The 1967 War Created Both the “West Bank” and the Notion of a Palestinian State

Posted on May 24, 2020 by First.One.Through

The area east of the Armistice Lines struck between Israel and Jordan in 1949 is commonly referred to as the “West Bank.” It only got that moniker after Israel took the area in June 1967.

Timeline to Naming the “West Bank”

After Israel’s war of Independence in 1948-9, the United Nations did not have a specific name for that region.

When Jordan annexed the area on April 24, 1950, only the United Kingdom, Iraq and Pakistan recognized Jordan’s actions while the rest of the world rejected it. After that time, during the years 1950 through 1958, the United Nations used various terms for that area which were tied to either Jordan or the Jordan River:

“west bank of the river in Arab Palestine” (1951)
“the area west of the Jordan River” (1952)
“West Jordan” (1950, 1951, 1952, 1954, 1955, 1956, 1957, 1958)
“the western bank” (1952)
“Western Jordan” (1951, 1952)
“that part of Jordan west of the Jordan River” (1956)
“west bank of the Jordan” (1957)

Then, in 1959, the United Nations seemed to embrace the Jordanian annexation, referring to the area simply as “Jordan,” no different than the eastern part of the kingdom. To the extent that the UN wanted to specifically call out that area it used wordy terms:

“Jordan side of the armistice demarcation line”
“frontier villagers in Jordan”

That all changed after Jordan attacked Israel in June 1967 and lost the region. By the end of that month, the United Nations quickly moved to shorthand (A/6713) by the third mention:

“the West Bank of the Jordan”
“West Bank area of the Jordan”
“West Bank”

This shortened version for that area east of the 1949 Armistice Line has stuck since that time.

The “West Bank”

Jordan	Israel
Seized the land in an offensive war against Israel in 1949	Took the land in a defensive war against Jordan in 1967
Annexed the land within a year	Only annexed eastern Jerusalem thirteen years later
Only three countries recognized the annexation	For fifty years, no country recognized the reunification of Jerusalem until the United States in December 2017
No country suggested boycotting Jordan for its illegal annexation	Several countries have boycotted Israel since its re-establishment in 1948, even before taking eastern Jerusalem and the “West Bank”
Jordan expelled all Jews from the area, including the Old City of Jerusalem	Israel did not expel anyone; many Palestinians who had taken Jordanian citizenship moved to Jordan
Jordan granted Arabs but not Jews citizenship within four years of annexation	Israel immediately gave all people in Jerusalem – Arab and Jew alike – the option to apply for citizenship
The UN ultimately referred to the area as part of Jordan	The UN to this day uses the term “East Jerusalem” even though such entity only existed between 1949 and 1967 as an artifice of war
The UN never called the region “West Bank”	The UN only calls it the “West Bank” and “East Jerusalem”
The UN never called it “occupied Palestinian territory”	The UN only calls it “Occupied Palestinian territory including East Jerusalem”

The United Nations applied a complete double standard to the “West Bank” and eastern Jerusalem when controlled by Jordan and then by Israel.

Timeline to Recommending Distinct Palestinian State

The United Nations General Assembly voted in favor of independent Jewish and Arab states in November 1947. Many countries recognized the enlarged frontiers of Israel’s border after it accumulated more land at the end of its war of independence of 1948-9.

United Nations proposed borders for the Jewish State in 1947 were much smaller than countries ultimately recognized two years later (inset map)

For eighteen years from 1949 to 1967, the United Nations considered Palestinian refugees living in the “West Bank” of Jordan as temporary residents who were waiting to move back to homes in Israel and take on Israeli citizenship. Together with their fellow Arab neighbors in the “West Bank” who were not refugees, they all took on Jordanian citizenship in 1954. For the United Nations, there was no plan for a Palestinian state until 1967; there were Palestinian Arab refugees who were to become Israelis and there were Jordanians (those who had lived in the “West Bank” before Israel’s war of independence.) The self-determination of the local Arabs was manifest in Jordan and the Egyptian-controlled Gaza Strip.

The Palestinian Liberation Organization fought that narrative. The PLO’s founding charter in 1964 sought to create a new Arab State of Palestine in the ENTIRETY of the British Mandate, and to eradicate the Zionist state. It was not a two-state solution, but the same zero Jewish state solution which remained the consistent goal in the Arab world.

Only when Egyptian President Anwar Sadat came to Israel in 1977 to forge peace was the notion of two states considered a reality anywhere in the Arab world. In his speech he called for:

“Ending the occupation of the Arab territories occupied in 1967. [Note: Egypt lost the Sinai Peninsula in 1967 and wanted it back]
Achievement of the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people and their right to self-determination, including their right to establish their own state.
The right of all states in the area to live in peace within their boundaries, their secure boundaries, which will be secured and guaranteed through procedures to be agreed upon, which will provide appropriate security to international boundaries in addition to appropriate international guarantees.”

