Friday, August 24, 2012

The Best Charles Cogan Can Do

We have already spoken about Dr. Charles Cogan before, and basically he's just another anti-Israel Huffington Post blogger. This time around he is again speaking about the settlements, but his article is only half finished, as if it were partially formed in his mind before he put pen to paper. 

He begins by talking about the Balfour Declaration, which as we all know called for a Jewish national home in Palestine. Dr. Cogan points out that "Palestine" was not well defined at the time, something I think we all know, but became "historical Palestine" later on. Again, this is something that we know.

Then the settlements come in. Dr. Cogan points out that since the Balfour Declaration included Palestine as a national home for Jews, and the area now known as the "West Bank" is part of Palestine as it is known then, the argument goes that Jews should be allowed to live in the West Bank. Settlers do use this argument. I'm not sure I entirely agree with it, but I know that Dr. Cogan's counter to it is wrong.
'But the British Mandate also specified the following: ... "it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country." 
'But how could a mass influx of Jews into Palestine not prejudice the "civil and religious rights" of existing non-Jewish communities there?'
Good question, Dr. Cogan. Would you care to answer it? Or is this one of those statements that you assume is just too obvious and doesn't need backing up?

Notice how the Balfour Declaration does not use the term "human rights." It uses "religious and civil rights." A Jew living down the road from an Arab does not stop him from practicing his religion as he chooses. However, Arabs forbidding Jews from worshiping at say Sarah's tomb does. On the other hand, civil rights are rights that the government gives you. Again, no amount of Jewish people could affect the civil rights of Arabs there even if they wanted to, since until 1948 they didn't even rule the area.

The problem, as always, is that Arabs consider the presence of a Jewish person walking down the road to be a violation of "their rights" and react accordingly. This continues until this day. Not that Dr. Cogan will ever be bothered to condemn it.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Hey guys we've started to employ a slight comment policy. We used to have completely open comments but then people abused it. So our comment policy is such: No obvious trolling or spamming. And be warned: unlike the Huffington Post we actually enforce our comment policy.