KEEN RESPONSE TO EARNEST PALESTINIAN

As always, in this battle against moral relativism, the always astute Hugh Fitzgerald from Jihad Watch separates the sticks from the stones in this reply to a self-proclaimed moderate Palestinian named Ibrahim who preaches from the old tired playbook of the eternal victim Muslims have adopted in their war of taqiyya against the West in general and against Israel in particular. Revisionism trumps the facts in their playbook. Mr. Fitzgerald's rather keen elucidation against the blurring of the facts speaks for itself.

Quite a few atheists in this particular foxhole, Ibrahim. But atheists who happen to know the history of the treatment, or mistreatment, of Jews and other non-Muslim (and non-Arab) minorities in the Middle East. Atheists who know the history of the Jews, including what happened in "Palestine" after the Muslim invasion. Atheists willing to do research into the cadastral (land ownership) records, and the demographic records, of that dusty part of the Ottoman Empire that, split between several vilayets and the separate sanjak of Jerusalem, did not have more than 100,000 people in the mid-19th century, with 15,000 in Jerusalem—a plurality of them, even then, Jews.

Atheists who know perfectly well why Lloyd George, Clemenceau, Jan Christiaan Smuts, and others who founded the League of Nations found it right, found it proper, found it just, to establish, among the various mandates (four Arab countries came out of those mandates, while the Kurds and the Armenians never had the promises made to them fulfilled, and the Jews received a dimidiated territory—only historic "Palestine" west of the Jordan —and that, of course, is precisely the territory that you know perfectly well, sir, the Arabs and Muslims have no intention of letting the Israelis permanently possess, no matter how many further territorial and other absurd concessions the Israelis, whose entire negotiating history for the past 59 years has been to give up, give up, give up, tangible gains for promises that are always and everywhere eventually breached, for those who follow the Treaty of Al Hudaibiyya (and as Majid Khadduri points out in "War and Peace in Islam" all Muslims follow Muhammad's example in that treaty, the 10-year hudna with the Meccans, broken by him after 18 months).

Yes, there are plenty of atheists, Protestants and Catholics too, and Hindus and Buddhists, and would you believe it? even Muslims of the Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only variety, and certainly every apostate I have ever met, who are deeply worried about, concerned about, and refuse to contemplate any further surrenders to the Lesser Jihad that will forever be conducted against it, the State of Israel.

Not everyone, contrary to your silly stereotype, is a holy-roller Bible-thumper who supports Israel. In fact, it only takes two things. It takes specific historical knowledge, and moral sense. And even if you lack that knowledge, and that sense, and all you know is that any further triumphs by Arab Muslims, either by pressuring Israel into still more idiotic and dangerous concessions, or by accepting the Arab narrative that attempts to disguise the Lesser Jihad as a "nationalist struggle" of that recently-invented (circa late 1967) "Palestinian people" (see Zohair Mohsen on this), will only whet, not sate, the Muslim appetite. In other words, all you have to know, now, if you are a non-Muslim, is that any concession, anywhere, to Msulim demands by any non-Muslim people or state, will be bad for all non-Muslims.

That is what many Infidels are coming to recognize. And in so doing, all the hard work of all those Arab, Muslim, and "Palestinian" propagandists over the past forty years is coming unravelled, coming undone.