Sunday, 8 February 2009

FREEMAN CENTER BROADCAST- FEB 8, 2009
FREEMAN CENTER FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES
P.O. Box 35661 * Houston, Texas 77235-5661
Phone or Fax: 713-723-6016 * E-mail:
bernards@sbcglobal.net
OUR WEB SITE (URL): http://www.freeman.org
THE MACCABEAN ONLINE: URL:http://www.freeman.org/online.htm
============= ====================
They deem him their worst enemy who tells them the truth. - Plato
"The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody had decided not to see." -- Ayn Rand
########## 
Ignorance Is Weakness - Know The Truth
Self-Inflicted Ignorance Is Suicide

The Freeman Center Is A Defense Against Ignorance
======
IF ISRAEL HAD ZIONIST LEADERSHIP, THE TERRORISTS WOULD HAVE BEEN DEFEATED LONG AGO
THE PRESENT WAR WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN NECESSARY
 =========
ISRAELIS MUST FIGHT FOR INDEPENDENCE FROM LIVNI, BARAK AND THE ANTI-ZIONIST LEFT
=======
VOTE RIGHT! 
APPEASEMENT BREEDS VIOLENCE AND TERRORSISM
===========
 
MORE ACCURACY AND DEPTH NEEDED
by David Basch

       "Were England, France, and the U.S. racist in their
        policy of having relocated 12 million ethnic Germans
        to Germany after World War II ?"

Charles Levinson's article (Wall Street Journal 2.6.09) reporting
on developments in Israeli elections concerning the candidacy of
Avigdor Lieberman could use more accuracy and depth.

Unlike Levninson's report that Lieberman's views are like the views of
the late Rabbi Meir Kahane, they are different in important respects.
Lieberman would redraw Israel's boundaries to exclude Arab-Israeli
populations and, in land trades, would expel Jews from the territories
the way it was done in Gaza. But this would only create Jewish
refugees and enable the Arab enemy to transform Israel's eastern
territories into Gaza platforms for rocketing Israel's nearby cities.
Lieberman's is hardly a right wing program, any more than are the
programs of Kadima and Labor, which parties would likewise surrender
Israel to the Arab enemy with only variations in detail.

On the other hand, Rabbi Kahane recognized early the since proven
implacable nature of the Arab enemy and advocated their relocation
while retaining the strategic Jewish territories that Lieberman and the
leftist parties would surrender. Rabbi Kahane's approach would
strengthen Israel for survival in the long run while Lieberman's
bombastic program, damaging to Israel's interest, does not grapple
with the Arab threat and would leave Israel worse off.

What does not emerge with Levinson is that Israel deals with
an implacable Arab enemy within the Israeli perimeter that is hardly a
"minority population" but is actually the vanguard of a huge Arab
majority population in the region that has as its priority the
destruction of Israel -- a goal far more important to them than
nationhood, Bush-type democracy, prosperity, or peace.

How would any rational being deal with the problem of preventing the
devastation of a jackel in an henhouse? The situation of the innate
enmity of the jackals against the hens -- akin to that of the Arabs
against the Israelis -- dictates effective separation of the two if
both are to survive and should be used as a paradigm guide.

If there is a Panglossian insistence that such a view is extremist,
I would suggest that those with rosy colored glasses sit in as I did
at Yale on the two hair-raising lectures on Islamic terrorism, one in
the classroom of a political science professor and the other by a
talk by an Israeli research associate of the Begin-Sadat Center.
While the Yale professor noted that the entire 1.3 billion Muslim
population could not be accused of being active terrorists, he
observed that even the less than 1% of them numbers in the
frightening millions. What is more, this savage group is supported
by vast numbers of active and passive sympathizers. The professor
further observed that even the terrorists do not profess an unusual
form of Islam, but mainstream Islam and differ from the relatively
passive groups in that they are not active in actualizing Islam's
precepts such as jihad, though providing unlimited recruits from
their number to the terrorists.

