The incalculable cost of Palestine

Jerusalem Newswire ^ | 12-10-03 | Stan Goodenough

[SJackson]

The incalculable cost - revisited By Stan Goodenough Jerusalem - December 10, 2003

A few weeks ago, I penned an article I called, "The incalculable cost of Palestine." [below]

Spelling out the de facto price that would be paid for the creation of a Palestinian state on the biblical heartland of Israel, I said that among other things, its birth would:

** Mark the beginning of the end of the Jews as a nation.

** Lead to the eventual extinction of Bible-believing Christianity.

Creating Palestine in the biblical heartland of Israel, I wrote, would "sever the bonds holding the Jews together as a nation, remove the ground on which Judaism stands, and cut off the faith supply that has nourished and kept the Jews alive for the last 2000 years." I argued that it would also "shatter the biblical foundations on which much of Christianity stands."

The article provoked a divided response: Some thought it was "wonderful" and "anointed," others wondered whether I had fled my faith or spent excess time in the Jerusalem sun. Quite clearly I had committed the cardinal writers' error of assuming most my readers were on the same page, so to speak, and would therefore know where I was coming from.

I'd be grateful if those I thus abused would forgive me, and would follow through the rest of this article as I try to clarify and re-stress what I was really saying before.

Actually, I am thankful for the opportunity to so quickly revisit this subject, for I believe it lies at the heart of the Middle East conflict. Not until it is recognized and fully engaged will we Christians who are deeply concerned for the future survival and prosperity of the Jewish homeland be truly effective in our efforts to help secure her.

"The incalculable cost" was written as a "what if," a wake-up call. I wanted to startle the reader into realizing what is actually at stake concerning Israel's fate. My intention was to strip away the layers that blur and fudge the issue, and bare the core for those who have spiritual eyes to see.

Let me stress my personal starting point: I am a Bible believer. No philosophy, no revolutionary scientific theories or discoveries, no pleas for "reason," no scoffing, no threats, no bribes, no "enlightenment" - nothing will change what I believe. For me, forever, the Bible contains the divinely given words and wisdom of the Creator of all things. He cannot be wrong. He cannot change. He cannot be ganged up on, outnumbered, out-witted or out-maneuvered. He is God. And there is no other.

This Being, Who alone has the right to do so, and Who knows the end of all things from the beginning, designated the swathe of land between the River of Egypt and the Euphrates as the national home of the descendants of the man He renamed Israel.

In the pages of the Bible, He is referred to 16 times as the God of Abraham, 8 times as the God of Isaac, 22 times as the God of Jacob, and more than 200 times as the God of Israel. He states categorically and unequivocally that the aforementioned land is His personal possession. And He tells first Abraham, then Isaac, and then Jacob that He has given this land to them and their descendants after them, in this bloodline, "as an everlasting possession."

He has given it to nobody else - not to Esau, not to Ishmael, not to the Arabs, not to the Palestinians. The land belongs, only, to Israel. Others may live here of course, but only Israel may be sovereign.

In order to have this land, Israel needs to enter and take possession of it. The ancient forebears of modern-day Israel were commanded to enter and possess it, and the prophets foretold a day when their descendants would be brought back to the same land, and be settled in it once again - this time forever.

[Ed note: The LORD is not hesitant to use the word "settle" to describe His replanting of the Jews in their land; I too, therefore, choose to use the words "settle," "settlement" and "settler" - without apology and without shame. ]

This instruction to settle, and justification for settling, is predicated upon the biblical promise and injunction. That is to say, it is the Bible that imparts to Israel the right and the command to be in this specific land, and to rule over it.

Throw away the Bible, and Israel loses that right. At best, what they are then left with, in the aftermath of the 2000-year effort to annihilate the Jews, is the right to a haven state somewhere in the world - for example in Uganda, or, as Hamas leader Sheikh Yassin suggested just this past weekend, in Europe.

The Bible is the ONLY document that gives the Jews the inalienable right to this land. The Balfour Declaration, League of Nations and United Nations rulings, white papers and "peace" treaties - all of these are contestable and open to alteration or reversal if enough of the world's nations decide it should be so.

For Bible believers, the Bible alone has the authority to back the claim to this land as the Jews'. And, to get to the crux of the matter, the Bible specifically and intentionally singles out the very part of the land that is today on the chopping block for a Palestinian state as the heart of Israel's "eternal inheritance."

