All Nations Name Their Own Capitals – Except Jews?

By | December 7, 2017 | 3 Comments

President Trump keeps a campaign promise and acts on decades-old congressional resolution to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
News report

My father was born in the part of Poland ruled by the czar. Growing up, he saw notices for jobs or places at the university, each ending Kromye Yevrayev, “except Jews.” Unwilling to live under such an oppressive regime, my father came to the United States. He worked his way through school and eventually became a respected physician. If my father were here, he would be saddened by many nations’ refusal to recognize Israel’s right to name its own capital – but not surprised. He would nod his head and mutter, “Kromye Yevrayev.”

● People have a right to defend themselves – except Jews. Israel gave up the Gaza Strip, which then was used to launch over 4000 rockets at Israel. Israel was condemned for a “disproportionate” response. But what would the American response be if Mexicans in Tijuana fired 4000 rockets at San Diego? In fact, what is demanded of Israel is a disproportionately small response − or better still, none at all.

● Independent nations control their borders − except Jews (and recently, except Americans). When vans filled with illegal immigrants attempted to crash the border from Mexico, U.S. agents opened fire, wounding three in the vans and an innocent motorist. The U.N. did not call this “disproportionate.”

● After World War II, the Allies redrew the borders of Germany. Some Germans long for the return of eastern territory taken by Poland, but realists know that only winners of wars redraw borders – except Jews. Israelis were victorious in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973. But a four-to-nothing record does not entitle them to the rights normally accorded to victors. Why?

● Victors in struggles for independence are entitled to a homeland, as witness Ireland, India, Pakistan, and former Soviet provinces from Latvia to Kyrgyzstan. This principle applies to all peoples – except Jews. Israel was reestablished in 1948, but maps printed in Arab nations still fail to show it.

● All peoples have a right to name the capital of their country – except Jews. Jerusalem has been the capital of Israel since 1948. There the parliament meets, the supreme court sits, and the prime minister has his office. But until now, the United States, like most nations, recognized Tel Aviv as the capital, though it never was. Pakistan moved its capital from Karachi to Rawalpindi to Islamabad; no one complained, and nations dutifully moved their embassies. Israel keeps its capital as Jerusalem, and nearly everyone objects.

Imagine how Americans would feel if other nations refused to recognize Washington as our capital, and instead insisted on locating their embassies in Boston, which had never been our capital. We would feel – correctly – that other nations regarded Americans as their inferiors.

● No one questions whether Catholics should control the Vatican, or whether Muslims should control Mecca. Religious groups have a right to control their holy places – except Jews. Some insist that the Temple Mount in Jerusalem be under Muslim control, because the site also contains two mosques. Others push for U.N. control. But no one suggests that any other religion’s holiest site be under the control of others.

From 1948 to 1967, the Temple Mount was controlled by Jordan. No Jews were allowed, but the “world community” did nothing. Few cared about the Temple Mount until Israel took control, when it suddenly became a topic of keen interest.

● The French have reason to resent Germany, but they do not claim that Bach and Beethoven were French. All peoples are entitled to their history – except Jews. Hitler ridiculed the Old Testament as “Jewish chicaneries,” “Jewish filth and priestly twaddle,” and “Jewish mumbo-jumbo.” Now Hitler is quoted on Islamic websites.

Palestinian leaders claim there never was a Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. Are we to believe the ancient Romans who destroyed the Temple were Zionists, and that carvings on the Arch of Titus in Rome showing seven-branched candlesticks being carried off by Roman soldiers are bogus?

The pattern is clear: First deny that the Old Testament is genuine, then deny that Jews have a historical claim to live in their homeland, and finally deny that they have a right to live at all.

● England was settled by Normans, who displaced Saxons, who in turn had displaced Britons. The sad story of Native Americans is well known. It is accepted that most nations were settled by people who displaced the former inhabitants – except Jews. It ill-behooves those who displaced other peoples to condemn Israelis for displacing Palestinians.

● About 1.2 million Arabs live in Israel, a fact that is taken for granted. About 350,000 Jews live in the West Bank, a fact that causes major distress. Why? Many of them have lived there for decades. But the media describe them as “settlers,” not residents, living in “settlements,” not towns. (One pictures bearded miners in tents.) Turks live in Germany. Germans live in France. Koreans live in Japan. Even unpopular groups are allowed to live among other groups – except Jews.

The avowed aim of Muslim leaders is that “their” land be “cleansed” of Jews – judenrein the Nazis termed it. The model for “Palestine” − that is, all of Israel − is Gaza and Saudi Arabia, where there are no Jews. The map of “Palestine” in Abbas’ office includes all of Israel. Those who support the creation of a state where Jews are forbidden to live are racists.

