Zombies and the Fringes of Consciousness

 

Image result for pet cemetery

This past week, I enjoyed watching some of scary zombie movies on Hulu and Netflix; it’s a custom I have kept since I was a boy of seven or eight years old.

Halloween was always a fun time for me as a child. Watching scary movies still remains a ritual every time of this year.

Horror films often give us a rare opportunity to examine our deepest questions about the nature of our existence, of life and death, and life beyond death. To some degree, they force us to examine our deepest fears about the postmortem existence of our souls. When we die, is there any part of our soul that remains present in the body itself?

Horror writer Stephen King’s Pet Semetery, reminds me of a Kabbalistic teaching about the different manifestations of the soul. The highest level of the soul is identified as neshamah—the soul breath of God that gives us the capacity to wonder about our nature and inspires us to act humanely toward one another. The second level is ruach—the spirit realm that inspires within us a capacity to feel emotion and compassion toward all living beings.  And then there is nefesh—the lowest manifestation of life that we share with the vegetative kingdom. On this level, we exist only to physically survive and nothing more.

Stephen King’s movies illustrate what happens when human beings forget what it is that makes all of us “human.” According to this definition, a zombie is a being whose residual soul is bereft of all its humanity. It lives to consume; it consumes only to live.

By all accounts, it seems that the  life of a zombie is pretty simple and uncomplicated. So some of us might wonder: Are zombies merely mythical creatures? Do they or do they not exist? Could a zombie apocalypse really occur?

Inquiring minds really want to know…

While rabbis across the world may wonder, “Who Is a Jew?”—on this night of Halloween, I am going to pose the question: “Who Is a Zombie?” Are zombies “human,” or are they something “Other” than human? The question has profound implications not just in the sphere of science-fiction, philosophy, religion—but also in the area of medical ethics.

The 17th century philosopher Rene Descartes viewed animals as machine-like creatures, bereft of a soul. Every aspect of the animal could be explained in terms of its physical “mechanical” movements. Descartes even entertained the idea of a mechanical person what we could call today, a robotic being. How would one differentiate such a creature from the “real deal”? For one thing, the machine would never be able to spontaneously formulate sentences; its non-verbal behavior would also be limited. (Bear in mind that the rabbis arrived at a similar conclusion regarding the artificial being known as the “golem,” for it too was incapable of human speech.)

“So what is it that defines our humanity?” asks Descartes—it is the presence of the immaterial mind, the soul, which interacts between the brain and the other organs of the body.

But this raises an important question regarding the nature of “personhood,” (to use the more modern terminology). At what point does a human being, cease being “human”? If we apply Cartesian philosophy to our question, it might very well be when our brain ceases to function adequately.

Could this apply to zombies as well? (Not that they care very much about our deep philosophical deliberations!)

Of course, this begs the question: Do zombies really exist? Or, are they merely mythical creatures created out from Hollywood?

In general, many mythic stories of primitive peoples have some sort of basis in fact. This principle would apply to zombies as well.

Ever since I watched that great movie, “The Serpent and the Rainbow,” I have been fascinated with this question. Harvard botanist, E. Wade Davis and Dr. Lamarque Douyon, Canadian-trained head of the Psychiatric Center in Port-au-Prince, have been trying to establish the basis for zombies, and according to them—they do exist![2] By the way, the book is much better than the film!

Haiti is a remarkable country; much of the contemporary folklore concerning zombies originates in Haiti—but there are legends about zombies that really go back to ancient history. Davis narrates the following story:

On a brilliant day in the spring of 1980, a stranger arrived at L’Estère marketplace in Haiti’s fertile Artibonite Valley. The man’s gait was heavy, his eyes vacant. The peasants watched fearfully as he approached a local woman named Angelina Narcisse. She listened as he introduced himself, then screamed in horror—and recognition. The man had given the boyhood nickname of her deceased brother Clairvius Narcisse, a name that was known only to family members and had not been used since his funeral in 1962. This incident was witnessed by more than 200 people!!

Well, it looks like the zombie can speak—and respond to human questions!!

You might wonder, “What could possibly turn a person into a zombie?” I have other questions as well, like—where did this man eat for the past 18 years, McDonald’s take out? What kind of music groups do zombies listen to? The Grateful Dead? (Sorry for the pun!)

Well, in both the movie and in real life, there is a coma-inducing toxin that comes from the voodoo priest (known as “bocors”), which slows the human metabolism. The sources for this toxin “textrodotoxin,” come from: New World Toad (Bufo marinus), and the Japanese “Puffer Fish,” which is considered to be a delicacy in Japan—after the toxin has been removed. The chemicals of these ingredients can affect both the heart and the nervous system. In Japan, thousands of miles from Haiti, those people who have accidentally consumed the puffer fish toxin behave—well, a lot like zombies—Japanese zombies, I might add.

Godzilla, move over!!

Experiments on rats have proven that the drug can induce a trancelike state as well. So, what does this all mean?

For one thing, zombies do not have an appetite for eating human brains. But there is some scientific evidence that certain drugs can induce the famous zombie-like state. So, would a person be guilty if he killed a zombie, according to Jewish law? Based upon the evidence these two scientists have shown, a “zombie” still remains within the category of a human being. Kabbalists believe there is a residue of the soul that lingers in the body after death. Could this explanation apply to zombies?

BEYOND THE QUESTION ABOUT ZOMBIES . . .

 

However, there is one lingering question regarding the nature of a “person” that is still a difficult to ascertain. Would a person still be considered “human,” even if s/he is in a chronic vegetative state? The case of Terry Schiavo is an excellent example of someone whom the State declared as “clinically dead,” while the family who loved her claimed that she was still “alive,” and even allegedly, “responsive.”

About six months after her life-support was turned off, and while she was also starved by order of the court, Discover Magazine produced a fascinating article that made special mention about people like Terry Schiavo, who suffer from the chronic vegetative condition.

 

Here is one part of the Discover Magazine article that I thought was especially interesting.

 

  • In the 1970s, when intensive care dramatically improved the survival of brain-injured patients, doctors found that if the body can be kept alive, the brain usually shakes off a coma—a totally unresponsive, eyes-closed state—within two to four weeks. At that point some people simply wake up, although they may be delirious and impaired. Others graduate to an in-between zone that New York Hospital–Cornell Medical Center neurologist Fred Plum labeled the “persistent vegetative state” in 1972. At the time, among these patients, it seemed as if only “vegetative” brain functions like breathing, waking, and blinking were working. The higher functions commonly associated with consciousness seemed to be lost.

 

  • The first vegetative patient Schiff saw, the victim of a stroke, had no sign of consciousness. But when he ran into her three years later at a rehab center, he was shocked to find her awake and capable of talking to him.

 

  • The patients, doctors found, usually had widespread brain damage, but two injured areas were especially noteworthy: the thin outer rind, called the cortex, and the thalamus, a pair of walnut-size lumps in the brain’s central core, along with the neural fibers that connect these regions. The two areas are normally in constant cross talk, filtering and analyzing sensory data and making continual adjustments to attention and alertness. Lacking this chatter, someone in a vegetative state seems to be awake but not aware. They might moan and shift around, but they do not look toward a loud hand clap or pull away from a pinch. Given a feeding tube and basic medical care, someone might stay in this condition from days to decades, potentially until death. [3]

 

Well, as science progresses, it is only a matter of time before it can finally resolve this ethical question regarding the chronic vegetative state. Questions regarding the quality of life–even if such person should be revived from the chronic vegetative state–needs to be ethically weighed and considered by the family. If the patient has no quality of life, it is possible that reviving such a person may only cause indefinite suffering. Would this be something desirable? There is a season for everything under the heavens . . . sometimes we need to let go of the people we love. The dignity of the patient is something we must also take into consideration.

Obviously, the border separating consciousness from death is a question worthy of a Solomon to answer. In one of the symposiums I organized and participated in, I argued that ultimately—we may know a lot about the human body, but we still know very little about the nature of consciousness–where it begins and where it truly ends.

Lastly, here’s a piece of trivia that will probably surprise you: Oddly, even some of the Italian rabbis of the 17th century saw nothing wrong with kids having a little bit of Halloween fun–but that is a topic for another time.

====================

Notes:

[1] R. Descartes, Discourse in Method, c. 5.

 

[2] Time Magazine, “Zombies: Do They Exist?” Oct 17, 1983,
www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,952208,00.html – Similarto Medicine: Zombies: Do They Exist? – TIME – Time Magazine

 

[3] Discover Magazine, Kat McGowan, “Rediscovering Consciousness in People Diagnosed as ‘Vegetative,’” March 2011; http://discovermagazine.com/2011/mar/09-turning-vegetables-back-into-humans/article_view?searchterm=Terri%20Schiavo&b_start:int=3

Last modified on Tuesday, 03 September 2013

 

The Closing of the Muslim Mind

The Golden Age of Islam extended from the 8th century to the 13th century, when much of the historically Islamic world embraced a flowering of scientific, economic and cultural prosperity until the time of the Mongol conquest of Baghdad in 1258 CE , when the Islamic Golden Age officially ended. Before that time, Islam was vastly ahead of their counterparts in Europe, and excelled in just about every ancient secular and scientific endeavor. As I was perusing some of the books from one of my book vendors’ emails, the Islamic name of Ghazali appeared. Being familiar with a number of Muslim medieval scholars like Ibn Sina, Rumi, Averroes, al-Farabi, Ibn Arabi, I decided to look up the Islamic thinker, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (1055-1111), a Sufi-thinker who  is well known in Muslim circles for his wisdom:

Some of his wise aphorisms include:

  • People count with self-satisfaction the number of times they have recited the name of God on their prayer beads, but they keep no beads for reckoning the number of idle words they speak.

How true, God’s Name is always being bantered about by “religious” fanatics who use God’s Name as an excuse to commit any kind of atrocity against the non-believing Other. It is also used by politicians who will use God to obtain their fiendish desires.

  • Half of disbelief in Allah in the world is caused by people who make religion look ugly due to their bad conduct and ignorance.

This particular aphorism certainly applies to much of what we see with respect to the Global Jihad taking place in continents all over the world. Yes, bad and evil conduct certainly produces disillusion with faith—and atheism is certainly on the rise today as less and less young people frequent the traditional places of worship.

  • Declare your jihad on thirteen enemies you cannot see – Egoism, Arrogance, Conceit, Selfishness, Greed, Lust, Intolerance, Anger, Lying, Cheating, Gossiping and Slandering. If you can master and destroy them, then will be ready to fight the enemy you can see.

It is significant that both Sufi and Kabbalistic texts found a way to sublimate the violent impulses of holy war, by internalizing it in purely spiritual terms. Sufism for most of its history has enjoyed a well-deserved reputation for open-mindedness and tolerance.

However, this broadness of mind never applied to Ghazali’s worldview. Although one might presume Ghazali stresses the importance of fighting the inner enemy—but he evidently had no compunctions about fighting the “external enemy,” and this is where his idealism seems to have collapsed along with his wisdom.

Sectarian differences often make people forget about their idealism and higher values; religion often is more pre-occupied with “being right” than “being righteous.” Ghazali’s disdain for one of Islam’s most brilliant thinkers, Avicenna is a classic illustration of what righteous indignation with a tinge of fanaticism is capable of doing. In his book on “The Incoherence of Philosophy,” Ghazali issued a decree (fatwa) concerning anyone who teaches Avicenna’s philosophy is a “kafir” –an apostate of Islam. Once labeled a kafir, it is permitted for the pious Muslim to kill the apostate.[1]

What were the three heretical views Avicenna espoused?  [For the sake of contrast, I will briefly compare Avicenna and Ghazali with some of Maimonides’ theological positions.]

  1. The theory of a pre-eternal world. Ghazali asserted God created the world in time and just like everything in this world time will cease to exist as well but God will continue on existing. (Maimonides concurred, but also hedged to some degree)
  2. God only knows the universal characteristics of particulars – namely Platonic forms (a view Maimonides seems to have endorsed).
  3. Bodily resurrection will not take place in the hereafter only human souls are resurrected (another view that Maimonides might have supported).

Semites have always been a contentious people when it comes to matters of faith. To this day, the Shiites and the Sunnis still argue over, “Who is an Apostate?” much like Jews still fight among themselves, “Who is a Jew?” Fanaticism has always been a driving force among zealots. Jewish history bears witness to these unfortunate phenomena too over 2000 years ago. This much has not changed over history—even now, as our society is rapidly retrogressing to the darker periods of human history when men like Ghazali, Torquemada, and others determined who would live or die based on their personal belief system.

Perhaps the greatest tragedy is that Ghazali possessed a gift of wisdom and insight; yet because of his disdain for other scholars’ theological beliefs, he and similar thinkers led the Muslims along a narrow corridor of the mind that has cut itself from the human progress and positive societal development.



[1] Great minds sometimes suffer from moments of moral blindness. I would add that as a side note, Maimonides might have been influenced by Ghazali. According to Maimonides, (theoretically,) a heretic deserved to be executed too. He writes:

The term “Apikorsim” (Epicureans) pertains to any Jewish person who denies the divinity of the Torah and the belief in prophecy. Ideally, they deserved to be executed in public by the sword (beheading). However, if this is not possible, a subterfuge ought to be developed to facilitate their death. For example:  If one sees such a person descend to a cistern, and a ladder is available; he should  find an excuse to take the ladder, saying: “I must hurry to take my son down from the roof. I shall return the ladder to you soon.” Similarly, one should devise other analogous plans to cause the death of such people” (MT Hilchot Rotzach 4:10).

 

Holocaust Book Review for Children: A Walk With Esther

 

 

Deb Bowen and Cassie Brown, A Walk With Esther – Contact the  Jewish Federation of Quad Cities to order:

Publisher: Never Forget Publishing 2015

Many years ago, while I was serving a congregation in Rock Island, IL, I was privileged to work with a number of Jewish and Christian professionals in designing one of the country’s best attended Yom HaShoah programs in the nation. Every year, we would bring a Holocaust survivor to share his or her story. We used to attract anywhere between 500 to 800 people depending upon the year.

This program inspired a woman named Deb Bowen of Aledo, IL., who one day had the  most remarkable idea: having children write short children’s stories about the Holocaust. This vision originated in 2002 from a meeting she had with three local Jewish survivors from her area, each one bore the name Esther.  To keep their stories alive, she collaborated with the Jewish Federation of the Quad Cities and area teachers. Survivors shared their story in local schools and students were asked to write and illustrate their stories in a simple children’s storybook form.

Along with Jewish stories, books have been written about Christians who risked their lives (Righteous Gentiles) and prison camp liberators. Over 60 books have been written to make the series called “A BOOK by ME”; six of those books were printed and distributed to local schools. The larger version of all these stories are recorded in her recent self-published 2015 book, A Walk with Esther, which contained several stories about Holocaust stories of survivors of the Rock Island Jewish community, whose names happened to be Esther.  While I was there, I knew  each of the three women and their stories about survival demonstrated the power of the human spirit to triumph over all obstacles.

While I was in the Quad-Cities, in one interview,  I sat with Debra and told her all about my father’s story, which she ultimately produced called, Leo Samuel: The Tailor’s Life.” What makes Bowen’s project so powerful is that she has young teens write the stories and illustrate them as well. I wish we had more educators as talented as Deb Bowen. What is so remarkable about Deb Bowen is the fact that she is not Jewish.  Yet, her passion is evident in every little booklet she has produced.

Throughout the years, I maintained contact with the authoress. When   Deb Bowen came to San Diego, I immediately introduced her to Ruth Sax, one of the finest Jewish women you will ever meet, who came from a village in  Czechoslovakia that was very close to where my father grew up.

Ruth is a Holocaust survivor.

I introduced her one of our members Luke Chabner and his two daughters, Shlomit and Aliana, who is doing her Mitzva Project for her upcoming Bat Mitzvah. Together, Ruth told Deb her story and with the Shlomit and Aiyana’s help, they will be writing the story book about Ruth Sax—one of the truly great narratives of this series.   In all my years as a pulpit rabbi, this best mitzvah projects is one of the best I have ever seen.

There is no better way to teach children about the Holocaust than sharing stories of survivors who live or lived in their midst.

Deb Bowen is married, a mother of six, a grandmother of five and a ‘host mom’ to twelve exchange students. She represents high school age exchange programs helping young leaders from many countries spend an academic year in the USA. Bowen is an ordained minister, a motivational speaker, freelance writer and serves as a member of The Holocaust Education Committee of the Greater Quad City Area.

In short, let me conclude by saying that one of the hardest subjects to teach young people is the subject of the Holocaust. As someone who has visited numerous Jewish and public schools over the last thirty five years, the challenge of making the Holocaust is daunting and oftentimes frustrating because there is so much information to teach. Purchasing this book for your children may be one of the best gifts you ever give them.

Purim Then and Purim Now

 

One of the interesting facets of the Purim story is the tradition of giving a Purim Torah talk during the holiday. “Purim Torah” is a humorous and often satirical way of using biblical and Talmudic narratives in a manner that is creative and imaginative—but always funny, if not carnivalesque. Purim Torah expositions may be simple or elaborate.

On one occasion I received from a friend a Purim Torah written as if it came from a page of the Talmud dealing with the debate Israelis had whether they should leave Gaza or not—replete with all the names of the political leaders written in classic Aramaic script! Like a good old April Fool’s joke, only afterwards do you  do you realize that you have been taken by surprise.

My Purim story began a couple of days ago when I had a conversation with a good friend who runs an electronic Jewish publishing company named Alex. As we were conversing, we started talking about the Purim story and attempted to find parallels to today’s drama concerning Israel and Iran, President Obama and Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. The entire conversation involved considerable tongue-in-cheek humor.

Despite the comical way the Purim story is narrated, its message is deadly serious. The Jewish people have always been a vulnerable minority to immoral leaders—past and present.

My friend Alex began his exposition of Purim with the incident of Mordechai and Haman. When Haman became the viceroy, he insisted that everyone bow down to him, yet as we read in the Book of Esther, that Mordechai refused to pay any kind of homage to Haman (Esther 3:1-9). One reason given by the Midrash suggests that Haman was wearing an idol around his neck and Mordechai refused to bow lest he guilty of idolatry.[1] This might suggest that Mordechai and Haman were enemies long before Haman became the Prime Minister of Persia.

Ibn Ezra raises the obvious question: How could Mordechai endanger himself and the Jewish people for this breach of etiquette? Surely, he could have requested that the Queen transfer him to another part of the King’s Gate so that he would not run into Haman again! Alex deduced that Netanyahu behaved a lot like Mordechai, while Haman behaved much like Obama, whose Administration indicated there could be a serious chilling effect if Netanyahu wins the election that could affect Israel’s security, or the Palestinian quest for Statehood that the State Department might endorse.[2]  According to some Arab and European  newspapers, it was rumored that Obama threatened to shoot down any Israeli planes attempting to bomb Iran[3], a point that the State Department officially denied.[4]

Of course  the analogy breaks down. Obama is not threatening to kill eight million people in Israel. True, his error in judgment could indirectly lead to that result, but the real threat comes from the heirs of ancient Persia—Iran!

Perhaps Netanyahu ought to be compared to Queen Esther, who at one point breaks with the royal protocol to meet with the King in order to save her people’s lives. (I could just imagine Netanyahu dressing up in a Queen Esther Purim costume.) This exposition has some potential validity. Netanyahu also felt that the situation demanded that he go and speak on behalf of his people before the President’s agreement with Iran became a fait accompli.

Some people I have spoken with suggest President Obama might resemble the Persian King Achashverosh. In his naiveté, the king believed everything that Haman had spoken to him about the problematic Jews. This comparison is striking because President Obama appears willing to accept the Iranian claim that “using nukes goes against the teachings of Islam” [5]  despite the fact the Ayatollah Khamenei has threatened “to wipe Israel off the map.”  Former Clinton envoy Dennis Ross candidly said  that the Obama administration needs “to explain why the deal it is trying to conclude actually will prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons for the lifetime of the agreement and afterwards.” [6] Yes, Congress has a right to know, as do our Arab allies.[7]

Should we take these threats seriously? If you’re a small country like Israel, whose memory of the Holocaust is still fresh—you must take these threats seriously. One does not need nuclear centrifuges to make peaceful electricity, but one certainly needs it to make a nuclear bomb. This is alone serious enough of a problem for us to have grave doubts—the same kind of doubts that the Arab countries have expressed.

One of the 20th century’s premiere Modern Orthodox thinkers, Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, was quoted as once saying  “A madman rose and articulated his intentions to destroy the Jewish people. The miracle was that we didn’t ignore him, we didn’t excuse him, and we didn’t seek to reinterpret him. The miracle was that we actually believed him and sought to do something about it, The Purim story teaches us to recognize that we have been in this situation before. So it was in days of old, so it will be today.”[8]

This exposition resonates with what we need to remember as Jews, we are sometimes oblivious to the world around us. We cannot imagine why the anti-Semites wish to destroy us for being different—whether in the past, or in the present day.

As of today’s writing, Haman’s successor, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was reportedly hospitalized and is listed in critical condition. How intriguing! Stalin also died on Purim in 1953.[9]

A Purim synchronicity? Possibly.

The last custom of the Purim holiday is to imbibe enough wine so we do not know the distinction between “Blessed is Mordechai” and “Cursed is Haman.” It would seem that for many American Jews, they cannot distinguish between a hero like Netanyahu who is trying to warn the Western world—along with most of the Sunni countries of the Middle East, against signing an inferior agreement with Iran. The political landscape has left many of us confused. We have become so intoxicated with the good life in the United States, we can no longer think what is in our people’s own best interest. The Holocaust seems for most Jews like a distant memory, as are its lessons. We tend to put too much trust in politicians from both parties rather than take responsibility for the situation of our brethren in Israel.

 

[1] Esther Rabba 7:6.

[2] http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.639832

[3] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/03/02/how-a-rumor-about-shooting-down-israeli-jets-caught-fire-in-conservative-media/ cf. http://english.pravda.ru/news/world/04-03-2015/129960-obama_israel_fighters-0/ See also

[4] http://www.timesofisrael.com/white-house-denies-obama-threatened-to-down-israeli-jets/

[5] See the Obama video at http://www.westernjournalism.com/obama-dont-worry-iran-nuke-religion/#vvzO7R2gePAkrv04.97

[6] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2015/03/05/dennis-ross-worried-arab-leaders-panicky/

[7] http://www.israeltoday.co.il/NewsItem/tabid/178/nid/26170/Default.aspx

[8] http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/25/why-religious-jews-see-a-parallel-between-the-netanyahu-obama-rift-on-iran-and-the-bibles-book-of-esther/

[9] http://unitedwithisrael.org/soviet-jews-saved-from-stalins-genocidal-plans-on-purim/

From Hans Christian Anderson to Barak Obama — The Emperor’s New Clothes — Redux

 

Hans Christian Anderson’s famous parable, “The Emperor’s New Clothes” tells a story about two swindling weavers who promised to make an Emperor a new suit of clothes that is invisible to those who are unfit for their positions, stupid, or incompetent. After the swindlers present him with his suit, the Emperor parades before his subjects in his new clothes, no one dares to say that he doesn’t see any suit of clothes until a child cries out, “But he isn’t wearing anything at all!”

After the child said what was obvious to everyone but to the Emperor, the rest of the crow chimed in, “Why, the Emperor hasn’t got anything on!”  So, the Emperor shivered as he realized that everyone else was correct. However, he thought, “This procession has got to go on.” So, he walked more proudly than ever, as his noblemen held high the train that wasn’t there at all.”

Anderson’s parable can certainly apply to what is going in the Middle East today as the United States desperately tries to conclude an agreement with Iran over its use of their nuclear program. The whole world knows fully well that Iran hasn’t a shred of moral or religious integrity. At one joint news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, President Obama addressed his ongoing nuclear negotiations with Iran. According to the Supreme Leader of Iran, said Obama, “it would be contrary to their faith to obtain a nuclear weapon.”[1]

I can only imagine what the German audience must have been thinking. . .

Yes, just as the Emperor has no clothes, and neither does President Obama’s plan to make an agreement with Iran “have any clothes” either.  The agreement is nothing more than a legal fiction intended to deceive Iran’s many enemies into thinking that their thousands of nuclear centrifuges are designed solely for peace.

The Democrats’ behavior is reminiscent of the Emperor’s subjects who are too terrified to cross their foul-tempered President, who remembers every infraction or sign of disloyalty to his political reign.

I wonder: does he really expect the world to think that Iran is a shining example of a nation that adheres to the positive values of Islam?

  • Women are routinely raped and stoned  for adultery if they don’t have four witnesses to attest to their innocence.[2]
  • Christians are persecuted if they try to publically speak about their faith.[3]
  • Homosexuals are stoned on almost a daily basis.[4]
  • Iran has sentenced several juvenile offenders to death.[5]
  • The Mullahs have no respect for killing infidels like the Americans who fought in Iraq, only to be blown up by their IED roadside bombs.[6]
  • Blowing up Jews across the world in Argentina is perfectly acceptable civilized behavior for the Mullahs of Iran.[7]
  • Hezbollah leader said: “If they [the Jews] all gather in Israel it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide” and “They [Jews] are a cancer which is liable to spread at any moment. . .”[8]

If President Obama thinks we can accept the Iranian mullahcracy to promise that they will not use nuclear bombs, then we are as foolish as the Emperor who believed he was wearing a special suit—even though he was stark naked. We are also just as morally cowardly as the Emperor’s subjects who lacked the integrity to recognize the fraud that the Emperor’s assistants perpetuated against the kingdom.

Like the child of our original story, Bibi Netanyahu is the only political leader in the Western world who is not afraid to say it the way it is. Obama’s disdain toward Netanyahu was evident, as was Obama’s contempt for the people of Israel when he refused to speak to the Israeli government at the Knesset. Despite not wishing to influence the Israeli election, Obama has sent many of his minions to do precisely that—influence the Israeli elections.

The entire world owes Netanyahu a huge debt of gratitude. Let us hope that Congress—and not the President—has the ultimate say whether this proposed agreement with Iran is worth signing.

Interestingly enough,  Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has considerable supportive in  Saudi Arabia. According to the Saudi daily newspaper Al-Jazirah on Monday, columnist Dr. Ahmad Al-Faraj called Netanyahu’s appearance before Congress under such circumstances “unprecedented in US political history.”

  • I am very glad of Netanyahu’s firm stance and [his decision] to speak against the nuclear agreement at the American Congress, despite the Obama administration’s anger and fury,” wrote the Saudi. “I believe that Netanyahu’s conduct will serve our interests, the people of the Gulf, much more than the foolish behavior of one of the worst American presidents. . . .Obama is the godfather of the prefabricated revolutions in the Arab world, and…he is the ally of political Islam, [which is] the caring mother of [all] the terrorist organizations,” he wrote, suggesting that any deal struck by this particular American president could simply not be trusted.

For everyone else living in the Middle East, they know exactly what is at stake here. If allowed to act with impunity, the world will see a new nuclear arms race in the Middle East that can engulf the entire world in perpetual nuclear warfare.

Our politicians who think that Netanyahu is motivated by politics, I would say, “What politician isn’t motivated by political concerns?” If that were a crime, every politician would be arrested. However, I personally believe that Netanyahu is correct here to bring this up before the final agreement with Iran becomes fait accompli. The Israeli PM is correct, “Thy enemy’s enemy is still thine enemy.”[9]

We would be wise to remember that.

[1] http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/02/09/obama_according_to_irans_supreme_leader_it_would_be_contrary_to_their_faith_to_obtain_a_nuclear_weapon.html

[2] http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/03/world/meast/iran-stoning/

[3] http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Iran-Rouhani-UN-Christians/2014/03/21/id/560965/

[4] http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/03/new-moderate-iran-executes-two-gay-men-and-hands-down-death-sentence-for-insulting-the-prophet

[5] http://www.hrw.org/news/2010/10/09/iran-saudi-arabia-sudan-end-juvenile-death-penalty

[6] Blair warns Iran over Iraq bombs”. BBC News. 2005-10-06.

[7] “Iran, Hezbollah charged in 1994 Argentine bombing”. Daily Jang. October 25, 2006.

[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Nasrallah

[9] http://www.israeltoday.co.il/NewsItem/tabid/178/nid/26160/Default.aspx

Living in an a Dystopian America

Image source: BuzzFeed

Whenever I hear Obama and his minions claim that “Islam is the religion of peace,” I cannot help but think the President is utilizing several concepts drawn from writer George Orwell’s famous book, Nineteen Eighty-Four. In this political parable, he writes about how the people of Oceania are trained from childhood to be vigilant in detecting and persecuting anything that the State considers as “evil.” Simply put, the State defines what is good and what is evil. Succumbing to the Party is considered the greatest good; obedience and complicity constitute the “love” of Big Brother.  The State aims to pursue a merging of consciousness, where the State’s will—as defined by Big Brother—becomes the will of the individual.

Slogans play an important part of  the collective indoctrination of the people. Orwell describes an usually fictional language he calls, “Newspeak,” which is a controlled language that is designed to constrict the freedom of thought. Newspeak aims to eliminate concepts that pose a threat to the regime such as freedom, self-expression, individuality, and peace. Contrarian perspectives are typically regarded as “thoughtcrimes”

Big Brother uses another interesting too to enslave the minds of the people called  “Doublespeak.” Simply defined, it is a language that deliberately disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words. Wherever one goes in this dystopian society, the citizen always encounters the three slogans of the Party that stand out in bold capital letters: 

  • WAR IS PEACE
  • FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
  • IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Orwell intended to warn us about the dangers of people whose visions for a totalitarian utopias, whether political, economic, social, or theocratic. You can see this kind of “political correctness,” our now-passing rage of liberal conformity today. Often as Jews, we can see how the Left is castigating Israel and demonizing anyone who dares to challenge the status quo.

As we look in the present era, 2015, we can see how people who criticize Obama are routinely called “racist” and marginalized through shaming and other not-so-subtle techniques of intimidation. In Hollywood, actors who criticize the President’s agenda often do not receive acting jobs. There is an atmosphere of terror and the ghost of McCarthy  is reminding us that liberalism can be just as fascist as any political philosophy of the ultra-right.

