Vice PM Moshe Ya’alon: Regime change in Ramallah will ultimately be necessary for peace talks to progress

Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Strategic Affairs Moshe “Boogie” Ya’alon (Likud), former head of Israeli Intelligence in the West Bank and the IDF Chief of Staff during the Second Intifada, told Arutz Sheva that he does not believe that peace talks will be possible with the current Palestinian leadership. He insists that Abbas is not someone Israel can deal with in good faith because he refuses to accept the existence of a “Jewish state,” a demographic definition that both Israeli and Palestinian leaders have failed to agree upon. Ya’alon ultimately hopes that a new leadership will arise in Ramallah that accepts this condition, and also drops demands for a freeze on West Bank settlement construction. He did not offer any hints as to how this might come about, noting only that Israel would not turn aside such leaders if they arose.

Ya’alon says that since 1995, he has clearly seen that the Palestinian side of the peace process is “a Trojan horse that will allow them to enter ‘Palestine’.” When pressed that “it appears from what you are saying that you do not really believe there are any prospects to these negotiations,” Ya’alon replied:

“In this situation facing this leadership there definitely are no prospects, and it’s better that all of us know this. It’s important that an Israeli majority that recognizes reality take shape, without illusions of peace now or disengagement. When we are united, the world opinion will be with us.”

The controversy these remarks will engender will not be anything new for “Boogie.” Referred to as “the true face of Netanyahu” by some Israeli leftists (and as “the Butcher of Qana” by those who brought a civil suit against him in the U.S. over his alleged role in the IDF shelling of a UN outpost in Lebanon that killed over 100 Lebanese civilians), Ya’alon is first and foremost an outspoken supporter of West Bank settlement expansion. He opposed the withdrawal from Gaza that led Israel to evacuate 25 settlements in that territory. During a 2009 tour of West Bank settlements with members of the Jewish Leadership Movement, Ya’alon referred to the activist group Peace Now’s ideology as “a virus.” And he said he regarded “the [Israeli] elites,” (i.e., the “leftist” media, liberal politicians and the judiciary) with similar disdain. PM Netanyahu subsequently asked Ya’alon to make what Carlo Strenger calls a “semi-retraction” of these publically expressed views, and Ya’alon complied.

But, as Strenger points out, it is hard to imagine that this retraction has dissuaded Ya’alon from his earlier bombast, given his assertions that the withdrawal from Gaza only emboldened “Arab nationalism,” and that Jewish individuals have an “unassailable right to settle anywhere, particularly here, the land of the Bible.” This statement was made during celebrations marking the founding of Eli, a small West Bank settlement of 3,500 people.

Ya’alon does, at least, offer an answer to the question of why recognition of a “Jewish state” is not something that was asked of Egypt and Jordan. His answer is that “because they have no claim on Sheikh Munis, Haifa, Akko and Ashkelon.”

With rumors of Abbas threatening to dissolve the PA, and the Israeli right urging Netanyahu to formally annex the West Bank (Arutz Sheva, being a pro-settlement news outlet, manages to ask Ya’alon the rather leading question of “And given all this, when will the Likud government fulfill its nationalist platform and finally build after so many years in Judea and Samaria?”), Ya’alon may just get his wish for regime change in the Occupied Territories.

A regime change that forces Israel to take over the duties of the PA, that is, although this not a scenario Ya’alon says he would welcome:

“We say that we do not want to rule over them. They have political independence and we are ready to strengthen it in those areas for which they are responsible, but if they do not respect our right to exist, why should we start talking with them about territory? We are ready to have them conduct their lives in their area of autonomy.”

Israel is “ready” for peace, Ya’alon concludes, and it is – always has been, he says – the Palestinian leadership that stands as an obstacle to peace.

 

About Paul Mutter

Paul Mutter is a contributor to Mondoweiss, Foreign Policy in Focus and the Arabist.
Posted in Gaza, Israel/Palestine, One state/Two states, Settlers/Colonists, US Politics

{ 105 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. Les says:

    Obama has left the choice of who is to “negotiate” on behalf of the Palestinians up to Netanyahu.

    • I recently saw this 1858 painting in an art book and imagined the woman (as Abbas) is saying to the arrogant man (Netanyahu) grabbing her, “Bibi, i told you on your last visit, i will not be your strumpet. Maybe i wasn’t clear about it then. But I really mean it now.” The painting is titled “The Awakening Conscience”:
      link to en.wikipedia.org

  2. pabelmont says:

    So the puppet-master wants to replace the (former) puppet which is acting with a mind of its own. (Brave puppet.)

    As to the Jewish State matter, I suggest that Israel formally change its name to:

    “The Jewish and Occasionally also Democratic State of Israel”.

    That way, PLO and everyone else can “recognize” or otherwise deal with TFI (the former Israel) BY NAME without making any statement about its politics, rights, etc.

  3. mig says:

    “he does not believe that peace talks will be possible with the current Palestinian leadership”

    ++++ Yup, same hasbara coming up again. Remember how Arafat got same treatment ?

    • annie says:

      abbas will probably come down with some disease and get shipped off to a foreign hospital and then die.

      or maybe he will be assassinated by some alleged palestinian like Juliano was gunned down.

  4. seafoid says:

    The rich Ashkenazis will leave first. Afterwards the professionals will go. Anyone who can get a job abroad will try to get a second passport. Most of the English speakers will leave. It will be much harder for Hebrew only speakers.
    The border police will be left behind with the Shas voters.

    • eee says:

      Of course, and that is why apartments are so expensive in Israel. Because everyone is leaving or expects others to leave. In fact what you are describing has happened in the Palestinian territories.

      • Eva Smagacz says:

        If returning Occupied Territories economy to stone age worked for Israelis, who wanted to encourage Palestinians to go away, as you say, why wouldn’t similar treatment result in Israelis moving away?,

        If BDS damages economy and middle class emigrates, you would have shortage of quality teachers, doctors, engineers and intellectuals.

        If their freedom to work and study abroad (and note how much of intellectual elite relies on periods of study and work abroad to bring fresh ideas into Israel – it is very clear from CVs of it’s leading medical personnel) was diminished by BDS in sustainable way, it would have a very negative impact on Israel’s growth.

        • eee says:

          Continue with your wishful thinking. The facts on the ground are the other way around completely. It is easier to find a job in Israel than in the US. Israeli growth is much higher than the US one or European one. Do you want to talk facts or science fiction? Nobody serious in the US or Europe is going to BDS anything more than things made in the West Bank. Elvis Costello not playing in Israel is not going to influence the Israeli economy. How is the campaign against Soda Stream going by the way?

        • Hostage says:

          It is easier to find a job in Israel than in the US. Israeli growth is much higher than the US one or European one. . . .Nobody serious in the US or Europe is going to BDS anything more than things made in the West Bank.

          The last year for which there are any reliable published data showed that foreign direct investment in Israel dropped to $3.9 billion compared to $10 billion the previous year.
          link to google.com
          link to ynetnews.com

          A year ago Haaretz reported that only 56 percent of Israel’s potential workforce is employed. A few weeks ago there were 400,000 people demonstrating because young educated people can’t find housing they can afford.
          link to haaretz.com

  5. annie says:

    let’s make regime change in israel, i’m sure we can find some israelis who will agree to the 67 borders and lift this silly ‘jewish state’ recognition/demand that no israeli found necessary for negotiation with any other country.

    • eee says:

      There will be elections soon enough in Israel. You can make your points to the Israeli electorate.

      • annie says:

        eee: ‘There will be elections soon enough in palestine. Vice PM Moshe Ya’alon can make his points to the palestinian electorate.’

        • eee says:

          When are the next elections in the Palestinian authority? I am looking forward to Omar Bargouti winning…

        • annie says:

          as far as i know omar barghouti is not a politician.

        • annie says:

          When are the next elections in the Palestinian authority?

          the pa is a construct of the oslo accords. it is not a permanent body. as far as the plo elections, i don’t know but i would imagine in the near future.

        • eee says:

          “as far as i know omar barghouti is not a politician.”

          So who are the parties that support his platform?

        • eee says:

          “the pa is a construct of the oslo accords. it is not a permanent body. as far as the plo elections, i don’t know but i would imagine in the near future.”

          So what? Nothing is permanent. When are the next elections to the PA?
          Do you know when the last election to the PLO “parliament” took place? You should look it up.

        • annie says:

          platform? are you talking about bds? that is not a platform he is running on.

        • tree says:

          When are the next elections in the Palestinian authority? I am looking forward to Omar Bargouti winning…

          Ah,the clueless hypocrisy. To quote yourself back at you, ” You do not get a vote though so nobody cares what you think …”

        • pabelmont says:

          And “Oslo” is dead. So the PA should fold and return the policing problem to Israel. Israel might even hire the same police as mercenaries (as the USA hired BLACKWATER as mercenaries). Best if Hamas and Fateh could agree to a NAME for a new governing body, call elections, see if Israel permits them, etc.. This body then could represent the OPT-Palestinians in PNC elections.

      • seafoid says:

        There is nobody on the Jewish side to vote for. The Zionist parties are all committed to apartheid.

  6. Dan Crowther says:

    “When we are united, the world opinion will be with us.”

    What planet is this guy on? Dude, doubling down on your racism and expansion is not going to engender any international goodwill. These whack jobs have to fall.

  7. Sin Nombre says:

    Moshe Ya’alon said:

    “he does not believe that peace talks will be possible with the current Palestinian leadership. He insists that Abbas is not someone Israel can deal with in good faith because he refuses to accept the existence of a ‘Jewish state’…”

    Why is the question, and I think we just heard the answer. I’ve been saying for some time that the problem for the Palestinians in accepting this is that they cannot know what it might mean later for any arabs left in Israel after any peace deal. Could it mean, for instance, that Israel has the future right to expel same given their demographics starts to threaten their “jewish” state? Or deprive them of the franchise?

    And there’s Mr. Abbas at the U.N. saying precisely that: The Palestinians will not do anything that might “prejudice the rights” of an Israeli arabs.

    And now we see Ya’alon coming out on the heels of same noting the regime’s insistence on same, so indicating to me at least that not only is Abbas right to be worried about such an interpretation, but that indeed that or something very much like it *is* indeed Israel’s interpretation and motive for insisting on what otherwise would seem a meaningless phrase.

    Interesting that in the talk about the I/P issue that I at least follow I seem to see ever more use of the phrase “ethnic cleansing” to describe people’s unease/anger/etc. at Israel. Before it used to just be talk about land, such as “stealing land” or etc. Now, even if mostly evident before, I think people are cottoning on to the fact that this is accompanied by a desire for the expulsion of people too. And indeed I think that’s getting very much closer to the darker heart of the matter, and if I’m right about Israel’s intentions behind this “jewish state” recognition matter it’s just gonna ever more central.

    Here’s my bet: You ain’t never gonna see Israel really explaining why it wants that hyped-up recognition in terms of defining what it means. Never. Because they know they can’t say out loud the words “ethnic cleansing.”

  8. HarryLaw says:

    Many jurists have observed the breaching of art 49.6 of the Fourth Geneva convention with the settlement enterprise is a grave war crime. The reason this particular crime is in a special category is it is essenially a law to prevent colonisation which threatens the integrity of an entire people. Livni told the Palestinian Leadership to their faces “that the Israeli policy is to take more land day after day and that at the end of the day we’ll say that is impossible, we already have the land and we cannot create the state” She conceeded that it had been the policy of the Government for a really long time. (Palestinian papers The Guardian] Because this fundamental breach of Customary International Law has occured every day since Oslo the Israelis must be perplexed this late in the day to find the Palestinian leadership insisting on the application of International Law and no talks until settlement activity ceases. The Israeli Leadership are criminals, the Palestinian Leadership are not far behind, can they atone?

  9. I am proud to say that I served directly with Boogie in the IDF Paratroops in the mid 1970s. He was one of the first to remind me of the new Jew. The one that doesn’t take any crap. The one that builds a state we can be proud of, and is ready to defend it at any time. Yet, the one who is also a realist to the neighborhood we live in.

    • seafoid says:

      The new Jew. The ones that run the concentration camps.

      How many Arabs did Boogie have murdered?

    • Listen to the childish self-aggrandisement. Realist? You’re having a laugh

    • clairseoir says:

      We should thank “longliveisrael” for a such a succinct illustration of why zionism is such an anti-semitic ideology, feeding off of Jewish self-hatred. Clearly, by his lights, the “old Jew” was one who “took crap,” and was insufficiently enamored of The State and the militarism associated therewith. He was a puny, effeminate intellectual, not to be trusted by the real nation-builders, right loveliveisrael? What did the “old Jew” ever produce of value – besides, of course, monuments of world literature through the medium of the Yiddish language that the zionists helped to kill, earth-changing theories such as those of Marx and Freud, and antifascist fighters from Madrid to Stalingrad. Not to mention the Marx Brothers. Whereas the “New Jew,” the macho, muscled, bronzed übermentsch has brought us – Zohan! It’s kind of sad, actually.

      • The old Jew produced a lot as do the new Jews, in case you haven’t noticed. The old Jews got politely onto the cattle cars, walked quietly into the gas chambers or into the mass graves.

        I know it offends you terribly that we refuse to be those old Jews again. Damn uppity Jews don’t know their place.

        • James North says:

          lli: Now you’ve gone and shown your ignorance. Have you never heard of Mordechai Anielewicz, the Jewish Fighting Organization, and the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising? Does Hasbara Central only teach Jewish history after 1947?

        • clairseoir says:

          Longliveisrael, thanks for proving my point. you anti-semite. Your ancestors were vigorous opponents of tyranny, who spilled their blood on the battlefields of Jarama and Kursk to defend the principles of humanism that were not only part of their heritage, but an endowment to which they had contributed to all mankind. That you gleefully spit on their memory, and the heroes of the Warsaw Ghetto, should come as no surprise. Your idea of the “new Jew,” with whom you pathetically identify, is that of the tyrant, the torturer, the ethnic cleanser, and the murderer. Plus, he’s very buff and tanned, of course. Yum!

        • AhVee says:

          “I know it offends you terribly that we refuse to be those old Jews again. Damn uppity Jews don’t know their place.”

          If you don’t see how this has transcended not settling for being a subordinate peoples and slipped into the foul depths of bullying everyone around and doing horrible things and developing a serious superiority complex, you’re pretty damn near-sighted. People like you have swung from one extreme to the other like a pendulum. Apparently it really is as simple as fancying yourself the jailor instead of the inmate to you, and your universal perception of human interaction has seemingly descended into a ‘fuck or get fucked’ mentality, and refuses to transgress this on any meaningful level. You have one of the sorriest, most distorted views of emancipation that I’ve ever encountered, and you seriously lack any reasonable conception of balance, equality, measure and common sense. Then again, so does Israel as a whole, and the apple doesn’t fall far from its roots.

        • eee says:

          What, James North supports Mordechai Anielewicz, a hardened Zionist, who took his own life in a Masada like stand?

          Yes, Mordechai Anielewicz was very brave. But he was a Zionist. He understood that true strengths comes from Jews being organized to resist in THEIR OWN LAND. He was a new kind of Jew, not the old kind like Phil and Adam that trust others to be nice to them because for several decades the US has been great to its Jews.
          link to en.wikipedia.org

          Here is a small challenge for James North. Can you identify leading Jewish resistance leaders from WWII that were not Zionists? Good luck.

        • eee says:

          AhVee,

          It is quite simple. Jews want a state of their own. This is not bullying anybody around. As long as the Palestinians demand 2 Palestinian states, there will be war. Arafat should have accepted the Clinton deal in 2000 instead of launching the second intifada. This is what Clinton says. He was there brokering the deal. You should really examine yourself to figure out why you lay all the blame at Israel’s feet.

        • eee says:

          Another thing, Jame North.
          If Jews are ever attacked in the US, who do you think will organize to protect them? Zionist Jews or Jews like Phil and Adam?

        • tree says:

          Can you identify leading Jewish resistance leaders from WWII that were not Zionists? Good luck.

          Marek Edelman.

          Edelman was a lifelong anti-Zionist.[26][27] He remained firmly Polish, refusing to emigrate to Israel.[28] In old age, he spoke in defence of the Palestinian people, as he felt that the Jewish self-defence for which he had fought was in danger of crossing the line into oppression.[13] In August 2002 he wrote an open letter to the Palestinian resistance leaders. Though the letter criticised the suicide bombers, its tone infuriated the Israeli government and press. According to the late British writer and activist Paul Foot, “He wrote [the letter] in a spirit of solidarity from a fellow resistance fighter, as a former leader of a Jewish uprising not dissimilar in desperation to the Palestinian uprising in the occupied territories.”[29] He addressed his letter “To all the leaders of Palestinian military, paramilitary and guerilla organizations — To all the soldiers of Palestinian militant groups”.[30]
          Moshe Arens, former Israeli Defence Minister and Foreign Minister, visited Edelman in Warsaw in 2005 to discuss the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. Arens admired Edelman and tried unsuccessfully to gain official Israeli recognition for his heroism. Following Edelman’s death, Arens recalled in Haaretz:
          ‘Many of the survivors of the uprising who settled in Israel could not forgive Edelman for his frequent criticism of Israel. When on my return from Warsaw I tried to convince a number of Israeli universities to award Edelman an honorary doctorate in recognition of his role in the Warsaw ghetto uprising, I ran into stubborn opposition led by Holocaust historians in Israel. He had received Poland’s highest honor, and at the 65th commemoration of the Warsaw ghetto uprising he was awarded the French Legion of Honor medal. He died not having received the recognition from Israel that he so richly deserved.’[31]

          link to en.wikipedia.org

          I’m sure there are many more. I understand, though, that Israeli education tends to slip over those Jews who were not Zionist. It might create a kink in the myth that only Zionists cared about and defended Jews, when the facts are mostly to the contrary.

        • Shmuel says:

          Can you identify leading Jewish resistance leaders from WWII that were not Zionists? Good luck.

          It was our group [the Bund] that called the first battle organization into being with the knowledge of the Polish Socialists (Left-wing group of the PPS–the Polish Socialist Party). Bernard Goldsztejn, Abrasha Blum, and Berek Sznajdmil constituted the Command. The first “five” of instructors was organized and comprised Liebeskind (from Lodz), Zygmunt Frydrych, Lejb Szpichler, Abram Fajner and Marek Edelman. We started our work with theoretical instruction, but the complete lack of weapons made it impossible to broaden our activities. Thus we were practically limited in our activities to intelligence work among the Germans and, in close relation to the foregoing, the warning of particular people against possible “slip-ups”. The following people were active in our intelligence service: Pola Lipszyc, Cywia Waks, Zodka Goldblat, Lajcia Blank, Stefa Moryc, Mania Elenbogen, and comrades from the PS: Marian Meremholc, Mietek Dab, etc. Despite our very limited possibilities, the mere fact of establishing such an organization was of obvious importance. Our initiative met with the full approval of all those in the know.
          In those days the Bund was quite a large organization, considering the clandestine working conditions. More than 2,000 people participated in the festivities occasioned by the Bund’s 44th anniversary in October 1941. These meetings were held in many places simultaneously. On the surface nothing was discernible, and it was difficult to realize how great the number of small groups–dispersed “fives” or “sevens” meeting in private apartments–really was.
          The Central Trade Union Council was also revived (Bernard Goldsztejn, Kersz, Mermelsztein), and eventually registered approximately 30,000 former union members.

          The scope of the Zukunft’s work was also quite extensive. The clandestine Zukunft Committee established itself during the first days of October 1939, and by mid-November 1939, the first “fives” were meeting. In the generally tragic conditions of Jewish life, the lot of Jewish youth was the worst. Young Jews were being persecuted by the Germans with special cruelty. These young men, whom the Germans continuously hunted for forced labour, were not even free to walk the streets, let alone attempt regular work. To remedy their difficulties, the Zukunft established cooperative enterprises where young people could find employment. In 1940 two barber shops were opened, a cooperative tailor shop, and a cooperative shoemaker shop. The shops served not only as working places, but as comparatively safe meeting places for the entire organization as well. It was here that the first Zukunftsturm (Zukunft Militia) met. With the increase in the scope of work, the Zukunft and Skif Committees merged into one (Henoch Russ, Abramek Bortensztein, Lejb Szpichler, Abram Fajner, Miriam Szyfman, Mojszele Kaufman, Rywka Rozensztajn, Fajgele Peltel, Welwl Rozowski, Jankiel Gruszka, Sziojme Paw, Marek Edelman)….

          In the beginning of October 1942, talks between our own Executive Committee and the Command of the Hechalutz Battle Organization took place. The purpose of the talks was the establishment of a joint organization. This matter, argued back and forth among our comrades, was finally settled at a meeting of the Warsaw Party cadres which took place on October 15th. We then decided that a joint battle organization should be formed, and that its purpose should be to prepare armed resistance for the time when the Germans might attempt to repeat the extermination procedure in the Warsaw ghetto. We realized that only through coordinated work and our utmost joint efforts could any results at all be expected.
          About October 20th the so-called Coordinating Committee (KK) whose members were representatives of all existing political parties, was formed. Abrasha Blum and Berek Sznajdmil represented us on the KK. At the same time the Command of the new Jewish Battle [Fighting] Organization (ZOB) was appointed. Mordechaj Anielewicz (Hashomer) became the ZOB’s Commander. Marek Edelman was called into the Command to represent our groups. Dr. L. Fajner (“Mikolaj”) undertook to represent the KK on the “Aryan side”, on our behalf. An executive committee for the KK was also appointed, as was a propaganda committee. Abrasha Blum represented us on these committees.
          Since the ghetto was divided into separate areas between which there was almost no contact, the ZOB necessarily had to organize its work accordingly. We took over the leadership in the “brush-makers’ region” (Grylak), the W.C. Tobbens area (Paw), and the Prosta Street neighbourhood (Kersz). We succeeded in forming several battle groups. Thus B. Pelc and Goldsztejn led two “fives” in the central ghetto; Jurek Blones and Janek Bilak headed two “fives” in the “brush-makers’ area”; A. Fajoer and N. Chmielnicki were the leaders in the Schultz area; W. Rozowski led our group at the Rohrich shop.

          From Marek Edelman, The Warsaw Ghetto Uprising

        • AhVee says:

          “It is quite simple. Jews want a state of their own.”

          Which has exactly what to do with the discussion that was going on previously?

          And that’s fine. It’s not objectionable to want a car either, as long as you don’t steal someone else’s, and proceed to mistreat its rightful owner.

          “You should really examine yourself to figure out why you lay all the blame at Israel’s feet.”

          All of the blame? It never occurred to me that there existed a finite amount of it, and I’ve just decided to spend it all on being Israel critical. The finite amount of blame thing is an interesting thought though, one I should pursue when I’ve had one too many beers. It’s right up there with the question If a part of my body itches, and I don’t scratch it, and it stops itching, who scratched me? or Do all Chinese people have to starve if I take away one of each of their chopsticks?

          If by any chance you mean critical of Palestinians, I recall saying I don’t endorse violence, which includes the violence of Palestinians against Israelis. In practice, you don’t mistreat a dog for years and then blame it for biting you though, do you. Is that excusing it? No, but it’s a whole lot more understandable than almost anything Israel have pulled in regards to the Palestinians for as far back as I can remember.

          And just in case that’s what you were going to proceed to do.. I don’t need to be familiarised with “your side of the story”, or reminded of the ifs and buts. I’ve heard it all before, more often than I like to admit to myself. In fact, I endorsed it all before for years and years, I have since corrected my opinion substantially. Don’t lecture me brosky, I’ve been there and bought the t-shirt.

        • Mooser says:

          “who do you think will organize to protect them?”

          ROTFL!!! You? Oh give me a break. Frankly, jerk, I’ll die a Jew’s death before I let a goddam Zionist raise a hand for me. Not that you would.

        • AhVee says:

          “If Jews are ever attacked in the US, who do you think will organize to protect them? Zionist Jews or Jews like Phil and Adam?”

          Instead of giving you an answer, I’ll give you a question. Why wouldn’t Jews like Phil and Adam “organize to protect other Jews” in a hypothetical situation where Jews were being attacked in America? Prithee, enlighten us, you obviously have the answer to that question. (Will it be of the ‘self-haters’ persuasion? Will it not? I can hardly contain my excitement).

          I fail to see how the US zionists have contributed anything at all to stability or protection in the first place, their key contribution is making a notable number of enemies by their constant whitewashing and endorsement of Israel’s repeated breaches of human rights, illegal occupation and continued landgrabbing. If you’re afraid of teh eebul Mooslims, it might be wise to stop continually ticking them off like a boss.

        • Bumblebye says:

          eeeeeeeugh
          All the blame belongs to the Zionist enterprise, and its enablers. Nowhere else. From the start, an ethno-supremacist state was envisioned, and from its acceptance, was put into practice, despite empty promises to the UN of treating people equally. Had a truly binational state been born, it would have had far fewer problems and would likely genuinely have become a beacon in the ME once they were overcome. Imagine instead of your nasty little neo-fascist state one that was a real powerhouse, that had perhaps been such an example of democracy that the peoples of the surrounding nations had not just been far less hostile, but were determined to emulate maybe more than a generation ago. So we wouldn’t have had extended tyrannies kept in place to ‘protect’ Israel, we wouldn’t have had worthless wars killing hundreds of thousands to ‘enhance Israel’s safety, and so on. If you and your supremacist types can get your act together and reject that evil philosophy it may still be possible to build such a future. It may be possible to overcome the hatred your state’s actions have sown in the region. Do you or the leaders of your country believe the US will continue to underwrite the zionist enterprise once you’ve extended sovereignty over most of the West Bank and cleansed its indigenous occupants into the bantustans that have been planned for them? Can the US afford ‘poor beleaguered Israel’ for another 60+ years? I don’t see it, nor do I see another benefactor state on the horizon to take over when it quits.

        • Eva Smagacz says:

          Marek Edelman – he was Jewish Pole, not a Polish Jew.

        • Talkback says:

          eee,

          “Jews want a state of their own.”

          Palestinians, too. Do Palestinians living in Israel and outside of it have the right to partition and occupy all of it, expell the majority of Jews and keep them segregated? Or is this only the zionist way?

          “As long as the Palestinians demand 2 Palestinian states, there will be war.”

          They can have as many states as they want on their territory.

        • RoHa says:

          “Jews want a state of their own.”

          Australian Jews have Australia, just like all the other Australians they share it with. Why is that not enough?

        • James North says:

          Thanks to tree and Shmuel for the information. I knew some Bundists in the 1970s: superior people.
          3e ran away to other threads. It turns out he doesn’t know Jewish history like he thinks he does.

        • eee says:

          James North,

          Are you joking? You call the paltry examples given leading resistance leaders?
          Not one of them is of the stature of Mordechai Anielewicz who was a huge Zionist. By the way, why did you give him as an example?

        • Shmuel says:

          Paltry examples?

          The Bund initiated resistance and cooperation, and was a part of the joint command of the ZOB. Your ignorance of the roles played by the people Edelman mentions merely demonstrates the propagandistic version of history you (and I) were fed, and your inability to see beyond it.

          Your entire argument is deeply offensive on a number of levels. You exalt one form of greatness of spirit above all others and then claim – on the basis of an anti-Semitic stereotype engrained in Zionist thought – that only Zionists possess such greatness.

          Read Edelman’s conclusion. You might learn something about greatness of spirit:

          In the period preceding the last German extermination drive the Bund’s activities were closely intertwined with the history of the ZOB. I think that never before had there existed a similar degree of unanimity and coordination of people of different political parties as during the various groups’ collaboration in that period. We were all fighters for the same just cause, equal in the face of history and death. Every drop of blood was of precisely the same value.

          However, I should like to mention a few of our comrades, although there were many like them, simply because I came in contact with those particular ones in our daily work.

          ABRASHA BLUM. He was the ideological father of armed resistance in our Party. Physically very weak, but of exceptional force of conviction and strength of character, he was always the one to decide about our most momentous moves, and he always sided with the youth. He did not permit the flame of zeal and work to die out. Calm and collected in the most difficult moments, he was forever thinking of and looking after somebody else. He simply considered it his duty, as he always did with the most difficult assignments. Whatever he did was simple and obviously the right thing to do. On several occasions friends concerned about his safety urged him to leave the ghetto and move to the “Aryan side”. He did not agree to do so, however, wanting to remain in the ghetto until the very end. And he did remain at his post despite the fact that he was physically unable to fight. He carried no weapons, but he was a partisan nonetheless, at heart. On May 3rd, in the course of the fighting for the brush-makers’ base, when the order “All to the attack” was given and Abrasha asked the Commander whether it applied to him too, the latter, in the general confusion and without time to consider, answered “yes”. Abrasha, unarmed, went to the attack with the others.

          JUREK BLONES. He was commander of a battle group in the brush-makers’ area, a young enthusiast. Twice, during the hardest fighting, when everything seemed lost, when everyone around him was already giving up, he remained on his post alone and fought off the Germans singlehandedly, thus saving not only partisan lives, but the lives of hundreds of civilians as well. He did not live to tell the tale.

          MEJLACH PERELMAN. As Commander of the Combat Patrols in the central ghetto, he led his men himself on several occasions, penetrating to the very ghetto walls. During the last patrol he was wounded three times by German rifle fire. A severe stomach wound almost immobilized him, but he did not relinquish his leadership. He covered the patrol’s withdrawal to its base. When the base was reached, however, he was unable to enter through the narrow passage and had to remain on the outside. His comrades made him as comfortable as possible in one of the outside rooms and left an armed guard at his side. When the Germans approached at 11 a.m., he gave his arms and ammunition to the guard “so it may serve further” and ordered him to join the others inside. He remained upstairs alone, and perished. His voice could be heard from amidst the flames for a long time.

          DAWID HOCHBERG. He was a battle group commander in the central ghetto. Almost a child, his mother wanted to save him so badly that she forbade him to join the ZOB. When the Germans approached a bunker where five battle groups and several hundred civilians were sheltered and their death seemed inevitable, Dawid relinquished his weapons and blocked the narrow passageway with his own body. In this position he was killed by the Germans, but before his wedged-in body could be removed, the entire civilian group as well as the partisans had time to leave the endangered shelter.

          TOBCIA DAWIDOWICZ. A liaison woman between the Schultz and Tobbens areas during the fighting, she walked that horrible path under fire more than a dozen times. When she led her group for the last time, to the sewer entrance, she sprained an ankle and could no longer walk unaided. Her friends helped her along, but when, the last in line, she was about to enter the sewer trap door, she said: I shall not come along, I do not want to make the difficult passage still more difficult for you…”. And she remained in the ghetto, alone, where she perished.

        • Shmuel says:

          Idit Zertal on the Zionist nationalisation of history and memory:

          “Nationalizing the ghetto uprisings was a way of nationalizing the narrative and removing all the contradictory, non-Zionist elements…. The fact that the umbrella organizations involved in the rebellion included all the political parties was minimized or obscured. Of all the efforts to hush up and disguise the truth, the case of Marek Edelman is perhaps the most glaring.”

          See: link to azvsas.blogspot.com

          Marek Edelman was the deputy commander of the ZOB (the Jewish Fighting Organisation in the Warsaw Ghetto) and commander, after the death of Mordechai Anielewicz.

          I once called up the association of ghetto fighters in Israel to ask about Marek Edelman. The laconic response I received was “Edelman is in Poland. He is not a Zionist.”

        • James North says:

          Thanks again, Shmuel. George Orwell said that if you control the history of the past, you can control the present. I’m old enough to see that happening in the United States. Thanks for putting the Bund back in history, where they belong.
          3e will probably hide again. On the other hand, he just might learn something.

        • eee says:

          James North,

          Learn what? The Zionist organizations were the main force behind the resistance. Are you going to deny that?

          The Bund had 2500-3000 members after WWII:
          “After the end of the Second World War, the Bund reorganized itself in Poland. Whilst Zionists organized mass emigration to Palestine after the war, the Bund pinned its hopes to a democratic development in Poland. At the time the Bund had between 2,500-3,000 members.”
          link to en.wikipedia.org

          Compare that to the millions of Zionists after WWII. The Bund is nothing more than a footnote of a footnote in Jewish history. Plus they were responsible for the death of many Jews in WWII. They were against Jews leaving Europe before the war. Read the article.

          So really, are you going to hang your magnificent theory on this organization?

        • eee says:

          As for hiding, I think it is you that needs to do that. After all it was you that brought Mordechai Anielewicz, a fervent Zionist, as an example of a fighting non-Zionist and it is you that does not want to admit the major role played by Zionism in resisting the Nazis in WWII.

        • Shmuel says:

          The Bund … were responsible for the death of many Jews in WWII.

          That is one of the most despicable things you have ever written here – and that’s saying a lot. Your blaming of the victim (and not just the Bund, but the entire Yiddish-speaking proletariat) – first of the Nazi genocide and then of Stalinist persecution, is no less outrageous than attempts by other historical “revisionists” to blame German or European Jews for having brought the Holocaust upon themselves. To add insult to injury, you mockingly cite the movement’s political, cultural and physical annihilation as proof of its supposed irrelevance.

          For a less partisan history of the largest and most important political and cultural Jewish movement in inter-war Poland, see: link to yivoinstitute.org

          Marek Edelman’s first-hand account of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising can be read here: link to writing.upenn.edu

        • DBG says:

          eee,

          Jewish history is much deeper than Zionism. You do nothing to quell the stereotype that Zionists care more about Zionism than Judaism. At the end of the day our Judaism is more important than our Zionism.

        • eee says:

          Shmuel,

          From the wikipedia article:
          “In Poland, the activists argued that Jews should stay and fight for socialism rather than emigrate. Marek Edelman once said “The Bundists did not wait for the Messiah, nor did they plan to leave for Palestine. They believed that Poland was their country and they fought for a just, socialist Poland, in which each nationality would have its own cultural autonomy, and in which minorities’ rights would be guaranteed.”.[18] When the Revisionist Zionist leader Vladimir Jabotinsky toured Poland urging the “evacuation” of European Jewry, the Bundists accused him of abetting anti-Semitism.”

          From 1933 the writing was on the all. The Bund is of course responsible for swaying the minds of Jews that might have left Europe but didn’t. That is not what a responsible party does. My grandfather had 7 brothers and sisters. He helped bring 5 to Palestine after 1933 and before 1939. Until his death he felt responsible for not being able to convince the other two to come. The Bund are responsible in the same way, only much worse. They made little of the Nazi threat before the war and oversold the possibility of Poland being democratic after the war. That is two horrendous calls.

        • eee says:

          DBG,

          I am an atheist Jew, like Herzl and many other founders of Zionism.
          I care about Jews and the Jewish community not about Judaism and Zionism. Of course Jewish history is much deeper than Zionism. But where we disagree, I think, is that to me it is pretty clear that Zionism is the future of Judaism. You will not have one without the other. In 2-3 generations the predominant Jewish community by far in the world will be in Israel.

        • Mooser says:

          “I care about Jews and the Jewish community not about Judaism and Zionism”

          That’s great! In that case, we can all convert to Islam or Christianity or Buddhism or whatever the local favorite, and still be Jews! Wonderful! And we can keep our “Jewish Community” identity under wraps to avoid persecution, and make it easier to rip off our neighbors!
          Crap, I wish I had though of that “atheist Jew” wheeze years ago. It’s the key to success!
          But of course, we mustn’t stop mutilating out male son’s genital (I’ll make an exception for female sons) or else they won’t be Jews anymore! Cause, you know that God commanded circumcision. Oh, wait…

        • Mooser says:

          “He was a puny, effeminate intellectual, not to be trusted by the real nation-builders…”

          Did somebody call me? I mean, puny effeminate intellectual is my middle…. Okay, puny, effeminate, psuedo intellectual if you want to get sticky about it. Also short, pale and ugly, too. Oh well, what can you do?

          But I don’t know, this “new Jew” sounds a lot like the guys hanging out at the gay biker bars around here, and as far as I know, very few of them are Jewish

        • Mooser says:

          “The old Jews got politely onto the cattle cars, walked quietly into the gas chambers or into the mass graves.”

          How dare you say that! I’ve read there was a lot of pushing and shoving, it was like a bus in Tel Aviv!

          Of course the “new Jew” who simply quietly does whatever Zionists tell him, is much more to your taste, huh?
          And of course, given the sterling record of Jewish political leadership throughout history, what else should they do. Cause if there’s one thing you can count on Jewish “leaders” for, it’s smart politics. I mean, that’s how we got where we are today.

        • eee says:

          Mooser,

          You have in fact converted to the local favorite which is “universalism”. So what are you complaining about? And in Israel Jews determine what our local favorite is, which is very nice. I think this is the point you cannot understand.

        • Shmuel says:

          From 1933 the writing was on the [w]all.

          Where? In Poland? You’re rewriting history again. My grandfather (a Zionist) left Poland for Canada in ’36, and failed to convince his brothers (also Zionists) to do the same, and also felt guilty for the rest of his life. He feared Polish anti-Semitism (but not Canadian anti-Semitism), not Nazi genocide. An uncle (another Zionist) in Berlin and an aunt (of no particular political conviction, to the best of my knowledge) in Vienna, didn’t see “the handwriting on the wall” even in 1939. Fortunately a Nazi friend of the former and the husband of the latter forced them to leave at the very last possible minute.

          The Bund fought for Jewish rights in the context of a broader struggle for a more just society. No one – not even Zionists (not even Jabotinsky who knew and admired the Fascists so much) – did or could have predicted what was to come . The ideological battle was a legitimate one, and hind-sighted attempts to blame one side for its own annihilation at the hands of the Nazis (and later the Stalinists) are truly disgraceful. Similar claims against anti-Zionist ultra-Orthodox leaders in Eastern Europe are equally disgraceful.

          Following the German invasion, in the ghettos and abroad, the Bund played a vital role in spreading accurate information, providing moral and material support, maintaining ties with the general Polish underground and the Polish government in exile, and fighting in all of the uprisings.

          For a true picture of the day-to-day bravery exhibited by residents of the Warsaw Ghetto of all religious and ideological convictions, see the Oyneg Shabbos (posthumously “converted” to the Zionist- Hebrew “Oneg Shabbat” for some reason) Archives: link to archiwa.gov.pl

        • eee says:

          Shmuel,

          How am I rewriting history? The writing was on the wall in Europe. Your grandfather saw it, my grandfather saw it. The Bund did not see it because they couldn’t see it. They were blinded by their ideology. It would have undermined what they believed in. But what they believed in was false and that is why they are a footnote of a footnote. Their ideological battle was stupid in the context of Europe.

        • Shmuel says:

          My grandfather foresaw a future of racism and hardship and wanted a better life for his family, but had no reason to believe that things would not go on in Poland much as before. Your grandfather may have been psychic, although I doubt it. No one could possibly have imagined what would happen only four or five years later – certainly not people who had lived through pogroms, a world war, and revolutions.

          My grandfather told the following story to illustrate conflicting feelings at the time: His father had been a relatively successful merchant, who lost everything during WWI, and died soon afterward, leaving a widow and three young boys. The only thing they had left from their father’s years of affluence was a leather-bound, gilt-edged set of Talmud. When my grandfather was getting ready to leave for Canada, his brothers urged him to take the Talmud with him, that it would be “safer” in Canada. My grandfather – the family “alarmist” – refused, saying that there was no reason, and that it was only right that the books should remain with the two brothers rather than the one.

          So how is your blaming the Bund for not having predicted the future (not that Palestine was necessarily the answer, of course) any different from blaming “powerful Jews” for having “humiliated” Germany or for having “destroyed its economy”? As for footnotes, Yiddish culture is not a footnote in Jewish history, and the Jewish labour movement that was an important part of it is not a footnote in Jewish or world history. They were destroyed by Nazism and Stalinism, and eventually defeated by Zionism. Your ideologically-motivated contempt for their beliefs, achievements and heroism does you no honour.

        • eee says:

          Shmuel,

          The Bund is a footnote of a footnote. What exactly are their achievements? You yourself admit they were destroyed by Nazism and Stalinism. Not a very resilient ideology is it? Contrast that with how Zionism survived both Nazism and Stalinism because it understood that Jews needed a state of their own.

          The Bund was an ideological driven political party. Of course I can blame them for their ideology being completely out of whack with reality as it unfolded. They put forward a strategy that they claimed was good for the Jews and they were totally wrong twice, both times with ultra deadly results.

        • Hostage says:

          Plus they were responsible for the death of many Jews in WWII. They were against Jews leaving Europe before the war.

          We’ve been here before the Zionists couldn’t have cared less:

          *The Executive Committee of the Jewish Agency for Palestine did not participate in the Allied Anti-Nazi Boycott of 1931. They entered into the Ha’avara Agreement with the Nazis instead.

          *The Jewish Agency’s Executive met on June 26, 1938 to discuss the Evian Conference goal of raising Allied attention to the need for efforts and funding in order to resettle Jews in other countries. Boas Evron wrote that:

          “It was summed up in the meeting that the Zionist thing to do ‘is belittle the Conference as far as possible and to cause it to decide nothing… We are particularly worried that it would move Jewish organizations to collect large sums of money for aid to Jewish refugees, and these collections could interfere with our collection effort.” Ben Gurion said “No rationalization can turn the conference from a harmful to a useful one. What can and should be done is to limit the damage as far as possible.” — See Boas Evron, “Jewish State or Israeli Nation?”, Indiana University Press, 1995, page 260

          According to Morris L. Ernst, Roosevelt’s designated representative for the plan, the opposition from the Zionist leadership was responsible for the failure of the US to alter its immigration policy and for the negative results of the Evian Conference. Morris related that President Roosevelt said:

          The Zionist movement knows that Palestine is, and will be for some time, a remittance society. They know that they can raise vast sums for Palestine by saying to donors, ‘There is no other place this poor Jew can go.’ But if there is a world political asylum for all people irrespective of race, creed or color, they cannot raise their money. Then the people who do not want to give the money will have an excuse to say ‘What do you mean, there is no place they can go but Palestine? They are the preferred wards of the world.” See Morris L. Ernst, So Far So Good, Harper, 1948, pp. 170-77 or Alfred M. Lilienthal, What Price Israel?, Infinity, 2004

          Weizmann had demonstrated an uncanny power in 1940 to estimate the number of Jews Palestine would be able to accommodate after the war. His plans didn’t include the six million:

          It was to be anticipated, Dr. Weizmann said, that at the end of the war there would be at least 2,500,000 Jews seeking refuge. Of these perhaps 1,000,000 would represent Jews with a future and the others Jews whose lives were behind them-”who were but little more than dust”. He believed that it would be possible to settle in Palestine 1,000,000 of these refugees, so far as possible those with a future, one-fourth on the land, the remainder as an addition to the urban population.

          The Zionist Executive also opposed Allied bombing of the concentration camps where the Jews were interned:
          *W. D. Rubinstein, The Myth of Rescue: Why the democracies could not have saved more Jews from the Nazis, Psychology Press, 1997 link to books.google.com
          *James H. Kitchens, “The Bombing of Auschwitz Re-examined”, in The Journal of Military History, LVIII, April 1994, pp.233-266. link to kevsam.com
          *Richard H. Levy, “The Bombing of Auschwitz Revisited: A Critical Analysis”, in The Bombing of Auschwitz, St. Martins Press, 2000, p. 101 or Oxford University Press link to hgs.oxfordjournals.org

          When Ben Gurion’s political career as Prime Minister came to an end in 1963, he gave a speech in the Knesset excoriating and naming members of the political right and the Herut party for their support and admiration of Hitler. Oddly enough, the Revisionist paper, Chazit Ha’am, had announced that Nazism was a national liberation movement and that Hitler had saved Germany from Communism – just before it reversed its editorial position and accused the head of the political department of the Jewish Agency, Chaim Arlosoroff, of collaborating with the Nazis. Years later Judge Halevi allowed the Gruenvald libel trial to be turned into a political trial on the behavior of the Labor Party during the War. He noted that Dr. Rudolph Kastner, a MAPAI party official, “had sold his soul to the devil” and collaborated with the Nazis. Compare:
          *Steven E. Aschheim, Hannah Arendt in Jerusalem, University of California Press, 2001, page 233;
          *Lenni Brenner, Zionist-Revisionism: The Years of Fascism and Terror, Journal of Palestine Studies Vol. 13, No. 1 (Autumn, 1983), pp. 66-92, link to jstor.org
          *Yechiam Weitz, Taking Leave of the ‘Founding Father’ Ben-Gurion’s Resignation as Prime Minister in 1963, Middle Eastern Studies
          Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 2001), pp. 131-152,
          link to jstor.org

        • MRW says:

          I couldn’t agree more, Shmuel: “The Bund … were responsible for the death of many Jews in WWII.” That is one of the most despicable things you have ever written here.

          Vile.

          I wish I could get my sister-in-law on here and have her tell the story about her mother left for dead by the Zionist charities when she was orphaned at age 11 and the other choice was the concentration camp up the road. She wasn’t Palestine material. The nuns found her near death in a barn and gave her shelter and a new identity in the convent and orphanage school.

        • MRW says:

          Hostage, I’m going to have to copy your October 3, 2011 at 7:26 pm response to slam down every time I read on this board how the US and Canada wouldn’t let Jewish refugees into the country. It was the Zionists who engineered it, and you have the cite. (I just refer people to The Transfer Agreement). Thx.

        • Hostage says:

          But what they believed in was false and that is why they are a footnote of a footnote. Their ideological battle was stupid in the context of Europe.

          In fact, the Zionists have established the Holocaust Industry™ in a vain attempt to derive benefits from the memory of the victims vicariously. The ideological views of the victims are still the basis of Western society and modern nation-states – incorporation of all national minority groups on the basis of constitutional equality. The reason Israel is increasingly isolated is because it refuses to assimilate that concept into its own nascent constitutional framework.

        • eee says:

          Hostage,

          Your one sided BS does not convince anyone. I talked to plenty of Zionists who lived through the 1930′s and WWII and it is obvious that most if not all Zionists living at the time were worried about the Jews in Europe and would have been happy to see them take refuge anywhere. And the Canadians and Americans using so called Zionist pressure as an excuse not to take refugees is quite low. They didn’t accept refugees because they didn’t want to, not because someone was pressuring them.

        • Chaos4700 says:

          How many Zionists were worried that Israel would turn into this, eee?

        • Shmuel says:

          The ideological views of the victims are still the basis of Western society and modern nation-states – incorporation of all national minority groups on the basis of constitutional equality.

          That is a historical outlook that someone who believes that nothing of value happened between Bar Kochva and Ben Gurion would have trouble understanding.

        • RoHa says:

          “Hostage,
          Your one sided BS does not convince anyone.”

          Yeah, Hostage. Keep those facts, quotes, citations, and references to yourself. We don’t want a good story spoiled by reality.

          Smart-ass know-all.

        • Hostage says:

          Hostage, . . .Your one sided BS does not convince anyone.

          Okay, why don’t you just feel free to provide a more balanced verbatim quote from the same Zionist archives of something Ben Gurion said to the other members of the Zionist Executive concerning the upcoming Evian Conference.

          While you’re at it supply a verbatim quote from the US State Department archives of something kind that the President of the Zionist Organization, Chaim Weizmann, might have said to the US government during WWII about the Jews whose lives were behind them- who were but little more than dust displaced Jews of Europe.

        • Hostage says:

          Yeah, Hostage. Keep those facts, quotes, citations, and references to yourself. We don’t want a good story spoiled by reality.

          I have been keeping quite a bit of material to myself. Here is a quote from a letter written by Georg Landauer, the managing director of the Jewish Agency Central Bureau for the Settlement of German Jews, to Rabbi Stephen Wise, the Co-Chair of the American Zionist Emergency Council, dated February 13, 1938:

          I am writing this letter at the request of Dr. Weizmann because we are extremely concerned lest the problem be presented in a way which would prejudice the activity for Eretz Israel. Even if the conference does not propose immediately after its opening other countries but Eretz Israel as venues for Jewish emigration, it will certainly arouse a public response that could put the importance of Eretz Israel in the shade. . . . We are particularly worried that it would move Jewish organizations to collect large sums of money for the aid of Jewish refugees, and these collection efforts would interfere with our collection efforts. S. Beit Zvi, Post-Uganda Zionism and the Holocaust, Tel Aviv: Bronfmann, 1977, page 178 – cited in Boas Evron, “Jewish State or Israeli Nation?”, Indiana University Press, 1995, page 260

          Who needs enemies with a managing director of the Jewish Agency Central Bureau for the Settlement of German Jews like that?

          I’ve noted elsewhere that the representatives of the Zionist Organization frankly admitted they were only interested in taking-in one million of the younger Jewish refugees. However, the US Ambassador in Poland, Mr. Biddle, sent a telegram to the Secretary of State dated August 30, 1938 explaining the views expressed during discussions with Minister Beck regarding the positions of Jewish leaders. He said that the Jewish refugee issue was being manipulated for political and territorial advantage in Palestine:

          The Jews felt that as long as they concentrated their efforts on Palestine they might acquire some part thereof (even though limited in area) as a nucleus for a Jewish state. This they wanted for sentimental reasons as well as to establish a principle, namely the “right to be taken care of”;

          He also said that “before an effort to solve the [Jewish] question as a whole could become effective the Palestine question had first to be settled definitely, no matter what the basis might be in terms of territorial dimensions, before the Jewish groups might be expected to collaborate wholeheartedly in a search for other remedies for the problem.” He stated that the Palestine settlement had been delayed because of the Inclination of Jewish leaders to take advantage of any and all openings to retard a settlement in hopes of bettering their position.
          link to digicoll.library.wisc.edu

        • eee says:

          Yes Hostage,

          What you are doing is called cherry picking. Obviously there must have been more than one opinion on the subject, but you choose to highlight a few letters that maybe support your position. The fact of the matter is that the British gave very few visas to Palestine at that time if at all and were busy dealing with the 36-39 Arab uprising.

          But, even your hugely slanted evidence shows that Zionists were for mass immigration to Palestine. 1 million more young Jews in Palestine, translates to 1 million less Jews being killed in Europe. The Bund on the other hand, urged them to stay and face death.

        • Hostage says:

          What you are doing is called cherry picking. Obviously there must have been more than one opinion on the subject, but you choose to highlight a few letters that maybe support your position.

          The material that I’ve quoted speaks for itself and it comes from the most senior Zionist officials. Your assertion that there must have been other opinions besides Weizmann’s, Ben Gurion’s, and Landauer’s is absolutely correct. There was also the statement by Menachem Ussishkin in the meeting of the Zionist Executive on June 26, 1938 regarding the report of Mr. Greenbaum:

          “He is also concerned at the Evian Conference. . . . Mr. Greenbaum is right in stating that there is a danger that the Jewish people also will take Eretz Israel off its agenda, and this should be viewed by us as a terrible danger. He hoped to hear in Evian that Eretz Israel remains the main venue for Jewish emigration. All other emigration countries do not interest him. . . . The greatest danger remains that attempts will be made to find other territories for Jewish emigration.” — also cited in Boas Evron, “Jewish State or Israeli Nation?”, Indiana University Press, 1995, page 260

          But, even your hugely slanted evidence shows that Zionists were for mass immigration to Palestine. 1 million more young Jews in Palestine, translates to 1 million less Jews being killed in Europe.

          You failed to address the statements and ample evidence that the Zionist leadership intentionally delayed efforts to find other countries of emigration for the 6 million that perished, while they unsuccessfully dickered over the political and territorial demands to better their own position in Palestine.

          The British representative to the Evian Conference, Mr. Winterton, concluded his statement by telling what the British Government had done in Palestine emphasizing that the British had offered the Jews a national home in Palestine, not Palestine as a national home for the Jews, and said that further action taken with regard to Palestine was contingent upon the conference which had been called by McDonald.
          link to digicoll.library.wisc.edu

          The McDonald conference resulted in the 1939 White Paper. As for the claim that I’m cherry picking, believe me when I say that I’m prepared to quote everyone but the night janitor at the Jewish Agency. Why don’t you get off your high horse and provide a verbatim quote from a higher ranking Zionist official who disagreed with Messrs. Weizmann, Ben Gurion, Landauer, Greenbaum, & Ussishkin?

        • RoHa says:

          “Hostage, What you are doing is called cherry picking”

          Show us the rest of the cherries, then.

        • annie says:

          the Revisionist paper, Chazit Ha’am, had announced that Nazism was a national liberation movement and that Hitler had saved Germany from Communism – just before it reversed its editorial position and accused the head of the political department of the Jewish Agency, Chaim Arlosoroff, of collaborating with the Nazis. Years later Judge Halevi allowed the Gruenvald libel trial to be turned into a political trial on the behavior of the Labor Party during the War. He noted that Dr. Rudolph Kastner, a MAPAI party official, “had sold his soul to the devil” and collaborated with the Nazis. Compare:
          *Steven E. Aschheim, Hannah Arendt in Jerusalem, University of California Press, 2001, page 233;

          fun facts/not.. meaning ‘not fun’

    • Potsherd2 says:

      Every word uttered by LLI could have been spoken proudly by the Brownshirts as they created their new Germany, a state they could be proud of, and ready to defend it at any time – for definitions of “defend” that meant “conquer and exterminate inferior peoples.”

      • eee says:

        Potsherd2,
        Yes, every patriot is a Nazi, especially Israeli ones. These kind of allegations show what a radical extremist you are. Israel returned the Sinai for peace. That was more than 50% of the TOTAL territory held by Israel. Israel held less than half the land after the treaty. And yet, Israel is an “expansionist” state. Go figure.

        • Talkback says:

          So if you conquer 100% and give back 50%, you’re not an expansionist. If you steal 100% and return 50% your not a thief. And if you lie 100% and take back half of your lies, you’re not a liar.

          Does Zionism have any other side effects on rationality?

        • Potsherd2 says:

          eee – the fact that Israel seized the Sinai in the first place, in an aggressive war that Israel started, after being forced to withdraw after their first attempt to seized Egyption territory a decade earlier, proves its expansionist character.

          What part of “the inadmissability of acquiring territory by war” don’t you understand?

        • Chaos4700 says:

          Add to that, eee, we’ve had Israelis right here on this discussion forum cheerleading the rumor that Israel is planning on invading and occupying the Sinai again.

        • eee says:

          Potsherd2,

          What part of “if you start a war, you better be sure you can win it” don’t you understand? If you start a war, don’t complain about the consequences. Whatever international law says, if you start a war and lose territory, complaining about that is just laughable. If you don’t want to lose territory, don’t start a war.

          Let’s also look at the facts on the ground. Israel annexed the Golan which was acquired by war. Israel still holds the Golan. So how could what you are saying be true? It is quite admissible to acquire territory by war. If I am wrong, why don’t you go to the ICC and complain? How about the fact the Russia took 2/3 of Finland by war? Is that inadmissible? How about the state of Hawaii? How was it taken?

        • annie says:

          It is quite admissible to acquire territory by war.

          yawn

        • Hostage says:

          What part of “if you start a war, you better be sure you can win it” don’t you understand? If you start a war, don’t complain about the consequences. Whatever international law says, if you start a war and lose territory, complaining about that is just laughable.

          You are pretty delusional. The documentary record of the Security Council and the US State Department establish beyond any doubt that it was Israel that launched a massive unprovoked attack and invaded the West Bank territory in the Hebron area in November 1966. The FRUS and Israeli historians also report that PM Eshkol had deliberately attacked the wrong country because he was afraid the Soviet Union would retaliate if he carried-out reprisals against Syria. In June of 1967 Israel attacked Egypt, triggering the mutual defense treaty with Jordan. So on both occasions, Israel started hostilities, not the West Bank Palestinians.

        • Chaos4700 says:

          So, eee, you’re perfectly fine with what Germany did to Poland, France and northern Europe? Because Germany was very successful at starting wars, and winning them, and then gaining territory.

          Tell us how much you admire Nazi Germany for its strength and territorial acquisition, eee.

        • Potsherd2 says:

          eee, it’s only Israel that has started these wars. That’s where all its illicitly acquired territory has come from.

        • Mooser says:

          “Does Zionism have any other side effects on rationality?”
          Talkback

          I care about Jews and the Jewish community not about Judaism…” “eee”

          There you go, Talkback! BTW, on of the biggest effects of ziocaine on rationality is the ‘ziocaine amnesia’ syndrome, which allows Zionists to forget all the stupid shameful things they said today and say them over again tomorrow.

  10. seafoid says:

    “he does not believe that peace talks will be possible with the current Palestinian leadership. He insists that Abbas is not someone Israel can deal with in good faith because he refuses to accept the existence of a ‘Jewish state’…”

    Reminded me of something I read a while ago

    link to guardian.co.uk

    In 1950, after three years at the sharashka Solzhenitsyn was transferred to a special camp at Ekibastuz in northern Kazakhstan, where he worked for three more years, first as a bricklayer, and then as a brigade leader in the machine shop. The grinding hard labour, the extremes of heat and cold, the brutality of the guards, and the corruption of the camp administration were later evoked with great brilliance in his short novel One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich (1962). The suffering provoked a bloody riot (not mentioned in Ivan Denisovich but fully described in The Gulag Archipelago), which was followed by a hunger strike.A commission of inquiry was appointed, and Solzhenitsyn, as a brigade leader, urged caution on his fellow strikers and supported compromise. But the prisoners were cynically deceived by the commission, and Solzhenitsyn learned the bitter lesson that compromise with the authorities was impossible.,

  11. Real Jew says:

    Are you freakin kidding me. Every time “palestine” is mentioned in his remarks needs to be replaced with “Israel”. The Israeli govt keeps getting more extreme and moving further right year after year. U can bet due to the rate of settlement expansion and sheer stupidity of Israeli leadership resolving the conflict diplomatic-ly will become impossible. Once that occurs, the only other option left on the table is war. Which after all is exactly what Israel is pushing for.

    Considering how badly the situation is deteriorating, unless the BDS movement gets a shot of steroids, I’m afraid war is the only thing capable of stopping Israel’s insatiable desire for complete domination of the ME. God help us all!

    • AhVee says:

      “U can bet due to the rate of settlement expansion and sheer stupidity of Israeli leadership resolving the conflict diplomatic-ly will become impossible.”

      What makes you think that resolving the conflict diplomatically was ever a viable possibility in the first place? All that’s happened in recent times is that what was already mission impossible has now become a little more difficult.

      Israel’s idea of diplomacy has always meant, and still means refusing to argue with anyone other than those of whom it is already clear will bend to their demands. This of course isn’t an acceptable diplomatic solution as much as it is forcing their agenda down other people’s throats formally and on paper, instead of, you know, doing it by brute force, which is what they usually resort to when “talking” doesn’t cut it.

      • Mooser says:

        Well, Ah Vee, it’s pretty much a certainty that nuclear capabilities must balance out from the one-sided current arrangement…. Maybe Israel will be more amenable then. Maybe not. My point is not to wish for Israel’s nuclear destruction, it is simply that in every case in which power seemed to be irrevocably one-sided, things changed, and this is a time of quick technological change, not to mention other areas.

        • AhVee says:

          ” it is simply that in every case in which power seemed to be irrevocably one-sided, things changed”

          This is pretty much what is keeping me hopeful, though I have less than a vague notion of how this will end up panning out. If the US are anywhere near smart, they’ll abandon Israel at one point (for their own wallet’s sake, and let’s face it, they have enough problems already, without entertaining another), leaving it in the hands of various US / Western Zionist lobby groups to drum up money and garner support of their own accord (something that will substantially reduce both the pro-Israel propaganda the greater public is subjected to as well as the flow of money to Israel). The US will not be able to afford to entertain Israel in the way it is currently into all eternity, that much is pretty much sure, if for nothing else but economic reasons.

          What isn’t so sure is how Israel will react (but I wouldn’t bet against it being in the time-honoured manner). In the case of a blow-out and large-scale violence, I can see the first Western states declaring it a hostile state that poses a viable threat to Europe, some might start cutting off trade relations with Israel formally. Israel’s increasing isolation on the global stage (and its failed attempts to bring far eastern countries into this) is what I think will be its eventual downfall. Once the US drops Israel – and it will, sooner or later, they’re on their own. They’re a hideous creation that only a mother could love, once that mother drops it, or starts showing signs of weakness, it will find itself all alone in a world it was cheeky enough to continually alienate previously.

          And then? We’ll be left with a bombshelled ideology that has left millions still ill with its afterpoisoning. I can only hope that the majority of Jews, especially those in the western world, will sooner rather than later manage to drop the ideology, or at least subject it to massive revision, and see the remaining Zionists in their current form as a radical Jewish fringe that has been discredited on all accounts, making them people who join the ranks of Christian fundamentalists and Muslim extremists in the minds of the vast majority of the population.

          Then, perhaps, we can start mending the great damage that this ideology has done to Judaism, its history and legacy, start scraping the foul revisionist odor off the history books and rediscovering, and finally properly honouring the righteous ideas our ancestors walked into their graves for.

        • Mooser says:

          Thanks for the thoughtful response, Ah Vee. Hadn’t read it til this morning.
          But me, I’m planning for the Masadadammerung

  12. Talkback says:

    Just in case nobody understands longliveisrael’s distinction between the old and the new Jew:

    link to evcomics.com

    • LeaNder says:

      New man:

      ‘Dead are all the Gods’. It is not just one morality that has died, but all of them, to be replaced by the life of the übermensch, the new man:

      Nietzsche inspired the Nazis too, man as hard as Krupp-steel, you know.

      Decadence and rebirth as new man, Griffin’s fascist core comes to mind:

      Griffin’s theory of fascism suggests that a heuristically useful ideal type of its definitional core is that it is a form of palingenetic ultranationalism. In other words it seeks, by directly mobilizing popular energies or working through an elite, to eventually conquer cultural hegemony for new values, to bring about the total rebirth of the nation from its present decadence, whether the nation is conceived as a historically formed nation-state or a racially determined ‘ethnos’.

      • Mooser says:

        “It was her intention to start you on Nietzsche next, sir. You would not like Nietzsche, sir, he is fundamentally unsound”

        Jeeves, to Bertie, explaining why he broke up Bertie’s engagement to Florence Cray. (She was awfully good-looking, seen sideways)

    • Mooser says:

      “Just in case nobody understands longliveisrael’s distinction between the old and the new Jew”

      Oh, that one’s easy as pi! The old Jew went quietly to the gas chambers, and the “New Jew” quietly does and believes whatever the Zionists tell him.
      Hard for me to see any difference.

    • Elliot says:

      Thanks, Talkback :)