Paris Peace Summit – responding to the draft summary

INTRODUCTION: This coming Sunday, January 15 2017 representatives from 70 Nations will gather in Paris, France for the ironically named Paris Peace Summit – with the sole purpose of implementing their vision for a “two-state solution”.  Neither Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu nor Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas will be present at the meeting. Haaretz news, a left-wing news outlet obtained and published (Barak Ravid Jan 09, 2017 7:40 PM) a draft summary statement for this conference and the full text appears below this article.

[Special acknowledgement to israellycool.com for highlighting Haaretz’s publication of the draft summary.]

Paris Peace Summit – highlights from the draft summary

Here are some key highlights from that summary;

1. a negotiated solution with two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security

2. a negotiated two-state outcome should end the occupation that began in 1967

3. call on Israeli and Palestinian leaders to publicly renew their commitment to the two state solution

4. call on Israeli and Palestinian leaders to disavow official voices on their side that reject the two state solution

5. the 70 nations gathered in Paris will not recognize any future changes to the 4 June 1967 lines other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations

6. welcome the adoption of United Nations Security Council resolution 2334 of the 23 December 2016, which condemned ‘settlement activity’, and which declared that all of Jerusalem is ‘occupied territory’ (i.e. the Western Wall (Kotel), the Temple Mount do not belong to Israel)

7. welcome the adoption of United Nations Security Council resolution 2334 of the 23 December 2016, which declared that the “West Bank” (Judea and Samaria) is ‘occupied territory’

8. for both sides to comply with international humanitarian law and international human rights law

Text and Terms – a closer examination

Let’s look at each of the above terms individually; 

RE: 1. “a negotiated solution with two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security”

Israel wants to exist as a Jewish state and to live in peace. The problem, however, is that Palestinians and many other Muslim and Arab nations do not recognize the right of the Jewish state of Israel to exist.

To have two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security” will require;

(a) the Palestinians, Arab and Muslim nations to formally recognize the right of the Jewish state of Israel to exist, which they have refused to do up until this point.

(b) the Palestinians and Arab states to renounced the three “No’s” of the Kartoum conference of 1967 — no recognition, no peace and no negotiations.


Re: 2. a negotiated two-state outcome should end the occupation that began in 1967

There is no “Israeli occupation”.

During the Six-Day War in 1967, Israel re-took control of its own land (East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria on the “west bank” of the Jordan River) that Jordan had taken by force in 1948 after the creation of the state of Israel, later illegally annexing it in 1950.

Since 1967, the international community has referred to this land as “disputed territory” and Israelis as ‘occupiers’ and ‘settlers’ of their own land.

The only “occupation” that took place was from 1948 until 1967 when Jordan occupied Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem.


Re: 3. call on Israeli and Palestinian leaders to publicly renew their commitment to the two state solution

‘Palestinian’ leaders can’t “renew” their commitment to a two state solution as they and many other Muslim and Arab nations do not even recognize the right of the Jewish state of Israel to exist.

The concept of a two-state solution is often proposed as a means to resolve the ongoing tensions between Israel and the ‘Palestinians’, however few people are aware that there have already been two “two-state solutions“.

The first two-state solution was when the Arab-Palestinian state of Transjordan (later renamed Jordan) allocated 75% of the land that was to be part of the reconstituted homeland for the Jewish people to the Arabs, and excluded it from Jewish settlement – leaving only 25% for a Jewish homeland.  Jordan is Arab Palestine.

The second two-state solution was created under UN Resolution 181 in November 1947 – where the remaining 25% of the land of the former British Mandate for Palestine was partitioned into two states (again) — with 43% of the land set aside by the British for the Jewish homeland being given to this second Arab state under the Partition Plan – which Israel accepted in exchange for peace with the Arabs, but the Arabs rejected.


Re: 4. call on Israeli and Palestinian leaders to disavow official voices on their side that reject the two state solution

If ‘Palestinian’ leaders renounce their officials that do not support a two-state solution, they would have no leadership.

The Arabs that live in this area have never wanted to live in peace with the Jews – but rather to live in peace without Jews.

When Trans Jordan (renamed Jordan) was created from 3/4 of the land under the British Mandate for Palestine, it was excluded from Jewish settlement.

When the State of Israel was created from the remaining 1/4 of the land, the very next day the armies of all of the neighboring Arab states of Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Trans-Jordan (now Jordan) and Egypt attacked the newly-created State of Israel, in an attempt to destroy it.


Re: 5. the 70 nations gathered in Paris will not recognize any future changes to the 4 June 1967 lines other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations

Just to be clear, there is no such thing as “pre-1967 borders”. The Green Line running through the “West Bank” is the 1949 Armistice Line, and this line was never intended to be a border;

(a) According to the 1949 Armistice Agreement between Israel and Jordan, the Armistice Line “did not compromise any future territorial claims of the two parties” since it had been “dictated by exclusively by military considerations.

(b) UN Security Council’s Resolution 242 which was passed 5 months after the Six-Day War recognizes that the 1949 Armistice line was not supposed to designate final Israeli borders.

Both the UN Security Council’s Resolution 2334 of December 23, 2016 (which called for Israel to stop building communities outside the 1949 Armistice Lines) and the text of the upcoming Paris Conference, contradict UN Security Council Resolution 242 as well as the Israel-Jordan Armistice Agreement. 


Re: 6. welcome the adoption of United Nations Security Council resolution 2334 of the 23 December 2016, which condemned ‘settlement activity’, and which declared that all of Jerusalem is ‘occupied territory’ (i.e. the Western Wall, the Temple Mount do not belong to Israel)

Re: Jerusalem being “occupied territory”:

The only time Jerusalem was “occupied territory” was from the end of the War of Independence in 1948 until 1967, when Jordan occupied it – after having seized it by force.

Jordan’s decision to join the Arab allegiance with Egypt and Syria to destroy Israel, despite a request from Israel that they do not, ended by Israel taking control of its own land that Jordan had occupied in 1948 and illegally annexed in 1950— specifically East Jerusalem and the land on the “west bank” of the Jordan River, Judea and Samaria — freeing it from illegal occupation by Jordan.

Re: The Temple Mount belonging to the Jews and the Jewish state of Israel:

Under the Temple Mount are the remains of two Jewish Temples;

Solomon’s Temple stood on the Temple Mount from 827 BCE until it was destroyed by the Babylonians 470 years later.

The Second Temple stood on the Temple Mount from 349 BCE until it was destroyed in 70 CE by the Romans. The Western Wall (the Kotel) is the remains of the wall of the Second Temple.

Throughout history, different people including the Arabs, Persians and Christians captured Jerusalem – just as Jordan did in 1967, but Jerusalem from its foundation is Jewish, as is the Temple Mount.

Jerusalem has been the capital of the Jewish people since ~1000 BCE.

Archaeologists at the summit of the City of David have unearthed what is believed to be the palace of King David (who ruled from ~1005 to 965 BCE).

More information on the ancient and modern history of Jerusalem:  

http://www.morehasbara.com/2016/12/27/jerusalem-modern-and-historic-capital-of-the-jewish-people/

Re: 7. welcome the adoption of United Nations Security Council resolution 2334 of the 23 December 2016, which declared that the “West Bank” (Judea and Samaria) is ‘occupied territory’

The very term “Jew” is derived from the region from which they originated, Judea – on the “west bank” of the Jordan River.

Hebron, on the “west bank” of the Jordan River is where the Jewish Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are buried and where the Jewish Matriarchs, the wives of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – Sarah, Rebecca and Leah are buried. Hebron is where David was first crowned King of Israel.

Christians should be outraged the UN seeks to declare Bethlehem, the birthplace of the one they call “King of the Jews” as not being from the land of the Jews.


Re: 8. for both sides to comply with international humanitarian law and international human rights law

Israel has been accused by the UN of not adhering to the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 — a statute which outlines the obligations of an “occupying power” in times of war.

The Fourth Geneva Convention cannot be applied to Israel as it cannot be an “occupying power” in its own land — land it reclaimed from illegal annexation by Jordan.

The only “occupying power” in East Jerusalem and in Judea and Samaria was Jordan, from the years 1948 – 1967.

Final thoughts…

UN Security Council Resolution 2334 of December 23, 2016 declared, among other things that the Kotel, the Western Wall of the Jewish Temple and all of Jerusalem, the capital of Israel are “illegally occupied Palestinian territory”.  This did not make it so. Neither will the Paris Conference.

If the 70 Nations gathering on January 15 2017 in Paris were to declare that the Great Wall of China wasn’t Chinese, would that make it so? Neither will their declarations concerning Jerusalem, the Temple Mount or Judea and Samaria.


Draft Summary Statement –  Paris Peace Summit 

[credit: Haaretz news | Barak Ravid | Jan 09, 2017 7:40 PM]

I) Following the Ministerial meeting held in Paris on 3 June 2016, the Participants met in Paris on 15 January 2017 to reaffirm their support for a just, lasting and comprehensive resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They reaffirmed that a negotiated solution with two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security, is the only way to achieve enduring peace.

They emphasized the importance for the parties to restate their commitment to this solution, to take urgent steps in order to reverse the current negative trends on the ground and to start meaningful direct negotiations.

They reiterated that a negotiated two-state outcome should [meet Israeli security needs and the rights of Palestinians to statehood and sovereignty, end the occupation that began in 1967], and resolve all permanent status issues on the basis of United Nations Security Council resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003), 1850 (2008), the Madrid principles (1991) and the Quartet Roadmap (2003). They also underscored the Arab Peace Initiative as a vision for a comprehensive resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict, thus contributing to regional peace and security. They welcomed the adoption of United Nations Security Council resolution 2334 on 23 December 2016, which clearly condemned settlement activity, incitement and violence, and called both sides to take steps to advance the two-state solution on the ground.

They took note of the report of the Quartet of 1 July 2016 and its recommendations for both sides to take concrete steps to preserve the two-state solution and to create the conditions for final status negotiations.

They noted with particular interest United States Secretary of State’s remarks on 28 December 2016, in which he stressed that no solution could be imposed and outlined his vision of principles for a final status agreement.

They further emphasized the importance for both sides of complying with international humanitarian law and international human rights law, including accountability.

II) The Participants highlighted the potential for security, stability and prosperity for both parties that could result from a peace agreement. They expressed their readiness to exert necessary efforts toward the achievement of the two-state solution and to contribute substantially to arrangements for ensuring the sustainability of a negotiated peace agreement, in particular in the areas of economic incentives, the consolidation of Palestinian state capacities, and civil society dialogue. Those could include, inter alia:

  • a European special privileged partnership; other economic incentives and increased private sector involvement; support to further efforts by the parties to streamline economic cooperation;
  • concrete support to the implementation of the Palestinian Statehood Strategy, including further meetings between international partners and the Palestinian side to that effect;
  • convening Israeli and Palestinian civil society fora, and rekindling the public debate.

They called for these different strands of work to be pursued diligently.

III) Looking ahead, the Participants:

  • expect both sides to restate their commitment to the two-state solution, and to disavow official voices on their side that reject this solution;
  • call on each side to independently demonstrate, through policies and actions, a genuine commitment to the two-state solution and refrain from unilateral steps that prejudge the outcome of final status negotiations, in order to rebuild trust and create a path back to meaningful direct negotiations, in line with the recommendations of the Quartet report of 1 July 2016;
  • restate the validity of the Arab Peace Initiative and highlight its potential for stability in the region;
  • reaffirm that they will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations; also reaffirm that they will distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967;
  • welcome the prospect of closer cooperation between the Quartet and Arab League members to further the objectives of this Declaration and enhance, if necessary, existing mechanisms;
  • welcome the readiness of interested Participants to review progress and further the set of incentives; their findings could be conveyed to the United Nations for the reporting under 0P12 of UNSCR 2334.

France will inform the parties about the international community’s collective support and concrete contribution to the two-State solution contained in this joint declaration.

Jerusalem – modern and historic capital of the Jewish people

INTRODUCTION: UN Security Council’s Resolution 2334 (December 23, 2016) declared among other things that the Kotel, the Western Wall of the Jewish Temple and all of Jerusalem, the capital of Israel are “illegally occupied Palestinian territory”.  Many people don’t understand the issues concerning this Resolution because they do not have an overall knowledge of the history of Jerusalem itself. This article provides a succinct dated account of Jewish ties to Jerusalem, the date of when the Arabs first arrived (as well as subsequent Muslim conquests), as well as the Modern History of Israel from just after WWI.

A Brief History of Jerusalem

For the purposes of this article, the history of Jerusalem will be divided into its I – Historic / Biblical History and its II – Modern History (post WWI).

I – Jewish Historic ties to Jerusalem

Jerusalem has been the capital of the Jewish people since ~1000 BCE.

Archaeologists at the summit of the City of David have unearthed what is believed to be the palace of King David (who ruled from ~1005 to 965 BCE).

Davids Palace escavation inside
inside David’s Palace excavation site

Excavation have uncovered monumental structures, including a city gate, towers and a royal structure believed to be part of the city wall of Jerusalem, built during the 10th century BCE by King Solomon.

Inside Solomons Temple Gate - large clay jars for grain
Inside Solomons Temple Gate – large clay jars for grain
Eilat Mazar dig site outside Herods Temple
The Ophel excavations at the foot of the southern wall of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem

In March 2016, a 2500 year old Jewish seal was found in Jerusalem, dating from the first Jewish Temple Period, clearly establishing that there was an established Jewish presence at that time.

[see http://www.morehasbara.com/2016/05/21/king-solomons-wall-discovered-outside-2nd-temple-wall/].

The First Temple (also called Solomon’s Temple) stood on the Temple Mount from 827 BCE until it was destroyed by the Babylonians 470 years later. The Second Temple stood on the Temple Mount from 349 BCE, until it was destroyed in 70 CE by the Romans.

Prior to the arrival of the Romans, the Jewish people were politically independent and were governed by self-rule for ~80 years under the Hasmonean Dynasty beginning in ~167 BCE — after the Maccabee brothers defeated the Seleucid king, Antiochus IV (Antiochus Ephipanes) ~165 BCE), after he had plundered the Jewish Temple of its gold objects of worship then and desecrated it by sacrificing a pig on its alter (what is celebrated as Hanukah).

The first time an Arab government ruled in Jerusalem was in the sixth century CE with the rise of Islam, ~700 years after the Hasmonean Dynasty.

The Romans conquered the Seleucids and in 37 BCE and appointed Herod King of Judea. Ten years after Herod’s death in 4 BCE, Judea came under direct Roman administration.

Roman suppression of Jewish life and increased taxation escalated into a full-scale revolt in 66 CE and culminating in the razing of Jerusalem and distruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE. In 73 CE, the last Jewish outpost at Masada was destroyed. The Romans merged Roman Syria and Roman Judaea and renamed the geographical area Syria Palaestina in 135 CE. They chose the name as an insult to the Jewish inhabitants they displaced* because the ancient adversary of the Jews, were the Philistines.

* the inhabitants they displaced were Jews, not Arabs.

The founding of the Byzantine Empire in ~325 CE followed Constantine’s adoption of Christianity as the national religion. The Byzantines renamed the geographical area Palestina Secunda or Palestina II and ruled the area until 629 CE. 

In 614 CE, after a brief siege the Persians, with the assistance of Jewish forces captured Jerusalem.

In 636-637 CE, the Arabs under Caliph Umar conquered Jerusalem, claiming it as part of the Arab Caliphate.  Umar was the second Caliph of the Rashidun Caliphate who succeeded Abu Bakr (632–634 CE). In 687–691 CE, Caliph Abd el Malik of Syria had the Dome of the Rock built on top of the ruins of the First and Second Jewish Temples — as a means of demonstrating Islam’s superiority over the Christians and Jews that they had driven from Jerusalem. The al-Aqsa mosque was built ~20 years after the Dome of the Rock.

NOTE: Jerusalem was the Jewish capital >1500 years before the Arabs arrived.

The Arab Muslims ruled the area until the First Crusades, when Jerusalem was captured by the Christians in 1099 CE.

In 1187 CE, Saladin, a Sunni Muslim of Kurdish descent and the founder of the Ayyubid Dynasty conquered Jerusalem from the First Crusader Kingdom. The Christians failed to recapture Jerusalem during the Second Crusader Kingdom (1192–1291 CE) and Third Crusader Kingdom (1192 CE).

As a result of a 1229 CE treaty between the Roman Catholic Emperor and the Ayyubid Sultan, Jerusalem was under Christian control until 1244 CE, when Muslims failed to recapture it and the city was destroyed. A failed attempt to recapture the Jerusalem during the Seventh Crusades 1248–50 CE fails and the Muslim Ayyubids retain rule then relocate to Damascus, where they continue to rule the area, including Jerusalem for 10 more years.

In 1260 CE, the Mongol Empire raids the Land, and turns over Jerusalem to the Christians, under Louis IX of France.

From 1516 – 1917, the Ottoman Empire rules the Land, including Jerusalem. The Ottomans were defeated during World War I (WWI) — a month after the Balfour Declaration was issued.


Where is “Palestine”?

The term “Palestine” is a geographical term used to designate the region at the above points in history, none of them belonging to Arabs;

(1) belonging to the Romans (Syria Palaestina, 135-390 CE),

(2) a province belonging to the Byzantine empire (called Palestina Secunda or Palestina II – 390 CE),

(3) a geopolitical entity under British administration, after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire after WWI.

When did the Arabs arrive in the Land?

The Arabs arrived in the Land during the Muslim conquest, when they besieged Gaza in 634 CE and defeated the Byzantines (636 CE). Two years later, in 638 CE, the Arabs conquered Jerusalem .

The Arabs first came to the Land > 1500 years after King David established his palace there in ~1000 BCE.

The Arabs first ruled Jerusalem 1465 CE years after the First Temple was built in Jerusalem on the Temple Mount in ~827 BCE.

Modern Jewish ties to Jerusalem

The Balfour Declaration in was issued by the British government in November 1917, where it announced its intention to facilitate the “establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”.  The was the beginning of concrete plans for a modern state of Israel.

In 1920, the Mandate system was instituted by the League of Nations (forerunner of the United Nations) in order to administer non-self-governing territories. A nation granted mandatory powers by the League of Nations was to consider the mandated territory a temporary trust and to see to the well-being and advancement of its population.

In 1922, following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in WWI, the British were granted mandatory powers by the League of Nations to administer the geographic region of Palestine. The area included all of the area of present-day Israel and Jordan.

The British Mandate for Palestine included provisions calling for the establishment of a Jewish homeland, facilitating Jewish immigration and encouraging Jewish settlement on the land all of which built on the foundation of the Balfour Declaration.

 

In 1923, under Article 25 of the British Mandate for PalestineBritish Mandate - Israel and TransJordan the first Arab-Palestinian state of Transjordan (later renamed Jordan) was created by the British, which allocated 78% of the land that had been set aside to be part of the reconstituted homeland for the Jewish people under the Balfour Declaration to an Arab state  and the British excluded it from Jewish settlement.

This left only 22% of the land for a Jewish state.

After the partition, Transjordan remained part of the British Mandate for Palestine, and Britain continued to be responsible for administering the land on both sides of the Jordan River.

The Arabs that remained living on the small piece of land earmarked for the Jewish state after the creation of the Arab-Palestinian state of Transjordan, attacked and killed Jews living there in an effort to drive them out and claim all of British Mandate of Palestine as Arab land. The Hebron Massacres of 1929 and the 1936-39 Arab Revolt are the most notable of these attacks.

In 1936, the British appointed the Peel Commission to find a solution to the violence, the outcome of which was a recommendation to partition the land under the British Mandate for Palestine, between Arabs and Jews.

In 1939, WWII began and shortly afterwards, the British issued a White Paper restricting Jewish immigration to British Mandated Palestine   just as thousands of Jews wanted to flee the escalating Nazi violence in Europe.  The British set a limit that a maximum of 75,000 immigration certificates would be authorized by the mandatory power to incoming Jews. The British hoped to appease the local Arab population by limiting the number of Jews coming into the region and with the US having also limited immigration of Jews, those being hunted by the Nazis had no place of escape.

Under the British Mandate for Palestine, the Jewish community that was already in the land, formed political, social and economic institutions that governed daily life and served as a infrastructure for the community. David Ben-Gurion served as its head.

In 1946, Britain unilaterally granted Transjordan independencecreating an independent Palestine-Arab state. This was the first “two-state solution“. In doing so, however, Britain failed to live up to its responsibility under the Mandate system to see the well-being and advancement of all of its population, Jews included. Shortly afterwards, the British government, unable to manage Arab tensions and ongoing violent attacks against the Jews in the land, handed control over to the United Nations.

After much debate and discussion, in November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly voted on Resolution 181, which allocated half of the land that the British had set aside for the Jewish homeland under the Balfour Declaration for creation of a second Arab state — with the remaining half (mostly of which was in the barren Negev desert) for a the Jewish state. This became known as the “Partition Plan“. The Jews accepted the Partition Plan that would have given the Arabs all of Gaza and all of Judea and Samaria  — in exchange for peace with a Jewish state, but the Arabs rejected it.

Foundation of the State of Israel

At 4:00 PM on May 14, 1948, just 8 hours before the British Mandate for Palestine officially terminated, David Ben-Gurion proclaimed the creation of the State of Israel and became its first prime minister. The very next day the armies of all of the neighboring Arab states of Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Trans-Jordan (now Jordan) and Egypt attacked the newly-created State of Israel, in an attempt to destroy it. This became known as the “War of Independence“.

By March 1949, at the end of the 10-month long War of Independence, Gaza was occupied by Egypt, and Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem were occupied by Jordan.

On April 24, 1950, Jordan annexed both East Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria — areas it had seized from Israel by military force in 1948. The annexation of East Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria was viewed as illegal by most of the international community, including all of the Arab states. 

The Six Day War

In May of 1967, Gamal Abdel Nasser, President of Egypt announced his plans “to destroy Israel”. Nasser placed Egypt’s troops on Israel’s border and after signing a treaty with Syria, placed the Syrian military under an Egyptian general. The armies of Egypt and Syria were mobilized to attack Israel. Israel preemptively attacked Egypt and Syria but did not attack Jordan — asking instead for King Hussein of Jordan not to join the war. Kind Hussein did not have a good relationship with Egypt’s President Nasser (Nasser’s intelligence service had tried to assassinate the King multiple times), but when the rest of the Arab world lined up behind Nasser’s promise to destroy Israel, King Hussein of Jordan joined the attack.

Jordan’s decision to join this Arab allegiance to destroy Israel, despite a request from Israel that they do not, ended by Israel taking control of its own land that Jordan had occupied in 1948 and illegally annexed in 1950— specifically East Jerusalem and the land on the “west bank” of the Jordan River; Judea and Samaria.

 “Pre-1967 Borders”

The UN Security Council’s Resolution 2334 of this past Friday (December 23, 2016) declares, among other things, that the Kotel (the Western Wall of the Jewish Temple) and all of Jerusalem are “illegally occupied Palestinian territory”  trying to enforce what “Palestinians” call “pre-1967 borders”.

A recent article in Arutz Sheva (Israel National News, Jeff Dunetz, 26/12/16 12:30) was a good reminder that;

there is no such thing as pre-1967 borders. That “green line” running through the West Bank is the 1949 Armistice Line.

At the end of the War of Independence, the Armistice Line (the so-called “green line”) was created where Israeli and Arab forces stopped fighting. It was not a border, but a cease-fire line. In fact, the 1949 Armistice Agreement with Jordan explicitly states that the Armistice Line did not compromise any future territorial claims of the two parties  since it had been

“dictated by exclusively by military considerations.”

Given that “pre-1967 borders” have been explicitly established in international law to not be the 1949 Armistice Line, the only “pre-1967 border” are the borders which existed on May 14, 1948, the day the modern state of Israel was created.

UN Security Council Resolution 242

Five months after the Six-Day War, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 242 which recognized that the 1949 Armistice Line was not to designate final Israeli borders.

During the negotiations to create UN Resolution 242, Arab governments tried three times to have the article “the” inserted in the resolution which would have changed the wording from;

“Israel should withdraw from territories taken during the war”

to

“Israel should withdraw from the territories taken during the war”

The addition of the article “the” would have changed Resolution 242 to mean that Israel should withdraw from all territories taken during the war — however their request for addition of a “the” in UN Resolution 242 was rejected.

Final thoughts…

During the Six-Day War in 1967, Israel re-took control of its own land (i.e. East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria on the “west bank” of the Jordan River) that Jordan had taken by force in 1948 after the creation of the state of Israel, later  illegally annexing it in 1950. Since 1967, the international community has referred to this land as “disputed territory” and Israelis as ‘occupiers’ and ‘settlers’ of their own land — yet at no point from 1948 until 1967 did the international community ever view Jordan as “occupiers” of Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem. The double standard is striking.

Israel is accused by the international community of not adhering to the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 — a statute which outlines the obligations of an “occupying power” in times of war.  The Fourth Geneva Convention cannot be applied to Israel as it cannot be an occupying powerin its own land — land it reclaimed from illegal annexation by Jordan. The only “occupying power” in East Jerusalem and in Judea and Samaria was Jordan, from the years 1948 – 1967.

While the UN Security Council’s Resolution 2334 of last Friday (December 23, 2016) effectively calls for Israel to stop building communities outside the 1949 Armistice Lines — those lines were never intended to “compromise any territorial claims” (1949 Armistice Agreement).

Furthermore, the UN Security Council’s Resolution 2334 of December 23, 2016 contradicts its own declaration (UN Security Council Resolution 242) which was passed 5 months after the Six-Day War and which recognizes that the 1949 Armistice line was not supposed to designate final Israeli borders.

“Palestinians” and the UN assert that Israel should return to “pre-1967 borders” Given that the 1949 Armistice Lines were specifically excluded from forming Israel’s borders, the only “pre-1967 borders” are those that existed in 1948, when the State of Israel was created.

Judea and Samaria — the West Bank of the Jordan

INTRODUCTION: To understand the present issues with regards to Jewish inhabitants in outpost towns in Judea and Samaria*, in the so-called “disputed territories”, requires some knowledge of the modern history of region.  This article provides that brief history.

*Judea and Samaria is know as "the West Bank" as it is on the west bank of the Jordan River.

The ancient and biblical history of Jews in the land is beyond the scope of this article — suffice to say that the very term “Jew” is derived from the region from which they originated, Judea.

In terms of timeline, this article begins towards the end of World War I (WWI) with British involvement in the geographic area known as Palestine.

[For information regarding where the term "Palestine" came from, please see Where is Ancient Palestine and Who are the Palestinians: http://www.morehasbara.com/2015/10/11/where-is-ancient-palestine-who-are-the-palestinians/]

Balfour Declaration and the Mandate System

Towards the end of WWI, in November 1917, the British government issued the Balfour Declaration in which it announced its intention to facilitate the “establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”.  The was the beginning of concrete plans for a modern state of Israel.

In 1920, the Mandate system was instituted by the League of Nations (forerunner of the United Nations) in order to administer non-self-governing territories. A nation granted mandatory powers by the League of Nations was to consider the mandated territory a temporary trust and to see to the well-being and advancement of its population.

In 1922, following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in WWI, the British were granted mandatory powers by the League of Nations to administer the geographic region of Palestine.  The British Mandate for Palestine included provisions calling for the establishment of a Jewish homeland, facilitating Jewish immigration and encouraging Jewish settlement on the land all of which built on the foundation of the Balfour Declaration.

However just a few months later, the League of Nations and Britain arrived at the decision that the provisions for setting up a Jewish national home would not apply to the area east of the Jordan River.

In 1923, under Article 25 of the British Mandate for PalestineBritish Mandate - Israel and TransJordan the first Arab-Palestinian state of Transjordan (later renamed Jordan) was created by the British, which allocated 78% of the land that had been set aside to be part of the reconstituted homeland for the Jewish people under the Balfour Declaration to an Arab state  and the British excluded it from Jewish settlement.

This left only 22% of the land for a Jewish state.

Judea and Samaria was included in this small piece of land destined for the Jewish State.

After the partition, Transjordan remained part of the British Mandate for Palestine, and Britain continued to be responsible for administering the land on both sides of the Jordan River.

The Arabs that remained living on the small piece of land earmarked for the Jewish state after the creation of the Arab-Palestinian state of Transjordan, attacked and killed Jews living there in an effort to drive them out and claim all of British Mandate of Palestine as Arab land. The Hebron Massacres of 1929 and the 1936-39 Arab Revolt are the most notable of these attacks.

In 1936, the British appointed the Peel Commission to find a solution to the violence, the outcome of which was a recommendation to partition the land under the British Mandate for Palestine, between Arabs and Jews.

In 1939, WWII began and shortly afterwards, the British issued a White Paper restricting Jewish immigration to British Mandated Palestine   just as thousands of Jews wanted to flee the escalating Nazi violence in Europe.  The British set a limit that a maximum of 75,000 immigration certificates would be authorized by the mandatory power to incoming Jews. The British hoped to appease the local Arab population by limiting the number of Jews coming into the region and with the US having also limited immigration of Jews, those being hunted by the Nazis had no place of escape.

The role of Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and his 1941 meeting with Adolph Hitler certainly factors into the “big picture” as does al-Husseini’s role in the Middle East after WWII and leading up to the Six Day War, including President Abdel Nasser of Egypt’s intent to “destroy Israel”.

For more information, please see;

The Mufti and the Fuhrer (http://www.morehasbara.com/2015/10/22/the-mufti-and-the-fuhrer-background-to-nazi-influence-in-the-middle-east/) 

and 

Nazi Influence in the Middle East (http://www.morehasbara.com/2015/10/24/nazi-influence-in-the-middle-east-haj-amin-al-husseini/) for more information]

Under the British Mandate for Palestine, the Jewish community that was already in the land, formed political, social and economic institutions that governed daily life and served as a infrastructure for the community. David Ben-Gurion served as its head.

In 1946, Britain unilaterally granted Transjordan independencecreating an independent Palestine-Arab state. This was the first “two-state solution“. In doing so, however, Britain failed to live up to its responsibility under the Mandate system to see the well-being and advancement of all of its population, Jews included.

Shortly afterwards, the British government, unable to manage Arab tensions and ongoing violent attacks against the Jews in the land, handed control over to the United Nations.

Partition-Plan-1947-235x300After much debate and discussion, in November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly voted on Resolution 181, which allocated half of the land that the British had set aside for the Jewish homeland under the Balfour Declaration for creation of a second Arab state — with the remaining half (mostly of which was in the barren Negev desert) for a the Jewish state.

This became known as the “Partition Plan“.

The Jews accepted the Partition Plan that would have given the Arabs all of Gaza and all of Judea and Samaria  — in exchange for peace with a Jewish state, but the Arabs rejected it. As little as 1/4 of the original land allocated to a Jewish state was still considered too much

Birth of the State of Israel

At 4:00 PM on May 14, 1948, just 8 hours before the British Mandate for Palestine officially terminated, David Ben-Gurion proclaimed the creation of the State of Israel and became its first prime minister.

The very next day the armies of all of the neighboring Arab states of Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Trans-Jordan (now Jordan) and Egypt attacked the newly-created State of Israel, in an attempt to destroy it. This became known as the “War of Independence“.

By March 1949, at the end of the 10-month long War of Independence, Gaza was occupied by Egypt, and Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem  were occupied by Jordan

On April 24, 1950, Jordan annexed both East Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria — areas it had seized from Israel by military force in 1948. The annexation of East Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria was viewed as illegal by most of the international community, including all of the Arab states.

In May of 1967, Gamal Abdel Nasser, President of Egypt announced his plans “to destroy Israel”. Given his documented, past affiliation with the Nazis during WWII, this should come as no surprise [see Nazi Influence in the Middle East, link above].

Nasser placed Egypt’s troops on Israel’s border, and after signing a treaty with Syria, placed the Syrian military under an Egyptian general. The armies of Egypt and Syria were mobilized to attack Israel.

Israel preemptively attacked Egypt and Syria but did not attack Jordan — asking instead for King Hussein of Jordan not to join the war. King Hussein did not have a good relationship with Egypt’s President Nasser (Nasser’s intelligence service had tried to assassinate the King multiple times), but when the rest of the Arab world lined up behind Nasser’s promise to destroy Israel, King Hussein of Jordan joined the attack.

Jordan’s decision to join this Arab allegiance to destroy Israel, despite a request from Israel that they do not, ended by Israel taking control of its own land that Jordan had occupied in 1948 and illegally annexed in 1950— specifically East Jerusalem and the land on the “west bank” of the Jordan River; Judea and Samaria

It was after the Six-Day War in 1967, when Israel reclaimed land that Jordan had seized from Israel, that East Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria (since dubbed “the West Bank”) became so-called “disputed territory” in the eyes for the International community, and Israel came to be called ‘occupiers’ and ‘settlers’ of their own land.

It should be noted that at no point from 1948 until 1967 did the international community ever view Jordan as "occupiers" of Judea and Samaria. 

The double standard is striking.

Israel is accused by the international community of not adhering to the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 with respect to Judea and Samaria — a statute which outlines the obligations of an “occupying power” in times of war.  The Fourth Geneva Convention cannot be applied to Israel, as it cannot be an occupying powerin its own land — land it reclaimed from illegal annexation by Jordan.

The only “occupying power” in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention in Judea and Samaria was Jordan, from the years 1948 – 1967.

Final Thoughts…

Most obvious, Jewish inhabitants of outpost towns in Judea and Samaria cannot be “settlers” or “occupiers“. Judea and Samaria has always been part of Israel, both in ancient times (beyond the scope of this article) and in modern times.  The Arabs rejected the Partition Plan which would have given them all of Gaza and all of Judea and Samaria, in exchange for peace and rejected a similar offer in 2000. It seems apparent that any amount of land for a Jewish state is too much.

The Jews of Judea and Samaria have always been willing to live in peace with its non-Jewish inhabitants.

All the Arab inhabitants have ever needed to do is;

(1) recognize Israel as a Jewish state

and

(2) promise to live in peace with it.

It seems apparent from modern history that the Arabs do not want a Jewish state of any size that they need to recognize.

Struggle for Amona – the struggle for national sovereignty

Amona is an Israeli outpost village founded in 1997 in central Samaria (Benyamin region). Amona lies on a steep ridge, 70 meters above the closest neighboring village of Ofra, which is one kilometer to the west. Benyamin Region (where the Tribe of Benjamin originate from) is a mountainous area, 850–900 meters above sea level and has relatively dry and mild summers and cold winters — even seeing snow for several days each year.

Amona has a current population of 42 families, with a total of several hundred residents — most of whom farm the land.

Sheep and lamb farm in Amona (photo by Brian John Thomas)
Sheep and lamb farm in Amona (photo by Brian John Thomas)

Some in Amona  raise sheep and lamb…

 

15380858_10154119027631716_6031557709022414275_n
baby lamb under heat lamp (photo by Brian John Thomas)

 

 

 

 

 

 

15355743_10104191232693023_2487786853714765833_n
Amona Vineyard (photo by Joshua Wander)

…while others farm for fruit, including grapes and olives.

Amona is known for producing award-winning wine.

15349579_10104191232673063_3287932742227080831_n
Award winning wine (photo by Joshua Wander)

In August 2016, the High Court of Israel ruled that the houses and vineyards of Amona had been mistakenly built on ‘private land’ and the ruling has slated Amona for evacuation by December 24 2016 – a little more than a week and a half away followed by bulldozing of the entire community — ending the livelihoods of the 42 families and their employees that live in Amona.

To understand the struggle for Amona requires understanding of the modern history of Judea and Samaria and whether it is even possible that Amona is built on ‘private Arab land’ 

We’ll touch on that history here.

Please see Judea and Samaria - the West Bank of the Jordan, our next article for more detail. http://www.morehasbara.com/2016/12/13/judea-samaria-west-bank-jordan/

The land on which Amona is built was gifted by King Hussein of Jordan to a close associate of his during the period in which Jordan illegally occupied Judea and Samaria (1948-1967). That period began on May 15, 1948, when the surrounding Arab nations of Jordan, Syria and Egypt attacked the one-day old State of Israel in an attempt to destroy it — beginning the 10-month-long War of Independence. 

At the end of that war (March 1949), Egypt occupied Gaza and Jordan occupied Judea and Samaria as well as East Jerusalem — having seized them from Israel, by military force. On April 24, 1950, Jordan annexed  both East Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria which was considered illegal by most of the international community, including all of the Arab states.  At no point from 1948 until 1967 was Judea and Samaria ever considered by the international community as being “Jordan”.  This area on the west bank of the Jordan River was referred to as “the west bank” so as to distinguish it from the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, which lay on “the east bank” of the Jordan River.

In 1923, when Britain created Jordan (then called Transjordan) giving 75% of the land that had been set aside by the Balfour Declaration for a “national Jewish homeland” to this first Arab-Palestinian state — it left only 25% of the land on the “west bank of the Jordan” for the Jewish state. That is, the tiny remaining piece of land included Judea and Samaria something Jordan knew since 1923.

In 1948, when Jordan illegally seized Judea and Samaria, it had known for the previous 25 years (1923-1948), that it belonged to the future Jewish state and it knew that Judea and Samaria belonged to Israel when the State of Israel was created on May 14, 1948.

It was only after the Six-Day War in 1967, when Israel reclaimed its own land that had been illegally annexed by Jordan from Israel, that Judea and Samaria (“West Bank”) and East Jerusalem became “disputed territory” to the international community — and Israel came to be called “occupiers” and “settlers” of their own land.

Judea and Samaria has been part of Israel since biblical times and even in modern history, it was included in the land earmarked for the Jewish national homeland since the 1917 Balfour Declaration. Even after the first Arab-Palestinian state of TransJordan was created in 1923, Judea and Samaria was included in the remaining 25% of the the land that was for the establishment of the Jewish state.

partition-plan-jewish-virtual-libraryThat said, the Jewish people were willing as part of the 1947 Partition Plan to retain the small region of Galilee in the north and the large Negev desert area in the south, with the remainder going to a second Palestinian Arab-state — something the Jews accepted and the Arabs rejected.

The Arabs refused the 4,500 square miles that was offered to them, including Judea and Samaria and Gaza because the 5,500 square miles that would remain for the Jewish state was considered “too much”.

Even as recently as the year 2000, when Israel proposed trading land for peace by agreeing to give the Arabs of the region a sovereign state in more than 95% Judea and Samaria and all of Gaza —the Palestinian leadership responded by sending waves of suicide terrorists into Israel.  

Any amount of Israel remaining in Jewish hands is still “too much”.

The international community believes that Israeli towns and villages in Judea and Samaria  fall under the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 — which outlines the obligations of an “occupying power” in times of war. Israel maintains that the Geneva Convention cannot possibly be applied to Israel with respect to Judea and Samaria, as it can’t be an occupying powerin its own land — land reclaimed from illegal annexation during the Six-Day War which Egypt, Syria and Jordan, started.

Struggle for Amona – Struggle for National Sovereignty

amona5

For the last 19 years, whoever has held “deed” to this land has been absent —expressing no interest in the land whatsoever, while these Jewish families have tilled it and caused it to become productive.

The struggle for Amona is a struggle for the rights of these 42 Jewish families who have built their lives and earn their livelihood (and the livelihoods of those they employee) from their labour.

The struggle for Amona is also the struggle for national sovereignty of Israel over her own land.

That land in Judea and Samaria was gifted by the King of Jordan to colleagues during the period that Jordan illegally occupied it, does not make the land the possession of those to whom he gave it. It was not the King of Jordan’s to give!

In almost any civilized nation, the recipient of stolen property does not become the “owner” of it — it remains the possession of its rightful owner.

Likewise, if stolen property is later sold, those who purchase it do not become the “owner of it” — it continues to remain the possession of its rightful owner. A person or people who buy stolen property anticipate that when it is returned to its rightful owner, that they will lose the money they paid for it, as well as lose the property itself.

The Jordanian king having given parcels of land in Judea and Samaria to Arab Hashemites colleagues that his Kingdom had illegally occupied and annexed from Israel does not make that land the possession of (1) these families (2) their descendants nor (3) anyone that may have subsequently purchased it from them.

While local Arabs may hold a “deed” to this, is about as significant as a having a “receipt” for purchase of a stolen car.

15391512_10104190277836563_5314581155805949991_o
ruins of Amona (photo by Joshua Wander)

It expected that when stolen property is returned to its rightful owner, that the purchaser lose the money paid for it, as well as lose the property itself. While Israel owes them nothing, how would it be anything other generous for the Israeli government to pay fair market value to those hold “deed” to a land they have been absent from for almost 20 years, and on which the Jewish residents of Amona live?

 

UPDATE: Please see Ultimatum in Amona – rejected by residents! http://www.morehasbara.com/2016/12/15/ultimatum-in-amona-update-dec-15-2016/

 

 


Here is a short video created by Joshua Wander on Amona:

The Middle-East Situation (Illustrated)

INTRODUCTION: The situation in the Middle East is said to be one of the most complex problems in the world, but it’s very simple. This post was compiled from a transcript of Dennis Prager’s video “The Middle East Problem” with photos captured from that video. Prager explains how and when the modern state of Israel was founded and how, since that day in 1948, its neighbors have tried to destroy it, again and again.


“When I did my graduate studies at the Middle East Institute at Columbia University’s School of International Affairs, I took many courses on the question of the Middle East conflict. Semester after semester, we studied the Middle East conflict as if it was the most complex conflict in the world — when in fact, it is probably the easiest conflict in the world to explain. It may be the hardest to solve, but it is the easiest to explain. In a nutshell, it’s this: one side wants the other side dead. “

— Dennis Prager

Israel wants to exist as a Jewish state and to live in peace. Israel also recognizes the right of Palestinians to have their own state and to live in peace. The problem, however, is that most Palestinians and many other Muslims and Arabs, do not recognize the right of the Jewish state of Israel to exist.

capture_2016-11-26-09-03-522

This has been true since 1947, when the United Nations voted to divide the land under the British Mandate for Palestine — into a Jewish state and an Arab state.

capture_2016-11-26-09-10-362

The Jews accepted the United Nations partition but no Arab nor any other Muslim country accepted it.

capture_2016-11-26-09-09-552

When British rule ended on May 15, 1948, the armies of all the neighboring Arab states —Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Trans-Jordan and Egypt — attacked the one-day old state of Israel in order to destroy it.

capture_2016-11-26-09-11-192

But, to the world’s surprise, the little Jewish state survived.

Then it happened again. In 1967, the dictator of Egypt, Gamal Abdel Nasser announced his plan, in his words, “to destroy Israel.”

capture_2016-11-26-09-11-452

He placed Egyptian troops on Israel’s border…

capture_2016-11-26-09-11-572

… and armies of surrounding Arab countries were also mobilized to attack.

capture_2016-11-26-09-12-092

However, Israel preemptively attacked Egypt and Syria.

capture_2016-11-26-09-12-222

Israel did not attack Jordan, and begged Jordan’s king not to join the war.

But he did.

capture_2016-11-26-09-12-512

And only because of that did Israel take control of Jordanian land, specifically the “West Bank” of the Jordan River.

capture_2016-11-26-09-14-242

Shortly after the war, the Arab states went to Khartoum, Sudan and announced their famous three “No’s”:

No recognition, no peace, and no negotiations”

capture_2016-11-26-09-14-422

What was Israel supposed to do?

Well, one thing Israel did, a little more than a decade later, in 1978, was to give the entire Sinai Peninsula — an area of land bigger than Israel itself…

capture_2016-11-26-09-15-002

and with oil — back to Egypt…

capture_2016-11-26-09-15-192

… because Egypt, under new leadership, signed a peace agreement with Israel.

So, Israel gave land for the promise of peace with Egypt…

capture_2016-11-26-09-17-102

…and it has always been willing to do the same thing with the Palestinians.

capture_2016-11-26-09-15-492

All the Palestinians have ever had to do is:

(1) recognize Israel as a Jewish state

and

(2) promise to live in peace with it.

capture_2016-11-26-09-17-502

capture_2016-11-26-09-18-262

But when Israel has proposed trading land for peace — as it did in 2000 when it agreed to give the Palestinians a sovereign state in more than 95% of the “West Bank” and all of Gaza —the Palestinian leadership responded by sending waves of suicide terrorists into Israel. 

capture_2016-11-26-09-19-012


Meanwhile, Palestinian radio, television and school curricula remain filled with glorification of terrorists

capture_2016-11-26-09-19-222

… the demonization of Jews

capture_2016-11-26-09-19-342

… and the daily repeated message that Israel should cease to exist.

capture_2016-11-26-09-19-432


 

So it’s not hard to explain the Middle-East dispute:

One side wants the other dead.

capture_2016-11-26-09-07-322

 

capture_2016-11-26-09-07-572


 

The motto of Hamas, the Palestinian rulers of Gaza, is:

“We love death as much as the Jews love life.”

capture_2016-11-26-09-22-392


There are 22 Arab states in the world — stretching from the Atlantic Ocean to the Indian Ocean…

capture_2016-11-26-09-23-012

 

There is 1 “Jewish State” in the world.

It’s about the size of New Jersey; in fact, tiny El Salvador is larger than Israel.

capture_2016-11-26-09-23-162


 

Finally, think about these two questions:

“If, tomorrow, Israel laid down its arms and announced, “We will fight no more,” what would happen? And if the Arab countries around Israel laid down their arms and announced “We will fight no more,” what would happen?”

 

(1) In the first case, there would be an immediate destruction of the state of Israel and the mass murder of its Jewish population.

capture_2016-11-26-09-24-332

capture_2016-11-26-09-25-022

 


(2) In the second case, there would be peace the next day.

capture_2016-11-26-09-25-392

capture_2016-11-26-09-25-232

 

“As I said at the outset, it is a simple problem to describe: one side wants the other dead — and if it didn’t, there would be peace.”

— Dennis Prager

 

capture_2016-11-26-09-26-392

 


“Please remember this; there has never been a state in the geographic area known as Palestine that was not Jewish.”

 

(1) Israel is the third Jewish state to exist in that area

capture_2016-11-26-09-26-592

capture_2016-11-26-09-27-112

capture_2016-11-26-09-27-272

 

(2) There was NEVER an Arab state

capture_2016-11-26-09-27-372

 

(3) There was NEVER a Palestinian state

capture_2016-11-26-09-27-452

 

(4) there was NEVER a Muslim state

capture_2016-11-26-09-28-312

 

(5) There was NEVER any other state…

capture_2016-11-26-09-27-542

That’s the issue. 

 

Why can’t the one Jewish state the size of El Salvador be allowed to exist?

 

“That is the Middle-East problem.”

– Dennis Prager, April 28, 2014

 

 

 


Sponsorship of the video from the Adam and Gila Milstein Family Foundation.

Supreme Muslim Authority Contradicts Palestinian Authority’s Claims

INTRODUCTION: Adnan al-Husayni, the Minister of Jerusalem Affairs for the Palestinian Authority (PA) government, said on Thursday, August 18, 2016, that Jewish organizations are preparing plans to demolish the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem and to build a Jewish Temple in its place.  This is one version of the “al-Aqsa Libel” outlined in an previous blog.

The al-Aqsa Libel is the lie that Israel is planning to destroy the al-Aqsa mosque and this lie has been used to incite violence against Israelis since the days of Yasser Arafat and the Palestine Liberation Organization (late 1960’s), and included such false claims that Israel was behind a mosque fire there in 1969. Current renditions of the al-Aqsa libel include that Israel is digging under the mosque in order to topple it, or using chemicals to erode the foundations of the mosque in order to cause it to collapse, as well as the rendition that al-Husayni retold today: that Israel plans to demolish the al-Aqsa mosque and replace it with the 3rd Temple. None of these claims are true.

Since most ‘Palestinians’ identify themselves as practicing Muslims and the al-Aqsa mosque is considered Islam’s 3rd holiest site, this lie is highly inflammatory and is often combined with the call to Palestinians to “defend al-Aqsa” from the Jews.

Since 1967, when Israel regained control of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount after the Six-Day War, there has been a concerted effort on the part of the ‘Palestinian’ authorities to (a) promote the al-Aqsa libel while at the same time (b) creating and promoting a ‘Palestinian’ version of “history” that creates an alleged Arab connection to the Temple Mount that predates the Jewish oneThe goal is to stir up religious fervor, with the hope that it will lead to a violent confrontation and the ‘Palestinians’ taking the Temple Mount by force.

In recent years and right up to the present day, Palestinian Authority (PA) propaganda has focused on denying the Jewish link to the Temple Mount and claiming that the entire site, including the Dome of the Rock Mosque and the Kotel (the Western Wall of the 2nd Temple), as well as the al-Aqsa Mosque have “always been Muslim holy sites”.  This is what Adnan al-Husayni, the Minister of Jerusalem Affairs for the Palestinian Authority (PA) government tried to do today.

Ironically, a direct challenge to the Palestinian Authority’s version of “history” comes from Muslim documents from Jerusalem, which state that the Temple Mount was the site of Solomon’s Temple, before Islam ever existed.


Al-Aqsa Libel – current rendition

Adnan al-Husayni, the Minister of Jerusalem Affairs for the Palestinian Authority (PA) government, claimed on Thursday, August 18, 2016, that Jewish organizations of preparing plans to demolish the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem and to build a Jewish Temple in its place.

Speaking with the Hamas-affiliated “Palestine” newspaper, al-Husayni claimed that while Israel is aware that the “demolition of the Al-Aqsa mosque” will result in violence that would spread to all parts of the country, Israel’s policy “is meant to deliberately expel the “original” inhabitants of Jerusalem“. Al-Husayni called on UNESCO, the UN’s educational and cultural organization, to;

“act immediately against the excavations carried out by Israel in the Old City of Jerusalem”

claiming that;

“Israel is digging tunnels in the area in an attempt to find historical evidence of Jewish existence in the region, but that they failed to do so despite all their attempts to falsify the history and the Palestinian historical sites.”

There it is – (a) the al-Aqsa libel combined with (b) the creating and promoting of a ‘Palestinian’ version of “history” that seeks to create an Arab connection to the Temple Mount that predates the Jewish one

Even if the ‘Palestinians’ want to discredit archaeological evidence from Solomon’s wall (see a earlier article) or discount the ancient coins that have been found in Israel, irrefutable proof from the Supreme Muslim Council itself documents that they believed that the Temple Mount is the site where Solomon’s Temple once stood, before Islam ever existed.

The Mufti and the Supreme Muslim Council

The Supreme Muslim Council (Arabic المجلس الإسلامي الاعلى) was the highest body in charge of Muslim community affairs for British Mandated Palestine after WWI. The High Commissioner of the British Mandate for Palestine, Herbert Samuel, issued an order in December 1921 establishing the Supreme Muslim Council with authority over all the Muslim waqf and sharia courts in Palestine. It consisted of five members – a president and four members.

al-Husseini-president-World-Islamic-Congress-1931-300x152
Haj Amin al Husseini – World Islamic Congress 1931

Haj Amin al-Husseini had previously been made Grand Mufti of Jerusalem by Samuel following the death of his half-brother Kamil al-Husayni in March 1921.  Haj Amin al-Husseini became President of the Supreme Muslim Council.

800px-Al-Husseini-1929head-150x150

Haj Amin al-Husseini’s name should be very familiar.  As covered in previous posts, al-Husseini met with with Adolf Hitler in Berlin in November 1941 to discuss their shared goal to exterminate the Jews and who went on to form the Hanzar Division of Nazi Muslim Soldiers in Bosnia, one of the largest divisions of the Third Reich military force, through which he gained the moniker “the Arab Fuhrer“.

[for more information, please read “The Mufti and the Fuhrer”: http://www.morehasbara.com/2015/10/22/the-mufti-and-the-fuhrer-background-to-nazi-influence-in-the-middle-east/ and “Nazi Influence in the Middle East” http://www.morehasbara.com/2015/10/24/nazi-influence-in-the-middle-east-haj-amin-al-husseini/]


The Mufti and the Temple Mount

A brief Guide to Al-Haram Al-Sharif – Jerusalem” was published by the Supreme Muslim Council headed by Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and was available for purchase by visitors to the Temple Mount. From its first edition published in 1924 until 1953, the content remained unchanged, however in 1954, the documentation for the link between the Temple Mount and Solomon’s First Temple was removed and replaced with a reference to Herod’s Temple (the Second Temple), instead.

The guide helped direct visitors around the site, and served as a souvenir of their visit.

For the Supreme Muslim Council’s accounting purposes, the upper left-hand corner of the back cover of the guide would be marked with the official Supreme Muslim Council stamp and then torn off and the guide returned to the visitor who purchased it.

A brief Guide to Al-Haram Al-Sharif 1924

Three References to the Jewishness of the Temple Mount

In “A brief Guide to Al-Haram Al-Sharif – Jerusalem”, there are three irrefutable references to the Jewishness of the Temple Mount, which are outlined below, but let’s walk through the entire booklet, page by page.

Page 1 is the cover (above) and page 2 is a picture of the Temple Mount from north to west. Page 3 of the guide contains a notice that the area is considered a sacred site to Muslims;

“IMPORTANT NOTICE – Visitors should bear in mind that the whole of the Haram Area, and not only it’s edifices, is scared to Muslims; and that they will be expected to pay due regard to its sanctity. In particular, they must abstain from smoking anywhere in the Area, and from bringing dogs with them. The visiting-hours are from 7.30 a.m. to 11.30 a.m. daily, (Fridays excepted) and visitors are particularly requested to leave punctually at 11.30 so as not to hinder the observance of the midday-prayer.”

Page 4 contains a “historical sketch” of the Temple Mount, referred to by its Arabic name “al-Haram al-Sharif”.  The 1925 guide mentions the two mosques but nothing related to either the al-Aqsa Mosque (silver domed structure on the southwest corner of the complex) or the Dome of the Rock Mosque (gold domed structure built over the site of the First and Second Temple) having any place of prominence in Islam;

“The two principal edifices are the Dome of the Rock, on a raised platform in the middle, and the mosque of al-Aqsa against the south wall.”

On Page 4 of the guide is the first of three clear acknowledgements that the Temple Mount site was where Solomon’s Temple once stood and that this fact “is beyond dispute”;

“The site is one of the oldest in the world. Its sanctity dates from the earliest times. Its identity with the site of Solomon’s Temple is beyond dispute. This, too, is the spot, according to universal belief, on which David built there an altar unto the Lord, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings.

Page 5 of the guide contains a photo of the fountain on the Temple Mount site and page 6 provides some history as to when the Dome of the Rock and the al-Aqsa Mosque were built;

“With the reign of Abdul-Malek ibn Marwan, the Umayyad, 685-705 A.D., the history of the present buildings begins. He collected large sums of money, amounting (say the Arab historians) to “seven times the revenue of Egypt”; and with that he built the Dome (691 A.D.) and the mosque of al-Aqsa (693 A.D.), both of which, according to medieval Arab travelers and chroniclers, were of unsurpassed magnificence.”

Page 7 has a photo of the southern Arcades and page 8 contains a description of the Dome of the Rock;

“The Dome of the Rock stands on an irregular platform whose
level is some 12 feet above that of the Area. It is approached
from every side by flights of broad steps surmounted at the landing by graceful arcades (Fig. 3) known as Mawazin, that is to say ‘scales’, because of the traditional belief that on the Day of Judgment the scales of good and evil will be suspended there. Having ascended the steps on the raised platform, you should, before entering the edifice, walk around it and examine it from the outside first. Its plan is that of a regular octagon inscribed in a circle of 177 ft. diameter. It has four entrances, each of which faces one of the points of the compass: on the West…”

Page 8 – 12 of the guide are dedicated to the detailed description of the Dome of the Rock, with page 9 containing a photo of it and page 11 containing a photo of the rock on which the mosque is built.

dome of the rock wnload

[One can see how much the site had been restored from the neglect and disrepair that had occurred during the (MuslimOttoman Empire. It is apparent that the Temple Mount was not viewed by the Muslim Ottoman Turks as the holy site it is today.]

dome-of-the-rock-1875-300x232
Dome of the Rock 1875

Page 10 of the 1925 guide to the Temple Mount (al-Haram al-Sharif) contains the second of three clear references to the Temple Mount (al-Haram al-Sharif) having been the site of Solomon’s Temple!

“On the east side of the Dome of the Rock, facing the Bab Daub or gate of David, stands an elegant little edifice, also surmounted by a dome, which look at first sight like a miniature representation of its larger brother…The edifice is variously known as Mahkamat Daud (i.e. Tribunal of David)it was the practice in Solomon’s time to appeal in cases of conflicting evidence.

Tribunal of David

On page 12 of the guide begins the description of the al-Asqa mosque and that it was built in commemoration of the prophet’s ascension;

Leaving the Dome of the Rock by the west gate, the visitor will notice, some 50 yards away on the right, a small octagonal domed edifice of semi-oriental and semi-Gothic appearance. This is the Qubbal al-Mi’raj or Dome of the Ascension. It was originally built in commemoration of the Prophet’s miraculous ascension, and rebuilt in its present form about the year 1200 A.D., that is to say some thirteen years after the capture of the Holy City by Saladin and at a time when Gothic influence in building, which had been imported by the Crusaders, was still at its height.

Page 12 is a photo of the al-Aqsa Mosque from the front and then on page 14, there is a very telling reference to the disrepair the al-Aqsa mosque that had occurred under the Ottoman Turks. While the Ottomans were Muslim, it is evident that neither the Temple Mount site nor the al-Aqsa mosque (claimed now to be Islam’s 3rd holiest site) were viewed as such by the Ottomans;

“The interior of the mosque is unfortunately only partly accessible to visitors at the present time, on account of the considerable repairs which have to be carried out to that part of the buildings which supports the dome.”

The guide describes the porch of al-Aqsa mosque (pg. 13), the interior (pg 14) and page 15 contains a photo of the interior of the al-Aqsa mosque.

Page 16 of the guide contains descriptions of The Substructures around the al-Aqsa mosque (pg. 16) and contains the third clear reference to the Temple Mount (al-Haram al-Sharif) having been the site of Solomon’s Temple;

“In the west wall of the chamber, a door opens into a staircase descending to Solomon’s Stables. This is a vast subterranean chamber, of roughly rectangular shape, of which the chief feature is the imposing size of the piers. Of these, there are fifteen rows of varying size and height supporting the vaults on which rests the roof. Little is known for certain of the early history of the chamber itself. It dates probably as far back as the construction of Solomon’s Temple. According to Josephus, it was in existence and was used as a place of refuge by the Jews at the time of the conquest of Jerusalem by Titus in the year 70 A.D.”

Final thoughts…

From 1924 until the 1953 edition of the “A brief Guide to Al-Haram Al-Sharif – Jerusalem”, the Supreme Muslim Council and the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj amin al-Husseini clearly acknowledge that the Temple Mount was the site of Solomon’s First Temple. That the ‘Palestinians’ continue to claim that the site was never the location of the Jewish Temples is ludicrous – and that the UN and UNESCO continue to support such claims, is nothing short of reprehensible.

It is only since 1967, when Israel regained control of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount for the first time in 2000 years that the the promotion of the ‘Palestinians’ as the alleged ‘indigenous people’ of the Land who have been “occupied” by the Israelis since 1948, began. This movement began with Yasser Arafat (the Egyptian-born self-proclaimed leader of the ‘Palestinian Liberation Organization’) who was also the first to begin recirculating the al-Aqsa Libel – claiming in 1969 that the Israelis were behind the fire at the al-Aqsa mosque.

To this day, the ‘Palestinians” seek to (1) create an Arab connection to the Temple Mount which predates the Jewish one and  (2) incite violence with the goal of forcibly removing the Temple Mount from Israeli control.

The ‘Palestinian’s’ claims that there never was a Jewish Temple on the Temple Mount (al-Haram al-Sharif) is not only ludicrous, it is entirely contradictory to documentation from the supreme Arab-Muslim source from 1924-1953.

Promotion of a pseudo “Palestinian history” that creates an alleged Arab connection to the Temple Mount that predates the Jewish one, is the means by which the ‘Palestinians’ seek to garner public sympathy – however such a connection does not exist.

‘Palestinian’ claims are not rooted in history or archaeological evidence, nor are they religious in nature, but political.

The goal is to incite violence so as to forcibly remove the Temple Mount from Israeli control.

Is the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem the one mentioned in the Qu’uran?

INTRODUCTION: Since 1967, when Israel regained control of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount after the Six-Day War, there has been a concerted effort on the part of the ‘Palestinian’ authorities to stir up religious fervor, using the false claim that Israel is intending to destroy the al-Asqa Mosque while simultaneously advancing their claim that the entire Temple Mount is sacred to Islam. By creating and promoting their own version of “Palestinian history“, they seek to (1) create an Arab connection to the Temple Mount which predates the Jewish one and  (2) incite violence to forcibly remove the Temple Mount from Israeli control.

A lecturer with the Department of Arabic at Bar-Ilan University and expert in military intelligence, Arab political discourse and Arab mass media recently raised some doubt as to whether the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem is same al-Aqsa Mosque mentioned in the Qu’uran. If it is not, that would shed a very different light on ‘Palestinian’ claims that the Temple Mount is the 3rd holiest site in Islam.

Jordanian Tourist Map from 1965

Jordanian Tourist Map - only al-asqaLast week, an official Jordanian tourist map from 1965 that is part of a large collection of maps of Israel owned by Chaim Steinberger of New York City was seen, photocopied and written about by Dr. Mordechai Kedar this past Thursday, (August 11, 2016) in the Israeli national news, Arutz Sheva.

At first glance, it seems like an ordinary tourist map of Jerusalem – but this map was drawn by a Jordanian, Abd al-Rahman Rassas who worked as an official surveyor for the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the map bears the words:

recommended and approved by the official Jordanian Tourist Authority“.

To understand the significance, it is important to understand the political context under which it was made. It was drawn and published two years before the 1967 Six Day War – when East Jerusalem and the Temple Mount were still being illegally occupied by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.  This map produced by Jordanians shows the Temple Mount (by its Arabic name al-Haram al-Sharif) as being located on Mount Moriah and indicates the “al Aqsa Mosque” as a building on the southern end of al-Haram al-Sharif – with no notable significance to Islam;

“In other words, thirty years before the peace agreement between Israel and the Kingdom of Jordan, the Jordanians identified al Aqsa as no more than an edifice on the southern end of al-Haram al-Sharif, which in turn is built on Mount Moriah.”

– Dr. Mordechai Kedar, Arutz Sheva, August 11, 2016

Dr. Kedar sheds further light by mentioning that the al-Aqsa mosque is only mentioned once in the Qu’uran in Surah 17:1, about the al-Isra – the “night journey” that the prophet was to have taken from Mecca;

Exalted is he who took his servant by night from al-Masjid al-Haram to al-Masjid al- Aqsa, whose surroundings we have blessed, to show him of our signs. Indeed, he is the hearing, the seeing.

Surah Al-Isra 17:1, Qu’uran

There were many mosques in and around Ji’Irrana, Saudi Arabia but there are two in particular; one called al-Masjid al-Adna, meaning the “closer mosque” and the other called al-Masjid al-Aqsa, meaning the “farther mosque” and while later commentaries such as the al-Jallalayn maintain that “the furthest mosque” (al-masgid al-aqsa) is in Jerusalem, Dr. Kedar says that according to the Islamic source Kitab al-Maghazi, ibn Umar Wāqidī states that the al-Aqsa mosque mentioned in the Qu’uran is near Mecca on the Arabian peninsula   between Taaf and Mecca, and not on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

Furthermore, Dr. Kedar provides an explanation as to how and when the al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem came into prominence.

The first Islamic Empire, the Umayyad Empire (661-750 CE) was Sunni  and mercilessly persecuted the Shias.  In 651 CE, Abd allah ibn al-Zubayr was named Caliph (Islamic leader of the Islamic Empire) and inʿ682 CE he prevented the Sunni Umayyads who ruled Damascus from fulfilling the required annual Haj pilgrimage to Mecca. Since the Haj is one of the five basic Islamic commandments, Abd al-Malik, the Sunni Umayyad Caliph, needed an alternative site for the pilgrimage and settled on Jerusalem, which was then under his control. 

According to Dr. Kedar, in order to establish a basis for the “holiness” of Jerusalem in Islam, the Caliphs of the Ummayad dynasty invented many ‘traditions’ (known as fadha’il bayt al-Maqdis), upholding the value of Jerusalem, which would justify pilgrimage to Jerusalem for the faithful Muslims. Thus was al-Masjid al-Aqsa was “transported” to Jerusalem.

It is apparent when looking at the 1965 Jordanian tourist map, the  al-Aqsa Mosque on the southern end of Temple Mount is hardly mentioned and is certainly was not highlighted as an Islamic holy site. Further support that this was not historically considered an Islamic holy site can be found in an earlier post on this site, titled “Is the Temple Mount Really Islam’s Holiest Site?” Photographs of the Temple Mount taken in the late 1900’s by Felix Bonfils (1831-1885) clearly show the Temple Mount complex (where the al-Aqsa Mosque is) as having been very neglected under Ottoman (Muslim) rule.  

Both of these lend support to the Dr. Kedar’s assertion that the al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem is not the al-Aqsa Mosque of the Qu’uran.

Dr. Mordechai Kedar is a senior lecturer in the Department of Arabic at Bar-Ilan University and served in IDF Military Intelligence for 25 years, specializing in Arab political discourse, Arab mass media, Islamic groups and the Syrian domestic arena.

Final Thoughts…

It was only after the Six Day War in June 1967 that Arab claims to the Temple Mount began – after East Jerusalem and the Temple Mount were in Jewish hands for the first time in 2000 years. Since that time, ‘Palestinian’ authorities have sought to (1) create an Arab connection to the Temple Mount which predates the Jewish one and  (2) incite violence with the goal of forcibly removing the Temple Mount from Israeli control.

If the al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount is not the same al-Aqsa Mosque mentioned in the Qu’uran, then it is just another mosque like many throughout the Middle East and the Temple Mount is not Islam’s 3rd holiest site.

This 1956 map produced by Jordanians which shows labels the Temple Mount (by its Arabic name al-Haram al-Sharif) on Mount Moriah and indicates the “al Aqsa Mosque” simply as a building on the southern end of al-Haram al-Sharif – with no notable significance to Islam, seems to support the idea that the al-Aqsa Mosque only became of importance to the ‘Palestinians’ after 1967.

Furthermore, it would account for the tremendous disrepair [see earlier post] of the entire Temple Mount complex under the Ottoman Turks (who were Muslims) – as it was of no special significance to Islam.


UPDATE: Be sure to read our most recent article about how a historic Arab-Muslim document from the supreme authority in Jerusalem blatantly contradicts the Palestinian Authority’s claim that the Temple Mount was never a Jewish site: http://www.morehasbara.com/2016/08/19/muslim-challenge-to-the-palestinian-authoritys-claims/

 

 

 

The Palestinian “Narrative” – descended from the Philistines

On March 21, 2016, Palestinian Chairman Mahmoud Abbas claimed that the ‘Palestinians’ preceded Abraham in the land of Canaan and that the Bible supports his claims:

“Our narrative says that we were in this land since before Abraham. I am not saying it. The Bible says it. The Bible says, in these words, that the Palestinians existed before Abraham. So why don’t you recognize my right?”
Mahmoud Abbas, Official PA TV, March 21, 2016

Abbas’ statement about the Bible relates to the Palestinian’s long-standing claim that they are descended from the Philistines. The text of Scripture that Abbas is referring to is;

And Abraham lived as a foreigner in the land of the Philistines for many days.

Genesis 21:34

Are the Palestinians of today descendants of the Philistines?

I – Palestinians: Not Sons of Abraham

First off, Abbas’ ongoing claim that the ‘Palestinians’ are descendants of the Philistines and predate Abraham, the father of Ishmael poses a major problem for them.   

If the ‘Palestinians’ of today are descended from the Philistines;

  1. the ‘Palestinians’ are not descended from Ishmael
  2. they are not sons of Abraham
  3. they have no inheritance with the twelve Ishmaelite tribes listed in Genesis 17:20; 25:13-18
[Special thanks to Orna W., Pennsylvania, USA]
II – Palestinians – not Arabs that predate Abraham

If the present-day ‘Palestinians’ predate Abraham, they could be Arabs that have no ethnic connection to Abraham, such as the descendants of Shem, and his progeny Aram, Eber, Joktan. All of them lived before Abraham.

  • One of Shem’s sons was Aram (possibly father of the Arameans), another was Arphaxad (whose grandson was Eber).
  • Eber had two children – Peleg and Joktan.
  • Joktan is the patriarch of many Arab tribes, many of whom can be traced to the Saudi Arabian Hejaz and Yemen.

Oh. Wait.

If the ‘Palestinians’ are descended from the Philistines, they cannot be Shemites from Saudi Arabia or Yemen (who are not descended from Ishmael, and not sons of Abraham).

Philistines were Aegeans – Hellenic, like Greeks.

Well done, Mr. Abbas!

You have now succeeded in making the ‘Palestinians’ neither sons of Abraham nor Arabs!

III – Palestinians as Philistines – Aegean (Hellenic)

If the ‘Palestinians’ are descended from the Philistines, what is their ethnic background?

The Philistines arrived from Egypt in the 12 century BCE and preceded the Israelite tribes, the people that call themselves ‘Palestinians’ today, and were a people of Aegean origin. Historical Philistines were closely related to the Greeks, Hellenic — with no connection ethnically, linguistically or historically with Arabia or the Arabs.

From the Biblical Archaeology Review;

“Archaeology has brought the Philistines to life more vividly than perhaps any other Biblical people save the Israelites and the Egyptians. We now know that the Philistines were one of the Sea Peoples that also included the Tjeker, the Denyen (or Danuna), the Shardana and the Weshesh. At the very beginning of the 12th century B.C.—the beginning of the period archaeologists call Iron Age I—the Sea Peoples swept out of the Aegean to make their appearance in the archaeological record and in ancient literary references.”

Wood, Bryant G.,The Philistines Enter Canaan, Biblical Archaeology Review 17:06, Nov/Dec 1991

“The Philistines were only one of several tribes known as the Sea Peoples, however, who invaded the Land of Israel during the 12th century B.C.E. It has recently become clear that these Sea Peoples conquered not only parts of the Land of Israel but virtually the entire eastern Mediterranean coastal region, including northern Syria and southern Anatolia. Their attempt to conquer Egypt failed.”

Stern, Ephraim,The Other Philistines, Biblical Archaeology Review 40:06, Nov/Dec 2014

The Philistines settled in the land of Canaan after having been evicted from Egypt in 1176 BCE by Egyptian Pharaoh, Ramses III, and there are inscriptions and reliefs from his mortuary temple located at Medinet Habu in Egypt which indicates that Ramses III took credit for defeating them and the other Aegean sea people in the eighth year of his reign (1176 BCE). forcing them to settle elsewhere. Ramses III claims to have “settled them in strongholds, bound in my name”.

Barako Tristan, Yasur-Landau, Assaf, One if by Sea, Two if by Land: How did the Philistines get to Canaan, Biblical Archaeology Review 29:02, Mar/Apr 1013

“The Philistines ended up in one of the choicest areas of Palestine, the southwest coastal region. Archaeologists have been able to track their presence there because of their distinctively Aegean material culture, especially their pottery.”

Wood, Bryant G.,The Philistines Enter Canaan, Biblical Archaeology Review 17:06, Nov/Dec 1991

According to Scripture, the Philistines originated in “Caphtor” (Jeremiah 47:4; Amos 9:7), identified as the island of Crete, supporting that they were of Aegean origin.

Hess, Richard S. 1992 Caphtor. Pp. 869–70 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary 1, ed. David N. Freedman. New York: Doubleday

“The Philistines [of the south] established the famous Pentapolis—Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Gath and Ekron—in the southern coastal plain. Archaeological excavations at each of these sites, save for Gaza (due to the modern buildings constructed atop its tell), reveal a rich material culture with origins in the Aegean.”

Ngo, Robin, The Philistines to the North, Biblical Archaeology Society, Mar 13, 2015

According to Ephraim Stern, the Philistines of the Bible lived in the northern region of Canaan and were also Aegean Sea Peoples but differentiated from the Sea Peoples who lived in the south, referred to Philistines in the Archaeological literature.

Stern, Ephraim,The Other Philistines, Biblical Archaeology Review 40:06, Nov/Dec 2014

Those that call themselves ‘Palestinians’ today are Arabs, not Aegean (Greek) in origin, thus the ‘Palestinians’ are not descended from the Philistines. 

But The Palestinians are Arabs!

The ‘Palestinians’ are Arabs and could not have ancestors that were in the Land from Biblical times because the Arabs only arrived in the land in 637 CE with the Muslim invasion. 

To frame that with respect to the Jewish presence in the Land, the First Temple was built in Jerusalem from ~833 – 827 BCE by King Solomon, son of King David.

The first Arabs arrived ~1500 years after Solomon build the first Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, and as foreign conquerors.

The Palestinians are Pan-Arabists

Yasser Arafat, Mahmoud Abbas’ predecessor and second Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), unintentionally revealed in the organization’s 1964 Charter, who they are;

Article 2 of the 1964 PLO Charter reads;

Palestine with its boundaries at the time of the British Mandate is a regional indivisible unit.”

The land under the British Mandate for Palestine is shown below, and includes present-day Israel (in white) and Transjordan (later renamed Jordan) in green.  According to Article 2 of the 1964 PLO Charter, all of this area is Palestine and is an “indivisible unit”.

British Mandate - Israel and TransJordan

Article 24 of the 1964 PLO Charter reads:

“This Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, and on the Gaza Strip.”

Wait. What?

Article 2 of the 1964 PLO Charter states that all of the area under the former British Mandate is “Palestine” and is an “indivisible unit” with the exception of Jordan, the “West Bank” [ Judea and Samaria, in Israel], and the Gaza Strip.

That is, the only land that the Palestinian leadership was claiming for a future “Palestine State” was Israel; not Jordan, not the “West Bank” (Judea and Samaria) and not the Gaza Strip!

Why not?

In 1970, Yassar Arafat himself revealed why the ‘Palestinians’ excluded the “West Bank” and “Gaza Strip” from a future Palestinian State in his interview with Italian reporter Arianna Palazzi:

The question of borders doesn’t interest usFrom the Arab standpoint, we mustn’t talk about borders. Palestine is nothing but a drop in an enormous ocean. Our nation is the Arabic nation that stretches from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea and beyond it….. The P.L.O. is fighting Israel in the name of Pan-Arabism. What you call ‘Jordan’ is nothing more than Palestine.

In 1970 the Palestinians (1) considered themselves to be Pan-Arabists and (2) their purpose to be “to fight Israel in the name of Pan-Arabism.

The Palestinian’s excluded the “West Bank” and Gaza Strip as part of a future “Palestinian State” because as Arabic countries, they were already part of the “Arabic nation”Egypt controlled the Gaza Strip and Jordan controlled the “West Bank” and Jerusalem. No problem.

The PLO’s focus was Israel, which it was “fighting in the name of Pan-Arabism“.

Pan Arabism is the belief that all the countries of North Africa and West Asia from the Atlantic Ocean to the Arabian Sea constitute a single nation, the Arab nation. 

The ‘Palestinians’ clearly had no issue with being “occupied”; they were occupied by Egypt and occupied by Jordan without any problem.  

What Changed?

During the 1948 War of Independence – which began the day after the State of Israel was created in May 1948, Jordan took control of territory on the western side of the Jordan River (hence the name “West Bank“) – including the cities of Jericho, Bethlehem, Hebron and Nablus, as well as the Old City of Jerusalem. They illegally annexed the “West Bank” in April of 1950.

In June 1967, weeks after Egypt blockaded the Straits of Tiran and cut off Israeli shipping, Israel launched an attack against Egypt, beginning the Six-Day War.

From 1948 until before the 1967 Six Day War, the ‘Palestinians’ of the “West Bank” were under Jordanian rule and the ‘Palestinians’ of Gaza were under Egyptian rule and neither made any demand for self-determination or statehood.

During the Six-Day War, Israel defeated the armies of the surrounding Arab states in a mere 6 days and took control of the formerly Egyptian-controlled Gaza Strip as well as the formerly Jordanian-controlled West Bank.

Suddenly, the ‘Palestinians’ had an issue.

When  occupied by Egypt and occupied by Jordan — no problem, no complaints about “occupation”, no push for “statehood”.  It was only in 1967, when Israel re-claimed its own land which had been theirs for ~3500 years, that the ‘Palestinians’ began to speak of “the occupation“.

What changed was the “West Bank” and Gaza Strip were no longer part of the “Arab nation” of Pan-Arabism.

This is what triggered the PLO to re-write their Charter in 1968.  This was the beginning of the Palestinian nationalism movement as we know it now.

The revised 1968 Charter called for “a war of liberation“, the use of terrorism (called armed struggle and commando actions) in order to achieve their aims and the ‘Palestinians’ now laid claim to every inch of land under the British Mandate not already ruled by Jordan; including the “West Bank” and the Gaza Strip – in other words, all of Israel.

The Arabs of the surrounding area never considered that there was a special, separate entity called “Palestine”;

In 1919:

“We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds.”

Resolution of the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations, Jerusalem, February 1919

In 1937:

There is no such country as Palestine! ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria.

Local Arab leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, to the British Peel Commission

In 1947:

“Palestine was part of the Province of Syria” … “politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the sense of forming a separate political entity.”

Representative of the Arab Higher Committee, Statement to the General Assembly of the United Nations, May 1947

In 1948:

“Palestine and Transjordan are one.”

King Abdullah, Arab League meeting in Cairo, 12 April 1948

In 1956:

“It is common knowledge that that Palestine is nothing by Southern Syria”

PLO founder Ahmed Shuqeiri, to the United Nations Security Council, May 31, 1956

In 1970:

“Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine; there is only one land, with one history and one and the same fate”

Prince Hassan of the Jordanian National Assembly, February 2, 1970

In 1976:

“You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people.

Syrian President Hafez al-Assad, addressing the PLO, July 20, 1976

Revising History – intent and purpose

Central to the Palestinian Authority’s (PA) policy is to rewrite history; specifically the history of the land and its inhabitants. The purpose is to legitimize its own alleged claim to the land and justify the destruction of Israel.

Long before the current “knife intifada”, there was the “history intifada”; seeking to erase Jewish history in the Land of Israel and replace it with a fabricated Palestinian history.

This is where the myth of the Palestinians as the ancient Philistines was born.

Palestinian revisionist history has two main goals:

1- erase the Jewish people’s 3,000+ year history in the Land of Israel
2- create an fabricated “ancient” ‘Palestinian’ history in the same land

This historical revision has an intentional political strategy to rewrite history to the political goal of denying Israel’s right to exist.

This strategy was presented by Dr. Yussuf Alzamili, Chairman of the History Department of Khan Yunis Educational Collegeat a 1998 conference of Palestinian historians .  At that conference, Alzamili

called on all universities and colleges to write the history of Palestine and to guard it, and not to enable the [foreign] implants and enemies to distort it or to legitimize the existence of Jews on this land…”

Al-Ayyam newspaper, December 4, 1998

Writing the history of Palestine was very clearly for the purpose of “not enabling the (alleged) foreign implants [the Jews] to legitimize their existence on this land.” Palestinian history is in effect to replace the Jewish history in the land of Israel with their own alleged ancient narrative and by conveying themselves as “a people under occupation” they elicit public support for their political ideology and agenda.

The Palestinian Narrative – alleged claim to the Land

Palestinians claim that they have been the occupiers of the land “since time immemorial” and many, including Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas insist that they are the “descendants of the Philistines”. 

Another tactic of Palestinian ‘historians’ seek to disconnect the Jews of today from the ancient generation of Jews, maintaining that the ancestors of today’s Jews were from places other than the land or Israel (“Palestine”) and thus have no claim to the land. Some of those that make this claim say that the Jews entered the Land as the “Arab Children of Israel tribe” or “Arab Yemenites“, were “weak in number“, “unimportant” and “never ruled” and were “wiped out” – and that the Jews of today are not related to that ancient people.

They maintain that the land has been theirs “since the last Arab immigration 200-300 years BCE” and that the “true owners of the land are Arabs” who have been “invaded” by a series of different people; first the Persians, then the Greeks, then the Romans “and in modern times by the English and the Zionist entity“.

Really, you can’t make this up;

“Palestine is ours since the period of the Canaanites (members of the Kinana Arab tribe), the Arab Jebusites, and the Arab Philistines (the Palestinians) (worshippers of the Arab god Falas in Yemen), and from time immemorial… It is ours since the last Arab immigration 200-300 years BCE, as a result of the collapse of the emirates/regions of the tribes of the Children of Israel (the Arab Yemenite [tribe] in Yemen)… In our land, as the archeologists say today… the Arab Children of Israel tribe, weak in numbers, was unimportant and never ruled, given the existence of dozens of other tribes in Palestine (in general, there is no connection between the people of Israel, the Arab Yemenite tribe which has been wiped off the stage of history and the present Jewish residents of Palestine who are mainly Jews from Russia, Ukraine, Georgia, [the region] between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, and then east and west Europe – see [the writings of] Shlomo Sand (author of The Invention of the Jewish People, which claims that that the ancestry of most contemporary Jews stems mainly from outside the Land of Israel -Ed.) and Arthur Koestler (author of The Thirteenth Tribe, which advances the thesis that Ashkenazi Jews are descended from the Khazars Ed.), two fair Jews.) (parenthesis in source) The invasions of Palestine which occurred one after the other – the Persians, Greeks, Romans, and in modern times the English and the Zionist entity – are nothing but a prelude to its redemption by the Arabs, the true owners of the land.”

Source: Official PA daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Oct. 14, 2015
Author: Bakr Abu Bakr, regular columnist for official PA daily (Fatah Revolutionary Council member)

Professor Omar Ja’ara of Al-Najjah University in Nablus said on Palestinian national television in 2012 that their history is traced to those that defeated the Philistines — asserting that the Arabs that defeated the Philistines were Muslims.  How ludicrous, given Islam only began in 610 C.E;

“We must make clear to the world that David in the Hebrew Bible is not connected to David in the Quran, Solomon in the Hebrew Bible is not connected to Solomon in the Quran, and neither is Saul or Joshua son of Nun [of the Bible]. We have a great leader, Saul, [in the Quran] who defeated the nation of giants and killed Goliath. This is a great Muslim victory. The Muslims of the Children of Israel went out of Egypt under the leadership of Moses, and unfortunately, many researchers deny the Exodus of those oppressed people who were liberated by a great leader, like Moses the Muslim, the believing leader, the great Muslim, who was succeeded by Saul, the leader of these Muslims in liberating Palestine. This was the first Palestinian liberation through armed struggle to liberate Palestine from the nation of giants led by Goliath. This is our logic and this is our culture.”

Dr. Omar Ja’ara, Professor Al-Najah University, Nablus, PA TV (Fatah), Feb. 15, 2012

While a minority, there are those that accepts the Israelite presence in historic Palestine starting from Jacob (what the Quran calls “Isra’il”).

Mazen Abdel Latif, a lecturer in the archaeology department of An-Najah University in Nablus told the Times of Israel in a February 2014 interview that as a believing Muslim he accepts the Israelite presence in historic Palestine starting from Jacob (“Isra’il”) through the 12 tribes, down to Moses and King David;

“The Hebrew presence in the area has also gained archaeological support from the Amarna Letters found in Egypt and dating back to 1,300 BCE. The stone cuneiform tablets, written in Akkadian, make reference to a people called Habiru or ‘Abiru, believed to be the Hebrews.”

Mazen Abdel Latif, archaeology lecturer,  An-Najah University, Nablus

In that same interview, he said;

“Modern nations have the right to take pride in their ancestors, imagined or real.”

Final Thoughts

The Arabs calling themselves ‘Palestinians’ could not be descendants of the Philistines, who Aegean – closely related to the Greeks, with no connection ethnically, linguistically or historically with Arabia or the Arabs. Furthermore, the Arabs only arrived in the Land in 637 CE; ~1500 years after the First Jewish Temple was built in Jerusalem.

Palestinian family names speak more than anything to the foreign origin of their bearers; the Al-Masri family from Nablus originated from Egypt (Al-Masri means Egyptian in Arabic), the Chalabis came from Syria and the Houranis came from the Houran region of southwestern Syria, names such as al-Djazair (Algerian), el-Mughrabi (Moroccan / North African) and al-Yamani (Yemenite) bespeak the “Palestinians’ pan-Arab origins.

In March 2012, Hamas’s interior minister Fathi Hammad said this;

“Allah be praised, we all have Arab roots, and every Palestinian, in Gaza and throughout Palestine, can prove his Arab roots — whether from Saudi Arabia, from Yemen, or anywhere. We have blood ties. Personally, half my family is Egyptian. We are all like that. More than 30 families in the Gaza Strip are called al-Masri. Brothers, half of the Palestinians are Egyptian and the other half are Saudi.”

Fathi Hammad, Hamas’s interior minister

Jews are accused of being “settlers” and “occupiers“, yet it is evident from the words of their own mouths that the Arabs of the surrounding area never considered that there was ever a special, separate entity called “Palestine”.

The desire for a “Palestinian State” is very recent and traceable to the events following the 1967 Six-Day War, stemming from pan-Arabism.

The ‘Palestinians’ had no issue with “occupation” prior to 1967; the ‘Palestinians’ of Gaza were occupied by Egypt and the ‘Palestinians’ of the “West Bank” were occupied by Jordan – from 1948 until 1967 without complaint, and without any demand for self-determination or statehood.

No, “occupation” is not the issue.

Jews in Israel is the issue.

The Palestinians have said it from when the term “Palestinian” was created:

The question of borders doesn’t interest usFrom the Arab standpoint, we mustn’t talk about borders. Palestine is nothing but a drop in an enormous ocean. Our nation is the Arabic nation that stretches from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea and beyond it….. The P.L.O. is fighting Israel in the name of Pan-Arabism. What you call ‘Jordan’ is nothing more than Palestine.

Yassar Arafat, 1970 interview with Italian reporter Arianna Palazzi

The Palestinians are not descendants of the Philistines and have not been in the Land “since time immemorial“, but are Pan-Arab Hashemite colonialists, descendants of Egyptians, Syrians, Jordanians and those from others Pan-Arabist lands. They are Arabs, descended from the conquering Muslims of Arabia that first arrived in the 6th century CE with the founding of Islam, and later enticed by the Ottomans and British to come as migrant laborers, and recruited by Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, in order to try to prevent a Jewish state from being formed (see earlier post).

They are the settlers and occupiers in the ancient land of the Jews.

 

 

Where did the Palestinians of Today Come From?

Central to the discussion regarding the Land and who are its original inhabitants is the origin of those that call themselves ‘Palestinians’. This article tackles where they came from and when, with documentation.

Where is Palestine – a brief history

There has never been an Arab state called “Palestine”.   The term “Palestine” is a geographical term used to designate the region at specific points in history; (1) under the Romans (Syria Palaestina, 135-390 AD), (2) a province of the Byzantine Empire (Palestina Secunda or Palestina II – 390 AD ) and (3) a region under British administration (British Mandate for Palestine, 1920-1948).

The land of Israel changed hands three times between 614 and 638 CE; first to the Persians (614 CE), then the Christian Byzantines (629 CE) and finally to the Arab Muslims in 638 CE.

The Arabs first came to the Land in the 6th century CE, after the Jews had already been ruled for almost 100 years by a Jewish Dynasty (the Hasmodian Dynasty, aka as the Maccabees).  This was prior to Romans overthrowing the Hasmodian Dynasty during the Jewish-Roman Wars. Prior to the rule of the Hasmonean Dynasty, the Jews had been in the Land for ~ 1500 years.

[UPDATE: In March 2016, a 2500 year old Jewish seal was found in Jerusalem, dating from the first Jewish Temple Period, clearly establishing that there was an established  Jewish presence at that time.

[see http://www.morehasbara.com/2016/05/21/king-solomons-wall-discovered-outside-2nd-temple-wall/].

The Arabs arrived substantially later, when they first invaded the land and besieged Gaza in 634 CE, and defeated the Byzantines (636 CE) and two years later, conquered Jerusalem.

The Western half of the Byzantine Empire fell in 476 CEbut the Eastern half survived for 1,000 more years and fell to the Ottoman Turks when their Muslim army stormed Constantinople in 1453. 

The Ottoman Turks (converted to Islam in the 8th and 9th centuries) began traveling westward from the area now known as Turkey, into Europe and then through the Middle East, conquering lands as they went.  In 1453, the Ottoman Turks stormed Constantinople, renaming it Istanbul and destroyed the last remains of the Byzantine Empire. Under the Ottoman Empire (1517-1917 CE) the geographic area of southern Syria was referred to as ‘Palestine’ but wasn’t a state or province and was indistinguishable from southern Syria.

(3) At the end of WWI (1921), the former Ottoman Turkish Empire was carved up, with the British becoming responsible for administering the Holy Land, a region which became known as the British Mandate of Palestine.

Changing Demographics of Jerusalem – under Arab and Christian Occupation (638 CE – 1917 CE)

Arab Rule – part one

When the Arabs conquered Jerusalem in 638 C.E,  the majority of the population was Christian.  Umar, the first Caliph (Islamic representative) lifted the almost 500 year ban against Jewish residence imposed by the Christians under the Byzantine Empire and invited the Jews to return, live and worship once again in Jerusalem.

The Umayyads oversaw the construction of the Dome of the Rock mosque in 691 CE (almost 700 years after the time of Jesus), built near the area formerly occupied by Herod’s Temple (the Second Temple) and close by the Kotel (Western Wall)  — the last remnant of Solomon’s temple (the first Temple*). The Dome of the Rock was constructed over the outcropping of limestone rock which Jewish tradition held to be the place of Abraham’s intended sacrifice of Isaac and which Islamic tradition points to the sacred rock as the place from which Muhammad began his Ascent to Heaven to receive Allah’s final revelation. They also built the al-Asqa mosque in 705 CE. Under the Umayyad empire, Damascus (Syria) was their capital.

[*As mentioned above, the seal that was found in March 2016, and an earlier one found in 2007, both originated from the First Temple Period.]

For four centuries (691 – 1099 CE) the Jews and Christians lived peacefully along side the Muslims before the beginning of centuries of ‘holy wars’.

Christian Rule

In 1099 CE, the Crusaders stormed Jerusalem and massacred its Muslim and Jewish populations. Residence by non-Christians was banned and Jerusalem became the capital of the Latin Kingdom. Throughout the Crusader Period, neither Muslims nor Jews were allowed to live in Jerusalem.

The Temple Mount (known to the Arabs as the “Haram al-Sharif”) was desecrated and the Dome of the Rock was converted into a church. The al-Aqsa mosque became the residence of the king.

The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem lasted only eighty-eight years.

Arab Rule – part two

In 1187, the Abbasids recaptured Jerusalem and for the next seven centuries, except for a very short period, Jerusalem remained under Muslim rule. Civilians were spared and churches were largely left untouched but the Dome of the Rock and al-Asqa mosque reverted back to their original use.

After the Abbasids took control, the capital was moved from Damascus (Syria) to Baghdad (Iraq) and Jerusalem began to decline.

In 1219, under threat of another Crusade, the walls of Jerusalem were originally reconstructed then later dismantle with most of the population of Jerusalem finally leaving the un-walled, ill-defended city. Battles took place between the Mongols and Muslims but for the most part, Jerusalem remained uninhabited and in decline.

Ottoman Empire

Jerusalem fell to the Ottomans in 1517 but the Sultan did not make the city a district capital. During the first part of their rule, Jews were allowed to practice their religion and the Holy Land became a refuge for Jews fleeing persecution under the Christian Crusaders in Europe.

With the decentralization of Ottoman rule in the mid 16th century, the lives of the Jews declined. Much of the land was in the hands of absentee landlords,  fell into disrepair and arable land returned to desert.  

In the last two decades of Ottoman rule, the first waves of Jewish immigrants mainly from Russia arrived in the Holy Land; coming to build a better life for themselves and fulfill their dreams of living in the Holy Land.

The Armenian Christians initially prospered during Ottoman rule and gained control over their own quarter in Jerusalem, comprising over 20% of the Christian population in Jerusalem by the late 17th century. Over the following two hundred years and during and just after WWI however, the Ottomans massacred between 1 – 1.5  million Armenians worldwide.

At the end of WWI (1921), the former Ottoman Turkish Empire was divided up, with the British becoming responsible for administering the Holy Land, a region which became known as the British Mandate for Palestine. It is very telling to see photos of what this area looked like just prior to them taking it over from the Ottomans — an arid, un-farmed land which was very sparsely populated. More on that below (with actual photos from the late 1800’s.

Southern Syria largely uninhabited under the Ottoman Turks

The region of southern Syria which included the Holy Land had fallen into disrepair largely due to the absence of Ottomans in the region, as the center of rule was Istambul (in present-day Turkey) — formerly Constantanople.

Félix Bonfils (1831-1885) was a French photographer and writer who was active in the Middle East and traveled to the region several times in the late 1800’s, while the region was still under Ottoman rule. Below are some of his photographs taken from late 1800’s.

Of the 9,000 photos taken by Bonfils, none show any evidence of any large-scale settlements — Arab or otherwise. 

gihon-valley-palestine-300x234

mur-des-juifs-un-vendredi-300x228

felix-bonfils-solomons-pools-300x221

felix-bonfils-modern-jericho-300x229

dome-of-the-rock-1875-300x232

Bonfils_Félix_1831-1885_-_613_-_Joueurs_de_violon_bedouins-300x232

755px-birket_israel_19th_century-300x239

Here are a few other photos that are part of a collection from Harvard that were taken and collected by the Austrian chemist Dr. Rudolph Avraham Seiden.

 

Grave-of-Maimonides-Rambam-in-Tiberias-circa-1920.-300x185

Grave of Maimonides (Rambam) in Tiberias (circa 1920).

British Mandated Palestine

When the British took control of the region in 1921, after WWI and the collapse of the Ottoman empire, the Holy Land was undeveloped and the population small.  The British  census of October 23, 1922 reported there were only 757,182 individuals including military and “persons of foreign nationality“.

Broken down according to religion, there were 590 794 Muslims  (“Mohammedans”), 83 794 Jews , 73 024 Christians and 9 474 “others” — Baha’i, Samaritans, etc.

The survey also notes that it included “persons of foreign nationality” in the census including those that came “from Syria and Asia Minor (Turkey)…since the British occupation, which presumably would be Muslims.

So where did the so-called ‘Palestinians’ come from?

Remember, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem?  Yes, the same Haj Amin al-Husseini who later went on to collaborate with Hitler and Himmler? See his role in this, below.

During Ottoman rule

During the Ottoman Empire, Arab migrant workers began to come to work in the Land, beginning around 1831-1947 and towns such as Haifa, Jaffa and Jerusalem saw an increase in their population under Ottoman rule between 1880 and 1919. For example, Haifa’s Arab population surged from 6,000 to 80,000, mostly due to migrant workers.

 

Influx of Muslim Arabs Into Palestine

Importation of Arab migrant workers that began under the Ottoman Empire, continued under the British Mandate, and Arabs were enticed to come to work on major civilian and military infrastructure projects. Legal and illegal Arab migrants were also attracted by economic growth generated by the Jewish community that began, starting in 1882.

After the creation of the first Arab Palestinian state (Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan, renamed Jordan) in 1921, the newly appointed Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini began a intentional campaign to populate the British Mandate for Palestine (which was largely uninhabited) with Muslim Arabs.   

Al-Husseini knew that just prior to the creation of the Mandate for Palestine (1920), the United Kingdom’s Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour signed the Balfour Declaration of 1917 (dated 2 November 1917) which committed the British government to ‘the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people‘. The Balfour Declaration was intended and understood by British officials to mean that Palestine would ultimately become a ‘Jewish Commonwealth’ or a ‘Jewish State’; provided Jews came and settled there in sufficient numbers (i.e when a Jewish majority was achieved) — the wording of which was later incorporated into the British Mandate for Palestine.

Al-Husseini’s goal was to prevent a Jewish majority in the tiny piece of remaining land earmarked for the Jewish national homeland and to this end, the Grand Mufti, Haj Amin al-Husseini encouraged the mass influx of Arab Muslims from neighbouring countries. He used the noble concept of Muslims moving to non-Muslim lands in order to claim them for Islam to motivate Arab Muslims to move there. The largest influx of Muslims was in the mid 1920’s to late 1930’s.

[Great Britain and Palestine, 1915-1945, Information Paper no. 20, 3d ed. (London: Royal Institute for International Affairs, 1946), p. 64. C.S. Jarvis, “Palestine,” United Empire (London), 28 (1937): 633. Census of Palestine 1922, Census of Palestine 1931, Also see quote from Zahir Muhsein, Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), March 1977, below.]

British Census Date – 1922 and 1931

British Census data supports this significant increase in Muslims.

As mentioned above, just after the British began administering Palestine, census data (October 23, 1922) reported only 757,182 individuals including military and “persons of foreign nationality” and those that had recently arrived from Syria and Asia Minor (Turkey), presumably Muslim.

The 1922 data were broken down by religion, indicating that there were 590 890 Muslims (“Mohammedans”), 83 694 Jews and 73 024 Christians.

Palestine-1922-Census-cover-200x300       Palestine-1931-Census-183x300

 

In 1931 the British took a second population census which reported 1,035,821 individuals.  The population broken down by religion was as follows: 759 712 Muslims (total) / 693159 (settled)*, 174 610 Jews, 91 398 Christians, 9 148 Druze — with the rest Baha’i, Samaritan, etc.

*Note: for the purpose of the census, “houses” were defined as “an enclosure or residence of one or more families having a separate entrance from the common way” and could be either “attached” or “semi-detached“.  In 1931, a total of 66,553 Muslims lived in a dwelling other than a “house” but none of the Jews, Christians, Druze, Bahai’s or Samaritans did.

Comparing the 1931 census data with the 1922 census data indicates that;

  1. Muslims (“Mohammedans”) increased by 168822 individuals (102269 living in “houses” and 66553 in another kind of dwelling),
  2. Jews increased by 90 916 individuals
  3. Christians increased by 18  374 individuals

The Muslim population of mandated Palestine increased by 169,000 Muslims between 1922 and 1931, but during the same time period, the Jewish population only increased by 91, 000 JewsThe most notable increase in Muslim population was in Southern Palestine, Be’ersheva and the Jerusalem area.

Keep in mind, the data above is only up to 1931.

In order to claim the land for Islam and ensure there wasn’t a Jewish majority, the Grand Mufti, Haj Amin Al-Husseini continued to recruit Muslims to move to mandated Palestine until the late 1930’s.

According to a 1937 report by the British Peel Commission and published in the book, Palestine Betrayed

“during 1922 through 1931, the increase of Arab population in the mixed-towns of Haifa, Jaffa and Jerusalem was 86%, 62% and 37% respectively

Professor Efraim Karsh, “Palestine Betrayed”

It is these Arabs; ones who were enticed under the Ottoman Empire, the British Mandate for Palestine and directly by Haj Amin al-Husseini who are the so-called “Palestinians” of today — Muslim Arabs whose parents and grandparents emigrated to the British Mandate for Palestine from the late 1800’s to the late 1930’s.

These Arabs were not born in Palestine (under the Ottomans or the British).  They did not originate from Palestine. They moved there .

But from where?

The Royal Institute for International Affairs sheds some light on the origin of the increased Arab Muslim population during the 1920s and 1930s when it reports:

“The number of Arabs who have entered Palestine illegally from Syria and Transjordan is unknown but is probably considerable.”

[source: Great Britain and Palestine, 1915-1945, Information Paper no. 20, 3d ed. (London: Royal Institute for International Affairs, 1946), p. 64.]

The governor of the Sinai from 1923-36 C.S. Jarvis also indicated  where these Arab Muslims came from,  when he said that:

“illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Trans-Jordan and Syria”

[source: C.S. Jarvis, “Palestine,” United Empire (London), 28 (1937): 633.]

“The Sinai” is Egypt.

These newly arrived Muslim Arabs came from; (1) Egypt and (2) Transjordan and (3) Syria; Hashemite Arabs. 

It is the descendants of these that call themselvesPalestinians“.


Footnote: Al-Husseini further added to the population imbalance of Muslim Arabs over Jews in the land by writing to Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill in 1921, demanding that restrictions be placed on Jewish immigration.  As tensions between the Jews and the increasing Arab population rose, the British government, then under the leadership of Churchill issued a White Paper (1939) restricting Jewish immigration certificates issued by the mandatory power to maximum of 75,000.  This was just as thousands of Jews were trying to flee the escalating Nazi violence in Europe and emigrate to the Holy Land and re-establish the Jewish homeland.   This left the Jews few options for escape the Nazis.

Al-Husseini did not stop there…

As you can read about it previous articles, al-Husseini then left the Middle East for Berlin where after meeting with Adolf Hitler, went onto to become the “Arab Fuhrer” — working closely with head of the Gestapo and SS Henrich Himmler (architect of the concentration camps) to carry out their shared goal to eradicate the Jews.

Nazi Influence in the Middle East – Haj Amin al-Husseini

Introduction: A US National Archives report released in 2010 titled “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War” documents Nazi influence in the Middle East.  This report is an addendum to a 2004 US government report, “US Intelligence and the Nazis”  and both are based on thousands of documents declassified under the 1998 Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act. Of significance, this report supports the significant role that Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem played in WWII as well as the documenting the link between Adbel Nasser, the second President of Egypt and the Nazis.

In this article we trace Haj Amin al-Husseini from his role in the British Mandate for Palestine between WWI and WWII, through his meeting with Adolf Hitler where he secured the Fuhrer’s promise for “Arab liberation” and the”destruction of the Jewish element residing in the Arab sphere to his close relationship with Heinrich Himmler, the architect of the Nazi concentration camps, to his role immediately after the war in the politics of the Middle East, specifically Egypt.

Haj Amin al-Husseini – Grand Mufti of Jerusalem
800px-Al-Husseini-1929head-150x150

Haj Amin al-Husseini also known as Mohammed (Effendi) Amin al-Husseini was appointed Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in 1921 by the British under the Mandate for Palestine.  The role of the position of Grand Mufti was as the supreme Muslim religious leader. He used the position to promote Islam, push for Arab independence and oppose the establishment of a Jewish national home in the British Mandate for Palestine.

al-Husseini-president-World-Islamic-Congress-1931-300x152
al-Husseini-president-World-Islamic-Congress-1931

In his determination for Arab independence, al-Husseini incited his followers to a three-year war against the Jews in Palestine and the British who administered the Palestine Mandate, which is known as the 1936-39 Arab Revolt. The British published the Peel Report in 1937 recommending the partition of Palestine between Jews and Arabs, however the Arabs rejected the Peel plan and escalated their revolt. Evading a British arrest warrant, al-Husseini fled British Palestine and took refuge in the French Mandate of Lebanon. When World War II started, the Mufti was asked to leave Lebanon and first went to the British Mandate of Iraq, escaped via Tehran to Italy and eventually ended up in Berlin, where he lived until the end of the war.

Once in Berlin, the Mufti received an enthusiastic reception by the “Islamische Zentralinstitut” and the whole Islamic community of Germany, which welcomed him as the “Führer of the Arabic world“.

The Mufti and Hitler
Mufti-and-Hitler-300x226
Grand Mufti al-Husseini meeting Adolf Hitler November, 28 1941, Berlin

On meeting Adolf Hitler on November 28, 1941 in Berlin,  the Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini requested backing for Arab independence and support in opposing the establishment of a Jewish national home in the British Mandate for Palestine, however al-Husseini got much more than he sought.

[actual German archive documents of the meeting between the Mufti and the Fuhrer, as well as the transcript in previous post]

Adolf Hitler himself told al-Husseini of his intention to eliminate the Jews of British Palestine in their November 28, 1941 meeting in Berlin.  In that meeting,  Hitler said that the outcome of the war in Europe Nazis and the Middle East would also decide the fate of the Arab world. Hitler told al-Husseini that German troops intended to break through the Caucasus region and move into the Middle East and that this would result in the liberation of the Arabs there. Hitler said that Germany’s objective was the destruction of the Jews.

Archived documents on German Foreign policy (posted in the earlier article, link above) document Adolf Hitler promising the Grand Mufti:
(1) “Arab liberation
(2) “destruction of the Jewish element residing in the Arab sphere under the protection of British power”
(3) letting the Grand Mufti become theauthoritative spokesman for the Arab worldwhere he wouldset off the Arab operations, which he had secretly prepared“.

[Editorial note: It would appear that his desire for “Arab liberation” and the “destruction of the Jewish element residing in the Arab sphere” made Adolf Hitler the first advocate for the “Free Palestine” movement.  Wait until you read below who joined Hitler and al-Husseini (the Grand Mufti) in the 1950’s! Hint: he became President of Egypt.]

Hitler’s third promise to al-Husseini was that he was to become the “authoritative spokesman for the Arab world” is supported by a recently released US National Archives report titled “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War” (an addendum to a 2004 US government report, “US Intelligence and the Nazis“). This report is based on thousands of documents declassified under the 1998 Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act. This report supports that the Nazis planned for al-Husseini to serve as leader after Nazi conquest. More on that below.


Note: The balance of this article is based on this newly released US National Archives report titled “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”. Photos were added by us, to support the text. We have included the references cited in the report throughout the rest of the article to support that this is far from conjecture.


mufti_handchar-300x209
Nazi Financial Support of the Mufti

 

The report documents that after the war, Carl Berthold Franz Rekowski, an official of the German Foreign Office who had dealt with Husseini, testified that the Foreign Office financially supported the two Arab leaders (Husseini and an Iraqi named Gailani), their families, and other Arabs in their entourage who had fled to Germany after the coup. The report documents that al-Husseini lived in a villa in the Krumme Lanke neighborhood of Berlin.  The report states that Husseini was a believer in a Pan-Arab state and that his closest ties were with the SSThe CIA file on al-Husseini indicated that he had a staff of 20–30 men in Berlin and from spring 1943 to spring 1944, al-Husseini was paid 50,000 marks monthly [JRofC note: 600,000 marks per year] for operational expenses and in addition received living expenses averaging 80,000 marks per month [JRofC note: 960,000 marks per year].  A German field marshal received a base salary of 26,500 marks per year. [JRofC note: al-Husseini was paid 1,560,000 marks per year by the Nazis]

[from pg 19 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow, source: Norman J.W. Goda, “Black Marks: Hitler’s Bribery of His Senior Military Officers,” Journal of Modern History, v. 72, n. 2 (June 2000): 413–52.]

Of great significance and supporting what Hitler said to Husseini when they met, Rekowski learned through conversations with other Foreign Office officials that Nazi authorities planned to use Husseini to control Palestine after Germany conquered them. 

[from pg 20 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: Herf, Nazi Propaganda, 200.]

The Mufti – Nazi SS recruiter in Croatia

 

al-Husayni-Bosnian-SS-300x219

The report states that in the fall of 1943 Husseini went to the Independent State of Croatia, a Nazi ally, to recruit Muslims for the Waffen-SS. During that trip he told the troops of the newly formed Bosnian-Muslim 13th Mountain Waffen-SS division that the entire Muslim world ought to follow their example. Husseini also organized a 1944 mission for Palestinian Arabs and Germans to carry out sabotage and propaganda after German planes dropped them into Palestine by parachute. In discussions with the Foreign Intelligence branch of the RSHA, Husseini insisted that the Arabs take command after they landed and direct their fight against the Jews of Palestine, not the British authorities.

[from pg 20 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: Herf, Nazi Propaganda, 200.]

Muftil_Muslim-SS-300x215
Mufti inspecting Muslim Nazi recruits
Amin-Al-Husseini
Amin Al Husseini giving Nazi salute to Muslim Nazi recruits
Muslim-SS-praying-November-1943-300x213
Muslim SS praying November 1943

SS- Officer Wilhelm Beisner had frequent contact with Husseini during the war and told Rekowski that Husseini had good ties with Heinrich Himmler and with Waffen-SS Gen. Gottlob Berger, who handled the recruitment of non-German forces into the Waffen-SS.

The Mufti and Heinrich Himmler

For those that do not know who Heinrich Himmler is, let us provide a brief background.

Heinrich Himmler was head of the Gestapo and the head of the Waffen-SS,  under which al-Husseini recruited Muslim fighters.  Himmler was also the main architect and organizer of the mass murder of Jews in the Third Reich.  In 1933, Himmler set up the first concentration camp in Dachau and with Hitler’s encouragement over the next several years, extended the range of those who ‘qualified’ for internment in concentration camps. 

From the outset of his position as Reichsfuhrer of the SS, Himmler introduced the principle of racial selection and special marriage laws which would ensure the systematic coupling of people of ‘high value’.  It was Himmler’s vision to transform the idea of racial selection from a negative concept based on anti-Semitism into a positive concept for building up the SS and forming a perfect Aryan Race.

Himmler’s vision of this perfect ‘Aryan race’ of blue-eyed, blond haired people was to be achieved by literally ‘cultivating them’ based on the ‘laws of selection’ and according to very specific criteria of physical characteristics as well as mental and physical abilities. Simultaneous with that, was the systematic extermination of Jews and others seen as inferior in his instrument of perfect design for such, the concentration camps.

Below are some photos of Husseini and Himmler; the first one  they are sharing a glass of wine at one of the concentration camps, looking over architectural plans for another concentration camp, presumably Auschwitz.

 

MUFTi_himmler3-300x213
Mufti al-Husseini and Himmler

 

mufti_himmler1-300x265

 

Mufti-Himmler-300x261

 

 

Both the SS leaders, including Hitler and Himmler had common values with Husseini.  According the documents declassified under the Nazi War Declassification Act of 1997, both stated that Nazism and Islam had common values as well as common enemies—above all, the Jews.

[from pg 20 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: Document XX-8830, old pouch, November 1-26,1944, NARA, RG 263, E ZZ-18, B 58, Haj Amin alHusseini Name File, v. 1, f. 1.]


The Mufti wrote a pamphlet for the SS Handschar division, called ‘Islam i Zidovstvo’ (Islam and Judaism) which closed with a quotation from Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, a Sunni Islam Hadith which states:

“The Day of Judgement will come, when the Muslims will crush the Jews completely: And when every tree behind which a Jew hides will say: ‘There is a Jew behind me, Kill him!.

Muslim-soliers-of-Handschar-Waffen-SS-reading-Islam-and-Judaism-300x209
Muslim soliers of Handschar Waffen SS reading Islam and Judaism

As well, on 1 March 1944 while speaking on Radio Berlin, al-Husseini said:

‘Arabs, rise as one man and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion. This saves your honor. God is with you.

Husseini after the War

According to the report, right after the war ended a group of Palestinian-Arab soldiers in the British Army who were stationed in Lebanon had staged anti-French demonstrations. They carried around a large picture of Husseini and declared him to be the
sword of the faith.”

According to one source considered reliable by the American intelligence organization known as the Strategic Services Unit (SSU), British officials objected to French plans to prosecute Husseini, fearing that this would cause political unrest in Palestine.

[from pg 21 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: Gensicke, Der Mufti von Jerusalem und die Nationalsozialisten, 148. Burrell to Blum, March 7, 1946, NARA, RG 263, E ZZ-18, B 58, Haj Amin al-Husseini Name File, v. 1, f. 1. 22 Floyd A. Spencer, Asst. Military Attaché, Cairo Report, Background of Plan]

In October 1945, British head of Palestine’s Criminal Investigation Division Arthur Giles (who used the title Bey) told the assistant American military attaché in Cairo that the Mufti might be the only person who could unite the Palestine Arabs and “cool off the Zionists”.

[from pg 21 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: Floyd A. Spencer, Asst. Military Attaché, Cairo Report, Background of Plan to Return … Husseini to Middle East, June 21, 1946, NARA, RG 165, Army G-2 3161.0503, MIS 279421.]

The report documents that after the war, Husseini was held in Paris when ” Palestinian Arab leaders” and “various Muslim extremists” agitated to bring him back to the Middle East“.  As prospects for a peaceful settlement in the British Mandate for Palestine declined, a delegate of the Palestine Higher Arab Committee went to Paris in June 1946 and told Husseini to get ready to escape France.

[from pg 22 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: Floyd A. Spencer, Asst. Military Attaché, Cairo Report, Background of Plan to Return … Husseini to Middle East, June 21, 1946, NARA, RG 165, Army G-2 3161.0503, MIS 279421.]

Amin-Al-Husseini-1946-w-founder-Muslim-Brotherhood-Hassan-al-Banna-300x253
Amin Al Husseini, 1946 with founder Muslim Brotherhood Hassan al-Banna

Arab leaders from Morocco and Algeria worked out the details of Husseini’s escape. According to the report, the French government learned of the plan but chose not to intervene in order to avoid offending the Arabs of North Africa.

Husseini flew to Syria, then went via Aleppo and Beirut to Alexandria, Egypt.

[from pg 22 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: The Escape of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, August 2, 1946, NARA, RG 263, Grumbach Series 12]

Husseini denies Nazi-connection; blames Jews for spreading slander

According to the report, in 1947 Husseini denied that he had worked for the Nazis during the war. It is documented that Husseini told one acquaintance that he hoped soon to have documentary evidence “rebutting this slander, which the Jews were spreading.”  Husseini said that he had been forced to take refuge in Germany simply because British wanted to capture him.

[from pg 22 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: Palestine: Views of Mufti: Desire for British Neutrality. Remarks of the Mufti to an experienced Arab source, May 14, 1947, and Reuters article of March 4, 1961, NARA, RG 263, E ZZ-18, B 58, Haj Amin al-Husseini Name File, v. 1, f. 1 and v. 2, f. 1.

While physically absent from British Mandated Palestine, al-Husseini continued to exert a great deal of influence from exile and backed by Muslim Brotherhood and other Arab states, the Arabs rejected the UN Partition Plan for Palestine with the intention of preventing the establishment of a Jewish state, no matter how small.

In the early 1950’s, a blend of Nazi ideology and Muslim-based hatred of Jews, inspired by the preaching of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna and Haj Amin al-Husseini began to grow in influence.  In Part 2 of this article, we will cover the link between al-Husseini and the Muslim Brotherhood and its direct impact on the brand of radical Islam we see today.

Here is a small taste:

Below is a photograph showing Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the Palestinian Liberation Organization at Husseini’s funeral, in 1974.

[Note: Arafat was born in Cairo, Egypt. His father (Abdel Raouf al-Qudwa al-Husseini) was from Gaza City but his father’s mother, Yasser’s paternal grandmother, was Egyptian.  Arafat’s mother (Zahwa Abul Saud) was from a Jerusalem-based family.]

Yasser-Arafat-funeral-Amin-Al-Husseini-216x300
Yasser Arafat, funeral Amin Al Husseini

According to Nazi leader Adolf Eichmann’s deputy Dieter Wisliceny (subsequently executed as a war criminal), al-Husseini’s influence was critical to the German decision to annihilate the Jews of Europe.

As Wisliceny testified at the Nuremberg Trials in July 1946:

The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan… He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chambers of Auschwitz.”

[source: https://training.ehri-project.eu/d07-testimony-dieter-wisliceny-during-nuremberg-trial-3rd-january-1946-about-eichmann-and-order]


In addition to al-Husseini’s tie to the Nazis and the Middle East, the report exposes another; that of Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser.

Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser’s link to the Nazis

In 1956, Gamal Abdel Nasser lead a revolution in Egypt and became its second president however it was not known until very recently that along with Husseini, Nasser worked for the Nazis during war.

The document below, declassified under the 1998 Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act and contained in the report (pg 23) provides the evidence that Gamal Abdel Nasser (called Jamal Nasir in one document and Gamal Nasir in another) had worked for the Germans during the war.

Furthermore, this document shows that both al-Husseini and Abdel Nasser reported to SS Officer Wilhelm Beisner during WWII.

Husseini-and-Abdel-Nasr-on-Nazi-chart-circled
Husseini and Gamal Abdel Nasr of Cairo, Egypt on Nazi chart
Husseini-with-Abdel-Nasser-Egyptian-President
Husseini with Abdel Nasser Egyptian President

According to the report, Wilhelm Beisner spent the last part of the war in Italy, where American forces apparently captured him but Beisner escaped from American internment with French help and went to work for French intelligence in Austria.

[from pg 25 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: Nachrichtenagent Willi Beissner, May 9, 1950, both in NARA, RG 263, E ZZ-18, B 10, Friedrich Beissner Name File

In late 1950 an Austrian official who located Beisner in Munich reported that Beisner had a business enterprise in Munich named Omnia that probably served as cover for French intelligence activities.

[from pg 25 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: Chief of Station Vienna to Chief of Station Karlsruhe, December 8, 1950, and Chief of Station Karlsruhe to Chief of Station Vienna, December 29, 1950, and January 8, 1951, NARA, RG 263, E ZZ-18, B 10, Friedrich Beissner Name File]

According to the report, West German intelligence in March 1952 indicated that Beisner had been involved in black-market arms transactions among Switzerland, Spain, and France and that discovery of these activities forced him to go to Cairo, where he allegedly continued to work for the French and enjoyed good connections with the Americans.

The report goes on to say that Beisner seemed to have been active in purchasing arms for the Egyptian government. prior to Gamal Abdel Nasser taking power.

[from pg 26 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: Beissner, Willi, Egypt, April 4, 1952, and CS-7845, April 30, 1953, NARA, RG 263, E ZZ-18, B 10, Friedrich Beissner Name File.]

A CIA document indicated that Wilhelm Beisner arrived in Cairo on July 21, 1951.

[from pg 26 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: Pull 6790, IN 48795, February 19, 1957, NARA, RG 263, E ZZ-18, B 10, Friedrich Beissner Name File.]

So now we have al-Husseini living in Egypt just before his old buddy, Gamal Abdel Nasser led a revolution to become the second president of Egypt in 1956.

The Muslim-Nazi link becomes even stronger…

Egypt’s new President Gamal Abdel Nasser established an intelligence organization under Zakaria Mohieddin who chose Beisner’s former RSHA comrade Joachim Deumling as his intelligence adviser.

[from pg 26 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: Central Registry, 66th CIC Group, June 30, 1959, NARA, RG 319, IRR Deumling, Joachim, XE 017494]

Shortly after, Beisner suddenly decided to leave West Germany for….you guessed it… Egypt and traveled secretly to avoid attracting British attention.

[from pg 26 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source:  JX 5911, undated, and JX-6019, July 7, 1954, NARA, RG 263, E ZZ-18, B 23, Joachim Deumling Name File.]

According to the report, in February 1958 Franz Rademacher, a former Nazi living in Damascus under a pseudonym told a  CIA source in Syria that Gamal Abdel Nasser had worked for the Germans during the war and that Beisner had served as Nasser’s liaison and that Nasser and Beisner were still close.

[from pg 26 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”, source: IN-39568, March 6, 1958, DAMA, March 7, 1958, and 1961 chart of Beisner’s connections, NARA, RG 263, E ZZ-18, B 10, Friedrich Beissner Name File. ]

According to the report, Beisner who played an important role in the systematic killing of millions of Jews under the Nazis, as well as a number of other former SS (Rademacher, Brunner, Deumling ) and police officials had not only found haven in –, but postwar employment in the Middle East. 

It is from the safe shelter of the Middle East, that these former Nazis were able to carry on and transmit to others Nazi racial-ideological anti-Semitism .

[from pg 28 of the report “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War”]

Al-Husseini died in Egypt in 1974.

The section of the report dealing with the Middle East closes with the statement

Perhaps one day the opening of archives in Middle Eastern countries will allow further insight into how far their (Nazi) influence went.”

 


Source: Breitman, R., Goda, N. J. W., & United States. (2010). Hitler’s shadow: Nazi war criminals, U.S. intelligence, and the Cold War. Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration

 

 

 

The Mufti and the Fuhrer – background to Nazi Influence in the Middle East

Meeting between Adolf Hitler and the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini on November 28, 1941 at the Reich Chancellory in Berlin

For years, Germany has taken responsibility for the Nazi role in the Holocaust, but what about the Palestinian role – specifically the role of Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem; spiritual leader of the British Mandate for Palestine’s Arab Muslims?

Background – Who is Haj Amin al-Husseini, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem?

Haj Amin al-Husseini also known as Mohammed (Effendi) Amin al-Husseini was appointed Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in 1921 by the British under the Mandate for Palestine.  He used the position to promote Islam, push for Arab independence and oppose the establishment of a Jewish national home in the British Mandate for Palestine. Al-Husseini’s opposition to the British reached its peak during the 1936–39 Arab revolt in British Palestine and in 1937, evading an arrest warrant, al-Husseini fled British Palestine and took refuge in the French Mandate of Lebanon and then the British Mandate of Iraq. 

On meeting Adolf Hitler on November 28, 1941 in Berlin,  al-Husseini requested backing for Arab independence and support in opposing the establishment of a Jewish national home in the British Mandate for Palestine.

Below are the actual German records of the meeting between al-Husseini and Hitler, as well as the complete transcript.


Meeting between Adolf Hitler and the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini on November 28, 1941 at the Reich Chancellory in Berlin

Source: Documents on German Foreign Policy 1918-1945, Series D, Vol XIII, pp 881-885 (London, 1964)

A transcript appears directly below each page. [Source: Time of Israel, Full Official Record What the Mufti said to Hitler, October 21, 2015]


1. Analytical List of Documents – pg XLVIII

Analytical-List-of-Documents-pg-XLVIII-1
Analytical List of Documents – pg XLVIII

November 30, 1941 Document 515, Page 881

Memorandum by an Official of the Foreign Minister’s Secretariat  Record of the conversation between Hitler and the Grand Mufti on     November 28.  Hitler promised to announce the hour of Arab liberation once the German armies stood south of the Caucasus but suggested that the declaration requested by the Mufti be put off for a few months.

2. No. 515, Page 881

November 1941

 Memorandum by an Official of the Foreign Minister’s Secretariat

Fuh.57a g Rs                                                   Berlin, November 30, 1941

Documents-on-German-Foreign-Policy-pg-8811-2
Documents on German Foreign Policy – pg 881

(transcript p 881)

The Grand Mufti began by thanking the Fuhrer for the great honor he had bestowed by receiving him. He wished to seize the opportunity to convey to the Fuhrer of the Greater German Reich, admired by the entire Arab world, his thanks of the sympathy which he had always shown for the Arab and especially the Palestinian cause, and to which he had given clear expression in his public speeches.

The Arab countries were firmly convinced that Germany would win the war and that the Arab cause would then prosper. The Arabs were Germany’s natural friends because they had the same enemies as had Germany, namely the English, the Jews and the Communists. Therefore they were prepared to cooperate with Germany with all their hearts and stood ready to participate in the war, not only negatively by the commission of acts of sabotage and the instigation of revolutions, but also positively by the formation of an Arab Legion.

The Arabs could be more useful to Germany as allies than might be apparent at first glance, both for geographical reasons and because of the suffering inflicted upon them by the English and the Jews. Furthermore, they had had close relations with all Muslim nations, of which they could make use in behalf of the common cause. The Arab Legion would be quite easy to raise. An appeal by the Mufti to the Arab countries and the prisoners of Arab, Algerian, Tunisian and Moroccan nationality in Germany would produce a great number of volunteers eager to fight. Of Germany’s victory the Arab world was firmly convinced, not only because the Reich possessed a large army, brave soldiers and military leaders of genius, but also because the Almighty could never award the victory to an unjust cause.

‘The Arabs could be more useful to Germany as allies than might be apparent at first glance, both for geographical reasons and because of the suffering inflicted upon them by the English and the Jews’
In this struggle, the Arabs were striving for the independence and unity of Palestine, Syria and Iraq. They had the fullest confidence

3.  Page 882      Documents on German Foreign Policy

Documents-on-German-Foreign-Policy-pg-882 -3
Documents on German Foreign Policy 882

(transcript pg 882)

in the Fuhrer and looked to his hand for the balm on their wounds, which had been inflicted upon them by the enemies of Germany.

The Mufti then mentioned the letter he had received from Germany, which stated that Germany was holding no Arab territories and understood and recognized the aspirations to independence and freedom of the Arabs, just as she supported the elimination of the Jewish national home.

A public declaration in this sense would be very useful for its propagandistic effect on the Arab peoples at this moment. It would rouse the Arabs from their momentary lethargy and give them new courage. It would also ease the Mufti’s work of secretly organizing the Arabs against the moment when they could strike. At the same time, he could give the assurance that the Arabs would in strict discipline patiently wait for the right moment and only strike upon an order from Berlin.

With regard to the events in Iraq, the Mufti observed that the Arabs in that country certainly had by no means been incited by Germany to attack England, but solely had acted in reaction to a direct English assault upon their honor.

The Turks, he believed, would welcome the establishment of an Arab government in the neighboring territories because they would prefer weaker Arab to strong European governments in the neighboring countries and, being themselves a nations of 7 million, they had moreover nothing to fear from the 1,700,000 Arabs inhabiting Syria, Transjordan, Iraq and Palestine.

France likewise would have no objections to the unification plan because it had conceded independence to Syria as early as 1936 and had given her approval to the unification of Iraq and Syria under King Faisal as early as 1933.

In these circumstances he was renewing his request that the Fuhrer make a public declaration so that the Arabs would not lose hope, which is so powerful a force in the life of nations. With such hope in their hearts the Arabs, as he had said, were willing to wait. They were not pressing for immediate realization for their aspirations; they could easily wait half a year or a whole year. But if they were not inspired with such a hope by a declaration of this sort, it could be expected that the English would be the gainers from it.

The Fuhrer replied that Germany’s fundamental attitude on these questions, as the Mufti himself had already stated, was clear. Germany stood for uncompromising war against the Jews. That naturally included active opposition to the Jewish national home in Palestine,

4.  Page 883     November 1941

Documents-on-German-Foreign-Policy-pg-883-4
Documents on German Foreign Policy – pg 883

(transcript of pg 883)

which was nothing other than a center, in the form of a state, for the exercise of destructive influence by Jewish interests. Germany was also aware that the assertion that the Jews were carrying out the functions of economic pioneers in Palestine was a lie. The work there was done only by the Arabs, not by the Jews. Germany was resolved, step by step, to ask one European nation after the other to solve its Jewish problem, and at the proper time to direct a similar appeal to non-European nations as well.

Germany was at the present time engaged in a life and death struggle with two citadels of Jewish power: Great Britain and Soviet Russia. Theoretically there was a difference between England’s capitalism and Soviet Russia’s communism; actually, however, the Jews in both countries were pursuing a common goal. This was the decisive struggle; on the political plane, it presented itself in the main as a conflict between Germany and England, but ideologically it was a battle between National Socialism and the Jews. It went without saying that Germany would furnish positive and practical aid to the Arabs involved in the same struggle, because platonic promises were useless in a war for survival or destruction in which the Jews were able to mobilize all of England’s power for their ends.

‘Germany was resolved, step by step, to ask one European nation after the other to solve its Jewish problem, and at the proper time to direct a similar appeal to non-European nations as well’

The aid to the Arabs would have to be material aid. Of how little help sympathies alone were in such a battle had been demonstrated plainly by the operation in Iraq, where circumstances had not permitted the rendering of really effective, practical aid. In spite of all the sympathies, German aid had not been sufficient and Iraq was overcome by the power of Britain, that is, the guardian of the Jews.

The Mufti could not but be aware, however, that the outcome of the struggle going on at present would also decide the fate of the Arab world. The Fuhrer therefore had to think and speak coolly and deliberately, as a rational man and primarily as a soldier, as the leader of the German and allied armies. Everything of a nature to help in this titanic battle for the common cause, and thus also for the Arabs, would have to be done. Anything however, that might contribute to weakening the military situation must be put aside, no matter how unpopular this move might be.

Germany was now engaged in very severe battles to force the gateway to the northern Caucasus region. The difficulties were mainly with regard to maintaining the supply, which was most difficult as a result of the destruction of railroads and highways as well as the oncoming winter. If at such a moment, the Fuhrer were to raise the problem of Syria in a declaration, those elements in France which were under de Gaulle’s influence would receive new strength. They would interpret the Fuhrer’s declaration as an intention to break up France’s colonial empire and appeal to their fellow countrymen that

5.  Page 884      Documents on German Foreign Policy

Documents-on-German-Foreign-Policy-pg-884-5
Documents on German Foreign Policy – pg 884

(transcript pg. 884)

they should rather make common cause with the English to try to save what still could be saved. A German declaration regarding Syria would in France be understood to refer to the French colonies in general, and that would at the present time create new troubles in western Europe, which means that a portion of the German armed forces would be immobilized in the west and no longer be available for the campaign in the east.

The Fuhrer then made the following statement to the Mufti, enjoining him to lock it in the uttermost depths of his heart:

1. He (the Fuhrer) would carry on the battle to the total destruction of the Judeo-Communist empire in Europe.
2. At some moment which was impossible to set exactly today but which in any event was not distant, the German armies would in the course of this struggle reach the southern exit from Caucasia.
3. As soon as this had happened, the Fuhrer would on his own give the Arab world the assurance that its hour of liberation had arrived. Germany’s objective would then be solely the destruction of the Jewish element residing in the Arab sphere under the protection of British power. In that hour the Mufti would be the most authoritative spokesman for the Arab world. It would then be his task to set off the Arab operations, which he had secretly prepared. When that time had come, Germany could also be indifferent to French reaction to such a declaration.

Once Germany had forced open the road to Iran and Iraq through Rostov; it would be also the beginning of the end of the British World Empire. He (the Fuhrer) hoped that the coming year would make it possible for Germany to thrust open the Caucasian gate to the Middle East. For the good of their common cause, it would be better if the Arab proclamation were put off for a few more months than if Germany were to create difficulties for herself without being able thereby to help the Arabs.

He (the Fuhrer) fully appreciated the eagerness of the Arabs for a public declaration of the sort requested by the Grand Mufti. But he would beg him to consider that he (the Fuhrer) himself was the Chief of State of the German Reich for five long years during which he was unable to make to his own homeland the announcement of its liberation. He had to wait with that until the announcement could be made on the basis of a situation brought about by the force of arms that the Anschluss had been carried out.

The moment that Germany’s tank divisions and air squadrons had made their appearance south of the Caucasus, the public appeal requested by the Grand Mufti could go out to the Arab world.

The Grand Mufti replied that it was his view that everything would come to pass just as the Fuhrer had indicated. He was fully reassured and satisfied by the words which he had heard form the Chief of the German State. He asked, however, whether it would not be

Documents-on-German-Foreign-Policy-pg-885-6
Documents on German Foreign Policy – pg 885

(transcript of pg 885)

possible, secretly at least, to enter into an agreement with Germany of the kind he had just outlined for the Fuhrer.

The Fuhrer replied that he had just now given the Grand Mufti precisely that confidential declaration.

The Grand Mufti thanked him for it and stated in conclusion that he was taking his leave from the Fuhrer in full confidence and with reiterated thanks for the interest shown in the Arab cause.


It is said that Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini’s mixture of Nazi propaganda, Islam and Arab nationalism served an inspiration for Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization from 1969 until his death in 2004.

The chief goal of the Palestinians leadership now, under Mahmoud Abbas is the same as what it was under Yasser Arafat and what it was under Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini.

They do not want a ‘two-state’ solution – they want the final solution.

The Palestinian goal is now what is always has been — the establishment of an independent Arab state in ALL the land that once belonged to the British Mandate for Palestine and the complete eradication of the Jewish national homeland, Israel.

hitler-youth-in-palestine-300x231

Hitler Youth in Palestine

11986947_1032068910159124_3733888818343315038_n
Nazi symbol (right) – Palestinian symbol (left)

Palestinian Loss of Land Map – Media Deception or Incompetence?

A recent broadcast on MSNBC (October 16, 2015) displayed a map of alleged “Palestinian Loss of Land’ which is based on well-known Palestinian propaganda maps. Was this media deception or incompetence?

The host on the segment Kate Snow is heard stating that the mapshows historically the areas that used to be Palestine in 1946” that hasshrunk down to basically Gaza and the West Bank” and that “the area where Palestinians are living has been growing increasingly smaller“. Theexpert‘, appearing with Snow,  Martin Fletcher is heard saying “absolutely, this is what it’s all about, it’s all about the land and it’s pretty shocking when you present that way“.

Both the map and the narration are inaccurate at best or deliberately deceptive, at worst.

The Jews continue to be portrayed by the media as ‘land-grabbers’ and the ‘Palestinian’ Arabs as ‘victims’ and most people who read about it or hear about on TV, simply accept it as portrayed. This is both naive and dangerous. Without people stopping to consider what they are being told to believe by any group and assessing whether it is true or not, allows governments or leaders or groups of people to act without accountability. How do you think any totalitarian regime took power during periods of democracy within the past hundred years? Think of the Bolsheviks in Russia, Franco in Spain, Mussolini in Italy, Hitler in Germany; all of these men took power during times of democracy when the masses were complacent and apathetic when it came to political affairs. By the time citizens realized there was a problem, it was far too late.” 

The map MSNBC aired is commonly referred to as the “shrinking Palestine map”.  Here is just one of many that can be found on any pro-Palestinian site;

 

Palestinian-Loss-Of-Land-1946-2010-propaganda-300x221

Let’s show the map that MSNBC showed again;

 

MSNBC-Palestinian-Loss-of-Land-lie-October-16-2015-300x211

Look at the “shrinking Palestine map” above. The MSNBC map looks familiar, doesn’t it?

Here is the transcript beginning at the 0:47 mark of the show. The bold text was added;

HOST: Another bit of history to remember. If you look at the map, we have a map that shows historically the areas that used to be Palestine in 1946, and then the UN Plan there, and then as it shrunk down to basically Gaza and the West Bank, right, and then at present. And so what does that show you Martin, that the area where Palestinians are living has been growing increasingly smaller?

GUEST: Well absolutely. But this is what it’s all about. It’s all about the land. And what this map shows you — plus it’s pretty shocking when you present it in this way — what it clearly shows is that if there’s no peace agreement between the Palestinians and Israel, more of those green areas, more of that Palestinian land will be eaten up by Jewish settlements. Although right now there is a freeze on settlements by Israel, because there’s so much international pressure, the Palestinians say “If we don’t have peace soon, then we won’t have a Palestine left.”

HOST: And the Israelis say, “we have every right to be in all of those areas.”

GUEST: Well, the Israelis say, “Look, you know, this is our land, too, and we’re Jews, and we have the right to live anywhere, same as anyone else in the world. We should be able to live anywhere we like. And it’s hard to argue about, except it’s taking the land of a future Palestinian state. Which that’s what the frustration and the violence is all about for the most part — the occupation of their land.

 


Let’s look at that map, frame by frame, and correct the errors;

There have 3 places bearing that name, none of them ever belonging to Arabs.

  1. The first was under the rule of the Romans(Syria Palaestina, 135-390 AD)
  2. A second was a province of the Byzantine Empire(Palestina Secunda or Palestina II – 390 AD)
  3. the third was a territory under British Administration (Mandate for Palestine,1920-1948) carved out of Ottoman Southern Syria after World War I.

Frame 1 of the MSNBC map is a map of the British Mandate for Palestine.

MSNBC-Palestinian-Loss-of-Land-lie-October-16-2015-map1
frame 1, from MSNBC map

The firstArab-Palestinian state was created by the British when they divided the Mandate for Palestine to create Transjordan (later renamed Jordan) by giving 75% of the land of the Mandate for Palestine to the Arabs, specifically excluding it from Jewish settlement and setting aside the remaining 25% as the Jewish homeland (which is the area labeled “Palestine” in the first frame of the MSNBC, which we have labelled “frame 1”).

Below, in green is a map of that first Palestinian Arab state.

british-mandate-israel-and-transjordan-201x300

 


 

MSNBC-Palestinian-Loss-of-Land-lie-October-16-2015-map2
frame 2 from MSNBC map

The borders shown in this map never existed. What this map shows is the 1947 UN Partition Plan of November 29, 1947 [Resolution 181(11)].

The 1947 Partition Plan proposed a secondArab-Palestinian state and was set out under Resolution 181 in November 1947.  This would have been where the remaining 25% of the former Mandate for Palestine designated as the Jewish homeland would have been partitioned into more two states (again); one Arab and the other for the Jewish homeland.

This proposed secondArab Palestinian state was to receive 43% of the land set aside by the British for the Jewish homeland.  The Jews accepted the Partition Plan but the Arabs refused it.

These borders never existed.


MSNBC-Palestinian-Loss-of-Land-lie-October-16-2015-map3
frame 3 from MSNBC map

Frame 3 actually shows a map of Israel between 1949 and 1967.

The areas in green were illegally occupied by Jordan and Egypt which they seized from Israel during the 1948 War of Independence which they started a day after Israel declared statehood on May 14, 1948.

Jordan annexed Jerusalem and occupied Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) until 1967 when Israel liberated it.

Egypt occupied the Gaza Strip between 1948 June 1967.


MSNBC-Palestinian-Loss-of-Land-lie-October-16-2015-map4
frame 4 from the MSNBC map

The Palestinian terrorist group Hamas controls all of Gaza which has been “Jew-free” since 2005, when Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon exchanged “land for peace” – a peace Israel has not known. Since the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza >11,000 rockets have been fired from Gaza at Israeli cities.

Parts of the “West Bank” fall under the Oslo accords and are controlled by the Palestinian Authority.  In his recent speech at the UN on September 30 2015, Palestinian Chairman Mahmoud Abbas asserted that the Palestinians are no longer bound to the Oslo Accords.


MSNBC’s airing of this set of maps is either deliberate deception or journalistic incompetence.

This is a breach of trust between the network and the public and should cause the public to question the credibility of any segments discussing the political situation in Israel broadcast on this network.

 

Where Did the Land that is Currently Israel’s Come From?

Israel is often portrayed in the media as ‘land-grabbing’, so where did the land that is currently Israel’s come from?

The Partition Plan – creation of the first two-state solution

Partition-Plan-1947-235x300

To the left is a map of the “Partition Plan” that was voted on in the UN on November 29, 1947. This was to be the second two-state solution offered to the Arabs, apart from the Jewish state.

The first two-state solution took place under Article 25 of the UN on 21 March 1921, where 75% of the land formerly under the British Mandate of Palestine and that was to be reconstituted as a national homeland for the Jewish people was allocated to the Arabs, as an Arab state; Transjordan, later renamed the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan).

The remaining 25% of the land on the ‘west bank’ of the Jordan River was then designated to become the Jewish national homeland.

When any size Jewish State was too big…

After the creation of the first Palestinian Arab state of Transjordan, Arabs living on the small piece of land on the “west bank” of the Jordan continued to attack and kill Jews living there in an effort to drive them out and claim all of land of the British Mandate for Palestine, as Arab land.

As Pan-Arabists (evidenced by both the flag of Jordan and the ‘Palestinian’ flag being based on the Pan-Arab flag of Hejaz), the Arabs remaining on the land earmarked for the Jewish state were determined that there would be no Jewish state. Such sentiments were fueled by their religious leader, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini

[see the two posts on The Mufti and the Fuhrer and Nazi Influence in the Middle East]

As the crisis with Arabs attacking Jews escalated, the British who were administering the Land at the time (under the Mandate system), grew weary of the time and expense involved and turned the matter over the United Nations (UN).

In a special session in November 1947, the UN General Assembly held a vote on Resolution 181, which would have partitioned the remaining 25% of the land set aside as the Jewish homeland into two states (again); one Jewish and the other Arab. That is, Resolution 181 would have allocated 43% of the remaining 25% of the land that the British set aside for the Jewish homeland to this SECOND Arab state.. This became known as the Partition Plan.

The Jews accepted the Partition Plan in exchange for peace with the Arabs, but the Arabs rejected it, wanting all of the Jewish homeland as theirs.

By rejecting the Partition Plan, the Arabs rejected making what is commonly called “the West Bank” (i.e. Judea and Samaria) and the Gaza Strip theirs. This is all the territory coloured orange, in the map above.

Let’s be clear; this land is not being occupied by Israel — it is Israel.

Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) was illegally occupied by Jordan beginning with the War of Independence that was launched by the surrounding Arab nations against Israel just one day after its creation in May 1948 – until Israel re-unified Israel after the Six-Day War in 1967.

Yes, Jordan, the Arab state that was part of the first two-state solution illegally annexed the “West Bank” and half of the capital city of Israel, Jerusalem.

Also following the War of Independence in 1948, Egypt occupied the Gaza Strip and did so until the Six-Day War in 1967, when Israel reclaimed it.

This was actual “occupation” – yet the Arabs of the “West Bank” and Gaza Strip had no objections, since they were being ruled by other Pan-Arab Hashemites whose goal it was to take over every inch of land of the Levant, as one “Arab nation”.

The “West Bank” is not “occupied” by Israel. The Arabs refused the Partition Plan, and every other subsequent offer by Israel of another “two-state solution” — in exchange for peace…a peace Israel has never known since its creation in 1948.

Jews living in Judea and Samaria (aka “the West Bank”) are not settlers and the Jewish communities there are not settlements.

This is Israel.

 

Where is Ancient Palestine and Who Are the Palestinians?

People often assume that part of the current land of Israel was once part of “Ancient Palestine” and that the Arabs of Gaza and the “West Bank” (Judea and Samaria) had their land stolen from them, allegedly but the Jews, so where was “ancient Palestine”? Is it where Israel is now? Who are the people that call themselves ‘Palestinians’?


There were 3 such geographic places with the name Palestine; none of them belonging to Arab people.  One belonged to the Romans, one was a province of the Byzantine Empire and one was under British administration;

(1) belonging to the Romans (Syria Palaestina, 135-390 AD); It was established by the merge of Roman Syria and Roman Judaea, following the defeat of the Bar Kokhba Revolt in 135. Shortly after 193, the Syrian regions were split off as Syria Coele in the north and Phoenice in the south, and the province was reduced to Judea.

(2) a province belonging to the Byzantine empire (Palestina Secunda or Palestina II – 390 AD), The province experienced the rise of Christianity under the Byzantines but was also a thriving center of Judaism, after the Jews had been driven out of Judea by the Romans in the 1st and 2nd centuries

(3) and a geopolitical entity under British administration (carved out of Ottoman Southern Syria after World War I,1920-1948).

There is no archaeological evidence supporting an Arab claim of an “Ancient Palestine” in the Land;  no ancient Palestinian coinage has been unearthed, no Palestinian Emperor’s or King’s names inscribed anywhere, and no ancient Palestinian manuscripts.

There is, however, abundant archaeological evidence dating back more than 3000 years of there being a thriving civilization in the Land of the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; the Jews.

Excavations at the summit of the City of David have unearthed what is believed to have been the palace of King David (who ruled from ~1005 to 965 BCE). The site of the First Temple that was built in Jerusalem from ~833 – 827 BCE by King Solomon is currently being excavated [see http://www.morehasbara.com/2016/05/21/king-solomons-wall-discovered-outside-2nd-temple-wall/], and ancient Jewish seals called bullas have been found with ancient Hebrew lettering bearing the name Jehucal, son of Shelemiah, son of Shovi: an Israelite high-ranking official mentioned twice in the Bible (Jeremiah 37:3 and Jeremiah 38:1). These are but a few examples.

The reason the Romans named their territory Syria Palaestina when they conquered it in the early first century as an insult to the Jewish inhabitants they displaced; because the ancient adversary of the Jews, were the Philistines. Why would the Romans name to offend the Jews, if Arabs were the inhabitants of the land? They weren’t. The Jews were.

Right under the feet of those in what the press calls “the West Bank”, in Judea and Samaria — in Hebron, the Jewish Patriarchs are buried. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and their wives.  The reason the Tomb of the Patriarchs is in Hebron is because Judea and Samaria are part of the ancient Jewish homeland.

What few people realize is that the Arabs of the surrounding area never considered that there was a separate entity called “Palestine”;

In 1919:

“We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds.”

Resolution of the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations, Jerusalem, February 1919

In 1937:

There is no such country as Palestine! ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria.

Local Arab leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, to the British Peel Commission

In 1947:

“Palestine was part of the Province of Syria” … “politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the sense of forming a separate political entity.”

Representative of the Arab Higher Committee, Statement to the General Assembly of the United Nations, May 1947

In 1948:

“Palestine and Transjordan are one.”

King Abdullah, Arab League meeting in Cairo, 12 April 1948

In 1956:

“It is common knowledge that that Palestine is nothing by Southern Syria”

PLO founder Ahmed Shuqeiri, to the United Nations Security Council, May 31, 1956

In 1970:

“Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine; there is only one land, with one history and one and the same fate”

Prince Hassan of the Jordanian National Assembly, February 2, 1970

In 1976:

“You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people.

Syrian President Hafez al-Assad, addressing the PLO, July 20, 1976

The very idea that the people of Gaza or Judea and Samaria are the inheritors of an ancient homeland called “Palestine” is simply a myth — or a lie. Most telling is the blatant fact that there isn’t even a letter in Arabic that makes the “p” sound. Literally, it is Falestine – “f” like fallacy.

Until the so-called ‘Palestinians’, no people in history have adopted a name for themselves or for their country that could not be said or written in their own language.  In Arabic, the ‘Palestinians’ call their country “Filastin” and themselves “Filastiniyun”. This detail testifies that the ‘Palestinian’ national narrative is a modern invention.

The ‘Palestinians’ claim to be part  Arab however the historical Philistines, from whom “Filastin” is presumably taken, came from the Aegean world and were Hellenic

[more here: http://www.morehasbara.com/2016/06/07/problems-with-the-palestinian-narrative-descended-from-the-philistines/]

The last identifiable vestiges of Philistine culture disappeared about 2600 years ago. It is possible they were incorporated into, or became the Tribe of Dan and became part of the Israelites. It is known that a Hellenic tribe known as the Danae disappeared from the south coast of Turkey just before the Philistines arrived in Canaan. DNA would provide no help here; 2600 years is roughly 100 generations, which is more than enough for everyone on the planet to have some Philistine DNA.

As mentioned above, the name ‘Palestine’ was given by the Roman emperor Hadrian to the province of Judaea in 135 CE as an insult and means to cut its tie to the Judaeans, from whom the name “Jews” is derived.

Christians residing in the land continued to use the term ‘Palestine’ to refer to this geographic area over the centuries, while (as documented above) the Arabs of the surrounding area referred to it as southern Syria.

The term ‘Palestine’ has always referred to a geographic area, and not a sovereign state – certainly never an Arab state, and so it was natural that the land that the British administered after WWI when the Ottoman Empire collapsed, was called the British Mandate for Palestine. During this period of time, the name “Palestinian” referred to the Jewish inhabitants of the land administered by the British from its inception in 1923 until the establishment of State of Israel, in 1948. During the Mandate, no Arab would call himself a “Palestinian”; they were the Arabs, living in Palestine.

So where did the people that call themselves ‘Palestinians’ come from?

For that we refer you to some two of our posts;

Where did the Palestinians of Today Come From?[http://www.morehasbara.com/2015/11/10/where-did-the-palestinians-of-today-come-from/]

The Palestinian “Narrative” – descended from the Philistines [http://www.morehasbara.com/2016/06/07/problems-with-the-palestinian-narrative-descended-from-the-philistines/]

Contrary to what they claim, the ‘Palestinians’ are not descendants of the Philistines and have not been in the Land “since time immemorial”, but are Pan-Arab Hashemite colonialists, descendants of Egyptians, Syrians, Jordanians and those from others Pan-Arabist lands. They are Arabs, descended from the conquering Muslims of Arabia that first arrived in the 6th century CE with the founding of Islam, and later enticed by the Ottomans and British to come as migrant laborers, and recruited by Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, in order to try to prevent a Jewish state from being formed (see earlier posts).

The youth of Gaza and the “West Bank” have grown up with this as their “history” – a history that their parents and grandparents wrote. This is all they have ever know – so they fight to the death for the “return” of “their land”. The ‘Palestinian’ narrative is a historical revision with the intentional political strategy of denying Israel’s right to exist.

At a 1998 conference of ‘Palestinian’ historians, Dr. Yussuf Alzamili, Chairman of the History Department of Khan Yunis Educational Collegeat;

called on all universities and colleges to write the history of Palestine and to guard it, and not to enable the [foreign] implants and enemies to distort it or to legitimize the existence of Jews on this land…”

Al-Ayyam newspaper, December 4, 1998

Writing the history of Palestine was for the clearly stated purpose of “not enabling the (alleged) foreign implants [the Jews] to legitimize their existence on this land.”

The ‘Palestinian’ “history”, this myth of an Ancient Palestine allegedly stolen by the Jews – that the youth of Gaza and the “West Bank” have grown up with, undermines and seeks to replace Jewish history in the land. However, the glaring facts remains; there is no archaeological evidence supporting ‘Palestinian’ “history” – no ancient Palestinian coinage, no inscriptions with Palestinian Emperor’s or King’s names anywhere, no ancient Palestinian manuscripts.

The ‘Palestinian’ Narrative has been told over and over again since the first PLO Charter of 1964, and its more militant revision of 194 – with the knowledge that if it is told often enough, for long enough, it will be believed;

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from it. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

~ Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s propaganda expert

roman-syria-palestine

The Two Previous “Two State Solutions”

The concept of a “two state solution” is often proposed as a means to resolve the ongoing tensions between Israel and the ‘Palestinians’, however few people are aware that there have already been two “two-state solution“.  The first “two-state solution” was when the Arab-Palestinian state of Transjordan (later renamed Jordan) allocated  75% of the land that was to be part of the reconstituted homeland for the Jewish people to the Arabs, and excluded it from Jewish settlement – leaving only 25% for a Jewish homeland.  The second “two-state solution” was created under UN Resolution 181 in November 1947 – where the remaining 25% of the land of the former British Mandate for Palestine was partitioned into two states (again) — with 43% of the land set aside by the British for the Jewish homeland being given to this second Arab state under the Partition Plan — which Israel accepted in exchange for peace with the Arabs, but the Arabs rejected. Jordan is Arab Palestine.

Partitioning of Palestine — Creation an Arab State and the Jewish homeland

Just prior to the creation of the Mandate of Palestine (1920),  the United Kingdom’s Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour committed in an initial draft of the Balfour Declaration of 1917 (dated 2 November 1917) “that Palestine should be reconstituted as the National Home of the Jewish people“.  In the final text, the word that was replaced with in to avoid committing the entirety of Palestine to this purpose. The final phrase ‘the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people‘ was intended and understood by British officials at the time of the Balfour Declaration to mean that Palestine would ultimately become a ‘Jewish Commonwealth’ or a ‘Jewish State’;  provided Jews came and settled there in sufficient numbers (i.e when a Jewish majority was achieved). The wording of the Balfour Declaration was later incorporated into both the peace treaty with the Ottoman Empire and the Mandate for Palestine.

A year later, in November 1918 at the parade marking the first anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, a large group of Palestinian Arab dignitaries and representatives of political associations addressed a petition to the British authorities in which they denounced the declaration.  Ongoing tensions between the Jews and the Arabs in the Mandate of Palestine over the creation of the Jewish state became increasingly unpopular with the British public and the government under Winston Churchill sought to disengage the British from the time and cost associated with managing the Mandate of Palestine.

In 1922, following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in WWI, the British were granted a mandate by the League of Nations to administer the geographic region called Palestine. The British Mandate for Palestine included provisions calling for the establishment of a Jewish homeland, facilitating Jewish immigration and encouraging Jewish settlement on the land.

In September 1922, the League of Nations and Britain decided that the provisions for setting up a Jewish national home would not apply to the area east of the Jordan River and on 21 March 1923,  Article 25 of the mandate was introduced which designated 75% of the land of the Mandate of Palestine to an Arab state and in August of 1922 the newly created Arab state was named Transjordan and was established east of the Jordan river. The remaining 25% of the land on the west of the Jordan River was designated to be the Jewish national homeland.  Arabs living on the small piece of land earmarked as the Jewish state continued to attack and kill the Jews in an effort to drive them out and claim all of British Mandate of Palestine as Arab land. The Hebron slaughters of 1929 and the 1936-39 Arab Revolt are the most notable of these attacks.

Flag_of_Jordan.svg_-300x150
Flag of Jordan – derived from the Pan-Arab flag of Hejaz (adopted April 18 1918)

Transjordan remained under British control until the first-Transjordanian treaty was concluded in 1928 at which time it became nominally independent.  On 17 January 1946, the British government initiated steps to establish Transjordan as an independent and sovereign state which was finally realized when Transjordan’s independence was recognized by the League of Nations during the last meeting of that organization on April 18, 1946 , being renamed the “Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan” in May of that year. In 1949 the country’s official name was changed to the “Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan“.

british-mandate-israel-and-transjordan-201x300
Map of Transjordan, now Jordan
Establishing of the Jewish Homeland

Just as thousands of Jews wanted to flee the escalating Nazi violence in Europe and emigrate to Palestine, the British issued a White Paper in 1939 stipulating that a maximum of 75,000 immigration certificates would be authorized by the mandatory power to incoming Jews. The purpose in preventing a mass influx of Jews was a British attempt at resolving the ongoing conflict between Jews and Arabs, leaving the Jews few options.

After the liberation of Europe at the end of WWII, many Jewish survivors feared to return to Europe and many who did faced pogroms (violent anti-Jewish riots) where Jews continued to be killed (e.g. Kielce, Poland 1946). With few possibilities for emigration, tens of thousands of homeless Jewish Holocaust survivors migrated westward to other European territories liberated by the western Allies where they were housed in UN-administered refugee centers and displaced persons camps such as Bergen-Belsen in Germany.   In 1947, the Jewish displaced person population of these camps was ~250,000 people. With the United States heavily restricting the number of refugees permitted to enter and many countries around the world having closed their borders to Jewish immigration, the Jews sought to immigrate to the territory remaining for the Jewish homeland under the Mandate of Palestine, however in an effort to maintain order in the area,  the British restricted Jewish immigration to Palestine because of the armed Arab revolts which left the Jews no place to go.

As the crisis with the Arabs wanting control of the land set aside as the Jewish homeland under the Balfour Declaration escalated, the British turned the matter over the United Nations (UN).

In a special session, the United Nations General Assembly voted in Resolution 181 on November 29, 1947 to partition the remaining 25% of the land set aside as the Jewish homeland under the British into two states (again); one Jewish and the other Arab.  

maphistwar1947
UN Resolution 181 – Partition Plan of 1947

Resolution 181 allocated 43% of land that the British set aside for the Jewish homeland to this second Arab state within the land under what became known as the Partition Plan.

The Jews accepted this in exchange for peace with the Arabs, but the Arabs rejected it, wanting all of the Jewish homeland as theirs.

 

The partition plan of the UN specified borders for new Arab state and the Jewish state and also specified an area of Jerusalem and its environs which was to be administered by the UN.

2000px-Flag_of_Palestine.svg_-300x150
Palestinian flag – Pan-Arab flag (derived from the flag of Hejaz)

The end of the British Mandate for Palestine was set for midnight on 14 May 1948 and on that day, David Ben-Gurion, president of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, declared “the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz Israel, to be known as the State of Israel“.

flag-of-Israel
flag of the state of Israel

Arab armies invaded the newly created State of Israel the very next day.


War of Independence (“Arab-Israeli War”) – invasion and occupation of Jerusalem

During the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, Transjordan’s Arab Legion attempted to capture the entire city of Jerusalem, shelling it and cutting off its Jewish residents from the coastal plain. In May 1948, Transjordan invaded and occupied Eastern Jerusalem, dividing the city for the first time in its history and driving thousands of Jews whose families had lived in the city for centuries into exile.

After 10 months of fighting, an armistice agreement was signed on April 3, 1949, dividing Jerusalem along the November 1948 ceasefire lines of Israeli and Transjordanian forces, with several areas of no-man’s land. This armistice line served as a temporary border.

Jerusalem – a City Divided

Jerusalem was a divided city. Eastern Jerusalem, including the holy sites was illegally occupied by Transjordan (which in 1949 became the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan). The Jewish Quarter of the Old City was destroyed and its residents expelled. Fifty-eight synagogues (some hundreds of years old) were destroyed, their contents looted and desecrated.  Some Jewish religious sites were turned into chicken coops or animal stalls. The Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives, where Jews had been burying their dead for over 2500 years was ransacked, graves were desecrated, thousands of tombstones were smashed and used as building material, paving stones or for latrines in Arab Legion army camps.  The Western Wall (the Kotel) became a slum area.

Western Jerusalem became Israel’s capital city.

Jordan’s Illegal Annexation

In April 1950, Jordan illegally annexed the territories it had captured in the 1948 war–-Eastern Jerusalem and the West Bank. 

All nations, including the Arab states rejected Jordan’s annexation — except for Great Britain which recognized only the annexation of the West Bank and never recognized either Jordan or Israel’s sovereignty over any sector of Jerusalem — viewing both Jordan’s 1950 annexation and Israel’s annexation of west Jerusalem as illegal.

Jordan did not permit Jews access to their holy sites or to the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives — in direct contravention of the 1949 armistice agreements.  Jews were denied access to the Western Wall, the Jewish cemetery and all religious sites in Eastern Jerusalem.

Israeli Arabs, were denied access to the Al Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock and they fell into disrepair during this time.

Reunification of Jerusalem in 1967

Jordanian forces fired artillery barrages from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Although Israeli forces did not respond initially, not wanting to open up a Jordanian front in the war, Jordan continued to attack and occupied UN headquarters in Jerusalem. Israeli forces fought back and within two days managed to push back the Jordanian forces and retake Eastern Jerusalem.

On June 7, 1967, IDF paratroopers advanced through the Old City toward the Temple Mount and the Western Wall, bringing Jerusalem’s holiest site under Jewish control for the first time in 2000 years.


[Acknowledgments: Historic facts on Jordanian’s Illegal Annexation of Israel and the 1967 reunification of Jerusalem from “the Six-Day War”, the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting]