Kenan Camurcu

In the boring, propaganda-laden second season finale of the Mo series, which began as a charming and entertaining intercultural comedy on Netflix, the mother, Yusra Najjar, speaks to a harassing police officer at Ben Gurion Airport when she visits her relatives in Palestine. Her intention is to deliver a strong social message to the officer (but actually to us, the viewers):

Yusra: Where are you from?

Police Officer: I'm Israeli.

Yusra: No, I mean, where did your grandparents come from?

Police Officer: My grandparents were from Spain.

Yusra: I was born here. My family was also born here. But you're still questioning me.

Let me remind you that before the scenes of the airport police harassing the family, "October 6, 2023" appeared and disappeared on the screen as the date of that day. This implies that the massacre of 1200 people in Israeli settlements and the taking of 250 hostages, including babies, a day later in the Qassam attack, was noted as a deserved treatment for the Jews.

Victimhood rhetoric is at the forefront of the Palestine industry's method of justifying and legitimizing even the most horrific acts.

The dialogue in the Mo series essentially represents the Palestinian thought model. This is the template that sees/presents themselves as indigenous and Jews as foreigners and thus occupiers. Mother Yusra also spits and curses when England is mentioned, but there is no doubt that if the British, like the Romans, had ethnically cleansed Jews in favor of Palestinians, she would have remembered them with blessings and prayers.

Palestinians were grateful to Rome for exiling Jews and giving them the land due to their freedom revolts. And also for the Muslim conquerors continuing Rome's political legacy. It's said that happiness cannot be built on another's pain, yet Palestinians see no harm in this and can ask bizarre questions to Jews, who have aimed to return to their homeland since the time of Moses, such as "who are you, what are you doing here, why did you come here?" This implies that even though this land, whose original name is Judea/Judaea, belongs to Jews, they should accept that they were exiled and lost their right, and leave the place. If they don't do this themselves, Palestinians gain the right to resort to violence. This is an entirely unsympathetic, unpleasant, absurd, and illogical chain of reasoning. Even the most ultra-extremist Israeli factions, despite causing various injustices, would not legitimize, justify, or morally validate these strange propositions and equations.

According to this logic, for example, Turks who immigrated to Anatolia in the 11th century would be considered occupiers and should not be there. Moreover, unlike Jews, they are not the original owners of the land. They are foreigners. Yet, in the streets of Turkey, Turks hoist the flag of this Palestinian idea and organize demonstrations demanding Jews leave Palestine.

Shouldn't the tragedy of Jewish immigrants becoming immigrants in their historical homeland after centuries of exile across the world move Muslim hearts? Is it fair to react to the migration of Jews to Judea in this way? Can it be explained by any sentiment other than hatred of Semitic origins? Does hatred of Semitic origins fit within humanity? Are not the reciprocal massacres, destructions, killings, and crimes that followed Muslim harassment, abuse, and attacks on Jewish immigrants shameful? Is it forgivable to enter into a full-scale conflict instead of isolating the extremists on both sides and striving for a reasonable and moderate consensus?

The final photograph of the disaster is when there is nothing left to do after the phase where the powerful can do anything has been reached. Muslims are those who consider that last moment to be the entirety and essence of the incident.

The Defeat of Those Who Choose War Is Not Victimhood

Palestinians, who see war and conflict as the only remaining option in the face of insolubility, constantly complain and whine about the disastrous consequences of the path they have chosen. In the wars of 1948, 1967, and 1973, and in numerous attacks by the PLO and Hamas, Palestinians were always the ones to make the first move and start the war, but they were defeated in every instance. In the laws of war, it's a rule that the defeat of the aggressing party is a just and legitimate reason for the loss of rights. However, Palestinians want the rules to be changed for them, and for defeat to grant them rights.

Starting from the Romans, when states exiled Jews from their homeland, Palestinians did not complain. They seized everything the Jews left behind. Subsequently, as Muslims continued this legacy, Palestinians multiplied while the original inhabitants of Judea, the Jews, diminished. You know, in verse 140 of the surah that speaks of the family of Imran (Alu Imran), it says, "Such days We alternate among the people," implying that when the wheel turns and Jews return by their own efforts to the lands from which they were brutally exiled, it is not easy to find justification in the Palestinians' cries of victimhood.

Tensions between Palestinians and Israelis in daily life are outside our scope. This is because a thousand variables can play a role there: personal calculations, jealousies, power struggles, conflicts and quarrels over trivial matters, etc. War, however, is a very different situation. The laws of war exist for this very reason, to be adhered to when disagreement and tension turn into hot war. But let's not forget, those laws concern two sides that have taken up arms against each other. That's why member states have signed the UN convention that sets criteria for wartime conditions and casualties.

Politics, propaganda, slogans, and the like will always exist. Parties do this to gain psychological and media advantage over each other. But there must also be those who look at the issue from a legal perspective. Of course, it may be startling at first glance, but in international law, there is a concept called "reasonable civilian casualty rate." Işın Eliçin addressed this issue in her article titled "War and Civilian Casualties." The UN Human Development Report found 9 civilian casualties per 1 soldier to be reasonable. In the Gaza war, which began with Hamas's attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, there were no uniformed soldiers among the 1200+ Israelis killed by Hamas, according to UN criteria. Nor were there any civilian-clothed individuals who retaliated with weapons. Therefore, all Israelis killed by Qassam militants are considered civilians. This is why the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague issued arrest warrants for Hamas leaders Deif, Haniyeh, and Sinwar. But since they died before they could be arrested, the case was dropped.

Although Israelis claim that civilian casualties in Gaza are in line with the UN's "reasonable civilian casualty rate," the ICC also issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Gallant on charges of violating the laws of war. Despite this, Israelis claim they did not violate the law. One piece of evidence is a letter sent by Hamas's Khan Younis commander to Sinwar during the war, stating that half of his forces had been killed and asking for help. According to this, the number of Hamas fighters lost is over 20,000. According to Israeli claims, when the number of killed uniformed or non-uniformed fighters is subtracted from Hamas's announced 45,000 casualties, the remaining ratio of civilians to combatants is well below the UN's ratio of 9 civilians per 1 soldier.

This means that, according to UN criteria, the war crime committed by Qassam militants in massacring elderly, women, and children civilians is actually qualitatively greater than Netanyahu's. There is documented proof that the excited, unconscious individuals who refer to Netanyahu with the insult "baby killer" can comfortably attribute the same epithet to Hamas and Qassam.

It will be recalled that Hamas supporters initially denied the accusation of killing Israeli civilians in the first few days after October 7. Those making the statements probably relied on the fact that the Israeli side would not release images due to respect for the deceased and their families, unlike their own disregard for human and Islamic limits in corpse display. They guessed correctly; Israel did not officially release the horrific images of the 1200 people massacred in one day. For this reason, Hamas leaders initially called the accusations of killing innocents "Zionist lies." But when images of elderly people, children, and families being targeted and killed began to leak, they resorted to the justification that "such things happen in wars." Well, for those things that happen in wars, according to UN criteria, the civilians targeted and killed by Hamas are many times higher than the rate considered a war crime.

Given this, it becomes clear that the sole purpose of those who wave the mutilated bodies of children in Gaza in front of cameras is not just media propaganda aimed at creating outrage. It's highly probable that those demonstrations with tiny war victims were also intended to downplay the fact that Qassam militants did something similar in Israel and to prevent it from entering the media agenda.

It is thought that one reason for Trump's statement that "Palestinians have no alternative but leaving Gaza" after watching the footage of the October 7 massacre, filmed by Qassam militants with body cameras for propaganda purposes, was these horrific images that were not released to the public.

For us, war itself is a crime. No conflict can be considered legitimate except for self-defense against an attack. Hamas's civilian massacre and the Likud's are on the same plane. The difference in numbers does not affect this judgment. Because killing even a single innocent person is like killing all humanity (Maide 32). Therefore, what we have written here does not address the slogan merchants who use the Gaza war as an excuse to unleash their accumulated anger and hatred. Instead of shouting memorized slogans in the fan stands, we pursue what is true and real. Truth itself is valuable, and it does not matter on whose side it manifests.

"Thank God I'm Not a Muslim"

There is nothing to value in being targeted with the accusation that we pursue justice, rights, truth, and what is right, and do not take the side of Muslims and Palestinians, even if they are wrong. This is because Islam does not mean belief, faith, spiritual perfection, justice, and fairness; it requires defending one's own tribe and tribal members, even if they are wrong, mistaken, and guilty. This is the custom of ignorance that the Prophet tried to abolish but failed.

To be able to subject Islam itself, starting from the Palestine industry, to reasoning, investigation, examination, analysis, and questioning, it is necessary to step outside this tightly marked belief system. It is not enough to escape from fiqh, which is the algorithm for keeping social life under control. One must abandon the entire package of Islam, including fiqh and creed. Just as the Prophet was called in Mecca to break away from the dominant, established pagan mechanism labeled "the religion of Abraham," which even attracted slaves, and to turn towards the pristine beginning, the principle of nature/existence created by Allah (Rum 30).

If there is a global "ex-muslim" trend, this new wave mostly refers to atheists. I have also been an ex-Muslim for a while, I don't define myself with Islam, and when the cliché "we are all Muslims" is used in social settings, I even say "thank God I'm not." However, I am also aware that we are part of an immense existence and being that atheism, a shallow political activism lacking philosophical depth, cannot explain. Spinoza and Ibn Arabi both explored the possibility of a new explanation with the same sentiment. After stepping out into a different universe through the opening they created, I became convinced of the futility of trying to explain that the oddities circulating were not found in the original Islam. I am among those who believe in the unnecessary burden of carrying the baggage of historical Islam, full of contradictions and irritating evils.

Mustafa Öztürk, when asked if he was a deist, explained that if believing like Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi and Sadreddin Konevi is deism, then he could be included in that list. He also stated that his new belief is pantheist. That is, the "emanation" theory of the Farabi, Ibn Sina school. God is not nature itself, but nature is not an independent entity separated from God. It is the gradual and evolutionary manifestation of existence through the overflowing (fayz) of God's indescribable essence. Whether one is convinced by the simulation universe/life explanation or is curious about the secret of divine manifestation/theophany/revelation, it's the same; the quantum universe consists of a concentrated essence. Placing a creative God at the head of this truth or assuming a creative nothingness does not change the outcome or the reality. It's a good start that I wholeheartedly agree with. In my article "Nature Religion Islam", I had briefly touched upon the principle and nature of existence.

It is impossible to think and act in accordance with the two fundamental principles of revelation without separating from the tribal, clan solidarity that prioritizes truth, and from the power-hungry, established/popular/institutionalized Islam addicted to power and wealth: 1) You shall uphold justice, truth, and righteousness, even if it is against yourself (Nisa 135), 2) Even if you harbor hatred towards a people due to unhealthy sentiments, you shall not deviate from justice, righteousness, and truth (Maide 8).

For forty years, within the prison of Muslim identity at the level of social inclusion, I wrote and spoke about Israel, Zionism, Palestine, and so on. I confess, they were largely unreasoned dogmas and clichés. But thank God, I was never antisemitic at any point in my life. The perversion of viewing all Jews, including children, as cursed and believing that whatever is done to them is deserved, always disgusted me. Perhaps because of the validity of the hypothesis that a person's name influences their personality.

Yes, like all other ideological obsessive neuroses, Islam is a prison. Primarily for believers, but also for people in general. As my elder brother Ahmet (Turan Alkan) added Sivas, where I studied until third grade, as the sixth city to Tanpınar's "Five Cities," I too will add Islam as the fifth prison to the late Ali Shariati's "Four Prisons of Man."

If there is a "genocide industry" on the Israeli side, there is also a "Palestine industry" on the Palestinian side. The fact that no Muslim among those who are immensely pleased when leftist Jews write about the "genocide industry" in the hands of ultra-conservatism, the Jewish version of Salafism, writes about the "Palestine industry" stems from their belief that everything is permissible to them due to the divine privilege they attribute to themselves. I would like it to be thought that this humble ex-Muslim has tried to contribute to the fulfillment of this obligation with this three-part series of articles.

I'm in my mid-sixties now, and from now on, for the rest of my life, I will question the dogmas and clichés of institutionalized Islam built on distortion. Getting to grips with the Palestine industry also falls within this scope.

On this occasion, the map symbolism illustrating the step-by-step occupation of Palestine could be a good starting point.

The Famous Map Issue

The famous map is one of the most important visuals of the Palestine industry. According to their claims, while everywhere was Palestine in 1947 - by this, they mean a country and a state - Israel's occupation led to a map where everywhere was Israel in 2005. Is this true?

In Hadith methodology, it is said that fabricated narrations are so carefully crafted with language, content, chain of narrators, period characteristics, etc., to resemble reality that detecting their fabrication is not easy. Even if their fabrication is determined, they are still a source of information due to their anthropological qualities. However, the famous map themed on the step-by-step occupation of Palestine is so remotely unrelated to the truth that it is neither a source of information nor difficult to detect; even a small child who reads a short text on recent history would immediately realize its falsity.

The map of the Palestine industry claims that in 1947, in the lands historically named Judea/Judaea, but which the Romans named "Palestine" as punishment for Jewish freedom revolts, there was no Jewish population, categorizing "Palestine (land)" and "Jewish settlers." The term "Jewish settlers" is a code for the claim that Jews were foreign to those lands and came later. This is undoubtedly a major distortion of objective history. Those interested in the subject can learn the truth by reading one or two studies.

The correct map is the one showing the lands of Judea under British Mandate administration in 1947. At that time, sovereignty was with the United Kingdom, and the majority Palestinians and minority Jews lived together under mandatory rule. During this time, Jews began to arrive as immigrants to historical Judea from various places, especially Europe. The demographic schema at that time was approximately 600,000 Jews to over 1 million Palestinians. According to historical records, Palestinians did not like the Jews' decision to return from two thousand years of exile and began attacks to stop the wave of migration. At the same time, they were conducting diplomacy with the British, and later with Hitler, to establish a Jewish-free Palestinian state.

The Palestine industry propagates the story that Jewish immigrants seized the lands and expelled the indigenous Palestinian people. What should be questioned, however, is this: How did Jews, who constituted one-fifth of the total population in Palestine until 1945, expel the overwhelming majority and seize their land? The logical flaws in the distortions made to portray Palestinians as victims should actually undermine the dogma, but naturally, they have no effect on Muslims devoid of reasoning ability.

The story of Jewish immigrants seizing lands and expelling the indigenous Palestinian people is a copy of the fabrication in Ibn Abu Ishaq's (d. 735) Al-Maghazi, which claims that in 627, five years after the Hijra to Medina, during the tension and conflict with the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe, 700 Muslim men executed 900 Qurayza warriors (Ibn Ishaq/Ibn Hisham, Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, 1-6/414). Moreover, according to the claim, the Muslims did this under conditions where the 600 warriors of Banu Nadir, the other hostile tribe in the conflict zone, remained passive observers.

Muslims enthusiastically and ecstatically embrace this story that describes the mass killing of the Medinan Qurayza Jews by the order of the Prophet. Western orientalists also use the same narration against the Prophet and Islam. The Saudi historian Muhammad b. Faris al-Jamil finds the claim that Muslims, with 300 warriors at Badr and 700 at Uhud, executed the numerically superior Qurayza men (1500 warriors from the Nadir and Qurayza tribes combined) without encountering resistance, illogical and suspicious (Al-Nabi wa Yahud al-Madina, p. 207).

I won't go into details, but in another article, I will write about fabrications that portray the Prophet as someone who hired hitmen to carry out insidious assassinations against his opponents. Instead of resembling the Prophet in morality and civility, Muslims have made him resemble themselves, inventing a Prophet profile far removed from morality and civility.

Contemporary Muslims, repeating the logical error in Ibn Abu Ishaq's narration, recount as a story of victimhood the claim that in 1947, the numerically very few Jews in Palestine expelled and removed from their lands the Palestinians, who were twice their number.

The outcome is known to everyone: in 1947, due to tensions and conflicts, when the possibility of the two communities living together ceased to exist, the UN presented a two-state partition plan proportional to the population, but Palestinians and Arab states rejected this plan.

After the anti-Jewish Arab uprising in 1947, with the declaration of the State of Israel in May 1948, in addition to the Palestinians, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia declared war on Israel. When the Arab states and Palestinians suffered heavy defeats in the 1948, 1967, and 1973 attacks, the map that the Palestine industry calls "Israeli occupation" emerged.

Let's put aside the passionate slogans and ask ourselves: Did events not unfold this way? Haven't Palestinians and Muslims wanted to eradicate Jews from Judea from the beginning? Hasn't gross distortion been committed in religious culture for this purpose?

Furthermore, isn't a genocide hoped for at the end of history, where all Jews are massacred, eagerly awaited in the "Gharqad tree" myth, which has polluted minds as much as the Al-Aqsa Mosque distortion?

Gharqad Tree: A Preventive Dome

The most beloved fabricated narration of conservative radicalism, the "Gharqad Hadith," is the pinnacle of antisemitism in the Palestine industry.

The fabricated narration known as the "Gharqad Hadith" speaks of a tree behind which Jews will hide when fleeing the genocide by Muslims at the end of time. According to the claim, in the apocalyptic war (Armageddon, Malhama al-Kubra) that will break out, Muslims will kill all Jews and dominate the world. During this war, Jews will hide behind this tree to escape the genocide, and the tree will then say, "Oh Muslim, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him." (Bukhari: 2926, Muslim: 2922).

This, like other strange narrations, is one of the fantastic tales of the person nicknamed "Abu Hurayrah." But it is one of the fundamental beliefs of Sunni Islam. So much so that Turkey, under the domination of full-time religiosity, has declared this premeditated act to the world at the presidential level, saying, "They will not even find a tree to hide behind".

We wrote: The name of the person nicknamed "Abu Hurayrah," the author of the fabrication, is not even known. He came to Medina 3 years before the Prophet's death, but the narrations of this person are the source of all Sunni beliefs and practices. Bukhari's commentator Ayni quotes Ibn Abd al-Barr as saying, "No companion's name before Islam has been as controversial as Abu Hurayrah's" (al-Ayni, Umdat al-Qari, 1/124). Abu Hurayrah claimed that the Prophet gave him this nickname, which means "Father of the Kitten" (Ibn Hajar, Al-Isabah, 7/349). There is no other witness to this claim. The new trend among conservatives, affection for cats, is not about a feeling of belonging to living things and nature; it has such a religious basis.

The fact that Islam, using this fabricated narration, screams hostility towards Semitic Jews might mean that we have reached another level on the path to the dystopian Gilead depicted in "The Handmaid's Tale."

The fact that an ugly slander, such as the announcement of the Jewish genocide at the end of time, is attributed to the Prophet in a hateful fabricated narration against the Semitic race, and is shouted to the world by the country's president, is of course worrying, shameful, and a hatred that will invalidate any right to complain about Islamophobia. May Allah grant wisdom, what more can we say.

Nitre Bush Only Good for Hiding in Hide-and-Seek

The Gharqad tree is a large shrub that botanists call the "Nitre bush." One can certainly hide behind it, but only if they are children playing hide-and-seek. In the age of current warfare technologies, how can one hide behind a bush? This bush is not armor that would provide protection against firearms. Israelis also don't see Gharqad as a super tree with iron dome functionality to protect against attacks.

The Gharqad Hadith is a childish fantastic myth, tale, or story. But it is a belief as influential as an article of faith for everyone, from scholars to commoners. However, if one remembers that in the popular religious culture of Sunni Islam, the Prophet's grandchildren Hasan and Husayn never grew up but remained children, the level of reasoning on this matter is also explained. Yet, Hasan died at 45 and Husayn at 54. That is, they lived for approximately 35-40 years after the Prophet's death. But in popular Sunni culture, these years are lost. This is because they do not dare to face the catastrophes that occurred in those years and the reality that they have now turned into piety.

The mathematical genius John Nash (1928-2015) suffered from schizophrenia. In a critical scene in the film "Beautiful Mind," which tells his life story, he proved how he dealt with his schizophrenia in old age by stating that the child of the family he frequently saw visiting him never grew up. Sunni Islam, which always remembers Hasan and Husayn as children on their grandfather's back while praying, cannot cope with its cultural schizophrenia.

Some scholars within Twelver Shiism also, by relying on narrations in Sunni sources, believe that in the context of the end of time, the apocalyptic war, and the advent of the Mahdi, there will be Jews who try to hide behind this tree to escape the genocide. However, researchers state that there is no such hadith in Shia narration sources, reminding that only Sheikh Saduq (d. 991) mentions fighting Jews but does not provide information about the Gharqad tree.

By the way, the Gharqad tree might also be the tree from which Moses heard revelation (Qasas 30). So, it's a historical memory of high value.

Antisemitic conservative radicalism, which attributes Gharqad to Jews who will survive the Jewish genocide at the end of time, probably does not know that one of the names of the Baqi' cemetery in Medina (Jannat al-Baqi') is also "Baqi' al-Gharqad." This is because there were Gharqad trees in the cemetery at that time.

The mental world of antisemitic Islam, which believes that the prophecy in the "Gharqad Hadith" (hiding behind a tree), fabricated by Abu Hurayrah by looking at 7th-century war tactics and technology, will still be valid in an unknown technological future, is anachronistic, strange, and comical.

It is excessively bizarre for adherents of a religious culture that has openly theorized the annihilation of Jews at every opportunity to accuse Israel of genocide.

Voice of Conscience, or Antisemitic Delirium?

Antisemitic Islam would do well not to rush into labeling the anti-Israel protests it imports from Western countries as "the voice of conscience." No one is unaware that there has been a strong antisemitic vein in Europe starting from the invasion period in the 4th century. Therefore, expressions of support for Palestine do not explain affection for Arabs. Let's not forget that antagonism towards Semites also includes Arabs, and that Islamophobia is cooked in the same pot.

Even if we're sitting crooked, let's not stray from the truth: If the target of the slogans shouting insult, hatred, humiliation, and destruction against Jews in pro-Palestine demonstrations in the US and Europe were Muslims, Muslims would tear themselves apart crying "Islamophobia." But when the subject is Jews, they applaud with joy.

The proportion of genuinely conscientious sensitivity among the crowds gathered under the banner of support for Palestine has not been investigated. But one day, it might turn out that the enthusiasm fueled by Gaza is actually a Catholic, or rather, a political-economic-cultural hegemonic antisemitic mobilization, as it was before.

As various studies have recorded, antisemitism in Europe has approached Hitler-era levels in the last five years. The findings from the Danish leg of a study conducted by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights in 16 European countries confirm the generalization. In the Spanish example, nearly 60% blame Jews for the economic crisis. The same percentage does not want Jews in their university classes.

In other words, Gaza is just an excuse. In reality, examples of hatred towards Muslim communities, especially Arabs, are also on the rise. Muslims, for example, try to get away with it by collaborating with antisemitic hatred, disguised as a reaction to the Gaza events, and directing anger towards Jews. This is, of course, immoral.

One needs to be aware of the powerful narcotic effect of Netanyahu's Gaza massacre. It leaves no room for any reasoning, questioning, or search for morality. But what is certain is that if there were a leftist government in Israel and it advocated for a peaceful solution in Gaza, antisemitic hatred would not subside.

Has anyone wondered why the streets are not overflowing with protests in many places around the world where destruction hundreds of times greater than in Gaza is occurring? Or why antisemites of every belief, arm-in-arm, react ultra-radically only to the Jew's desire for a state? Or to the Kurd's demand for a state?

Why are the Muslims and their antisemitic allies filling the squares for Gaza maintaining a deadly silence regarding the genocide committed by Islamist terrorists under the patronage of the Sudanese army? There are 300,000 casualties and 1 million refugees, 20 million people face starvation, and 80% of hospitals are unusable.

Only 22% of Palestinians rejected Hamas's horrifying October 7 attack, which killed even the elderly and took 250 people, including a 10-month-old baby, hostage. In contrast, 85% of Israelis rejected Netanyahu's Gaza massacre. Which society is conscientious and loyal to the truth?

Summary and Declaration of the Obvious

Muslims have adopted a cause based entirely on false, baseless, unreal, and fabricated information, and they fight for it, wasting resources.

In reality, there's a malady, a sickness at play: racism. A feeling of disgust arises within them when Jews are mentioned. It's the same feeling triggered by black skin in America and elsewhere. I'm from İzmit, and I know well the feeling of disgust from the racist malady towards the Roma. For the last forty years, Kurds have been the target of the same disgrace.

If we replace "Jew" with "Kurd" in the anti-Jewish sentiment of Ikhwanist Turks, who are inspired by Palestinians who adopted Rome's military justifications for ethnic cleansing of Jews as strategy, the situation becomes understandable. So, what makes Khamenei's Shiism antisemitic? Its hatred of Iran's pre-Islamic history. Even though Iran is the country with the second-largest Jewish population in the Middle East after Israel and a historical center of Judaism, Khamenei's Shiism's antisemitic motivation stems from its starting Iranian history with Omar's conquest and the Umayyad's tribalistic Islam, denying anything before. An oxymoron, of course, but it is what it is.

An important note: Do we really think that the deviant, antisemitic type of Islam that sees Jews as an inherently cursed people doesn't know that Jesus and his mother Mary were also Jewish? No, they do know, and in the quagmire of anti-Jewish sentiment, they also show hostility towards celebrating Christmas. From our perspective, this is the crux of the matter, while preserving other discussions related to cultural elements inherited from Roman Christianity and the issue at hand.

The first inhabitants of Jerusalem were Jews. They built and prospered the place. They fought to uphold the Qibla built by David and Solomon (Bayt al-Maqdis/Masjid al-Aqsa), and they tried to save the "Holy City" (Madinat al-Quds) through freedom revolts. Until they suffered massacres, slaughters, and exiles from invaders every time. The latest to volunteer to take over the mantle of exile and ethnic cleansing were the Muslims. And those striving to continue that legacy are the Arabized locals in Gaza and the West Bank (Judea and Samaria), whom the Romans named and they adopted as Palestinians; their organizations Hamas and equivalent structures. They believe that Israel should succumb to this ambition, acquiesce, and that Jews should silently go into exile again. Is this reasonable?

The Holocaust Remembrance Day is actually also a day to remember the shame of Ikhwanist Islam's complicity in murder, with al-Husseini's urging Hitler to "don't send them to Palestine, annihilate them." This is a community that celebrates Hitler while it should be doing everything to cleanse itself of this grave crime. There is certainly a shameful aspect in the designation of 1948, the year Israel was founded, as "Nakba" (catastrophe).

On the other hand, extremist Jewish factions also want the Arabized (muarreb) population to be exiled. There is no qualitative difference between the Jews' desire to return to the land of Canaan, where they were indigenous three thousand years ago, and the Muslims' claim to own it because they conquered it a thousand years ago. So why is the Jews' claim illegitimate, and the Muslims' a right? One problem is the Ashkenazis establishing dominance with the discrimination they learned in Europe. But Muslims also have this in abundance.

The ignorance that interprets the 1927 British Mandate currency, bearing "Palestine" in Arabic, Hebrew, and English, as proof of the existence of a Palestinian state, is the peak of madness. This is the British Mandate that considered Jews illegitimate but appointed al-Husseini, a fervent advocate of Jewish ethnic cleansing, as the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.

"Right of Conquest": Lawful for Oneself, Forbidden for Others

The compulsory destination of the Palestine industry is ignorance. But it is conscious ignorance. Otherwise, anyone who reads one or two works on recent history would ask themselves whether the state of Palestine was established during the British Mandate in 1927. Or whether there was a Palestinian state and country under Ottoman rule before that.

The claim by Jewish settlers that they are seizing Palestinian homes because these lands belonged to them two thousand years ago is a core piece of propaganda from the Palestinian industry. It's a simple method for Hamas members, who dream of a country cleansed of Jews, to legitimize their own ethno-nationalist fantasies. This is an invalid reading of history and demographics that ignores the Jewish people who have always been there, despite fluctuating populations, and appropriates the entirety of the land.

Palestinians, who claim the conquests of Muslim tribes as their own sovereignty, suffer from severe amnesia when it comes to Sultan Selim, who fought them and massacred a third of the population. If the Ottoman state's rule simultaneously meant Palestinian sovereignty and made the land theirs, then why did they rebel against the Ottomans? Isn't the Palestinian flag waved in pro-Palestine demonstrations on the streets of Turkey a symbol of rebellion against the Ottomans?

According to the "right of conquest" that Islam deems permissible for itself but forbidden for others, the capture of Jerusalem during Omar's time is in the past and cannot be discussed. But Israel's seizure of Palestine, having emerged victorious from the attacks in the 1948 and 1967 wars where the Arabs attacked and were defeated, is unacceptable. This is, of course, a strange, contradictory, and absurd logic.

The propaganda that Jews are seizing Palestinian land and homes based on historical claims aims to create the impression that Israel, with a population of approximately 10 million, is daily assaulting the homes of 5 million Palestinians and seizing their houses and lands. This is not the reality, of course. If it were, the land, homes, and lives of 3 million Arab, Circassian, Druze, and Christian citizens of Israel would have been confiscated. Extracting a huge generalization from isolated examples is another victimization scenario from the Palestinian industry. Israeli internal intelligence refers to settlers who harass Palestinian homes as "Jewish extremists" and considers acts of violence against Palestinians as "terrorism". However, among the Israeli army's counter-terrorism methods is the punishment of demolishing the homes of those who commit or are involved in deadly acts in Israel, and it is stated that this is contrary to international law.

In this situation, one might also ask: Why do terrorists not emerge from the 25% of the population within Israel consisting of Arabs, Circassians, Druze, and Christians? Why aren't individuals from these communities pouring into the streets to hunt for Jews in cafes, parks, and shopping malls?

There is no doubt that Palestinians, whose origins are unknown and who have become Arabized over time, uphold the Roman tradition in their anti-Semitism. And that, based on that historical foundation, they tried to annihilate Jews with continuous attacks starting from the British Mandate period until 1973. The literature of victimhood is the result of failure. If they had succeeded in annihilation and ethnic cleansing, a literature of triumph would have been celebrated.

The deeply rooted anti-Semitism in the ideological heritage of Palestinians can be based on their non-Semitic origins. The exchange of Hamas member Shuruk, arrested for stabbing two civilians simply because they were Jewish, and 5-year-old Emilia, taken hostage simply because she was Jewish, is a good example of this model. The conservative media opened a pathetic victimhood file for Shuruk, without mentioning the crime she committed, stating she had been imprisoned since she was 18.

The Palestinian industry is not a just cause. It is not even a cause. It is a diseased and dark concoction containing heavy fascism, anti-Semitism, expansionism, jihadism, domination, uniformity, abundant rent-seeking, a donation economy, fraud, terrorism, and radicalism. It is the shamelessness of someone shouting "Hitler knew how to treat these people [Jews]" in the heart of London, applauded by Muslims, using advanced freedom to express genocidal aims.

Islam, which the Prophet established as a public life, was a faith firmly connected to reality, not a mixed bag. It was the religion of reason based on deliberation. Muawiyah, who brought the structural transformation of public life to its natural conclusions in the "new Medina" process that began with the first two caliphs, turned it into a metaphysical story. It is the followers of that story who, knowingly or unknowingly, shouted anger and hatred at rallies during the Gaza war, aware that those who continuously sold goods to Israel and those who organized pro-Gaza and anti-Israel protests were the same people. No pathological case can better describe the Palestinian industry than this.

Translated by Gemini