Why Israel Cannot Go Back to Pre-1967 Borders

Thinking Outside the Blog exists to not only make comments on current events - political and religious - but to also provide historical information on the Middle East conflict. It is my conviction that much discussion on the news and in the blogosphere is based on a lack of accurate historical information. I fear that individuals form their opinions about the Palestinian/Israeli conflict from last night's evening news sound bytes.

I am most concerned with President Obama's suggestion that Israel return to its pre-1967 borders.  Those borders are shown on the following map:

One can see from this map that there was not much area between the borders of the West Bank to the Mediterranean Sea. Hostile Palestinian forces or other terrorist entities in the West Bank had the advantage over Israel since some of the land area between the West Bank and Israel's West Coast was as small as 9 miles (Netanya is one example)!

Israel needs defensible borders to prevent ground assaults.  Israel's return to pre-1967 borders would provide Arab states and the Palestinians with the ability to launch ground and missile attacks on the Jewish state with ease.

The most effective military strategy by Israeli's enemies would be to attack at the narrowest point using ground troops and cut Israel in half, thus isolating northern and southern Israel with an enemy military zone in the middle.

 I cannot emphasize enough that with the pre-1967 lines, the boundaries of the West Bank would be 9 miles of the Israeli coast, 11 miles from Tel Aviv, 10 miles from Beersheba and 21 miles from Haifa.


Consequently, Israel needs to push its border as far East as possible in order to be put some distance between the Israeli population and the Palestinian capability of ground or missile attacks.

While living in Hollywood, CA when I first moved to the West Coast, I would be very concerned if missiles were being fired over the Hollywood Hills from northern Van Nuys. I would want to put as much distance as possible from the source of these missile attacks and myself, In addition,  I would want military troops stationed as close to Van Nuys as possible to control any enemy attacks and engage the enemy. I would also support checkpoints for individuals leaving Van Nuys and trying to enter Hollywood with evil designs to cause more havoc.

In the next map from 2002 one can see the importance of Israel maintaining a buffer zone of security between the West Bank and Jordan.

It should not be any surprise that attacks by Arab states were more frequent before 1967.  Prior to the Six Day War Palestinian attackers used Syria and Jordan as a home base for attacking Israel.

Another important reason Israel cannot go back to the pre-1967 borders is that Israel would have to give up its present-day  system of early warning radar set up in the hills of Judea and Samaria.

With this early warning system Israel can maintain its ability to deploy surface-to-air missiles in the case of attack by an Arab state.

In addition, the citizens of Israel are given enough time to relocate to places where shelter is provided from incoming missiles after being warned by an air raid warning.  If Israel was to give back the locations where the early warning radar is set up, the Jewish state would give up its own security.

Based on this 2002 map of modern day Israel one observes the need for Israel to maintain a military presence in the Jordan River Valley to the east of the West Bank.  Without this military presence there would be no security between Israel and Jordan.  Terrorist groups would have open access to enter the country through the West Bank.

Israel must maintain its military control, not occupy, the adjoining areas to the West Bank.

To put things in proper perspective, I've included another map of Israel, but this one shows the area Israel controlled after the Six Day War. In comparison, this map shows shows what territories Israel has already given up.

During the Six Day War Israel took military control over the Sinai, Gaza and the West Bank.  In post Six Day War peace negotiations Israel gave back 94% of the land that came under IDF control.

Now two million Arabs live in the West Bank. In recent years, the infiltration of Palestinian terrorists from the Palestinian Authority has increased. May of these infiltrators have included suicide bombers.  In addition, 1.5 million Arabs live in Israel itself in such towns as Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

Also, since the 1993 Oslo Accords, Israel has withdrawn from 40% of the West Bank. The Oslo Accords were:

. . . .  a framework for the future relations between the two parties. The Accords provided for the creation of a Palestinian National Authority (PNA). The Palestinian Authority would have responsibility for the administration of the territory under its control. The Accords also called for the withdrawal of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) from parts of the Gaza Strip and West Bank.

In a post Six  Day War world, Israel has returned to the Palestinians a vast amount of formerly Israeli controlled territory.

To return back to the pre-1967 borders would be suicide for Israel. The Jewish state would lose its military security which is a necessity as long as Israel is adjoined to the Palestinian state under the control of the self-proclaimed terrorist organization, Hamas.

Thus far Hamas has given Israel no indication that Israeli citizens will be free from terrorist attacks from radical Palestinians nor has Hamas renounced it failure to recognize the Jewish state or to back off from their goal to destroy Israel.

Unless there is a change in the stance of Hamas, Israel can never go back to the pre-1967 borders for the sake of the security of the Jewish state and its citizens - both Arab and Jewish.

Why Israel Cannot Go Back to Pre-1967 Borders

Non-Violent Palestinian Christians Living in a Culture of Hate

In this blog I've previously mentioned Palestinian Christian, Sami Awad.   Awad is the executive director of Holy Land Trust. The mission statement of HLT is stated on its website:

Through a commitment to the principles of nonviolence, the Holy Land Trust seeks to strengthen and empower the Palestinian community in developing spiritual, pragmatic and strategic approaches that will allow it to resist all forms of oppression and build a future that makes the Holy Land a global model and pillar of understanding, respect, justice, equality and peaceful coexistence.

