Our Friday News Analysis | What the World Reads Now!

If you want, I can quote you the scripture on 'loving your enemies' from the Christian gospels (confirmed and accepted by Islam) or from the Old Testament or Tanakh, a collection of writings first compiled and preserved as the sacred books of the Jewish people. Check it out by clicking on Leviticus 19: 18 in the Tanakh and the Gospel of Matthew 5:43-48 in the New Testament.

What do Jews, Christians, and Muslims believe to be true? HAVE NO ENEMIES! Work with your enemies! To quote Abraham Lincoln: "Destroy your enemies by becoming friends."

DON’T CROSS THE LINE! – PRESIDENT DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER

France and England with Their Proxy Israel at War Against Egypt to Regain the Suez Canal, October 29, 1956.

Edited by Abraham A. van Kempen
30 October 2024

President Eisenhower Honored the United States of America and the World – Eisenhower Refused to Compromise the Presidency.

“There can be no peace without law, and there can be no law if we invoke one code of international conduct for those who oppose us and another for our friends.…

We judge no man by his name or inheritance but by what he does and for what he stands, and so likewise, we judge other nations.

Should a nation that attacks and occupies foreign territory in the face of the United Nations disapproval be allowed to impose conditions on its withdrawal?

Israel Ruin Seen in a Dollar Ban.
Tel Aviv would be dire if the United Nations
calls for sanctions, and the U.S. complies.

A stroke of President Eisenhower’s pen
could bring virtual economic ruin to Israel.”

France and Great Britain were plotting against Egypt and scheming new realignments in the Middle East in secret negotiations with some Arab quislings in Iraq and Jews in Israel. In August 1956, Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal in her territory. The British and French Governments colluded with Israel to regain it back, at any cost.

The French were additionally angry, not only because so many influential rich Frenchmen had extensive stock holdings in the Suez Canal “gold mine,” but also because Egypt had inspired and” abetted the Arabs of Algeria to fight for their independence against France.

Israel always looked to the Negev (the southern region of Palestine) as leading to the Gaza Strip and Sinai (not only because of sacred Mount Sinai but because she hoped she might strike oil there. Egypt now had several oil fields in the Sinai Peninsula. Israel also needed a land route to the Red Sea for an outlet to the Indian Ocean, Asia, and Africa. Strategically, the Negev, in the hands of the militant Israelis, cut the Arab world in two.

During September and October 1956, in a series of diversionary cover-up moves to hide its real intentions of a blitz assault on Egypt, Israel made “reprisal” raids in the northern Arab neighbors’ territory, the biggest of which was at Qalqilya, in Jordan.

United Nations observers counted forty-eight Arabs dead. Soon, however, the mobilization of the Israeli army was on such a large scale that it could no longer be kept a secret. A revelation by President Eisenhower threw light on what took place in October 1956.

At a press conference, President Eisenhower said:

               “… the United States would stand by its interpretation of United Nations policy and the Charter.

               We apply this to anybody: those we thought were our closest friends and those we thought were in the other category.…

               Mr. Abba Eban, the Israeli ambassador, was returning to Israel briefly early in October 1956. He came to see me. I told him I’d hoped he would not allow any misinterpretation of sentiment in this country to sway him, mainly because possible Jewish sympathy was building up around Israel's mobilization at that time.

               I told him to disabuse himself of it if he thought this would have any part, an iota of influence, on the 1956 election or that it would impact me.

               In addition, Foster Dulles and I went to great pains to show Britain and France what we would do under those circumstances.… (New York Times, January 27, 1960)

A fanatical, daring, and indomitable politician, Ben Gurion probably thought of the unique and great opportune moment—the coming presidential elections in the United States. Some foolish or subverted Jewish voters in America must have been intoxicated by the slogan “Ben Gurion expects you to do your duty!”—a statement one often met with in the English-Jewish magazines.

Indeed, they must have argued a candidate running for the Presidency of the United States would think twice before antagonizing the Jewish voters in New York City, Chicago, Cleveland, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, and other cities. Consciously or unconsciously, subverted American Jews began to live ideologically in terms of the “Jewish homeland” more than in terms of the United States. The old, tragic ghetto yardstick “Is it good for the Jews?” would help them decide in their choice of a President of the United States.

Before the invasion of Egypt, Abba Eban declared: “Israel will start no war!” The next day, October 29, 1956, the press reported the Sinai Peninsula's invasion.

               “The 30,000-man invasion force of Israel, with tanks, jeeps, and half-tracks, and under cover of French Mystere jets, lunged across the entire Sinai Peninsula, straight for the Suez Canal.

On October 31, at dawn, Britain and France began their invasion of Egypt by planes, ships, paratroops, and land forces, already quietly assembled in readiness on the island of Cyprus. In four days, Israel took the Gaza Strip and the entire Sinai Peninsula.” Was it collusion, collaboration, or connivance?