For it was in Samaria, at Bethel, where Jacob (Israel) lay sleeping when God said to him: "[T]he land on which you lie I will give to you and your descendants." (Genesis 28:13 cf. Jeremiah 31:5) He was not lying on the beaches of Tel Aviv but on the rocky slopes of the central "West Bank."

Daily, for more than 2000 years as they wandered among the nations of the world, the Jews have been reminding God of His promise to restore them to this very land - the land of the Patriarchs - to Jerusalem, and to the Temple Mount. Their belief in Him and in His promises sustained them through the darkest history imaginable. It gave them reason to hope when it seemed futile to do so. It was a goal, an aim, in fact a beacon, holding their identity and their eventual future out before them - something real and promising to strive towards.

Through unmentionable horrors, to the very doors of the gas chambers, the Jews clung to their belief in the Author of the Bible, the One Who founded the nation and gave it its land: "Sh'ma, Yisrael, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai Ehad" - "Hear, O Israel, the LORD our God, the LORD is One."

It was this faith that enabled Israel to resist all efforts to absorb them as a people, to render them extinct as a race. And the faith was, and is, inextricably in God and in His promises of this specific part of the land universally called the "Occupied Territories."

It doesn't take rocket science to grasp what a devastating blow it would be to this, for so long, tenacious people should the physical embodiment of what they have been clinging to for fully half their existence as a nation, finally and irretrievably be taken from them.

We should not fool ourselves either with pious proclamations about God being able to restore it all again. Certainly from the world's point of view it will be irretrievable. Once Palestine is declared a state and officially welcomed into the world community of nations, there can be no going back. For the Gentile nations there will be celebrations and rejoicing. For Israel, the birth of Palestine will spell catastrophe.

Oh, those Jews who have long ago traded in their belief in the Bible and its God won't bat an eyelid. In fact, their dream of being fully accepted by the Gentile nations - of becoming just like them - will appear closer to realization than ever.

But in the Diaspora, it was seldom the eviscerated Jew who carried the flame of Am Yisrael intact through persecution and out the other side. It was those who had faith; those who had a reason to believe in God, and in His promises to restore them to their land.

Which brings me to where I was before:

Being a publicly professing Bible-believer, I naturally never intended to communicate a belief that the Jewish people could be eradicated, or that the hope we true Christians are living in could be taken away from us. I wanted to communicate the calamitous nature of the threat.

I am convinced that not until we recognize the extent of this peril will a fire be lit under us to try to counter it.

When I wrote, I was caught up in that tension that exists between God's foreknowledge of all that will come to pass, in this case Israel's assured survival into eternity, and in the part we have to play to bring it all about.

Some people believe that we need not concern ourselves overly much about Israel's future because God has it all in control. Yes He does. But I believe at the same time that we are a part of that unfolding picture that He has ever open before Him, and we can either rise to fulfill our destiny and help Israel fulfill hers, or we can decide to "leave it all up to Him."

I believe God is looking for those who would "stand in the gap" for Israel at this time. (Ezekiel 22:30). Standing in the gap means interceding in prayer on Israel's behalf before the Lord, as Daniel did. (see Daniel 9). But I believe it means more than just praying, and then chastising Israel from afar for not being able to stand up against international pressure and claiming all its land. Standing in the gap for me means we are also to stand between Israel and our Gentile rulers who choose to deal with the Jewish people and their state in an unjust way.

To play our part, or to leave it up to God? The following example may help to further clarify this question:

It's almost universally believed that, but for the Holocaust, Israel would not have been restored to life. Had they not felt so guilty for abandoning the Jews to the Nazis, the nations of the world would never have permitted the re-establishment of the Jewish state.

Should Christians, aware of Israel's prophesied future restoration, have therefore sat quietly by (as, to their eternal shame, so many did,) because it was all "foreknown," all "predicted," and they knew it would all "work out" in the end?

Certainly not!

Just as - had we lived then - we should have done everything in our power to save the Jews from Hitler's Holocaust, so too should we do all we can today to prevent Israel's enemies from pursuing the 2003 version of that very same plan. There is no question that the Arab and Islamic world is bent on wiping out the Jews just as surely as Hitler was.

Effectively it has been the same plan all along: From the day Pharaoh commanded the Israelite boys be drowned in the Nile, right up to today, the enemy has sought to destroy the Jews and, with them, the channel God designed to bring hope and blessing and peace into the world.

We should have resisted it before, and we should resist it now. Establishing Palestine would drive a barrage of nails into Israel's coffin - something I believe this generation's Christians should oppose with everything we have.

..................................

The incalculable cost of Palestine By Stan Goodenough
Jerusalem - October 3, 2003

When considering the price paid to try bring peace to the Middle East, it is natural to think of the thousands of lives, the millions of man-hours, and the untold billions of dollars that have been spent.

The human cost has been staggering; the material cost immense, and all the more incomprehensible as we daily witness how fruitless the efforts have been; how abjectly they have failed.

And yet, when measured against the sweep of human history, and especially the history of the Jews, the creation of a Palestinian state is set to exact a price that will dwarf all other costs put together.

For the birth of "Palestine" will not only strengthen the Islamic world's determination to do away completely with the Jewish state.

Its eventual affect will be the end of the Jews as a nation.

Soon, not too long after the world celebrates the independence of the 23rd Arab state, the Jews of the world will curl up, wither, and blow away.

It will take a little longer, but eventually the true Christians in the world will follow suit.

No nation can last when the reason for its existence has been taken away.

No faith can stand when its foundations have been undermined.

No tree can survive without its roots.

The creation of Palestine will, in one fell swoop, sever the bonds holding the Jews together as a nation, remove the ground on which Judaism stands, and cut off the faith supply that has nourished and kept the Jews alive for the last 2000 years.

It will also shatter the biblical foundations on which much of Christianity stands.

To grasp this, you need to have eyes to see.

The area earmarked for Palestine is not just a 5,860 square kilometer piece of land the rest of Israel is being told to exchange for peace. Nor is it simply land housing a handful of sites sacred to Jews.

The specific land the Jewish people are being asked, ordered and coerced into surrendering is the very cradle of its existence as a nation.

In this land, the land Israel would have to take leave of forever, lie the bones of Abraham and his wife Sarah, Isaac and his wife Rebecca, Jacob, renamed Israel, and his wives Rachel and Leah with their maids Bilhah, and Leah - the fathers and mothers of the children of Israel that grew into the twelve tribes which made up the nation. Their tombs are in Hebron and Bethlehem - land designated for Palestine.

The borders of Palestine are to encompass the lands given to Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim, Manasseh, Issachar and Levi as a part, or the whole of, their tribal inheritance.

Also in this land are the tombs of Joseph, favorite son of Israel, Samuel the prophet, and David the king, together with the tombs of most of the kings of Israel.

Here Abraham built altars, at Shechem, Bethel, Jerusalem and Hebron; here God entered into an eternal covenant with him, promised him ownership of the land forever, and here, in Hebron, Abraham bought land.

In this land, God established that covenant with Isaac and Isaac passed "the blessing of Abraham" on to Jacob. In this same land, at Bethel, next to today's Ramallah - Arafat's home - God visited Jacob and confirmed to him and his descendants after him ownership of the land forever. At Shechem (Nablus) Isaac purchased land.

In this land, designated for Palestine, the Israelites camped at Gilgal, conquered Jericho, worshipped in Shiloh, assembled in Mizpah, lived in Gibeon, bred their sheep in Tekoa, grazed their flocks in Dothan, fought the Philistines, and housed their king in Gibeah.

Also in this land, the land destined by the world to be Palestine, is Ramah, home of the prophet Samuel, Bethlehem, hometown of Ruth and Boaz, and then of Jesse, father of David. Here is the wilderness into which David fled to get away from Saul, and Hebron, where David ruled for the first seven-and-a-half years of his reign.

Here is Jerusalem, being demanded by the Palestinians as a capital for their state, the City of David, where his throne was established, and from where Solomon and, after him, all the kings of Judah ruled.

Here, in "Palestine-in-the-making," is the birthplace of Jesus, Bethany, where Lazarus was raised, the Mount of Olives, where Jesus wept over Jerusalem, Gethsemane in the Kidron Valley, where he was abandoned and arrested, Annas' house, where He was mocked, Herod's palace, where He was punched, Pontius Pilate's courtyard, where He was scourged, the Via Dolorosa, along which He stumbled under His cross, Golgotha, where He died, the Garden Tomb and the Holy Sepulcher, from which He arose, Bethphage, from which He ascended, all will be in Palestine.

And Palestine will be home to the most glittering prize of all, the Temple Mount, the place where the God of Israel chose to place His name forever, the hill on which Abraham offered up Isaac, the hill on which Solomon and Zerubbabel built the first and second temples, the hill on which the third temple is meant to be built, and the Mountain of the Lord from where the Messiah is destined to rule.

Can you see it? Can you see what lies behind this global effort to separate the Jews, (and the Christians, because Islam will wield control over all the places sacred to both) from Judea and Samaria - the cradle of Israel's physical birth and our, believing gentile's, spiritual birth?

The Jews' unprecedented ability to survive as a nation outside their land through 2000 years of wandering and terrible persecution is mostly attributable to their longing to return to their homeland, and their belief that one day they would.

It is to this land, this specific land designated for Palestine, and not the Negev and the coastal plain, not even the Galilee, that the Jews have prayed daily for 20 centuries to return to.

It is to this precise part of the land, the "Mountains of Israel," that Ezekiel prophesied the Jews would be brought back to and settled in.

And it is in this very part of the land that the Messiah whom we all seek, "will suddenly come to His temple." (Malachi 3:1)

To remove this land from the Jews - the graves of their forefathers, the crucible in which they were formed and the place that holds the promise of their longed for redemption - will be to sever them from their national roots, from their past, and from their future, dispossessing them of the main motivation for remaining Jewish through the centuries.

And as for us Christians - if God is unable to keep His promise to His ancient, Chosen People, what, then, will become of the hope that is in us?

We dare not permit Palestine to be born.

Thick, squat and grotesquely gnarled, their roots twisting deep into the ancient soil that has gripped them since their planting as saplings two millennia ago, the oldest olive trees in Gethsemane's Garden have been there to witness more history than we can imagine or conceive.

Somehow, miraculously, they have survived siege, fire and the denuding of the land around them. They have withstood earthquakes, droughts, flash floods and who knows what other destructive efforts wielded by nature and by man.

And 2000 years after witnessing the anguish of the One who prayed in their presence before being led away to die, they still stand in the shadow of Mount Olivet - immovable, unyielding, apparently indestructible. But take an axe to their roots, and they will surely, inexorably, wither, and die.

So, too, will Israel.

[SJackson]

If you'd like to be on or off this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

[mvpel]

Some people believe that we need not concern ourselves overly much about Israel's future because God has it all in control. Yes He does. But I believe at the same time that we are a part of that unfolding picture that He has ever open before Him, and we can either rise to fulfill our destiny and help Israel fulfill hers, or we can decide to "leave it all up to Him."

Every miracle G-d performed during the liberation of the Children of Israel from Egypt involved some participation of a human hand - the Sea was not parted until a staff was raised over it. G-d works in partnership with us, and "leaving it all up to Him" is a violation of the clear command, "do not test the lord your G-d as you tested Him in Haran."

[dennisw]

Pakistan was a bad idea in 1948, and it has not improved with time.

The last thing the Middle East needs is another Islamic nation, a Palestinian homeland nation. Just look at what a cesspit Pakistan is. Multiple attempts to assassinate Mushareff, when they aren't busy killing Kashmir Hindus and brandishing their nukes. What an effing hole! Pakistan was designed to be an Islamic homeland. 

Oh, but the poor widdle Muslims (of the sub-continent) needed an Islamic homeland and deserved one. And the ignorant Brits caved in creating a nuclear monster that threatens the peaceful Hindus. Pakistan was created over the objections of Hindus though I think Gandhi advocated it. Maybe just to done with them, rid of them.

Islam =in yo' face big time.

Hinduism = peaceful, just let me practice my religion in peace

[Colonel Kangaroo]

I don't see what significance Israel has for Christians other than the political and humanitarian. In John 18:36, Christ states "my kingdon is not of this world". The hope of the saints is based on the resurrection of Christ (I Peter 1:3) not on the political status of Israel. Galatians 3:26-29 states that the Abrahamic promise is now based on faith and obedience, not on flesh and lineage. Some may condemn that as "replacement theology", but that is the theology of the inspired apostle Paul.

I'm not speaking against the political ties between the US and Israel, nor am I meaning to show disrespect to the Jewish religious viewpoint which is totally separate from Christianity. But from the Christian viewpoint, Israel is a non-factor as a matter of faith. Faith comes by hearing the word of God (Romans 10:17), not by the status of geography and holy sites.

[HankReardon]

The west bank of the Sea of Galilee was Jordan before the '67 war, how do they by pass returning the land to Jordan and go directly to creating a Palestinian state?

[Publius6961]

I argued that it would also "shatter the biblical foundations on which much of Christianity stands."

The price is already being paid.
For the first time ever I missed the fact that there were no images of Nazareth... or Bethlehem anywhere to be found on the 150+ channels I have access to. No Midnight Mass from St. Peter's (I had to go to a Spanish channel to enjoy that.