The United Nations began to consider an independent Palestinian State in 1967 and the Arab world began to consider a Jewish State in 1977. The Jordanians gave up claim to the “West Bank” in 1988 and Palestinians slowly came to recognize Israel in the Oslo Accords of 1993 and 1995.

The move towards a “two-state solution” began to unravel with the Palestinian Second Intifada from September 2000 to February 2005, followed by the election of the terrorist group Hamas to the majority of the Palestinian parliament in 2006 and their subsequent takeover of Gaza in 2007. When the Palestinian Authority sought to enter a unity government with Hamas in 2014, the U.S.-brokered peace talks officially collapsed.

As we approach the 53rd anniversary of the 1967 war and consider Israel’s possible application of sovereignty to parts of Area C in the West Bank which are officially under full Israeli control according to the Oslo Accords signed by the Palestinians, it is worth noting that the world has already accepted Israel expanding its borders in a defensive war in 1949 and did not even consider the need for another Arab state in the region until 1967. There are many pathways to local Arab self-determination, and currently proposed initiatives do not terminate that aspiration.

Related First One Through articles:

When You Understand Israel’s May 1948 Borders, You Understand There is No “Occupation”

Jordan’s King Abdullah II Fights to Retain His Throne

Maybe Truman Should Not Have Recognized Israel

“Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem”

Recognition of Acquiring Disputed Land in a Defensive War

The Peace Proposal Monologues

A Response to Rashid Khalidi’s Distortions on the Balfour Declaration

I call BS: You Never Recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital

Arabs in Jerusalem

Related First One Through video:

The anthem of Israel is JERUSALEM

The Green Line (music by The Kinks)

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

The Green Line Through Jerusalem

Posted on May 22, 2020 by First.One.Through

When the United Nations considered dividing Israel into an Arab State and a Jewish State in 1947, it sought to remove the contentious religious sites sacred to Jews, Christians and Muslims into a distinct “corpus separatum” which would be under international control. The area of Greater Jerusalem and Greater Bethlehem was to become a “Holy Basin,” and a unique model from the nascent United Nations.

The Arabs rejected partition and five Arab armies invaded Israel. At wars end in 1949, armistice lines with Egypt, Syria and Jordan created new boundaries in the region. Jordan took control and soon annexed the area it seized, including three-quarters of the Holy Basin. The division for the Jordanian frontiers were marked in green and it became known as the “Green Line.”

The division of Jerusalem in the 1949 Armistice agreement between Israel and Jordan

The Israeli portion of the map was marked in blue and Israel applied sovereignty up to that line. The space between the blue and green lines was considered “no man’s land.”

The Jordanian side included the entirety of the Old City of Jerusalem. The line ran right along the western side of the city, including the Jaffa and New Gates up to the Damascus Gate. The Jordanians forbade Jews from living in, visiting or praying at their holy sites in the city.

The map above is from the United Nations and marks the city’s sacred locations. Note that even though the city is only considered the holiest for Jews, the Jewish locations are listed last. The holiest location, the Jewish Temple Mount, is not even marked as sacred to Jews. The Western Wall is marked as holy – to both Jews and Muslims.

The map lists the Christian holy places first and includes numerous locations including each station of the Cross. It lists but does not show the various sacred spots in Bethlehem.
Muslims have the fewest holy sites of the three monotheistic religions, but occupy the dominant platform of Jerusalem. Uniquely among the monotheistic faiths, Muslims have no sites subject to “the status quo” according to the map.

The only holy location on the Israeli side of the lines is the Tomb of David, curiously listed as the only site holy to all three religions.

The world’s vision of Jerusalem from 1949 to 1967 was a place dominated by Christianity in terms of reverence, by Muslims in regards to prominence, and lastly by Jews, whose holiest spot was not even acknowledged and their basic human rights to live and worship were ignored.

Jerusalem Day is a day to mark the upending of that dynamic, at least in part.

Related First One Through video:

The anthem of Israel is JERUSALEM

The Green Line (music by The Kinks)

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

For The New York Times, “From the River to the Sea” Is The Chant of Jewish and Christian Zealots

Posted on May 21, 2020 by First.One.Through

There has rarely been a pro-Palestinian march around the world without the chant “From the River to the Sea, Palestine Will be Free.” It is a chant for the destruction of the only Jewish State.

Pro-Palestinian protest in London

One sees the phrase on placards in Europe. One hears it in the streets of the United States.

It is the official charter of HAMAS, a terrorist organization and an official Palestinian political party, the ruling authority of Gaza.

