Europe's Compassionate Hatred of Israel

[Gatestone Institute] [Facebook] [Twitter] [RSS] [Donate] In this mailing: - Bat Ye'or: [Europe's Compassionate Hatred of Israel] - Heshmat Alavi: [Iran: Why the Mullahs Will Not Reform from Within] - Shoshana Bryen: [Change Is Coming and Change Can Be Good] [Europe's Compassionate Hatred of Israel] by Bat Ye'or • December 22, 2016 at 6:00 am - The Jerusalem Declaration of UNESCO seeks to Islamize, with the help of many governments in Europe and other Christian countries, the ancient history of the people of Israel. - But what does this declaration mean for Europe and Christianity? Wasn't Christianity born out of Israel? Wasn't Jesus a Judean Jew, as were the apostles and evangelists? Or was it Islam that Jesus was preaching, in Arabic and in the mosques? - Where are the great Catholic or Protestant voices to protest against this Islamization of Christianity? This passivity, this indifference makes you think that Europe will soon look more like Lebanon. - European countries recognize terrorism everywhere except in Israel, where they themselves are allies of these terrorists whom they call "freedom fighters" or "militants", against "occupation". - This alliance has ruined Europe -- because the enemies of Israel are also enemies of Christianity and of Europe. How can you ally yourself with those who want to destroy you, without in fact dying yourself? - The same obsessive hatred Hitler had for Israel, which led to the ruin of Europe, has persisted today in the European Union against the Jewish State. The great irony is that in trying to destroy Israel, Europe has destroyed itself. During WW II, the alliance of Pétain and Hitler with the Mufti of Jerusalem sought the extermination of the Jewish people, whom they accused of being the cause of evil. Today, this same policy, this same alliance, has set itself the same objective with the same motivation: Israel must be wiped out. Today we are witnessing the coming of the worldwide caliphate. This expression means that the Muslim view of history is currently prevailing in international institutions. We see it with the Jerusalem Declaration of UNESCO, this palace of revisionism. The Jerusalem Declaration seeks to Islamize, with the help of many governments in Europe and other Christian countries, the ancient history of the people of Israel. The Venice Declaration of 1980, issued by the European Community, which tried to force Israel to survive in an indefensible territory, already prescribed its disappearance and replacement with a people that had never even manifested itself before 1969 -- and all with the assistance of the Soviet Union and especially France. The Islamization of Jerusalem and the delegitimization of the State of Israel were already set out in the Venice Declaration, which to this date the European Union has continued to view as valid. [Continue Reading Article] [Iran: Why the Mullahs Will Not Reform from Within] by Heshmat Alavi • December 22, 2016 at 4:45 am - Iran's entire power structure and most of its civil society is centralized under the personal control of the Supreme Leader. In this way, Iran's dictatorship is every bit as entrenched as North Korea's, making the idea of traditional regime change a pipe dream. - The mullahs created a regime -- an entrenched revolution -- specifically designed to resist change or reform, adopting a unique theocratic structure that uses both Islamic ideology and brutal force to maintain absolute power. - There is but one regime, and it has no interest in "reform." - The membership of every single one of the many official-sounding bureaucratic organs is personally approved by the Supreme Leader. Indeed, any individual, or coalition of individuals who might serve as a check on his absolute power is, in fact, completely beholden to Khamenei's whims, making him the most complete and powerful dictator on the planet. - Elections in this regime are not indicative of any form of "democracy". Instead, they are merely a process of choosing among individuals vetted by the Supreme Leader. There are no factions based upon ideological differences, there is mere jockeying for position and the personal favor of the Supreme Leader. - Western governments' policy of providing concessions to the Iranian regime in order to empower "reformist" factions is based on a fantasy -- a fantasy which the Iranian regime deliberately encourages in order to fool naïve foreign leaders into easing sanctions and turning a blind eye to the nuclear program. In reality, Western concessions are strengthening Khamenei -- further reducing the possibility of change, and increasing the likelihood of outright war. Traditional "regime change" in Iran is inconceivable. The Western obsession of labeling the regime's factions as "reformists" or "hardliners" is laughable. There is but one regime, and it has no interest in "reform". Ever since Iran's mullahs rose to power in 1979 and established an "Islamic Republic", they have worked to consolidate power both at home and abroad. Given Iran's growing belligerence toward its neighbors, persistent crackdowns on domestic dissidents, and frightening nuclear ambitions, foreign analysts often talk about the possibility of regime change in Tehran. But there is very little understanding of the obstacles to dethroning the mullahs -- namely, that the entire power structure and most of civil society is centralized under the personal control of the Supreme Leader. In this way, Iran's dictatorship is every bit as entrenched as North Korea's, making the idea of traditional regime change a pipe dream. The mullahs created a regime -- an entrenched revolution -- specifically designed to resist change or reform, adopting a unique theocratic structure that uses both Islamic ideology and brutal force to maintain absolute power. [Continue Reading Article] [Change Is Coming and Change Can Be Good] by Shoshana Bryen • December 22, 2016 at 4:00 am - Palestinian statehood demands should be taken seriously only within the context of bilateral negotiations with the government of Israel. American attention should be paid to the non-democratic excesses of Palestinian leadership. - U.S. economic support and general support for the Palestinian Authority should be attached to improvements in press freedom, human rights and economic opportunity supported by the PA government. Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, U.S. President Bill Clinton, and PLO chairman Yasser Arafat at the Oslo Accord signing ceremony on September 13, 1993. It is worthwhile to review the parameters of the Oslo Process, negotiated without the participation of the U.S., but adopted formally by President Clinton, because its underlying assumptions are about to be challenged. (Image source: Vince Musi / The White House) President-elect Trump's choice of David Friedman as Ambassador to Israel appears to be an excellent decision. It has already brought howls of protest from people invested heavily in the Oslo and subsequent accords, the "peace process" and the concept of the United States as an "evenhanded" broker between Israelis and Palestinians. Friedman, an Oslo-skeptic, has said he believes that, "Notwithstanding 'agreements' reached at Camp David, Oslo, Wye Plantation and elsewhere, neither Yasser Arafat nor Mahmoud Abbas ever had any intentions to observe the minimal conditions required of a two-state solution." [Continue Reading Article] You are subscribed to this list as {EMAIL}. To unsubscribe, go to [ To edit your subscription options, go to [ To subscribe to the this mailing list, go to [ [Gatestone Institute] 14 East 60 St., Suite 1001, New York, NY 10022