Sami claims to be deeply committed to the principles of non-violence as a way to deal with the Middle East conflict. Yet he fails to ever condemn his own Palestinian brothers who endorse a violent solution to peace with the Israelis.  In other words, peace will come when Israel is destroyed.

In his lecture at the 2010 Christ At the Checkpoint conference, Mr. Awad describes an opportunity he was given to tour several Nazi death camps including Auschwitz. This experience was part of a retreat provided by Peace Maker Circle International. They bring people from all over the world to allow them to experience the tragedy that happened to the Jewish people as well as other ethnic groups in Auschwitz.

Sami tells of an experience he observed which he shared in the lecture, an experience he also shared in the evangelical produced film The Little Town of Bethlehem, a film that takes the viewer into the heart of the Israel/Palestine conflict but with a strong Palestinian twist.

Here is what the Holy Land Trust director tells the audience in his lecture about his experience at Auschwitz;

we witnessed hundreds of young Israelis (12‐16 years old), come to visit the place in tours organized by Israel. They would wear big Israeli flags on their back and walk on the railway in Birkenua singing nationalist songs. They would take the tour of the site and then sit in circles similar to what we were doing, and then the Israeli guide would begin talking. 

At this time you imagine how important it is for the guide to tell these children how important it is that something like this does not happen again. Something else was happening. 

These guides were telling the children, “You see what happened to your grandparents, great‐uncles, and great‐aunts? Well this is not over. You are living in that same threat and if given the opportunity, Palestinians, Muslims, Arabs will do the same to you.”

The point of Awad's observation is that Israeli children are growing up in a culture of fear and hate. Awad continues:

Then this 18 year old is handed a machine gun, thrown at a checkpoint in the West Bank that has nothing to do with providing any security for Israel and is now told, deal with the new “Nazi”…. Fear is planted in their heart from day one.

The irony of Awad's observation is that he ignores how deeply embedded is the culture of hate among Palestinians.

Here in a video called Hamas Kids Play the viewer is shown what the land of Israel is up against as Palestinian children are taught from a young age that terrorism is acceptable and part of the Palestinian mindset.

In this video we observe Palestinian children dressed as suicide bombers and displaying bloody hands. Again, Sami Awad, the director of the Holy Land Trust has hypocritically leveled his attacks of violence against Israelis while ignoring the violence that is so much a part of his own Palestinian culture.

If Awad, a Palestinian, is truly a Christian for non-violence, then why is it that he and his other non-violent supports fail to confront the violence in the Hamas controlled entity of Palestine?

Non-Violent Palestinian Christians Living in a Culture of Hate

Fabricated Ben Gurion Quote Used in Pro-Palestinian Evangelical Film

The Committee on Accuracy on Middle East Reporting's blog exposes a glaring inaccuracy in the 2010 documentary "With God On Our Side." The film produced by Rooftop Production LLC is an evangelical response to Christian Zionism.

The film's Facebook page describes the production:

With God On Our Side takes a look at the theology of Christian Zionism, which teaches that because the Jews are God's chosen people, they have a divine right to the land of Israel. Aspects of this belief system lead some Christians in the West to give uncritical support to Israeli government policies, even those that privilege Jews at the expense of Palestinians, leading to great suffering among Muslim and Christian Palestinians alike and threatening Israel's security as a whole.

The accompanying study guide to the film was mostly taken from evangelical pastor Stephen Sizer's book, Zion’s Christian Soldiers (Downers Grove, IVP). Sizer, as previously noted in this blog is Vicar of Christ Church in Surrey, UK and has recently been part of a pro-Palestinian forum of speakers in Malaysia which include pro-Hamas speakers and noted anti-Semitic apologists.

With God On Our Side assails Christian Zionists for their alleged failure to think through their support of Israel. According to the CAMERA blog, the film is a "jaundiced summary of Israeli history."

In one scene of this propaganda piece, the narrator reports the following:

In a letter to his son in 1937 David Ben Gurion, who would later become the first Prime Minister of Israel, stated “The Arabs will have to go, but one needs an opportune moment for making it happen, such as war.”

According to the CAMERA post, that even though this quite fits well with producer Porter Speakman's agenda, it’s nothing but a fabrication. It's a fake quote that was debunked well before the 2010 release date of With God On Our Side.

I quote from a portion of a  letter from Benney Morris to the Independent, UK dated November 2006 that  proves the usage of the Ben Gurion quote in With God on Our Side is a fabrication:

Hari quotes David Ben-Gurion as saying in 1937: ‘I support compulsory transfer ... The Arabs will have to go, but one needs an opportune moment for making it happen, such as a war.’ The first part of the quote (‘I support compulsory transfer’) is genuine; the rest (‘The Arabs will have to go ... such as a war’) is an invention, pure and simple, either by Hari or by whomever he is quoting (Ilan Pappe?)