This Orwellian phenomenon can be seen in our country’s universities, wretched parodies of what they are supposed to be, are veritable monuments of newspeak and doublethink.  Yet, as we witness the global rise of ISIS and observe how the Iranian mullahcracy continues to threaten both Israel AND the United States, as they stand at the threshold of developing nuclear arms—our President has the temerity to tell us:

  • ISLAM IS THE  RELIGION OF PEACE!
  • THERE IS NO GLOBAL JIHAD
  • BEWARE OF EXTREMISM

Consistently, Obama has never recognized a “global jihad” is shaping up before the entire Western word to see. Now that ISIS is taking over Libya (as Khadafi warned Hillary and Obama), ISIS is threatening Italy and announced, “: “You have seen us in Syria, now we’re right here, just south of Rome…”[1] Continue reading “Living in an a Dystopian America”

Shirley MacLaine: Aging Without Saging

 Shirley MacLaine is a better actress than she is a philosopher or theologian. Jewish groups are justifiably upset with some comments she penned in her new memoir, “What If… A Lifetime of Questions, Speculations, Reasonable Guesses, and a Few Things I Know For Sure.”

The quote that is generating a lot of criticism suggest, the six million Jews and others who died in the Holocaust were “balancing their karma” by paying for sins in a previous life.  But MacLaine did not stop with just the six-million Jews, or for that matter the other eighteen million people killed by one man’s hatred, she also compared  Stephen Hawking to Jesus, writing that just as Jesus chose martyrdom, Hawking “chose to live” with a debilitating disease.

Gee, that must make the Holocaust survivors along with their children really great knowing that somehow, they “karmically” managed to survive. As  a child of an Auschwitz survivor and as a parent of an ALS child, I take great offense to her words.

Let us briefly examine MacLaine’s comments:

  • What if most Holocaust victims were balancing their karma from ages before, when they were Roman soldiers putting Christians to death, the Crusaders who murdered millions in the name of Christianity, soldiers with Hannibal, or those who stormed across the Near East with Alexander? The energy of killing is endless and will be experienced by the killer and the killee.” (pp. 240-241)

Over twenty-years ago, I encountered this kind of muddled thinking once before.  On one occasion I debated a Religious Science minister who said  something almost identical to MacLaine. The minister claimed that if a young child is raped or mutilated, it is I order to clear the child’s soul of his/her “karmic debt.” The Church of Religious Science is an example of a New Age religion sometime ago in the 1980s—based on the metaphysical theosophical thought of Ernst Holmes. Although Holmes never advocated anything that was even remotely similar to what this minister asserted, many of his disciples seemed to developed this idea on their own.

The popular New Age self-help writer, Louise Hay, author of  the NY Times best-seller “You Can Heal Your Life” maintains that every human being is responsible for creating every circumstance that occurs in one’s life. According to her, all disease comes from a lack of self-love and unwillingness to forgive others. This is true regardless whether you have headaches or hemorrhoids—all disease comes from a failure to “love yourself.”

A Pulitzer prize journalist named Michael D’Antonio wrote about a conversation he had with Hay. Her views on Third World nations and AIDS victims prove to be revealing:

  • People starve amid the “abundance of the universe” because of low self-esteem,” said Hay. “A poor self-image is more damaging than one might expect and attracts the kind of experience that seems appropriate. That’s why, she said, women who are raped are responsible for what happens to them. They attract the rapist because they expect and fear an attack. Similarly, the poor of the world are responsible for their plight, as are those afflicted with AIDS…[1]

In another conversation, D’Antonio commented about Hay’s remarks regarding the Holocaust. She mused that the AIDS victims were the reincarnated souls of the Nazis, who were being paid back for “their crimes against the Jews!”

And the Jews? Well, they too deserved their “karmic fate.” [2]

For Jews, this is nothing new. We have been accused of karmic crimes for a long time. Unfortunately, many of the Christian world’s greatest theological minds—ancient and modern—expressed  ideas that also resonated with MacLaine’s view of karma. After the night of  Dietrich Bonhoeffer became famous for saying on the night of Kristallnacht, ““If the synagogues are set on fire today, it will be the churches that will be burned tomorrow.” But who would imagine him, saying only minutes later to one of his colleagues, “that the Nazis were merely giving what was owed to the Jews. After all, “they nailed the Redeemer of the world to the cross,” they had been forced to bear an eternal curse through a long history of suffering, one that would end only “in the conversion of Israel to Christ”?[3]

Here is one more example of Bonhoeffer’s animus against the Jews:

  • The Church of Christ has never lost sight of the thought that the “chosen people” who nailed the redeemer of the world to the cross must bear the curse for its action through a long history of suffering…. But the history of the suffering of this people, loved and punished by God, stands under the sign of the final homecoming of Israel [the Jews] to its God. And this homecoming happens in the conversion of Israel to Christ…. The conversion of Israel, that is to be the end of the people’s period of suffering. From here the Christian Church sees the history of the people of Israel with trembling, as God’s own, free, fearful way with his people, because God is not yet finished with it. Each new attempt to solve “the Jewish question” comes to naught…[4]

Deicide is not a new accusation, it goes back to the earlier period of Christian history.[5] All of these attempts to explain the suffering of the Jews ignores what I believe to be the only truth worth discussing: Karmic reasons play no role whatsoever in why one people  suffers and not another. When looking at the real causes of human suffering, one thing is clear. Human beings are responsible for the moral evil they perpetuate against other people. Continue reading “Shirley MacLaine: Aging Without Saging”

If Looks Could Kill…

Much has been said about the Netanyahu’s alleged “breach of etiquette” regarding his plans to speak to Congress concerning the Iranian nuclear quest for nuclear weaponry. President Obama is obviously feels that his negotiations may (pardon the pun) “go up in smoke” if the United States imposes greater sanctions on the Iranian mullahcracy. In fact, one senior Obama advisor put it in the blunt terms:

  • “Netanyahu spat in our face publicly and that’s no way to behave. Netanyahu ought to remember that President Obama has a year and a half left to his presidency, and that there will be a price.” [1]   

Regarding “breach of etiquette,” let me point out that Obama has done this on several occasions with respect to Israel. For example, in March 2013, Israel invited the American President to speak before the Knesset (Israel’s Parliament). Past presidents such as Bill Clinton (in 1994) and George W. Bush (in 2008) politely accepted the offer while they were serving their presidency.

However, President Obama declined and chose to speak to some Israeli students from some of the Israeli universities.  Now, based on the political etiquette civilized nations demonstrate to one another throughout the year, you ought to be asking some simple but direct questions:

  • Why President Obama’s rejection of Israel’s invitation was not considered a breach of etiquette?  Not only did he deliberately slight PM Netanyahu, more importantly—he insulted the entire country of Israel.
  • Why did he choose instead to address the students of Israel?
  • More importantly, does Obama have any respect for Israel’s democratic process?
  • Why are some Jews in this country so willing to overlook Obama’s shabby behavior in Israel but are so willing to heap scorn on Netanyahu for insulting the President by speaking about a topic concerning Israel’s welfare and nuclear?

In President Obama’s speech to the Israeli students, he even made a joke about not speaking to the Knesset on Israeli television:  “Any drama between me and my friend, Bibi over the years was just a plot to create material for Eretz Nehederet (an Israeli comedy show”).

Frankly, I am amazed the President went to Israel at all, but while he was there—not only did he insult the chosen democratically elected Israeli leader, he snubbed the entire country.

In my opinion, this is hardly the first time the President has shown a lack of etiquette when it comes to international behavior. His conspicuous absence from the French funeral after the terrorist attack on the  French journalists and the four Jews murdered by Islamic gunmen showed  a complete disinterest in an the world community. Why do Jews in this country accept insulting behavior as if it is perfectly normal when it comes to belittling the Jewish people and Israel?

Then again, at the seventieth year Auschwitz commemoration, not only didn’t the President show up to express the importance of remembering the Holocaust and its legacy—he didn’t send the Vice President or the Secretary of State. When we consider how the Iranian mullahcracy is threatening to wipe Israel off the map in one mighty attack, don’t you think Obama’s presence alone would have sent a powerful message to the Iranians that the United States will not tolerate any threat to destroy Jews living in Israel again?

So, as you can see, I have some very serious problems with the President’s lack of etiquette when it comes to the Jewish people—and the nation state of Israel.[2]

I hope you do too.

Lastly, the President’s official promised there would be a cost exacted if Netanyahu dares to speak to Congress.

Is this how allies speak to one another?

It is time for us to have a reality check.



[1]http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/23/1359691/-U-S-Official-Netanyahu-Spat-In-Our-Face-And-There-Will-Be-A-Price

[2] Beyond Israel, President Obama has frequently broken the rules of etiquette in many international settings. For example, “As Barack Obama appeared in the home of Myanmar pro-democracy activist Aung San Suu Kyi in Yangon of Burma, the U.S. president planted a platonic, but very affectionate, kiss on her cheek (to which she appeared to slightly recoil in embarrassment). This act has surprisingly elicited little or no comment in the global press thus far – quite unusual since public displays of affection represent a grave breach of custom in virtually all Asian countries”  http://www.ibtimes.com/obama-suu-kyi-forbidden-kiss-889606;  “President Obama was caught committing a funeral faux pas — snapping a selfie during Nelson Mandela’s memorial service with Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt and British PM David Cameron,” wrote the New York Daily News. “The threesome smiled as the Scandinavian beauty held her smartphone out to capture the moment but Michelle Obama sat at a distance, as if in disapproval of the digital display.” And the list goes on…

A Contrast in Leadership: King Abdullah and President Obama

 

 

Some of us have short memories and some of us have long memories. This writer in particular will not ignore two noteworthy events that occurred in the last six months. Both of these events involved ISIS executing its hapless captives. Both of these events present two very different kinds of responses–as different as day and night.

President Obama took to the podium and said some appropriate remarks for the tragic death of the American journalist Tom Foley.

  • They declared their ambition to commit genocide against an ancient people. So ISIL speaks for no religion. Their victims are overwhelmingly Muslim, and no faith teaches people to massacre innocents. No just god would stand for what they did yesterday and what they do every single day. ISIL has no ideology of any value to human beings. Their ideology is bankrupt. They may claim out of expediency that they are at war with the United States or the West, but the fact is they terrorize their neighbors and offer them nothing but an endless slavery to their empty vision and the collapse of any definition of civilized behavior.[1]

What happened next proved to be more important than anything the President said at the podium.  In short, if a picture could tell a thousand words, the images that ensued within four minutes after the President’s speech could fill ten thousand volumes. Within four minutes after leaving the podium, Obama teed-off and could be seen laughing with friends and fist-bumping them during a five-hour round at Farm Neck Golf Course on Martha’s Vineyard  – his seventh 18-holes in ten days.

I cannot recall a president in recent memory who was so oblivious to the pain and shock that the entire nation felt, yet the game of golf had to go on! I can only imagine the European heads of states shaking their heads in disbelief. Putin and ISIS were probably laughing derisively at our President, who forgot about the “optics” of how he looked on camera.

Yes, Mr. Obama, we know why you detest the press.

After discovering how his popularity plummeted in the next several days, President Obama reluctantly admitted, “after the statement that I made, that you know, I should’ve anticipated the optics,” he said.

The second reaction was that of King Abdullah II of Jordan to  news that the Jordanian pilot Lt. Moath al-Kasasbeh, 27, had been burned alive while confined in a cage.

  • Jordan’s King Abdullah, himself a former general, angrily vowed to pursue ISIS until his military runs “out of fuel and bullets,” in a closed door meeting with U.S. lawmakers that followed the release Wednesday of a grisly video showing a captured Jordanian airman being burned alive in a cage by the terrorist army.[2]

Such resolve, such courage! Who would expect little tiny Jordan to act like the mouse who roared while the most powerful leader of the free world got upset that the world did not see him at his best.

Interestingly, King Abdullah II of Jordan was in the United States when ISIS released the video on the Internet. What did he do? The King immediately cut his trip short in order to return to Jordan to comfort the family of the lost pilot.

Can you—the reader—appreciate the difference between Obama’s and Abdullah’s reaction? I do not think for a minute that King Abdullah worried about the optics—his place was with the victims and with his people.

Winston Churchill has never been one of Obama’s heroes. When Obama first took the White House, one of the first things he did while he was in office was to remove the bust of Winston Churchill from the Oval Office and send it back to the British Embassy. The British probably felt surprised at this sign of presidential disrespect, for one never unilaterally returns a gift from a foreign leader!

In retrospect, it is not hard to see why.  Churchill once said: Continue reading “A Contrast in Leadership: King Abdullah and President Obama”

King Faisal–Weizmann Agreement – When the Arabs asked the Jews to return to Israel

Whenever you hear the Palestinian rhetoric, one would get the impression that Jews were nothing more than a European transplant who came over and seized all the Arab lands they could grab. Needless to say, there is much more history to this narrative than most people realize–including our President of the United States. When people ignore history, they change the narrative into the image of their device. Sadly, this has happened way too much in the last 40 + years, but armed with knowledge–we can change the public misconception about the real Arab and Jewish relationship concerning Palestine (as it was called at that time). Here is a fascinating article I think most of you will find enlightening:

Feisal-Frankfurter Correspondence (March 1919)

Letter from Emir Feisal (Son of Hussein Bin Ali, Sharif of Mecca | Great grandson of the prophet Muhammad) to Felix Frankfurter, associate of Dr. Chaim Weizmann:

DELEGATION HEDJAZIENNE

Paris Peace Conference

March 3, 1919

Dear Mr. Frankfurter:

I want to take this opportunity of my first contact with American Zionists to tell you what I have often been able to say to Dr. Weizmann in Arabia and Europe.

We feel that the Arabs and Jews are cousins in having suffered similar oppressions at the hands of powers stronger than themselves, and by a happy coincidence have been able to take the first step towards the attainment of their national ideals together. The Arabs, especially the educated among us, look with the deepest sympathy on the Zionist movement. Our deputation here in Paris is fully acquainted with the proposals submitted yesterday by the Zionist Organisation to the Peace Conference, and we regard them as moderate and proper. We will do our best, in so far as we are concerned, to help them through: we will wish the Jews a most hearty welcome home.

With the chiefs of your movement, especially with Dr. Weizmann, we have had and continue to have the closest relations. He has been a great helper of our cause, and I hope the Arabs may soon be in a position to make the Jews some return for their kindness. We are working together for a reformed and revived Near East, and our two movements complete one another. The Jewish movement is national and not imperialist. Our movement is national and not imperialist, and there is room in Syria for us both. Indeed I think that neither can be a real success without the other.

People less informed and less responsible than our leaders and yours, ignoring the need for cooperation of the Arabs and Zionists, have been trying to exploit the local difficulties that must necessarily arise in Palestine in the early stages of our movements. Some of them have, I am afraid, misrepresented your aims to the Arab peasantry, and our aims to the Jewish peasantry, with the result that interested parties have been able to make capital out of what they call our differences. I wish to give you my firm conviction that these differences are not on questions of principle, but on matters of detail such as must inevitably occur in every contact of neighbouring peoples, and as are easily adjusted by mutual good will. Indeed nearly all of them will disappear with fuller knowledge.

I look forward, and my people with me look forward, to a future in which we will help you and you will help us, so that the countries in which we are mutually interested may once again take their places in the community of civilised peoples of the world.

Believe me,

Yours sincerely,

(Sgd.) Feisal

Letter of reply from Felix Frankfurter to Emir Feisal:

Paris Peace Conference

March 5, 1919

Royal Highness,

Allow me, on behalf of the Zionist Organisation, to acknowledge your recent letter with deep appreciation.

Those of us who come from the United States have already been gratified by the friendly relations and the active cooperation maintained between you and the Zionist leaders, particularly Dr. Weizmann. We knew it could not be otherwise; we knew that the aspirations of the Arab and the Jewish peoples were parallel, that each aspired to re-establish its nationality in its own homeland, each making its own distinctive contribution to civilisation, each seeking its own peaceful mode of life.

The Zionist leaders and the Jewish people for whom they speak have watched with satisfaction the spiritual vigour of the Arab movement. Themselves seeking justice, they are anxious that the just national aims of the Arab people be confirmed and safeguarded by the Peace Conference. We knew from your acts and your past utterances that the Zionist movement — in other words the national aim of the Jewish people — had your support and the support of the Arab people for whom you speak. These aims are now before the Peace Conference as definite proposals by the Zionist Organisation. We are happy indeed that you consider these proposals “moderate and proper,” and that we have in you a staunch supporter for their realisation.

For both the Arab and the Jewish peoples there are difficulties ahead — difficulties that challenge the united statesmanship of Arab and Jewish leaders. For it is no easy task to rebuild two great civilisations that have been suffering oppression and misrule for centuries. We each have our difficulties we shall work out as friends, friends who are animated by similar purposes, seeking a free and full development for the two neighbouring peoples. The Arabs and Jews are neighbours in territory; we cannot but live side by side as friends.

Very respectfully,

(Sgd.) Felix Frankfurter

PART 3

Agreement Between Emir Feisal and Dr. Weizmann

Faisal–Weizmann Agreement

3 January 1919

His Royal Highness the Emir Feisal, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of Hedjaz, and Dr. Chaim Weizmann, representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organization, mindful of the racial kinship and ancient bonds existing between the Arabs and the Jewish people, and realizing that the surest means of working out the consummation of their natural aspirations is through the closest possible collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine, and being desirous further of confirming the good understanding which exists between them, have agreed upon the following:

Articles:

Article I

The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding, and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in the respective territories.

Article II

Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.

Article III

In the establishment of the Constitution and Administration of Palestine, all such measures shall be adopted as will afford the fullest guarantees for carrying into effect the British Government’s Declaration of the 2nd of November, 1917.

Article IV

All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.

Article V

No regulation or law shall be made prohibiting or interfering in any way with the free exercise of religion; and further, the free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall ever be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.

Article VI

The Mohammedan Holy Places shall be under Mohammedan control.

Article VII

The Zionist Organization proposes to send to Palestine a Commission of experts to make a survey of the economic possibilities of the country, and to report upon the best means for its development. The Zionist Organization will place the aforementioned Commission at the disposal of the Arab State for the purpose of a survey of the economic possibilities of the Arab State and to report upon the best means for its development. The Zionist Organization will use its best efforts to assist the Arab State in providing the means for developing the natural resources and economic possibilities thereof.

Article VIII

The parties hereto agree to act in complete accord and harmony on all matters embraced herein before the Peace Congress.

Article IX

Any matters of dispute which may arise between the contracting parties hall be referred to the British Government for arbitration. Given under our hand at London, England, the third day of January, one thousand nine hundred and nineteen

Chaim Weizmann Feisal Ibn-Hussein

Reservation by the Emir Feisal

If the Arabs are established as I have asked in my manifesto of 4 January, addressed to the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, I will carry out what is written in this agreement. If changes are made, I cannot be answerable for failing to carry out this agreement.

What happened then?
http://www.factualisrael.com/root-cause-conflicts-middle-east/

Kudos to factualisrael.com for their excellent article.