● In 1947, India was split into largely Hindu India and largely Muslim Pakistan, which had never existed before. Millions of Hindus fled to India, and millions of Muslims fled to Pakistan. What occurred was seen as a tragedy, but as a mutual resettlement, not a unilateral expulsion.

Something similar occurred in 1948. Hundreds of thousands of Arabs fled from areas that became Israel. And hundreds of thousands of Jews fled from Muslim lands. As with India and Pakistan, what occurred was an exchange of populations. Yet one hears only about Palestinian refugees, never about Jewish refugees. Israelis are told they “stole the land,” but Pakistanis never are. Why?

● Hitler first wanted the Jews to leave, “…for all I care, on luxury liners.” But no nation wanted the refugees, except for a pitiful few. A Nazi newspaper gloated, “Nobody Wants Them.” Only then did the Nazis implement the Final Solution and exterminate every Jew they could.

Do all those who now insist that Israel accept responsibility for the refugees of 1948-1967 also agree to accept their responsibility for the refugees of 1940-1945? Of course not. Why is it that refugee status lasts long enough to impose obligations on Jews, but expires just in time to absolve anyone of obligations to Jews?

● If the nations had accepted Jewish refugees, there would have been no Holocaust – and probably no Israel. The descendants of those who fled from Hitler would now be living in America, Canada, Australia, Britain, and Russia. And with no Israel, there would be no Palestinian refugees. Those nations that turned their backs on Jewish refugees are thus indirectly responsible for Palestinian refugees − and in a poor moral position to make demands on Israelis.

● Americans who support claims by Palestinians would not give their property to Native Americans or Mexicans whose ancestors were dispossessed in years past, nor would Europeans give their homes or businesses to descendants of the Jews who lived there before the Holocaust. They do not hold themselves to the same standard.

Nobody is expected to give up his or her home or workplace to the descendants (or alleged descendants) of those who were dispossessed generations ago – nobody except Jews.

● Years ago, miners took canaries into mines. Canaries are sensitive to toxic gas, so if they died, the miners knew there was danger. Jews are like canaries. They are often the first to die – but never the only ones. This was true in the Nazi era, and it is still true in the era of Muslim extremism.

Terrorists bombed Israeli buses, markets, and pizzerias, and the world yawned. But then came 9/11, Madrid, London, Bali, Mumbai, Paris, Fort Hood, the Boston Marathon, and San Bernardino. The world should have paid attention when the canaries started dying.

To deny people the right to defend themselves is to imply that they do not deserve to live. When the dean of the White House press corps told the Jews to “get the hell out of Palestine” and go “home” to Germany and Poland, we knew that anti-Israel sentiment had morphed into frank anti-Semitism, and that anti-Semitism is again socially acceptable.

I can hear my father now: Kromye Yevrayev. Except Jews. He would be saddened, but not surprised. What would surprise him, just as it surprised many people in America and throughout the world, is that a politician kept his word. Candidate Trump promised to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. President Trump did so.

Perhaps that is what so upsets the Washington establishment ‒ Trump really means it.

Contact: dstol@prodigy.net. You are welcome to publish or post these articles, provided that you cite the author and website.

www.stolinsky.com

3 Comments

  • David Stolinsky says:

    A bit of history:

    Vice President Truman became president when Franklin Roosevelt died in 1945, near the end of World War II. Roosevelt was an impossible act to follow. Roosevelt was eloquent and charismatic, while Truman was plain-spoken. But then 1948 came, and Truman had to run for election on his own.

    At this critical time, Senators Strom Thurmond and Richard Russell left the Democratic Party, angry with Truman because of his push for civil rights. They took many segregationist Southerners with them, reducing Truman’s chances for election. A reporter asked Thurmond why he objected so strongly now, despite the fact that he had supported Roosevelt, whose civil-rights position was quite similar to Truman’s. The reply was revealing:

    But Truman really means it.
    ‒ Strom Thurmond, 1948

    Roosevelt talked a good game when it came to civil rights, but Truman meant what he said. In the end, Truman won the election regardless, and went on to desegregate the armed services ‒ and in general accelerate the civil-rights movement. But the lesson goes deeper. People may tolerate opinions with which they disagree, so long as they believe that the one expressing those opinions doesn’t really mean what he says. But if he speaks frankly and intends to carry out his program, then the trouble starts.

    No, Trump isn’t Truman. But as Mark Twain is reputed to have said, history doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes. Let the political establishment, in America and abroad, be so upset that they lose control of their bodily functions. If they can’t tolerate someone who means what he says, that’s their loss – and our gain.

  • Great piece, lots of history backing it too!

    • Thanks! That’s why the study of history is so important – if you don’t know where you came from, how can you know how to get where you want to go? Here’s a great quote from Admiral Rickover:

      “It is necessary for us to learn from others’ mistakes. You will not live long enough to make them all yourself.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Social Widgets powered by AB-WebLog.com.