 It is true that Ben-Gurion in 1937-38 supported the transfer of the Arabs out of the area of the Jewish state-to-be – which was precisely the recommendation of the British Royal (Peel) Commission from July 1937, which investigated the Palestine problem. The commission concluded that the only fair settlement was by way of partition, with the Jews receiving less than 20 per cent of Palestine, but that, for it to be viable, the 20 per cent should be cleared of potentially hostile, disloyal Arabs. (Britain, incidentally, at the end of World War II supported the expulsion to Germany of the German Sudeten minority, which had helped Hitler destroy and occupy Czechoslovakia – for precisely the same reasons.) The Arabs, then and later, rejected the principle of partition as well as the specific Peel proposals.

Neither Ben-Gurion nor the Zionist movement ‘planned’ the displacement of the 700,000-odd Arabs who moved or were removed from their homes in 1948. There was no such plan or blanket policy. Transfer was never adopted by the Zionist movement as part of its platform; on the contrary, the movement always accepted that the Jewish state that arose would contain a sizeable Arab minority.

But in 1947-48 the Palestinian Arabs, joined by invading Arab states’ armies from outside, launched a war whose aim – which they (and even Pappe, Israel’s Lord Haw-Haw) have never denied – was to destroy the nascent state of Israel (and quite probably its inhabitants as well). But – what can you do? – the Arabs were beaten. And in the course of beating them, the Israelis drove out the Palestinians, who were not ‘totally innocent ... peasants’ (a ludicrous phrase). Their villages and towns served as the bases from which their militiamen and armies attacked Jewish communities and convoys.

The ‘innocent’ Palestinians were the aggressors – and dispossession was the price they paid for their aggression. In the circumstances, had the Jews not driven them out, Israel would not have arisen and its (Jewish) population would have been slaughtered – or, at the least, the Jewish state would have been established with a considerable Fifth Column in its midst and rendered mortally unstable. (Conversely, had the Arabs accepted the 1947 UN Partition Resolution, refrained from violence, and gone on with their lives as loyal Israeli citizens, nothing would have happened to them.)

Nonetheless, Israel emerged from the 1948 War with a 160,000-strong Arab minority (alongside 700,000 Jews) – a fact that tends to undermine the charge that there was a blanket policy of ethnic cleansing.

It is important that evangelicals who view the film With God On Our Side are equipped with factual information that  debunk the lies and deliberate historical inaccuracies that are found in the Rooftop Productions film.

Fabricated Ben Gurion Quote Used in Pro-Palestinian Evangelical Film

Who are the True Enemies of Palestinian Christians?

Who are the enemies of the Christian that Jesus commands us to love and pray for?  According to Sami Awad, Executive Director of the Holy Land Trust, the enemies Jesus tells him to love and pray for are Israeli soldiers.  So when he is instructed as a Christian in Matthew 5:44 to "love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you", Mr. Awad applies this passage from the Sermon on  the Mount to the Israel Defense Force.

In a June 2, 2011 blog post on Huffington Post, entitled, "WWJD? A Non-Violent Conflict Resolution for Palestine," Mr. Awad, a Palestinian Christian states,

How could a person living under military occupation, experiencing first-hand suffering and humiliation, even think about loving the enemy, let alone urge family, friends and neighbors to do the same? This challenging message came from a young rabbi named Jesus in his "Sermon on the Mount.

Of course, Jesus could have suggested we make peace with our enemies or negotiate peace agreements or peacefully resolve conflict; those statements would have been as shocking to the suffering Jews of that time. Instead, he entreated them to go further: to "love" them. This was the word he chose -- a command to all those who seek to follow him.

First, let us not ignore the context of Matthew 5:44 about loving our enemies before we start love bombing every thing that moves and breathes.  The context of the passage is first century Israel which was under the control of Roman imperialism.  Jesus is speaking to first century Jewish people about His messianic kingdom.  He is persuading the children of Israel who make up His audience to accept His kingdom manifesto and to embrace Him as the Messiah King-Jesus of Nazareth.

Jesus also realizes not all Jewish people are going to accept Jesus as the King Redeemer of Israel and not all Jewish have to this day.  Yet Jesus knew that some Jewish people like myself will accept Jesus as Messiah.

Right away a conflict is created.  Jesus said this would happen in Matthew 10:34-36

Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, 

a daughter against her mother, 

a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law— 

a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.

Honestly, not my favorite Bible passage. But I've experienced hostility from fellow Jewish people because of my commitment to Jesus.  It comes with the territory and I understand the historical roots of this enmity.

But what does Jesus tell me to do towards Jewish people or gentiles who stumble over my acceptance of Jesus? To love them and pray for them even if they persecute me. The persecution comes n the form of verbal attacks, the silent treatment as well as through many thought provoking books and articles written by Jewish scholars to disprove the claims of Jesus to be Israel's long-awaited Messiah.  So be it.

To Sami Awad, I want to say, Jesus was speaking about a Jewish community issue that only Jewish people would understand.

