Trending Topics:

The two-state solution is dead. Let us take the obvious and humane path forward

Opinion
on 149 Comments

One of the most obvious absurdities in the world of foreign policy is seeing what is considered serious. The people who want to continue funding massacres, genocides, and authoritarian regimes abroad frame their ideas in the sober language of realism, and earn plaudits from pundits and think tanks; those who propose the moral and obviously necessary alternatives are dismissed as unserious, among the cruelest insults in the world of foreign policy. Thus I do not expect the policy I will propose for Israel and Palestine to be taken seriously by the foreign policy establishment, which is too busy honoring Henry Kissinger to care much. But I will be frank with what I view as true seriousness on this important issue.

The very basic threshold for seriousness with regards to Israel/Palestine policy is one that no major party backs: the two-state solution is dead, and we have killed it.

The signs of its expiration are all around us. More than half a million Israeli settlers live (illegally) in Palestinian territory, and it would be politically, and logistically, impossible for them to be removed peacefully. The increasingly entrenched Israeli hard right—led by toxic figures like Ayelet Shaked and Naftali Bennett—openly advocates annexing “Area C,” which constitutes most of the West Bank. And the compromises that a two-state solution would require would not only be politically toxic for both Israeli and Palestinian leadership; they would also be disastrous in practice. It is not difficult to envision ethnic cleansing reminiscent of the massacres surrounding the partition of British India in 1947, as vast numbers of people scramble to cross arbitrary borders in short stretches of time.

With these deteriorating conditions constituting difficult obstacles, it stands to reason that if Bill Clinton and Barack Obama could not reach a working agreement, the particular charms of a Pete Buttigieg or Joe Biden won’t be able to, either. It is also apparent that a two-state solution would likely not be worth the bloodshed and chaos it would cause. So why keep up the charade? Most American diplomats will, in their more candid hours, admit that the two-state idea is long dead. Prudence dictates that America acknowledge that on the world stage and begin the search for other solutions.

The most obvious and humane path forward is the creation of a secular, democratic, binational state with equal rights for all. That is the model the U.S. government, with its partners in the region, should work toward and publicly highlight as the ideal outcome. This, like any real solution, would disappoint many, both those who want an official Palestinian national homeland and those who want an official Jewish homeland. But this is necessary. Both visions serve an abstract nationalism rather than the actual needs of Israelis and Palestinians living in the area, and a state along the lines of the idealized United States model, one with no prized ethnicity or religious character, is the solution all those seeking a humanitarian alternative should support. There would be no need for the byzantine arrangements (land swaps, dual city ownership, etc.) upon which most attempts to resolve the conflict have hinged: it would simply be the decision—an admittedly difficult one—to live together, Muslim, Jew, and Christian, in a peaceful, democratic, egalitarian society.

Of course, the sheer power of the Israel lobby in the United States is the main hurdle to such a radical departure from traditional blind support for Israel. Thus the Israel lobby should be restricted; it is time to free American policy from the shackles of AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee), ZOA (Zionist Organization of America), and other groups. AIPAC especially wields awe-inspiring power over Congress; the hysterical reaction to relatively mild criticism of the group by Rep. Ilhan Omar—criticism that stands out in large part because of the rarity of sitting federal officials criticizing that ship of fools—illustrates just how much influence it wields.

The first step should be mandating that AIPAC register as a foreign lobby under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). AIPAC manages to skirt American laws about foreign lobbying by claiming that it represents Americans who happen to support Israel. But the shockingly close ties between the governing Likud Party and AIPAC give a lie to this legal fiction; AIPAC will always stand closer to Israeli interests than American ones. (And no, despite Vice President Mike Pence’s claim that Israel’s “cause is our cause, her values are our values and her fight is our fight,” Israeli interests and American ones are not one and the same.) Such an arrangement would prevent AIPAC from influencing American elections, and would require it to report all of its contacts with Congress, along with details of its spending, to the Department of Justice.

Next, the U.S. should end military aid to Israel, citing the Israeli military’s complicity in crimes against the Palestinian people. It should call for a gradual demilitarization of Israel and Palestine, and should be clear with the Israeli government that the days of Israel-right-or-wrong are over. Future outrages by either side will receive an even-handed response without bias. Accordingly, it should demand that Israel bring itself into compliance with international law and end the harassment of dissidents like the liberal Zionist Peter Beinart or those who support the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

And the U.S. should refuse to take unconstitutional steps to stifle BDS. Whatever one’s personal thoughts on BDS, an individual or group’s decision not to associate with another group or country is a legitimate exercise of the freedoms of speech and association guaranteed by the Constitution, and using the power of the government to influence those decisions is wrong. Senators Amy Klobuchar and Cory Booker should be ashamed of themselves for supporting federal laws to restrict BDS. (It is perhaps no coincidence that Booker and the president of AIPAC “text message back and forth like teenagers,” by Booker’s own admission.)

What I’m calling for is, in fact, a moderate and sensible proposal; it is the current policy, of unbridled fondness for a government flirting openly with ethnic cleansing, that is radical and dangerous. The current policy is the exact one that George Washington warned against in his Farewell Address: “a passionate attachment of one nation for another,” the creation of “an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists.”

It’s time for a mature relationship with Israel, free of the cloying sentimentalities and tired banalities (“Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East”) that infest our political discourse surrounding it. America’s wanton indulgence of the whims of Benjamin Netanyahu and his fellow rightists will only redound to the harm of Israelis and Palestinians years down the line. It is too late to return to the fantasies of old, and high time to begin the projects of the new age. There are two possible futures for Israel and Palestine: one close to the vision of Isaiah—“nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more”—and one reminiscent of the prophecy of the Sibyl of Virgil’s Aeneid: “wars, horrendous wars,” the Jordan “foaming with tides of blood.” It’s a simple choice. Let’s choose peace.

Mike Gravel

Mike Gravel is a former Senator and a candidate running for president in 2020.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

149 Responses

  1. eljay on June 19, 2019, 3:12 pm

    Beautifully said, Mr. Gravel. If I were American, I’d vote for you. Since I’m Canadian, I’ll just wish you well in your campaign. The U.S. – and other countries – could use a lot more people like you.

    • LiberatePalestine on June 19, 2019, 6:33 pm

      I agree. Finally something intelligent on the subject has come out of US electoral politics. Some comments:

      → Thus I do not expect the policy I will propose for Israel and Palestine to be taken seriously by the foreign policy establishment, which is too busy honoring Henry Kissinger to care much.

      Of course the same reactionaries that honour genocidal criminal Henry Kissinger also support the genocidal, criminal Zionist entity.

      → More than half a million Israeli settlers live (illegally) in Palestinian territory,

      Actually, perhaps 6 or 7 million Israëli settlers live illegally in Palestinian territory, which is not limited to the West Bank and Gaza.

      → So why keep up the charade [of a two-state solution]?

      Because holding out the false promise of a two-state solution allows the genocidal, settler-colonial, Jewish-supremacist status quo to continue unabated.

      → The most obvious and humane path forward is the creation of a secular, democratic, binational state with equal rights for all.

      That is the correct option at this point. Undoing the terrible crime that is the Zionist project is no longer realistic, but establishing a single state for all of its residents is.

      → The first step should be mandating that AIPAC register as a foreign lobby under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

      AIPAC would simply reconstitute itself under a different name.

      • jon s on June 25, 2019, 11:40 am

        LP,
        Are there any Palestinians who support a secular democratic bi-national state?

      • LiberatePalestine on June 25, 2019, 12:17 pm

        Of course there are. Are there any Zionists who support the same?

      • mondonut on June 25, 2019, 1:20 pm

        @jon s, Are there any Palestinians who support a secular democratic bi-national state?

        Nobody of consequence. And not in great numbers. It is not the opinion of any political party or armed militia and not a widespread opinion of the populace.

        By and large the “secular democratic bi-national state” formulation is a charade put forth by the anti-Israel crowd (and many, many mondos) to give themselves a veneer of respectability while working to replace Israel with what the Palestinians really have in mind.

      • jon s on June 25, 2019, 3:48 pm

        Mondonut,
        If there is Palestinian support for a bi-national secular democratic state, that’s sensational news.
        I suspect that some people here are confusing “one state” with “bi-national state”.

      • Nathan on June 26, 2019, 7:27 am

        It’s quite ironic that an anti-Zionist (such as “LiberatePalestine”) would come out in favor of a bi-national state. When you call for a bi-national outcome, you are stating as self-evident that there are two national groups. So, which national groups does one have in mind? Obviously, the Jews are the one national group, and the Arabs are the other national group. The Zionist position has always been that the Jews are a nation, and the Arab response has always been that the Jews are a religious community. Therefore, the Arabs have always rejected bi-national proposals, just as they have rejected the idea of partition. Obviously, the former senator doesn’t understand the abc’s of the conflict, and neither do the commentators here who support an idea which is actually an admission that the Jews are in fact a national community.

        By the way, the main anti-Zionist ideology before the Holocaust was the Bund. Also the Bund defined the Jews as a nation, but their line of thought was that the Jews as a nation should participate in the future world revolution with the other nations. So, it turns out that one can be anti-Zionist while at the same time be in agreement that the Jews are indeed one of the nations of the world.

        Anyway, those Jews who felt that they wish to express their national identity through statehood succeeded in founding their state. Those outsiders who wish to convince them that they should now go for bi-nationalism with their enemies should try and explain why on earth such a plan is worth their while. Moreover, those outsiders should try and prove that there is a willingness on the part of the other nation in this bi-national arrangement to accept the very idea that the Jews are a nation with whom they wish to share a common homeland.

      • LiberatePalestine on June 26, 2019, 1:31 pm

        → It’s quite ironic that an anti-Zionist (such as “LiberatePalestine”) would come out in favor of a bi-national state.

        Why is that ironic? I am simply being practical. I’d prefer to remove all of the invaders from Palestine, thus leaving it with a Palestinian population including small but significant minorities of Palestinian Christians and Palestinian Jews. But removing the settler-colonial population from Palestine is scarcely more realistic than removing the settler-colonial population from North America. Under the circumstances, I go for the most workable option, which is a single Palestinian state for all of its residents.

        → When you call for a bi-national outcome, you are stating as self-evident that there are two national groups. So, which national groups does one have in mind? Obviously, the Jews are the one national group, and the Arabs are the other national group.

        Don’t put words in my mouth. First, it was not I who used the term binational. I consider that term inaccurate and inappropriate. Second, there are indeed two major national groups in Palestine, but they are not «the Jews» and «the Arabs»: they are the Israëlis and the Palestinians. There is no Jewish nation, but thanks to settler-colonialism there is now an Israëli nation, which I acknowledge every bit as much as any other nation. (Note that I use the word nation in an ethnographic sense, not a political one. Thus I don’t regard the US as a nation, just as a state or a polity.)

        → The Zionist position has always been that the Jews are a nation,

        The Zionist position has always been that the Jews should be a nation. The early Zionists sought to create a Jewish nation. Like the prevailing anti-Semitic goyim of their time and place, they agreed that the Jews had no business living in Europe and could never be assimilated there. I flatly reject that idea (as should anyone else who has seen where it led), but it was the basis of Zionism.

        Jews do not constitute a nation. Some subsets of Jews do constitute nations. But Jews collectively have no common language or culture, just a vague ancestral connexion to a religious heritage to which many of them do not subscribe.

        → and the Arab response has always been that the Jews are a religious community.

        Be careful with your reductionism. There is no single «Arab response».

        → Therefore, the Arabs have always rejected bi-national proposals,

        Not true.

        → just as they have rejected the idea of partition.

        Also not true. Even the compradors of the «Palestinian Authority» have proposed partition.

        → By the way, the main anti-Zionist ideology before the Holocaust was the Bund. Also the Bund defined the Jews as a nation,

        No, the Bund defined the Yiddish Jews as a nation. And it was right to do so.

        → Anyway, those Jews who felt that they wish to express their national identity through statehood succeeded in founding their state.

        A genocidal invasion sponsored by imperialism is an expression of national identity? You’re a fine candidate for the Euphemism of the Year Award.

        → Those outsiders who wish to convince them that they should now go for bi-nationalism with their enemies should try and explain why on earth such a plan is worth their while.

        First of all, this particular «outsider» doesn’t wish to convince them of anything. He could more usefully spend his time talking to a brick wall.

        Second, it is the Zionists who turned the Palestinians into «their enemies».

      • jon s on June 27, 2019, 10:36 am

        Nathan,
        I had intended to elaborate along the same lines regarding the bi-national concept so thank you for saving me the effort.
        Some background : In the 1930s and 1940s , before 1948, groups such as the Socialist-Zionist Hashomer Hatzair and the dovish Brit Shalom promoted the bi-national state idea. There were no takers on the Arab side, and few on the Jewish side. After 1948 and the establishment of Israel as a Jewish state the idea was seen as irrelevant.
        As to “secular” – the Palestinian goal is to establish an Islamic state . I’m not referring just to Hamas but also to mainstream PLO . See here, Article 4:
        https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Palestine_2005.pdf?lang=en

      • eljay on June 27, 2019, 12:04 pm

        || jon s: .. As to “secular” – the Palestinian goal is to establish an Islamic state . I’m not referring just to Hamas but also to mainstream PLO . … ||

        So…it’s the goal of Hamas and the PLO, but not the goal of all Palestinians.

        Regardless, the goal of a supremacist “Islamic State” is as wrong-headed as the goal of a supremacist “Jewish State”. I condemn both forms of supremacism, neither of which should exist.

      • LiberatePalestine on June 27, 2019, 6:37 pm

        Let’s be careful with our language here. «Jewish state» and «Islāmic state» are not parallel.

        By «Jewish state», the Zionists do not mean a state that imposes Jewish law on the population. The Zionist entity, by that standard, would not count as a Jewish state. What they mean is a state in which Jews are supreme. Juden, Juden über alles.

        «Islāmic state», by contrast, means a state that imposes Islāmic law. It does not mean a state that privileges Muslims.

        I oppose any sort of supremacist state, whichever group it may elevate. I also happen to oppose any sort of theocratic state, but not for the same reasons. A theocratic state that to some extent imposes Muslim, Jewish, Christian, or other religiously inspired laws on the whole population is at least defensible: after all, the laws of any society will tend to reflect the prevailing mores, some of which may stem from religious laws. But a régime of apartheid is not defensible at all.

      • eljay on June 27, 2019, 8:46 pm

        || LiberatePalestine: Let’s be careful with our language here. … ||

        We are being careful with our language here. The goal of a supremacist “Islamic State” is as wrong-headed as the goal of a supremacist “Jewish State” as neither state is the secular and democratic state of and for all of its citizens, immigrants, expats and refugees, equally.

      • LiberatePalestine on June 27, 2019, 9:51 pm

        As I said, I oppose all supremacist states, and indeed all forms of supremacy (whether backed by a state or not). A state that elevated Muslims, Palestinians, Arabs, green-eyed people, harpsichordists, or Type I diabetics over all others would be every bit as repugnant and intolerable as a «Jewish state».

      • oldgeezer on June 27, 2019, 11:24 pm

        @LiberatePalestine
        “the Zionists do not mean a state that imposes Jewish law on the population.”

        True but that is changing and it is headed in that direction.

        Israel is unhinged in my opinion. It’s leadership count amongst themselves the most publicly vile racists on the planet. By that I mean well known and upfront about their obscene bigotry. Their supporters equally vile.

        There are no doubt worse, little known racists but they aren’t sitting there with nukes wrecking the lives of millions of innocent civilians.

      • RoHa on June 28, 2019, 1:06 am

        Why do you hate green-eyed, diabetic, harpsichordists? Surely they should have a state of their own.

      • echinococcus on June 28, 2019, 6:11 am

        Liberate,

        “I oppose any sort of supremacist state, whichever group it may elevate.”

        It seems that the thoughts you expressed to accompany your statement have not (as usual) been addressed at all by Eljay.

        The absence of equality before the law of all, and harsh discrimination against the population that owns the territory, is but one aspect of the Zionist crime against humanity.

        The other important aspect, in fact the consideration that takes precedence over this, is that the victims of such discrimination and all those exiled by Zionists since 1897 at the latest) are the sole owners of the country, who collectively can decide in its name.

        The invader population has no rights at all to even be in the country, let alone have equal rights with the invaded owners. Except, of course, if so stipulated by the collective Palestinian people, including all its forced diaspora, in the absence of military occupation, control, or any other duress. Which is not forthcoming.

        The wordplay by Eljay tries to call “Supremacism” the imprescribable, basic right of a people to refuse entry to invaders and robbers, and to seek full remedy. This comedy of requesting equal rights for a population of invaders who have exerted the most brutal post-WW2 military occupation and genocidal practice must be denounced. The attempt to equate racial supremacism, theocracy, etc. with the right of peoples to determine the fate of their very own territory is a dangerous distortion that only serves to reinforce Zionist propaganda.

      • LiberatePalestine on June 28, 2019, 10:04 am

        → The invader population has no rights at all to even be in the country, let alone have equal rights with the invaded owners.

        True, but after a while it becomes difficult to oust the invaders. If this were 1952 or 1955, I would happily expel the entire invading population, including its descendants, manu militari. Today, however, that would be impractical and even unjust. Who counts as an «invader» is no longer clear, what with immigration of various types, intermarriage, and so on.

      • eljay on June 29, 2019, 8:21 am

        || LiberatePalestine: … after a while it becomes difficult to oust the invaders. If this were 1952 or 1955, I would happily expel the entire invading population, including its descendants, manu militari. Today, however, that would be impractical and even unjust. … ||

        For daring to suggest that many (most?) of the Jews currently in Palestine should not be expelled from the region – for daring to suggest that to do such a thing might be unjust – you may have gotten yourself added to echi’s “shit list”.  :-(

        Welcome aboard.  :-)

      • oldgeezer on June 29, 2019, 10:41 am

        @eljay

        It’s getting crowded on this boat!

      • oldgeezer on June 29, 2019, 3:38 pm

        @LiberatePalestine
        “Today, however, that would be impractical and even unjust. ”

        I fail to see the unjust part. Certainly under law their tend to be time limitations but they would likely not apply in this scenario since the time typically stops when a claim is made and not when it is resolved.

        The UN, ICJ, UNSC, etc have always pronounced and reiterated that Israeli activities are illegal. Even Israel’s own legal advice was that they settlement project was illegal. For the many tens of thousands of US citizens the US State department always published warnings about the illegality of the settlements to those departing for Israel. Perhaps they still do.

        To suggest that Israel and these individuals would face injustice if they were stripped of their ill gotten gains.

        To remove them is imprtactical of course.

        Two states on 67 lines. All settlements become part of Palestine. Israelis may remain and take Palestinian citizenship. Should they choose to return to Israel then it’s up to Israel to compensate them. Since the land was stolen the house must be left in good repair or brought up to good repair at Israel’s expense and subsequently sold to a Palestinian.

        I know it won’t fly with Israel but the reality is there should be a price they pay for 70 years of crminality and human rights abuses.

        Anything else is injustice.

      • echinococcus on June 29, 2019, 7:13 pm

        Eljay,

        No, you aren’t in the same club as Liberate.

        You have been affirming a right of the invaders to remain squatting in Palestine: you keep calling for equal rights to invaders and invadees alike. You completely ignore the fact that the objection is not to invaders/offspring remaining as residents in Palestine but to their doing so without formal approval by plebiscite of the entire Palestinian people, including the diaspora ejected since 1897. No one can make decisions in their stead, period.

        Liberate is saying that expulsion would be “impractical and even unjust”, of which the first is certainly true and the second probably true in a restricted number of individual cases.

        “Impractical” is no objection, though, as there is not a wisp of a shadow of an idea that the USZionist invaders will consent to anything peacefully. Anyone thinking in that direction needs a shrink; there is no way anything is going to happen if not manu militari. Any progress is impractical. Any step backward by Zionists is impractical.

        “Unjust” has a true and tried remedy, as in Algeria: an offer of Palestinian citizenship conditioned on a statement of allegiance to the Palestinian nationality. That’s unlikely to be rejected by the people.

      • echinococcus on June 29, 2019, 7:23 pm

        Liberate,

        Also see the answer directed at Eljay.
        This is only to address who counts as invader offspring: that is something already very clearly regulated by customary rules of citizenship transmittal, family reunification, etc. No different, say, than my right to French and Italian citizenship through parents and grandparents, and my wife’s right to a US passport.

      • Mooser on June 30, 2019, 6:03 pm

        “Are there any Palestinians who support a secular democratic bi-national state?” “Jon s”

        Gee, I would think a “classic Israeli Left” person like “Jon s” would be in touch with those groups and constantly reaching out to them. Instead he denies they could even exist.

        That’s some Left you got going there, Jonny.

      • echinococcus on June 30, 2019, 9:02 pm

        Liberate Palestine,

        It looks as if I spoke too early, saying “see my answer addressed to Eljay”. The Censor is sitting on it, trying to decide if Weiss will give me a right of response.

      • LiberatePalestine on June 30, 2019, 11:28 pm

        The rules respecting the transmission of citizenship are not customary; in most jurisdictions, they are legislated. Many jurisdictions apply jus solis or jus sanguinis but not both. Even those that apply jus sanguinis differ on the number of generations that are eligible for citizenship on the basis of descent. There are also special rules galore, such as Liberia’s limitation of citizenship to those of «the Negro race» (Liberia, as far as I know, is the only remaining state with a thoroughly racist policy on citizenship) and the Zionist entity’s special dispensations to those whom it regards as Jews.

        Back to the question. I doubt whether you can devise an acceptable way to determine, in 2019, who in Palestine is an «invader» and who is not. You could probably draw that distinction in a principled way for 95% of the population, but there would be plenty of difficult cases, such as children of ethnically mixed couples, non-Jewish immigrants, people some (but not all) of whose ancestors were Jews established in Palestine before the Nakba…

        In addition, unless we adopt Jehovah’s policy of visiting the iniquity of the father upon the sons unto the third and fourth generation, we cannot reasonably call someone an «invader» on the basis of descent from invaders. What we can say is that, whether any individual Israëli is an invader or not, the Israëlis collectively constitute a settler-colonial population that cannot be allowed to maintain its apartheid régime or otherwise violate the rights and interests of the Palestinians (and for that matter the other groups in Palestine).

        Anyway, the expulsion en masse of the settler-colonial population in Palestine simply isn’t going to happen. Any proposal that requires it is therefore unrealistic.

        In no way will I whitewash the genocidal Zionist project or excuse settler-colonialism. But we have to be realistic. We’re past the point at which «expel the invaders» is a viable solution.

      • LiberatePalestine on July 1, 2019, 12:36 pm

        A lot will have to happen before we can speak of equality in Palestine. Formal equality in law will not suffice. Blacks and whites in the US have formal but not substantive equality.

        In principle, there can be no objection to the forced expulsion of the entire settler-colonial population by a victorious Palestinian army. The injustice that would result for a minority would pale in comparison to the injustice of Zionist apartheid and genocide. If that’s what it takes to eliminate Zionist settler-colonialism, I’m in favour.

        The best solution now is a single Palestinian state, secular and dedicated to achieving substantive equality. That will mean reallocating land and other resources in order to rectify some of the injustices of Zionist settler-colonialism. All Palestinians everywhere, including the refugees and their descendants, will have the right to return. Jews not from Palestine will not enjoy any «right of return»: they will have to apply for immigration like any other foreigners.

      • echinococcus on July 1, 2019, 1:20 pm

        Liberate,

        It’s extremely clear who an invader is: a person who establishes residence in Palestine within the collective colonial project, from the moment it declared its aim of subverting its sovereignty.

        Allowing American-style unqualified jus soli to their offspring would mean voiding all international law that forbids settler conquest, period. All other cases (most of them exceptional) can be solved by the customary rules, of proving descent from a legitimate, Pre-Zionism, resident, or marriage to, or adoption by, a legitimate Palestinian, etc.

        No need to complicate things by citing all the unusual or non-unanimous or slightly varying dispositions of citizenship laws.

        Anyway, exactly which rules the Palestinian people want to apply is something to be decided by them in an exercise of self-determination. Given the highly unlikely absence of occupation or other duress and the absolute likelihood of extreme violence of any solution, a plebiscite will probably not occur; one can only hope for some minimal collective wisdom.

        In Algeria, the most relevant precedent, mass expulsion was not applied; mass self-expulsion of colonists and collaborators took care of that. There is no way to imagine how it will go in Palestine but one thing is certain: “selling one’s birthright for a mess of pottage has never been advisable” as you say yourself in one of your posts today. On top of which, invoking “impracticality” for doing so, where every step is already highly impractical, sounds a bit off.

      • echinococcus on July 1, 2019, 1:50 pm

        Old Geezer,

        You mustn’t be old at all if you continue to believe that history starts in 1967 AD…
        This was a discussion on the Zionist occupation of Palestine.

      • LiberatePalestine on July 1, 2019, 7:13 pm

        Again, if this were 1947, 1957, even 1967 or so, I would fully endorse expelling all of the invaders (going back to 1947, perhaps earlier) and their descendants as well.

        Today, however, with three generations of descendants of settler-colonial invaders and a newly developed Israëli nation in occupied Palestine, I cannot see that as reasonable. Do you also propose to throw all of the haole and other non-Hawai‘ians out of settler-occupied Hawai‘i? or all of the non-Indigenous people (to the extent that who is «Indigenous» can be determined) out of settler-occupied North America?

        I say that it’s simply too late for any of that. Some wrongs just can’t be set right through the obvious means. Indeed, even if all «invaders» were driven out of Palestine and North America, they would still owe huge debts—debts that they could never pay.

        That doesn’t mean that we give up and accept the settler-colonial status quo. It means that we have to find other ways to address the problem. Sending fourth-generation Israëlis «back to» Roumania or Poland is not fair or reasonable. The best that we can do is to establish a single secular state in all of Palestine, ensure the rights of all Palestinians to return to Palestine, disarm the settler population, and redistribute resources in order to achieve equality as quickly as possible.

        Probably a lot of Israëli pieds noirs would leave. Most of them have dual citizenship.

      • oldgeezer on July 1, 2019, 8:06 pm

        @ech

        You really do the best Don Quixote impression I have ever witnessed. Kudos

      • annie on July 1, 2019, 9:12 pm

        ha ha ha! perfect oldgeezer!

      • wondering jew on July 1, 2019, 10:28 pm

        Liberate- “most of them have dual citizenship”. This may be true. This may be false. Asserting a speculation as if it is fact is poor form. If you have facts or a link to back this up, it would be appreciated.

      • LiberatePalestine on July 2, 2019, 12:37 am

        → This may be true. This may be false.

        Since you have seized upon that one inconsequential point without commenting on the rest of what I have said, I take it that you agree with me on everything else.

      • Mooser on July 2, 2019, 1:59 pm

        “perfect oldgeezer!”

        Yup.

      • GusCall on July 3, 2019, 7:56 am

        Mike Gravel for President! (even if he somewhat confuses bi-nationalism and one secular state)
        I agree with almost all of the posts from >LiberatePalestine. I especially like his use of the term ‘Zionist entity’ and his insistance, just above, that all of Israel/Palestine is ‘Palestinian territory’ and thus there are at least 6 million illegal occupants there. This is the shift of narrative that is needed.
        Some people on this thread are evidently totally ignorant of the hundreds of Palestinians who support either bi-nationalism or One Democratic State. The Palestinian leaders from 1918 on supported it, and only rejected the bi-nationalism, based on parity and the claim of collective rights, offered them by such as Judah Magnes in the 1930s. Recent advocates who have written whole books or articles for ODS: Mazin Qumsiyeh, Ghada Karmi, Ali Abunimah, Saree Makdisi, Nur Masalha, Susan Abulhawa, Awad Abdelfatah, Radi Jarai, Joseph Massad and dozens of others.
        ODS would expel absolutely nobody although it would restore land to its rightful Palestinian owners.

    • JWalters on June 19, 2019, 7:05 pm

      Fully agree. A statement of eloquent common sense. Much needed and very valuable. Here’s a highly interesting, recent interview with Senator Gravel.
      “Mike Gravel Smashes War Machine With Facts”

    • RoHa on June 19, 2019, 10:47 pm

      Mike Gravel does seem to be an intelligent and decent man. Obviously not fit to be president.

    • Misterioso on June 20, 2019, 11:56 am

      Bravo Mr. Gravel!!

      Well and truly stated.

      The road ahead is winding and full of pot holes, but in the long run as the Zionist zealots die off, the current rapidly growing alienation of young American Jews from “Israel” will increase in intensity as will that of non-Jewish Americans and others around the world who are disgusted with and enraged at the expansionist/criminal “Jewish state,” a product of 19th century racist settler colonialism.

      Despite only about 150,000 left in their homeland after well over one million were dispossessed and expelled between late 1947 and 1967, Palestinians already outnumber Jews between the River and the Sea and while their numbers continue to grow, the Jewish population is in decline due to plummeting immigration and growing emigration.

      A blood bath and mass expulsion of Palestinians will not be tolerated by the world. Most telling is that it’s now 71 years since borderless, expansionist “Israel” was established and it is still dependent on massive contributions from American taxpayers. The writing is on the wall. It’s only a matter of time before one democratic state is established. It’s the only real workable solution.

      • echinococcus on June 20, 2019, 3:58 pm

        Misterioso,

        “A blood bath and mass expulsion of Palestinians will not be tolerated by the world.”

        How could the entire history of unlimited tolerance of the selfsame “world” for all crimes against Palestinians be compatible with this statement?

        Who is gonna bite Netanyahoo in protest, the King of Marshall Islands?

      • LiberatePalestine on June 21, 2019, 3:36 am

        → A blood bath and mass expulsion of Palestinians will not be tolerated by the world.

        Haven’t they been tolerated for seventy-odd years?

    • genesto on June 20, 2019, 12:50 pm

      Excellent! The man has it nailed on the issue!

      Time to support Bernie Sanders for President with Gravel as his Secretary of State!

      • echinococcus on June 20, 2019, 3:29 pm

        Sure. Support a warmongering mountebank and give him a sincere antiwar Sec of State. That’s a formula for success.

  2. Citizen on June 19, 2019, 3:44 pm

    He’s not going to be joining in the Democrat candidates panel tv debate at the end of this month.

    • JWalters on June 19, 2019, 7:11 pm

      A pity. It would be a great value to the entire country to watch him blow away the bankster “Democrats” like Harris and Buttigag.

      • echinococcus on June 20, 2019, 3:33 pm

        Walters,

        No need for scare quotes. The Democratic Party is the administrative tool of US imperialism and war, has never done anything undesirable to the owners of the country and won’t ever in the future, either (unless you have some secret documentation.) So these persons are all Democrats, the label not being reserved to only deluded peons who think they can countermand the Owners of the Country.

  3. Kay24 on June 19, 2019, 5:43 pm

    I agree with what has been said, but the question is, the Palestinians would not want to live among vicious settlers, some terrorists, who have attacked their people, and even killed a family while they were sleeping. They are not going to live peacefully, and make it easy for these long suffering people.

    • echinococcus on June 20, 2019, 3:38 pm

      Kay,

      Thank you for this level-headed comment that exposes the illogic of both the “two-state” farce and the “one democratic state with equal rights for invaders and owners of the country” nonsense.

      One would think that before such equal rights, anyone should talk of reality, i.e. equal power.

      • Kay24 on June 20, 2019, 6:00 pm

        The only hope is for a two state solution, and complete independence from each other. The occupier will somehow make things difficult for the Palestinians, and use their weapons to terrorize and steal. It is in their DNA to be vicious and arrogant.

      • echinococcus on June 21, 2019, 2:18 am

        “Make things difficult”? Who, pray, is going to give the Palestinians a real state, with as much weaponry, US support, US military personnel and worldwide diverted money as the Zionist entity? What kind of a cruel joke is this? “Two states” (negotiations) is a technical name for the mumbo-jumbo needed by the European governments and assorted boobies to excuse the fact that the genocide of Palestinians and appropriation of their remaining land and goods can proceed undisturbed. It also stands as a lame excuse for the puppet USZionist Oslo-imposed police administration in post-67 occupied Palestine.

        Right after having a clear insight, don’t destroy it with fairy-tale belief. No, they won’t allow two (real) states. Palestine one day will be bitterly fought for –provided the genocide isn’t successfully completed before that.

      • Sibiriak on June 21, 2019, 2:31 am

        Neither two states nor one democratic state (in the foreseeable future):
        ———————————————————————————————————–

        MB. on June 8, 2012:

        […] The Israelis are quite right to fear the one state solution — they know, very well, the ceaseless humiliations that they have heaped on the Arabs, and they fear that the Arabs will never, ever forgive them, and will never turn the other cheek. They are right — most Israelis, surely, must know what they have done. I am not suggesting Israelis feel guilty or sorry about it — they are racist supremacists — but they know very well Arabs will not forgive them.

        It is not at all the same case as when West and East Africa was handed back to its original African owners — in those cases, the white population, annoyed and peeved that they could no longer enjoy their manicured lawns, cucumber sandwich garden parties, cricket, evening cocktails and ‘England in the summer’ lifestyle, simply packed up their colonial bags and returned to the rolling fields of Southern England or France. Think about it — how many of the original white population of settlers stayed and worked with the new African governments? Very few — an eccentric white tea planter here or there, or a working class white electrician or engineer, with little to go back to in Europe remained — but not a great amount of white people remained in Kenya, Malawi, Zambia, and even fewer white people remained in Nigeria, Niger, Mozambique Algeria, Morocco, etc.

        In Southern Africa it was different — the white settlers had deeper roots going back to the late 1600’s, and had developed a rural white peasantry, a working class and an affluent middle class, who had long severed their European roots. And in these countries, the black populations usually lived in chronic under class slum poverty, servitude, and even lived quasi hunter gather rural lives, a state for the most part, worse than the serf status of Europe in the 1600’s, with no education and no real means of taking organised, directed revenge beyond numerous random gruesome stabbings and lynching of white people, etc, which did happen in South Africa.

        In Israel though, it is different — you have a literate, well educated, powerful Arab population, with a long and enlightened cultural memory, with a sense of identity and dignity that goes far further back than the middle ages, a sense of pride, supported by very powerful connections worldwide, and all of these Arabs know they have had their faces shoved in the dirt and trash for decades — and they will not live in peace with those who turned up from Poland and Russia, Paris and Brooklyn, stole their homes and then proceeded to intentionally hurt everything sacred to them.

        The Israelis know that, and thus will not accept one state — that is the truth.

        Also, as Shahak and other have shown, Israeli society, culture, and religion is riddled with racism, prejudice and exclusion – the Israelis would never accept being on equal footing with ‘the other’. Not only that, many of Israel’s immigrant population hail from Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine, Russia, Moldova, Poland — ALL of these countries are deeply, deeply racist, macho, inward look, excluding societies, mired in ethno centric nationalism, and exclusion of the ‘other’, and the Jewish immigrants have carried that racism with them to Israel.

        Do you think Ukrainians and Poles and Moldovans would ever accept equal rights with Arabs — never. Israelis will not either.

        Two states is not going to happen — the Jews have contempt for the very idea of giving up, or sharing the land. One state isn’t going to happen either.

        https://mondoweiss.net/2012/06/a-debate-about-the-two-state-solution-with-norman-finkelstein/

      • LiberatePalestine on June 21, 2019, 4:08 am

        → Think about it — how many of the original white population of settlers stayed and worked with the new African governments?

        And the Rhodesians of occupied Palestine will also flee. Many hold the citizenship of a European or North American state; they could easily pull up stakes and leave. Indeed, the settlers are already emigrating from Palestine in droves. And they’re not being replaced. The Zionist entity got a bit of a reprieve in the early 1990s when hordes of «Jews» immigrated to Palestine, but today immigration is low. What Zionists call the «demographic threat» bears witness to the fact that the Zionist project was always wrong: it was predicated upon the dispossession, expulsion, and destruction of the established population. The Zionists’ failure to make Palestine Jewish even after a century of imperialist-sponsored invasion, ethnic cleansing, apartheid, and genocide shows that it was never «a land without a people».

      • wondering jew on June 22, 2019, 12:19 am

        Israel is one of the most crowded countries on earth. So people are moving away, but they are procreating like rabbits and filling up the land at the same time. In fact there are too many people in Israel: too many Jews and too many Muslims and it would be better for the Jewish people if more Israelis moved away. There is only one problem: there must be more of “us” than there are of “them”. only in terms of the demographic competition is there a problem that too many are moving away. otherwise it is preferable that more move away, because the place is overpopulated.

      • echinococcus on June 22, 2019, 3:52 pm

        Here the wisdom of the day, from Wandering Fredman:
        “Israel is one of the most crowded countries on earth”

        Duh. If you were a country with 50% invader population, with invader immigration open to the wide world, you’d be most crowded, too. So tell me, instead of leaving after having invaded –because it’s become too crowded to your taste, why not avoid invading, like plain human logic would suggest in the first place?

        I suppose that you people are preparing a genocide defense in the form of “we had become too crowded to keep any Ayrabs in the Holy Eretz, so much so that Jews were emigrating”.

      • eljay on June 22, 2019, 6:26 pm

        || wondering jew: … There is only one problem: there must be more of “us” than there are of “them”. … ||

        That’s what happens when your focus is:
        – on carving up a geographic region in order to establish in as much as possible of it it a religion-supremacist state for people who choose to embrace a chosen (no pun intended) identity;
        – not on establishing a secular and democratic state of and for all people living in and up to n-generations removed from that geographic region.

      • RoHa on June 23, 2019, 1:31 am

        “Israel is one of the most crowded countries on earth.”

        Not to worry. There is plenty of lebensraum between the Nile and the Euphrates.

      • Mooser on June 23, 2019, 1:24 pm

        “In fact there are too many people in Israel: too many Jews…” “wj”

        It never fails, does it? You can always count on a Zionist to think there are “too many Jews”!

        “Yonah” knows that our value depends on our scarcity, like any other commodity.

      • jackal on June 23, 2019, 8:29 pm

        Robert Fisk, one of the greatest war-time journalists of the 20th and 21st centuries, attempts to dissect the Middle East wars in both his books, “Pity the Nation” and “The Great War for Civilization” and fails because there is no plausible conclusion to be had. The Muslim Shiites hate the Muslim Sunnis, the Saudi Arabs really don’t like the Palestinian Arabs, the Iranians hate the Iraqis, the Afghans don’t like the Turks and, the Israelis have been attempting to obliterate the Palestinians for over 70 years now, because of course, God gave them the land thousands of years ago. But it all boils down to the vast amount of oil in a number of these countries and the desire to control either the oil or the land or both. Can you really imagine a God sitting on his throne, watching all of this with love in his heart, if such a God really has a heart as Genesis suggests and doing nothing while millions of people are killed, many of them innocent women and children? When people eventually realize that there is no “God” will they still go at it hammer and tong?
        I totally agree with that great unknown British Parliamentarian who said, “There are a lot of stupid people in this world.”

      • RoHa on June 24, 2019, 12:34 am

        You should thank the Zionists, Mooser. If they keep going, you’ll soon be worth the really big bucks.

      • LiberatePalestine on June 24, 2019, 5:51 am

        → God gave them the land thousands of years ago.

        According to Jewish mythology, «God» drove them out of the land on account of their own impiety.

        → Can you really imagine a God sitting on his throne, watching all of this with love in his heart, if such a God really has a heart as Genesis suggests and doing nothing while millions of people are killed, many of them innocent women and children?

        According to Jewish mythology, «God» smiled as the Israëlites genocidally «smote» the various other ethnic groups living in Palestine.

      • Mooser on June 24, 2019, 11:18 am

        “According to Jewish mythology, «God» smiled….”

        But if you look at the picture, it’s a very sad kind of smile.

      • jon s on June 25, 2019, 7:17 am

        This may disappoint some commenters here but immigration to Israel reached a low point around ten years ago but has increased in recent years:
        https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/total-immigration-to-israel-by-year
        https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-immigration-to-israel-up-5-in-2018-1001266944
        On the whole the population of Israel is growing nicely and is now over 9 million.

      • eljay on June 25, 2019, 10:49 am

        || jon s: This may disappoint some commenters here but immigration to Israel … has increased in recent years … ||

        This will disappoint all Jewish / “Jewish State” supremacists (Zionists) but ~21% of Israelis are not Jewish.  :-(

      • Mooser on June 25, 2019, 2:03 pm

        Israel is headed straight for a military-religious coup.

    • oldgeezer on June 22, 2019, 10:39 pm

      @wondering jew

      “Israel is one of the most crowded countries on earth. ”

      It’s about the same as Belgium. And singnificantly less than Gaza. Belgium seems to be doing fine. Might I suggest Israeli leaders visit the Hague to see how it’s done? Not a short decade but hopefully the rest of their lives.

      Give it up you drama queen and apologist for crimes against humanity.

      • RoHa on June 24, 2019, 12:36 am

        The Hague? Brussels, surely.

      • oldgeezer on June 24, 2019, 11:16 am

        @RoHa

        Oops! Netherlands. Sentiments remain unchanged.

    • MHughes976 on June 23, 2019, 1:25 pm

      The World Bank gives the population density of Israel as 403/km.sq., which is closely comparable to that of Southeast England excluding London, an area which is still very pleasant to live in, the numbers being manageable, it seems, if there is a fair amount of economic activity.

  4. mondonut on June 19, 2019, 9:31 pm

    How wonderful.

    Mike Gravel has decided the only solution among right thinking, virtue signaling people is to put an end to Israel itself. And then to piously claim that nobody will listen to little old me because I am so right and they are so wrong.

    As if the end result would not be exactly what the Palestinians intend for it to be. Egalitarian society, my ass.

    • bcg on June 20, 2019, 11:54 am

      @Mondonut: Ok, what’s your proposal? I have yet to hear from the graduates of Hasbara U how this is all supposed to end (except for a few who openly call for the expulsion of all Palestinians).

      • genesto on June 20, 2019, 12:53 pm

        Absolutely right. The ‘game plan’ for the Zionists consists of nothing more than continued ethnic cleansing and crisis management. That’s a formula for disaster for all concerned.

      • mondonut on June 20, 2019, 1:43 pm

        @bcg Ok, what’s your proposal?

        Firstly, Israel remains Israel and Jerusalem remains Israeli. Then if Gaza can overthrow the warlords that are occupying it, it becomes Palestine along with whatever Palestinian controlled parts of the West Bank are inclined to join them. The West Bank can in whole or in part choose union and citizenship with Israel, Jordan or Palestine. The states and parties involved can cede or swap whatever land they are inclined to. Long term, Israel, Jordan and Palestine seek an economic union.

    • echinococcus on June 20, 2019, 3:41 pm

      “As if the end result would not be exactly what the Palestinians intend for it to be”

      From your mouth to god’s ear.

  5. Nathan on June 19, 2019, 10:35 pm

    “More than half a million Israeli settlers live (illegally) in Palestinian territory, and it would be politically, and logistically, impossible for them to be removed peacefully”.

    So, because of the settlements, we must go for the one-state solution. It should be clear then that the settlements will stay put within the framework of the one-state solution (because their existence is the justification of the one-state solution). Now, if it is agreed that the settlements stay, then they are legal. Obviously, if the settlements are regarded to be illegal, then they’ll have to be removed, right? When they will be removed, it would be possible to return to the two-state solution.

    It should be clear to the supporters of the one-state solution that they also support the legalizing of the settlements from THEIR point of view. Of course, I’m not really that naive. If and when the day comes and there is an agreement to live in one state, not too surprisingly we shall hear that the settlements are nevertheless illegal, and they must be removed. The proposal for a single state based on the “impossible removal” of the settlements is in reality just silly propaganda. The two-state solution means the permanent existence of Israel, and that’s an unthinkable outcome of the conflict from the point of view of the anti-Israel world. So, let’s pretend that the public is stupid, and let’s tell them that the settlements can stay (and the Jews can stay) within the one-state solution (but in reality we all know that the conflict will remain unresolved).

    • Brewer on June 20, 2019, 12:54 am

      There are precedents for the dismantling of post-colonial racist states.
      The most likely scenario is that the racist elements will disperse. In Israel’s case, those dual citizens among the settlers will return to Europe and the U.S. voluntarily
      As Palestine matures as a state for all its people, legislation will be introduced to recompense the indigenous population for past losses and a general reconciliation process will commence. It is actually not that painful.
      Here is a good model:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waitangi_Tribunal

      • echinococcus on June 20, 2019, 3:50 pm

        Brewer

        You don’t seem to know the Zionists (the lower, cannon fodder level.)
        “..those dual citizens among the settlers will return to Europe and the U.S. voluntarily.” That’s of course ardently to be wished (except if they become your neighbors, tough luck) but the percentage of reasonable people is not in any way comparable to that in other countries, say SA.
        Settlers they all are, anyway, and all have the right to another citizenship.
        Also, where is the authorization for these invaders to remain squatting, issued by a clear majority of the owners of the country in the absence of any duress?

      • Brewer on June 20, 2019, 7:13 pm

        @echinococcus
        Granted but I do know – grew up among – die-hard kiwi blokes who were utterly blind to the validity of indigenous culture and claims.
        That has now changed in Aotearoa New Zealand. It is difficult to pinpoint the agent of change but I will hazard a few possibilities.
        1. The State took the lead with the Waitangi Tribunal and I urge readers to study its model. As indigenous groups expressed satisfaction with full and final settlement, confidence grew (among Pakeha*) that such settlement could be achieved – that is to say, they began to realize that the claims were reasonable and finite.
        2. A number of writers (Michael King in particular) raised awareness through publishing popular biographies and Historical accounts. Through these, the “other’s” point of view became comprehensible.
        3. 4th and 5th generation Pakeha (such as my own family – pioneering stock) found themselves more comfortable with a new generation of more integrated Maori leaders than with more recent immigrants (think Misrahim versus settlers).
        4. Intermarriage and a new attitude to the whole idea of mixed race became not just acceptable but desirable, there was a paradigm shift in the aesthetic as the inescapable fact of Polynesian beauty and intellect became a component of the ideal.

        I’m tempted to apologize for this brief, disjointed attempt to explain a complex process. As I re-read what I have written I see vast gaps – each item warrants a full essay. Suffice it to say that, in my opinion, the process of reconciliation requires more than a Western, purely material, approach. More important is the acknowledgement of past wrongs and the acceptance of the validity of the “other’s” culture, values and yes, aesthetic.

        Zionism is a material culture. For all its claim to spiritual values, it is rooted in possession of real estate. It will fail.

        *New Zealanders of European descent

      • Mooser on June 20, 2019, 11:25 pm

        “Brewer” – Interesting and informing, thanks.

      • echinococcus on June 21, 2019, 2:07 am

        Brewer,

        No need to convince me, as with the little I know I always admired the example of NZ in fixing colonial damage. Small and remote enough to be ignored and obscured by our worldwide genocidaire thinking, would bad tongues add. I’ve no truck with that but again, you don’t know the Zionists. Kiwis were initially just common-or-garden colonists out to make a comfortable living with the help of local sweat, somewhat contradicted by their need to recreate home country, with the locals kept out of sight. Not a fanatic mob indoctrinated from birth to keep all of Palestine to themselves,no matter if by expelling the owners laterally or vertically, as long as it’s all theirs. Because it was promised by a god, or the superior right of an invented Romantic/Germanic Nation. So you assume that there can ever be a state there to issue instructions for a Waitangi Tribunal. The hardcore Zionists will make sure we get an Algeria at the very least.

      • Brewer on June 21, 2019, 5:05 am

        @echinococcus
        I understand your cynicism, sympathize with it. I tend however, to the idea that mindsets are malleable and the human biocomputer is susceptible to the influence of ideas, no matter how divergent from the imprint of cultural archetypes and religion. Change is the only constant in the Universe. That the Jewish tradition is not immune is evident in these pages.
        Hard-line racist ideologies are in decline to the extent that even I sometimes become concerned that the most meritorious aspects of my European culture might become submerged in a melange of compromise.
        The propaganda efforts of the hard-line Zionists are, in essence, an effort to keep Zionism fashionable. Fashions change. Those who cling to them become irrelevant anachronisms. The “fanatic mob indoctrinated from birth to keep all of Palestine to themselves” is rapidly going out of fashion.
        The aesthetic features high in my estimation of the various powers influential in these matters.

      • echinococcus on June 21, 2019, 12:13 pm

        I’d be delighted to be proven wrong, Brewer. In fact, I’ll eat my hat or go to church or something like that in that eventuality. But then, how you describe these Zionists tells me that you haven’t yet met them massively and in the flesh.
        Also, reports of their going out of fashion is the kind of news that we only see in Mondoweiss. When they go out of fashion where it counts for power, that would be huge news. Anyway, I suppose that people need some hope to survive, even if the hoped-for event is almost as unlikely as the presence of supranatural beings.

      • Brewer on June 22, 2019, 5:52 pm

        Yeah I fully appreciate the difficulty and am aware of the intractability of the zealots – not just Zionists but also fundamentalist Christians, some of whom I have in my own family.
        What I have written here is not so much a prediction with a fixed time-line, it is a description of the way in which such seemingly intractable problems can cease to exist and almost inevitably will.
        When is an altogether different story but there are signs that the tide is turning – political discord within Israel, tipping point among younger U.S. Jews, increasing support for BDS and Palestinian rights. I have been active for over twenty years, familiar with despair but also witnessed the collapse of Apartheid in S.A. and the break-up of the Soviet bloc come almost unheralded.

      • echinococcus on June 23, 2019, 3:28 pm

        Brewer,
        I hope you’re right. But. Yes, the Truth and Reconciliation system is the best way but it must be administered by a government, which means it cannot be done before Zionists give up. What will happen when they give up is a whole nother story, with a most-optimistic scenario not of Algeria or Massada, because they will create incredible mayhem in very many countries, many of which they even control. They are a worldwide outfit, and their Palestine operation is just a branch office. So all along my point is still don’count your chicken and give them T&R commissions while there is nothing going on.
        The SA comparison doesn’t apply, either: the SA regime ended with a compromise after many years of very hard and widespread armed struggle –not just by being nice and suicidal.

    • eljay on June 20, 2019, 7:32 am

      || Nathan: … The two-state solution means the permanent existence of Israel, and that’s an unthinkable outcome of the conflict from the point of view of the anti-Israel world. … ||

      You keep repeating that lie as though it were truth. And you keep ignoring the indisputable truth that no Zionist – including you – will accept any solution to I-P that involves justice, accountability and equality.

    • Citizen on June 20, 2019, 8:17 am

      Lebensraum, by Effi Eitam, anybody?

    • oldgeezer on June 20, 2019, 9:45 am

      @nathan
      “Now, if it is agreed that the settlements stay, then they are legal. ”

      Logic fail 101.

    • genesto on June 20, 2019, 12:58 pm

      As Gravel explains, removing and relocating hundreds of thousands of illegal settlers to create anything like a viable Palestinian state is infeasible. It’s NEVER going to happen folks! So, we are left with the choices being: a growing apartheid state; a single state, or; a bi-national state.

      That’s all there is. Take your pick.

      • echinococcus on June 20, 2019, 3:22 pm

        Genesto,

        You haven’t explored the logical range of possibilities.
        One possibility is Palestine.
        The other one is a completed genocide of the Palestinians and disappearance of their culture (with ritual dances for tourists by surviving show-aborigines.)
        Zionists being what they are, and colonized peoples’ reaction being what they are, it looks like these two are the most probable possibilities.

  6. Ossinev on June 20, 2019, 7:04 am

    Nathan/Mondonut = screw that warmongering Churchill we`ll stick with good old status quo Chamberlain.

  7. lonely rico on June 20, 2019, 10:28 am

    … a government flirting openly with ethnic cleansing, that is radical and dangerous.

    The Zionists have been married to ethnic cleansing since 1947, the racist project founded on the destruction of Palestine/the Palestinians, a people who had done them no wrong.

    I am heartened by Gravel’s forthright principled position, raising the topic of US/Israel on a national stage, hopefully forcing other presidential candidates to address the issue.

    I regret there is no national political figure in Canada who has the moral courage to take a similar stand on Canada’s unhealthy relationship with Israel.

  8. Vera Gottlieb on June 20, 2019, 10:35 am

    israel, for the most part, is a racist society and the day will never be, when these two ethnicitys will co-exist peacefully.

    • LiberatePalestine on June 20, 2019, 12:59 pm

      That day used to be. Jewish Palestinians, Christian Palestinians, Muslim Palestinians, and other Palestinians used to live harmoniously. That was before the Zionist invaders drove most of them out (including not a few of the Jewish Palestinians).

      • echinococcus on June 20, 2019, 2:18 pm

        But then, that is a definitely irrecoverable past. Now Zionist invaders are there and they are the element that cannot be assimilated by definition –not within one generation at least.

      • LiberatePalestine on June 20, 2019, 7:04 pm

        Yes, Zionism has spoilt things in Palestine. Correcting the damage will not be easy. But it must be done.

      • jon s on June 25, 2019, 11:36 am

        LP,
        Jews are not invaders in the Jewish historic homeland.
        And where did you come up with “Jewish Palestinians ” driven out by Zionists?

      • eljay on June 25, 2019, 12:29 pm

        || jon s: … Jews are not invaders in the Jewish historic homeland. … ||

        Geographic Palestine is not the historic / ancient / one true / forgotten homeland of people throughout the world – citizens of homelands all over the world – who have chosen to embrace the religion-based identity of Jewish.

        Geographic Palestine is, however, the actual homeland of all people living in and up to n-generations removed from it.

        A commenter like “jon s” serves as a reminder as to what those who seek a just and moral solution to I-P – a solution based on justice, accountability, equality and respect for human rights and international laws – are up against.

        For Zionists like “jon s” – which is to say, for every Zionist – it’s all about guaranteeing Jewish supremacism in/and a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” in as much as possible of Palestine.

      • Mooser on June 25, 2019, 1:01 pm

        “Jewish historic homeland.”

        Oh, the value “Jon s” gets from that “historic”!

        Hey, “Jon s”, guess what? Palestine is the Palestinian’s actual homeland.

      • RoHa on June 25, 2019, 7:38 pm

        A bunch of people came from overseas and started taking over a land. They were not born in that land, they were not long term residents, they did not share the prevailing culture or language of the natives. Their intention was to replace the natives.

        “Invaders” seems to be exactly the right word.

      • Marnie on June 27, 2019, 1:53 pm

        jon yawn s ‘Jews are not invaders in the Jewish historic homeland.’ Still gnawing on that bone, jon? Still wrong. If I showed up at the door of the house that was built for my parents who moved into when I was 6 weeks old, and claimed it as my historic homeland, I would be arrested for trespassing. Same thing here, same thing, same thing, same thing.

      • LiberatePalestine on June 27, 2019, 7:02 pm

        → If I showed up at the door of the house that was built for my parents who moved into when I was 6 weeks old, and claimed it as my historic homeland, I would be arrested for trespassing.

        Let’s extend it beyond that. Suppose that, while going through the papers of your deceased parents or grandparents or great-grandparents, you discovered documents that proved that they had acquired a house that they never sold. As sole heir, you should have inherited the house. Suppose further that your evidence is irrefutable. Yet the house has been in the hands of other people for 50 or 75 or 100 years; it has even changed hands a few times. Can you assert your rights to the house, have title put into your name, and expel the occupants?

        In most jurisdictions, the answer is no. Legal systems typically extinguish such claims after a prescribed period, such as 30 years, because people need to be able to buy, sell, and own land without fear that a stranger may come along with a claim of superior title dating back many decades or even centuries.

        Now consider how much weaker the Zionists’ claim to Palestine is:

        * The claim runs back not a few decades but two millennia.

        * It is not to specific parcels of land but to the whole of Palestine—and, for many Zionists, even more land (parts or all of what are now Ægypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Turkey).

        * It is advanced not for individual claimants but for a group.

        * Most members of that group do not have ancestors who lived in Palestine or owned land there 2000 years ago.

        * The ancestral population never controlled all, or even a large part, of Palestine.

        * There is no documentation, let alone irrefutable documentation, establishing superior title, or indeed any title at all.

        * It goes beyond title to land, which would have to be asserted within an existing state. It extends to an assertion of sovereignty and the alleged right to establish an apartheid régime.

        * Competing claims from Palestinians and others get no attention from the Zionists.

        * Religious claims respecting «god’s will» take the place of objective evidence.

      • RoHa on June 27, 2019, 9:07 pm

        Excellent summary, LP.

      • Marnie on June 29, 2019, 2:59 am

        @liberatepalestine

        ‘Let’s extend it beyond that.’
        ‘ Yet the house has been in the hands of other people for 50 or 75 or 100 years; it has even changed hands a few times. Can you assert your rights to the house, have title put into your name, and expel the occupants?

        In most jurisdictions, the answer is no. Legal systems typically extinguish such claims after a prescribed period, such as 30 years, because people need to be able to buy, sell, and own land without fear that a stranger may come along with a claim of superior title dating back many decades or even centuries.

        Now consider how much weaker the Zionists’ claim to Palestine’

        BOOM.

      • oldgeezer on June 29, 2019, 3:40 pm

        @jon s

        “Jews are not invaders in the Jewish historic homeland.”

        Catchy jon but yes they are. They have no legal right to be there and have no right of any kind to force out or relocate Palestinians to make way for them. They are invaders and criminals.

  9. Misterioso on June 20, 2019, 11:14 am

    https://ahtribune.com/us/israelgate/3231-kushner-as-a-colonial-administrator.html

    “Kushner as a Colonial Administrator: Let’s Talk About the ‘Israeli Model’” American Herald Tribune, June 16/19, by Ramzy Baroud.

    “In a TV interview on June 2, on the news docuseries ‘Axios’ on the HBO channel, Jared Kushner opened up regarding many issues, in which his ‘Deal of the Century’ was a prime focus.

    “The major revelation made by Kushner, President Donald Trump’s adviser and son-in-law, was least surprising. Kushner believes that Palestinians are not capable of governing themselves.

    “Not surprising, because Kushner thinks he is capable of arranging the future of the Palestinian people without the inclusion of the Palestinian leadership. He has been pushing his so-called ‘Deal of the Century’ relentlessly, while including in his various meets and conferences countries such as Poland, Brazil and Croatia, but not Palestine.

    “Indeed, this is what transpired at the Warsaw conference on ‘peace and security’ in the Middle East. The same charade, also led by Kushner, is expected to be rebooted in Bahrain on June 25.

    “Much has been said about the subtle racism in Kushner’s words, reeking with the stench of old colonial discourses where the natives were seen as lesser, incapable of rational thinking beings who needed the civilized ‘whites’ of the western hemisphere to help them cope with their backwardness and inherent incompetence.

    “Kushner, whose credentials are merely based on his familial connections to Trump and family friendship with Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is now poised to be the colonial administrator of old, making and enforcing the law while the hapless natives have no other option but to either accommodate or receive their due punishment.

    “This is not an exaggeration. In fact, according to leaked information concerning Kushner’s ‘Deal of the Century,’ and published in the Israeli daily newspaper, ‘Israel Hayom’, if Palestinian groups refuse to accept the US-Israeli diktats, ‘the US will cancel all financial support to the Palestinians and ensure that no country transfers funds to them.’

    “In the HBO interview, Kushner offered the Palestinians a lifeline. They could be considered capable of governing themselves should they manage to achieve the following: “a fair judicial system … freedom of the press, freedom of expression, tolerance for all religions.”

    “The fact that Palestine is an occupied country, subject in every possible way to Israel’s military law, and that Israel has never been held accountable for its 52-year occupation seems to be of no relevance whatsoever, as far as Kushner is concerned.

    “On the contrary, the subtext in all of what Kushner has said in the interview is that Israel is the antithesis to the unquestionable Palestinian failure. Unlike Palestine, Israel needs to do little to demonstrate its ability to be a worthy peace partner.

    “While the term ‘US bias towards Israel’ is as old as the state of Israel itself, what is hardly discussed is the specific of that bias, the decidedly condescending, patronizing and, often, racist view that US political classes have of Palestinians – and all Arabs and Muslims, for that matter; and the utter infatuation with Israel, which is often cited as a model for democracy, judicial transparency and successful ‘anti-terror’ tactics.

    “According to Kushner a ‘fair judicial system’ is a condition sine qua non to determine a country’s ability to govern itself. But is Israeli judicial system ‘fair’ and ‘democratic’?

    “Israel does not have a single judicial system, but two. This duality has, in fact, defined Israeli courts from the very inception of Israel in 1948. This de facto apartheid system openly differentiates between Jews and Arabs, a fact that is true in both civil and criminal law.

    “’Criminal law is applied separately and unequally in the West Bank, based on nationality alone (Israeli versus Palestinian), inventively weaving its way around the contours of international law in order to preserve and develop its ‘(illegal Jewish) settlement enterprise’, Israeli scholar, Emily Omer-Man, explained in her essay ‘Separate and Unequal’.

    “In practice, Palestinians and Israelis who commit the exact same crime will be judged according to two different systems, with two different procedures: ‘The settler will be processed according to the Israeli Penal Code (while) the Palestinian will be processed according to military order.’

    “This unfairness is constituent of a massively unjust judicial apparatus that has defined the Israeli legal system from the onset. Take the measure of administrative detention as an example. Palestinians can be held without trial and without any stated legal justification. Tens of thousands of Palestinians have been subjected to this undemocratic ‘law’ and hundreds of them are currently held in Israeli jails.

    “It is ironic that Kushner raised the issue of freedom of the press, in particular, as Israel is being derided for its dismal record in that regard. Israel has reportedly committed 811 violations against Palestinian journalists since the start of the ‘March of Return’ in Gaza in March 2018. Two journalists – Yaser Murtaja and Ahmed Abu Hussein – were killed and 155 were wounded by Israeli snipers.

    “Like the imbalanced Israeli judicial system, targeting the press is also a part of a protracted pattern. According to a press release issued by the Palestinian Journalists Union last May, Israel has killed 102 Palestinian journalists since 1972.

    “The fact that Palestinian intellectuals, poets and activists have been imprisoned for Facebook and other social media posts should tell us volumes about the limits of Israel’s freedom of press and expression.

    “It is also worth mentioning that in June 2018, the Israeli Knesset voted for a bill that prohibits the filming of Israeli soldiers as a way to mask their crimes and shelter them from any future legal accountability.

    “As for freedom of religion, despite its many shortcomings, the Palestinian Authority hardly discriminates against religious minorities. The same cannot be said about Israel.

    “Although discrimination against non-Jews in Israel has been the raison d’être of the very idea of Israel, the Nation-State Law of July 2018 further cemented the superiority of the Jews and inferior status of everyone else.

    “According to the new Basic Law, Israel is ‘the national home of the Jewish people’ only and ‘the right to exercise national self-determination is unique to the Jewish people.’

    “Palestinians do not need to be lectured on how to meet Israeli and American expectations, nor should they ever aspire to imitate the undemocratic Israeli model. What they urgently need, instead, is international solidarity to help them win the fight against Israeli occupation, racism and apartheid.”

    • LiberatePalestine on June 20, 2019, 1:02 pm

      → Much has been said about the subtle racism in Kushner’s words

      What is subtle about it? The absence of a white hood and a burning cross?

      • Mooser on June 20, 2019, 6:08 pm

        “What is subtle about it?”

        That’s the way the matzoh crumbles sometimes, into a half-baked cracker.

      • Citizen on June 22, 2019, 8:30 am

        Yes, I can see why Zionists can be characterized as a “half-baked cracker.”

      • Mooser on June 23, 2019, 1:10 pm

        “Yes, I can see why Zionists can be characterized as a “half-baked cracker.”

        And there’s a corollary: “As goes the Right, so goes the all-rightnik

  10. echinococcus on June 20, 2019, 11:50 am

    “Of course, the sheer power of the Israel lobby in the United States is the main hurdle to such a radical departure from traditional blind support for Israel.”
    The same power is also the main reason why letting invaders continue to squat in Palestine with whatever regime, illegally recognizing them a “right” to do so, would only continue the invader’s domination under a new name.

  11. JimMichie on June 20, 2019, 5:58 pm

    “The most obvious and humane path forward is the creation of a secular, democratic, binational state with equal rights for all.” Thank you, Mike, for this “solution” to the Palestine/Israel decades-long bloody confrontation. But you can be assured that the brutal, racist, genocidal, ethnic cleansing, land stealing, terrorist Zionist regime in control of both Israel and Palestine will never agree to this laudable “solution”. Rid Israel of Zionist control and there is reasonable chance for such a “solution” to be realized.

    • Citizen on June 22, 2019, 8:32 am

      Rid Israel of Zionist control? Then it would be more like America in its principles of governance for the masses. God forbid.

  12. DaBakr on June 21, 2019, 1:52 am

    I got five paragraphs into this piece of garbage before I realized how condescending this old farts concern for a one state solution with no Jewish identity. In other words the one small state of the national movement of the Jewish people must disappear into a binational state where Arab/muslims already occupy over 98% of the middle east land mass and, it has been cleansed of nearly every Arab jew. (Some rational people call the million stab jews and the 700,000 Arab Palestinians a defacto population swap. Even and done with. So, his idea is a joke. The solution for actual realists (not Israel zionist hating cranks) will involve jordon judea Samaria and Israel. It won’t be coming for a long time. But one day Israel will stop protecting the little hashemite king and the majority Palestinian can divide up there new nation with the minority tribes aligned with hussein

    • echinococcus on June 21, 2019, 7:22 am

      Hey Abu Bakr,

      Not worth much as a propagandist, are you? Where would you get the crazy idea that proclaiming your Zionist opinion and analysis to people who don’t share any basic values with you, and have opposing goals and aspirations, would be interested in reading your elucubrations? Do you still think that this here is J-Post or sumpin? You do an excellent job of turning off the legendary undecided, should they happen to stumble by Mondoweiss, which they don’t. I have half a mind to report you to the Ministry of Propaganda and Immigration. Look at your fellow Z-prop on this site, who all make an effort, clumsy as it is, to invoke some common, albeit unshared, value.

      • Mooser on June 22, 2019, 1:47 pm

        “Not worth much as a propagandist, are you?”

        I could do a better job at evoking, at least, some sympathy and understanding of Zionism and Israelis.

      • echinococcus on June 22, 2019, 8:00 pm

        Mooser,

        Of course you could do a much better job painting Zionists cuddly and beautiful than comrade Abu Bakr does. You could do it on your head. Happily you manage to avoid that, even when your quill is in a nonsense-spitting mood. That’s why many people, or at least the undersigned, give you many thanks.

      • Mooser on June 23, 2019, 12:37 pm

        “Of course you could do a much better job…”

        Thank you. I have thought so for a long time.

    • LiberatePalestine on June 21, 2019, 7:27 am

      → the national movement of the Jewish people

      Whatever «the Jewish people» may mean, Jews are not a national group. They don’t share a language, a culture, a region. All that they share is a vague religious heritage. By contrast, the Palestinians do constitute a nation with valid, indeed rock-solid, national claims on the land of Palestine.

      → where Arab/muslims already occupy over 98% of the middle east land mass

      Standard Zionist hasbara treats the Palestinians not as Palestinians but as «Arabs», by way of denying their Palestinian nationality and suggesting that they are just part of a broad, undistinguished «Arab» population. It is true that Palestinians are «Arabs» in a vague linguistic sense, just as they are also Semites. But the diverse nations lumped together as «Arabs» are not united even linguistically. A Moroccan and an Iraqi speaking their respective native languages cannot understand each other. (The same written language, derived from classical Arabic, is used in both Morocco and Iraq; the spoken languages are not written at all.) And Morocco and Iraq don’t have much in common culturally either—no more than do, say, England and Greece, yet we would not lump the latter together under a «European» nationality.

      And now even «Arabs» is being broadened to «Arab/muslims» [sic]. Jews, we are expected to believe, are a special élite, whereas Palestinians are just shapeless «Arabs/Muslims».

      Anyway, it matters not that «Arabs/Muslims» allegedly occupy 98% of the land in the so-called Middle East. That’s no justification for stealing the land of Palestine and setting up a settler-colonial régime there to elevate the Jewish master race.

      • gamal on June 21, 2019, 1:00 pm

        ” (The same written language, derived from classical Arabic, is used in both Morocco and Iraq; the spoken languages are not written at all.) And Morocco and Iraq don’t have much in common culturally either ” true dat anyway

        Ahmad Faris al- Shidyak wrote leg over leg because Arabs don’t know Arabic…in English too now its 1840-50’s obscene so they say

        https://nyupress.org/9781479875757/leg-over-leg/

        but as to fusa (the Quran is not in Classical Arabic) ameya stuff no one stands up for slang but Egyptians write in it and garner a good deal of contempt people still argue passionately, Arabic is dying…look at the kids today etc. Language is a bit of a battle ground everybody has a passionate opinion it’s so tedious and everyone supports MSA but…

        “This sort of intimate chatter has “become exclusive to ‘ameya,” says Jordanian novelist Ma‘n Abu Taleb. “Whilst anything complex or intellectual is exclusive to fos’ha. There is almost no overlap between those two spheres of language, and therefore, thought. This means that intellectual ideas and discourses don’t cross over from academia and books into daily life. It also means that everything expressed in fos’ha is idealistic, detached from life, and is oblivious to the real world.”

        This creates a potential crisis in the novel, particularly for authors who want to use an intimate, first-person narrative. Many authors have steered away from first person, or even – like Palestinian writer Adania Shibli – from dialogue. For the most part, writing in ‘ameya remains an unpopular choice for “serious” literary novelists. Some, like scholar Elias Muhanna, have suggested the distancing effect of MSA is why Arabic-speaking children don’t easily pick up reading, because it’s harder to emotionally engage the text.

        Muhanna has likened the language used in an MSA children’s book about going to the doctor to English that sounds like: “Forsooth didst the nayward damsel alight upon the threshold of the quacksalver’s vestibule … A panic came upon her ‘ere [sic] her mother didst coax her forward, dreading the prick of the misprised instrument…”

        Yet the educated sector spends years steeped in MSA, and it becomes natural to see this as the only way to write. Egyptian writer and economist Galal Amin, who chaired judging for the 2013 International Prize for Arabic Fiction, said in an interview that the committee received only one work written in colloquial that year. “You can produce something exceedingly beautiful and appealing and useful by using ‘ameya. But also ‘ameya could be terribly low and vulgar and does not achieve what a good literary work should. So we have to be very careful.”

        https://www.mashallahnews.com/language/colloquialising-arabic-literature.html

      • Citizen on June 22, 2019, 8:35 am

        agreed

      • RoHa on June 23, 2019, 1:41 am

        “Forsooth didst the nayward damsel alight upon the threshold of the quacksalver’s vestibule …”

        That’s what children’s books were like when I was young. But that was how we spoke in those days.

        Children’s books should be in the language that the children actually speak, but it is the job of their Arabic teachers at school to increase their knowledge of the language so that, by the end of high school, they can easily read both MSA and older forms of the language.

        (I remember being shocked at discovering some of my students found a perfectly clear passage from Locke beyond their linguistic capabilities. Apparently their schools had not taken them beyond MTV.)

      • LiberatePalestine on June 23, 2019, 7:35 pm

        → Forsooth didst the nayward damsel alight

        People who cannot use archaic forms correctly should not use them at all. Didst implies the subject thou. The correct form, unsurprisingly, is did. And nayward makes no sense here. A damsel cannot be nayward.

      • LiberatePalestine on June 23, 2019, 7:49 pm

        → Children’s books should be in the language that the children actually speak,

        What the children actually speak is not a written language. Perhaps it should be one, but it isn’t.

        → but it is the job of their Arabic teachers at school to increase their knowledge of the language so that, by the end of high school, they can easily read both MSA and older forms of the language.

        Yes, but the need goes beyond reading. For both formal and international communication, Arabs typically speak in Modern Standard Arabic, which is based on the written language. Illiterates do not understand MSA. They cannot follow, say, a broadcast of the news, nor can they communicate with Arabs whose colloquial speech is far removed from their own.

      • RoHa on June 24, 2019, 12:22 am

        I’m pretty sure the children make roughly Arabic-sounding noises, so it should be possible to write their language (the local colloquial) in the Arabic alphabet.

        And do the Arabic-speaking countries still have many illiterates?

      • Mooser on June 24, 2019, 11:05 am

        “A damsel cannot be nayward.”

        “Nayward” means ‘proceeding towards a negative decision.’ It’s the opposite of “yeaward.”

      • LiberatePalestine on June 24, 2019, 1:25 pm

        → I’m pretty sure the children make roughly Arabic-sounding noises, so it should be possible to write their language (the local colloquial) in the Arabic alphabet.

        It is possible to write any language (though some of the signed ones present special challenges), in the Arabic alphabet or otherwise. Plenty of languages unrelated to Arabic, including Persian, Malay, Urdu, and Turkish, are or formerly were written in Arabic script. Developing a writing system for Palestinian (or Moroccan, Iraqi, &c) Arabic would be a simple task.

        But the various Arabic colloquials are not ordinarily written. As someone mentioned above, sometimes short passages of dialogue are written in an ad hoc way in the midst of text otherwise written in Modern Standard Arabic.

        The situation of writing in a language other than the spoken one is known as diglossia, and it is rather common. Not too many centuries ago, many languages of Europe were not written: speakers wrote instead in Latin, Greek, German, or some other language, if they wrote at all. Hebrew was retained for writing long after it ceased to be spoken.

        → And do the Arabic-speaking countries still have many illiterates?

        Yes, especially Yemen and some of the Arabic-speaking countries of Africa. Palestine, incidentally, has a relatively high rate of literacy, notwithstanding the Zionist terror.

        → “Nayward” means ‘proceeding towards a negative decision.’ It’s the opposite of “yeaward.”

        I know what it means. It makes little sense in the given context, however.

      • Mooser on June 24, 2019, 2:58 pm

        “I know what it means. It makes little sense in the given context, however.”

        Yes, the “given context” is quite important.

      • RoHa on June 24, 2019, 6:12 pm

        Both good words. We should use them more often.

      • RoHa on June 25, 2019, 2:04 am

        I will add that “nayward” is appropriate for my attitude towards the quacksalver’s misprised hypodermic syringes.

      • wondering jew on June 27, 2019, 7:41 am

        Regarding Jewish people hood, the Jews as a nation. I am biased by my upbringing: the Jewish prayers, that refer to the Jews (or Israel to be accurate) as a nation. My other bias is historical: the catastrophe in Europe which was not targeted against a religion, but against a “race” and as such to deny factors other than religion to the essence of the catastrophe is to deny facts.

        Certainly in 1881 before the great migration, the Jews of Eastern Europe constituted a nation in a sense that in 2019 that is not true for any concentration of Jews outside of Israel. If 4/5ths of the Jews in the world (at that time) constituted a nation, the existence of 1/5th outside of that nation, not definable as a nation, is not sufficient to contradict the existence of a nation. That seems like a gotcha game of some sort. I can prove someone is a Jew who does not belong to your nation, therefore you Jews are not a nation. Gotcha!

        If the Jews of Israel did not exist and all that existed were the diaspora of North America and the dwindling diaspora of Europe and elsewhere, it is dubious that one would apply in 2019 the term nation to the Jewish identifying humans on the planet. But Israel does exist and many of the Jews of North America and Europe (and other smaller communities) identify with Israel to some degree and so there is a national element involved.

        Blanket statements regarding: the Jews are not a nation are taken as offensive, no matter the logical underpinnings. They are taken as you defining me. I reject that. I will define myself.

        Obviously the conflict with the Palestinians and the consequences of “since I am a nation, the Palestinians must share with me or make way for me” are sufficient reasons that others will concern themselves with defining the Jews. Nonetheless there is an obnoxiousness and a noxiousness involved in this activity.

      • eljay on June 27, 2019, 7:55 am

        || wondering jew: … Blanket statements regarding: the Jews are not a nation are taken as offensive, no matter the logical underpinnings. They are taken as you defining me. I reject that. I will define myself. … ||

        You can define yourself any way you want. That doesn’t give you the right to be a supremacist, to have a supremacist state or to do “necessary evil” unto others.

        Being told “Jews are not a nation” may be “taken as” offensive, but the injustice and immorality you Zionists believe in, advocate and commit actually is offensive (not to mention (war) criminal).

      • echinococcus on June 27, 2019, 8:22 am

        Fredman,

        ” If 4/5ths of the Jews in the world (at that time) constituted a nation, the existence of 1/5th outside of that nation, not definable as a nation, is not sufficient to contradict the existence of a nation”

        That (grossly hyperinflated) 4/5 (or way less) is and was the Eskenazi Jews. One variety only of Jews, by your own admission.

        As for now, the totally illegal existence of a Crusader Kingdom pirate nation on Palestinian soil still only represents the Invader-Settler Jews(-and–non-religious-pirates), only one variety.

        Granted, you never were taught to know the part from the whole, but humans sort of acquire a solid understanding of that principle by the age of 3 without a need for any Schule.

        “Blanket statements regarding: the Jews are not a nation are taken as offensive, no matter the logical underpinnings. They are taken as you defining me. I reject that. I will define myself.”

        No matter facts and logic, as you say, you stick to the illogical, claiming the right to define yourself. During a psychiatry internship, I met several inmates who were there because they were doing just exactly that: defining themselves against fact and logic.

      • eljay on June 27, 2019, 8:37 am

        || wondering jew: … If the Jews of Israel did not exist and all that existed were the diaspora of North America and the dwindling diaspora of Europe and elsewhere, it is dubious that one would apply in 2019 the term nation to the Jewish identifying humans on the planet. … ||

        The idea that the state of Israel is required for Jews to define themselves as a nation should be taken as offensive. Instead of supporting that idea you should reject it. But you won’t because that would undermine the “logical underpinnings” of your hateful and immoral Zionist beliefs.

      • Keith on June 27, 2019, 11:22 am

        WONDERING JEW- “Regarding Jewish people hood, the Jews as a nation.”

        The concept of “nation” is ideological. Any relatively large group of people who consider themselves to be a “nation” based upon a variety of criteria and who act accordingly do, in fact, constitute a nation. The Jews of Classical (medieval) Judaism constituted a religious based nation insofar as they believed themselves to be unique, distinct, separate and intrinsically foreign to the surrounding community of non-Jews, all of whom lumped together as “Gentiles” even though there was no “Gentile” nation. The enlightenment caused “the Jews” to splinter into various sub-groups such as Reform Jews, Orthodox Jews, Conservative Jews, and secular Jews, the criteria for being “Jewish” vaguely defined other than having a “Jewish” mother. Assimilation was the order of the day.

        Zionism was a reaction to that not to anti-Semitism per se. The Zionists wished to maintain a distinct Jewish “nation” based upon Blood and Soil nationalism combined with religious symbolism. In effect, the Zionists considered Jews to be foreigners in the emerging multicultural nation states who would need to return to Zion to be secure in their “peoplehood.” Prior to the Holocaust, Zionism wasn’t popular with the majority of Jews who wished to assimilate. The Holocaust along with Zionist ideology changed all of that, with Israel assuming a certain metaphysical dimension. Zionism has since evolved so that Zionist Jews in multicultural America consider themselves a distinct people and act accordingly while claiming “anti-Semitism” when non-Jews treat Jews as a foreign people and act accordingly. This Zionist hypocrisy has been amazingly successful such that it is a major unifying factor in maintaining the ideological concept of Jewish peoplehood. That and the exploitation of the Holocaust by Zionist Jews as the ideological basis for modern Jewish “peoplehood.”

      • LiberatePalestine on June 27, 2019, 1:22 pm

        → Regarding Jewish people hood, the Jews as a nation. I am biased by my upbringing:

        Thank you for admitting your bias. Whether Jews are a nation or not is a factual question that has nothing to do with your upbringing or mine, so we need to set our biases aside and look at the facts.

        → My other bias is historical: the catastrophe in Europe which was not targeted against a religion, but against a “race”

        Yes, it was. And unfortunately the Zionists too treat Jews as a racial group. Membership, by Zionist standards, passes through matrilineal descent, the only exception—a rare one—being conversion supervised by approved Orthodox rabbis. When the UN declared that Zionism is racism, it was correct.

        → Certainly in 1881 before the great migration, the Jews of Eastern Europe constituted a nation in a sense that in 2019 that is not true for any concentration of Jews outside of Israel.

        The Yiddish-speaking Jews did indeed constitute a nation. They were treated as such in the Soviet Union and various other places. (The Soviet Union even set up Birobidzhan as a national territory for Soviet Jews, some twenty years before the establishment of the Zionist entity.) And there were other Jewish nations of different sizes.

        Certainly today there is an Israëli nation that did not exist a hundred years ago. Curiously enough, however, it is less and less Jewish all the time.

        → Blanket statements regarding: the Jews are not a nation are taken as offensive, no matter the logical underpinnings.

        I don’t seek to give offence, but I won’t suppress facts or logic for the sake of preserving others’ feelings. Jews are not a nation. You’ve admitted that yourself.

        → They are taken as you defining me. I reject that. I will define myself.

        You are welcome to define yourself, but others don’t have to accept your self-definition (you probably wouldn’t seriously entertain any claim by me to be, say, Vietnamese or Palestinian)—and you don’t have the right to define others, as the Zionists do.

        → Obviously the conflict with the Palestinians and the consequences of “since I am a nation, the Palestinians must share with me or make way for me” are sufficient reasons that others will concern themselves with defining the Jews.

        Thank you for acknowledging that. Again, I’m not interested so much in «defining the Jews» as in addressing the concrete issues in Palestine. To the extent that I involve myself in «defining the Jews», it is in response to Zionist claims about them. Outside that and other political contexts, I treat «Jew» as an ill-defined term. Hell, not even Jewish institutions agree on the question of who is a Jew. There are many people who are considered Jewish by Reform standards but not by Orthodox standards, or vice versa.

      • Mooser on June 27, 2019, 4:56 pm

        “Yonah”, we can’t go on blaming everybody else. Nobody is dismantling the “Jewish nation” or “Jewish people” any faster or harder than Jews are.

        You have any plans to change that?

      • RoHa on June 28, 2019, 3:11 am

        “I will define myself.”

        Why be defined by anyone?

      • RoHa on June 28, 2019, 3:18 am

        “Any relatively large group of people who consider themselves to be a “nation” based upon a variety of criteria and who act accordingly do, in fact, constitute a nation.”

        But the differing criteria mean there are different types of nation. That is what my distinction between p-nation, n-nation, and c-nation was intended to cover. If the lazy sods would get off their arses and provide search engine for the archives, I would give you a link.

        In the meantime, I will simply say that the type of nation which the Jews seem to constitute is not the type of nation to which standard notions of “national liberation” apply.

      • RoHa on June 28, 2019, 3:23 am

        “You are welcome to define yourself, but others don’t have to accept your self-definition (you probably wouldn’t seriously entertain any claim by me to be, say, Vietnamese or Palestinian)—”

        As a side note, it seems that if a man defines himself as a woman, or vice versa, we do have to accept that. Nor are we permitted to ask what s/he means by such a claim.

        Apparently this situation is causing some disturbance in the Force.

      • Mooser on June 28, 2019, 12:41 pm

        “You have any plans to change that?”

        There I go again, forgetting that Zionists believe there should be fewer, but better, Jews.

    • eljay on June 21, 2019, 8:33 am

      || @Dak: I got five paragraphs into this piece of garbage before I realized … ||

      …that you – like every other Zionist – were hypocritically disgusted and offended by the idea of justice, accountability and equality in I-P.

    • Mooser on June 21, 2019, 1:55 pm

      “a one state solution with no Jewish identity. In other words the one small state of the national movement of the Jewish people must disappear into a binational state”

      Oy Gevalt! That sounds all too much like America, and you know what happened to the Jews in America!

  13. Ossinev on June 21, 2019, 7:25 am

    @DaBakr
    You are the one who appears to be “farting”.
    WTF is a “stab Jew”. Sounds “Anti – Semitic” to me.
    On the plus side you appear to be de facto separating “Israel” from “Judea and Samaria”
    Hasbara Central will of course not be best pleased with this watering down of Eretz Israel into separate components.

    Sounds as if you are having one of your hot flushes. Best relax , put your feet up , have a cup of coffee(or tea) and then have a re- read of what he actually said.

    BTW Calling an older person with whom you disagree an”old fart” is seriously “condescending”.

  14. bcg on June 21, 2019, 4:40 pm

    Since the topic here is the death of the two state solution, this seems relevant –

    “Whatever the concrete content of the plan, the gist of Trump’s policy for Israel and Palestine is already clear: Make the most controversial issues of the conflict disappear, magically, and to Israel’s advantage.”

    https://thehill.com/opinion/international/449568-trumps-israel-palestine-plan-is-all-smoke-and-mirrors

  15. Ossinev on June 24, 2019, 7:20 am

    Sick bucket at the ready folks Danny Boy has figured it all out:
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/24/opinion/palestinian-peace-bahrain-conference.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
    ” Instead, surrendering will create the opportunity to transform Palestinian society, thereby leading to his people’s liberation”

    Surrender macht frei !!

  16. jon s on June 25, 2019, 11:31 am

    A commenter like “Liberate Palestine” serves as a reminder as to what those who seek Israeli-Palestinian peaceful co-existence are up against. For the anti-Israel extremists it’s not about the occupation, the settlements, terrorism, human-rights violations or any such issues, it’s about our very right to exist in any borders at all.

    • LiberatePalestine on June 25, 2019, 2:23 pm

      What have I done? Why am I being singled out?

      I don’t know whom you mean by «our», so I can’t speak to that. If you explain which group you have in mind, I can tell you what I think of your claims to its rights to exist in any designated location.

      I’ll simplify things for you:

      Such Jews and others who are already established in Palestine should be able to stay. All Palestinians, including refugees and their descendants, should be able to return to Palestine. Palestinians collectively and in many cases individually are entitled to compensation for the harm that they have suffered on account of the Zionist project.

      There should be a single state in Palestine—a democratic and secular one free of group-related supremacy and other forms of discrimination.

    • RoHa on June 25, 2019, 7:30 pm

      Jon, I don’t think anyone here is denying your right to exist.

      Many of us do deny that the State of Israel has a right to exist. States do not have that right. Belgium does not have the right to exist. Uruguay does not have the right to exist. Vietnam does not have the right to exist. Australia does not have the right to exist. New Zealand would not have that right if it actually existed. Even Canada does not have the right to exist.

      States regularly pop into and out of existence. My much-loved 1963 Readers Digest Great World Atlas shows East Germany, Czechoslovakia, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. It does not show the states of Bangladesh, Armenia, or South Sudan.

    • Mooser on June 27, 2019, 5:45 pm

      A commenter like “Jon s” serves as a reminder as to what those who seek Israeli-Palestinian peaceful co-existence are up against. For the Israel extremists it’s not about the occupation, the settlements, terrorism, human-rights violations or any such issues, it’s about the Palestinians very right to exist in any borders at all.

  17. Mooser on June 25, 2019, 12:45 pm

    ” it’s about our very right to exist in any borders at all.” “Jon s”

    “Writing in the New York Times, Israeli UN Ambassador says Palestinian surrender and ‘national suicide’ is what is needed for peace.”

    Hey Jonny, how about this. When you make an irrevocable commitment to Israel by renouncing your US citizenship, we’ll talk about Israel’s ‘right to exist’
    You’re not looking for the right to exist, you think you are entitled to the right to the main chance.

    BTW, formed a government yet?

  18. echinococcus on July 2, 2019, 9:16 am

    “Perfect Oldgeezer” – Leave the Zionist entity alone, only contest the post-67 conquest.

Leave a Reply