(JNS) When Jordan’s Arab Legion seized half of Jerusalem, ethnically cleansed its Jewish population and annexed the city, the only entity to recognize the annexation was the United Kingdom—which had provided the officers and the training that made the conquest possible. Officers like Col. Bill Newman, Maj. Geoffrey Lockett and Maj. Bob Slade, under Glubb Pasha, better known as Gen. John Bagot Glubb, whose son later converted to Islam, invaded Jerusalem and used the Muslim forces under their command to make the partition and ethnic cleansing of Jerusalem possible.
The Jews living in the free half of Jerusalem continued to be killed by Jordanian Muslim snipers. The victims of those years of Muslim occupation included Yaffa Binyamin, a 14-year-old girl sitting on her balcony, and a Christian carpenter working on the Notre Dame Convent.
Under Muslim occupation, while snipers were murdering their children, the Jewish residents couldn’t so much as put in an outhouse without being reported to the United Nations for illegal construction. In one case a UN observer organization held four meetings to discuss an outhouse for local residents, before condemning Israel for illegal construction.
It did not however condemn Jordan when one of its soldiers opened fire on a train, wounding a teenage Jewish girl.
Not very much has changed.
The hysterical condemnations of “illegal construction” did not end when the Muslim occupation did. The great outhouse of the United Nations and the smaller outhouses of the foreign ministries of countries whose leaders tremble whenever Muslims grow agitated over a cartoon or a YouTube video fill the air with the vilest of substances whenever a Jewish family moves into a home in Jerusalem.
It would be inconceivable for the international community to denounce an ethnically cleansed group which had survived attempted genocide for moving back into its own city. It is, however, standard policy at the State Department and the Foreign Office to denounce Jews living in those parts of Jerusalem that had been ethnically cleansed by Muslims as “settlers” living in “settlements,” and accuse them of being an “obstruction to peace.”
Peace being the state of affairs that sets in when an ethnic cleansing goes unchallenged.
What we are talking about here is not peace, but ethnic cleansing. In 1948, the Jews were ethnically cleansed from Jerusalem to Islamize the city. Their synagogues were blown up by the Muslim occupiers. Their tombstones were used to line the roads traveled by the racist Muslim settlers. In 1948, the Jews were ethnically cleansed from Jerusalem to Islamize the city. Whether they were Zionists or anti-Zionists did not matter. They were not Muslims. That was all that counted.
“For the first time in 1,000 years not a single Jew remains in the Jewish Quarter,” boasted Abdullah el-Talal, a commander of the Muslim invaders. “Not a single building remains intact. This makes the Jews’ return here impossible.” In his memoirs he wrote, “I knew that the Jewish Quarter was densely populated with Jews who caused their fighters a good deal of interference and difficulty…. Only four days after our entry into Jerusalem the Jewish Quarter had become their graveyard. Death and destruction reigned over it.”
Every politician who denounces Jews building houses in Jerusalem, but not Muslims doing the same thing, is endorsing Abdullah’s genocidal vision and all the terrorism that goes with it.
In 1920, racist Muslim settler mobs in Jerusalem chanted “Muhammad’s religion was born with the sword,” “Death to the Jews” and “the government is with us” as Muslim policemen under British colonial rule joined with them in the rape and murder of the indigenous Jewish population.
Too many governments are still with those who wave the sword of Muhammad and cry “death to the Jews.” They encourage them, defend their agenda and issue weak rebukes when blood is spilled in the name of Islamization in Jerusalem, as it is in Kobani by Islamic State (ISIS), and in a thousand other places. Those who endorse the Islamization of Jerusalem cannot escape responsibilities for the crimes of the Islamizers.
Describing Jewish homes in Jerusalem, one of the world’s oldest cities, a city that all three religions in the region associate with Jews and Jewish history, as “settlements” is a triumph of distorted language that Orwell would have to tip his hat to. How does one have “settlements” in a city older than London or Washington, DC?
To understand that, you would have to ask London and Washington, DC, where the diplomats insist that one more round of Israeli compromises will bring peace.
They say that there are three religions in Jerusalem—but there are actually four. The fourth is the true Religion of Peace, the one that insists that there will be peace when the Jews have been expelled from Judea and Samaria, driven out of their homes in Jerusalem and made into wanderers and beggars once again. Oddly enough, this religion’s name isn’t even Islam—it’s diplomacy.
Diplomacy says that the 1948 borders set by Arab countries invading Israel should be the final borders and that, when Israel reunified a sundered city in 1967, it was an act of aggression, while, when seven Arab armies invaded Israel in 1948, it was a legitimate way to set permanent boundaries. When Jordan ethnically cleansed eastern Jerusalem, it set a standard that Israelis are obligated to follow to this day by staying out of eastern Jerusalem. To violate that ethnic cleansing endangers peace.
When Muslims move into a Jewish town, there’s no clamor. When Muslim countries fund Muslim housing in Israel, there are no angry statements. Muslim housing in Jerusalem or anywhere in Israel is not a problem. Only Jewish housing is.
The issue is not Israel. If it were, then Arabs with Israeli citizenship would also be condemned. It’s only the Jews who are the problem.
The entire peace process is really a prolonged solution to the latest phase of the Jewish Problem. The problem, as stated by so many diplomats, is that there are Jews living in places that Muslims want. There were Jews living in Gaza before 1948, but they were driven out, they came back, and then they were driven out again by their own government in compliance with international demands. Now only Hamas lives in Gaza, and it’s as peaceful and pleasant without the Jews as Nazi Germany.
But there are still Jews in the West Bank, and they have to be gotten rid of. Once enough Jews have been expelled, there will be peace. That’s not a paragraph from “Mein Kampf,” it’s not some lunatic sermon from Palestinian Authority television—it is the consensus of the international community. This consensus states that the only reason there still isn’t peace is because enough Jews haven’t been expelled from their homes. The ethnic cleansing for peace hasn’t gone far enough.
There will be peace when all the Jews are gone. That much is certainly undeniable. Just look at Gaza or Egypt or Iraq, or Afghanistan, which has a grand total of two Jews, both of them in their seventies. Or Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Syria, where peace reigns now that the Jews are gone. Some might say that violence seems to increase proportionally with the number of Muslims, but we all know that would be Islamophobic. On the other hand suggesting that violence increases with the number of Jews living on land that Muslims want, that’s just diplomacy. A common-sense fact that everyone who is anyone in foreign policy knows to be true.
How will we know when the Muslims have gotten all the land that they want? When the violence stops. Everyone knows that agreements mean nothing. No matter how many pieces of paper are signed, the bombs and rockets still keep bursting. The only way to reach an agreement is by groping blindly in the dark, handing over parcel after parcel of land, until the explosions stop or the Muslims fulfill their original goal of pushing the Jews into the sea.
That’s the wonderful thing about diplomacy if you’re a diplomat and the terrible thing about it if you are anyone else without a secure way out of the country when diplomacy fails. And diplomacy in the region always fails. Camp David and every single agreement Israel has signed with Muslim countries aren’t worth the paper they’re written on. The only peace treaty that counts is the one made by tanks and rifles. It’s the one made by Israeli planes in Egyptian skies and Israeli soldiers walking the border. It’s the one made by Jewish farmers and ranchers, tending their sheep and their fields, with rifles on their backs. The only peace that’s worth anything is the peace of the soldiers and settlers.
In 1966, Jerusalem was a city sundered in two, divided by barbed wire and the bullets of Muslim snipers. Diplomacy did not reunite it. Israel pursued diplomacy nearly to its bitter end, until it understood that it had no choice at all but to fight. Israel did not swoop into the fight; its leaders did their best to avoid the conflict, asking the international community to intervene and stop Egypt from going to war. Read back the headlines for the last five years on Israel and Iran, and you will get a sense of the courage and determination of the Israeli leaders of the day.
When Israel went to war, its leaders did not want to liberate Jerusalem, they wanted Jordan to stay out of the war. Even when Jordan entered the war, they did not want to liberate the city. Divine Providence and Muslim hostility forced them to liberate Jerusalem, and forced them to keep it. Now some of them would like to give it back, another sacrifice to the bloody deity of diplomacy whose altar flows with blood and burnt offerings.
As we remember Yom Yerushalayim, Jerusalem Day, it is important to remember that the city is united and free because diplomacy failed. The greatest triumph of the modern state happened only because diplomacy proved hopeless and useless in deterring genocidal Muslim ambitions. Had Israel succumbed to international pressure and had Nasser been as subtle as Sadat, then the Six-Day War would have looked like the Yom Kippur War fought with 1948 borders—and Israel very likely would not exist today.
Even as Jews remember the great triumph of Yom Yerushalayim, the ethnic cleansers and their accomplices are busy searching for ways to drive Jews out of Jerusalem, out of towns, villages and cities. This isn’t about the Muslim residents of Jerusalem, who have repeatedly asserted that they want to remain part of Israel. It’s not about peace, which did not come from any previous round of concessions, and will not come from this one either. It’s about solving the Jewish problem.
As long as Jews allow themselves to be defined as the problem, there will be plenty of those offering solutions. And the solutions invariably involve doing something about the Jews. It only stands to reason that if Jews are the problem, then moving them or getting rid of them is the solution. There is less friction in defining Jews as the problem than in defining Muslims as the problem. Numbers alone dictate this.
Yom Yerushalayim is a reminder of what the real problem is, and what the real solution is. Muslim occupation of Israel is the problem. The Islamization of Jerusalem is the problem. Muslim violence in support of the Muslim occupation of Israel and of everywhere else is the problem. Israel is the solution. Only when we liberate ourselves from the lies, when we stop believing that we are the problem and recognize that we are the solution—only then will the liberation that began in 1967 be complete.
Only then will we have liberated our Jerusalem. The Jerusalem of the soul. It is incumbent on all of us to liberate that little Jerusalem within. The holy city that lives in all of us. Only then will we truly be free.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical left and Islamic terrorism.
This article was first published by FrontPage Magazine.