Gary Fine

Gary Fine is a biblical researcher and writer, specializing in topics specific to ancient Israel. He is a retired Air Force captain, a lifelong Minneapolis resident and a graduate of the University of Minnesota. Fine is an individual advocate for a strong America, a secure Israel, and a strong American-Israel partnership.

Why no international outcry against Arab apartheid?

Posted by: Gary Fine Updated: March 14, 2012 - 6:31 AM

 As Israel Apartheid Week continues, a Palestinian boy was left to die at a Lebanese hospital because his father couldn’t afford treatment .  Mohammed Nabil Taha, an 11-year-old Palestinian boy, died this week at the entrance to a Lebanese hospital after doctors refused to help him because his family could not afford to pay for medical treatment. Taha’s tragic case highlights the plight of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who live in squalid refugee camps in Lebanon and who are the victims of an apartheid system that denies them access to work, education and medical care. This is in stark contrast to the routinely false portrayal offered by many major international media sources and individuals against Israeli policy towards Palestinian Arabs.  Ironically, the boy’s death at the entrance to the hospital coincided with Israel Apartheid Week, a{n annual} festival of hatred and incitement organized by anti-Israel activists on university campuses in the US, Canada and other countries. -KHALED ABU TUOMEH 03/17/2011.
 Just this week, the University of Minnesota’s Minnesota Daily Op-Ed page printed: “Disinvest in Israel” an articulate though hypocritically inaccurate article, heavily inlaid with unsubstantiated misstatements and false charges calling for the divestment (banning) of all funding to the State of Israel. This was given prominent display, visually inferring a sort of University-endorsed-scholastic-integrity to the so-called “academic” nature of the opinion piece, according to its author, in the Daily’s Op-Ed page-3/08/12. Personally, I find it disconcerting that such uneducated drivel found a welcome home in the Minnesota Daily, a better choice would have been the Nazi publication -Der Sturmer. A notoriously anti-Semitic publication.

Although many pro-Palestinian organizations are aware that the Israel-apartheid analogy is inaccurate, this rhetoric is continually used to condemn and isolate Israel.  Just visit Israel to see the truth...Israeli Arabs shopping at Jerusalem's Mamila Mall, enjoying Tel Aviv beaches, enrolled in the universities, getting hospital care, going on school trips to the zoos, and having free access to public places… Labeling Israel "apartheid" is meant to provoke worldwide criticism and elicit human rights-based anger that sanctions demonstrations, boycotts, and the denigration of Jewish morals.  This finger-pointing is an intentional attack on Israel.  It condones terror in the guise of "freedom-fighters," encourages prosecution of Israeli officials in foreign courts, promotes laws against Israeli goods, and supports boycotts of stores selling Israeli products.  It sees the advantage of kidnapping soldiers, allows the destruction of Jewish artifacts and religious sites, and tries to exclude Jews from their legitimate claim to their historic homeland.- JanSuzanne Krasner 10/26/11-Israeli Democracy vs. Arab Apartheid 

Why Israel is not an apartheid state – see video below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eupkfyd1ulc&feature=related


President Obama’s US-Israel Alliance?

Posted by: Gary Fine Updated: March 5, 2012 - 9:44 AM

Though Israel has broadly been recognized as a strategic ally for America, and President Obama claims to be one of Israel’s staunchest supporters; certain actions of his administration do not align with this scenario.  Below is a rather lengthy video detailing the Obama administrations frosty record on Israel:

Arab Apartheid against Palestinian Arabs

Posted by: Gary Fine Updated: February 12, 2012 - 1:33 PM

 In the video below, the truth about Arab apartheid against Palestinian Arabs is revealed. This is in stark contrast to the routinely false portrayal offered by many major international media sources and individuals against Israeli policy towards Palestinian Arabs.

