Saturday, March 27, 2010

Palestinian propaganda: When honesty slips out

Palestinian propaganda long ago reached impressive levels of sophistication and fabrication. Arguing for the delegitimation of one nation, an act that contradicts the core values of liberal progressive societies, while pretending to be a national liberation movement with social liberal progressive values, is quite a feat. And when we see the automatic trust their propagandists enjoy from the mainstream media and left-leaning intelligentsia including Jews, this success is very impressive. But sometimes their true intentions and their supremacist view of the world make their way to the surface as a result of their own words and actions. This is the case with their set of maps below, which appears in many of their demonstrations and websites, but only recently caught the attention of the pro-Israel blogosphere.

The four maps below are supposed to represent Zionist lust for Arab lands. As usual with Palestinian propaganda, it has its omissions.  For example, the map showing Israel giving up the oil-rich Sinai Peninsula in exchange for peace in 1979 is missing. While it does have its falsehoods, as pointed out by Jeffrey Goldberg, Adam Holland, and at Zionism-Israel, when they debunked misguided convictions held by pro-Palestinian activists; this set of maps does portray a genuine feeling of loss, one that comes from losing actual property that was in the possession of the Arab world prior to the formation of the state of Israel. However this property was not land, land was just the means by which this property was lost:

The first map, on the left, that of 1946, represents the ultimate sin, Jews aspiring for life of liberty, already taking significant steps toward that goal on land bought and paid for with hard currency and earned by blood and sweat.

The second map is the ultimate outrage; the world acknowledges that Jews are their own property, free to have a land, a country and a will of their own, like all nations on earth. Today the Palestinian propagandists say they couldn’t have accepted the partition offer of 1947 because the Jews got 55%. However, when the Peel proposal of 1937 offered only 17% to the Jews, the Arabs violently rejected it. Why? Because it was not about land, it was about the use of that land. To the Palestinian propagandist, a free Jewish society on any portion of the land of Israel, even with zero Arab population, is something to be totally rejected.

The third map is the ultimate crime: A free Jewish state and free Jewish people as a fact of life, of everyday reality. The fact that in that alleged abomination Arabs do own land, privately and through organizations such as the Islamic Waqf and the Greek Orthodox Church, is not surprisingly omitted, along with the fact that in the Arab world, then and now, Jews are not allowed to own land. And prior to 1967 those lands were not Palestinian; they were Jordanian and Egyptian.

The fourth map, which is vaguely based on the phases of the Oslo peace process, has its own set of omissions, and quite a list of them:
  • It omits the fact that it was Israel, the enemy of the Palestinians who gave them land to rule on, and not Egypt or Jordan, who ruled the Gaza Strip and the West Bank prior to 1967.
  • It omits the facts that more land was offered by Israel in exchange for peace in 2000 and the Palestinian leadership rejected it completely.
  • It omits the murderous violence launched against Israeli citizens after that rejection.
  • It omits the disengagement from Gaza and the subsequent rise of Hamas.
  • It omits the Qassam rockets attacks on Israeli population centers in the south of Israel, Olmert’s offer to Abu Mazen in 2008 of more land, and Abu Mazen rejection of that offer.
  • It omits the attacks on Israeli citizens by Palestinian terror organization in 1994 and 1996.

It omits so much one has to wonder what the little green enclaves in the last map really represent, after all their connection to reality is more tenuous than any of the other maps?

Is it possible that their size is a metaphor for the propagandists’ own lack of confidence in their own beliefs and arguments, and that in spite of their successful deception they fear reality and morality will close in on them, exposing their lies and delusions?

Know this, even the most successfully sold fabrication has a major flaw, it is a fraud based on a lie. And as such it will always fear exposure, and that fear will be its downfall. And it is up to us, the ‘stolen’ property that gained its liberty by owning land legally and becoming a sovereign nation like most of the nations on this earth, to catch it.

Happy Passover.


  1. Why are we pursuing a losing battle? Why not go on the proactive defense, which is even more legitimate. The best answer to Christian and Islam dominated threats of boycotts, isolation, and maybe even worse, is to de-legitimise the legitimacy of the charges against Israel. Since the article clearly identifies the false pretexts employed, why not respond with un-false counters:

    1. That the corruption of the Bafour was not just immoral, but also illegal, perpetrated under extreme duress when the Jews were totally helpless. The Mandate, originally proposed by America 100 years before the British, and which the British corrupted for 30 barrels of oil - is not a *COMPROMISE* as depicted - when some 70% was carved off.

    2. Its a deathly 3-state and not a 2-state, as described today:
    A Jews' 11th Commandment is never to call a 3-state as a 2-state today. Rocket science!

    3. The Arab states created by Briton are also illegal, immoral and devoid of any historical borders, conducted in secret and sanctioned as dictorial regimes which have caused mayhem the past 100 years globally. These should be re-examined by the global community of nations and be voted upon - as with Israel. The Jews, the Coptics, the Kurds, the Indians - all predate both Islam and the Arab race, and have been disregarded and abused.

    4. The UN's worst violation in its history is the attack of multi-Arab states with a declared goal of genocide - on a UN established state. Why no UN Resolution?

    5. Jewish refugees, which the UN archives say is greater than the Arab refugees combined - must be made pivotally inclusive.

    Those are the only factors which must be pursued - all the rest is superfluos. And contrary to the views of those who have become too clever for Israel's good, even genuine Zionists - have played into the hands of Israel's enemies, accepting the above factors are beyond redemtion anymore. In fact, a host of sectors will see the light and back Israel on what are irrefutable and with no defense of those wanton destroyers of Israel. It is the factors pursued now which are beyond redemtion.

    1. Time for your meds, or did the doctors consider you mental case terminal?

  2. Joseph,
    If what you are suggesting is to delegitimate the delegitimizers of Israel, you will get no objection from me. I do believe that every blog on my blog list does that. That is the only reason why I made that list.
    As for your points I sincerely believe most of them are not relevant to that subject. Points 1 to 4 represent various political grievances held by various sectors of the Israeli and Jewish publics. Advancing them does not expose a single lie about Israel and the Jews.
    Your last point does confront the hypocrisy and one sidedness practiced by Israel bashers regarding the Palestinian refugees, and most of the blogs on my list addressed that at one or the other.