in the age category between 16 and 30 it exceeds 57%; Greece is quite close too, and Italy is not too far either), such declarations sound like saying to the public: you are a fool who will eat anything we feed. And judging by the number of people who repeat this stupidity, maybe they are right.
It´s not the working hands the Western economy needs; the truth is that there are even too many of them. And this is what pushes the politicians to defend bringing millions of strangers, when millions of native citizens are unemployed. A paradox? No, a result of the struggle for rights.
At the beginning of the era of the Industrial Revolution, workers had practically no rights at all. Then in the course of their fierce battles, they managed to scratch some rights out of the capitalists. Then the pendulum passed the center and, by natural law, moved further to the left- and these rights became guarantees, like a retirement, paid holidays, and numerous social payments united in the people´s collective mind under the commonly used term “welfare.” These developed social guarantees now permit an enormous number of people to live reasonably well: eat, drink, have a place to live- without having to work. Growth of productivity due to the use of machines made the demand for labor less- but the population grew. This, quite logically, led to the growth of people who now live on welfare because the economy simply does not need so many of us. It also meant an increase of the funds needed to support these welfare users. How are these funds formed? By taxes. Who pays the taxes? Those who work. But their number became relatively small, while the number of those who live off welfare became relatively large. The tax base then shrunk.
At the same time, the West is aging. The elderly population has grown. And people are living longer now. Where do their pensions come from? They also come from taxes.
So a constantly decreasing number of taxpayers must support the constantly growing number of people who sit on welfare and as well as the retired people, now living longer, which means that social security must last for a far longer period of time.
The system called the State, whose part the government officials and politicians are, is an instrument of oppression, and taxes are its vital interest; the State– and its elite, politicians and State officials- lives from the money the oppressed pay. That is why the State, in all eras, reacted extremely fiercely to any attempts of the people to avoid paying taxes; the punishments for this crime were quite often more severe than the punishments for a murder. But in the current situation, the State could do nothing; people paid taxes, but the number of people who pay taxes became smaller. There was no one to punish.
Increasing taxes negatively influences the economy and leads, among other serious problems, to the outflow of capital from the country; so there is a limit to this method. And printing money leads to inflation.
What to do? There are three possible solutions. First is to increase the number of people who pay taxes, for example, by including women in the economic activities. As the number of pediatricians, nurses, school teachers and other traditionally women´s professions is limited, women were stimulated to go to the traditionally male ones, to such an extreme that women were used in digging trenches, serving as police officers and making a career as professional sportsmen not only in gymnastics and volleyball, but also in weight lifting, boxing and wrestling. The result was a fast drop in natality and an increase in divorces, and consequently the situation very quickly returned to what it was before.
The second possible solution is to stimulate natural growth. But stimulating the birth rate supposes that women are leaving the workforce. Besides, it is costly; the State must pay allowances for children until they reach the age of 16, and finally, it leads to the growth of the people – citizens of the country, and that means that the State will have to pay them the usual benefits citizens receive if they become unemployed. Plus, they are entitled to social security. So stimulating the growth of children among citizens will actually mean MORE social payments, not less.
Another way is to reduce the number of people who are entitled to social benefits and pensions. In the past, a State could start a war. But now, when the weapons became increasingly deadly and when wars became so costly, this method of reducing the population is impossible. And what to do with the constantly growing number of long-living pensioners? Sink them in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans?
The problem can be solved by increasing the number of people who pay taxes, who agree to low wages – but who are not entitled to the social benefits and pensions. Some kind of guests, who come, do the job, get a minimum wage and no social benefits, and besides, are quite content with this situation and who can be sent out when their working contract expires- or at any moment at all, if need be.
Legal immigrants.
And what to do with illegal ones? Arrest them, put them in jail, and deport them without mercy and without hesitation. But above all, do not let them enter. The wall on the border with Mexico, almost 17 meters high and patrolled 24 hours/day by the Border Police, does not look too democratic, but it serves its main goal: to not let illegal immigrants from Mexico enter the USA.
That was the initial idea behind immigration. Nobody in the West planned to let immigrants set their roots in Western countries. Immigrants were seen as temporal workers who would come to fill the positions that were not wanted by the citizens, pay taxes – and leave after working some years in the recipient country. That was the original intent, but something changed.
To be continued…
By: Y.K. Cherson
Read the rest of this series:
Related articles:
PALESTINIANS SUPPORT TERROR: STATISTICAL DATA
There have been numerous polls providing statistics on howPalestinians feel about this or that. These statistics vary depending on the poll and depending on the specific questions. However, one thing remains the same in each poll-the vast majority of Palestinianssupport terror attacks against civilians.
From December 2012:
87.7% of Palestinian Arabs support Hamas-style terror
87.7% of Palestinian Arabs support Hamas-style terror
From the latest AWRAD poll we see this question:
“The results of the recent Gaza conflict prove that armed struggle, as adopted by Hamas, is the best means of achieving Palestinian independence”
Among all Palestinian Arabs, 55.6% said they “strongly agree” and 32.1% said they “agree.”
“The results of the recent Gaza conflict prove that armed struggle, as adopted by Hamas, is the best means of achieving Palestinian independence”
Among all Palestinian Arabs, 55.6% said they “strongly agree” and 32.1% said they “agree.”
In the “moderate” Judea and Samaria, the percentage that agreed was 86.4%.
From January 2013: (The Jewish Press)
“The Palestinian Arabs have several active survey organizations that periodically test viewpoints and trends. One of the more prominent is the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR), headed by Dr. Khalil Shikaki. His office put out a release on Sunday [online here] analyzing what it calls “Palestinian Public Opinion Poll No. 46″…
“The Palestinian Arabs have several active survey organizations that periodically test viewpoints and trends. One of the more prominent is the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR), headed by Dr. Khalil Shikaki. His office put out a release on Sunday [online here] analyzing what it calls “Palestinian Public Opinion Poll No. 46″…
Asked (via Question 61) whether they support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel (code terms to mean “we are not asking you about Israeli soldiers” and “we are not asking you about attacks in the so-called occupied territories, but inside the pre-1967 borders“), responses fell into three groups reflecting each of the two Palestinian Arab regimes as well as both taken together.
