Double standard

 

The U.S. government took, sometimes after instigating a war, land from the indigenous population and drove - in the case of the Cherokee Nation - the people half-way across the country, causing countless deaths (Cherokee Trail of Tears).

The U.S. government also took, occasionally by warfare or purchase from a foreign conqueror, huge chunks of land now part of the southern United States (from Florida to California).

The Russians annexed, often by force, large chunks of northern Europe and Asia. The Russians also exiled thousands from their homes and forced thousands more into special areas where the populace could be easily controlled - and abused on a whim.

Communist China forcefully annexed Tibet and suppresses dissent.

Syria's Asad and Iraq's Hussein destroyed towns containing people who dared object to their despotism.

England annexed Scotland after a series of wars and, through "repopulating" Northern Ireland, managed to tear asunder a nation. The Brits also, without consideration of tribal affiliations, partitioned India and Pakistan, causing wars to this day.

The French and the Brits carved up the former Ottoman Empire after World War I, establishing some states where none existed before (Saudi and Jordan in particular; Syria and Lebanon have histories back to pre-Davidic times).

The Spanish abuse the Basques.

Iraq and Turkey are no friends of the Kurds, and Kashmir has its independence thwarted by India.

And "The World" is quiet.

Granted, the United States' abuses were "pre-tv." Likewise the antics of the colonial powers, of which France and England were but two. Still, no one is demanding redress of these wrongs. All the American Indians, save for the Seminoles of Florida, have lost their language and pride. (The Seminoles are, or at least were when I went to elementary school in Miami, still in a state of "war" with the U.S. government; albeit one with a long-lasting truce that benefits all.)

So why, I ask, is "The World" so upset when Israel - long denied access to Judaism's holiest city by Jordan (that took Jerusalem by force as the Brits withdrew in 1948) - wants to build homes for Jews in an Arab-dominated portion of the city Israel reunited after Jordon attacked Israel (1967)?

When the U.S. wanted Indian land, it simply expelled the native population. Marched the Indians cross-country while the death count mounted. Most Americans (now) know about Wounded Knee when the U.S. cavalry slaughtered an entire village (maybe that's where Sadam Hussein and Hafez al-Assad learned how to exterminate whole communities).

Until the 1960s, there was no "Palestinian" people. There were Arabs (Moslems and others) and Jews in an area that was in the 18th and 19th centuries known as "Palestine"; that would make the Jews in Israel before 1948 as much "Palestinian" as any Arab claiming that title - and indeed, passports of Jews in the region - that included Jordan - listed them (the Jews) as Palestinian.

Unlike the U.S. treatment of the native population, MOST Moslems who left Israel in 1948 did so because they were encouraged to do so by their Muslim clerics. There WERE some chased out by Jews who feared the Moslems would be "Fifth Columnists" - enemies within the community. On the other side of the coin, Jews were forced to flee, often with nothing but the clothes on their backs, from Muslim-dominated counties. Not all Jews left - some countries kept "their" Jews hostage; Syria does so even today.

But "The World" fails to seek redress for the Jews.

Since Jerusalem was reunited by Israel, for the first time since 1948 Jews were free to enter and leave the city, as were Muslims and other non-Jews. It was, for the first time since Jordan annexed Jerusalem, a city open to all (including, sadly, Islamic terrorists).

Jerusalem, while an "open" city is NOT an "international" city any more than Rome or Geneva or New York or Paris or Bagdad or any other nation's premier city. Jerusalem is an Israeli city, and Israelis - Jews and non-Jews alike - have the right to live anywhere in the country, including Jerusalem.

Can a Jew live anywhere in, say, Rabat without fear for his or her life? Morocco, although a breeding ground for Islamist terrorists, is a relatively "modern" Arab state. Is Amman or Cairo any better despite the two countries having a peace agreement with "the Jewish state"? Ahh, but "The World" is silent.

When "the Jewish state" of Israel started building a fence to keep out terrorists, "The World" screamed "Shame on Israel." Never mind that the people on the other side of the fence were coming to murder Jews - not just soldiers, but old and young civilians including babies in strollers.

When Israel closed its border with Aza - an area that Sadat in his wisdom refused to take back from Begin - "The World" screams "Shame on Israel" and never mind that terrorists infiltrated the Jewish state to murder innocents. But no one screams "Shame on Egypt" when it refuses to let its Moslem brothers and sisters into its Moslem country for ANY reason. "The World" is silent. During Israel's long-delayed retaliation for countless rocket attacks from Aza, the Jewish country STILL admitted enemy and non-combatants injured in the fighting for treatment in its hospitals, diverting medical attentions from ITS OWN PEOPLE. Did "The World" take note? Hardly.

It seems "The World" has a double standard. One for the powerful nations (e.g., U.S., Russia, China) and the once-powerful nations (e.g., France, England), and for Moslems (ignoring Somalia, for example, where Moslems continue to murder non-Moslems and continue to prevent aid to starving non-Moslems).

No, no, and no again; all Moslems are not "bad" people.

No, no, and no again, all Moslems and non-Jews in Israel are not "anti-Israel." Most Arabs - Moslem and non-Moslem - in Israel know that even as "second class citizens" they are better off in all respects that their kin in Islamic-dominated countries.

So why, given all that, does "The World" find it convenient to condemn Israel for every action is takes while turning a blind eye to atrocities elsewhere?

Why is it that while there is a U.S. law (Equal Housing Act) that makes it a crime to prevent someone from living any place that person can afford to live yet, when Israel wants to allow Jews to live any place in the Israeli city of Jerusalem, "The World," including the U.S., condemns Israel.

Has anyone heard "The World" demanding that the Moslems in Occupied Israel - Hebron, where the Jewish patriarch Abraham BOUGHT land - allow Jews to live peaceably among the Arab population?

For this, "The World" remains silent.