|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
[Editor’s note: Make sure to read Robert Spencer’s masterpiece contributions in Jamie Glazov’s new book: Barack Obama’s True Legacy: How He Transformed America.]
If the Palestinian Arabs really wanted a state, they would have accepted one of the many offers that have been made to them to establish one, going back to 1948. What they really want to do is destroy Israel utterly, in accord with the succinct Qur’anic command: “Drive them out from where they drove you out” (2:191). It is actually a historical myth that the Israelis drove the Arabs out; the Arab Higher Committee told them to leave, but that fact has been obscured by decades of propaganda. Now, however, no less a luminary than Sami al-Arian, a former U.S. academic and darling of the Left, has revealed the truth: the goal of the Palestinian jihad is not a Palestinian state, but the demise of the Jewish state.
Speaking on Al Jazeera on July 30, al-Arian said: “In my view, the Palestinian cause is not about creating a state, like everybody says. It is not about a one-state solution or a two-state solution. The Palestinian cause has to do with the very presence of Zionism in the region. Therefore, our greatest strategic goal, in the meantime, we can take steps, but the greatest strategic goal is to dismantle the State of Israel, which means uprooting Zionism from Palestine.”
Sami al-Arian has been an enemy of Israel for a long time. A former professor at the University of South Florida, he pleaded guilty back in 2006 to a charge of “conspiracy to make or receive contributions of funds to or for the benefit of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a Specially Designated Terrorist” organization. He was then deported from the United States, but he remains a darling of American academia. In Dec. 2022, Indiana University featured him as a speaker. In 2021, according to JNS, al-Arian organized a conference that was co-sponsored by the University of Denver’s Josef Korbel School for International Studies. Conference speakers denounced Israel as the “apartheid Jewish Zionist colonial state” and called for its eradication. The program, JNS reported, was “replete with Palestinian propaganda, revisionist history, and blatant anti-Semitism and anti-Israel vitriol.”
At that conference, Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s al-Arian denounced Israel in the hysterically false terms that are now becoming familiar in America thanks to the likes of Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Mogadishu) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Ramallah): “There is no doubt we are talking about a settler, colonialist movement. What we see here today is an attempt to depopulate the indigenous people, and bring in as many Jews from around the world and try to bring a system that is properly being identified now as apartheid. There is no doubt about this.”
Israel, al-Arian thundered, was a “racist movement,” a “Zionist onslaught” that was directed toward replacing the “indigenous people.” The solution? Israel’s total destruction: “the essence of the struggle should be to dismantle this structure.”
Al-Arian has been quite clear about his views for decades. In 1991, during a speech in Chicago, al-Arian screamed: “The Quran is our constitution. Jihad is our path … Victory to Islam… Death to Israel… Revolution… revolution till the victory.”
Showing he hadn’t changed, in mid-December 2020, al-Arian spoke via Zoom at the Fourth International Conference on the Muslim Ummah. There al-Arian also called for “defeating and dismantling the Zionist project,” adding: “We cannot pursue an ummah project without actually attaining our real independence. We cannot attain our real independence without dealing with the problem of Israel….As long as Israel exists, the ummah will stay weak and fragmented, and disunited and divided and dependent and under control.”
Numerous American academics and other Leftists have counted al-Arian as a friend for years and were anxious to portray him as a victim of “Islamophobia.” Before al-Arian pleaded guilty, he was dismissed from his post at the University of South Florida, whereupon Georgetown Professor John Esposito claimed that al-Arian was merely falling victim to “anti-Arab and anti-Muslim bigotry.”
Al-Arian himself pushed all the right buttons as well, declaring: “I’m a minority. I’m an Arab, I’m Palestinian. I’m a Muslim. That’s not a popular thing to be these days. Do I have rights, or don’t I have rights?” In March 2002, Nicholas Kristof went to bat for the professor in the New York Times: “The point is not whether one agrees with Professor Al-Arian, a rumpled academic with a salt-and-pepper beard who is harshly critical of Israel (and also of repressive Arab countries) — but who also denounces terrorism, promotes inter-faith services with Jews and Christians, and led students at his Islamic school to a memorial service after 9/11 where they all sang ‘God Bless America.’ No, the larger point is that a university, even a country, becomes sterile when people are too intimidated to say things out of the mainstream.”
Phil Donahue fawned over al-Arian on his show. “So, one more time, sir,” he said to the professor, “and I know that you’re probably getting tired of these same questions — ‘death to Israel’ did not mean you wanted to kill Jews, do I understand your position?” After Al-Arian assured him of his pacifistic intentions, Phil went on to allege that “the law of innocent until proven guilty doesn’t seem to exist for Professor Sami Al-Arian.” He worried for al-Arian’s safety: “You are swimming upstream, professor, and this must be quite a shock to you. I know that your life has been threatened. I assume you have security.” In a 2002 defense of al-Arian in Salon, Eric Boehlert wrote: “The al-Arian story reveals what happens when journalists, abandoning their role as unbiased observers, lead an ignorant, alarmist crusade against suspicious foreigners who in a time of war don’t have the power of the press or public sympathy to fight back.”