US OUTS ISRAEL

Posted by: Gary Fine Updated: February 10, 2012 - 5:58 AM

 How the Obama Administration continues its foreign policy love-in with America’s enemies balancing disdain for America’s friends:

“Israel teams with terror group to kill Iran's nuclear scientists, U.S. officials tell NBC News-- Deadly attacks on Iranian nuclear scientists are being carried out by an Iranian dissident group that is financed, trained and armed by Israel’s secret service, U.S. officials tell NBC News, confirming charges leveled by Iran’s leaders…. U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Obama administration is aware of the assassination campaign but has no direct involvement…The Iranians have no doubt who is responsible – Israel and the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, known by various acronyms, including MEK, MKO and PM.. As it has in the past, Israel’s Foreign Ministry declined comment… Said a spokesman, "As long as we can't see all the evidence being claimed by NBC, the Foreign Ministry won't react to every gossip and report being published worldwide.".. For its part, the MEK pointed to a statement calling the allegations “absolutely false.”  U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton  immediately denied any connection to the killings. “I want to categorically deny any United States involvement in any kind of act of violence inside Iran,” Clinton told reporters on the day of the attack…. NBC, By Richard Engel and Robert Windrem, Thu Feb 9, 2012 6:16 AM EST

Only recently, the Obama administration offered a stirring, punchless “verbal” criticism of UN Security Council behemoths Russia and China for blocking action against the terrorist regime of Syria’s Assad.  In tandem with US criticism, there was no US outing of China and Russia to the media for  protecting the terrorist Syrian state engaged in mass murder. Media outrage was sparse to absent.

But the leftist media was all too willing to vilify Israel in collaboration with the current US administration policy of abandoning and/or criminalizing America’s friends, for their enemies’ aggrandizement.  With the US announcement to NBC, the Obama administration has tacitly encouraged the attack media to equate Syria’s terrorist actions, which include openly murdering thousands of its own people, to Israel’s unconfirmed self-defensive, targeted, coordinated, assistance to an Iranian anti-government group in its action against a handful of Iranian scientists. NBC stated that, Daniel Byman, a professor in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and also a senior fellow with the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, said that if the accounts of the Israeli-MEK assassinations are accurate, the operation borders on terrorism.-Engel and Windrem,NBC.  

As the media rushes to portray Israel as assassin, Iran’s frequent and direct threat of nuclear holocaust against Israel becomes an insignificant afterthought, unworthy of mention- just old news.   Also overlooked is the blatant fact that these innocent Iranian scientists are engaging in an operation that when/if completed will threaten not only Israel, but all of western civilization with nuclear disaster.

If the Obama administration can publicly pride itself for assassinating Bin Laden as a non- US state sponsored terrorist action, then how can the US administration rightfully encourage the media to infer that Israel’s unconfirmed antiterrorist actions in assisting the elimination of Iran’s nuclear scientists,(thus reducing Iran’s nuclear bomb capacity) borders on state sponsored terrorism?

With full knowledge of the repercussions, why did the Obama Administration purposely out Israel to a  negative media attack?

Why does the Obama administration have a hands off policy to America’s enemies contrasting a confrontational, accusatory policy against Israel and other US allies?

NBC also noted that “two GOP presidential candidates have no problem with the targeting of nuclear scientists.  In a November debate, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich endorsed “taking out their scientists,” and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum called it, ”a wonderful thing.””-NBC,2/9/12

 

Not So legitimate Palestinian Claims

Posted by: Gary Fine Updated: December 15, 2011 - 6:50 AM

Newt Gingrich, Dec 2011, openly and accurately stated what most European and American political leaders and media organizations have chosen to bury or ignore; that the Palestinian people are “invented” and “are in fact Arabs” and were historically part of the Arab people. His statement is in stark contrast to the heavily regurgitated media mantra supporting Palestinian Arab nationalistic claims to the land of ancient Israel.

Later Gingrich reaffirmed his earlier comments: “Is what I said factually true? Yes," Gingrich said during a debate where he drew applause for asserting that it was time someone spoke honestly about Israel's struggle with the Palestinians. “Gingrich's remarks …struck at the heart of Palestinian sensitivities about the righteousness of their struggle for an independent state and put him at odds … with the international community”.-Haaretz 12/2012

Of course, Gingrich’s statement was hurriedly criticized by Palestinian apologists, antisemites and others who have diligently worked to conceal the truth for so long.

1.Speaking for the Obama administration, H. Clinton stated that Gingrich’s comments on Palestinians were “unhelpful”.