The destruction of Israel has long been the desire of its neighbors since the state was re-established in 1948, prompting five Arab armies to invade the country to destroy it. Through wars, boycotts and terrorism, the craving has persisted in much of the Muslim world.

Yet the liberal media has decided to ignore the genocidal antisemitic intent of the chant. In Europe, the slogan is considered a pro-Palestinian anthem which has nothing to do with the destruction of Israel. In the United States, The New York Times is loathe to call any actions or comments by the Palestinians or their supporters as antisemitic.

So as Israel considers breaking the impasse in the region in which the Palestinian Authority refuses to negotiate with Israel and Hamas continues to attack Israel, it is remarkable to see The New York Times suddenly address the call “from the river to the sea” as a right-wing ISRAELI message.

On May 20, 2020, the paper published an article about acting-President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas calling to cancel security agreements with Israel because Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called for applying sovereignty to areas of the West Bank which were acknowledged by the PA to be under full-Israeli control in the 1995 Oslo Accords. The article wrote:

“With the peace talks non-existent for years, many right-wing Israelis have urged Mr. Netanyahu to extend sovereignty over the West Bank on ideological and religious grounds, believing the Jewish state should control the entire Holy Land from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean. Evangelical Christians who are key supporters of President Trump have also backed the effort.”

The article failed to mention that the Israeli government gave much of the “West Bank” to the Palestinians in 1995 and 1997 despite repeated terrorist attacks. It did not mention that Israel gave Gaza to the Palestinians in 2005. The paper did not refer to the April 14, 2004 letter from US President George W Bush to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon which stated clearly:

“In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion. It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities.”

Instead, the anti-Zionist paper called the application of sovereignty a move by religious radicals, not people who seek a secure Jewish State and an end to the stalemate.

The New York Times has been an apologist for radical Palestinian antisemitism for years. It has now re-branded the anti-Zionist chant “from the river to the sea” as a Zionist one, and newly cast it as the mantra of Jewish and Christian religious zealots.

Bahrain Takes All the COVID-19 Tests But Doesn’t Give a Cent to the WHO

Posted on May 19, 2020 by First.One.Through

The pandemic is reaching all corners of the world and the United Nations Secretary General is sounding the sirens about poor countries in Africa being at great risk of being overwhelmed by the virus. UN Secretary-General António Guterres said “We are as strong as the weakest health systems. Protecting the developing world is not a matter of charity or generosity but a question of enlightened self-interest.”

He might want to address the rich Persian Gulf monarchies more directly.

Most of the COVID-19 tests have been administered by large countries like India, and hard hit countries like the United States, Italy and Spain. The table below shows the top twenty countries where tests have been administered.

	Deaths/	Total	Tests/	Population
Country	1M pop	Tests	1M pop	Population
USA	278	12,253,346	37,045	330,769,370
Russia	19	7,147,014	48,977	145,927,122
Germany	97	3,147,771	37,584	83,752,125
Italy	529	3,041,366	50,294	60,472,166
Spain	593	3,037,840	64,977	46,752,654
UK	513	2,682,716	39,543	67,843,268
India	2	2,302,792	1,671	1,378,344,732
Turkey	50	1,650,135	19,591	84,227,597
UAE	23	1,600,923	162,108	9,875,638
France	433	1,384,633	21,218	65,256,433
Canada	155	1,312,613	34,816	37,701,865
Australia	4	1,062,034	41,708	25,463,408
S. Korea	5	753,211	14,693	51,263,999
Brazil	79	735,224	3,462	212,376,810
Iran	84	701,640	8,367	83,859,705
Belgium	784	696,840	60,157	11,583,602
Peru	85	661,132	20,086	32,914,644
Portugal	121	652,497	63,969	10,200,144
Poland	25	636,046	16,804	37,851,440
Saudi Arabia	9	601,954	17,324	34,745,848

One country stands out in the top 20 – the United Arab Emirates. A country with fewer than 10 million people has already had over 1.6 million tests performed. It amounts to a whopping 162,108 tests per million people, or over five times the average of 31,700 per million for the other top countries.

This rich Muslim kingdom is not an outlier. Nearby Bahrain has had 143,508 tests per 1 million people.

While the UAE does contribute to the World Health Organization (less than 1.0% of WHO’s budget), Bahrain gives virtually nothing – less than Sudan, Mali, Eritrea, Uganda, Lesotho and many other African countries.

Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, King of Bahrain

Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Oman have run 56,243, 17,324 and 11,985 tests per million people, respectively, a fraction of the rate of Bahrain, but at least each has contributed to the WHO.

Bahrain has one of the highest GDP per capita‘s in the world and has performed among the highest number of COVID-19 tests in the world, but barely gives a penny to the World Health Organization. Forget select vilification of the US for pulling funding of WHO because of the organization’s failures in handling the pandemic; how about a simple mention that it’s time for the rich oil kingdoms to contribute their share.

