How
Low Will Israel Stoop to Win the Propaganda War?
Writers Articles And Opinions
24 September 2009
By Stuart Littlewood
The Israel Project, a US media
advocacy group, has produced a revised training manual
to help the worldwide Zionist movement win the
propaganda war, keep their ill-gotten territorial
gains and persuade international audiences to accept
that their crimes are necessary and conform to "shared
values" between Israel and the civilised West.
It's a clever document
The manual teaches how to justify the slaughter, the
ethnic cleansing, the land-grabbing, the cruelty and
the blatant disregard for international law and UN
resolutions, and make it all smell sweeter with a
liberal squirt of the aerosol of persuasive language.
It is designed to hoodwink us ignorant and gullible
Americans and Europeans into believing that we
actually share values with the racist regime in Israel
and that its abominable behaviour is therefore
deserving of our support.
Israel is hoping for a PR massacre. The other side —
the Palestinian Authority and the PLO — don't take
communications seriously and have neglected to correct
Israeli distortion. They are happy, it seems, for
Israel's one-sided definitions to prevail, which of
course makes the task for Israel so much easier. This
latest propaganda offensive is potentially the `coup
de grace' to finish off the tormented Palestinians.
And the manual will no doubt serve as a communications
primer for the army of cyber-scribblers that Israel's
Ministry of Dirty Tricks is recruiting to spread
Zionism's poison across the internet.
This quote at the beginning sets the tone: "Remember,
it's not what you say that counts. It's what people
hear."
Top priority: demonise Hamas
The manual's numerous messages are aimed at the mass
of "persuadables" , primarily in America but also in
the UK. The strategy from the start is to isolate
democratically- elected Hamas and to rob the
resistance movement and the Palestinian population of
their human rights….
Clearly differentiate between the Palestinian people
and Hamas. There is an immediate and clear distinction
between the empathy Americans feel for the
Palestinians and the scorn they direct at Palestinian
leadership. Hamas is a terrorist organization –
Americans get that already. But if it sounds like you
are attacking the Palestinian people (even though they
elected Hamas) rather than their leadership, you will
lose public support. Right now, many Americans
sympathize with the plight of the Palestinians, and
that sympathy will increase if you fail to
differentiate the people from their leaders.
The plight of the Palestinians under Israel's heel was
an international concern long before Hamas appeared on
the scene.
But this scorning of leaders is familiar ground. We
scorned Bush and Blair and had to differentiate
between them and their respective peoples. We now have
to do the same with Barack Obama and Gordon Brown. We
are tired of having to make that same differentiation
between the Israeli people and the dreadful leaders
they produce.
ISRAEL'S RIGHT TO DEFENSIBLE BORDERS: With more than
three years of violent history since Israel's
agreement to withdraw from Gaza and portions of the
West Bank, Americans have had time to take stock of
the situation and form opinions. The big picture: they
believe that Hamas' leadership of Gaza has made Israel
and the region less safe, while some are more
receptive to what they perceive as a moderate approach
in the West Bank by Mahmoud Abbas. Based on these
experiences, they are willing to grant Israel more
leeway in resisting calls to give more land for more
peace.
Here we clearly see the motive for demonising Hamas….Israel
wants more leeway to continue its land-grabs and other
criminal activities.
If… If… If…Then.": Put the burden on Hamas to make the
first move for peace by using If's (and don't forget
to finish with a hard then to show Israel is a willing
peace partner). "If Hamas reforms… If Hamas recognize
our right to exist… If Hamas renounces terrorism… If
Hamas supports international peace agreements… then we
are willing to make peace today.
How daft can you get? Substitute Israel for Hamas.
Words that work
The manual sets out numerous examples of "words that
work" — supposedly.
We know that the Palestinians deserve leaders who will
care about the well being of their people, and who do
not simply take hundreds of millions of dollars in
assistance from America and Europe, put them in Swiss
bank accounts, and use them to support terror instead
of peace.
No mention here of the billions of tax dollars Israel
takes from the US and spends on munitions to
obliterate and vaporize its neighbours.
Peace can only be made with adversaries who want to
make peace with you. Terrorist organizations like
Iran-backed Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad are,
by definition, opposed to peaceful co-existence, and
determined to prevent reconciliation. I ask you, how
do you negotiate with those who want you dead?
