Trending Topics:

‘Not a single person in this room would accept living as Palestinians do, generation after generation’

on 86 Comments
Boteach and Beinart

Beinart, right, with Shmuley Boteach after debate last week at Columbia

Last week’s debate over Israel at Columbia University included two statements I’ve been meaning to quote from the two-staters on the panel, liberal Zionist writer Peter Beinart and Hussein Ibish of the American Task Force for Palestine.

Beinart said that his motivation for much of what he writes is that he fears Palestinians under occupation getting the vote. (I mentioned this last week.) Here’s the quote, in response to a questioner:

You cannot permanently hold people without a passport, without the right to vote for the government that controls their lives, and the right to live under the same legal system as their neighbors who are of a different religion or ethnic group. Israel either solves that problem, by giving Palestinians a state of their own which you and I both want or– or– Israel will ultimately have to give citizenship and voting rights to Palestinians on the West Bank in the state of Israel, which will mean the end of the Jewish state of Israel.

And it is because of my fear of that that I write much of what I do on this very subject.

The evening also included an inspired statement by Hussein Ibish, describing the political conditions of Israeli rule as a unique form of ethnic discrimination globally and challenging Americans to consider what they would do if their lives were controlled to the same extent:

The de facto state of Israel, which involves all of the areas that have come under Israel’s control since 1967, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, and the Gaza strip, operates a settlement project that is in total violation of black-letter international law and that is strenuously objected to by the international community. It already has more Arabs than Jews in it, and therefore the de facto state of Israel is not Jewish in any meaningful sense…

It is highly undemocratic in that it completely disenfranchises at least 4.5 million people living under its jurisdiction, the Palestinians in the occupied territories… millions of people who live under intolerable conditions of disenfranchisement and discrimination. There is nothing like Israel’s occupation, particularly in terms of the discrimination it imposes on Palestinians in the West Bank, that I can think of anywhere else in the world today. It’s quite unique.

Everything you can do in the occupied territories depends on whether the Israeli government classifies you as a Jewish settler or an occupied Palestinian. Every single aspect of daily life is determined by this inevitably ethnic distinction. Where you may live, what roads you can drive on, whether you can be armed for self defense or not, how much water and other basic necessities you get per capita, what type of education your children will have, whether you can travel freely around your own country or leave it with the normal confidence of being allowed to return, or whether you need the permission of foreign soldiers, many of them just out of high school, to go from one village to another, whether you may be subjected to midnight house raids, what laws you live under, etc.

I could go on till midnight, I really could.

Does this arrangement sound like the basis for a reasonable security policy to you? I mean, really? Because that’s how it’s conceptualized– as forward bases in enemy territory. “This is Israel’s strategic depth.” We hear that all the time from people, except Israeli security professionals, who don’t see it that way.

The bottom line is that in the occupied territories, Palestinians, who are citizens of no state, live under one set of laws and conditions, and… Israeli settlers even standing next to each other live under another. Settlers are Israeli citizens, with all the rights and responsibilities that come with that. The Palestinians have neither.

Millions of people have been living like this for almost 50 years, the vast majority of the history of the modern Israeli state. Now I want to put it to you, There’s not a single person in this room, not one of you– not one of you– who would accept to live like that, generation after generation, decade after decade, with no end in sight. You would resist, in an intelligent manner hopefully. And you would not put up with it. And if you think you would put up with it, you’re lying to yourselves.

Protip. Don’t put anybody else in that situation either.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

86 Responses

  1. chuckcarlos
    chuckcarlos on April 11, 2014, 10:47 am

    frequently the Zionist dingdongs point to Native Americans as justification for the Apartheid and Racist and Fascist tendency of Israel…

    in actual FACT…if one lives in Texas, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and California one is confronted by millions, no, make that 10s of millions, maybe it will approach 100 million Native Americans each day…I see them constantly and eat their food…they are the cops, the judges, the lawyers, the nurses, the plumbers and just about everything else in my society…

    Hernan Cortez y Malinche yo soy MexicoAmericano

    • Les
      Les on April 11, 2014, 1:02 pm

      Let us remember that America’s earliest religious leaders led the charge to eliminate native Americans from the face of the earth.

    • annie
      annie on April 11, 2014, 1:26 pm

      wonderful comment and video chuckcarlos..thank you!

    • DaBakr
      DaBakr on April 11, 2014, 4:53 pm

      In Israel we are judged by Palestinian judges, treated by Arab doctors and bossed by Druze police and taught but Palestinian professors, as well as eat food prepared by Palestinian chefs and “just about everything else in society you ding dong. next point

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 11, 2014, 9:14 pm

        and “just about everything else in society

        You are not married to them, or even buried with them. There has never been an Arab party included in a governing coalition, so there’s no danger that a Palestinian Judge or Police Officer will ever enforce a law favoring non-Jews or create a Judge-made law or administrative regulation that won’t be overturned by the Jewish Knesset, Land Administration, & etc.

        So the truth is, just about nothing you’ve mentioned is an accurate description of Zionist society or “democracy”.

      • talknic
        talknic on April 11, 2014, 9:51 pm

        @ DaBakr “In Israel we are judged by Palestinian judges”

        The Israeli judicial system has no Palestinian judges. They’re Israeli you ding dong. But being non-Jewish do not have equal rights

        ” treated by Arab doctors and bossed by Druze police and taught but Palestinian professors … etc etc”

        All of them Israeli you ding dong

      • on April 12, 2014, 8:42 am

        talknic. You don’t understand. According to Israel, there is no such thing as an Israeli citizens. There are only Jews — including all Jews living elsewhere — and others. Arabs living in Israel are not Israelis, at least according to Israeli law

      • Citizen
        Citizen on April 12, 2014, 12:01 pm

        According to the Israeli highest court, there is no such thing as Israeli citizenship. Under Israeli rule, you are either a Jews or a non-Jew, and from that conception, comes any rights you may have. The high court of Israel is second banana to the Knesset’s legislation. Most Americans don’t know this. You can thank the US mainstream media for keeping Americans misinformed. There’s only 5 key corporations that control 90% of all the news about Israel Americans get. I suggest Americans who want facts read the Israeli media. You won’t get any facts from your own mainstream media, which is, of course, the contrary to informed consent.

  2. DaveS
    DaveS on April 11, 2014, 11:39 am

    I’m not always a fan of Hussein Ibish, but that is one brilliant speech he gave. However, as a proponent of the two state solution, there is a huge problem that he fails to address. If a miracle occurs and the 2ss becomes a reality, Palestinian citizens of the Jewish State will continue to be relegated to a second-class status and citizenship. Take Ibish’s key sentence, highlighted by Phil:
    There’s not a single person in this room, not one of you– not one of you– who would accept to live like that, generation after generation, decade after decade, with no end in sight.
    That sentence is equally applicable to Israeli citizens who are not Jewish. Not a single person in Ibish’s audience would agree to live as a second-class citizen in the land of his/her birth. True, the list of woes that the Palestinians under occupation must endure, as eloquently articulated by Ibish, are much worse; but second-class citizenship based upon ethnic/religious/ancestral “deficiencies” is not something that should be tolerated anywhere in the world, and it is an essential and undeniable component of the Jewish State.

    • Hostage
      Hostage on April 11, 2014, 12:13 pm

      If a miracle occurs and the 2ss becomes a reality, Palestinian citizens of the Jewish State will continue to be relegated to a second-class status and citizenship.

      LOL! I had the same thought about two-tiered citizenship, only in response to Beinart’s comment:

      You cannot permanently hold people without a passport, without the right to vote for the government that controls their lives, and the right to live under the same legal system as their neighbors who are of a different religion or ethnic group.

      After all, the Goldstone report explained that Palestine is really only as screwed-up (as it truly is), because the two-tiered system of Israeli municipal law has been exported to Palestine and it treats the indigenous Palestinians as aliens in their own country. Of course its authors in the Knesset intended for it to have that same effect on Palestinians living in Israel too – and no one in the audience would accept living as the “Israeli Arabs” do.

  3. Krauss
    Krauss on April 11, 2014, 11:56 am

    I’m reading Shira Robinson’s brilliant book, ironically entitled “Israel’s liberal settler state”.

    She gives an enormous amount of detail for the period after the establishment of the state and ’67, thereby crushing the “liberal” Zionist myths about “how Israel democracy collapsed in the 67 occupation”.

    And Beinart’s right out of her book. And it’s not only Jewish colonialists. She writes at length about gentile European “liberal” imperialists who viewed the non-white masses through the lens of paternalistic racism. They didn’t hate them, per se, but viewed them as inferior and dangerous to democracy. Thus they needed to be given “time to prepare” for democracy, under the firm white hand that ruled them, of course. Beinart’s no different.

    We sometimes portray these old colonialists in a cartoonish way, with the same broad brush. But the fact was that there were moderates, people who believd themselves to be liberals, who worked within a colonial system.
    Of course, the end results were the same for the people being ruled over, but in their own minds, they were humanitarians.

    Beinart’s fear are common to all Zionists, and by extention, colonialists: demographics. And demographics because they fear the outcome, a loss of racial supremacy.
    He doesn’t talk about his fundamentally racist views in an honest way, but rather, like Mill disguises them in humanitarian garbs, as a pretense for a paternalistic expression of concern for the hapless non-white masses who need a firm white hand to guide them(and not to the ballot box!).

    • seafoid
      seafoid on April 11, 2014, 12:43 pm

      Beinart must surely also be afraid of the collapse of the Zionist narrative and , by extension, Zionist identity.
      Much easier to pretend nothing is wrong and sing about the 2SS.

      When the dam breaks there are going to be a lot of very awkward questions.
      Zionism was never designed for what is coming.

      • Citizen
        Citizen on April 12, 2014, 12:10 pm

        Excuse me, wasn’t Beinart a signer of the original PNAC declaration in the late 1990’s?

