Israel Does Not Cause Anti-Semitism

There is a parallel that isn't looked at by those who blame Israel for Antisemitism.

It's this: When a car is in need of repairs, blaming how it was built, and how it operated according to specifications is daft. Something went wrong, and as long as those who are guilty of Antisemitism have that excused, the problem doesn't go away.

To draw a North American analogy, it's like the Colorado Avalanche, who have the fewest points in the National Hockey League right now, blaming the Washington Capitals, who have the most points, for the fact that the Colorado Avalanche have as few points as they currently have. When some are better than others, it's because of what didn't work by those who are behind, instead of what was accomplished by those who are ahead.

It seems that Roderick Francis Arthur Balfour, 5th Earl of Balfour, is under the impression that "the millions of Jews around the world" did not suffer anti-Semitism until Benjamin Netanyahu became the Prime Minister of Israel. This Etonian blissfully ignores the prevalence of anti-Semitism "around the world" even before Benjamin Netanyahu's premiership. This is not the place to list anti-Semitic incidents. I can expect his erroneous allegation from the keyboard of an ignorant plebeian but not from someone who worked most recently as director of the Rothschild Trust Corporation. During the first meeting between Weizmann and Arthur James Balfour, 1st Earl of Balfour, in 1906, they discussed Uganda scheme. Just before after Dr. Weizmann left, Lord Balfour said: "It is curious. The Jews I meet are quite different." Dr. Weizmann answered: "Mr. Balfour, you meet the wrong kind of Jews". After reading Lord Balfour's letter to the editor, New York Times, I felt he was the wrong kind of Balfour.

Until and unless the Palestinians accept Israel as the Jewish state and stop teaching their children, their youth and others to hate and want to destroy all Jews there will never be a Palestinian state. At this point, even should they claim a desire to want to do these things, a period of some years would have to pass before Israel could trust that the Palestinians actually wanted and were prepared to live in peace with them. Even then, there would have to be restrictions on Muslim brotherhood members, jihadists, Hamas followers and all other radicals from entering these territories. Given all that, it is hardly likely that a Palestinian state will ever come into existence. Far better for the Palestinians to live in Jordan with their Palestinian brethren, though it's highly unlikely that the Jordanians would welcome them. Best to follow Martin Sherman's plan and offer payment to all those prepared to live elsewhere and disincentives to those who are not prepared to leave.

OMG I cannot believe this. I guess the people in government are really the idiots I already think of them as. Why do they not see.
Those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it.
The Brotherhood of Muslims which still exists today, were one of Hitler's bigger fan clubs. They viewed his actions of eliminating Jewish people as highly admirable and to be emulated.
One can only assume the "guberments" are being given orders to be followed by the very top. Things will deteriorate to the point of all out civil if not world war. This will not only solve their perceived overpopulation issues but will also enable them to step in and offer the one world government as their solution?
Islam has zero shared values with the west. And they will never integrate.

Roderik, the current Earl of Balfour, doesn't want to take on Islamic extremism and bigotry, the root causes of Israel's predicament. Muslims are more numerous and violent than Jews and more influential in Britain. Roderik would rather appease Islam than stick up for a small faraway much-maligned country and miss a few nice dinner parties in London.

How do you make peace with a side that wants the other side DEAD? Please answer that Lord Balfour.

A Jewish state, we are here told, was intended to solve the problem of antisemitism. This problem has not been solved. A leading idea originally was that if most Jews in the world lived in a state of their own, or could easily move there, they could not be persecuted in other countries.

Israel as constituted is too small to accommodate most Jews in the world, even if they sought to live there, and can do so only by territorial expansion. This has provoked and will provoke regional and overseas opposition. Public presentation of this dilemma is not ipso facto antisemitic, nor indeed irrational.

If you have a connection with someone of historical importance it does not confer that person's importance or standing upon you. I would simply ask these questions, "Apart from this man's family connection with the late Lord Balfour, who is he? What has he achieved in his life? Why should his opinion be of the slightest interest to me or anyone else for that matter?" Like many others who bear a name that has connotations of past importance he confuses that importance of past events with his own self importance.

Great fathers particularly do not usually produce great sons as has been shown in history. Lord Arthur Balfour had an in-depth understanding of the Israel-Arab question. He acted based on a sense of fairness borne of clear understanding of the issues.
We can see that Roderick Balfour has very shallow and informed understanding of the issues here; and it is a shame. Roderick Balfour represents millions of Europeans who actually have no understanding of the issues they are trying to meddle in. Again shame. In this years of increased knowledge, double shame.

