The Desert Bloom - An Insult to Human Dignity?

Reflecting upon the events of Islamo-Fascist Awareness Week, we felt compelled to once again examine the alleged source of all the chanting, frothing, eye-bulging, beheading, suicide-bomb vest-donning, IED-planting, plane-crashing, WMD-seeking passion that is Islamania: the existence of Israel.

At a recent Al Quds Day Celebration (October 5 if you missed it), the “It Girl” of contemporary fascism – Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – declared, “The creation of the Zionist Regime and the continuation of its existence are an insult to human dignity.” This is a most telling declaration on the part of Mr. Ahmadinejad (although it tends to get far fewer laughs than, “There are no homosexuals in Iran.”)

Therefore, let us now disassemble Mr. Ahmadinejad’s statement into two parts and analyze them separately. Then, employing Aristotle’s method of deductive reasoning, we shall reassemble them as the major and minor premises of a syllogism which will lead us to a reasoned conclusion. (Hint – for those of you not wanting to read the whole bloody post, our reasoned conclusion is that all this rubbish about “Zionism” is nothing more than brute racism, Islamo-Fascism is very very bad and not at all in the interest of actual human survival … oh and that Ahmadinejad is a jackass – but you knew that.)

Item 1. “The creation of the Zionist Regime and the continuation of its existence.”
In terms of the creation of the “Zionist Regime,” few individuals were as instrumental as Sir Winston Churchill. An unapologetic Zionist, Sir Winston fought passionately – at times virtually single-handedly – to hold Britain to the promises it made via the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and the subsequent Palestine Mandate of 1922 to facilitate the establishment a Jewish national home in Palestine.

Why? Did Sir Winston so hate the people of the nation of Palestine that he wished to force them from their homeland and replace them with Jews? No, for there was no, nor has there ever been such thing as a nation of Palestine. In his superlative essay, “Does Israel Have a Right to Exist,” Michael Medved writes:

“First of all, it’s not true in any sense that the modern Jewish State ever supplanted or destroyed an existing nation of “Palestine.” From the time of definitive destruction of the ancient Jewish commonwealth in 70 A.D., the land that comprises the current State of Israel never enjoyed independent existence but, rather, passed back and forth among competing world empires - Roman, Byzantine, Arab, Crusader, Mamaluke, Ottoman and British. Over the course of more than 1,800 years, no nation with the name “Palestine” appeared on any maps, anywhere.”

What there had been, and what enchanted spirits such as Sir Winston’s so thoroughly, however, was a slow but steady resettlement of the Holy Land over the centuries by Jewish immigrants who, by their own industry and ingenuity, were transforming a veritable wasteland into a prosperous community. As Sir Winston detailed in his White Paper of June 1922:

“During the last two or three generations the Jews have recreated in Palestine a community, now numbering 80,000, of whom about one fourth are farmers or workers upon the land. This community has its own political organs; an elected assembly for the direction of its domestic concerns; elected councils in the towns; and an organization for the control of its schools. It has its elected Chief Rabbinate and Rabbinical Council for the direction of its religious affairs. Its business is conducted in Hebrew as a vernacular language, and a Hebrew Press serves its needs. It has its distinctive intellectual life and displays considerable economic activity. This community, then, with its town and country population, its political, religious, and social organizations, its own language, its own customs, its own life, has in fact "national" characteristics."

Again, in 1939, before the British House of Commons Sir Winston related:

“Yesterday the Minister responsible descanted eloquently in glowing passages upon the magnificent work which the Jewish colonists have done. They have made the desert bloom. They have started a score of thriving industries, he said. They have founded a great city on the barren shore. They have harnessed the Jordan and spread its electricity throughout the land.”

But surely, all this Zionist prosperity came at the expense of the Arab Palestinians? In fact, quite the opposite is true, as Sir Winston pointed out:

“So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country and multiplied till their population has increased more than even all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish population.”

