Manipulating the world to destruction

The Middle East crisis has reached a decisive point. From the entry of a relatively few Zionists to Palestine, the trajectory of the crisis has monotonically pursued a direction toward complete Zionist control of former Palestinian lands and complete disruption of Palestinian life.

A startled world wonders how this happened, while neglecting the social and psychological manipulations that preceded each stage of the Zionists’ forward movement. Unaware of this strategy of conditioning, the world fails to apply necessary countermeasures and halt a more far reaching conflagration.

Manipulating a world to enhance a nation’s interests is not unique, and especially easy for a country that is a global economic and military power. Citizens relish the strength that gives them respect and advantages, refuse to regard the harm done to others and are blinded to the eventual retribution.

Napoleon and Queen Victoria convinced their own and colonial subjects, for a while, that their armies, navies and administrations brought civilization and prosperity to subdued peoples. Nazi Germany had approval of its nationals and many peoples from other nations as its Panzers swept across a Europe that Hitler posed as one to which Germany would bring stability, peace and cleared of what he defined as the “scourge of liberalism.” The United States spread its influence with slogans of bringing freedom and democracy until injured peoples surveyed their dead and wounded and realized these were dubious phrases.

An expanding Israel is unique. Although not starting as a global economic and military power, Israel has advanced its frontiers with its own manipulations—convincing a part of the world that its development has been defensive, a reaction to events, and honestly implemented. Can we trust the words of a nation that, for whatever reason, occupies other people’s lands, has forced out the native peoples, committed a myriad of proven atrocities, changes daily the landmarks and artifacts of history to suit its agenda, and has maintained generations of Palestinians in oppressive and captive conditions?

The manipulated scenario describes dispersed Jews seeking a national home, obtaining it after fleeing the World War II Holocaust and arriving in the land of their ancestors, which, as Israeli education teaches students, was given to them by a vote from the United Nations. Because of consistent attacks upon the Yishuv, the Jewish residents in Palestine and their Israeli descendants were forced to defend themselves. Conflicts caused turmoil, and a major part of the Arab population of Palestine became displaced. Continuous wars, forced upon Israel by adjacent Arab nations, pushed development of a strong military whose decisive victories captured territory for defensive purposes. For security reasons, Israel expanded its boundaries and placed immigrants in strategic locations in the West Bank. Roads and a security wall, which happened to cut through Palestinian lands, became necessary in order to prevent terrorists from entering the homeland. Security measures demanded absolute control of Palestinian movements. Unfortunately, a poorly directed and recalcitrant Palestinian community has been responsible for its decline and egregious fate.

Facts create a contradictory scenario, which will have its detractors. However, any refutation should argue with the facts and not the overall scenario.

History contradicts the portrayal of Zionism as a mass movement by the Jewish people. The Zionist message prompted nations to question the loyalty of their Jewish citizens, served to impede their advances, and reinforced a race-baiting theory that Jews engaged in international conspiracies. Proof is shown by the Russian Jews, who had major problems and did not consider Zionism as a relief for their difficulties. Between 1881 and 1914, 2.5 million Jews migrated from Russia—1.7 million to America, 500,000 to Western Europe, almost 300,000 to other nations, and only 30,000—50,000 to Palestine (ED: 15,000 returned to Russia).

Plans for establishing a nation on Palestinian lands occurred long before World War II, and therefore the World War II Holocaust had no relation to the Zionist concept for the creation of a state. The settlers, of whom only 180,000 came from refugee camps, arrived in Palestine with no more verified connection with the ancient Hebrews than many other ethnicities. Known to archaeology and accepted history (not Biblical history) as mainly wandering tribes that established themselves in hilltop areas of Canaan, the Hebrews never formed a vibrant civilization or a unified nation of extensive administered territory.

Not only is it unproven that the land to which European Zionists returned was a land of their forefathers, but the claim is supercilious—in a world of democratic law, legal qualifications, not self-proclaimed and spurious identifications that span thousands of years, determine land ownership, and the Zionists had no legal claims, while Palestinian people had occupied and tilled the area for generations.

Identification of Hebrews as Jews happened principally during the during the fifth century B.C., after Hebrews returned from exile in Persia with a more complete vision of monotheistic Judaism, and later in Mesopotamia during the fifth century A.D., where the center of Rabbinical Judaism composed the main body of Jewish law, the Babylonian (not the Jerusalem) Talmud.

Skip one thousand five hundred years to the 1948 War, when 700,000 Palestinians fled their homes and Israel refused to allow them to return to their ancestral lands. During the Palestinian exodus, known atrocities, forcible evictions and brutal attacks, all planned to intimidate Palestinian families to leave, have been documented. Israel destroyed 411 Arab villages, and engaged in several wars with its neighbors in which the kill ratio overwhelmingly favored Israel, and by which Israel doubled its original territory.

For more than sixty years, Palestinians have seen their lands appropriated and their lives controlled by an Israel military authority. The Israeli army occupies the Jordan valley, and slowly clears it of Palestinian presence, while Israeli settlers, mostly immigrants from foreign nations, occupy the West Bank and East Jerusalem. All these endeavors have been declared illegal by several United Nation resolutions.

President Barack Obama’s recent voyage to Israel exposes and emphasizes the conditioning of the world community to acceptance of the Zionist agenda. It is difficult to believe that an erudite President Obama prepared the speech. Examine some of his statements.

I’ve borne witness to the ancient history of the Jewish people at the Shrine of the Book,

The Shrine of the Book only houses the Dead Sea scrolls and the Aleppo codex, which are controversial rewrites of Biblical scrolls and not historical documents. Touring Jerusalem’s Rockefeller Archaeological Museum and the Bible Lands Museum, which is across from the Shrine of the Book, demonstrates that there are few significant artifacts of an established Hebrew civilization in the Middle East—no constructions other than those from ninth century B.C. King Omri era, nor statues, monuments, roads, ships, national commerce, weapons, treasures, utensils, jewelry, communication, transportation, and significant documents, other than the Bible, that have survived and can be attributed to the efforts of the ancient Hebrews before the sixth century Babylonian invasion of the Levant.

It’s a story of centuries of slavery, and years of wandering in the desert; a story of perseverance amidst persecution, and faith in God and the Torah. It’s a story about finding freedom in your own land. And for the Jewish people, this story is central to who you’ve become. But it’s also a story that holds within it the universal human experience, with all of its suffering, but also all of its salvation.

These are Biblical stories, refuted by Israel’s most recognized archaeologists and historians, such as Prof. Ze’ev Herzog, Deconstructing the Walls of Jericho , Ha’aretz Magazine, Oct. 29, 1999.

Although the ancient Egyptians maintained detailed recordings of their lives and later academics compiled that history, no historical evidence has been presented of centuries of Hebrew slavery and their years of wandering in the desert. The Sinai desert has never exposed the wanderings and the Hebrew language did not exist during the supposed time. The “exodus” did not free the Jews—just the opposite—it has been used to keep Jews in perpetual bondage to a false sense of history and given them a conscience that sees themselves as eternal victims, and distracts them from realizing that they may also play a role in the injustices done to others.

For the Jewish people, the journey to the promise of the State of Israel wound through countless generations. It involved centuries of suffering and exile, prejudice and pogroms and even genocide. Through it all, the Jewish people sustained their unique identity and traditions, as well as a longing to return home. And while Jews achieved extraordinary success in many parts of the world, the dream of true freedom finally found its full expression in the Zionist idea—to be a free people in your homeland. That’s why I believe that Israel is rooted not just in history and tradition, but also in a simple and profound idea—the idea that people deserve to be free in a land of their own.

Mostly true, except for using the concept of a Jewish people. Two persons make a people, but a people don’t make a nation. A nation refers to a community of people who share a common language, culture, ethnicity, descent, and history. The Jews, similar to the Mennonites, Jehovah Witnesses, Basques, and myriads of other religious and ethnic groups did not share the attributes of a nation. If it were otherwise, why has Israel’s thrust been to give its Jews a new frame of a nation—a common language, culture, descent and history. The Mizrahi, who came to Israel, were Arabs; the Europeans were Ashkenazi; the Ethiopians were Falasha and the Yemenites were from the Arabian peninsula. The differing languages, dialects, music, cultures and heritage of these ethnicities have been discarded and replaced by unique and uniform characteristics. With the destruction of each community went the destruction of centuries old Jewish history and life in Tunisia, Iraq, Libya and Egypt. All these immigrants became a new Jew, an Israeli Jew, which unlike the Iraqi Jews, who were probably the closest relatives to the ancient Jews, had no proven lineage to the biblical Hebrews.

If Obama is sincere in helping people from their journey as a people to a nation, he should give attention to the aspirations of the Kurds, Assyrians and Nubians. Each of these peoples, who have suffered greatly throughout history, and still suffer today, especially the three million Assyrians, have all the elements of a people and were well recognized and established as nations in previous eras. Maybe a little prejudice and favoritism to others permits them to be disregarded.

I know Israel has taken risks for peace. Brave leaders—Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Rabin—reached treaties with two of your neighbors. You made credible proposals to the Palestinians at Annapolis. You withdrew from Gaza and Lebanon, and then faced terror and rockets. Across the region, you’ve extended a hand of friendship and all too often you’ve been confronted with rejection and, in some cases, the ugly reality of anti-Semitism. So I believe that the Israeli people do want peace, and I also understand why too many Israelis—maybe an increasing number, maybe a lot of young people here today—are skeptical that it can be achieved.

The two mentioned Israeli leaders could never redeem themselves for their severe atrocities against the Palestinians. Begin held office as Prime Minister during the first invasion of Lebanon and during the attacks on the Palestinian refugee camps at Sabra and Shatila. Excerpts from the Kahan Commission report:

On the evening of September 16, 1982, a force of about 150 Phalangists entered the Sabra and Shatila camps under Israeli protection. It subsequently developed that instead of restoring order, the Phalangists perpetrated a massacre in the camps. Estimates of the number of people killed and missing vary from about 460 (Red Cross estimates) to 700 (IDF intelligence estimate) to 2,000 (Palestinian estimates). There is no doubt that the victims included women and children, as well as unarmed men, and were mostly not Palestinian fighters killed in the heat of battle.

The Kahan Commission determined that Ariel Sharon and several others were at least negligent in their duty and should have known that there was a danger that such massacres might occur. Under these circumstances they should not have permitted the Phalangists to enter the camps, or should have at least taken steps to ensure that no massacres occurred, or should have intervened to investigate and stop the massacres once suspicious reports began coming out of the camps.

Yitzhak Rabin was responsible for the Palestinian Exodus from Lydda and Ramle in 1948. Historian Benny Morris wrote in “Operation Dani and the Palestinian Exodus from Lydda and Ramle in 1948″, Middle East Journal, 40:

At 13.30 hours on 12 July [1948] . . . Lieutenant-Colonel Yitzhak Rabin, operation Dani head Operation, issued the following order: ’1. The inhabitants of Lydda must be expelled quickly without attention to age. They should be directed to Beit Nabala, . . . Implement Immediately.’ A similar order was issued at the same time to the Kiryati Brigade concerning the inhabitants of the neighboring town of Ramle, occupied by Kiryati troops that morning . . . On 12 and 13 July, the Yaftah brigades carried out their orders, expelling the 50–60,000 remaining inhabitants of and refugees camped in and around the two towns . . .

Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces during the 1967 war, Yitzhak Rabin, was responsible for expelling about 5,000 inhabitants from three villages in the area between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem (Emwas, Beit Nuba and Yalou) and having the villages destroyed. The Jerusalem Post of 24 October 1991, reported that “Rabin admitted to Canadian TV that he gave the order to destroy the villages. The inhabitants were not allowed to return nor bury their dead.”

Rabin, as Defense Minister, is also known for the infamous “break their bones” decree during the first Intifada (1987), a means to make impotent the Palestinian male population. Reports had Palestinian youngsters rounded up from their homes, brought to remote areas, and while soldiers held them, had their bones smashed. Amira Hass in Haaretz, Nov.04, 2005, described the feelings “when Palestinians were asked about Rabin”:

. . . this is what they remember: One thinks of his hands, scarred by soldiers’ beatings; another remembers a friend who flitted between life and death in the hospital for 12 days, after he was beaten by soldiers who caught him drawing a slogan on a wall during a curfew. Yet another remembers the Al-Am’ari refugee camp; during the first Intifada, all its young men were hopping on crutches or were in casts because they had thrown stones at soldiers, who in turn chased after them and carried out Rabin’s order.

Prime Ministers Begin and Shamir were known terrorists during the British Mandate, the former being responsible for the bombing of the King David hotel and the latter accused of playing a role in the assassination of UN representative Folke Bernadotte. Manipulations prevented their trial for criminal efforts. Israel leadership, except for Moshe Sharret, who was forced to resign the office due to his conciliatory attitude toward the Palestinians, have been nationalist hawks, have encroached upon Palestinian lands and those, after 1967, pursued a policy of constructing West Bank settlements.

The rest of Obama’s appraisals in the former paragraph of his speech is subject to interpretation, and it is doubtful that much of the world would interpret the happenings as he expressed them.

Here, in this small strip of land that has been the center of so much of the world’s history, so much triumph and so much tragedy, Israelis have built something that few could have imagined 65 years ago.

This severe exaggeration is constantly repeated. Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Emirates, South Africa and many other countries have shown more dynamic growth since 1950, and, unlike Israel, achieved the progress without huge aid from the United States and Germany. Israel’s major cities of Tel Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem (except for the Old City) are routine in appearance and activity. Amman, Jordan, with its engineering marvels of tunnels and bridges, has much more appeal than Tel Aviv. A trip through Israel does not reveal any special advancements—some interesting tourist areas, mostly from Roman and Crusader times, and sterile urban areas, with pockets of poverty and deterioration. As for making the desert bloom, bring in irrigation and anything will bloom. Maybe Israel’s irrigation and desalinization methods are slightly more advanced, but Israel does not have any proprietary methods that money cannot buy. The Negev is no more vital than Phoenix, Arizona, or the farms that Qatar is building in the desert. Look at it another way—Israel has used huge quantities of water in a water deficient area and has destroyed the appearance of the biblical lands they claim to cherish, and which the Palestinians preserved for centuries.

At the Paris Peace Conference, the Zionists stated their mission and Israel has intended to fulfill that mission—incorporate all of former Palestine, and maybe more, into one Jewish state, or have nothing—and no Israeli Prime Minister dares to deter the Zionist state from its ultimate objective. Unlike, much of the world, the Arab nations are cognizant of Israel’s plans and scramble to prevent them. Despite the manipulation of rhetoric, the Arab world and Iran are consigned to an Israeli state, but not this Israeli state, not to a military state of exclusiveness, which treats Arabs as inferiors and promotes a singular group.

The world faces two choices—permit Israel to continue its expansionist polices and destroy the Middle East or bring democratic changes and level headed government to an Israel that is willing to share the country with the original landowners. The latter suggestion removes a major impediment to instability and conflict in the Middle East. Naturally, a corrupt and manipulated world will accept its own destruction.

Dan Lieberman is the DC-based editor of Alternative Insight, a commentary on foreign policy and politics. He is author of the book “A Third Party Can Succeed in America and a Kindle: “The Artistry of a Dog.” Dan can be reached at alternativeinsight@earthlink.net.