What Rod Balfour does not seem to recognise is that the Balfour Declaration led to the San Remo decision in 1920 to hand ALL of Palestine to the Jewish nation, including Jordan today (The Mandate for Palestine), and that decision together with the Declaration were accepted by the League of Nations, subsequently by the United Nations and is therefore still accepted as International Law. Hence, the Arabs in Judea and Samaria, who represent no nation at all, are demanding a state on land they occupy and refuse to compromise in any way - even to recognising Israel as a Jewish state. As for apartheid, who demands that their state be free of Jews or Arabs? Israel has over 20% of an Arab minority who enjoy equal rights with every race or religion in the country. Roderick Balfour is a shame to his ancestry.

"He argued further that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu 'owes it to the millions of Jews around the world'...to resolve the Israel-Palestine conflict."

This sounds incredibly naive. Since when has it been in Netanyahu's power to "resolve" the conflict, especially when Hamas (and probably the PA) really want to destroy Israel. Not that I'm any fan of Netanyahu's. The guy is a disaster and the settlements are something I cannot fathom. But while he could halt or at least limit the settlements, there is little else that Netanyahu can achieve without a serious peace partner among the Palestinians. He could no more "resolve" the I/P conflict single-handed than he could control the weather.

Seeing as some Britains - such as Balfour - seem to think it's OK to be anti-Semitic "because of" Israeli geopolitical issues, by the same line of thinking should not the rest of us be engaging in discrimination against Anglicans given the English-Scottish situation? Only stands to "reason," right?

Palestinians reject statehood because the status quo is a fat cash cow. Every year, the EU and US alone provide billions in direct and indirect aid. In return for that the Palestinians build no peace, no democracy, no courthouses, no schools, no tolerance, no market economy, no security, no rule of law etc.

The current Earl of Balfour, Roderick, begins his letter to the NY Times with: "In 1917, my forebear Arthur Balfour, as British foreign secretary, wrote the Balfour Declaration..."

Forbear [Forebear]: "A person from whom one is descended."

Roderick (5th Earl of) Balfour is the grandson of the nephew of Arthur (1st Earl of) Balfour. He is NOT a descendent of Arthur, who never married and did not have children.

Were it not for the arcane terms of the Earlship of Balfour, Roderick would be just another wealthy Englishman whose opinions and dissembling (beginning with the word "forbear") would not warrant the attention of the NY Times or anyone else.

See also: http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2017/02/the-earl-of-balfour-blames-antisemitism.html

The statement that Roderick Balfour has published is a shocking denigration of all Arthur Balfour stood for and achieved. The sheer ignorance recorded in this word simply defies understanding. People of his rank and privilege have absolutely no excuse for writing these libels and slander of Mr Netanyahu. He is the classic example of someone "following the pack" baying at the heels of those whose only desire is the total destruction of israel and Jewish people worldwide.
No doubt he too will pay the penalty for his ignorance. It will be a very costly one.

Same old argument if there were not any Jews there wouldn't be any antisemitism: it simply permutates from one extremist cause to another. With every cycle of bigotry the virus develops new antibodies, as if there is precedent. hence it is necessary for the Ayatollah to deny the Holocaust happened.

But it also metastasized. So that Germans who debated the efficacy and moral of ethnic cleansing as a result of witnessing first hand the Armenian genocide by the Turks planing the seed for the Germans to follow suit and they claimed they got the idea from America's reservation system. Each strain growing more virulent and numbers killed grew exponentially.

The carrier of the disease is denial. Denial is the host for moral indifference. Some systems like State Socialism, Radical Islamic beliefs are especially resilient when producing the virus and spreading it. some societies that had gone through the process and in shame recognized the truth of this despicable aspect of the human condition. Whether or not the serum a natural antibody is retained both a sense of moral responsibility and moral shame takes a hit with every denial.

And that is what the enemy of the peoples of the world claiming they love peace while spitting hate, burning cars, etc.,. hope to accomplish the erosion of moral strength by barraging us with lies and false narratives

The "Arab territory" to which the lord refers was designated in 1922 by international law, via the League of Nations-endorsed Mandate for Palestine as part of the Jewish National Home. That Home extends from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River according to that international law, which was acknowledged by Article 80 of the United Nations Charter.

It is inconceivable that a British lord, an educated, sophisticated gentleman, is unaware of these facts, hence his motivation in misrepresenting the facts is sinister.

The depraved death cult in Islam enjoys support from another death cult - the deniers of the sanctity of human life at all stages - the "progressive."

"At the present time, the hatred of the Islamic countries toward the West has become hatred against Christianity itself. Statesmen are now taking it into account that there is a grave danger that the temporal power of Islam may return on a broad scale, and with it, the menace that it may shake off a West which has ceased to be Christian, and affirm itself as a great anti-Christian world power. Muslim writers say, "When the locust swarms darken vast countries, they bear on their wings these Arabic words, "We are God's host, each of us has 99 eggs, and if we had 100, we should lay waste to the world and all that is in it."

No one could have said it better than Mr. Dershowitz. This is the perfect response to Roderick (does not deserve to be called by the name of his ancestor) and his ilk. Never has so few words done so much to clarify Israel's position and hopefully for all to behold. Next time an anti-Semite tries to justify his anti-Semitism in this manner just copy and paste! I'm sure Mr. Dershowitz would approve despite the plagiarism!

How can the delusional ramblings of an anti-Semite be "benign?"

The 21st Century is morphing back into the 20th Century rampage against the world' preferred scapegoat for all the troubles and problems/crisis facing Mankind. That is the Jew and even more specifically. Look no further then the corrupt United Nations.

The world during the 20th Century was never held accountable or ever took responsibility for its inactions. Israel has changed the way the Jewish community now responds.

It surprises no one, I am sure, that this descendant cannot hold the candle of enlightened thinking up to the previous more astute descendant. I say that with the sure knowledge that there is such a divergence from facts with this generations' Anti-Semitism.
It also astounds me that no one has bothered to educate this generation,... outside of Gatestones' arsenal of competent journalists.
To me the settlement issue presents a very sincere divergence from the normative caution of a brilliant Israel whose measured actions and responses have always seemed so precision-based with regard to perceptions, as well as realities. My stance is, Israel KNOWS WHAT'S BEST. This response within me is not based on a moral predetermination of Israeli rights; it is predicated on the notion that Israel is there, and I am a Gentile, here, with only questionable media veracity "guarding" my education on this or any issue...and, we all know how Nov.8ths' election left the media corporate "giants" looking rather "out-of-the-loop?!?!?"
I stand behind the construction of settlements for one reason. In order to have a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict,...you NEED settlements to "settle people"...it matters NOT who decides to "settle"...as long as they choose to "settle"!
I present to the vast intelligence available in thinking-America, a very important "play on words"! By actions alone, I give Israel lauds for the inducement to "settle" they have shown, in this dispute, with "settlements", even if on disputed geography!!! I DON'T SEE THE SAME CARE OR CONCERN in action on the opposition side!

Roderick Balfour, who currently holds the title of 5th Earl of Balfour, is not a descendant of Arthur Balfour, 1st Earl of Balfour, who was not married and had no children. He is even not a descendant of Gerald Balfour, Arthur's younger brother, who succeeded him as the 2nd Earl of Balfour, but a distant cousin of Gerald Arthur James Balfour, Gerald's grandson and the 4th Earl of Balfour. His betrayal of the Balfour family's noble Zionist heritage is of no consequence.

Both Jeremiah and Daniel prophecied that the persecution of the Jewish people would increase and that they would return to Israel immediately prior to the end times. This is yet another warning to the church (and Israel) that time is short and we should prepare for the return of the messiah.

Israel is a country admired by most. It could be argued that because of its success as an innovative and successful country, other less capable states may look at the tiny Jewish state with a degree of jealousy. Roderick Balfour's diatribe holds no water. Sorry Roddie but no cigar.

Unfortunately I think it unlikely that Rodrick Balfour will read your measured response to his recent letter to the New York Times.
Even if he did I doubt whether it would change his mind set.
Bigots like Balfour who continue to falsify the reality of the Israel/Palestinian conflict are usually beyond the reach of rational arguments.

Balfour claims that it is the fault of Israel that anti-Semitism is growing. Israel in a very minor way exists thanks to the Balfour Declaration it follows with this British kind of logic that anti-Semitism is caused by the British Balfour declaration. Time for all Brits to hit their chest and say Mea Culpa (stolen from Jewish religion). British anti-Semitism is not original. It was always the claim of anti-Semites that the Jews themselves are causing good people to hate them. Some still claim that we caused the Shoa. "Nothing new under the sun" a once wise Jew declared.