How many years will it be till neoconservative Commentary Magazine apologizes for its Nakba denial? 5, 10, 50? Well, I’m setting the egg-timer. Because the National Post of Canada, a neocon hive–owned by rightwing Jews, long guarantor of a platform to David Frum, who invented two dangerous slogans, "Victory or Holocaust" and "Axis of Evil"–yesterday stated there was "ethnic cleansing" in ’47-48 Palestine. First it printed a piece by contributor Jeet Heer on the Nakba that was unapologetic:
there was a tragic side to Israel’s founding. The ethnic cleansing
that allowed Israel to emerge was a terrible trauma for the Arab
victims, and it continues to haunt the Jewish state to this day. The
external war against Arab armies was mirrored by an internal war
against Arabs living inside Palestine. Because of this tragic legacy,
uncritically celebrating 1948 does a disservice to Jews and Arabs alike.I
know many readers will be shocked by my use of the words "ethnic
cleansing," which seem so harsh to those raised on the myth-making of
Leon Uris. But the fact is that the best recent historians of Israel’s
founding, some of whom are ardent Zionists, have made it clear that the
events of 1948 were an ethnic cleansing.
The Post then felt it necessary to "contextualize" the piece with an editorial somewhat denying it.
If anything, in fact, Israel represents a relatively mild exhibit in
the "ethnic cleansing" department. Local Arabs did die among the
bloodshed attending Israel’s creation, as Mr. Heer argues. But the
death toll was orders of magnitude lower than that in, say, south Asia,
which divided between India and Pakistan during the same period.
Yes; and the Pakistanis have had a state for 60 years.
But let us hail the Post for diversity of opinion. And the loyalty and respect it has shown to Jeet Heer, a regular contributor–loyalty and respect absent in the treatment by the Chicago Global Affairs Council and the New York Times of former contributor John Mearsheimer.
Wonder of wonders! If a paper controlled
by the Aspers can publish such a piece, perhaps there is some hope for a non-Zionist
narrative of the Middle East to reach the
thinking public. Now if only the NY Times
would print a fair review of The Transparent
Cabal by Sniegoski!
"The terrorists hate us for who we are, not for what we do."
Is this Israel? Or the USA?
There is no difference in the respective governments's spiel in this sense.
The irony is so immense.
Only Obama among the wannabees even barely comprehends it.
Ron Paul will eventually be seen as a clear voice in the wilderness.
By then, the USA worthy of the star-spangled banner inspiration will be gone. Then where will Israel be?
Jeet Heer published a groundbreaking article in the Boston Globe a few years ago about how many of the neocons were not even born in America, among them the idiot Charles Krauthammer, who was supposedly born in Uruguay.
http://www.jeetheer.com/politics/anglosphere.htm
Were these men born to fathers who were traveling at the early Zionists' request to scout out possible alternative sites for Israel? I remember reading North Africa was a possible site, so Krauthammer's birth there confirms this?
neocognitism wrote:
"I remember reading North Africa was a possible site, so Krauthammer's birth there confirms this?"
You're one confused guy, neocognitism, aren't you… Uganda was offered as a site for the Jewish state in 1903, roughly 50 years before Krauthammer was born. Uruguay is in South America.
Aww Peter, you must be one of those reddit stalkers. Thanks for the correction.
You're welcome :)
You know, there is enough confusion and ambiguity about most of the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict, with each side citing so many facts to support its claims, that verifying them all is a huge challenge in itself; that is to say, we might at least try to be precise about the most basic things, which are easy to check. Sorry if I came across as condescending. Cheers.
No I confused the two, my mistake.
But there was ample reason for Krauthammer's dad to be there, since Uruguay was apparently the biggest Israel-creation booster country.
"At the 1920 San Remo Conference, Uruguay supported Jewish aspirations in Eretz Yisrael and the Balfour Declaration. In 1947, it voted for the establishment of the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP), which had a delegate from Uruguay who was one of the Jews' most ardent supporters. Uruguay was the first Latin American country, and one of the first countries overall, to recognize the State of Israel. Montevideo was the first Latin American capital (and fourth globally) in which Israel established a diplomatic mission. Uruguay was also one of the few nations willing to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. It opposed the proposed internationalization of the city in 1949 and upgraded the diplomatic representation in Jerusalem to the status of an embassy in 1958."
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/vjw/Uruguay.html
In fact it would seem the most ardent Zionists would have wanted to be in Uruguay back then.
So instead of my choosing the U-something country as a possible site for Israel, it's the U-something country responsible for lobbying for the creation of Israel. Equal importance.