Denied No More

There are many parallel and conflicting narratives in the Middle East. The impossibility that items can be both parallel and perpendicular at the same time in geometry is de rigueur  in matters revolving Israel. Anti-Israel lies are crafted by the liberal media while anti-Arab facts cannot be uttered.

The New York Times ran a lead editorial on September 17, 2020 about the Israeli-Arab Abraham Accords titled “A Welcome Middle East Development.” However, the contents of the article would have better deserved the title “You’re Not Worthy, You’re Not Worthy” stating that neither Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu nor U.S. President Donald Trump deserve a Nobel Peace Prize for the remarkable milestone.

The New York Times lead editorial September 17, 2020

A common lie repeated in the Times opinion piece was captured as it attempted to summarize its thoughts belittling the agreements:

“But a true Middle East peace deal will require an accommodation with the 4.75 million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, a people who have been denied a homeland for more than seven decades.”

The lies and inversion in the phrase “a people who have been denied a homeland” are so noxious, I imagine the entire Times editorial board has it as screen savers on their computers and phones.

The Palestinians have homes; they don’t have a country. The notion that Palestinians are refugees running from country to country similar to Syrians fleeing their country set on fire by a genocidal maniac, or like the Rohingya Muslims tossed and unwanted in Southeast Asia is outrageous. The Arabs in Jericho have lived there for decades. Even those Palestinians whose grandparents were from Jaffa who now live in Jericho – considered “refugees” by the United Nations – are in their “homeland” living among their cousins.

The Palestinians haven’t been denied, they have refused. The Arabs in Palestine were welcomed to live as equal citizens by Israel in 1948. The Jordanians annexed the West Bank and offered the local Arabs Jordanian citizenship in 1954. The Arabs in eastern Jerusalem have been offered Israeli citizenship since 1980. But it is the Palestinian Arabs themselves who have refused both citizenship in another country and every peace agreement offered by Israel for the past seven decades.

It is the Jews who have been denied. For centuries, Jews were denied their homeland in Israel, living as unwanted and abused guests who suffered from pogroms, libels, expulsions and a Holocaust. They finally were able to return, only to be denied any rights or welcome by the Arabs who fought to expel them. The Palestinian and surrounding Arabs fought wars and intifadas for seven decades in efforts to rid the land of Jews, while the Arabs simultaneously used the United Nations and global media – like The New York Times – to deny Jews their history and rights in their homeland.

The time for denial is over.

  • The Jews have reclaimed their homeland.
  • The U.A.E., Bahrain and hopefully many more Arab states will no longer deny Jews their history and rights in that homeland nor will they deny the Jewish State’s existence as they normalize relations.
  • And the world will no longer swallow the lies that Palestinians are homeless, living in foreign unknown lands and denied the ability to become citizens. The Palestinians’ refusal to make peace with Israel is of their own making, not as portrayed by The New York Times, as passive victims who are being “denied a homeland.”

The Abraham Accords are a time to celebrate the termination of the hateful and stale thinking that denied peace in the region.


Related First One Through articles:

Time to Dissolve Key Principles of the “Inalienable Rights of Palestinians”

The Arab Spring Blooms in the UAE

UNRWA Artificially Extends Its Mandate

The Fourth ‘No’ of the Khartoum Resolution: No Return of Palestinian Refugees

Time to Define Banning Jews From Living Somewhere as Antisemitic

Related First One Through videos:

Aliyah to Israel (music by The Maccabeats)

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

Ethiopian Jews Come Home (music by Phillip Phillips)

Jewish Migration Since 1900 (music by Diana Ross)

1001 Years of Jewish Expulsions (music from Schindler’s List)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Every Picture Tells a Story: Have Israel and the US Advanced Peace?

After 26 years of seeking a normal place in the Middle East, Israel struck two normalization agreements in a single day with the help of the United States. The Wall Street Journal broadcast the news while The New York Times hid it in the shadows.

Cover page of The Wall Street Journal, September 16, 2020

Featured prominently on the WSJ cover page in a large color photo were leaders of three foreign countries surrounding U.S. President Donald Trump standing on the balcony of the White House. With smiles and waves, the four gentlemen conveyed the new warm feelings they had for each other, with the imprint of the presidential seal.

The caption was just as positive: “SEALED: Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Trump, Bahrain’s Foreign Minister Abdullatif bin Rashid al-Zayani and the United Arab Emirate’s Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed al Nahyan wave from the White House balcony after the signing ceremony Tuesday. The pact is seen as the foundation for a broader alignment against Iran in the region.” The top of the picture had a bold header “Israel, Two Gulf States Sign Peace Deal at White House”

A moment for celebration with each other and the whole world.

The New York Times had a very different view of the two pacts.

Cover of the New York Times, September 16, 2020

The Times also gave the story a large photo – but it was impossible to make out any of the individuals or even if the photo was in color, as it showed the backs of the four men in a dark room.

In contrast to the WSJ picture of people standing together, the Times showed a disjointed group. The Journal showed global leaders happily standing before the world while the Times made it appear that the four men were reluctantly engaged in a farce.