This fact is confirmed by many sources, including the Zionism and Israel Encyclopedic Dictionary whose excellent analysis of the Arab Revolt in Palestine states that by 1937:

“Palestine contained more Arabs than ever before in its history, and they enjoyed a higher standard of living than ever before…”

BUT (here’s where things start getting ugly)…

“…but they could only be supported as long as they were dependent on the economic activity of the Jewish minority and the investments of the Zionist movement. At the same time, the Arabs of Palestine insisted that this Jewish minority was dispossessing them and tried to rid themselves of the Jews and the Zionist enterprise. The Arabs would say that they had been impoverished by Zionist "dispossession," but in fact they enjoyed a higher standard of living and faster economic growth than their neighbors in Syria, Jordan or Egypt.”

So what was the cause of increasing Arab Palestinian dependence upon the Zionist economy? As detailed in the 2005 essay Zionism and Its Impact, Ami Isseroff explains that Arab Palestinian infighting, disorganization, and obsession with blaming the Jews resulted in “the almost total lack of constructive effort in building up their own institutions, investing in the Arab sector of the Palestinian economy and creating their own ‘state in the making’ as the Zionists did.” Envy instead of industry possessed the Arab Palestinian population, and – as is usually the case in such instances - violence erupted.

While the most significant violence of this era took place during “The Great Uprising” of 1936-1939, previous riots had set the stage in 1929. Here it is instructive (and somewhat amusing) to read the Arab account of the events of 1929, as compared to the Jewish account. We will leave the decision as to which seems the more credible to you the reader.

It is important to remember, however, that this violence – so nauseatingly similar to that of today – occurred at a time when there was not as yet any nation of Israel, no Israeli military, no 1948 War of Israeli Independence, no war of 1967 and Jewish taking of territory, noYom Kippur War of 1973, no oil, no Shah of Iran, no U.S. presence in Saudi Arabia, no sanctions on nor war in Iraq etc. etc. etc. all of the “atrocities” which our Islamaniac brethren point to today as justification for blowing up shopping malls, discothèques, and office buildings the world over. There were merely two communities in a desert – one thriving, one disintegrating – both by their own hands.

Many might here suggest that it was British repression of non-Jewish Palestinians in contrast to their support of the Jews that fueled such violence. While no one will deny that British support was decidedly behind Jewish efforts to extract civilization from desert (in much the same way one is more apt to water the budding plant than the inert rock lying beside it) every issuance of policy from the British government – and Sir Winston - regarding the establishment of a Jewish national home was rife with qualifiers ensuring that full recognition of the rights of non-Jewish Palestinians was of paramount importance.

From the Balfour Declaration of 1917:
"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

From Sir Winston’s 1922 White Paper:
“Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the (Balfour) Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

And …

“The Secretary of State would point out that already the present administration has transferred to a Supreme Council elected by the Moslem community of Palestine the entire control of Moslem Religious endowments (Waqfs), and of the Moslem religious Courts. To this Council the Administration has also voluntarily restored considerable revenues derived from ancient endowments which have been sequestrated by the Turkish Government. The Education Department is also advised by a committee representative of all sections of the population, and the Department of Commerce and Industry has the benefit of the co operation of the Chambers of Commerce which have been established in the principal centres. It is the intention of the Administration to associate in an increased degree similar representative committees with the various Departments of the Government.

The Secretary of State believes that a policy upon these lines, coupled with the maintenance of the fullest religious liberty in Palestine and with scrupulous regard for the rights of each community with reference to its Holy Places, cannot but commend itself to the various sections of the population, and that upon this basis may be built up that a spirit of cooperation upon which the future progress and prosperity of the Holy Land must largely depend.”

From the Palestinian Mandate of 1939:
Article 2 – “The Mandatory shall be responsible for … safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.”

Article 6 – “The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions…”

Article 9 – “The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that the judicial system established in Palestine shall assure to foreigners, as well as to natives, a complete guarantee of their rights. Respect for the personal status of the various peoples and communities and for their religious interests shall be fully guaranteed. In particular, the control and administration of Wakfs shall be exercised in accordance with religious law and the dispositions of the founders.”

Article 13 – “Nothing in this mandate shall be construed as conferring upon the Mandatory authority to interfere with the fabric or the management of purely Moslem sacred shrines, the immunities of which are guaranteed.”

Article 15 – “The Mandatory shall see that complete freedom of conscience and the free exercise of all forms of worship, subject only to the maintenance of public order and morals, are ensured to all. No discrimination of any kind shall be made between the inhabitants of Palestine on the ground of race, religion or language. No person shall be excluded from Palestine on the sole ground of his religious belief.”

Article 22 – “English, Arabic and Hebrew shall be the official languages of Palestine. Any statement or inscription in Arabic on stamps or money in Palestine shall be repeated in Hebrew and any statement or inscription in Hebrew shall be repeated in Arabic.”

From Sir Winston’s speech before the House of Commons in 1939:

“I cannot feel that we have accorded to the Arab race unfair treatment after the support which they gave us in the late War. The Palestinian Arabs, of course, were for the most part fighting against us, but elsewhere over vast regions inhabited by the Arabs independent Arab kingdoms and principalities have come into being such as had never been known in Arab history before.”

And once again….

“So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country and multiplied till their population has increased more than even all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish population.”

Without doubt there were British (Harold MacMichael) and Zionist (the Irgun Response) excesses in reaction to Arab unrest. In the end however, it cannot be denied that the only real motivation behind Arab objection to Zionism, was – and is – bald face racism.

Item 2. “…an insult to human dignity.”

Thus spake Ahmadinejad: The Zionist venture and support of such a thing is “an insult to human dignity.” In other words, to employ ingenuity, commitment, hard work, dedication, industry, wisdom, loyalty, and good will to create one of the world’s most prosperous societies is “an insult to human dignity.” To share one’s wealth and make peace with one’s enemies - Israel established diplomatic relations with West Germany on May 12, 1965 (causing several Arab nations to break ties with West Germany on May 13) and Egypt in 1979 (causing Egyptian President Anwar Sadat to be shot to death by Islamic fundamentalists) – is an “insult to human dignity.” To ask nothing more than the right to tend one’s own people and business on a parcel of land slightly smaller than New Jersey amidst a vast Middle East landscape is “an insult to human dignity.” Fascinating.

One is compelled to ask then, how exactly do you define “human dignity” Mr. Ahmadinejad? Does it consist of the chaos, violence, poverty, and misery that has characterized much of the Islamic world throughout its history? Murder-suicide on an international scale? Repression of women, people of non-Muslim faith, and homosexuals? Being only a parrot, perhaps it’s all beyond me but as best I can tell, there is little of humanity or dignity in any of that.

Our Conclusion

Now let us re-examine Mr. Ahmadinejad’s original statement via Aristotelian syllogism:

Major premise: The creation of the Zionist Regime is an insult to human dignity
Minor Premise: The continuation of the existence of the Zionist Regime is an insult to human dignity
Conclusion: The Zionist Regime is itself antithetical to human dignity

Very well then. Let us for a moment remove the element of “Jew” from the concept of Zionism. The above syllogism then would mean that a society that employs behaviors, attitudes, beliefs, philosophies, and actions which result in the well-being and prosperity of those employing them are an insult to human dignity. Is this what Mr. Ahmadinejad intends to say? Likely not. For even he would have to acknowledge – at least publicly – that societies such as these comprise mankind’s only hope for survival. Adding the element of “Jew” back into the equation, however, renders in Mr. Ahmadinejad’s mind – and the minds of those who agree with him – such societies antithetical to human dignity and justifies their destruction.

Here we see plainly the effects – like rabies – of Racism Gone Wild. This is what we call, “Islamania.” This is what we are fighting. And this, if we fail to succeed in that fight, will quite likely be the end of human civilization.

Cheers,

Charlie