Related First One Through articles:

The CoronavirUS is Not Us Versus Them

Liberal Senators Look to Funnel Money into Gaza

Conditional U.S. Support in The Middle East

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Palestinian Post-paid Terrorism

Posted on May 17, 2020 by First.One.Through

Mobile subscribers come in two general varieties: pre-paid and post-paid.

Post-paid subscribers pay AFTER they receive service each month. These customers do not know exactly how much they will pay for service due to the variability in usage but have an understanding with the wireless carrier on the basic parameters of $X for Y voice minutes and Z GB of data usage.

In contrast, pre-paid customers pay BEFORE they use the service. Sometimes this is done because the consumer wants to have a defined liability and ensure they are not burdened by overage charges. Pre-paid plans are often used by consumers with poor credit.

In the early days of wireless, there were only post-paid subscribers as the handsets and calling plans were expensive. The cost kept the marketplace limited to only the wealthy and consumers who truly needed the service. To attract the masses, carriers introduced pre-paid plans which were not only much cheaper but avoided the lengthy contracts and background checks. The mobile industry took off.

This is the template the Palestinian Authority has used with terrorism, inverting pre-paid and post-paid to attract the masses.

Post-paid Terrorism for the Masses

In the early days of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, the group took a significant amount of time to recruit and train its killers. Money was spent on guns, ammunition and bombs, and considerable time was invested in surveillance, training and planning. The massacre of the Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympic Games, the 1978 Coastal Road Massacre and the numerous airplane hijackings in the 1970’s were carried out by devout fanatics. These were pre-paid terrorist activities with the terrorist group investing a lot upfront, limiting both the number of attacks and PLO membership.

The world changed after the jihadist terrorism against the United States on 9/11/2001. The U.S. pushed the world to fight terrorist groups directly with arms AND by cutting off their source of funding. Even the United Nations got involved.

The impact was felt in Israel.

HAMAS, the Palestinian jihadist terrorist group, was forced to wage war on a more limited budget and use less expensive weaponry to kill Jews including cheap and poorly constructed missiles, bombs attached to balloons and thousands of young men with rocks.

For its part, the Palestinian Authority employs a “pay-to-slay” program, a post-paid terrorism financing plan in which it needn’t directly recruit individuals or invest in armaments for attack. The PA pays the terrorists and their families based on how long they spend in Israeli jails which is correlated to their crimes – more dead Israelis equals more jail time and more money.

This contract is considered sacrosanct. Acting-President of the PA Mahmoud Abbas said “[e]ven if we have only a penny left, we will give it to the martyrs, the prisoners and their families…. We view the prisoners and the martyrs as planets and stars in the skies of the Palestinian struggle, and they have priority in everything.”

Consider Hakim Awad, just 18-years old when he burst into a Jewish family’s home one night while they slept. He stabbed the parents and three children to death, including a three-month-old infant. The PA considers his actions noble and pays his family $14,000 per year. Should Awad live to the age of 80, the PA will pay nearly $2 million to Awad’s family.

Hakim Awad leaving court. He received five life-sentences for murdering five Jewish civilians (Photo: Hagai Aharon)

This system of “pay-to-slay” works well for all the Arab parties. The terrorists and their families get the money directly rather than it going to weapons, and they have clarity that the greater destruction they can inflict, the more money will go to their families. The Palestinian Authority gains millions of terrorists-in-waiting while it maintains that it is not involved in terrorism as the world is accustomed to thinking about terrorism on the basis of pre-paid financing. This allows Abbas to stand at the General Assembly of the United Nations while playing the victim and continue to receive millions of dollars from countries.

Abbas’ post-paid terrorism has worked. Stabbings, rock-throwings and car rammings ballooned after Hamas’s failed war against Israel in 2014. Countries around the world continue to give monies to the PA considering it “humanitarian” support because they are in favor of an independent Palestinian state, even though it is clear that they are funding terrorism. The Palestinian terrorists-in-waiting read about the funds transfers and consequently know their families will be paid well and that they will be honored as heroes in their communities.

In the early days of mobile, post-paid wireless subscribers were considered much more valuable than pre-paid subscribers, as they spent much more money each month and were more loyal, less likely to leave the carrier. That has changed over time with each spending roughly the same amount today.

In terrorism, the dynamics have also converged. The loyalty of post-paid terrorists-in-waiting has matched the devoted jihadists, knowing that the monies and honor are guaranteed.

As long as donor charities and countries continue to fund the Palestinian Authority, the value of the post-paid terrorists will continue to rise and the blood of Israeli Jews will continue to flow.

