Much has been written at this site regarding Islamic mandates, particularly in relation to jihad. Terms are bandied about by others, some of whom have little understanding of their depth and breath.
In this regard, a mission herein is to enlighten and duly inform, with the goal being action-oriented, as opposed to throwing up ones hands.
And just because Islamic leaders lie to their citizens (on a regular basis) regarding other matters, it doesn’t mean that the collective Arab/Muslim goal to destroy Israel isn’t full of truth telling. Say what? But first things first.
Islamic imperatives dictate submission to Allah – Islam LITERALLY means to submit – and this is not up for debate. It is obligatory. Besides, unlike other religions, there are no squishy areas in ones adherence to Islam, if one seeks to stay in the fold, or even remain alive in Muslim-ruled countries. And it is this all or nothing ideology which renders the world awash in jihadist bloodletting.
On the other side of the spectrum, Israel’s leaders lie on a regular basis too, but from the opposite side of the spectrum. They (for the most part) understand full well that “peace” (as defined by their enemies, with the unbearable price tag to be extracted) is unattainable, as it will literally destroy the nation – through every “peace” process and by every piece of land they surrender. This is not rocket science. Their “peace” at all costs obsession/quest has left a trail of thousands of dead and maimed Jewish bodies. In fact, one only has to peer through a PA officer’s binoculars to realize how attainable their end goal is. Easy as pie.
Few Israeli intellectuals have the integrity to admit as much, but Professor Paul Eidelberg is not among the liars and fraudsters.
When Yasser Arafat said, “Peace means the destruction of Israel,” that’s speaking as it is.
When Benjamin Netanyahu said (at his most recent speech at Bar-Ilan University), “For peace, the Palestinian Authority must recognize the Jewish homeland,” that’s speaking as it ain’t.
Arafat, an accomplished liar, was telling the truth—to his audience, an Arab audience that possessed understanding, not fools.
Netanyahu, a less accomplished liar, was obscuring the truth—to his audience—an audience that lacked understanding, an audience of fools.
Translate Netanyahu’s Bar-Ilan remark into Arabs terms. “For peace, the Palestinian Authority must renounce Islam, jettison the Qur’an and 1,400 years of Islamic history and theology.”
What would be the audience of such a remark? Obviously not an audience of fools. The audience would be one that understood the true nature of the conflict. Such an audience would recognize that the democratic or ethnocentric and “value-free” idea of conflict resolution does not apply to the anti-democratic world of totalitarian Islam.
Such an audience would understand—as did Alexis de Tocqueville—that nations devoted to Islam have much in common with the pagan nations mentioned in the Bible. Such nations which, like the Canaanites, sacrificed their children as burnt offerings to Baal, are comparable to Muslims nations that use their children as human bombs.
Since such nations do not recognize the Biblical concept of man’s creation in the Image of God, they reject the idea of the inviolable dignity of the human personality. This Islamic denial of Genesis 1:26 prompts Muslims to call Jews “pigs” and “dogs.” Hence, the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians of which Netanyahu speaks is a conflict between good and evil, and this is beyond the ken of the “value-free” political science that has either influenced Israel’s Prime Minister or that induces him to speak of the conflict as it aint and not as it is.
Here’s another way of rendering Netanyahu’s Bar-Ilan remark into Arab terms. “For peace, the Muslim world must change its power structure. Its leaders must cease being autocrats and become democrats.”
The above renderings of Netanyahu’s Bar-Ilan remark means that the conflict in question is not resolvable in peaceful terms. However, to make such a “politically incorrect” statement is beyond the capacity of politicians like Mr. Netanyahu, who dare not speak of the conflict as it is, but only as it aint.
Similarly, Prof Eidelberg’s rendering of Oslo’s Authentic Truth makes nonsense of Israel’s leadership’s “promises”, and exposes what the enemy has in store for her. Would Israel’s leaders ever be so truthful? NOT if they want the powerful, non-elected leftist “elites” to back them.
However, there are some duly doable prescriptions for the onset of long-standing “peace and quiet”, thus, promising to usher in decades of calm and without surrendering an inch of the Jewish homeland! It has yet to be tried: Kill For Peace. Hell, it worked for the U.S. (when they had leaders who understood how to take care of business) and allied powers during WW 2.
In tandem with the above insights and recommendations, Dr. Martin Sherman is another such intellectual giant who stands above the fray of Israel’s braying “peace” jackals. His weekly Jerusalem Post column skewers the leadership’s mendacity, and it can be found within Into The Fray. MORE than worth the read, if truthfulness is your barometer. His recent interview at Inquisitr.com, Confronting Israel’s Precarious Future: An Interview With Dr. Martin Sherman, is a devastating indictment of Israel’s leadership, most trenchantly, their lack of strategic policy making, which, by default, has led to many “peace” disasters.
The point being, it doesn’t have to end this way, as there are intellectual warriors at the ready. They just need more support.
Heed the valiant profs and their dire, but sober, warnings.