2010-07-20

Zionist Founding Fathers’ Plans for Transfer of the Palestinian Arabs

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

by Neil Godfrey

The following quotations by early Zionist leaders are from Expulsion of the Palestinians: The Concept of “Transfer” in Zionist Political Thought, 1882-1948 by Nur Masalha, published by the Institute for Palestinian Studies.

Nur Masalha opens his book with

When in the late nineteenth century Zionism arose as a political force calling for the colonization of Palestine and the “gathering of all Jews,” little attention was paid to the fact that Palestine was already populated. Indeed, the Basle Program adopted at the First Zionist Congress, which launched political Zionism in 1897, made no mention of a Palestinian population when it spelled out the movement’s objective: “the establishment of a publicly and legally secured home in Palestine for the Jewish people.” (p.5)

It was in order to secure support for their enterprise that “the Zionists propagated in the West the idea of ‘a land without a people for a people without a land,’ a slogan coined by Israel Zangwill” (who is quoted a number of times in this post).

Even as late as 1914 Chaim Weizmann (one of the founding fathers of political Zionism) stated:

Chaim Weizmann

Image via Wikipedia

In its initial stage, Zionism was conceived by its pioneers as a movement wholly depending on mechanical factors: there is a country which happens to be called Palestine, a country without a people, and, on the other hand, there exists the Jewish people, and it has no country. What else is necessary, then, than to fit the gem into the ring to unite this people with this country?

But “neither Zangwell nor Weizmann intended these demographic assessments in a literal fashion. They did not mean that there were no people in Palestine, but that there were no people worth considering within the framework of the notions of European supremacy that then held sway.” (p.6)

20 May 1936, according to Arthur Ruppin, head of the colonizing department of the Jewish Agency, Chaim Weizman (to become the first president of Israel) replied, when asked about the Palestinian Arabs

“The British told us that there are there some hundred thousands negroes [Kushim] and for those there is no value.”

Zangwell made the meaning of his slogan clear in 1920:

Israel Zangwill

Image via Wikipedia

If Lord Shaftesbury was literally inexact in describing Palestine as a country without a people, he was essentially correct , for there is no Arab people living in intimate fusion with the country, utilising its resources and stamping it with a characteristic impress: there is at best an Arab encampment.

But Zangwell and other Zionists also were very well aware that far from being an empty land, the Palestinians were there in very large numbers. Zangwell had visited Palestine in 1897 and in a speech in 1905 said:

Palestine proper has already its inhabitants. The pashalik of Jerusalem is already twice as thickly populated as the United States, having fifty-two souls to the square mile, and not 25 per cent of them Jews.

Early Zionist texts do indeed show that its leaders were concerned about what to do with the “Arab problem” or “Arab question.”

As an example of the attitudes of Zionist groups and settlers concerning the indigenous Palestinian population, Zionist author and Labor leader who immigrated to Palestine in 1890, Moshe Smilansky, wrote:

“Let us not be too familiar with the Arab fellahin lest our children adopt their ways and learn from their ugly deeds. Let all those who are loyal to the Torah avoid ugliness and that which resembles it and keep their distance from the fellahin and their base attributes.”

Minority Jewish voices against racist attitudes

Some Jews spoke out against these attitudes. One was Ahad Ha’Am (Asher Zvi Ginzberg), a liberal Russian thinker who visited Palestine in 1891. He published a series of articles criticizing the “ethnocentricity of political Zionism as well as the exploitation of Palestinian peasantry by Zionist colonists.” He wrote that Zionnist “pioneers” believed that

“the only language that the Arabs understand is that of force…. [They] behave towards the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, trespass unjustly upon their boundaries, beat them shamefully without reason and even brag about it, and nobody stands to check this contemptible and dangerous tendency.”

He suggested that this aggressive attitude of the colonists stemmed from their anger

“towards those who reminded them that there is still another people in the land of Israel that have been living there and does not intend to leave.”

Another early settler (he arrived from Russia in 1886) who spoke out against such attitudes, Yitzhaq Epstein, warned that the methods of Zionist land purchases and dispossession of Arabs in the Galilee were stirring up resentment such that a future political confrontation was inevitable.

Early Transfer Proposals of the Founding Fathers

Theodor Herzl, founder of the Zionist movement, recorded in his diary in 1895:

When we occupy the land, we shall bring immediate benefits to the state that receives us. We must expropriate gently the private property on the estates assigned to us.