The other speaker from the Begin-Sadat Center illuminated the views of
terrorists who are willing to give up their lives in terrorist
attacks and suicide, noting the Islamic philosophy that the time of
death is already destined and better approached in attaining the
rewards of the after life by choosing death in the fight against
Islamic enemies like Israel.

With each of the speakers, it became evident that Israel's survival
depended wholly on Israel's strength rather than on insane
reeducation programs for these enemies of Israel that are the
favorites of US dreamers like Bush and Israel's leftist leaderships.
Reeducation is no more a doable program with the Arabs than it would
have been for the Nazis. The latter required total defeat to
accomplish and no one should imagine the reality is different for
Israel's enemies.

The question emerges then whether it is racist for Israelis to want
The question emerges then whether it is racist for Israelis to want
effective programs to enable their country to survive against enemies
that do not recognize Israel's legitimacy and wish to either
exterminate its Jewish population or, if Western nations will not
accept the defeated Jewish remnant, expel it into the Mediterranean.

In this context, Lieberman's approach does not provide any real
solution to the determination of Arabs to destroy Israel, as Gaza
illustrated. Arab leaderships have shown by past performance that
they heartily embrace the destruction of their own Arab community
if it makes the region uninhabitable for Israel. (I do not even raise the
obvious reality that, even at best, the tiny region of Israel cannot
accommodate two peoples.)

Therefore, the Lieberman candidacy would be bad news for Israel. The
massive tumult stirred by Lieberman's ineffective, counter productive
program -- more harmful to Israel's Jews than to anyone else -- would
not solve Israel's problem with her Arab enemies but would rather
enable this enemy to create Gazas along Israel's eastern edge.  This
is hardly a right wing program that, if racist, is more of a racism
directed at peaceful Israelis Jews, who are dehumanized and expelled
from their legal homes in favor of Arabs who seek the destruction of
these Jews.

Since Levinson raised the issue of Rabbi Kahane's views as allegedly
racist, let us see whether this holds water. Rabbi Kahane
recognized Israel's legitimate and moral right to exist and possess
the unallotted territories of the Mandate of Palestine -- the portion
remaining after Britain gave almost 78% of its lands to create today's
Jordan -- lands set aside for a Jewish homeland by the League of
Nations. Kahane was clear eyed in recognizing the implacable Arab
hostility of the Arabs living within these lands of the Mandate -- a
hostility rooted in Islam's doctrine of jihad and raw Arab
nationalism. Rabbi Kahane saw relocation of these Arabs as the only
solution to Israel's survival, relocation being a just
cause for the sake of peace in the region.

If Rabbi Kahane's approach seems extreme and racist -- certainly it
will to those who embrace the insanity of reeducating Nazis and have
no great commitment to Israel's survival -- then the same charge of
racism ought to be raised against the Western Allies -- England,
France, and even the U.S. -- after World War II. Facing what the
Allies believed was a potential threat to peace in Europe by the
German ethnic population that lived in the countries surrounding
Germany, the Allies relocated this ethnic German population of 12
million to Germany.

Recall that it was the German ethnic population that had stirred
Hitler's pretext to demand the strategic lands of Czechoslovakia, just
as the Arabs do today in order to wrest from the Jews the lands
assigned to them under the Mandate of Palestine. Was this program the
expression of Allied racism or was it a valid means to cope with the
reality of creating long term peace in Europe, threatened by what they
believed was a potentially disruptive ethnic population that could
combine with a resurgent Germany. This is the same problem that stares
Israel in the face today and is not at all the "potential" problem
that the Allies foresaw but a problem all too manifest in Israel by a
threatening Arab population that already combines with vast numbers of
its fellow Arabs in neighboring Arab countries. For Israel too, like
for the Allies, relocation of this threatening Arab population is a
valid means to attain an otherwise unattainable regional peace.

Unfortunately, Israel's allies are in bed with the Arab tyrannies that
control the oil spigots of the Middle East and these supposed allies
immorally make slicing off ever more parts of Israel's own strategic,
defensive territories a key feature of appeasement of their Arab
partners. The situation in this is nothing more than a rerun of the
sellout of Czechoslovakia prior to WWII -- a sellout that made that
horrific war possible. Thinking then that such a sacrifice of a small
country would lead to peace, the Allies actually brought on that great
war. This is the fate destined for the Middle East as a result of a
similar sellout of Israel, which will surely climax in a major Middle
East war, perhaps nuclear.

The irony is that the Western countries today, including the US,
insist on retroactively calling themselves "racist" in their achieved
relocation of the ethnic German population, as these hypocrites would
now insist on calling Israel "racist" were Israel to advocate a life
saving program for herself of a similar kind, dissimilar only in that
the problem for the Allies was only a distant, "potential" one and for
Israel the problem is at hand.

A peaceful relocation program sending the Arabs of Mandate Palestine
to live in Arab nations, including some that could be sent to Iraq to
prop up the numbers of the Sunni population -- a program once
advocated by some Arab leaders before 1948 -- is no doubt not
attainable. On the other hand, a different situation would prevail
during war time. Were the Arabs to attack Israel, as is occurring at
Gaza, then, as part of Israel's defense action, Arab relocation could
be put into action as part of that defense.

Gaza offers a sterling example of the concept. The Gaza salient has
been and is an historic invasion route of the lands of Israel from the
south. Now that the Arabs have made Gaza into a military base to
attack deep into Israel -- this after Israel withdrew as a gesture for
peace, another solid proof of hostile Arab intention -- as a response
Israel is well within her defensive right to create the secure borders
prescribed by UN Resolution 242 in 1967 to cut off southern Gaza along
the border with Egypt, creating a wide corridor that will preclude the
illegal weapons supply tunnels from Egypt. The Arab population in the
corridor, after being warned that the area was a military zone that is
soon to be leveled, would be urged move, either going to Egypt (a
reward to Egypt for its service to the Arab terrorists in enabling
them to secure 9,000 rockets to assault Israel) or, going further
north, compact the Gaza city population and offered Israel's help in
their relocation to Arab countries.

Would Egypt find this a cause to go to war against Israel? I hardly
think Egypt would create a provocative situation on her side in
reaction, lest Egypt deservedly receive the full load of Gaza's
population as a further consequence of a war.

Through this seizure of territory that belonged to Israel as part of
the Mandate of Palestine and the relocation of its Arabs, Israel would
be declaring as the consequence of the Arab war thrust upon her and
that a potential impact that awaited other Arab enclaves in the
Israeli territories that pursued war. While Jordan might not welcome a
million new Arabs across its border, they may well tolerate far less,
a few hundred thousand, a little at a time, especially if this
population were promptly given transit to live in more roomy Iraq.

The absorption by Arab nations of Arab populations that threaten
Israel's peace and survival is the means that would be used to solve
the problem of the now millions of Arabs living in Lebanon that are
miseducated to call themselves the true owners of Israel. Israel's
policy of relocating dangerous, hostile Arab populations that are
today the ocean in which the terrorist fish swim will be a sign that
the era is over of an Israel that immolates and weakens herself for
the futile purpose of winning over implacable Arab hearts and that
there is a new Israeli determination to survive against the very
obvious threat to her existence.

If the Arabs -- who are the true "racists" in their forbidding of non
Muslim nations from existing in the Middle East and who have not
shirked from the expulsion of Jews from their lands, wish to avoid a
devastating conflict that will change their government regimes and
destroy their societies, they will accept Islam's escape hatch that
allows Muslims to desist from jihad to avoid their own devastation.
The Arabs must be faced up to that choice in the case of Israel for
the sake of attaining peace in the region and enabling their own
people to pursue productive lives.