On the other hand, Christians have quite a lot to answer for the inexcusable and horrendous ways throughout Christian history they've treated Jewish people who have not accepted Jesus.  Jewish people have been massacred, tortured, exposed to forced conversions, expelled from European countries and so much more . . . . all because they made a choice not to believe in Jesus. The Christian church, who should know better and which claims to be empowered with the love of Christ lacks any excuse for their persecution and slaughter of Jewish people especially during the Middle Ages.

Sami continues in the Huffington Post article

So while I had grown up knowing about the Sermon on the Mount, living it creates a different meaning and purpose. The first step in loving the enemy is to love and honor myself as a person loved by God, to break free from the fear and hatred within me, and to no longer claim victimization and seek pity as a result of the oppressive forces around me.

So the enemies that surround Mr. Awad are the "oppressive forces around him" -  Israeli soldiers dedicated to protecting Israel from Palestinian terrorists meant to do harm to innocent Israelis. Where in the Sermon on the Mount does Jesus refer to military personnel, political or nation enemies as the adversaries He is referring to?  He doesn't.

Taking Sami Awad's incorrect interpretation of Matthew 5:44, he needs to stop pointing his finger at the Israelis as the "enemies", but he, as a Christian, should look in his own backyard for the real enemies of peace.

 It's not the Israeli soldiers that are the enemies of peace between Palestinians and Israeli.  Rather, the real enemies are the Palestinians that have embraced terrorism as the means to peace.

If Sami and the members of the Holy Land Trust want to use non-violent means to create peace, they best use their efforts to confront their own terrorist government Hamas.  In addition, these Palestinian Martin Luther King wannabes should look at their own people who cowardly send children and women into Israeli territories with bombs strapped to their backs in order to blow up innocent humans - Jewish, Christian and Muslim.  Shrapnel makes no religious distinctions.

By Sami Awad's failure to condemn the terrorism of his own people, he drops the ball of Christian love by not confronting the enemies - his fellow Palestinians Muslims - of not only Jewish people but Christians as well.

WWJD?  Jesus would tell Sami Awad and his followers to begin their non-violent quest and go before Hamas, Hizbolleh and other terrorist groups who are finding safe refuge in the Palestinian entity and face them with their evil and lack of respect for human life. Use blockades, protests, peace marches and sit downs in the Palestinian territories and tell your own people to stop sending Katyusha rockets from Gaza into Israel.

Finally, if non-violent Palestinian Christians want to create a conflict resolution peacefully, then the best approach to take is to ask Palestinian leaders in Fatah and Hamas to accept the existence of the state of Israel.

The present issue is not about borders, Israeli settlers in the West Bank, the security wall or Israeli checkpoints. The only issue is about the refusal by Arab and militant Islamic leaders to fail to accept the existence of the state of Israel.

Israeli PM Netanyahu, in his speech before the US Congress, a few weeks ago said that Israel will accept a Palestinian state.  Where has there been a reciprocal response from any Palestinian leader about accepting a Jewish state?

All I hear from your leaders, my Christian brother Sami Awad, is a call for the destruction of Israel and the extermination of the Jewish people.  Those who call for the annihilation of Israel and the Jews are enemies of the God of Israel and your enemies as well.

Who are the True Enemies of Palestinian Christians?

44 Years Later - Israel's Land Giveaway But Still No Peace

Forty four years ago I arrived in South Vietnam, landing at the Bien Hoa Air Base on May 18, 1967.  The troop carrier plane on which I was a passenger hit the runway amidst Viet Cong mortar fire. It was my first good look at the Vietnam war.

After a few days, I was given assignment papers that destined me to an amphibious craft unit in Cam Rahn Bay.  After a few weeks of settling into my job as a marine diesel mechanic, I received another set of orders telling my unit to pack up and be prepared to leave Vietnam.

It was the first week of June 1967.  I soon learned our unit was on alert to travel to Israel to provide transport support for Israeli troops in the Sinai in their attack on the Egyptian army.  As a solder and a young Jewish man I was eager to go to Israel to defend the country of my heritage.

However, the war only lasted six days, thank God, and Israel was clearly the victor in their engagements with Syria, Jordan and Egypt.  As a result of the Six Day War Israel controlled land that included the Sinai, the Gaza Strip, the entire West Bank and the addition of East Jerusalem.

After peace talks and UN negotiations Israel gave back 94% of the land they controlled through conquering the Arab aggressors.  Israel returned the Sinai to Egypt and Gaza and the West Bank to the Palestinians or Jordanians. Israel hoped that with this gigantic land give-away there would be peace and the Palestinians and their Arab brothers would drop their goal to remove the Jewish presence from the land of Israel.

The one thing a student of Israel's history will learn is that Israel's conflict with the Palestinians is never about borders or land. It's always about Israel's right to exist.

It is foolish for Israelis, Americans and especially evangelical Christians now being courted by Palestinian Christians to think that if Israel gives the West Bank back to the Palestinians, there will be peace. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The only way peace will come in the Middle East is if the Jewish people living in Israel are annihilated by the surrounding Arab and militant Islamic nations.  To the Palestinian when Israel ceases to exists, there will be peace in the Middle East.