Zionist leader Theodor Herzl Source: http://ww...

Image via Wikipedia

We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country.The property owners will come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.

Let the owners of immovable property believe that they are cheating  us, selling us something far more than they are worth.
But we are not going to sell them anything back.

Another early example of the transfer idea’s deep roots among the early Zionists is found in a story by Moshe Smilansky in which he recounts a dialogue that took place in 1891 between two pioneers of Houeuie Tzion (Lovers of Zion)“:

“We should go east, into Transjordan. That would be a test for our movement.”
“Nonsense … isn’t there enough land in Judea and Galilee?”
“The land in Judea and Galilee is occupied by the Arabs.”
“Well, we’ll take it from them.”
“How?” (Silence.)
“A revolutionary doesn’t ask naive questions.”
“Well then, ‘revolutionary,’ tell us how.”
“It is very simple. We’ll harrass them until they get out … Let them go to Transjordan.”
“And are we going to abandon all of Transjordan?” asks an anxious voice.
“As soon as we have a big settlement here we’ll seize the land, we’ll become strong, and then we’ll take care of the Left Bank [of the Jordan River].We’ll expell them from there, too. Let them go back to the Arab countries.”

Anglo-Jewish writer Israel Zangwill in an April 1905 talk in Manchester, proclaimed what needed to be done, given that Palestine “was already twice as thickly populated as the United States,” and given that “not 25 per cent of them [are] Jews,”

“[We] must be prepared either to drive out by the sword the [Arab] tribes in possession as our forefathers did or to grapple with the problem of a large alien population, mostly Mohammedan and accustomed for centuries to despise us.”

In a discussion with Vladimir Jabotinsky (who later founded Revisionist Zionism, the forerunner of present-day Likud), Zangwill stated that

the Zionist enterprise should be part of a new world order in which there could be no place for sentimental argument (p. 10 description by Masalha cited from Jabotinsky’s records)

Zangwell another time argued that

“If we wish to give a country to a people without a country, it is utter foolishness to allow it to be the country of two peoples. This can only cause trouble. The Jews will suffer and so will their neighbours. One of the two: a different place must be found either for the Jews of for their neighbours.”

Another pivotal Zionist leader, Arthur Ruppin, in his diary in 1930 wrote that dispossession of the Arabs was inevitable because

“land is the most vital condition of our settlement in Palestine. But since there is hardly any land which is worth cultivating that is not already being cultivated, it is found that wherever we purchase land and settle it, by necessity its present cultivators are turned away …. In the future it will be much more difficult to purchase land, as sparsely populated land hardly exists. What remains is densely [Arab] populated land.”

(Ruppin, ironically, founded the Brit Shalom movement advocating a binational Arab-Jewish state.)

Ideological founder of Socialist Zionism, Nahman Syrkin, proposed in an 1898 pamphlet entitled “The Jewish Question and the Socialist Jewish State”:

“Palestine, thinly populated, in which the Jews constitute today 10 per cent of the population, must be evacuated for the Jews.”

More pragmatic, less visionary, proposals after the Balfour Declaration of 1917

At the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, Chaim Weizmann (leading the Zionist Commission) called for a British Mandate over Palestine extending north to the Litani River (now in Lebanon), east to the Hijaz railway lilne (well west of the Jordan River). At this conference Weizmann also called for a Palestine

“as Jewish as England is English.”

The removal of the native population implicit in such claims was never made explicit at the Conference. It was, however, spoken of in the corridors. Another member of the Zionist Commission, Aaron Aaronsohn, had during the war written in secret intelligence for the British of the need to “remove forcibly” Arab farmers from the lands. Aaronsohn’s friend William K. Bullitt, a member of the U.S mission at the Conference, later wrote:

“Many times during the Peace Conference in Paris I joined him [i.e., Aaronsohn] and Dr. Weizmann at a time while both were considering and assessing policies and plans. Aaronsohn’s proposal was the following: While Palestine must be made a Jewish state, the vast valley of Iraq, which is irrigated by the Euphrates and Tigris, should be restored, through the use of planned irrigation, to be the paradise of the world … and furthermore the Arabs of Palestine should be offered lands there … to which as many Arabs as possible should be persuaded to emigrate.”

