++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If you have children or grandchildren in university please make sure they publish this important letter in the students' rag or post it on the university bulletin board.
It's a response from Dr Denis MacEoin, a non-Jewish professor (https://en.wikipedia.org/
TO: The Committee Edinburgh University Student Association.
May I be permitted to say a few words to members of the EUSA? I am an Edinburgh graduate (MA 1975) who studied Persian, Arabic and Islamic History in Buccleuch Place under William Montgomery Watt and Laurence Elwell Sutton, two of Britain 's great Middle East experts in their day. I later went on to do a PhD at Cambridge and to teach Arabic and Islamic Studies at Newcastle University . Naturally, I am the author of several books and hundreds of articles in this field. I say all that to show that I am well informed in Middle Eastern affairs and that, for that reason, I am shocked and disheartened by the EUSA motion and vote.
I am shocked for a simple reason: there is not and has never been a system of apartheid in Israel .
That is not my opinion, that is fact that can be tested against reality by any Edinburgh student, should he or she choose to visit Israel to see for themselves. Let me spell this out, since I have the impression that those members of EUSA who voted for this motion are absolutely clueless in matters concerning Israel, and that they are, in all likelihood, the victims of extremely biased propaganda coming from the anti-Israel lobby.
Being anti-Israel is not in itself objectionable. But I'm not talking about ordinary criticism of Israel . I'm speaking of a hatred that
permits itself no boundaries in the lies and myths it pours out. Thus, Israel is repeatedly referred to as a "Nazi" state. In what sense is
this true, even as a metaphor? Where are the Israeli concentration camps? The einzatsgruppen? The SS? The Nuremberg Laws? The Final Solution? None of these things nor anything remotely resembling them exists in Israel , precisely because the Jews, more than anyone on earth, understand what Nazism stood for.
It is claimed that there has been an Israeli Holocaust in Gaza (or elsewhere). Where? When? No honest historian would treat that claim with anything but the contempt it deserves. But calling Jews Nazis and saying they have committed a Holocaust is as basic a way to subvert historical fact as anything I can think of.
Likewise apartheid. For apartheid to exist, there would have to be a situation that closely resembled how things were in South Africa under the apartheid regime. Unfortunately for those who believe this, a weekend in any part of Israel would be enough to show how ridiculous the claim is.
That a body of university students actually fell for this and voted on it is a sad comment on the state of modern education. The most obvious focus for apartheid would be the country's 20% Arab population. Under Israeli law, Arab Israelis have exactly the same rights as Jews or anyone else; Muslims have the same rights as Jews or Christians; Baha'is, severely persecuted in Iran, flourish in Israel, where they have their world center; Ahmadi Muslims, severely persecuted in Pakistan and elsewhere, are kept safe by Israel; the holy places of all religions are protected under a specific Israeli law. Arabs form 20% of the university population (an exact echo of their percentage in the general population).
In Iran , the Bahai's (the largest religious minority) are forbidden to study in any university or to run their own universities: why
aren't your members boycotting Iran ? Arabs in Israel can go anywhere they want, unlike blacks in apartheid South Africa . They use public transport, they eat in restaurants, they go to swimming pools, they use libraries, they go to cinemas alongside Jews - something no blacks were able to do in South Africa .
Israeli hospitals not only treat Jews and Arabs, they also treat Palestinians from Gaza or the West Bank.
On the same wards, in the same operating theatres.
In Israel , women have the same rights as men: there is no gender apartheid.
Gay men and women face no restrictions, and Palestinian gays often escape into Israel, knowing they may be killed at home.
It seems bizarre to me that LGBT groups call for a boycott of Israel and say nothing about countries like Iran , where gay men are hanged or stoned to death. That illustrates a mindset that beggars belief.
Intelligent students thinking it's better to be silent about regimes that kill gay people, but good to condemn the only country in the
Middle East that rescues and protects gay people. Is that supposed to be a sick joke?
University is supposed to be about learning to use your brain, to think rationally, to examine evidence, to reach conclusions based on solid evidence, to compare sources, to weigh up one view against one or more others. If the best Edinburgh can now produce are students who have no idea how to do any of these things, then the future is bleak.