On October 27 and 28, 1956, President Eisenhower called on Israel diplomatically and publicly to refrain from any act endangering the peace.

The Israeli Government replied that the mobilization was defensive in purpose.…

When, on October 29, the Israeli army announced that its forces had invaded the Sinai Peninsula, the news was almost as much of a surprise to the public in Israel as it was to Cairo, Egypt, or Washington.

The New York Times of November 3 reported:

               “Israeli patrols have reached the east bank of the Suez Canal.”

               On November 5, the Times reported: “Israelis are increasingly disturbed over the slowness of the British and French forces in occupying the Canal.”

The invasion of Egypt on October 29, 1956—a date that will live in infamy—was accompanied by a unilateral revocation of the Egyptian-Israeli Armistice Agreement by Israel.

The Security Council of the United Nations promptly met on October 30 to examine the aggression by Israel. But the Security Council was rendered incapable of doing anything by the exercise of the veto by Britain and France—Israel’s accomplices (masters) in the war on Egypt.

The matter was referred to the General Assembly, which held its first Emergency Special Session from November 1 to November 12. In a series of four resolutions, the United Nations called upon Israel to “promptly withdraw behind the Armistice Line.”

A few days later, “the United Nations notes with regret that according to the communications received by the Secretary-General, no Israel forces have been withdrawn. And reiterates its call to Israel to comply forthwith with the resolutions.”

Despite the trying pre-election days in America, President Eisenhower, to his lasting honor and courage, voiced prophetic words that humanity had not heard since the days of Woodrow Wilson:

               “There can be no peace without law, and there can be no law if we invoke one code of international conduct for those who oppose us and another for our friends.…

               We judge no man by his name or inheritance, but by what he does and for what he stands, and so likewise we judge other nations.” (TV and radio “Report to the Nation” by President Eisenhower, on October 31, 1956, carried by all newspapers on November 1, 1956.)

Think of it: Eisenhower, a goy (Gentile), appealing to an old Bible-quoting Jew to abide by law and justice and not resort to force. Nevertheless, the audacity, presumptuousness, and gnarled morals of Ben Gurion and his junta passed all limits of tolerance.

Ben Gurion’s first answer was quite astounding:

               “Up to the middle of the sixth century [that is, 1,400 years ago, if that be historically true], Jewish independence was maintained on the Island of Yotvat [Tiran] south of the Gulf of Elath, which was liberated yesterday by the Israeli army.… Israel terms the Gaza Strip as an integral part of the nation. No force, whatever it is called, was going to make Israel evacuate Sinai! And the words of Isaiah the prophet were fulfilled.” (New York Times, November 8 and 11, 1956.)

The New York Times of October 14, 1956 (Sunday Magazine section) published a special interview its correspondent in Israel had with Ben Gurion in his office in Jerusalem in anticipation of his seventieth birthday on October 16, two weeks before the assault on Egypt. In that article, one observation made by the Times correspondent is relevant in connection with Ben Gurion’s artful tactics of leaning on and quoting the Bible.

Said the New York Times correspondent:

               “On the corner of the Premier’s glass-topped desk lie two books he always has within reach—a copy of the Old Testament, and a big, thick Biblical Concordance, to help him find passages he seeks.… Ben Gurion’s fierce attachment to the Bible sometimes seems paradoxical.

               He hardly speaks without quoting Biblical passages.

               Yet, he does not feel bound by Biblical laws.”

To return to the invasion of Egypt, things were going “wonderfully well” with the “new specimen of the fighting Jews.”

On November 5, 1956, the New York Times published a cable report from Tel Aviv:

               “Israel military circles were hopeful tonight that the rout of the Egyptian army from an area four times the size of Israel during four days of fighting would revolutionize the Middle East picture and remove some of the obstacles to an Israeli Arab peace.…”

On November 12, American newspapers carried the following revealing story:

               “Fiery Menachem Begin, the undisputed leader of the Herut (old Irgun) Party, Israel’s second largest political body, said in an interview in Tel Aviv on November 11 that he now sees eye to eye with the Government of Israel’s Arab policy! ‘With all my heart and soul, I support this action by our Government.’

Menachem Begin termed ‘the invasion of Egypt by Ben Gurion’s army as legitimate self-defense.”

               “Peace, peace, peace with Egypt is the paramount goal, but I also hope that we will not sit with Gamal Abdel Nassar.’”

Hollywood and Madison Avenue techniques worked overtime to tell the story of the “renascent,” “triumphant” advancing Israeli army in Egypt. Here is a small collection of captions under the daily display of war pictures in the press of America, all of which, of course, also appeared in the New York Times:

               “Col. Shlomo Goren, Chief Chaplain of the Israeli army, holds a submachine gun in one hand and a Torah in the other hand.”

The picture was taken during the assault on Gaza.