The caption of the NYT picture was a short single line: “President Trump hosted the Prime Minister of Israel and the foreign ministers of Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates on Tuesday.” None of the foreign leaders had their names mentioned – perhaps not a surprise as their faces were not shown either. The caption did not even mention that Trump hosted these world leaders TO SIGN A NORMALIZATION AGREEMENT, the first Israel signed with an Arab country in 26 years!

The New York Times could not give the historic agreements – nor the leaders it despises in Trump and Netanyahu – the limelight. It belittled the milestone and the men.

But in reality, the pictures laid bare the disgraceful anti-Trump, anti-Israel and anti-peace bias of The New York Times.


Related First One Through articles:

Every Picture Tells a Story: Goodbye Peres

Every Picture Tells a Story: Anti-Semitism

Every Picture Tells a Story: No Need for #MeToo for Palestinians

Every Picture Tells a Story: Fire

Every Picture Tells a Story: The Invisible Killed Terrorists

Every Picture Tells a Story: Arab Injuries over Jewish Deaths

New York Times’ Lost Pictures and Morality for the Year 2015

Every Picture Tells a Story: Versions of Reality

Every Picture Tells A Story: Only Palestinians are Victims

Every Picture Tells a Story: The Invisible Murdered Israelis

Every Picture Tells a Story- Whitewashing the World (except Israel)

The New York Times’ Buried Pictures

Every Picture Tells a Story, the Bibi Monster

Every Picture Tells a Story, Don’t It?

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Naked Trades in the Middle East

The template for forging peace between Israelis and Arabs for the last many years was based on the notion of trading one item for another. The idea was for Israel to give land to Arabs and would get peace or normalization in return. The formula worked in the 1979 peace treaty between Israel and Egypt and to a lesser extent in the 1994 treaty between Israel and Jordan. During the period of the Oslo Accords, the same idea was advanced between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

After signing of the Oslo II Accords in September 1995, the Palestinian Authority received several towns and cities from Israel. This was the first time that local Palestinian Arabs got to rule themselves in their history. It was orchestrated as a test to see if the PA could build a functional government and establish controls to enable and enforce a peace agreement with Israel. The five year period ending September 2000 was designed to test the thesis and then hand considerable more territory to the PA.

The Oslo effort proved a complete failure.

The five year period between 1995 and 2000 was marked by intense violence and terrorism. It was capped when Yasser Arafat launched the Second Intifada in September 2000 when the negotiations did not yield 100% of his stated demands. Years of bloodshed began to slow to a trickle when Israel constructed a security barrier separating many of the towns in the “West Bank” from which the Palestinian terrorists emerged.

As the violence ebbed, Israel sought to implement a long-term solution, even without a peace partner. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon opted to unilaterally withdraw all Israeli troops and civilians from Gaza in 2005, with the assurances from U.S. President George Bush in 2004 that Israel’s borders would not follow the 1949 Armistice Lines and account for current realities. Israel took the action and asked for nothing from the Palestinians.

This first naked trade in the Arab-Israeli conflict was a failure. Within two years of withdrawing from Gaza, the terrorist group Hamas seized control and used the area as a launching pad for terrorism against Israel including three full wars in 2008, 2012 and 2014.

Israel pulled civilians from their homes in Gaza in 2005. It asked for nothing from the Palestinians in return.

It took many years for another one-way trade to take place.

In 2017, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that the United States officially recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and would relocated its embassy to the city. While the U.S. Congress had approved such measure in 1995, every president deferred such recognition and move, hoping to couple such actions with something for the Palestinians. However, in light of the acting-President of the PA’s refusal to engage with the U.S. administration, Trump moved forward with the one-party deal.

The politicians and pundits who worked the region for years derided the move. Former U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said the move was “ill-advised” and former Secretary of State John Kerry said that Trump wouldn’t survive a year in office. Yousef Munayyer, executive director of the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights said that the move would fuel the “narrative of extremists who want to paint the Western world in terms of a religious war.

Those predictions proved incorrect. There was no outbreak of violence throughout the Muslim world in reaction to the announcement or the relocation of the embassy. The naked trade rectified a historic wrong and did not lead to mayhem. It led to additional positive actions like Guatemala, Serbia and Kosovo recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

The success of the 2017 Trump action has enabled the quick adoption of additional one-way trades: the 2020 normalization of relationships of both the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain with the Jewish State, to be signed in Washington, D.C. on September 15.

Palestinians were apoplectic that fellow Arab countries would recognize Israel before a peace agreement with the PA was signed. While the Palestinians were angered by the Israeli peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, each Arab country at least got tangible benefits from their respective agreements. Such treaties were therefore viewed as not only understandable, but clever. Egypt and Jordan essentially gave away nothing – just a “hudna,” a ceasefire which could be over-turned at any time – while they obtained real immediate benefits. Palestinians were therefore able to convince themselves that they were still a priority for the broader Arab nation.

But these naked trades by the UAE and Bahrain have laid that lie bare. The two gulf emirates are receiving nothing in the near-term but the prospects of gaining access to Israeli and American technology and military capabilities. The trade was for a long-term situational benefit, much like Israel had assumed leaving Gaza in 2005 would yield.

It would appear that we have entered a new stage of diplomacy in the Middle East which is not based on near-term raw cost-benefit analyses but rather on long-term situational positioning. Goodbye land-for-peace. Hello aspirations for the future.

Let’s all hope that this evolution to naked trades will produce an enduring peace for the region.


Related First One Through articles:

Enduring Peace versus Peace Now

The Peace Proposal Monologues

The Arab Spring Blooms in the UAE

Trump Reverses the Carter and Obama Anti-Israel UN Resolutions

Schrodinger’s Cat and Oslo’s Egg

Republicans Do Not Believe There is Any “Occupation”

Netanyahu Props Up Failed Arab Leaders

The Shrapnel of Intent

Nikki Haley Channels Robert Aumann at the UN Security Council

Abbas’ European Audience for His Rantings

Time to Dissolve Key Principles of the “Inalienable Rights of Palestinians”

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The Cultural Appropriation of the Jewish ‘Promised Land’

Various segments of western society have become critical about “cultural appropriation” in which the majority group adopts customs of another group without explicitly acknowledging its origins, as to do so would be both stealing and effectively wiping out the essence of the minority culture. The issue is even more concerning when the majority group’s acts of appropriation specifically target religious and holy items of minority groups.

There is no greater example of this trend than the broad theft of the Jewish “Promised Land.”

In Genesis 12, God tells Abraham to leave his home “to the land that I will show you.” When he passed through Shechem (Nablus) God said “I will assign this land to your offspring.” It is a speech which God would repeat throughout the Bible to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob (Israel) and the Children of Israel, that this specific land was promised “as an everlasting possession.” (Genesis 17:8) It is a core belief of Judaism.

Over time, non-Jewish musicians and poets would use the phrase “Promised Land” as a generic destination without noting its specific identity to the land of Israel for Jews. Chuck Berry sang about it (later covered by Elvis) in reference to California as a destination for his music to reach the masses. Bruce Springsteen sang about the “promised land” as a place of yearning, a mental and spiritual destination beyond current problems.

When Arab invaders brought Islam into Israel in the seventh and eighth centuries, they seized Jewish holy sites like the Tomb of the Jewish Matriarchs and Patriarchs in Hebron and turned it into a mosque. They built the Dome of the Rock atop the Jewish Temple Mount. The Muslims even adopted the notion of a “waqf” as a religious holy space. As opposed to Jews who viewed the land of Israel as holy because it was promised to them by God, Muslims believe that anywhere Muslims conquered and established the supremacy of Islam became a Muslim holy land. As such, Muslims attempted to erase the physical Jewish Promised Land as a land of their own.

Politicians mostly avoid using the term “Promised Land.” They might note that Israel is a “Holy Land” which is “sacred to Jews and Christians and Muslims” as President Obama noted in a national prayer breakfast in 2014, stripping the uniqueness of the Promised Land for Jews. When Obama did use the term “Promised Land” it was as a metaphor for when Black children will have full equality to live in an America devoid of bigotry and racism.


The worst and most feared element of cultural appropriation happens constantly in regards to the “Promised Land,” in which it is either used generically as a metaphor without any connection to Jews, or when applied to the physical land of Israel, it is noted as holy to the three monotheistic faiths and not uniquely promised to the Children of Israel.

We should aspire to follow the example of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. whose final speech in 1968 pulled together the story of the Jewish Promised Land in connection with his desire for a more perfect society:

Something is happening in Memphis; something is happening in our world. And you know, if I were standing at the beginning of time, with the possibility of taking a kind of general and panoramic view of the whole of human history up to now, and the Almighty said to me, “Martin Luther King, which age would you like to live in?” I would take my mental flight by Egypt and I would watch God’s children in their magnificent trek from the dark dungeons of Egypt through, or rather across the Red Sea, through the wilderness on toward the promised land. And in spite of its magnificence, I wouldn’t stop there…

Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land!

The “promised land” is commonly used as a metaphor for a perfect society. Let’s strive for that perfection by acknowledging that its foundation is the Jewish State of Israel.


Related First One Through articles:

Martin Luther King and Zionism

The Cave of the Jewish Matriarch and Arab Cultural Appropriation

Linda Sarsour as Pontius Pilate

The Remarkable Tel Jerusalem

The Jewish Holy Land

Jews, Judaism and Israel

The Nation of Israel Prevails

“Flowing with Milk and Honey”

Today’s Inverted Chanukah: The Holiday of Rights in Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Replacing the Jordanian Waqf on The Temple Mount

After Israel defeated the attacking Jordanian army in June 1967, it allowed the Jordanian Islamic Waqf to have administrative control of the Jewish Temple Mount in the Old City of Jerusalem while Israel controlled the security of the area. In 1980, Israel officially applied sovereignty and reunited the city of Jerusalem as its eternal capital but still allowed the Jordanian Waqf to administer Judaism’s holiest site. And in Israel’s 1994 peace treaty with Jordan, the country continued to be sensitive to Jordan, statingIsrael respects the present special role of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in Muslim Holy shrines in Jerusalem. When negotiations on the permanent status will take place, Israel will give high priority to the Jordanian historic role in these shrines.

However, in recent months, Jordan has come out very aggressively against Israel’s contemplated application of sovereignty over more of the west bank of the Jordan River.