I do not object to well-documented criticism of Israel . I do object when supposedly intelligent people single the Jewish state out above states that are horrific in their treatment of their populations. We are going through the biggest upheaval in the Middle East since the 7th and 8th centuries, and it's clear that Arabs and Iranians are rebelling against terrifying regimes that fight back by killing their own citizens.
Israeli citizens, Jews and Arabs alike, do not rebel (though they are free to protest). Yet Edinburgh students mount no demonstrations and call for no boycotts against Libya , Bahrain , Saudi Arabia , Yemen , and Iran . They prefer to make false accusations against one of the world's freest countries, the only country in the Middle East that has taken in Darfur refugees, the only country in the Middle East that gives refuge to gay men and women, the only country in the Middle East that
protects the Bahai's.... Need I go on?
The imbalance is perceptible, and it sheds no credit on anyone who voted for this boycott. I ask you to show some common sense. Get information from the Israeli embassy. Ask for some speakers. Listen to more than one side.
Do not make your minds up until you have given a fair hearing to both parties. You have a duty to your students, and
that is to protect them from one-sided argument.
They are not at university to be propagandized. And they are certainly not there to be tricked into anti-Semitism by punishing one country among all the countries of the world, which happens to be the only Jewish state. If there had been a single Jewish state in the 1930's (which, sadly, there was not), don't you think Adolf Hitler would have decided to boycott it?
Your generation has a duty to ensure that the perennial racism of anti-Semitism never sets down roots among you. Today, however, there are clear signs that it has done so and is putting down more. You have a chance to avert a very great evil, simply by using reason and a sense of fair play. Please tell me that this makes sense. I have given you some of the evidence.
It's up to you to find out more.
Yours sincerely,
Denis MacEoin
It's a response from Dr Denis MacEoin, a non-Jewish professor (https://en.wikipedia.org/
TO: The Committee Edinburgh University Student Association.
May I be permitted to say a few words to members of the EUSA? I am an Edinburgh graduate (MA 1975) who studied Persian, Arabic and Islamic History in Buccleuch Place under William Montgomery Watt and Laurence Elwell Sutton, two of Britain 's great Middle East experts in their day. I later went on to do a PhD at Cambridge and to teach Arabic and Islamic Studies at Newcastle University . Naturally, I am the author of several books and hundreds of articles in this field. I say all that to show that I am well informed in Middle Eastern affairs and that, for that reason, I am shocked and disheartened by the EUSA motion and vote.
I am shocked for a simple reason: there is not and has never been a system of apartheid in Israel .
That is not my opinion, that is fact that can be tested against reality by any Edinburgh student, should he or she choose to visit Israel to see for themselves. Let me spell this out, since I have the impression that those members of EUSA who voted for this motion are absolutely clueless in matters concerning Israel, and that they are, in all likelihood, the victims of extremely biased propaganda coming from the anti-Israel lobby.
Being anti-Israel is not in itself objectionable. But I'm not talking about ordinary criticism of Israel . I'm speaking of a hatred that
permits itself no boundaries in the lies and myths it pours out. Thus, Israel is repeatedly referred to as a "Nazi" state. In what sense is
this true, even as a metaphor? Where are the Israeli concentration camps? The einzatsgruppen? The SS? The Nuremberg Laws? The Final Solution? None of these things nor anything remotely resembling them exists in Israel , precisely because the Jews, more than anyone on earth, understand what Nazism stood for.
It is claimed that there has been an Israeli Holocaust in Gaza (or elsewhere). Where? When? No honest historian would treat that claim with anything but the contempt it deserves. But calling Jews Nazis and saying they have committed a Holocaust is as basic a way to subvert historical fact as anything I can think of.
Likewise apartheid. For apartheid to exist, there would have to be a situation that closely resembled how things were in South Africa under the apartheid regime. Unfortunately for those who believe this, a weekend in any part of Israel would be enough to show how ridiculous the claim is.