Related First One Through articles:

HSBC Blocks Payments to US-Designated Terrorist Organization Fundraiser, Interpal

The UN Fails on its Own Measures to address the Conditions Conducive to the Spread of Terrorism

The United Nations Must Take Its Own Medicine Re the Palestinian Authority

Empowering Women… To Murder

The New Salman Abedi High School for Boys in England and the Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel Soccer Tournament in France

Liberal Senators Look to Funnel Money into Gaza

While Palestinians Fire 400 Rockets, the United Nations Meets to Give Them Money

Paying to Murder Jews: From Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Iran to the Palestinian Authority

Related First One Through video:

The 2011 Massacre of the Fogel Family (music by Gorecki)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Hamas Charter, Articles 23 and 24

Posted on May 15, 2020 by First.One.Through

The Hamas Charter begins a new section called “Our Attitudes” with Articles twenty-three and twenty-four, underscoring that it is not just a religious movement which was established earlier, but is intended solely for Muslims.

Our Attitudes Towards:

A. Islamic Movements:

Article Twenty-Three:

The Islamic Resistance Movement views other Islamic movements with respect and appreciation. If it were at variance with them on one point or opinion, it is in agreement with them on other points and understandings. It considers these movements, if they reveal good intentions and dedication to Allah, that they fall into the category of those who are trying hard since they act within the Islamic circle. Each active person has his share.

The Islamic Resistance Movement considers all these movements as a fund for itself. It prays to Allah for guidance and directions for all and it spares no effort to keep the banner of unity raised, ever striving for its realisation in accordance with the Koran and the Prophet’s directives.

“And cleave all of you unto the covenant of Allah, and depart not from it, and remember the favour of Allah towards you: since ye were enemies, and he reconciled your hearts, and ye became companions and brethren by his favour: and ye were on the brink of a pit of fire, and he delivered you thence. Allah declareth unto you his signs, that ye may be directed.” (The Family of Imran – Verse 102).

Article Twenty-Four:

The Islamic Resistance Movement does not allow slandering or speaking ill of individuals or groups, for the believer does not indulge in such malpractices. It is necessary to differentiate between this behaviour and the stands taken by certain individuals and groups. Whenever those stands are erroneous, the Islamic Resistance Movement preserves the right to expound the error and to warn against it. It will strive to show the right path and to judge the case in question with objectivity. Wise conduct is indeed the target of the believer who follows it wherever he discerns it.

“Allah loveth not the speaking ill of anyone in public, unless he who is injured call for assistance; and Allah heareth and knoweth: whether ye publish a good action, or conceal it, or forgive evil, verily Allah is gracious and powerful.” (Women – verses 147-148).

The Hamas Charter calls for Muslim unity immediately after calling Jews global conspirators who instigate wars to enrich themselves. Such embrace of fellow Muslims after such antisemitic vitriol can best be considered a request for Muslims around the world to not call out Hamas as vile Islamic extremists and to distance themselves from Jews who were once considered fellow monotheists and children of Abraham.

Ismail Haniyeh of HAMAS (right) and Rami Hamdallah of Fatah (left). Opposing political parties.

And the Palestinian Arabs elected Hamas to 58% of the parliament with this charter, the United Nations pushes for Hamas to be part of a unity government, and the media talks of “Islamic resistance” as a peaceful and natural endeavor.

Related First One Through articles:

Palestinians of Today and the Holocaust

Mahmoud Abbas’s Particular Anti-Zionist Holocaust Denial

The Holocaust and the Nakba

The Palestinians aren’t “Resorting to Violence”; They are Murdering and Waging War

Extreme and Mainstream. Germany 1933; West Bank & Gaza Today

Pick Your Jihad; Choose Your Infidel

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Even The New York Times Needs to Fire David Halbfinger

Posted on May 8, 2020 by First.One.Through

The New York Times has been growing more anti-Israel and anti-religion for several years. David Halbfinger, the paper’s Jerusalem Bureau chief has a long history of writing some of the most biased articles, leading his colleagues into the abyss.

But even he can stoop to the levels often reserved for Arab media.

On May 8, 2020 he wrote a piece which would have made Josef Mengele blush. The opening paragraph of the article – an article about Israel developing life saving treatments to fight the Covid-19 pandemic – accused the Jewish State of being the modern incarnation of Nazi Germany’s doctor of death. It read:

“The Israeli Defense Ministry’s research-and-development arm is best known for pioneering cutting-edge ways to kill people and blow things up, with stealth tanks and sniper drones among its more lethal recent projects.”

The IDF actually has long history of developing life saving items such as the Iron Dome which intercepts missiles fired by Palestinian and Lebanese Arabs at Israeli civilians. It has developed methods of detecting Hamas terrorist tunnels dug into Israel to abduct and kill Israelis. It’s the only military that has a deliberate missile system without warheads which it uses to warn people in a building to abandon the facility before it gets blown up. ALL DESIGNED TO SAVE THE LIVES OF BOTH ISRAELIS AND THEIR ENEMIES.