In May 2020, Jordanian Prime Minister Omar al-Razzaz saidWe will not accept unilateral Israeli moves to annex Palestinian lands and we would be forced to review all aspects of our relations with Israel.” King Abdullah also said that if Israel “really annexes the West Bank in July, it would lead to a massive conflict with the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

In light of the statements and contemplated reaction by Jordan, it makes sense for Israel to approach both Egypt and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to see if they would be interested in taking over the role of the Jordanian Waqf in Jerusalem.

Egypt has maintained a peace treaty with Israel since 1979 and there is a good working relationship with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi. Israel’s relationship with KSA has improved in recent years, especially because of the countries mutual distrust of Iran. As the guardian of Mecca and Medina, KSA would logically welcome the role to extend its guardianship of Islamic holy sites, and the move could be part of an important peace treaty with Saudi Arabia.

The Old City of Jerusalem including the Jewish Temple Mount/ Al Aqsa Compound during the Jewish holiday of Passover

Jordan’s threat to abandon its peace agreement with Israel is an opening for Israel to offer Saudi Arabia a place in Jerusalem and to forge a new peace agreement with the powerful kingdom. In light of the Trump Administration’s deep ties with KSA, it makes sense to advance those initiatives now.


Related First.One.Through articles:

Jordan’s King Abdullah II Fights to Retain His Throne

Oh Abdullah, Jordan is Not So Special

Time for King Abdullah of Jordan to Denounce the Mourabitoun

The Waqf and the Temple Mount

Hamas Charter, Articles 11 and 12

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

The Shrinking Modern Jewish Homeland

The Jewish homeland as described in the bible is well known to the entire world. Originally the land promised to the first Hebrew, Abraham, was the land west of the Jordan River. When the twelve tribes of Israel returned to the land of their forefathers after being slaves in Egypt, they took land east of the Jordan River as well.

Map of Terra Sancta, Homann, 1730

Later generations would see the Jewish homeland carved up into different footprints under various kings and rulers over 1,400 years but the configuration above remains the orientation of anyone familiar with the Hebrew bible. It also became the basis of the modern initiative to facilitate Jewish immigration back to their homeland.

The San Remo Resolution of April 1920 became enshrined in the League of Nation Mandate of Palestine of July 1922. It sought to facilitate the “establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people” based on the “historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine.” The mandate of Palestine roughly incorporated the land of Israel as described in the Old Testament plus additional lands.

Modern Jewish homeland per Mandate of Palestine, 1920 and 1922

Article 25 was added into the Mandate in March 1921 which gave the British who were to administer the lands, the option to separate the area east of the Jordan River to a distinct Arab state. The League of Nations approved the British request if such new state would NOT prohibit Jews from living there (“no action shall be taken which is inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 1516 and 18″). In spite of the clear language, the British did exactly that and created Transjordan in August 1922 and barred any Jews from living in the land. Not only was 77 per cent of the Jewish homeland removed by the British but they enforced an antisemitic edit on even allowing Jews to live in the land.

The British would continue to ban Jews from living in parts of their homeland.

In August 1929, Arabs engaged in a series of deadly pogroms in the holy land. The Jewish community of Hebron was massacred and the British response was to evacuate Jews from the city and forbid them from returning. The British commissioned the Shaw Report in 1930 which advocated for limiting the number of Jews in Palestine and their role in government:

  • it is our view that, among a large section of the Arab people of Palestine,
    there is a feeling of opposition to Jewish immigration, that this feeling is well founded in that it has its origin in the known results of excessive immigration in the past and that, given other and more immediate causes for disturbance, that feeling would undoubtedly be a factor which would contribute to an outbreak [of violence]…. It is clear that His Majesty’s Government should at an early date issue a clear and definite declaration of the policy which they intend to be pursued in regard to the regulation and control of Jewish immigration to Palestine.
  • “we would suggest that His Majesty’s Government should re-affirm the statement made in 1922 that the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization by the
    Mandate does not entitle it to share in any degree in the government of Palestine.”

The Jewish homeland was continuing to be chipped away by the British in regards to how many Jews could live in Palestine, where they could live and their role in government.

After more Arab riots in 1936, the British established the Peel Commission which concluded the Mandate was unworkable and suggested dividing the land into a section where the Jews would be allowed to live. As the proposal worked its way through the British system with Arab input, the end result was the 1939 White Papers which capped Jewish immigration to 75,000 people over five years just as the Holocaust began in Europe, condemning tens of thousands of Jews to death.

After Israel declared itself an independent country in 1948, five Arab armies invaded Israel to destroy it. At war’s end, the Arab army of Jordan seized the eastern part of the holy land and expelled all Jews, while the Egyptian army seized the Gaza Strip. In 1950, Jordan illegally annexed the land it took and in 1954, extended its ban on Jewish citizens beyond Transjordan into the “West Bank.”

Israel recaptured parts of the Jewish homeland in 1967 after surrounding Arab countries again sought the annihilation of the Jewish State. Many countries refused to recognize the rights of Jews to live in those lands which had become Judenfrei. Israel uprooted all Jews from the Gaza Strip in 2005 and in 2016, the United Nations Security Council declared that any Jew living east of the 1949 Armistice Lines between Israel and Jordan did so illegally, even in eastern Jerusalem.