               “Israel’s flag on Mount Sinai. A historic moment: a group of soldiers at the ceremony of hoisting the Israeli flag on Mount Sinai.”

               “Girl soldiers on a night march. Israeli girl soldiers marching through the night from El Arish in the Sinai Peninsula in the course of their training.”

               “Israeli soldiers wed in Egypt. Lieutenant Bezalel Rubin and his bride, Cpl. Orah Miekas of the Israeli army share cutting their wedding cake at El Arish on the Sinai Peninsula.”

               “Makeshift Menorah: At an outpost on one of Israel’s frontiers, members of the army try out a homemade candle holder constructed of wood and cartridge shells as they prepare for the traditional celebration of Hanukah.”

               “Desert War Toll: The Israeli victory in El Arish area left this trail of destruction: Egyptian [dead] soldiers in the sand, a battered truck,” and so on.

               “An Israeli soldier tries his hand aboard an Egyptian camel captured.”

               “Ben Gurion chats with the troops.”

Should these not be thrilling to the new Jewish hearts? Down with Isaiah, down with Amos, with Hillel, with Dr. Magnes, down with old-fashioned Judaism! Rejoice, you Jews of the world, for your “Jewish homeland” is fast expanding!

Of course, those who knew better and who were disinterested, fair-minded, and decent, such as the United Nations and the United States Government under President Eisenhower, had quite other things to say than to acclaim Israel’s attack on Egypt. And while England and France suddenly realized that it was too late in history to make aggressive wars under any pretense, Israel, the spoiled brat of the United Nations and the world, refused and stalled for three long months to give up the annexed foreign lands grabbed during the blitz campaign.

The United States was forced to give serious consideration to recommendations of sanctions against Israel.

Said President Eisenhower on February 20, 1957:

               “Should a nation which attacks and occupies foreign territory in the face of the United Nations’ disapproval be allowed to impose conditions on its withdrawal?”

The New York Times also carried this headline story on the same day:

               “Israel Ruin Seen in a Dollar Ban. Tel Aviv would be dire if the United Nations calls for sanctions, and the U.S.A. complies.”

               “A stroke of President Eisenhower’s pen could bring virtual economic ruin to Israel.”

Israel, however, would not believe what it heard or read about the reactions of our Government. Said Moshe Brilliant, New York Times correspondent in Israel, on November 24, 1956:

               “Israelis believe that much of the castigation directed against them in the United Nations and elsewhere has been mainly for appearance’s sake. Some Knesset members said that Israel had a robust set of cards. A world war could be no less dangerous to others than to Israel, they argue.… They ask why Israel should not exploit her current nuisance value to induce the Great Powers to press Egypt and the other Arab States to negotiate peace.…”

The frustrated, fanatical “Jewish” political nationalists were suffering from a Samson complex. They were ready to bring down the pillars of the world in an apocalyptic Armageddon together with themselves.

They “just had to have” their “lollipop”—the Greater Israel, the biblical homeland, as in the days of King David and King Solomon. Nevertheless, the commanders of the “brilliant sortie” (English-Jewish newspapers preferred to call the assault on Egypt by this French term) had to take into account the American dollars for Israel and other possible sanctions.

And so, even though they did not have in their souls any “decent respect for the opinions of mankind,” they had to capitulate. With malevolence and ill humor, the Israeli soldiers were ordered to retreat very slowly but surely.

Fred Sparks, Pulitzer Prize winner and reporter for the Scripps-Howard newspapers, who was with the retreating Israeli army, wrote:

               “We moved into the Sinai desert after the retreating Israelis. Of course, the Israelis were relatively slow in retreating; there was a considerable amount of haggling back and forth at the United Nations, and for a time, it looked pretty disastrous, but finally, they left.

               We saw the destruction left by the Israeli forces, which was considerable.

               It was a vindictive campaign in Sinai. Those poor people there have very little—the few water holes were salted; the few railroad tracks had been blown up; camels were killed, and cattle were destroyed. Instead, it was a vicious campaign like campaigns in that part of the world, and it does seem to predict a sorry sight for tomorrow.”

               “It cost Israel 350,000,000 Israeli pounds to finance the swashbuckling war of Ben Gurion and his junta. However, this emptied the coffers of the Israeli treasury, making it indispensable to raise new “rescue funds” for “economic, social, cultural, health” needs.

The chief source, of course, as always, was America. Who, then, paid for the war on Egypt?

Another innocent Jewish party paid dearly for the reckless and irresponsible attack on Egypt—the Jews of Egypt. From time immemorial, the Jewish community in Egypt, one of the oldest in Jewish history, had prospered and lived in brotherly peace with their Arab fellow citizens. This happy lot of Jews was irresponsibly sacrificed as a burnt offering on the altar of aggressive “Jewish” political nationalism.