But writing a complimentary article about new Israeli inventions to help the entire world was seemingly a task too tall for Halbfinger. He needed to disparage Israel from the start and paint the country to resemble the worst mass murderers of history.

It is not enough to cancel the subscription to the Times. Decent people everywhere must demand the immediate firing of Halbfinger.

Related First One Through articles:

The New York Times Excuses Palestinian “Localized Expressions of Impatience.” I Mean Rockets.

New York Times Pushes the Lie of Israeli Apartheid

The Real “Symbol of the Conflict” is Neta Sorek

The New York Times Knows It’s Israeli Right from It’s Palestinian Moderates

A Review of the The New York Times Anti-Israel Bias

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

While Lying About Israel, Democrats Demand Nothing of Palestinians

Posted on May 8, 2020 by First.One.Through

Thirty Democratic politicians under the Obama and Clinton administrations sent a letter to the Democratic National Committee on May 4, 2020. The letter began by completely misleading its audience which led directly into slandering Israel and absolving Arabs of any responsibility.

The letter stated

“Past party platforms have rightly stated a commitment to Israel’s security and included condemnations of threats and actions against our ally, in addition to embracing a two-state outcome. Those platforms have, however, also been nearly silent on the rights of Palestinians, on Israeli actions that undermine those rights and the prospects for a two-state solution, and on the need for security for both peoples.”

The phrase “embracing a “two-state solution” completely misleads a reader to believing that the Democratic party platform as recently as 2008 (pre-Obama) supported the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative (1967 “borders”; Arab capital in “East Jerusalem,” repatriation of “refugees”). IT DID NOT. It envisioned a completely different kind of two-state outcome.

Borders: The 2008 DNC platform stated ““All understand that it is unrealistic to expect the outcome of final status negotiations to be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949.” Today, Democrats talk about the “1967 borders” as the natural orientation of the two-states, but that was not their historic vision because those “armistice lines of 1949” were never designed by the parties at that time or after to become borders.
Jerusalem: The DNC was clear in 2008 that “Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel.” But the Democrats today are pushing for Israel to hand over half of its capital including the holiest sites for Judaism.

“Israeli actions” of living beyond the armistice lines including in eastern Jerusalem was something Democrats always supported until the Obama administration changed the party platform. These Obama employees who crafted the letter claim that Jews living freely somehow “undermines rights” of Palestinians. It does nothing of the sort.

The 2008 platform continued that the United States should isolate Hamas (Jimmy Carter still loves the terrorist group) and added that all “refugees” would be settled in a new Palestinian state, not in Israel. Under Obama, the statements were removed.

In 2012 and 2016, the Democratic platform became increasing less supportive and increasingly harsh in its treatment of Israel and has demanded less and less of the Palestinians.

Consider a simple desire from 2008: “a democratic, viable Palestinian state dedicated to living in peace and security side by side with the Jewish State of Israel.” The new letter makes no requirement of Palestinians living in peace. Instead, it just holds up Palestinian rights:

“The 2020 platform should expressly state a commitment to a resolution of the conflict that ensures both Israel’s security and future as a Jewish and democratic state with equal rights for all its citizens, as well as Palestinian rights, including self-determination, security and freedom. It should include clear opposition to ongoing occupation, settlement expansion and any form of unilateral annexation of territory in the West Bank as well as clear opposition to violence, terrorism and incitement from all sides.”

Note that these Democrats seek an Israel that is “democratic with equal rights for all its citizens,” but says nothing about a new state of Palestine and demands nothing.

No demand to abolish the Palestinian law which calls for the death sentence for any Arab selling land to a Jew
No call for Palestine to be a democracy and move away from sharia law
No call for allowing Jews to live throughout the land
No call for allowing Jews to pray at their holy sites
No call for striking the Palestinian law which allows for men to get a light sentence for honor killings of women in their families

Past party platforms never used the word “occupation” as Democrats once understood that international law for the past 100 years encouraged Jews to live throughout historic Palestine, understood that the 1949 Armistice lines were arbitrary and not meant to be a border, and that Israel retook the “West Bank” in a defensive battle. It was only under the watch of these same thirty Democrats who blessed the Arab demand for a Jew-free state and therefore enabled UN Security Resolution 2334 (2016) declaring Jews living peacefully in their ancient holy land as illegal. THEY MADE a basic human right illegal, and now chastise Israel for ignoring their antisemitic actions. #ResistUN

Not only are Democrats standing tall by the horrific Obama decision at the UN, but are pushing forward with attacking Israel and asking nothing of the Palestinians: a sharia-inspired Jew-free state for Palestinians and a state with full equality and no preferences for Jews in Israel which should absorb millions of additional Arabs. It’s a two state solution based on 1.5 states for Arabs and 0.5 of a state for Israel.