First the British worked with the Arabs to shrink the Jewish homeland in regards to land where Jews could live, the number of Jews who could live there, and the role of Jews in government, making the notion of Jewish sovereignty questionable. Later the Arabs asserted for themselves that there was no Jewish history or rights in the land as they fought to completely dismantle the Zionist project in theory and practice. Then the United Nations supported the Arab cause to officially shrink the Jewish homeland.

The attack on the Jewish homeland is ongoing and without Jewish resistance, the Jewish homeland would disappear completely. #100YearsofZionistResistance.


Related First One Through articles:

The Original Nakba: The Division of “TransJordan”

Recognition of Acquiring Disputed Land in a Defensive War

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

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

WHY The Progressive Assault on Israel

On February 10, 2019, New York Times opinion writer Bret Stephens posted an article about the dangers of the Democratic Party moving sharply to the left and adopting anti-Israel positions. He used considerable ink to refute the claims of progressives that Israel is an apartheid state and generally debunked the various arguments made against Israel.

But he never touched upon WHY progressives are suddenly so ready to condemn Israel when they weren’t a decade ago. Stephens mentioned the relatively new “intersectionality” concept in which the suffering of one group is the suffering and common cause of all groups, but he offered no reasons why Israel alone was the celebrated cause of the alt-left (for example, no group attacks Iran for hanging gays in the street, Turkey for occupying northern Cyprus, Switzerland for banning minarets at mosques or Belgium banning kosher and halal meat) and why these progressives feel so comfortable cozying up to anti-Semites like Louis Farrakhan.

WHY only Israel versus other countries in the world and WHY now as opposed to ten years ago?

Underdogma

Underdogma is the notion that the downtrodden are always the victims. Not only is the cause of the powerless always right, but their actions must always be excused. Black progressives can easily defend Louis Farrakhan because he is considered powerless; he is punching up in society on behalf of poorly performing Black people. Similarly, Palestinian Arabs who rape and kill 19-year old Jewish girls in Israel are not cast as terrorists, as the Palestinian Arabs are stateless.

This is a point made by Bret Stephens and Matti Friedman. Israel is viewed as the bigger and more powerful party if one views the situation very narrowly, namely the State of Israel with a strong military, against the Palestinian Arabs without either a state or army. The Arab-Israel Conflict has become a narrower Palestinian-Israeli Conflict for progressives. However, if one viewed the situation more broadly, it is easy to see a single Jewish State dwarfed by dozens of Muslim countries, an Israeli Jewish population outnumbered 100-to-1 by Muslims, and Israel standing alone at the United Nations where 30 countries still refuse to acknowledge the existence of the Jewish State.

The Jewish State is very small, but it looms large and powerful for progressives.

Proportionality

Part of the Israeli – and Jewish – problem for progressives is specifically about proportionality. It is not only that the Jewish State appears too big in their narrow focus, it is too powerful based on the raw number of Jews globally.

Progressives want positions of power to reflect the demographics of society. With a Jewish population of less than 15 million in a global population of 7.8 billion, why should a people with 0.2% of the population have any country at all? Perhaps if there were 500 countries instead of the less than 200, progressives might be more sympathetic. Instead, this slice of the global population presents like elites, with a thriving economy and powerful military. Worse, it has these attributes abutting people who are poor and without self determination.

The Jewish State doesn’t look like an oppressed minority success story for progressives. Israel looks like “the 0.1 percent” with a disproportionate share of land and resources.  Progressives attacking these (coincidentally) Jewish one-percenters is as natural as attacking the (also coincidentally) Jewish bankers and real estate owners.

Narrative of Emotions versus Facts

Adding fuel to the fire for progressives to attack the Jewish State is the evolving philosophy which has caught hold in the far left. Progressives have advanced the notion that emotions are not only real, they are perhaps more relevant than facts. Such approach allows them to shut down debate and discussion if they feel under attack from “microaggressions,” a term coined in the 1970’s which has infected college campuses and left-wing groups today.

The counter-factual Palestinian narrative now has a natural audience in the far left. Jewish history in the holy land can comfortably be erased such as the fact the Jerusalem has been majority Jewish since the 1860’s, with the charge that Jews are changing the Muslim “character” of the city using the ominous language of gentrification. Thousands of years of Jewish history evaporate as Jews are transformed into “colonialists” seeking to expel and subjugate the indigenous Arab population and continue to steal “Palestinian land.

Falsehoods do not matter. Fighting emotional perceptions with facts as Bret Stephens did is a debate using different bases. When progressives embrace non-factual emotions of feeling wronged, is the best method of countering it using facts, fact-based emotions or non-fact based emotions? Are Israelis forced to only talk about the pain of antisemitism and the Holocaust (fact-based emotions) or conjure up something new (what can really be worse than the Holocaust to dream up? That Palestinians harvest Jewish organs like the Arabs claim Jews do?)