Fifty thousand innocent Jews who lived an independent, ideal, happy, and respectable life as equal citizens in Egypt, whether under Farouk or Nasser, became beggars overnight, exiled from their homeland, the first casualty in a war that was not of their making or interest. Ben Gurion and company had little compunction about this cruel sacrifice of the Jews of Egypt.

Besides, the Egyptian exiled refugees might even become a “national” asset; they might serve for a long time as straw for new bricks in the future campaigns for funds in America, grist for the mills of propaganda and “rescue drives.”

…

In addressing the Anti-Defamation League, Abba Eban “warned that in the conditions imposed by the United Nations on Great Britain, France, and Israel, following their attack on Egypt, he saw a ‘missed moment in history’” (New York Times, November 25, 1956).”

What cloven-footed piety, presumptuousness, and self-righteousness! The world “missed the moment in history.” The United Nations should have let the Bible-quoting Ben Gurion and his predatory junta, in company with the last remnants of international gangsterism in France and England, run the new world, the one-world, the post–World Wars nuclear world of humanity’s revolt against depraved, maniacal nationalism.

— "Not by Might, Nor by Power": The Zionist Betrayal of Judaism (Forbidden Bookshelf) by Moshe Menuhin

_________________________

Editor’s Note | President John F. Kennedy, Jr. reinforced the Eisenhower Doctrine to keep the modern state of Israel within its original borders, 56 percent of the allotted land.

In 1967, President Lyndon Baynes Johnson permitted Israel to expand its territory to 78 percent of the land in its so-called Six-Day War (which only took six hours).

Israel’s victory has become Israel’s Achilles Heel despite the many hallelujahs and hosannas from Jews and Christians worldwide.

Peace is just as elusive now as then.

What a difference one president can make.

What is the Side of the Story that is Not Yet Decisive? Edited by Abraham A. van Kempen. 

‘The Qur'an, A Contemporary Understanding, with References to the Bible,’ Co-authored by my friend, Safi Kaskas, and the late David Hungerford.

My friend, Safi Kaskas, who co-authored with David Hungerford, ‘The Qur'an, A Contemporary Understanding, with References to the Bible,’ stated in his article: ‘Is Forgiving My Enemy a Muslim Tradition?’

               “A few years ago, I was speaking to a group of Muslims about forgiving your enemy, and a young lady said to me, ‘But forgiving your enemy is a Christian tradition, and it’s not for Muslims.’

               Her statement shook me to my core as it contradicted many basic concepts I had found in the Qur’an after spending more than six years translating it from the original Arabic into simple English.

               The first of these concepts is that the Qur’an confirms previous books such as the Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospels [1].

               The second concept I learned from the Qur’an is that the Holy Spirit supported Jesus from birth. As such, every word he uttered was Gospel. He was the Injeel, as the Qur’an calls the Gospels.

               Hence, we Muslims revere Jesus and consider every one of Jesus’ principles worth following because it is confirmed in the Qur’an [2].

               The third concept is that forgiving transgressors is integral to the Qur’an, and believers are always urged to forgive [3]. This was confirmed by the daily practice of the Prophet (PBUH) any chance he had. A prime example is when he entered Mecca, which rejected him and tortured him for eleven years with a large army. He forgave all of its population, including those sworn enemies who waged war against him and wanted to kill him.

                If this is my understanding of the Qur’an, why is it not that young lady’s understanding? Are there verses in the Qur’an calling on Muslims to forgive their enemies?

I started hearing Jesus saying: ‘You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. He makes his sun rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the just and the unjust. What reward do you have if you love those who love you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?’

               These words of Jesus were echoed by the sounds of these verses from the Qur’an: “Good and evil are never equal. Repel evil with good, and your enemy will become like an intimate friend.” (41:34) and the second one was: ‘The retribution for a bad deed is one like it, but whoever forgives and makes peace will have his reward with God.’ (42:40)

               If you want to be healthy, forgive your enemies and leave the judgment to the ultimate Judge. Otherwise, how can you expect God to protect you from the next enemy who is undoubtedly there and desires to harm you?

               ‘If you pardon, overlook, and forgive, God is forgiving and Merciful-to-all.’ (Qur’an 64:14)

               [1] 2:97 ‘he (the holy spirit) has brought it [the Qur’an] down to your heart by God’s permission, confirming what is already revealed and a guidance and good news to believers.” (02:97) and “He has sent down the Book to you with the Truth to confirm what is available of other revelations, as it is He who sent down the Torah and the Gospel (03:03) beforehand as guidance to people, and He revealed the Standard by which we judge right from wrong.’ (03:04)

               [2] Especially those found in the synoptic Gospels.