Hamas and Hezbollah are only regarded as terrorists by
the White House and Tel Aviv and by US-Israeli stooges
and flag-wavers at Westminster and elsewhere.
In Executive Order 13224 – BLOCKING PROPERTY AND
PROHIBITING TRANSACTIONS WITH PERSONS WHO COMMIT,
THREATEN TO COMMIT, OR SUPPORT TERRORISM – Bush used
this definition: "The term "terrorism" means an
activity that —
(i) involves a violent act or an act dangerous to
human life, property, or infrastructure; and
(ii) appears to be intended —
(A) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(B) to influence the policy of a government by
intimidation or coercion; or
(C) to affect the conduct of a government by mass
destruction, assassination, kidnapping, or
hostage-taking. "
It describes the antics of the US and Israel
perfectly.
There is NEVER, EVER, any justification for the
deliberate slaughter of innocent women and children.
NEVER…. there is one fundamental principle that all
peoples from all parts of the globe will agree on:
civilized people do not target innocent women and
children for death.
Fine words, but where does that leave Israel, which
recently killed 320 children in Gaza and 773 civilians
including 109 women? From the start of the second
Intifada (uprising against the Israeli occupation) in
2000 to the end of last year Israel had slaughtered
4,936 Palestinians in their homeland, including 952
children, according to the Israeli human rights
organization B'Tselem. In the same period Palestinians
killed 490 Israelis in Israel including only 84
children. So Israel's kill-rate is at least 10 to 1,
and rising since the blitzkrieg on Gaza.
Iran-backed or US-backed – take your pick
Use humility. `I know that in trying to defend its
children and citizens from terrorists that Israel has
accidentally hurt innocent people. I know it, and I'm
sorry for it. But what can Israel do to defend itself?
If America had given up land for peace – and that land
had been used for launching rockets at America, what
would America do? Israel was attacked with thousands
of rockets from Iran-backed Palestinian terrorists in
Gaza. What should Israel have done to protect her
children?'
Palestinians too have a right to defend themselves.
Hamas was the popular choice of Palestinians at the
last election and is entitled under international law
to take up arms against an illegal occupier and
invader. If it is supported by Iran, so what? Israel
is extravagantly funded and supplied by the US. Here's
part of their begging-bowl "Military Aid Speech"….
Israel makes the request for military assistance out
of self-defense. As a democracy, they have the right
and the responsibility to protect our borders. As a
democracy, they have the right and the responsibility
to protect their citizens.
Israel does not ask for U.S. troops to protect itself.
It does not ask for a single American soldier to
protect its borders. It only asks for the funds for
them to protect themselves. They need the equipment so
that their own troops can ensure the safety of their
civilian population through this gathering conflict
with the enemies of democracy.
They didn't ask to have our nation built in range of
Iranian missiles. They didn't ask that their nation be
a focal point for religious extremists who have
declared war on the West and on democracy.
But they are, and they need your help.
And here's the rationale behind it….
Americans fundamentally believe that a democracy has a
right to protect its people and its borders. And while
Americans don't want to increase foreign aid in a time
of significant budgetary deficits and painful spending
cuts, there is one and only one argument that will
work for Israel (in four easy steps):
1) As a democracy, Israel has the right and the
responsibility to defend its borders and protect its
people.
2) Terrorist groups, including Iran-backed Hezbollah
and Hamas, continue to pose a direct threat to Israeli
security and have repeatedly taken innocent Israeli
lives.
3) Israel is America's one and only true ally in the
region. In these particularly unstable and dangerous
times, Israel should not be forced to go it alone.
4) With America's financial assistance, Israel can
defend its borders, protect its people, and provide
invaluable assistance to the American effort against
the war against terrorism.
It's evident that Americans don't believe in democracy
enough to allow Palestinian democracy to flourish.
"When the terror ends, Israel will no longer need to
have challenging checkpoints to inspect goods and
people. When the terror ends we will no longer need a
security fence."
There are no rockets coming out of the West Bank, so
why is the security fence still there – and still
being built? Why are the occupation troops still
there? Why are hundreds of checkpoints still there?
Why is Israel still stealing land, demolishing
Palestinian homes and building settlements there?
Remind people – again and again – that Israel wants
peace.
Reason One: If Americans see no hope for peace—if
they only see a continuation of a 2,000-year-long
episode of "Family Feud"—Americans will not want their
government to spend tax dollars or their President's
clout on helping Israel.
Reason Two: The speaker that is perceived as being
most for PEACE will win the
debate. Every time someone makes the plea for peace,
the reaction is positive. If you want to regain the
public relations advantage, peace should be at the
core of whatever message you wish to convey.
Israel does NOT want peace. It has never met its peace
agreement obligations. Every action is directed at
keeping the conflict going until the Israelis have
stolen enough land and established enough `facts on
the ground' – Jews-only settlements, highways,
disconnected Palestinian Bantustans – to enable them
to redraw the map to suit their expansionist agenda
and make the occupation PERMANENT.
Gaza in a vice
Israel made painful sacrifices and took a risk to give
peace a chance. They voluntarily removed over 9,000
settlers from Gaza and parts of the West Bank,
abandoning homes, schools, businesses, and places of
worship in the hopes of renewing the peace process.
Despite making an overture for peace by withdrawing
from Gaza, Israel continues to face terrorist attacks,
including rocket attacks and drive-by shootings of
innocent Israelis. Israel knows that for a lasting
peace, they must be free from terrorism and live with
defensible borders.
Israel never left. It still occupies Gazan airspace,
coastal waters and airwaves, and controls all borders
except Rafah where it nevertheless exerts a veto.
Israel has Gaza in a vice, which is crushing the tiny
enclave's economy, starving its 1.5 million citizens
and creating a huge humanitarian crisis in an attempt
to bring the elected government to its knees.
Draw direct parallels between Israel and
America—including the need to defend against
terrorism…. The more you focus on the similarities
between Israel and America, the more likely you are to
win the support of those who are neutral. Indeed,
Israel is an important American ally in the war
against terrorism, and faces many of the same
challenges as America in protecting their citizens.
Note how Israel's strategy is almost totally dependent
on the false idea that they are victims of terror and
western nations need to huddle together with Israel
for mutual protection. Fortunately, level-headed
people are beginning to realize who the terrorists
really are.
It is surely obvious by now that allowing parallels to
be drawn between Israel and America only serves to
increase the world's hatred of America. US citizens
need to wake up to this, and British citizens should
avoid falling into the same trap.
Inject with "core values" and repeat over and over
again…
The language of Israel is the language of America:
`democracy,' `freedom,' 'security,' and `peace.' These
four words are at the core of the American political,
economic, social, and cultural systems, and they
should be repeated as often as possible because they
resonate with virtually every American.
If so fluent in this language, why won't Israel
acknowledge their neighbours' rights to democracy,
freedom, security and peace and end their military
oppression?
A simple rule of thumb is that once you get to the
point of repeating the same message over and over
again so many times that you think you might get
sick—that is just about the time the public will wake
up and say `Hey—this person just might be saying
something interesting to me!' But don't confuse
messages with facts….
Never let facts get in the way of a good message!
How can the current Palestinian leadership honestly
say it will pursue peace when previous leaders
rejected an offer to create a Palestinian state just a
few short years ago and now refuse to live up to their
responsibilities as outlined in the Road Map?
This must be a reference to Barak's so-called
"generous offer", another of the myths Israelis love
to peddle. The West Bank and the Gaza Strip, seized by
Israel in 1967 and occupied ever since, comprise just
22% of pre-partition Palestine. When the Palestinians
signed the Oslo Agreement in 1993 they agreed to
accept the 22% and recognise Israel within `Green
Line' borders (i.e. the 1949 Armistice Line
established after the Arab-Israeli War). Conceding 78%
of the land that was originally theirs was an
astonishing compromise on the part of the
Palestinians.
But it wasn't enough for greedy Barak. His `generous
offer' required the inclusion of 69 Israeli
settlements within the 22% remnant. It was plain to
see on the map that these settlement blocs created
impossible borders and already severely disrupted
Palestinian life in the West Bank. Barak also demanded
the Palestinian territories be placed under "Temporary
Israeli Control", meaning Israeli military and
administrative control indefinitely. The `generous
offer' also gave Israel control over all the border
crossings of the new Palestinian State. What nation in
the world would accept that? The unacceptable reality
of Barak's offer, contained in the map, was hidden by
propaganda spin.
Later, at Taba, Barak produced a revised map but
withdrew it after his election defeat. Don't take my
word for it – the facts are well documented and
explained by organisations such as Gush Shalom.
Why is the world so silent about the written, vocal,
stated aims of Hamas?
Why is the world so silent about the written, stated
aims of the racist regime and its political parties?
Read their manifestos.
Successful communications is not about being able to
recite every fact from the long history of the
Arab-Israeli conflict. It is about pointing out a few
core principles of shared values—such as democracy and
freedom—and repeating them over and over again…. You
need to start with empathy for both sides, remind your
audience that Israel wants peace and then repeat the
messages of democracy, freedom, and peace over and
over again…. we need to repeat the message, on
average, ten times to be effective.
Is democracy a shared value? Israel is an ethnocracy.
Is freedom a shared value? The world is still waiting
for Israel to allow the Palestinians their freedom.
The situation in the Middle East may be complicated,
but all parties should adopt a simple approach: peace
first, political boundaries second.
Renounce resistance while still under Israel's
jackboot? The correct approach is for the
international community to first insist that Israel
complies with international law and the many UN
resolutions it has contemptuously ignored. The
boundaries are already defined. Whatever issues remain
to be decided, Palestinians should not have to
negotiate under occupation or duress.
Rockets, bombs and atrocities: the language of peace
Bottom line: What will happen if we fail to get the
world to care about the fact that Israeli parents in
southern Israel need to literally dodge rockets when
they drive their children to kindergarten in the
morning? What will happen if the world allows Iran,
the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism, to get
nuclear weapons? What will Israel do if bad press
causes American citizens to ask [their] government to
turn its back on Israel?
Why do I care so much about the success of your
communications efforts? I care because I never want
our children to live through what my family and yours
lived through in the Holocaust.
Only one in 500 makeshift Qassam rockets causes a
fatality, small beer compared to the devastation and
carnage resulting from Israel's state-of-the- art
rocketry targeted on Gaza. How does it look when
Palestinians are forced to pay a heavy price for the
Holocaust in Europe? And how much does Israel care
about the Palestinian holocaust it has caused?
The manual then gives a long glossary of terms. Here's
a sample….
"Deliberately firing rockets into civilian
communities" : Combine terrorist motive with civilian
visuals and you have the perfect illustration of what
Israel faced in Gaza and Lebanon. Especially with
regard to rocket attacks but useful for any kind of
terrorist attack, deliberate is the right word to use
to call out the intent behind the attacks. This is far
more powerful than describing the attacks as "random."
Israelis know all about bombarding civilian targets.
And they are careful not to mention that Sderot, until
recently the only Israeli township within range of
Gazan rockets, is built on the ruins of an ethnically
cleansed Palestinian village whose inhabitants were
forced from their homes by Jewish terrorists.
"Economic Diplomacy": This is a much more embracing
and popular term than the current lexicon of
"sanctions." It has appeal across the political
spectrum: the tough economic approach appeals to
Republicans, and the diplomacy component satisfies
Democrats.
This is a game we can all play. Israel is now
beginning to suffer "economic diplomacy" in the form
of worldwide boycotts.
"Economic Prosperity": Whenever Israel talks about the
"economic prosperity" of the Palestinians, it puts
Israel in the most positive light possible. After all,
who can disagree?
What sort of prosperity is it when nothing can be
imported or exported without Israel's approval and
fisherman can't even put to sea in their own waters
without having their boats shot up by the Israeli
navy?
"Human to Human": "We know that the average
Palestinian and the average Israeli want to come
together and make peace. They want to live in peace.
Israeli leaders have come together with Arab leaders
to make peace in the past. But how do you make peace
with Hamas and Hezbollah?
Simple. You get off their land and stay off. There can
be no peace under occupation. You have to be very
stupid not to understand that.
"Humanize Rockets": Paint a vivid picture of what life
is like in Israeli communities that are vulnerable to
attack. Yes, cite the number of rocket attacks that
have occurred. But immediately follow that up with
what it is like to make the nightly trek to the bomb
shelter.
Would Israel care to tell the world how many bombs,
rockets and shells (including the illegal and
prohibited variety) its F-16s, tanks, armed drones and
navy gunboats have poured into the densely-packed
humanity that is Gaza?
Still more advice….
"Living together, side by side". This is the best way
to describe the ultimate vision of a two-state
solution without using the phrase.
Sounds cute but is worn out. Who would want to live
alongside bigots and extremists who have made your
life a misery for 61 years?
When talking about a Palestinian partner, it is
essential to distinguish between Hamas and everyone
else. Only the most anti-Israel, pro- Palestinian
American expects Israel to negotiate with Hamas, so
you have to be clear that you are seeking a `moderate
Palestinian partner'.
Where are the moderate Israeli partners?
The fight is over IDEOLOGY – not land; terror, not
territory. Thus, you must avoid using Israel's
religious claims to land as a reason why Israel should
not give up land. Such claims only make Israel look
extremist to people who are not religious Christians
or Jews.
If the fight isn't about land, why did Israel steal it
at gunpoint? And why won't they give it back when told
to by the UN?
Think PRO-PALESTINIAN. While I have spoken about
Israeli casualties, I want to recognize those
Palestinians that have been killed or wounded, because
they are suffering as well. I particularly want to
reach out to Palestinian mothers who have lost their
children. No parent should have to bury their child.
Israel won't even allow cement into Gaza to build the
graves.
And so I say to my Palestinian colleagues … you can
stop the bloodshed. You can stop the suicide bombings
and rocket attacks. If you really want to, you can put
an end to this cycle of violence. If you won't do it
for our children, do it for your children.
This is recommended to activists as "an effective
Israeli sound bite".
I want to see a future where the Palestinians govern
themselves. Israel does not want to govern a single
Palestinian. Not one. We want them to govern
themselves. We want them to have complete
self-determination.
Israel is desperate to snuff out Palestine's fledgling
democracy and destroy the remnants of its government.
For decades Israel has dismissed the Palestinians'
right to self-determination.
The big picture approach is this: You must isolate
Hamas as:
– A critical cause of the delay in achieving a
two-state solution
– The biggest source of harm to the Palestinian
people, and
– The reason why Israel must defend its people from
living in terror.
Read from the Hamas Charter. Now, here's how to attack
Hamas: indict them with their own indoctrination
materials. Yes, people know Hamas is a terrorist
organization – but they don't know just how terrifying
Hamas can be. The absolute best way to heighten their
awareness is to read from the Hamas Charter itself.
Don't just "quote" from it. Read it. Out loud. Again
and again. Hand it out to everyone.
At last Israel makes a good point. After 3 years of
`government' Hamas must be mad to persist with its
ill-advised charter. They have been severely tested.
They have matured. They have earned credibility in
many eyes. Israel's behaviour makes Hamas look good.
But all that will count for nothing if they don't
re-write their charter as a matter of urgency.
Regev's pearls of wisdom. But how safe is the region
under the threat of Israel's nukes?
It's not just Israel who refuses to speak to Hamas.
It's the whole international community… Most of the
democratic world refuses to have a relationship with
Hamas because Hamas has refused to meet the most
minimal benchmarks of international behavior.
Isn't that a little cheeky, Mr Regev, coming from a
regime widely condemned for war crimes, piracy and
mega-lawlessness.
It was the former U.N. secretary general Kofi Anan
that put four benchmarks on the table. And he said,
speaking for the international community … That if
Hamas reforms itself … If Hamas recognizes my
country's right to live in freedom … If Hamas
renounces terrorism against innocent civilians … If
Hamas supports international agreements that are being
signed and agreed to concerning the peace process …
then the door is open. But unfortunately – tragically
– Hamas has failed to meet even one of those four
benchmarks. And that's why today Hamas is isolated
internationally. Even the United Nations refuses to
speak to Hamas.
Which of those benchmarks has Israel met, Mr Regev?
Israel is very concerned about the Iranian nuclear
program. And for good reason. Iran's President openly
talks about wiping Israel off the map. We see them
racing ahead on nuclear enrichment so they can have
enough fissile material to build a bomb. We see them
working on their ballistic missiles. We only saw, last
week, shooting a rocket to launch a so-called
satellite into outer space and so forth. The Iranian
nuclear program is a threat, not just to my country,
but to the entire region. And it's incumbent upon us
all to do what needs to be done to keep from
proliferating.
