"When people understand our claims to the land n [sic] by history, by military victory, and by UN mandate n [sic] they find it easier to speak up," says Unterberg. "And I will tell them even half an answer is better than perfect silence."

[Source: "Defending Israel on campus goal of high-school program," by Ellen Schur Brown. Cleveland Jewish News. May 13, 2008.]

That's in reference to training Jewish high school students to defend false-Zionism.

Let's take the claims to the land by 1) history 2) military victory and 3) UN mandate one at a time and in order.

Claims to the land by history:

  • The only full record is The Bible. The Bible's first five books are reputed to have been written by Moses, although there are plenty of those termed "biblical scholars" who dispute that. Even if we take those books, which the Jews and others call the Torah, literally, we are left with the question of the exact nature of the spirit or angel that moved Moses and his followers and disciples to take the land by force of arms.
  • Right now, any nation could say God has told our leader to wipe out other nations to take their land to occupy as our sole property. What nation doing that would not be condemned?
  • We have Jesus coming after Moses saying that the Jewish people were failing to see their own deep hypocrisy. I agree with Jesus. The Mosaic Law and the actions of the people of Moses ultimately don't jibe. They are inherently hypocritical for exactly the reasons Jesus pointed out.
  • There are Jews today who say that that doesn't matter. They say Jesus was wrong to apply the highest spirit of the law to all. However, the entire direction of humanity has been toward more and more human rights for all. It has been away from slavery. It has been decidedly moving away from sanctioning wars of aggression, notwithstanding George W. Bush's illegal, neocon wars of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq, and Somalia (so far). Of course, the neocon philosophy is rooted in Mosaic hypocrisy. The most strident and belligerent of the neocons are Jews after all.
  • The founding of the current state of Israel with the Jews declaring an independent state based upon Jewishness couldn't have come at a more awkward and telling moment in history for them. The Zionists had been pushing for it for many decades only to do it at the very moment in history when horning in and taking over land already occupied couldn't be worse and more glaring for the sheer evil of it.
  • What compounded the effrontery is the very fact that the people horning in and horning others out were just themselves subjected to horrendous mistreatment. Rather than learn the right lesson from that, which is don't be cruel or mean or superior, etc., they took the exact opposite lesson, which is to do anything and everything to stake out territory both physically and psychologically, stating that if we go down (Jews) again, we're taking the whole world with us.
  • Claims to the land military victory:

  • After WWII, there just isn't any right to land taken in war.
  • There really never was such a right. Only people were stupid enough to think there was. Now people aren't being so stupid.
  • Who's buying the argument that Israel won the land by warfare and therefore deserves to keep it? That argument is dead on arrival. If it isn't, then anyone can just make war on Israel to take the land right on back (no holds barred; all's fair in war). More than that, anyone anywhere can just take anything he or she can, because under the neocon, false-Zionist philosophy "might makes right." Only it doesn't.
  • Power isn't inherently a force for good. There is such a thing as evil power. Hitler was at one point in a very powerful position. He over estimated his power, but he was still much more powerful than were the Jews at the time, at least militarily. He wasn't more powerful morally though.
  • Now Israel is powerful militarily, since it reportedly has nuclear weapons. The Israel of today could take the Germany of WWII. We all know that. But that doesn't make Israel more moral than Jesus who was a total pacifist.
  • A claim to land on account of military victory is the argument put forth by people with extremely low moral IQ's, frankly. No truly moral and intelligent person would want to associate himself with such sheer lack of reasoning.
  • Claims to the land by UN mandate:

  • The powers that "gave" Palestine to the Jews were all colonial powers. What right did they have? They didn't have the right to become colonial powers in the first place.
  • Sure, there was a vote in the UN, but it was the result of arm twisting just as such votes are often now.
  • Look at the bribery and threats George W. Bush used to get his way to illegally steal Iraqi's oil and hang Saddam Hussein in a kangaroo court design to shut him up before he could testify to the world all about U.S. duplicity in the Iraq-Iran War and the Iraqi gassing of civilians, etc.
  • A UN mandate under the circumstances at the time wasn't worth the paper on which it was written. The UN didn't own Palestine to give it to others.
  • The toughest guy on the block doesn't have the right to give other people's houses away just because he can beat them up if they disagree. That's not righteousness. There's no God in it. It doesn't matter how much the bully says God's telling him to do it, God isn't telling him anything. It's all in his imagination. He's been led astray by evil in his own heart and mind. He sick, broken, defiled, and needs mental/spiritual help.
  • If you people are going to fill a bunch of high school Jews with the nonsense I read in your article, you're only going to make matters much worse for those kids. If you think that teaching them to get in other people's faces who are "leftists" sticking up for oppressed Palestinians, you're sadly mistake and terrible role models.

    By the way, there are plenty of rightist who also hate what you're doing. Libertarians don't like your philosophy. They are every bit as anti-neocon as are the leftists. The Paleoconservatives as they are called don't like what you're doing at all. Most liberals (not socialists), but mixed-economic social liberals as they're viewed are moving toward standing up to the racism of the Apartheid promoting Jews. Plenty of Jews are being counted among them too.

    Listen, don't think for a moment that support for human rights for Palestinians means that once the Palestinians are being treated fairly that they will be given even an inch to retaliate against any Jews anywhere. This movement isn't about anti-Semitism. This movement is about consistency. That's the direction.

    If the Jews in current Israel want to survive there in peace, they need to make friends with the Palestinians. The fastest way to do that is to just treat them well. The Arabs in Palestine aren't some unfeeling, unreceptive sub-species. If they are treated fairly and with decency, they will respond in kind. There will be those who will have a harder time softening their hearts after so many decades of abuse, but if the Jews will be consistent in treating the people well, things will work out. That's the prophecy.

  • Subscribe
  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.