Our Children Are The Guarantors

Defending Zionism from its detractors. Anti-Zionism is a form of anti-Semitism. Let the other side apologize for a change.

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

A Brief Commentary on l’Affaire ADL

By now, probably everyone has heard about the disgrace wherein the Anti-Defamation League, in order to stay in good terms with Turkish officials, refused to condemn the Armenian Holocaust of 1915–8. The topic, particularly its moral implications, has been covered to the utmost in the Jewish blogosphere, and is one of the very rare occasions where I can agree with the diaries at Daily Kos (though the piggybacking of some of the commenters there in order to score their usual anti-Israel points remains as despicable as always). All I can add from the moral point of view is an analogy: it would be as if I were to cozy up to Stormfront just because of the prospect of them being allies in the resistance to Islam. (In practice, the Stormfronters are more likely to be allied with the Muslims, for the same reason Hitler was: their hatred of the Jews is stronger than their hatred of non-“Aryans”; but I had to bring up the Stormfront example, because their being the scum of the earth is a pretty wide concensus.) I hate Islam intensely, but no so much as to sell my soul.

On August 21 the ADL issued a statement, an feeble attempt at damage control. The closing paragraph of the statement reveals the thought-pattern behind the whole disgraceful affair:

Having said that, we continue to firmly believe that a Congressional resolution on such matters is a counterproductive diversion and will not foster reconciliation between Turks and Armenians and may put at risk the Turkish Jewish community and the important multilateral relationship between Turkey, Israel and the United States. [Emphasis mine. —ZY]

It was upon reading this that I felt the need to write this post. I cannot add much to the slew of criticisms from the moral point of view, but this pragmatic standpoint is right in my ballpark. The ADL’s pragmatic case for supporting Armenian Holocaust Denial is totally lacking.

I will say it forthright: Turkey is a “staff of bruised reed” (Hebrew mish’enet kaneh ratzutz, which the prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel called Egypt, in whom the Judeans trusted to save them from Babylon), as is any other Muslim-majority country. Yes, there may be a large portion of secularists loyal to Kemal Atatürk’s original vision, but the recent electoral victory of Islamic theocrats there did not appear from thin air, there had to be an even larger portion of people who are opposed to that vision. Yes, the military can reverse the rise of an Islamic government by a coup, as happened already in the past, but if a military coup is all that stands between a secular, pro-Western regime and a shariah-ruled, jihad-supporting one, then the state cannot be said to be a reliable ally, let alone worthy of making such soul-sacrifices to as the ADL just did.

The transformation of Iran from pro-Western to jihad-supporting in 1979 should be the most instructive example: wherever there is a Muslim majority, there is a push for the implementation of shariah and for making the state a base for the global jihad. Pro-Western puppets like Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan and Abu Mazen of the “Palestinian Authority” (oxymoron) are no good in countering that, for they are both hated by the Muslim populace for their collaboration with the non-Muslims, and, in an attempt to reduce that hatred, compromise on their aid to their non-Muslim benefactors (witness Musharraf’s gift of Waziristan to the jihadis a few months ago). No Muslim-majority state can ever be relied on for help against “radical Islam”, for the enemy is Islam itself, of which the jihadis are not an aberrant strain but the mainstream (active jihadis may number very few, but their supporters make up the majority of Muslims worldwide).

If it is pragmatic benefits we are discussing, then the best course of action, pragmatic as well as idealistic, is to support the expansion of non-Islamic states and steps toward de-Islamification of new territories taken by them, whether it be mass expulsion or an aggressively maintained system of incentives for leaving Islam and obstacles in the way of practicing it. It is far better pragmatically to support Greece and its retaking of former Greek lands in present-day Turkey, and from the other side, to support Armenia and its expansion. To support Turkey, even if it now seems Turkey can still hold on to Kemalian secularism, is to commit a long-term folly, just as it was Clinton’s folly to intervene in favor of a Muslim state in the Balkans (Bosnia), and the current Bush’s folly to try to democratize Iraq instead of de-Islamifying it. Throughout all the world, it is not in the interests of non-Muslims to support Muslim-majority states. Islam is the enemy, and politically incorrect and culturally imperialistic models are required in order to repulse the threat of subjugation to shariah law.

But don’t expect the ADL to alight upon these truths. The ADL is basking in former glory; it is now irrelevant, or nearly so, because it is trapped in the old view of anti-Semitism, in fighting the same enemies as it did decades ago. The ADL devotes precious little effort to shedding light on (let alone combating) the New Anti-Semitism, Jew-hatred in the form of anti-Zionism, of the Left, and the Left/Islam alliance that is working in tandem to make a repeat of the Holocaust (God forbid). Furthermore, the ADL’s mode of operation is now widely copied, by the enemies of the Jews in particular and of Western civilization in general, one of the most prominent examples being the Council for American–Islamic Relations (CAIR). This is a different age with different realities than when the ADL came to be, and the task of fighting for freedom and against Jew-hatred must be entrusted to those who are cognizant of the present situation. The ADL Affair serves as a demonstration of that truth.

[UPDATE, August 23, 2007] Seppuku-committing Jew Philip Weiss suggests that the reason for ADL’s stance was to stall the coming into awareness of the expulsion of the “Palestinians” in 1947–9, in the course of Israel’s War of Independence. A grain of salt with everything such people say, but assuming for the sake of argument: genocide and expulsion are not equivalent. Advocating mass expulsion, as I do incessantly, is nothing to be ashamed of when such an enemy is concerned—it wasn’t immoral to expel all the Sudeten Germans in 1945, and it’s not immoral now to expel all the Muslims from within and near non-Muslim states over all the world.

I have no problem with what happened in 1947–9. If anything, the only flaw was it wasn’t done thoroughly enough, and not at all when we took more of the Land of Israel in 1967. HaShem willing, we’ll do it right next time.

And to the Leftards: it’s either mass expulsion of the Muslims or “I for one welcome our new scimitar-wielding overlords”. You may think there are other options, but you’ll find out there aren’t any.

Labels: ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why should the modern government of the Republic of Turkey accept blame for the result of warfare between the Ottomans and the Armenians anyway? And, since it has been established that this was a brutal and tragic war, and that both sides suffered greatly, why are the Armenians fostering a political claim? Even without answering these questions, the never ending ranting by the Armenians against the savage Turks has fallen upon the ears of the Western world and has been responded to in knee-jerk fashion. The Armenians have not only gained the support of the Christian world, but also the main stream Jewish establishment. Even when esteemed historians with no Ottoman or Turkish allegiance, such as the late Prof. Stanford Shaw (UCLA), Prof. Bernard Lewis (Princeton University), and Justin McCarthy (Univ. of Louisville), all agree that the so-called Armenian genocide was no genocide.

August 23, 2007 8:42 AM  
Blogger Michael said...

You said: Furthermore, the ADL’s mode of operation is now widely copied, by the enemies of the Jews in particular and of Western civilization in general, one of the most prominent examples being the Council for American–Islamic Relations (CAIR).

A most interesting point. In some ways, it's a backhanded compliment to us (Jews as a community), but it's also a deep threat that needs to be countered.

The question is, what are the tactics to use, now that the old tried-and-true methods have been co-opted by the enemy?

I have some ideas.

First, groups like CAIR need to be hit with an all-out media blitz. Every time they speak, someone must counter their comments with documented cases of their supporting terrorits, wanting to undermine the US gov't, etc.

Second, everytime they file a lawsuit, a counter-suit must be filed against them. Even if it's just for filin a frivolous suit (you can sue for that, in the States). But don't let them get away with the scare tactics. And remind every judge and potential juror of the CAIR suits that have been dismissed or dropped for lack of evidence on CAIR's part.

Finally, every Jewish communal spokesman must have, at hand, counterpoints available for every attack that CAIR and their allies have ever used.

And if all of this sounds familiar, it's just Karl Rove's tactics from the 04 election campaign: attack, attack, attack.

August 23, 2007 11:45 AM  
Blogger ZionistYoungster said...