Israel Zangwill, after 1917, began to campaign openly for the transfer of the Arab population from Palestine. After several publications advocating population removal, in his 1920 book, The Voice of Jerusalem, he called for

an “Arab exodus” that would be based on “race distribution” or a “trek like that of the Boers from Cape Colony,” which he advocated as “literally the only ‘way out’ of the difficulty of creating a Jewish State in Palestine.”

He continued:

“We cannot allow the Arabs to block so valuable a piece of historic reconstruction….And therefore we much gently persuade them to ‘trek.’ After all, they have all Arabia with its million square miles….There is no particular reason for the Arabs to cling to these few kilometres. ‘To fold their tents’ and ‘silently steal away’ is their proverbial habit: let them exemplify it now.”

Zangwill’s public campaign — including his pronouncements during the 1919 Peace Conference — caused considerable embarrassment and diplomatic tensions. Emir Faisal who led the Arab revolt against the Ottoman Turks and who was the focus of British plans for the Arab world, was angered when Zangwell remarked at a public meeting of the Arabs of Palestine —

“many are semi nomad, they have given nothing to Palestine and are not entitled to the rules of democracy”

Faisal in response emphasized that Palestine had a deeply-rooted Arab population and could not be transformed into a Jewish state.

Zangwill’s remarks also embarrassed Chaim Weizmann who was at the time involved in sensitive negotiations with the Sharifian Emir aimed at a Zionist-Arab deal.

And this is 1920. The story of the transfer plans has only just begun.

The delegates at the First Zionist Congress in...

Image via Wikipedia

Enhanced by Zemanta

23 Comments

  • ChilastaRS
    2010-07-20 23:15:10 UTC - 23:15 | Permalink

    You disgustingly easily approve of quotes which lack any credibility.
    Does a book wrriten by Nur Masalha and published by the Institute for Palestinian Studies, sound straight out a good historical work to you?
    The misinformation coming via you through others is shameful.

    The misquoting of Zionists is far and beyond anyone with credible historical information on this issue.
    Like misquoting David Ben-Gurion 20 years ago. And Herzel? Have you ever even read his opinions to know how unlikely of him to say that? How contradicting?

    Extensively misquoted David Ben-Gurion: “We must expel Arabs and take their places” after appearing in this form in The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949 (1987) by Benny Morris, p. 25.

    Original:
    We do not wish, we do not need to expel the Arabs and take their place. All our aspirations are built upon the assumption — proven throughout all our activity in the Land — that there is enough room in the country for ourselves and the Arabs.
    * Letter to his son Amos (5 October 1937), as quoted in Shabtai Teveth, Ben Gurion: The Burning Ground;

    You should read the pretty good book “Fabricating Israeli History: The ‘New Historians” (2000)

    I can understand the easy confirmation bias, lazy research and ignorance if you are hateful and full of prejudice.

    • Fabrizio
      2010-07-21 06:53:19 UTC - 06:53 | Permalink

      Karsh’s “Fabricating Israeli History” a pretty good book? Please, be serious. It can be considered a good reading only by those who scarcely know anything about Middle East. Beside suggesting a careful reading of the same Pappé, Shlaim and (partially) Morris that Karsh criticizes so much (I mean, a truly unprejudiced reading of them), I strongly urge that you take a look at the following review of Karsh’s book by Lustick, “Israeli History: Who is Fabricating What?” Survival, 1997, together with Karsh’s reply to him. Both can be found online:
      http://web.archive.org/web/20110720100937/http://www.polisci.upenn.edu/faculty/bios/Pubs/survivalreview.pdf (Lustick review)
      http://web.archive.org/web/20100611235244/http://www.polisci.upenn.edu/faculty/bios/Pubs/survivalletter.pdf (Karsh reply)
      For what concerns the wrong quote from David Ben-Gurion in “The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem”, Lustick informs us that:
      “[..] Karsh’s accusation that Morris ‘misrepresented’ a sentence from Ben-Gurion’s diary is itself an unfortunately typical Karsh misrepresentation. Several issues of the Hebrew journal Alpayim were devoted to the episode. It turns out that the reason Morris was forced to use Shabtai Teveth’s work, Ben-Gurion and the Palestinian Arabs for which he is taken to task by Karsh, is that the actual diaries had been made available to Teveth […] but not to other researchers. Teveth quoted the line regarding the need to ‘expel’ the Arabs, which appears in the text of the diaries, but which had been partially erased (by whom is not clear). The Hebrew version of Morris’ book appeared after the diaries were made available to other researchers, explaining the change in his formulation.”
      But I know, Lustick, Pappé, Shlaim, Finkelstein, Chomsky are just anti-semitic apologists of terror, full of hate and prejudice. Karsh, instead, is pure love.