               [3] ‘If you pardon, overlook, and forgive, God is forgiving and Merciful-to-all.’ (Qur’an, 64:14)

               ‘Hold to forgiveness, command what is right, and turn away from the ignorant.’ (Qur’an, 7: 199)

               ‘They should rather pardon and overlook. Would you not love God to forgive you? God is Ever-Forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (Qur’an, 24:22)

               ‘The retribution for a bad deed is one like it, but whoever forgives and makes peace will be rewarded with God. He certainly does not like those who do wrong.’” (42:40)

COMMENTARY | PAY ATTENTION TO THE ARAB PUBLIC RESPONSE TO THE ISRAEL-HAMAS WAR

The peaceful nature of the mass mobilization reflects a growing trend to renounce violence

By Amr Hamzawy
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
02 November 2023

Once again, the Arab street is the epicenter of peaceful demands for change.

Protests have swept across the region—including notable demonstrations in Casablanca, Algiers, Tunis, Cairo, Amman, Beirut, Damascus, Baghdad, and Manama—in support of the Palestinians in Gaza and their fundamental human rights in the face of an ongoing Israeli military assault and horrifying living conditions.

The peaceful nature of this wave of Arab mass mobilization reflects a growing trend to renounce violence to pursue political objectives and a desire for stability following the turbulent years following the 2011 Arab Spring.

The initial Arab public response to Hamas’s acts of terror set a secular and moderate tone. Hamas’s 07 October actions conflated the boundaries between legitimate resistance to the Israeli occupation and siege of the Palestinian territories, which categorically does not include targeting civilians and crimes of terrorism. In response, Arab governments, civil society organizations, several media outlets, and some influential social media accounts were quick to condemn the violence and call for the protection of life on both sides.

When governmental and nongovernmental voices ignored the targeting of Israeli civilians, their one-sided opinions were quickly marginalized. On 26 October, as Israeli bombardment of Gaza intensified, nine Arab foreign ministers issued a statement reaffirming their opposition to violence and the killing of civilians.

Together, the mainstream Arab public space put forward pro-peace and pro-life values without any attempt to justify Hamas actions—neither with references to the ongoing occupation and siege of the Palestinian territories nor by evoking militant Islamist anti-Jewish rhetoric that has lost its popular appeal in recent years. Instead, many Arab commentators and influencers placed the occupation and siege as crucial facts in the persistent denial of the Palestinian right to self-determination. They also highlighted the daily struggles of Palestinians in the West Bank due to the aggressive expansion of the Jewish settlements, in East Jerusalem because of the forced displacement, and in Gaza as a result of the inhumane siege.

Despite a shocking trend to dehumanize Palestinians in Israeli media and policy circles, parallel narratives dehumanizing Israeli civilians have not gained popularity among Arabs. In the first hours following the Hamas attack, mainstream Arab voices showed no appetite for condoning or justifying the violence.

This initial nonviolent and humanist response has held its ground with the emergence of pro-Palestine mass mobilization in several Arab countries. The Arab street has watched as the civilian population in Gaza falls victim to Israeli attacks and is left without international protection or aid amid a humanitarian catastrophe. As Arab citizens have taken to public spaces to protest the Israeli aggression, they have focused on the Tel Aviv war cabinet’s decision to launch a ground invasion of Gaza, to displace Palestinians within the strip, and to punish them collectively by cutting off water, electricity, and fuel. The demands that arose from these demonstrations have not called on Arab governments to attack Israel. They instead prioritized protecting the Palestinian people from Israeli aggression, ensuring that humanitarian aid gets into the strip, and denouncing plans to displace a population that has been dispossessed numerous times since 1948.

These mass mobilizations have also aimed to expose and condemn Western double standards and collaboration in the ongoing occupation and current onslaught on Gaza. Protesters have emphasized the US and others’ unconditional support for Israel—despite a Palestinian death toll in the thousands, the destruction of critical civilian infrastructure, the displacement of over 1 million Palestinians within Gaza, and the obstruction of access to humanitarian aid. Scenes of protesters burning the Israeli and the US flags and expressing sympathies to Hamas militants have surfaced on social media. Still, they account for a tiny fraction of the Arab street movement. The overwhelming majority have stayed on the nonviolent course.

The trend toward renouncing violence in the mainstream Arab public space and the Arab street has been on the rise. Data from the Arab Barometer, a Princeton University-based public opinion surveying project, documents a decrease in the widespread acceptance of violence and its use for internal or external purposes. In recent years, an overwhelming majority of respondents— including those from Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Tunisia, and Libya—have stated their rejection of the use of force or violence for political causes. Additionally, Arab Barometer surveys have documented that the sheer majority of Arabs—on average over 90 percent— disapprove of extremist organizations and condemn their acts of terror. Although Hamas and other Palestinian groups are predominantly seen in the Arab world as resistance movements, their violence against Israeli civilians has mainly been condemned. A clear preference for peace between Israelis and Palestinians based on the two-state solution has been on the rise.

But this support for nonviolence can be fragile, especially if protesters’ demands aren’t addressed. I’ve witnessed these changes firsthand. I participated in the peaceful 2011 movement in Egypt, as nonviolent demonstrators took to the streets there—as well as in Tunisia and other Arab countries—to call for more rights and freedoms and to demand an orderly transition to democracy. I watched as demonstrators’ hopes and aspirations withered away, and some countries degenerated to violence and militant activism. Now, I fear we may observe a similar development in the making.