It's not about modern Turkey accepting blame, it's about recognition of a historical event. In the Jewish case, for example, everyone agreed that the reparations paid by Germany to the state of Israel in the 1950s weren't any compensation, because life has no price (the whole idea was very controversial at the time--the late Menachem Begin was most vehement in rejecting the idea, and lashed at Ben Gurion for proposing it at all). It isn't about compensation (which is impossible) or revenge (which isn't ours to take), it's about recognition.

I think it's the same for the Armenians. Over a million of them killed, systematically so, and the subject isn't even up for grabs as far as the government of modern Turkey is concerned?! Even Ahmadinejad (may he go to hell soon, amen) isn't as bad--he dresses his Jewish Holocaust Denial with the clothing of "a call for debate". The government officials of the modern Republic of Turkey aren't willing to permit even that. This is the diametric opposite of imprisoning people for expressing skepticism of the Jewish Holocaust. If the government of Turkey agreed to permit debate of the question whether the Armenian deaths were the result of unrestrained warfare (highly doubtful, to my mind--even the most blatant "going medieval" doesn't end with so many civilian deaths) or a planned, systematic action, that would be a step up from the current situation. And for any Jew to accept a situation far worse than goes for the Jewish Holocaust is the utmost in hypocrisy and selling one's soul to the Devil.

Even without the Armenian question, however, modern Turkey is a security threat to the world, as are all Muslim-majority countries. The world is having enough trouble with Islamic Iran, ever since 1979; the recent demonstration of Turkey's susceptibility to a similar event (the rise of Islamic theocracy) ought to make it clear that it is not in the interests of the non-Muslim world to support that state. This issue is not about past blame, it's about the present. Islam is a threat at the present.


The big problem is that CAIR is padded with Saudi oil-money. Their suits may have no merit, but they can draw them out long, financially damaging the other party.

I admit I'm not very knowledgeable about this, so I don't know whether to agree or disagree with you about the efficiency of those Rovian tactics. (He was a magnificent mamzer, Rove was!) It's obvious to me that, when all hell breaks loose in the world, all the CAIRmen will be either booted back to the cube in the desert where they came from, or dangling from the noose for sedition. But of course that's not where we're at yet, so some kind of tactics must be found. I find this so frustrating, because this is all a textbook case of [our civilization] being impaled on one's own sword.

HaShem bless you.

August 23, 2007 12:53 PM  
Blogger Yankee Doodle said...

Certain elements in Israel are in very tight with those in power in Turkey. Together, they have friends in high places in Washington -- it's good for business, if you know what I mean.

The moment it's not, Turkey will slit Israel's throat at the drop of a hat, and those guys in Washington will only step in if forced to.

August 24, 2007 3:48 AM  
Blogger ZionistYoungster said...

Yankee Doodle,

It's like the relations between Israel and Egypt. Sadat made the peace agreement because the wars with Israel were hurting Egypt's economy, and that's the main reason why Mubarak is still, formally, keeping them. But that doesn't prevent the Egyptians from supporting Fakestinian terrorism from the side, not to mention being the center of production for anti-Jewish brainwashing material.

Good relations is what Israel and Iran had until 1979, and that's my whole point: Israel has no reliable peace partner, let alone friend and ally, among the Muslim-majority nations. And the same for non-Muslims with regard to Muslims in general. Some years ago there was an item in Yediot Achronot's (one of Israel's major newspapers) weekend addendum about the enmity between Azerbaijan and Armenia, and the reporter unabashedly took sides with the Azeris, who are [Shi'ite] Muslims. My views weren't yet as orderly as they are now, but already then I said to myself, "This is sheer folly".

What do you mean by, "Turkey will slit Israel's throat at the drop of a hat", by the way? Just a figure of speech for double-crossing, or is this another instance of the idea (often voiced in lefty sites) that, without its external helpers like the USA, Israel would fall to its enemies like a house of cards? If the latter, then that's an unbelieving point of view.

August 24, 2007 1:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


ZY, youve got to check that articel out

August 27, 2007 6:58 PM  
Blogger ZionistYoungster said...


As long as there's debate on it, that's OK. I support the right to debate the Jewish Holocaust too, for that matter, and am opposed to imprisoning those who question it. Not to mention that I think the question of Holocaust Denial should take a back seat to the question of Zionism Denial (the denial of the ancient connection of us Jews to the Land of Israel, which manifests in framing Zionism as 19th-century colonialism).