Progressives demand no rebuttal, just a focus on the raw emotions of those in a disadvantaged state. The tacit conclusion is that to forge a peaceful coexistence, the outrageous lies should be ignored and/or considered as though they contain morsels of truth. Pretend that Arabs did not begin to arrive in the Jewish holy land in the Muslim invasion of the seventh and eighth centuries but are descendants of biblical Canaanites. Consider that the Palestinian Arabs did not try to destroy Israel in 1948 and 1967 but were arbitrarily expelled. Honor their counter-factual emotions. Do more than shut up as the stronger party, take steps to address their pain. To do less is cruelty.

The Masses Make History

One upon a time, history was written by the victor. In modern times it is re-written by the 99.8% with smartphones and social media accounts.

Jews have succumbed to raw power for thousands of years. Judaism was crushed by the power of the Catholic church which replaced the chosen people spiritually, and by the Moslems who replaced the Jews physically by taking over the Jewish holy land and building the Dome of the Rock atop their Jewish Temples. Both religions used the sword for execution and conversion, leaving Jews a paltry sum.

Today, Jews are falling to a new power: the stories, emotional narratives written by the masses. When feelings trump facts, billions of people will be drawn to compelling narratives such as a modern day David-versus-Goliath story and will love the irony of the Jew now being slayed as the Giant. Israelis are called Nazis without consideration of the deep antisemitism of the charge. Why pause to ponder, when it completes the chapter with a curious twist, and absolves the world from its role in the Jewish genocide as it shows that all people are just as evil when they obtain too much power.

Rip power from the elites, flatten society and distribute power equally is the logical conclusion say today’s socialists / Democratic Socialists. The stories secure alt-left converts with absolution, reward and righteous smugness. Empathy can be contagious: post it online and share it with friends. Take it to the streets. It doesn’t matter that the original whisperers came from Iran or Russia, when the emotions feel so real.

Why Progressives Attack Israel Today

In short, why now and why Israel:

  • It is laudable to attack the powerful. In the past, progressives wanted to empower the weak with programs like affirmative action. Now they want to pull down the powerful. It is no longer about making sure people do not live in poverty but to focus on the “gaps” in society including wealth and income. It is much easier to strip the elites than to build a long-term sustainable economy.
  • The alt-left believes Jews and the Jewish State are disproportionately powerful. Israel’s recent battles of 2008, 2012 and 2014 were with Gaza, a small impoverished strip of land, and not with the broader Arab world as in the early days of the state. Israel’s economy sailed through the global financial meltdown of 2008-9 and continues to have multi-billion dollar IPOs and sales of its flourishing technology and biotech industries. Progressives see elitists, not a minority success story.
  • Israel abandoned early socialism in favor of capitalism. Israel’s early days were scrappy and agrarian, working the land in collective kibbutzes. The left-wing Labor party dominated the political landscape for decades from its founding days. But the country pivoted to the right and the champion of privatizing the Israeli economy, Benjamin Netanyahu, has become the longest serving prime minister in Israeli history. For the alt-left, the right cannot be right: Israel’s success must have come from theft, corruption and abuse. The fact that Netanyahu is being charged with the same is too rich for the left to ignore.
  • Perception of White European Colonial Patriarchy. Israel has long had white Ashkenazi male leaders with the exception of Golda Meir in the 1970’s, so Netanyahu is not a new phenomenon. But the objection to his background in the middle of a Middle East with Arab leaders is suddenly more offensive to Americans who had a Black president for eight years. The fact that the majority of Israeli Jews are Brown and Black from Arab and African countries is ignored or not known. The face of Israel is portrayed as one of colonialism, white privilege and the patriarchy, all unforgivable sins to the newly woke.
  • Jewish liberals give them cover. Democrats once had champions for the Jewish State like Scoop Jackson, Patrick Moynihan and Joe Lieberman and a strong Israel advocacy group like AIPAC. Today, new alt-left wing Jewish groups like J Street and Jewish Voice for Peace loudly lobby for policies against the Jewish State and donate and back politicians with anti-Israel views. They supported the Iran deal, the declaration of Jewish homes east of the Green Line as illegal, boycotting Jewish Israeli businesses, and were upset with the US moving its embassy to Jerusalem. When Jewish groups which claim to be “pro-Israel” and “pro-peace” aggressively push the US and UN to take actions against the Jewish State, it becomes easy for all progressives to endorse anti-Zionist views without appearing antisemitic.

Among Progressives, the past dozen years has seen the Arab-Israel Conflict shrink into the Besieged and Impoverished Gaza Strip-Israeli Army Conflict. There is no longer an antisemitic Hamas or Palestinian terrorists, just poor Arabs seeking self-determination in the face of a powerful and rich alt-right foreign entity. It is a story recast to elicit empathy.

Israel’s supporters on the right may get excellent scores on Middle Eastern history but fail to connect with the masses who are craving a story of empathy. Tyrion Lannister summed it up in the finale of Game of Thrones: “What unites people? Armies? Gold? Flags? Stories. There’s nothing in the world more powerful than a good story. Nothing can stop it. No enemy can defeat it.” The alt-left gets it and has spun a tale which is being mainstreamed and going viral.

Israel is in a new war with progressives and it is clueless about how to confront it.