      • ChilastaRS
        2010-07-21 16:50:33 UTC - 16:50 | Permalink

        “which appears in the text of the diaries, but which had been partially erased”. And that sounds like a good explanation to you? That’s evidence? an anecdote? The letter sates clearly the right quotation which you can actually be checked.
        Lustick, Pappé, Shlaim, Finkelstein are moved by political (extreme left) and ideological (trendy Post-modern academics) motivators which heavily distort there works & have no scientific standard, and this is what Karsh points out. In Europe science has no meaning, it’s humanities. All is fiction.
        All these people you mentioned -contradict one another fiercely- with heavy accusations & criticism. With all these ‘new historians’ using ‘new facts’ they sure are not convinced by one another. And you actually lump them together. Efraim Karsh offers a coherent explanation.

        It seems like you actually never read Karsh’s book.
        In the review before even taking care of the material whole lines are wasted on calling it a “myth” and speaking of Karsh’s “faith” (whatever that means) & writing style. Simple vilification.
        The prejudicial language is in the review is itself a logical fallacy, personal attacks & attacks on his style. And then doing the opposite to the ideological “anti-Zionists” (him calling the it “anti-Zionist” before even going on the arguments). He Systematically gets ‘facts’ wrong which Krash replies to.
        He interprets Krash’s work in distort. & Chutzpah is not in Hebrew (but Yiddish) But whole cares about facts?

        It’s amazing how they selectively choose what to look at to prompt an “anti-Zionist” (whatever that means) agenda. I don’t see how using “evidence” in such a partial and distorted manner can count as clear & good history. Why do they do this? Academic respect & דם many people use this dubious accounts of history to justify a genocide & ethnic cleansing of Jews living today in Israel.

        Karsh has released this year a new book: “Palestine Betrayed”.
        I suggest you actually read the book, before criticizing it or taking a second hand account criticism of it. That is the meaning of fair judgment.

      • Fabrizio
        2010-07-24 20:21:52 UTC - 20:21 | Permalink

        That’s very funny, ChilastaRS.
        With reference to the erased lines in Ben-Gurion’s letter, you say:
        “And that sounds like a good explanation to you? That’s evidence? an anecdote? The letter sates clearly the right quotation which you can actually be checked.”
        It’s funny because with this line of text you show that you actually have not read the book you yourself so passionately recommend (while wrongly accusing me of the same misconduct). In fact what Lustick says is known to anyone really competent in that matter, and even Karsh is aware of the erasure.
        In his book “Fabricating Israeli History”, p.50, Karsh offers his own explanation for it: “In any case, he [i.e., Ben-Gurion] crossed out the emphasized words in sentence A above, rewriting them in a slightly different form as sentence B above. In so doing, most probably due to an abrupt brush of the pen, he erased the critical words “do not” […] leaving the sentence as ‘we need’ […]”
        Therefore Ben-Gurion’s letter states clearly that you are wrong, and you should actually read Karsh’s book, if you want to sponsorize it.
        I would ask you for a favor. Could you post at least a single contribution satisying the following properties:
        1) absence of any ad hominem (i.e. personal attack on scholars who thinks differently from you, such as malicious comments on their hidden motivations, political agendas, and so on);
        2) absence of ridiculous generalizations (such as “Europe science has no meaning, it’s humanities. All is fiction.”) which lead any reader to think that you are a bit borderline. By the way I’m from Europe and I’m a physicist, I’m a first-hand witness that science here is as good as in US or Israel;
        3) absence of falsities and mischaracterizations about scholars you criticize (for example, they do not “fiercely contradict” each other but simply disagree on how to interpret the same set of data, as it is usual (and very positive) in any scientific discipline; they do not “selectively choose” what constitutes evidence, but very reasonably make use of the principle that any politician, in public discourses and occasions, portrays an image of himself which can be considerably far from the truth, so that personal communications, private or secret meeting records, and above all acts and facts should be always preferred to get a proper grasp of reality);
        4) presence of good, reasoned, sourced arguments, offered in a calm way.
        Those are, in my opinion, necessary preconditions to start a fruitful discussion. But I suspect that you disagree.