None of those people are apologizing now that al-Arian has revealed beyond any doubt what he is all about. Now, why is that?
“In my view, the Palestinian cause is not about creating a state, like everybody says. It is not about a one-state solution or a two-state solution. The Palestinian cause has to do with the very presence of Zionism in the region. Therefore, our greatest strategic goal, in the meantime, we can take steps, but the greatest strategic goal is to dismantle the State of Israel, which means uprooting Zionism from Palestine.” Well duh.
All,
It’s bigger than “Kassandra’s” premise. This article’s premise ( unbeknownst to the author) is about world domination.
Israel has known this ever since the establishment of the State of Israel. That Israeli governments have tried to make peace is not testament to stupidity, but rather a testament to the fact that we do want peace. But not at any price. So we remain vigilant and, contrary to other countries’ wishes, we exact a heavy price from those who try to kill,us. Time for the world to deal with it. And time for Biden and his clowns to butt out.
The “progressive” Left supports a movement which would finish Hitler’s work..
Arafat himself admitted (before the ink on Oslo I was dry that he had no intention of true peace or recognition of Israel. He likened Oslo to the “hudna” or truce Muhammad made with Jewish tribes in Arabia. Those Jews were comprehensively annihilated when the “hudna” ceased to be expedient. The attitude of the Palestinians can be discerned easily: the “moderate Palestinian President” Mahmoud Abbas (whose term was supposed to end 13 years ago) wrote his doctoral thesis (at Patrice Lumumba University in Moscow, a school for budding terrorists) denying the Holocaust; he also denies that a Temple ever existed in Jerusalem. “Moderate Palestinian spokeswoman” Hanan Ashrawi has twice been caught peddling blood libels about Jews in a newsletter she publishes. In Gaza one can buy clothing at “Hitler 2” which features knife wielding mannequins.
The Nobel committee long ago lost any credibility.
No mater what we get from the M.S. Media we now know what the Jihad wants and its aided and abetted by China and Russia
And the U.S. democommunist party.
“If the Palestinian Arabs really wanted a state, they would have accepted one of the many offers that have been made to them to establish one, going back to 1948”
There was a partition plan in 1937. “The Peel Commission recommended for the first time a partition of the land into a Jewish state and an Arab state alongside an international zone.”
Partition plan which was rejected by the Arab league.
There were in all five possibilities for the Arabs of this region to have a state, five times this was accepted by the Jewish authorities, five times refused by the Arab authorities. Without the local populations being consulted.
I find it very distressing when an article such as this, which clearly sets out to reveal a wicked man and those people who, by association, are knowingly complicit in promoting his wickedness, broadcasting his lies to the public, actually ends up, unintentionally, sounding like a primer for anti-Semitism: where to work, what to say, how to ingratiate yourself with influential people who have latent or tacit Jew/Zion hatred, who will hide behind someone else’s despicable words, have the public’s ear, who are willing to assist and enable, especially when it also boosts their ratings and professional careers and, of course, the remuneration.
It sounds like a primer because there are no counter statements of truth to the lies and hatred. For every quote from this ‘rasha’ (‘evil man’ in Hebrew) and his willing supporters, there should be included by the writer – not from a reader making a comment- a counter statement of truth. Every quoted false statement requires a counter statement of truth in print.
It is assumed that the reader knows the truth, but that’s not enough. Good words must defeat evil words. Evil words lead to evil thoughts which lead to evil action.
For instance, this savage says he’s a minority. The counter statement should be he’s one of two billion. And there are over twenty exclusively Arab countries and the number of exclusively Muslim countries is almost triple that. He doesn’t believe in nationhood. He knows there’s no such thing as a Palestinian citizen. He believes in worldhood.
To where was this bad man deported? What country claimed him, took him in?
Why exactly was he deported?
Unfortunately, unlike the United States, Israel is not afforded the right apparently to deport all the terrorists, let alone hostile university professors, from within her borders. Who would take them? After all, they are no longer citizens of any real nation, right? Post 1967 war, Jordan and Egypt abandoned their citizens living in Samaria, Yehuda and Gaza and revoked their citizenship. And, oh, there’s just no room to accept deportees to Jordan, which is 90% uninhabited and Egypt, which is 95% uninhabited.
“Why does the world have no shame?” is another question to ask.
I like how he states that he is a Palestinian – he was born in Kuwait……
Palestinian who ethymologically refers to Philistine.
He is therefore from an Indo-European people who have disappeared for thousands of years.
Weird.