The Green Line Through Jerusalem

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 article:

The Dark Side of Jerusalem Day: Magnifying the Kotel and Minimizing the Temple Mount

The Arguments over Jerusalem

The UN’s #Alternative Facts about the 1967 Six Day War

“Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem”

750 Years of Continuous Jewish Jerusalem

Here in United Jerusalem’s Jubilee Year

The Remarkable Tel Jerusalem

Jordan’s Deceit and Hunger for Control of Jerusalem

Ending Apartheid in Jerusalem

May 15 is Israel’s Neighbor Day

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

The New York Times Inverts the History of Jerusalem

The Jews of Jerusalem In Situ

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

Conditional U.S. Support in The Middle East

In late 2019, some Democratic candidates for president stated that they would condition American support for Israel with Israel’s behavior regarding Palestinian Arabs. Former Vice President Joe Biden considered the suggestion made by Senator Bernie Sanders (as well as Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg) to be “bizarre.”

Biden seemed to further cement his position of not compromising on military aid to Israel in a recorded message to an AIPAC conference on March 1, 2020 when he reiterated that “I will never boycott [Israel]…. Israel must be able to defend itself. It’s not just critical for Israel’s security, I believe it is critical for America’s security.

As Biden tries to court the Sanders supporters who are highly critical of Israel, it remains to be seen how far Biden will tilt towards the anti-Israel stance of Team Sanders who demand a boycott of Jewish homes and businesses east of the Green Line and funneling Israeli military aid towards rebuilding Gaza.

To appreciate the “bizarre” Sanders conditional approach to Israel, consider America’s approach to the Middle East overall.

American Blood

The United States has thousands of troops deployed throughout the Persian Gulf.

Country U.S. Troops Operations
Bahrain 5,000 Headquarters of the U.S. Fifth Fleet and U.S. Naval Forces Central Command (USNAVCENT)
Qatar 10,000 Home to the Al Udeid Air Base, which includes the forward headquarters of U.S. Air Forces Central Command (AFCENT)
Saudi Arabia 2,500 Prince Sultan Air Base
Kuwait 14,500 U.S. uses Camp Arifjan, Camp Buehring, Ali Al Salem Air Field and the naval base Camp Patriot
Iraq 6,000 Remaining troops after Operation Inherent Resolve to fight ISIS
Oman 600 Relatively small footprint
UAE 5,500 Al Dhafra Air Base hosts several U.S. fighter, attack and reconnaissance aircraft of the U.S. 380th Air Expeditionary Wing.

There are over 225,000 U.S. troops stationed abroad but the United States has no permanent base in Israel and no troops are stationed there. Based on the shared principles of democracy and trust, the United States relies on Israel as a partner in the region and supplies it military aid to defend itself.

The figures of American dead and wounded reflect these facts. The data below is from October 2001 to April 18, 2020 from the U.S. Department of Defense:

Military Operation  Killed   Wounded 
Iraqi Freedom             4,431             31,994
New Dawn (Afghanistan)                  74                  298
Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan)             2,353             20,149
Inherent Resolve (ISIS)                  96                  224
Freedom’s Sentinel (Afghanistan)                  92                  570
            7,046             53,235

No Americans have died protecting Israel.

In June 1996, a truck bombing killed 19 Americans at the Khobar Towers barracks near Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.Credit…U.S. Navy, via Associated Press

Treasure

The United States spent roughly $2 trillion to fight wars in Iraq and has spent over $2.5 trillion fighting in Afghanistan. It has spent tens of billions of dollars maintaining its various bases throughout the Persian Gulf and supporting and protecting the Arab and Muslim Persian Gulf countries.

In Egypt, the United States has provided over $40 billion in military aid and $30 billion in economic assistance since 1980. The United States also provides over $1 billion of aid to Jordan every year, in addition to billions of dollars of loan guarantees.

In total, the United States has spent roughly $5 trillion since 2001 on countries in the Middle East, excluding Israel. Almost all of that money has been expenses to stabilize failing regimes and protect U.S. interests. There has been almost no investment in technology development to advance the U.S. military.

However, when it comes to Israel, the United States has benefited from an INVESTMENT in a close ally. As described by the U.S. State Department,

“Israel has long been, and remains, America’s most reliable partner in the Middle East. Israel and the United States are bound closely by historic and cultural ties as well as by mutual interests.”

The U.S. gives Israel over $3 billion per year in military assistance, much of which is spent procuring American products. Israel shares the technological advancements that it develops to enhance America’s military capabilities. In total, the U.S. has given Israel roughly 1/80th of the funds it has spent on the rest of the Middle East, while receiving over 80 times the benefits in technological advancement.

Conditionality

The United States has spent $5 trillion this century on Middle Eastern countries that do not share American values, yet the progressive wing of the Democratic Party has been mum.

Saudi Arabia, a major trading partner, executes minors – in public. It kills people for basic human rights like converting religion. It executes men for engaging in homosexual sex (it only beats woman who are lesbians). Women are forbidden to drive and cannot leave the house without a male escort or approval.

No one seems to care.

Qatar and the United Arab Emirates also have a death penalty for apostasy, converting from Islam. Kuwait, Oman and the UAE have capital punishment for people dealing in drugs. The Palestinian Authority has capital punishment for Arabs who sell land to Jews.

