Is Israel Its Own Worst Enemy? – No!

Pages: 1 2

Below is an open letter to Nicholas Kristof regarding his New York Times column of October 5, 2011, “Is Israel its own worst Enemy?”

Dear Mr. Kristof,

Your essay of October 5 in the New York Times, “Is Israel its own worst enemy?” raised several questions.

You reference “the Palestinian Cause.”  What is the Palestinian cause?  Arafat used to assert that it was ending Israeli occupation and getting his state. Remember Marwan Barghouti’s moving op-ed in the Washington Post back in 2002? (“Want Security? End the Occupation”).  But let’s recall that Palestinian leaders have always been candid with their own, while selling us the bill of goods that we want to hear.  The Hajj Amin el-Husseini, Jerusalem’s “Grand Mufti” back in the Mandate era (1922-1947), minced no words about his end game: the annihilation of the Jews of Palestine. Hence his alliance with Hitler and his plans for a concentration camp, replete with gas chambers and crematoria, in Nablus.

And Arafat, while speaking plaintively to us about occupation and the destitute Palestinians who have only their bodies with which to fight (hoping that such a deceitful concept would justify suicide bombers, and that we would not notice the 50 tons of armament on the Karine A), ranted to his followers in Arabic : Jihad, Jihad, Jihad; a million martyr; from the River to the Sea Palestine will be free (no room for Israel in that scenario); the goal is not peace, the goal is victory and victory is the destruction of Israel.

Hamas is worse.  Not only does the Hamas Covenant commit to the destruction of Israel, but also their leaders exhort to the annihilation of every Jew in “Palestine.”

And now, after two intifadas and thousands of qasam rockets and thousands of Israelis and Palestinians dead and thousands more wounded or maimed for life, Abbas goes to the UN and tells the world that getting his state will not end the conflict.  Instead, having his state will enable him to pursue the conflict more efficaciously.

So obviously the “Palestinian cause” is NOT the end of the occupation and the creation of a Palestinian state. The end is the destruction of Israel and the annihilation of its Jews….and the Palestinian leaders tell us this themselves, in the NY Times and in the UN and on their own radio and TV and newspapers and with hate-teach in their schools and hate-preach in their mosques.  These are not “radicals” or “extremists,” a few weirdoes whose crank ideas are out of step with their own society. These are the President of the PA, its Ambassador to Lebanon, the rulers of Hamas, the highest imams (Muslim spiritual leaders) of the Palestinian people, the directors of the PA’s ministry of education, etc.

You harshly critique Prime Minister Netanyahu’s hard line on settlements.  But are the “settlements” the cause for the violence?

Recall that the PLO was formed in 1964.  There were no “settlements” then, except the “settlements” of Tel Aviv and Haifa and the rest of down-town Israel. None the less, Arafat and his cronies vowed to end the occupation, wipe Israel off the map, replace it with Palestine, and kill its Jews.   Keep in mind that the original version of the “PLO Covenant” (1964, Article 24) stated specifically: “This Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, in the Gaza Strip or the Himmah area. Since the PLO’s original Covenant explicitly recognized Judea, Samaria, and the eastern portion of Jerusalem, and Gaza as belonging to other Arab states, the only “homeland” it sought to “liberate” in 1964 was the State of Israel. However, the PLO revised its Covenant on July 17, 1968, a year after the Six-Day War, to remove the operative language of Article 24, thereby asserting for the first time ever a “Palestinian” claim of sovereignty to the West Bank and Gaza Strip. This area was not part of the “Palestinian Homeland” in 1964 when it was under Jordanian sovereignty; but when it came under Israeli sovereignty it suddenly took on a new faux-historic status.

Palestinian leader tell us, perhaps without meaning to, that settlements are not the problem.  Note too that good old fashioned concept central to western logic:  cause and effect.  Cause must come before effect.  The West Bank “settlements” cannot be the cause of the terrorism and the hatred and the violence because all of those existed before there were any West Bank “settlements;” nor have these bleak and tragic attributes abated in the slightest with the end of all Israeli “settlements” in the Gaza Strip.

This radical concept, that the “settlements are not the problem,” was validated by none other than a member of the Palestinian National Council, Zahir Muhse’in,  in his interview with the Amsterdam-based newspaper “Trouw”[i] in 1977:

“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism. For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.”

Pages: 1 2

  • agarron

    Enuf of this Palestinian Rubbish.
    Here's their own leadership telling their 'secret' plans.

    • derick

      If your country was stolen by underhand means, would you not have the same approach as the Palestinians? Sit down and think about this question honestly. I find that whenever I challenge Zionists to think honestly, my comment is removed. Does this mean that Zionist are not allowed to think honestly?

      • joelsk44039

        The Palestinians NEVER had a country in any defined sense. How is it that you can make this statement as FACT when it is utterly false?

  • SHmuelHaLevi

    Repeatedly the islamic low lifes have mass murdered everywhere they happen to be as proven by the 9/11 attack, bombings, lynchings, decapitations, ghastly torture just about everywhere they reside at,.but I will address mainly the bestial entities gruesome attacks on babies, pregnant women, old people, etc, Jews in Eretz Israel.
    They have made amply clear what is their objective and I accept their platforms as truly being expressions of their ultimate goal.
    Here is our goal.
    Total destruction of the islamic cult of death. Nah! No oil for peace or land for peace with the filth.
    Our view is that since in their own recognition they do not exist, we only need to make sure that that fact is made a reality.
    The rest is just a simple consequence from that.

  • jbtrevor

    In listing Israel's worst enemies in the 3rd to the last paragraph, the author (David Meir-Levi) omitted the world's main stream media outlets, including the NYTimes.

  • al Kidya

    There will only be peace in the Middle East, and the world for that matter, when Islam is abolished from the face of the earth, it's mosques torn down and all of its literature burned to ashes never to rise again.

  • maturin20

    Most national movements, I hesitate to say all, begin in terror. That's what a nation is. Fear.

  • Kranti

    What a load of zionist apologista hokum. I would have expected better from someone who supposedly lectured at a university. Those of us who actually properly research the current issues in the ME know that Israel has noone to blame but herself. To expect such a mindless diatribe to sway anyones opinion after a modicum of fair investigating is the height of ignorance. Mearsheimer and Walt tell a very different story of Israels motivations, so does Norman Finklestein. Even Chomsky knows better. So sad.

    • stern

      You write "properly research" – and then you quote Measheimer and Walt, Finkelstein and Chomsky as your sources?
      If "properly research" means looking only at those "analysts" who agree with your pre-conceived notions, then you've done your job. However, if "properly research" means considering the reality of a situation, learning the history, reading opinions from ALL sides and then arriving at a balanced opinion of your own, then what you do here is considerably less than half-assed.

      So do us all a favour. Go away, do some "proper" research and then come back here and maybe we'll listen to you. This is not the forum in which you can spout your hatred, biases and garbage and get away with it unchallenged.

      • StephenD

        Stern, well said except you allow for him to come to a "balanced opinion" when the truth is based in fact. He cannot ever refute the facts as they are well stated by the author. Opinions on the other hand are like A**holes…everyone has one and most of them stink.

        • stern

          Point taken. And I really enjoy your conclusion!

    • johnnywoods

      Kranti, You should go to one of those things known as a library and study some history on the Middle East and the Israeli/Palestinian Conflict. Then you can say you "properly researched' this situation.

  • Flipside

    Mr. Meir-Levi, you are a caricature. You are an Israeli living in Palo Alto, California while pining that life in Israel is difficult because Palestinians exist. You use the argument that because bad things happened in the distant past to people tangentally related to you, that genocide in the present is acceptable. This cornball hypothesis doesn’t work for child rapists who had a tough upbringing, and it doesn’t work for you.

    • stern

      What "genocide in the present"? Who is committing genocide against whom?

      • Flipside

        Don’t play stupid. Levi wants Palestine to be prohibited from nationhood and its people ethnically cleansed from the region.

        • stern

          1. Where does Levi say that?
          2. In 1993, Israel ceded large parts of the West Bank to the Palestinians, giving them de facto control over their own lives – control they still have today.
          3. In 2005, Israel pulled out of Gaza completely
          4. In 2000 and again in 2008, Israel offered the Palestinians somewhere between 93% and 97% of the West Bank, with land swaps to make it up to 100%.

          These are all facts that you cannot deny. How is this ethnic cleansing?

          (Oh, and don't think we didn't notice that your accusation of "genocide" suddenly transformed into "ethnically cleansing". You know you can't support your first accusation, so you change it. Unfortunately for you, you cannot support your second accusation either.

          As for whether I'm playing stupid, I would think that a good definition of stupid would be someone who clings to their preconceptions despite all evidence proving them wrong. Which sure sounds like you.

          • stern

            One more thing. The only – ONLY – people who have been ethnically cleansed by Israel are Jews; they were ethnically cleansed from Gaza in 2005 and they continue to be ethnically cleansed from places like Migron.

            Another fact you have trouble dealing with, Flipper (I think this is a more appropriate name for you as your speciality is flipping the truth on its head.)

        • Flipside

          1) When did Jeffery Dahmer announce that he found peoples heads tasty? He didn’t. It just follows.
          2) Jacob an Esau BS.
          3) Why don’t they pull out of America too?
          4) Pulling a knife 93 to 97% of the way out of someone’s back isn’t a favor.

          You opened with playing stupid and you followed up with a bunch of crap about how Israel backed out of occupation and everybody lived happily ever after until the Palestinians messed it up. Quite simply, this is why Israel is disliked.

          • stern

            Poor Flipper. Faced with reasoned argument and facts, he is helpless and has to resort to nonsense. Jeffrey Dahmer indeed.

            I keep wondering why I bother replying to flipper idiocies, but now I know. It's just so much fun to see him squirm.

          • Flipside

            A reasoned argument was already presented. In that one, Israel simply refrain from insisting Palestinians play dead and refrain from expanding settlements. Then they shut up and let the state go to referendum. After that, if Palestinians do anything wrong, nobody cares. Blow them to hell. The reasoned argument involves Israel not acting like a scared girl and blowing up the US press every five minutes.

          • stern

            So how's this for your "reasoned" argument. Israel walked away from Gaza, completely. Not a single "settler", not a single soldier, not even a dead body left behind. Just a couple of highly successful agricultural buildings, some houses and synagogues. At this point, there was no border barricade, no boycott. One of the arguments of those proposing this move promised that if "the Palestinians do anything wrong, nobody cares". They promised that if there was terrorism from Gaza, the world would understand when Israel fought back.

            Like that happened?

          • Ben Cohen

            You're wrong about this. When Arafat walked away from the bargaining table it was a huge defeat for everyone involved. That may have been (and I hope not), the last best hope for peace.

    • Ghostwriter

      No,Flipside. You're the caricature here. You are a disgusting piece of anti-semitic filth who basically worships people like Hitler. If you had any modicum of decency or humanity,you'll stop your incessant Jew-bashing. The Jews have suffered enough. They don't need morality lectures from someone who despises the very existence of Jews.

      • Flipside

        I think they do. Anybody with a 16 year old daughter in the army and an armored bulldozer in somebody else's front yard needs a good morality lecture.

        • stern

          Man do you deserve the name you've chosen for yourself. You see absolutely everything in reverse. For you, good is bad, right is wrong, white is black. Why the f…. do you think Israelis have their daughters in the army? Do you honestly believe that this is something Israelis choose? Do you truly believe Israel wants her children to spend three years away from home, while kids everywhere else in the world are at university, starting on their lives.

          You're not only perverse. You're a perverse idiot.

          • Flipside

            Yes. I do believe that all countries with a draft choose that.

  • Susan Q

    Help the Palestinians – ship them all to Saudi Arabia!

  • Flipside

    I truly hate dem joos cause my pecker is so very tiny!

    • Flipside

      James, you should stop speculating about my genitals.

    • johnnywoods

      True, no doubt. It matches your brain.

  • Kranti

    I hate dem Joos cause my momma ran away with the milkman and left me to be raised with the barnyard animals

  • Edwin Svigals

    Kristof has to produce a column: that's his job. Free of any original ideas, he simply selects a bit of conventional wisdom from the left, polishes it up a bit, writes his column in a trice, and his work is done for the day.
    The man is as shallow as can be….

