Martin Indyk’s references to Nakba represent denial of atrocities

US Politics
on 274 Comments

Martin Indyk is a powerful man in the Israel lobby. He worked for Bill Clinton and George Bush and now heads the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution, the thinktank funded by Haim Saban who declares that his bottom line is affecting policy on Israel. Last year Indyk published a lively book on his years in the peace process, called Innocent Abroad. It includes two or three references to the Nakba, in the context of the second intifada:

The first indication of their [Palestinian] inclination to violence came on May 15, 2000… Palestinians call that particular day the Naqba, or disaster, because it commemorates the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948.

I think this is a form of Nakba denial. My understanding of the Nakba is that Palestinians are commemorating not just the establishment of the state of Israel but a tremendous catastrophe, the expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians during the war of Israeli independence. Limiting the description in the manner that Indyk does makes the Palestinians out as pure rejectionists who hate the idea of a Jewish state, rather than as people who experienced a significant trauma, losing their homes and way of life during the Nakba. Many were massacred and/or raped.

If you watch Lia Tarachansky’s interviews (with Zochrot) of Israelis in Tel Aviv about what Nakba means, you will see that a couple of the Israelis have some understanding of what befell the Palestinians with Israeli independence– they lost their homes– while others expose their ignorance or callousness, or even undertake some form of denial. Like Martin Indyk. 

274 Responses

  1. Richard Witty
    May 20, 2010, 10:54 am

    What do you think is the appropriate description?

    1. Israel actively and intentionally and over a century undertook a strategy of only ethnic cleansing.
    2. Ethnic cleansing occurred by the actions of ideologs (minority) in the context of a larger war, and was later institutionalized by post-war laws.
    3. No ethnic cleansing occurred.

    • Mooser
      May 20, 2010, 12:00 pm

      Richard, your English is getting steadily more nonsensical, and how many times do I have to tell you, it’s I-D-E-O-L-O-G-U-ES

      Richard, don’t you think it’s pretty obvious that your Zionist furore scribendi is all about you having to avoid coming to grips with the fact that Zionism has taken your son from you? Jeez, I hate to put it that way, but there it is. And ruined him as a person able to function in the world? And you let it happen, because doing anything about it might have taken some effort, or made you come face-to-face with our pitiful Jewish humanity.
      Oh, but I’m being awful (probably because I have court today, I swear it, I never laid a finger on that girl, and she told me she was 47 yrs old!)
      to you Richard. So why not give the kid a link and let him join the discussion for himself. He could show us the real Jewish humanity of the settlers, and put us all to shame.

    • Donald
      May 20, 2010, 12:24 pm

      “Ethnic cleansing occurred by the actions of ideologs (minority) in the context of a larger war, and was later institutionalized by post-war laws.”

      So Ben Gurion was part of the ideological minority then. Surely you’re not blaming it all on the far right?

  2. Avi
    May 20, 2010, 11:26 am

    The Nakba is commemorated by Palestinains for the same reason the Shoah is commemorated by Jews and Pearl Harbor and 9/11 are commemorated by the US.

    Indyk, like the Israeli government in all its forms, denies the responsibility he and the Zionist movement bear for their actions.

    This tactic is worse than outright denial. Here, Indyk and his ilk acknowledge the term Nakba, but they attach to it their own false meaning, spin. Instead of taking responsibility for said crimes, they are discrediting the victim by condemning the victim to be a Jew-hating anti-Semite.

    Imagine for a moment that the German ambassador to the US said that those who commemorate the Shoah are doing so because they are anti-German racists.

    • jonah
      May 20, 2010, 1:49 pm

      Avi,
      the Nakba and the Shoah can not even remotely be compared, and you are wrong by suggesting so. The first occurred as a result of a war between the Jews and the Arabs in former British Palestine and it concides with the defeat of the Arab Palestinians and the consequent refugee problem, which is actually – if you want a comparison at any cost – more comparable with the Arab retaliation and ethnic cleansing against their own Jewish citizens following the birth of the state of Israel (the latter however much less publicized and discussed in the public opinion than the Nakba).
      In a completely different absolutely “other” category is instead placed the Shoah – the Holocaust against the European Jews – which caused the deliberate planned and systematic destruction of millions of innocent lifes.

      The Arabs (Palestinians) are today 1,5 million in Israel, about 2 million in the West Bank and another 1,4 million in the Gaza strip, with a steady average population groth rate of 2.5%. These continuous claims and accusations of the ethnic cleansing and a crimes allegedly committed by the “evil Zionists” appear to me untrue and even boring, a propagandistic exaggeration, aimed to hide the Arab and Palestinian responsibilities in the ME-conflict and to blame solely on “the Zionist entity”. This Palestinian-Arab “mimicry” makes the conflict difficult to resolve.

      Regards.

      • Citizen
        May 20, 2010, 2:02 pm

        It’s a tad grayer than you say, Jonah. For example, you forgot about the Transfer Agreement. And, did the Arabs boot the Palestinians out of their homes? Or prevent them from coming back?

      • Julian
        May 20, 2010, 3:35 pm

        The facts are the Arabs went to war to destroy Israel and lost. Now they want to get politically what they couldn’t get with violence.
        If the Arabs didn’t resort to war there would be no Naqba.

      • Shmuel
        May 20, 2010, 3:42 pm

        As many have posted, many times before, the ethnic cleansing began at least 6 months before Israel’s unilateral declaration of independence and the subsequent declaration of war by Arab countries.

        Smith and Wesson repeating action hasbara.

      • Richard Witty
        May 20, 2010, 3:48 pm

        Civil war occurred in 47-48, following the holocaust, following the 36-39 Arab revolt.

        Its not so simple Shmuel.

      • Shmuel
        May 20, 2010, 3:55 pm

        Its not so simple Shmuel.

        Obviously not, but my shorthand is far more representative of the picture as a whole than your attempt to create balance where none exists.

      • Avi
        May 20, 2010, 5:01 pm

        As many have posted, many times before

        Indeed. Isn’t that symptomatic of these Ziobots? No matter how many times the facts are held in front of their eyes, as clear as day, they continue to hold onto their own delusions.

        It’s truly despicable that they think they can get away with historical revisionism if they only repeated the lies long enough and at great frequency.

      • yonira
        May 20, 2010, 11:19 pm

        As many have post, many time times before, the aggression against Jews in Palestine started, in earnest, directly following the failed partition plan.

      • sammy
        May 21, 2010, 12:20 am

        Civil war? How can you have a “civil” war with foreign immigrants pouring in from Europe?

        I recommend to you an excellent book on the history of the I-P conflict in the years before the nakba – it goes back much further than 1936

        From Coexistence to Conquest: International Law and the Origins of the Arab-Israeli Conflict 1891-1949 by Victor Kattan
        link to amazon.co.uk

      • Shingo
        May 21, 2010, 12:46 am

        “As many have post,  many time times before,  the aggression against Jews in Palestine started,  in earnest,  directly following the failed partition plan.”

        Yet, the aggression against Palestinians in Palestine started years earlier.

      • yonira
        May 22, 2010, 1:28 am

        Great source Citizen, tell me, are you a truther?

        From the same site you are linking to…..


        Seven 9-11 Hijackers Are Alive and Well
        Framing bin Laden
        Demolition of the World Trade Center
        Towering Inferno
        Jet Fuel at the World Trade Center
        A Missile Not Flight 77

        looking forward to none of you loons toons crying foul here.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 22, 2010, 3:27 am

        yonira
        Where’s the answer to my question, you mental thug?

      • Avi
        May 20, 2010, 2:05 pm

        Jonah,

        I’m not wrong. You’re clueless and I’ve got news for you, sweetie. I wasn’t born yesterday. Nice regurgitation of propaganda, by the way.

        I find it quite amusing that you saw it necessary to go on blathering about how I have “suggested” that the Shoah and the Nakba are the same while leaving Pearl Harbor and 9/11 out of your diatribe. You dig?

        Yoav Shamir’s Defamation is out on DVD. Make sure you watch it. Report back with your findings. And in light of the aforementioned propaganda and lies you posted about the events that led to the establishment of Israel, I hope that your listening skills are better than your reading skills.

      • jonah
        May 20, 2010, 2:25 pm

        What a masculine response, Avi, congratulations. But I do not even fall into your kind of mimicry. You are indeed comparing the Shoah, the Nagba and Pearl Harbor but you avoid to mention the “same reason” because the latter would reveal your arbitrary intent.

        Actually, your attempt appear to me quite symptomatic for your way of thinking.

      • Avi
        May 20, 2010, 5:28 pm

        What a masculine response, Avi, congratulations. But I do not even fall into your kind of mimicry. You are indeed comparing the Shoah, the Nagba and Pearl Harbor but you avoid to mention the “same reason” because the latter would reveal your arbitrary intent.

        Actually, your attempt appear to me quite symptomatic for your way of thinking.

        It’s quite sad that the only really good act in which you excel is provocation. Where have I seen that kind of behavior before? Oh yeah, the fanatic colonialists in the occupied territories of the West Bank and the Israeli government.

        It’s rather telling, don’t you think?

      • jonah
        May 20, 2010, 5:44 pm

        Yes, I am a Jew. You too?

      • Avi
        May 20, 2010, 6:12 pm

        You’re not a Jew, you’re a mental patient. No offense to mental patients.

      • sammy
        May 21, 2010, 12:22 am

        Lets see you have the lebensraum, the reinrassig and the untermensch.

        Whats missing?

      • yonira
        May 21, 2010, 12:33 am

        Caliphate? Dar al-Islam?

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 12:41 am

        Wow, so you’ve gone from denying photographic evidence and documentation, to forwarding a crazy theory that Muslims are secretly trying to take over the world.

        You really are the Jewish version of a neo-Nazi.

      • jonah
        May 21, 2010, 8:09 am

        you are a funny guy, Avi.

      • Psychopathic god
        May 20, 2010, 2:06 pm

        shove it up your arse jonah. world is getting sick of hearing how dead jews are more valuable than dead anybody else.

        go ahead and ban me phil. it’d be worth it if it stopped one set of people from killing another set of people then rationalizing it as acceptable.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 21, 2010, 12:52 am

        “shove it up your arse jonah.”

        Now you’re talking PG ( although I wouldn’t do it myself). There are times when this is the only arguments those vicious Israel worshipers understand.

      • Avi
        May 20, 2010, 2:10 pm

        The Arabs (Palestinians) are today 1,5 million in Israel, about 2 million in the West Bank and another 1,4 million in the Gaza strip, with a steady average population groth rate of 2.5%. These continuous claims and accusations of the ethnic cleansing and a crimes allegedly committed by the “evil Zionists” appear to me untrue and even boring, a propagandistic exaggeration, aimed to hide the Arab and Palestinian responsibilities in the ME-conflict and to blame solely on “the Zionist entity”. This Palestinian-Arab “mimicry” makes the conflict difficult to resolve.

        The Jewish population of the world is double that of 1940, so what ethnic cleansing are you talking about with this thing you call Shoah?

        As you can see, your ludicrous nonsense doesn’t even pass the smell test. It reeks. We can play your idiotic games all day.

        Regards.

        Keep those regards to yourself.

      • jonah
        May 20, 2010, 2:36 pm

        Yes, but you and your kind refer always to the ethnic cleansing by Israel. Fact is: In Israel live today far more Arabs than Jews in the whole Arab-Islamic world.

        How do you explain this, Avi?

        Perhaps again the Zionists have ethnically cleansed the Jews from the Arab world.

      • Danaa
        May 20, 2010, 2:46 pm

        jonah – you mean the Mizrahi Jews who,for the mosst part 9and certainly in many) cases were talked into, cajoled and frightened into coming to the land of milk and honey, as demographic canon fodder by their so-called co-religionists? a land, I should say, that for them it was more turned out to be the land of dust and toil and derision?

        I wouldn’t use them as example to flay the arab countries over. I tend to use the mizrahi as an example of the true failure of the zionist project. At least the democratic portion thereof. The messianic part which turned israel into Judea – the country of the maccabim – was, of course, an astounding success.

      • Danaa
        May 20, 2010, 2:51 pm

        Too much haste – typos galore alert! But I think jonah may get the point, typos or otherwise….

      • Shmuel
        May 20, 2010, 3:09 pm

        Yes, but you and your kind

        And here I was thinking we only had an ilk.

      • jonah
        May 20, 2010, 3:17 pm

        Danaa,
        yes this is your story, the Anti-Zionist one. But the ethnic cleansing of the Arab Jews is well-documented, even though it is far not so publicized and known as the Palestinian refugee problem.

        Have a look into the matter:

        link to hsje.org

      • Brewer
        May 20, 2010, 3:30 pm

        “In Israel live today far more Arabs than Jews in the whole Arab-Islamic world.

        How do you explain this”

        “Iraqi-born Ran Cohen, a former member of the Knesset, said: “I have this to say: I am not a refugee. I came at the behest of Zionism, due to the pull that this land exerts, and due to the idea of redemption. Nobody is going to define me as a refugee”. Yemeni-born Yisrael Yeshayahu, former Knesset speaker, Labor Party, stated: “We are not refugees. [Some of us] came to this country before the state was born. We had messianic aspirations”. And Iraqi-born Shlomo Hillel, also a former speaker of the Knesset, Labor Party, claimed: “I do not regard the departure of Jews from Arab lands as that of refugees. They came here because they wanted to, as Zionists””
        link to en.wikipedia.org

        “I write this article for the same reason I wrote my book: to tell the American people, and especially American Jews, that Jews from Islamic lands did not emigrate willingly to Israel; that, to force them to leave, Jews killed Jews; and that, to buy time to confiscate ever more Arab lands, Jews on numerous occasions rejected genuine peace initiatives from their Arab neighbors. I write about what the first prime minister of Israel called “cruel Zionism.” I write about it because I was part of it.”
        link to bintjbeil.com

      • potsherd
        May 20, 2010, 3:46 pm

        Perhaps again the Zionists have ethnically cleansed the Jews from the Arab world.

        They have. And from more than the Arab world, from the Asian world and the African world. Mourn the synagogues falling into ruin in places where “the Arabs” were not a factor.

      • Julian
        May 20, 2010, 3:47 pm

        800,000 Jews were thrown out of Arab Countries. That’s the reality no matter how many anti Zionists or Messianic Jews you quote.
        Another fact: The Arabs started a war causing thousands of deaths and now want to be compensated for their actions. Amazing.

      • jonah
        May 20, 2010, 4:16 pm

        postherd

        Any evidences? Hard facts? Or the simple usual unfounded insinuations?

      • potsherd
        May 20, 2010, 4:42 pm

        You are ignorant of this? It’s quite well-known.

        For example the Cochin Jews of India, whose community flourished for over a thousand years. Gone.

        link to thehindu.com

      • jonah
        May 20, 2010, 5:00 pm

        In your article I can not find any evidence that the Jews of Kerala were forced to leave by the Zionists. Or is the fact itself that they left for Israel the proof of the Zionist guilt? Very interesting, indeed.

      • Brewer
        May 20, 2010, 6:20 pm

        “Another fact: The Arabs started a war causing thousands of deaths and now want to be compensated for their actions. Amazing.”

        Not fact, a fiction invented to justify a planned Colonial enterprise.

        At the time the Arab league moved troops into the area these facts pertained:

        Between 250,000 and 400,000 Palestinian civilians had been driven from their homes and were placing great stress on their Arab neighbours. Massacres at Deir Yassin, Tiberius, Safad, Balad al Sheikh, Jaffa had already been perpetrated. If you wish to assign responsibility for the 1948 War, I suggest that these facts cannot be ignored. They were acts of War and they all occurred before May 15 1948.

        The statement by the Arab League to the U.N. read, in part:

        “The Zionist aggression resulted in the exodus of more than a quarter of a million of its Arab inhabitants from their homes and in taking refuge in the neighbouring Arab countries. The events which have taken place in Palestine have unmasked the aggressive intentions and the imperialist designs of the Zionists, including the atrocities committed by them against the peace-loving Arab inhabitants, especially in Dayr Yasin, Tiberias and others. Nor have they respected the inviolability of consuls, as they have attacked the consulates of the Arab States in Jerusalem. After the termination of the British mandate over Palestine the British authorities are no longer responsible for security in the country, except to the degree affecting their withdrawing forces, and (only) in the areas in which these forces happen to be at the time of withdrawal as announced by (these authorities). This state of affairs would render Palestine without any governmental machinery capable of restoring order and the rule of law to the country, and of protecting the lives and properties of the inhabitants. ….
        ….The Governments of the Arab States emphasize, on this occasion, what they have already declared before the London Conference and the United Nations, that the only solution of the Palestine problem is the establishment of a unitary Palestinian State, in accordance with democratic principles, whereby its inhabitants will enjoy complete equality before the law, (and whereby) minorities will be assured of all the guarantees recognized in democratic constitutional countries and (whereby) the holy places will be preserved and the rights of access thereto guaranteed. “

        This, in no way, was a declaration of War and, in retrospect, if the U.N. had supported the Arab League, as the League fully expected, 60 years of carnage would have been avoided and Israel/Palestine would by now have been a thriving bi-national State.

        I strongly recommend to those who have not already done so, read the declaration and ask yourselves what might have been.
        link to mideastweb.org

      • potsherd
        May 20, 2010, 6:43 pm

        The means were various: fearmongering, false promises, incitement. The results were the same: ancient communities left in ruins, their heritage destroyed, forgotten.

        The lies that people like Julian tell, the myth of the forced expulsion of the Jews, served the Zionist purpose of populating the land left untenanted by the expulsion of the Palestinians, of providing forced labor, as well as the propaganda value.

        No one came running an airlift to save the Palestinians.

      • yonira
        May 20, 2010, 11:21 pm

        Jesus Christ, get some new fucking material! how many times can you guys post the same obscure links by a single individual and base your whole argument on that.

      • Shingo
        May 20, 2010, 5:10 pm

        “The first occurred as a result of a war between the Jews and the Arabs in former British Palestine..”

        False. The Nakba ocured becasue it hd been in the plannign for half a century.

      • yonira
        May 20, 2010, 11:21 pm

        so the planning of the Nakba began at the turn of the century Shingo,

        False.

      • Brewer
        May 21, 2010, 12:29 am

        Not so fast:

        Arthur Ruppin wrote in 1913:

        “Land is the most necessary thing for establishing roots in Palestine. Since there are hardly any more arable unsettled lands. . . . we are bound in each case. . . to remove the peasants who cultivate the land.” (Righteous Victims, p. 61)

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 21, 2010, 1:54 am

        so the planning of the Nakba began at the turn of the century Shingo, .False.

        No, not false! . Ridding the coveted land of its Palestinian inhabitants was an essential requirement for the establishment of a “Jewish state”. It has been theorised at the turn of the century. How could it have been possible to build a Jewish state while keeping a majority of non-Jewish population still living on their ancestral lands..It’s impossible.

      • javs
        May 21, 2010, 2:58 am

        Maybe you should dress as an arab and walk through Palestine without uttering a word and see what the aparthied’s criminals and children of them have learned to do.
        Then understand what it is to be a party to the largest holocaust in the world. and see how the world will eventually turn their backs on you.
        Never a single resolution followed, they attack all the cameras that are taking photos and video…because they know when the world realizes fully how eveilness was born, they will stomp it out, so they try but will never hide the truth.

  3. Colin Murray
    May 20, 2010, 11:45 am

    I would say it happened in several phases, a combination of points two and three. Sorry for poor editing; I have very little time.

    First, gradual ethnic cleansing and colonization (ETC) took placed actively and intentionally with a program of land-buying in combination with refusal to sell acquired land to any but other Jews. Others may know better, but it appears to me it this process can at least be dated to the foundation of the Jewish National Fund (JNF) in 1901. This process was especially facilitated by wealth divisions in Palestinian society, i.e. absentee landowners who would sell large tracts from which renting Palestinian peasants would be expelled by the new owners.

    Second, Zionist terrorism against Palestinians with the goal of encouraging their emigration began long before 1948. These acts IMO made Palestinians realize that when Jewish immigration into Palestine in the 1940’s spelled doom for them; they knew they were going to lose their land. Arab resistance in 1948 in no small part stemmed from the sure knowledge that Zionist leadership was going to expel them. It’s not like Jews showed up in 1948 and Palestinians were surprised and then callously refused to throw out a welcome mat to European refugees. I’m being repetitive: they know Europeans were going to kick them out of their homes at gunpoint, and that is exactly what happened. What occurred was no accident, and IMO not a huge surprise to more perceptive Palestinians.

    Third, from 1948 to the present Israel has continued uninterrupted gradual or creeping ETC, i.e. one plot of land and one building at a time, supplemented by, not alternating with, punctuated events of ethnic cleansing cloaked and/or disguised as wartime necessity in at least 1948, 1967, and 1973, which were of course followed by colonization.

    The gradualist ETC was carried out by non-govermental organizations such as JNF up to the present, and was supplemented by the direct Israeli government intervention no later than 1967. Others will know better if the Israeli government was involved earlier in gradual ETC, obviously in was directly involved in punctuated ethnic cleansing. It was easier to keep the Israeli government ‘sweet’ with respect to the international community if they kept a low-profile by allowed non-state actors to carry the load. Their direct involvement since 1967 in gradual ETC is one reason it has developed a higher profile.

    Fourth, while gradualist ETC has accelerated sharply in the past several years, the demographic problem (so-called by Israelis themselves) has made it apparent IMO to any Israel leader with more than two brain cells that gradualist ETC has failed in the goal of securing a decisive Jewish majority in ‘biblical Judea and Samaria’. Time has run out for the gradualist campaign: international repercussions are spiraling with astounding speed.

    I have not a shred of doubt the the Israeli political establishment fully realizes that only another punctuated ethnic cleansing event dwarfing that of 1948 will secure a Jewish majority in what they themselves called Eretz Israel. Note that Israel had every intention of eventually annexing south Lebanon up to the Litani River, which they occupied from 1982 until 2000 when they were finally driven out by Hizbullah, and Egypt up to the Sinai in 1956 until forced out by Pres. Eisenhower. Israel has formally annexed the Syrian Golan, and has effectively annexed much of the West Bank, defined as a formal extension of Israeli civil law and public services, e.g. cell phone service, road construction, school systems, etc. Also recall that Israeli colonies in Gaza were a hoped-for toe hold for eventual annexation there.

    Point three is ridiculous.

    • Colin Murray
      May 20, 2010, 11:46 am

      was directed at Richard Witty May 20, 2010 at 10:54 am, since AVI posted first, wanted to make sure it was clear that I didn’t start a new topic but was responding to a prior post

    • Julian
      May 20, 2010, 3:59 pm

      “: they know Europeans were going to kick them out of their homes at gunpoint, and that is exactly what happened.”

      Israel accepted the partition and peace. the Arabs went to war. That’s reality however you try to spin it.
      Palestinian firsters always try to hide that fact.

      • Brewer
        May 20, 2010, 6:30 pm

        “Israel accepted the partition and peace.”

        “after we become a strong force, as the result of the creation of a state, we shall abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine.”
        -Ben Gurion

        “The partition of the Homeland is illegal . It will never be recognized.The signature of institutions and individuals of the partition agreement is invalid. It will not bind the Jewish people. Jerusalem was and will forever be our capital. Eretz Israel (the land of Israel) will be restored to the people of Israel, All of it. And forever“.
        – Menachim Begin

      • VR
        May 20, 2010, 8:13 pm

        “…the Arabs went to war…” On the contrary Julian, the “Arabs” only joined a war already in progress by Zionists against Palestinians. That is the hard fact.

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 8:38 pm

        Hard fact? Hardly? Soft fact? Maybe. Hardly fact? You be the judge.

        On Apr. 16, 1948 Jamal Husseini, the Arab Higher Committee’s spokesman told the Security Council, “The representative of the Jewish Agency told us yesterday that they were not the attackers, that the Arabs had begun the fighting. We did not deny this. We told the whole world that we were going to fight.”

      • potsherd
        May 20, 2010, 8:49 pm

        The term “the Arabs” is too vague. What “Arabs?”

      • James Bradley
        May 20, 2010, 8:49 pm

        Unfortunately, a “quote” from a single person does not change the fact that the Zionists began the ethnic cleansing of Palestine far before a single Jordanian, Egyptian, Iraqi, or Syrian entered Palestine.

        Cycle of Events:

        1) European Zionists; mainly fresh immigrants from Europe began ethnically cleansing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from Palestine.

        2) Uproar over what is happening ensues in neighboring countries.

        3) Leaders of neighboring countries (most of which are new countries themselves – under the nation state model) are forced to send assistance to the Palestinians who are being ethnically cleansed.

        4) A largely uncoordinated attack on the territories that are meant for the Palestinians according to partition commences by some of the neighboring countries.

        5) The total combined strength of the 5 armies sent into Palestine to fight the Zionists is half the number of the single Israeli army (for example, Lebanon sent a mere 500 regulars and called it an army), is largely outgunned, and is completely uncoordinated.

        6) Of course the Arabs lose, and the Zionists continue the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

        7) Once the cleansing is complete, the Zionists do not allow any of the refugees to return to their homes despite resolutions from the United Nations and despite the fact that international law calls on nations to allow refugees to return to their homes.

        In the end Israel ends up conquering even more territory than was allotted to it, ethnically cleanses 90% of the population in that territory, and begins the official creation of an ethnic supremacist state.

      • Shingo
        May 20, 2010, 8:57 pm

        Did the Zionists already expel 200,000 Palestinian from their homes and seize 500 villages already by that stage in preparation for war?

        Yes or no WJ?

        “Hard fact?  Hardly?  Soft fact?  Maybe.  Hardly fact?  You be the judge.”

      • VR
        May 20, 2010, 9:17 pm

        “Unfortunately, a “quote” from a single person does not change the fact that the Zionists began the ethnic cleansing of Palestine far before a single Jordanian, Egyptian, Iraqi, or Syrian entered Palestine.”

        Precisely Mr. Bradley

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 9:50 pm

        The British commander of Jordan’s Arab Legion, John Bagot Glubb admitted:

        “Early in January, the first detachments of the Arab Liberation Army began to infiltrate into Palestine from Syria. Some came through Jordan and even through Amman . . . They were in reality to strike the first blow in the ruin of the Arabs of Palestine.”

        The two forces fighting for the Palestinians during the war of 47 through 49 were the AHC, the Palestinian army and the ALA, the forces from outside Palestine.

        The representatives of the Palestinians was the AHC, and thus this “one quote” is the quote of the official representative of the Palestinians making his case in front of the UN Security Council.

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 9:52 pm

        More quotes:UNSCOP was prevented by Arab and British forces from doing a full investigation in Palestine. They reported to the Security Council on 16 February 1948:

        “Organized efforts are being made by strong Arab elements inside and outside Palestine to prevent the implementation of the Assembly’s plan of partition and to thwart its objectives by threats and acts of violence, including armed incursions into Palestinian territory… This Commission now finds itself confronted with an attempt to defeat its purposes, and to nullify the resolution of the General Assembly.”

        So far: three quotes.

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 10:02 pm

        Cycle of events:

        1. UN approves partition plan. Zionists rejoice. Arabs promise violence.

        2. Violence- Including Palestinian Arab versus Jewish violence and Jewish violence against Arabs, plus the invasion of Arab Liberation Army forces into Palestine. Casualties in December and January came to 1000 killed and by the end of March 2000 killed.

        3. Assessment by the Zionists that the situation of defense was untenable: With Arab forces controlling the roads throughout the country and particularly the road to Jerusalem, the decision was made to go on the offensive.

        4. Launching Plan Dalet.

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 10:07 pm

        The defeat of Gush Etzion, a Jewish enclave in the area allocated to the Palestinian state which was never born:

        For five months the bloc was besieged, first by Arab irregulars, and then by the Jordanian Arab Legion. Throughout the winter hostilities intensified and several relief convoys from the Haganah in Jerusalem were destroyed in ambushes. For 47 days the armed conflict was intense.

        But according to you there was no Jordanian Arab Legion in Palestine and would not be one until after May 15th, even though the Jewish forces in Gush Etzion were defeated on May 14th.

      • Chaos4700
        May 20, 2010, 10:11 pm

        Remind me how wondering jew is supposed to be one of the only respectable Zionists who doesn’t blog-spam with revisionist history.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 20, 2010, 10:20 pm

        He’s getting his “facts” from this far right revisionist site. I checked !
        link to palestinefacts.org

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 20, 2010, 10:21 pm
      • thankgodimatheist
        May 20, 2010, 10:24 pm

        Wondering Jew has espoused the narrative of the far right fundamentalist, fascitic site Palestinefacts.org!!! Who could have guessed!!

      • sherbrsi
        May 20, 2010, 10:26 pm

        Chaos you are absolutely right. This wondering jew fellow has made some sort of a reputation as some credible, respectable Zionist commentator on this site. I’ve been reading his posts and they smack heavily of Nakba denial. Now he has gone all out and has displayed his sources to be the same as the trolls (DavidSiden).

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 10:37 pm

        The quotes from Eichmann’s deputy were accurate and available elsewhere. As far as the accuracy of Eichmann’s deputy, others question that.

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 10:37 pm

        And where did I deny the nakba?

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 10:38 pm

        Chaos- the man with little information. noun verb troll.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 20, 2010, 11:12 pm

        And where did I deny the nakba?

        You just cannot have it both ways! You say you do not deny the nakba but you see a site like Palestinefacts which denies the nakba, as serious enough a source as to espouse their “cycle of events”. .You failed to see that their denial flows from their narrative or version of the cycle of events. If they’re wrong on one major fact they’re also wrong on their cycle of the events which lead to the nakba.

      • lareineblanche
        May 20, 2010, 11:19 pm

        I like how they just stamped on “Eretz Israel The Jewish National Home” to a post WW1 map of the ME – very convenient!

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 11:20 pm

        If palestinefacts denies the nakba and I use palestinefacts for a quote, therefore I deny the nakba. immaculate logic. can i quote you on that. oh no. i can’t quote you or else I am saying that everything you assert is correct. sometimes evil people quote people accurately. isn’t that possible?

      • yonira
        May 20, 2010, 11:23 pm

        LOL! Jesus you guys are on fire on this thread. Blame it on the Jews, yeah yeah!

      • VR
        May 20, 2010, 11:33 pm

        All cloak and dagger comes to a decided end, does it not wj? This is why we clashed from the first meeting, and now you make your “position” apparent. It is amazing what a terse statement speaking the truth will unearth wj, how does it feel to have the entire mess of disinformation go up in flames before your eyes? Some turn quickly, some slowly, but all eventually reveal their hand

      • Chaos4700
        May 20, 2010, 11:36 pm

        If palestinefacts denies the nakba and I use palestinefacts for a quote, therefore I deny the nakba. immaculate logic.

        And the same logic you twits use to slander Ahmedinejad and Neuterai Karta for being in the same room as David Duke.

      • VR
        May 20, 2010, 11:44 pm

        “If palestinefacts denies the nakba and I use palestinefacts for a quote, therefore I deny the nakba. immaculate logic.”

        It is not a matter of what the site does in regard to the Nakba, it is the sources you will turn to wj – a matter of intent. The entire sequence and dialog is twisted throughout the site – BUT, it throws a lifeline to your desperate attempt to color the events. As an example, you can read through the Mandate period on the site and it is pure unmitigated bullshit – the whole site is a hack job.

        It is similar to Dershowitz’s deepening and widening of the role of the Mufti. Earlier in his volume in defense of Israel he says one can hardly fault the Palestinians with the sentiments of the Mufti, he said this when he thought things were in hand with the Israeli hasbara narrative. However, as things got tougher and the truth began to shine, suddenly every Palestinian had a picture of Hitler in their home! This is the type of nonsense you turn to, the same in kind.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 21, 2010, 1:00 am

        “If palestinefacts denies the nakba and I use palestinefacts for a quote, therefore I deny the nakba.”

        You did NOT post “a quote”WJ..You posted the full biased fantastical, mythical cycle of events! Not the same thing.
        Btw, That site does not only deny the nakba, that’s only a small detail in their stream of absurdities, it’s a drop in the ocean of blatant lies and forgeries a la julian..

      • wondering jew
        May 21, 2010, 1:06 am

        TGIA – Here’s the worst insult I can think of right now. You remind me of Chaos.

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 1:11 am

        Isn’t it sad when the hasbara bots can’t even come up with original insults? Never mind that WJ just pulled a textbook yonira. “BLAH! AD HOMINEM! BLAAAAAH!”

        The cream of the Zionist intellectual crop, huh.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 21, 2010, 1:21 am

        “LOL! Jesus you guys are on fire on this thread. Blame it on the Jews, yeah yeah!”

        Yeah, it’s the Jews! Of course, it’s the JUWS..The fact that more fakers, forgers and swindlers a la Julian are dumping it all and polluting the site has nothing to do with us being “on fire”. It’s because we like to blame the JUWS!

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 21, 2010, 1:34 am

        Suit yourself with which ever insult you feel like WJ. I read your cycle of events, smelled a rat and there it was! the site you linked to! I thought you’d be above that. I’m disappointed. There are many very interesting serious historians you could quote. The new historians, for example, are widely accepted now. We could have at least found serious elements of contention or agreements. Not that reprehensible forgery of a site!

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 21, 2010, 1:43 am

        BTW, WJ.
        You can insult me if you wish but I won’t respond in same. I still think that you’re above the loathsome julian/DavidSiden/Rachel even if you could think for a moment that Palestinefacts is a valid source. To your defense I would say many could be fooled by it because unlike other sites such as massada2000 and Samsonblinded they disguise their narratives and views with a scholarly garb . “Facts”. You’ve been fooled, I should believe!

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 21, 2010, 2:19 am

        Another thing WJ
        Your quote from that site attributing a direct Palestinian responsibility for the holocaust via their “leader”,( something you seemed to endorse, otherwise you wouldn’t have quoted it), is there and it’s not going anywhere. The more I read it the more I’m at loss explaining how you could buy that! I mean, accusing the Palestinians of being part in the holocaust! What else for your service, Gentlemen?

      • wondering jew
        May 21, 2010, 2:38 am

        TGIA- I was very clear regarding the so called mufti, (that scumbag Haj amin al husseini) that I was primarily concerned with James Bradley’s assertion of the mufti’s innocence rather than with asserting the mufti’s guilt.

        If you are interested in sticking with this topic, I cannot stop you, but i’ve just read half of the “National Left Manifest”. I don’t know how to copy a link that looks to be a page long, so just google National left manifest eldad yaniv and take the quick look at the pdf and even though I don’t agree with all of it and I’m sure that you will object to much of it, this is certainly a topic more worthy than discussing that scumbag Husseini.

      • javs
        May 21, 2010, 3:05 am

        EXPEL !! More like they ran for their lives while others tried to fight back, and yes it is hard fact, too bad when it is all over, people like you will be hard pressed not to believe the truth except for the war part, how everyone continously states the word WAR, is just BS (not bob serot) . I just hope when the time comes, a law could be passed internationally that if you did nothing to stop the crimes and supported it, that you can be found guilty and not jailed…too much money to jail so many. But we can do something else to them and all the offspring (families) exile them all to siberia and other places where they will strive to survive…maybe the outback and national parks in Africa, those critters need to eat too.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 21, 2010, 3:21 am

        What’s the point? That The Israeli left died in 1967 ? I don’t disagree. It’s been a while that Israel has become a very right wing country. We all can see that, no?

      • Brewer
        May 22, 2010, 1:00 am

        “On Apr. 16, 1948 Jamal Husseini, the Arab Higher Committee’s spokesman told the Security Council, “The representative of the Jewish Agency told us yesterday that they were not the attackers, that the Arabs had begun the fighting. We did not deny this. We told the whole world that we were going to fight.” “

        This is a partial quote, out of context. It refers to one action, not the War.

    • lareineblanche
      May 20, 2010, 7:11 pm

      Nice, clairvoyant summary, Mr Murray.
      It’s happening right before our eyes, yet somehow we just refuse to believe it.

      “Also recall that Israeli colonies in Gaza were a hoped-for toe hold for eventual annexation there.”
      Like the salients in the West Bank, surrounded by the annexation wall – will they actually stop there?

  4. Miss Dee Mena
    May 20, 2010, 12:04 pm

    To admit to ethnic cleansing, slaughter, racism and stealing land as a basis for establishing a country in this day and age, especially in light of the growing criticism of the country, would kind of be political suicide for Israel.

    It would also mean Israelis being forced to acknowledge that they have committed crimes against humanity when they rely on being the personification of victimhood as they endeavour to continue winning international sympathy and dollars.

    The best I think they will do is try to promote themselves as trying to reach some “reasonable compromise” with the Palestinians despite the “terror” they have suffered as “eternal victims”.

    • Donald
      May 20, 2010, 12:23 pm

      That’s a very good summary of how the issue is presented in the US and I think you’ve hit on why. To get too deeply into the issue means raising the question of just what sort of values underlay Israel’s “right to exist as a Jewish state”. It could only exist in that form as a result of ethnic cleansing. This is why people like Harold Bloom insist on the notion that criticism of Israel is okay (to some small degree, after one says that 100 other countries are worse), but criticism of Zionism is anti-semitic. It’s an attempt and a successful one, at shutting down conversation in mainstream US circles.

      And it works even against advocates of a two state solution, if one wants Palestinians to have a strong negotiating position. Nobody who knows about the Nakba could talk seriously about “generous offers” from the Israelis when they start off insisting that they will only discuss which portion of the remaining 22 percent of the land they will “generously” allow Palestinians to keep.

  5. Nevada Ned
    May 20, 2010, 12:21 pm

    The “Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine”, as Ilan Pappe entitled his book, speaks for itself. The Nakba continues today, more slowly, with evictions of Palestinians from East Jerusalem, and their replacement by Jews-only settlements.
    Consider Gaza: the present inhabitants of Gaza didn’t always live there. They ended up in Gaza after being ethnically cleansed from what is now Israel.
    Among scholars, whether it’s Norman Finkelstein, Ilan Pappe, or Benny Morris (former dove, now a hawk), there is broad agreement that Israel kicked out the Palestinians. Naturally there is disagreement over the moral question: whether or not Israel had the right to do so. And according to international law, the Palestinians have the right to return to their homes.

    Here’s one bogus issue: Israelis often claim that Palestinians “left voluntarily”. In fact the Palestinians were kicked out. But even if they did leave voluntarily, they have the right to return. I’ve met a number of Israeli Jews in the US, who really did leave voluntarily. And they planned to return voluntarily. Which they can do, because they are the “right race” in the eyes of the Israeli authorities.

    It isn’t really a question of voluntary or involuntary. It’s a racial question.

  6. hughsansom
    May 20, 2010, 1:41 pm

    Indyk’s “inclination to violence” jab exemplifies his dismissive, condescending attitude towards the Palestinians. He is a master of being a reasonable sounding bigot.

    It’s worth remembering that Indyk lost his security clearance in 2000 while he was Ambassador to Israel for failing to follow “security procedures.” It was the first (and, to my knowledge, only) time a US ambassador has lost his security clearance. It was sufficiently serious that Indyk was barred from entering some buildings without an escort.

    Indyk certainly knows fully that the term “Nakba” refers to a great deal more than just the establishment of Israel. It refers to the forced expulsion, displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, the murder of many, the destruction of a Palestinian way of life. The term was first used in 1948. Hundreds of towns and villages were emptied of Palestinian residents. Something like 80% of the Palestinian population of 1948 Israel were displaced. Israeli law then prevented their return.

    The Israeli campaign to displace Palestinians was planned, organized, centralized. It included massacres like Deir Yassin. It was “ethnic cleansing” by any reasonable understanding of the expression.

    • jonah
      May 20, 2010, 1:58 pm

      hughsamson,

      “The Israeli campaign to displace Palestinians was planned, organized, centralized. It included massacres like Deir Yassin. It was “ethnic cleansing” by any reasonable understanding of the expression.”

      What do you think about the siege of Jerusalem? What this again only the defensive war of the Arabs against the Jewish invaders and executioners?

      link to en.wikipedia.org

      • Avi
        May 20, 2010, 2:16 pm

        eee left, along came jonah.

      • Danaa
        May 20, 2010, 2:40 pm

        Oh no! so you see bits of the eee program?

      • Avi
        May 20, 2010, 5:09 pm

        I see bits, although I can’t say it amounts to bytes or even kilobytes as it’s not a very advanced bot. The program code is very basic and crude.

      • robin
        May 20, 2010, 4:05 pm

        Jonah, what do you see as the relevance of your comment to hughsansom’s post? You seem to disagree with his characterization of Israeli actions, but your post doesn’t address those actions.

        Furthermore, what is the relevance to the current situation? What existing institution could be held responsible for the siege of Jerusalem, and what ongoing injustice is an outgrowth of that event?

        And, if you are suggesting — merely for the sake of historical understanding — that Arabs also perpetrated ethnic cleansing against Jews (which may be true), I see no evidence of that in the wiki article. It describes what seem like war crimes along similar lines of Israel’s contemporary siege and bombing of Gaza, only in the former case there was a real and powerful threat to Palestinians’ independence and national survival.

        In any case, these examples of violence and tragedy in the past seem to indicate that the best way forward is an inclusive Jerusalem, an inclusive West Bank, and an inclusive Israel, in which no Jew or Palestinian can be said to be ethnically cleansed or unwelcome in any sense. That is what many of us are arguing for on this blog. Can we agree on that?

      • jonah
        May 20, 2010, 4:48 pm

        Robin,

        It was a civil war before and a regular war after may 1948. I don’t like the way many try to blame all on Israel and the Zionists. The Arabs expressed very clearly their aims toward the Jews of Palestine and their deeds didn’t leave many doubts in that regard too.

        Inclusive Jerusalem? Inclusive West bank? I thought that the Palestinians want the Jews out of East Jerusalem, out of the West Bank. And their charters are not really happy with Israel neither.

        Basic objectives of the Fatah movement
        المادة (12): تحرير فلسطين تحريراً كاملاً وتصفية الكيان الصهيوني اقتصادياً وسياسياً وعسكرياً وثقافياً. Article (12): total liberation of Palestine and the liquidation of the Zionist entity economically, politically and militarily and culturally.

        link to translate.google.ch (click on Fatah, Part III of the Rules of Procedure of the Fatah movement
        ( مبادئ وأهداف وأسلوب حركة فتح ) (Principles, objectives and method of Fatah movement).

      • Shingo
        May 20, 2010, 4:59 pm

        “The Arabs expressed very clearly their aims toward the Jews of Palestine and their deeds didn’t leave many doubts in that regard too. ”

        That was long after Zionists delared very openly that they would take the laqnd and drive the Arabs from it. Tell me Jonah, what would your language and Isael’s be if Turkey stated they were going to colonize Israel?

      • Avi
        May 20, 2010, 5:16 pm

        It was a civil war before

        A civil war would imply that Jews, Muslims and Christians woke up one day and decided to attack their neighbors for no reason.

        Explain WHY there were tensions between these groups at the outset of the 20th century instead of the 19th or the 18th? What made the early 1900s period so special that said conflict erupted?

        As for the Holocaust, it has very little to do with the establishment of Israel insomuch as the Balfour declaration took place in 1917.

        Can you put together a coherent and convincing argument on this very issue?

        PS: It’s rather telling that you’re going on and on about Fatah. How come the Israeli government saw it fit to speak with Fatah as early as twenty years ago? Have you been living under a rock?

      • jonah
        May 20, 2010, 5:19 pm

        “That was long after Zionists delared very openly that they would take the laqnd and drive the Arabs from it.”

        I thought it was the Grand-Mufti El-Husayni who called already in the thirties for the holy Jihad against the Jews in Palestine. Not to mention the anti-Jewish riots 0f 1921, the Hebron massacre of 1929 and the Arab rebellions against the Jews from 1936 until 1939.

      • Shingo
        May 20, 2010, 5:33 pm

        “I thought it was the Grand-Mufti El-Husayni who called already in the thirties for the holy Jihad against the Jews in Palestine.”

        The Zionissts were callign for war 50 years earlier.
        In that regard, it’s worth quoting one of the most ardent Zionists, Israel Zangwill, who stated as early as 1905:

        “Palestine proper has already its inhabitants. The pashalik of Jerusalem is already twice as thickly populated as the United States, having fifty-two souls to the square mile, and not 25% of them Jews ….. [We] must be prepared either to drive out by the sword the [Arab] tribes in possession as our forefathers did or to grapple with the problem of a large alien population, mostly Mohammedan and accustomed for centuries to despise us.” (Righteous Victims, p. 140 & Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 7-10)

        “Not to mention the anti-Jewish riots 0f 1921, the Hebron massacre of 1929 and the Arab rebellions against the Jews from 1936 until 1939. ”

        As the number of Palestinian Jews (Yishuv) doubled between 1931-1935, the Palestinian people became threatened with being dispossessed, with Jews becoming their masters. The Palestinian political movement was becoming more vocal and organized, which surprised Ben-Gurion. In his opinion, the demonstrations represented a “turning point” important enough to warrant Zionist concern. As he told Mapai comrades:

        “. . . they [referring to Palestinians] showed new power and remarkable discipline. Many of them were killed . . . this time not murderers and rioters, but political demonstrators. Despite the tremendous unrest, the order not to harm Jews was obeyed. This shows exceptional political discipline. There is no doubt that these events will leave a profound imprint on the [Palestinian] Arab movement. This time we have seen a political movement which must evoke respect of the world. (Shabtai Teveth, p. 126)”

      • jonah
        May 20, 2010, 6:09 pm

        “How come the Israeli government saw it fit to speak with Fatah as early as twenty years ago? Have you been living under a rock? ”

        I don’t know, probably they didn’t read the Palestinian Charter or they decided to ignore it in order to reach peace. But it didn’t work, as we know. But I really wonder how it can be possible that in May 2010 the Fatah, which is supposed to make peace with Israel, still openly calls in its official Charter for the liquidation of Israel. It’s absurd. Or probably not.

        “Explain WHY there were tensions between these groups at the outset of the 20th century instead of the 19th or the 18th? What made the early 1900s period so special that said conflict erupted?”

        The Jewish immigration. The Arab leaders couldn’t accept it, even though many did good business with the Jews under the counter by selling land at high prices and then stir the masses against them when it was convenient. There was as much opportunism as there was xenophobia.

      • robin
        May 20, 2010, 7:11 pm

        I thought that the Palestinians want the Jews out of East Jerusalem, out of the West Bank.

        I would disagree with you here, but this is kind of a broad statement. The kind of generalization that is difficult to assess with facts. I think if you want to make an argument, you should shy away from broad generalizations that serve to disparage an entire people.

        But you are certainly wrong in spirit, in that you imply the presence of Jews represents Palestinians’ fundamental grievance. It’s possible that some are intolerant in the way you think, but Jewish settlement has not been a peaceful and just process. In Jerusalem and the West Bank (and previously Gaza and Israel proper in some ways) it has involved the theft of private Palestinian land, and the alienation of that land to all Palestinian use — in other words, ethnic cleansing. That is the most basic problem with the “Jewish settlements”. They are not places where Jews seek to peacefully settle. They are spaces that Jews steal with state force, and then ethnically cleanse through violence.

        So if you want to analyze Palestinian opinion, my guess would be that it is not Jewish people per se that the majority of Palestinians want gone, but rather the abuses, restrictions, and discrimination of the Israeli institutions that come with them. But regardless of Palestinians’ specific views, they have a right to be upset in the face of these real injustices. And Israel has a responsibility to act in accordance with the ethical principles of human rights and international law.

        Israel is a state, with overwhelming military superiority over any and all Palestinian groups. Israel is, by design, ruled exclusively by Jews, even as it controls the lives of an equal number of Palestinians. So you say you don’t like “the way many try to blame all on Israel and the Zionists”. Well, with power comes responsibility. If you don’t like taking all the responsibility, then try sharing some of the power with Palestinians. The situation may improve! And if it doesn’t, Palestinian institutions or parties will at least rightly share the blame.

        But the complete denial of power and rights to millions of people along ethnic lines is the basic problem. And it is a problem that indeed only goes one way. There is not a “circle of oppression” (unless you want to expand the time frame and bring in outside actors like the Nazis), there is a “straight line of oppression”.

        And your attitude towards the Palestinians smacks of a primitive stereotyping that is, at best, thoroughly unhelpful and hypocritical.

  7. Shmuel
    May 20, 2010, 2:33 pm

    Palestinians have chosen the date on which the State of Israel was established to mark all of the injustices they have suffered. Commenters here have noted the ethnic cleansing prior to ’48, and subsequent ethnic cleansing in Jerusalem and the OT. It is important however, not to forget the ethnic cleansing that has gone on within Israel’s ’49 borders, since the establishment of the state – including the creation of internal refugees (“present absentees”), land expropriation (specifically marked on “Land Day” – 30 March), the treatment of the Bedouin, the ongoing tragedy of the “unrecognised villages”, policy and law concerning naturalisation of Palestinian spouses, and various other forms of discrimination against Palestinian-Israelis that have contributed and continue to contribute to their depopulation.

    • jonah
      May 20, 2010, 2:44 pm

      Of course, Shmuel. But the Palestinian-Israelis (what a wonderful word) have far more rights than Arabs in any other Arab country. Our Western lenses make us sometimes very selective and critical towards the sole (difficult, indeed) democracy in the Middle East.

      • lareineblanche
        May 20, 2010, 3:00 pm

        “…have far more rights than Arabs in any other Arab country.

        sole (difficult, indeed) democracy in the Middle East. “

        “That dull knife
        Just ain’t cuttin’ it
        Just talkin loud
        And sayin’ nothin’
        And sayin’ nothin’
        And sayin’ nothin’…”

      • Shafiq
        May 20, 2010, 3:04 pm

        If Israel is a democracy, then it must give the Palestinians the same rights as other democracies do – which Israel currently doesn’t. Most importantly, it must grant the Palestinian right of return.

        If Israel wants to be considered a democracy, then it must stop comparing itself with states that are clearly not democracies.

      • jonah
        May 20, 2010, 3:45 pm

        Shafiq,

        the right of return can not be granted. Who would have this right today, Shafiq. The refugees of 1948? Their descendants? All together? Millions of individuals? This is not going to happen. And you know it. In the same way as the Jewish refugees from the Arab lands will not receive compensation for the loss of their homes, properties and lifes in the country of origin.

        The solution must today be based on a healthy realism, not on idealist claims.

      • Shmuel
        May 20, 2010, 3:51 pm

        the right of return can not be granted

        Only if one insists on perpetuating a racist ethno-religious state. The Feasibility of the Right of Return

      • MRW
        May 20, 2010, 4:45 pm

        the right of return can not be granted. Who would have this right today, Shafiq. The refugees of 1948? Their descendants? All together? Millions of individuals?

        But Jews can claim this insane right to former Palestine based on dubious, and debunked, evidence from 3,000 years ago.

        For debunked, read this:
        link to mideastfacts.org

      • robin
        May 20, 2010, 7:24 pm

        But Jewish refugees have been granted a right of return to some countries (not to mention granting themselves the “right to return” in Israel). Surely the answer is full rights for everybody, rather than abuses piling up in order to “cancel out”.

      • James Bradley
        May 20, 2010, 11:48 pm

        Furthermore, why should the Palestinians have to pay for the crimes of other states?

        Must the Palestinians pay for the crimes of Nazi Germany and the crimes of some Arab States as well?

        Why?

      • Shmuel
        May 20, 2010, 3:07 pm

        South African blacks had more rights than blacks in any (other) black African country. Our Western lenses [were] sometimes very selective and critical towards the sole (difficult, indeed) democracy in Africa [at the time].

      • VR
        May 20, 2010, 8:47 pm

        “But the Palestinian-Israelis (what a wonderful word) have far more rights than Arabs in any other Arab country.”

        Don’t you find this bald statement with no context made by jonah to be a twofold matter-of-fact lie? First, there is no mention of the entire colonization of the region, including the drawing of borders, and the setting up of Arab “leaders” who do obeisance to the West and are ostensibly “on the payroll.” You have not even a short quip about this reality from Jonah, I wonder why?

        Second, you have to ostensibly be blind, deaf, and dumb to think that the Palestinians in Israel even approach any democratic parity in Israel. What I recommend is people reading the Palestinian “Vision” document to see what they want to accomplish, and when you see what they are trying to accomplish, you will get an idea of how the Palestinians live inside of Israel. Note, that now we also have a stepping up in Israel of repression among Palestinians inside of Israel that take any stand whatsoever for others in the OT or Gaza and the scattered and forcefully restricted diaspora which is not allowed to return. For a better grasp of what is taking place inside of Israel I recommend –

        THE ARAB ASSOCIATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, IN SERVICE OF THE PALESTINIAN MINORITY INSIDE OF ISRAEL

        Other than these points, who would have believer that such a short statement by Jonah could have been so packed with BS?

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 20, 2010, 8:47 pm

        Jonah sounds like eee with a softer tone. A gut feeling.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 20, 2010, 8:52 pm

        “But the Palestinian-Israelis have far more rights than Arabs in any other Arab country.”

        You don’t even realise the utter bullcrap that this statement makes. Where to start here with this nonsense?
        Could you please cite those rights that Israeli Palestinians enjoy that “no Arab have in any Arab country”? Can you cite one or two? Back it up, please!

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 20, 2010, 9:28 pm

        Can a Palestinian Israeli buy land in Israel? Fat chance! Can they lease land in Israel, well, not in 91% of the country!!

  8. rmd
    May 20, 2010, 2:44 pm

    The first indication of their [Palestinian] inclination to violence came on May 15, 2000 …

    This is less ugly in context than Weiss makes it seem. It would be better edited as

    The first indication of [the Tanzim's] inclination to violence came on May 15, 2000 …

    It follows immediately the paragraph:

    Arafat’s sensitivity reflected a debate that had been raging for some time among Palestinian activists about the best way to liberate Palestine. The “young guard” or Tanzim, in Arafat’s ruling Fatah party had grown disaffected from the Palestinian Authority and increasingly restless about the failure of the six-year-long Oslo process to end the Israeli occupation. They argued that what the Palestinian cause needed was a new revolution, an uprising not only against the Israeli occupation but also against the corrupt and arbitrary rule of Arafat and the cronies he had brought with him from Tunis. Citing the American and Israeli experience, they argued that the only way to redeem an independent Palestine was “in blood and fire”.

    So, he attributes an “inclination to violence” not to “the Palestinians” but to the Tanzim, and he even gives a reasonably objective account of the causes of that inclination.

    Indyk links this to a relatively sympathetic discussion of Arafat’s position at Camp David:

    … Arafat’s room for flexibility at the looming Camp David summit had been significantly narrowed. If he agreed to a deal that was rejected by the Palestinian street, violence could well erupt, threatening the survival of his increasingly unpopular regime. If he rejected the deal on offer, the frustration of the Tanzim might well lead to an explosion anyway. However, in those circumstances he would still be able to retain his legitimacy among his people as the leader who had struggled for their interests and had the courage to say No to the United States and Israel.

    So, Indyk is not reinforcing but undermining the standard Israeli-lobby account of the summit; as he was one of the perpetrators of the US performance there, that is surprising and encouraging.

  9. MRW
    May 20, 2010, 2:44 pm

    From the end of Senior Editor Gordon Duff’s article today in Veterans Today entitled: Restoring The Jewish Homeland, Turning Jerusalem Into “New Miami Beach”
    link to veteranstoday.com

    Back in Israel, homes are being plowed under, not fancy homes but those of working people, farmers, tradesmen, Muslims all. If enough people die, and so many have, we can call this a holocaust. It is no stretch of the imagination to call it ethnic cleansing.

    Moving into the new homes will be Jews, many American citizens, most kind and generous people who have spent most of their lives caring for their families, employees and their country, one some seem to forget, some but not all. We call that country the United States and those loyalties should last a lifetime, perhaps longer for some of us.

    Palestinians are defiant. Palestinians are angry. Many Palestinians are violent.

    Are they right to be that way? Fiction, fiction like Numbers, fiction like Colin Powell, fiction like Sean Hannity, fiction, not so innocent fiction has stolen the ability of any, Jew or not, to make a moral decision on this issue. You can take nothing more important from a man than his ability to know right from wrong. The most that can be asked, in a world where looking away has become easy, is to never know the truth, to die deceived. Is this what it means to be a Jew?

  10. rmd
    May 20, 2010, 2:59 pm

    Palestinians call that particular day the Naqba, or disaster, because it commemorates the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948.

    As Weiss says, this is wrong, and misrepresents Nakba as referring to the establishment of Israel rather than to Palestinian defeat, flight, expulsion, subjugation, and exile. But also, Nakba is the name of that whole process not of a day. Indyk should have said something like

    Palestinians call [May 15] Nakba Day, because it commemorates the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948 and the consummation of the Palestinian Nakba, or disaster.

  11. DavidSiden
    May 20, 2010, 4:13 pm

    Avi, read Efraim Karsh on the real history of 1948.
    Historian Efraim Karsh destroys the myth of Zionist dispossession of Arabs in 1948.
    link to elderofziyon.blogspot.com

    • Shingo
      May 20, 2010, 5:01 pm

      “Avi, read Efraim Karsh on the real history of 1948.”

      Karsh’s revisionism has been debunked and discredited.

      “Historian Efraim Karsh destroys the myth of Zionist dispossession of Arabs in 1948.”

      He tries very hard to but failes miserably.

    • Avi
      May 20, 2010, 5:20 pm

      I have Efraim Karsh’s book on the subject.

      I use it as a door stop. No self-respecting scholar would label Karsh’s work a sound academic research. Efraim Karsh is as reliable as Michael Oren, the self-styled historian.

      Ironically, even Benny Morris’ own writings show what liars are the two above.

  12. DavidSiden
    May 20, 2010, 4:16 pm

    There was a good article about Martin Indyk last month.
    link to jpost.com
    From pro-Israel to anti-Israel apologist
    ISI LEIBLER
    4/29/2010

    • Shingo
      May 20, 2010, 5:02 pm

      Watch Finkelstein destroy Indyk in this debate. Indyk is scared and tries to run away from it.

      • Chaos4700
        May 20, 2010, 10:34 pm

        I remember watching that when it was first aired. Actual journalism and debate is so incredibly rare in the US nowadays. DN is just about the last source of it.

  13. DavidSiden
    May 20, 2010, 4:18 pm

    March 1, 1944. Amin Al-Husseini makes speech from Berlin addressing Muslim SS Nazi troops: “Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, History and Religion. This saves your honor. God is with you.”

    • Shmuel
      May 20, 2010, 4:38 pm

      The transference of the Holocaust situation on to the Middle East reality, which harsh and hostile to Israel as it was, was of a totally different kind, not only created a false sense of the imminent danger of mass destruction. It also immensely distorted the image of the Holocaust, dwarfing the magnitude of the atrocities committed by the Nazis, trivializing the unique agony of the victims and the survivors, and utterly demonizing the Arabs and their leaders. The transplanting of one situation into the other was done, before and during the [Eichmann] trial, in two distinctive ways: first, by massive references to the presence of Nazi scientists and advisers in Egypt and other Arab countries, to the ongoing connections between Arab and Nazi leaders, and to the Nazi-like intentions and plans of the Arabs to annihilate Israel. The second means was systematic references – in the press, on the radio, and in political speeches – to the former Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin El-Husseini, his connections with the Nazi regime in general, and with Eichmann and his office in particular. In those references he was depicted as a prominent designer of the Final Solution and a major Nazi criminal. The deeds of Eichmann – and other Nazi criminals – were rarely mentioned, without addition of the Arab-Nazi dimension …

      During the trial itself, where proper legal procedures and the law of evidence were to be followed, the mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin El-Hussein, appeared in more correct proportions, as a fanatic nationalist-religious Palestinian leader who, in the context of the”sacred” war he waged against the Zionist enterprise, sought help and advice from the Nazi leadership and found solace in their murderous actions during World War II.

      From: Idith Zertal, Israel’s Holocaust and the politics of nationhood

    • Shingo
      May 20, 2010, 5:03 pm

      “March 1, 1944. Amin Al-Husseini makes speech from Berlin addressing Muslim SS Nazi troops: ”

      Husseini was in exile from 1939.

    • David Samel
      May 20, 2010, 5:17 pm

      John Vorster did more than al-Husseini to help the Nazis during the war, and when he was Prime Minister of apartheid South Africa, Israeli leaders of all stripes rolled out the red carpet for him.

      • Avi
        May 20, 2010, 5:45 pm

        John Vorster did more than al-Husseini to help the Nazis during the war, and when he was Prime Minister of apartheid South Africa, Israeli leaders of all stripes rolled out the red carpet for him.

        Siden doesn’t like inconvenient truths. It puts him in an awkward position where he has to face reality.

  14. DavidSiden
    May 20, 2010, 4:59 pm

    Dieter Wisliceny one of Eichmann’s top advisors said at the Nuremberg trials.
    Haj Amin Al Husseini was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and advisor of Eichmann and Himmler in execution of this plan…He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chamber of Auschwitz.

    • Shingo
      May 20, 2010, 5:03 pm

      “Dieter Wisliceny one of Eichmann’s top advisors said at the Nuremberg trials.”

      False propaganda. No transcript exists.

      • Shingo
        May 20, 2010, 5:07 pm

        Further to Husseini, when he called for the Palestinans to fight against the allies, they rejected and ingored his commands and fought with the allies.

        Meanwhile, the Stern gang collaborated with the Nazis to fight the British.

  15. DavidSiden
    May 20, 2010, 5:17 pm

    Shingo, not one single Stern gang collaborated with the Nazis to fight the British. What the Stern gang did was try to save the Jews in Europe by getting them out and fight the British who were doing everything to appease the Arabs by giving out the White paper.

    • Shingo
      May 20, 2010, 5:22 pm

      “Shingo, not one single Stern gang collaborated with the Nazis to fight the British.”

      No, they just wrote letters expressing mutual goals, and received money and weapons from the Nazis.

      “What the Stern gang did was try to save the Jews in Europe by getting them out and fight the British who were doing everything to appease the Arabs by giving out the White paper. ”

      False. The Stern gang were driving out the British becasue teh British stood in their way of stealing land.

      • James Bradley
        May 20, 2010, 5:25 pm

        Its no secret that the Stern Gang favored collaboration with the Axis powers, particularly with Mussolini and Hitler.

      • James Bradley
        May 20, 2010, 5:27 pm

        Lets also not forget that several of Israels political leaders came from the Stern Gang including Yitzhak Shamir.

      • Shingo
        May 20, 2010, 5:41 pm

        Yes, Isral elected 2 terrorist leaders to the office of Prime Minister.

        Welcome to Israel: As state of the terrororists , by the terrororists for the terrororists .

  16. DavidSiden
    May 20, 2010, 5:19 pm
  17. DavidSiden
    May 20, 2010, 5:20 pm

    If Philip Weiss would have been around in WW2, he would have been writing propaganda for Haj Amin Al Husseini calling him a man of peace.
    I can imagine the lies he would write.
    The hatred Philip Weiss has for Jews is scary.

    • Shingo
      May 20, 2010, 5:24 pm

      “If Philip Weiss would have been around in WW2, he would have been writing propaganda for Haj Amin Al Husseini calling him a man of peace.”

      The way that Bush Jnr claled the war criminal Sharon a man of peace oyu mean?

      “I can imagine the lies he would write.”

      Nothign compref to the lies the Zionists have manufactured.

      “The hatred Philip Weiss has for Jews is scary. ”

      What scares you is the truth and that it is comming out.

    • thankgodimatheist
      May 20, 2010, 9:54 pm

      I reported you a…hole. Not for this very comment only but also for resorting to the same old tactic of thread hijacking by multiple off-topic posting.

  18. DavidSiden
    May 20, 2010, 5:22 pm

    Avi, you say
    I have Efraim Karsh’s book on the subject.
    I use it as a door stop. No self-respecting scholar would label Karsh’s work a sound academic research.

    Tell me one thing Karsh says thats wrong?
    Ofcourse you dont like Karsh.
    Usually the Israel haters dont like the truth and like Arab lies.

    • Shingo
      May 20, 2010, 5:25 pm

      “Tell me one thing Karsh says thats wrong?”

      All of it.

      “Usually the Israel haters dont like the truth and like Arab lies. ”

      Usually the Israelis dont like the truth and like Israel, lies.

  19. MHughes976
    May 20, 2010, 5:26 pm

    It’s wrong to say that the term Nakba represents ‘an inclination to violence’ – though it does suggest the belief that Israel is illegitimate.
    Indyk parodies the Palestinians’ mental process (thus dehumanising Palestinians) by suggesting that the idea that Israel is illegitimate is really a conclusion based on a premise that is nothing but an expression of bloodlust. Not a whisp of a reason for believing this.
    What we have is an argument accepted by most Palestinians whose premise or starting point is that Israel (itself premised on arguments of which we know) is illegitimate and whose conclusion is that Israel, an illegitimate force using incessant violence against those who rightly refuse to accept, deserves to be resisted.
    Even this conclusion doesn’t involve a commitment to counter-violence, since the form of resistance chosen can be non-violent. Almost all of us in the West who think that the Palestinian cause is just press the non-violent option on them and very many of them accept our pleas, showing the opposite of what Indyk claims, that their disinclination towards violence is quite strong.
    Of course there are bloodthirsty and generally horrible people among them, but so there are in every human group.
    One of the nasty things we encounter is this dehumanising rhetoric – brutal racism – expressed in the suave tones of academic instruction.

    • rmd
      May 20, 2010, 9:37 pm

      Indyk parodies the Palestinians’ mental process (thus dehumanising Palestinians) by suggesting that the idea that Israel is illegitimate is really a conclusion based on a premise that is nothing but an expression of bloodlust.

      I think you’ll find that Indyk doesn’t say that, if you read the quote in context; and you can, thanks to Google books.

      Given Indyk’s history, his book seems much less bad than it might have been; for other reasons to think better of him, see the complaints DaveSiden links to here.

  20. DavidSiden
    May 20, 2010, 5:26 pm

    Shingo, writes, No, they just wrote letters expressing mutual goals, and received money and weapons from the Nazis.

    Your making up your own history.
    No Stern member received any money or weapons from the Nazis.

    • James Bradley
      May 20, 2010, 5:29 pm

      The Stern Gang sought to collaborate with the Nazis and many members of the Stern Gang including much of its leadership saw Nazi Germany as an example for their own state (this was after all an era when Fascism wasn’t a bad word).

      None of this is a secret.

      However, the extent of that collaboration is up for debate.

      • Shingo
        May 20, 2010, 5:36 pm

        The Stern gang’s collaboration with the Fascists and Nazis was going on while their Jewish brothers were being persecuted in Nazi concentration camps. It should also be noted that when the Americans, British, and their Arab allies were busy blocking the Desert Fox’s (Erwin Rommel) advances in north Africa, the Stern gang’s leader Yitzhak Shamir and the Irgun gang’s leader Menachem Begin were busy ambushing British soldiers, blowing up the vital Haifa-Cairo railroad supply line, and terrorizing British and Palestinian civilians (Righteous Victims, p. 174). And when Yitzhak Shamir, Israel’s future Prime Minister in the 1980s, was asked to explain their collaboration with the Fascists, he replied:

        “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” (One Palestine Complete , p. 464).

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 6:00 pm

        Shingo- your quote is from PalestineRemembered. As far as I can tell the Irgun (Begin’s group) did not attack the British until victory in Europe by the British and Americans over the Nazis was assured by the landing of the Americans on D Day and certainly not while Rommel was still a threat in Africa. The split between the Lehi (Stern gang) and Etzel (Irgun, Begin’s group) was primarily over the question of cooperation with the British after 1939, with the Stern Gang opposed and the Irgun willing to suspend anti British action during the period when the major enemy of the “Hebrew” people were the Nazis.

  21. DavidSiden
    May 20, 2010, 5:29 pm

    Shingo, if it wasn’t for Sharon, Jews would be speaking in Arabic.
    Think 73 war.
    The Arab thought they would anihilate the Jews in the 73 war, the way the Iraqi Arabs exterminated the Kurds and the way the North Sudanese Arabs are exterminating the Black Christians of Sudan.

    • James Bradley
      May 20, 2010, 5:33 pm

      Actually, Sadat (Egypt) attempted to retake the Sinai Peninsula that was stolen from Egypt during Israels pre-emptive invasion of Egypt in 1967.

      Most historians accept that Sadat had no intention of destroying Israel, hence why hardly any Egyptian forces crossed into the 1948 borders of Israel.

      Also, what does Iraq and Sudan have to do with the topic at hand? (This is aside from the ridiculous claims you put forth).

    • Shingo
      May 20, 2010, 5:37 pm

      The 1973 war was a hangoever of the1967 watr that Israel started. had Israel accepeted Egypts calls for peace talks, it would have been unecesary.

  22. DavidSiden
    May 20, 2010, 5:31 pm

    Avi, real history of Judea and Samaria.
    link to palestinefacts.org

    • Shingo
      May 20, 2010, 5:37 pm

      “Avi, real history of Judea and Samaria.”

      Debunked.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 20, 2010, 9:57 pm

        The site he linked to is a well known far right fundamentalist settler/colonist site. Talk about scholarly research!

  23. DavidSiden
    May 20, 2010, 5:31 pm

    Avi, everything Israel does is stopping the mass murdering Palestinians from carrying out their cruel atrocities.

    • Shingo
      May 20, 2010, 5:38 pm

      “Avi, everything Israel does is stopping the mass murdering Palestinians from carrying out their cruel atrocities. ”

      …whiel stealing land, ethnically cleansing Palestine of Palestinians and carrying out their own much crueller atrocities.

    • Avi
      May 20, 2010, 6:18 pm

      Avi, everything Israel does is stopping the mass murdering Palestinians from carrying out their cruel atrocities.

      Shhhhh. The adults in the room are trying to have a conversation.

  24. DavidSiden
    May 20, 2010, 5:33 pm

    James Bradley, again show me where the Stern gang fought with the Nazis or received weapons from the Nazis.
    IT Never happened.
    Hajj Amin Al Husseini had an SS army killing Jews and Serbs in Yugoslavia in WW2.

    • Shingo
      May 20, 2010, 5:40 pm

      “Hajj Amin Al Husseini had an SS army killing Jews and Serbs in Yugoslavia in WW2. ”

      Husseini was one man. 150,000 Jews joined the Nazi military.

      51 Documents:
      Zionist Collaboration with the Nazis
      link to counterpunch.org

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 6:06 pm

        Those 150,000 Jews (who joined the Nazi military) were Germans with some Jewish blood who did not consider themselves Jews.

      • tree
        May 20, 2010, 6:22 pm

        From the review of Rigg’s book:

        As Rigg fully documents for the first time, a great many of these men did not even consider themselves Jewish and had embraced the military as a way of life and as devoted patriots eager to serve a revived German nation. In turn, they had been embraced by the Wehrmacht, which prior to Hitler had given little thought to the “race” of these men but which was now forced to look deeply into the ancestry of its soldiers.

        The process of investigation and removal, however, was marred by a highly inconsistent application of Nazi law. Numerous “exemptions” were made in order to allow a soldier to stay within the ranks or to spare a soldier’s parent, spouse, or other relative from incarceration or far worse. (Hitler’s own signature can be found on many of these “exemption” orders.) But as the war dragged on, Nazi politics came to trump military logic, even in the face of the Wehrmacht’s growing manpower needs, closing legal loopholes and making it virtually impossible for these soldiers to escape the fate of millions of other victims of the Third Reich.

        It does not say that they they only had “some Jewish blood” nor does it say that none of them considered themselves Jews. You are over generalizing, WJ.

      • Colin Murray
        May 20, 2010, 6:47 pm

        I remember reading many years ago (I can’t recall the source, and may have some small details garbled) about a German Jewish man and his family being loaded on to a train with his family (I think it was one of the early trains to ghettos, not to a death camp). He showed the guy pushing him into the train car the Iron Cross, First Class he won as an enlisted man during the First Wold War.

        He served Germany as a German patriot who was also Jewish, and ended up on the train anyway. BTW, it was rare for enlisted men to be awarded the IC first class (second class not so much); it was usually reserved for officers.

    • James Bradley
      May 20, 2010, 5:41 pm

      Actually, Al Husseini helped raise a tiny volunteer army of Bosnians who were already fighting with the Axis forces.

      Husseini foolishly thought that the Germans would repay his work by helping him liberate Palestine from Zionist colonization.

      He was also completely unaware of the Holocaust.

      Furthermore, certain important elements in the Zionist movement were rather adamant about obtaining Nazi German and Fascist Italian support for their own ends in Palestine.

      • Shingo
        May 20, 2010, 5:49 pm

        Here is a photo of a group of young Jews from Betar … wearing Nazi uniforms.

        link to whatreallyhappened.com

      • Shingo
        May 20, 2010, 5:51 pm

        Zionism was supported by the German SS and Gestapo.[3] [4] [5] [6] Hitler himself personally supported Zionism.[7] [8] During the 1930’s, in cooperation with the German authorities, Zionist groups organized a network of some 40 camps throughout Germany where prospective settlers were trained for their new lives in Palestine. As late as 1942 Zionists operated at least one of these officially authorized “Kibbutz” training camps[9] over which flew the blue and white banner which would one day be adopted as the national flag of “Israel”.[10]

        The Transfer Agreement (which promoted the emigration of German Jews to Palestine) implemented in 1933 and abandoned at the beginning of WWII is an important example of the cooperation between Hitler’s Germany and international Zionism. [11] Through this agreement, Hitler’s Third Reich did more than any other government during the 1930’s to support Jewish development in Palestine and further the Zionist goals.

        Hitler and the Zionists had a common goal: to create a world Jewish Ghetto as a solution to the Jewish Question.

        link to jewsagainstzionism.com

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 6:02 pm

        Those may be fascist uniforms, but they are not Nazi uniforms.

      • tree
        May 20, 2010, 6:13 pm

        “Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers” by Bryan Mark Rigg

        link to kansaspress.ku.edu

      • Colin Murray
        May 20, 2010, 6:54 pm

        Wow, that looks really interesting. Even more interesting-looking is his “Rescued from the Reich: How One of Hitler’s Soldiers Saved the Lubavitcher Rebbe.” Thanks for hte link.

      • potsherd
        May 20, 2010, 7:39 pm

        WJ – they can not be fascist uniforms, as the Fascist Party was Italian and this photo was from Berlin. And the caption does say “Nazi”.

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 7:57 pm

        potsherd- I didn’t mean Italian fascist uniforms, I meant uniforms that resembled fascist uniforms. I realize the caption includes the word “nazistowskich”. My Ukranian (or is it Polish) is nonexistent and thus this is pure speculation, but the term might mean Nazi like, rather than Nazi. There are no swastikas on their uniforms and I doubt Beitar (Betaru) wore Nazi uniforms, but they did wear brown shirts and thus were condemned by other groups for being fascistic.

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 6:05 pm

        James Bradley- How do you know that Husseini was completely unaware of the Holocaust?

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 7:05 pm

        Re: Husseini’s knowledge of the Holocaust. This is a quote from the Nuremberg trials:

        Eichmann’s deputy Dieter Wisliceny (subsequently executed as a war criminal) testified:

        “* The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan. … He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chamber of Auschwitz.”

        I suppose the testimony of Eichmann’s deputy doesn’t really count for much, but certainly James Bradley’s bald statement that Husseini had no knowledge of the Holocaust seems to be manufactured from thin air.

      • Shingo
        May 20, 2010, 7:20 pm

        Where did this statement come from WJ? And if this was accurate, why wasn’t Husseini charged with war crimes?

        “Eichmann’s deputy Dieter Wisliceny (subsequently executed as a war criminal) testified”

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 7:48 pm

        the quote is from link to palestinefacts.org

        the quote starting “The Mufti… gas chamber of Auschwitz” is in italics seeming to indicate that it was in fact verbatim from the Nuremberg Trials.

        I do not believe that Eichmann’s deputy would have been sufficient testimony to attribute the initiation of the systematic extermination of European Jewry to the Mufti. Certainly he could have been motivated to remove the blame from Eichmann and himself and to curry favor with whomever. I quoted it, not as a firm fact against the Mufti, but certainly to dismiss those who say that the Mufti had no knowledge of the Holocaust as making up facts out of thin air.

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 7:50 pm

        one more try for the link: link to palestinefacts.org

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 20, 2010, 10:11 pm

        Well well well !
        Wondering Jew is linking to the far right revisionist palestinefacts.org site! How cute is that? This very site which denies the Palestinians were expelled, “they fled” and make you believe Deir Yasin was a battle with unfortunate civilian casualties (There Never Was A Massacre At Deir Yassin)
        You could as well link to massada2000 or Samsonblinded, the 2 notorious fascistic sites, WJ… As credible!

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 20, 2010, 10:17 pm

        Just check this map! It’s what the site above believes is the “Jewish national home, Eretz Israel”!!
        link to palestinefacts.org

        Edifying!!

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 10:31 pm

        I am sorry for quoting from unreliable sources. Here is wikipedia on the topic:

        The Mufti was in Berlin during the war, but later denied knowing of the Holocaust. One of Adolf Eichmann’s deputies, Dieter Wisliceny, stated after the war that he had actively encouraged the extermination of European Jews, and that he had had an elaborate meeting with Eichmann at his office, during which Eichmann gave him an intensive look at the current state of the “Solution of the Jewish Question in Europe” by the Third Reich. This testimony was denied by Eichmann at his 1961 trial in Jerusalem. Eichmann stated that he had only been introduced to the Mufti during an official reception, along with all other department heads. In the final judgement, the Jerusalem court stated: “In the light of this partial admission by the Accused, we accept as correct Wisliceny’s statement about this conversation between the Mufti and the Accused. In our view it is not important whether this conversation took place in the Accused’s office or elsewhere. On the other hand, we cannot determine decisive findings with regard to the Accused on the basis of the notes appearing in the Mufti’s diary which were submitted to us.”[122].[123]

        Hannah Arendt, who attended the complete Eichmann trial, concluded in her book Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil that, “The trial revealed only that all rumours about Eichmann’s connection with Haj Amin el Husseini, the former Mufti of Jerusalem, were unfounded.”[124] Rafael Medoff concludes that “actually there is no evidence that the Mufti’s presence was a factor at all; the Wisliceny hearsay is not merely uncorroborated, but conflicts with everything else that is known about the origins of the Final Solution.”[125] Bernard Lewis also called Wisliceny’s testimony into doubt: “There is no independent documentary confirmation of Wisliceny’s statements, and it seems unlikely that the Nazis needed any such additional encouragement from the outside.”[126]

        Some recent research, however, apparently argues that al-Husayni did work with Eichmann for the dispatch of a special corps of Einsatz commandos to exterminate the Jews in Palestine, if Rommel managed to break through the British lines in Egypt.[127] Husayni did intervene on May 13, 1943, with the German Foreign Office to block possible transfers of Jews from Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania, after reports reached him that 4000 Jewish children accompanied by 500 adults had managed to reach Palestine. He asked that the Foreign Minister “to do his utmost” to block all such proposals and this request was complied with.[128] A year later, on the 25 July 1944, he wrote to the Hungarian foreign minister to register his objection to the release of certificates for 900 Jewish children and 100 adults for transfer from Hungary, fearing they might end up in Palestine. He suggested that if such transfers of population were deemed necessary, then:-“it would be indispensable and infinitely preferable to send them to other countries where they would find themselves under active control, as for example Poland, thus avoiding danger and preventing damage.”[129]

        This segment from wikipedia accepts as fact the quote supplied by the palestinefacts site that I quoted in the first place.

        I repeat: that I did not think this quote from Eichmann’s deputy proved the Mufti’s guilt, but it certainly put the assertion that Husseini knew nothing about the Holocaust in a new light: that of something created from thin air. The assertion that Husseini was in on it has some testimony. The assertion that Husseini knew nothing is based on nothing but thin air.

      • rachel
        May 20, 2010, 10:35 pm

        TGIA
        You are in no position to criticise WJ when you engage in non stop propaganda day in and day out. You quote extensively from far left sites, pull pictures of settlers at a drop of a hat, post quotes at the tip of your fingers, link to you tube videos instantly to prove a point , and use Karsh’s, Indik’s, and Oren’s books as door stops. Let’s face it you and your friends on this site are sitting on a gold mine of so called facts ready to be deployed like good soldiers of Palestine against anyone with a different opinion.
        So please , you are not above a bit of fudging yourself. Actually a lot. BTW, why do you have to do that? I thought you had justice, on your side?
        PS: WJ is a very well informed person.

      • Chaos4700
        May 20, 2010, 10:41 pm

        I am sorry for quoting from unreliable sources. Here is wikipedia on the topic:

        Really?

        Sigh. Not that I haven’t quoted Wikipedia before myself, but it’s not my favored source.

        Why is WJ respectable again? Like, at all? He’s siding with DavidSiden.

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 10:52 pm

        Chaos- noun verb insult.

      • sherbrsi
        May 20, 2010, 10:58 pm

        So please , you are not above a bit of fudging yourself. Actually a lot.

        rachel, after your warped spin on the East jerusalem settler picture, you are the last person on this site to accuse anyone of hypocrisy or fudging.

      • Shingo
        May 20, 2010, 11:08 pm

        “I repeat: that I did not think this quote from Eichmann’s deputy proved the Mufti’s guilt, but it certainly put the assertion that Husseini knew nothing about the Holocaust in a new light: that of something created from thin air.  The assertion that Husseini was in on it has some testimony.  The assertion that Husseini knew nothing is based on nothing but thin air.”

        I’m inclined to agree with WJ about this, though knowledge of the Holocaust was not easy to come by at the time.  Most of the world was oblivious to what was happening in the death camps, and much about them only case to light after they were liberated.

        That Husseini had anything to do with the Holocaust however, beggars belief.  While Hitler may have considered him a useful idiot, it’s unimaginable that Hitelr took hsi cues from an Arab.

      • yonira
        May 20, 2010, 11:33 pm

        what would you consider your favorite source Chaos? the tabloid news source, vanity fair? Hmmm what is on their cover today….

        link to vanityfair.com

        Or better yet the Finkster’s death porn pictorial spread. The more doctored images the better.

        Oh wait, don’t forget the huffington post!

        Don’t talk to us about sources Chaos, yours, the once that you repeat on here daily, are a joke.

        (you can save your fake Jew and painted donkey retorts and maybe come up with something of a defense of yourself)

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 21, 2010, 12:01 am

        “The more doctored images the better.”

        Oh, so you’ve adopted the rachel approach, now. How shocking!NOT!

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 12:06 am

        “Doctored images.” The rachel/yonira/David Duke approach.

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 12:08 am

        Actually, WJ, if I wanted to insult you, I’d merely point out that there’s nothing that separates you from yonira besides mastery of the shift key.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 21, 2010, 12:11 am

        “PS: WJ is a very well informed person. ”
        Oh, I could see that! Haha!
        Look, let’s forget about all sites, left and right if we have to and consider scholarly books. History has been written on both sides. I read the quasi totality of the Israeli new historians from Morris to Seguev to Avi Shlaim to Pappe and Michael Palumbo. They are widely perceived as having more or less debunked the official Israeli version of events. None of them, NONE! agree with that abominably trashy source as palestinefacts (Wondering Jew source!). Bring any of those numerous historians, some of whom are quite comfortable with the idea of ethnic cleansing (Morris) BTW! Bring any and let’s discuss.

      • yonira
        May 21, 2010, 12:20 am

        that decapitated child that you link to regularly (and most likely defile yourself too) is a fake photo. sorry dude. A human head can not be severed so nicely and at the same time be covered in debris, its an obvious fake.

      • sherbrsi
        May 21, 2010, 12:24 am

        A human head can not be severed so nicely and at the same time be covered in debris, its an obvious fake.

        And you say this because of your expertise in crime scene investigations? Have you been watching too many TV shows lately?

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 12:27 am

        It’s official! Yonira has veered due south into Holocaust denial territory. “TEH EVIDENCE IS FAAAAKE!!!!!11″

      • yonira
        May 21, 2010, 12:36 am

        fuck you chaos, you are the one who was jumping on Ahmiwhackjobs back denying the Holocaust with him, I am just questioning that picture on Finkster’s website.

      • sherbrsi
        May 21, 2010, 12:39 am

        I am just questioning that picture on Finkster’s website.

        There is a big difference in questioning and declaring “it’s an obvious fake.”

        You’re a disgusting freak.

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 11:01 pm

        Let us recap: James Bradley made an assertion without a shred of evidence.

        I attacked him for making an assertion without a shred of evidence and offered a quote from a site which has been deemed politically disreputable and then from a site that has been deemed shallow.

        Who is attacked? I am. Why? Because I am a Zionist and James Bradley is pro Palestinian.

        That is the rule here in the comment section. If you are a Zionist you should expect to be attacked. And if you are pro Palestinian you can assert whatever you want however you want and you should expect bravos when you are right and silence when you are wrong.

      • sherbrsi
        May 20, 2010, 11:05 pm

        I attacked him for making an assertion without a shred of evidence and offered a quote from a site which has been deemed politically disreputable and then from a site that has been deemed shallow.

        Actually, it is because the site is a well known source of propaganda and falsehoods. The readers of this site are well attuned to detecting these talking points when they see it, especially when it used to spam the site with Hasbara by trolls such as DavidSiden.

        Btw, if you want to distance yourself from the Zionist trolls here, you might want to ease the victimhood ploy. Your comments were denounced for very valid reasons and on solid grounds.

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 11:10 pm

        james bradley made an assertion without a shred of evidence. do you give a damn. no of course not. why not? because you’re on his side and he’s on your side.

        Btw- if you wish to be reasonable you only need to be reasonable.

        btw- the quotes from the propaganda site that you hate were in fact accurate.

      • lareineblanche
        May 20, 2010, 11:11 pm

        If you are a Zionist you should expect to be attacked provide some evidence and sound arguments.

      • yonira
        May 20, 2010, 11:16 pm

        WJ,

        There has been more zionist chatter lately, so these freaks are on the defensive. It’s quite funny actually to see how vile they will become. It’s a sad group of folks.

      • sherbrsi
        May 20, 2010, 11:20 pm

        do you give a damn. no of course not. why not? because you’re on his side and he’s on your side.

        He made an assertion without proof, granted. But he was NOT using some propaganda site as a basis for his arguments. Like I stated before, the readers of the site are attuned to Hasbara talking-points. An assertion that is not supported by proof will naturally not catch their eye as your efforts to use a known site of falsehoods. Assertions without proof are made constantly on both sides of the debate, as no one will you find here backing each and every one of their posts with sources and links. So the ploy of victim hood is again a work of your own, and a very unnecessary one at that.

        the quotes from the propaganda site that you hate were in fact accurate.

        That’s quite irrelevant. Even a propaganda site uses some facts and truths as its basis. But they are not to be trusted, for obvious reasons.

      • yonira
        May 20, 2010, 11:25 pm

        Sherbsi,

        This and the majority of sites quoted on here are propaganda sites. I’ll try to do a better job of pointing them out in the future.

      • Chaos4700
        May 20, 2010, 11:31 pm

        You mean like the Guardian? Or were you refering to Haaretz? I know I’ve quoted from Reuters from time to time, and that’s a veritable cesspool of anti-Semitism, huh?

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 20, 2010, 11:35 pm

        Oh cut it off yonira! You have more than amply proven lately that you’re no different fromthe abject, shameless crowd trying their best to whitewash and revise history. WJ is getting his facts and narrative from an ultra right wing fascistic site that I referred to. No one is fooled now. To my dismay I’ve been fooled by some of you but not anymore. You’re all part of the same cult of death called Israel. Sheesh!

      • yonira
        May 20, 2010, 11:35 pm

        The guardian is the mouth piece for Hamas. Haaretz and Reuters I respect, but i haven’t seen you quote them before.

      • yonira
        May 20, 2010, 11:36 pm

        we are all part of death cults, just on different sides of the aisle.

      • Chaos4700
        May 20, 2010, 11:39 pm

        …and apparently the Yellow Crescent has replaced the Yellow Star of David.

      • James Bradley
        May 20, 2010, 11:40 pm

        I made the assertion because its well known that Husseini had no knowledge of the Holocaust – he wrote that he did not know about the holocaust it in his memoirs and he made no mention of the holocaust during the time period when the Holocaust was taking place.

        Next, you link us all to a known propaganda site (a far right wing one at that) to try and prove that Husseini knew about the Holocaust.

        When that is exposed, you then cite from Wikipedia, in which Husseini himself says “I had no idea about the Holocaust.” The only accusations in the article from Wikipedia that claim he did were all from hearsay and not based on any real direct evidence.

        Furthermore, Wikipedia recently had a controversy with Pro-Israel Media Watch Dog Group CAMERA doctoring articles to give them a pro-Israel slant.

        link to electronicintifada.net

        WJ, I honestly respect you, largely because you don’t deny the atrocities that Zionism has inflicted upon the Palestinian people, nor do you try to white wash them. However, when you post stuff like this it makes me wonder =P

      • yonira
        May 20, 2010, 11:41 pm

        what the fuck does that even mean Chaos, you try to be all poetic and faux intellectual, well buddy it is backfiring. could you once in your life make a concrete argument, or at least a coherent one?

        you Nazi obsessed freak.

      • Chaos4700
        May 20, 2010, 11:48 pm

        Backfiring. Right.

        As opposed to your elucidating replies, huh.

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 11:49 pm

        James Bradley you are either a liar or very gullible. Husseini asserts something therefore it’s true? Give me a break. The man was scum. But you believe him, good for you. I disagree that the Palestinians deserved their fate because this scumbag was their leader. But he was scum through and through.

        Do you deny that Eichmann’s deputy made that claim about Husseini? Do you deny that the court that judged Eichmann made that statement regarding Husseini?

        I am not all that interested in the scumbag that led the Palestinians back in the day. But to assert something as fact because the scumbag himself asserted it? Where do you come from and where are you going?

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 20, 2010, 11:54 pm

        If even the “sensible” among you has espoused the narrative of Paslestinefacts.org, the ultra right wing site, what is there to conclude apart from the obvious? That it’s an intoxicating cult. Israel has shrinked your minds to a point where you’re no different from the jehovah witness crowd or the church of scientology and other BS.

      • Chaos4700
        May 20, 2010, 11:59 pm

        James Bradley you are either a liar or very gullible. Husseini asserts something therefore it’s true?

        Those dirty lying Ayerabs, huh.

        Well, for those of you who haven’t noticed, WJ just gave a big “fuck you” to all of you who gave him the benefit of the doubt. He’s just as vicious as anyone else who sells out to the cult of Zionism.

      • James Bradley
        May 21, 2010, 12:03 am

        WJ, please calm down.

        What I am saying is that the only evidence that the Mufti even knew about the Holocaust came from a hearsay source.

        Eichman himself stated in the very same article that you cited, that Husseini would not have known about the Holocaust.

        But then again, none of this is the point. The only reason Zionists try to make the Mufti-Holocaust claim is due to a feeling of Projection in that it allows you to try to link the actions of Nazi Germany with the Palestinians thus justifying the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

        This is why I’m not going to allow you to pass off the “Mufti” claims so easily.

      • yonira
        May 21, 2010, 12:06 am

        nice source, EI, no propaganda there, Oh the hypocrisy. WJ’s source is right wing conspiratorial BS, but EI is a trusted source. EI, like it’s leader Abunimeh, profit on the suffering of Palestinians.

      • wondering jew
        May 21, 2010, 12:08 am

        JB- I am glad that you have changed your statement from the mufti did not know to there is no proof that the mufti knew.

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 12:09 am

        Anyone else getting tired of WJ and yonira just shouting “DIRTY LYING AYERABS!” as a reply?

      • wondering jew
        May 21, 2010, 12:12 am

        Chaos- apparently you consider Haj Amin al Husseini your hero. He ain’t no “Arab” he is a specific Arab and a liar and a scumbag. Is he just your average “Arab” to you.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 21, 2010, 12:22 am

        WJ
        Haj Amin Husseini was NOT the Palestinian leader as you say. He was the grand mufti of Jerusalem. Not the same thing! 30% of the Palestinians were Christians! Was he their leader too? Were they under their authority?
        Another point. Who appointed Husseini? The Palestinians themselves? NO! It was the British! Why, well that’s a long story but if you read Khalidi, you’ll understand why? I have little time to explain a long complicated issue.

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 12:23 am

        apparently you consider Haj Amin al Husseini your hero.

        You know, I could refute you if you claimed that Hitler managed to land Nazi soldiers on the moon before 1945, but doing so doesn’t suddenly make Hitler my hero.

        Like I said, you’re no better than yonira.

      • James Bradley
        May 21, 2010, 12:25 am

        Well I’m glad that makes you feel better about the matter.

        Nonetheless, I’m not going to sit here and deny that the Mufti denied entry to Palestine of European Jews slated for execution in Nazi Europe.

        Nor can I say that the Mufti knowing about the Death Camps would have changed his mind.

        However, what is clear, according to most sources, including the ones you cited is that there is very little evidence to suggest that the Mufti knew about the Holocaust. This corroborates what the Mufti himself had written in his journals during the time period, what others had written about him during the same time period, (39-45) and public statements he made later on in his life after the fact of the Holocaust became known to him.

        Nonetheless, despite all of this, many Zionists insist on trying to link the Mufti to the Holocaust and somehow give him a position that is only slightly lower than that of Himmler, Goebbels, and other despicable figures. Its no joke when you notice that the Mufti has one of the largest sections in the Holocaust Encyclopedia.

        In the end, while it is true that the Mufti had relations with the Axis powers, these relations were merely for political ends. The Mufti did not want the Zionists to succeed in transforming Palestine into a Jewish supremacist state at the expense of the indigenous Palestinian population.

        This is despite the fact that the Mufti seemed to have little effect in getting Palestinians and other Arabs to join the Axis powers. This was so much the case that the British army had far more Arabs from Palestine alone in its ranks than the German army was able to recruit from all Arab countries together.

        link to iire.org

        Lets also not forget that even the Zionists tried to employ the support of the Axis powers and many of them (especially members and leaders of the Stern Gang) sought to emulate European Fascism.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 21, 2010, 12:25 am

        Roughly the same policy of divide and rule that later the Israelis have adopted by strengthening Hamas to counter Fat’h.

      • sherbrsi
        May 21, 2010, 12:37 am

        EI, like it’s leader Abunimeh, profit on the suffering of Palestinians.

        Yonira, I know your credibility is way down with the trolls on here, but do you have any proof of what you are claiming? How is Abunimah profiting on the suffering of Palestinians?

      • wondering jew
        May 21, 2010, 12:41 am

        TGIA – Between 1936 and 1939 who was the leader of the Palestinians? But if you recall my sentence, it was “I don’t care who was the leader of the Palestinians back in the day”. But next time I read something (on a reputable site or in a reputable book) about Husseini I will take notes and report back to you.

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 12:43 am

        Which is why you’ve brandished that photo of Husseini sitting down with Hitler on topics related to neither in the past, right here on Mondoweiss, huh, WJ?

        And you had the chutzpah to invoke Godwin’s law against someone else? Who was actually, you know, pointing out actual comparative war crimes?

      • yonira
        May 21, 2010, 12:47 am

        Sherbsi, his entire shtick is palestinian suffering, how can you say he isn’t profiting from it? He wrote a book (albeit, shitty and didn’t sell well, but was published) he does speaking engagements.

        I am sure he is making money from it. i don’t denounce it, but its the truth, just like finkster and wiesel are making money of the Holocaust.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 21, 2010, 12:47 am

        “The guardian is the mouth piece for Hamas.”

        A link, a proof would be appreciated thanks!

      • yonira
        May 21, 2010, 12:48 am

        WJ,

        that is a low blow, I for one thing your 10x better than I am.

      • sherbrsi
        May 21, 2010, 12:55 am

        Sherbsi, his entire shtick is palestinian suffering, how can you say he isn’t profiting from it? He wrote a book (albeit, shitty and didn’t sell well, but was published) he does speaking engagements.

        I am sure he is making money from it. i

        A lot of Zionist commentators would say the same thing about Chomsky and Finkelstein. Their “entire schitck” is Palestinian suffering. They also wrote books, do speaking engagements and make money off of them.

        Does that mean they are “profiting off of Palestinian suffering”?

        You made a very specific and charged allegation, and I don’t think you fully thought it through, because it is a very foolish and hateful accusation.

      • wondering jew
        May 21, 2010, 1:01 am

        hey yonira,

        thanks for the kind word. you’re here in the trenches more often than me and when they’re slinging mud, it’s tough to find anything other than mud to sling back.

      • yonira
        May 21, 2010, 1:02 am

        don’t give me that bs, you’ll applaud people who say the same thing about wiesel and others who have profited from the Holocaust industry, but when its turned around its a major sin. spare me the righteousness, we can see right through it.

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 1:07 am

        Yeah, notice how neither of them can really be bothered to confront the little example of WJ’s hypocrisy that I mentioned.

      • sherbrsi
        May 21, 2010, 1:08 am

        don’t give me that bs, you’ll applaud people who say the same thing about wiesel and others who have profited from the Holocaust industry, but when its turned around its a major sin.

        Can you show me where I have done so?

        Knowing your posting history I’m not counting on any evidence.

        And the charge you made has very little to do with the commentators of the conflict. Those who are truly profiting off Palestinian oppression are the Israelis, who are stealing land, water, and other resources of the Palestinians while keeping them in military occupied enclaves.

        You claim to be against the occupation and the siege, so at least that much must be acknowledged by you?

      • yonira
        May 21, 2010, 1:10 am

        which hypocrisy is that, you spout some much bullshit on here its tough to decipher, if you can specifically say what you are talking about i’d be happy to confront it, head on. unlike all of the questions I have ever posed for you.

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 1:12 am

        I seem to recall yonira being totally discredited on the notion that Finkelstein was making money hand over fist with regards to the Nakba.

        So tell me, how many millions did Finkelstein lose in the Madoff swindle, then?

      • sherbrsi
        May 21, 2010, 1:16 am

        See Yonira, thanks for proving my point. You have no evidence of the claim you made against me. You’re not even trying.

      • James Bradley
        May 22, 2010, 8:03 pm

        Finklestein receives an honorarium when he speaks.

        Which means that those hosting him merely pay for his room and board.

        Hardly the cash cow that Yonira is making it out to be.

    • potsherd
      May 20, 2010, 6:55 pm

      Husseini’s “SS army” was was neither Husseini’s nor an army.

  25. wondering jew
    May 20, 2010, 6:53 pm

    I am not sure that one can accuse Indyk of a type of Nakba denial because of the statement

    May 15, 2000… Palestinians call that particular day the Naqba, or disaster, because it commemorates the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948.

    The question that Indyk is dealing with is not what the definition of the Nakba is, but why that day was chosen. Since the disaster occurred on many different days, why was that day chosen? Because it commemorates the establishment of the state of Israel. But I supposed Indyk can defend himself.

    • Avi
      May 20, 2010, 11:22 pm

      The question that Indyk is dealing with is not what the definition of the Nakba is, but why that day was chosen. Since the disaster occurred on many different days, why was that day chosen? Because it commemorates the establishment of the state of Israel. But I supposed Indyk can defend himself.

      You know you’ve got no basis for an argument when you have to perform Olympic-level logical gymnastics, otherwise known as desperation.

      Really now? Why did they pick that date? I don’t know. Let’s put together a few focus groups and see what they come up with.

      I bet you don’t like my tone. Your tone is just fine. I hear the little Zionist in you loud and clear.

    • thankgodimatheist
      May 20, 2010, 11:27 pm

      WJ
      It’s of primordial importance to understand that the nakba does not refer to the establishment of the state in isolation but to the events which lead to it, the expulsion from and the loss of their land concluded by the establishment of the state which marked their history in blood and tears referred to as the nakba, . It’s ridiculous that we even have to discuss such a point.

      • Chaos4700
        May 20, 2010, 11:33 pm

        But then, it’s also ridiculous to have discussion with people who claim the Holocaust didn’t happen. For pretty much the same reasons.

      • thankgodimatheist
        May 20, 2010, 11:44 pm

        Absolutely Chaos. They’re no different. It’s the same mindset. Denial provides psychological comfort. It makes one feel good about oneself to the point where one can spout absurdities (rachel’s statement that Arabs stole hummus from the Israelis and other nonesense). What also could be said of their blatant dishonesty attemting to forge documents as julian have demonstrated julian 2 days ago?

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 11:35 pm

        I don’t know if Indyk is a nakba denier. I assume he is not. If he is and you wish to prove that he is, I suggest that you read his book and find some other sentence that backs up your claim, because this sentence of his is too vague to constitute proof. I did not take it that way. Maybe I was predisposed not to take it that way. Maybe you were predisposed to take it that way. Such is the nature of proof and in this case the lack thereof.

      • Chaos4700
        May 20, 2010, 11:42 pm

        What about Ahmedinejad, WJ? Do you label him as a Holocaust denier?

      • wondering jew
        May 20, 2010, 11:56 pm

        Ahmedinejad is not a Holocaust denier about half the time. The other half of the time he says that it is myth and then he says even if it’s not myth, why do the Palestinians have to pay. And then he says, it is a myth and holds a contest to who can draw the funniest Holocaust cartoon and then he says it is a myth and then he says even if it isn’t a myth… And then he holds a conference. Neturei Karta never deny the Holocaust. Ahmadinejad denies it and then doesn’t deny. then he denies it and then he doesn’t deny it…

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 12:01 am

        Oh, how very convenient. He’s a denier but you don’t call him a denier.

        Is there any aspect of Zionism that doesn’t predicate itself on hypocrisy, contradiction or outright falsehood?

      • yonira
        May 21, 2010, 12:07 am

        what do you think Chaos? is he a denier?

      • wondering jew
        May 21, 2010, 12:10 am

        Chaos- He is a denier. He denies it sometimes, when it is convenient he denies it. Do you want me to link you to Juan Cole and his statements regarding that scumbag from Iran’s denials? or will you accept it on fact. You game playing noun verb dummy.

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 12:10 am
      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 12:11 am

        Good, WJ. I just needed to get your hypocrisy down on record. Thank you, come again.

      • yonira
        May 21, 2010, 12:15 am

        Nice source Chaos, I am sorry if we don’t believe your bullshit sources.

        Since you have ‘claimed’ to have linked to Haaretz and Reuters before, here is their take

        link to reuters.com

        link to haaretz.com

        How about the international conference in 2006 to debate the facts of it? Do you support that Chaos, do you also believe your beloved Nazis didn’t perpetrate the Holocaust?

      • yonira
        May 21, 2010, 12:18 am

        you should actually read that bullshit that you link to sometime. do you ever get past the titles of these literary masterpieces that you base your entire arguments (or lack of arguments) on?

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 12:25 am

        See? WJ and yonira are no different.

        WJ deserves no respect. Absolutely none. Compare his rhetoric with that of the post above. See for yourself.

      • Shingo
        May 21, 2010, 12:39 am

        “How about the international conference in 2006 to debate the facts of it?  Do you support that Chaos,  do you also believe your beloved Nazis didn’t perpetrate the Holocaust?”

        Are you ideologically opposed to investigating the Holocaust Yonira?

      • Shingo
        May 21, 2010, 12:40 am

        “Chaos- He is a denier.  He denies it sometimes, when it is convenient he denies it.  Do you want me to link you to Juan Cole and his statements regarding that scumbag from Iran’s denials?  or will you accept it on fact.  You game playing noun verb dummy.”

        Do you believe he said anything about wiping Israel off the map?

      • yonira
        May 21, 2010, 12:42 am

        no shingo, i spend considerable time studying it in college. i am also not for the imprisonment of someone who denies it.

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 12:47 am

        i spend considerable time studying it in college

        Well, I think we can consider that class to be a failure, then, considering you’re perfectly fine with wielding Holocaust-denial tactics against evidence of Palestinian suffering and Israeli crimes against humanity.

      • wondering jew
        May 21, 2010, 12:50 am

        Juan Cole says that translation is incorrect.

        I do think the fact that Iran supposedly parades missiles covered with banners saying “Death to Israel” (I don’t read Farsi) is not indicative of an intention to allow a peaceful evolution towards a world without Zionism. But the wipe Israel off the map quote has had some questions raised by those who speak Farsi.

      • yonira
        May 21, 2010, 12:52 am

        when have I ever denied palestinian suffering, for the fucking millionth time, i don’t deny the nakba, nor the ethnic cleansing of the palestinians, i am against the occupation and the siege.

        you are the holocaust denier and anti-semite chaos. you are a crime against humanity.

      • wondering jew
        May 21, 2010, 12:53 am

        Shingo- Ahmadinejad is not a historian interested in history. He is a politician interested in playing to the crowds. And if you think that Ahmadinejad is interested in investigating the Holocaust, I have some swampland in Florida you might be interested in investing in.

      • Shingo
        May 21, 2010, 1:09 am

        “no shingo, i spend considerable time studying it in college.   i am also not for the imprisonment of someone who denies it.”

        Dumb idea really

      • Chaos4700
        May 21, 2010, 1:16 am

        I’d by that swamp land about as much as I’d buy the notion that you were sincere about Palestinian rights and gave two shits about treating them like human beings instead of cavorting with yonira over the corpses of dead children, singing, “These are faaaakes!”

      • wondering jew
        May 21, 2010, 1:23 am

        Sorry for interrupting this illuminating discussion, but there’s a decent article in Haaretz about the price of rentals in various settlements.

      • RoHa
        May 21, 2010, 6:23 am

        At least part of the time Ahmadinejad is demonstrating the limits the Western countries place on “free speech”.
        Rude cartoons about Muhammad are fine.
        Cartoons about the Holocaust are not.

        He suggests there is a touch of hypocrisy there.

      • wondering jew
        May 24, 2010, 5:38 am

        Just for the record, the article Chaos linked to dealt with a quote from Ahmadinejad from 2005. Here is Juan Cole’s take on a speech from Ahmadinejad from September 2009. Juan Cole, no Zionist, called the speech nauseating and clearly Holocaust denial.
        link to juancole.com

      • Richard Witty
        May 24, 2010, 5:56 am

        Interesting post.

  26. VR
    May 21, 2010, 1:17 am

    The real point in all of these arguments is that support for Israel as a Jewish majority state is a denial of the Nakba by default. One does not need to overtly deny the Nakba, one just needs to deny the right of return and the delivery of real justice to the Palestinians. The settlement of Israel, the land which it claims as its own as it stands with no recourse is Nakba denial. The only way to truly do justice in regard to the Nakba is the extinction of Zionism, because the State of Israel as it exists today, its justification is a denial of the Nakba by default. Crying about the Palestinians does no good, feeling bad about the Palestinians does no good, if you want the current condition to continue. Zionism on its current course brings nothing more but the same, it will do nothing but worsen, so if you want it to stand it is Nakba denial.

    • VR
      May 21, 2010, 1:21 am

      Likewise, the only way to do away with Nakba denial is to deliver true justice to the Palestinians, and if you want to do true justice to the Palestinians Zionism cannot continue to stand and follow the current course.

  27. javs
    May 21, 2010, 3:32 am

    Can germany not be held responsible and brought into the international criminal courts for the reparation to Palestinian civilians for the
    Völkischer Beobachter, l920, that link is good, seems the truth really sucks for the zionist to have allowed so many to die, that it is the zionist whom should have been on trial as well in nuremberg, Has too much time passed, I see a lot of info and stuff which could be researched regarding that there.
    Sorry I forgot the ICC is also controlled by the zionist…damm, but seriously is there too much time that has passed.,, I believe there is no time laws regarding murder.

Leave a Reply