Yet there have been no calls from Sanders or other Democratic Socialists to condition aid to these countries which KILL people for basic human rights. There are over 70 countries – mostly Arab and Muslim – which consider homosexuality a crime, and there is not a peep about placing any conditions on trade and assistance.

The singling out of Israel for allowing a basic human right of a family living in a home and protecting itself from missiles is both hypocritical and antisemitic. Threatening to withhold or divert military aid to Israel which directly benefits American security interests while saying nothing to spending 80 times as much on Arab and Muslim countries is insane. And putting thousands of American lives in danger for backwards regimes while denying Israel the ability to protect Israeli and American interests with ITS OWN SOLDIERS is outright un-American.

Team Sanders and the Democratic Socialists of America including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib should not be allowed on any foreign policy committee or have any hand in crafting the Democratic Platform. They are dangers to America on multiple levels.


Related First One Through articles:

Bernie Sanders’ Antisemitic and Anti-Zionist Friends

Bernie Sanders is Less Sophisticated Than Forrest Gump

Bernie Sanders is the Worst U.S. Presidential Candidate for Israel Ever

Related First One Through videos:

The Crime of Being Gay (music by Boy George)

The Anthems of the Middle East (music by Enya)

BDS Movement and Christian Persecution (music by Hovaness)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

 

 

For CNN, The Critical Israeli Facts Have No Murdered Jews

The bias against Israel in the liberal media is no longer an accusation but established fact.

Consider the salient facts regarding Israel by the largest global media company, CNN.

Its website has a page called “Israel Fast Facts” which attempts to showcase the most relevant information about the modern state of Israel.

The “Timeline” runs from November 2, 1917 until January 28, 2020 (as of this writing). From the 1917 Balfour Declaration until Israel’s independence in May 1948, CNN wrote that there were “riots” between 1936 and 1939 due to “tensions between Arabs and Jewish settlers.

  • For CNN, every single Jew who came to Palestine was a “settler.” In today’s parlance, CNN and the liberal media call any Jew living east of the 1949 Armistice Lines a “settler” committing an illegal activity. Does CNN believe that every Jew who came to Palestine did so illegally? The facts that Jews have been a majority in Jerusalem since the 1860’s and many thousands of Jews lived in the land for years is unmentioned and irrelevant.
  • The “riots” included massacres of Jewish civilians as in Hebron in 1929. However, no blame on Arabs or Jewish victims are noted.
  • The 1936-9 Arab riots resulted in the British succumbing to Arab pressure to issue a White Paper limiting the immigration of Jews into Palestine to 75,000 over five years, just as the Holocaust in Europe was starting. CNN failed to mention the Arab riots not only killing hundred of Jews in Palestine but resulting in over 100,000 dead Jews in Europe.

Two papal visits are listed in CNN’s timeline, in 1964 and 2000. It is unclear how that is critical to the history of Israel as CNN does not list papal visits to other countries like Lebanon in their timelines.

Dozens of Palestinian terrorist attacks around the world are unmentioned, and the sole attack listed by CNN was the slaughter of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympic Games, which failed to label the terrorists as Palestinian.

There is no mention of Hamas being formed in 1987, the publication of its anti-Semitic charter calling for the killing of Jews and destruction of Israel in 1988, its election to a majority of the Palestinian parliament in 2006 or its routing of Fatah and takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2007.

No mention of Israel’s peace agreement with Jordan in 1994.

While CNN mentioned the Gaza Disengagement Plan in December 2003, it failed to mention the April 2004 letter from US President George W. Bush to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in conjunction with such action, clearly stating the US position that a two-state solution would NOT run along the 1949 Armistice Lines.

The May 2010 Turkish flotilla to Gaza is referred to as bringing “humanitarian supplies,” in which “nine activists” were killed by Israeli commandos. Lost in this description was that the boat refused to dock peacefully in an Israeli port to have the supplies delivered to Gaza and that the “activists” actively beat the Israelis with the soldiers responding in a defensive action.

Continuing its theme of Israelis being aggressors, CNN wrote about Israeli confrontations with Hamas in 2008, 2014 and 2018 mentioning the number of Palestinians killed but never mentioning any Israelis killed or injured.

CNN map of Israel, referring to “East Jerusalem,” a place that only existed for 19 years as an artifice of war

CNN’s timeline of Israel’s history includes thousands of dead Palestinians at the hands of Israelis but not a single dead or injured Israeli by Palestinians. It further minimized Palestinian terrorist attacks against Jews around the world with only a solitary mention of the massacre of Israeli athletes at the Olympics and even then, refusing to state the terrorists were Palestinian.

And CNN goes further to label Israelis as militants and Palestinians as victims by describing every Jew that ever came to Israel as a “settler,” inherently deserving of Arab wrath.


Related First One Through articles:

Christiane Amanpour is More Anti-Semitic Than Ilhan Omar

CNN’s Politicization of Antisemitic Murder

CNN Will Not Report Islamic Terrorism

Social Media’s “Fake News” and Mainstream Media’s Half-Truths

Review of Media Headlines on Palestinian Arab Terror Spree

Related First One Through video:

Israel Provokes the Palestinians (music by The Clash)

Netanyahu Apology to Erdogan (music by Joe Cocker)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough