Do we need even righteous judges?

In 1947, BBC reported that the vote at the UN was conducted under pressure and that the large audience at hand demonstrated its predominantly Jewish character by applauding the UN resolution’s adoption. The same “impartial” BBC shapes the world opinion about Israel now.

The US soon withdrew its 1947 vote for establishing Israel. Britain conducted its usual policy of siding with the weaker to crush the stronger: at times Jews, at other times – Arabs. Russia’s only foreign policy goal is to stir the events and thus bug everyone. France remains attached to its imperial paranoia and builds the imperial alliance with Muslims it is unable to finance or sustain. The UN leadership runs among the world powers, pleading for money and positioning itself as everyone’s ally; naturally, an ally of everyone is an enemy of Israel. There was zero goodwill on the level of governments toward Israel: Europeans supported Israel as a way to get rid of the Jews they failed to annihilate completely, and Britain evacuated its forces from the Land of Israel because Jewish guerrillas carried out thousands of terrorist attacks in the 1940s.

Arbitrators are acceptable when they have no agenda of their own. Friends are expected to share our agenda. America and especially the Quartet of peacemakers are neither friends, nor arbitrators. The best-wishing members of the US Administration want Israel to live in peace. That’s not what the Jews need. The original idea of Zionists – a safe place for the Jews – went up in the smoke of Auschwitz which the Zionist leaders did not care about. After Stalin’s death ended the Russian plans for finishing the German work and annihilating the remnant of Jews in Siberia, safety was not an immediate problem for European Jews. Plans for the Jewish state on Muslim land created a huge security problem for the previously peaceful Jewish communities in Arab countries. The sixty years of fighting prove that in security terms, Israel is a complete failure. The only reasons for Jews to stay in Israel rather than move to Canada are religious and nationalist. Those reasons do not concern the US Administration in the peace process, and are entirely antithetical to Russia and the UN.

Israel essentially brings her case before thoroughly anti-Semitic judges. Even if the judges act objectively, Jews cannot accept their decisions because Jews want a subjective solution. The Britain objectively reasoned that Jewish immigrants don’t need Transjordan, and cut it off from the Balfour Declaration’s territory. Then the UN objectively reasoned that the remaining Palestinian Arabs need a state of their own, and partitioned whatever was left of the Jewish homeland. European settlers, on the other hand, rejected objectivity in America and ethnically cleansed a country for themselves. Jews, too, are partial to our own interests. A Jewish state in the Land of Israel seems as an injustice to Arabs and the Quartet, but it’s very just for the Jews.

As Mao Zedong remarked, a proposition could be true and false at the same time: true for some, false for another. Why would we want arbitrators who find the Jewish propositions false?

do we need even righteous judges

Ray Bright Subscribed to comments via email

Obadiah,

It may not even be as bad as you say. I think that the problem is that Jews themselves bought into anti-Zionist perspective.
If we clearly stick to our perspective, namely that all of Land of Israel is our Jewish homeland, then we may find more sympathy in both America and the West.
Right now only Arabs are consistently sticking to their version, and the whole world bought into their terminology. “The occupied territory” means “Israeli occupied territory” not “Arab occupied Jewish land of Judea and Samaria”.

Reply to this comment

Shiloh

There is another reason to remain here, and that is the opportunity to eek out a living. Since this is currently impossible for me, I am leaving this popsicle stand too. ENOUGH!!

Actually there is security reason; at least historically.
In almost every country Jews have been persecuted, some times after a long period of tolerance. There is no guarantee, that the current period of tolerance in North America and Australia, will not end with a new wave of persecution.
==================
Another perspective is global: Is the world better off with or without the Jewish people?
Or the question could be phrased: Is which of the two states is going to make greater contribution to the world: Israel or Palestine.
=======================
I believe it is possible to generate clear moral support for the existence of Israel once it becomes clear that the Palestinian State and Israel are mutually exclusive.

Admirer of R Kahane

Why does Obadiah chose Canada as a safer place for Jews than America? Do they have a better record regarding Jewish relations, or better, are they more accepting as a society of Jewish citizens?

Joseph

Israel needs a King.

Danny the Admin

At least, no one tried to push Jews into the Atlantic, so Canada is safer than Canaan

Alain

For the most part Jews have been safer in Canada than in the United States. This does not mean that Jews were welcomed or that they did not face discrimination and anti-Semitism. Violent or physical attacks on Jews in Canada did not occur as it did south of the border.

These days however that has changed mainly due to the increasing number of Muslim immigrants. Attacks are not that uncommon, especially against Jewish institutions. This is evident by the required security (not provided by the government mind you) for Jewish schools, Synagogues and other institutions. Still I believe Canada is still a safer country than the United States for what that is worth.