2.Hussain Ibish (American Task Force on Palestine) on CNN declared Gingrich’s comments outrageous, stating “there was no Israel and no such thing as an ‘Israeli people’ before 1948.” Most non-experts can easily decipher the glaring errors in Ibish’s statement.

3.PA prime minister S. Fayyad on CNN stated: “The Palestinian people inhabited the land {Israel} since the dawn of history”. This was further expounded on by Fatah Council member D. Diliani, also on CNN, that “The Palestinian people {are} descended from the Canaanite tribe of the Jebusites that inhabited the ancient site of Jerusalem as early as 3200 BCE”.  Both statements are total fabrications. In “the 1931 census {Palestine}, at least 23 different languages were reported in use by “Moslems”…the non-Jews in Palestine in 1931 listed as their “birthplaces” at least 24 different countries,”-J. Peters, From Time Immemorial .Linking the great variety of Arab nationalities occupying Palestine in the 1930’s to an single extinct common ancestry such as the ancient Jebusites is a ludicrous proposition.

4. Saeb Erekat, PA negotiator, characterized Gingrich’s statements as “despicable,” and opined- that they reflected “the lowest point of thinking anyone can reach”- suggesting that it would increase “the cycle of violence.”

Commonly, truth is the victim when details are required to prove Palestinian Arab nationalistic claims prior to 1920. In contrast Israel and her modern descendants {called- Israelis or Jews} date back consecutively over 3500 years in Israel and throughout the world, and are recognized among the histories of most current and prior nation states. Yet the non-existent state of Palestine is already recognized by some 125 of the 193 UN member states – while Israel, more than six decades after its acceptance as a UN member state, is still not recognized by 36 UN members, including 30 Muslim majority countries. Moreover, there is plenty of evidence showing that the UN supports a veritable “infrastructure of anti-Israel propaganda” and devotes truly disproportionate resources and energies to censuring Israel.”-JPost, 12/2012

So- when was the notion of a Palestinian Arab nation invented?  Prior to 1918, Palestinian Arabs were“identified with the Syrian Arab government in Damascus, headed by Prince Faysal. Palestinian enthusiasm for Pan-Syrian unity steadily increased through mid-1920.Three major Palestinian organizations propounded Pan-Syrian ideas in the imme­diate aftermath of World War I: the Arab Club, the Literary Club, and the Muslim-Christian Association. (Note that none of these names makes any mention of Palestine.) The first two groups went furthest, calling outright for unity with Syria under Faysal. Even the Muslim-Christian Associa­tion, an organization of traditional leaders — men who would expect to rule if Palestine became independent — demanded incor­poration in Greater Syria... “The Muslim-Christian Association held a congress in January-February 1919 to draw up demands to submit to the Paris Peace Conference. Representatives of fourteen Palestinian cities and towns presented a peti­tion calling for Southern Syria {Palestine}to be "insep­arable from the independent Arab Syrian government." The congress declared Pal­estine "nothing but part of Arab Syria and it has never been separated from it at any stage." The delegates saw Palestine tied to Syria by "national, religious, linguistic, moral, economic, and geographic bonds." On the basis of this view, they called for a Palestine that would remain "undetached from the independent Arab Syrian Government." A congress of Palestinians met in Damascus in February 1920 and strongly advocated Pan-Syrian unity. One speaker suggested that Palestine stood in the same relationship to Syria as Alsace-Lorraine did to France. According to a contemporary newspaper report…'Izzat Darwaza spoke about Palestine and [the need for] Syrian unity, then he submit­ted a statement for general opinion. No one disagreed with him. The discussion pro­ceeded further on this matter; some partici­pants wanted not to mention Palestine but to use the expression Greater Syria for all the regions of Syria {Greater Syria included Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan}, and they were applauded… The congress passed two resolutions which called for Palestine "not to be divided from Syria”…the Palestinian goal was to join in a union with Syria.-D. Pipes 1989, The year the Arabs Discovered Palestine.

The political situation changed when about July 1920 the French and British decided to divide Syria from Palestine. The new situation required new politics.  This resulted in the eventual birthing (1920) of Palestinian Arab nationalistic claims to the ancient Land of Israel, as a political counter weight to legitimate Jewish historical claims.

 

 

  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT