WHY DOES GREAT BRITAIN ESPECIALLY HAMMER ISRAEL WITH FRAUDULENT PROPAGANDISTIC NOMENCLATURE SUCH AS "ILLEGALLY OCCUPIED" AND "ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS"?

FOR A NATION THAT PUBLICLY SPEAKS OF ITSELF AS ISRAEL'S "ALLY", BRITAIN CALLS TO THE JEWISH MIND THE APHORISM, "WITH FRIENDS LIKE THESE, WHO NEEDS ENEMIES?" THE SAME CAN BE ESPECIALLY SAID OF EUROPE TODAY AND OF MUCH OF THE WORLD AND CERTAINLY OF HILLARY CLINTON, JOSEPH BIDEN, AND PRESIDENT OBAMA. BUT, WHAT IS IT, THAT MAKES THE VITRIOL OF THE BRITISH SO UNRELENTING, WAR-LIKE, MEGALOMANIACAL, AND PUZZLING?

It was not so long ago historically that Britain occupied what it chose to call "Palestine" after the name "Syria Palestina" given to that part of the world by the Romans during Rome's Middle East occupation. The British extended the term to apply to the territory eastwards of the Jordan River, which territory it referred to as "Transjordan". The British won this territory during WW1 [World War 1] by defeating the Syrians and Turks, who were allied with Germany. The underlying conflict was largely about oil supply for the war and long term oil rights in general in addition to the customary violence pertaining to political spheres of influence.

The British like to see themselves as being on the forefront of the historical fight for freedom, liberation, and liberty. Other nations tend to see them as elitists and imperialists. To be sure, the truth encompasses both aspects. Even the British, with their reputation for coldness and correctness, achieving at times an emotionless mechanical quality coupled with talent for great thespianism (witness Parliament), do actually have feelings and emotions like other people do. One suspects that the great bombing of London by the Germans during the early stages of WW2 (World War 2) may have had more than a little to do with the stereotypical subdued personality of Britain. One suspects as well that such phenomenon as the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, the Animals, Monty Python, and "Keeping Up Appearances" and "Are You Being Served" are all representative of the once and great Empire that was Britain, struggling to be itself again after the great bombing of London and all that the British suffered during WW2.

Whether as imperialist or as grand patriarch reticent to leave the "children" on their own, the British cannot have felt thrilled to have been targeted by their "Jewish" and "Arab" children for guerilla warfare bent on freedom and independence. However pernicious and inhibiting BRITISH OCCUPATION may have felt to the Jews and the Arabs, the British Patriarchy must have thought and represented their hegemony to be for the regional good and for the good of the Peoples within, however evolutionarily backwards the Brits may have regarded those Peoples to be.

Anyone, who has ever freed a trapped animal, knows that he or she must protect him or her self from the flailing and rage of the animal while it is trapped, and then from the possible venting of that rage on anything or anyone nearby, once that animal has gained it's freedom. Any parent knows that at some point a child has to grow up -- preferably on his or her own and out of the house. The troubles of an occupier are that an occupier rarely has the good instinct of a human freeing an animal, who knows when and how to set that animal free without getting into conflict with it, and an occupier tends to think of that which is occupied as Home of the Occupier. A parent may kick a child out of the house or give the house to the child; but, it is the right of the parent to choose and execute, not the other way around.

So, how dare these backwards, retrograde "Peoples" -- these Jews, these Arabs -- kick the Brits out of their "Home"! And, how dare these "Peoples" have such respective power today, even be they enemies! The Arabs with all their oil, the Jews with their spiritual and military might! How dare they challenge the Enlightenment brought to them and to the World by Great Britain! By Europe! By the USA!

So, segway to Palestine. The Brits know that the Arabs want to kick the Jews into the Mediterranean Sea. All the world knows that the Arabs want to kick the Jews into the Mediterranean Sea. The Brits know that there was never a People called "Palestinians" and never a State called "Palestine" and that it is completely a fabrication of British foreign policy to do so -- as does the rest of the world know this. The Brits know that Israel, as a political entity, has an identity going back thousands of years, including more than two-thousand years of foreign occupation. It was Israel that decisively motivated Britain to depart from it's occupation of the Holy Land after the close of WW2. So, revendfully, Britain targets Israel -- with it's BBC propaganda machine most especially -- framing Israel as "illegal occupier".

Use by the BBC of such loaded and biased nomenclature as: "Palestine" to refer to a non-existent state of [militant] Arabs, "settler" to refer to Jews building homes in their homeland [e.g. Jerusalem], "illegal settlers" to refer to Jews building homes in their historical homeland [e.g. Judea-Samaria], "illegal occupation" to refer to the presence of the Israeli military wherever there is disputed territory and wherever in those territories the Israeli military presence is essential for Israeli self-defense and for maintaining peace between the various Arab factions and for maintaining law and order -- all of that responsible Israeli behavior is derided and decried by the British, and one tool for this is the unrelenting use of fraudulent language to bully Israel with propaganda.

In their misguided vindictiveness the British pound and hammer Israel with propaganda, day after day, year after year, conducting their own "propaganda bombing" campaign against Israel analogous to the bombing Britain received from Hitler's Luftwaffe! Is it possible that the British tacitly think in the irrational mode that somehow, were it not for the Jews, that the bombing of London might never have happened? Is it possible, however ironically, that after sixty-years of freedom from the Nazis, that now the British are behaving like freed animals, lashing out at their most vulnerable ally and indirect liberator, Israel?

Indeed the media is replete with the idea that somehow "peace" in Israel between the Jews and the Arabs would be like oil on the troubled waters of other Arab or other Muslim nations at war! There is ugly anti-semitism behind such thinking, not merely the historical record of war and terror from Africa and the Middle East all the way to Asia, East Asia, and Indonesia, and from Arabia into Europe and across the Atlantic to the USA; there is also great strategic stupidity in such thinking.

Media fraud to propagandize against Israel by the British must not go unnoticed and must not be ignored by the British justice system, by the court of world opinion, and by an appropriate world court, even the Hague, if such an appropriate world court exists. This is not only true of Britain, it is also true in the media of Europe as a whole, as in these times Britain and Europe seek to rid themselves of the guilt of their own history by once again using the Jews as Scapegoat, by waging media wars of propaganda and fraud against Israel.

It is legitimate for the media to report activities that occur in "disputed territories;" it is illegitimate to refer to the disputed territories as "illegally occupied" or "illegally settled". It is legitimate to refer to the building of homes for Jews -- if such building is indeed within the confines of the Arab East Jerusalem -- as occurring within Arab East Jerusalem or the Arab Quarter of Jerusalem; it is illegitimate to refer to the Arab Quarter as "illegally occupied East Jerusalem. And so on, when reporting on such disputed territories as Sheba Farms, the Golan, Judea-Samaria [the "West Bank"], and Gaza.

And, there is a real occupation that ought to be addressed immediately by the world. It is the occupation of the soul of Gilad Shalit, 1,372 days captive today by Hamas, Hamas being Arab descendants of Arab allies to the Nazis. Today is DAY 1,372 of captivity for once young Gilad Shalit. Tomorrow is Erev Pesach, the day before Pesach [Passover]. Britain holds the power of persuasion to see to the freeing of Gilad Shalit by Hamas immediately.

Britain, your lands are already infested with crickets of Muslims, your population flows with the living blood of millions of Muslims, your airwaves croak like millions of frogs.... Britain, turn back from your Evil, lest you suffer the full wrath of The Miracle Plagues of The Almighty!

Free Gilad Shalit so that he may celebrate Pesach with his family in his home in Israel! Let Gilad Shalit go!

IT IS VITAL TO THE WORLD, NOT ONLY TO ISRAEL, THAT JERUSALEM REMAIN UNIFIED AND AN ISRAELI CITY.

IF THE WORLD HAS A STAKE IN POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, THEN IT CANNOT BE DENIED THAT THE RECOGNITION AND PRESERVATION OF JERUSALEM AS AN ENTIRELY ISRAELI CITY IS VITAL.

It is an interesting conundrum at the core of the creation of the United Nations, that the United Nations is body for the meeting of all member nations, and that despite the democratic appearance of the United Nations, not all member nations are required to be nor assumed to be democratic nations. Hence many nations are members of the UN, and yet are not democracies or are democracies in name only. Hence there are nations, such as Russia and China and Iran and Syria, which are UN members and which are not democracies or are democracies in name only.

It is well known that in recent years the UN has become increasingly anti-West as a body and in it's body of decision making.

It is well known that for many decades the UN has been decidedly biased against Israel, passing resolution after resolution without fairness or factual basis against the State of Israel.

It is not so well known, that as a matter of UN Law, Israel is prohibited to serve on the UN Security Council, even as it's enemy nations (e.g. Syria, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudia Arabia, Libya, Sudan, etc.) may and do serve on the UN Security Council. Imagine! These nations, famous for human rights abuses, serve on the UN Security Council! Oy, Vey!

When Jerusalem was under Arab hegemony, Jews were denied the right to pray at the Western Wall [commonly called the "Wailing Wall"]. This was also true and remains true, even within Israeli controlled borders, where in Arab "territories" of Israel, the State of Israel bows to local control, even when that means that Jews may not visit Holy Sites. Most famous of these are such places as the Machpellah Cave [Tomb of the Patriarchs] in Hebron, and Joseph's Tomb and Jacob's Well, both adjacent to each other on the outskirts of Nablus. Joseph's Tomb was desecrated by Arab Terrorists during the 2003 Intifada. Jews attempting to visit the Machpellah Cave are always at risk of stoning or riot or worse, and are prohibited from the Machpellah Cave most of the year. The Machpellah Cave is under the administration of the Waqf, which is the Arab religious authority, the same authority that oversees the famous Dome of the Rock Mosque. [The present Israeli Government recently announced that it intends to include the Machpellah Cave and Rachel's Tomb in a national heritage sites protection and rehabilitation plan.]

Under Israeli rule religious freedom is held as a sacred right for all including the Muslims as well as Christians, Bahai, Buddhists, Hindus, etc. This respect is taken to the incomprehensible conclusion that excludes the Waqf from showing all but the most minimal level of respect for Jewish worship at Jewish Holy Sites under Waqf hegemony. At this very moment the Waqf is well under way in it's excavations and construction of an huge Mosque directly below the present Al-Aqsa [Dome of the Rock] Mosque! This has been going on for years with the willing participation of the previous conciliatory Israeli Government, despite the rampant destruction of Israeli archaeological history resulting from the digging out of the rock.

There is a double standard in the world, that somehow it is okay for Arabs to disrespect the inherent religious right of any human being to worship as they choose, and that other religious bodies must disrespect themselves in favor of Muslim religious sensibilities. Israel is the proverbial "canary in the coal mine" in this respect.

It is disgusting enough that in the name of "peace", the Israeli government enforceably supports the Waqf in the denial of religious rights to Jews. One can see that today the Waqf barely allows or protects Jews with respect to visiting Jewish Holy Sites under Waqf administration. It is obvious that tomorrow, if statehood is granted to the Arabs of Judea-Samaria (commonly called the "West Bank"), the consequence will be that Jews will be denied access altogether.

Until recently East Jerusalem and Arab East Jerusalem and The Arab Quarter of Jerusalem were synonymous. Now the media speaks of "Illegal Israeli Occupied East Jerusalem" -- as if it were somehow illegal for a Jew to live there. In the mind of much of the media, the Arab Quarter is already the Capital of "Palestine" -- a political State that does not exist, at least not yet! And according to that same mentality, Jews have no right to live in the Arab Quarter, and the Arabs have the right to deny any such right to Jews, as they do most everywhere else under Arab or Muslim hegemony! Double standard? At least! There is no shortage of Arabs freely living in Jerusalem, who do not live in East Jerusalem. If an Arab chooses not to live in East Jerusalem and to live elsewhere in Jerusalem, it is not against the law. Nor is it against the law for a Jew to live in the Arab Quarter!

The historical behavior of the Arabs and the Waqf makes clear that if Jerusalem and/or Judea-Samaria become a world-sanctioned political hegemony, Jews will altogether be excluded and discriminated against. Whatever may come out on paper in terms of rights of Jews in a new "Palestine", the reality will be that Jews will be excluded and discriminated against. Pogroms against Jews are not unique to the history of Europe. The history of anti-Jewish pogroms by Palestinian Arabs is not a recent phenomenon of alleged Israeli "occupation". No paper agreement with any Arab authority will survive the bigotry or the Waqf or the Arabs themselves.

Europe and Russia are already so heavily populated with Muslims that Europe is often referred to as "Eurabea". Will the European nations divide themselves each in half, as they desire Israel to do, so that we will soon see, e.g. England alongside Saudia-England with capital cities London and London-Riyadh, e.g. France alongside Syria-France with capital cities Paris and Paris-Damascus, e.g. Germany alongside Iraq-Germany with capital cities Berlin and Berlin-Baghdad? Will we soon see Russia do the same, e.g. Russia alongside Iran-Russia with capital cities Moscow and Moscow-Tehran? Will we one day say Wahabi-Washinton, D.C. alongside our nation's Capitol?

Besides the simple fact that today's Eurabeans [not a coffee blend (please forgive the humor)] are in the majority not of Arab Palestinian extraction; it should be obvious, even to Europe, that the policies, history, and demographics of Europe today are as much the direct consequence of The Holocaust, as is Israel's existence as we know it today. Europe itself not only rolled over for Hitler; Europe actively aided and abetted the Nazis, as did Poland and parts of Russia such as the Ukraine, as did the Palestinian Arabs, all having bloody histories of hatred of Jews. So, now Europe and Russia, having largely ethnically cleansed themselves of Jews (even though today there are special protections for the few Jews remaining or returning), now face the Eurabea problem.

Europe and Russia, hammer-locked by increasing Muslim population growth, are caught between the extreme pressures to ethnically cleanse themselves of Muslims, and by their own pathetic politically correct rhetoric about democracy and equality even as they commit suicide! Symbolically resisting the suicide by enacting restraining laws against Muslims, one after another European State has already established new Law: restraining Muslim immigration into Holland, prohibiting the wearing of the "hajaf" [head scarf] by Muslim women in public in France, and prohibiting the construction of minarets on mosques in Switzerland.

One cannot help but think that Europe and Russia blame Israel for their ubiquitous Arab populations, as if somehow these Arabs are all "Palestinians" with a right to return to "Palestine" and that once an hypothetical new State of Palestine comes into being, all these "Palestinians" will happily and speedily leave their respective European and Russian host countries to return "home"!

Russia and Europe are mentally unstable to begin with; and, given their history of the past century and their current demographic dilemmas, Europe and Russia should profoundly re-examine their attitudes and policies towards the Arab-Israeli Conflict.

Russia and Europe will not find their increasing Muslim populations to be either democratic or tolerant of democracy. Russia and Europe inevitably must realize that the demands of democracy will require that they draw a line against Islam -- or die. They will have to limit their Muslim populations, just as Israel will, or enact segregation laws to enable peaceful co-existence. (Such an idea may fly in the face of the American mind in particular, as the word "segregation" has a loaded pejorative content with respect anti-Negro racism in America. There may be some similarities of context; but, in the largest context, America's struggle with racism is a different thing than facing the religious warfare of Islam, which is antithetical to democracy.)

As to the guilt of Russia and Europe for The Pogroms and The Holocaust: there is no theological or ethical axiom, nor democratic value, that demands Europe to seek out Muslims as the "Hand of God" in Punishment. Nor is there any similar democratic value or religious value that demands that democracies must allow anti-democracies to flourish in their midst to the point of the death of democratic hosts.

The sooner Israel formally annexes the disputed territories, and the sooner the world recognizes such annexation by Israel -- including Israel's 1967 annexation of Jerusalem -- the sooner Europe and Russia may grant themselves permission to be functional democracies and deal with their own demographic issues with Muslims -- lest they be guilty of causing their own ethnic cleansing at the hands of the Muslims.

No democratic impulse can support the division of the Arab Quarter from Jerusalem, nor Jerusalem from Israel, just as no democratic impulse can support the creation of another bigoted, anti-democratic, anti-Israeli, Arab State. Any such policy held and put forth against Israel, be it a long-standing policy or a new policy, must needs be oxymoronic in the eyes of Lady Liberty.