Thursday, May 23, 2013

Answer Number Two to the Namavaran Network Corporation

Mike L.

Mr. Soleimani asks this:

2- In your opinion, is there any distinctions between Israel and Zionism?

That's a rather odd question.  Certainly there is a difference between Israel and Zionism.  Israel is a country.  Zionism is the political movement by which the country came into being.  I suppose one could interpret the question as asking whether or not Israel can, or should, exist as a non-Zionist state, i.e., as a state that does not represent the national homeland of the Jewish people.

If that is close to what you are actually asking then the answer is "no."  For the last four thousand years, or thereabouts, the Jews of the Middle East have lived on that tiny sliver of land as their home.  For thirteen of the last fourteen centuries they did so within the system of oppression, under Sharia, known as dhimmitude.  But, as I am exceedingly happy to report, the day of the dhimmi is done.  The Jews were second and third class citizens under the boot of Islamic imperialism from the seventh century, when Muhammed's armies conquered Judea and Samaria, until the fall of the Ottoman empire.  Although dhimmitude varied in its cruelty from time to time and place to place it was never better than African-Americans had it under the system of Jim Crow in the United States.  

Arab youths have always had a fondness for trying to injure or murder Jews by pelting them with stones.  The difference is that under the system of dhimmitude we had to take our beating and like it.  

Now we do not.  

The Jewish minority of the Middle East, due to the violent racism toward them by the overwhelming Arab-Muslim majority, have finally, after so many centuries, organized themselves in a manner as to protect themselves and their children.  Thus Israel is, and will remain, the nation-state of the Jewish people as a matter of self-defense.  If there was no long history of dhimmitude and brutality living under Sharia then there might not be any necessity for a Jewish state, but there is such a necessity.

Much of the world seems to think that it is the Jews who are the aggressors in the long Arab-Muslim war against us, but this is false.  Anyone who cares to take even a cursory glance at the history of the Jews in the Middle East knows that they were a persecuted minority for 13 centuries.

But, as I say, The Day of the Dhimmi is Done. 

We will go forward making computer bits and pieces and technological and medical doodads of all sorts, while sending Natalie Portmans out into the world, and the Arab-Muslim Middle East can continue to spread their hatred toward us, but so far - as a poker player - my money is on the Jews.


  1. Another excellent answer, Mike.

    Really nothing else to say!

  2. Oh, actually I do have something to add.


    Just a quick note that these questions seem tailored as softballs lobbed to a Daily Kos-style antisemitic anti-Zionist Western 'progressive' audience.

    That is to say, the very type of people who would viciously object to being characterized as exactly what they are (ranging from useful idiots like David Harris-Gershon, all the way down the line to the worst of the worst who freely push Jew-hating narratives with no qualms whatsoever), but who like to couch their hatred in currently 'acceptable' terms such as we see in the other interviews there.

    This is a learning moment, if nothing else. For all intents and purposes, many of those interviews may very well have been posted at Daily Kos...

  3. Cool answer Mike.

    Must say I had my reservations about you playing ball with these guys but can see where you're coming from.

    After reading Jays's comment I'm wondering whether it was mistaken identity sending you the questionnaire in the first place.

    1. We'll see if they actually publish anything that I write.

      I'll write it, anyway, that's for damn sure.