But in the current trend to renounce violence in the Arab street and the collective rejection of dehumanizing narratives in the mainstream public space, I see the launchpad for a possible revival of the peace process between Israelis and Palestinians, with wide Arab backing for the first time.

Will Israel play along? Will Arab majorities stick to nonviolence to put an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? I truly hope. And I pray that our region can avoid the fate of failed transitions and lost peace this time.

Amr Hamzawy is a senior fellow and the Carnegie Middle East Program director. His research and writings focus on governance in the Middle East and North Africa, social vulnerability, and the different roles of governments and civil societies in the region.

THE MANURE YOU CAN'T STICK BACK INTO THE HORSE

A Game Changer

By Abraham A. van Kempen

About a year ago, I met 'Rich' on the phone. I think that's his name. It could have been 'Ralph.' I never met him. I've neither seen him before nor since. He called me to sell me something. I can't even remember what. He's retired in Florida and has 79 years of street-wise smarts inside his soul. I told him I was working on my book.

                "The common thread, the overall theme will be about dignity … to dignify God, you must dignify the other … we're all created in His image.

               And I will do my best to convince the 70 million Evangelicals in the United States and their 600+ million followers worldwide to get off the Israeli bandwagon to stop supporting Israeli atrocities against the indigenous people of Palestine ... because Israel's crimes against humanity are anti-Christian … what's more, Rich, this will be the game changer.

Suppose the Evangelicals join me in rebuking Israel's criminal misconduct against a defenseless people. What would happen to the $6 million a week 'defense' package from the United States that aids and abets Israel's brutalities and the $500 million of direct donations to Israel from Christians throughout the United States?"

               "Well, good luck," was Rich's response.

               "From the tone of your voice, it sounds like you think I'm dreaming," I countered.

               "Rich," I continued, "many Palestinians are more genetically connected to the Ancient Israelites than most European Jews who wandered into the region, especially after World War II … most Christians view Modern Israel as Ancient Israel. They are clueless when it comes to what's happening in Israel-Palestine and, you know what, I've done my homework, I know what I'm talking about … most Christians are clueless when it comes to understanding the fullness of Christianity … and the Second Coming is less about Israel and more about becoming Christ-like, to be witnesses of Christ … the WALK, not the talk … just walk the talk 'in every nation' (Matthew 24: 14)."

Smell the Stench

That fired him up. "Abraham," he said, "Don't write the same superfluities (speaking in a pronounced New York-Irish accent, he uses a more guttural term, the 's' word). "You want to write a game changer, a bestseller?

               Expose Israel! Name one by one the manure (he uses that same 's' word again) that you just can't put back into the horse and let people smell the stench." Wow! That got me thinking of my childhood … the scent of manure in the early morning dew above the meadows with the water vapor still hanging above the ground. We were on the phone for at least an hour and a half.

               "I'm not going to tell you how to write your book, but I want you to bulldoze through the brick wall of 'anti-Semitism.' They'll rake you over the coals … but I've done my homework, too. Nothing is more anti-Semitic than Zionism."

That was not a slap in the face. It felt more like a ton of bricks or, worse, a kick in where it would hurt me the most. And then Rich started to rub it in even more.

Nothing is More Godless than …

"In fact,' he says, "it's worse than that. Are you ready?

               Nothing is more anti-Christian than Zionism.

               Nothing is more anti-Muslim than Zionism.

               Nothing is more godless, inhumane, heartless, merciless, brutal, ruthless, vicious, and indecent than Zionism. Now, do your research.

And if your findings corroborate with what I just said, shout from the mountain tops, tell the world … you're a Jew … prove your case … at most, they'll vilify you as 'Judenrat'… me, they'd charge me with anti-Semitism, and they might even slap me with some hate crime."

I had one other meaningful telephone conversation with the woman who became my wife 34 years ago. We just had our first date, a disaster. Our second date was an impromptu phone call. We didn't know what was in store for us. My mother badgered me for days: "Have you thanked her yet?" My future wife painstakingly prepared lunch, which, an hour or so later, I vomited out, all of it, thank goodness, into the toilet. How does one say: "I'm sorry I threw up all your food … it isn't the food, it's me … maybe I was sick or something …?" I blew it. My macho self-image imploded right in front of her.

Finally, on a Wednesday night at 21.00 hours (9 P.M.) I thought, "Let me get this over and done with and swallow my pride." It turned out to be the serendipity of serendipities. The phone call lasted from 9.00 P.M. until 3.30 A.M., 6.5 hours. Our conversation was open and honest, exuberant and exhilarating. If we discussed the puking incident, it was hardly a talking point. At around 3.15 A.M.– and this is all I can still remember – I asked, "If I were to ask you to marry me, how would you respond?"