To show you what Israel has given away for peace, the map below lays out thirty four years of Israel giving away more and more land to the Palestinians.  And what do they have to show for it?  A demand for more land give aways and more Palestinian rockets from Gaza killing innocent Israeli citizens.

Let not Christians be fooled by Palestinian Christians who sidestep historical facts and try to persuade evangelicals that the Israelis are the enemies.  The more land Israel has given to the Palestinians, the less respected they are by Arabs and militant Muslims and the more these enemies attack the Jewish nation.

This map provides tangible proof that the falsehood of "land for peace" can no longer be tolerated. The only key to peace in the Middle East is for the Palestinian government made up of Fatah and the terrorist Hamas to accept Israel's right to exist and to drop their commitment to destroy Eretz Yisrael.

44 Years Later - Israel's Land Giveaway But Still No Peace

Anglican Pastor Sizer Hobnobs With Pro Hamas Groups

If you care about Israel, you'll become familiar with the name Stephen Sizer.  Sizer, the Anglican pastor of Christ Church in Surrey, UK, is well known in an evangelical circles. Sizer is also well known in pro-Hamas and antisemitic circles as I will show the reader.

Vicar Stephen Sizer

Stephen has accumulated an impressive list of Christian credentials during his twenty eight years of ordained ministry.  In fact, according to his bio Sizer is a Trustee of the Biblica Ministries Trust, who sponsored and publish the New International Version (NIV), the most widely used English Bible translation.

But as I started to say, there is another side to Sizer as described on his website:

He is a Patron of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD-UK), a Trustee of Friends of Sabeel UK, a founding member of the Institute for the Study of Christian Zionism (ISCZ), a member of the Advisory Council of Evangelicals for Middle East Understanding (EMEU)

He is also a consultant and contributor to the [anti-Israel and pro-Palestianian-author's remarks] film With God on our Side and the Bible study guide that accompanies the film. . . . He is a contributor to Bridges of Faith, the international Evangelical-Muslim Dialogue Group.

The problem with Sizer's credentials is that once one studies all the groups he associates with, the clearer it becomes that Sizer's major stance is anti-Christian Zionism. In fact, the Vicar has no problems with associating with pro-Hamas groups like Viva Palestina Malaysia and with antisemitic speakers such as Mahathir Mohamad, Azzam Tamimi, and an apologist for anti-Semites Lauren Booth.

Sizer's affiliations are as disturbing as the anti-Israel remarks he makes himself.  But to understand the crowd this so-called evangelical hangs out with, let me pull today's blog from a post contributed by  Joseph W on the blog Harry's Place:

Anglican Vicar hosted by Far Right Malaysian outfit

Cross-Post, June 5th 2011, 4:00 pm

by Joseph W

In January, this blog reported on the Far Right activities of the anti-Israel outfit Viva Palestina Malaysia.

Stephen Sizer is being hosted by VPM this week – more on him later.

Viva Palestina Malaysia is proudly pro-Hamas. Here is one of VPM’s activists, Azra Banu, meeting the leader of Hamas:

VPM promoted the idea that Jews should all relocate to Siberia, taking their ideas from David Duke’s website:

VPM has chosen to host a range of speakers with extreme views on Israel, including the raging anti-Semite Mahathir Mohamad, Azzam Tamimi, and the apologist for anti-Semites Lauren Booth.

Mahathir has previously stated:

“the Jews for example are not merely hook-nosed, but understand money instinctively.”

“Jewish stinginess and financial wizardry gained them commercial control of Europe and provoked anti-Semitism which waxed and waned in Europe throughout the ages.”

“We do not want to say that this is a plot by the Jews, but in reality it is a Jew who triggered the currency plunge, and coincidentally Soros is a Jew”

“Of late because of their power and their apparent success [the Jews] have become arrogant. And arrogant people, like angry people will make mistakes, will forget to think.”

When Booth visited VPM, she defended Mahathir from charges of anti-Semitism:

If you speak to Dr. Mahathir, it is clear he has neither the personality nor the inclination to be an anti-Semite. He is a thoughtful, pious and philosophical man.

I want to tell the people of Malaysia not to be scared of being labeled anti-Semitic when criticising the unjust, disgraceful behaviour of the Israel regime.

The label ‘anti-Semite’ is applied deliberately to quash debate on the Israeli government and its army and we must not be afraid to speak out (on it).

VPM is the Malaysian chapter of Viva Palestina, which is overtly a pro-Hamas outfit. The team leader of the Malaysian contingent of one of the Viva Palestina convoys is the Nazi apologist Matthias Chang. 

Here are some quotes from Chang, addressing Iran’s Holocaust-questioning conference in 2006:

In fact, in the early 1930s, it was the Zionists that declared war on Germany.

[...]

There is an arguable legal case for the proposition that Germany, faced with a Zionist Declaration of War in the early 1930s, had the right to defend itself against the Zionists’ agenda to annihilate Germany and her citizens!