The trouble is, Turkey is doing to those who talk of an Armenian genocide the same thing that's being done to Holocaust Denial: silencing. I can't support that. I support silencing only in case of threat to life (as is the case brought in my recent post, Beyond Offense).

The jury may be out, but theoretically, I don't put it beyond the Muslims (the Ottoman Turks were staunchly Islamic) to do such a thing. They did that before. Ask the Hindus, or the Jewish tribe of Banu Qoreizah in Mohammed's time. Planned mass-murder is hardly something that the inventors of the suicide-vest could be incapable of doing or having done.

And regardless of what the final verdict may be, I can't stand with Turkey. They're Muslims, therefore our enemies, and that closes the case for me.

I had a feeling I was wading into murky waters when I wrote this post. But if I were to withhold writing every time I felt the post might attract controversy, there'd be very little left of this blog, if at all.

HaShem bless you.

August 27, 2007 8:17 PM  
Blogger ZionistYoungster said...

P.S. I'm inclined to agree with what one of the anonymous commenters on Sultan Knish's post said:

"Wow, You have illustrated exactly how the recognition of the Holocaust will be lost over the next fifty years."

Sorry, but I find I disagree with both Sultan Knish and Steven Plaut on this. Oh, their copious citations for proving their points? The Zionism Deniers a.k.a. the Fakestinians and their supporters can boast of the same. I'm not impressed.

August 27, 2007 8:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1) ZY, Very well thought out post.

2) First anonymous:
Sorry but as has been noted in several scholarly journals, including ones coverings scandals of Turkish funding of these "studies" you seem to be aware of several scandal which have been reported in the Chronical of higher education as well as several periodicals dealing with historiography.
Shaw's wife is Turkish, so are his grandchildren. His family has business and holdings in Turkey. There is no one more politically connected to the Turkish military and nationalists than Bernard Lewis. Justin McCarthy authors books subsidized by Turkish government institutions.

In short yo just named the three main deniers, and claimed they have no connection to Turkey when the opposite is true.

3) Looking at the Sultan Knish website referenced by one commenter, I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

It isn't factually correct as anyone with a background in history will tell you. More to the point Sultan Knish is employing the exact mode of the Holocaust deniers! Really quite shocking garbage.

Ironically all but a tiny fraction of Ottoman Armenians males of fighting age were in the Ottoman Army and "worker battalions" as draftees at the time. Thy were fighting for the Ottomans outside of Armenia while almost all of their mothers, fathers, wives, sisters and children were being slaughter by the Ottomans.

-- Avi --

August 27, 2007 9:51 PM  
Blogger ZionistYoungster said...


Thanks, though I think that post wasn't so much well-thought as it was common-sensical. My assumption is that the Armenian Genocide is a matter of academic concensus just as much as the Holocaust is, or the Theory of Evolution is in biology. Of course, I am aware of dissenting voices, but the fact that all begin with the general tone of, "We've all grown up on believing X, but recent research shows that it was all a myth, and the truth is Y", is enough to make me suspicious at the very least.

What was thought-out in my post was the pragmatic point, that Turkey, by virtue of being a Muslim-majority country, is not a horse to bet on. Even if the tables were turned, i.e. history were conclusive about a Turkish genocide by the Armenians, I'd side with the Armenians, just as I now support German activists against the Islamization of Europe.

Ironic in Sultan Knish's post is that he says, "There is no reason for Jews to take sides in the ongoing conflict between Turks and Armenians over their history" (and so on in the last paragraph), but that is exactly what his entire post does, beginning with the very title! That's strictly not Sultan Knish's fault, because standing up for the truth usually means you have to take some side, but that makes that the last paragraph all the stranger. At any rate, I don't think I'm taking sides too blatantly when I just advocate free debate of this whole historical issue, which Turkey does not currently allow. As for my siding with the Armenians, again, this has little to do with history, and much to do with the present situation: I don't side with Muslims.

What a mess. But without taking risks, life loses its whole taste.

HaShem bless you.

August 27, 2007 10:33 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home