She said, "Yes."

"Really? You mean that?"

"Yes!"

Just like that. Six weeks later, we were on our honeymoon. We're still together through thick and thin with all the ups and downs. Of course, it was a marriage made in heaven. We recognized it. We went for it in faith. Don't think for one moment it's been an easy ride. To give you an idea, it took us one week to negotiate our eldest son's name. He was nameless for a week. She is strong-willed; me, too; and so are our children. What a family!

THE LABYRINTH WAR

Israel targets the Hamas tunnel system under Gaza City

Flares dropped by Israeli forces above the Gaza Strip on 31 October 2023, viewed from a position near Sderot along the Israeli border. / Photo by Yuri Cortez/AFP via Getty Images.

By Seymour Hersh
Substack.Com
1 November 2023

The Israeli leadership is continuing its all-out war against Hamas—a war being played out in the air above Gaza City, at street level, where tanks have entered the zone, and underground in a labyrinth of tunnels under Gaza—as the death toll from its constant bombing and shelling mounts. More than 8,000 residents of the Gaza Strip have been killed so far, forty percent of them children, according to the international aid group Defense for Children, in retaliation for Hamas’s terrorist attack on an all-night Israeli dance party, kibbutzim and small farming villages in the south of Israel on 7 October. Hamas still holds more than 230 Israeli hostages it seized on that murderous Saturday when scarcely any Israeli forces appeared on the scene for as long as ten hours.

The Israeli death count for the Hamas attack of 7 October now stands at 1,400. He includes 317 members of the Israeli military—some of those victims may be military contractors—and 58 police officers. At least thirty Americans, according to the State Department, many of them working for NGOs, were also killed, and thirteen Americans are still unaccounted for. Dozens of those captured by Hamas—among them the very young and the very old—never made it to its tunnel system because they fell or, more likely, were flung off the bicycles or motorcycles that were carrying them and were immediately executed.

In the last few days, the Israeli Defense Force has escalated its ground operations against Hamas by sending tank columns directly into Gaza and firing from a distance at targets in Gaza City. I was told by a military expert who has served in combat with the IDF that the tank movements were the beginning of a second phase of its combat operations against Hamas. The goal, he said, is to break Hamas’s defensive perimeter around its main bunkers and tunnels in the center of Gaza City. The tank columns “are not rushing into the center. Rather, they stay put on the perimeters, firing in from a distance.”

Such tactics, the expert said, minimize Israeli casualties while also producing hundreds of enemy kills: “The soldiers don’t rush in, and they don’t fight face to face with terrorists.” The downside to such tactics, he said, is that buildings and neighborhoods are “flattened . . . whether or not civilians are inside these buildings.” Israel has consistently told journalists that Gaza City residents are provided with warnings before their buildings are attacked.

There is a second downside, he added: “The slow approach takes time. How much time does Israel have to pursue this war?” He was referring to the growing worldwide protests calling for a ceasefire.

There are two more concerns facing the bitterly divided Israeli leadership, now led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: to negotiate the return from Hamas of its more than 230 hostages, who include at least sixteen and perhaps a dozen more active duty members of the IDF; and to destroy the extensive Hamas tunnel system that provides for exits and entrances underneath the thousands of residential and office buildings in Gaza City that are the main targets of the Israeli Air Force. At this point, I have been told close to 50 percent of the targeted buildings inside Gaza City have been destroyed, and the bombing is scheduled to continue until the Israeli Air Force reaches its goal of wiping out 65 percent of the possible citywide escape routes for the Hamas leadership and its fighters.

Israel’s insistence that all residents of the targeted buildings were given notice of the pending destruction has done little to lessen the international outrage at what is seen as a grossly disproportionate response by Israel to the Hamas terrorist attacks.

The Hamas tunnels “were dazzling in their ingenuity,” I was told by an official who helped Israel map the tunnels and come to grips with the threat posed by easy citywide access for Hamas fighters. “There were administrative tunnels, command-and-control tunnels, and storage tunnels throughout Gaza City,” he said, with hundreds of entry points. It was decided after the 7 October attack that “all buildings with terminal exits and entry points had to be bombed.”

The official said the amount of dirt and debris removed for the underground construction in Gaza City was estimated to amount to 75 million cubic feet—a total whose disposal would require 140,000 dumpsters. The official used an analogy to describe the project, which was closely monitored for years by outside experts working with Israeli intelligence: enough material was removed to build the Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt.

There is no sign, well-informed Americans and Israelis have told me, that the Israeli leadership will stop the nearly round-the-clock bombing campaign until 65 percent of the targets for destruction have been hit. The bombing has turned long-deprived Gaza City into a deadly wasteland.

In my recent reporting, I’ve been told that at the time of the October raid, as many as 15,000 to 20,000 fighters were living and training in the vast system, which included heat, light, and ventilation, even air-conditioning. The citywide access allowed many to come and go to their families in Gaza City.

The many thousands of Gazan workers who held jobs inside Israel are now understood by Israeli intelligence to have provided the Hamas planners with a core of data and photographs, many sent on mobile phones via WhatsApp, about the Israeli kibbutzim and local villages that were attacked on 7 October.

Meanwhile, serious talks are continuing between Israel and the Hamas leadership. Hamas is aware that the Israeli leadership, which failed to protect its citizens on 7 October, is eager to rescue the hostages through a prisoner swap, as has occurred before. Public discussion of those talks has not come from Tel Aviv but from Yahya Sinwar, the feared and hated leader of Hamas in Gaza, whose spokesman issued a statement Saturday to Hamas’s al-Aqsa television station declaring that his movement was ready for an “immediate” swap of the Israeli hostages for all of the Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails. Sinwar himself was sentenced to life in prison in 1999 for the murder of four suspected Palestinian informers and two Israeli soldiers but was released, along with more than a thousand fellow inmates, in a prisoner exchange in 2011 for a single captured Israeli soldier named Gilad Shalit.

I have been told—the details are complicated—that Sinwar, who reportedly learned Hebrew while in prison, has expressed willingness to discuss an exchange of prisoners that would include the release of thousands of Hamas prisoners now in Israeli jails. The freed prisoners would perhaps be relocated to Qatar. However, I was also told that there was an impasse: Sinwar refuses to include the captured Israeli soldiers in the deal, and he insists that the male Israeli hostages between the ages of 17 and 45—their numbers could total thirty or more—should be considered soldiers because of their automatic status as IDF reservists until the age of forty-five.

The talks, as described by an Israeli source, are underway even as Israeli special forces and regular army soldiers are in the Gaza Strip, penetrating tunnels from known access points and destroying exits and ventilation ducts as they move. The main goal of the penetrations thus far has been to determine where the hostages are being held. I have been told there has been little resistance, with only one significant casualty as of Sunday. At this point, no major Israeli army ground invasion of Gaza City is imminent, but the Israeli air and ground campaign is gaining traction. Many of the tunnels are believed to have collapsed as a result of the heavy bombing, and it is not clear how long the Hamas fighters can survive despite its heavy stockpiling of food and water. I also have been told that there is no power throughout the underground tunnel system, and all the fighters and hostages are living in the dark.

Given all the obstacles to their rescue, the fate of the hostages is uncertain. The Hamas leaders have refused to allow the International Red Cross to visit the hostages. And I was told by a well-informed Israeli that two weeks ago, Netanyahu instructed Israel’s foreign and domestic intelligence agencies “to hunt down and kill every single Hamas political and military leader” in the Middle East.

“Israel, ruthlessly,” I was told, “is going after the families, wives, kids, brothers, sisters, and parents of Hamas political and military leaders.” He said fourteen members of the family of Ismail Haniya, the political leader of Hamas based in Qatar, had already been killed. Within two days of the 7 October raid, he said, the widow of Abdel Aziz al-Rantisi, a Hamas co-founder who was assassinated in 2004, was killed. Similarly, he said, eight members of the family of Muhammed Deif, the Hamas military leader, were killed in safe homes.

“From Israel’s perspective,” the Israeli told me, “It is now a no-holds-barred war.”

EDITORIAL | The Israeli House of Cards

The Israeli House of Cards, fabricated and shaped on ideas envisaged during post-revolutionary Russia that also trickled into the ideological mindset of post-World War I Germany26, can and will eventually collapse, preferably democratically from within; otherwise, inescapably from without.

If only the people of Israel were mature and free enough of the frenzy of nationalism to vote their self-perpetuating, inveterate government out and choose humane, regular, and peaceful representatives who would come to terms with the harsh realities, the growing power, and growing tempers of the whole Arab and Muslim world.

A shift of balance of power, a secret military alliance, a new lethal weapon; and then, given an atmosphere overstrained because of some border incident— a shepherd, a dam, a water pipeline, fishing rights or marsh draining, and the David Ben-Gurion to Binyamin Netanyahu jingoists rushing in with their garish One Thousand-Eyes-for- ONE-eye surprise attacks— and a brush fire may turn into a holocaust. Israel-Palestine is the world's most dangerous powder keg.27 Enemies who are enemies against a common enemy could become, geopolitically, comrades in arms.

Would the EU-US-led Western Alliance risk World War III if Tel Aviv becomes another Aleppo?

van Kempen, Abraham. Christian Zionism ... Enraptured Around a Golden Calf, 2nd Edition (Kindle Location 2137). The 3rd Edition will be released in February 2023.

________________________

Related Articles Recently Posted on www.buildingthebridgefoundation.com:

OUR FRIDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR WEDNESDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR MONDAY EDITION

________________________

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of the Building the Bridge Foundation