* Certainly support armed attacks against Israeli civilians insideIsrael – and live in Gaza: 23.7%
* Certainly support armed attacks against Israeli civilians insideIsrael – and live in West Bank: 10.5%
* Certainly support armed attacks against Israeli civilians insideIsrael – both groups taken together: 15.5%
* Certainly support armed attacks against Israeli civilians insideIsrael – and live in West Bank: 10.5%
* Certainly support armed attacks against Israeli civilians insideIsrael – both groups taken together: 15.5%
Let’s call them the hard core. And the masses?
* Support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel – and live in Gaza: 42.9
* Support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel – and live in West Bank: 30.8%
* Support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel – both groups taken together: 35.3%
* Support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel – and live in West Bank: 30.8%
* Support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel – both groups taken together: 35.3%
Add these together, and you get 66% of Gazan Palestinian Arabs, and 41.3% of “West Bank” Palestinian Arabs who support, or certainly support, armed attacks on civilians if they are Israelis and even if, presumably, they don’t live in the “occupied territories” and even if (it follows) those Israelis are opposed to Israel being in the “occupied territories.”
The report goes on to analyze Palestinian Arab support for terrorism – which is the plain meaning of deliberate, targeted armed attacks on innocent civilians – by various sub-groups. Palestinian Arab terrorism is:
* more popular in the Gaza Strip (46%) than in the “West Bank” (39%)
*preferred by more men (47%) than women (35%)
* the choice of those whose use the Internet daily (46%) compared with those who use it once a month (24%)
* overwhelmingly the preferred option of Hamas supporters (63%) compared with supporters of Fatah (25%).
*preferred by more men (47%) than women (35%)
* the choice of those whose use the Internet daily (46%) compared with those who use it once a month (24%)
* overwhelmingly the preferred option of Hamas supporters (63%) compared with supporters of Fatah (25%).
* Educated people, as measured by those who have a first degree from a university, give terrorism 47% support. Palestinian Arab illiterates give terrorism slightly less support: 39%
* Students support terrorism to exactly the same extent as Bachelor degree holders do: 47%. But so-called simple folk – in this case, farmers, housewives, laborers, and retirees – give it less support: 30%, 34%, 35%, and 37% respectively.
* Students support terrorism to exactly the same extent as Bachelor degree holders do: 47%. But so-called simple folk – in this case, farmers, housewives, laborers, and retirees – give it less support: 30%, 34%, 35%, and 37% respectively.
In a Pew poll in 2009, only 17% of Palestinian Muslims stated that they did not think that suicide bombing was ever justified. This means that 83% believe it can be justified.
Polls for more specific events: (Palestinian Media Watch)
Palestinian survey finds 78% of respondents believe third Intifada is the next step
Source: Ma’an, Palestinian news agency, Dec. 16, 2012
Palestinian survey finds 78% of respondents believe third Intifada is the next step
Source: Ma’an, Palestinian news agency, Dec. 16, 2012
64% of Palestinians would not object to Bin Laden burial in “Palestine”
Source: Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, May 9, 2011
Source: Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, May 9, 2011
PA daily: Poll shows a third of Palestinians support murder of five Israelis in Israeli town of Itamar
Source: Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Apr. 7, 2011
(Three of those Israelis were children, one of whom a 3-month-old baby who was decapitated, and a third of Palestinians supported this murder of a family killed in cold blood.)
Source: Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Apr. 7, 2011
(Three of those Israelis were children, one of whom a 3-month-old baby who was decapitated, and a third of Palestinians supported this murder of a family killed in cold blood.)
PSR poll: 84% of Palestinians support bombing attack of Mercaz Harav Yeshiva
Source: Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR), Mar. 24, 2008
Source: Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR), Mar. 24, 2008
These are but a few statistics. Other episodes around the world prove that a large percentage of Muslims around the world support terror. There are more who support it than condemn it, and many who publicly condemn it but privately fund it.
WHAT IS A PALESTINIAN REFUGEE?
Anyone who lived in the British Mandate for Palestine for as little as only two years in 1948 could claim refugee status as “Palestinians,” as well as their offspring. They are the only refugees in the world whose subsequent generations can claim refugee status, people who have never even stepped foot in the land. A little known fact is that most of these so-called refugees left on their own accord and after being recent immigrants in the land to begin with. What kind of a refugee is that?
Imagine living your entire life in the United States. Then you move to Italy and live there for two years- (or less- according to the Palestinian National Charter, anyone who lived in Palestine until 1947 is Palestinian, meaning, if they arrived the last day of 1946, they qualify). Finally, some land swaps go on, and you must leave. The UN decides to call you an “Italian” refugee, as well as your children and your grandchildren and even their children. Are you Italian? Or are you really American after all?
Now imagine that you and other American ex-pats had been harassing the real native Italians ever since you arrived in their land, evening murdering innocent people. And in fact when the reorganization of the land occurred, you did not leave but fought in a war against the native Italians- but you lost and then had to leave. You were offered your own state but turned it down. Who is to blame for you becoming a so-called refugee? If you were given an offer but turned it down, went to war but lost, you really don’t have a leg to stand on if you cry about injustice.
The big question is, why are these people still refugees anyway after 65 years? If a refugee comes to the US, after 5 years, he can apply for citizenship. If his children are born on American soil, those kids are automatically American citizens. Not so with Palestinians. Their Arab brethren refuse to give them citizenship, choosing instead to use them as pawns in this political battle. And the Palestiniansthemselves prefer this as well since as special “Palestinian” refugees, they get a unique type of welfare from the UN which no other refugee in the world receives. This way, their children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren can live off the UN and claim victimization for the rest of their lives.
Meanwhile, there were far more Jewish refugees from Arab nations during the same time period who lost billions more in money and property than the Palestinians who mostly left voluntarily because the surrounding Arab countries advised them to leave since they were about to go to war with the newly re-created Israel. The Jewish refugees, however, had no choice. They were forcibly expelled after their homes, jobs and property were taken away, their bank accounts frozen.
So what is a Palestinian refugee? Good question. There should be no such thing. What is a Jewish refugee from Arab countries? That is what needs to be examined now. Arab nations deny this truth because it shows the hypocrisy. But there are many Jews who lived through this. The only difference is that Israel welcomed them with open arms while the Arab nations did not want to take responsibility for their own brethren. But this does not justify anything, nor should it get them off the hook for persecuting Jews whose families had lived in those nations for generations upon generations. In other words, no one remembers the Jewish refugees only because Israeltook care of them. The reason why “Palestinian refugees” exist is because their Arab brethren have not taken them in. They are not the responsibility of Israel. They lost the war and have been offered their own state many times. The issue of “Palestinian refugees” is a non-issue. They only have themselves to blame.
By: Rachel Molschky
Further reading: Jewish Refugees Lost Far More Than Arab “Refugees”
WHY AREN’T THERE TERRORISTS AMONG CHRISTIAN ARABS?
The same ethnic group: Arabs. They live in the same climatic conditions, eat very similar food, and have a similar level of wealth and education. Strange thing though: there are no terrorists among Christian Arabs!
I’ve never heard of Christian Arabs cutting off some poor devil’s head in front of the cameras or blasting innocent people in buses, schools or synagogues.
So the same people, if they are Christians, do not commit terrorist attacks, and if they are Muslims- they are responsible for 94% of the total number of the terrorist attacks perpetrated in the world.
What conclusion can be drawn?
The answer is obvious. Arabs as an ethnic group are no more violent than any other people on Earth. They do not have some special gene that pushes them to kill 4 year-old girls by smashing their heads against a rock or to throw a 93 year-old cripple into the sea just for being Jewish. Arabs, if they are not Muslims, are not some bloodthirsty maniacs who enjoy overseeing the sufferings of other people.
But if they are Muslims- they become the wild lot of savage murderers responsible for 94% of the total number of terrorist attacks perpetrated by all the terrorist groups in the world.
In fact, 33 of the 44 main terrorist groups of the world are Muslim:
- Abu Nidal Organization (ANO)
- Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG)
- Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade
- Al-Shabaab
- Ansar al-Islam
- Armed Islamic Group
- Asbat al-Ansar
- Aum Shinrikyo
- Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA)
- Communist Party of Philippines/New People’s Army
- Continuity Irish Republican Army (CIRA)
- Gama’a al-Islamiyya
- HAMAS
- Harakat ul-Jihad-i-Islami/Bangladesh (HUJI-B)
- Harakat ul-Mujahideen
- Hizballah
- Islamic Jihad Union (IJU)
- Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
- Jaish-e-Mohammed
- Jemaah Islamiya (JI)
- Al-Jihad
- Kahane Chai (Kach)
- Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK)
- Lashkar e-Tayyiba (LT)
- Lashkar i Jhangvi (LJ)
- Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)
- Libyan Islamic Fighting Group
- Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group
- Mujahadin-e Khalq Organization
- National Liberation Army (ELN)
- Palestine Liberation Front – Abu Abbas Faction
- Palestinian Islamic Jihad – Shaqaqi Faction
- Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
- Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command
- Al-Qa’ida
- Al-Qa’ida in Iraq (Tanzim Qa‘idat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn)
- Al-Qa’ida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM)
- Real IRA
- Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia
- Revolutionary Nuclei
- Revolutionary Organization 17 November
- Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party/Front
- Shining Path
- United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia
What converts Arabs into bloodthirsty maniacs and assassins is Islam.
By: Y.K. Cherson
PALESTINIAN NATIONAL CHARTER DEFINES “PALESTINIANS” AS “ARAB NATIONALS”
The Palestinian National Charter, as amended by the PLO’s Palestine National Council in July 1968, defined “Palestinians” as “those Arab nationals who, until 1947, normally resided in Palestine regardless of whether they were evicted from it or stayed there. Anyone born, after that date, of a Palestinian father — whether in Palestine or outside it — is also a Palestinian.”
So Palestinians are:
1. Only Arabs
2. Only those who lived in Palestine until 1947 (if some Arab entered Palestine illegally on 12/31/1946, at 23:59, he is a “Palestinian”)
3. Any, for example, Chinese girl born in 2013 from an Arab father is a “Palestinian” too. And any boy born in 2013 whose mother is a Cherokee Indian and father is an Arab is also a “Palestinian.”
So Palestinians are:
1. Only Arabs
2. Only those who lived in Palestine until 1947 (if some Arab entered Palestine illegally on 12/31/1946, at 23:59, he is a “Palestinian”)
3. Any, for example, Chinese girl born in 2013 from an Arab father is a “Palestinian” too. And any boy born in 2013 whose mother is a Cherokee Indian and father is an Arab is also a “Palestinian.”
With this logic, it´s strange that the “Palestinian population worldwide” is, by the estimates of the “Palestinians,” only some 12 million people; it should be at least 5 times bigger.
If “Palestinians” agree they are Arabs, why do they wish to steal the land of Israel?
Jordanians are Arabs too. And if both Jordanians and “Palestinians” who live in Judea, Samaria and Gaza say they are the same people- who are the “Palestinians” then?
“Palestine and Jordan are one…” said King Abdullah in 1948.
“The truth is that Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan,” said King Hussein of Jordan, in 1981.
“Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine; there is only one land, with one history and one and the same fate,” Prince Hassan of the Jordanian National Assembly was quoted as saying on February 2, 1970.
Abdul Hamid Sharif, Prime Minister of Jordan declared in 1980, “The Palestinians and Jordanians do not belong to different nationalities. They hold the same Jordanian passports, are Arabs and have the same Jordanian culture.”
“There should be a kind of linkage because Jordanians andPalestinians are considered by the PLO as one people,” according to Farouk Kaddoumi, then head of the PLO Political Department, who gave the statement to Newsweek on March 14, 1977.
So, the truth is the “Palestinians” are Arabs, no different from Jordanians. And they agree with this.
Why then do they pretend to be something different when it comes to the land of Israel?
Why then do they pretend to be something different when it comes to the land of Israel?
By: Y.K. Cherson
ARAB LEADERS CONFESS, “PALESTINIAN” PEOPLE DO NOT EXIST
Zionists do not deny the existence of Palestine. Arabs do:
“There is no such country as Palestine. ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. ‘Palestine’ is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it.” – Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader
“There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people.” – Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat
“There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not.” – Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian
“It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria.” – Representative of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations
“Palestine and Jordan are one…” -King Abdullah in 1948
“The truth is that Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan.” – King Hussein of Jordan, in 1981
Jordanians, for decades, were avid proponents of the ‘Jordan is Palestine’ position. They used that position as justification for the annexation of Judea and Samaria, arguing that Palestine was one single, indivisible unit, and that Jordan was the legitimate governing body of Palestine…
“We are the government of Palestine, the army of Palestine and the refugees of Palestine.” -Prime Minister of Jordan, Hazza’ al-Majali, 23 August 1959
“Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine; there is one people and one land, with one history and one and the same fate.” -Prince Hassan, brother of King Hussein, addressing the Jordanian National Assembly, 2 February 1970
“Jordan is not just another Arab state with regard to Palestine, but rather, Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan in terms of territory, national identity, sufferings, hopes and aspirations.” -Jordanian Minister of Agriculture, 24 September 1980
As “Palestinian” politician Zouhair Moussein told the Dutch newspaper Trouw in 1977 (Israel Matzav):
“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state ofIsrael for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism.
“For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jersusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan. There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity… yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel.”
PALESTINIAN ARABS ACTIVELY FOUGHT AGAINST ISRAELIS IN 1948
Some people tell the tale that in 1948, it was the Armies of the five Arab countries which attacked Israel, while the Palestinian Arabs were peacefully sitting at home drinking coffee and did not take any part in preparing to massacre the Jews.
The facts, however, are quite different.
The list of belligerents on the Arab side included:
1. The regular Army of Egypt (about 20,000 soldiers with 135 tanks, 90 artillery pieces and some 50 planes);
2. The regular Army of Syria (about 5,000 soldiers);
3. The regular Army of Jordan (about 12,000 well-trained soldiers under the command of British officers, with 40 artillery pieces and 75 armored cars);
4. The regular Army of Lebanon (about 3,000 soldiers);
5. The regular Army of Iraq (about 18,000 soldiers and 100 planes);
6. Regular units of Saudi Arabia (about 1,200 soldiers);
7. The Arab Liberation Army (some 5,000 soldiers).
All in all, about 65,000 men with 135 tanks, 130 artillery pieces, some 100 planes and 75 armored cars. This number includes only combat units, not the entire military contingents Arab countries sent to Palestine. Those who have served in the Army will understand what it means, and for those who have not, just in order to make the understanding easier: multiply the number of the people in the combat units at least by 2.5 – and you will receive the approximate total number of troops.
And what about the Palestinian Arabs? More than 12,000 Palestinian Arabs from the paramilitary organizations Futuva and Najjada were fighting against Israel. It makes the Palestinian Arabs the third largest striking force after Egypt and Iraq. But it was only in combat units. And together with the support units, the number of Palestinian Arabs who took part in the war against Israel exceeded 30,000 men.
In 1948, the total number of Palestinian Arab males was slightly more than 200,000. Of them, 50% were between 18 and 40 years of age. So, every third Palestinian Arab male between 18 and 40 years was fighting against Israelis, with the full support of the members of their families and under the full of admiration from their neighbors.
After that the Arabs ask with tears in their eyes why the Israelis expelled “the innocent Palestinian Arabs” from Palestine.
What surprises me is, first, why the Israelis did not expel them all.
And second, how the Israelis could be so stupid to let Arabs return to Palestine.
And second, how the Israelis could be so stupid to let Arabs return to Palestine.
By: Y.K. Cherson
HOW DID THE NUMBER OF “PALESTINIAN REFUGEES” GROW NEARLY TEN TIMES SINCE 1948?
The initial number of Palestinian Arab refugees was 700,000. It was over 65 years ago, and at least half of these people have by now died of old age. But by some mystery, the number of those who call themselves “Palestinian refugees” is today about 6 MILLION people.
How is this possible?
Very simple. By the UN regulations and norms, the status of a refugee is not inherited. It means that if your father was a refugee, but you were born elsewhere, then you do not qualify for refugee status.
This law applies to all the refugees in the world: to more than 20 million Germans who became refugees after WWII, to hundreds of thousands of Japanese, to nearly 1 million Jews who were robbed of everything except maybe their underwear in Arab countries like Syria, Egypt, and Lebanon-and then thrown out of these countries.
But somehow this law does not apply to the “Palestinian refugees.”For them, the UN applied another, and absolutely unique “technique.” By this technique, a “Palestinian refugee” is any person “whose normal place of residence was Palestine between June 1946 and May 1948.” This trick immediately converted all those hundreds of thousands of Arabs who emigrated to the Jewish Palestine from neighboring Arab countries from 1935 to 1948 into “Palestinian refugees.” If not for this trick, the initial number of the “Palestinian refugees” would be not 700,000, but more like 200,000, and even that number is a stretch.
Then the UN declared that the “Palestinian refugees,” maybe for their special and outstanding merits for all of mankind, can inheritthe status – and pass it to their children, grandchildren, wives, husbands, brothers, cousins…
And now over 65 years later, we have 6 million professional beggars who are sure that the world must feed, teach, cure, dress and kiss them only because their grandparents fled Palestine many years ago.
By: Y.K. Cherson
FALSE CLAIMS ABOUT “PALESTINIANS” AND THEIR GOVERNMENTS
There are many claims regarding “Palestinians” and their supposedly positive qualities which are applauded by their fellow Muslims and Western liberal friends. The problem is, none of these claims are true.
For example, people say, “they never giving up fighting for what they believe in.”
They go on fighting not because they “believe in” their capacities to beat Israelis, but because if they stop fighting, they will cease to be of any interest for Iran and Arab countries that pay them hundreds of millions of dollars to continue fighting. No fighting- no money- and no Hamas, together with its “heroic” leaders.
“They are courageous.”
During Operation Cast Lead, Hamas leaders moved around Gaza only with small children in their hands. They knew Israelis would not deliberately shoot the children and used them as live human shields. This is what they call “courageous?”
The main headquarters of Hamas was under Shifa hospital.
This is “courage?”
“They try to help their people.”
It´s in pursuit of “trying to help their people” that Hamas systematically attacks the Ashdod power station which generates electricity for Gaza? Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent by Hamas to smuggle arms. With this money they spend on arms smuggling, they could build hundreds of new schools, hospitals, roads… but they don’t. They were just offered $4 billion in economic aid from the US, but the Palestinian Authority’s Abbas turned it down because economic aid is not what they’re after. They take a large portion of the money they already receive from America and use it to pay the Palestinian terrorists who sit in Israeli prisons- terrorists who killed or attempted to kill innocent Israeli civilians.
“To help out their people,” what a laugh!
“If they were cowards and agreed to oppression, they would have given up and surrendered long ago.”
They are cowards. Abdel Aziz Rantissi was one of the Hamas leaders who called to kill the Jews anywhere Arabs find them. He was the author of the famous phrase, “we shall make Jews swim in their children´s blood.” But when the Hamas recruiter called Rantissi´s wife and asked her to bless her son for a martyrdom operation – what did she answer? She told him that if he dares call her once more, she will ask her husband to break all his bones and cut out his tongue.
And the next year her dear son went to study in Great Britain.
And once again: they fight not because they are so brave, but just because if they stop fighting, they will lose all interest from their Iranian and Saudi sponsors- and will become nothing.
By: Y.K. Cherson
LEBANESE TREATMENT OF “PALESTINIAN REFUGEES”
According to the UNRWA website, there are 455,000 of these so-called “Palestinian refugees” registered in 12 refugee camps in Lebanon today. They account for around ten percent of the population but are forbidden to work in as many as 20 particular professions such as doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc. Since these people are not technically citizens of any other state, other immigrants in Lebanon actually enjoy more rights than they do. They have no access to public social services and live off the welfare they receive from the UNRWA, which explains why they have no desire to become citizens or integrate in any way so long as they are taken care of by the UN.
Incidentally, the majority of the money donated to the UNRWA for these people comes from the US and the European Commission who together provide nearly half their funding. Western countries provide nearly all the funding. As a matter of fact, the UNRWA website lists the main donors in alphabetical order as: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, European Commission, ECHO (European Commission again), Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and the United States. Not a single Arab nation is listed as a main donor.
According to a Washington Times article by Mona Charen:
According to a Washington Times article by Mona Charen:
The Lebanese government revoked the citizenship it awarded to about 25,000 Palestinians in 1994, a move that cost many of them their jobs, schools, homes and access to health care. “They are not welcomed,” writes reporter Daniel J. Wakin, “by a government that declares its allegiance to the struggle for a Palestinian right to a homeland.”
Lebanon, like Israel’s other Arab neighbors, refused to absorb Arab refugees in 1948, placing them in camps instead. [Israel, by contrast, absorbed and made citizens of the nearly 1 million Jews who fled Arab lands from that time and on through the 1970s as Arab countries continued to expel them.] Lebanese law declares them to be stateless and, as such, forbidden to own land outside the refugee camps.
The camps are a disgrace. “Waste water runs through a trough in the alleys,” reports the New York Times. “Human waste is disposed of in pits beneath homes. Some of the alleys have grown so jumbled that waste-removal trucks cannot get through, and filled-up pits are becoming a problem. … Residents say the Lebanese army, which has a checkpoint at the camp’s entrance, sometimes searches cars to make sure no unauthorized building materials enter, so the camp does not become more permanent.”
Though the Palestinians are ethnically, culturally, religiously and linguistically indistinguishable from their neighbors in Lebanon, they are rejected and excluded from Lebanese society only to make a point about Lebanon’s total rejection of Israel’s existence.
And Charen continues:
Following the Persian Gulf war in 1991, Kuwait simply clapped its hands and expelled up to 300,000 Palestinians. Why? Because Yasser Arafat had sided with Saddam Hussein in the war. ThePalestinians had been integrated into Kuwaiti society, working at all kinds of jobs, from engineering to computer to menial work. Many had been born there. But the Kuwaiti royal family had no qualms about uprooting them. Ambassador Saud Nasir Sabah said, “They didn’t represent a necessity to us.” There was hardly a peep from the world community. Certainly there was no condemnation by the United Nations.
It seems that the poor treatment Arabs give fellow Arabs is condoned while Israel, which has granted full citizenship rights to the Arabs living in green line Israel who make up 20% of the population, is demonized. In fact, Israel’s democratic treatment of Arabs is so good that when polled, Israeli Arabs have stated that there is nowhere else they would want to live, even in another Arab Muslim country. And many homosexual Palestinians attempt to flee their homes in Palestinian controlled territories, hoping to escape to the protection of Israel. And Israeli Arabs enjoy the right to vote and representation in the Knesset, or Israeli Parliament.
Big difference from how they are treated by the Lebanese and other Arab nations. Yet Israel is condemned? There can only be one explanation, and it begins with “anti” and ends with “Semitism.”
By: Y.K. Cherson and Rachel Molschky
ANTI-SEMITISM IN ISRAEL
Jerusalem is the eternal capital city of the State ofIsrael and of the Jewish people. Yet according to a Jerusalem woman,reported by Israel National News, Arab violence in the city is worsening. Batya Kayman and her husband made Aliyah to Israel from New York ten years ago and moved to Jerusalem. But the romantic ideology of moving to the eternal capital has been hampered by Arab violence, so severe, that she’s afraid to leave her home.
“The Arabs from the villages come here in organized groups. They go into parks and courtyards and steal everything, and they often use violence,” she related.
She described just one recent incident of many, “Yesterday two Arabs came into our backyard and ate fruit from our tree. I told them to go away. They told me this isn’t Jerusalem, it’s Palestine, and the house belongs to them.”
Imagine, Jerusalem, the Holy City, belonging to… Palestine? First, there is no country of Palestine. And second, Muslims laying claim to Jerusalem is only done as a way to attackIsrael and Jews around the world and for no other reason. And attacking Jews in Jerusalem of all places is despicable. Recently a Nazi flag was seen flying next to a mosque just south of the Holy City. That’s some serious chutzpah!
But that’s not all. Kayman continued, “There were four arson attacks here last Friday. The situation is getting worse here from day to day.”
What’s worse is when firefighters come to put out the blaze and are attacked by stone, brick and firebomb throwers, and authorities have to protect them in order to do their job and put out the fires before they reach the stonethrowers’ own homes. (See our story.)
Just South of Tel Aviv lies Bat Yam. It is home to a synagogue founded by Holocaust survivors, and in May 2013, it was vandalized for the fourth time in one month’s time. According to Israel National News, earlier that week vandals sprayed the words “filthy Jews out” on a synagogue in Bat Yam. On the Sabbath, worshipers in Haifa found that a synagogue had been desecrated with swastikas, anti-Semitic graffiti, and drawings indicating “devil worship.”
“Filthy Jews out”… of Israel, the Jewish State? The concept of anti-Semitism within Israel is appalling. As Religious Services Minister and Bayit Yehudi chairman Naftali Bennett said on May 28, 2013, at the Global Forum for Combating Anti-Semitism, “Part of the truth is that this land, where we are right now – Jerusalem and Israel – is the land of the Jewish people,” he declared. “It’s so very simple: Israel belongs to the Jews. Period. It’s not a compensation for the Holocaust. Israel is the Jewish State. We have to say that again and again.”
The Jewish State. And as such, Israel is the last place anti-Semitism should exist, not that it should exist anywhere. But in Israel, of all places, it cannot be tolerated.
By: Rachel Molschky
RUSSIA’S PROACTIVE MOVE TO PREVENT ISLAMIC ATTACKS
Russian police have detained 300 Muslims, including 170 foreigners, in a bold move to prevent future attacks. “We must fight back hard against extremists who, under the banners of radicalism, nationalism and separatism, are trying to split our society,” Putin said. Should Europe and the US follow Russia’s lead and get more proactive in preventing Islamic terror attacks?
Here’s the full story:
(Reuters) – Russian police rounded up 300 people at a Muslim prayer room in Moscow on Friday after President Vladimir Putin ordered a crackdown on radical Islamists ahead of next year’s Winter Olympics in Sochi.
Putin has put security forces on high alert to safeguard the Games in the Black Sea resort of Sochi, which lies near to mainly Muslim southern provinces where Russia is battling an Islamist insurgency that has targeted Moscow.
“We must fight back hard against extremists who, under the banners of radicalism, nationalism and separatism, are trying to split our society,” Putin said.
“The policy in the fight against corruption, crime and the insurgency has to be carried out harshly and consistently,” Putin told a meeting of security force officers.
“The situation in the North Caucasus should be kept under particular control.”
Friday’s raid, the third targeting Muslim places of worship in Moscow or St Petersburg this year, led to the detention of 300 people including 170 foreigners and the confiscation of Islamist literature to check for extremist content, Russian news agencies quoted the Federal Security Service (FSB) as saying.
The FSB did not say why the people had been detained.
Russia is keen to boost its counter-terrorism credentials after the deadly Boston Marathon bombing allegedly carried out by two ethnic Chechen men, one of whom spent time last year in the North Caucasus province of Dagestan that borders Chechnya.
The Islamist insurgency, led by the ‘Caucasus Emirate’ group and Russia’s most wanted man Doku Umarov, is rooted in two post-Soviet wars between Moscow and Chechen rebels. The insurgents want to create an Islamic emirate in the North Caucasus region.
Fears of Islamist militants in Moscow have risen since police killed two men and detained another two who allegedly belonged to an outlawed Islamist group that was plotting an attack during a major holiday earlier this year.
Human rights activists say Russia’s Islamist insurgency is fuelled by a combination of religion, official corruption and strong arm tactics against suspected militants by local leaders.
In Dagestan, which has become the focal point for insurgent violence, police disarmed two suicide bomber belts and detained two women, Interfax reported on Friday.
(Reporting By Thomas Grove; Editing by Alissa de Carbonnel and Gareth Jones)
FIREFIGHTERS ATTACKED BY MUSLIMS AND STOCKHOLM RIOTS
Firefighters in Jerusalem were attacked twice in one week in May 2013, when they attempted to put out fires which were rapidly approaching Arab homes. Instead of being grateful and allowing the firefighters to do their job and save those homes, Arab mobs threw stones and firebombs at the crew, according to Arutz Sheva. Border guards were called to protect the firefighters during one of the incidents, and under attack, they had no choice but to open fire on those rioting. No one was hurt, but one of the fire trucks was damaged. In the other incident, the firefighters were hit with stones and bricks, and one was injured and taken to the hospital. The police had to come in order for the firefighters to be able to put out the fire which would have burnt down Arab homes had it been left alone.
This is not the first time Muslims have attacked the very firefighters called to help them, and this is not a phenomenon which only happens in Israel. In Malmö, Sweden, when the largest mosque was on set on fire several years ago, firefighters were met with stonethrowers attacking them, rather than allowing them to put out the fire on their own mosque. EMTs in ambulances are also attacked when entering Muslim neighborhoods. They come to help but fear their own safety instead.
The recent rioters in Sweden were depicted in the media sometimes as “youths” and sometimes as “immigrants” tired of unemployment, but in reality, were militant Islamic immigrants. These “poor immigrants” were torching cars and throwing stones at both rescue workers and the police.
What is ironic about the riots is the fact that Sweden has been one of the most liberal European countries in terms of welcoming immigrants, and in particular, Muslim immigrants. According toReuters, some 43,900 asylum seekers arrived in 2012, a nearly 50 percent jump from 2011 and the second highest on record. Nearly half were from Syria, Afghanistan and Somalia and will get at least temporary residency. There was a total of 103,000 new immigrants.
Some 15% of Sweden’s population is foreign born, the highest in the Nordic region. Asylum seekers in particular are drawn by Sweden’s robust economy and tradition of helping refugees, Reuters reports.
But while Sweden opens its arms, the immigrants turn around and bite the hand that feeds them. The Sweden riots in May 2013 began in Husby, a northern suburb of Stockholm with a large Muslim population but spread to areas of the city. At least seven police officers were injured and around 150 cars were torched, many belonging to the immigrants themselves. Buildings were also set ablaze, including schools, shops and a police station.
While the initial reported cause of the riots was an incident where police were thought to have wrongfully shot an immigrant waving a machete at them, (sounds like a peaceful man, right?), many have speculated on the real underlying cause. Blame it on unemployment, but the Swedish unemployment rate is 8.7%. Even with a higher rate of 16% among immigrants, this means that 84% of immigrants are working, hardly a reason to riot. In fact, if anyone should be rioting, it should be native Swedes, angry about the immigrants who are taking positions they could use. But of course, native Swedes are not the ones rioting- Muslims are.
Fredrik Reinfeldt, the prime minister, blamed “hooligans,” rather than accepting the fact that it was Muslim immigrants. Instead of ignoring the problem by sugar-coating it and calling the perpetrators of the violent outbreak “youths” or “poor immigrants,” perhaps liberal politicians should address the situation head-on and make a change. The liberal open-door immigration policies of the West have been too open and too liberal and have had dire consequences. Once peaceful European towns have become ridden with crime and violence, and terrorism plots are on the rise. When are politicians going to wake up and smell the coffee? It’s time to make a change.
By: Rachel Molschky
IMMIGRATION BILL FACING MORE CRITICISM
Looks like more politicians are concerned about granting amnesty to over 11 million illegal immigrants who have broken the law by their very presence in this country. According to the Washington Post, Sens. Ted Cruz (Texas), Chuck Grassley (Iowa), Jeff Sessions (Ala.) and Mike Lee (Utah), all members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, have expressed their concerns over the ramifications of what this overhaul of our current immigration policy entails.
While the bill was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee, all four Senators voted against it. They had recommended amendments which would have improved border security and limited the legal status of some of these illegal immigrants, but their amendments were rejected. The committee “voted down every attempt to mandate meaningful control of our borders,” the senators wrote. “Americans expect their government to end the lawlessness, not surrender to it.”
Why liberals are set on weakening our borders and granting amnesty to millions of people, many of whom drain the economy by not paying taxes and abusing the welfare system, is a mystery. What’s more, with terrorism fundraising schemes and terrorist plots on the rise, we should be more selective than ever, rather than giving a free pass to millions.
With Obama’s recent declaration that the war on terror is over,(see our article), ignoring the fact that Muslim terrorism, especially against the West, is only getting worse, and despite the Boston Marathon bombing, which just happened less than two months ago, and this immigration bill granting amnesty to millions of illegals, the security of this country is weakening. Liberal politicians are making the work of our military and law enforcement doubly hard by creating laws requiring them to be extra vigilant in order to make up for the shortcomings of these new laws.
The entire Senate will be discussing the bill next week and hope to vote on it before the July 4th holiday. We’ll be keeping an eye on the results.
By: Rachel Molschky
CALL ME AN ISLAMOPHOBE
Mark Twain once wrote that if you pick up a dog dying of hunger and feed and shelter it, the dog will not bite you. And that is the difference between a dog- and a man. This is the core of the problem facing Europe and the West in general now; Europe gave shelter, welfare, medical treatment and asylum to millions of immigrants from Muslim countries – and they are now paying her with terrorist attacks, murders and massive rapes of Western women on Western soil. What makes the situation absolutely surrealistic is that Europe does not accept Muslim immigrants because it needs a cheap workforce. With unemployment in Europe fluctuating between 8% in Germany and 28% in Spain, Europe would be faring much better without any immigration at all. By logic, European countries should have stopped any immigration in general and especially immigrationfrom Muslim countries some 10 years ago. But this does not happen.
Sweden, a country that is worst hit by Muslim immigration, goes on giving asylum, social benefits and unbelievably generous privileges to Muslim immigrants and is not going to stop even after the recent riots. Not only government agencies, but also quite a lot of NGOs, many of which were attacked during the riots, continue their job of substituting the native population with Muslim immigrants, and have achieved serious successes; some areas of Sweden, like Malmö, look now more like Karachi than like a European city, which seems to inspire these NGOs to strive more and turn other Swedish cities into the same.
When a Muslim immigrant in France attacked a French soldier and tried to stab him, the French officials immediately declared that there was not any connection between this attack and the tragic terrorist attack that happened two days before in Great Britain, when two Muslim immigrants attacked a British soldier in broad daylight, stabbed him – and then cut his head off; all this happened just 1000 feet from the barracks of the Regiment where this soldier served and that were full of armed soldiers. Nobody saw or heard anything, and nobody even moved a finger to save the life of their comrade-in-arms.
The explanation French officials offered was very simple: these two attacks happened in two different European countries, ergo, they were not connected.
And of course these attacks are by no means and in no way connected to what happened in Sweden; it´s also another country.
Moreover, the word “Muslim” should not be said aloud in connection with these attacks; they were perpetrated by “bandits,” “extremists,” radicals”… bad guys, to put it simply. But Muslims are good and peace-loving people.
Of course not all those whose religion should not be said aloud are assassins, murderers and terrorists. But for some strange reason, 94% of those who commit terrorist attacks against the people of the West on Western soil confess that same religion whose name should not be said aloud.
What can we do to stop this wave of rising Muslim violence? First of all, we must start talking about it without fearing the accusation of being “politically incorrect.” All this “political correctness” is just a fig-leaf that covers the fear of the Western political elite to lose Muslim votes, and to tell the people an evident truth: that Islam raises and shapes the terrorists, that Islam openly glorifies those who attack non-Muslims, that Islamic culture, that same one which condones honor killings and the stoning of women, is absolutely hostile to the democratic Judeo-Christian values that were the cornerstone of Western civilization, and that mosques, medresses, sheikhs and mullahs all over the world, including in Western capitals, openly call their flock to jihad.
Instead, they are telling us tales about how Muslim immigrants turn to violence because they are poor and uneducated, and that we must give them more – and then they will become grateful and all will be pals. But those who blasted the Twin Towers in New York were neither poor nor desperate. And those who murdered dozens of British and wounded hundreds weren’t either. And of course, nobody would call the Tsarnaev brothers who in cold blood murdered absolutely innocent people in Boston “poor and desperate.” The people in the West should stop being afraid to speak the truth just because this truth might “offend” Muslims; we are living in our home, and Muslim immigrants are just guests here. Theyare the ones who must be careful not to offend us.
You call it “Islamophobia?” I call it Common Sense.
No, the West should not start chasing Muslims and expelling them right and left, although expelling such “peaceful Muslim preachers” like Bakri would be a very good idea. But massive immigration from Muslim countries must be stopped.
By: Y.K. Cherson
WHEN IMMIGRATION KILLS, PART VI: ANOTHER BOMB PLOT, ANOTHER IMMIGRANT RESPONSIBLE
A Lebanese immigrant was sentenced on Thursday in connection with a terrorism plot to blow up a bar across the street from Wrigley Field in Chicago. The idea was to place the bomb in a trash can at a key location and at a key time in order to have the greatest impact possible. The stadium was holding Dave Matthews Band concerts over that weekend, and the sports bar involved is a popular hang-out just outside the stadium.
Sami Samir Hassoun, 25, is an immigrant from Lebanon and had been living in Chicago for about three years at the time of his arrest. He was caught in an undercover sting by the FBI and was very engaged in the planning of the event. Eventually, he placed a fake bomb, provided by the FBI, in a trash can and walked away, upon which, he was arrested. Now he is sentenced to 23 years in prison.
The story is all too common. Another immigrant, Jordanian Hosam Maher Husein Smadi, pleaded guilty to attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction after he had left a bomb in a garage underneath a Dallas skyscraper. Another undercover sting operation, the bomb was fake, and no one was hurt. However, the perpetrator did not realize this and had every intention of causing the most destruction possible. He had arrived in the country with a tourist visa but had stayed here, working illegally at a gas station. In 2010, he was sentenced to 24 years.
According to the Department of Justice website, Undercover FBI agents, posing as members of an al-Qa’ida “sleeper” cell, were introduced to Smadi, who repeatedly indicated to them that he came to the U.S. for the specific purpose of committing “Jihad for the sake of G-d.” And in case there is any doubt regarding the blatant connection to Islam, Smadi told agents he would have preferred to do the attack on “11 September,” but decided to wait until after the month of Ramadan, which ended on September 20, 2009.
In yet another undercover operation in 2009, this time a joint FBI/NYPD collaboration, four Muslim men were arrested for their plot to kill Jews. They planted bombs, fake ones thanks to the undercover agents, outside a synagogue and a Jewish community center in the Bronx. James Cromitie, aka Abdul Rahman, aka Abdul Rehman; David Williams, aka Daoud, aka DL; Onta Williams, aka Hamza; and Laguerre Payen, aka Amin, aka Almondo, were found guilty in 2010.
Cromitie said “I hate those f-ing Jewish bastards.” He said that his parents lived in Afghanistan, and he was upset about the war and wanted to do something to America. He was interested in jihad. The interesting thing is that in “doing something to America,” the Americans he targeted were specifically Jews.
All four were found guilty of conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction among other charges and were sentenced to 25 years in prison. Three of these terrorists were homegrown, Americans who had converted to Islam in prison, but the fourth was a Haitian immigrant.
The examples of immigrant terrorism are never-ending. More examples to follow…
By: Rachel Molschky
EGYPT’S ANTI-BLASPHEMY LAWS TARGETING COPTIC CHRISTIANS
The Arab Spring was supposed to make Egypt a new democracy. But anti-blasphemy laws and religious discrimination against anyone who isn’t Muslim do not sound very democratic. The last active synagogue was shut down in Egypt after the Muslim Brotherhood came into power, and discrimination against Coptic Christians has gotten worse. Churches have been attacked, there have been claims of Muslims kidnapping Copts and forcing them to convert to Islam, and rapes of Christian girls. Now, discrimination has become legalized, whereas under Mubarak, Christians, while still facing harassment from Muslims, were legally protected. But under Morsi, more and more Christians are being accused and convicted of blasphemy. In many cases it is merely a question of having a religious debate. It seems one cannot disagree with Islam, or it will be taken as an insult of Muhammad, which is now illegal.
The most recent case involves a lawyer, sentenced to hard labor in prison:
Egyptian Christian lawyer convicted of blasphemy, sentenced in absentia to 1 year in prison
Published June 01, 2013
| Associated Press
ASSIUT, Egypt – An Egyptian court has convicted a Coptic Christian lawyer in the southern province of Assiut on charges of blasphemy and sentenced him to one year in prison with hard labor.
The verdict against Roman Murad Saad was handed down on Saturday. It’s the latest in a surge of blasphemy cases following Egypt’s 2011 uprising.
Saad was sentenced in absentia. If he’s arrested or surrenders to authorities, he will be given a retrial and will have to pay 10,000 Egyptians pounds (around $1,400) in fines.
Court officials say Saad was found guilty of ridiculing Islam’s holy book, the Quran, at a lawyers’ union library. No further details were immediately available in the case.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to media.
No comments:
Post a Comment