Ben Rhodes, Former Deputy National Security Adviser in Obama administration

The letter penned by Obama’s politicians which argued for “a commitment to security, democracy, and human rights,” failed to seek democracy for Palestinians and human rights for Israeli Jews. It demonstrates that Israel is not becoming a wedge issue for American politicians but a symbol of Democrats abandoning the western world. Israel is just the first casualty of the their headlong embrace of non-Democratic antisemitic norms found in countries around the globe.

Related First One Through articles:

The Democrats’ Slide on Israel

The Insidious Jihad in America

The United States Should NOT be a Neutral Mediator in the Arab-Israel Conflict

The Joy of Lecturing Jews

Trump Reverses the Carter and Obama Anti-Israel UN Resolutions

The Obama Administration Continues to Abandon Israel in Fighting Terror

J Street: Home for Pro-Palestinian, Pro-Peace Americans

Obama’s “Palestinian Land”

International-Domestic Abuse: Obama and Netanyahu

Obama supports Anti-Semitic Palestinian Agenda of Jew-Free State

Related First One Through video:

The “1967 Borders” (music by The Kinks)

Trump’s “eastern Jerusalem” and Biden’s “East Jerusalem”

Posted on May 7, 2020 by First.One.Through

As people concerned about the Israel-Arab conflict consider the US presidential elections, an important understanding of the two candidates can be found in their articulation of where a theoretical capital of a future Palestinian state would be located.

President Donald Trump announced the US road map to peace In January 2020 which included proposed contours for a two state-solution, the first such third-party proposal since the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative. In regards to a Palestinian state, Trump said:

“The Palestinian people have grown distrustful after years of unfulfilled promises — so true — yet I know they are ready to escape their tragic past and realize a great destiny. But we must break free of yesterday’s failed approaches.

This map will more than double the Palestinian territory and provide a Palestinian capital in eastern Jerusalem where America will proudly open an embassy. (Applause.) No Palestinians or Israelis will be uprooted from their homes. (Applause.)”

The map highlighted areas within the eastern part of the city of Jerusalem which would become a “Palestinian capital.” The phrase “eastern Jerusalem” highlighted that the United States recognized not only that Jerusalem is a single city but that “East Jerusalem” has not existed for over fifty years; it had a brief turbulent life for nineteen years as an artifice of war in the 1948-1967 time period. Those dark years had barbed wire running through the heart of the city with the Jordanian Arabs controlling the eastern portion after they expelled all of the Jews. The Arabs would not let any Jew enter the Old City, even for prayer at Judaism holiest location.

Vice President Joe Biden sees Jerusalem quite differently as can be inferred by his recent comment in May 2020:

“I will reopen the US consulate in East Jerusalem, find a way to reopen the PLO’s diplomatic mission in Washington, and resume the decades-long economic and security assistance efforts to the Palestinians that the Trump Administration stopped.”

Biden referred to “East Jerusalem” as a proper noun as if such city exists and had any legitimacy. He spoke about it as if the United Nations had proposed splitting Jerusalem in 1947 and giving “East Jerusalem” to Palestinian Arabs. He conjured a world in which Israel hadn’t already divided the UN’s “Corpus Separatum” giving the Palestinian Authority the city of Bethlehem in 1996 while it held Jerusalem.

Biden spoke of pure fantasy. He might as well as have mentioned his Obama Administration’s permitting UN Security Council Resolution 2334 to pass which advanced a time-altering, human rights-scoffing principle that Jews living in their holiest city is illegal and an occupation of Palestinian territory.

Vice President Joe Biden addressing AIPAC in a pre-recorded message March 2020

Names highlight a particular narrative, and President Trump’s “eastern Jerusalem” and former Vice President Biden’s “East Jerusalem” underscore how each party understands the nature of the city. One party will deal with the Israel-Arab conflict on the basis of reality and the other in the construct of harmful fiction.