    • Talkback
      Talkback on April 14, 2014, 12:37 pm

      I’m reading this book, too. I can’t understand why most criticize Zionist settler politics only after 1967. It’s basically the same like the one before 1967 except with the right to an irrelevant vote.

  4. Chu
    Chu on April 11, 2014, 12:29 pm

    Avigail has this great comment on her site:

    “I also write for a very selfish reason. When one day, Israelis stand trial for the occupation and the war crimes against the Palestinian people, I would like to be counted as someone who spoke up. I was brought up on stories of the Holocaust. I was told that perhaps even more despicable than the Nazis themselves were all those who knew what was happening and allowed it to happen. Jews have always felt abandoned by a world full of bystanders. Being a bystander doesn’t mean doing nothing. It means collaborating. And I don’t want to be a collaborator.”

    • adele
      adele on April 11, 2014, 1:06 pm

      Thanks for sharing that Chu.

      • ritzl
        ritzl on April 11, 2014, 1:31 pm


    • dbroncos
      dbroncos on April 11, 2014, 6:12 pm


      A week or so ago PBS did a story on the ’79 Camp David Accords as it’s depicted in a current play on the subject. Margaret Warner was presented as an expert on the history and she provided background analysis of the Arab-Israeli conflict. At one point she contrasts two competing points of view: The Palestinian view that the world stood by while they were dispossessed and Manachim Begin’s view that the world stood by while the horrors of the Holocaust were bing committed. Warner offered these perspectives as if they both had equal merit.

      It’s obvious that the world stood by and continues to stand by as Palestinians are/were expelled from their homes. But the notion that the world “stood by” during the Holocaust, an opinion that went unchallenged by Warner, is absurd. Some 60 million people died in WWII, the biggest war in human history, and many of them were soldiers who paid the ultimate price to defeat Nazi Germany. To memorialize the lives of 6 million Jews who lost their lives to Nazi Germany while characterizing tens of millions of others as merely bystanders is insulting.

  5. irishmoses
    irishmoses on April 11, 2014, 12:57 pm

    Left out of this conversation are the 2 million plus Palestinians living in stateless exile in Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan. Almost a million of these are still living in squalid refugee camps that date back to 1948. It is inconceivable to me that these unfortunates are left out of “solution” discussions.

    So where do they go? Israel won’t take them and there’s certainly no room in Gaza where maybe half a million Palestinian refugees will eventually want to relocate to the West Bank. Can the West Bank handle up to 2.5 million more Palestinians?

    Would Israel even allow them to return to the West Bank? Will Israel and its vast army of rich diaspora supporters provide relocation compensation? Perhaps the US could redirect its $3.5 billion a year from Israel to the Palestinian refugee problem?

    These folks can’t be an afterthought. They have to be at the forefront of any solution discussion. The problem started with them in 1948, the solution has to end with them.

    • Abierno
      Abierno on April 11, 2014, 7:38 pm

      Well stated. The realism of the refugee situation is rarely as well delineated
      your comment. Thank you.

  6. Maximus Decimus Meridius
    Maximus Decimus Meridius on April 11, 2014, 2:55 pm

    ”There’s not a single person in this room, not one of you– not one of you– who would accept to live like that, generation after generation, decade after decade, with no end in sight.”

    I would also add that not a single non-Jewish Zionist would be a Zionist if it involved giving up so much as one square meter of their own land to build the ”Jewish state’. These people are supporters of a Jewish state – on Arab land. If it ever came down to it, they would not themselves make the tiniest sacrifice for that state. They’re all for Zionism – so long as it’s mere Arabs who are paying the price.

  7. wondering jew
    wondering jew on April 11, 2014, 2:58 pm

    As far as Beinart’s alternatives. The prospect of a Jewish minority living in Arab majority Palestine is a radical change compared to the last 66 years. Phil mocks Beinart’s fear of this prospect, particularly given Beinart’s love for democracy in America. Phil’s mockery would have the ring of reality to it, if only he could tell us how what is happening in Egypt and Syria are irrelevant to the prospects of governance in Arab majority Palestine. The war of ideas must include some theory of the current state of Arab self governance.

    Meanwhile the thinkers of the Jewish people in Israel and around the world should be applying their thoughts to enlarging the democracy in Israel to all those ruled by Israel, for those who care about democracy in Israel must also realize by now that the current situation is “bad” and isn’t disappearing on the near horizon, so means to include everybody living in Israeli controlled borders (I mean the West Bank, although Gaza deserves study and effort to free the coming and going of people and goods in all directions other than the border with Israel) need to be conceived.

    • seafoid
      seafoid on April 11, 2014, 3:41 pm

      Israel is a poor example of the quality of jewish self rule.$ 100 bn on YESHA looks really naive. Maybe it will all work out and the turd can be polished and sold at Sotheby’s.
      The whole region has been damaged by the imposition of Israel on the Levant.
      Arabs are crap….is pure orientalism. Jewish militarism has been a disaster.
      Jews can’t live as a minority- they already do. The IDF makes it work and it is a very popular arrangement. The 1SS would not involve any border changes….

    • DaveS
      DaveS on April 11, 2014, 4:18 pm

      Yonah, that is a very South African apartheid-type argument. Whites were genuinely afraid of living as a small minority in a black majority country, and the examples of sub-Saharan governance were not very promising. Moreover, Jews would comprise close to 50% of the population of a democratic state, as opposed to SA with a white population of only 15%.

      There is nothing in the DNA of Arabs or Palestinians in particular that inhibit a stable functioning democracy, and to contend otherwise is, frankly, racist. When dictatorships flourished throughout Latin America and Eastern Europe, the people were considered victims of their governments, not the causes of tyranny.

      Indeed, Palestinians have as much, if not more, to fear from one state. Generations of Israeli Jews have been raised to believe they have superior rights which may be protected at the point of a gun. Jews and non-Jews would have to negotiate a system that protects the rights of all to worship (or not) as they see fit, have access to all holy sites, and guarantee equality under the law for all. True, this is not as easy to do as it is to say, and there are genuine fears on the part of all
      that must be assuaged, but the alternative IMO is intolerable.

      This is the 21st century, Yonah. There simply is no place for ethnic/religious privileges for one segment of the citizenry of any state.

      • adele
        adele on April 11, 2014, 4:26 pm

        I hope Yonah truly understands the truth and reason of the argument you laid out. Wonderfully put, the analogies were spot on.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew on April 11, 2014, 4:27 pm

        David Samel- It is valid to contend that because of differences Palestine will not end up like Egypt. But I have heard the term racism thrown around on this issue before (I will hear it again) and I think that it is a mere attempt to stop thought and questions. I think it is antithetical to thought. I have not done sufficient research to figure out when democracies develop and when they don’t and governance is not my specialty. But the “racist” term is a show stopper and does not really convince me. Great. So what I consider common sense you call racism. Who am I going to believe my own eyes or your name calling? Sorry, just cause you called me a name, that doesn’t change the facts that fundamental Islam is going to be a problem. Doesn’t change the fact that the PA showed every evidence of corruption and anti democratic tendencies. Doesn’t change the power politics of a region where Iran casts a large shadow. Good, you’ve called me a name. Good, you’ve shown that it might be different. But you have not convinced me. Nor are your arguments convincing. And your name calling proves only that you wish to inhibit my questions. Great!

      • seafoid
        seafoid on April 11, 2014, 4:42 pm

        @ Yonah

        Oscar Wilde said about Charles Dickens’ The Old Curiosity Shop: “One must have a heart of stone to read the death of Little Nell without laughing.”

        And one must have a heart of stone to read of Israel’s fears of Islamic fundamentalism without laughing.

        Israel pauperised Gaza.

        What does Hatorah have to say about unintended consequences ?

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew on April 11, 2014, 4:47 pm

        seafoid- “Hatorah” is not a phrase that I’ve heard anyone use but you in a sentence like that. What does the Torah say is how the English and the Hebrew live together in a sentence in 2014 usage.

        The idea that Israel created Islamic fundamentalism is patently untrue. It is a movement of global proportions of which the oppression of the Gaza Palestinians by Israel has played only a small role, certainly not the determining role. There’s no question that Israel is not preparing for the future and has made things worse. But advocacy of democracy in Palestine must take into account the realistic fears of the current democratic or anti democratic milieu (global, regional and local).

      • seafoid
        seafoid on April 11, 2014, 4:50 pm

        What does the Torah say about unintended consequences ?

        Islamic fundamentalism in Gaza is a response to Israeli policy.
        So Israeli fears about the results of Israeli policy in Gaza are laughable.

        The Middle East was the wrong choice of Altneuland.

      • DaveS
        DaveS on April 11, 2014, 5:45 pm

        Yonah, I can understand your offense at my use of the word “racist,” but you are mistaken on two grounds. First, I did not simply use the word without explaining in detail why I thought it was appropriate. Your suggestion that Arabs have an inability to govern themselves is deserving of the term, for the reasons I stated.

        Second, I know it’s hard to parse, but I did not call you a “racist.” I used the word as an adjective, describing your reasoning, and not as a noun, describing you. Smart people can sometimes say dumb things, ordinary people can sometimes act with great courage, and non-racist people can sometimes use racist reasoning. As the Avenue Q song, says, “Everyone’s a little bit racist.” I don’t put you in the category of unrepentant racists, nor even in the category of some other primitive hasbarist commenters on this site, like hophmi and JeffB and eee of yore. Still, I think your reasoning was racist, and it was reasonable of me to call it that. If someone called me “anti-Semitic” because I oppose Jewish self-determination or something like that, I would explain why I thought the accusation was wrong. (Yeah, I might be a little peeved about it too). You, however, accuse me only of name-calling, but do not try to defend your statement from my charge that it is racist.

      • seafoid
        seafoid on April 11, 2014, 6:25 pm

        Yonah thinks that a Palestinian majority would be a shocker. But there already is a Palestinian majority in Greater Israel hashlemah.

        Israel basically no longer exists. Jews wouldn’t countenance minority status sez Yonah. They already have it- it’s just the IDF that makes their larger cut of power possible.

      • Sumud
        Sumud on April 12, 2014, 4:50 am

        I think it is antithetical to thought.

        In the world according to yonah Israel is pure as the driven snow and has zero impact on the behaviour and policy of any other country in the region, including Palestine (formerly the PA).

        No wonder you resort to racist stereotypes about ‘the other’ – since you are determined to not consider how the dominant power in the region (and it’s best friend global superpower the US) effects other countries, you have little choice but racism to justify your shaky world view.

        Antithetical to thought, indeed.

        How ’bout those awful pictures of jews in the Warsaw Ghetto walking past sick and dying people on the street and just ignoring them. The inhumanity of it. Jewish self-governance sure is ugly.

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder on April 11, 2014, 6:31 pm

        Doesn’t change the fact that the PA showed every evidence of corruption and anti democratic tendencies.

        What do you expect under these conditions, jonah? And how much do you really know about it apart from selective news. I mean hard empirical facts.

        And what about corruption cases in Israel? That’s a completely different issue?

      • tree
        tree on April 11, 2014, 6:43 pm

        Yonah, here is what makes your “common sense” racist: You apply it differently to Jews than you do to Palestinians.

        You posit from the fact that Palestinians are Arab as are Egyptians that since Egypt at present is not a democracy and treats its citizens poorly, an Israel with a majority of Palestinians rather than a majority of Jews would not be a true democracy either. But you have a prime example in front of you that an Israel with a majority of Jews has been incapable for 66 years of being a true democracy that treats its citizens with justice and equality. You don’t take that very obvious example of Israel and from it conclude that Jews are incapable of creating a true democratic state without oppressive discrimination against non-Jews, or without rampant corruption for that matter. And that is your double standard and where your belief exhibits racism.

        And your name calling proves only that you wish to inhibit my questions. Great!

        David is answering your questions, not inhibiting them. What is inhibiting you is not the answer but your inability to listen to the arguments of others you disagree with. You want dialogue on your terms only, but that is not the way dialogue works. You’ve just created in your head another reason why you don’t have to listen to David. You’ve done this consistently here with the majority of commenters. Soon there will be no one here that you deem worthy of talking to, and will blame that on everyone else.

        If you want an example of what Israel/Palestine might be like with a majority of non-Jewish citizens, then look to earlier Palestine, one hundred years ago, circa 1900-1916, when it was still governed by the Ottoman Empire, and Zionist Jews were allowed to buy land there; when the governance of Jews by non-Jewish Arabs was better than any governance of Arabs by Jews since the creation of Israel. Read Shira Robinson’s book “Citizen Strangers” and see how those Palestinians who managed to remain in Israel despite the Israeli governments worst efforts to get rid of them tried against overwhelming odds to use the instruments of democracy to attain their rights in Israel. Learn more about Palestinian society. Talk to Palestinians. Don’t just assume that Palestinians are interchangeable with Egyptians, especially when you know next to nothing about either group. You wouldn’t want the same thing said about all Jews being interchangeable so don’t say that about Arabs unless you want your statement to be perceived as racist.

        One more point:

        And your name calling proves only that you wish to inhibit my questions.

        Can we assume this is projection on your part? Since one of your overriding penchants here is to call others anti-semites, or stupid, or propagandists, or other various names, does that mean that you are trying to inhibit other’s questions?

      • on April 12, 2014, 8:50 am

        What could be more racist than the existence of a “Jewish” state.

        For someone who loves to accuse people of anti-Semitism, resident Zionist Yonah F. sure is sensitive to having his racism pointed out.

      • irishmoses
        irishmoses on April 11, 2014, 6:55 pm


        Your statement that Jews would comprise close to 50% of the population of a single democratic state ignores the plight of the 2 million plus Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan (see my earlier post above). They are not chopped liver and must be part of any permanent solution. Where are they to go? Their host countries consider them are temporary residents and presume their return to the new Palestinian state.

        They can’t be ignored in terms of a single state solution, and their return to the West Bank will clearly increase the Arab majority in such as state to about 60 percent.

        I am amazed at how easily the fate of 2 million refugees is glossed over in this discussion. It’s like they’re invisible.

    • SQ Debris
      SQ Debris on April 12, 2014, 5:12 pm

      Supporters of Israel sound like they forgot their pants when they pimp “Jewish Democracy.” What part of democracy involves depriving people of the right to vote for the government that determines every aspect of their lives ..for 47 years? It’s a hoot. The Palestinian majority from the river to the sea is growing by the hour. The “importance of Jewish majority rule” is a dead letter.

  8. American
    American on April 11, 2014, 3:27 pm

    I am oddly enough listening to a doc on TV on Ayran motorcycle gangs in the US.
    They present themselves as being ‘seperationist’, not racist.
    Zionist are in fact and practice ‘separationist”.
    They have an actual ‘separationist state’.
    So if we refer to Ayran groups as racist we must also refer to Zionism as racist.
    Cant have a double standard for Zionist and Ayrans.

    • seafoid
      seafoid on April 11, 2014, 4:47 pm

      Zionism is not racist. It’s Jewish destiny.
      Jewish destiny is racist.

  9. eGuard
    eGuard on April 11, 2014, 3:35 pm

    A liberal Zionist writer. What is that? Why is that important? Discuss hunderd years more with a liberal Zionist, and you have not moved ahead an inch. Not in life, not in your mind.

    Actually, giving liberal Zionists oxygen like this is postponing any improvement or solution. Remember that only a few years ago, those liberal Zionists like Beinart, J-Street, and MJ Rosenberg were applauded on this site as paving the way to the solution. And NYT even showed rays of liberal light.

    John Kerry said ‘poof’ this week. Why is there not a single liberal Zionist from that Mondoweiss’s hall of Liberal Zionist Fame that said: “you’re right, Kerry. Good you said it”?

  10. seafoid
    seafoid on April 11, 2014, 3:44 pm

    Shmuley and Smartarse will never move to Israel. Too poor, too provincial, too far away, too complicated. In a way they epitomise the failure of Zionism.

  11. American
    American on April 11, 2014, 4:02 pm

    Compensation calls as Israel seizes EU-funded aid projects
    11/04/2014 – 08:01

    Israeli seizure of EU shelters at Ras-a-Baba. Photo: Rami Allaria
    EXCLUSIVE / Israel has seized three EU-funded humanitarian aid projects on the edge of a settlement construction zone that Europe views as as a ‘red line’, spurring demands for compensation payments to Brussels at a crisis moment for John Kerry’s Mideast peace bid.
    The three humanitarian aid shelters were dismantled on 9 April in Ras-a-Baba, also known as Jabal-al-Baba, which lies in the E1 corridor of the West Bank, linking the settlement of Ma’ale Adumim to Jerusalem.
    All three shelters were prefabricated caravans, built for families made homeless in severe storms that hit the region in December. They were funded by the EU’s humanitarian aid wing, DG ECHO, and some were provided by the French development agency, Action Contre la Faim (ACF).
    Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, told EurActiv that the seizure was “more than a provocation, it is a crime,” and linked it to the deteriorating Mideast peace process.
    “We ask the EU to apply their laws in relation to Israel,” he said. “This is consistent with the Israeli policy of forced displacement of the Palestinian population around occupied East Jerusalem.”

    EU officials contacted by EurActiv confirmed that they also saw the Israeli action as a “forced displacement of Palestinians” that breached international law and “must be halted immediately”.
    “While we acknowledge that these events come at a politically sensitive time where parties to the conflict are currently negotiating a peace-deal brokered by the US (Secretary of State) John Kerry, we must nevertheless denounce the humanitarian consequences of such actions and try to prevent further demolitions from occurring by unreservedly condemning them,” a senior source said. Internal discussions are underway over proposals to demand compensation for such actions in future.
    The dismantling of Palestinian homes in the E1 region has previously been followed by settlement construction.
    “The location is definitely an attractive area and when you go there it is easy to understand why it is coveted by the Israelis,” a European diplomat in the region told EurActiv over the phone. “It is quite beautiful and there’s a nice view of Jerusalem. It is also between Ma’ale Adumim and Jerusalem and is prime real estate.”

    In November 2012, the Netanyahu government announced a zoning plan to build 3,000 Jewish housing units in E1 that would create an urban bloc linking Jerusalem and Ma’ale Adumim, and disrupting the territorial coherence of any future state.
    An EU Foreign Affairs Council the next month expressed “deep dismay and strong opposition” to the plan which would “seriously undermine the prospects of a negotiated resolution of the conflict” and “could also entail forced transfer of civilian population.”
    The Conclusions pledged to “closely monitor the situation and its broader implications, and act accordingly.” EurActiv understands that a delegation of European diplomats in Jerusalem will deliver a complaint to the Israeli authorities about the seizure today (11 April). More actions could follow.
    “One of the key messages coming up will be a call for freeze on demolitions and for a fair planning and zoning regime to be put in place,” the diplomat said. “I don’t know if it will happen today but it is in the pipeline.”

    Some 79 EU-funded structures were demolished in the West Bank’s ‘Area C’ and Jerusalem region in 2012 and 54 more were destroyed in the first six months of 2013, according to an EU incident logging service. In all, the European Commission says that between 2001 and 2011, Israel destroyed development projects worth €49.14 million, of which €29.37 million was funded by the EU or its member states.
    As Israel is increasingly blamed for an impasse in Mideast peace talks, calls are growing for compensation for such actions at an EU Mashreq and Maghreb (MaMa) working group meeting that is expected to deliver recommendations on an EU ‘Area C’ report on Tuesday 15 April.
    Compensation calls
    One EU diplomat in Brussels speaking on condition of anonymity told EurActiv that while the final note was still being finalised, many member states now favoured such a proposal. “We should ask for compensation from Israel whenever EU-funded humanitarian aid projects are destroyed,” he said. “That would definitely be a pertinent recommendation.”
    EurActiv understands that no opposition was raised to this recommendation when it was raised in MaMa group discussions. The recent E1 demolition could have an effect on the vote, the diplomat said, as it was “a very good example that we need to do something concrete.”

    The EU’s humanitarian aid commissioner, Kristalina Georgieva, recently wrote a letter to the Israeli defence minister Moshe Ya’alon, outlining her concerns about the destruction of EU-funded structures in the West bank. But it remains to be seen whether a proposal to demand recompense will be included in the final note, which will then face a long route to the European Council.
    Maja Kocijancic, a spokesperson for the EU’s foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, would only say that a delegation of diplomats visited the caravan site, also known as Jaba-al-Baba in February, when ‘stop work’ orders were first delivered and would do so again today.
    “We will raise this issue with the relevant Israeli authorities,” Kocijancic said.

    Israeli reaction
    An Israeli spokesman contacted by EurActiv declined an interview about the new E1 action but sent a statement saying that the three caravans were seized because they had been “assembled illegally”.
    “At least two of the buildings [were] located on state land and within the jurisdiction of the city of Ma’ale Adumim,” the statement read.
    It went on: “It is important to note that the elements in question were carefully dismantled and seized by the authorized bodies of the Civil Administration and that their owners can act according to the standard procedure in order to get them back from the Supervision Unit.”

    EU officials counter that the lack of any meaningful permitting regime for Palestinians can make complaints of permit violations a self-reinforcing proposition, and some fear that they can make EU aid funding complicit in violations of international humanitarian law.
    “I think every diplomat working here realises that we are here to help the Palestinians and build Palestinian institutions but in the end we end up funding the occupation as we are taking care of the responsibilities that Israel should take care, of as an occupying power,” an EU diplomat in Jerusalem told EurActiv. “So when we support the occupied population instead of Israel, we let them off the hook.”
    Death knell
    The Ras-a-baba demolition occurred hours after an instruction by Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, to his ministers to stop all high-level meetings with their Palestinian counterparts, in retaliation for a Palestinian bid to join 15 UN treaties and conventions as a state party.
    This has been seen as the end of US Secretary of State John Kerry’s attempts to revive the battered 1993 Oslo peace Accord in the form of a framework agreement on principles.
    While the Oslo talks have ground on, by 2011, Israeli settlements which are considered illegal under international law, had expanded to house over 520,000 settlers, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).
    The following year saw a 300% increase in the number of settler units issued for tender, OCHA says. In total 43% of the West Bank has now been allocated to settlement local and regional councils.>>>>

    Oh and btw, Israel has frozen all of Palestine tax revenues due them.

    • American
      American on April 11, 2014, 4:14 pm

      And also btw, while they are eviscerating Palestine and burning the taxpayer dollars of the EU aid projects for Palestine….they are still sucking every ounce of lira they can milk out of the holocaust…and having the US act as their lawyer to do it.

      Obama administration warns states over Holocaust reparation talks with France

      ”The Obama administration is warning the state legislatures of Maryland and New York that legislation aimed at a French railway carrier over its Holocaust- era activities was jeopardizing its negotiations with the French government over reparations.

      ”The State Department released a statement on Thursday confirming that it was negotiating with Paris over a reparations agreement for Holocaust victims, survivors, and their next of kin who were transported to the Nazi death camps by way of French railways.

      “The United States and France have entered into discussions of compensation for victims of deportations by rail from France to Nazi labor and death camps as well as for victims’ families,” State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said. “It is our mutual aim to conclude these talks as quickly as possible.” >>>>>>>>>>

      The real question here is why the French RR company should have to pay reparations. France was OCCUPIED by Germany, it was not an ally of Germany. As such everything in France was controlled by the Nazis including the rail roads. The RR company didn’t ” volunteer” to transport Jews, they were ‘forced’ to transport Jews.
      I will be delighted to dance on their grave when their era of zionist rule and holocaust extorting ends.

      • Whirlygig
        Whirlygig on April 11, 2014, 6:22 pm


        Apparently The Guardian is just another Zionist stooge and maybe also French President Francois Hollande, who now says the “Vel d’Hiv roundup of Jews to Nazi camps was a ‘Crime committed in France by France’ (not Germany and not due to the German occupation, but the willing collaboration of Vichy officials).

        You’re in good company, American, with David Irving and other discredited revisionist historians. There are many who will dance on your grave.

      • Qualtrough
        Qualtrough on April 12, 2014, 2:00 am

        Whirlygig–are you seriously suggesting that the German invasion of France (after the French suffered 92,000 soldiers killed in the space of weeks), the subsequent partitioning of the country into one part fully occupied by Germany and the other with a collaboration government installed at Germany’s behest, had little or nothing to do with Jews being rounded up and deported? While there were surely French men and women who eagerly participated in that, does it matter for nothing that the penalty for acts as mild as reading underground newspapers (among other things) was death? Are you aware that the SNCF lost several thousand employees who were executed for sabotage and other subversive acts? How do you think a trainman would have fared if he had told anyone that he was refusing to participate in running a train carry deportees out of conscience? While you have perfect knowledge how events played out, that was not always the case at the time, even among Jews. It is little short of extortion to punish the current owners of the SNCF for acts that occurred during a period of military occupation some 70+ years ago.

      • Whirlygig
        Whirlygig on April 12, 2014, 10:36 am


        The issue comes down to the “DEGREE” of collaboration. I’m sure you’ll also make the case that most Poles, Ukrainians, Lithuanians and Slovaks were “pressed” into serving in Einsatzgruppen by their German overlords. I expect you’ll also argue that fascist para-militaries like the Rumanian Iron Guard, the Croatian Ustashi, the Slovak Hlinka Guard and the Hungarian Arrow Cross were aberrations and then only killed their Jewish compatriots very “reluctantly”.

        In 1972, historian Robert Paxton’s book, Vichy France: Old Guard and New Order, shattered the resistance myth for good. Based on research in French and German archives, Paxton showed that collaboration was not a policy imposed on France, but one that originated in France itself. Paxton concluded that the majority of French people did little to oppose Vichy; in fact, their very apathy had allowed the regime to remain in place. The resistance myth was thus turned on its head – the French had not been a nation of resisters but a nation of collaborators.

        The same CANNOT be said of the Serbs or the Danes, who rejected the racist dictates of Nazi Germany and did much to protect their Jewish compatriots.

        Those countries which willingly collaborated were largely homogeneous, Catholic or Eastern Orthodox and viewed Jews as “Bolshevists” and “Christ-Killers”. They were to be dispatched, liquidated and the sooner the better.

      • Sumud
        Sumud on April 12, 2014, 4:58 am

        Whirlygig – what’s your estimate for reparations for 66 years of Nakba – and counting?

        Do you think Israel can afford to pay it?

      • talknic
        talknic on April 12, 2014, 5:10 am

        @ Sumud … Israel couldn’t afford it in 1948

      • Whirlygig
        Whirlygig on April 12, 2014, 10:53 am

        What’s your estimate of the 800,000 Jews persecuted and butchered in Arab countries between 1940 and 1967 ? Give me a count of how many Jews are left in Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Libya and the other Judenrein countries of the Maghreb. Those that survived the savagery of their neighbours built new and productive lives, did not languish in misery and hope for vengeance.

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 12, 2014, 12:58 pm

        What’s your estimate of the 800,000 Jews persecuted and butchered in Arab countries between 1940 and 1967 ?

        It was pretty clear to the officials of the Jewish Agency that their plan for the conquest of Palestine would cause a backlash:

        A representative of the Jewish Agency has stated that in the event of partition the 400,000 Jews in the Arab states outside Palestine may have to be sacrificed in the interest of the Jewish community as a whole.

        link to

        There are former Jewish refugees who have opted for citizenship and resettlement in Israel. They are entitled to restitution or compensation. The number 800,000 is a gross exaggeration. Most of the emigres were Zionists making aliya. Declassified documentary evidence establishes that Israel shares responsibility for the refugee problems, because it deliberately triggered the mass exoduses. Here is one example:

        Ingathering of Exiles
        At the close of the interview I asked Kollek to tell me frankly whether Israel planned to start the ingathering of 70,000 Jews from Iran along the lines of the ingathering from Iraq. I said that so far as I knew, the level of anti-semitism in Iran was not abnormally high and I thought the friends of Israel, including the United States, would not favor a deliberately generated exodus there.
        Kollek replied that there was a school of thought in Israel which believes that when a nationalistic government of the Mossadegh type comes into power sooner or later they turn against their minorities and this has caused consideration to be given to the Iranian Jews. He did not believe, however, that efforts would be made to bring them to Israel unless the situation generally deteriorates. There could be no doubt that the need of the Roumanian Jews to come to Israel is far greater than the need of the Iranian Jews.
        I opined that the Iraqi operation had been bad for Iraq. I said that I hoped the Iraqi Government would not disenfranchise the Jews who had elected to remain Iraqi citizens. Kollek argued that short range, Iraq may have lost some skills, but he thought that long range it is “better for a country to be homogeneous” as would be the case if all of the Jews left Iraq. I asserted that homogeneity of population is not always a good thing and pointed with pride to the fact that the United States is in no sense homogeneous. Kollek’s only answer was “The United States is different.”

        – Memorandum of Conversation, by the Director of the Office of Near Eastern Affairs (Jones), Secret [WASHINGTON,] August 2,1951.
        Subject: Israel’s Concern Re Peace With the Arabs and Other Matters.
        Participants: Mr. Theodore Kollek, Embassy of Israel and Mr. G. Lewis Jones, NE, Foreign relations of the United States, 1951. The Near East and Africa, page 815 link to

        For years the government of Israel shamelessly tried to claim that there were 800,000 refugees from Arab lands whose claims offset those of Palestinian refugees, despite the fact that those Jews had no claims against Palestinians at all.

        Now it turns out that Israel never collected more than 14,000 claims from refugees in the first place:

        In 2010, a law was passed stating that compensation for the lost property would be included in any future Arab-Israeli peace agreement. But the report shows that even if peace were to break out tomorrow morning, Israel would be hard-pressed to present a solid claim because the state does not know what property is at issue. The possible reasons for this are many and absurd: Over the years, immigrants from Iran and Arab states were instructed to fill in and submit forms aimed at enabling the coordination of both individual and communal claims. Between 1969-2009, the Justice Ministry collected around 14,000 of these, but they were never processed or entered into a computer database. Some of the records are still in the ministry’s archive, waiting to be scanned digitally, but some have deteriorated so badly as to be worthless. The retirement of a single clerk who was in charge of the material at one point but did not train her successor is thought to have led to the disappearance of still more documents connected to the issue.
        – Comptroller blasts state for neglecting restitution of Jewish property in Arab states link to
        PLO Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi reportedly claimed that “if Israel is their [Arab Jews’] homeland, then they are not ‘refugees’; they are emigrants who return either voluntarily or due to a political decision.”
        Ironically, Ashrawi’s sentiment succinctly captures what was once the prevailing view within the Israeli government and among major Zionist advocacy organizations. “I do not regard the departure of Jews from Arab lands as that of refugees,” asserted Iraqi-Israeli former Knesset Speaker Shlomo Hillel. “They came here because they wanted to, as Zionists.” His position was and still is shared by many others. Noteworthy, too, is the Law of Return, which ensures that Jews never arrive in Israel as refugees, but as “olim hadashim” − new immigrants.

        – A dubious campaign on behalf of Arab Jewish refugees link to

      • American
        American on April 12, 2014, 3:11 pm

        ”’ The resistance myth was thus turned on its head – the French had not been a nation of resisters but a nation of collaborators.” ..says Whirlygig

        Well you arent a ‘resister’ to the Zionist regime either are you?
        Better start saving your pennies to pay reparations to the Palestines.

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 12, 2014, 2:28 pm

        Apparently The Guardian is just another Zionist stooge and maybe also French President Francois Hollande, who now says the “Vel d’Hiv roundup of Jews to Nazi camps was a ‘Crime committed in France by France’ (not Germany and not due to the German occupation, but the willing collaboration of Vichy officials).

        You are mixing apples and oranges. The Guardian and Obama administration are negotiating a settlement with the French government, not the French railway company. That’s a different legal entity. The state legislatures of Maryland and New York have bills pending aimed at a French railway carrier that are jeopardizing US negotiations with the French government and threatening to trigger the involvement of the ICJ.

        In 1972, historian Robert Paxton’s book, Vichy France: Old Guard and New Order, . . .

        It certainly does mention the culpability of the French government, but does not comment directly about the culpability of any French railway companies or workers in any wrongdoing.

        It’s important to remember that the French government was one of the parties to the Final Act of the Paris Conference on Reparation with annex (Paris 21st December 1945), which had already paid millions in reparations and/or waived its claims to assets that were turned over to Jewish victims of the war. Under the terms of that agreement, disputes regarding reparations are supposed to be settled by the International Court of Justice.

        Here’s some background information on the reparations paid so far, which included 90 percent of the plundered non-monetary gold recovered from Germany:

        The Government of Israel, in support of its request for reparation from Germany, alleges that it is the only state which can speak on behalf of the Jewish people and that the claims of the Jewish people were disregarded in the allocation of reparations from Germany. In connection with those allegations, the Government of the United States calls attention to the following considerations:
        (a) Throughout the period of Nazi domination of Germany, the United States and other Countries offered sanctuary to many thousands of persons of Jewish origin fleeing from their Nazi persecutors. At the end of the war it enacted special laws to open its doors to the flood of unfortunate people made homeless, destitute and infirm by the ravages of war and oppression. Furthermore, the Governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, and France have made the major contribution to the International Refugee Organization, which has facilitated the resettlement of Jews in Israel. These voluntary acts of assistance demonstrate the concern for and the large measure of responsibility which the Government of the United States has assumed for the welfare of the Jewish victims of Nazi oppression.
        (b) Although they were not represented at the Paris Reparation Conference, the claims of the persecutees were given special consideration. The Paris Reparation Agreement allotted all non-monetary gold found in Germany, a fund of $25,000,000 from German external assets to be liquidated in the countries which remained neutral during the war, and all assets in neutral countries of victims of Nazi action who died without heirs for the relief and rehabilitation of non-repatriable victims of German action. It was recognized at the time that the overwhelming majority of these victims were Jewish, and immediately thereafter the Five Power Agreement of 1946 provided that ninety percent of the $25,000,000 fund and non-monetary gold and ninety-five percent of the heirless properties should be used for such victims. Furthermore, the Government of the United States notes that pursuant to the agreement between the Government of Israel and the Government of the United Kingdom of March 30, 1950, the latter turned over to the Government of Israel the proportion of reparation in respect of the mandate for Palestine which was received by the British Government under the Paris Reparation Agreement.

        In bringing to the attention of the Government of Israel the reparations and indemnities thus far received by the Jewish refugees, the Government of the United States does not imply that it regards them as full compensation for their sufferings. It concurs in the view of the Israeli Government that no material compensation can be sufficient. It would point out, however, that many nations and peoples experienced tremendous losses and sufferings at the hands of the Nazis and that none can expect its reparation receipts to reflect compensation in any substantial measure.

        The Government of the United States must also point out the bearing of certain agreements, to which it is a party, on further reparation demands on Germany. Immediately following the termination of hostilities, the Occupying Powers established the form of reparations to be exacted from Germany; in so doing they agreed that reparations must be of a character which would not impose a financial burden on the Allies, and that policy is unchanged. They then convoked a conference of those nations which made the greatest contribution to winning the war, for the purpose of distributing the share in German reparation allocated to the three Western Powers under the Potsdam Protocol. From that conference emerged the Paris Reparation Agreement, which not only determined the percentage share in reparation of the signatories but also provided that the reparation receipts shall be regarded as covering all their claims against Germany arising out of the war but without prejudice to the final settlement of German reparations. The effect of these decisions is to preclude the assertion by the Government of the United States, on its own behalf or on behalf of other states, of further reparation demands on Germany pending a definitive settlement in the nature of a peace treaty. It is impossible to predict when such a settlement will be possible.

        The Government of the United States therefore regrets that it cannot impose on the Government of the German Federal Republic an obligation to pay reparation to Israel as a condition to implementation of the decision reached by the Foreign Ministers at their conference in Brussels to place Allied-German relations on a new basis.

        The Government of the United States wishes to emphasize, however, that the new relationship will not effect a definitive settlement of all problems arising out of the war and that it will not prejudice the consideration of further claims for reparation in the negotiation of a final settlement with Germany in the nature of a peace treaty.

        – Foreign relations of the United States, 1951. The Near East and Africa, Page 749 link to

      • American
        American on April 12, 2014, 2:32 pm

        @ Whirlygig

        Suing the French RR companies under occupation by the Nazis for transporting Jews is equivalent to a home invasion gang holding me hostage while they use my car to rob a bank and the bank suing me for it.

        The holocaust industry has become nothing but an extortion racket–a wing of the Zionist Mafia. And after extorting trillions from every entity that existed during WWII with deep pockets, the 52,000 actual camp survivors and the 200,000 displaced still claim they are destitute.
        The extorted money goes to the Zio mafia and not to the survivors.

      • Sumud
        Sumud on April 13, 2014, 9:34 am

        Whirlygig – didn’t your parents teach you manners? It’s rude to answer a question with a question.

        I’ll ask again:

        what’s your estimate for reparations for 66 years of Nakba – and counting?

        Do you think Israel can afford to pay it?

        I will answer your question as a courtesy – noting that arab jews coming to Israel and Palestinian refugees are separate issues altogether. You’re just trying to change the subject…

        We both know that the vast majority of jewish arabs that moved to Israel in the 20 years from 1948 chose to leave their native country voluntarily – to make aliyah to Israel. That when Israel encouraged the mizrahi to register claims only about 1% (i believe it was 14,000) of the immigrant population filled out the paperwork and then …poof! The paperwork went AWOL or got damaged. Either way it’s a failed attempt to try and counter Palestinians claims about the nakba.

        Still, in case(s) where there are actually refugees instead of voluntary immigrants – such as Egypt – then it’s only fair that reparations and compensation be paid by the offending country. I’m no hypocrite, are you?

        Further – in cases such as Iraq where Israel bombed synagogues etc to terrorise the jewish population to flee – then Israel should contribute significantly to the reparations. So many lives Israel has destroyed, without care.

        Now – back to my questions…?

  12. just
    just on April 11, 2014, 5:45 pm

    My goodness– Ibish nails it yet again! He’s done so twice lately– once in print, just a couple of weeks ago in Haaretz:

    ““Many commentators, including this author, have carefully picked apart the myriad problems involved with Israel’s new demand that the Palestinians formally recognize it as a “Jewish state.” But at least one of its most problematic aspects has been significantly under-examined and underappreciated. The new demand negates, both in effect and intention, the greatest of Palestinian concessions, their 1993 recognition of the State of Israel.

    There is an international consensus in favor of a two-state solution, and even Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman now say they, too, support this goal after long careers opposing it. And in the quarter-century campaign to achieve a conflict-ending two-state agreement through direct talks, there remains a dangerous anomaly. One side, the Palestine Liberation Organization, recognized Israel up front. All other details aside, they have long since performed the sine qua non of a two-state agreement by recognizing Israel. The other side, Israel, has never recognized a Palestinian state or, in any formal, written, or legal sense, even the Palestinian right to a state.


    What has yet to be fully recognized is that the single most significant impact of this “Jewish state” demand is that it effectively dismisses and reverses the 1993 Palestinian recognition of Israel. This concession made it ridiculous for anyone to argue that the core of the problem was Palestinians’ refusal to recognize Israel. But now, hey presto, it is once again possible to present Palestinian recognition of Israel as a major issue, because it wasn’t recognition of Israel as a “Jewish state.”

    It doesn’t matter that no one ever asked the Palestinians to do so until 2007, or that there are a great many complications, ambiguities, and grave difficulties associated with it. It has become a mantra of much of the pro-Israel constituency the world over that the 1993 recognition of Israel by the PLO is all but irrelevant, and that until Palestinians recognize Israel as a “Jewish state,” their intention to end the conflict and live in peace remains very much open to question.

    So, this new demand solves the problem that one side is lived up to its core commitment under a two-state solution – recognizing the statehood of the other party – while the other side has not. It pushes the diplomatic, psychological, and political clock back before 1993, to an era where Palestinians are once again being asked to demonstrate their willingness to live in peace with Israel by uttering some magic mantra.

    It elides the fact that, from a Palestinian and Arab point of view, the 1993 recognition of Israel was the mother of all concessions: a recognition that Palestinians were surrendering their political claim to around 78% of what had very recently been their country, in the sense that they were a large majority there until 1948. So now we are left negotiating over the territories conquered by Israel in 1967, without even touching the areas that became Israel in 1948. The enormity of this vast concession, this overwhelming – almost impossible – agreement by the Palestinians, was never fully recognized by Israel or the international community. And now, with the Jewish state demand, it’s dismissed altogether as almost totally irrelevant.” ”

    He’s taken the “gloves” off. Speaking comprehensible and comprehensive truth. Super& steady ‘reveal’.

    • Whirlygig
      Whirlygig on April 12, 2014, 1:29 am

      Hey Just,

      The 1993 “mother of all concessions” by the Arabs in accepting the state of Israel, with the proviso that all Palestinians be repatriated, is priceless in it’s transparency. It is tantamount to saying, “We agree to recognizing the name you chose (Israel) on the condition that you allow us to form the majority in your country.”

      I can hardly wait the 30-40 years when Moslems form the majority in England and France, and declare them Islamic republics, without their requiring a name change either. I’m sure the minority of infidel Brits and Frenchman will be very accommodating to their countries’ new ethnic identity. So let’s be absolutely transparent and unambiguous as to why the “JEWISH State of Israel”.

      As far as who stole what from whom, let’s be clear that the continuous habitation of Jews in Tzfat and Jerusalem since time immemorial predates the arrival of Arab nomads in what the Romans called Palestine, by thousands of years.

      The truth is that any territory once having fallen under Moslem dominion, regardless of its insignificance and regardless of any competing claims, cannot be relinquished to infidels, whether Christians or Jews.

      There was never a bid to forge an Arab “Palestinian” identity or country prior to Israel’s establishment. As long as Jews in the middle-east kept quiet, their presence was barely tolerated, in the best cases. In the worst cases they were hunted down and murdered in Egypt, Lebanon, Libya, Iraq, Syria and other Judenrein Arab countries.

      • Inanna
        Inanna on April 12, 2014, 8:48 am

        He said ‘time immemorial’. I think that really says it all about this comment. Thanks, Joan.

      • Whirlygig
        Whirlygig on April 12, 2014, 11:38 am

        I’ve never read Joan Peters, ‘Since Time Immemorial’ but if the phrase offends I will excise it from my vocabulary. I’m sure Peters also used terms like ‘age old’ and ‘historical’, which I am loathe to drop.

        Lest I continue being targeted with ad hominems and as a shill for ‘Hasbara Central’, for the record, as an Israeli who supports 2 states and opposes the occupation, I have engaged in more reasoned and civil debates with Israeli Arabs, Bedouins and Palestinians than most of the binary Zionist-baiters on this site.

        Good luck and goodbye

      • RobertB
        RobertB on April 12, 2014, 2:07 pm


        “What’s your estimate of the 800,000 Jews persecuted and butchered in Arab countries between 1940 and 1967 ? Give me a count of how many Jews are left in Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Libya and the other Judenrein countries of the Maghreb. Those that survived the savagery of their neighbours built new and productive lives, did not languish in misery and hope for vengeance.”


        The Jews of Iraq
        Photo of Naeim Giladi

        By Naeim Giladi

        “Zionist propagandists still maintain that the bombs in Iraq were set off by anti-Jewish Iraqis who wanted Jews out of their country. The terrible truth is that the grenades that killed and maimed Iraqi Jews and damaged their property were thrown by Zionist Jews.

        “This, too, was the conclusion of Wilbur Crane Eveland, a former senior officer in the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), whom I had the opportunity to meet in New York in 1988. In his book, Ropes of Sand, whose publication the CIA opposed, Eveland writes:

        In attempts to portray the Iraqis as anti-American and to terrorize the Jews, the Zionists planted bombs in the U.S. Information Service library and in synagogues. Soon leaflets began to appear urging Jews to flee to Israel. . . . Although the Iraqi police later provided our embassy with evidence to show that the synagogue and library bombings, as well as the anti-Jewish and anti-American leaflet campaigns, had been the work of an underground Zionist organization, most of the world believed reports that Arab terrorism had motivated the flight of the Iraqi Jews whom the Zionists had “rescued” really just in order to increase Israel’s Jewish population.

        Click on link for the rest of the details:

      • Inanna
        Inanna on April 13, 2014, 12:10 am

        You don’t seem to realize that the comment I responded to was replete with Islamophobia, completely in denial about how the Jewish state was formed on the backs and necks and lives of Palestinians, denial of the Palestinians as a people, as well as ignorant of what Arab Jews say about their Aliyah. Spare us the pity party you’re having and think about why someone would respond negatively to the ugliness you’ve shown.

      • Walid
        Walid on April 13, 2014, 12:39 am

        “I can hardly wait the 30-40 years when Moslems form the majority in England and France, and declare them Islamic republics, without their requiring a name change either. I’m sure the minority of infidel Brits and Frenchman will be very accommodating to their countries’ new ethnic identity”

        Your above comment isn’t reasoned nor civil and should tell you where the unpleasant reactions came from.

      • seafoid
        seafoid on April 12, 2014, 8:51 am

        We have a live one.

        “There was never a bid to forge an Arab “Palestinian” identity or country prior to Israel’s establishment”

        There was no gay bear identity pre 1987 either
        What was your point ?

      • James North
        James North on April 12, 2014, 8:59 am

        Just, Ianna, seafoid et al: I suspect “Whirlygig” has been brought out of retirement by Hasbara Central because of all the mounting pressure and the success of the BDS movement. Whirlygig didn’t get the memo that Joan Peters’s From Time Immemorial was completely discredited 30 years ago, and even Hasbara Central doesn’t use it anymore.

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder on April 12, 2014, 12:31 pm

        James, I am not sure, if we should reduce his comment to From Time Immemorial, which seems to come from–at least as far the mainstream debate is concerned–comparatively “innocent” times.

        Don’t ignore what I call the counter-conspiracy tale in his comment:

        I can hardly wait the 30-40 years when Moslems form the majority in England and France, and declare them Islamic republics, without their requiring a name change either.

        These narrative obviously has much longer historical roots. Bernard Lewis is mentioned occasionally concerning the religious idea of the Mahdi(?)’s return. Mahdi, the spiritual antagonist of the Anti-Christ. Quite possibly treating it not as a spiritual and religious theme but as a politically dominating force, it feels. But I didn’t read him. This may belong into the historical roots of “Islam the threat” for the West scenario from my completely uninformed perspective.

        I doubt the many narratives in this context could surface in earlier decades to the extend they do post 911.

        Laurie Mylroie?

        To not go into the obvious grain of truth in the event’s (911)present obvious “Muslim conspiracy”. That no doubt helped a lot to get an inflated Muslim conspiracy narrative mainstream.

        Strictly it might be interesting to look at this issue from a comparative literature perspective. Or for that matter to contextualize all the Muslim Conspiracy Theories..

        These type of stories do not work without a minor “grains of truth”. Since the audiences that are targete3d with this narrative, needs to be given a grain of hard factual truth that help open them up for the larger narrative, I think.

        But strictly I am never at a loss to invent subjects to study for others. ;) And this idea may be influenced by the desire decades ago, that someone would look carefully into the specific national introductions of the the Protocols in a comparative literature study. Since I wondered if and to what extend these introductions could possibly differ. After all they where a political tool aiming at different national audiences. And shouldn’t the introduction offer them basic hooks via things they already knew? I may have underestimated the interconnectedness of the world at that time, I have to admit in hindsight. Strictly it may not have needed specifically national narratives. But shouldn’t one expect they are modified for that aim in the Arab versions?

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 12, 2014, 9:01 am

        There was never a bid to forge an Arab “Palestinian” identity or country prior to Israel’s establishment.

        You are repeating shopworn Zionist propaganda, so let’s refute it with some more. In light of constant Zionist attempts at the negation of Palestine and Palestinians, it’s supremely ironic that the Director of Propaganda for Keren Hayesod and the Founding Father of Revisionist Zionism, Ze’ev Jabotinsky wrote:

        If it were possible (and I doubt this) to discuss Palestine with the Arabs of Baghdad and Mecca as if it were some kind of small, immaterial borderland, then Palestine would still remain for the Palestinians not a borderland, but their birthplace, the center and basis of their own national existence. Therefore it would be necessary to carry on colonization against the will of the Palestinian Arabs, which is the same condition that exists now. . . . because they are not a rabble but a nation, perhaps somewhat tattered, but still living.” “

        . See The Iron Wall (We and the Arabs), First published in Russian: “O Zheleznoi Stene,” Rassvyet, November 4, 1923 from Daniel Pipes website.

        In 1914, long before there was a Balfour Declaration, a circular entitled “General Summons to Palestinians – Beware Zionist Danger” was distributed and published in the press. It warned that “Zionists want to settle in our country and expel us from it” and it was signed anonymously by “a Palestinian”. The author attributed the crisis to “history going full circle”, resulting in the disintegration of “the Palestinian nation” that had once been blessed by God. See the full description of the article and verbatim extracts at the embedded link above on pages 220-222 of Neville J. Mandel, “The Arabs and Zionism Before World War I”

        For additional sources which debunk this Zionist myth, see the comment here:

      • eljay
        eljay on April 12, 2014, 9:21 am

        >> I can hardly wait the 30-40 years when Moslems form the majority in England and France, and declare them Islamic republics …

        Moslems have no more right to a supremacist “Islamic republic” than do Jews to a supremacist “Jewish State”. All forms of supremacist states should be condemned. I condemn them. Do you? Or are you just one more Zio-supremacist hypocrite who thinks supremacism is acceptable only when it favours Jews?

      • Whirlygig
        Whirlygig on April 12, 2014, 2:32 pm


        I just love fatuous declarations ! Here is mine: “I condemn all supremacist states.” Is Israel a “Jewish” state ? Yes. Do Arabs, Druze and Bedouin participate in the civic life of the country ? Yes. The IDF ? Yes. The legislature ? Yes. The courts ? Yes. The media ? Yes. Is it a “free/open/democratic society” ? Yes, according to Freedom House (with some caveats). Is there discrimination in Israel ? Yes. Is it a supremacist state ? No.

        Now let’s ask all these questions about the role of Jews in Arab and Moslem countries. And while you’re at it check their ratings on Freedom House’s index. Then rush back and tell me again about “supremacist” states !

        Here is a little conundrum for you:
        I can categorically state: Whatever team you’re routing for, there are TWO EQUALLY LEGITIMATE NARRATIVES AND CLAIMS for the same piece of real estate, between the Jordan river and the Mediterranean. Any one insisting that the claim of one side, supersedes that of the other, is only contributing to hostilities and conflict. Anyone demanding a priori conditions just to sit down and negotiate a resolution, is not interested in peace.

        Those are my views. Are they yours ?

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 13, 2014, 12:15 pm

        I just love fatuous declarations !

        If you check the comment archives here, you’ll find that the state parties to the human rights Treaties, like the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, elect the panels of legal experts who serve in the monitoring bodies and review each country’s compliance, not the UNHRC.

        You’ll also find that the elected representative bodies of experts that Israel and the US helped to appoint, found that Arabs, Druze and Bedouin do not enjoy equal rights and protection under the law in Israel and are subjected to forms of systematic discrimination that are a serious on-going concern under the terms of Article 3 of the convention regarding the prohibition of racial segregation and apartheid.

        FYI, the Freedom House report on Political Rights and Civil Liberties is unofficial and little more than a catalog of systematic discrimination against non-Jews.

      • puppies
        puppies on April 13, 2014, 12:26 pm

        Who the f*** cares about the “views” of a nationalist madman supporting invasion, genocide, international piracy and theocracy? For preaching, go to some Zionist rant site.

      • eljay
        eljay on April 13, 2014, 1:33 pm

        >> Eljay
        >> I just love fatuous declarations ! Here is mine: “I condemn all supremacist states.”

        Glad to hear it.

        >> Is Israel a “Jewish” state ? Yes. … Is it a supremacist state ? No.

        Israel was devised as, created as and exists as a state fundamentally of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews, and not as a state fundamentally of and for all of its Israeli citizens – and immigrants and ex-pats and refugees – equally. That makes it a supremacist state. But you won’t condemn it. Surprise, surprise.

        >> Now let’s ask all these questions about the role of Jews in Arab and Moslem countries. And while you’re at it check their ratings on Freedom House’s index. Then rush back and tell me again about “supremacist” states !

        What’s to tell? That “Arab and Moslem countries” are, overall, worse places to live than Israel? So what? The fact that Israel is somewhat better than the worst doesn’t mean Israel is anywhere near as good as the best*. And it certainly doesn’t mean that Israel as a “Jewish State” is not supremacist.

        *I simply can’t understand why Zio-supremacists think that comparing their “Jewish State” with countries even they despise is somehow supposed to make right everything about Israel that is wrong.

        It’s like supporters of a serial wife-beater thinking that defending him because he’s not a serial rapist or a serial killer – rather than condemning him for not being a good, honest and law-abiding citizen – somehow makes him a better person.

      • Bumblebye
        Bumblebye on April 12, 2014, 12:01 pm

        “Whirlygig” defined = completely stuck in the Hasbara spin cycle!

      • Whirlygig
        Whirlygig on April 14, 2014, 1:21 am

        Here, Eljay…

        Let me explain it to you. The Israeli Law of Return was enacted so that never again will Jews be faced without a safe haven as they were in WWII when country after country closed their doors to desperate Jewish refugees seeking to escape extermination. (Why not read up on the USS. St.Louis, for some entertainment !!?)

        Israeli citizenship is available to other faiths and ethnic groups through a normal naturalization procedure that to the best of my knowledge other western countries follow as well. The rationale for a French or Austrian Jew’s preferential “fast-tracking” for citizenship hails from ONE and ONLY ONE COLLECTIVE EXPERIENCE. (I’ll let you figure out what it is.)

        You have not said anything that suggests what makes Israel a “Supremacist” state; calling Israel a Martian colony would make about as much sense. You would have a stronger case in demanding that refuges for abused women that bar men are discriminatory to men.

        Funny I don’t hear you whining about ethnic Germans being granted German citizenship when they move to Germany (it’s called jus sanguinis).

      • eljay
        eljay on April 14, 2014, 1:04 pm

        >> The Israeli Law of Return was enacted so that never again will Jews be faced without a safe haven …

        An Israeli “Law of Return” that applies not to Israelis, but to Jews. IOW, a supremacist “Law”.

        Fail #1.

        >> Funny I don’t hear you whining about ethnic Germans being granted German citizenship when they move to Germany (it’s called jus sanguinis).

        Why would I? I have nothing against ethnic Israelis being granted Israeli citizenship when they move to Israel.

        Fail #2.

        Chin up – maybe next time you’ll manage to convince me that Jewish supremacism and past and on-going Jewish (war) crimes have something to do with justice, equality and accountability.

      • puppies
        puppies on April 14, 2014, 6:08 pm

        @whirly – Yeah, talk about safe haven where the illegal immigrant is by definition a citizen of the state waging a war of aggression and as such a target.
        As for the ethnic Germans, they get citizenship to live on German land. Not Patagonia. As also do all descendants of Jewish citizens of Germany…

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 14, 2014, 4:25 pm

        The Israeli Law of Return was enacted so that never again will Jews be faced without a safe haven as they were in WWII when country after country closed their doors to desperate Jewish refugees seeking to escape extermination. (Why not read up on the USS. St.Louis, for some entertainment !!?)

        You need to remember to read about the SS Patria and the SS Struma too. The British evacuated some of the Struma passengers who held expired visas to Palestine. They used an overland route after the ship docked in Turkey. But they refused to admit the others, unless the Jewish agency reduced the number of its 25,000 unused entry permits accordingly. The Jewish Agency murdered hundreds of Jewish refugees when it deliberately blew-up the Patria for propaganda purposes.

        The rank and file membership of the Zionist Organization and the WJC were concerned about the plight of Jewish refugees in Europe, but the members of the Zionist Executive were not. The documentary record shows that, long before Israel became worried about being flooded with millions of Palestinian refugees, it was worried about being flooded with millions of undesirable Jewish refugees.

        The Jewish Agency Executive were not concerned with bringing all of the Jewish people, as such, to Palestine or concerned about their fate:

        A representative of the Jewish Agency has stated that in the event of partition the 400,000 Jews in the Arab states outside Palestine may have to be sacrificed in the interest of the Jewish community as a whole.

        link to

        Weizmann never considered many Jews to be fit material for the Jewish community he was building in Palestine:

        Dr. Weizmann, President of the World Zionist Organization and ex-officio President of the Jewish Agency, stated that he had come to this country, with Palestine as always uppermost in his mind, to raise $4,000,000 outside the United Palestine Appeal for strengthening the Jewish community in Palestine.
        It was to be anticipated, Dr. Weizmann said, that at the end of the war there would be at least 2,500,000 Jews seeking refuge. Of these perhaps 1,000,000 would represent Jews with a future and the others Jews whose lives were behind them-”who were but little more than dust”. He believed that it would be possible to settle in Palestine 1,000,000 of these refugees, so far as possible those with a future, one-fourth on the land, the remainder as an addition to the urban population.

        link to

        Here are a number of cites from Boaz Evron, “Jewish State or Israeli Nation?”, Indiana University Press, 1995, page 260-261 regarding the deliberations and correspondence of the Zionist Executive on the subject of the Evian Conference on Refugees:
        *The Jewish Agency’s Executive met on June 26, 1938 to discuss the Evian Conference goal of raising Allied attention to the need for efforts and funding in order to resettle endangered Jews in other countries. Evron wrote that: “It was summed up in the meeting that the Zionist thing to do ‘is belittle the Conference as far as possible and to cause it to decide nothing’.
        “We are particularly worried that it would move Jewish organizations to collect large sums of money for aid to Jewish refugees, and these collections could interfere with our collection effort.” Ben Gurion said “No rationalization can turn the conference from a harmful to a useful one. What can and should be done is to limit the damage as far as possible.”

        *Evron quotes from a letter written by Georg Landauer, the managing director of the Jewish Agency Central Bureau for the Settlement of German Jews, to Rabbi Stephen Wise, the Co-Chair of the American Zionist Emergency Council, dated February 13, 1938: I am writing this letter at the request of Dr. Weizmann because we are extremely concerned lest the problem be presented in a way which would prejudice the activity for Eretz Israel. Even if the conference does not propose immediately after its opening other countries but Eretz Israel as venues for Jewish emigration, it will certainly arouse a public response that could put the importance of Eretz Israel in the shade. . . . We are particularly worried that it would move Jewish organizations to collect large sums of money for the aid of Jewish refugees, and these collection efforts would interfere with our collection efforts.

        *There was also the statement made by Menachem Ussishkin head of the Jewish National Fund in the meeting of the Zionist Executive on June 26, 1938 regarding the report of Mr. Greenbaum: “He is also concerned at the Evian Conference. . . . Mr. Greenbaum is right in stating that there is a danger that the Jewish people also will take Eretz Israel off its agenda, and this should be viewed by us as a terrible danger. He hoped to hear in Evian that Eretz Israel remains the main venue for Jewish emigration. All other emigration countries do not interest him. . . . The greatest danger remains that attempts will be made to find other territories for Jewish emigration.”

        The statement by Ben Gurion and the letter to Rabbi Wise were also cited in S. Beit Zvi, Hatzionut Ha-Post-Ugandit Bemashber Ha’shoah (Post-Uganda Zionism and the Holocaust), Tel Aviv: Bronfmann, 1977, page 178, 181, 182

      • puppies
        puppies on April 14, 2014, 6:05 pm

        @Hostage – Thank you; concentrated to pill-size with all the strength.

    • talknic
      talknic on April 12, 2014, 5:49 am

      Why is this repeated “the areas that became Israel in 1948. “

      The only areas that became Israel in 1948 were those under which the Israeli Government pleaded for recognition and by which it was recognized

      By at least 1933 the acquisition of territory by war was illegal . Israel has not yet legally acquired ANY territories it has acquired (illegally) by war. No one has been able to show me where, how, when and by what agreement territories captured by Israel 1948-49 became sovereign to Israel.

      • just
        just on April 12, 2014, 7:25 am

        “Israel has not yet legally acquired ANY territories it has acquired (illegally) by war. No one has been able to show me where, how, when and by what agreement territories captured by Israel 1948-49 became sovereign to Israel.”

        great point. I’d love an answer to this as well……

      • Walid
        Walid on April 13, 2014, 5:38 am

        Fun and games in progress in Jerusalem. Earlier in the week, settlers had served notice on Muslims to vacate the Haram. Today, they are actually attacking it.

        From Maan News:

        “Israeli forces storm Al-Aqsa compound, injuring 6 worshipers
        Published today (updated) 13/04/2014 10:45

        Palestinian men scuffle with Israeli police at an alleyway leading
        to the al-Aqsa Mosque compound on Feb. 25, 2014 in the
        Old City of Jerusalem.(AFP/Ahmad Gharabli)

        JERUSALEM (Ma’an) — Israeli forces stormed the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound on Sunday morning, attacking worshipers with stun grenades and rubber-coated steel bullets, as Muslim worshipers braced for raids by right-wing Jewish groups as Passover approaches.

        Director of Al-Aqsa Mosque Sheikh Omar al-Kiswani told Ma’an that more than 50 Israeli “special forces” stormed the compound through the Moroccan Gate and the Chain Gate during the raid.

        Al-Kiswani added that Israeli forces “besieged” Muslim worshipers with rubber-coated bullets and stun grenades, and closed the Chain Gate with chains.

        One of the Al-Aqsa compound security guards was struck by a rubber-coated bullet during the raid, and he was identified as Amjad al-Alami.

        In addition, five worshipers were hurt by pepper spray used by Israeli officers during the assault.

        Witnesses told Ma’an that Israeli forces had arrived in the early morning and stationed themselves near the Moroccan gate watching the movement of all worshipers inside the compound. The soldiers also denied right-wing Israeli groups access to the compound.”

      • Walid
        Walid on April 13, 2014, 6:58 am

        From the Palestinian Information Center:

        “Hamas calls for defending al-Aqsa Mosque
        [ 12/04/2014 – 03:30 PM ]

        GAZA, (PIC)– Hamas Movement has called for defending al-Aqsa Mosque in light of Israeli settlers’ intention to break into the mosque next Monday, warning the occupation of its aggression and violations in holy sites.

        Following Israeli extremist organizations’ threats to storm al-Aqsa Mosque to mark the Passover, Hamas movement warned occupation authority of its escalated violations and repeated aggressions against al-Aqsa Mosque in total provocation to Muslims’ feelings.

        In light of the US biased policy and international community’s silence, Israeli occupation has escalated attacks on al-Aqsa Mosque. However, the Palestinian people’s strong determination will foil these Israeli attempts to impose a status quo in the mosque, the movement’s statement said.

        Al-Aqsa Mosque is wholly owned by Muslims and it will never be temporally or spatially divided, the statement stressed.

        Hamas called on the PA to stop negotiations with the occupation in response to Israeli continued attacks and Judaization policy.

        The Islamic movement also called for intensifying Palestinian presence in al-Aqsa Mosque in face of all Israeli attempts to storm it particularly between 14-20 April.

        The statement called on Arab and Islamic countreis to intervene to defend al-Aqsa Mosque and support Jerusalemites’ steadfastness, and urged the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation to take urgent steps to protect the holy mosque before it is too late.”

    • puppies
      puppies on April 13, 2014, 1:44 am

      @just – Of course the Zionists know the demand for “Jewish state” recognition completely cancels the 1993 recognition. They’re not stupid that way.
      The point is, and people have to finally nail it into their bean, that the Zionists don’t care at all if the Palestinian leadership, or PA, or SP, or whatever they have in the OT under their control recognizes them or not, has demands or not. They have been uncommonly clear that they don’t give a shit about any understanding with any Palestinians as they are proceeding with their original program. They don’t need no stinkin’ recognition now that Oslo has reached its goal of eliminating the resistance.

      They will install more and more of their fanatic army of bloodthirsty settlers, they will build more, eating up all the rest of Palestine and cleansing it of its inhabitants.
      The request for recognition as a “Jewish” state is both a deliberate sabotage of all peace talks until the US comes licking their ass again next year, and a transparent message to the world that they will do whatever they want, on their own terms and calendar. Why shouldn’t they? They own the US and Netanyahu is way more powerful in the US than Obama.

  13. Citizen
    Citizen on April 12, 2014, 12:19 pm

    Here’s the list on those who urged the US to attack in PNAC fashion:
    Note Beinhart makes the list.

    • seanmcbride
      seanmcbride on April 12, 2014, 1:21 pm

      Citizen — that is an eye-opening list that will forever live in infamy, when one considers that the PNAC instigated the worst foreign policy disaster in American history (the Iraq War). Notice how many PNAC affiliates are leading pro-Israel activists — the PNAC was basically an Israeli op — now rebranded as the FPI (Foreign Policy Initiative) — and one of dozens of similar organizational tentacles of the neoconservative/neoliberal wing of the Israel lobby.

      For a list of some leading pro-Israel activists (many of them PNAC affiliates), see:

      By the way, I am as big a fan of lists and tables as ever — and your link is an especially well-organized one. Lists are sets of precise facts that permit one to see what is really going on in the world — often worth much more than volumes of vague opinionating.

    • Walid
      Walid on April 13, 2014, 2:32 am

      It’s be put into perspective that in 1997 the satanic PNAC was spawned from an earlier (1996) and even more satanic blueprint for war that had been prepared for Netanyahu called ” A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” by just about the same group of zio-neocons. The PNAC plan triggered the execution of Israel’s blueprint that was premised on the removal of Saddam and the subsequent toppling of the Syrian regime that is currently being attempted by the US and Gulf and Turkish friends for benefit of Israel.

      In 2003, in a NYT opinion piece it was written that:

      “… Douglas Feith and Richard Perle advised Netanyahu, who was prime minister in 1996, to make “a clean break” from the Oslo accords with the Palestinians. They also argued that Israeli security would be served best by regime change in surrounding countries. Despite the current mess in Iraq, this is still a commonplace in Washington. In Paul Wolfowitz’s words, “The road to peace in the Middle East goes through Baghdad.” It has indeed become an article of faith (literally in some cases) in Washington that American and Israeli interests are identical, but this was not always so, and “Jewish interests” are not the main reason for it now.

      … What we see, then, is not a Jewish conspiracy, but a peculiar alliance of evangelical Christians, foreign-policy hard-liners, lobbyists for the Israeli government and neoconservatives, a number of whom happen to be Jewish. But the Jews among them—Perle, Wolfowitz, William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, et al.—are more likely to speak about freedom and democracy than about Halakha (Jewish law). What unites this alliance of convenience is a shared vision of American destiny and the conviction that American force and a tough Israeli line on the Arabs are the best ways to make the United States strong, Israel safe and the world a better place.”

      • puppies
        puppies on April 13, 2014, 3:28 am

        @Walid – Buruma was fighting a strawman, of course. No, there is no Jewish conspiracy but that is no reason for hypothesizing a large and strange and soo diverse coalition. It is obviously a Zionist plan (conspiracy, if you will) straight from the handlers of the Shitty Spartan State, written for its government, and pushed through with the help of its stable allies.

  14. Walid
    Walid on April 13, 2014, 3:45 am

    Whatever became of Israel’s plan of favouring the Palestinian Christians’ status as non-Arabs?

    Today, Christians aged 35 and under are not permitted access to the Church of the Resurrection in Jerusalem for the Palm Sunday mass. Israelis are showing their idiotic side as Palm Sunday that is a feast commemorating the entrance of Jesus into Jerusalem for Passover, is intended mostly for children that enter or are carried by their parents into the church carrying candles.

Leave a Reply