On the other hand, I remember many images all year long of mecca, pilgrims going there, and brutal constant reminders of that most evil religion, in deed if not in word.

What's wrong with this picture?

[ml/nj]

Islam =in yo' face big time.

Hinduism = peaceful, just let me practice my religion in peace

This certainly has been my view too.

But I'm reading Fareed Zakaria's The Future of Freedom. I'm probably less impressed with it than I thought I might have been. I was probably attracted to it by a NY Times review. But it's not like Zakaria is an idiot, and he is from India.

So I take notice of stuff like this:

The BJP [Hindu fundamentalist Bharatiya Janta Party] came to power by denoucing Nehruvian secularism, advocating a quasi-militant Hindu nationalism, and encouraging anti-Muslim and anti-Christian rhetoric and action. ... And whenever it has found itself in political trouble, it has stoked the fires of religious conflict, as it did in Gujarat in 2002. In Gujarat the local BJP government - in an unprecedented manner - allowed and even assisted in the massacre of thousands of innocent Muslim men, women, and children and the ethnic cleansing of tens of thousands from their neighborhoods and towns. [p. 108-109]

and wonder.

ML/NJ

[Piranha]

Jordan illegally took control of the West Bank. Jordanian occupation was recognized only by the UK, I believe (I'm not sure of this latter fact).

We don't hear too much about Jordan's illegal occupation of the West Bank any more, do we?

[HankReardon]

Did you see the "60 minutes" piece last week? It was as if there really was an actual nation called palestine at one time. One who did not know better one would think Israel stole this land instead of acquiring it by conquest during a war. And yes, there is a difference, and no it was not Palestine, it was Jordan.

[HankReardon]

From whom did Jordan take control of the west bank? I'm not challenging you on this, just want to know. I never heard this.

[SJackson]

See the maps below. The orginial 1947 partition provided for both a Jewish and Arab state, however it was rejected by the Arabs who claimed (claim) all the territory. The 1949 truce lines supplanted the 47 partition with Jordan and Egypt occupying the West Bank and Gaza. Jordan claimed the West Bank in the early 50s (51?) but their claim was largely unrecognized. The status of the West Bank and Gaza was to be determined in negotiations, however Jordan made no request for a return of the WB in peace negotiations, and Egypt wanted only the Sinai (about 85% of the land captured in the 67 war by Israel) returned.

United Nations Partition Plan September 1947

Israel After the Armistice Agreement (1949)

Jewish National Home Determined by San Remo Conference (1920)

Palestine and Transjordan After 1922

[banjo joe]

the Sea was not parted until a staff was raised over it.

I've read that God requires faith before He will act. Thanks for the reminder.

[Piranha]

Thank you for answering HankReardon's question. I was away from my computer.

You can find an English-language transcript of the Knesset's debate about Jordan's annexation of the West Bank (which had been called Judea and Samaria by everyone until Jordan annexed it) at http://www.jcpa.org/art/knesset6.htm. It makes very interesting reading, and touches on the Cairo Conference of 1921, in which the area called Jordan was lopped off of Palestine by Winston Churchill and given to the Hashemite family as a consolation prize.

[Piranha]

Here is a good synopsis of the founding of Jordan, posted on another website called "in context" (http://incontext.blogmosos.com/archives/004118.html). I don't konw anything about this website, but I am familiar with the book that the poster, lynn-b, posted on December 6, 2002 (the book, which is quoted only for part of the posting, is "A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and The Creation of the Modern Middle East," by David Fromkin. Unfortunately, our friends the British made quite a mess of the Middle East, from which it only now is beginning to recover under the leadership of President Bush.

"In March, 1920, the Emir Feisal, son of Hussein king of Hejaz, was crowned King of Syria, Feisal having marched into Syria with his armed followers. In April, 1920, the San Remo conference confirmed the mandates allocation, according to which Britain would receive the mandate over Palestine (which would include both banks of the Jordan), and France would received the mandate over Syria/Lebanon. To France, the latter decision was incompatible with Feisal ruling as Syria’s king; the French solution was to occupy Syria/Lebanon and expel Hussein (July 1920).

"But Arab attacks on the French continued, and Britain was concerned that France would use the hostilities as a pretext to invade Palestine. This issue was one of many Middle East problems that Churchill (as colonial secretary, 1921-1922) had to deal with. To discuss these issues, Churchill called the “Cairo Conference” for 12-22 March, 1921. While the Conference was ongoing, news arrived that Abdullah, brother of the deposed King Hussein of Syria, arrived in Transjordan at the head of two hundred Bedouin warriors. It was believed that Abdullah intended to go to war on the French and reinstate his brother as king of Syria. Alarmed, Churchill proposed to offer Abdullah the following deal: in return for Abdullah agreeing not to attack French Syria, Churchill would appoint Abdullah as temporary ruler of eastern Palestine, with the express mandate of establishing order and preventing attacks on the French in Syria/Lebanon.

"Herbert Samuel and Wyndham Deedes, respectively, the High Commissioner and the Chief Secretary for Palestine, objected to this proposal on the grounds that Eastern Paelstine was included in the League of Nations mandate for Palestine, and that Churchill could not change the terms unilaterally. But Churchill argued that Abdullah’s position would be temporary, for a few months only, and with this argument succeeded in persuading the British cabinet.

"As the Cairo Conference closed on March 22, 1921, Churchill travelled to Jerusalem and met Abdullah in person. In these meetings, Abdullah agreed to govern Transjordan for six months, with the advice of a British chief political officer and with a British financial subsidy.

"Within weeks it became clear that Abdullah was unable to either quell the internal fighting among the local tribes or to prevent attacks on the French in Syria. But when summer turned to fall and the British doubts about Abdullah became clear, he simply made it know to his British handlers (especially to TE Lawrence “of Arabia”) that he would not leave. Abdullah knew that the Arabists in the British Colonial Office would prefer to see him installed permanently under their tutelage, rather than eject him by force of arms, and he was right: Abdullah had succeeded to out-manoeuver Churchill. Faced with this reality, Britain used her clout to redraft the San Remo terms, so that the mandate given to Britain by the League of Nations in July 1922 did indeed permit Britain to exclude Eastern Palestine from the Jewish National home.

"Fromkin summarizes the subsequent developments thus:

"'[T]he Colonial Office's temporary and merely administrative set of arrangements for Transjordan in time hardened into an enduring political reality. The Arabian prince with his foreign retinue settled in Amman and became a permanent new factor in the complex politics of the Palestine Mandatory regime... The newly created province of Transjordan, later to become the independent state of Jordan, gradually drifted into existence as an entity separate from the rest of Palestine; indeed, today it is often forgotten that Jordan was ever part of Palestine.'"

[dennisw]

Today's Hindu extremism is a reaction to Muslim extremism. The Islamic conquest of India was equal to ten (Jewish) holocausts

[dennisw]

Did you see the "60 minutes" piece last week? It was as if there really was an actual nation called palestine at one time.

Hhahha. So much for "the Jews" who run 60 minutes. The legendary producer (Don what's his face) and the on screen talent are almost all Jewish.   Incl. Mike Wallace, Lesley Stahl, Mory Safer, Steve Croft

[ml/nj]

Today's Hindu extremism is a reaction to Muslim extremism. The Islamic conquest of India was equal to ten (Jewish) holocausts.

That's a pretty extreme statement. I don't know too much about the history of India. When was this "Islamic conquest"? How many did they kill?

The quote I supplied referred to events in 2002, so it's hard for me to believe that if the events occurred as Zakaria descibes, that these would have been in response to an Islamic conquest. Few think less of the Islamic Swine than I do, but facts matter. Do you have any?

ML/NJ

[dennisw]

The quote I supplied referred to events in 2002, so it's hard for me to believe that if the events occurred as Zakaria descibes, that these would have been in response to an Islamic conquest. Few think less of the Islamic Swine than I do, but facts matter. Do you have any?

This Hindu extremism is indirectly related to the Muslim conquest centuries ago. And directly related to Muslim violence of today.

Muslim conquest of India--->

Hindu Holocaust Museum
"The massacres perpetrated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger
than the holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the ...
www.mantra.com/holocaust/ - 6k - Cached - Similar pages

[dennisw]

http://www.indiastar.com/wallia10.htm

Gautier focuses mainly on the Muslim period of India's history. "Let it be said right away: the massacres perpetrated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese."

However, the British, in pursuing their policy of divide-and-rule, colluded "to whitewash" the atrocious record of the Muslims so that they could set up the Muslims as a strategic counterbalance to the Hindus. During the freedom struggle, Gandhi and Nehru went around encrusting even thicker coats of whitewash so that they could pretend a facade of Hindu-Muslim unity against British colonial rule. After independence, Marxist Indian writers, blinkered by their distorting ideology, repeated the big lie about the Muslim record.