    • Blake
      2016-07-06 14:50:50 UTC - 14:50 | Permalink

      The actions have been clear – actions like creating the the world’s largest/longest suffering refugee population and the theft of a ready made country from the indigenous inhabitants just proves that was their intentions.

  • rambo
    2010-07-21 01:22:11 UTC - 01:22 | Permalink

    “I could point out that while Israel aligned with the Allies, the Palestinians aligned with the Nazis and that the only demand Israel has ever had in the conflict is that the Palestinians stop murdering innocent women and children but how is that going to help the present situation?”

    why lie for israel? the only demand israel has is to replace a palestinian people with israeli people.

    • ChilastaRS
      2010-07-21 17:05:26 UTC - 17:05 | Permalink

      “the only demand israel has is to replace a Palestinian people with israeli people.”
      This is the demonizing of an typical anti-Semite.
      Jews are people too, even if you don’t like this fact. you treat them as vehicles of evil, with destructive targets against humanity. This is the spirit of the extreme political-left sadly becoming mainstream.

      Palestinian leaders supported the Nazis, and imported there ideological hate of Jews & freedom.
      Muslims did actually create SS units in Europe.
      Jews actually fought for the Brits and Americans.

      Instead of condemning terror acts committed in order to kill Jews because they are Jews, people support these acts as ‘self-defense’. Killing people in buses and restaurants as a just action. THis is how far the hate has come towards Israel. Jews are not people, not human again.

      • 2010-07-21 18:34:15 UTC - 18:34 | Permalink

        ChilastaRS, Rambo’s comment was certainly a one line generalization. I do not know rambo, so my comments are restricted to the sentence he wrote. His comment refers to “Israel”. Israel is a state, and there is nothing anti-semitic about criticizing the policies of a state. Sweeping condemnations of state policies — those of America, of Russia, of Britain, of Australia, of Iran, of Egypt, of China, of North Korea — are being made all the time and no-one that I know accuses any of them of being racist or of demonizing a people.

        What is outrageous is some would attempt to shut down any and all criticism of the policies of just one state in the world on the presumption that they must by definition be racist.

      • Blake
        2016-07-06 14:52:51 UTC - 14:52 | Permalink

        NPalestinians didnt support the Nazis they fought on the side of the Allies. Menachem Begin – leader of the terrorist Stern Gang – on the other hand offered to run Palestine & the Middle east for fascist Germany.

  • 2010-07-20 21:51:35 UTC - 21:51 | Permalink

    JW:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel#Zionism_and_the_British_Mandate

    “In November 1947, the United Nations voted in favor of the partition of Palestine, proposing the creation of a Jewish state, an Arab state, and a UN-administered Jerusalem.[17] Partition was accepted by Zionist leaders but rejected by Arab leaders, leading to civil war. Israel declared independence on 14 May 1948 and neighboring Arab states attacked the next day.”

    This is the history of Israel Neil. The Jews were always in favor of separate states and the Palestinians and surrounding Muslims were always in favor of destroying Israel. Israel won the war(s). You need to deal with that, Israel isn’t going anywhere. Why try to present Israel in the worst possible light and inflame? I could point out that while Israel aligned with the Allies, the Palestinians aligned with the Nazis and that the only demand Israel has ever had in the conflict is that the Palestinians stop murdering innocent women and children but how is that going to help the present situation? Do you want peace or do you just want the Palestinians to win the war and Transfer the Palestinian Jews? If you want peace than you need to promote it instead of articles inciting terrorist attacks. The only thing preventing peace has always been the terrorist attacks which is the only thing completely within Palestinian control. If there were no terrorist attacks the US and moderate Israelis (49-51%) would have forced a Palestinian state long ago. Why no articles by Palestinians who agree with what I said here?

    Joseph

  • 2010-07-21 09:46:20 UTC - 09:46 | Permalink

    I find some of the comments here most disturbing and regretful. The people I quote were products of their times. I have read similar sentiments, and worse, among my fellow Australians from the same period of history in regard to our indigenous population. I can also find many statements that attest to the well-meaning and otherwise benevolent attitudes they saw in themselves, and that were no doubt sincere. It was the time of taking up the “white man’s burden”, and defending civilization against savages at the same time.

    In Australia we have also seen “history wars” with history raising facts critical of some of our past being branded as “black arm”. Some people even today want to whitewash, deny or excuse or minimize certain past words and deeds.

    I do not believe it is self-hate against my own country to acknowledge these. I think it is important that this side be understood and known, for the sake of full reconciliation and promotion of the most constructive relationships between the white and indigenous populations here.

    My bias in the question of Israel and Palestine has always been clear among those who know me. In Australia I facilitated the visits of Israeli Jews belonging to the activist peace movements in concert with Palestinian Arabs for well attended public speaking engagements and presentations. And yes, we have also invited Palestinian peace activists, too.

    I was very relieved to have been able to include in this post the names and words of at least two Jewish voices opposed to the racism they witnessed in their own time, and I have no doubt those same voices today would fully support the peace movements which I have supported.

    I have frequently heard that the sorts of facts I have presented in this post are more freely known and publicly debated in Israel itself, and that it is primarily in countries like the US and the west where such facts are suppressed.

    The facts — both sides of the story — need to be known in the West. They will not sway people such as some of you. But in the interests of understanding and justice the Palestinian voices do need to be heard, too.

    • ChilastaRS
      2010-07-21 16:55:52 UTC - 16:55 | Permalink

      “Israel and Palestine”. Why do you presume that there is such a state as “Palestine”? How absurd this conversation has become.
      The Palestinians want a country, I support them in so.
      But what I do not support in what I see as fabricating history.
      I’m very empathetic to Palestinians, yet I don’t think in black & white. the Hamas are not sympathetic characters by anyone who actually knows content.
      This is not a struggle only for liberation but also for genocide and “kicking The Jews into the sea”.
      Have you ever watched Palestinian TV? “Jews eat babies”, ‘Jews are satanic”, “Kill & eat Jews” to little children.
      Is this analogous to indigenous population Australia? False analogy.
      Did someone call to genocide Australians like anti-Zionists do today? Or send you back to Europe?
      Why the cherry picking? Why not see the whole picture?

      • 2010-07-21 17:34:50 UTC - 17:34 | Permalink

        You are failing to address the contents of my post. If you do not want fabricated history, then do not sweep uncomfortable facts under the carpet.

        Yes, I know very well the racism among both the Arab and Jewish peoples towards each other. It is obscene — on both sides. I have been as sickened by some Arab websites as Jewish websites. I have also listed a number of Palestinian sites (it needs updating) in my right hand pages as another avenue for their voices to be heard, too. If you find among any of those the espousal of the sorts of rabid racist comments in their news reports I will remove them.

        You seem to have overlooked my bias and how I have acted it out. I have worked with people — on both sides, Jews and Palestinian Arabs — who rise above that sort of racism.

        And yes, I have been informed by West Bank Palestinians, and others who have lived and worked among them, of the feelings of loathing of many families towards the Hamas military wing — including some of those who have lost their children as recruits to Hamas.

        You say you have empathy for the Palestinians. I do not see any evidence of it in your comments.

        It is also helpful in a fruitful discussion if we keep to verifiable facts, citing the sources of the most serious claims.

        (What is analogous is with Australian treatment of our indigenous population is the removal of them by various means from their lands, mass intimidation and massacres in response to acts of murderous terror, denying them basic services and leaving them to fend for themselves in malnourished communities away from control of viable resources, . . . . the destruction of their indigenous cultures and identities. . . .)

  • 2010-07-21 19:39:12 UTC - 19:39 | Permalink

    I have removed some comments made here. I deemed them racist, outright justifications for ethnic cleansing and incitements to hatred. I am attempting to moderate comments made to this post.

    I am a peace activist. I work with both Jewish and Arab fellow peace activists. The attitudes that I have encountered with these people are what I am hoping to find again here.

    Peace by definition must mean justice, and for that both sides must be heard. My intent for these posts is to give another venue for the voice of a side rarely heard in the West.

  • ChilastaRS
    2010-07-21 20:09:21 UTC - 20:09 | Permalink

    A peace activist? Supporting the Hamas? Have you read there charter? Seen there speeches?
    I have read “Response to ADL propaganda, “Major Attacks Against Israel””, and I’m shocked by the misinformation & propaganda.
    You support an extreme religious ideological genocidal group and call yourself a peace activist? Like the guys on Flotilla. You are just an “Useful idiot”.

    DO you think that because you label yourself a “peace activist” it makes you one?

    Promoting an article like “Why Palestinians should never recognize Israel’s right to exist”.
    The Right to Self-Determination a crime against humanity? All people have it, including Palestinians but Jews don’t?
    I think you should leave Australia, then convince the Americans out of America and return of refugees wherever to there original places (Isn’t Israel the original place of Jews?) and
    – then preach such extreme actions from Israel and the Jews in Israel.
    You are a hypocrite that pretends to be pious in every level.

    A “a death toll comparison”. You wish more Jews would be killed fix the issue?
    What does it prove expect you lust for Jewish blood?
    You think that because Israel has the means to defend itself properly, it’s a crime?
    If Hamas had the same tools, Hamas would genocide Jews (and people like you would do nothing to help them), and that’s the difference that matters (and this is probably what your dreaming of).

    You remind me of Arabs, telling me that the Holocaust was fine. Jews were evil bunkers and they toke woman of German men, they should be killed. Pathetic excuses to use violence against an ethnic group.

    A cold fact:
    There is no other country in the world which it’s military toke such action like Israel to avoid civilian casualties. None. Israel is an imperfect democracy stuck between a rock and a hard place.
    You have a pathological obsession of Israel which you judge in such an -absolute manner- with no regard to context or state-of-affairs in the world today or even the basic rights if Israeli, the right for life.

    “Jewish anti-Semitism against Islam”
    Can you distort the word even more? anti-Semitism is a word -used- (and this is how a word gets it’s meaning) as hate towards Jews only. The obvious cynical usage of this word in this context is as clear as daylight. The same with using the word “Holocaust” in this context.
    You are cynically evil.

    The amazing amount of anti-Jewish and Anti-Israeli content on this website is appalling.
    “the call by Likud Knesset member for Israel, Yisrael Katz, to bomb Gaza the way Russia bombed Grozny really is being carried out.” – Do you have any honest idea of the meaning of this? Or are you just using pure propaganda to prove your points?

    “That does not justify the massacre, but it does put it in a context that”
    Jesus Christ. In a democracy, even if hold any opinion you cannot be killed and it’s no more justified.
    You remind me of people saying that many people died during world war II, the Holocaust means little to dismiss it.
    This is the pattern of all your comments on issues:
    “It’s bad…but it’s OK since, or at least not bad”
    Sickening to see how murder of babies & children are “OK” and understandable to you in context.
    The sheer hypocrisy when you say Israel cannot defend it-self because of Collateral damage. Israel has every right to defend its civilians (human too you know) and it wiill, even if extreme-Islamic supports like yourself don’t like it for the most wrong reasons

    “It is not evidence of “the Palestinians” attempting genocide against Israeli Jews.”
    Why don’t you refer to Palestinian culture, education, TV? Is there not enough evidence there for you?
    “If I kill a JEW I go to heaven” -And this is not genocidal?
    Or Interviews with suicide bombers?

    You are no different from racist idiots & bigots.

    Go on say repeat after him: “Yes, I’m an anti-Semite. Yes, I’m anti-Zionist. Yes, judgment days will NOT come until we fight the Jews”
    Join these people on boats to “help” the Palestinians.
    People like you disgust me to the bone.
    Show this to your kids at home:

    Great education.
    A rabbit that eats Jews.

    If you will not come over your confirmation bias and prejudices, you will be wrong over & over again.
    –I support a Palestinian country, but the idiotic notion that “it’s all up to Israel” is bluntly stupid. Also I condemn the settlers in Judea and Samaria, and in an agreement should be evacuated.
    Any war crimes committed by Israeli soldiers or government, should be immediately brought to justice.

    But from here, to YOUR opinions, you need hate and lots of it.

  • 2010-07-21 23:32:02 UTC - 23:32 | Permalink

    I love this image

  • rambo
    2010-07-24 07:41:43 UTC - 07:41 | Permalink

    What if israel didnt invade lebanon? would hizbullah even exist? What if israel didnt create inhumane conditions in the occupied territories and killed and oppressed palestinians would hamas even exist?