That a body of university students actually fell for this and voted on it is a sad comment on the state of modern education. The most obvious focus for apartheid would be the country's 20% Arab population. Under Israeli law, Arab Israelis have exactly the same rights as Jews or anyone else; Muslims have the same rights as Jews or Christians; Baha'is, severely persecuted in Iran, flourish in Israel, where they have their world center; Ahmadi Muslims, severely persecuted in Pakistan and elsewhere, are kept safe by Israel; the holy places of all religions are protected under a specific Israeli law. Arabs form 20% of the university population (an exact echo of their percentage in the general population).
In Iran , the Bahai's (the largest religious minority) are forbidden to study in any university or to run their own universities: why
aren't your members boycotting Iran ? Arabs in Israel can go anywhere they want, unlike blacks in apartheid South Africa . They use public transport, they eat in restaurants, they go to swimming pools, they use libraries, they go to cinemas alongside Jews - something no blacks were able to do in South Africa .
Israeli hospitals not only treat Jews and Arabs, they also treat Palestinians from Gaza or the West Bank.
On the same wards, in the same operating theatres.
In Israel , women have the same rights as men: there is no gender apartheid.
Gay men and women face no restrictions, and Palestinian gays often escape into Israel, knowing they may be killed at home.
It seems bizarre to me that LGBT groups call for a boycott of Israel and say nothing about countries like Iran , where gay men are hanged or stoned to death. That illustrates a mindset that beggars belief.
Intelligent students thinking it's better to be silent about regimes that kill gay people, but good to condemn the only country in the
Middle East that rescues and protects gay people. Is that supposed to be a sick joke?
University is supposed to be about learning to use your brain, to think rationally, to examine evidence, to reach conclusions based on solid evidence, to compare sources, to weigh up one view against one or more others. If the best Edinburgh can now produce are students who have no idea how to do any of these things, then the future is bleak.
I do not object to well-documented criticism of Israel . I do object when supposedly intelligent people single the Jewish state out above states that are horrific in their treatment of their populations. We are going through the biggest upheaval in the Middle East since the 7th and 8th centuries, and it's clear that Arabs and Iranians are rebelling against terrifying regimes that fight back by killing their own citizens.
Israeli citizens, Jews and Arabs alike, do not rebel (though they are free to protest). Yet Edinburgh students mount no demonstrations and call for no boycotts against Libya , Bahrain , Saudi Arabia , Yemen , and Iran . They prefer to make false accusations against one of the world's freest countries, the only country in the Middle East that has taken in Darfur refugees, the only country in the Middle East that gives refuge to gay men and women, the only country in the Middle East that
protects the Bahai's.... Need I go on?
The imbalance is perceptible, and it sheds no credit on anyone who voted for this boycott. I ask you to show some common sense. Get information from the Israeli embassy. Ask for some speakers. Listen to more than one side.
Do not make your minds up until you have given a fair hearing to both parties. You have a duty to your students, and
that is to protect them from one-sided argument.
They are not at university to be propagandized. And they are certainly not there to be tricked into anti-Semitism by punishing one country among all the countries of the world, which happens to be the only Jewish state. If there had been a single Jewish state in the 1930's (which, sadly, there was not), don't you think Adolf Hitler would have decided to boycott it?
Your generation has a duty to ensure that the perennial racism of anti-Semitism never sets down roots among you. Today, however, there are clear signs that it has done so and is putting down more. You have a chance to avert a very great evil, simply by using reason and a sense of fair play. Please tell me that this makes sense. I have given you some of the evidence.
It's up to you to find out more.
Yours sincerely,
Denis MacEoin
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Tom Cahill's: "The Gift of The Jews," Chapters 4.5
Chapter four discusses the 10 Commandments and the embrace of JHWH as the Jew's GOD. Following a recitation of the 10 Commandments, Cahill follows with the establishment and embrace of the Sabbath as the day of rest. Finally, the author goes into a discussion of the "circumcision."
He concludes by writing '...the various laws remain as testimony to Jews they were among the first people to develop an integrated view of life including various obligations.'
Chapter discusses Moses and his various conversations with JHWH but, as we know, Moses was not to enter Canaan. That opportunity fell to Joshua who was Moses' young general.
JHWH chose the handsome Saul to lead the Jews but they chose David. JHWH relented to warned them of the consequences of their decision. if David was placed in the role of King.
Cahill discusses the history of David, his slaying of Goliath, Saul and David's contentious relationship even though Saul offered his oldest daughter to David as his first wife. Over a period of time and wives David was the unchallenged ruler of Canaan, eventually had 10 sons and each formed the "10 Tribes of Israel."
Eventually David had 2 opportunities to slay Saul but relented. David died a natural death after having 3 wives, committing may sins which JHWH chose not to punish him for committing.
+++
TUNNEL VISION
I would hope hostage families do not believe BIBI does not seek to obtain the release of hostages. It is inconceivable he would want this additional issue to hang over his head and become another "kup draynish one " on his plate of otherwise, overwhelming concerns. To believe such would make him a traitor.
You can question his judgement, you can challenge his ethics, you can disagree with his politics but you cannot question his love of Israel. He bleeds for Israel and every death sustained because demoniacal terrorists, who care not a whit for humanity, took hostages to use as bargaining chips in subsequent negotiations.
What has Hamas done with the alleged 10's of millions of monthly munificence they receive and which comes to them from various charities and misguided well wishers? Did they spend it on improving the lot of Gazan Palestinians? Did they spend it on improving the education of Gazan Palestinian children and to change their attitude? You have to be naïve to believe they would do so because the goal of Hamas' leadership is to enrich themselves, to survive, to train and prepare for their unprovoked raid into Israel on October 7. You would have to have tunnel vision to believe such nonsense and propaganda.
You would have to have concrete for brains.
To accomplish the goals sought by the hostage families involves engaging with those who seek the end of Israel and Jews throughout the world. How does one negotiate satisfactorily with such animals? Can one trust their word even if you can reach an acceptable agreement?
Time has proven otherwise.
In the final analysis, what Israel and Bibi have to deal with is not an atypical nation state seeking territory and or manufacturing assets but rather total destruction predicated on hatred of Jews, misplaced religious delusions and wanton propaganda.
When Israel voluntarily vacated Gaza, Palestinians were left a thriving community but they chose to destroy everything because it was Israeli made much like Biden did because it was a Trump accomplishment. Biden's inflation was caused by his ignorance regarding natural sourced energy. Biden's support of Iran and unwillingness to recognize the brilliance of the Benjamin Accord achievements led to the rise in hostility by Iranian surrogates like Hamas, Hezbollah and Houthi's.
Biden and Bilken continue as proponents of a two state solution but I daresay, were they in Bibi and Israel's situation, they would reject this concept. Why? Because it is strategically wrong headed and untimely even for appeasers who believe feeding bullies does not increase their appetites. Do they not understand the lessons of Chamberlain?
There may be no solution to this Gordian Knot unless one is willing to attack the source which means going after Iran in a meaningful way. We know Biden would rather avoid this because he claims it would cause an unwanted war. Apparently, Biden fails to see we already are at war by reason of his allowance of the invasion of our southern borders for which we have yet to sustain consequences but there be be some.
Finally, Trump may not be the candidate best suited for the times but we cannot endure more of a Biden tenure and we really would prove how little we care if our republic survives were Michelle Obama become an elected candidate.
The best we can hope for, should Trump be an elected candidate, is his propensity for excessive self aggrandizement and display of narcissistic behaviour. I can handle his combative tendency. The main issue I have with Trump might be his career of leverage and unconcern about our deficit. Yes, he was burdened by a pandemic and apparently poor scientific advice. However, he also was and is a spender and we no longer have the unfettered luxury that our promise to pay being unchallenged. China seeks to replace the dollar as the world's medium of exchange.
I also believe Sen. McConnell has outlived his effectiveness ad should be replaced..
It would be refreshing if the GOP could come together and demonstrate they are America's "Happy Party" which can speak with one voice and win large pluralities because nothing will happen if Trump lacks Congressional leverage.
Stay tuned.
+++
No comments:
Post a Comment