I know that Arutz Sheva is a rightwing news service, but here is their latest poll. Shiver-making.
Transfer of Arabs from the Palestinian Authority to actual Arab countries was the most popular solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, according to a poll this week by Israel National News. Of the more than 6,400 people surveyed, 53.2 said ‘Transfer of Palestinians to another Arab country’ when asked, "What’s the best solution for the Arab-Israeli conflict?"The "two-states for two peoples" solution being pushed by the United States and the international community received 30.8 percent support…
So 5 more years and then 2 states will not just be politicall and logistically dead, but also socially dead among Israelis in Palestine? I wonder if those surveyed included Israeli Arabs
Normally Israeli Arabs are not included when polling ‘Israelis’, and if pollers happen to be aware of this, they rarely let on.
I wonder what percentage “put them in the ovens” would have received if it was a poll choice.
“Actual Arab countries?” Really? Holy crap have Zionists ever become the new reinrassig.
It’s difficult to really take on board how pervasively bigoted Israel is.
Before we get our knickers in knot about how awful Israelis are, we should realize that this poll is an informal internet poll linked to from the home page of Artuz Sheva, the right wing settler news agency. Its akin to judging the opion of all Americans based on emails sent into Fox News, or (l’havdil) to analysing the commentary on Mondoweiss.
Here’s a more mainstream assessment: evidence for pervasive bigotry still unmistakable.
Some 46 percent of Israel’s Jewish citizens favor transferring Palestinians out of the territories, while 31 percent favor transferring Israeli Arabs out of the country, according to the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies’ annual national security public opinion poll.
When the question of transfer was posed in a more roundabout way, 60 percent of respondents said that they were in favor of encouraging Israeli Arabs to leave the country.
link to haaretz.co.il
This is another thread the Nazi trash Richard Witty will not comment on.
Anything that is a clear indicator of the fascism of Israeli Jewish society.
Of course not! Witty’s off busy trying to shame the BDS movement into submission while his precious little vaterland continues its ethnic cleansing.
Cliff, calling people ‘Nazi trash’ is not acceptable.
Ben-Gurion was destined to be heralded as not only the founder of the State of Israel and its first prime minister, but also as the mastermind of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
In his Diary, an entry on 12 July 1937, Ben-Gurion records writing to his son that the only course of action open to Zionism was: “The Arabs will have to go”. What was needed was an opportune moment for making it happen, as Israeli historian and senior academic Ilan Pappe observes in his awesome study “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine”.
In order to make sense of the current politics of Israel, which under the right-wing leadership of Benjamin Netanyahu remains adamant in denying Palestinian rights, its significant to grasp the malicious intent on the part of his predecessors. Zionist leaders such as Ben-Gurion developed and implemented concrete actions to empty Palestine of its natives. Its equally useful to recollect that in the period between 1919 to 1933 after 35,000 more Zionists immigrated to Palestine, Jewish hold of the land constituted less than 3% while their population stood at 12%……
‘Plan Dalet’ and Palestinian Holocaust
link to rehmat1.wordpress.com
This poll is not accurate. In more scientific polls the percentage of Israeli Jews that support the forced transfer option is closer to 40%. This is absolutely horrifying if you think about it. How many of the 60% that say they oppose transfer are deterred from saying yes because it is so unthinkable. (Basically, Nato bombed Serbia in 1999 after claiming that the Serbs were ethnically cleansing Albanians from Kosovo). The Israelis have to know we consider this act a crime. I suspect that when that day arrives and they start driving Arabs out of all of Palestine, that only 10% or so would actually protest the action, 40% would cheer or even join in the fun and the other 50% would avert their eyes. Wonder if Nato would start bombing Israel at this time?
“Start?” There are already UN resolutions condemning deportations of Palestinians from their own country by the Israeli occupation. We’re already seeing it in progress, in East Jerusalem in particular and the West Bank in general, and we’re seeing the darker edge of the real stormfront over Gaza. The ethnic cleansing is already happening.
Otherwise I agree with you 100%. I’d love to see the same rules applied to the rest of the world applied to Israel. Dealing with Israeli pirates the way we’ve dealt with Somali pirates, for another.
People don’t want to be morally wrong – and they’re capable of coming up with the wackiest justifications to avoid this. So you get the following mechanics: the basic concept is “only us”, but that doesn’t sound right enough. Modified version: we have no problem with Palestinians at all, as long as they leave us alone. “leaving alone” means to be far away. You don’t want to expel them unprovoked because that would be morally wrong. This leaves -at least- two public tracks: the nice track is to make it easy and attractive for Palestinians to leave. A poll asking “wouldn’t it be nice if Palestinians left voluntarily” will get many votes. The angry track is that you wouldn’t use force normally but all the bad things they’ve done leave you no other choice – it’s self defence. Results of a poll then will vary wildly depending on whether these tracks are activated, whether responsibility is taken away. The task of the policymakers then is to take away responsibility.
There is a huge difference between “only us” and wanting to be accepted. I see no sign of any desire to be accepted by the neighboring countries.
Whereas the first intifadeh opened the Israeli center to the possibility of a two state solution, the second intifadeh closed them to it. And the withdrawal from Gaza and the continued shelling of Sderot and environs proved the point.
Granted those who were pro Palestinian from the start view the second intifadeh and the withdrawal from Gaza from a different perspective. But the harm that the second intifadeh and the Gaza withdrawal did to the hardening of the worldview of the Israeli center is substantial.
That observation is undeniable. Only those that regard the Jewish majority as unworthy of a democratic voice, ignores that.
Wow, Witty and the rest of the Zionists blaming Palestinians for everything that’s gone wrong and never once confronting Israel’s ongoing ethnic cleansing? Gee, what a shocking twist.
Witty employs the all too typical Zionist tactic of emotional blackmail (poor poor Juice).
No it has nothing to do w/ thinking Jews are ‘unworthy’ you dumb yuppie.
It has to do w/ the fact that your Jewish country club only exists through atrocity and lies and ethnic cleansing of the indigenous population.
But yea, I’m sure the Palestinians stay up awake at night not because of the occupation and that Zionist thugs and Jewish fundamentalists terrorizing them daily – but because they think ‘the Juice’ are ‘unworthy’ of a democratic voice.
You’re such a fucking Nazi, it’s astounding.
You have to be superficial. Like the fucking weasel you are.
I’m sorry to see the abusive comments.
I would have thought that it’s the Palestinians who lack democratic – or any kind of political – voice that anyone listens to.
The basic proposition of Zionism, I think, is that sovereignty over the Holy Land belongs by right (s0me say God bestowed this right, some say there was a human process) only to Jewish people, to others only by concession. So it’s deeply desirable for others not to be there, or to be there only in small numbers, so that concessions are affordable. The Palestinians surely reciprocate this view: to them the Israeli Jews are usurpers, which means that it’s morally wrong for them to be there except perhaps as a small remainder, which means that their absence must be deeply desired, though no doubt the Palestinians would accept much less in those serious negotiations that never happen.
Most people in the West think that a solution through the mass transfer of either population just cannot be done, which is probably true. To assist ourselves with this problem of two groups who much desire, but cannot obtain, each other’s absence we Westerners seem to have convinced ourselves that both groups are present by right, though it’s quite hard to explain why there are two kinds of right, evidently in some conflict but both essentially valid.
One thing to keep in mind, and it bears repeating: There were non-Israeli, non-Zionist Jews in Palestine before Israel. The Israel/Zionism phenomenon is primarily of European manufacture — the original Zionists of Israel were overwhelmingly Europeans, and immigration of other Middle Eastern Jews to Israel only came with inducements from Israel — which sometimes took the form of false flag attacks, like the Lavon affair.
So there isn’t a direct moral or philosophical equivalence between Palestinians and Jews. Palestinians comprise a traditional culture and national identity, analogous to those of any modern nation. Israelis, on the other hand, are by and large not unified by anything other than Zionism — realistically, they aren’t even unified by Judaism, considering the tensions between secular Israelis, Orthodox pro-settler Israelis, Haredim, etc. They don’t share family ties, generational ties to the land, an established culture and language, etc. the way Palestinians do.
So therefore, I’m not sure it is actually fair to equate Israeli and Palestinian attitudes.
While I understand the temptation of moral equivalence, there is still the fact that the Palestinians were already inhabiting the land, and the Zionists came to take it from them by any means, including force.