Why is Israel the only state in the region not to have
signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Mr Regev?
Are we all supposed to believe that Israel's 200 (or
is it 400?) nuclear warheads pose no threat? Would you
also like to comment on why Israel hasn't signed the
Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, and why it
has signed but not ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear
Test-Ban Treaty, similarly the Chemical Weapons
Convention? What proof do you have of Iran's nuclear
weapons plans?
And why do you persist in misquoting Mr Ahmadjinadad?
The Holy City is not up for grabs
The toughest issue to communicate will be the final
resolution of Jerusalem. Americans overwhelmingly want
Israel to be in charge of the religious holy sites and
are frankly afraid of the consequences should Israel
turn over control to the Palestinians. Consider:
• 71% of Americans trust Israel most to protect the
holy sites in Jerusalem, compared to 6.1% who trust
the Palestinian authority most. 8.5% percent trust
neither.
• 54% of Americans believe that "Jerusalem must remain
united under Israeli sovereignty" while just 23.9%
believe that `Jerusalem should be divided into Israeli
controlled and Palestinian controlled areas'.
Given the choice between the two, Americans of all
political and demographic stripes trust Israel to
protect and have sovereignty over Jerusalem.
Israel is in control right now and prevents Muslims
and Christians from outside the City visiting the holy
places. No way can Israel be trusted. The UN's
partition plan decreed that Jerusalem should become a
`corpus separatum' under international management. It
is unlikely that the UN would wish to see its
resolutions torn up or international law re-written
for Israel's sole benefit, regardless of America's
misinformed opinion.
Get the name-calling right
I'll close with the following extract….
Many on the left see an "Israel v. Palestinian" crisis
where Israel is Goliath and the Palestinians are
David. It is critical that they understand that this
is an Arab-Israeli crisis and that the force
undermining peace is Iran and their proxies Hezbollah,
Hamas and Islamic Jihad. You must not call Hamas just
Hamas. Call them what they are: Iran-backed Hamas.
Indeed, when they know that Iran is behind Hamas and
Hezbollah, they are much more supportive of Israel.
By the same token we must call the racist regime what
it is – US-backed Israel.
Iran's support for Hamas is difficult to quantify and
probably less than we think. It is likely that more
funding has come from Sunni Arab countries such as
Saudi Arabia and Qatar. In any case it is peanuts
compared to America's support for Israel.
Hamas is an offshoot of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhhod and
was founded in 1987 during the first Intifada.
Hezbollah came into being in 1982 in response to
US-backed Israel's invasion of Lebanon. So the
territorial ambitions of US-backed Israel provoked the
rise of both. Israel's problem is entirely
self-inflicted and shouldn't concern the rest of us.
It's no surprise that Hamas's election manifesto in
2006 called for maintaining the armed struggle against
US-backed Israel's illegal occupation of the
Palestinian Territories.
Our obligation to respect and promote human rights
The Israel Project describes itself as "devoted to
educating the press and the public about Israel while
promoting security, freedom and peace". It provides
journalists, leaders and opinion-formers with
"accurate information about Israel".
However its propaganda manual, which runs to 116
pages, is an unpleasant piece of work which recycles
many of the discredited techniques used by the
advertising industry before standards of honesty,
decency and truthfulness were brought in to protect
the public.
And it serves to undermine with clever words the
inalienable rights pledged by the UN and the world's
civilized nations to all peoples, including the
Palestinians.
When you have to stoop this low you simply don't have
a case.
Everyone should bear in mind the following, written
nearly 61 years ago:
Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS
UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common
standard of achievement for all peoples and all
nations, to the end that every individual and every
organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly
in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to
promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by
progressive measures, national and international, to
secure their universal and effective recognition and
observance, both among the peoples of Member States
themselves and among the peoples of territories under
their jurisdiction.
It would seem that Israel has not read or understood
the principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration,
which all nations signed up to. There can be no
excuse. Attempts to wipe out the rights of people who
happen to be in the way of the bulldozing Zionist
vision of a `Greater Israel' deserve no support
whatever.
Meanwhile the Palestinian side needs to de-bunk this
Zionist handbook and re-frame the Holy Land situation
in the language of truth. If the PA and the PLO won't
do it, who will?
Save
Add Comments To This Story