  • Dr Dave

    Stop waisting time trying to convince the self-loathing Jews who run the New York Times that they should stop what they were paid to do. There is absolutely no logical argument that will sway them or their like-mined readership. Also be aware that there is a fall court press in the liberal media being waged by the Obama administration designed to topple Netanyahu & prop up weak Livni. They are of the foolish impression that the liberal Jews of the Upper West Side can influence their Israel brothers & sisters. As far as Kristof goes, the real question is "Are Jews their own worst enemy? " and clearly the answer is yes as many gladly play the stereotypical role which is expected of them by their non-Jewish "friends" which is that of "Judas!".

  • Marty

    The new york times must require that only delusional columnists can write for the paper. That is bad enough, but they are contributing to the myth that only by making further territorial concessions to its genocidal enemies can Israel have peace. And what is there left to concede: the Israeli capital city perhaps? Who exactly is the recipient of Israeli concessions? hamas, the humanitarian organization that wants every Jew murdered or the palestinian authority, an inherently corrupt and inept regime that imprisons and tortures its own citizens? Even Israeli arabs don't want further concessions because they fully understand the monsterous mindset that covets the destruction of the only democracy ever to appear in the Middle East.

  • Fred Remington

    Help me out here. Since 1948 the Arab Palestinian population has increased five fold and their life expectancy has gone from 42 years of age to 70, while under occupation. Where is the genocide I keep hearing about?

    Fred Remington

  • WilliamJamesWard

    Kristof was left off of the list of Isreal's enemies, the man is anti-Semetic, the
    reasons may be his own but he wears them like a crown propagandizing for
    the foul Palestinian death cult of Islam……………………………………..William

  • Ben Cohen

    Mr. Meir Levi,

    The Israeli hard liners really are Israel's biggest enemy. While the vast majority of Israeli Jews want to live safely within a state that is Jewish and Democratic, the hardliners have a different agenda. Their agenda is too control as much of the holy land as possible regardless of the political or military consequences. This extremist clique jerks around the other 95% of Jews. The situation is very much like what happened in the American south where a tiny slave owning clique led the majority of southerners to support secession.

    As I've said before and I will repeat:

    Israel has two options annexing the West Bank and Gaza, or allowing these territories independence. If they annex them Israel is no longer a Jewish state, but a Sunni Arab state, clearly there is only one option. The settlements make this option harder and harder to implement because it has always been assumed that the settlements will either be annexed or evacuated; both of which are difficult tasks, evacuation requires sending soldiers to move people and paying them for the land and annexation requires further concessions to the Palestinians and complicated border redrawing.

    Clearly if the Israelis were interested in peace they would not be expanding the settlements. That they are is an unambiguous signal to the rest of the world that they do not desire peace. This is clear to everyone except for the majority of Jews who have the wool pulled firmly over their eyes.

    • stern

      Do you even know what is happening in the West Bank? Clearly you don't. Israel is not taking up more land in expanding the "settlements". All growth is natural (for families that are having more kids, and need more rooms in their homes or more schools, hospitals and other facilities – or do you have a problem with that? Do you believe that Israeli families are not allowed to grow?) and is WITHIN existing settlement borders.

      Want proof? Have a look at every single Israeli offer since Camp David. Israel has offered between 93% and 97% of the West Bank, with land swaps (all offers have either been turned down or simply ignored). This makes claims like yours, of more and more land being "stolen", leaving nothing for the poor Palestinians, absolutely ridiculous.

      Do the math and you can easily see that the settlements take up at the very most, 7% of the land. 7 PER CENT!!!! Get that through your head and you'll realize that your "either/or" claims are ridiculous.

      • Ben Cohen

        I find it hard to believe that all of the increase over the last decade has been natural growth….Since 2004 the number of Westbank settlers has increased by 70,000.

        I will agree that the impact of the settlements can be overstated, but still….

        • stern

          I did not say over the last decade. However, it's perfectly clear that accusations of land "theft" are horribly overblown.