Related First One Through articles:

The Subtle Discoloration of History: Shuafat

“Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem”

Abbas’s Harmful East Jerusalem Fantasy

“East Jerusalem” – the 0.5% Molehill

Ramat Shlomo, Jerusalem and Joe Biden

Jizyah for Jews in Jerusalem

The Remarkable Tel Jerusalem

The Jews of Jerusalem In Situ

Western Jerusalem’s U.S. Consulate and Embassy

I call BS: You Never Recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital

The New York Times Inverts the History of Jerusalem

750 Years of Continuous Jewish Jerusalem

Arabs in Jerusalem

Related First One Through video:

I Hate Israel – East Jerusalem

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Hamas Charter, Articles 21 and 22

Posted on May 6, 2020 by First.One.Through

The 1988 Hamas Charter concluded the “Strategies and Methods” section with Articles Twenty-one and Twenty-two:

Article Twenty-One:

Mutual social responsibility means extending assistance, financial or moral, to all those who are in need and joining in the execution of some of the work. Members of the Islamic Resistance Movement should consider the interests of the masses as their own personal interests. They must spare no effort in achieving and preserving them. They must prevent any foul play with the future of the upcoming generations and anything that could cause loss to society. The masses are part of them and they are part of the masses. Their strength is theirs, and their future is theirs. Members of the Islamic Resistance Movement should share the people’s joy and grief, adopt the demands of the public and whatever means by which they could be realised. The day that such a spirit prevails, brotherliness would deepen, cooperation, sympathy and unity will be enhanced and the ranks will be solidified to confront the enemies.

Supportive Forces Behind the Enemy:

Article Twenty-Two:

For a long time, the enemies have been planning, skillfully and with precision, for the achievement of what they have attained. They took into consideration the causes affecting the current of events. They strived to amass great and substantive material wealth which they devoted to the realisation of their dream. With their money, they took control of the world media, news agencies, the press, publishing houses, broadcasting stations, and others. With their money they stirred revolutions in various parts of the world with the purpose of achieving their interests and reaping the fruit therein. They were behind the French Revolution, the Communist revolution and most of the revolutions we heard and hear about, here and there. With their money they formed secret societies, such as Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, the Lions and others in different parts of the world for the purpose of sabotaging societies and achieving Zionist interests. With their money they were able to control imperialistic countries and instigate them to colonize many countries in order to enable them to exploit their resources and spread corruption there.

You may speak as much as you want about regional and world wars. They were behind World War I, when they were able to destroy the Islamic Caliphate, making financial gains and controlling resources. They obtained the Balfour Declaration, formed the League of Nations through which they could rule the world. They were behind World War II, through which they made huge financial gains by trading in armaments, and paved the way for the establishment of their state. It was they who instigated the replacement of the League of Nations with the United Nations and the Security Council to enable them to rule the world through them. There is no war going on anywhere, without having their finger in it.

“So often as they shall kindle a fire for war, Allah shall extinguish it; and they shall set their minds to act corruptly in the earth, but Allah loveth not the corrupt doers.” (The Table – verse 64).

The imperialistic forces in the Capitalist West and Communist East, support the enemy with all their might, in money and in men. These forces take turns in doing that. The day Islam appears, the forces of infidelity would unite to challenge it, for the infidels are of one nation.

“O true believers, contract not an intimate friendship with any besides yourselves: they will not fail to corrupt you. They wish for that which may cause you to perish: their hatred hath already appeared from out of their mouths; but what their breasts conceal is yet more inveterate. We have already shown you signs of their ill will towards you, if ye understand.” (The Family of Imran – verse 118).

It is not in vain that the verse is ended with Allah’s words “if ye understand.”

There is no foundational charter of any movement in the world that comes close to the antisemitism and conspiracy theories of the Hamas charter. It is a combination of Hitler’s Mein Kampf and Protocols of the Elders of Zion with a splash of the worst possible reading of the Koran.

Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, visiting with Adolf Hitler

According to the “Islamic Resistance Movement,” Jews have been amassing “great and substantive material wealth” so they could “control of the world media, news agencies, the press, publishing houses, broadcasting stations.” With that achieved, the Jews “formed secret societies… for the purpose of sabotaging societies and achieving Zionist interests.”

The Hamas Charter claims that the Jews started “World War I, when they were able to destroy the Islamic Caliphate,” so “they could rule the world.” Further, Jews “were behind World War II, through which they made huge financial gains by trading in armaments, and paved the way for the establishment of their state. It was they who instigated the replacement of the League of Nations with the United Nations and the Security Council to enable them to rule the world through them. There is no war going on anywhere, without having their finger in it.”

This is the antisemitic vitriol of Hamas that is the central tenet of their “resistance.” And the Palestinian Arabs elected Hamas to 58% of the parliament with this charter, the United Nations pushes for Hamas to be part of a unity government, and the media talks of “Islamic resistance” as a peaceful and natural endeavor.

Related First One Through articles:

Palestinians of Today and the Holocaust

Mahmoud Abbas’s Particular Anti-Zionist Holocaust Denial

The Holocaust and the Nakba

The Palestinians aren’t “Resorting to Violence”; They are Murdering and Waging War

Extreme and Mainstream. Germany 1933; West Bank & Gaza Today

Pick Your Jihad; Choose Your Infidel

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough