AW W W W  World Wide Web Witness Inc. Home Page   Volume  What is New




Internationally Recognised Genocide ?

News 480

Anti-Israel Lessons

Israel My Glory September-October 2014


The thoughts of the faith as of little children receive rupture in the violations of the nations. Indeed, the very lives of such are at risk in the current maelstrom in the Middle East, with its underlying vast and historically illiterate, incursive machinations against Israel.

There is a movement which views askance Israel's desire to be a place safe for Jews, as racist. There are many places RELATIVELY safe for Islamic people, if they want Islam. It is difficult to know what is the reason for wanting Jews to have NO place which is safe for Jews. Like Islamic peoples, Jews have their differences, though it is hard to find them killing each other the way many Islamic nations are doing to each other. The land of the Jews, Israel, brought back despite many predatory nations wanting to disrupt the League of Nations grant of Palestine to it as a national home,  want peace; numbers of other nations want to violate the integrity and purpose of their land so that there may a discriminatory, uneven, unequal  treatment, annulling the gift of the land, ignoring the reason for it, disruptive and dispersive of the nation. This involves with its aggressive and desolatory aims,     REMOVAL OF the SITE SAFE FOR JEWS.

Indeed, numbers even want Israel with such a status, to cease from very existence, and since this is specifically a refuge for Jewish people whose race have been slaughtered from pogrom to the present series of multinational assaults, it appears as a case of moral cardiac arrest. How is it that so many are actively propagandising as if genocide of a small people, one who have returned to historic roots many centuries before the faith of the Mohammedans even gained its name, were some kind of a virtue, as if extermination were not only apt for rats, indeed as if pogrom, Inquisition and Nazism were mere trial runs for more ultimate heartlessness, injustice and at times, even fraud.

It is as if it were some kind of a shame unless Israel were made to cease to exist as a refuge. An ultimate inhumanity bids fair to appear a mission of mercy, as the little, truncated land is bombarded, despite the enormously and blatantly treacherous offer of the UN, scattering the affirmation of the Leauge of Nations, to grant a national pittance, including an internationalised Jerusalem. Even this, however, was rejected by Israel's competitors in 1947, and many come to applaud this action on the part of many nations already regaled with loads of land, as they try to cry poor in terms of a forced re-entry even when military means failed, now served by propaganda means.

If Israel did not want terrorists to kill babies and young children and bussed youth, is that so surprising ? Did Britain find it objectionable to try and protect the same from another aggressive faith which wanted to take IT over ? Where is wisdom in all this ? It is not even to be seen. Let people who want to preserve an historic identity do so, for on what right, ground or rational basis is this to be censured ? Must those who want to eliminate a nation and say so, to be welcomed ? or do those who want to take it over so that it ceases to have its present identity or function, qualify as needing protection! Does Switzerland welcome interlopers who wish to change its form and purpose of government ? or is a productive nation of famed ingenuity to be deadened by the introduction of other paths, other ways, other ways of running it  ? Does Iran want this for itself ?

If now that people should come to  want, despite its very desired and safeguarding, its singular and needful refuge function, and without qualification or compromise of what it is trying to do for a grossly, infamously and incomparably persecuted race, for some reason in the future, to surrender its national character and function, historic roots and ethical character, what then ?

Then that is for it as an option, if and when it comes so to desire. If in parallel, Switzerland decided by a free vote that it was finished with its form of democracy and wished to have vast quantities of non-Swiss enter and become the majority, that would be its affair. We would not however expect its peculiar and in some ways fruitful and peaceable nature to be ruptured by those who found this possession of certain qualities and preferences in it, something to exterminate from outside it. If they wanted to delete the Swiss, as Germany and the USSR came near to deleting Poland, this would not be viewed favourably, but as one more militant massacre on the part of deluded ambition, suppressive swagger and entangling rupture.

Those who want to exterminate other vulnerable states, let alone those which have flourished in much larger grounds in the past, and seek to bring  confusion, disorder and suffering on such, which want to live in peace, to what in ambition may they be compared ? do they wish to become like Hitler, racist in disqualifying a race, racially organised in advancing another, odiously alive and murderously active.

If on the other hand, as in any other land,


they want to come in, join in the nature of the country in view,
forward its aims and conform to its nature, with freedom of thought and word


but not to aim by force to be alien to its grounds of existence -


in which case they are simply at war with it, seditious and plausible;

if physical actions do not occur to forward such disruptive attitudes,


then that is just a normal matter of immigration.

As in other cases, if subversives want to take over the country by force, then their entry would have to be watched for, and vetted as a form of illicit, subtle invasion.

What is so different, then, is that Israel alone is to be treated in this dog's body way; and if its endeavours not to be so taken over are discriminatorily viewed as if the rank assaults did not constitute invasion by more or less direct route, then what is the point of the exercise ?

Is it a reckless, racking act of mortal turpitude, brazenly held aloft instead of morality ? Is it to become a case of making genocide moral, or extermination of a nation a thing just and equitable and the endeavours of that nation, liable at any defeat to be  slaughtered as is becoming increasingly common AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL, at the hand of those of such persuasions, to  prevent such defeat, to be decried as a thing of shame! Is evil to be called good and good to be called evil, a charge of God in Isaiah 5 made in His own discipline of that ancient people! (Isaiah 5:18-21). If God disciplined Israel, is it imagined that morality is subvertible, or divine law a new heap for the ruin by the fiery racism involved and implicit in these hideous insurgencies ?

What glorious modern ideology is giving birth and existence to such activistic hate,  elaborate propaganda and religiously oriented take-over movement ? Hitler's racism was so deep as not  to lack a religious aspect, and all were to accept HIS VERSION of German rule on the  stated racial basis. The nations and groups were to be taken over,  though they might have preferred to live in peace, to be vilified though for all their various sins, they yet had no aspirations to  drown Germany! This was one-sided aggression, based on a semi-religious view of race. This was a riot of unreason.

So is this other, this more recent extension of anti-Semitism. To be sure, in terms of Christianity, there is a vast background for Israel; but this does not mean that violence against Israel is, or ever was, justified in terms of John 18:36, or that a change should be instituted by force ? That is neither wisdom nor justifiable. ALL nations and races and religions and values will of course in the presence of God be judged, whether for arrogance, proud innovation, devious twisting of truth concerning the Lord, or various insolent institutions of rivers of blood to amplify their power, presence or purposes. But this justifies none who take it upon themselves, like students in a class, to slay others in that class.

Violence and force, these remain what they are,  wholly inhuman and reductionism in resolving matters of religion and instituting right. Judgment is one thing; but it belongs to God who is competent in these heights and overviews, and gives His own testimony to truth*1.

Playing God is not a ground for seeking endorsement; but the height of folly. To forward it, becomes a kind of surrogate religion, and a brashly belligerent manner of gaining the desire, as if this were some kind of necessary allowance, like giving an allowance of several million a year as the RIGHT of an adolescent. It is not commendable and vastly to be abandoned, lest a whole nest of sins become vicariously and viciously present, to add  to the sins of the whole human race, which are already quite sufficient.




On this, for example, see the following.