Zionism didn’t have to turn out so badly for Palestinians, says Roger Cohen

US Politics
on 94 Comments

The theme of Roger Cohen’s recent memoir of his cosmopolitan family was that Jews are insecure in the west and therefore Jewish sovereignty is a just and necessary answer.

He restates these ideas emphatically in a review of Simon Schama’s book, The Story of the Jews, which the New York Times Book Review aptly titles “Millenniums of Tribulation.” The story of the Jews is never-ending persecution and expulsion, and assimilation won’t save us either.

At the end, Cohen acknowledges that Palestinians have had to be exiled to make room for the Jewish state, and it hasn’t been any fun for them since. But– anti-Zionism is sometimes anti-Semitism.

In the end the price of Jewish statehood has been heavy: the exile of another people, the Palestinians. More than a half-century of occupation of the West Bank has corroded Israeli democracy. This was not inevitable and is still not irreparable. No doubt, these themes will be prominent in Schama’s next volume. At a time of facile anti-Zionism spilling sometimes into outright anti-Semitism, Schama has made an eloquent and a far-reaching case for why Jews needed a small piece of earth they could call home.

This argument is unconvincing. As Donald Johnson writes:

Cohen is being a chickenshit at best. To be fair he acknowledges that currently Israel is not behaving well, but he claims Zionism didn’t have to be this way and then says that anti-Zionism can be antisemitism. The real question is, given the actual history, was it possible for Zionism not to be anti-Palestinian racism? The burden of proof is on Cohen.  I am even willing to say it could have been innocent, if they had never had any intent of forcing or inducing Palestinians to leave in order to have a state with the “ correct” demographic composition.  But once that little notion of demographic composition enters into it, the Nakba is inevitable– in which 750,000 Palestinians are exiled from their homes and never allowed to return, let alone compensated for their losses.

I’d challenge Cohen on his description of the Jewish condition. As he relates it:

The book begins around the time of the Spanish Inquisition and ends with the Dreyfus case, a 400-year round trip back to the same Jewish question. Theodor Herzl finally answers that question with his Zionist vision of a “home that is destined to be a safe haven for the Jewish people.” The homeland, for Herzl, whose pamphlet “The Jewish State” was published in 1896, was needed because it had proved “useless” for Jews to be “loyal patriots.” Only in their own state would they not be potential pariahs.

It is difficult to read the 800 pages of “Belonging” and not reach the same conclusion. No Jewish patriot, rich or poor, was secure….

To think otherwise was indeed useless, an exercise in delusion. Expulsion, imprisonment or worse lurked — a constant threat.

My challenge to Cohen is simple. Roger, you’re a man of the world. You’ve led a privileged life on two continents at this point, North American and Europe, and by marriage and ancestry you know a lot about South Africa and South America. Tell me: how much prejudice/abuse/persecution have you experienced in your personal arc? Do you have any responsibility to reshape your ideas of Jewish insecurity based on our privileged lives (I include myself here, born in the same year). My anti-Zionism is not facile. It’s based on what I’ve actually observed of life, my own and Palestinians, not what I’ve read in books. P.S. You and I are friendly. But I’ve issued a similar challenge to you on other occasions; and you always ignore it.

By the way, speaking of throwaway lines in the mainstream press, New Yorker TV critic Emily Nussbaum mentions Israel in a piece on the best ten TV shows of 2017.

Also, I’ve only seen half of “Twin Peaks: The Return.” Maybe on purpose? I suspect that I’ve been unhealthily avoiding being informed on “Twin Peaks” in order to duck out on having a clear opinion, like with Israel, or fracking.

That’s a defense of cowardice. She is saying, The pro-Israel side is vicious; Israel can’t be defended. Writes Annie Robbins: “Chances are, she won’t lift too many eyebrows with a negative review of ‘Twin Peaks: The Return.’ And the chance it would damage her career, not likely. She says about her list this year, ‘They’re mostly shows that took big risks.’ … Maybe 2018 will be her year to come out.”

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

94 Responses

  1. eljay
    December 27, 2017, 11:29 am

    In the end the price of Jewish statehood has been heavy: the exile of another people, the Palestinians. More than a half-century of occupation of the West Bank has corroded Israeli democracy. This was not inevitable and is still not irreparable. No doubt, these themes will be prominent in Schama’s next volume. At a time of facile anti-Zionism spilling sometimes into outright anti-Semitism, Schama has made an eloquent and a far-reaching case for why Jews needed a small piece of earth they could call home.

    I think the classy Zionist phrase Mr. Cohen is searching for here is “necessary evil”.

    • Mooser
      December 27, 2017, 11:54 am

      “Schama has made an eloquent and a far-reaching case for why Jews needed a small piece of earth they could call home. …”

      I am sure that eloquent and far-reaching case is very convincing to part of 0.2% (rounded way up) of the world’s population.

    • pabelmont
      December 27, 2017, 2:39 pm

      Hmm, “why Jews needed a small piece of earth they could call home. … “.

      Well, on the world stage, maybe someone would regard Mandatory Palestine a “small piece of earth” but in the context of I/P, Israel could be a lot smaller if just to offer a modicum of justice to the Palestinians. To reduce the amount of the “necessary evil” as it were.

      Must always remember to ask those fellows about that.

      • Mooser
        December 27, 2017, 4:09 pm

        “Israel could be a lot smaller if just to offer a modicum of justice to the Palestinians. “

        I feel the same. Nothing should get in the way of Israel shrinking to it’s natural size.

    • echinococcus
      December 27, 2017, 3:18 pm

      I think the classy Zionist phrase Mr. Cohen is searching for here is “necessary evil”

      10/10, Eljay

    • Talkback
      December 28, 2017, 5:27 am

      Eljay: “I think the classy Zionist phrase Mr. Cohen is searching for here is “necessary evil”.

      Or “military necessity”.

  2. W.Jones
    December 27, 2017, 11:48 am

    In Chomsky’s nonstate Zionist model, as I understand it, Israelis and Palestinians would each get separate economic and social organizations, while living in a binational state.

    Unfortunately, isn’t that model based on an unrealistic segregation principle of “separate but equal”? If one group’s social and economic organizations are more successful and become richer and more powerful than the other’s, won’t inequality result?

  3. Maghlawatan
    December 27, 2017, 12:31 pm

    Israel is a tragedy . Shakespeare was very good at describing them.

    CASSIO

    Reputation, reputation, reputation! Oh, I have lost my reputation! I have lost the immortal part of myself, and what remains is bestial. My reputation, Iago, my reputation!

    Judaism has been debased by Zionism

    • genesto
      December 28, 2017, 12:12 pm

      But, what about the Covenant in the Bible, promising the land to the Israelites? How is that not connected to Zionism?

  4. Annie Robbins
    December 27, 2017, 1:34 pm

    At a time of facile anti-Zionism spilling sometimes into outright anti-Semitism

    sure, facile anti zionism can spill into anti semitism. but this statement implies we are “at a time” when a preponderance of anti zionism is facile — which is not the case. anti zionism is neither effortless, easy, undemanding, unexacting, painless, trouble-free… or superficial. it’s quite the opposite.

    Schama has made an eloquent and a far-reaching case for why Jews needed a small piece of earth they could call home.

    it’s hard to imagine there’d be anything worth saying on this topic that has not been said millions of times before. we know, we know about the eternal victims.

    Tell me: how much prejudice/abuse/persecution have you experienced in your personal arc? Do you have any responsibility to reshape your ideas of Jewish insecurity based on our privileged lives ……I’ve issued a similar challenge to you on other occasions; and you always ignore it.

    and he will continue to ignore you. he talks to those inside the LZ bubble. the shoot and cry brigades.

    • Mikhael
      December 29, 2017, 1:49 pm

      Annie Robbins December 27, 2017, 1:34 pm
      we know, we know about the eternal victims

      But the era of Jewish victimhood is eternally over, because Israel exists. That’s what Zionism is all about.
      Those who are dismayed at this fact have been having a collective shit fit ever since Jews stopped being victims and will have to continue to stomp their little feet because Jews won’t ever go back to being victims.

      • Mooser
        December 29, 2017, 3:07 pm

        “But the era of Jewish victimhood is eternally over”

        Thatr’s right “Mikhail”! Now that we have embraced serial monogamy, all the demographic and social trends will be short-circuited!

      • Maghlawatan
        December 29, 2017, 5:25 pm

        Israel won’t survive. The IDF is a pariah.

      • Mikhael
        January 8, 2018, 2:07 pm

        Mooser December 29, 2017, 3:07 pm

        Thatr’s right “Mikhail”! Now that we have embraced serial monogamy, all the demographic and social trends will be short-circuited!

        The demographic trend is for people like you (secular American Jews) to go extinct. Secular Jews have a future in Israel, of course, but the Jewish future in North America belongs to the Orthodox. The vast majority of Orthodox Jews have family in Israel and support Israel.
        You’ll be dead soon and all that will remain of you will be some ones and zeroes.

      • eljay
        January 8, 2018, 2:39 pm

        || Mikhael:

        Mooser …

        … You’ll be dead soon … ||

        Whoa. Looks like Larry Derfner isn’t the only guy Mooser needs to watch out for.

      • Mooser
        January 8, 2018, 2:56 pm

        “You’ll be dead soon and all that will remain of you will be some ones and zeroes.”

        Which Zionism will inherit? There is the fundamental absurdity of Zionism, they keep insisting that the fewer Jews there are, the more powerful Jews will be.

        It’s like a death wish for Judaism. That’s it, “Mikhael” you keep telling us who you will exclude from Judaism. When you get down to the last couple million, you will rule the world.

        Edit: Oooh, silly me! Disparaging “Mikhael” as if Zionism needed any Jewish support, now that the Zionist Christians and Evangelicals support the project.

      • Mooser
        January 8, 2018, 3:10 pm

        ” but the Jewish future in North America belongs to the Orthodox”

        Quick, make Jared Kushner a Chief Rabbi!

      • Mooser
        January 8, 2018, 6:32 pm

        “Whoa. Looks like Larry Derfner isn’t the only guy Mooser needs to watch out for.”

        They will never get past my bodyguard, Tribal Unity. She is one tough lady.

      • Mikhael
        January 9, 2018, 2:51 pm

        Mooser January 8, 2018, 2:56 pm
        “You’ll be dead soon and all that will remain of you will be some ones and zeroes.”

        Which Zionism will inherit? There is the fundamental absurdity of Zionism, they keep insisting that the fewer Jews there are, the more powerful Jews will be

        The demographic trend is for Israel to have the world’s largest Jewish population. That is only natural and normal.

        That’s it, “Mikhael” you keep telling us who you will exclude from Judaism

        I never mentioned “Judaism” in any of its forms. That’s a religious system that has no pertinence to this discussion; why are you referring to it?
        You, however, have excluded yourself from the Jewish People, which is a national group that exists independently of the religious systems grouped under the name of “Judaism” and I have had nothing to do with that. It is of course your right as a free individual who lives outside the Jewish homeland to disaffiliate from the Jewish People and in fact it is a normal and natural thing for people who live in a free Western society to assimilate and reject their ancestral ethnic and national heritage. They shouldn’t claim, however, as you do, that as they disaffiliate from their ancestral roots that their rejection of Jewish Peoplehood means something significant to the future of the State of Israel.

        Disparaging “Mikhael” as if Zionism needed any Jewish support, now that the Zionist Christians and Evangelicals support the project

        You didn’t say anything disparaging or insulting to me.
        For Zionism to survive, it doesn’t need Evangelical Christian support nor does it really need Diaspora Jewish support, but of course it needs Jewish support in Israel and it will survive as long as the vast majority of Israeli citizens are Hebrew-speaking Jews who love their homeland and desire that the State of Israel will continue to have a Jewish national character. This of course is the case. The fact that there are many people of Jewish heritage living in the Diaspora who reject Zionism and who don’t support Israel (the vast majority of American Jews who don’t support Israel are merely indifferent and aren’t “anti” Israel, freaks like you and the other people of Jewish heritage on this blog are a minority) has no consequence. Seriously, you’re just not that important.
        Factually speaking, however, the demographic trend over the next few decades is for US Jews (and other Jewish communities in Diaspora countries in the Western world) to be a majority-Orthodox group as non-Orthodox Jews marry out, and, even in cases where they try to pass on a sense of Jewishness to offspring, their children and grandchildren will cease identifying as Jews. So be it. Orthodox Jews are mostly very pro-Zionist and have close kin in Israel, even among the rank-and-file of ostensibly “anti-Zionist” groups like Satmar which reject political Zionism on theological grounds there’s a lot of concern for Israel’s security.

      • Mikhael
        January 9, 2018, 2:57 pm

        eljay January 8, 2018, 2:39 pm
        || Mikhael:

        Mooser …

        … You’ll be dead soon … ||

        Whoa. Looks like Larry Derfner isn’t the only guy Mooser needs to watch out for.

        He’s an old fart who’ll be dead soon with no issue. He’s in his 60s, I’m in my late 40s. Let’s say he manages to reach his 100s through healthy habits, and I get hit by a bus (I ride my bike a lot on NYC and in Israel so it’s not inconceivable). But as I already have offspring (of course there’s no guarantee they’ll have children or live long lives), it is highly likely (although not inevitable) that I will have Hebrew-speaking progeny living in an Israeli-Jewish state a century from now, while “Mooser” will be dead in a few decades’ time at the most, with no descendants, Jewish or otherwise.

      • eljay
        January 9, 2018, 3:27 pm

        || Mikhael: … You, however, have excluded yourself from the Jewish People … ||

        “Jewish people” are people all over the world – citizens of homelands all over the world – who have chosen to embrace the religion-based identity of Jewish. AFAIK, Mooser hasn’t decided to stop being Jewish and you haven’t managed to excommunicate him.

        || … It is of course your right as a free individual who lives outside the Jewish homeland … ||

        Geographic Palestine is not the homeland of every person in the world who has chosen to embrace the religion-based identity of Jewish. Neither is Israel.

        Countries all over the world are the homelands of their Jewish – and non-Jewish – citizens.

        || … For Zionism to survive, it doesn’t need Evangelical Christian support nor does it really need Diaspora Jewish support, but of course it needs Jewish support in Israel and it will survive as long as the vast majority of Israeli citizens are Hebrew-speaking Jews who love their homeland and desire that the State of Israel will continue to have a Jewish national character. … ||

        Of course: As long as there exist sufficient – and sufficiently influential – Jewish supremacists to ensure the existence of Israel as a religion-supremacist “Jewish State”, Israel will continue to exist as a religion-supremacist “Jewish State”.

        At some point – maybe a Thousand Years from now, maybe less – sufficient Jewish supremacists will not exist and neither will religion-supremacist “Jewish State”.

      • Mooser
        January 9, 2018, 4:48 pm

        “He’s an…/…with no descendants, Jewish or otherwise.”“Mikhael”

        And you have both! My, I must admit you’ve really thought this through. You’re a real gantseh mentsh.

      • Mikhael
        January 9, 2018, 5:06 pm

        January 9, 2018, 3:27 pm

        “Jewish people” are people all over the world – citizens of homelands all over the world – who have chosen to embrace the religion-based identity of Jewish

        “Jewish” is primarily an ethnic-based, national identity that can exist independently of “religion”. I will never believe in “god” (so-called) or follow the dictates of any religious dogma, yet I will always be a Jew, that is my national identity and millions of other secular Jews in Israel as well as those who live outside the Jewish national homeland, feel as I do. Our Jewish national identity is not “religion-based.”

        AFAIK, Mooser hasn’t decided to stop being Jewish and you haven’t managed to excommunicate him

        “Excommunication” is a religious concept. I have no religious sentiment and we were not discussing religion, so this concept has no relevance here. I have no idea of and care less about “Mooser’s” religious inclinations (although it is very obvious that he is extremely ignorant of Classical Rabbinical Judaism). He may or may not regard himself as a Jew but it’s very clear from everything he has posted that he has disaffiliated himself from the Jewish People. It’s not my business.

        || … It is of course your right as a free individual who li

        ves outside the Jewish homeland … ||
        Geographic Palestine is not the homeland of every person in the world who has chosen to embrace the religion-based identity of Jewish

        The last time that a geopolitical entity known as “Palestine” existed was on May 15, 1948.
        Excluding very recent converts to the Jewish religion, who are very few, nearly every Jew alive today traces his or her ancestral lineage to people who once lived in the ancient Jewish polities that formerly existed in the Land of Israel. Ina very real sense ,the Land of Israel is the national and ancestral homeland of most Jews.

        Countries all over the world are the homelands of their Jewish – and non-Jewish – citizens

        I don’t necessarily disagree. One thing does not exclude the other, however. If they wish, Jews in Canada and the USA and Australia who were born or raised in or immigrated to can claim those countries as their homeland and they can can also truthfully state that the Land of Israel is their ancestral homeland (because it’s where their ancestors originally came from). And because Jews are fortunate to live in the age of Zionism, and are no longer victims, like their ancestors who lived in the Diaspora in places like Iraq and Germany and Tsarist Russia and the USSR once were, Jews in places like Canada, the USA, Australia can also reject those places as a “homeland” and fulfill their legal and more importantly, moral right to move to the national Jewish homeland in the State of Israel, and not live in the Diaspora. Jews have that right and will enjoy that right just as if a Canadian citizen of Armenian heritage wants to move to Armenia, the land where his ancestors once lived, so his children can grow up in a society that is based on Armenian culture. Too bad for you that you don’t like it.

        Of course: As long as there exist sufficient – and sufficiently influential – Jewish supremacists to ensure the existence of Israel as a religion-supremacist “Jewish State”, Israel will continue to exist as a religion-supremacist “Jewish State”

        The modern State of Israel has never existed as religion-supremacist “Jewish State” but since 1948 it has been a Jewish parliamentary liberal democracy with guaranteed equal rights to all citizens whether they are of Jewish national origins or not. I will grant that there are many elements in the society that the society was were religion-based (Muslim as well as Jewish) but they are unlikely to succeed in converting Israel into a theocracy.

        At some point – maybe a Thousand Years from now, maybe less – sufficient Jewish supremacists will not exist and neither will religion-supremacist “Jewish State”

        At some point maybe all nations will cease to exist. Perhaps in less than a hundred years all of humanity will be replaced by AI or we’ll all be destroyed by a rogue comet or a plague. But considering that modern Israel as a religion-supremacist state has never existed, it would have to come into being as such in order for it to cease to exist.

      • Mooser
        January 9, 2018, 6:19 pm

        Yup, tell yourself that Zionism and Judaism will better off after about 80% of all Jews are gone “Mikhael”.

        Makes a whole lotta sense. A death wish for your own people. “No trauma ‘long us, boss!”

      • eljay
        January 9, 2018, 7:05 pm

        || Mikhael: He’s an old fart who’ll be dead soon with no issue. He’s in his 60s … Let’s say he manages to reach his 100s through healthy habits … “Mooser” will be dead in a few decades’ time at the most … ||

        When someone threatens suggests that a person will be dead “soon”, 40 years is not the time-frame that usually comes to mind.

        Guy: You’ll be dead soon.
        Other guy: What?
        Guy: You’ll be dead soon. In the dark, without witnesses and cameras.
        Other guy: What the hell? Are you threatening me?
        Guy: What? No, no, not at all. I was just saying that in approximately 40 years you’ll die of natural causes late at night in a quiet hospital room. What else could I have possibly meant?

      • eljay
        January 9, 2018, 9:21 pm

        || Mikhael: … “Jewish” is primarily an ethnic-based, national identity that can exist independently of “religion”. … ||

        Jewish is a religion-based identity that is acquired:
        – by undergoing a religious conversion to Judaism; or
        – being descended from someone who underwent a religious conversion to Judaism.

        The Jewish identity exists because of Judaism. No Judaism, no Jewish.

        || … Jews in Canada and the USA and Australia who were born or raised in or immigrated to can claim those countries as their homeland and they can can also truthfully state that the Land of Israel is their ancestral homeland … ||

        Some Jews can truthfully claim that geographic Palestine is their ancestral homeland. The rest can only fancifully make the claim. Too bad for you that you don’t like it.

        || … The modern State of Israel has never existed as religion-supremacist “Jewish State” … ||

        It was envisioned and established and has been operating since it inception as a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” primarily of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews.

      • Talkback
        January 10, 2018, 8:57 am

        Mikhael: ““Jewish” is primarily an ethnic-based, national identity that can exist independently of “religion”.”

        ROFL. Like “Christian”, right? Another primarily an ethnic-based, national identity that can exist independently of “religion”.

        But you are right about one thing. “Jewish” is not a nation state identity, not a citizenship. That’s at the core of Israel’s Apartheid.

        MikhaeL: “Excommunication” is a religious concept.”

        So is conversion. Can someone convert to Judaism and can become am member ot this “primarily an ethnic-based, national identity that can exist independently of “religion”.”?

        Mikhael: “The last time that a geopolitical entity known as “Palestine” existed was on May 15, 1948.”

        Oh no. It never stopped existing despite the Zionist effort to destroy this “geopolitical entity” which was nothing else than a (dependant) state under mandate. It was redeclared in 1988 within 1967 lines.

        Mikhael: “Excluding very recent converts to the Jewish religion, who are very few, nearly every Jew alive today traces his or her ancestral lineage to people who once lived in the ancient Jewish polities that formerly existed in the Land of Israel. ”

        ROFL. Of course. Every Jew can prove that she or he is a descendant and that any Nonjew – especially Palestian Nonjews – isn’t, right?

        Mikhael: “na very real sense ,the Land of Israel is the national and ancestral homeland …”

        Yep. The keyword is “ancestral”. So what rights to Palestinians Nonjews have to return to their proven homenland in this loony Zionist narrative?

        Mikhael: “The modern State of Israel has never existed as religion-supremacist “Jewish State” but since 1948 it has been a Jewish parliamentary liberal democracy with guaranteed equal rights to all citizens whether they are of Jewish national origins or not. ”

        Yep, except those Nonjews it keeps expelled and denationalized to fake being a “liberal democracy” and the fact that equal rights are not “guaranteed” at all. To the contrary. This right was explicitely removed from one of Israel’s “Basic Law’s”. And don’t forget that all citizens of Israel are equal. But Israel’s “nationals” (aka Jews) are more equal then equal and have more rights. In fact only Jews have the rights that every citizen would have in a true liberal democracy. Israel has even perverted the term “citizen”. Guess which Germany regime also differentiated between nationals and citizens to privilige the former.

        Mikhael: “But considering that modern Israel as a religion-supremacist state has never existed, …”

        Well, that’s Eljay’s focus on “religion-supremacist”. I disagree with this focus. To me Israel is simply an Apartheid state, because it has to keep Nonjews expelled to maintain a regime that is dominated by Jews. That amounts to the Crime of Apartheid as defined in international law.

      • Mikhael
        January 11, 2018, 9:43 am

        Mooser January 9, 2018, 6:19 pm
        Yup, tell yourself that Zionism and Judaism will better off after about 80% of all Jews are gone “Mikhael”.

        Only an an addled old fart who will be dead soon could construe my words as suggesting that.

        The demographic trend is for American Jews to be an overwhelmingly Orthodox community, whether haredi or “modern Orthodox”. Non-affiliated Jews mostly intermarry and have no interest in passing on Jewish culture and identity to the next generation. This is a normal and natural thing in an open and pluralistic society that was denied to the ancestors of American Jews. And that’s fine. But the Orthodox cohort will remain and has a large natural growth rate. More importantly, they’re an overwhelmingly pro-Zionist community.

        Secular Jews will also still exist in large numbers in Israel.

      • Mikhael
        January 11, 2018, 10:23 am

        eljay January 9, 2018, 9:21 pm
        || Mikhael: … “Jewish” is primarily an ethnic-based, national identity that can exist independently of “religion”. … ||

        Jewish is a religion-based identity that is acquired:
        – by undergoing a religious conversion to Judaism; or
        – being descended from someone who underwent a religious conversion to Judaism.

        For the vast majority of people who identify as Jews today, Jewish identity is a national and ethnic identity that is primarily acquired through descent from the Hebrews and Israelites of antiquity who lived in the Jewish kingdoms that used to exist in Eres Yisra’el. Since at one point these ancient Hebrews believed in polytheism, and eventually over a period of time they adopted Israelite religion, which would eventually evolve into what we now describe as Rabbinic Judaism, in that sense they are descended from people who underwent a religious conversion to Judaism. Most Jews living today (excepting very recent converts like Ivanka Trump) can accurately claim descent from people who lived in Eres Yisra’el in antiquity (and of course in more recent times as well, as our homeland was never devoid of Jews). Because you are a simpleton, I must stress that I am not claiming that most Jews are solely descended from peoples who lived in Eres Yisra’el in antiquity, of course some of the ancestors of modern Jews were from among the populations of the host countries that Jews lived in the Diaspora (and other peoples) .

        The Jewish identity exists because of Judaism. No Judaism, no Jewish.

        Incorrect. There are many secular, non-believing, atheist and/or agnostic Jews (such as yours truly) who do not believe in Judaism. There are also many Jews who follow other religious systems. They are all Jews and many also embrace their Jewish identity while they reject Jewish religion. That said, classical Rabbinic Judaism is a good system to preserve Jewish national and cultural identity in the Diaspora and that was its function in often hostile environments. For a Hebrew-speaking Israeli citizen like me who spends much of the year in the Jewish homeland, the rites and rituals and beliefs of Judaism are irrelevant and unnecessary.

        Some Jews can truthfully claim that geographic Palestine is their ancestral homeland.

        Since “geographic Palestine” ceased to exist when the British Mandate of Palestine ceased to exist, I don’t know of any Jews who would claim “Palestine” as their homeland. I suppose that my late father, who received Palestinian citizenship when he was born in 1932 during the Mandate era, might have described himself and his family as coming from “Palestine” (even though his parents, born in Jerusalem as he was, but when the country was under Ottoman rule, were not from “Palestine” until the British dubbed the country as such.

        The rest can only fancifully make the claim. Too bad for you that you don’t like it.

        My paternal grandfather was from a Mizrahi Jewish family originating from today’s Syria (Aleppo and Damascus) and my great grandparents (my father’s paternal grandparents) moved to Jerusalem at the end of the 19th century. On my father’s maternal side, the family had been living in Galilee (and later Jerusalem) since at least the 1500s. Like most Spanish Jews (Sefaradim), they migrated to the Ottoman Empire, in my paternal grandmother’s family My mother’s side are Ashkenazi Jews from Central Europe, and they only immigrated to Israel after WW2. But my mother’s Ashkenazi family from Hungary can accurately claim roots in the Land of Israel just as much as my Mizrahi side of the family. Both sides of the family weer ethnic Jews who traced their lineage to Eres Yisra’el in antiquity. In one part of my father’s family they never left the Levant region (and the part of the family that lived in Damascus actually moved back and forth between the Land of Israel and Damascus over the centuries, this was common in Damascene-Jewish families, as it was so close, ultimately permanently resettling in Jerusalem in the 1870s), but the Ashkenazi side of the family has just as much connection to the country as the side that had lived in the region of for centuries. The ancestral connection of all major historical Jewish communities to each other stemming from roots in the Levant has been repeatedly demonstrated through numerous genetic studies. Too bad for you if you’re too stupid to understand this.

        || … The modern State of Israel has never existed as religion-supremacist “Jewish State” … ||

        It was envisioned and established and has been operating since it inception as a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” primarily of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews.

        Incorrect. It was envisioned as a Jewish state, with a Jewish national culture, and with absolute freedom of religion (and freedom FROM religion) and equal rights for all citizens of the state whatever their ethnicity or national background, Jewish or otherwise. Non-Jewish Israeli citizens have rights as Israeli citizens that Jews from abroad who are not Israeli citizens do not have, and will not have, unless and until they claim Israeli citizenship under Israel’s Law of Return.

      • Mikhael
        January 11, 2018, 10:26 am

        eljay January 9, 2018, 7:05 pm
        || Mikhael: He’s an old fart who’ll be dead soon with no issue. He’s in his 60s … Let’s say he manages to reach his 100s through healthy habits … “Mooser” will be dead in a few decades’ time at the most … ||

        When someone threatens suggests that a person will be dead “soon”, 40 years is not the time-frame that usually comes to mind.

        Guy: You’ll be dead soon.
        Other guy: What?
        Guy: You’ll be dead soon. In the dark, without witnesses and cameras.
        Other guy: What the hell? Are you threatening me?
        Guy: What? No, no, not at all. I was just saying that in approximately 40 years you’ll die of natural causes late at night in a quiet hospital room. What else could I have possibly meant?

        I have the feeling he’s got far less than 40 years. In any case, he’ll most likely be dead soon.

      • eljay
        January 11, 2018, 10:40 am

        || Mikhael: For the vast majority of people who identify as Jews today, Jewish identity is a national and ethnic identity … ||

        That’s nice. But the fact remains that it’s a religion-based identity acquired by:
        – undergoing a religious conversion to Judaism; or
        – being descended from someone who underwent a religious-conversion to Judaism.

        || … Because you are a simpleton … ||

        You say the sweetest things. :-)

        || … Incorrect. There are many secular, non-believing, atheist and/or agnostic Jews (such as yours truly) who do not believe in Judaism. … ||

        That’s nice. But the fact remains that it’s a religion-based identity acquired by:
        – undergoing a religious conversion to Judaism; or
        – being descended from someone who underwent a religious-conversion to Judaism.

        || … My paternal grandfather was from a Mizrahi Jewish family originating from today’s Syria (Aleppo and Damascus) and my great grandparents (my father’s paternal grandparents) moved to Jerusalem at the end of the 19th century. … ||

        And catalan is Bulgarian, hails from Spain (he guesses) and lives in New Mexico. Like I said: Some Jews can truthfully claim that geographic Palestine is their ancestral homeland. The rest can only fancifully make the claim. Too bad for you that you don’t like it.

        || … Too bad for you if you’re too stupid to understand this. … ||

        Stop it – you’re making me blush! :-D

        || … Incorrect. It was envisioned as a Jewish state, with a Jewish national culture, and with absolute freedom of religion (and freedom FROM religion) and equal rights for all citizens of the state whatever their ethnicity or national background, Jewish or otherwise. Non-Jewish Israeli citizens have rights as Israeli citizens that Jews from abroad who are not Israeli citizens do not have, and will not have, unless and until they claim Israeli citizenship under Israel’s Law of Return. ||

        Like I said: It was envisioned and established and has been operating since it inception as a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” primarily of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews.

      • eljay
        January 11, 2018, 11:04 am

        || Mikhael: … I have the feeling he’s got far less than 40 years. In any case, he’ll most likely be dead soon. ||

        Today must be “Charm Day” at ZioHQ.

      • Mikhael
        January 11, 2018, 11:25 am

        Talk hack January 10, 2018, 8:57 am
        Mikhael: ““Jewish” is primarily an ethnic-based, national identity that can exist independently of “religion”.”

        ROFL. Like “Christian”, right? Another primarily an ethnic-based, national identity that can exist independently of “religion”.

        Ummm, no. Not at all like “Christian”. When we speak of a “Christian” we can only mean someone who believes in or follows one of the various varieties of the Jesus-cult. When we speak of a Jew, we mean someone who traces his/her descent to Eres Yisra’el of antiquity and who has a distinct national heritage, kinship with other Jews and a national language (Hebrew).

        But you are right about one thing. “Jewish” is not a nation state identity, not a citizenship. That’s at the core of Israel’s Apartheid.

        “Jewish” is the national identity of the State of Israel. Israel is a Jewish nation-state. The state recognizes the distinct national identities of citizens who belong to minority groups and who would take umbrage as being classed as “Jewish”. That’s why there are non-Jewish Israeli citizens who have every right that Jewish Israeli citizens have who are officially classified in the Population Registry as having Arab nationality.

        MikhaeL: “Excommunication” is a religious concept.”

        So is conversion. Can someone convert to Judaism and can become am member ot this “primarily an ethnic-based, national identity that can exist independently of “religion”.”?

        Sure. But it’s relatively rare.

        Mikhael: “The last time that a geopolitical entity known as “Palestine” existed was on May 15, 1948.”

        Oh no. It never stopped existing despite the Zionist effort to destroy this “geopolitical entity” which was nothing else than a (dependant) state under mandate. It was redeclared in 1988 within 1967 lins.

        There was never an independent, sovereign state known as Palestine. Oh, no. Now, I happen to be a proponent of the establishment of the first-ever Palestinian Arab state in history, but there are going to be many border adjustments. There’s just no way that Israel is going to accept the Armistice Lines that existed between Jordan and Israel in 1949 as the future border between an as-yet non-existent “State of Palestine” and Israel.

        Mikhael: “Excluding very recent converts to the Jewish religion, who are very few, nearly every Jew alive today traces his or her ancestral lineage to people who once lived in the ancient Jewish polities that formerly existed in the Land of Israel. ”

        ROFL. Of course. Every Jew can prove that she or he is a descendant and that any Nonjew – especially Palestian Nonjews – isn’t, right?

        You really need to work on your reading comprehension. Let’s review again. I wrote (it’s right up there, but I’m repeating again, with bold for emphasis):
        Excluding very recent converts to the Jewish religion, who are very few, nearly every Jew alive today traces his or her ancestral lineage to people who once lived in the ancient Jewish polities that formerly existed in the Land of Israel”

        Now, since I clearly wrote excluding very recent converts” and nearly every Jew I don’t understand how you can possibly think that I stated “Every Jew can prove that she or he is a descendant”. “Nearly” does not mean “every”. But if we exclude very recent converts like Ivanka Trump, or in the rare cases where a convert marries another convert, the children of such converts, then yes, pretty much every Jew who traces his or descent to the historical Jewish communities of the Diaspora can trace his or lineage lineage to people who once lived in Eres Yisra’el. Because you are a dullard and have poor reading comprehension, I feel it necessary to stress that I am not stating that people from the major Jewish Diaspora communities are solely descended from the Jews of antiquity who lived in the Land of Israel.
        Mikhael: “in a very real sense ,the Land of Israel is the national and ancestral homeland …”

        that any Nonjew – especially Palestian Nonjews – isn’t, right

        It’s quite likely that there are many non-Jews throughout the world who have Jewish descent as many Jews left the Jewish fold and converted to Christianity or Islam. So yes, that means there are Christians in Poland and Muslims in Morocco who trace their descent to Jews who once lived in the Land of Israel because great great great grampaw converted out and married a shiksa. It’s also quite likely that some of the Arabic-speaking population that has recently adopted a “Palestinian” national identity are also in part descended from the Jews of antiquity. Who said otherwise? And who cares?

        Yep. The keyword is “ancestral”. So what rights to Palestinians Nonjews have to return to their proven homenland in this loony Zionist narrative?

        The Arabic-speaking non-Jews who have developed a Palestinian national identity in recent decades have the right to national self-determination and to create a Palestinian Arab state in the part of the country where they constitute a majority. If and when such a state arises, then the so-called ” Palestinian refugees” should have the right of return to that Palestinian state, which will likely arise on a sizable chunk of formerly Jordanian-controlled “West Bank” with border adjustments. They don’t have the right and will never have a right to demand a “return” to Israel itself, but compensation can be an issue to discuss (as well as compensation for Jewish-owned property).

        Mikhael: “The modern State of Israel has never existed as religion-supremacist “Jewish State” but since 1948 it has been a Jewish parliamentary liberal democracy with guaranteed equal rights to all citizens whether they are of Jewish national origins or not. ”
        Yep, except those Nonjews it keeps expelled and denationalized

        The Arabs who fled the territory that would become part of the State of Israel during Israel’s independence war were not “denationalized” — they never had Israeli citizenship to begin with. The ones who stayed were given Israeli citizenship and enjoy all the benefits of being citizens of a liberal democracy.

        This right was explicitely removed from one of Israel’s “Basic Law’s”.

        Non-Jewish citizens of Israel are guaranteed the same rights to Human Dignity and Liberty that are enumerated in Israel’s Basic Law as Jewish citizens of Israel. Nowhere in Israel’s Basic Law is it stated that these rights are reserved “only for Jewish citizens of the state”. You’ve failed again.

        And don’t forget that all citizens of Israel are equal. But Israel’s “nationals” (aka Jews) are more equal then equal and have more rights.

        Wrong again. It’s not only Jews that are “nationals” of Israel. There are several different recognized “nationalities” in Israel that have citizenship. And your saying thatr Jews are “more equal” than non-Jewish citizens is unsubstantiated.

        In fact only Jews have the rights that every citizen would have in a true liberal democracy. Israel has even perverted the term “citizen”. Guess which Germany regime also differentiated between nationals and citizens to privilige the former.

        You cannot name one single right that I, as a Jewish citizen of Israel, have under Israeli law that a non-Jewish citizen of Israel does not have and cannot have under Israeli law because he or she is a non-Jew. Name just one. And don’t give me that bullshit Adalah list of so-called discriminatory laws (which, by the way does not list one right that Jewish citizens have that are denied to non-Jewish citizens of Israel).

        To me Israel is simply an Apartheid state, because it has to keep Nonjews expelled to maintain a regime that is dominated by Jews. That amounts to the Crime of Apartheid as defined in international law.

        Newsflash. There are almost 2 million non-Jewish citizens of Israel who live, work, and love in Israel, who serve not only in Knesset, but in the Supreme Court, in Cabinet Ministries, in the diplomatic corps, and as brigadier generals in the IDF. None of this would be possible under an Apartheid system. But you’re an idiot and your mind is made up. Facts confuse you.

      • echinococcus
        January 11, 2018, 11:40 am

        Michael,

        When we speak of a Jew, we mean someone who traces his/her descent to Eres Yisra’el of antiquity

        Thank yo so much for confirming that “Jewish” identity is
        racist,
        mythologic,
        mythomaniac
        and
        plumb crazy.

        You don’t believe me? Just read your definition, agreedly a commonly held one among people who call themselves Jewish.

        By the way, our so-called Moderators seem to be letting your logorrhea unchecked, for the express purpose of reducing the number of their readers. I have no problem with any content, be it inhuman and revolting, as it often is coming from Zosters. Yours is a major space problem that intentionally blurs the eye and liquefies the reader’s brains.

      • Talkback
        January 11, 2018, 5:43 pm

        Mikhael: “Ummm, no. Not at all like “Christian”. When we speak of a “Christian” we can only mean someone who believes in or follows one of the various varieties of the Jesus-cult.”

        Who are you to define that Christians are not a people, if Jews are? That’s just the difference between a patrilineal and a matrilineal ‘descent systems’. And Jews just follow their cult.

        Mikhael: “When we speak of a Jew, we mean someone who traces his/her descent to Eres Yisra’el of antiquity and who has a distinct national heritage, kinship with other Jews and a national language (Hebrew).”

        Yep. Without any offical prove that she or he actually is. LOL.

        Mikhael: ““Jewish” is the national identity of the State of Israel. Israel is a Jewish nation-state. The state recognizes the distinct national identities of citizens …”

        Exactöy Jewish is not a citizenship. It’s only a ‘nationality WITHIN citizenship’. Nobody can become Jewish by acquiring citizenship in Israel. So Jews are not a state nation as much as you need to twist these concepts and distract from this fact. A Jewish national identity of a state in which “Jewish” is not a citizenship is as racist as an Aryan national identity of a state in which “Aryan” is not a citizenship. No wonder why Israel and Nazi Germany differentiate(d) between nationals and citizens to privilige the former.

        Mikhael: “That’s why there are non-Jewish Israeli citizens who have every right that Jewish Israeli citizens have who are officially classified in the Population Registry as having Arab nationality.”

        Again, that’s Israel perverse trick. While Jews and Nonjews have the same rights (at least on paper) AS CITIZENS, Jews enjoy more rights AS NATIONALS. What Israel calls “citizens” is NOT what other contries call citizens.

        Mikhael: “Sure. But it’s relatively rare.”

        So being Jewish is a religious concept.

        Mikhael: “There was never an independent, sovereign state known as Palestine. ”

        That’s what I said. It was a dependent state under mandate. And it was a failed and occupied state under Jordan’s protectorate and it is an occupied state under Israel today. No wonder it wasn’t independet and souvereign.

        Mikhael: “Now, I happen to be a proponent of the establishment of the first-ever Palestinian Arab state in history, but there are going to be many border adjustments. There’s just no way that Israel is going to accept the Armistice Lines that existed between Jordan and Israel in 1949 as the future border between an as-yet non-existent “State of Palestine” and Israel.”

        First of all. The State of Palestine was recognized within the UN in 2012 and is a non-member observer state with access to the International Criminal Court. Secondly, of course there is no way that the Jewish Apartheid Junta is going to abide to international law, withdraw to the borders in which it declared statehood and give up territory it illegaly annexed. You don’t have to remind us that the only way it acquired territory is through war and expulsion.

        Mikhael: “I wrote (it’s right up there, but I’m repeating again, with bold for emphasis):
        “Excluding very recent converts to the Jewish religion, who are very few, nearly every Jew alive today traces his or her ancestral lineage to people who once lived in the ancient Jewish polities that formerly existed in the Land of Israel. Now, since I clearly wrote excluding very recent converts” and nearly every Jew I don’t understand how you can possibly think that I stated “Every Jew can prove that she or he is a descendant”. “Nearly” does not mean “every”.”

        O sorry, that changes EVERYTHING, well NEARLY everything. So Judaism doesn’t have a history of prolelytism, but only knows “very few” and “very recent” converts. And any other Jew can prove that she or he is a descendant. Is this a more precise description of your delusion?

        Mikhael: “Who said otherwise? And who cares?”

        Yes, yes. That’s what I’m thinking about Jewish traces, too. Who cares? That doesn’t give them any rights, does it? The question is: Who was a legitimite citizen of Palestine in 1948 and especially not a Jewish refugee or a Jew who illegaly immigrated after the White Book policy in 1938. Only legitimate citizens had the right to determine Palestine’s future and by majority ruling, right?

        Mikhael: “The Arabic-speaking non-Jews who have developed a Palestinian national identity in recent decades have the right to national self-determination and to create a Palestinian Arab state in the part of the country where they constitute a majority. ”

        First of all a Palestinian national “identy” doesn’t exist. Since 1925 the Palestinians are a constitutive people – a nation in the relevant sense of the word and not some irrelevant racist “national identity” nonsense which differentiates between Jews and Nonjews. Secondly. It’s rich from you to say that they could create this state after Zionist commited an ethic cleansing and became a majority through expulsion. Thirdly. Nonjews are today a majority in historic Palestine even without those the Jewish Apartheid Junta keeps expelled. So be the honest racist that you are and claim that real majorities don’t count if Jews are a minority.

        Mikhael: “They don’t have the right …”

        Well it may be different in the Kahane continuum, but in this universe not only Jewish refugees have an inaliable right to return. And not only Jews don’t have a right to expell others and keep them expelled only to achieve and maintain a racist national character. Ask the Germans, if you have doubts.

        Mikhael: “The Arabs who fled the territory that would become part of the State of Israel during Israel’s independence war were not “denationalized” — they never had Israeli citizenship to begin with.”

        First of all. Only 5% fled. And 100% of the refugees were expelled, because the Jewish Apartheid Junta prevented them to return. Secondly there was no “independence” war. Israel didn’t became “independent” from a colonial power. Israel was not the result of an anticolonial struggle. Israel is the result of settler colonialism. Thirdly. Allthough according to customary international law (as reflected in the partition plan) they should have become Israelis, the Jewish Apartheid Junta created a perversion of a nationality law and only considered those to be citizens which it didn’t kept expelled. That’s institutionalized racism based on a crime against humanity. Compare Israel’s racist nationality law to Palestine’s from 1925 regarding the correct transfer of nationality by a successor state:

        “Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August 1924 shall become Palestine citizens.”

        Mikhael: ” The ones who stayed …”

        That is the ones who either weren’t expelled or managed to return despite the Apartheid Junta’s trying to murder them at its “borders”.

        Mikhael: “Non-Jewish citizens of Israel are guaranteed the same rights to Human Dignity and Liberty that are enumerated in Israel’s Basic Law as Jewish citizens of Israel. Nowhere in Israel’s Basic Law is it stated that these rights are reserved “only for Jewish citizens of the state”. You’ve failed again”

        ROFL. Let me use your own words: You really need to work on your reading comprehension. Let’s review again. I wrote (it’s right up there, but I’m repeating again):
        “Yep, except those Nonjews it keeps expelled and denationalized to fake being a “liberal democracy” and the fact that equal rights are not “guaranteed” at all. To the contrary. This right was explicitely removed from one of Israel’s “Basic Law’s”. ”

        And again using your words: “Because you are a dullard and have poor reading comprehension, I feel it necessary to stress” again that there is no such thing as a guaranteed equal right in any Basic Law of this Apartheid Junta. It was explicitely removed from the Basic Law “Human Dignity and Liberty” and you did not only fail to understand what I wrote, but will also fail to prove me wrong. Just quote from any Basic Law anything that comes close to an acknoledgment that all Israelis have equal rights. Secondly, there is not any fundamental right in Israel that is guaranteed and explicitely enshrined. Israel can – and according to its own Basic Law – declare any law “constitutional” even if it violates a fundamental “righ”. Just read the relevant clause in it’s Basic Law “Human Dignity and Liberty”:

        “8. There shall be no violation of rights under this Basic Law except by a law befitting the values of the State of Israel, enacted for a proper purpose, and to an extent no greater than is required. ”

        There was a case regarding Israel’s entry law in which even a majority of Judges ruled that it was violating fundamental rights, but since one of the majority Judges also ruled that it would be more practical to have a racist law than no law tat all he law was kept alive and later insignificantly modified.
        This Basic Law can even be voted off by a simple majority and is not constitutionally “enshrined” at all.

        Mikhael: “Wrong again. It’s not only Jews that are “nationals” of Israel. There are several different recognized “nationalities” in Israel that have citizenship. ”

        Are you deliberately confusing two different concepts? These several “nationalities” (which is a racist concept in itself) don’t have anything to do with the fact that only Jews are considered to be THE nation of Israel. Only they are considered to be “nationals” . An Israeli nation doesn’t exist according to the Supreme Apartheid Court. Again the fundamental egaliterian concept of citizenship=nationality is totally perverted in this racist colonial entity.

        You said it yourself: “Israel is a Jewish nation-state”.

        Mikhael: “You cannot name one single right that I, as a Jewish citizen of Israel, have under Israeli law that a non-Jewish citizen of Israel does not have and cannot have under Israeli law because he or she is a non-Jew. Name just one.”

        Oh, it begins before a Jew has even become a citizen of Israel (“Law of Return”). Nonjews who actually had lived in the area of Palestine that was conquered by the Apartheid Junta have nor right to return. Continue with the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law and the rights of Nonjewish Israelis to family. Btw. do Nonjewish Israelis have a right to move to one of Israel’s illegal settlements in the Westbank? Or do they have a right to create a settlement in Israel?

        Mikhael: “Newsflash. There are almost 2 million non-Jewish citizens of Israel who live, work, and love in Israel, who serve not only in Knesset, but in the Supreme Court, in Cabinet Ministries, in the diplomatic corps, and as brigadier generals in the IDF. None of this would be possible under an Apartheid system. But you’re an idiot and your mind is made up. Facts confuse you.”

        Brainflash. Who is the real idiot again? I didn’t talk about the Nonjewish citizens of Israel, but about the Nonjews whose expulsion and denationalization you need to deny and ignore. The Apartheid Junta can only maintain a regime dominated by Jews by keeping those Nonjews expelled. That amounts to the Crime of Apartheid. as defined in international law. Just look it up even if you are not allowed to.

      • Talkback
        January 11, 2018, 5:54 pm

        Mikhael: ” I have the feeling he’s got far less than 40 years. In any case, he’ll most likely be dead soon.”

        I have the feeling that you will fail to become a human being in this life. And let’s sincerely hope for you that there’s no such thing as reincarnation.

      • RoHa
        January 11, 2018, 6:10 pm

        Eljay, every day is Charm Day at ZioHQ.

      • Mooser
        January 11, 2018, 6:28 pm

        “By the way, our so-called Moderators seem to be letting you….”

        Perhaps they feel “Mikhael” represents the views of a vast cohort. As “Mikhael” explains:

        “There’s… nothing extraordinary about a middle-aged dad who’s been married three times and has kids with two exes (I wound up marrying every woman I was intimate with).

        A “real issue” for Zionism.

        I’m sure his posts were given a sober consideration, since everybody at Mondo drinks in moderation.

      • Mikhael
        January 11, 2018, 7:18 pm

        eljay January 11, 2018, 10:40 am
        || Mikhael: For the vast majority of people who identify as Jews today, Jewish identity is a national and ethnic identity … ||
        That’s nice. But the fact remains that it’s a religion-based identity acquired by:
        – undergoing a religious conversion to Judaism; or
        – being descended from someone who underwent a religious-conversion to Judaism

        Your ignorance-based opinion is not a fact.

        || … Incorrect. There are many secular, non-believing, atheist and/or agnostic Jews (such as yours truly) who do not believe in Judaism. … ||

        That’s nice. But the fact remains that it’s a religion-based identity acquired by:
        – undergoing a religious conversion to Judaism; or
        – being descended from someone who underwent a religious-conversion to Judaism.

        It’s a national identity, and the vast majority of people (with a handful of exceptions) who have this national identity come by it through descent from the Jews of antiquity who lived in Eres Yisra’el, which is the common ancestral homeland of the Jewish nation. While it is certainly true that over the centuries many goyyim adopted Judaism and married into Jewish families, it’s not as if Jews of Germany were ethnic Germans whose ancestors adopted Judaism and the Jews of Iraq were ethnic Arabs whose ancestors adopted Judaism and the only thing that binds them is a putative shared “religion”. The fact is that they can both truthfully claim descent from Jews of antiquity who lived in the Jewish homeland, which by the way has never been empty of Jews.

        || … My paternal grandfather was from a Mizrahi Jewish family originating from today’s Syria (Aleppo and Damascus) and my great grandparents (my father’s paternal grandparents) moved to Jerusalem at the end of the 19th century. … ||

        And catalan is Bulgarian, hails from Spain (he guesses) and lives in New Mexico. Like I said: Some Jews can truthfully claim that geographic Palestine is their ancestral homeland. The rest can only fancifully make the claim. Too bad for you that you don’t like it.

        If “Catalan” (is he a commenter here?) is a Sefaradi Jew from Bulgaria (“Katalan” is a Sephardic-Jewish surname, although not so common) then that means he is descended from Sefaradi Jews whose ancestors were expelled from Spain in 1492. After the Expulsion of Jews from Spain, Sefaradi Jews scattered all over the place, but the vast bulk of them settled in the Ottoman Empire (including some of my ancestors who re-settled in the ancestral Jewish homeland when it was under Ottoman control). Many Sefaradim also settled in the Ottoman-controlled Balkan states, including in the areas that would eventually become independent Greece, Bulgaria, and the areas that once were part of the former Yugoslavia. In regard to the Sefaradi Jews in Bulgaria, they were never ethnically speaking “Bulgarians” (although they acquired Bulgarian citizenship) but they lived a separate lifestyle and preserved the Spanish-Jewish idiom (Ladino, which is replete with vocabulary from Hebrew, the national language of the Jews) for many centuries. They also were never “Spaniards”. The earliest evidence of Jews settling in Spain is from the Roman era, however, the bulk of the ancestors of Sefaradi Jews only went to Spain with the Moorish invasions. But it’s not as if Sefaradi Jews are descended in the main from indigenous Iberian converts to Judaism. They are Jews who have the same heritage and descent stemming from the Jews of antiquity who lived in geographic Eres Yisra’el, the historic Jewish homeland, and all people whose lineage stems from the historical Diaspora communities can truthfully claim this descent. Too bad for you that you’re too stupid to understand this.

        Like I said: It was envisioned and established and has been operating since it inception as a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” primarily of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews.

        Incorrect. It was envisioned as a Jewish state, with a Jewish national culture, just as other ethnic nation-states (e.g., Armenia, Greece) are envisioned as Armenian or Greek states. If such states accord citizens who belong to national minority communities the same civic rights under law as its citizens who belong to the dominant national group , then they are not supremacist states. There are of course allegations that states like Greece and Armenia fail to meet their obligations towards their citizens who belong to minority communities (and in the case of Armenia today there is some evidence of this towards Azeris, most of whom fled Armenia after Armenian independence in the early 1990s) the definition of Armenia as an Armenian state for Armenians doesn’t in and of itself make it a “supremacist” state or an Apartheid state; neither does the definition of Israel as a Jewish state render it a supremacist state or an Apartheid state.

        Since Jewish does not exclusively refer to “religion” and is a national identity that can encompasses people of no religion and even adherents of other religions, and since Israel is not governed by religious clerics (like Iran , for instance) Israel cannot be accurately described as “religion-supremacist”, as every citizen in Israel enjoys religious freedom under the law (and freedom FROM religion)

        Since non-Jewish citizens of Israel have rights under Israeli law that non-Israeli citizen Jews do not have, It is inaccurate to define Israel as “primarily of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews.” The anti-Israel fanatic Knesset member Haneen Zouabi, who is from an Arab Muslim family, certainly has the same rights that I do as an Israeli citizen (even though she openly states that she wants to tear down the Israeli state that pays her handsome Knesset salary), she also enjoys more rights under Israeli law than Jews who are not Israeli citizens (e.g., the soon-to-be-dead Mooser) have. You have failed to substantiate your allegation that Israel is a Jewish state primarily of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews.

      • eljay
        January 11, 2018, 9:28 pm

        || Mikhael: … Your ignorance-based opinion is not a fact. … ||

        But it is a fact that your opinion is supremacism-based.

        || … It’s a national identity … ||

        If you say so. But it’s actually a religion-based identity acquired by:
        – undergoing a religious conversion to Judaism; or
        – being descended from someone who underwent a religious-conversion to Judaism.

        No Judaism, no Jewish.

        || … Too bad for you that you’re too stupid to understand this. … ||

        I’m starting to think you’re hitting on me.

        || … It was envisioned as a Jewish state … ||

        Right: Israel was envisioned as a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” primarily of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews.

        || … Since Jewish does not exclusively refer to “religion” … ||

        I never said it did. I said it’s a religion-based identity…which it is.

        || … You have failed to substantiate your allegation that Israel is a Jewish state primarily of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews. ||

        There’s nothing “allegation” about it. Israel was envisioned as, established as, has been operating since Day 1 as and is constantly promoted as a “Jewish State” primarily of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews.

        And since Jewish is a religion-based identity, a state that exists primarily of and for people all over the world – citizens of homelands all over the world – who choose to embrace that identity is a religion-supremacist state.

      • Sibiriak
        January 12, 2018, 3:46 am

        Eljay: No Judaism, no Jewish.

        —————————

        But: No Jewish (ethnos), no Judaism (religion).

        Something that can’t be said about Christian/Christianity

      • Talkback
        January 12, 2018, 4:41 am

        Adding to my response to Mikhael (January 11, 2018, 5:43 pm)

        Mikhael: “It’s a national identity, …”

        Call Jews whatever you like. But Jews are NOT a civic nation. Their identity is NOT a political identity built around shared citizenship in a democratic state. You are just supporting a racist concept of “nationality within citizenship” while claiming that only one of its nationalities is THE nationality of the state. The Jewish Apartheid Junta is a self declared ethnocracy based on ethnic and not on civic nationalism. Now compare this to Germany before 1945.

      • Talkback
        January 12, 2018, 5:58 am

        Mikhael: “… and in the case of Armenia today there is some evidence of this towards Azeris, most of whom fled Armenia after Armenian independence in the early 1990s) the definition of Armenia as an Armenian state for Armenians doesn’t in and of itself make it a “supremacist” state or an Apartheid state; neither does the definition of Israel as a Jewish state render it a supremacist state or an Apartheid state.”

        Oh, Armenia would be an Apartheid state if it needed to keep anyone expelled to maintain an certain Armenian majority based on “national identity”/ethnicity or religion. But just have a look at its nationality law and how it treats those who fled or were expelled:

        “The following persons are recognised as the citizens of the Republic of Armenia:
        1) Citizens of the former Arm. SSR permanently residing on the territory of the Republic of Armenia, who until the enactment of the Constitution has not acquired the citizenship of the another State or has rejected that citizenship within one year from the day of the enactment of this Law;”
        2) Stateless persons or former citizens of other USSR republics who are not foreign citizens permanently residing in the RA and before 31 December 2003 have applied for the acquisition of the RA citizenship (amended on 20 March 2002);
        3) The former citizens of the Armenian SSR, who live out side the Republic of Armenia and have not acquire the citizenship of another country (amended on 12 April 2001).”
        http://www.legislationline.org/download/action/download/id/5907/file/Armenia_Law_Citizenship_1995am2013_en.pdf

        Just replace “Arm. SSR” with (mandated) Palestine and “Republic of Armenia” or “RA” with “Israel” to see how Israel perverted the concept of a nationality law to exclude those it expelled and strip them of their right to return and citizenship.

        And wait, it becomes even more Non-Apartheid than the Jewish Apartheid Junta and its racist “Entry law”:
        “A person with no citizenship of the Republic of Armenia can be accepted into the citizenship of the Republic of Armenia without the condition of the term of residence, if he/she:
        1) marries a citizen of the Republic of Armenia or has a child, father or mother who are citizens of the Republic of Armenia; …”

        And oh, wait for more. Armenia has even explicitely enshrined the right to equality in the same document and contrary to the Jewish Apartheid Junta :
        “The citizens of the Republic of Armenia are equal before the Law, irrespective of the basis of the acquisition of the citizenship, nationality, race, sex, language, religion, political and other opinions, social origin, estate or other position, have all rights, freedom and obligations qualified by the Constitution and laws.”

        Now find the same in any documents of your beloved Apartheid Junta. I won’t wait for obvious reasons.

      • echinococcus
        January 12, 2018, 1:34 pm

        Sibiriak,

        No Jewish (ethnos), no Judaism (religion)

        Provide even one (1) single, common ethnic/cultural etc. element, common to the many diverse strands of “Jewish” that is not strictly liturgical/religious, or admit that you have given up the most basic requirement of logic.

        There is no difference from Christianity. If your contention were true, which it isn’t, then Christianity and any other religion should be equally qualified for recognition as an “ethnos”, too, according to you.

      • Sibiriak
        January 12, 2018, 10:00 pm

        echinococcus: Provide even one (1) single, common ethnic/cultural etc. element, common to the many diverse strands of “Jewish”
        ———————————

        Why? That’s not required by the logic of groups. The brilliant logician Wittgenstein long ago made that clear with his famous “family resemblance” concept, which is based on the idea that:

        . ..things which could be thought to be connected by one essential common feature may in fact be connected by a series of overlapping similarities, where no one feature is common to all (Wikipedia) (emphasis added)

        Thus, an essential common feature is not necessary for a large “kinship” type group structure. What is in common to all Jews is that they all meet the requirements for membership in the group “Jews”.

        (A “common ethnic/cultural etc. element” in a group of persons doesn’t necessarily make that group a “people” (ethnos), btw.)

        [ echinococcus:] There is no difference from Christianity.

        In fact there is. Judaism (most forms afaik) is based on the idea of a covenant between a People (ethnos) and a God. Judaism is a people-based religion. No Jewish People, no Judaism. Not so for Christianity.

        If your contention were true, which it isn’t, then Christianity and any other religion should be equally qualified for recognition as an “ethnos”, too, according to you.

        I made no contention in that post that Jews “qualified for recognition as an ‘ethnos’ [people].” I simple wrote: “No Jewish (ethnos), no Judaism (religion).”

        Recognition of a group as a people (ethnos) in the context of international law, self-determination rights, national minority rights, indigenous peoples’ rights etc. is a much more complicated affair.

      • Sibiriak
        January 12, 2018, 11:46 pm

        @echinococcus

        Why waste your time arguing that “Jews are not a people”? It’s a distraction. It’s counterproductive. Whether Jews are a people or not is completely irrelevant to the fact that:

        1) Jews had no right to colonize Palestine and create a discriminatory Jewish state there; those actions were carried out in explicit and total contradiction to the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination.

        2) Israel has imposed an apartheid regime on Palestine in total violation of international law and universal moral values.

      • Mikhael
        January 18, 2018, 2:01 pm

        Talk-hack January 11, 2018, 5:43 pm
        Mikhael: “Ummm, no. Not at all like “Christian”. When we speak of a “Christian” we can only mean someone who believes in or follows one of the various varieties of the Jesus-cult.”
        Who are you to define that Christians are not a people, if Jews are?

        Christians themselves don’t claim to be a national community. If we are discussing the descendants of the major historical Jewish communities of the Diaspora, i.e., the Ashkenazim of Central and Eastern Europe, many of whom later migrated to the New World, the Sefaradim of Spain who eventually spread throughout the Maghreb, the Balkans and the Levant, and whose descendants also migrated to the New World, and the Mizrahim who lived in North Africa and the Levant (often intermixing with Sefaradim who settled there) and Mesopatamia, we are discussing people of the same far-flung ethnos and who share common ancestral origins in Eres Yisra’el, the historical homeland of the Jewish nation. This is quite different from a Norwegian Lutheran whose ancestors converted from Nordic religion in the Middle Ages and a Filipino Catholic, who both practice some variety of the mutated Jewish Jesus cult from the 2nd Temple era Judea that begat “Christianity” and later spread around the world.

        That’s just the difference between a patrilineal and a matrilineal ‘descent systems’. And Jews just follow their cult.

        Some Jews so. I do not. I don’t believe in Judaism, or any religion. The correct definition for a non-believing agnostic such as me is “Jew.” And Classical Rabbinic Judaism (aka “Orthodox” Judaism) believes in matrilineal descent for defining Jewish identity. Karaite Judaism, which also goes back over 1,000 years, does not; neither does Reform Judaism.

        Mikhael: “When we speak of a Jew, we mean someone who traces his/her descent to Eres Yisra’el of antiquity and who has a distinct national heritage, kinship with other Jews and a national language (Hebrew).”
        Yep. Without any offical prove that she or he actually is. LOL.

        Eres Yisra’el has never been devoid of a Jewish population. I can trace 17 generations of my own ancestors to Upper Galilee and Jerusalem, There are ample historical records of constant Jewish migration and resettlement in the Jewish national homeland over two millennia, centuries before long before local Arabic-speaking non-Jews decided that they were a Palestinian nation. Moreover, there have been numerous genetic studies that have amply demonstrated the interconnectedness of Jews from the major Diaspora Jewish communities that show they are a distinct population group with a high degree of consanguinity to each other; these studies also demonstrate the relatedness of Jews to other modern populations in the Levant region, e.g., Syrians and Lebanese, This is only doubted by people who seek to deny the Jewish ancestral connection to their homeland.

        Mikhael: ““Jewish” is the national identity of the State of Israel. Israel is a Jewish nation-state. The state recognizes the distinct national identities of citizens …”
        Talk-hack sez: Exactöy Jewish is not a citizenship. It’s only a ‘nationality WITHIN citizenship’. Nobody can become Jewish by acquiring citizenship in Israel.

        And what of it? Are you suggesting that Israel should deny the unique cultural and national identities of its non-Jewish citizens, the way that Turkey refused to acknowledge its Kurdish citizens as having their own unique culture and persisted in categorizing them as “Mountain Turks” and denied them the right to teach their children in their own language for fear of separatism? And if a non-Jew acquires citizenship in Israel, whether they are born to one of national minority communities in Israel that hold Israeli citizenship (e.g., Druze Arabs, Muslim or Christian Arabs, Circassians) or if they are foreigners who become naturalized Israeli citizens by means of various routes (e.g., marriage to an Israeli citizen of any religion or nationality, having some skill that allows them to get permanent residency and eventually apply for naturalization), the fact they don’t become Jewish by acquiring Israeli citizenship (which would be a denial of their own identity) doesn’t preclude them from enjoying any of the same rights that Jewish citizens of Israel have.

        So Jews are not a state nation as much as you need to twist these concepts and distract from this fact.

        You are very confused and inarticulate. Let me break it down into simple concepts for your simple mind. No, “Jews” (wherever they may live) are not a “state nation” but Israel is a “a Jewish nation-state”. If we compare it to other ethnic nation-states, for example, Greece, the analogy would be thus. “Armenians are not a state nation, but the ic Republic of Armenia is a nation-state for Armenians”. That means people of Armenian ethnicity living in say, California or Syria or France or Argentina do not constitute a “state nation” (how can they, they live outside the borders of the nation-state of Armenia) just as Jews in those places do not constitute a “state nation” but people of such heritage are entitled not only ,legally but morally, to move to their ancestral home whether it be Armenia or Israel) and claim citizenship rights. This is right, normal, natural and just in both cases, but what is right, normal, natural and just for Armenians or Greeks or other Diaspora communities is condemned by withered minds as racist when it comes to Jews.

        Jewish” is not a nation state identity, not a citizenship. That’s at the core of Israel’s Apartheid.

        The above is bullshit. Israeli is a citizenship.The word “Israeli” in English is Yisra’eli in Hebrew. When the word Yisra’eli is used in classical Jewish sources, it is basically synonymous with the word Yehudi and ‘Ibri, which are translated into English as “Jew” and “Hebrew”. They all basically mean the same thing — a Jew. Additionally, in Western languages, when these terms were used by Jews and non-Jews alike, the word “Israelite” (which is the English translation of the Hebrew Yisra’eli) or Israelitische in German, basically was just a way of saying “Jew” So functionally speaking, classifying Israel’s non-Jewish citizens as “Israelis” is using traditionally Jewish terminology that refers to Jews and includes them in a shared civic identity with Israeli Jews without imposing a Jewish identity on them that they would reject. As it is, though, many of Israel’s non-Jewish citizens resent being called Israelis and have started to refer to themselves as Palestinians, I can imagine what would happen if Israel started to insist that they were Jews.

      • Mooser
        January 18, 2018, 6:44 pm

        “Christians themselves…/… insist that they were Jews.”

        So now you tell us this? This changes everything!

  5. Edward Q
    December 27, 2017, 1:42 pm

    “Jews are insecure in the west and therefore Jewish sovereignty is a just and necessary answer.”

    Committing historic crimes against the Middle East will lead to security? There is so much hypocrisy in Zionism.

    • Citizen
      December 27, 2017, 10:51 pm

      Some piece of principled “logic,” eh? X feels insecure, therefore X’s sovereignty is just & necessary. Reminds me of young Adolph in Vienna.

  6. yonah fredman
    December 27, 2017, 4:37 pm

    There were a few factors that made the clash between Palestinian aspirations and Zionist aspirations inevitable on the level of the 47-48 nakba:

    1. Leadership- the choice of Husseini as mufti rather than someone from the less confrontational Nashashibi clan might have made a difference. Also Ben Gurion’s ascendancy in the Yishuv eclipsed the more accommodating Weitzman.

    2.Demography- the increase of Jewish population from 90,000 before WWI to 175,000 in 1929 to 400,000 before world war I, which can be attributed to a. the closing of the doors of the west (not closing but certainly not open as in the 1881 to 1914 period) after WWI and through the 30’s. and of course the added insecurity of Polish and German Jews in the years before WWII.

    and 3. History: One cannot determine what role the catastrophe in Europe played in the mindset of the leaders of the Yishuv and of Jews around the world, but certainly the mixed attitude in 1917 (Balfour) compared to the enthusiastic attitude in 1947 (UN Partition Plan) is largely attributable to the history that took place between the two dates. It is impossible to know what role that enthusiasm played in the decisions taken by Ben Gurion, but certainly it is impossible to dismiss it as minor.

    From the moment of the UN partition plan to the nakba, I have read nothing to indicate that anything could have been done to avoid the head to head clash that led to the nakba. (Given the leadership, the mindset and the array of forces, I cannot imagine that the Zionists or the Palestinians could have changed the course of history once the UN Partition Plan was passed.)

    (As far as the failure of Clinton and camp david 2000, there was a failure on the part of all the parties: Israel, the Palestinians and the Americans. The Geneva Initiative has its roots in the negotiations from that period that continued on by nongovernment representatives of Israelis and Palestinians. There were leaps of compromise that were possible when crafting an initiative rather than a peace treaty and a retrospective vision of the possibility of negotiating the Geneva Initiative in the summer of 2000 is a nostalgic mirage.)

    • Mooser
      December 27, 2017, 5:10 pm

      “There were a few factors that made the clash between Palestinian aspirations and Zionist aspirations inevitable”

      You mean the “Zionist aspiration” to take Palestine and the “Palestinian aspiration” to simply live where they were living, and their “aspiration” to go on living?

      Those “aspirations”? (Hardly even worthy of the name, compared to Zionist “aspirations”, are they?)

      Another comment straight from “Yonah’s” bottomless pilpul vial. Brought to you by today’s obfuscater and false equalizer, the word “aspirations”.

      • Mooser
        December 27, 2017, 5:24 pm

        Shorter “Yonah”: ‘Yes, yes, it had to be that bad! ‘

      • Annie Robbins
        December 27, 2017, 10:15 pm

        You mean the “Zionist aspiration” to take Palestine and the “Palestinian aspiration”

        i’d love to put a leash around the neck of someone i know and walk him around my neighborhood on his knees. and after a few rounds around the block and his knees all bloody and the bones sticking out, with the leash pulled tight, i’d say “There are a few factors that clash between your aspirations and mine.”

      • Mikhael
        January 9, 2018, 5:39 pm

        Mooser December 27, 2017, 5:10 pm
        “There were a few factors that made the clash between Palestinian aspirations and Zionist aspirations inevitable”

        You mean the “Zionist aspiration” to take Palestine and the “Palestinian aspiration” to simply live where they were living, and their “aspiration” to go on living?

        I think he might have meant that there was the Zionist aspiration to create a Jewish nation-state in Eres Yisra’el, or at least a very small part of it, coexisting next to an additional Palestinian Arab nation-state (the second) per the Jewish Agency’s acceptance of Resolution 181 and the Arab nationalist aspiration to have an exclusively Arab state (not a “Palestinian” state at that time though) in all of the former British Mandate of Palestine west of the Jordan River (excluding the parts of Mandate Palestine that became Transjordan) and ethnically cleanse the country of all of its Jewish inhabitants. We can’t forget that all the Jews who lived in the areas of the former British Mandate that fell to Arab forces between 1948-1949 were expelled by the Arab Legion, including those whose families had lived there continuously for many centuries (mostly in Jerusalem’s Old City, including my father’s aunt and cousins), whereas tens of thousands of Arabs went on “to simply live” in the areas of the erstwhile British Mandate of Palestine that came to be part of the State of Israel after the signing of the Armistice Agreement as Israeli citizens.

      • Talkback
        January 10, 2018, 8:39 am

        Mikhael: “I think he might have meant that there was the Zionist aspiration to create a Jewish nation-state in Eres Yisra’el, or at least a very small part of it, coexisting next to an additional Palestinian Arab nation-state (the second) per the Jewish Agency’s acceptance of Resolution 181 …”

        What? The Jewish Agency accepted Resolution 181? When? Ben Guriojn’s proposal to the UN was to put all of Palestine under Jewish control and delay its independence until a Jewish majority was achieved. And he also said that if the UN would approve his plan he would have the right to implement it through force against the Nonjews.

        Mikhael “… and the Arab nationalist aspiration to have an exclusively Arab state (not a “Palestinian” state at that time though) in all of the former British Mandate of Palestine west of the Jordan River (excluding the parts of Mandate Palestine that became Transjordan) and ethnically cleanse the country of all of its Jewish inhabitants.

        Well, that’s a lie. The party that represented the majority citizens of Paletine propsed a unitariy democratic state inluding minority rights and just asked for tPalestine to be released into independence as any other Class-A-state under mandate.

        “We can’t forget that all the Jews who lived in the areas of the former British Mandate that fell to Arab forces between 1948-1949 were expelled by the Arab Legion, including those whose families had lived there continuously for many centuries (mostly in Jerusalem’s Old City, including my father’s aunt and cousins), …”

        How many? 10,000? After the Jewish Agency ignored its collaboration with Jordan and started to conquer Jerusalem?

        Mikhael: :”.. whereas tens of thousands of Arabs went on “to simply live” in the areas of the erstwhile British Mandate of Palestine …”

        We can’t forget that all the 750,000 Nonjews who lived in the areas of the former British Mandate that fell to Jewish forces between 1948-1949 were expelled and denationalized by them, including those whose families had lived there continuously for many centuries. We can’t also forget another 300,000 Nonjews who lived in the Westbank that fell to Jewish forces in 1967 and were expelled by them, including those whose families had lived there continuously for many centuries and including those who were expelled from the areas of the former British Mandate that fell to Jewish forces between 1948-1949, including those whose families had lived there continuously for many centuries. And we can’t forget another quarter of a million Nonjews who lived lived in the areas of the former British Mandate that fell to Jewish forces since 1948 and whose residential status was revoked, including those whose families had lived there continuously for many centuries. And who konws how many Nonjews the Jewish Apartheid Junta has expelled since then.

        Mikhael: “… that came to be part of the State of Israel after the signing of the Armistice Agreement as Israeli citizens.”

        There’s no such thing as a part of mandated Palestine that became part of Israel after signing of any treatment. Every single inch of Israel was conquered through war and terrorism, allthough the acquisition of territory through war is inadmissible after the Nuremberg Trials. It would be invalid of any third country to transfer territory of Palestine to Israel.

    • eljay
      December 27, 2017, 9:30 pm

      || yonah fredman @ December 27, 2017, 4:37 pm ||

      To summarize: The ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their homes and lands so that a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” could be established in (as much as possible of) geographic Palestine was a “necessary evil” but “currently its (sic) not necessary”.

    • Talkback
      December 28, 2017, 5:25 am

      Yonah: “From the moment of the UN partition plan to the nakba, I have read nothing to indicate that anything could have been done to avoid the head to head clash that led to the nakba.”

      Really? From 1947 in the UN? How about 1922 in Great Britain?

      LORD ISLINGTON: “The first point I desire to make in relation to my Motion is that those provisions embodied in the Palestine Mandate are in direct conflict with the fundamental principles of the mandatory system. In order to make good that point I must ask your Lordships to listen to me while I read two governing Articles in the Covenant of the League of Nations which represent what I call the fundamental principles of the mandatory system. They are in Article 22, which states that— “To those colonies and territories which, as a consequence of the late war, have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them … there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation

      Paragraph 4 of Article 22 goes on to say— “Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations earl be provisionally recognised, subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.” The establishment of a Zionist Home under the Palestine Mandate, as applied to the Articles that I have explained, is directly inconsistent with the undertakings embodied in those two Articles. …

      […] the moment it was decided to convert the Palestine Mandate, and to introduce into it the principle of the Zionist Home, the whole of that great ideal of leading the people on in their own way and by their own means to a system of self-government in their own country was at once and for ever abandoned. The Zionist Home must, and does, mean the predominance of political power on the part of the Jewish community in a country where the population is preponderantly non-Jewish. And that is what the Palestine Mandate, if it is ratified at Geneva, sets forth permanently to establish. If ratified, it imposes on this country the responsibility of trusteeship for a Zionist political predominance where 90 per cent. of the population are non-Zionist and non-Jewish. …

      In fact, very many orthodox Jews, not only in Palestine but all over the world, view with the deepest misapprehension, not to say dislike, this principle of a Zionist Home in Palestine. The scheme of a Zionist Home must, and does, entail direct Jewish bias as against the people of the country, who are mainly Arabs and Mahomedans. And it not merely introduces this influence by utilising the Jewish forces within the territory of Palestine, but it brings about this influence by importing into the country extraneous and alien Jews from other parts of the world, in order to make that predominance effective. …

      […] one does hear from many sources that this Zionist Commission, this advisory body to the [British] Administration, is the real power behind the throne, and really very largely controls the whole political machinery of Palestine. If that be the case, and I think it will be difficult to disprove it, I venture to say that Zionism, as it is now in practice in Palestine, is really the antithesis of the true principles embodied in the mandatory system.

      On more than one occasion [Churchill, the Secretary of State for the Colonies] has been asked by Arab Delegations and Palestinian organisations to remove the Zionist bias and to substitute in its place a national system. His reply has been […] “The difficulty about the promises of a National Home for Jews in Palestine was that it conflicted with our regular policy of consulting the wishes of the people in mandated territories and giving them a representative institution as soon as the people were fitted for it.” Then he went on to say: “The only cause for unrest in Palestine arose from the Zionist Government [in Palestine] and our promises in regard to it .[…]”

      It seems to me that the Palestine Mandate as it stands to-day is a real distortion of the mandatory system—where a small portion of the population is to be given preferential treatment and where British authority is to enforce that system. …

      Now I wish to give your Lordships one or two instances of how this Zionist influence is brought to bear upon the social and economic life of the country. One of the Articles in the Palestine Mandate deals definitely with immigration. I am given to understand, by an official document, I think, that since the occupation 25,000 Jews have been introduced into Palestine, that one-fourth of that number have found their way on to the land and have been absorbed in the agricultural districts and that three-fourths are littered about in the towns. That large invasion into this small country, depressed as it has been, like every other country, as the aftermath of the war, has caused very considerable embarrassment, and the result of their introduction has been that in order to find them subsistence the Administration has had to create artificial employment in Palestine at a high rate of wages; and of course the wages and all the expenses attached to the project have come out of the pockets of the taxpayers, who are, let me remind your Lordships again, non-Jewish to the extent of 90 per cent., and have no voice whatever in the control of that immigration.

      ow, Palestinian organisations have put forward what would appear to be a quite reasonable demand for a share of the control of the immigration of the people that are to come into their own country. That has been refused. I believe that a special Consultative Committee has been formed of members of the Legislative Council, but so long as the Palestine Zionist Executive—the Jewish organisation which is the real influence in the Administration—is in existence, so long is any committee that is formed neutralised in its influence and effect; because so long as the principle of a Zionist Home is prosecuted in Palestine as long must the Administration turn down any proposals from any other bodies which are likely to clash with that principle.

      The Palestinians have asked for an early recognition of self-government in their country and they have been told that it must be very gradual, although, as your Lordships are aware, in Iraq where you have just the same kind of people, self-government has been established, and although you have self-government established in Egypt, where it will be found that many of the officials are similar to those who in Palestine would be forming part of the Administration in Palestine. Why is this delay? One can draw only one conclusion, and that is that before self-government is given to Palestine time must be allowed for that amount of immigration of the Jewish community to take place which will enable the system of self-government to be based upon a Jewish Constitution. When one sees in Article 22, which I read just now, that the well-being and development of such peoples should form a sacred trust of civilisation, and when one takes that as the note of the mandatory system, I think your Lordships will see that we are straying down a very far path when we are postponing self-government in Palestine until such time as the population is flooded with an alien race.

      The Jewish people in Palestine have lived in the past in harmony with the Arab community. They have enjoyed in largo measure the same privileges as their Ottoman fellow subjects and, I venture to say also as a fact, they never agitated for Zionism. I do not think—I speak subject to correction—that there has ever been a demand from the Jewish Community in Palestine for the introduction of a Zionist Home in that country. The whole agitation has conic from outside, from Jews in other parts of the world. I go further, and say—I think I have said it before; if so, I repeat—that a very large number of the Jewish community in Palestine to-day look with considerable aversion not only upon the Zionist Home but upon the Jews who are being introduced into the country from Eastern Europe. …

      I again say that one is driven to believe in the truth of the allegation made by many impartial witnesses who have recently visited the country, that the Zionist Commission, or as it is now called the Zionist Palestine Executive, has gone a long way towards usurping the position of Government in Palestine. …

      It is impossible, I think, for any one to contend that this partial, and I might almost call it unnatural, condition of affairs is going to be developed in Zionism without meeting bitter hostility from the Arab community. I say with all possible deliberation, regarding all the facts that have been brought before me, that unless this policy is checked, and unless it, is very materially modified, it will lead to very serious consequences. It is literally inviting subsequent catastrophe. The modification of this policy will be no injustice to the Jews in Palestine, because they have never asked for it, while the continuance of it will be a growing injustice to the Arab community who will bitterly resent it.

      The people of Palestine ask, and I think most reasonably, for a national form of Government representative of the people in their own country. They will welcome every kind of British assistance to enable them to make effective that form of government, and under such a Constitution both the Jewish community and the Arab community can live in perfect harmony. …

      This scheme of importing an alien race into the midst of a native local race is flying in the very face of the whole of the tendencies of the age. It is an unnatural, partial and altruistic experiment, and that kind of experiment is a very grave mistake to-day, wherever it is tried, and particularly in the East and among Eastern peoples.

      Finally, it is not the proper function of His Majesty’s Government to spend the money of the British taxpayer for purposes of this kind.”
      http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1922/jun/21/palestine-mandate

      Just read the whole article.

    • Misterioso
      December 28, 2017, 11:41 am

      @Yonah fredman

      A few other factors:

      Zionists realized from the very beginning that the formation of a Jewish state would require the forceful expulsion of the Palestinians. As early as 1882 they were anticipating armed conflict: “The final purposes…are to take possession in due course of Palestine and to restore the Jews…political independence. Furthermore, it will be necessary to teach the young and the future generations the use of arms.” (David Vital, Origins of Zionism, Oxford University Press,1975 p. 85.) “Our ultimate goal is, with time, to gain Palestine….” (Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi, Original Sins, Olive Branch Press, New York, 1993, p. 39)

      Apparently, unaware of the real population figures for Palestine at the time, Nahman Syrkin, the ideological founder of Socialist Zionism, wrote a pamphlet in 1898 entitled “The Jewish Question and the Socialist Jewish State,” in which he stated that “Palestine, thinly populated [sic], in which the Jews constitute today 10 percent [sic] of the population, must be evacuated for the Jews.” (Mordechai Nisan, The Jewish State and the Arab Problem, Tel Aviv: Hadar, 1986, quoted by Nur Masalha, Expulsion of the Palestinians, p. 11.)
      In 1904, settler Menachem Ussishkin wrote: “In order to establish autonomous Jewish community life or, to be more precise, a Jewish state, in Eretz Israel, it is necessary, first of all, that all, or at least most, of Eretz Israel’s lands will be the property of the Jewish people. Without ownership of the land, [Palestine] will never become Jewish…. But, as the ways of the world go, how does one acquire landed property? By one of the following three methods: by force – that is, by conquest in war, or in other words, by robbing land of its owner; by forceful acquisition, that is, by expropriating via governmental authority and by purchase with the owner’s consent.” (Gershon Shafir, Land, Labor and the Origins of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict 1882-1914, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989; quoted by Mahmoud Yazbak in “Templars as Proto-Zionists?” Journal of Palestine Studies., Vol. XXVlll, No. 4, Summer 1999, p. 50.)

      Indicating Britain’s future policy for the Arab world (i.e., laying the foundation for the infamous and illegal 1917 Balfour Declaration), in 1907, British Prime Minister Henry Campbell-Bannerman issued the Campbell-Bannerman Report: “There are people [Arabs] who control spacious territories teeming with manifest and hidden resources. They dominate the intersections of world routes. Their lands were the cradles of human civilizations and religions. These people have one faith, one language, one history and the same aspirations. No natural barriers can isolate these people from one another … if, per chance, this nation were to be unified into one state, it would then take the fate of the world into its hands and would separate Europe from the rest of the world. Taking these considerations seriously, a foreign body should be planted in the heart of this nation to prevent the convergence of its wings in such a way that it could exhaust its powers in never-ending wars. It could also serve as a springboard for the West to gain its coveted objects.” (From the Campbell-Bannerman Report, 1907)

      Palestinians knew full well that the Revisionist Zionists led by Vladimir Jabotinsky were fascists who intended to expel them, but unlike Weizmann and the Labour Zionists who had the same objective, they were up front about it. Jabotinsky did not mince his words: “We Jews, thank God, have nothing to do with the East….The Islamic soul must be broomed out of Eretz-Yisrael.” (Ya’acov Shavit, “The Attitude of Zionist Revisionism towards the Arabs.” in Zionism and the Arab Question (Hebrew) p. 74; quoted by Nur Masalha, Expulsion of the Palestinians, p. 29.) Nor did he hide his racism. To him, Palestinians were “yelling rabble dressed up in gaudy, savage rags” (Joseph Schechtman, Rebel and Statesman: The Vladimir Jobotinksy Story, the Early Years, New York: T. Yoseloff, 1956, p. 54) and in his view the colonization of Palestine by European Jews would “push the moral frontiers of Europe to the Euphrates.” (Shlomo Avineri, The Making of Modern Zionism, p. 180; cited by Michael Palumbo, The Palestinian Catastrophe, faber and faber, London. Boston, 1987, p. 13).

    • yonah fredman
      December 28, 2017, 12:27 pm

      I’ve been following the Israel versus Palestine story since 67 and in a daily way since 73, so you experts who speak neither of the languages and have never lived there for more than 2 months at a time, I’m supposed to prefer your analysis, you who’ve been following the story only since 2001?

      i would estimate that it is about fifty years away, the one state solution that you are aiming for. that time might be shortened by a campaign of some practicality, for example: encourage Jerusalem Palestinians to seek Israeli citizenship. Israel has turned most applicants away and a real effort to achieve single state civil rights for all status would be to start: on the front lines for full citizenship for Jerusalem Palestinians. there are a few valid reasons to oppose the idea of this campaign, but the current “campaign” (rushing the gaza fence) is pretty stale.

      ben gurion founded israel with great ruthlessness and some effectiveness for the short range. arafat was a major figure in the palestinian struggle, but the face that will achieve the breakthrough for the palestinians might still be in the maternity ward today, y’know the ones that bezalel smotrich dislikes because of the integration.

      if the future belongs to the one state paradigm, the roger cohen perception, which belongs to the two state paradigm, will eventually be clarified as an idea that didn’t happen. i don’t understand what phil weiss is harping on regarding roger cohen coming clean about the openness of western society to jews. Israel is not located in the west, nor are most of its citizens jewish or not, from the west. maybe all you really want is for roger cohen to channel the olov hashalom tony judt and call it an anachronism. i don’t think it’s an anachronism, i think it’s a solution to a problem that does not exist globally but only in parts at times. the openness of america does not change the fact of israel’s existence or explain the facts in the immediate vicinity of israel. arab hatred for israel is understandable and one can hypothesize a nonzionist alternate history where the jews who were integrated in arab society might serve a function of a bridge to the jews in western society and the entire dynamic might have been if not 180 degrees different, certainly quite different. but it’s in fact a fact that the arab societies have been largely emptied of their jewish populations and that the influence of islam is such that coptic populations and christian populations feel insecure and to call jewish identity politics anachronistic is to treat the islamic part of the world as if they don’t exist. in fact identity politics is certainly a major part of the culture in that part of the world and anachronistic means that the arabs are part of the past too, so the term anachronistic has got to go.

      i still feel the appeal of the two state solution and so i know where roger cohen is coming from. just read gideon levy about a debate between abunimah and some fatah bigwig. interesting.

      • Philip Weiss
        December 28, 2017, 12:33 pm

        Yonah you are completely ignoring Roger Cohen’s argument. His article is chiefly about Jews in the west. He throws in Israel at the end of that article. Regardless of your one state two state pirouettes, he is talking about my life and his life; and I think he’s wrong.

      • Donald Johnson
        December 28, 2017, 12:58 pm

        Thanks for mentioning the Gideon Levy piece. Here is a link.

        I don’t subscribe to Haaretz, but for some reason I was able to read it.

        https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.831586

      • amigo
        December 28, 2017, 3:24 pm

        “I’ve been following the Israel versus Palestine story since 67 and in a daily way since 73, so you experts who speak neither of the languages and have never lived there for more than 2 months at a time, I’m supposed to prefer your analysis, you who’ve been following the story only since 2001?” YF.

        We don,t have to dip our toe in the water to know it,s wet.Neither is there any point in asking the zionist fish who swims in it , as he/she is not aware .

        Yonah ,really , it is truly sad to watch your pathetic struggle to sterilise the crimes of zionists and somehow lend credibility to a sick lawless project that has no smoothedges and sickens anyone with a iota of self respect .

      • Misterioso
        December 28, 2017, 3:30 pm

        @yonah fredman

        A glimmer of sanity perhaps inspired by Ahed Tamimi:

        https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.831626

        “‘We Won’t Take Part in Occupation’: Dozens of Teens Refuse to Enlist in Israeli Army in Letter to Netanyahu”

        “‘The army is carrying out the government’s racist policy that violates basic human rights,’ ” 63 teens write to Netanyahu and Israeli military chief Gadi Eisenkot”
        By Yaniv Kubovich. Dec 28, 2017, Haaretz.

        EXCERPTS:
        “A group of 63 teens have publicly declared they will refuse to be drafted into the Israel army, Yedioth Ahronoth reported on Thursday morning.

        “’We have decided not to take part in the occupation and oppression of the Palestinian people,’” they wrote in a letter sent to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot and the defense and education ministers. ‘The ‘temporary’ situation has dragged on for 50 years, and we will not go on lending a hand.’

        “The high-schoolers criticized the government and the military in the letter. ‘The army is carrying out the government’s racist policy, which violates basic human rights and executes one law for Israelis and another law for Palestinians on the same territory,’ they wrote.

        “The students also protested ‘intentional institutional incitement against Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line,’ referring to the 1949 armistice line separating Israel from the West Bank, ‘and we here – draft-age boys and girls from different areas of the country and from different socioeconomic backgrounds – refuse to believe the system of incitement and to participate in the government’s arm of oppression and occupation.’

        “The letter called on others to reconsider being drafted, adding that intended to go around the country to recruit for their initiative.

        “’We refuse to be drafted and to serve in the army out of an obligation to values of peace, justice and equality, with the knowledge that there is another reality that we could create together,’ they wrote. ‘We call on girls our age to ask themselves, will army service work toward this reality?’”

        “In early December, the education ministry and the IDF announced that they were working on a plan to increase the number of draftees enlisting for combat service. Currently, enlistment rates are sinking and dropout rates stand at over 7,000 male and female soldiers annually.”

      • just
        December 28, 2017, 4:17 pm

        Here’s the article:

        “The Voice of the Next Palestinian Generation…

        A lecture hall at Australia’s University of Adelaide, about a month ago. The event: An open discussion between longtime Palestinian diplomat Afif Safieh and the rising Palestinian star Ali Abunimah, co-founder of the Electronic Intifada website.

        The mood was charged, very tense; it was an intra-Palestinian clash of ideas — for and against the Palestinian Authority; one state or two, boycotts. It was a personal clash and also a generational confrontation, just as transfixing. The debate raised issues long brewing in Palestinian circles, in the territories and even more so in the diaspora. It is embarrassing to think that Israel hasn’t even begun such discussions. They are sorely needed.

        Safieh is a senior Palestinian diplomat. He has served as ambassador to Moscow, Washington, The Hague and London. He sat on Fatah’s Revolutionary Council and was very close to Yasser Arafat, who once sent him to deliver a letter to 25 African leaders. In that pre-email era, he presented the letter to nine of them and gave the rest to ambassadors. He is now a private individual, living in London with his Belgian wife. He visits Ramallah for meetings of the Revolutionary Council.

        Abunimah was born and lives in the United States. He knows Barack Obama from Chicago and often appears in the international media.

        Abunimah accused Safieh and members of his generation of capitulating to Israel, which made Safieh practically choke with rage. Abunimah appeared via video hookup from Chicago, where it was late at night. Safieh was on stage in Adelaide, squirming in his chair, flailing with anger, occasionally glancing up at the electronic screen above his head. He knows that the man appearing there represents the next generation, but Safieh’s cohort is not yet ready to yield the stage.

        Twenty-one years separate them, years of frustration and despair. Both are exiles — articulate and polished, educated and media-savvy, yet an abyss separates them. Safieh is an old-school diplomat, Abunimah is from the social networks. The latter’s generation will pose much more difficult challenges to Israel.

        Abunimah said that if you move slowly you’ll achieve nothing, while Safieh said that Israel is so strong that achieving great things is impossible, which is why one must be realistic and struggle for what one can. He recalls that it was his generation that raised the idea of one state, which was subsequently abandoned. “We aren’t able to get to two states, how will we get to one?” Safieh barked at Abunimah, and their mutual contempt was evident.

        It was a confrontation between the realpolitik of the previous generation and the revolutionary spirit of its heirs. Between modernity and the electronic struggle and diplomatic messages and the world of old. Between a compromise with Israel (never achieved) and an unwillingness to compromise on anything and to conduct a determined struggle that is unlikely to achieve anything in the near term, but at least exudes a new spirit.

        Safieh is an excellent spokesman for his people but the debate demonstrated the total ideological bankruptcy of the PA he represents. Fifty years of occupation and zero achievements is a worthy time to debate what went wrong and whether to adopt a new strategy. It’s doubtful it will bring the Palestinians any accomplishments, however; the continued bickering over two states, the 1967 borders and the peace process is a proven path to a dead end.

        Israelis should listen to the new voices. They will get louder. Abunimah is not a terrorist, nor is Safieh, of course; but Abunimah will not compromise with Israel that way Safieh was prepared to and still wants to. Israel has missed the opportunity for compromises. Abunimah wants one state and the right of return; boycotts, divestment and sanctions; the end of Zionism and a halt to racism. On American campuses they listen to him much more readily than to Safieh. The old Palestinian locomotive has reached the end of the line. “And then one track whispered to the other, the king is dead, long live the new king,” (from “Song of the Locomotive” by Arik Lavie). Let’s see how well Israel does with him.”

        read more: https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.831586

        I feel such sadness for the Palestinians who have tried and tried to achieve some kind of peace with violent, racist, genocidal Israel. It’s a new day now… there really are good (some of them formerly ignorant and brainwashed) people who are paying attention to the voices crying and yearning for justice. At last.

        May their voices be amplified and never silenced again.

      • yonah fredman
        December 28, 2017, 10:04 pm

        Phil- Schama’s book and Cohen’s piece were about western european history up until 1900. Your and Cohen’s experiences in the post world war II era will be relevant when Schama’s next book comes out. To inject Cohen’s personal experience of a different period would not be relevant to the book being discussed.

      • Talkback
        December 29, 2017, 4:57 am

        Yonah: “I’ve been following the Israel versus Palestine story since 67 and in a daily way since 73, so you experts who speak neither of the languages and have never lived there for more than 2 months at a time, I’m supposed to prefer your analysis, you who’ve been following the story only since 2001?”

        There seems to be a positive correlation between your level of expertise and your lack of arguments and relevant sources.

      • Talkback
        December 29, 2017, 5:10 am

        Donald: “Thanks for mentioning the Gideon Levy piece. Here is a link.

        I don’t subscribe to Haaretz, but for some reason I was able to read it.

        https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.831586

        https://www.haaretz.com/misc/article-print-page/.premium-1.831586

        See the difference in the url? ;)

  7. Keith
    December 27, 2017, 5:09 pm

    ROGER COHEN- “The book begins around the time of the Spanish Inquisition and ends with the Dreyfus case, a 400-year round trip back to the same Jewish question.”

    Four hundred years of gilded victimhood? What other group of privileged shakers and movers incessantly whines about their alledged “victimhood?” Did the WASPs? Basically, all of this is primarily an ongoing, orchestrated pre-emptive defense against questions regarding Jewish power and privilege. And it works! Hard to discuss any of this without being called an anti-Semite. Has anyone ever been called an anti-WASP for discussing the previous political economy?

    ROGER COHEN- “…his Zionist vision of a “home that is destined to be a safe haven for the Jewish people.”

    If it is so dangerous for Jews in the lands of the non-Jews, and so safe inside of Israel, why was it so difficult to recruit Jews to make aliyah prior to 1967? And why do half of the word’s Jews live in the “dangerous” US? The reality is that Israeli Jews are significantly dependent upon the “beleaguered” Diaspora for imperial support without which Israel would not be viable as presently constituted. End that support, and Cohen’s fellow Ashkenazi would abandon Israel en mass, fleeing to “anti-Semitc” Europe and the US leaving the Mizrahi to fight it out with the Palestinians.

    • Citizen
      December 27, 2017, 11:02 pm

      Hey, you forgot, the ivy league schools once had quotas for Jews, and wealthy golf clubs use to keep them out, as did some folks selling homes in some wealthy neighborhoods. Now, nobody knows what happened to the WASPs.

      Oh yeah, don’t forget Leo Frank: http://the-temple.org/AboutUs/History/TheLynchingofLeoFrank.aspx

      And Grant’s order, which Lincoln stopped.

      • Keith
        December 28, 2017, 11:21 am

        CITIZEN- “Hey, you forgot, the ivy league schools once had quotas for Jews….”

        Quotas which EXCEEDED the Jewish percent of the population as a whole.

      • Elizabeth Block
        December 28, 2017, 12:34 pm

        I just read this. It’s fascinating. I had no idea. And how many politicians – how many presidents – have come out and said “I was wrong”? Good for Grant.

    • atime forpeace
      December 28, 2017, 6:23 pm

      Nicely put. Jewish naval gazing gives the progressives a raison d’être and helps them remain judaic in their heart of hearts.

      The crime continues to be perpetrated and justified.

      Nobody pisses anybody off too terribly and the project continues unabated. From the river to the sea the dream and project goes on.

  8. JWalters
    December 27, 2017, 9:03 pm

    Many articles, including at Mondoweiss, have documented the Zionist control over America’s mainstream media. And as a result, almost everything Americans think they know about Israel is an intentionally disseminated lie. For example,

    1. Israel was NOT victimized by powerful Arab armies. Israel overpowered and victimized a defenseless, civilian Arab population. Military analysts knew the Arab armies were in poor shape and would not be able to resist the Zionist army.

    2. Muslim “citizens” of Israel do NOT have all the same rights as Jews.

    3. Israelis are NOT under threat from the indigenous Palestinians, but Palestinians are under constant threats of theft and death from the Israelis.

    4. Israel does NOT share America’s most fundamental values, which rest on the principle of equal human rights for all.

    But the disinformation includes not only Israel’s recent history, e.g.
    “Terrorism: How the Israeli state was won”
    http://mondoweiss.net/2017/01/terrorism-israeli-state
    but also the long history before the establishment of Israel. Specifically, Jews are portrayed as ALWAYS being the victims in any conflict with neighboring Gentiles. But the actual history is not so one-sided.

    Due to their cultural history of literacy, Jews were never the peasants in Europe. They were merchants, bankers, and eventually bankers to kings. And as the kings squandered their money on wars, financed by loans from the bankers, the bankers eventually replaced the kings as the financial power centers. Historically, some of the wealthy have always preyed upon the poor, and the Jews have been no exception.

    Going back to the Middle Ages, complaints and uprisings against Jews have been primarily for economic reasons, a perception that the Jewish bankers were not helping the community grow, but were pushing the Gentile community into poverty with predatory practices. A historical portrait of the Jewish community’s economic position and practices in Eastern Europe is given here.
    “A Closer Look at the Jews in Polish and Eastern European History”
    http://whenvictimsrule.blogspot.it/search/label/07__Poland_and_Eastern_Europe

    More recently, a lot of resentment was incurred when wealthy Jews switched their support from Germany to Britain in the middle of WWI in exchange for the Balfour declaration.
    “A Jewish Defector Warns America”
    http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/freedman.htm
    “The Balfour centenary is also the centenary of the Zionist lobby”
    http://mondoweiss.net/2017/11/balfour-centenary-zionist

    The myth of Jews as perpetually moral, innocent victims needs to be replaced with reality for there to be progress toward justice. The Jewish community at large has been duped as much as the Gentile community. Here’s an analysis by Jewish psychologist Avigail Abarbanel.
    “It’s time for American Jews to recognize they have been duped”
    http://mondoweiss.net/2015/07/american-recognize-duped

  9. RoHa
    December 27, 2017, 11:52 pm

    “Jews are insecure in the west and therefore Jewish sovereignty is a just and necessary answer.”

    Why not make an honest attempt at finding out why Jews are insecure? If you can find the reason, you might be able to remove it without making Palestinians pay the price.

    “And assimilation won’t save us either.”

    What level of assimilation? Jews in Australia, Britain, the US, and many other countries have managed a pretty high level of assimilation and seem pretty secure in their countries.

    But there is always the possibility of going the whole hog and giving up Jewishness entirely. After a generation or two, hardly anyone would know who was descended from Jews, and almost no one would care.

    Now I know that lots of people will protest that it would be somehow wrong for Jews to have to give up Jewishness. Perhaps it would.

    But is it more wrong than killing and dispossessing Palestinians?

    • Mooser
      December 28, 2017, 7:22 pm

      “Why not make an honest attempt at finding out why Jews are insecure? .”

      Oh, they know that, in its every detail. What Zionists refuse to find out or acknowledge is why Jews might be secure.

  10. Talkback
    December 28, 2017, 5:41 am

    Palestinians are insecure in the whole of Palestine and therefore Palestinian sovereignty is a just and necessary answer.

  11. Boomer
    December 28, 2017, 12:11 pm

    re: “Jews are insecure in the west and therefore Jewish sovereignty is a just and necessary answer”

    One wonders, what do they need to feel secure in America? Equal rights and protection under law isn’t good enough?

    Re: “Palestinians have had to be exiled to make room for the Jewish state, and it hasn’t been any fun for them since”

    And Africans had to be enslaved to provide workers for colonials in the New World, and Austria had to be invaded to provide room for Germany, and on and on endlessly.

    Roger Cohen gets paid for writing such crap, and an influential place to air it?

    • Mooser
      December 29, 2017, 3:15 pm

      “One wonders, what do they need to feel secure in America? Equal rights and protection under law isn’t good enough?”

      Oh, that’s good enough for most regular activities, like living in America, growing up, getting an education, earning a living, or being a a professional, stuff like that.
      But rights and protections aren’t enough to facilitate an ethnic colonial effort. For that you need privilege and immunity.

  12. Elizabeth Block
    December 28, 2017, 12:35 pm

    I got a schnorr sheet – an appeal for a donation – from the New Israel Fund. They claim to be working toward an Israel which is both Jewish and democratic. I wrote back to say this is not possible. No answer so far.

  13. Elizabeth Block
    December 28, 2017, 12:37 pm

    There were some Zionists who thought the Jews should share the land, not just take it. But they lost to the Jabotinskyites. Maybe they never had a chance – the colonialist ethos of the time was, take the land, rule (or expel) the people living there, they’re savages anyhow and they don’t count. I live in Canada.

  14. Maghlawatan
    December 28, 2017, 3:21 pm

    When a despicable situation persists beyond the limits of acceptability it is important to know what drives it. White rule in Rhodesia collapsed in 1979. South Africa gave up apartheid in 1991.
    Israel runs apartheid today because of Jewish money and the cover provided by people like Cohen.
    It will blow up. And there will be nobody in galut to blame.

  15. JLewisDickerson
    December 28, 2017, 4:31 pm

    RE: “I am even willing to say it could have been innocent, if they had never had any intent of forcing or inducing Palestinians to leave in order to have a state with the ‘correct’ demographic composition.” ~ Donald Johnson

    MY COMMENT: I have a difficult time finding innocence in the way Golda Meir met with King Abdullah of Jordan before hostilities broke out in 1948 and reached an agreement with him whereby he was to “capture” the West Bank, and Israel would capture the rest of Palestine. This is indeed what played out on the ground in ’48 (except, perhaps, for Gaza). Then, in 1967, Israel invaded the West Bank based upon the flimsiest of excuses, and captured the West Bank from Jordan (with the Jordanian army putting up very little resistance.)

    As it turned out , King Abdullah’s acting as temporary custodian of the West Bank turned out to be quite costly for the Palestinians. Had Israel captured the West Bank in 1948, thereby bringing many Palestinian refugees (who had fled from the coastal plain early in the war to find refuge in the West Bank) back into Israeli territory, it would have been virtually impossible to prevent those Palestinians from returning to their houses in Israel.

    This would have prevented Israel from declaring these houses “abandoned property” to be sold/laundered by Israel’s “Custodian of Abandoned Property”. This could have served as a precedent, and might have had a domino effect making it possible for Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Syria, Gaza, etc. to return to their property in Israel as well. But, thanks to Abdullah’s obliging nature, he acted as temporary custodian for the West Bank and its refugees from 1948 until 1967, thus sparing Israel from a return of the refugees.

    • Donald Johnson
      December 28, 2017, 5:45 pm

      Yeah, but I didn’t say the reality was innocent, so I am not sure why my comment leads off your post. In some alternate reality Zionism could have been about Jews immigrating to Palestine with no thoughts of taking it over. It didn’t happen that way.

  16. JLewisDickerson
    December 28, 2017, 4:55 pm

    RE: “Jews are insecure in the west and therefore Jewish sovereignty is a just and necessary answer” ~ Cohen’s theme (per Phil)

    MY COMMENT: I think Cohen means Jewish sovereignty along with a nuclear arsenal (in perpetuity) is a just and necessary answer”.
    I would also venture to say that the “white nationalists” appear to be insecure in the west. They also appear to be insecure in democracies unless the population is overwhelmingly lily-white. Is ‘white power’ sovereignty “a just and necessary answer?”
    And, what about us lefties? We’re insecure as hell living in the midst of right-handed types (especially with Donald Trump as President). We might even settle for the Greek island of Lesbos (in the northeastern Aegean Sea).

  17. Maghlawatan
    December 29, 2017, 11:07 am

    Roger cohen has a newer op-ed regarding the danger of dreams deferred

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/12/26/opinion/2018-deferred-dreams.html

    in which he quotes Langstone Hughes poem Harlem

    What happens to a dream deferred?

          Does it dry up

          like a raisin in the sun?

          Or fester like a sore—

          And then run?

          Does it stink like rotten meat?

          Or crust and sugar over—

          like a syrupy sweet?

          Maybe it just sags

          like a heavy load.

          Or does it explode?

    And he signs off with “in 2018 dear reader, take the time to gaze at the familiar, board the ferry to nowhere and do not, at risk of an explosion, defer your dreams”.

    He is a great writer. Except when it comes to Jewish apartheid.

    He reminds me of J Alfred Prufrock .
    ..”and I was afraid”.

    And Red House Painters
    “Even if your cheap career depended on it”

    https://youtu.be/EhD3aG8J3pE

  18. gamal
    December 29, 2017, 11:51 am

    “P.S. You and I are friendly. But I’ve issued a similar challenge to you on other occasions; and you always ignore it”

    I wonder maybe Rob could could find some inspiration here:

    “even liberal commentators sympathetic to South Africa, including: allegations of liberal media bias; the strategic importance of South Africa, both in geopolitical terms and because of its mineral resources; the argument that blacks were better off in South Africa than anywhere else on the continent; depictions of liberation movements including the African National Congress as terrorists, Communists, and stooges for the Soviet Union; the moral and political failings of independent African regimes; the idea that black South Africans are divided among separate tribes which do not and can not mix; the idea that the South African government is engaged in reform; and the idea that disinvestment is a Soviet scheme which will only hurt black workers, for example.

    Furthermore, the most violently racist of the tropes produced below — including the idea that Africans are incapable of governing themselves, and the threat of black violence against young white women — were contemporaneously being repeated by newspaper columnists in places like the Toronto Sun”

    https://medium.com/@michael.bueckert/the-1985-pro-apartheid-comic-by-disney-cartoonist-vic-lockman-f25d5d92b4aa

    Cohen can’t say those savages have no right to defend themselves, don’t absolutely own anything, he is an English gentleman so he implies it, stirring stuff,

  19. Boomer
    December 30, 2017, 10:11 am

    re: ‘Zionism didn’t have to turn out so badly for Palestinians, says Roger Cohen”

    If only they hadn’t “rejected a generous offer.” If only they “never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” If only they didn’t exist.

  20. MHughes976
    December 30, 2017, 12:07 pm

    It is inconceivable that the arrival of armed immigrants proclaiming ‘this land is ours’ could ever turn out well in generality for the other inhabitants.

  21. JuliaNoel
    December 30, 2017, 5:12 pm

    Good Lord, as he whines on about why Jews need a place to call home, Muslim’s nations are being bombed to smithereens and statistics show that the people must abused,hurt and killed because of their religion are Muslims. Enough already. We do not see native Americans , African Americans, the Irish, Australian Aboriginal peoples, the Indian people..the too many to name all other races and religions that have suffered in our past, asking for special treatment to take other people’s country. There is simply no monopoly on suffering- nor on cruelty. The answer of course is to not classify human beings according to their race, colour or religion. ALL human beings deserve to be treated as equals, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights applies to all, and that includes the Palestinian people, who are the ones who need a place to call home at this time in our human history.

Leave a Reply