Critics may well counter-argue that the above proposition is ridiculous – how could Zionists, not constituting a nation state declare war on Germany? My reply is simple. If Al Qaeda [and the “Jihadists”] can be accused of declaring war on America and which gave rise to the present Global War on Terror, the World Jewish Congress and allied organisations can likewise be accused for their crimes against Germany!

[...]

Those who continue to promote the political line that the Holocaust is a unique and an exceptional Jewish historical event, when compared to the sufferings of the other victims, such as the Chinese who were slaughtered in excess of 10 million, have to that extent minimised the atrocities committed by both sides in WWII. It is an attempt to white-wash the war crimes of the victors in WWII.

[...]

To accept that the Holocaust was an exceptional Jewish historical event is to deny the genocides, massacres and sufferings inflicted on the rest of mankind throughout history. This cannot be right.

I cannot help but question the motives of those who seek to elevate the sufferings of the Jewish people above those who had suffered as much, if not more from the horrors of the Second World War. And when the sufferings of the Jewish people have turned into an industry we owe a moral duty to the departed to ensure that no one should profit from blood money, more so, when lies are perpetrated to further such profiteering.

If we are gathered here to seek truth and to condemn war crimes, then we must condemn all war crimes, not just those allegedly committed by the defeated in WWII. If we judge Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo as war criminals, then we cannot but find Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin guilty as well.

[...]

We must set up an International Commission of Jurists to review the findings of the Nuremberg Military Tribunal.
We must set up a War Crimes Tribunal to adjudicate on the crimes of all Allied Powers leaders during WWII.

That Booth and Sizer should collude with this political group closely associated with a Nazi-apologist, speaks volumes. Last Friday, and this coming Tuesday, VPM are hosting the “anti-Zionist” vicar Rev Stephen Sizer.

Depressingly, the lectures are being held in the name of interfaith dialogue, in co-ordination with the International Institute of Advanced Islamic Studies, which is funded by the Malaysian government.

Given that he supports political protests outside synagogues on holy days, Sizer is probably the last person you want at an interfaith conference. 

Yet Sizer enjoys evangelising over the world, spreading the Bad News about Israel to the four corners of the Earth, to all who will listen. He has form. 

When Sizer went to Indonesia and spoke alongside government officials, he shared a platform with Holocaust denier Fred Tobin, reps from Hamas and Hezbollah, and an apocalyptic imam who believes Israel will be destroyed in 2022. 

Sizer has also visited Iran to give a tour speaking about Christian Zionism. He has since claimed that he formed links with the Iranian opposition when he was in the country, although the evidence tells another story. 

Sizer has recently caused concern by suggesting that Colonel Gaddafi and his son are linked to Israel and the USA by Jewish blood, which initially prevented the world from imposing a no-fly-zone over Libya. 

I know the Church of England doesn’t like getting involved in these matters, but really now: this is the Church that suspended a bishop for offending William and Kate. 

Surely the Church should do or say something about a maverick vicar involved in supporting pro-Nazi outfits – all whilst wearing his Anglican clerical collar. 

If you wish to complain to the Church, I strongly recommend you contact the Archbishop of Canterbury. I will.

Anglican Pastor Sizer Hobnobs With Pro Hamas Groups

The Subterfuge of Non-Violent Palestinian Christians

Rich Stearns, president of Christian relief organization World Vision recently spent a memorable meal with Palestinian Christians and 30 American pastors and church leaders in a cave west of Bethlehem.  After the half mile hike to reach his destination at the top of a hillside, he was greeted by a sign that read, "We refuse to be enemies."

The West Bank section of land where this Christian gathering took place is a mere 100 acres.  However, its Palestinian residents, the Nassars have turned their property into an touch point for demonstrating to evangelical American Christians how unfairly Palestinian Christians are being treated by Israelis.

The Nassars claim they have owned the land since 1916, and according to international law, the territory does not belong to Israel, but to the Nassar family.  But currently, according to World Vision President Stearns, the parcel of land is surrounded by 50,000 Israeli settlers, "living on similar land confiscated from other Palestinian families."

The Nassar family remain in a cave because, according to Daoud Nassar, the Israeli government has prohibited them from building structures on the land.

To demonstrate the unfairness of the Israeli government to Palestinian settlers, Stearns reminds readers of his blog, how difficult it was to scale the hill due to the barricades the Jewish government positioned to to close off the only access road the Nassar family has to their own property.

The History of the Nassar Controversy

Gush Etzion

In the World Vision post, Stearns points to 1991 as the time the Israeli government gave notice that they would annex the Nassar land as part of their plan to expand the neighboring Israeli Gush Etzion settlement.  In other words, while Israel recognizes the family's property rights to some of the land, about half of the acreage is declared "state land."

The controversy rages around the Israeli law that states Palestinian land that cannot be legally documented back to the Ottoman Empire (The Turks) which would be pre-1917, can be confiscated. If a Palestinian family on the West Bank has lived on a parcel of land for "centuries," says Stearns, and they lack proper documentation required to prove ownership of the land, the family will be booted out.

In 2002 the Nassar family, according to the Israeli newspaper HaAretz, appealed the 1991 decision, but was rejected even though "reliable proof was presented that the land was cultivated for decades".

Nassar's proof consisted of copies of land registration documents from the 1920s that bear the official stamp of the Israeli civil administration. The land was purchased by Nassar's Lebanese grandfather in 1916.

According to CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America) the military judge ruling in the trial rejected the challenge by Nassar refusing to accept a hand-drawn map as evidence.

Another issue with Nassar's papers is that they had been honored by the Turkish, British and Jordanian rulers prior to Israel's rule. Turkish or Ottoman rule ended in 1917, when the British conquered the entire region, By 1924 the area had already been under British rule for seven years. So the Turks could not have honored the Nassar's 1924 ownership papers since they were not ruling at that time.

Shaul Goldstein, mayor of Gush Etzion, views the Nassar's claim as another last ditch effort by Arabs to stymie the Jewish settlement effort.  Goldstein believes the disputed land has been declared state land and can be developed at the discretion of the Gush Etzion regional council.

Regarding the road built on Nassar's property, Goldstein says that road did not infringe on Nassar's property. Rather, the passageway carved up the hillside in the area that had been declared state property, and the road could have been built on an easier route, says Goldstein, but the Israelis chose to take a more circuitous route to avoid having to cut through Nassar's land.  Stearns failed to report that because of the conflict over the land, the settlers decided to stop the road project "until the matter is clarified."

The Symbol of the Nassar Family


One can only imagine how the Nassar family's plight has been used as a symbol of mistreatment of  Palestinian families by the Israeli government.

His farm,  located on a hill next to the Neve Daniel settlement,  now called  "The Tent of Nations" has become an attraction for tourists from other countries who travel to Israel  on an "occupation fact finding mission".

Now Daoud Nassar has taken his family's plight into the spiritual realm which has captured the attention of American evangelical Christians. "The Tent of Nations" is now a gathering place for Christians who seek peace in the Middle East and try to be both pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli. Unfortunately, more and more Christian leaders and their flocks are being duped by the Nassars for lack of information.

Nassar's claim "we refuse to be enemies" raises a lot of question.  As a Palestinian Christian he desires not to be enemies with Israelis. So how much has he reached out to Israeli families to befriend them? On his website Nassar uses their slogan "People building bridges."  But has he reached out to Israeli families or only to Christians to gain support for his cause?

 Is he taking advantage of what appears to be an unfair situation in order to dupe evangelical Christians into supporting him. Daoud wants Christians to meet him as a real person rather than allow American Christians to stereotype him as a terrorist because he is Palestinian.

Stearns asks whether the American church has turned a blind eye to the persecution of Palestinian families like the Nassars?

The Truth Behind the Nassar's Demolition Orders


In a June 2010 report from Missing Peace, "Demolition Orders and Co-Existence in Gush Etzion", Daoud received nine demolition orders from Israeli authorities.  He claims "[Israel} is attempting to break his spirit, he is determined to to fight and conquer this (Israeli) evil."

The statements and claims of Daoud Nassar call for further investigation. So Missing Peace contacted the Civil Administration in Israel, the mayor of Gush Etzion, Shaul Goldstein, as well as Palestinians living near Gush Etzion and the Nassar family. As a result of their investigation, it appears a lot of important information is missing from Nassar's claims.

First, the demolition order was delivered to Daoud Nassar on May 28th, 2010.  But the Israel Civil Administration (ICA) argues that the demolition only referred to illegal structures. So the demolition order, according to Nassar, had to to with adding of a structure with a solid roof. Nassar had built those structures adding to legally existing structures without obtaining a permit. So the demolition orders he has received were in fact the result of a court order handed down in 2006 in which the illegal structures were to be removed

Second, Nassar is not the only one receiving demolition orders for illegal building.  ICA officials issue between 10 to 15 demolition orders to Gush Etzion weekly, according to Mayor Goldstein.  He just wants Nassar to follow the  example of other inhabitants of Gush Etzion, to contest the demolition orders.

In addition, Goldstein rejected Nassar's claims that Israeli settlers are treated differently from Palestinians by the ICA. Goldsterin cited examples of Gush Etzion settlers who had to demolish structures in the absence of a permit. In addition, Shaul Goldstein added that demolition orders have been issued to the outpost Sde Boaz adjacent to Neve Daniel. So where is the basis of Nassar's claim that he is being treated differently simply because he is Palestinian. The Missing Peace article also goes into greater detail on the legality of the the claims of Palestinians farmers who claim land in Derech Avot. If the lands are state lands, their authorization will be considered but if the buildings are situated on private lands, the inhabitants will be subject to having their demolition orders executed.

The Truth About Nassar's Bridge Building to Israelis


Nassar invites American Christians to his "Tent for All Nations",  supported by groups from Germany and Switzerland, but it appears representatives from one nation in particular are missing from his inclusive list - Israel.  When questioned by Missing Piece about his relationship with Israelis, Nassar said "he had few or no affiliations."  Rather, he mentioned that he was engaged with problems on a regular basis with Jewish people in his proximity. Yet when investigated further, these run-ins with nearby Jews dated back to incidents in the 90s and an incident during the Second Intifada in 2002.

Under his website banner of "Bridges to Peace," Nassar has leaked out to various Christian websites stories about harassment and violence against his property committed by Jews in Gush Etzion. Oddly enough, the Mayor of Gush Etzion claims to have no knowledge of these incidents. Instead, tens of Palestinian farmers work their land in the fields in the same area without any reports of violence or harassing incidents.

Nassar speaks out of both sides of his mouth when he speaks about Israeli and Palestinians meeting to learn more about each other.  Yet in his own backyard, he has failed to practice such acts of peaceful co-existence.

Is Nassar pulling the wool over the eyes of American Christians who travel to Israel to hear the Middle East conflict from the Palestinian side?  Could it be that evangelicals are being hoodwinked by Palestinian propaganda perpetrated by the Nassar family in order to lure evangelicals away from supporting Israel.?

Nassar has limited his contacts to people who are pro-Palestinian and with those who are opposed to the "occupation."  Jesus had much to say about religious people who only had contact with people just like them (Matthew 5:46-48)  Nassar appears to be dishonest when he claims he wants co-existence and an end to the enmity between Palestinians and Israelis.

Gush Etzion's mayor recalls co-existence projects in Gush Etzion where Israelis and Palestinians work together on a daily basis.  One example of this co-existence occurred in Beit Sakariyah, a Palestinian village located among the Israeli villages of Gush Etzion.  There Palestinians are employed by Israelis at a garage and gas station in the area.

Even during the Second Intifada Israeli residents of Efrat, the largest settlement of Gush Etzion, assisted Palestinians with clothing and food.  Nassar confessed he had no connection with this co-existence between Arabs and Jews in Gush Etzion.

According to Mayor Goldstein, "the actions of some peace activists and reporters have served to inflame tensions and undermine the efforts to build coexistence with his Arab neighbors."

From the above statement it appears Nassar is misleading fellow non-violent peace activists to disregard laws and to test the Israeli ruling authorities for the sake of gaining publicity. Nassar's behavior as  Christian is  confusing.  I wonder if he has possesses any desire to demonstrate the spirit of Christ to his Israeli neighbors or is he using the dispute over his land as an excuse to influence Christians to turn their backs on Israel?

The Solution to End Nassar's Conflict with Israelis


Nassar spoke to the representatives from Missing Peace and sought their advice as to what he should do about the demolition orders.  He was advised to replace the corrugated iron structures with reed mats. These types of structures are permitted to be built without having to gain permission from the ICA. Consequently, Nassar would be able to maintain the use of the land.

CAMERA reports that under the laws of the West Bank, the family never actually owned the land in question. In fact, the land laws are not even Israeli but were passed on to Israel by previous rulers. The land laws are based on the Ottoman Land Code, and Israel was and is obligated to obey them under international laws (Article 43 of the Hague Regulations of 1947) to maintain the legal system in the territories, and to respect the laws in force in the country.

Under the Ottoman Land Code, there are  two major categories of land including mulk "property", which is private land,  There is no need to cultivate such land to keep rights over it.  So if the Nassar land is private, there was no need to cultivate it. But since they cultivated the land as a proof of ownership, they are suggesting the land is not private at all but belongs to the state.

The other category of land is miri, state land in which individuals gain limited rights by consistent cultivation. But the rights of such land is in no way equal to the rights to what is called private property. It is conditional ownership held by grant from the state.

What Nassar owns is land that is property of the state, and only reverts to the state if there is a failure to cultivate the land  So the Nassar family never really owned the land in the first place, but held limited rights granted by the state as long as they cultivated the land.

This law has worked in the favor of the Palestinians since 1967.  Since that time Palestinian farmers have been able to register state land in their own names in light of their own cultivation of the land.

Summary of Nassar's Claim to Conflict with Israelis


It's not hard to see that Nassar has omitted important information in his statements about the demolition of his property by Israelis. In addition, he or his attorney Jonathan Kuttab, failed to explain the application of the Ottoman Land Code as it applies to the Nassar property.

Nassar would rather have American evangelical pawns believe untruths to gain their support than to tell them the truth.

Nassar's Christian claims to desiring peace with Israelis lack substance and evidence. His proclamations of" love for his enemies" is absent in his actions.

As a Jewish person I have to ask why the Christians who visited the Nassar family near the Gush Etzion settlement, did not also spend time visiting Israeli families to hear "the other side."  To return to America and repeat the lies perpetrated by Daoud Nassar is deliberately distributing misinformation and contributing towards the deligitimization of Israel in Christian churches.

What I find most offensive is the fact the Nassars, as Christians, make no statements condemning the terrorism that exists among their own people.  Not a word spoken about Palestinian terrorism, suicide bombings, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, the PLO or the al Aqsa Martyr's Brigades. Where is their Christians conscience against Palestinian terrorism against Israelis? Do they feel it is justified?

The Nassar family leave us with more unanswered questions than giving us answers to our many question about the Middle East conflict.

The Subterfuge of Non-Violent Palestinian Christians