    • ChilastaRS
      2010-07-25 02:44:07 UTC - 02:44 | Permalink

      And what do you expect from Israel? To feel guilt and emotional paralyzes? How irrational.
      Instead we must learn from our mistakes, and try not to repeat them.
      Adults have responsibility on there actions, the Palestinians aren’t mentally depicted infantile. Nothing can justify intentional killing of innocent people, it is the most crude violation of morality possible.

      “We live in a time when men, driven by mediocre,
      ferocious ideologies, are becoming used to being
      ashamed of everything. ashamed of themselves,
      ashamed to be happy, to love and to create . . . .
      so we have to feel guilty. We are being dragged
      before the SECULAR confessional, the worst of all.”
      —Albert Camus

      Extreme left-wing manics and Islamic appeasers, acceding to insane demands of oppressed people who seek to oppress others. One applauds a religious revolution, another goes into ecstasies over the beauty of terrorist acts or supports a guerilla movement because it challenges an imperialist project. Indulgence
      toward foreign dictatorships, intransigence toward our
      democracies.
      No one is perfect, America is still better then the Nazis
      even after the Dresden bombing and Hiroshima. Israel is ten times higher in moral standards then any Arab country surrounding it.
      Arabs in Israel have more rights then Arabs in there own country, yet Israel receives more fire then them. I don’t think it’s universal human rights that concern people like Vridar.

      This primitive biblical Judo-Christian ethics that Vridar and other Europeans and endorsing is harmful, at best stupid and self-defeating.
      *Children ought to pay for sins of there fathers – Israelis born in Israel, should kicked out to sea.
      *Eye for an Eye – Israelis did harm, now they should pay with there own medicine.
      *Original sin – The Western world was a very very bad boy, now we must harm ourselves and act towards the oppressed with sensitivity.

      Cannot you see the vulgar hypocrisy in exhibit?
      “Israel has become the worst enemy of human rights.”
      Can you actually open your eyes to see the human condition today around the world? Can you actually look at all the evidence and tell me that’s true?
      Not only that, but the nauseating understanding Vridar shows towards killing of innocent children & woman only because of there national identity, works only in one way.
      This systematically a dehumanizing of Jews in Israel is a result of this idiotic feeling of guilt (Albert Ellis on guilt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yFxIjhdSlE and a demonizing of the Jewish nation.

      I suggest you read “Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time”, to understand better the psychology patterns behind this irrational behavior of the radical left.

      I don’t justify Israeli war crimes or even make them “understandable”, and I don’t use self-defeating guilt as a solution. because it simply isn’t.

      • 2010-07-25 07:03:48 UTC - 07:03 | Permalink

        Let’s leave this post as the final word to show why exchanges with ChilastaRS are pointless.

        If there can be any doubt I include one passage from a ChilastaRS post I removed earlier.

        The Jews are a peculiar people: things permitted to other nations are forbidden to the Jews.
        Other nations drive out thousands, even millions of people and there is no refugee problem. Russian did it, Poland and Czechoslovakia did it, Turkey threw out a million Greeks, and Algeria a million Frenchman. Indonesia threw out heaven knows how many Chinese-and no one says a word about refugees. But in the case of Israel the displaced Arabs have
        become eternal refugees.
        And what about Jewish refugees from Arab states in the exodus of 1948 and before? Why don’t you write about them?

        I think we can agree there is nothing to be gained by continuing exchanges with ChilastaRS.

      • 2010-07-25 18:32:14 UTC - 18:32 | Permalink

        I should explain, perhaps, that since attempting to moderate comments on this topic, most of ChilastraRS’s posts have been withheld. If exchanges continue with him/her I will probably find it easier to routinely redirect all his posts as spam.

        I hate doing this, but unless I do then unmoderated comments from one or two individuals can turn a section of this blog into something I consider a forum for many, lengthy, very very sick posts.

  • Pingback: Redemption and/or Conquest: Zionist Yishuv plans for transfer of Palestinian Arabs in the British Mandate period « Vridar

  • Pingback: The Weizmann Plan to “Transfer” the Palestinians « Vridar

  • Pingback: Vridar » Zionist Plans for Mass Transfer of Arabs: Alive But Discreet

  • Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *