Political Zionism is destroying a culture and a people, and intentionally so

I just spent two weeks in Israel/Palestine, representing American Presbyterians, with an international team that planted olive trees for Palestinian farmers who would otherwise be unable to work their fields.  This happened to be the two weeks in which the flap over the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Israel Palestine Mission Network’s new publication, Zionism Unsettled, was happening among those who oppose true Palestinian rights and justice.

Dr. Rev. Jeffrey DeYoe (Photo: Covenant Presbyterian Church)

Dr. Rev. Jeffrey DeYoe (Photo: Covenant Presbyterian Church)

When you live in Palestine for two weeks; when you talk to Palestinian people–both Christian and Muslim–up close and personal; when they share with you their daily struggles including the violation of every imaginable human right they have, and their intense pain and humiliation as a result of that; and when you are exposed to the same sort of suspicions they themselves are subjected to on a daily basis just for being there, you have to wonder what the flap is really about. When you read Zionism Unsettled and live and work in the West Bank, you clearly see the consistency between the written word and actual life in Palestine.  Even the most politically conservative person on our trip, who is sympathetic to some Tea Party agenda, said to me on day 4: “It doesn’t take a genius to see this and know who the aggressor and oppressor is.”  I never expected that statement from him in a million years.

Political Zionism is destroying a culture and a people, and intentionally so.  It is seeking to ethnically cleanse a land by any means possible: scaring Palestinian families so they flee to other nations, incarcerating Palestinian men for the simple crime of being Palestinian, harassing and damaging children both emotionally and physically (all well-documented), and yes, even killing them.  Palestinians are killed by the Israeli military on a regular basis under the guise of “crowd control.” We heard story upon story from young Palestinians who remember watching high school classmates die as a result of the so-called “harmless” rubber bullets, or because they were hit in the head with a tear gas canister at close range, or had a severe reaction to the gas itself.  There are many abuses of Palestinian children taking place at the hands of the Israeli military and penal system.   These stories hardly ever make U.S. headlines, which is why you really don’t know much about that.

Zionism Unsettled cover art

Zionism Unsettled cover art

Critics of Zionism Unsettled have argued that we are not allowing Zionists to engage in the same kind of exceptionalism afforded every other religious culture in the world. Indeed, every culture in the world throughout the march of history has demonstrated exceptionalist tendencies.  Zionism Unsettled critics are dead wrong when they argue that exceptionalism is something to preserved, protected and of which to be proud.   American exceptionalism is guilty of the massacre of Native Americans and the enslavement and oppression of African Americans. It has reared its ugly head in every war in which we have demonized our enemies to make them seem less-than-human, making it easier to resolve our consciences about collateral damage.  We hear it in our immigration debates today.  Our national psyche still suffers, whether we know it or not, from our exceptionalist sins of the past and present.    When we exercise our American exceptionalist attitudes in ways that are harmful to human beings not like us, we are wrong and immoral and must be called on that.  I learned that in a highly respected Presbyterian theological seminary in the late 1970′s and have practiced it throughout my life as well as in 3+ decades of ordained ministry.  When another people, with their own set of exceptionalist beliefs, do the same to an indigenous people in their own land, and my nation (translate: tax money) supports that financially to the tune of $3-4 billion each year the same standard applies.  Add in the reality of U.S. corporate investment in occupation and that figure of $3-4 billion shoots sky high.  As a tax payer and as member of a church that invests my retirement funds in those corporations I have every right and moral obligation to speak to this injustice.

Israel could not do what it does to Palestinians without U.S. support.  While talking to a couple of the Israeli soldiers standing guard over us in the olive fields, I said: “I work very hard in the U.S. so that my government can send you my tax money.”  His response was:  “I work very hard to spend your money.  Thank you very much.”

If you have never had an army standing and looking at you with assault weapons slung over their shoulders while you planted olive trees, you should give it a try. It is very unsettling to say the least. The Israeli military showed up every day we planted just for the sake of harassment and intimidation.  On two separate occasions they made us stop work while they verified Palestinian ownership papers.  The joke is that all the players know each other.  The Palestinian leaders of the Joint Advocacy Initiative (JAI) know the Israeli commander, and the Israeli commander knows the Palestinian farmer has the right papers because JAI doesn’t plant trees on fields where Palestinian ownership cannot be substantiated.  It’s a big dance, and would be funny except that the Israeli military is messing with people’s livelihoods, and lives. On the last day of planting, we were again stopped and delayed for over an hour. The Palestinian farmer once again produced all his ownership papers, the papers were verified, and yet on this occasion the commander told us to stop work and leave the field. But this was not before an Israeli settler came onto the field (uninvited, mind you) to argue with our team. The final spectacle came when he knelt down, slapped the ground with his hands and shouted: God gave us this land!  This was right after the commander had officially verified that this was Palestinian land.   The excuse for not letting us finish the job?  It serves as a “buffer zone” between the nearby settlement and other Palestinian lands.  Translation:  These adjacent fields are to be absorbed for future expansion of the settlement next door.

The last time I was in Israel/Palestine before this most recent trip was 2006.  Just as I was shocked that year at seeing the expansion of settlements since my previous visit in 2001, I was shocked even more in the last two weeks to see what has happened since 2006.  The Israeli government is allowing for settlement expansion at break-neck speed all over land well inside the Green Line.   This was land clearly established for a Palestinian state by the 1948 partition plan.  It is tantamount to not only endless occupation, it is invasion for the purpose of removing a people from the lands given to them by international agreement.  And they keep building walls in the strangest places deep within occupied Palestinian territory to make sure their slow, ongoing invasion will be successful.  Some are arguing that proponents of B.D.S. (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) are now not even hiding the fact they are for a one-state solution over a two-state solution.

Here is my answer:  I really was for the two-state solution until Israeli expansionism and colonization in Palestine made that impossible.  I was not alive in 1948 when decisions were made.   But I am alive now to go and see the mockery the Israeli government has made of that historical decision. It’s not my fault that the two-state solution no longer makes sense.  Yet, now it is my responsibility to point out that the human rights violations taking place arise out of the worst system of abuse in the “free world” since South African apartheid.

About Dr. Rev. Jeffrey DeYoe

Dr. Rev. Jeffrey DeYoe is Pastor of Covenant Presbyterian Church in Ft. Myers, Florida.
Posted in Israel/Palestine, US Politics | Tagged

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

  1. seafoid says:

    Zionism is destroying Judaism. Whatever Jewish culture was it wasn’t sparta redux. Those US jewish warmongers …ugh.
    The Palestinians will survive. They always have.

    • JeffB says:

      @seafold

      Zionism is destroying Judaism

      That’s a feature not a bug. Read the early or even modern Zionists. The goal of Zionism was always to remake the Jewish people and their culture. It was always a goal of Zionism to recast or create a new Jewish religion compatible with a Jewish nation living in a Jewish state and incompatible with the slave religion that developed in the diaspora.

      • What a ludicrous attempt at self-justification. So you think American and all other Jews outside Israel are like slaves? lol. And as for recasting a new religion, well you have certainly created a state-sponsored cult of terrorism, aggression, occupation and dispossession. Hardly an improvement, is it? The reverend has hit the bull’s eye. No amount of ridiculous flannel and hyperbole will change that. He is right, anyone who goes there sees it immediately, and it is extremely ugly. Zionism is also taking a wrecking ball to Judaism as it has traditionally been understood, seeking as it does to promote itself as the only true path. But it is a dead end.

        • JeffB says:

          @justicewillprevail

          So you think American and all other Jews outside Israel are like slaves?

          No American Jews also altered Judaism creating a form of Judaism which melding effectively into American Protestantism so that de jure American Judaism just became another America faith.

          . And as for recasting a new religion, well you have certainly created a state-sponsored cult of terrorism, aggression, occupation and dispossession. Hardly an improvement, is it?

          Yes. That’s a religion of life not one of death and suffering. The dead passively accept the environment. The living work to change the environment to their ends: they eat, converting proteins into their own structures, they breathe stripping the oxygen for their own needs, they move. And when the living form communities they fully understand that those communities need to be defended against enemies and do so.

          • @JeffB

            Just too bizarre and scientology-lite to warrant a reply.

            Of course, you studiously avoid addressing the Reverend’s excellent points, and concentrate instead on pseudo erudite babble.

      • MRW says:

        JeffB,

        From Allan Brownfeld’s review entitled Explaining the Long — and Largely Untold — History of Jewish Opposition to Zionism
        link to acjna.org

        An important new book, “A Threat From Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism” by Yakov M. Rabkin, Professor of History at the University of Montreal, sheds significant light on Jewish religious opposition to Zionism. After completing his university education, Dr. Rabkin studied Judaism with rabbis in Montreal, Paris and Jerusalem. He brings a lifetime of study and experience to his subject.

        In the forward, Joseph Agassi, professor of Philosophy at Tel Aviv University, notes that, “The author raises questions about the myth that Israel protects the Jews around the world and constitutes their natural homeland. This book rightly shows that this myth is anti-Jewish. Most Israelis mistake this myth for Zionism and argue that we can only reach independence once all the Diaspora Jews gather here. The Jews must therefore decide whether the interests of the State of Israel coincide or conflict with their own interests. However this question is taboo in the context of today’s Zionist ideology. Moreover, this ideology deems anti-Semitism unavoidable and Israel the only place where a Jew can be safe. This view is essentially undemocratic: it denies a priori any value of the emancipation of Jews in the modern world.”

        Agassi notes that Professor Rabkin “mobilizes little known historical data in order to make distinctions between the following concepts: Zionism and Judaism; Israel as a state, as a country, as a territory and as the Holy Land … this creates a real and dangerous confusion between faith and nationality … One need not be religious in order to protest the exploitation by Israel of religious concepts. I am not religious and am not part of the current fad to find fault with Zionism and its history. But as an Israeli patriot and a philosopher, I find it imperative to make Judaic anti-Zionism a part of the badly needed debate about Israel’s past, present and future.” [...]

        • JeffB says:

          @MRW –

          I’m not sure how to respond to that or what you are asking for. There are a lot of concepts in that quote I’d disagree with I’m not even sure where to begin. Start by replacing Judaism with Taoism, Israel with China, and Jews with Chinese. Would any of that even make sense?

          • mikeo says:

            Start by replacing Judaism with Taoism, Israel with China, and Jews with Chinese.”

            I guess this substitution seems clever to you – but all it shows is a pitiful lack of understanding of both Chinese culture and Taoism as a belief system.

            Stick to 19th Century ethnic-nationalist political ideologies.

            They’re much more your cup of tea.

      • puppies says:

        @JeffB – What better reason for destroying Zionism and sowing salt in its foundations?

      • kalithea says:

        @JeffB

        ” It was always a goal of Zionism to recast or create a new Jewish religion compatible with a Jewish nation living in a Jewish state and incompatible with the slave religion that developed in the diaspora.”

        Thank you! Zionism IS in fact a newly-invented Jewish religion although some like myself consider it more like a cult or a powerful tool of manipulation. But I was under the impression that Judaism was not developed in the diaspora, at least not the one you’re probably alluding to unless of course you’re thinking of Mesopotamia. Regardless. Zionism indeed represents a departure from faith and the detriment of Judaism and is even more the “slave religion” – enslaved to the ego that is, you know, man’s lower nature.

        • JeffB says:

          @kalithea

          Hmmm still haven’t quite put my finger on the denomination yet. Evangelical but anti-Zionist. Are you American?

          Anyway the people here are mainly Jewish, or liberal Christian and don’t speak evangelical. They are pretty comfortable with using “Judaism” to mean the rabbinic religion that evolved out of Pharisaic Judaism after the Roman-Judean wars and not the “true faith” that the gentiles were grafted onto after Jesus completed his first coming. I wasn’t talking about “Judaism” in the sense you mean at all.

          Anyway, couldn’t agree more with Zionism and lower nature. You are absolutely right. All Zionism promises all it can promise are blessing of this earth, the transient peace that can only last during this life. Just as the blood of bulls and goats could not bring the true salvation neither can Zionism which is just a shadow of the good of the heavenly sacrifice. Its a pity my fellow Jews and myself are blind to the truth, losing the freely offered gift of being born not of blood but of God and vainly search for these earthly alternatives. I’d like to thank you Christians for picking up the message that we dropped and spreading the Word to all the corners of the globe.

          OK so now that we agree on all that where do you want to take this?

          ____

          @Annie –

          As per our previous conversation…. here is a good example of what you don’t have to deal with and I do in America… tick, tick, tick, tick….

          • kalithea says:

            “All Zionism promises all it can promise are blessing of this earth, the transient peace that can only last during this life.”

            The only thing Zionism ensures is endless bloodshed. Quit trying to put lipstick on a…pii…tbull, oh well, you get my drift.

            And as for the rest of it; uhh, I’d rather not sully pearls.

      • pjdude says:

        Slave religion? wow rather unhinged aren’t. also there is no such thing as a jewish nation. its a religion with all the rights and privilges of such. but considering jews a nation is problamatic at best. hell the essential demand of jewish nationhood is treat us as a nation but don’t treat anybody else meeting the same critera as such.

        • RoHa says:

          “hell the essential demand of jewish nationhood is treat us as a nation but don’t treat anybody else meeting the same critera as such.”

          I’ve never seen those criteria spelled out, so I don’t know whether any other group meets those criteria.

          Jews do not, as I have often pointed out, meet the criteria for “nationhood” that I have seen.

    • munro says:

      “(Frederick Kagan) had been a prominent proponent of the surge in Iraq, and we had talked from time to time about both wars, including one long evening conversation on the veranda of one of Saddam’s palaces in Baghdad.” – Robert Gates in “Duty”
      link to consortiumnews.com

      Frederick and Kimberly Kagan (founder and President of the Institute for the Study of War) in Basra: link to en.wikipedia.org

    • bintbiba says:

      Thank you, Dr. Jeffrey DeYoe.
      “The Paletinians will survive. They always have.” seafoid.

    • kalithea says:

      “Zionism is destroying Judaism.”

      How do we know it was not all meant to be? To begin with, note the powerful, consuming and unimpeded nature of Zionism. It is undoubtedly a force fueled by collective or tribal subconscious will acting without restraint in plain sight, and obviously protected from impunity by the powers that be.

      I wonder what Jesus would say? After all, his truth also appeared to be very threatening to the reason for being and survival of Judaism, when perhaps his mission was really to improve upon it. Although sometimes self-indulgent patterns of behavior that keep humans from evolving require a radical break with the past to be corrected.

      Zionism just may be the only viable way that all Jews would accept to further their awareness (euphemism) once it accomplishes what it was really meant to accomplish which it appears is not land procurement at the expense of the suffering and rights of others. Maybe Zionism is in fact a self-fulfilling prophesy, but not the one that was intended when Zionism was created. While for many, Zionism appears to have morphed into something monstrous; I believe it was flawed (euphemism) to begin with and is merely exercising and exhibiting its true evil nature with impunity. But what better way for people to see the light then for they themselves to destroy that which keeps them from the light with a tool of their own invention! It’s extremely unfortunate though that the Palestinians must suffer in the meantime, and pre-determined or not, it is still our moral responsibility to make every attempt to lessen that suffering by working to defeat the injustice to which they have been shackled, albeit, the insurmountable obstacles they are subject to, which make me suspect that indeed all this was predetermined.

      I suppose the unstoppable, perfect storm of circumstances that led to Jesus’ unjust execution for trying to tell the truth that at the time sounded like blasphemy were also predetermined therefore sadly, even the righteous, who tried to change that fate–failed, but not in the larger scheme of things. So, if we assume that this tragedy was “written” and “necessary” in order for Christianity to take flight and expand; then it’s natural to assume and not far-fetched to imagine that consequently it was also “written” and “necessary” that Jews would one day fall prey to an ideology OF THEIR OWN MAKING that would lead to the destruction of Judaism.

      Pardon the blasphemy, but then remember what Bernard Shaw once stated: “All great truths begin as blasphemies.”

      • Textbook overlap of Jew hatred and anti Zionism. Thank you, Kalithea. Oh, yeah. It ain’t called blasphemy. It’s called Jew hatred.

        • RoHa says:

          Isn’t everything?

          • Wishing, hoping, praying that the Jews and their identity will disappear… what would you call it? Empathy? Realism? Teaching the stubborn to be unstubborn? How would you define it?

        • Hostage says:

          Thank you, Kalithea. Oh, yeah. It ain’t called blasphemy. It’s called Jew hatred.

          Not if you consider Jesus a Jew or include the Jewish members of the early Christian community that Kalithea was talking about. In the Christian view contained in the book of Romans, all of Israel will be saved for the sake of the promises made to the fathers, despite a period of preordained spiritual blindness that is supposedly affecting part of the Jewish people. That’s really not a doctrine that reflects Jew hatred or anti-Zionism, since it admittedly follows a long sermon about God having the authority to shower mercy on whomever he pleases, including the Jews. It is a rationalization for Jewish dislike and persecution of Christians, that attributes the perpetrators actions to predestination. Of course there are other interpretations and there are Christians and Jews alike who’ve never read one another’s scriptures.

          • Hostage- Christians are allowed to view Jews in whatever prism that they choose. In modern thinking, this is imposing a vision on another person or identity and is thus frowned upon. “I am praying for you, that you realize the error of your ways and see that the truth is as I know it to be, rather than the blindness that you were taught.” You expect me to accept that as good hearted? No. You don’t. You’re just pretending. If you wish to discuss how a believing Jew is supposed to deal with the beliefs of a Christian who sees the Jew as a blind tribalist, in a way that is not offensive, then you will certainly have to present your ideas in a more open fashion than Kalithea does and in a more open fashion than you do.

            Further. For Kalithea to put her desire for the jews to disappear here and for you to back her up, in the context of the reverend’s fervent combination of Christianity and anti Zionism is certainly to taint the reverend with her lack of empathy for the Jewish people and the faith that gave birth to Christianity.

            Jews, believing Jews, or Jews stubborn in their favoritism towards their former beliefs, consider the Torah and the law and Jewish identity as values that deserve attention. The Christians, whether they were born Jewish or not, whether they lived two thousand years ago or today, who consider the Torah and the law and Jewish identity as shells that need to be discarded are enemies to the belief that I delineated in the first sentence. I cannot see that the two ideas can coexist. There is something known as “can’t we all just get along” and I believe in that, because civility in the street and laws in our courts are more important than my beliefs. But to try to pull the wool over my eyes and tell me that it’s raining, when you’re spitting at me (euphemism) and telling me I am blind and part of the past that needs to disappear and give way to the new, sorry, you are my enemy. And you cannot explain that away.

          • Hostage says:

            Hostage- Christians are allowed to view Jews in whatever prism that they choose.

            That’s mighty big of you, since your own religious superstition and bigotry are shining through these comments of yours.

          • Hostage says:

            “I am praying for you, that you realize the error of your ways and see that the truth is as I know it to be, rather than the blindness that you were taught.” You expect me to accept that as good hearted? No. You don’t. You’re just pretending.

            The book of Romans says what it says, that God ordained the state of affairs it describes. The Gentiles, who are represented as a wild branch have no reason to brag, because the natural branches that appear to be cast off will also be grafted back in. It says that God will save all of Israel and have mercy on whomever he likes. I don’t care if you think that’s good hearted, or not. As a disinterested non-believer, I can only say it’s just as kind as anything Judaism has ever had to say about the ultimate spiritual fate of Gentiles or Christians.

        • kalithea says:

          That’s a pretty pathetic argument. Why do you have to predictably stoop to the “poor us” level to manipulate the narrative and discredit truth? It’s a fact that Zionism is on a path of destruction and ultimately, self-destruction in the process. Don’t blame me if Zionism is a billboard for injustice.

          You knowww, I can’t stand being manipulated and am a firm believer in tough love for the sinner and hate for the sin. But there’s no doubt, Jesus would handle the situation much better than me! I’m only human and very passionate about justice and I must admit the love part becomes a real challenge given the sadistic, cruel and selfish behavior your comrades in Israel are exhibiting against the other. So excuse me, but I’m not going to dance and tiptoe around the truth to spare your feelings and indulge the twisted fantasy that Zionism really is.

      • bilal a says:

        I don’t understand how believing Christians and Jews can continue to besmirch Judaism by calling atheist ethno-nationalists in New York or Tel Aviv ‘Jews’. Of course there are now religious settlers even if they are out of the mainstream of Jewish history and thought.

        Pamela Geller was onto something, perhaps ‘Judeofascists’ ? except fascist is so banal. Judeonationalists?

  2. shams says:

    Fantastic piece.

    • Philip Weiss says:

      I agree. I’m grateful the pastor gave us the opportunity to run it.

    • Citizen says:

      Christian Americans need to identify themselves as such and badger their religious and political reps to visit Palestinians on their land as Dr. DeYoe did, not just make the usual trips to Israel that are a right of congressional passage these days. Instead we get the former governor Huckabee bragging on his nightly TV show how he’s been to Israel a dozen times, walked the holy land of the bible, and never bothered to seek out a Palestinian or two on their own land. How dare they condemn free enterprise at Sodastream! They have no common sense! And I haven’t even mentioned Hagee!

  3. pabelmont says:

    I believe that Jews will also survive. they too always have. But we’ve lived through rough times. Not the rough times prepared adn delivered to Jews by others, but the times of the Zionist enterprise, when the rough times were made by Jews

    Not, thankfully, made by ALL Jews, but a project that — since 1967 — seems to have attracted favorable opinion among Jews far out of proportion to the need and against every other essence of Judaism than pure tribalism, the “We must Protect Our Jewish Family at all Costs (to others, who don’t count at all).”

    You know, it almost seems to me (but only almost) that if all Jews were to disappear today, there would be no loss to the rest of the world. No ethical loss. Certainly the Jews of today, largely, those who support Zionism, care not one whit for anyone else. It may always have been so — but, if so, it didn’t matter so much because the Jews had little power. Until Zionism appeared. It is a bad thing and a dangerous when psychopaths are armed.

    HOWEVER

    The Open Hillels, the kids questioning the censorship and propagandizing (brain washing) of the Jewish Day Schools, JVP, much suggest that there is, at long last, a saving remnant.

    And as days go by, the support for Zionism will decrease — or so I hope, I cannot predict — because the evil doings of Zionism are on a rampage, a crescendo, more and more NEWS of it comes out, slowly, slowly, but here are the Presbyterians telling it like it is, and the effort of self-management called “cognitive dissonance” will become ever more difficult for ethical Jews until a clear division is made between the ethical Jews and the Tribal Jews. It will become impossible to sit on the fence any longer.

    Yes, Zionism is trying to destroy TWO peoples and cultures, intentionally, the Palestinians and the Jews.

    And Zionism will sink without a trace, although not without leaving a as a sort of oil-slick on the water a horrible, and unforgivable history. Let Zionism be “spurlos versenkt”. It is my hope. And I read the tea leaves (not the tea party leavings) to support that hope.

    • JeffB says:

      @pabelmont –

      If a state with a large quantity of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and ready access to the Palestinians were a psychopath there wouldn’t be a Palestinian people. It is because Israel is trying to be balance being as humane as possible with being as brutal as necessary that there is something to discuss.

      The Jews are still an ethical people. They don’t however have the ethical virtues that come from powerlessness. Now they make their real choices with real consequences and don’t get to live in the myth of ethical perfection. Now they can understand the Tzar’s point of view. Which is analogous to growing up. As a child it without any power it is far easier to see black and white while as an adult with power and better insight into the implications deciding between actions becomes deciding between shades of grey.

      • radkelt says:

        psychopaths/sociopaths don’t necessarily exercise the nuclear
        option. Guided by the history of the ongoing genocide of native
        americans the Israelis may choose to stay below media managed public scrutiny and surreptitiously achieve the same ends.

        “It is because Israel is trying to balance being as humane as possible with being as brutal as necessary that there is something to discuss” There is little to substantiate the opinion that Israel is attempting to be humane as possible, while much to prove the opposite, international law anyone?

        “The Jews are still an ethical people” We all are “ethical people”,
        sometimes and sometimes not, being Jewish doesn’t confer a
        rigorous ethical mandate.

        As to the various shades of grey an adult mind may be able to consider potentially ambiguous ethical considerations but not hesitate to declare an unequivocal response to some.

        • Citizen says:

          I think Israel’s pattern reveals Israel does all it thinks it can get away with against the Palestinian people at every moment. No universal ethics are involved, only Zionist ethics.
          It’s always managing Brand Israel. It’s biggest triumph is keeping the average American taxpayer and voter virtually ignorant of what Israel does to the natives, and of the fact all wars Israel has fought have been premeditated and pre-textual with the possible exception of the ’73 war, which was really a continuation of the ’67 war. Nearly as big a triumph is most Americans have no clue the main motive for 9/11 was US backing of Israel right or wrong.
          The most direct responsibility for this state of ignorant affairs lies with the AIPAC lobbies. Thinly veiled bribery and black-balling is the Achilles heel of America.

        • JeffB says:

          @radket –

          Guided by the history of the ongoing genocide of native
          americans the Israelis may choose to stay below media managed public scrutiny and surreptitiously achieve the same ends.

          Then they are failing miserably. Palestinians are successfully migrating in large numbers away from Israel. So if the intent is genocide of the people they suck at it.

          There is little to substantiate the opinion that Israel is attempting to be humane as possible, while much to prove the opposite, international law anyone?

          International law is opposed to process of nation formation because such a process is disruptive to world peace and harmful to peoples. If violating international law is the standard for being humane then Israel, along with other countries going through the process at this point in history are all inhumane.

          • Donald says:

            “Then they are failing miserably. Palestinians are successfully migrating in large numbers away from Israel. So if the intent is genocide of the people they suck at it. ”

            Are you trolling? You are defending Israel by saying that Palestinians are successfully migrating in large numbers away from their homeland. That’s some defense. It’s more the sort of position a satirist would take. It’s often hard to tell the difference between satire and hasbara.

          • pjdude says:

            their using the same strategy used by russia prussia and austria after the partitians of poland. you erase their history their connection to their country and hope they forget. renaming all the towns from their arabic names is a classic example of this.

      • seafoid says:

        Ethical schmethical.
        How does Israel wangle its way out of this?

        • W.Jones says:

          If people could make the argument that none of the anti-fascist European nations wanted them, I don’t see why similar claims could not be made about other topics?

      • Qualtrough says:

        Even a psychopath might decide against using nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons to get rid of someone in their midst, simply because it would result in their death too. Your argument is like a husband telling the wife he beats regularly that he is really not that bad a guy because he could kill her but chooses not to.

      • pjdude says:

        there is nothing ethical in Israel actions they have consistently chosen to be as violent and brutal as they could possibly get away with. if they thought for a second their protector the US wouldn’t turn on them for nuking somebody or finally completed their decades long quest of genocide against the palestinians and their judifacation of palestine they’d do it in a heart beat.

    • Citizen says:

      Walter Mead identifies two main trends in “the tea party leavings,” one somewhat personified by Paul and the other by Palin. “Paulites” have a Jeffersonian approach that seeks to avoid foreign military involvement. “Palinites”, while seeking to avoid being drawn into unnecessary conflicts, favor a more aggressive response to maintaining America’s primacy in international relations. Mead says that both groups share a distaste for “liberal internationalism.”

      I’ve always supported Ron Paul’s stance that he stood behind US defense, but against knee-jerk foreign interventionism, which is not the same as isolationism. He also would cut foreign aid, not excluding military aid to Israel and Egypt. Palin of course favored more aid to Israel, and has backed Israel to the hilt as the USA’s best ally.

    • kalithea says:

      @ yonah fredman

      “…For Kalithea to put her desire for the jews to disappear”

      Please stop twisting my words. I stated in other words that what Zionism is doing is detrimental to Judaism not that human beings called jews will disappear but a way of thinking might disappear or evolve. Did I say anything about Jews disappearing? In fact, what I’m getting at is that if Zionism ends up destroying Judaism which it certainly appears to be doing, maybe it was written, maybe it’s a good thing, maybe it was a long time coming and maybe its detriment is meant to be for a higher evolutionary purpose.

      That said, do you honestly believe Jews in general will not pay a high price for the unrestrained urge they have to perpetuate injustice with their lust for land? One must ask, what is it that stops so many Jews from siding with their humanity and conscience on this issue? What??? Please enlighten me! Because to not side with righteousness and love or if you wish one’s humanity and conscience is definitely a flaw! Could it be that perhaps such a flaw or weakness requires correction either hopefully through self-awareness and making amends or tragically through punishment for such egregious cruelty against others and is the latter not then a self-willed punishment, as in self-fulfilling prophesy?

      It’s true, that in YOUR EYES and in the view of those who are blinded by Zionism and their unwillingness to put conscience, compassion and faith first, my comment would appear to diminish the Reverend’s which I found to be so genuine and profound, that I regret if my words diminish his powerful account. I should have been more generous and guarded, but I felt inspired and compelled.

      Before you start calling ME your enemy, Zionism which I really believe is the enemy of us both, and an injustice against others, was created by Jews. So what am I to conclude?

      Either Jews totally discarded their faith to embrace Zionism and move forward with it no matter how flawed and how much it hurts others indefinitely which naturally makes it a serious moral contradiction and threat to Judaism, OR I must strongly, logically suspect that perhaps this invention, Zionism, was all meant to be because maybe Zionism is NOT the origin of the flaw. Maybe that flaw goes much deeper and if so, it is at that deeper level of Jewish consciousness where Zionist injustice is sustained that a meaningful maybe radical correction is required. It is therefore not far-fetched to conclude that Zionism is a detriment to Judaism or the downfall of the Jewish community and that it is self-willed and that there may be a higher purpose at work. What is wrong with my stating what I perceive, except that maybe in doing so I could sabotage awareness of that higher purpose by risking being totally discredited with your anti-semitic accusation, or suspected to be a “Christian conspirator”?

      Am I your enemy? By embracing Zionism no matter what it reaps, you make yourself the enemy of many including myself. And perhaps I am partially responsible for failing to convey a message of a higher purpose, namely love/compassion because of my own anger with Zionism and the Jewish community for failing to step up and admit there is something very wrong happening in Israel. But by refusing to see what’s happening and ending the suffering of the victims of Zionism and personally rejecting Zionism now because it is ultimately a threat to Judaism YOU are no doubt your own worst enemy.

  4. seafoid says:

    I just spent two weeks in Israel/Palestine, representing American Presbyterians

    Great to see the Presbyterians ignoring Foxman and his intellectual thuggery

    link to huffingtonpost.com
    “The PCUSA continues to apply a double standard when it comes to Israel. Singling out Israel for special punishment is simply unacceptable, and runs counter to the PCUSA’s oft-proclaimed attempt to be a genuine voice of Christian conscience and reconciliation.”

    • Great to see the Presbyterians ignoring Foxman and his intellectual thuggery

      I’m not sure that they are ignoring Foxman. More like they are asserting aspects they view as central to their faith in terms of a set of physical places and people at the core of their belief system. I recently made this somewhat incomplete list for a friend:

      Places where Jesus probably went:

      Bethlehem: birth
      Ænon on the Jordan River: possible baptism
      Betharaba on the Jordan River: possible baptism
      Bethsaida: healed a blind man
      Cana: Jesus’ first miracle
      Capernaum: the beginning of Jesus’ ministry
      Chorazin: rejection of Jesus by Nazarenes
      Gennesaret: multiple healings
      Mount Tabor: transfiguration
      Nain: Jesus raises the dead
      Nazareth: Jesus upbringing, finding in the temple
      Sea of Galilee: prominent in Jesus’ narrative
      Decapolis: healing the deaf-mute
      Gerasa: cast out demons
      Sychar (Shechem): the Samaritan woman at the well
      Bethany: raising of Lazarus; dinner with Simon the leper; beginning of palm progression to Jerusalem
      Bethesda: Jesus heals a paralytic
      Bethpage: where Jesus sent disciples to get the mule he rode into Jerusalem
      Calvary: Jesus’ crucifixion
      Emmaus: resurrected Jesus appears
      Jericho: Jesus heals the blind
      Caesearea Phillippi: Jesus predicts his impending death

      When people like Foxman ask why Christians meddle in Israeli affairs rather than those of Sudan, Darfur, Tibet, Iran and so on (as if they do not!), point out that Israel/Palestine is no less holy to Christians than it is to Jews or Muslims.

      • Citizen says:

        It should also be continually pointed out to Foxman that US taxpayers have their biggest chunk of foreign aid continually invested in Israel, and that Israel’s PM has claimed the US and Israel share the same values, are one and the same, so to speak, as he did, right here in the USA–not to mention most US political leaders constantly describe Israel in the same way to their public. Being America’s sole unique special ally comes with responsibilities, not just handouts and diplomatic cover at the UN.

  5. just says:

    I am so moved by your article, Dr. DeYoe. My heartfelt thanks to you. Your congregation, your family and we Americans are lucky that you are in our world.

    So are the Palestinians. Your precious & invaluable work, and passion for justice may yet contribute to the salvation of Israeli souls, if only they would listen with their hearts.

    • seafoid says:

      This presbyterian piece is based on justice for the Palestinians but it also serves to destroy the myths around the return to Zion, which has become a moral quagmire.

      • W.Jones says:

        it also serves to destroy the myths
        I regret that our last lengthy conversation got cut off by the time deadline.

        • seafoid says:

          Why don’t we take up where we were cut off ?

          I think the powers didn’t want them in Europe. Like Stalin didn’t want any Germans east of Frankfurt an der Oder.
          The Dutch didn’t do anything, did they ? The Germans paid reparations – easier than land.
          Have you ever been to Poland or Slovakia ? You can feel the emptiness in the absence of those lost unwanted people.

          • W.Jones says:

            Hello Seafoid.

            It is nice talking with you, because of your sense of humor, and you are a frequent commentor here on Mondoweiss.

            The value in discussing it may be that it is a premise of Israeli nationalism. Namely, Europe’s Jewish population was banned from Europe and from “Arab” countries, therefore the only thing possible is to have a state for one community in the Holy Land.

            If this were not the case, don’t you think that recognizing it could reduce tensions and help people get along better?

            By the powers, I suppose you mean the US, France, the USSR, and Britain?
            You previously mentioned the Kielce pogrom, an unusual postwar event for Poland and for which the instigators were shot. Are there other reasons that you believe those powers wanted Europe’s Jewish population to leave.

            I understand that you are strongly emphasizing that the Dutch did nothing. Let’s say for a moment that Gien was right and that hundreds of thousands of conquered Dutch tried to resist unsuccessfully and were crushed brutally, and that after the war they took revenge on the collaborators. Can I ask you in a friendly way what would be behind the labeling if it were known to be incorrect?

            I did go to Poland for a few days. There is a nice Jewish restaurant in the tourist section of the central “castle” area. They also had a military museum with uniforms and equipment used in the fight against Nazism, as well as exhibits on how the Nazis shot Poles for being intellectuals. I also visited a rural town, where by chance there was a Holocaust memorial. An elderly, conservative Catholic friend came from there. He is not anti-semitic and gets Jewish calendars and magazines in the mail. Sometimes he gives talks on the Holocaust at US schools.

            Based on my experiences, it is impossible to accept the idea that postwar Poland’s population did not allow its Jewish population to stay. I think you are pretty intelligent, and are also able to look at issues from many sides.

          • W.Jones says:

            The Auschwitz museum was founded by the Polish parliament in 1947 to commemorate the Holocaust. Doesn’t this say something about whether Poland wanted its Jewish population or whether it could stay?

            (link to en.wikipedia.org)

          • puppies says:

            @Seafoid – At this point, I suppose one has to look at your posts as nothing but empty brain or malicious slander. Jones and I wrote repeatedly, indicating points that you could very easily have researched and pointing out logical incompatibilities that would have taken a second to think out. Of course it may be that none of this convinced you, but the way to go about it when one is obviously called a slanderer is not to totally ignore all arguments.
            I also see a raging “Jewish” race nationalism, the more ridiculous as you probably have no Jewish ancestry, either, blatant in: “The Germans paid reparations – easier than land.”, justifying some land claim in Germany –plumb crazy. By the way, it is the German governments, of two opposite types, and they unfortunately had to pay through the nose to an entity that doid not exist at the time and had zilch right to a single red cent.
            Poland and Slovakia are not emptied of their “Jews”; rather a huge lot of them have become tired of a racist identity. Most, of course, being stupid sheep as we all are as a group, went to rob Palestinians –so to say of their own will.
            As I said, I have never seen anyone who can so lightly toss around “national characters” as unquestioned truths and blame occupations on the occupied ever reconsider his deep racism. Get lost.

          • seafoid says:

            WJones

            Why do YOU think so many Jews left Eastern Europe post ww2?
            I think the PTB didn’t want them.

          • seafoid says:

            “The Germans paid reparations – easier than land.”, justifying some land claim in Germany –plumb crazy. ”

            Why did the Palestinians have to pay, Puppies?
            Did they run the death camps ?
            Germany lost Silesia, didn’t it? For war crimes, per Stalin
            Why didn’t they gives OberSchelsien to the Jews ?

          • puppies says:

            @seafoid (still no Reply buttons) – Making it worse.

            Look at the stupidity of what you write:

            “Why do YOU think so many Jews left Eastern Europe post ww2?”
            Never heard about Zionism and its propaganda, have you? On the one hand you charge resisting Dutch and other European peoples with the crimes of their occupiers and on the other you completely ignore Zionist and English colonial propaganda. How many persons in that brain of yours?

            “Why did the Palestinians have to pay, Puppies?”
            Go ask the Zionists. And the British. Duh.

            “Did they run the death camps ?”
            Said death camps were seized and closed in 1945. Duh again.

            “Why didn’t they gives OberSchelsien to the Jews ?”
            How are the “Jews” some kind of separate “nation” or “people” or anything like it, to be given some separate territory? Oberschlesien indeed. How many times are you going to pretend to ignore warnings about Jewish nationalism?

            There is nothing about Zionism that you are not doing propaganda for: separate racially determined “nation”, separate land claim. That’s all Zionism is about; I see you’d be OK with Israel-in-Uganda.
            As already said, get lost.

          • tree says:

            Maybe I can jump in here with a bit of information that I’ve gleaned from my readings.

            First off, seafoid, I think you are discounting or at least underestimating the desire of Israel to gain these European Jews, and the lengths to which it went to get them.

            From Tom Segev’s 1949:The First Israelis:

            (T)he emissaries from Israel were not only there to save or to liberate Jews. They were also there to promote the Zionist cause. “The awakening of the Jews of Poland will not happen by itself,” wrote the Israeli Consul in Warsaw.”They must be motivated and organized.” This was equally true in other places: (…) The immigration agent in Bucharest sent a secret report to Tel Aviv:”Working through the local leadership and every reliable Jew we have met, we are urging the Jews to make application for emigration and for passports. In September 1949, the Joint allocated $30,000 per month for helping the Jews of Rumania. The help is organized by the Israeli Embassy. It is directed to youth movements, Zionist activists, Jewish communal leaders who can be aided without risk to the enterprise, (…)” The propaganda methods employed by these agents combined scare tactics with inducements. They warned the Jews that if they did not leave at once they would not be allowed to leave later. They told them that the Mossad’s help in arranging their passage, and the aid given by the Zionist movement, would only remain available for a short while, and that no one would be left to help them. Efraim Shilo explained, “It’s true that we encouraged the Jews to leave. It’s true that we urged them. We believed that if they did not leave at once it would be too late. We really believed it. Some of us had been at this work since the Holocaust, so it’s obvious why we urged them to leave. Also the State needed them.” At times they were promised eternal happiness in Israel. “People were simply cheated,” stated Jewish Agency Executive Giora Yoseftal.

            page 107-8

            The Jews who left Eastern Europe for Israel were self-selected, not forced to leave, but they needed exit permits in order to leave. Israel paid anywhere from $100 to $500 a head for those exit permits from Bulgaria, Hungary and Poland, thus proving that Israel was more interested in gaining European Jews than that those Eastern European countries just “didn’t want them” there. In Poland, of those Jews who applied for emigration, those with professional degrees were prohibited from leaving until the later 1956 Gromulka aliyah, when those occupational restrictions were relaxed. The Gromulka aliyah was the time frame when Golda Meir was asking the Polish government to deny Israeli emigration to those Jews whom the Israelis thought were old or disabled. Hungary originally wanted to restrict exit permits to those Jewish men over 50 and Jewish women over 40, again an indication that they didn’t just simply “not want” Jews in their country.

            According to the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics, from 1948-1951 the number of immigrants from Eastern Europe were approximately 295,000: 118,000 from Rumania, 106,400 from Poland, 37,300 from Bulgaria, 18,800 from Czechoslovakia and 14,300 from Hungary. The number of immigrants to Israel from all sources declined greatly from 1952 on, it was only around 24,000 total in 1952 compared to approximately 240,000 in 1949.

            In the same time frame I’ve seen estimates that the total emigration from Poland, including ethnic Poles and all others, was on the order of 600,000 people so emigration from the decimated country was a major event that was not limited to Jews only. I would venture to guess that if other countries had been willing to pay to receive Polish immigrants like Israel was for Polish Jews, that 600,000 figure would have been much greater. As it was, Polish immigration to the US post WWII is considered one of the great waves of Polish immigration here.

            And an additional point about the Jewish DPs. They were the ones who entered into camps under the American and British spheres of influence in Germany and Austria. Grodzinsky estimates that there were 330,000 of them. According to his figures, at most only 140,000 of them emigrated to Israel, even though at various times it was the easiest place to go. 120,000 went to the US, 20,000 to South American, 15,000 to Canada, 10,000 to Australia, 20,200 chose to stay in Germany/Austria, and 8,200 of them moved to Western Europe. Besides noting that his figures were calculated to err on the side of immigration to Israel when the destination was unclear or contradictory, he also notes that there was at the time about a 10% re-immigration rate from Israel. In other words, for every 1000 Jews who came to Israel, 100 of them moved on to other countries.

            Just thought this information would be helpful. I don’t think it supports seafoid’s contention at all.

          • W.Jones says:

            Tree,

            I found your facts about the East European countries wanting money in return for emigration to be noteworthy. Thanks.

          • It’s a sign of the apocalypse when I defend seafoid, but since he is answering pupa (aka sick puppies), maybe it is no sign at all.

            sick pupas proclaims, “Poland and Slovakia are not emptied of their “Jews”; rather a huge lot of them have become tired of a racist identity.” Sorry if I don’t stoop to wipe your feces off my shoe. Let this just be a bookmark of another Jew hating comment here in the wonderful world of MW comments.

          • puppies says:

            @tree – Very interesting summary. I think one should also look into the use of DPs and colonization of Palestine post-1945 being used by the West as a destabilizing maneuver against socialist countries: the difficulties of life in those countries were there for all but citizens with Jewish ancestry were somehow more equal…

      • RoHa says:

        “when Golda Meir was asking the Polish government to deny Israeli emigration to those Jews whom the Israelis thought were old or disabled.”

        So Israel isn’t the final refuge for any Jew who feels persecuted.

        • RoHa says:

          yonah, take a breath or two.

          My obsession with English grammar is both a charming eccentricity and a valuable public service.

          Your obsession with finding Jew hatred everywhere is starting to look like monomania.

          • RoHa- Your rejection of identity in the case of Jews is complete. Other nations are allowed identity (if they are large enough), but the Jews, because they are small can only be encouraged to assimilate and fade away. Does this summarize your attitude, or am I wrong?

          • RoHa- You are an enemy to the all small minority groups that wish to maintain their identity. One of those small minority groups are the Jews. Thus you are an enemy to the Jews as a group. Why is this so difficult for you to understand?

            I accept that your enmity is not based upon any particular hatred for the Jews other than that they/we are small. That does not change the fact that you are an enemy to any Jew who wishes to maintain his/her identity. Why is this so difficult for you to understand?

        • seafoid says:

          @Tree

          Very interesting. Our previous discussion was cut short. I don’t think there was one single factor. For developments such as this there usually isn’t.

          link to goodreads.com
          “How did you go bankrupt?”
          Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.”

          Europe’s moral bankruptcy took time to develop.

          The PTB were happy to see the Jews go, IMO. I think Kielce was an operation “pour encourager les autres”, to tell Jews that Poland did not want them. Most Poles probably would have wanted them to stay.

          And the Zionists wanted them. It seemed like a win-win at the time.
          Europe was a real mess in the 10 years following 1945.

          But Poland was a bit like Spain post empire. It actually needed those people . If those 250K people had stayed Poland might have been different. But then you had Stalinism on top. Awful.

          Similar points for the countries who expelled their Germans. Like Czech. Stupid short termism.

          As Nietzsche says “Madness is rare in individuals – but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule.”

          And with Israel now, it is as if the architecture, especially in the settlements, testifies to the beliefs of a people who think they are hated , ostracized and unwanted.

          link to mondediplo.com
          ” There are windows with narrow openings to accommodate guns, wall after wall of high façades, row upon row of buildings: this is the city-as-barracks.
          The Israeli settlements present a series of closed-off architectural forms
          that embody the feeling of self-confinement. No doubt this is due to
          security constraints but it also reveals an obsession with space, a
          conception of space based on fear and repression. “The truth of an era”,
          said the Austrian writer, Hermann Broch, about late 19th century Vienna,
          “may generally be read in its architectural façades”. If Broch’s conclusion
          is correct, the building façades in the Israeli settlements are slogans that
          betray a sense of environmental panic, a fear of the outside world, the
          antithesis of hospitality-of-place.’

          They thought they could build modern Jews with no memory of the diaspora past but what they are left with now is the fear.

          • W.Jones says:

            Dear Seafoid,

            Since you are a common writer on Mondoweiss and care about people in the Holy Land, your opinion has weight. Your videos are nice too, by the way. Tree’s quotation was noteworthy, like you said. He showed that the nationalists, in desiring emigration, warned Jews against staying and promised them happiness, and he cited one agent who described this as “cheating.” It makes sense to me that people were traumatized by the war, like you said, and they would find a place with a better economy preferable. The Israeli state even today is more economically successful.

            But, if the story that they could not stay and no one wanted them is one of the justifications for the nationalist movement and a source of tension and fear about other nationalities, do you think it is worth questioning this justification, Seafoid?

            Tree’s facts raised some good questions:
            Did a single East European anti-fascist country force its Jewish population to leave? Why would they demand hundreds of dollars for emigration if they wanted it? Why would they ban professionals and certain age groups from leaving if they wanted them to leave?

            Turning to your answer: Who were the The Powers that Be? Poland’s government and parliament who set up the Holocaust Museum in 1947? The other governments that went as far as to put fees on emigration? Britain, France, and Russia who condemned the fascists for the genocides?

            I understand some scholars say that the Kielce pogrom was done intentionally. But how do they know that Stalin did this with the purpose of their emigration. We have very many Soviet-era documents. Are there documents or people saying they know of orders from high-up authorities? If so, what you would have to say is that Stalin wanted them to leave, picked a random Polish village, sent the order down, used a large mob of townspeople who would not have rioted otherwise, then shot 9 people he used for it and imprisoned the local or city police.

            This would be despite the fact that using rightwing anti-Jewish mobs was something Stalin hardly did anywhere else in Soviet history or East Europe before or after it over 30 years. Meanwhile, Stalin was appointing Jewish leaders in Poland’s government which discouraged immigration and proposing a Jewish State in the prosperous and pleasant Crimea. It would mean that Stalin wanted a section of the population to leave which was more in favor of Socialism at the same time when he was fighting the UPA in southern Poland.

            On another note you added that most Poles would have wanted them to stay. I tend to agree, based on how extremely minimal Polish collaboration was and how strong resistance was to the Nazis. One of the reasons they were in Poland to begin with was because in medieval times the Polish king invited them. I am sure there was discrimination, but am not aware of the Polish monarchy ever expelling them from Poland, where they were especially numerous.

            Plus, like you said: “Poland was a bit like Spain post empire. It actually needed those people.”

            I’m certainly open to considering other viewpoints myself, but how can I accept that no one in postwar Europe wanted them or that they could not stay? The relevance of asking is not to deny or put down whatever legitimate fears people may have. Rather the opposite- if you are actually right that people are acting out of fear and you do want people to break down the walls, isn’t it very important then to allay those fears about other nationalities, Seafoid?

          • seafoid says:

            @ WJones

            Did a single East European anti-fascist country force its Jewish population to leave?

            What did they do to stop their people leaving ? And, honestly, anti fascist is a red herring in this case.

            Turning to your answer: Who were the The Powers that Be?
            Stalin and co
            Poland’s government and parliament who set up the Holocaust Museum in 1947?
            Puppet regime
            The other governments that went as far as to put fees on emigration? Britain, France, and Russia who condemned the fascists for the genocides?
            Britain and France were opposed to the Potsdam agreement. They didn’t want the Soviets to ethnically cleanse Silesia and East Prussia. But what did they do about it? The genocides went on after the war BTW

            I understand some scholars say that the Kielce pogrom was done intentionally. But how do they know that Stalin did this with the purpose of their emigration.

            Look at the results. The Israelis were behind bombings in Cairo in the 50s designed to get the Egyptian Jews to Israel. It’s not rocket science. Stalin was a complete bastard.

            We have very many Soviet-era documents. Are there documents or people saying they know of orders from high-up authorities? If so, what you would have to say is that Stalin wanted them to leave, picked a random Polish village, sent the order down, used a large mob of townspeople who would not have rioted otherwise, then shot 9 people he used for it and imprisoned the local or city police.

            Do you think it is implausible ? Why did a pogrom happen in Kielce in 1946 ? Perhaps it was about property. Did Poland ever compensate the Jews for all of the property they lost. ?

            Meanwhile, Stalin was appointing Jewish leaders in Poland’s government

            Big deal. Israel occasional appoints an “Israeli Arab” to high office. Poland didn’t call the shots in 1946. Stalin did. Why do you think he had Katyn carried out ?

            On another note you added that most Poles would have wanted them to stay. I tend to agree, based on how extremely minimal Polish collaboration was

            I don’t think it was minimal. Maybe 5-10%. You can’t run a genocide without help.

            and how strong resistance was to the Nazis. One of the reasons they were in Poland to begin with was because in medieval times the Polish king invited them. I am sure there was discrimination, but am not aware of the Polish monarchy ever expelling them from Poland, where they were especially numerous.

            I don’t buy that. When Jewish kids were dying of hunger in the ghettos where were the angels ? When famine comes to a country, who does the dying? The weakest people.

            Rather the opposite- if you are actually right that people are acting out of fear and you do want people to break down the walls, isn’t it very important then to allay those fears about other nationalities, Seafoid?

            What does that mean ? I just think the surviving Jews were shafted. They had a lot of juicy property. What reparations did Poland pay ? Not enough people wanted them to stay and of those that did they had no power.

            I think there are 2 big issues that are not discussed enough around the Shoah

            1. The role of Jewish leaders, Kapos, Murmelsteins etc in facilitating the work of the Nazis (Arendt dealt with it but nobody else wants to go near it)

            2. The role of Europe immediately after the war

            Nothing Europe does to placate Zionism now will make up for what it did in the 1940s.

            It is a gruesome story.

          • W. Jones- I do not know what role Stalin played in the pogroms in Poland in the aftermath of WWII, but you seem to ignore that Stalin in the aftermath of that war (think 49 to 53) instigated purges and persecution of Jews. (Slansky trial, Jewish writers purged in USSR, doctors plot, are various topics you can google, if you think I am exaggerating.) Regarding Poland, the chasing out of Jews in 1968 is widely accepted as historical fact. Is that too far away from WWII to demand a mention.

          • RoHa says:

            @yonah

            I’m afraid your post just reinforces my suspicions of growing monomania.

            We have been sparring for years, so after all this time, you should be familiar with my ideas. You really ought to be aware of the following.

            (a) I do not see any way that the term “nation” can be properly applied to the Jews
            (b) I regard “identity” as too vague and disparate a cluster of concepts to have any practical value (and thus cannot have said that nations are allowed “identity”)
            (c) I consistently advocate integration and assimilation for minority groups, even if they are not Jews. I consistently reject hyphenation.

            (Here are a few examples of c.
            link to mondoweiss.net

            link to mondoweiss.net

            link to mondoweiss.net.

            But go to my profile and use the search terms “Irish”, “assimilation”, “assimilate”, and you will see my position clearly.)

            And yet you seem to totally disregard it all. You represent me as singling out the Jews for assimilation. This distortion suggests to me that you are concentrating on looking for Jew hatred and ignoring everything else.

          • RoHa- You are not an antisemite in the sense that you hate the Jews. You merely oppose small groups and the Jews are one of those small groups that you oppose. (Wishing for a group to disband is a form of opposition, and I will try to avoid the word hatred when depicting your opposition to the Jews.)

          • Walid says:

            Ooops; wrong location for the post. The missing reply button is confusing. I usually have it right.

        • seafoid says:

          @ Puppies
          “I think one should also look into the use of DPs and colonization of Palestine post-1945 being used by the West as a destabilizing maneuver against socialist countries”

          Good point.

          • seafoid says:

            @ Wjones

            Did you ever read about the Sobibór escape ?

            link to en.wikipedia.org
            ” On October 14, 1943, members of the Sobibór underground, led by Polish-Jewish prisoner Leon Feldhendler and Soviet-Jewish POW Alexander Pechersky, covertly killed eleven German SS officers and a number of camp guards. Although their plan was to kill all the SS and walk out of the main gate of the camp, the killings were discovered and the inmates ran for their lives under fire. About 300 out of the 600 prisoners in the camp escaped into the forests.[1]
            Only 50 to 70 escapees survived the war”

            I wonder who led the Germans to the escapees. Not everyone was decent during the war.

            Do you know much about collaboration in France during the war?

            link to en.wikipedia.org
            link to vox-populi.net
            link to rencesvals.blogspot.ch
            link to en.wikipedia.org
            link to content.time.com

            There were 200,000 French kids after the war whose fathers were German soldiers.

            Why would Poland have been any different? Because of the rosary ?

            And puppies blames everything that happened in the Netherlands on the Nazis. Do you buy that ?

          • seafoid says:

            Good man Yonah

            I think we are on the same page for this topic.

            What is your take on the Shoah in the Netherlands ? Was it all down to the Nazis ? Were there any collaborators ? Were they punished? What happened to the property of the 110,000 Jews who were murdered ?

          • W.Jones says:

            Seafoid,

            I have a socialist-oriented, but very nationalist acquaintance who very often discusses the Israel-Palestine conflict. He recognizes that Israelis seriously discriminate against the conquered Palestinians, even in their own state, and he considers that it is to a big extent from religious resentment. However, hundreds of messages over and again he supports the system and gives excuses for the abuses. For example he compares them to severe abuses that occurred in US history, as if to normalize them.

            At an intellectual level I could go through every argument my colleague makes and show that they are incorrect or how they should be viewed differently. I could say that we should not accept severe abuses anywhere, including in US history. But however I put it does not seem to get him to change his intense views, with which he practically always remembers to reply on the topic.

            I don’t want to be judgmental, but his intense, one sided way of thinking- which in my view discards abuses of the conquered- is simply foreign and incomprehensible. I have trouble understanding why he does this because otherwise he is egalitarian – unless I were to ascribe to him some kind of bias which I really do not want to. What can you do in situations like that?

          • W.Jones says:

            Seafoid,

            I like you and your sense of humor and wit, so what you are saying is troubling for me. I feel that I could go through everything you said and show that there were East European societies that wanted their Jewish people to stay and that they did not have to go. Their governments did not expel them, nor did they run press campaigns denouncing the Jewish people.

            Do you think that if Israelis and their supporters are going to be able to look at their situation in another way, then it is valuable to be able to look in a sympathetic, open-minded way at whether they really had to leave?

            Is it a sensitive topic, and if so, what is the best way to discuss it?

            I think we have the same facts at our fingertips, except that I can tell you more sympathetic stories I know from Russians and East Europeans that come from the postwar period. However, I am afraid that you will just discount these kinds of personal stories, because they are not much different from what you should know. Why should you and I look at things through lenses that are not open-minded about personal relationships and social possibilities, my friend?

          • RoHa says:

            @ Yonah (When, oh when are they going to fix the “reply” buttons?)

            “You are an enemy to the all small minority groups that wish to maintain their identity.”

            Much better summation. (Though I don’t know why you include “small”.)

            “you are an enemy to any Jew who wishes to maintain his/her identity. Why is this so difficult for you to understand?”

            I understand it perfectly well. That does not alleviate my fear that your obsession with finding Jew-hatred everywhere is verging on the pathological.

          • tree says:

            What is your take on the Shoah in the Netherlands ? Was it all down to the Nazis ? Were there any collaborators ? Were they punished? What happened to the property of the 110,000 Jews who were murdered ?

            Seafoid, you ask all these questions but seem uninterested in finding out the answers, especially if they run counter to your “impressions” of what happened. Some of these answers are easily found.

            2. MEASURES TAKEN BY THE DUTCH GOVERNMENT TO RESTORE LEGAL RIGHTS
            Action taken by the Dutch government: legislation
            Even before the first parts of the Netherlands were liberated in September 1944, the government in exile in London had made a start on drafting and promulgating measures designed to remedy, wherever possible, the action taken by the Germans against the Jews and other population groups. After the liberation in May 1945, these measures were extended and added to, giving rise in the end to an extensive corpus of legislation and legal protection in the field of the restoration of legal rights.

            Organization
            The Restitution of Legal Rights Decree Issued in London (Bulletin of Acts and Decrees E. I 00) created a special Organization called the Council for the Restitution of Legal Rights, which was installed on 20 August 1945. It comprised six divisions:

            the judicial division;
            the securities register division;
            the property administration division (including the Property Administration Institute NSI):
            the provisions for absentees division,
            the provisions for legal persons division;
            the immovable property division.
            The Chairman of the Council as a whole and the chairs of all the divisions together formed the Executive Board. Decisions on claims were taken by the relevant division. Appeal lay to the Judicial Division. The Council remained in existence until 31 May 1967, although the Securities Register Division continued as an independent unit for several years.

            Substance
            The aim of the entire exercise was to restore the legal rights of the dispossessed wherever possible and to return to them the property of which they had been robbed. For example, the Dutch securities register was completely purged by the Council’s Securities Register Division. Securities which had been taken from their Jewish owners were returned as far as possible to the original owners of their heirs. The Immovable Property Division did the same in respect of real estate. Art objects that had been removed from the Netherlands were recovered from Germany and likewise returned to the original owners or their heirs of possible.

            the entry continues…

            link to ushmm.org

            As for collaborators (and yes, the Dutch collaborators were punished after the war) ,there were Jewish collaborators during the war as well. Do you seriously think that therefore Jews are collectively to blame for their own suffering or those of others under the Nazis? Because that seems to be your implication about the collective guilt of the Dutch because of some Dutch collaborators. (And the Jewish Councils in the Netherlands were the organizations that urged all Dutch Jews to register with the Nazi authorities. Did this make them culpable as well?) There are Palestinian collaborators nowadays as well. Are all Palestinians collectively responsible for their own oppression because of that? It seems like a ludicrous stance to take with any ethnic or national group, and I only see you taking this stance with respect to European non-Jews. Why is that?

            I have a theory about the US retelling of the story of WWII after the fact. The US government was well on its way to becoming a superpower, a global policeman. It needed to be seen as “the good guy”, but it was also anti-communist in outlook. It had a problem because clearly if anyone qualifies as the ultimate bad guy it was Hitler, but he was also anti-communist. In fact, besides his sense of Aryan racial superiority, his hatred of Jews and Eastern Europeans in particular, his hatred was also a by-product of his hatred of communism, while he identified with Jews and Slavs. The US couldn’t allow WWII to be seen as simply a war between communists and anti-communists, with no good guys, only bad guys and worse guys. So the US had to de-politicize the war and instead emphasize the Jew hatred on the part of Hitler, ignore the Slav hatred that he also possessed, and totally omit any communist hatred he had since in post war USA anti-communism (even rabid anti-communism) was an acceptable stance. The US couldn’t have its people feeling sorry for Eastern Europeans in general because they worried that might either lead to sympathy for communist countries, or to possible agitation for another world war with Russia as the enemy this time. Thus the resultant American, and now Zionist, meme has become that WWII was essentially Hitler oppressing and killing Jews while the rest of the world sat around on their hands, under no threat of their own. This is such a blatant ahistorical notion, and frankly insulting to so many people who truly suffered.

            A long diversion on my part, but here’s my point. I think you are underestimating the hardship, pain and death involved for all peoples involved in WWII. I get the impression that you think that the Dutch, or the Poles, or whomever, were just sitting around enjoying themselves during the Nazi occupation, with little breaks taken to turn in their Jewish neighbors. This is so far from the truth. Dutch men between the ages of 18 and 45 were required to work as slave labor in German war factories, Poles of course had their intellectual and political elites slaughtered and Hitler had hoped to starve the vast majority of Poles and make the rest slave labor until they too died. Nobody had a picnic. Everyone was just trying to survive.

            As for the Jewish DPS after the war, they were kept in separate camps and allowed considerable self-government within the camps, in order to make them feel less like they were in detention camps, which for lack of a better alternative, they were. Grodzinsky points out that, because of this Jewish self-government, the Zionist emissaries from Israel were often able to take over administration of the camps, and this led to considerable pressure on the Jewish DPs to go to Palestine, or to at least claim they wanted to go to Palestine when polled by the American Anglo Committee looking into the situation. This pressure sometimes took the form of withheld money or rations or even physical assault. That’s why Grodzinsky subtitled his book “The Struggle between Jews and Zionists in the Aftermath of WWII”. Zionists were not necessarily looking out for Jews in the DP camps, UNLESS they were interested in going to Palestine. Jews with other plans were just as likely to be bullied and mistreated by the Zionists.

          • puppies says:

            @tree – Excellent review. Thank you. The analysis of postwar American anticommunist maneuvering made a lot of sense.

          • Walid says:

            tree, you appear to be jumping ahead of the period that seafoid was referring to. After the war, weren’t European Jews actually dispossessed of their properties, by supposedly anti-Nazis, upon their return to what had been their homes? Of course, in time some things were put back in order by the Europeans as you noted about the Dutch, but not 100% as some of the Jews were made into refugees a second time by the Europeans themselves. I believe this is what seafoid was talking about.

          • puppies says:

            @seafoid – With that kind of “logic”" you should be damning all Palestinians because collaborators and traitors among them are many times more frequent than they ever were in any German-occupied country after the war. Also, you may want to learn to listen to other s and answer to the point instead of repeating the same discredited stuff. If you want to sit in any of the account-settling committees after the war, jailing and killing collaborators and shearing women for having given a BJ to a German to avoid dying of hunger, you’re way too late. Alternately, you may prefer to ignore how life is and remain in your dream world. As I said, I’m not expecting any logic anymore.

          • seafoid says:

            @ Tree
            Thanks for the links about restitution in the Netherlands.

            “I think you are underestimating the hardship, pain and death involved for all peoples involved in WWII”

            I don’t think it was hunky dory in 1943 for non Jews. WW2 in the East was like a Famine situation where resources were suddenly cut off and society moved from a situation of stability to chaos with the strongest dictating terms. It was similar in the Netherlands although not as intense.

            In the Netherlands the Nazis seem to have used access to work to control people. There was no social welfare. They ruled via fear and extreme cruelty.

            Any civic resistance was crushed. People like Titus Brandsma were executed pour encourager les autres.

            The war was different in the East

            So they were even worse in Poland- they were inhuman to the entire population and they killed large numbers of non Jews, which didn’t happen to the same extent in the Netherlands.

            War is like bankruptcy. It’s about destruction and the reallocation of resources so that things can start again. That’s business logic.
            Property rights go out the window.

            By 1945 they were ready to forget everything and move on and Germany and the UK became allies. The whole thing was insane.

            I just don’t agree with WJones that a few anecdotes from some nice Poles indicate the state of play in 1946.

            I was thinking about the Apeldoorn mental hospital as an example of what the war was actually like for Jews, even Dutch Jews, people from a relatively economically developed society at the time, “modern”.

            They sent the patients of an entire mental hospital east to Auschwitz on a train. The hospital sent nurses with the patients to care for them on their journey. That’s the logic of medicine and care

            When they arrived at Auschwitz the patients were taken to be murdered. Somebody must have asked his superior about what to do with the nurses. They were also murdered. That was the logic of the Nazis.

            Imagine living under those sorts of rules for 6 years. And then how long it would have taken to get everyone back to equilibrium.

            Our systems of justice can’t deal with that sort of thing on that sort of scale.
            For example

            link to jewishvirtuallibrary.org
            “It was probably Goebbels who, more than and of the witnesses or documents called in on Fritzsche’s account that saved him from being convicted. As a radio broadcaster he had indeed disseminated information and propaganda that was extremely important to the Nazi organization; however, it could never be demonstrated that he was the originator of the materials. The media was under such tight control of Goebbel’s Ministry of Propaganda that the only source of information available to journalists and broadcasters was the information provided them by Goebbels’ office. His antisemitism seems to have been an ideology of assent rather than one which he pressed upon the German population.Hans Fritzsche was acquitted.”

            When the war is over nobody really wants to go back and investigate everything that happened- the peace is more important. This often happens in Lebanon nowadays. It also happened in Bosnia.

            They were hardly going to imprison all the Nazis in Germany or whatever proportion of Dutch people collaborated(even if they had no choice at the time) . The economy needed them….

            Very messy all in all but now the Dutch and the Germans could support Zionism.

            It is always there in the background and will happen again. Not necessarily to Jews, but to other powerless groups.

            I think that’s why I find Zionism so depressing. There would appear to be no escape from WW2 for them.

          • tree says:

            Walid,

            Responding here for lack of a reply button.

            tree, you appear to be jumping ahead of the period that seafoid was referring to. After the war, weren’t European Jews actually dispossessed of their properties, by supposedly anti-Nazis, upon their return to what had been their homes?

            Seafoid himself is jumping all over the place from WWII into the post WWII era in Europe. I have been addressing the same eras so I don’t understand why you think I am jumping ahead of the time he is talking about. Maybe you can clarify what you are referring to.

            In Poland a lot of people lost their homes during the war. The country was decimated by the end of the war.

            link to en.wikipedia.org

            The Soviet Union had nationalized all private property in its partitioned Poland in 1939, and the Nazi German’s confiscated the property of Polish Jews in its part of captured Poland, which later became all of Poland. After the war the Soviet Union controlled the government of Poland and continued with the nationalization of private property, regardless of the ethnicity of the private owner. Some Jews who remained in Poland were able to recover possession of their property by moving back into it, but owners or heirs who lived outside of the country were not able to regain ownership or compensation. More about that from two articles here:

            link to shoahlegacy.org

            link to humanityinaction.org

            Of course, in time some things were put back in order by the Europeans as you noted about the Dutch …

            “In time” in the Dutch case meant August of 1945, when the Netherlands had been under Nazi occupation up until Germany’s surrender in May, 1945. Pretty quick. Seafoid assumed that no such compensation took place, and as well implied that somehow the Dutch had benefited from the German confiscation of Jewish property. As a collective they didn’t.

            …but not 100% as some of the Jews were made into refugees a second time by the Europeans themselves.

            I don’t think it was as simple as that. I can certainly understand the desire of some Jews to leave after such traumatic events, and also understand Jewish fears and uncertainties over the future in war-ravaged Europe, but I don’t think it is fair to say that “some Jews were made into refugees” by “the Europeans”. Most of the Jewish refugees from post -WWII Europe came from Eastern Europe, some of the most devastated countryside and the countries that were all under the repressive control of the Soviet Union.

            Many of the DPs that entered the US or British zones in Germany and Austria were escaping as well from Soviet influence. This included all ethnicities and religions, not just Jews, so those refugees were more political and economic in nature, rather than religious or ethnic. And that included a number of Jewish refugees.

            As I pointed out above, Israel had to pay Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria and Rumania to secure exit permits for those Jews who chose to leave their home countries. I’m reminded of the situation in 1950-51 in Iraq when Western States and Israel were demanding that Iraq let its Jews freely emigrate. At that time the word was that Iraq was holding its Jews hostage and refusing to allow them their freedom. Considerable pressure was put on Iraq to allow Jewish emigration. Now, of course, all the pressure is forgotten and the present accusation is that Iraq “expelled” all its Jews, which is a falsity. I suspect what we have here in discussing Eastern Europe is the same selective memory. There was Western pressure as well as pressure from Israel for these Eastern European countries to allow emigration to Israel and elsewhere. The Eastern Bloc countries succumbed to the pressure and the inducements, and the Eastern European Jews were told by the Zionists how heavenly everything was going to be in Israel/Palestine. That is what my reading of history tells me.

          • Walid says:

            Tree, what I had on my mind was more than the simple taking over of private property by the communists in Poland. I read several stories way back of people in countries that had been under the occupation that had Jews returning to their homes, rented or owned, to find they had been taken over by people that chased them off when they tried to take back their homes.

            I found one such reference on the site of the US Holocaust Memorial Museum that mentions Poland, but that doesn’t introduce the communist appropriation of properties; whether because of communism as you said or because of squatters occupying the homes of Jews, they did effectively become refugees a second time:

            “THE SURVIVORS
            For the survivors, returning to life as it had been before the Holocaust was impossible. Jewish communities no longer existed in much of Europe. When people tried to return to their homes from camps or hiding places, they found that, in many cases, their homes had been looted or taken over by others.

            Returning home was also dangerous. After the war, anti-Jewish riots broke out in several Polish cities. The largest anti-Jewish pogrom took place in July 1946 in Kielce, a city in southeastern Poland. When 150 Jews returned to the city, people living there feared that hundreds more would come back to reclaim their houses and belongings. Age-old antisemitic myths, such as Jews’ ritual murders of Christians, arose once again. After a rumor spread that Jews had killed a Polish boy to use his blood in religious rituals, a mob attacked the group of survivors. The rioters killed 41 people and wounded 50 more. News of the Kielce pogrom spread rapidly, and Jews realized that there was no future for them in Poland.

            Many survivors ended up in displaced persons’ (DP) camps set up in western Europe under Allied military occupation at the sites of former concentration camps . There they waited to be admitted to places like the United States, South Africa, or Palestine…

            … AUGUST 3, 1945
            HARRISON ISSUES REPORT ON JEWS IN GERMANY
            US special envoy Earl Harrison heads a delegation to the displaced persons’ camps in Germany. Following World War II, several hundred thousand Jewish survivors are unable to return to their home countries and remain in Germany, Austria, or Italy. The Allies establish camps for displaced persons (DPs) for the refugees. Most Jewish DPs prefer to emigrate to Palestine but many also seek entry into the United States. They remain in the DP camps until they can leave Europe. Harrison’s report underscores the plight of Jewish DPs and leads to improved conditions in the camps. At the end of 1946 the number of Jewish DPs is estimated at 250,000.”

          • Walid says:

            Tree, I’m coming in on the tail end of your discussion so I may be missing out some of the points covered here, but about the myths that started this discussion, I’m seeing contradictions in what’s being written here about the heroic Dutch and happened to the Jews after the war:

            From “A Founding Myth for the Netherlands: The Second World War and the Victimization of Dutch Jews”
            by Matthijs Kronemeijer, Darren Teshima

            “… This positive image of the Netherlands’ role in the Second World War and its opposition to the evil of the Nazi persecution of the Jews has become a founding myth for the Dutch nation. According to this myth, Dutch society was united in its resistance to anti-Jewish actions and collectively opposed the German occupying forces. This memory of national unity and coming to the aid of Dutch Jews has become a defining story for Dutch national identity. Internationally, the Dutch experience of the war has been symbolized by the universally recognized symbol of Anne Frank, the young girl who represents youthful innocence and suffering.

            … Not only did Dutch Jews return home to a nation attempting to rebuild itself, they also returned home to an unwelcoming and unsympathetic Dutch society. Although some Jews may not have been ready to express their suffering in a public forum, others were ready and indeed needed such public recognition and support. ”

            link to humanityinaction.org

          • puppies says:

            @seafoid (still no Reply button) – Repeating your book-long sob story was unnecessary, as we all know the war did happen and that there was industrial-scale genocide, too. Respond to the point.

            @Walid – Any serious documentation of your accusations or just the cited Zio-American gossip of the sensitive years? Would be important to know.

          • W.Jones says:

            TREE,

            You made a good point:

            I’m reminded of the situation in 1950-51 in Iraq when Western States and Israel were demanding that Iraq let its Jews freely emigrate. At that time the word was that Iraq was holding its Jews hostage and refusing to allow them their freedom. Considerable pressure was put on Iraq to allow Jewish emigration. Now, of course, all the pressure is forgotten and the present accusation is that Iraq “expelled” all its Jews, which is a falsity. I suspect what we have here in discussing Eastern Europe is the same selective memory.

            The similarity is noteworthy. The story goes that a nationalist state is needed because almost no place else in continental Europe or Asia or North Africa was allowing them to stay and as a result the state was a necessity. Granted, in at least two cases- Algeria and I think Libya- the countries did expel their Jewish populations in response to the 1947-1948 Nakba.

            However, in the East European cases you had the opposite, with occasional restrictions on leaving, because of their manpower and human resources value that Seafoid mentioned in passing.

          • W.Jones says:

            Walid,

            You cited the American Holocaust Museum. The Museum is a good source to show that the Holocaust happened, however it would not be one that would be interested in proving or explaining how Jewish communities could have found ways to settle back into previous situations. The Museum is going to follow a certain narrative- which by the way is not necessarily a falsification, but it is going to portray things as strongly as possible.

            For example, it says: “returning to life as it had been before the Holocaust was impossible.” Well, in many cases that’s true, and it is a strongly worded statement; in many cases people could not rebuild a shtetl that was decimated to make it the same as before.
            However, I would not necessarily conclude from that tragic fact that it was impossible to return to the village. The almost the only example the passage you cited uses is the Kielce Pogrom, which we discussed earlier. Further, the passage is generalizing, because in Bulgaria and in at least a few other places Jewish communities were not ruined by the war. I think it was Khrushchev who was surprised to find Jewish communities untouched in the Carpathian mountains.

            In other words, there is a problem is with taking some very bad cases and then turning them into generalizations, as if the entire population had to leave. There was a sizable emigration from Bulgaria, for example.

            None of this is to deny trauma, it is just to consider whether they were being banned or seriously pressured into leaving by the Poles, Bulgarians, and other slavs.

          • Walid says:

            “@Walid – Any serious documentation of your accusations or just the cited Zio-American gossip of the sensitive years? Would be important to know.” (puppies)

            What’s your problem with the US Holocaust Memorial Museum or with Humanity in Action that had nothing to do with Zio-Americans that tree also cited on a different article? The HIA essay was not pushing any zio agenda but shedding light on the Dutch myth of how they protected the Jews from the Nazis. Couldn’t find anything written by Poles about what happened there, maybe Eva could help with that.

            Here’s more of the same from another Jewish source; a very short news video clip:

            link to jewishdestiny.com

            SYNOPSIS OF FILM CLIP
            The humanitarian crisis following World War II, with over one million refugees in Europe, presented a great economic and social challenge for the Allies. For those refugees who had to move out of their countries of origin in war-torn Europe, it was difficult enough – but for the Jewish refugees, mostly Holocaust survivors, the situation was far more dire. There was often no home to return to. For those who actually tried to enter their still standing homes after the Holocaust, many, faced anti-Semitic locals who prevented them from entering, -either because the locals had already taken over the premises, or simply to prevent the Jews from returning. This anti-Semitism extended across Europe, but was most pronounced in Poland. The Poles, even previously friendly neighbors, attacked the survivors who attempted to return. This phenomenon showed the 250,000 surviving Polish Jews that Poland was no longer a viable place for them to live, and almost all made plans to go to Palestine.

            link to jewishdestiny.com

    • joemighty says:

      Yeah, two weeks should make him an expert.

      • seafoid says:

        @ Walid

        Do you know anything about how the Anne Frank story became so widely known? It seems like a spray of perfume on something very smelly- a 70% extermination rate.

        Even if it was just the Nazis, 110,000 people is a lot to lose, even in war time.

        I still think the Dutch passed the problem onto the Palestinians. Populist arseholes like Wilders are so anti Muslim nowadays as well .

        • Walid says:

          Every time I read something new about the “Diary” it’s to say that it was wasn’t. I know the story was revived after the 67 war for obvious reasons.
          Martine Le Pen is now associated with Wilders for the coming EU elections.

          • seafoid says:

            the most widely sold Dutch book of all time is The Diary of Anne Frank)

            link to nybooks.com
            “If we are French, we remember Vichy and the Resistance. If we are Dutch we think of Anne Frank”

            We don’t think of Apeldoorn Mental hospital . I wonder why

            link to holocaustresearchproject.org
            “The evacuation from the Jewish mental hospital in Apeldoorn, in Holland on the 21 January 1943 remains one of the most horrible chapters in the dark history of the holocaust.

            Dr Jacob Presser recounts the terrible scenes:

            They were escorted into the lorries with pushes and blows, men, women and children, most of them inadequately clad for the cold winter night. As one eyewitness later recalled;

            “I saw them place a row of patients, many of them older women on mattresses at the bottom of one lorry, and then load another load of human bodies on top of them. So crammed were these lorries that the Germans had a hard job to put up the tailboards.”

            Aus der funten letter on Jewish emigration

            From the very start, the patients were thrown together indiscriminately, children with dangerous lunatics, imbeciles with those who were not fit to be moved. The lorries sped to the station, the station-master at Apeldoorn who stood by the train throughout, provided more eyewitness particulars. At first everything went smoothly.

            The earliest arrivals, mainly young men, went quietly into the freight wagons at the front of the train, forty in each, when the station-master opened the ventilators, the Germans immediately closed them again.

            At first, men and women were put into separate freight cars, but later they were all mixed together. As the night wore on, the more seriously ill were brought into the station. Some wore straight-jackets and they entered the wagons and then lent helplessly against the wall of the wagons.

            The report mentions the harrowing case of a young girl in a straight-jacket:

            “I remember the case of a girl of twenty to twenty-five, whose arms were pinioned in this way, but who otherwise was stark naked. When I remarked on this to the guards, they told me this patient had refused to put on clothes, so what could they do but take her along as she was.

            Blinded by the light that was flashed in her face, the girl ran, fell on her face and could not, of course, use her arms to break the fall. She crashed down with a thud, but luckily escaped without serious injury. In no time she was up again and unconcernedly entered the wagon.”

            Jewish staff at Apeldoornse Bos

            In general, the station master stated, “the loading was done without great violence. The ghastly thing was that when the wagons had to be closed, the patients refused to take their fingers away. They simply would not listen to us and in the end the Germans lost patience. The result was a brutal and inhuman spectacle.”

            Early the next morning Hauptsturmfuhrer Ferdinand Aus der Funten who directed Eichmann’s branch office in Amsterdam, responsible for the deportations of Jews from Holland, called for volunteers among the nurses to accompany the train.

            Some twenty came forward, Aus der Funten selected another thirty, the “volunteers” travelled in a separate wagon, at the back of the train. All of the nurses were offered the choice of returning home immediately after the journey, or working in a really modern mental home.

            The transport reached the Auschwitz-Birkenau on the 24 January 1943, with 921 Jewish patients, including children and medical personnel. After a selection 16 men and 36 women were admitted into the camp, the remaining 869 people are murdered in the gas chambers.

            Rudolf Vrba, a prisoner, who later escaped from Birkenau, recalled this particular transport:

            Rudolf Vrba

            “In some of the trucks nearly half the occupants were dead or dying, more than I have ever seen. Many obviously had been dead for several days, for the bodies were decomposing and the stench of disintegrating flesh gushed from the open doors.

            This, however, was no novelty to me. What appalled me was the state of the living. Some were drooling, imbecile, live people with dead minds. Some were raving, tearing at their neighbours, even at their own flesh.

            Some were naked, though the cold was petrifying; and above everything, above the moans of the dying or the despairing, the cries of pain, of fear, the sound of wild, frightening, lunatic laughter rose and fell.

            Yet amidst all this bedlam, there was one spark of splendid, unselfish sanity. Moving among the insane were nurses, young girls, their uniforms torn and grimy, but their faces calm and their hands never idle. Their medicine bags were still over their shoulders and they had to fight to keep their feet, but all the time they were working, soothing, bandaging, giving an injection here, an aspirin there.

            Not one showed the slightest trace of panic.” “Get them out!” roared the SS-men, “Get them out, you bastards.”

            “Tight Chair” from Apeldoornse Bos

            A naked girl about twenty with red hair and a superb figure suddenly leaped from a wagon and lay squirming, laughing at my feet. A nurse flung me a heavy Dutch blanket and I tried to put it round her, but she would not get up. With another prisoner, a Slovak called Fogel, I managed to roll her into the blanket.

            “Get them to the lorries!” roared the SS. “Straight to the lorries! Get on with it for Christ’s sake!”

            Somehow Fogel and I broke into a lumbering run, for this beautiful girl was heavy. The motion pleased her and she began clapping her hands like a child. An SS club slashed across my shoulders and the blanket slipped from my numbed fingers.

            “Get on you swine! Drag her.”

            I joined Fogel at the other end of the blanket and we dragged her, bumping her over the frozen earth for five hundred yards. Somehow she clung to the blanket, not laughing now, but crying, as the hard ground thumped her naked flesh through the thick wool.

            “Pitch her in! Get her on the lorries!”

            The SS men were frantic for here was something they could not understand. Something that knew no order, no discipline, no obedience, no fear of violence or death.

            We pitched her in somehow, then ran back for another crazy, pathetic bundle. Hundreds of them were out of the wagons now, herded by the prisoners who were herded by the SS, and everywhere the nurses, still working.

            Jewish Nurses from Apeldoornse Bos murdered at Auschwitz/Birkenau

            One nurse walked slowly with an old, frail man, talking to him quietly, as if they were out in the hospital grounds. Another half-carried a screaming girl. They fought to bring order out of chaos, using medicines and blankets, gentleness and quiet heroism, instead of guns or sticks or snarling dogs.

            Then suddenly it was all over. The last abject victims had been slung into one of the overloaded lorries. We stood there, painting in the chill January air.”

            Rudolf Vrba confirmed the fate of the nurses:

            The nurses were not allowed to return home, or work in a modern mental hospital, because the SS doctor making the selection decided the nurses would share the same fate as their patients.

            The nurses were loaded onto the lorries and roared off, swaying towards the gas chambers, not a single nurse or patient survived. “

          • seafoid says:

            Ya Walid

            Whether it was intended or not (I think it was) Europe exported its Jewish issue to the Middle East.
            And the wars of revenge.

            link to syedirfanajmal.com

            It’s pathetic, really, German and Dutch kneejerk support for Zionism and IAF flights over Auschwitz. Nobody did anything at the time and nobody does anything now.

          • Walid says:

            Very very sad story, seafoid, especially the part about the nurses that had worked so hard at comforting the sick.

            The overflights serve to feed the denial. It’s as you said, these people want so much to be admired and loved. I have a feeling that the worst backfire is going to come from the Germans that keep getting their noses rubbed in it.

          • seafoid says:

            Walid

            WW2 was cruel armed psychopaths persecuting defenceless people and so is Zionism

            That Apeldoorn story reminds me of this photo from Sharon’s Beirut rampage in 1982

            link to aymanjabr.tumblr.com

          • W.Jones says:

            According to you fellows, the Dutch are building up the Israeli military in order to compensate for their supposed own role in the Holocaust.

            If it were in fact not the case that the Dutch people as a whole collaborated with or willingly approved of the Holocaust, and if they were no longer stigmatized as if they had, perhaps they would not feel as much pressure to build up the Israeli military?

          • seafoid says:

            WJones

            Why has the Netherlands been so pro-Israel historically, in your opinion ?
            Throw out a few theories there and we can have a look at them .

          • seafoid says:

            @ Puppies

            Are you Dutch, by any chance?
            It seems to me that there are a few loose ends that are not covered either by Tree’s restitution links or your insistence that it was all war and Nazis and shit happens.

          • W.Jones says:

            Seafoid,

            If postwar Holland was so very pro-Israeli, then by implication, does it not suggest that the Jewish population could have lived there after the war and were not despised by the population or its authorities?

            More to the point, you ask for theories about why Dutch support for the state is so high. Your view, I take it, is that:
            Holland was anti-fascist and conquered by Germany in war, sizable resistance to the Holocaust was crushed, the country devastated, a small minority of Dutch collaborated and were attacked for that after the war.
            You also appear to suggest that the Dutch feel a collective guilt for the Holocaust and that this explains military or intense political support for the Israeli State, which you strongly decry.

            If all those things are true, then if pressure were let up against Holland in terms of accusing it as a society collectively responsible for the Holocaust, focusing instead on its people’s overall non-fascist character, might this alleviate the current intense political support?

            Regards.

          • seafoid says:

            W Jones

            I think there is a lot of institutional Dutch guilt over WW2 and that supporting Israel is a way of making up for that. It also presumably helps to keep the problem at arms length. I guess the bots have quite good leverage over the Netherlands given what happened.

            The Germans obviously are the descendants of the people who ran the Shoah. Poland and the Czech Republic also tend to vote for Israel within the EU, also linked to WW2.

            Austria doesn’t, interestingly. I think that’s because Austria is “neutral”. And Austria was a victim of the Nazis, as most Austrians will tell you …

          • Walid says:

            “I guess the bots have quite good leverage over the Netherlands given what happened.”

            seafoid, if we’re to get into the “iniquity of the fathers” thing, it may explain why so many feel indebted to Israel. 32 countries chaired by the US met to discuss “buying” the lives of Jews, but only the Dominicanos offered to take some in and under certain limitations. That made a lot of guilty consciences out there, starting with the Americans. Holland did not participate in the futile meeting.

            After the war, most these countries tried repairing their error by dumping it on the hapless Palestinians. But the guilt persisted and so did the payoffs.

          • seafoid says:

            Walid

            I think the magic will slowly wear off. Today’s Germans owe Israel nothing.

            Israelis have to take reponsibility for the actions of their leaders. Zionism without accountability makes a mockery of the sovereignty they always claim.

          • W.Jones says:

            The Nazis intentionally committed genocide against 5 million nonJews, according to Jewish Virtual Library. 3 million Poles were killed because Hitler wanted to ethnically cleanse Poland. If you think the US is guilty of not offering asylum to the 6 million Jewish victims, is it also guilty of failing to offer asylum to 3 million Poles and 2 million or more others?

            Walid and Seafoid, you talk about the “guilt” of Poland and Holland and then say that the guilt motivates them to support Israeli abuses to “repair their error” as you call it.

            If in fact Poland was antifascist and genocided by the Nazis, and Holland was persecuted as well, with what you consider 90-95% of their populations disagreeing with the Holocaust and not carrying it out, do you think that if you and others stopped accusing their antifascist populations of the Holocaust it might be helpful in slowing their support for Israeli abuses?

          • tree says:

            If you think the US is guilty of not offering asylum to the 6 million Jewish victims, is it also guilty of failing to offer asylum to 3 million Poles and 2 million or more others?

            I agree with your point, but I’d make an even broader point than that, W.Jones. In the 30′s, multiple millions of Ukrainians were dying of forced starvation. Hundreds of thousands, of Poles and other Eastern Europeans were either being killed or deported to Siberian gulags by Stalin. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese civilians were being killed by Japanese soldiers in the same time frame . This was all before WWII and not only did the US do nothing, we failed to loosen our immigration quotas which restricted immigration from Eastern or Southern Europe to a pittance and banned immigration from Asia all together. Why must we only have guilt when it comes to Jews and not to all the other people who could have been helped by opening our doors to more immigrants in dire straits? Why the double standard? Who cares about millions of dead Ukrainians or Poles, or other Eastern Europeans, or Chinese, or Filipinos? Or Congolese or Herero for that matter? Only Jews count? Utterly immoral.

            And another point in response to Walid, whom I think is referring to the Evian Conference. Although no decision came out of the conference, Roosevelt did subsequently create a new category of US immigrant, labeled refugee, and the number of German and Austrian Jewish immigrants to the US in 1938-1940 was approximately 90,000, which was over three times the number of German Jewish immigrants taken in from 1933 through 1937. In total, approximately two thirds of Greater Germany’s Jews were able to immigrate to other countries, mostly to the US and other European countries but also to South America, South Africa, and Asia. That’s nearly half a million refugees. And the Evian conference was only about the plight of the German (including Austria and the Sudetenland) Jewish refugees because at that time(July 1938) they were the only ones physically threatened by Nazi Germany. So I don’t think that the old saw, “We did nothing” is truly accurate. Could we have done more, yes. Did we do “nothing”, no, at least not concerning German Jews. Could we have realistically saved 6 million Jews? No. Could we have realistically “saved” anyone in Eastern Europe, Jewish or not, after the start of WWII? No. Nor could we have saved millions of Chinese and other Asians killed. To insist that the US owed some special debt to save Jews as separate from all the rest of the millions of humanity killed is pure prejudice.

            As a side note, at the same time, only about 40,000 German Jews had gone to Palestine, mostly in the early 1930′s, and those Jews were subject to the Zionist screening process at the time which limited immigration to healthy bodies who were deemed able to adequately support themselves, with preference given to young adults with the proper Zionist mindset (the so-called “good human material”). And at the Evian conference the Zionist emissaries, according to their own admissions, sought to preclude any resolution that did not involve German Jews going to Palestine, even though they knew they didn’t want them all, and were preventing those they didn’t want from entering Palestine. There should be some major guilt there.

        • tree says:

          I think there is a lot of institutional Dutch guilt over WW2 and that supporting Israel is a way of making up for that. …

          Austria doesn’t, interestingly. I think that’s because Austria is “neutral”. And Austria was a victim of the Nazis, as most Austrians will tell you …

          Seafoid, excuse me, but it’s comments like these that make me question why, when you are so ignorant about WWII, you don’t seem to mind spouting your ignorance. Or are you just pulling everyone’s leg? Austria was a victim of the Nazis but Holland was a collaborator state? You’ve got it totally back-ass-wards. Most historians credit Hitler’s hatred of Jews to his time spent in Vienna, Austria, which by all accounts of the time was a segregated and quite bigoted city. The Austrian Nazi Party existed well before the Anschluss, and even Chancellor Schuschnigg, while not a Nazi, was the head of a clearly fascist country prior to his resignation and replacement by the Austrian Nazi Party. When Hitler sent troops into Austria to enforce the Anschluss they were met by cheering Austrian crowds and flowers. They never fired a shot. This somehow makes Austria a “victim” in your head?

          Seyss-Inquart was an Austrian fascist and a believer in Himmler’s Aryan racial theories well before the Anschluss, and was a high official in the Austrian government. He joined the Austrian Nazi Party and became the governor of the new created Austrian province of Nazi Germany and immediately ordered the confiscation of Jewish property and started sending Austrian Jews to concentration camps. There was no large scale resistance to any of this from Austrian citizens. Hitler himself was a native Austrian, as was Adolph Eichmann and of course, Seyss-Inquart. According to Wikipedia, 40% of the staff at the extermination camps were Austrian.

          Seyss-Inquart was later appointed to rule over occupied Holland and occupied Poland, both of which, of course, violently resisted their military takeover by Germany, in contrast to Austria’s eager acceptance. He ruled both with an iron fist and a penchant for bloody reprisals. Life was a comparative picnic in Austria, provided you weren’t Jewish, up until the Allies reached its borders.

          As for why Dutch officials have been so supportive of Israel over the years, it could just as likely be the fact that they bought without question the Zionist line about being the victims in the Middle East instead of the victimizers. Being as how real power in Israel has always been in the hands of Ashkenazi Jews, the Dutch may have found it easier to relate to them as fellow Europeans versus their difficulty in relating to Middle Eastern Arabs. As it is, I don’t see that the Dutch have been particularly more supportive of Israel than most other European countries and its support certainly hasn’t been as sycophantic as our US politicians have been. US political support is primarily about money-whoring, not any real sense of guilt, either well-placed or mis-placed. And BDS has been way more successful in the Netherlands than it has here.

          link to bdsmovement.net

          • seafoid says:

            @ Tree

            Thanks for your comments.

            “As it is, I don’t see that the Dutch have been particularly more supportive of Israel than most other European countries and its support certainly hasn’t been as sycophantic as our US politicians have been. ”

            It hasn’t been as openly Zionist as in the US but EU votes to sanction Israel are consistently blocked by Germany, Poland, Czech and the Netherlands. The EU needs universal agreement to do anything so just one of these countries is enough to block anything happening . Here’s a sample :

            link to ideasinactiontv.com

            ” In 2002, the EU agreed to proscribe Izzedin al-Kassam, Hamas’s military wing, but the consensus view remained that Hamas’s political wing had a role to play in the political process and should not be isolated. As then-EU special envoy to the Middle East, Miguel Angel Moratinos, explained in December 2002: “Hamas faces a clear choice between the Turkish model of democratic Islam, and the al-Qaeda model.” However, the refusal of Hamas to abandon violence resulted in Britain, along with the Netherlands , demanding a crackdown on a group that was, in the words of then British foreign secretary Jack Straw, “literally trying to blow [up] this peace process”. Despite opposition from other members, notably Ireland, Spain and France, this view finally gained EU-wide support in 2004 and Hamas was blacklisted”

            link to israelmatzav.blogspot.ch

            Among these were the suggestion that the EU file an official protest every time a bill discriminating against Arabs passes a second reading in the Knesset, and that the EU ensure that all Arab towns have completed urban plans, “with each member state potentially ‘adopting’ a municipality to this end.”
            The contents of the 27-page report were kept under wraps, and a number of European diplomats contacted by Haaretz over the past two weeks refused to disclose any details. Foreign Ministry officials said they had heard about it unofficially from some European diplomats a few weeks ago, but to date no Israeli official has been able to obtain a copy.
            According to a European diplomat involved in drafting the report, work on it began more than a year ago at Britain’s initiative. The idea was to write a report that could be debated by a forum of EU foreign ministers. At some point, however, several countries, among them the Czech Republic, Poland and the Netherlands , expressed objections to its contents.”

            link to haaretz.com

            “The United Kingdom has made it clear to the Palestinians that it will support their measure in the United Nations if they guarantee that they will not seek to file criminal charges against Israeli officials with the ICC. The British did not state whether they were requesting oral or written guarantees from the Palestinians.
            But the diplomatic erosion does not stop there. In light of the French and British position, the Foreign Ministry expects Spain to follow suit. Also the Netherlands and Italy, which were expected to vote against the move, will now probably abstain.”

            That point about Austria was sarcastic BTW. I apologise if it wasn’t clear.

            In sum, I think there is a consistent pattern of institutional Dutch support for Zionism that can’t just be explained by cultural affinity with the Ashkenazim. The Brits left the party a long time ago.
            What’s your take on it ?

            BDS is doing well in the Netherlands but it’s still early days and not enough to move the needle. I think that Dutch media consumers are better informed than their American counterparts and that over time this should feed though to more constructive political stances from their Government

          • Citizen says:

            @ tree
            All you say about the difference between the Dutch and Austria is true. There’s no doubt at all that Austria mostly welcomed the Nazis; the Germans and Austrians viewed each other as cousins. The Dutch were not at the Versailles treaty meeting, nor were they at Munich–their stance was always neutrality; further, Hitler had constantly promised the Dutch royalty he’d honor Holland ‘s neutrality; they had nothing to fear. When Hitler invaded the Dutch were totally unprepared. It didn’t take long to overpower the Dutch military defenders. The Dutch refugee government allied with England, and fought the Japanese from Dutch colonial areas; Japan defeated the dutch navy. link to books.google.com

            PS Seys-Inquart at Nuremberg tested with the second highest IQ, after the Nazi finance wizard. Goering also had a high IQ.

          • puppies says:

            @seafoid – A one-track mind is a serious ailment. Get help. Now confusing what the Nazi occupation did in the Netherlands to what the Zionist infestation and propaganda is achieving…

          • tree says:

            Sorry, no reply button, so this response meant for seafoid.

            In sum, I think there is a consistent pattern of institutional Dutch support for Zionism that can’t just be explained by cultural affinity with the Ashkenazim. The Brits left the party a long time ago.

            And yet your example showed that the Dutch position on Hamas mirrored the British one, so it actually negates your comparison between “the Brits” and the Dutch. Not only that, you left out this part:

            The success of Hamas in the third round of Palestinian municipal elections in May 2005 — the group won 27 local councils, compared to Fatah’s 33, gaining more than twice as many votes as Fatah — also provided ammunition for those within the EU keen to end Hamas’ status as a terror group. Indeed, the argument put forward at this time that the group was earning legitimacy through the ballot box, meant that by mid-June, only months before the disengagement process, there was a renewed debate on whether or not to remove Hamas from the EU’s terrorism list.

            This move not only had the support of those same EU member states and senior European Commission officials who had always been skeptical about placing Hamas on the terrorism list, but also appeared to be winning over <b.the Netherlands and the UK, both of whom supported the original Hamas ban. At this time, for example, the Dutch foreign minister urged the EU to consider revising its ties to Hamas, given its likely successes in future Palestinian elections, while the British Foreign Office also acknowledged it was considering engaging openly with the group.

            As to your israelmatsav link, its impossible to tell what the objections to the report were, and the total count of countries that objected so its pretty useless as an example of anything other than a google hit concerning the EU and Israel with “Netherlands” in the copy. And I take anything israelmatsav says with a huge grain of salt.

            I think its much more relevant to cite the current (since 2010) conservative Dutch government as an important factor in the limited Dutch “support”, or more accurately the limited criticism, of Israel.

            You really haven’t proven your case as far as your theory that “guilt’ is the overriding reason for what Dutch support there is for Israel. If true guilt for WWII was a factor, then Austria should be most more supportive than the Netherlands, but Austria voted for observer status for Palestine, and the Dutch abstained. The important difference between the two that I see is that Austria has a socialist lead government and Netherlands has a conservative lead government. I’m sure there are other current political reasons to explain both countries stands without having to go back 70 years. I seriously doubt that governments, as a rule, do any kind of guilt. Every last one of them, worldwide, would be nervous wrecks if they did.

            I also think that your insistence that “nobody in Europe” wanted the Jews is counter-factual. After the war, few if any Jews left the Western European countries and several thousand moved there. In Eastern Europe pretty much everyone was looking for a new start or a way out. Jews had a country pushing for their immigration, promising them a better life. Israel always preferred the Ashkenazim over the Mizrahim. It wasn’t just the fact that so many Jews had been killed in WWII that made the Israelis turn to the Arab countries to find their Jews. There were 3 and a half million Jews left in Europe, one and a half million outside of the Soviet Union. Israel could only manage to get around 325,000 of them (a little over a fifth) to come to Israel in the first four years of its existence, despite the massive amounts of money and persuasion it dedicated to the cause.

            For Walid:
            As tree noted in subsequent years, the US and others started taking in Jews…
            Walid, you keep mixing up the timeline. It wasn’t “subsequent years”, it was subsequent months. Evian was in July 1938: within months after that the US quietly began increasing its number of immigrants, with nearly 50% of all US immigrants during that time being German Jews.

            …but this came after Hitler’s offer had come and gone which had kicked-off his mass killings

            Hitler’s mass killings were kicked off after WWII started. Evian was prior to WWII and had to do with the Greater German Jewish refugees, who were the only ones obviously in danger from Hitler at that time. As Timothy Snyder pointed out in “Bloodlands”, the Nazis were far less lethal prior to WWII than the Soviet Union was, but after the war started their positions were reversed. Nobody in the West held a conference to try to help victims of Stalin’s cruelty in 1938.

            As an aside for Citizen:

            PS Seys-Inquart at Nuremberg tested with the second highest IQ, after the Nazi finance wizard. Goering also had a high IQ.

            Which just proves that having a high IQ ain’t all its cracked up to be. Give me a person with empathy and tolerance and an average IQ any day.

        • Walid says:

          W. Jones, you are mixing 2 separate issues here, that of being pro-Nazi and that of being unconcerned for the fate that awaited the Jews. What I was saying about those 32 countries that refused to cough up the cash for Jews that Hitler was bargaining for, did so not out of love or hate for the Nazis but because they didn’t care enough about the Jews, if at all.

          As tree noted in subsequent years, the US and others started taking in Jews, but this came after Hitler’s offer had come and gone which had kicked-off his mass killings, so no real bouquets are due for those. The one and only offer was made by Dominican Republic to take in 100,000 if they too got paid for it and that the Jews to be taken would be doctors and only 800 took up that offer.

          No, I would not have expected the US to take in all 6 millions but to at least take in its fair share. It didn’t.

          • W.Jones says:

            Walid,

            I am surprised by Tree’s facts that the US took in 90,000 German Jews in 1939-1940. Before then they had severe restrictions like the Nuremberg laws. I am not putting down in any way the desire for the US to offer asylum to people suffering segregation. I just ask: what about the 5 million non-Jews killed by Hitler, Stalin’s 6 million victims, the Chinese killed by Japan, etc.? I don’t want anyone to be persecuted.

            You said I am mixing issues. The main issue we are discussing is whether no one in postwar Europe wanted their Jewish population and it had to leave. Seafoid said that Poland’s people probably wanted it to stay, but that Stalin was who counted. So if the Polish people don’t count and Stalin is the only one in East Europe who does… what’s the point of saying “No one” wanted them when in fact they did but only one guy counts?

            Basically my belief is to care about all people, including of course antifascist nations, Jews, and other nationalities. Where are we going with the story that the crushed antifascist nations were inhospitable?

  6. Kathleen says:

    This is a great piece. “Even the most politically conservative person on our trip, who is sympathetic to some Tea Party agenda, said to me on day 4: “It doesn’t take a genius to see this and know who the aggressor and oppressor is.” I never expected that statement from him in a million years.”
    I always wonder why people have to see it to believe it. Why the writings and witnessing by Edward Said, Ilan Pappe, Carter, Tutu and so many others to the daily violence and humiliation that the Palestinians suffer at the hands of the illegal settlers and the apartheid government of Israel is not enough?

    Well I guess as many people have said and the Pastor also stated “These stories hardly ever make U.S. headlines, which is why you really don’t know much about that.”

    • pabelmont says:

      Kathleen — Yes! People used to accost me at demos and ask me, “Have you ever been to Israel? No? then how can you criticize it?” and I always thought, “Funny, a lot of people never were in Germany from 1933-1945 and still think it is fair for them to criticize the Holocaust.”

      What’s the diff? But being there must indeed make it more vivid. That’s probably why the Birthright visitors are not shown the Palestinians and think Israel is the best thing since sliced bread.

      • Kathleen says:

        When I was a kid obsessed with reading about WWII and the Holocaust I did not need to directly see the horrific, unspeakable things that the Nazi’s did to Jews and others. Reading about it seeing the pictures would have me out of my ever loving mind as a kid, sobbing, sometimes on the floor sobbing pounding on the floor how could this go on? Looking at the photos of mostly Jews who were skin and bones, naked, hallow eyes, children who suffered like that and then would come to their brutal deaths in gas chambers. Ok I can barely breathe thinking about this. How could people be so fucking cruel, how could people stand back and not respond. We have seen many genocides since. One more recently in Iraq. Smaller yes, as systematic ..no…but as many Iraqi people and others believe did the Feith, cheney’s, Wolfowitz’s of the world know that if the lid of containment was taken off in Iraq and not enough soldiers were sent into maintain the peace that violence would ensue, hundreds of thousands would die. I believe Feith, Cambone, Cheney, Wolfowitz are that sick.

        But I am not one of those people who needs to see the occupation, racism, violence up close. And no it is not anywhere near the size and scale of death and violence that Jews and millions of others suffered at the bloody hands of the Nazi’s But that genocide is no excuse to perpetrate violence against the Palestinians for decades. No excuse. Reading about from Said’s, Pappe’s etc writings, reading UN reports, hearing stories from Art Gish and others, and now the video’s have been getting out is plenty for me to get stirred up about and.. inspire to respond.

  7. Have we selected out the Zionist ? Have we been targeting Israel and been ignoring other ? I don’t think so.
    America has tightened screws on Soviet, Mynamar, Mozambique, Libya! Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, and scores other in different times . The toll of those sanctions have been immensely destructive .
    Israel is not o ly exempted ,it enjoys the full throated support in every form imaginable. It is disingenuous and patently false to claim otherwise. But this is the main plank of the Zionist that Israel is no different than other countries . It is singularly unique and it manages to veer the power that -be towards its goal sooner or later. It also manages to bring the doubter and fence sitter and conscientious among its midst eventually to its side. Recent change of the attitude among the Israeli left is no different than the changes of same magnitude and direction by the secular and labor Zionist and by the advocates of the binational state towards full embrace of Jabotinsky ‘s ideals .

  8. broadside says:

    One of the best things I’ve read on Mondo. In addition to his heart, he has a great way w words. “If you have never had an army standing and looking at you with assault weapons slung over their shoulders while you planted olive trees, you should give it a try.”

    Hell, this guy’s so fine he gives religion a good name.

    Love the photo too.

    • Citizen says:

      @ broadside
      I agree. The pastor’s piece rings a clear bell–I’ve never seen the case against Zionist Israel made so well and as plain as the nose on one’s face.

  9. Talkback says:

    One tiny remark. They are not “rubber bullets”, they are steel bullets with thin rubber coats and according to IDF regulations the miminum range for firing them is 40 meters, only at the individual’s legs, not at children and not from a moving vehicle.

    According to BTselem at least 19 Palestinians, including 12 minors, have been killed since 2000.

    • Hostage says:

      One tiny remark.

      Well here’s another. During the question and answer session included in the DVD companion disk of the Presbyterian Church brochure, “Zionism Unsettled”, the moderator suggested that Ilan Pappe had suffered backlash in part, because he had failed to pull his punches and used the perjorative term “ethnic cleansing” to describe the events Palestine. I think Pappe is a brillant scholar and that he has constructed a very faithful historical narrative from the archival material. But the one bone of contention that I have have to pick with his work is that he did, in fact, pull his punches when he asserted that ethnic cleansing isn’t genocide. The UN and other sources that he cited in the text and footnotes of his book actually reported that in many cases, ethnic cleansing can, and should be considered a constiuent act of the crime of Genocide.

      The FRUS reveals that nearly one in five, of the original Palestinian refugees died during the first dozen years of exile. link to digicoll.library.wisc.edu

      Raphael Lemkin, who coined the term, specifically included reduced caloric rations, starvation, and brutal acts that resulted in mass flights and emigration to neighboring states in his definition of life threatening acts that constitute Genocide. The International Criminal Court guidelines on “Elements of Crimes”, “Genocide by deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction” explains that:

      The term “conditions of life” may include, but is not necessarily restricted to, deliberate deprivation of resources indispensable for survival, such as food or medical services, or systematic expulsion from homes.

      See page 9 footnote 4 link to icc-cpi.int

      Those descriptions match the conditions from U.S. State Department reports regarding the hundreds of thousands of Arab refugees:

      They are destitute of any belongings, are without adequate shelter, medical supplies, sanitation and food. Their average daily ration, made up exclusively of bread, is only 600 calories. Once the rainy season commences and winter sets in, tragedy on the largest scale will be inevitable unless relief is forthcoming.

      Thus far the Provisional Government of Israel has refused to admit the Arab refugees to their former homes, which have in some cases been destroyed by fighting, and in others preempted by Jewish immigrants.

      link to digicoll.library.wisc.edu

      From the very outset, officials realized that relief efforts would not be able to provide all the refugees with adequate supplies of protective clothing, food, water, or shelter in time and that many would sucumb if they weren’t allowed to quickly return to their homes and the properties that provided their normal sources of shelter and sustenance. One US official remarked:

      Meanwhile, winter approaches and plight refugees grows worse not better. If aid does not come soonest and in liberal quantities, nature will solve problem which man apparently cannot.

      link to digicoll.library.wisc.edu

      Other US officials reported that the Jewish Foreign Minister, Shertok, showed evidence of a “swelled-head” when he advised the UN Mediator that Israel would not admit the refugees. He changed his tune after the UNSCOP hearing and now said there was no room for Arabs since their space was needed for Jewish immigrants. Shertork also said that in any event, the government reserved right to replace them with Jews from Arab countries who had expressed a desire to come to Palestine. link to digicoll.library.wisc.edu

      Those Zionist aspirations eventually led to deliberate efforts by Israel to trigger the mass exodus of Jews from Arab or Muslim countries. link to digicoll.library.wisc.edu

      US officials also noted that the refugee problem began before the Arab-Israeli conflict began as a result of Zionist failure to fulfil their promises to the international community regarding the treatment of minorities in areas under Jewish control:

      Arab refugee problem is one which, as you quote PGI [Provisional Government of Israel] as saying, did develop from recent war in Palestine but which also began before outbreak of Arab-Israeli hostilities. A significant portion of Arab refugees fled from their homes owing to Jewish occupation of Haifa on April 21-22 and to Jewish armed attack against Jaffa April 25. You will recall statements made by Jewish authorities in Palestine promising safeguards for Arab minority in areas under Jewish control.

      link to digicoll.library.wisc.edu

      So Palestine was a case where the Israeli officials demonstrated the necessary intent or mens rea required to establish that they were “Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”.

      • Hostage says:

        Political Zionism is destroying a culture and a people, and intentionally so

        Raphael Lemkin called that Genocide.

      • Talkback says:

        Very helpful, thanks Hostage.

      • seafoid says:

        Hostage

        Your posts are consistently high quality but that one is just off the scale .
        It’s a reference.
        It’s Finkelstein Plus standard.

        • Obsidian says:

          @Hostage@seafoid

          Hostage’s posts are confetti, worthless cites to ‘international fairy law’.
          International laws are unenforceable, inconsistently interpreted infringements on State’s sovereignty.

          Nations obey International Law only when it’s in their own interests to do so.

          • Hostage says:

            Hostage’s posts are confetti, worthless cites to ‘international fairy law’. . . . Nations obey International Law only when it’s in their own interests to do so.

            Quite obviously then:
            * There are countries in Europe who think it is in their interest to investigate former President Bush for crimes against humanity. Bush’s Shrinking World: George W. Bush Cancels Europe Trip link to democracynow.org
            * There are countries in Europe that are willing to investigate claims one of the world’s major gold refiners committed a war crime by buying plundered gold link to online.wsj.com
            * There is a long list of persons who are currently being prosecuted for pillaging and other serious crimes who could obviously use legal advice from a smart ass like you Obsidian: Republic of the Congo: Germain Katanga, Bosco Ntaganda, Callixte Mbarushimana, Sylvestre Mudacumura, and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui; Central African Republic: Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo; Uganda: Joseph Kony, Vincent Otti, Okot Odhiambo and Dominic Ongwen; Darfur, Sudan: Ahmad Muhammad Harun (“Ahmad Harun”), Ali Muhammad Ali Abd-Al-Rahman (“Ali Kushayb”), Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Bahar Idriss Abu Garda, and Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein.

            So how many countries in the international community still owe Israel favors after they’ve repeatedly warned it for decades that its annexations and settlements are illegal and constitute flagrant violations of international law?
            * There were 120 countries that voted to adopted Article 8(2)(b)(viii) of the Rome Statute after they listened to the head of the Israeli delegation to the Rome Conference, Judge Eli Nathan, complained that it would make Israeli settlements a war crime. link to iccnow.org
            * When Attorney General and current Supreme Court Justice, Elyakim Rubinstein, warned that Israeli Settlers could be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court he didn’t sound as confident as you do. See “A-G: New Hague court may indict settlers for war crimes”, Jun.11, 2002

          • JeffB says:

            Nice to see some reality on this issue regarding the UN. I’ve felt like a lone voice in the wilderness.

            I think Hostage is well informed on the issue, even though I disagree with him strongly so I wouldn’t be nearly so harsh as to call it confetti.

          • Obsidian says:

            @Hostage

            “When Attorney General and current Supreme Court Justice, Elyakim Rubinstein, warned that Israeli Settlers could be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court”.

            Yeah. The AG said that 12 years ago and nobody listened and nobody’s been prosecuted. You’ve made my point.

            National leaders, including former President Bush, will defend their countries by all means necessary, regardless of international law.

            Hostage. Didn’t you help support the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia when you worked with the US military? How do you justify having rendered aid to that serial human rights violator?

          • Citizen says:

            Yes, Hitler’s Germany also ignored and took issue with International Law. Israel just copies this stance.

          • Hostage says:

            Nice to see some reality on this issue regarding the UN.

            The Swiss and ICC Prosecutors don’t work for the UN at all. We are talking about states enforcing international law. The European Court of Human Rights upheld Article 220a of the German Criminal Code in order to sustain a conviction for genocide in the case if Jorgic v Germany. link to wcd.coe.int None of the crimes in that case happened in Germany.

            Norwegian courts convicted a Rwandan man for participating in the 1994 genocide. link to theguardian.com

            Finland court convicts Rwanda pastor of genocide link to jurist.org

            See also: “Danish Court Upholds Extradition of Rwandan Genocide Suspect” link to allafrica.com
            France ‘to allow first genocide extradition to Rwanda’
            link to bbc.com

            Canada reports that it spends $15 million per year on its War Crimes program. According to the annual reports, it has conducted thousands of investigations to deny entry and deport persons suspected of war crimes. link to justice.gc.ca

            The DOJ’s Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section (HRSP) just obtained a conviction in the case of Jorge Sosa, a “Former Guatemalan Special Forces Officer Sentenced for Covering up Involvement in 1982 Massacre” link to justice.gov

            The reality is that neither Israel nor the United States raised any alarm about the dangers of universal criminal jurisdiction during the deportation hearings regarding John Demjanjuk and other countries won’t pay much attention if the tables are turned and an Israeli suspect has to be taken into custody.

          • seafoid says:

            Obsidian

            You are insane
            If Lionel Messi turned up in front of your house you’d declare him average.

          • Hostage says:

            Yeah. The AG said that 12 years ago and nobody listened and nobody’s been prosecuted. You’ve made my point.

            No I haven’t, since your government began wetting its pants and shreying gavault when Abbas went to the UN in order to hold Israelis criminally responsible in national and international courts. The whole point of Kerry’s 9 month peace talks has been to delay any further action in the ICJ or ICC.

            National leaders, including former President Bush, will defend their countries by all means necessary, regardless of international law.

            Bush can’t even protect his own miserable hide, much less anyone else.

            Hostage. Didn’t you help support the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia when you worked with the US military?

            No.

            How do you justify having rendered aid to that serial human rights violator?

            The UN Security Council, acting under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, authorized member states cooperating with the Government of Kuwait to use all necessary means to restore international peace and security in the event Iraqi armed forces failed to fully comply with resolution 660 and withdraw from Kuwait. link to un.org

          • Obsidian says:

            @Hostage

            “Hostage. Didn’t you help support the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia when you worked with the US military?

            “No.”

            You weren’t stationed in the KSA?

          • Hostage says:

            You weren’t stationed in the KSA?

            Yes. The CENTAF computer generated Air Tasking Order (ATO) was about a foot thick and it didn’t provide for any sorties to assist the Saudi government.

            Other than the single Iraqi attack on Ras al-Khafji, providing ad hoc assistance for Saudis was never a factor. In that case we time shared JSTARS coverage and vectored in Marine F-18s, A-6s, and AH-ls and Air Force A-10s, AC-130 gunships, and F-16s. An inland diversionary attack was stopped by U.S. Marines, a Qatari tank battalion, and helicopters from the British Royal Navy. Everyone initially thought that it was just a feint for a larger Iraqi operation, but that was it, the “mother of all battles” on Saudi soil. So we carried on with the ATO operations against objectives in Kuwait and Iraq.

          • talknic says:

            @ Obsidian “International laws are unenforceable”

            Iraq/Kuwait Indonesia/East Timor

            ” inconsistently interpreted infringements on State’s sovereignty”

            Israel has been operating beyond the extent of its self proclaimed sovereignty for 65 years.

            “Nations obey International Law only when it’s in their own interests to do so”

            It is actually in their own interests to do so, that’s why nations have developed International Law

          • puppies says:

            @obstreperous – Right. What the stupid don’t get is that international law works by making it clear to invaded and occupied peoples their absolute right to rectify the situation by all means judged necessary. By making the invaders know that they are pariahs even if they can buy the US Gov. Not talking to you, by the way, you’re a robot.

      • tree says:

        Hostage,

        The FRUS reveals that nearly one in five, of the original Palestinian refugees died during the first dozen years of exile.

        Wow, I always wondered since the conditions seemed so bleak, but that’s about 150,000 people killed.

        I’ve also always wondered what the figures were for the Palestinian death toll during the 1948 war. I’m aware of the 6000 Israeli (or pre-Israeli ) Jews killed, as I am aware that 80% of those Israeli Jews were killed in offensive operations (they were attacking, not being attacked), but I’ve never heard consistent numbers on the number of Palestinians killed. I’ve heard a figure of 35,000 Arabs killed but I think that number included foreign fighters, or perhaps it was only the foreign fighters.

        Hostage, do you have any source or figures on the number of Palestinians killed during the 1948 war?

        • Donald says:

          ” that’s about 150,000 people killed.”

          It’s roughly that many that died in 12 years–you’d need a demographic expert to figure out what the excess death toll is from that figure. How many Palestinians would have been expected to die in 12 years vs how many actually did die. Morbid, but years of reading various papers and arguments about the death toll in the Iraq War have made me think along such lines.

        • Hostage says:

          Hostage, do you have any source or figures on the number of Palestinians killed during the 1948 war?

          No, just estimates. The sad fact is that there weren’t any reliable figures for the population before the shooting started. The only reliable casualty figures I’ve seen came from the British High Commissioner in the early stages of the conflict and can be found in the UNISPAL Documents Collection.

          The refugees they were talking about in the FRUS were those who lived long enough to be registered. I imagine that plenty of people died in transit or while waiting for assistance to arrive and didn’t ever fall into that category.

          • Obsidian says:

            Uri Milstein, former IDF archivist, put the Arab dead at between 9000 and 12,000. Jewish dead were 6,600.

          • Obsidian says:

            ‘Imagine the people who died in transit’;

            The gradual exodus wasn’t the Bataan Death March. The refugees had to trek, at most, 30 to 40 kilometers to get out of the war zone.

            BTW. Many of the local Arab clans had summer and winter villages and it wouldn’t be uncommon for entire Palestinian villages to empty as a result of the (sh0rt distanced) migration from their plain villages to their mountain villages.

          • Hostage says:

            ‘Imagine the people who died in transit’; The gradual exodus wasn’t the Bataan Death March.

            I don’t know why you are still allowed the privilege to engage in Nakba denial here at Mondoweiss, but the testimonies of the murders who killed the Palestinians because they strayed from the path on that death march and destroyed or pillaged Palestinian villages during the ethnic cleansing campaigns are available online:
            * Yerachmiel Kahanovich, Palmach soldier
            link to zochrot.org
            * Binyamin Eshet, Palmach soldier
            link to zochrot.org
            * Zvi Steklov, Palmach soldier
            link to zochrot.org
            * Uri Pinkerfeld, Palmach soldier
            link to zochrot.org

          • Obsidian says:

            “Yerachmiel Kahanovich Palmach soldier”

            Sorry. No massacre at Lydda. See, Myths and Historiography of the 1948 Palestine War Revisited: The Case of Lydda Author(s): Alon Kadish and Avraham SelaSource: Middle East Journal, Vol. 59, No. 4 (Autumn, 2005), pp. 617-634.

          • Hostage says:

            Sorry. No massacre at Lydda. See, Myths and Historiography of the 1948 Palestine War Revisited: The Case of Lydda Author(s): Alon Kadish and Avraham SelaSource: Middle East Journal, Vol. 59, No. 4 (Autumn, 2005), pp. 617-634.

            The article is pretty unconvincing. It admits that the inhabitants were forcefully expelled, which is both a crime against humanity and a war crime, whether it was done with premeditation or not. The claim that there was no direct evidence of a massacre in 2005 is irrelevant, since the perpetrators confessed subsequent to the publication of the article. The webpage I cited explains that Yerachmiel Kahanovich was filmed in Kibbutz Degania Alef on July 23, 2012 By Eyal Sivan. link to zochrot.org

            I don’t really need to read propaganda and scholarly mental gymnastics about the lack of pre-planning either, since that isn’t a relevant element of the crime against humanity of deportation or forcible transfer of population. See the list of elements starting on page 12 link to icc-cpi.int

            The actual perpetrators have confessed publicly to their crimes, including premeditated murders, and that information is readily available online. After several complaints, you’re still deliberately engaging in Nakba denial and the moderators should block posts from your account.

          • hostage, here is the video of Binyamin Eshet, note at 1:36 in the video how he laughs and says he heard screams from a house and then the ‘half naked arab’ comes out and the squad leader calls her a slut, probably raped her.

            lots of those videos in this channel here: link to youtube.com

          • Hostage says:

            hostage, here is the video of Binyamin Eshet, note at 1:36 in the video how he laughs and says he heard screams from a house and then the ‘half naked arab’ comes out and the squad leader calls her a slut, probably raped her.

            Yes, that is disgusting. He goes on to relate that 1) there was a massacre of the people who volunteered to bury the dead from the earlier massacre in the Mosque; 2) that he witnessed the bodies beside the carts on the road of the people who had died because they couldn’t survive the forced march; and 3) that he witnessed the pillaging in which there was nothing that wasn’t taken. With regard to the massacre, he did say he thought those responsible should be brought to justice, but that’s what got him into trouble with the Shabak.

        • Citizen says:

          @ Hostage (no reply button)

          “The reality is that neither Israel nor the United States raised any alarm about the dangers of universal criminal jurisdiction during the deportation hearings regarding John Demjanjuk and other countries won’t pay much attention if the tables are turned and an Israeli suspect has to be taken into custody.”

          A prominent OP-ED writer for US mainstream media volunteered to be an IDF prison guard. The extradition of Demjanjuk from USA to Germany and his trial there for being a lowly prison guard (after decades of living in US as an auto worker) does set a precedent. Maybe some day said US media pundit will be tried for crimes against humanity sans statute of limitations? LOL. Your point is clear though; it’s not far-fetched to imagine the tables turned, an Israeli being taken into custody.

          link to forward.com

    • JeffB says:

      @Hostage

      The reality is that neither Israel nor the United States raised any alarm about the dangers of universal criminal jurisdiction during the deportation hearings regarding John Demjanjuk and other countries won’t pay much attention if the tables are turned and an Israeli suspect has to be taken into custody.

      First off the USA has raised the dangers on other occasions quite forcible during the Bush administration and other countries did back down. Belgium back down on their warrant for Sharon and repealed their law in 2003. The UK backed down. Spain backed down.

      And most recently on Robert Seldon Lady we saw what one of these arrests would look like if the arrest were actually made. Exactly what happened in the UK with Livni. There is no political support to create a dangerous international incident for no benefit and so it gets reversed.

      Warrants don’t change that. The ICC doesn’t change that. If European countries wanted to take out Israeli officials they have intelligence services perfectly capable of doing it that operate in Israel. It doesn’t happen not because they lack ICC paperwork but because they don’t want to. They don’t want to deal with blowback. And yes there would be tons of blowback.

      • Hostage says:

        First off the USA has raised the dangers on other occasions quite forcible during the Bush administration and other countries did back down. Belgium back down on their warrant for Sharon and repealed their law in 2003. The UK backed down. Spain backed down.

        No, the Prosecutors in Spain subsequently initiated a state referral of the flotilla incident to the ICC Prosecutor. That, and the Comoros referral are still pending.

        None of the changes you are talking about apply to cases where the ICC has issued an arrest warrant. The Abu Grahib scandal took the wind out of the Bush administration’s sails on its efforts to obtain blanket immunity from prosecution and his disclosure in the autobiography that he authorized torture sealed the deal for authorities in enough EU countries that he had to cancel his book tour there altogether.

        And most recently on Robert Seldon Lady we saw what one of these arrests would look like if the arrest were actually made.

        All that proves is that Panama doesn’t have an extradition treaty with Italy and that Lady was convicted by an Italian court, but not the ICC. He is already a convicted criminal who has to look over his shoulder for the rest of his life. FYI, Panama is an ICC member state and it does have an agreement in place to turn over suspects wanted by the ICC. Any behind the barn action taken on the national level for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility tends to trigger the ICCs complementary jurisdiction under the terms of the Rome Statute.

        Warrants don’t change that. The ICC doesn’t change that.

        There are plenty of people sitting in jail awaiting trial who know better.

        They don’t want to deal with blowback. And yes there would be tons of blowback.

        You might want to check your facts against reality: Fmr. Shin Bet Head Flees Denmark Over ‘Arrest Warrant’ Threat Carmi Gallon, of controversial film ‘The Gatekeepers,’ flees Denmark after pro-PA group demands warrant against him. link to israelnationalnews.com

  10. pabelmont says:

    Talkback: Palestinians used to joke blackly about the Israeli bullets which though fired at people’s legs hit their upper bodies and faces. Regulations, my foot, so to speak.

    • Talkback says:

      That’s why I mentioned it. It’s just another example of Israel not even following its own regulations, laws or rulings from its Supreme Court . You know the countless times when Israel’s bravest didn’t even shoot from 40 meters, but from 40 centimeters distance.

      • seafoid says:

        I went to a presentation by Dr Mustafa Barghouti once on the subject of Israeli bullet injuries. They tend to shoot an awful lot of kids and the bullets they use tend to leave behind dreadful injuries.

        Zionism is really dreadful.

        Some bot will come along and say yes the Marines use them too but I don’t think it matters. Some day Jews will be on the receiving end again and they’ll need protection.

        • Talkback says:

          Some bot will come along and say yes the Marines use them too …

          Not rubber coated steel bullets as far as I know. And especially not in demonstrations. Israel seem to see demonstrations of non-Jews as “riots”.

  11. Sycamores says:

    The Presbyterians are planning to vote again on the Divestment from Israeli Occupation this July. in 2012 it was rejected by 2 votes 331/333. it’s obvious back in 2012 they were fairly divided on the decision of divestment. hopefully this piece by Dr. Rev. Jeffrey DeYoe will help to enlightened those that were in doubt.

    back in 2012 ‘allegedly’ over 22,000 American Jewish citizens signed a “Letter in Hope” petition against divestment, with the petition sponsored by the Jewish Council for Public Affairs and the Israel Action Network. link to letterinhope.org

    i use the word allegedly because on the very first page of 25 signatures two people double posted and on the second page of 25 one person triple posted while another double posted and on the third page one person posted five times etc

    i understand people can make a mistake but a petition like this should have been null and void.

    Israel Action Network spearheaded this effort last time to stop the divesment call, worth keeping an eye on their next petition.

    • seafoid says:

      If they vote again it’s hard to see the status quo surviving. The bots made an intervention in bad faith last time around

      “The Scriptures that bind us reveal that G-d created all of us in the divine image – human dignity and equality is a core value of Jewish and Christian traditions. Further, our traditions call upon us to be peacemakers. In Hebrew, the word Shalom doesn’t just mean “peace” but wholeness and completeness. Peace comes about by our labors to complete the work of creation. We must work towards the day when every human is granted the dignity, security, and beneficence that is the promise of the created universe.”

      Honestly, that reminds me of a cheesy pickup schtick from a sleazebag who has his eye on a very classy lady.

      There has been no change on the ground in the occupied territories. More procrastination. “Letter in hope” was a very poor choice of name. Eventually Zionism will leave the Major Jewish Orgs in the US horribly isolated.

      Ya salam

      • JeffB says:

        @seafoid

        Eventually Zionism will leave the Major Jewish Orgs in the US horribly isolated.

        Zionism is far more popular with Americans than it was decades ago. Even if you are talking religion Dispensationalist Christianity which includes Christian Zionism is the mainstream among Evangelicals. Because of their influence I would bet among PCUSA membership (though not the clergy or elders) the majority who have eschatological opinions at all agree with Darby far more than Calvin. Calvin’s theology depends fundamentally on a state church, Darby’s thrives much better in a society of religious pluralism. Globally Pentecostalism which is also generally dispensationalist is becoming the dominant form of Christianity.

        Sorry but no. Zionism is doing rather well. Major Zionist organizations are just another lobby which has popular support on anything that doesn’t conflict with other major lobbies. Heck the PCA is attacking the PCUSA on being anti-Semitic now because of their strong anti-Zionism and evidently with effect on the right of the PCUSA (the part they want to break off). Increasingly for the Presbyterian right (excluding Kinism) while Jews are still believers in the burned out husk of a religion who have rejected Jesus and thus God; Israel is now cool and being against Israel is being against the Jewish people and not just against the Jewish error of rejecting salvation.

        I don’t know what happens with the PCUSA. Clearly they’ve been on the vanguard of anti-Israeli actions among mainstream American groups for over a decade now. They haven’t liked the heat this has brought on them at the same time they are committed to the anti-colonial world view and solidarity with 3rd world people’s struggles. OK sucks to lose them but I don’t see that as a harbinger of some dramatic shift in the general American’s outlook on Israel.

        • seafoid says:

          JeffB

          I am interested in bigger trends that Zionism cannot control.
          What can the Kirya do about them?

          The wonderful Presbyterians have been bitchslapped by your crowd and they are back and they don’t buy the memes any longer. What are you going to do about it? Call them anti-Semites ?

          • seafoid says:

            @JEffB

            Suck on this

            link to haaretz.com

            “Fifty years after Germany and Israel established bilateral relations, the special relationship is in danger. The current dialogue between the political echelons in Berlin and Jerusalem is neither open nor intimate. This is no longer a disagreement between friends, but milk that has soured.”

          • JeffB says:

            @seafold

            The wonderful Presbyterians have been bitchslapped by your crowd and they are back and they don’t buy the memes any longer. What are you going to do about it? Call them anti-Semites ?

            I don’t think my crowd will do much. Jews don’t have much leverage over the PCUSA. But Christian Zionists do. They can fight this battle much more effectively than Jews can. Jews because of Zionism now have real allies, not many and not enough but they do have them. The main thing that Jews can do is give moral legitimacy to Christian Zionism which they are doing. It is impossible to for the PCUSA to call dispensationalism anti-Semitic when Jews institutionally consider it friendly.

        • mikeo says:

          Zionism is doing rather well

          Yes JeffB, it has resulted in a nation desperate to salvage its sinking reputation with the most active PR apparatus in the known universe. A nation almost impossible to criticise in the US MSM, which is nevertheless a nation marginally more popular than North Korea, Pakistan and Iran in 2013 world opinion.

          What are the bets for Israel and Iran’s postions in 2014 I wonder…

          • JeffB says:

            @mikeo

            t has resulted in a nation desperate to salvage its sinking reputation

            What sinking reputation? When did Israel globally ever have a good reputation? What year can you point to? There is a short windows in the 1990s after Oslo but before the 2nd intifada where Israel was a bit more popular. But honestly, I’m not sure that Israel isn’t rather close to a high point globally as more and more countries and peoples are working with Israel. Israel isn’t facing anything close to what it faced in the 1950s or 1970s.

            If you mean the USA:

            60% are pro-Israeli
            10% are pro-Palestinian
            30% are indifferent or neutral

            That’s pretty awesome levels of support for a tribal war among the broad population.

          • mikeo says:

            But honestly, I’m not sure that Israel isn’t rather close to a high point globally as more and more countries and peoples are working with Israel.

            Well I guess I must be wrong and everything in the garden is rosy.

        • Rusty Pipes says:

          Presbyterians (the PC(USA)), declared Christian Zionism practically a heresy — inconsistent with Reformed Theology (Calvinist tradition) — at the 2004 GA. So many other issues related to Israel and Judaism, especially Divestment, were decided at that GA that coverage of the Christian Zionism overture may have been overlooked.

          Certainly, the PC(USA) has a broad range of belief from center-right to left. Even so, the most conservative of PC(USA) congregations which are trying to leave the denomination (especially their female members) are unlikely to be tempted to join the fundamentalist PCA, which not only refuses to ordain women as clergy, elders or deacons — they won’t even let women teach adult Sunday School classes which include men. Mainline congregations which do not want to talk about Israel’s violation of Palestinian Rights avoid the subject less because of Christian Zionism than because of the Ecumenical Deal (or because, if calling Israel an Apartheid State hurts the feelings of one member of the Church family, it would be unkind to mention it, divisive to host an educational program about it and threatening to the Peace, Unity and Purity of the church to take action about it).

          • JeffB says:

            @Rusty –

            Presbyterians (the PC(USA)), declared Christian Zionism practically a heresy — inconsistent with Reformed Theology (Calvinist tradition) — at the 2004 GA.

            Agreed and they are right in a theological sense. Darby et al. is total inconsistent with premillennial & amillennial views of the magisterial reformation. That being said, the view is increasingly popular with both the membership and clergy. Like in many other areas Presbyterians are becoming more Baptist in their theology.

            Certainly, the PC(USA) has a broad range of belief from center-right to left. Even so, the most conservative of PC(USA) congregations which are trying to leave the denomination (especially their female members) are unlikely to be tempted to join the fundamentalist PCA

            I’d agree that churches that want to go right aren’t likely to go to the PCA but membership OTOH is a different question. PCUSA bleeds 10k members / yr to PCA. PCA would like to pick up that pace and this is a wedge issue where the membership is often offended by their clergy’s views.

            As an aside I wouldn’t consider the PCA quite fundamentalist rather than the right edge of evangelical. Not that anyone should care where a Jew draws lines in his own taxonomy but I happen to think that the evangelical norm is a good way to divide between right evangelical and fundamentalist. In which case whether a church practices secondary separation becomes the dividing line. And while I agree with you the PCA is right wing they do follow the evangelical norm of primary separation only. In addition to that PCA members are well educated, generally middle class or higher…. so the soft factors also play towards evangelical.

    • JeffB says:

      @seafold –

      “Suck on this”. Seems to me to be great!

      But over the past year, the clashes between Merkel and Netanyahu have ended. There are no more shouting matches or angry statements to the media. This isn’t because their relationship has improved; Merkel is simply sick of fighting with him. She has concluded that nothing she says will actually influence his policy, so she’s given up.

      To me this attitude is good. Israel doesn’t weigh in on the German government’s construction projects. It recognizes German sovereignty fully and understands the government which controls German lands is the German government. If Merkel is coming to understand that the government which controls Israeli lands (and by those I’m including Greater Israel) is Israel and that Israel is not interested in their opinion on construction projects within their territory that’s a good thing. That’s called sovereignty. Merkel has her country to run. The Knesset decides what happens in Israel. The Bundestag decides what happens in Germany.

      Netanyahu is doing his job in gently weaning Europe from their belief that Israel is not a sovereign nation and that their interference is acceptable. The same way a teen has to have a series of fight with their parents, become their own person doing some stuff their parent agrees with and others they don’t.

      • Citizen says:

        @ JeffB

        At some point a healthy teen leaves the charitable parental nest, or the healthy parent boots that teen out who doesn’t play by house rules. A young adult doesn’t live off the parental dole. US is too enmeshed with Israel in the clinical sense, and Israel is not yet an independent adult. It just talks big, as if it were.

      • seafoid says:

        “The Knesset decides what happens in Israel.”

        No it doesn’t.

        link to ft.com

      • Ellen says:

        JeffB, after the US, Germany is the largest source of funds sent to Israel. By 2009 it was over 89 billion and saw a yearly increase in 2011 and is slated for another increase this year.

        What is Netanyahu doing to wean Israel from it’s absolute dependence on “aid” and ongoing reparations from Germany?

        • JeffB says:

          @Ellen –

          I’m not a defense procurement expert. AFAICT Germany gives Israel subsidies to buy German boats. This may just be effectively a negotiated sales price, since the USA is involved this may be a USA / German thing, or this may be a corporate welfare thing with Israel acting as a middleman to avoid WTO rules. I really don’t know. $800m / yr ain’t peanuts for Israel but it isn’t very much.

          If you are asking me to make sense of defense procurement deals, I can’t for Israel I can’t for any other country. Defense procurement is often too behind closed doors and complex. Jane’s is good on these deals, but I don’t regularly read it. Though I imagine if you search there you’ll find out more on the structure of the deals.

          But I’m not sure what this has to do with the political Mondoweiss type issues. I think people make far more out of what is really rather a small amount of aide / subsidies. This aide could disappear tomorrow and it wouldn’t matter. Israel is weaned.

        • Citizen says:

          The US and Germany continue to fund Israel with the biggest chunk of their taxpayer funds. There’s no sign this will stop. Jews have a word for this stupidity: goyischkopf.

      • Hostage says:

        If Merkel is coming to understand that the government which controls Israeli lands (and by those I’m including Greater Israel) is Israel and that Israel is not interested in their opinion on construction projects within their territory that’s a good thing. That’s called sovereignty. Merkel has her country to run. The Knesset decides what happens in Israel. The Bundestag decides what happens in Germany.

        So you are on the record as being a supporter of the fairytale “Greater Israel” and Jewish sovereignty over territories where non-Jews constitute the majority of the inhabitants. Forget Merkel, 130 other UN countries have rejected those swelled-headed claims and recognized the state of Palestine and the neighboring Arab states that would have to included in your delusions of grandeur.

        • JeffB says:

          @Hostage

          Just for clarity by “Greater Israel” in the above I meant Mandate Palestine or more particular Mandate Palestine X Gaza and Area A. Certainly not all of trans-Jordan or all or Arabia or whatever I think you might have used the term for. I’ve actually never in person met anyone who supports those larger goals but I know BDSers seem to think this is a common belief among Zionists.

          • Hostage says:

            Just for clarity by “Greater Israel” in the above I meant Mandate Palestine

            Jews didn’t have any right to exercise sovereignty over the non-Jewish communities of the Mandate, much less to expropriate their land, displace them to other mandated territory in Asia, or to implant Jewish colonies in their place. I doubt that you are reading Merkel’s mind very accurately when you suggest that she accepts those propositions.

            Frankly, if you are going to assert rights from the Mandate era, then you’d need to respect the rights and position of the non-Jewish German (Templar) community and condition reparation agreements on the principle of reciprocity.

          • Hostage says:

            That’s it. As Jews move into territories in the West Bank they shift ownership. It ceases to be an occupation and becomes inhabitation.

            Well your immorality and immaturity are showing if you think you can revive the law of conquest in the 21st century. I don’t think that you’re reading Merkel’s state of mind on that situation at all. You’re simply engaging in wishful thinking and projection. Merkel and Netanyahu are having regular shouting matches over the issue of the settlements, and it isn’t Netanyahu’s staff that is leaking those stories to the press. The UNESCO and UN votes illustrate that Merkel’s EU partners are not willing to follow along if that’s where Merkel is trying to lead them. Many of them are completely fed up with the Zionist colonial enterprise.

            ‘Significant Escalation’: Tensions Flare in German-Israeli Relations – German-Israeli relations are at a nadir as German Chancellor Merkel begins her third term. When leaders of the countries meet next week, deals on smaller issues may be possible, but divisions over Israeli settlements will persist. — link to spiegel.de

        • JeffB says:

          @Hostage

          Jews didn’t have any right to exercise sovereignty over the non-Jewish communities of the Mandate, much less to expropriate their land, displace them to other mandated territory in Asia, or to implant Jewish colonies in their place. I doubt that you are reading Merkel’s mind very accurately when you suggest that she accepts those propositions.

          I didn’t say she accepts them I’m saying she’s them in the abstract she’s coming to the conclusion that they are none of her business. That Israel is the governing authority in those territories. I’m sure given Germany’s history there is territory that Merkel thinks should be rightfully German that isn’t. For example Poland is governing the people of Upper Silesia and I think she probably believes that she and not the Poles should be the governing authority. But she knows she isn’t, and without a war she’s unlikely to get it.

          Which territory leader X should belong to country Y isn’t the relevant question.

          Frankly, if you are going to assert rights from the Mandate era, then you’d need to respect the rights and position of the non-Jewish German (Templar) community and condition reparation agreements on the principle of reciprocity.

          I’m not asserting rights in that sense. I think I’ve been pretty clear I reject your whole framework for determining state boundaries. Territory X is party of State Y when:
          a) Y’s army is in control
          b) The population of X is loyal to Y’s government.

          That’s it. As Jews move into territories in the West Bank they shift ownership. It ceases to be an occupation and becomes inhabitation. That’s the principle of self determination. That people that live in a territory should have the right to determine who governs that territory. Governments should have the support of the governed. That’s distinguished from right of conquest because right of conquest only asserts (a) and not (b).

          The UN has conflicting positions on this framework. In principle they support self determination but in practice they believe themselves to be the final authority on boundaries and fairly freely put peoples into governing structures they reject, quite often with disastrous results. So not only don’t I think much of their moral authority I think practical they suck at drawing boundaries. The last 70 years of history of the middle east, south Asia and Africa is a testament to their incompetence in playing the role of global government. There is nothing unique about the Israeli Palestinian case in how badly the UN is handling it, they suck just about everywhere these issues come up.

          I don’t know how to be more clear. I am not asserting rights under the UN framework, I’m rejecting it as a good framework. Now on top of that I also happen to believe you are interpreting International law, including the UN in ways that are maximally hostile to Israel. For example I don’t think you can simultaneously assert occupation or apartheid; they conflict Israel can only be guilty of one or the other at most. And as a point of fact I don’t think they are guilty of either. I think if anything they are “guilty” of conquest. What’s going on in the West Bank stopped being an occupation when Israel clearly started building an infrastructure of permanent integration. The UN’s definition of occupation doesn’t allow for that to be an ongoing process with broad support, ergo it is no longer an occupation. I also happen to think in other places you stretch international law beyond reasonable interpretation like our discussion of pillage.

          So hopefully that at least clarifies the point of dispute.

      • talknic says:

        @ JeffB “If Merkel is coming to understand that the government which controls Israeli lands (and by those I’m including Greater Israel) is Israel and that Israel is not interested in their opinion on construction projects within their territory that’s a good thing. That’s called sovereignty.

        Uh huh. Problem with your stupid theory is: Israel has never legally acquired any territories “outside the State of Israel” as it was proclaimed, asked to be and was recognized ” as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947″.

        It has been illegal to acquire territory by war/force since at least 1933 link to pages.citebite.com

        On what date and who agreed to Israel legally acquiring any territories other than those it proclaimed May 15th 1948? There must be documents. Where are they? Who co-signed?

        “The Knesset decides what happens in Israel. The Bundestag decides what happens in Germany”

        Uh huh. Problem. The Knesset is also deciding what happens in non-Israeli territories the Jewish state occupies where the Knesset decides to ignore Israel’s obligation to adhere to International law and the UN Charter link to wp.me

        Unlike the Knesset, the Bundestag decides what happens IN Germany.

        “Netanyahu is doing his job in gently weaning Europe from their belief that Israel is not a sovereign nation and that their interference is acceptable”

        You’re spouting idiotic drivel. Israel is acting outside of it’s actual sovereign extent, where under the UN Charter it actually becomes other folks business.

        “The same way a teen has to have a series of fight with their parents, become their own person doing some stuff their parent agrees with and others they don’t”

        Uh huh. A teen disagreeing with their parents is in breach of International Law and the UN Charter …WOW!!!! Interesting theory.

        • JeffB says:

          @Hostage

          I don’t agree. In Judaism only God is holy, not Herod’s wall or the Temple of Cyrus. The idea that you need to go to Jerusalem or Samaria to worship or make offerings was a just a superstition peddled by the competing Temple cults as a source of income for their priests.

          The torah, the talmud, the rabbinate all disagree with you. They all think the particular location is important. You are free to not like that. You are free to say they are wrong. But their opinion that the where matters is Judaism.

        • Hostage says:

          The torah, the talmud, the rabbinate all disagree with you.

          Jerusalem isn’t even mentioned in the Torah. Some scholars believe that the books regarding the fertilty cult, Temple, and animal sacrifices were nothing but priestly forgeries. Verses like Ezekiel 18:2 and Jeremiah 7:22 don’t lend much credibility to the many conflicting verses either.

          • JeffB says:

            @Hostage

            I think at this point an orthodox Jew and not an atheist like me should be having this argument. If one of you all wants to join in, please do!

            In the torah Jews are commended to observe rites having to do with tabernacle, the dwelling place of the spirit of God. A physical box that existed in a physical place. God dwells in some sense in that box in the Torah. In the torah worship is towards that box. Then finally the tabernacle is brought into the center of the temple by Solomon.

            Absolutely as the Tanakh progresses on average God becomes less material and more spiritual. Modern Judaism takes those ideas further. But the actual Torah is pretty clearly not talking about some vague pantheistic spirit but rather a specific spirit that lives in some sense in a box that the twelve tribes are carrying around.

            Some scholars believe that the books regarding the fertilty cult, Temple, and animal sacrifices were nothing but priestly forgeries.

            Heck I don’t think there were Jews or Judaism much before the 7th century BCE, its all a “forgery” prior to the last few books of the Tanakh. I think the legends associated with Joshua in the book of Joshua probably represent a primitive Jewish God.

            But those beliefs are not Judaism. Orthodox Judaism is the religion that holds that all this stuff in the Tanakh really happened. Reform/Conservative Judaism are 20th century constructions from Orthodoxy. I’m entitled to my opinion, my opinion has better evidence than what the orthodox teach. But I’m not entitled to call my opinion the Jewish mainstream, Judaism. Judaism is what Jews say it is. Judaism can make ridiculous historical claims, and they are still Judaism even while being ridiculous.

            Christianity has Philo’s Savior Jesus intermixed with the Great Angel as some historical figure. Stupid, silly, a complete misreading of their own bible, but Christianity is the religion that accepts this misreading as correct. I don’t get to redefine it.

          • Hostage says:

            In the torah Jews are commended to observe rites having to do with tabernacle, the dwelling place of the spirit of God. A physical box that existed in a physical place. God dwells in some sense in that box in the Torah. In the torah worship is towards that box. Then finally the tabernacle is brought into the center of the temple by Solomon.

            But Solomon and his Temple were not mentioned in the Torah.

    • Donald says:

      “The main thing that Jews can do is give moral legitimacy to Christian Zionism which they are doing. It is impossible to for the PCUSA to call dispensationalism anti-Semitic when Jews institutionally consider it friendly.”

      So Jews should support a crackpot variant of Christianity which shows contempt for Palestinians and their rights, because Christian Zionists will support Israel no matter what it does.

      Someday people are going to write intellectual histories of how the fight against anti-semitism morphed into a new form of racism–racism against Palestinians. It seems like it’d be an excellent topic for a PhD dissertation or rather, a whole shelf of PhD dissertations.

      • JeffB says:

        @Donald

        So Jews should support a crackpot variant of Christianity which shows contempt for Palestinians and their rights, because Christian Zionists will support Israel no matter what it does.

        I don’t buy into crackpot. I don’t see any reason that Jews should care between Calvin and Darby anymore than they should care between Aquinas and Luther. That’s sort of a weird criticism. And of course Jews should support their friends and hope for their success while opposing their enemies.

        Someday people are going to write intellectual histories of how the fight against anti-semitism morphed into a new form of racism–racism against Palestinians.

        Israelis don’t dislike Palestinians because of their race. Mizrahi Jews are the same race as Palestinians.

        • Light says:

          Mizrahi Jews are the same race as Palestinians.

          And what race is that? Do you also think that being Hispanic is a race?

        • Ellen says:

          Wait a minute JeffB. we’ve been told for years that all Jews have a special Jewish gene. (something like the Cohen or levy gene). So If the Mizrahi Jews are the same “race” as Palestinians as you say, they must also have the special Jewish genes, making all those Palestinians……Jewish!

          Can they go home now?

          • JeffB says:

            @Ellen

            we’ve been told for years that all Jews have a special Jewish gene.

            And where did the Jews get this gene from, the gene fairy? 70 generations is a long time, there has been a lot of cross breeding with the locals. Mizrahi Jews are far closely genetically to any random Arab than they are to a Ukrainian Jew like myself.

            I don’t follow this stuff but from what I’ve heard the Cohen haplotypes has been found commonly in Catholic Italians, a South African tribe that migrated from Zimbabwe called the Lemba, Kurds, Armenians, … I know there are Jews that buy into this racist crap but I’m not one of them.

            Jews were prior to Israel a loose family of communities with lots of cross migration who shared a common religion. Zionism not DNA created the Jewish Nation.

            Can they [the Palestinians ] go home now?

            Well I don’t believe in racial inheritance of land so I don’t think it is their home. It was their great grandparent’s home. But as far as I’m concerned they should be welcomed, if they are willing to genuinely live as loyal citizens of Israel. If they want to “go home” as a 5th column for Iran, pan-Arabists and the Muslim Brotherhood, no.

        • Donald says:

          ” And of course Jews should support their friends and hope for their success while opposing their enemies.”

          This is just getting dumber and dumber. Christian Zionists who support Israel no matter what are not “friends of Jews”–they are enablers that encourage Israeli Jews to steal Palestinian land. That’s not being a friend, unless you think a friend helps an alcoholic obtain hard liquor.

          “Israelis don’t dislike Palestinians because of their race. ”

          Irrelevant. Racism isn’t a logical coherent body of thought–people hate members of group X and it doesn’t matter whether there is any actual biological basis for defining a group X. Palestinians were living in the land that Zionists claim for Jews–that makes Palestinians an obstacle. Their basic human rights are a problem, so their basic human rights had to be denied.

          • JeffB says:

            @Donald

            Christian Zionists who support Israel no matter what are not “friends of Jews”–they are enablers that encourage Israeli Jews to steal Palestinian land. That’s not being a friend, unless you think a friend helps an alcoholic obtain hard liquor…. Irrelevant. Racism isn’t a logical coherent body of thought–people hate members of group X and it doesn’t matter whether there is any actual biological basis for defining a group X

            You should maybe consider that people who disagree aren’t insane on par with alcoholics. Christian Zionists are crackpots, Israelis are addicted to taking land, Israeli are racists but their racism isn’t coherent …. I’m not sure how to debate against your assertions that everyone holds views that make no sense and they can hold these views because they have some form of mental defect.

            I think the best thing for you to do would be to read people who disagree with you.

          • kalithea says:

            @JeffB

            “Zionism not DNA created the Jewish Nation. ”

            “But as far as I’m concerned they should be welcomed, if they are willing to genuinely live as loyal citizens of Israel.”

            “I know there are Jews that buy into this racist crap but I’m not one of them.”

            Zionism created the Jewish Nation, in other words, Jews get automatic entry whether their DNA is pure or not, while Palestinians are sentenced to exile.

            You say you don’t buy into this racist crap, and yet by calling Israel the “Jewish” Nation, you seem to be buying into that racist crap.

            Exactly how would you expect a returning Palestinian majority who were ethnically cleansed for generations and had their homes, possessions and land confiscated and their hard work uprooted and destroyed to express loyalty to Israel, ahem, the Jewish State? By taking a cut in their rights so it doesn’t inconvenience and upset the Jewish minority too much?

            “If they want to “go home” as a 5th column for Iran, pan-Arabists and the Muslim Brotherhood, no.”

            Don’t worry! Palestinians would go home merely to exercise their rights that have been denied to them by your Zionist brethren for decades. Somehow I think that worries you far more than the 5th column pretext which is merely a shabby excuse for denying Palestinians their rights in perpetuity.

            Your comment proves that talk is cheap.

          • Sibiriak says:

            JeffB:

            “Zionism not DNA created the Jewish Nation. ”

            So before Zionism there was no “Jewish Nation”.

          • Donald says:

            “I think the best thing for you to do would be to read people who disagree with you.”

            I was one of those people–a Christian Zionist. I’m friends with one still. I read Zionists all the time. I also grew up around white racists. Your mental block is your inability to see that what Israel does is obviously immoral. It’s a fairly common failing–you can probably see the flaws in the thinking of white southern American racists, but are unable to see the similar set of failings in the people you support.

          • Donald says:

            “I’m not sure how to debate against your assertions that everyone holds views that make no sense and they can hold these views because they have some form of mental defect.”

            Oh, not everyone. People who defend the settlement policy are bigots with no regard for the rights of Palestinians. Whether you wish to categorize this as a “mental defect” is up to you. I’d call it a moral defect, but moral defects are usually accompanied by some flaw in reasoning. You see nothing wrong with people who defend the settlement policy and you applaud Israel for embracing Christians who support their immoral policies. So you, the Israeli settlers and the Christian Zionists all share a mutual contempt for Palestinian rights.

            So I sympathize with your dilemma. I don’t know how you’d debate me either. I suppose you could try arguing that Palestinians are subhuman and don’t have rights. From this you could conclude that Israelis are justified in taking their land and Christian Zionists are right in cheering them on. But arguing that position could get you kicked off the blog. It’s a real headscratcher.

        • Hostage says:

          I don’t buy into crackpot. I don’t see any reason that Jews should care between Calvin and Darby anymore than they should care between Aquinas and Luther. That’s sort of a weird criticism.

          I’ve commented in the past that the story of the “Samaritan” woman at the well in Ain el Askar from the Christian scriptures illustrates that many of the descendants of Jacob had ceased to consider themselves to be “Jewish” more than 2000 years ago, i.e. “Our ancestor Jacob dug this well for us.” The bottom line in that account, and the parable of the Good Samaritan, is the same whether you are a student of Calvin, Darby, Aquinas, or Luther. The time has come when believers are no longer supposed to worship God in a prescribed location, like Samaria or Jerusalem, but in spirit and in truth and one’s duty to love one’s neighbors crosses ethnic lines. Anyone who teaches you that means to support the Jews no matter what is an obvious crackpot with a different personal agenda.

          • JeffB says:

            @Hostage –

            There is mytho history and there is history.

            Worshipping in spirit and truth was Jewish Gnosticism which evolved into Christianity, though with the rise of Catholicism as the dominant form of Christianity in the 2nd century this disappeared from their theology as well. That being said, Hellenistic Judaism did not survive, Pharisaic Judaism is what survived and Pharisaic Judaism rejects that theology. In Judaism how ritual are carried out really matters to God. The people who disagree aren’t crackpots they are representing the religion that actual exits not the one they would like to exist.

            The Samaritans probably came from migrations, cultural imperialism and intermarriage. They most certainly seem to represent earlier strains of Judaism in many of the areas of conflict. But the Samaritans also believed in a location. We don’t have any evidence of a Judaism which believed our relationship with God was purely spiritual and not physical prior to the Hasmonean dynasty. So sorry, but the mainstream Jews have the better historical case.

            It would be nice if American Judaism were open to Hellenistic Judaism including Jewish Gnosticism because I think Jewish kids would find it a lot more appealing then a religion that centers of what kinds of wire allows you to carry house keys under what conditions. But the reality is the Judaism we have is the latter. People aren’t crackpots who accept the reality of who won and who lost historical battles of ideas.

          • Hostage says:

            Worshipping in spirit and truth was Jewish Gnosticism which evolved into Christianity

            I don’t agree. In Judaism only God is holy, not Herod’s wall or the Temple of Cyrus. The idea that you need to go to Jerusalem or Samaria to worship or make offerings was a just a superstition peddled by the competing Temple cults as a source of income for their priests. According to Rashi’s commentary, the Shekhinah never rested on the Temple of Cyrus. The notion that the site remained sacred to all the Jews is contradicted by both textual and archaeological evidence of many other altars and Temples in the region. I’ve read the Christian scriptures too and can’t find anything in them that supports the crackpot notion that Jerusalem should be considered a holy place either. So, I’m always mystified by Jewish and Christian Zionists who claim that it is. God is obviously NOT manifesting his presence on the so-called Temple Mount, so it was a damn good question when “MK Cabel Asks Feiglin: Are You the Messiah?” link to israelnationalnews.com

        • talknic says:

          JeffB “I don’t buy into crackpot”

          Your posts indicate otherwise

          ” And of course Jews should support their friends and hope for their success while opposing their enemies. “

          Is that why when people warn Israel for its own sake of the eventual consequences of breaking the law and UN Charter, or give Israel for its own sake hundreds of opportunities to adhere to the law via Chapt VI UNSC resolutions, they’re called biased against Israel and or self hating Jews?

          Is that why when the POTUS says the US will support and protect Israeli sovereignty, he is sh*t canned?

          “Israelis don’t dislike Palestinians because of their race”

          Uh huh. What race are they? Arab? And how many Israeli Arabs?

          By 1950 the population of Israel was 1,370,000

          There were at least 156,000 non-Jewish Arabs in Israel and some 500,000 Arab Jewish refugees from the Arab states

          That’s 656,000 Arabs of a population of about 1,370,000

          Which is about 47% not including the indigenous Arab Jews of Israel!

          Jewish Israelis dislike Palestinians because they exist in territory Israel covets. Coveting other folks property is against the most basic tenets of Judaism. The ‘Jewish’ state coveting other folks territory is irreconcilable with Judaism

      • kalithea says:

        “Someday people are going to write intellectual histories of how the fight against anti-semitism morphed into a new form of racism–racism against Palestinians.”

        I believe this may be the best darned prescient truth you ever wrote here. Highly insightful. I wish I could have expressed it!

  12. dbroncos says:

    I’ll save my enthusiasm for the PCUSA vote to divest. Until then, good for De Yoe.

  13. Naftush says:

    The piece certainly strikes every chord. Olive trees, daily struggles, violation of “every imaginable human right,” intense pain and humiliation, *intentional* destruction of a culture and a people, ethnic cleansing, incarceration for the simple crime of being Palestinian, harassing and even killing [children], exceptionalist [sins against] an indigenous people in their own land… And the American connection: masking of truth by media, guilt, unwarranted aid for which Israel is ungrateful. The solution: take Israel down. And the concluding word: apartheid.
    It takes a moment to sense the dissonance: It fits the narrative too well. It has a player-piano simulacrum sound to it. It reads like a high-school assignment where you have to write an essay using a given set of words. I suspect the whole thing.

    • mcohen says:

      Naftush says

      “suspect” narratives

      you are correct but you need to understand the presybies have been left out since the league of nations days but that still does not change the fact that the real message is ……..zionism has stuffed up but we presybies can do better.he is planting the trees a symbolic gesture on behalf of the flock back home while at the same time making the support the local indig gesture
      I read an interesting article today on al akhbar,they have a few good writers and it was on abbas and his efforts to mediate in the syrian conflict
      quiet interesting because several palestinian proposals were implemented,one on chemical weapons and also that assad remains to lead another day,geneva 2 stuff
      so here you have this guy planting trees while the palestinian leadership are busy at work controlling the narrative in syria and lebanon to there advantage.

    • just says:

      “I suspect the whole thing.”

      Of course you do, Naftush. Seems you can’t handle the truth. By, the way, Dr. DeYoes never advocated to “take Israel down”. Apartheid, cruel, Occupying Israel is doing that by itself.

      • seafoid says:

        link to haaretz.com

        “In the interview, Levin said, “My legislation will provide separate representation and separate attention to the Christian public, separate from the Muslim Arabs … This is a historic and important move that could help balance the State of Israel, and connect us and the Christians, and I’m being careful about not calling them Arabs because they aren’t Arabs.”

        According to Levin, “Christians can be directors of government companies, they will get separate representation in the local authorities, they will get equal employment opportunities. The first law I will pass will give Christians representation on the advisory council of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.”

        He added: “We and the Christians have a lot in common. They’re our natural allies, a counterweight to the Muslims who want to destroy the country from within. On the other hand, there’s a message here: We will use an iron hand and demonstrate zero tolerance of Arabs who are liable to identify with the terror of the Palestinian state.”

      • Naftush says:

        Dr. DeYoes concludes: “I really was for the two-state solution until Israeli expansionism and colonization in Palestine made that impossible [...]. It’s not my fault that the two-state solution no longer makes sense.” Sounds like take Israel down.

        • Hostage says:

          Dr. DeYoes: It’s not my fault that the two-state solution no longer makes sense.” Naftush: Sounds like take Israel down.

          No, sounds like a guy who sees the facts on the ground and accepts the reality of the proposition advanced in the political platforms and coalition agreements of the governing Israeli coalition which says there can only be one state between the river and the sea.

          It’s your own elected officials who say that Israel can’t continue to occupy the Palestinian territories and still remain a democratic and Jewish state.

    • Talkback says:

      Naftush: I suspect the whole thing.

      No, that’s just your way of denial.

    • I’ve known Rev. Jeffrey DeYoe for years and have always respected his conscience, compassion, and humility. As time goes by, I can only venerate him more for his integrity, hard work, and for the great dedication to justice that leads him to tell truths despite the risks to all who criticize the actions of the Israeli government.

      Thank you, Jeff, for your endless kindness and honor, as well as for all you’ve taught us here.

  14. mcohen says:

    Anyway the olive branch is a symbol of peace and the american eagle grasping an olive branch in one claw and arrows in another is a potent reminder of the possibilities in kerry,s framework

  15. It is tragically beyond question that the movement to equate Political Zionism with the religion of Judaism is a pernicious and dangerous attempt to brainwash gullible Jews in diaspora communities around the world, but particularly so in the US.

    The reality of the US Congress being manipulated by the Zionist lobby is an attack on democracy that is certainly not endorsed by World Jewry many of whom are angry that a political lobby can falsely claim to act in their name.

    Political Zionism which the Likud party espouses should be banned and its lobby in America should be declared a de facto foreign agent. Mr Netanyahu does not and never has represented world Jewry. He represents less than 50% of the Israeli electorate which itself is a minority of world Jewry. His claims are not only absurd but dangerous.

  16. seafoid says:

    Sometimes the older stuff is the best way to understand the cancer that is Zionism

    Le Monde Diplomatique
    link to mondediplo.com
    May, 2002

    In March, during the worst of the fighting on the West Bank, a delegation
    from the International Parliament of Writers visited Israel and Palestine.
    Among the party was Christian Salmon from France.

    The bulldozer war
    CHRISTIAN SALMON

    During the wars in former Yugoslavia the architect Bogdan Bogdanovich coined
    the term “urbicide” to describe the destruction of cities in the Balkans. In
    Palestine the violence has targeted the entire landscape. A trail of
    devastation stretches as far as the eye can see: a jumble of demolished
    buildings, levelled hillsides and flattened forests. This barrage of
    concentrated damage has been wrought not only by the bombs and tanks of
    traditional warfare, but by industrious, vigorous destruction that has
    toppled properties like a violent tax assessor.

    A concrete-and-asphalt ugliness now mars some of the most beautiful views in
    the world. Hillsides have been carved up for bypass roads to Israeli
    settlements. On either side of the road Palestinian homes have been
    destroyed, olive trees uprooted and orange orchards razed, on behalf of
    enhanced visibility. All that remains is a no-man’s land topped by
    watchtowers. In the hostilities, the omnipresent bulldozers have as much
    strategic importance as the tanks. Never before has such an innocuous piece
    of equipment augured such violence and brutality.

    Unplanned development is not at issue, nor are the concrete jungles of
    Israel’s Mediterranean coastline nor the forces of heartless capitalism. No,
    I am reminded of the efforts of the former Soviet Union’s Gosplan, as if
    this destruction was being overseen by a state planning committee and the
    wilful hand of Israel was striving to erase the past. The twin mind-sets of
    construction and destruction have long coexisted here. In the 1950s
    thousands of pine trees, not olives, not oranges, were planted to wipe out
    traces of destroyed Palestinian villages; agricultural development was then
    hailed as a hallmark of civilisation. But today, in thrall to the forces of
    destruction, the gardener’s hand has turned against the land, slashing and
    plundering, uprooting, displacing and depopulating. All geographical
    settings contain intelligible signs and landmarks that bear witness to the
    narrative of history; but the painful realisation on entering Palestine is
    how profoundly the topography has been altered: the landmarks have been
    erased, producing disorientation.

    No concerted effort is being made to create a Palestinian state, a
    binational entity or even two separate Israeli and Palestinian states.
    Instead the forces at work here seek geographic fragmentation and
    dissolution, the abolition of the land itself. It would not be the first
    time that places and streets were renamed or localities taken apart before
    being remade anew. In Bosnia this was known as “memoricide”, the murder of
    the past. Here mere name changes are not enough: forests, hillsides and
    roadways must be completely deconstructed. The territory has been mutilated.
    We know that geography’s primary purpose is to serve the needs of war. But
    in Palestine, war is designed mostly to conquer geography.

    Official speeches and UN resolutions often fail to mention an important
    thing: this soil contains the interwoven strands of thousands of years of
    human history, the strata of numerous cultures and civilisations. The
    countryside and the roads, the fields and the olive groves are the
    endangered legacy of all humankind. Unesco was rightly alarmed when statues
    of the Buddha were destroyed by the Taliban in Afghanistan’s Bamiyan Valley.
    Will we stand by impassively while Palestine is reduced to fields of ruins
    and Jerusalem becomes another Beirut? Who will speak out against the
    obliteration of Palestine’s natural and archaeological sites?

    Destruction

    During the week we spent in Ramallah, Gaza and Rafah, all we saw was
    destruction: villages, roads and homes, all demolished. Crops have been
    burned and public services bombarded. Missiles from helicopter gunships or
    F-16 fighter planes have destroyed newly completed civilian infrastructure.
    The European Commission has compiled an extraordinary list of the EU-funded
    projects that have been damaged. These include Gaza international airport,
    Gaza seaport, Ramallah’s Voice of Palestine radio station, Bethlehem’s
    Intercontinental Hotel and a forensic laboratory. Municipal infrastructure
    including schools, public housing projects, roads, sewers and recycling
    centres have been destroyed, together with the administrative offices of a
    peace project in Jenin, reforestation projects in Beit Lahia, the central
    statistics office in Ramallah and irrigation systems in Jericho. In total 17
    projects valued at $15.58m. Does anyone believe that all these sites were
    terrorist hideouts?

    We visited a razed village near Rafah on the Egyptian border and walked
    among the rubble of bulldozed homes. Exercise books, kitchen utensils and a
    toothbrush were strewn about, signs of life reduced to pieces. One woman
    told us that residents were given five minutes to leave their homes in the
    middle of the night. The bulldozers returned several times to “finish the
    job”; these three words may well become the Israeli army’s catchphrase.
    Mounted high atop the watchtowers, infrared machine guns watch over the
    wasteland. There are no soldiers about. At night the guns fire automatically
    as soon as any lights are turned on. The first few rows of houses are
    riddled with bullet holes and their residents face the constant threat of
    automatic weapons fire. This must be how buffer zones are created.

    Like some stinging insect bent on inflicting injury, the war machine is in
    perpetual motion, spreading boundaries wherever it goes, patiently and
    absent-mindedly. Here the border is an all-pervasive force, cutting through
    street corners, hillsides, villages, even houses. Military fortifications
    have replaced the olive groves. City walls are all reinforced, each one a
    hostile presence. Any private home might conceal a lurking sniper.
    Checkpoints loom up at every bend in the road, sometimes every 100m; there
    are over 700 in the West Bank alone. Because some roads are blocked off,
    travelling to Bir Zeit University means you have to take a bus and a taxi as
    well as walking part of the way. The occupied territories have become a grid
    of impenetrable cells, with the Israeli army controlling all access in and
    out. There are some 220 of these rat traps – perhaps reservations or ghettos
    might be a better term – with battalions of Merkava tanks and Apache
    helicopters (supplied by the US military) on constant patrol.

    This is a new type of frontier: portable, porous and hazy, a border in
    motion. One evening we climbed with Mahmoud Darwish, the poet, to the top of
    a small hill in Ramallah, where we looked out on the twinkling lights of
    Jerusalem only a few kilometres away. In the foreground lay areas in shadow,
    with only a few scattered lights from Palestinian homes. To our right off in
    the distance, there was a zone of bright light with a deserted illuminated
    roadway leading to an Israeli settlement. And amid this shimmering
    nightscape, I could pick out the border.

    The Israeli occupation comes down to this: the right to determine what will
    be illuminated and what will be cast into darkness, what will be rendered
    visible or invisible, accessible or inaccessible. The border governs every
    aspect, even the division of light and shadow, like some supernatural
    apparition.

    Shifting, furtive border

    The Polish writer, Tadeusz Konwicki, once said of his homeland: “My country
    is on wheels: its borders shift in keeping with the latest treaty.” The
    situation is even worse here in Palestine: the border shifts like a swarm of
    locusts in the wake of another suicide attack, like the onset of a sudden
    storm. It might arrive at your doorstep like a delivery in the night, as
    quickly as the tanks can roll in; or it may slip in slowly, like a shadow.
    The border keeps creeping along, surrounding villages and watering places.
    It is a mobile phenomenon, like the specially designed walls we saw in
    Rafah: the dull partitions of an evolving habitat, easily transportable to
    keep pace with the ever-expanding settlements.

    The border is furtive as well: like the rocket launchers, it crushes and
    disintegrates space, transforming it into a frontier, into bits of
    territory. This frontier paralyses the ebb and flow of transit instead of
    regulating it. It no longer serves to protect, instead transforming all
    points into danger zones, all persons into living targets or suicide
    bombers. It has ceased to be a peaceful boundary designed to separate two
    autonomous lands, to assign a rightful place to each, to endow a given space
    with its distinctive shape, form and colour. The border here is meant to
    repress, displace and disorganise. In Israel and Palestine alike the very
    concept of territory has become hostile, devoid of content or contours,
    making insecurity the norm. In the words of the French poet, René Char, “To
    stifle distance is to kill”.

    There are windows with narrow openings to accommodate guns, wall after wall
    of high façades, row upon row of buildings: this is the city-as-barracks.
    The Israeli settlements present a series of closed-off architectural forms
    that embody the feeling of self-confinement. No doubt this is due to
    security constraints but it also reveals an obsession with space, a
    conception of space based on fear and repression. “The truth of an era”,
    said the Austrian writer, Hermann Broch, about late 19th century Vienna,
    “may generally be read in its architectural façades”. If Broch’s conclusion
    is correct, the building façades in the Israeli settlements are slogans that
    betray a sense of environmental panic, a fear of the outside world, the
    antithesis of hospitality-of-place.

    This is exophobia, a fear of the outside world, the converse of the process
    of occupation: the further you advance into enemy territory, the more you
    retreat into yourself. This holds for Israeli society in general. It is not
    exo-colonialism, to borrow the term used by the French architect and writer,
    Paul Virilio, as illustrated by the outward-looking style of Spanish
    colonial architecture in Latin America. This is endo-colonialism, an
    inward-looking variety that seeks more than the appropriation of enemy
    territory: it breeds dispossession, a withdrawal into itself. Its sign is
    the military bunker.

    The political debates and media coverage have failed to address an important
    issue: Israel’s colonisation of the occupied territories is not only
    unethical and illegal, it is impracticable. Indeed it is founded on a sense
    of unbearable living that is peculiar to the pathologies of exile and also
    afflicts those living in refugee camps. Strictly speaking, the Israeli
    settlements are uninhabitable places, not just uncomfortable, dangerous or
    impractical over the long term. The settlements show the impossible side of
    habitation that goes hand in hand with the question of return. They are an
    anti-urban development, based on warfare, as we might speak of a war-based
    economy. This is civil development founded on incivility.

    Hence the paradoxes. The settlements are extravagant, in the etymological
    sense of the word (from the Latin extra + vagare, to wander). Ensuring
    security within areas having a Palestinian majority – there are 5,000
    settlers versus 1.5m Palestinians in the Gaza Strip – requires constant
    vigilance and complete control over traffic entering and leaving the areas.
    An Israeli settler driving by creates traffic jams on the side roads, which
    are blocked off by checkpoints. This roadside version of apartheid obliges
    the inventive civilian population to come up with ever-greater feats of
    nerve.

    In Gaza we saw roads separated by high walls forming a bridge, a
    work-in-progress stretching across the occupied territories. Somebody
    mentioned a scheme that involved lining the roads with crocodile-infested
    canals. Although this proposal may seem far-fetched, it shows the prevailing
    mood. The Israeli transport minister even estimated the cost of building a
    viaduct to link Gaza and the West Bank, a grandiose project worthy of the
    pharaohs. Whether true or not, such plans indicate the climate of panic. The
    Other must be cast out or warded off. The choice boils down to repression or
    immobilisation. Never have so many people been confined to such a small
    area. Traffic between Israel and the occupied territories has been totally
    blocked off, with large numbers of Palestinians complaining of house arrest.
    Meeting with other people is impossible because of the traffic restrictions,
    which also make travel between Ramallah and Gaza impossible. Even a trip
    within the Gaza Strip can take longer than the flight from Tel Aviv to New
    York. In the occupied territories Israel is occupying time as well as space,
    with people facing long lines at checkpoints before being allowed to return
    home.

    Over decades the Israelis have abandoned the utopia of the kibbutzes for the
    atopia, the nowhere, of the settlements. People were fond of saying in the
    1960s that they tried to make the desert bloom and the kibbutz exerted a
    powerful appeal. Since then the biblical garden has become a desert, a
    wasteland, a battlefield.

    The bulldozers on the roadsides are the troubling acknowledgement of this.
    The key question is not the one posed by Kafka – “What must we do in order
    to live?” – since the goal here is not living, but dislodging and
    destruction. This is the first war to be waged with bulldozers. This is an
    attempt at deterritorialisation without historical precedent. This is total
    warfare that targets the civilian population and the land . This is war in
    an age of agoraphobia, a fear of open spaces, seeking not the division of
    territory but its abolition.

    Christian Salmon is the author of Tombeau de la fiction, Denoël, Paris, 1999
    and Censure! Censure!, Stock, Paris, 2000. He is also the founder and
    executive director of the International Writers’ Parliament, for which he
    edits the journal Autodafé

    Translated by Luke Sandford

  17. Thanks, seafoid, for this essay and all you give.

    • seafoid says:

      Cheers

      I just think it’s so consistent over time. They never wanted a Palestinian state.

      link to groups.google.com

      13:03 18/12/2001 Last update – 15:03 18/12/2001
      Tourism Minister: If they lose war Arabs will be
      expelled

      Tourism Minister Binyamin Elon of the far-right
      National Union said Tuesday that if the Palestinians
      continue their violence against Israel and are
      defeated, they will ultimately be expelled from their
      homes, adding that he personally was aiding
      “Judaization” in aiding Arabs in East Jerusalem and
      elsewhere to emigrate to the United States.

      Elon, the chairman of the National Union’s Moledet
      wing, became tourism minister after the October
      assassination of Moledet founder Rehavam Ze’evi. A
      rabbi, he first rose to prominence as the head of an
      East Jerusalem yeshiva built on land captured from
      Jordan in the 1967 Six Day War.

      Although Ze’evi openly advocated “transfer” of
      Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza Strip, he
      generally spoke of “voluntary transfer” or “transfer
      by choice” rather than expulsion.

      “If they do not stop the war that they initiated, they
      must understand that there is no such thing as a
      luxury war (a war without suffering or consequences),
      and that when they lose the war, they will be expelled
      from here, in the course of the war, all of them,
      plain and simple,” Elon told Army Radio, adding that:

      “A people which opens a war against us must understand
      that if it loses the war, it will cost them, and the
      price will be expulsion. Just as their leaders led
      them into Naqba (Arabic for the Catastrophe of the
      Israeli victory) in ’48, Arafat, the irrelevant, the
      wicked, this murderer, is leading into a disaster, and
      they must understand this. They must throw him the
      heck out.”

      A total of 1,000 Israelis have been killed or wounded
      since the Palestinian uprising began in late 2000,
      Elon said. “There’s a limit. They (the Palestinians)
      have to decide whether they want to live peaceably
      with us, or to expel us from our land. It is they who
      will be expelled, not us.”

      He said many Palestinians had already left East
      Jerusalem and the territories, some with the active
      aid of rightist Jews. “I personally take part in this.
      There are people for whom I make sure they receive
      compensation. They leave their houses in Jerusalem and
      in other places, and move to America or other places.
      This is a positive thing and it should be encouraged.”

      “This happens all the time,” Elon continued. “There
      are houses in Jerusalem in which I, thank the Lord, am
      an active partner in their Judaization.”

      Asked when was the last time an East Jerusalem family
      recently pulled up stakes and moved to America, Elon
      replied: “There are several. Here in the Shimon
      Hatzadik neighborhood there are a few, and in other
      neighborhoods. I don’t want to list all the names,
      because they sometimes have their own personal
      distress, but they are no longer here, and today Jews
      live in the houses.”

      Elon said a quiet majority of Israelis supported
      transfer and believed that it would be the ultimately
      result of continued fighting.

      “It’s true that the government has not yet decided on
      transfer, but the majority of the people understands
      that this is the solution that will be, and that this
      will be the result caused by the war, and the one who
      has caused this to happen to them (the Palestinians)
      will be Arafat himself.”

      “If they make war on us and do not willing to stop and
      we call on them again and again to make peace, and
      they are unwilling to stop, then just as the War of
      Liberation ended with a demographic and geographic
      change, so too will this war.”

      Elon, the chairman of the National Union’s Moledet
      wing, became tourism minister after the October
      assassination of Moledet founder Rehavam Ze’evi. A
      rabbi, he first rose to prominence as the head of an
      East Jerusalem yeshiva built on land captured from
      Jordan in the 1967 Six Day War.

      Although Ze’evi openly advocated “transfer” of
      Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza Strip, he
      generally spoke of “voluntary transfer” or “transfer
      by choice” rather than expulsion.
      On Sunday, National Union leaders held a meeting to
      decided whether to remain in the government. Elon was
      among the party figures arguing strongly for staying a
      part of the government, arguing that large-scale IDF
      ground and air operations against Arafat’s Authority
      and suspected terrorist targets were proof that the
      government was finally coming around to the hard line
      espoused by the National Union.

      “Today my sense is that Foreign Minister Peres and his
      (Labor party) comrades are mulling whether to leave
      the government. And they should be the ones to leave
      the government, if someone needs to go, and disturb
      the unity (government) and not me, because my feeling
      today is that I have influence in this government.”

      And still the bots claim good faith. Like that letter to the Palestinians. “Let’s all join hands and pray for justice in the Middle East”. As if.

      Elon’s modern day equivalent is Bennett.

      • seafoid says:

        link to theguardian.com

        Camp David failed because Israeli hardliners manipulated intelligence

        David Hirst
        Saturday July 17, 2004
        The Guardian

        In his memoirs, the former US president Bill Clinton writes that the Camp David summit, of which this month marks the fourth anniversary, was the greatest failure of his career. And that, he says, was overwhelmingly Yasser Arafat’s doing – for, unlike Israeli premier Ehud Barak, who had been ready for “enormous concessions”, the Palestinian leader couldn’t “make the final jump from revolutionary to statesman”. There is one reason that, even if he believes this, he should not, even now, be so publicly proclaiming it. Camp David was essentially Barak’s brainchild. Desperate for a breakthrough in the moribund peace process, he conceived the gambit of telescoping both the still unaccomplished “interim phases” of the Oslo agreement and “final-status” issues into one grand, climactic conclave that would “end the 100-year conflict”. Clinton only persuaded a deeply reluctant Arafat to attend at all by pledging not to blame him for an inglorious outcome. But blame him is precisely what Clinton did at the time. And that he should still be doing so renders his partisanship even more grossly out of place. For the controversy of which it is a part has moved on – and much in Arafat’s favour. It revolves around a second case, almost as momentous as Iraq, where intelligence was politicised and corrupted to serve a preconceived agenda.

        The story began with that ill-fated conference; it was the turning point, most agree, that led to the intifada. But who was actually to blame for this is where the disagreement lies. The standard Israeli version, to which Clinton thus lends weight, is that Arafat was. Yet this version, already heavily eroded, has just suffered another damning blow from a quarter more authoritative than Clinton – Amos Malka, the head of Israeli military intelligence at the time.

        The chief mantra of this version was that Arafat proved himself “no partner for peace”. He was bent on the destruction of Israel by demographic means. He engineered the failure of diplomacy so as to justify a resort to violence. This theory had enormous consequences that persist to this day. It was bought by just about the entire Israeli public. For the Israeli right, the intifada only showed that Arafat remained the “killer and murderer” they always said he was. But the left also bought Barak’s contention that at Camp David he had “exposed Arafat’s true face”. For those who self-righteously felt that they had done so much to promote the peace process, the intifada – even before the suicide bombers – betrayed the trust they had placed in him. The genuine “peace camp” dwindled almost to nothing. Before long, both left and right were ready for the “saviour” who promised a simple military solution; Sharon replaced Barak at the head of the most bellicose Israeli government ever. America bought it too, with the press almost unanimously outdoing Clinton himself in praise of the “most generous Israeli offer ever” and condemnation of the “rejectionist” Arafat. The partisanship came to full fruition under the Bush administration, especially after 9/11. For Bush, Arafat became the “obstacle to peace” who had to be replaced, democratically, by leaders untainted by “corruption and terrorism”.

        And this year, agreeing with Sharon that Israel had “no Palestinian partner with whom it is possible to make progress on a bilateral peace process”, he endorsed Sharon’s scheme for “unilateral disengagement” from Gaza, and its quid pro quo: Israel’s right to retain almost all its illegal settlements and the vast swath of the West Bank in which they are located. Though Arafat did seek to turn the intifada to his own advantage, this in essence was a spontaneous, popular revolt against Israel’s continued occupation, and against the realisation that Oslo could never end it – as well as, implicitly, against Arafat and his insistence that it could. What the evolving controversy now increasingly confirms is what a few dissident Israelis contended from the outset: the charge that Arafat “instigated” or “orchestrated” the intifada would be more aptly directed at the Israeli officials, politicians and military leaders who levelled it. For these people actually wanted the intifada, were preparing for it and, when it came, fanned its flames with the massively disproportionate use of force against unarmed Palestinian demonstrators and stone-throwers. Sharon, who held Oslo to be “the greatest misfortune ever to have befallen Israel” and considered the intifada the opportunity to destroy it, was foremost among them. But, his “generous offer” notwithstanding, the “moderate” Barak, Sharon’s political rival but admiring military disciple, was among them too. In the first place it was not Arafat who blew up Camp David. Robert Malley, Clinton’s adviser at the conference, and others have long since exhaustively debunked this for the almost ludicrously partisan myth it was. In their view, Barak himself contributed more to the collapse than Arafat.

        And now comes Malka, the former intelligence chief, who flatly asserts that the evaluations of Arafat’s intentions and actions on which Barak, and later Sharon, relied were “erroneous”, and deliberately so. They were the handiwork of one man, who occupied a key position in the Israeli policy-making process: Amos Gilad, the head of the military intelligence research department. He presented “national security assessments” to the government. Crucially, he only did so orally, because, as he put it, “they [ministers] don’t read”. But even more crucially, according to Malka, his oral reports were at variance with the written ones of his bureau, an inconsistency he made good by “retroactively rewriting them”. For these written reports just couldn’t support what, via his misrepresentations, became the orthodox, highly negative view of Arafat.

        “And who,” asks the peace activist Uri Avneri, “is this man who has had a greater influence than any other person on the policies of Israel over the last few crucial years, and whose ‘concept’ is still directing the path of the state? It is the very same Amos Gilad, who [recently] claimed the benefits due to disabled army veterans. He was not wounded in battle, but claimed that the stress of his difficult job had inflicted on him irreversible mental damage. When did this mental damage start, the first symptoms appear? When he started endlessly repeating that Arafat wants to throw us into the sea? Or was this declaration itself a symptom of his mental problem?”

        The controversy has earned little of the Israeli, let alone international, attention it richly deserves. But if the scandal constitutes bad news about the way in which a coterie of generals and generals-turned-politicians increasingly makes the real decisions in Israel, perhaps worse is the way it helps to make them in the US. James Bamford’s bestseller, Pretext for War, is the latest in the torrent of books on the Bush White House. It has long been clear that Israel played a big part in urging America to war in Iraq. Now it seems from Bamford’s account that Israel was deeply involved, too, in supplying phoney intelligence to justify it.

        · David Hirst reported from the Middle East for the Guardian from 1963 to 2001

        • thanks for everything seafoid. over and over and over again.

          • Citizen says:

            And now Bill is running with Hillary for POTUS as a “twofer.” The first book praising them in anticipation is out, and the two authors are making the News circuits, the man doing slightly better than his co-author woman, to disguise this early propaganda for next POTUS. The cover of the book reminds me of the poster plastered all over during Hitler’s campaign, with the total black background and the genteel, earnest face highlighted thereby…

  18. seafoid says:

    link to dissidentvoice.org

    The Penal Colonies
    by Tanya Reinhart
    http://www.dissidentvoice.org
    June 29, 2002

    Send this page to a friend! (click here)

    The Gaza strip is a perfect realization of the Israeli vision of “separation.” Surrounded with electric fences and army posts, completely sealed off the outside world, Gaza has become a huge prison. About one-third of its land was confiscated for the 7,000 Israeli settlers living there (and their defense array), while over a million Palestinians are crowded in the remaining areas of the prison. With no work or sources of income, about 80% of its residents depend, for their living, on the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinians in the Near East (UNRWA), or contributions from Arab states and charity organizations. Now Israel is considering the imprisonment there of families of suicide bombers from the West Bank. (1) As a senior Israeli analyst stated, Gaza can now serve as “the penal colony” of Israel, its “devils island, Alcatraz”. (Nahum Barnea, Yediot Aharonot, June 21, 2002).

    This is the future that Sharon and the Israeli army designate for the West Bank as well. While the external fence is presently being built, Israel’s current military operation is set to be the final step in the implementation of IDF plans for reestablishing full military rule (which was abolished in large parts of the West Bank during the Oslo process). Though Israel describes everything it does as a spontaneous reaction to terror, the plan was fully spelled out in the Israeli media already back in March 2001, soon after Sharon entered office. Alex Fishman, military and strategic analyst of Yediot Aharonot, explained at the time that since Oslo, “the IDF regarded the occupied territories as if they were one territorial cell”, and this placed some constraints on the IDF and enabled a certain amount of freedom for the PA and the Palestinian population. The new plan is a return to the concept of the military administration during the pre-Oslo years: the occupied territories will be divided into tens of isolated “territorial cells,” each of which will be assigned a special military force, “and the local commander will have freedom to use his discretion” as to when and who to shoot. (Yediot Ahronot, weekend supplement, March 9, 2001)

    The first stage of this plan, the destruction of the institutions of the Palestinian Authority, was completed in the previous �Operation Defensive Shield� in April of this year. In practice, from that time on, the towns and villages of the West Bank have been completely sealed. Even exit by foot, which was possible up to that point, became blocked, and movement between the “territorial cells” now requires formal permits from the Israeli military authorities. Soldiers and snipers prevent any “unauthorized” walking to agricultural fields, to places of work and study, or for medical treatment.

    However, unlike the pre-Oslo period of Israeli military rule, the army makes it clear that there is no intention to construct any civil administration that will take care of the basic daily needs of the two million Palestinians, such as food supplies, health services, garbage and sewage. For these tasks, some form of a Palestinian Authority will be maintained, though in practice it will not be allowed to function.

    As a �military source� told Ha’aretz: �Internal conclusions of the security echelons, following operation �Defensive Shield’, assessed that the functioning of the civil branches of the Palestinian Authority had reached an unprecedented nadir, mainly due to the destruction the IDF operation left behind in Ramallah (including the systematic destruction of computers and databases)… Combined with the severe restrictions on movement, the Palestinian population is becoming, as the military source defined it, ‘poor, dependent, unemployed, rather hungry, and extreme’… The financial reserves of the Palestinian authority are reaching the bottom… In a future not far off, the majority of Palestinians will only be able to maintain a reasonable life through the help of international aid.� (Amos Har’el, Ha’aretz, Hebrew edition, June 23, 2002)

    Thus, the West Bank is being driven to the level of poverty of the Gaza strip.

    Nevertheless, at the same time that Israel deprives the Palestinians of their means of income, it also makes a substantial effort to diminish or block international aid, under the pretext that the aid is used to support terrorists or their families. At the outset of its new �operation,� Israel �decided to stop the flow of food-aid and medicine from Iran and Iraq to Palestinians in the territories� (Amos Har’el, Ha’aretz, June 24, 2002). Iranian and Iraqi aid is an easy target for Israel, as these countries belong to the “Axis of Evil.” However, Israel started launching a more ambitious campaign: The EU, the largest PA donor, is under constant pressure from Israel to cut its aid, which is used, inter alia to pay the salaries of teachers and health workers. The tactics are always the same: Israel provides some documents presumably linking the PA to terror. Any aid to the PA is, therefore, aid to terror. (2)

    UNRWA’s aid is the next target. UNRWA has become a major source of food for Palestinians in the besieged territories. Its food supplies are now delivered not only to the refugee camps, but also in towns and villages. The amount of food UNRWA supplies has increased fourfold in two years. (3) Recently, �Israel has begun a campaign in the United States and the United Nations to urge a reconsideration of the way the UN Relief and Works Agency, which runs the Palestinian refugee camps in the West Bank and Gaza, operates. Israel charges that UNRWA workers simply ignored the fact that Palestinian organizations were turning the camps into terrorist bases and it is demanding the agency start reporting all military or terrorist actions within the camps to the UN…. Meanwhile, Jewish and pro-Israeli lobbyists in the U.S. are waging a parallel campaign … American Jewish lobbyists are basing their efforts on the fact that the U.S. currently contributes some 30 percent of UNRWA’s $400 million a year budget, and is therefore in a position to influence the agency: A congressional refusal to approve UNRWA’s funding could seriously disrupt its operations.� (Nathan Guttman, Ha’aretz, June 29, 2002).

    The campaign is not yet demanding cutting UNRWA’s aid and presence altogether, but raising the impossible demand that UNRWA should serve as an active force in “the war against terror” (“reporting military or terrorist actions”) is the first step towards such a demand. (4)

    Since September 11, Sharon has been constructing an analogy between the occupied territories and Afghanistan (with the PA as Al Qaeda). He keeps declaring that the solution to Palestinian terror, and the required �reforms,� should be along the lines set in Afghanistan. The analogy is frighteningly revealing: As it established the �reforms� in Afghanistan, the US forced starvation upon millions of people. This is how Noam Chomsky described it: �On Sept. 16, the New York Times reported that �Washington has also demanded [from Pakistan] a cutoff of fuel supplies…and the elimination of truck convoys that provide much of the food and other supplies to Afghanistan’s civilian population.� Astonishingly, that report elicited no detectable reaction in the West, a grim reminder of the nature of the Western civilization that leaders and elite commentators claim to uphold. In the following days, those demands were implemented… �The country was on a lifeline,� one evacuated aid worker reports, �and we just cut the line� (NY Times Magazine, September 30). According to the world’s leading newspaper, then, Washington demanded that Pakistan ensures the death of enormous numbers of Afghans, millions of them already on the brink of starvation, by cutting off the limited sustenance that was keeping them alive. (Interview with Michael Albert, reprinted in Noam Chomsky, 9-11, Seven Stories, 2002).

    Arundhati Roy summarized this at the time: “Witness the infinite justice of the new century. Civilians starving to death while they’re waiting to be killed” (�The Algebra of Infinite Justice,� The Guardian, UK, Sept. 29, 2001).

    The new stage of Israel’s �separation� can no longer be compared to the Apartheid of South Africa. As Ronnie Kasrils, South Africa’s Minister of Water Affairs, said in an Interview with Al-Ahram Weekly, “the South African apartheid regime never engaged in the sort of repression Israel is inflicting on the Palestinians” (Issue of March 28-April 3, 2002). We are witnessing the daily invisible killing of the sick and wounded being deprived of medical care, the weak who cannot survive in the new poverty conditions, and those who are bound to reach starvation.

    Nevertheless, the public debate in Israel revolves around questions of efficiency: Is it possible to stop terror with such methods. Let us suppose even that it is. Is it allowed? Is this what we (Israelis) want to be?

    One people stole the �Lamb of its poor neighbor� (5): Gaza and the West Bank are 22% of the land of Israel/Palestine, where the Palestinians lived in the past. On this small piece of land, three million people live, with hopes, needs and dreams, just like ours. Since Oslo, they have been lured with promises that we are about to evacuate the settlements and give them back their land, at the very same time that we have been imprisoning them in Gaza, stealing more of their land in the West Bank, and leaving them no hope whatsoever. The Palestinian people are fighting for their freedom. The crimes of Palestinian terror do not remove our culpability for our own crimes.

    Before Oslo, as well, there was a wave of horrible terror attacks. But at that time, after each such attack, the call was heard: get out of the territories! Then it was still understood that when you leave people no hope, there is no way to stop the madness of suicide bombing. It is not too late to get out of the territories.

    Tanya Reinhart is a Professor of Linguistics at Tel Aviv University. She is the author of Israel/Palestine: How to End the War of 1948 Seven Stories Press, 2002). This is an expanded version of an article that appeared in the Israeli daily Yediot Aharonot, June 30, 2002. Visit her website at: link to tau.ac.il

    Endnotes

    (1) In its meeting on Friday, June 21, 2002, the Israeli cabinet “decided in principle in favor both of the expulsion of families of suicide strikers from the West Bank to the Gaza Strip… The implementation of this expulsion policy depends upon the outcome of a legal review.” (�IDF set to expel bombers’ families,� by Aluf Benn, Amos Harel and Gideon Alon, Ha’aretz, June 23, 2002)

    (2) Here is one example of the pressure on the EU:

    “The documents seized from PA offices in recent months, some of which were included in the document compiled by minister without portfolio Dan Naveh following Operation Defensive Shield, were presented last week to the EC delegation in Israel and representatives of the International Monetary Fund at a meeting with IDF intelligence officers. Naveh claims the documents prove European financial aid has been used to finance terrorism and incitement, and has also found its way into the pockets of senior PA officials.

    The head of the EC’s delegation to Israel, Giancarlo Chevallard, told Ha’aretz that at the meeting, the delegation saw evidence that Arafat is financing terrorism, but added Israel had not provided evidence that European financial aid which is designated to pay the salaries of PA employees is being used to finance terrorist attacks. Another senior delegation official said he was extremely skeptical Israel had evidence to prove European aid is being used by the PA to finance terrorism…

    Meanwhile, in the shadow of the Israeli accusations, the European Parliament’s budgetary committee last week delayed the transfer of 18.7 million euros in financial aid to the PA until the EC reports how the money is to be distributed…” (Yair Ettinger, Ha’aretz, June 6, 2002)

    This specific frozen amount was released in the meanwhile, however Israel’s pressure continues.

    (3) Amos Har’el, �The IDF neutralizes the Palestinian Authority, and humanitarian organizations try to replace it,� Ha’aretz Hebrew edition, June 23, 2002. (Quoted before).

    (4). The campaign against UNRWA started earlier: “In letters written to Annan in May, Republican U.S. Senator Arlen Specter and Democratic U.S. Representative Tom Lantos accused the U.N. agency of allowing and promoting terrorist activity in the camps. Specter said UNRWA schools promoted anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic sentiments and Lantos said the agency allowed terrorists to organize in the camps.” (Inter Press Service, June 24, 2002)

    (5) Bible, Samuel II, 12:11: “12:1 The LORD sent Natan to David. He came to him, and said to him, �There were two men in one city; the one rich, and the other poor. 12:2 The rich man had very many flocks and herds, 12:3 but the poor man had nothing, except one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and raised. It grew up together with him, and with his children. It ate of his own food, drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was to him like a daughter. 12:4 A traveler came to the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man who had come to him, but took the poor man’s lamb, and dressed it for the man who had come to him.” (link to ebible.org)

  19. Mayhem says:

    There is all this hoo haa about Zionism, but not a word about the other ‘ism’ Islamism, which has led to far more conflict, killing and abuse, which is evident every SINGLE day.
    Such disproportionate behavior by anti-Zionists proves that they possess a manifestly perverse and distorted view of the world.

    • Citizen says:

      US taxpayers pay for lots of slams against Islamic people, and they pay for lots of support of likud Israel. If you disagree, tell us why and how, and what that means.

      • Mayhem says:

        US taxpayers pay for lots of slams against Islamic people, and they pay for lots of support of likud Israel

        Do Zionists blow up buildings all round the world?
        Do Zionists dispatch terrorist emissaries to kill innocent civilians?
        Do Zionists engage in religious wars where they massacre Zionists who disagree with their views?
        Do Zionists follow a doctrine that advances global jihad?
        @citizen, the money that goes towards Israel (not just likud Israel) is to maintain and protect a tiny nation from possible annihilation.
        The money the US invests stops the Middle East from descending into an Islamic inferno.

        • RoHa says:

          “Do Zionists blow up buildings all round the world?
          Do Zionists dispatch terrorist emissaries to kill innocent civilians?”

          I’d baulk at describing British Cabinet Ministers as “innocent”, but work your way through this little list anyway.

          link to guardian.150m.com

      • Hostage says:

        Do Zionists blow up buildings all round the world?
        Do Zionists dispatch terrorist emissaries to kill innocent civilians?
        Do Zionists engage in religious wars where they massacre Zionists who disagree with their views?
        Do Zionists follow a doctrine that advances global jihad?

        @ Mayhem If you check the comment archives, you’ll find we’ve discussed the fact that Zionists have blown up ships full of refugees, buildings, airports, nuclear reactors, and you name it, in places like Palestine, the neighboring states, Tunisia, Iraq, and Iran. Zionists most certainly have dispatched terrorists who have assassinated plenty of innocent officials and civilians, almost from the moment the movement was established, e.g. Jacob Israël de Haan, Walter Guinness, Manuel Allende Salazar, Folke Bernadotte, Ahmed Bouchiki. & etc. Zionists have also promoted a hateful anti-Gentile doctrine from the moment Pinsker and Herzl picked-up their pens and began to write embarrassing racist claptrap like Judeophobia and Der Judenstaat.

    • talknic says:

      Mayhem “There is all this hoo haa about Zionism, but not a word about the other ‘ism’ Islamism”

      One should clean up one’s own back yard first. The Zionist Movement’s state” link to pages.citebite.com is in breach of International Law and the UN Charter link to wp.me

      ” but not a word about the other ‘ism’ Islamism, which has led to far more conflict, killing and abuse, which is evident every SINGLE day.”

      The illegal acquisition of non-Israeli territory by Israel and the dispossession of the Palestinians has continued EVERY SINGLE DAY for 65 years. Every Jew should be concerned when their homeland state has been delegitimizing itself for as long as it has existed.

    • Naftush says:

      Much of the stuff here is about Zionism qua Zionism. All the rest — Palestinians, Americans, Europeans, non-Zionist Jews, even lots of Zionists — are mere cardboard cutouts. The worldview has no room for Islamism or just about anything else. It’s an inverted Israel-firstism, i.e., “You gotta start somewhere,” get rid of Israel first and only then look around.

  20. kalithea says:

    “I really was for the two-state solution until Israeli expansionism and colonization in Palestine made that impossible. I was not alive in 1948 when decisions were made. But I am alive now to go and see the mockery the Israeli government has made of that historical decision. It’s not my fault that the two-state solution no longer makes sense. Yet, now it is my responsibility to point out that the human rights violations taking place arise out of the worst system of abuse in the “free world” since South African apartheid.”

    For the longest time, I too was naively for the two-state solution and was even upset by the notion of one-state because I really believed Palestinians deserved sovereignty over their own state after being ruled and bullied for so long. But I didn’t have the whole picture then. The more my awareness grew in regards to the magnitude of the injustice being suffered by Palestinians, the expanding facts on the ground being created by Zionists on the issue of illegal settlements and the continuing ethnic cleansing and Bantustan isolation behind a wall of Apartheid, the inequality and deprivation inflicted by a heavily-militarized oppressor on the occupied Palestinian people, the more I began to see how ludicrous, unjust and delusional a two-state solution would be.

    Amongst other flaws, Zionism is replete with hypocrisy. Hypocrisy annihilates moral authority. Israel, that exists soley on a foundation of injustice created by Zionism and Israel’s benefactor the U.S. that pushes that morally bankrupt ideology on the rest of the world are bereft of all moral authority, and both similarly generate injustice with total impunity to sustain their power. They force their will upon the rest of the world through bribery, coercion and acts of war and occupation often with total disregard for the rule of law and then judge others from this morally defunct position. Regardless of their power they will never inspire genuine respect in others from this position and neither will they convince anyone that their objectives are honorable and peaceful armed to the gills and shoving their twisted, aggressive foreign policy down everyone’s throat.

    It’s up to everyone in the rest of the world to stand up to their fraudulent, immoral authority and bring down Apartheid wherever it rears its ugly head even in the so-called Jewish State.

  21. Bing Bong says:

    “I really was for the two-state solution until Israeli expansionism and colonization in Palestine made that impossible.”

    link to timesofisrael.com

    2SS is not impossible and most want that. I’m sure this guy would go back to supporting such if he knew the support that it had and the hope a majority of Palestinians share for their own state alongside Israel.

    And why does he see it as impossible? Israel was created from the ground up against enormous odds. A 2SS is far more doable than that was especially considering the support throughout the world that solution has nowadays from people who’s first concern is peace and don’t take a ‘one side is better than the other’ prejudice as both a start and end point.

    • Citizen says:

      No Palestinian in his or her right mind would accept such a rump state as Kerry-Israel will allow. Such a state would render sovereignty meaningless. You know, like the mini states totally dependent on the USA that the USA uses to make it appear at the UN that it’s not isolated in its endless support of Israel’s wishes right or wrong?

      • Bing Bong says:

        “No Palestinian in his or her right mind would accept such a rump state as Kerry-Israel will allow.”

        I hope you’re not calling Palestinians in favour of 2SS mentally defective.

        • Hostage says:

          I hope you’re not calling Palestinians in favour of 2SS mentally defective.

          No he is saying that there are still some of them left that you haven’t managed to drive off or drive crazy.

          • Bing Bong says:

            I haven’t driven anyone off (?!). Judging by your interminable wheelspinning and counter productive dogma in tow to your scattergun emotive reactions you may indeed have been driven crazy, but I don’t believe I can take credit for that either.

          • Hostage says:

            I haven’t driven anyone off (?!). Judging by your interminable wheelspinning and counter productive dogma in tow to your scattergun emotive reactions you may indeed have been driven crazy, but I don’t believe I can take credit for that either.

            I think its pretty obvious that you are the one with a loose screw, fucked up logic, interminable racist wheelspinning.

          • Bing Bong says:

            “I think its pretty obvious that you are the one with a loose screw, fucked up logic, interminable racist wheelspinning.”

            That’s because you cannot process how non Jewish non Israelis can disagree with your angry biases.

          • Hostage says:

            That’s because you cannot process how non Jewish non Israelis can disagree with your angry biases.

            The majority of non-Jewish Israelis are perfectly aware of the fact that their country is being run be a bunch of angry racial bigots who have adopted a long list of laws that discriminate against non-Jews. link to adalah.org

            Meanwhile the clock keeps ticking on the unfulfilled obligation to the United Nations contained in The Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel to enact a Constitution not later than the 1st October 1948 which will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

            The bottom line is that you find that agenda of mine and the BDS movement objectionable. But that only demonstrates that you are driven by a racist, colonial, supremacist agenda – no matter how much you try to deflect or distract attention away from that uncomfortable fact.

          • Bing Bong says:

            So according to you, I’ve driven Palestinians off, I am a racist and I try to dehumanise Palestinians.

            If this is how you treat people who want a separate state of Palestine for Palestinians it’s no wonder your blustering bombastic tactics, already damaging to Palestinians, are also damaging to your cause. Perhaps in the next 5 or 10 years of BDS will make Israel will be what you want it to be. Or 15. I’m sure Israel won’t build any more settlements and the original refugees won’t die during that time. And I’m sure the Palestinians employed by Israel will thank you for losing their jobs because your ego driven bias regards BDS as some sort of banner waving teary eyed resistance crusade for the noble Arab.

          • Hostage says:

            If this is how you treat people who want a separate state of Palestine for Palestinians it’s no wonder your blustering bombastic tactics, already damaging to Palestinians, are also damaging to your cause.

            It’s how I treat pretentious idiots like yourself. You act as if everyone here doesn’t already have you pegged after reading a few hundred of your comments. Telling-off Zionists trolls won’t hurt the Palestinian cause at all.

          • Hostage says:

            So according to you, I’ve driven Palestinians off, I am a racist and I try to dehumanise Palestinians.

            Yeah you’re the whiney little snot who wasted so much time trying to debate the fact that Zionists lied about their willingness to protect minority populations in areas under Jewish control and whether or not Zionists planned to take the Palestinians place. I’ve supplied readers with links to declassified documents in the US archives which illustrate that is exactly what they did and that the refugee problem began before the Israeli conflict with neighboring states. They say the Israeli Foreign Minister got a “swelled head” and said that Palestinians couldn’t return to their homes, because their space was needed for Jewish refugees from Europe and that Israel reserved the right to replace the Palestinian Arabs with Zionists from Arab countries who had expressed an interest in coming to Palestine.

            It isn’t me engaging in “interminable wheelspinning”, all of the UN and USA officials I’m quoting said that hundreds of thousands of people were without food and shelter and that many of them would die unless Israel allowed them to return to their homes before the rainy season and the winter came. link to mondoweiss.net

            You can’t engage in Nakba denial and say it never happened, so you try to troll the thread and get in a little ankle biting.

        • Citizen says:

          @ Bing Bong

          The Palestinians will reject the PA if all they are offered is a castrated rump state. Every Palestinian kid sees what the US Congress cares not to see: Israelis negotiating peace has always meant Israelis stealing more land, more water, etc. They see it happen on the ground in front of them daily. See US-Israel-Palestine–Expanding Debate In USA (Stephen Walt, Phil Weiss, et al, July, 2013):
          link to mepc.org

          • Sibiriak says:

            Citizen:

            The Palestinians will reject the PA if all they are offered is a castrated rump state.

            “If” ??

          • Hostage says:

            @ Bing Bong

            The Palestinians will reject the PA if all they are offered is a castrated rump state.

            Bing bong is the troll who tried to defend Ben Gurion’s letter to his son, despite the fact that it talked about using armed force to colonize the Negev along with Transjordan after the partition if they were NOT included in the Jewish state. Now he expects readers to take him seriously when he talks about a separate state for the Palestinians. He’s only talking about an ethnic enclave, not a state and engaging in a lot of ankle bitting in hopes no one will remember him.

        • Citizen says:

          @ Bing Bong
          Interesting how you’ve interpreted what I said. Palestinians want a sovereign state, just as sovereign a state as Israel is. And they want full and equal membership and rights in any such state. That’s their hope. They don’t want to be controlled by anyone offering them less.

        • Sibiriak says:

          @BingBong: From your Times of Israel link:

          44% of Israelis said they supported an Israeli withdrawal from the entire West Bank, with the exception of some settlement blocs in less than 3% of the area which would be swapped for an equal amount of territory inside the Green Line.

          That means the majority of Israeli respondents DO NOT support a 2SS settlement based on pre-1967 borders WITH LAND SWAPS to allow Israeli sovereignty over major settlement blocs.

          It seems Israelis do NOT support a settlement creating an independent, sovereign STATE, but a settlement that gives the Palestinians a small dependent statelet with limited sovereignty made up of barely contiguous enclaves.

          I hope you’re not calling Palestinians in favour of 2SS mentally defective.

          From your link: “Fifty-six percent of polled Palestinians supported a similar withdrawal plan

          So, unlike the Israelis , the majority Palestinian respondents supported a two STATE settlement.

          But that’s NOT what Kerry/Israel are proposing.

          Here’s a recent report:

          Secretary of State John Kerry’s framework agreement draft as “madness,” Palestinian newspaper Al-Quds reported Wednesday.

          According to the paper, meetings held between the two last week in Paris were very difficult and Abbas was on the verge of blowing up the peace negotiations.

          According to Al-Quds, Kerry demanded Abbas to official recognize Israel as a Jewish state, and offered that Beit Hanina neighborhood will be declared as the Palestinian capital instead of the entire east Jerusalem area.

          This was not the first time the Americans have offered only a part of east Jerusalem for the Palestinian capital. In a previous round of talks, the Americans offered Abu Dis as an alternative – an offered that was rejected immediately.

          Additionally, the secretary of state demanded that as part of land swaps, Israel will keep ten settlement blocs.

          In addition, Kerry has raised the possibility that the Jordan Valley will not be a part of the Palestinian state. This is in contradiction to comments Abbas made several weeks ago to the New York Times, where he expressed willingness to allow both international and Israeli presence in the area for an interim period of several years.

          The paper reported that Abbas was furious at Kerry’s proposal and threatened to turn back on his recent flexible offers.

          [...]Abbas had presented his core principles earlier this month during an interview with the New York Times. He confirmed that a Palestinian state might have to cede its defensive capability to NATO, and that he could accept IDF presence in the West Bank for a five-year period after the signing of an agreement. The Palestinian leader even agreed to a gradual evacuation of Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

          However, Abbas insisted that he would not recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

          link to ynetnews.com

        • Walid says:

          “I hope you’re not calling Palestinians in favour of 2SS mentally defective.” (Bing Bong to Citizen)

          By the configuration of the state they’re being offered, for those in favour of it I’d say they are.

        • Naftush says:

          Citizen isn’t calling real Palestinians anything at all. They’re just set pieces on the stage of a morality play in which heroes like him reaffirm the three noes of Khartoum until the despicable Zionazis retreat to … wherever.

          • Hostage says:

            Citizen isn’t calling real Palestinians anything at all. They’re just set pieces on the stage of a morality play

            The problem for you and Bing Bong is that you try to dehumanize Palestinians to the point that milions of people are mere pawns with no fundamental human rights or value for use in your false narrative of victimhood and political gamesmanship. You’re just pissed off that we stop and point that out and make you look like the despicable hasbrats that you are.

        • Talkback says:

          bing bong: I hope you’re not calling Palestinians in favour of 2SS mentally defective.

          I would cause it hasn’t worked since 1948. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result.

          Walid: By the configuration of the state they’re being offered, for those in favour of it I’d say they are.

          And this doesn’t even include the refugees.

          • Citizen says:

            @ Talkback
            You got that right. And there’s good justifiable reason to have the Palestinians deprived of their homes in ’47 & ’48, and again in ’67 be treated with special refugee status which also includes their offspring since those days.

      • Talkback says:

        You got that right. And there’s good justifiable reason to have the Palestinians deprived of their homes in ’47 & ’48, and again in ’67 be treated with special refugee status which also includes their offspring since those days.

        No, only the unproven descendents of ancient Hebrews have a right to return, because they are special, so f*** special.

    • eljay says:

      >> Israel was created from the ground up against enormous odds.

      Yes, it’s not easy creating an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist state! You have to:
      - engage in terrorism and ethnic cleansing;
      - steal land and resources;
      - occupy and colonize land;
      - oppress, torture and/or kill undesirables (i.e., non-Jews); and
      - play the victim the entire time you’re doing all of these hateful, immoral and unjust things.

      It’s thirsty work!

      • Bing Bong says:

        Not so much work nowadays, now that Israel has; against massive odds, established itself as a state in the world and has enough defences/resources coupled with international support to survive.

        • Walid says:

          Then why the never-ending talk about existential threats Israel keeps facing from Arabs and Iranians?

        • eljay says:

          >> Not so much work nowadays, now that Israel has; against massive odds, established itself as a state in the world and has enough defences/resources coupled with international support to survive.

          And yet Zio-supremacists do nothing but whine and complain about how unsafe they are – how they’re perpetually on the verge of being wiped off the map and pushed into the sea. This, as they continue to oppress, steal, occupy, colonize, destroy and kill.

          60+ years of playing aggressor-victim – while actually being hateful, immoral, supremacist colonialists – seems to have really messed up your minds.

  22. Citizen says:

    Anybody? “NBC is supporting Israel’s illegal activities in East Jerusalem and makes the network complicit in Israeli crimes against Palestinians such as residency revocation, home demolitions, land confiscation, and forced population transfer. This drama will also help Israel whitewash its occupation, apartheid system, and war crimes.

    Learn more below and stay tuned to take action to demand NBC not take any part in this project promoting Israeli apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and colonization in occupied East Jerusalem.”

    link to mondoweiss.net

  23. Bing Bong says:

    “Bing bong is the troll who tried to defend Ben Gurion’s letter to his son..”

    Since you bring it up here’s the translation I kindly supplied for you. The one that you thought you could do to uphold an incorrect translation you and your bias approved of by using OCR software and Google translate. I think Herodotus and Gibbon used that same method. And you went on to subsequently use the flawed Institute for Palestine Studies translation again despite knowing it was incorrect. What a cheating rotter. I wonder how many other ‘facts’ are extracted from the piles of legal documents you cite on MW to uphold your bias?

    link to mondoweiss.net

    And I still don’t understand how I’ve somehow driven off the Palestinians.

    • Hostage says:

      Since you bring it up here’s the translation I kindly supplied for you.

      Like CAMERA you are trying to distract attention away from the fact that the entire letter constitutes a plan for a future war of aggression to use military force to colonize the portions of Palestine awarded to the Arab State under any partition plan and the fact that violated public international law and policies like the Stimson doctrine that the US had already applied in other parts of Asia. You never established that Ben Gurion didn’t make the pen and ink changes either. He certainly owned the copyrights to it and prepared a typed manuscript containing it the he subsequently licensed for use by Valentine.

      The International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg and the International Military Tribunal for the Far East made carrying out any such plan of aggression punishable by death or life in prison.

      So let’s review:
      *The Nuremberg Tribunal’s Judgement on “The Law Relating to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity” included “plunder of public or private property” in its list of war crimes, for which there must be individual criminal responsibility.

      * There is ample evidence from the FRUS and the personal diaries of Ben Gurion and Joseph Weitz to establish the fact that the government of Israel began violating Article 28 of the Hague rules by settling European Jewish immigrants on illegally expropriated Palestinian land and homes while the armed conflict was still in progress. The UN Mediator, Folke Bernadotte, reported as much to the Security Council:

      In regard to property Arab refugees he said apparently most had been seized for use by Jews. He had seen Haganah organizing and supervising removal contents Arab houses in Ramle which he understood was being distributed among newly arrived Jewish immigrants. He was putting problem before SC but was not counting on its assistance. Also spoke of asking for special session GA to consider refugees.

      –Foreign relations of the United States, 1948. The Near East, South Asia, and Africa (in two parts), Page 1295 link to digicoll.library.wisc.edu

      * Israeli historian Shlomo Ben-Ami confirmed those reports using Israeli archival evidence:

      The Jews did not have to buy land any more, but to ‘conquer it’, as Ben-Gurion said to an official of the Jewish National Fund in February 1948. He also instructed that abandoned Arab villages needed to be settled by Jews even before the end of hostilities. Settling the land in a way that created Jewish contiguity’ and demographic superiority was not to be an enterprise to be executed after the victory. Rather, it was part of the war itself. Villages were destroyed, their populations either evicted or fled, and their lands were settled by immigrants or cultivated by kibbutzim in the course of the war itself. This is how Ben-Gurion put in April 1948: ‘We will not be able to win the war if we do not, during the war, populate Upper and Lower, Eastern and Western Galilee, the Negev and the Jerusalem area.’ And this, he understood, would be facilitated by the ‘great change in the distribution of the Arab population’, a euphemism Ben-Gurion frequently preferred to more blunt expressions.

      Scars of War, Wounds of Peace, page 45 link to books.google.com

    • Hostage says:

      The one that you thought you could do to uphold an incorrect translation you and your bias approved of by using OCR software and Google translate.

      As you will recall, I also pointed out that the document already had the penned-in changes when it was turned-over to the Ben Gurion archives by his estate along with the typed manuscript he had provided to Valentine when it published the quote “we will expel the Arabs and take their place”. The Archives simply supplied a copy of one of Ben Gurion’s typed manuscripts to the Journal of Palestine Studies for them to use as the basis of the translation.

      The bottom line is that the historical record shows that Ben Gurion was the Defense Minister who did engage in an illegal war of conquest that expelled thousands of Palestinians and settled Jews from Europe and Muslim countries in their homes and on their land.

      • Bing Bong says:

        “The Archives simply supplied a copy of one of Ben Gurion’s typed manuscripts to the Journal of Palestine Studies for them to use as the basis of the translation. ”

        I have a copy of the letter as it was hand written direct from the BG archives if you want to try to OCR and Google translate it if you think that will somehow help you. Perhaps the technology has moved on enough for that to not be a stupid waste of time instead of it being an approach that only a cretin, safe in the knowledge that he’s displaying his prejudiced ‘results’ to the gallery of applauding sheep, would do.

        People like you are the reason Israel was created. An no, I don’t mean because you are a Jew.